Microsoft Calls for Truce With GPL and Linux?

An anonymous reader writes to mention an eWeek article discussing Microsoft's efforts to reach out to the open source community. The company is hoping to find a common ground with softare released under the GPL, so that OSS and Microsoft products can interoperate. From the article: "The goal, from both sides, is to meet customer needs, he said, adding, 'This is just the more mature view of the way the world is evolving, and we want to make sure that if customers are choosing Linux or other open-source-based products that we have ways of interoperating and working effectively with that.'" A related article mentions Windows server Expert Jeremy Moskowitzs' call for a truce between the Linux and Windows communities.

Comments

Maybe the first to say it...

[jd]

...but probably not the first to think it. Microsoft's alliances have an interesting history, the most recent being cooperation with anti-virus corporations, followed by the sudden acquisition of one, followed by "accidently" including competing anti-virus products in the virus signature file. Microsoft's work with IBM on OS/2 (which led to Microsoft taking all the code for themselves and mangling Windows 3.11 to break OS/2's compatibility layer) was another example.

Sure, anyone can turn over a new leaf. That's always possible. But that won't stop the incidental music from Psycho from playing in my mind whenever I hear of Microsoft working with others. There are some areas where I think it might be safe. There's been no work on Linux' IBCS module for a long time. This would benefit Microsoft, as they could then run Linux software natively. That wouldn't hurt Linux too much, as many Unixes have been able to do this for a while, and the code is out there anyway. However, it would benefit Linux, precisely because other OS' can run Linux binaries but Linux can't run theirs without IBCS being brought up-to-date.

MPLS for Linux is another dead project that would be highly valuable to revive, and equally valuable to Microsoft to have for Windows. MOSIX and OpenMOSIX development has been at snail's pace over recent months - boo! - and Microsoft's clustering technology would certainly benefit from a comparable system, making a joint venture into improving this technology a definite plus for all sides.

If such ventures don't work out, Linux doesn't suffer because the level of work in these areas is small anyway. You can't lose by not getting what you wouldn't have had anyway. On the other hand, if they did work out, it would be an opportunity to develop extremely valuable technology with resources that would be extremely hard to muster by any other means.

To those who are contemplating any kind of alliance with Microsoft, however, just remember that the Computer is your friend. It says so. And if you don't agree, it may use you as reactor shielding.

Re:It's about time...

[pjrc]

Neither camp has made any significant effort in making their systems truly interoperable

Microsoft provides basic standards supports, though often with proprietary or non-standard "extensions". HTML/CSS, for example. Once could argue RTF was a good effort, though years of binary .DOC make RTF more or less obsolete. Microsoft also conforms to basic internet protocols, TCP/IP, FTP, etc. Very basic support for the most fundamental standards.

Linux (and related software) does all that. Linux also reads and in most cases writes Microsoft's filesystem formats. "mtools" provides a second, user-space support for native microsoft discs. Linux also supports Joliet (Microsoft's cdrom filename extensions). Samba supports Microsoft's file service protocols. These usually come preinstalled on major linux distributions.

Microsoft does NOT provide even read-only support for Linux ext2 filesystems. Microsoft does NOT automatically recognize unix/linux rock ridge cdroms. Microsoft does NOT provide support for mounting NFS file systems. These are all examples of well established protocols in widespread use for over 10 years!

But...

the fact that they're reaching out should be incentive enough for the OSS community to respond in kind

Remember how they "reached out" to Sun regarding Java?

Sure, if "respond in kind" means a bunch of cheap, fluffy talk, and not actually implementing anything, or writing a poor implementation with proprietary "extensions", sure.

But the truth is, almost every documented, and even many poorly or utterly undocumented Microsoft protocols are well supported by Linux and related software.

Re:They want the river to flow in one way?

[GreatBunzinni]

Exactly.

By "calling in a truce", what Microsoft is claiming is that they can not contain the influx of quality F/OSS projects which is now starting to surface. To make things worse, those projects are starting to take a big chunk of the market share. They know that F/OSS has arrived and it will not leave. They know that it is quite plausible that a F/OSS application becomes a killer app. So now they have two choices: keep marginalizing the free software movement and drive away their participants or make sure that it is possible that those applications are constantly ported to MS's platform.

So that is what MS is trying to accomplish. They know that the fight against the free software is lost and now, instead of trying to kill it, they are diverting at least part of their energies trying to preserve their stronghold on the market. They know that a platform is only as good as the applications which it can run and if MS's platform doesn't run the next killer app, what is it good for anyway?

Still lost in their own hubris

[kindbud]

"What people are starting to discover is that people who write GPL code are not evil and people who write commercial software are also not evil, we just have different approaches." - Muglia

Which people are discovering this? I don't think anyone has any beef with the people who write software. It's the management of companies like Microsoft we have a problem with. The coders are all right and always have been. You think we look upon you and Gates and Ballmer and the rest as coders! It is to laugh. Your agenda is other than making good code. If making bad code makes money, bad code it is. Do you think we're morons? Try not insulting us if you want to build bridges.

The goal, from both sides, is to meet customer needs, he said, adding, "This is just the more mature view of the way the world is evolving..."

No, dude. You're only just now barely realizing that the world is passing you by. The world evolved - past tense. You just missed the train and now have to hire a heliocopter to get you to the party. But you're trying to pass it off like you're Alan Arken and Peter Falk arriving late at the wedding.

What you need to do now to make up for it is to do what they did in "The In-Laws". Hand over envelopes of cash to some OSS projects including some GPL projects, no strings attached. That'll show us you're sincere. You can even deduct it.

Re:More like "embrace, extend, extinguish".

[kripkenstein]

I'll be prepared to believe they are turning a new leaf when they release Office for Linux.

Not before.