Microsoft Launches OSS Site, Submits License For Approval

prostoalex writes "Microsoft has launched a site dedicated to collaboration between Microsoft and open source community. The site helps developers, IT administrators, and IT buyers find out what Microsoft's product offerings are, and read articles about open source such as 'Open Source Provider Sees Sales Doubling After Moving Solutions to the Windows Platform.'" Relatedly, CNet has the news that the company has submitted its shared-sources license to the OSI for approval.

Comments

Re:Remind me why I give a shit?

[zx-15]

Windows isn't Unix. NT did include a POSIX system but that bit-rotted from lack of use and was removed I believe.

This is called bait and switch, I believe.

The DRDOS case shows a pattern of behavior.

[twitter]

Obnoxious M$ Fanboy dedazo asks an amusing question:

Why do you keep using the same [link about DRDOS]?

I like that link because it shows a clear pattern of behavior and the author is credible. It was written by a former MicroSoft fan who read now destroyed court records. Those records proved that M$ planned not only a technical sabotage of DRDOS, they also planned a PR attack on it. This is behavior they continue today.

I also like pointing to the case of Steve Barkto, when showing how old M$'s astro turfing efforts are.

If they are not paying you to be so annoying, you need to find a more productive hobby. This one is getting you nowhere.

FOSS has fewer patent problems than M$. NO TRUST.

[twitter]

In fact, [free software is] almost guaranteed that it does infringe software patents (both those existing now, and those that will be granted in the future).

Free Software is less likely to violate and be abused by patents. If you patent well known methods, you are a patent troll. Those mostly attack established companies like M$, who have money and are much less careful about what they do. This is why M$ continues to be stung with multiple billion dollar judgments. The patent system needs reform and software patents need to be abolished, but M$'s attempts to FUD free software with them are absurd.

There's no reason to hold Microsoft-written code to a different standard to other code. If it's free it's free.

M$'s past and ongoing behavior is a very good reason to stay far away from their code. If M$ wants to liberate their software, they can copy left it and surrender their tremendous patent portfolio to the public good. They have no such intentions and their "shared source" initiatives have been more like sharecropping than freedom. We're talking about a company that recently threatened one of their own MVPs for improving their "free" compiler.