Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Savvy Open Source Move
willdavid writes to mention Joe Panettieri is reporting that Microsoft is continuing their push for open source software interoperability. In the most recent push Microsoft is partnering with a small Silicon Valley company called SpikeSource to certify open source software on Windows 2008. "Despite growing Linux deployments, Windows Server remains quite popular for running open source applications. SugarCRM, the fast-growing open source application provider, is quick to note that many of its business developments occur on Windows Server. And Microsoft itself has sponsored SugarCRM's conferences, in order to stay in front of open source crowds."
... that Microsoft will be writing an ODF module for MS Office?
Didn't think so. Microsoft's idea of interoperability only goes one way.
This is the same company that just extended XP to prevent linux from gaining a foothold in the low end laptop market. They can try to paint themselves any way they want... They're not fooling very many.
Jaded? Yep. Suspicious? Yep.
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
... to Extend?!?
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Seems to me that Sun are being a bit more savvy in the way they are doing things. First OpenOffice and mysql, now they seem to be partnering up with Canonical (Ubuntu). call me what you will, I'll never trust M$ again.
She has a great track record - founded Marimba, product manager for Java at Sun. I'm not surprised that Microsoft would want to be involved with her when it comes to their open source interests.
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
so Microsoft having just destroyed the international standards organisation to prevent interoperability between word processors, someone manages to write this slashdot summary with a straight face?
"ideologically agnostic"
Looking at the definition of agnostic the only definition I can see that may fit is #4. Which would mean you are completely ignorant to OS and closed source software ideology.
I think the word you are looking for is neutral.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
Microsoft is happy to have anything running on Windows.
Microsoft refuses to have Microsoft apps support Open Source apps.
It's all one way. It's all Microsoft's way.
Kind of left that out of his background there on his bio page.
Microsoft is interested in anything that sells Windows Server. However, with all of their sword rattling, known monopolistic behaviors, partnering with them still can get you the Black Widow Effect. Just ask 3Com, or Ashton Tate, etc.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
I'm tired of reading about what corporation or project Microsoft has hooked up with this week. Open-source software is about the community (and thus partnerships), but first and foremost it's about the code. The community comes because of the open-sourced code, not the other way around.
When Microsoft actually starts releasing code under a real open-source license, then we can start talking. Maybe.
Microsoft did a nice deal with Moodle for adding MSSQL server support - rather than specifying just MSSQL server support be added they funded the development of an XML tool for adding database support - so it was easy to also add support for Oracle and other RDBMSs to Moodle (which already supported PostGreSQL and MySQL).
This is a "certification" process. How much do you want to bet Microsoft just wants to use this as a tool to control OSS? I'm sure Microsoft thinks they can create the artificial need for "certification" to run on Windows. Then just don't certify certain products, or make the certification process wind up making the software hugely advantageous for Windows. They could try to design the certification process so the software becomes less cross-platform, say uses a lot of closed-source windows specific APIs.
I'm not sure exactly how MS will turn the certification process to try to control OSS, but based on past behavior I'm pretty skeptical to accept it at face value.
AccountKiller
twitter, Erris, Mactrope, inTheLoo, gnutoo. A veritable army of one.
I consider myself a technical purist. When I see poor code it causes me pain (and usually hours to fix it) and I don't think I need that kind of punishment from microsoft. It is bad enough that I have to use their SloS at work. I prefer not to be subjected to their hideous source code.
ODF Convertor, is an addin for Office. Microsoft is Funding, and providing documentation and help.
http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/
I gotta agree with the article. This makes complete sense from a business perspective. As much as slashdot may beat on Windows, many of are using it while we type our abuse. Windows is not going away. If you want a PC to just run out of the box, you install Windows. Linux is getting better, but just isn't to that level, yet. My XP system is littered with open source apps, at work and home. I use Firefox hourly. I use OpenOffice to type up my messages. I use thunderbird to read my ISP mail. I have sunbird loaded, but have not quite got into using the computer to track my appointments, yet (I like my post-it notes, thank you). Open Workbench does a fair job at project management. It is the best of both worlds, imho.
Bearded Dragon
Microsoft cannot stand to see a product they do not control gain popularity. How long before Microsoft releases a half-backed 'competitor' to SugarCRM and using their monopoly to squash it?
Goodbye Slashdot. You've changed.
Sounds like they are very serious about open source.
A -savvy- open source move would be announcing a port of MS Office to SuSE. This "we want you to make your Linux software also run on Windows" move just increases the vulnerability of their cash cow.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
This is just making sure various popular OSS projects can run on top of Windows. That's not interoperability. It'll be interoperability when MS helps OSS projects written specifically for Windows port to *nix without the need for WINE or other emulators.
And let's be honest here. I like to bash MS as much as possible. I use MS at $work and FAMP at home. Windows 2008 and IIS7 took some truely great strides away from the old MS way of doing things. 2008 can be installed without a gui. You can powershell/remote admin EVERYTHING from the command line. In fact, the GUI admin tools use the things written for the powershell/command line administration. Group policies now have preferences, allowing things like making policy on what fields SQL developers need to add when they create tables...what users can consume n% of the CPU, etc.
IIS7 does NOTHING out of the box, and everything is a module. Almost everything that used to be a tab when configuring an IIS app is now a seperate module..even just redurecting an entire site to another url. And the new 3.5 ASP.NET stuff has a real MVC layer in the works for people like me who completely hate ASP.NET PostBack hackery. IIS7 now has full support for FastCGI and PHP is a first class language in terms of performance. I imagine this will hold true for other FastCGI friendly things like Ruby/Perl/Python/RoR/Catalyst/Django.
"Because some of you *did* think Microsoft was changing and getting more open and was wanting to build bridges to FOSS, etc. I know you did. I hoped for a while myself. Well, take a look at the evidence splayed out before us on the ISO table. It speaks. And what it says is, "There is no new Microsoft." And so we need to get smarter. Make the division more clear. People will choose well, given a clear choice. Firefox and Ubuntu and Red Hat and others have demonstrated that. There is no need to compromise. And if you are tempted by the money, think about the rest of us, will you? Look at ISO. Do you want to be like that? Anyone, then, from this day forward who is naive enough to believe a single word from Microsoft needs to see a doctor right away. That is the single most important positive result from this OOXML process, as far as I'm concerned. Now we know. They shouldn't be invited to Open Source conferences to give keynotes, I don't think, or get to be on boards of directors of organizations, or let inside in any way that gives them the chance to pretend to be members of the community or even fair-dealers with FOSS. They will harm you any time they feel like it, and clearly from the OOXML story, we see they do indeed feel like destroying FOSS. They don't mind if a redefined, brand X version of "open" source limps along in its wake, paying tolls along the way to Microsoft, but they intend to kill off the real thing. That's why the OSP doesn't cover the GPL and the February "interoperability" statement opening up certain documentation is only for FOSS if it is noncommercial. Otherwise, all signs point to patent litigation, with all those presidents of countries that just got phone calls from Bill Gates lending a hand, one presumes. That is the plan, Stan, as best I can make it out, and anyone who enables that strategy by signing patent pledges, inviting them to speak as if they are now members of the community, etc. is helping to kill off FOSS. There is no middle ground now." --Pamela Jones via http://www.cafeaulait.org/quotes2008.html
It's quite lightweight indeed - I'm using it as a VMware guest OS for cross-compilations, testing and such when I'm doing something that needs to be cross-platform. But I don't think I would be able to change my habits when it comes to administering servers - I need a good CLI for that, I just find the idea of clicking to do something on a server the most awkward thing since the company-name-sorted Programs menu, which is an abomination of its own category. Besides, isn't remote desktop or how they call it a little bit unsuitable for the extreme kind of emergency situations, such as logging in from your cellphone in the middle of your holidays to fix something that broke and no one on site is able to cope with? (Been there, done that, it worked.)
This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
Certification is yet another way to waste free software effort. If reverse engineering a sabotaged and constantly changing OS was not difficult enough, they now offer the chance to lick boots and pay for a certificate of Microsoft appreciation. Real interoperability is easy, liberate the code and follow reasonable standards. The more Microsoft does, the more transparent their motives are.
They can also use it for fear mongering at companies that continue to run Windows. What do you want to bet Microsoft creates a mechanism to not run "uncertified" code and link it into UAC with a default of deny? This can then be used as a threat to all free software projects.
Just say no. Don't take their money, don't do as they say, just ignore the whole thing and we will all be better off.
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
...where 'we' are offended that Microsoft makes calculating and obviously self-serving moves to court open-source applications to run on Windows.
But, we applaud the efforts of the FOSS community to make every effort to run Windows apps on *nix operating systems.
And I think both approaches are equally sel-serving. We understand and support it in FOSS, since we assume FOSS is the underdog, righting wrongs, giving us choice, and generally being a hero.
But Microsoft is trying not to be the underdog in open-source serving, giving us a choice, and generally being as self-preservationist as any *nix vendor. And there are, indeed, *nix vendors. Not just Sun, Red Hat, Novell, but others much smaller that carve out their niches and do very well, thank you. And they, mySQL for example, are not displeased that they also serve a Microsoft customer or two.
Trust Microsoft to not try and hijack FOSS? Of course not. Assume they want to play nice with FOSS? No, probably not. Condemn them for doing what their competitors are doing? just to pile on, IMHO.
If only Microsoft had done this when Novell was advancing the art of PC servers. But that's another tale for another day. Back then, the market was up for grabs. MS won, Novell lost. Today, I don't see Microsoft destroying the *nix marketplace any time soon. Too much momentum, too much good stuff out there. Microsoft thrives when they can identify a limited range of competitors. It's not like that any more.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Out of curiosity - do they offer something like the 2003's 180-day trial? Sounds quite nice, would be even nicer to try it.
This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
Microsoft is not really happy to have anything running on Windows if they can sell the same service. Look at Word Perfect, X11, Netscape, Samba and so on. Anyone who ports to Windoze has had to face the same treadmill of changing specs and sabotage. Now it's AV, Open Office, Safari and iTunes. Just look at the stink people made over something as trivial as *gasp* Apple offering another browser on Windows. Anything that threatens M$ revenue and control will always be under attack.
The OOXML and OLPC sagas are more than enough evidence that Microsoft is the same old M$ we have always known.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=216934&cid=17629948
I would imagine so, but I'm not sure. I got a free copy of Server 2008 at one of their Heros Happen Here gigs last month. Got it installed on Parallels on the MacBook. It runs rather lean, about 350MB on boot. I imagine that would be lower if you run it GUI-less.
I also forgot to mention, it now also fully support HyperVisor as a VM OS as well.
Why do you do it Twitter?
InTheLoo and Mactrope are both your accounts, and here they are carrying on a conversation with themselves.
Add to that your 'gnutoo' account that is posting further up the thread.
There is something seriously wrong with you. I couldn't care less about any Karma you whore by setting up your own rebuttals, but the fact that you are intentionally misleading people with your multiple accounts posting together on the same thread bothers me.
I guess all I can do is help newer mods be informed by listing your sock puppets for all to see:
Twitter
Erris
gnutoo
Mactrope (not Macthorpe who is legit)
InTheLoo
All the same person trying to game threads.
No, I mean like this comment on it: Only supported in Novell's version of OpenOffice.
Sound like a similar lock-in? HMMMM I WONDER.
No, but it does mean open and free specs. It wasn't until the EU forced their hand that the Samba guys had the specs for the SMB/CIFS protocol.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
If Microsoft had savvy they wouldn't be in the fix they are now. They have no savvy, they're just huge and cold-blooded. And they have the courts (and, apparently, the ISO) in their pocket.
Microsoft isn't fighting for its life, but the brand is dying, and nothing they can do will be able to stop it.
That comment is out of date. I downloaded that extension and it works just fine for me (AFAICT) in the version of OOo that came with Ubuntu Gutsy Beta.
I have a mod points but couldn't resist to comment :-)
>2008 can be installed without a gui. You can
> powershell/remote admin EVERYTHING from the
> command line. In fact, the GUI admin tools use the
> things written for the powershell/command line
> administration.
So MS finally reinvented the wheel and W2k8 finally behaves as Unix :-)
then I take back all I said about lack of interop...I've not had a reason to have to test it, nobody I know uses office newer than 2003 if they happen to unfortunately be in that crowd.
I also haven't checked to verify your comment, guess I'll have to check that later/take your word fo rit.
El Lobo, you crack me up every time.
Your last two sigs involved "linuzzz" and "abble".
And you're telling me that windows and IIS are "great pieces of software"?
Shocking!!!
Microsoft is like that brother/sister/neighbour who agrees to share things but doesn't actually understand the social rules of doing so. So you lend them something you cherish and then ask to loan something of theirs and they give you a blank look then say "oh, you mean I have to share to, I didn't know that was part of the deal".
From now on, just avoid SugarCRM like the plague.
Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
I have managed to get Novell's ODF Converter working on Mandriva Linux. It took some packaging, but it works.
Although Binary only, there is no reason odf-converter won't work on any given Linux distribution.
I have managed to get Novell's ODF Converter working on Mandriva Linux. It took some packaging, but it works. Although Binary only, there is no reason odf-converter won't work on any given Linux distribution.
Yes, but mainly because of how ubiquitous Windows is. We develop Java applications using Eclipse, but all of our desktop machines are Windows XP machines. This means we run Eclipse, Java, and all the various JARs we need (not to mention both Ant and Maven) in Windows. We also use CVS, but will be moving to Subversion. All open source, and all running on Windows.
Why Windows? Because that's what corporate environments use. Our corporate officers want Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Visio, and Microsoft Project. We get resumes in Microsoft Word. Whether we like it or not, we need to be able to use Windows.
I am sure that you look at many Open Source companies, most of their desktop machines will be Windows and that's what many developers will be using. This is even true of Google where all development is pretty much Linux and Web based. Heck, I bet even 37 Singles has more than a few Windows systems around.
Think of Microsoft Windows like the Flu. If you're very careful, you might be able to avoid it -- at least for a while. However sooner or later, you'll get caught. And when you do, you'll fell miserable.
Of course they're not doing to much of anything original. But the fact that they acknowledge that things sucked the way they were are were doing what OS has already done is still a big deal.
The one thing I did see in 2008 that I haven't been exposed to anywhere else is the direct tying of Group Policy and Network Access. Now you can set up group policies that define what a computer has to have before it's aloud to use the remote network. For example, a VPN user would dial in...then the policy server would check that it has: update x, progam y, setting z, and an up to date virus program. If it passes, the VPN user can use the private network. If it fails, the user is stuck on an alternate network until they have fixed the failing issues.
I'm sure of that already exists in RADIUS and other tech, but it was damn easy to config in 2008.
It has nothing to do with interoperability.
While I agree that Microsoft (and all companies) should strive for publishing accessible and clear documentation for their file formats and protocols, if your definition of "freedom" includes them releasing their code under the GPL (as you've "demanded" they do in other occasions), you better not hold your breath.
By the way, if you have time I'd appreciate a response to my post.
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
Windows Server 2008 offers a 60 day grace period, but you can rearm it three times:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/948472
As a student, there are ways to obtain permanently activated copies for less than the $999 or so retail. Most universities have MSDNAA access where you can log on and download a CD key for free. If that doesn't work, there is a deal if you log onto your MSDNAA account to obtain a one year Technet subscription for $99. This is for evaluation only licenses, but removes any time limitation not just on Server 2008, but any commercial MS product. Of course, as a student, you can buy a fully licensed copy for $500 each, and some universities even offer fully licensed copies for $10 or so.
Here are some concrete little suggestions that would prove Microsoft really is trying. Not nonsense that they won't do (like open-source stuff, or port Word to Linux). Very simple stuff that they have refused to do for years and years:
1. Do not "certify" software that will not accept a filename that is typed in or is dragged & dropped or cut & pasted that has forward slashes in it.
2. Do not "certify" software that cannot read a text file with bare linefeeds in it and preserve the line breaks.
3. Add a way to name a file on any disk that starts with a slash and works in any piece of software using any Windows calls that manipulate files, and that shows up in an attempt to list the directory it is in. My recommendation is "/A:/blah".
4. Add symbolic links and fix the finder to not screw up if you copy or delete them.
5. Include bash or some other Unix shell by default with Windows.
6. Add C99 standards to header files, such as NAN, sinf(), etc. Remove the underscores added to about 1/2 of the c99 library functions like snprintf. In general do all the obvious and easy things to fix POSIX compatability.
7. Add working "export" keyword to vc++ compiler so that you don't have to write macros with "__declspec(dllimport/export)" in order to make a shared library.
Everything that has free specifications has a free implementation. One follows the other like day follows dawn. The only thing that prevents people from interacting is when people keep secrets or threaten others with software patents.
People have made free software for obnoxious things too, like Microsoft's networking protocol or DeCSS. The EU's directives were helpful to Samba but the Samba people did an adequate job of reverse engineering the specs themselves. I think that the EU has gone a step further and made Microsoft release changes to the specs that Microsoft made to break Samba. Microsoft's networking protocols are inferior, so I don't keep up with it. DeCSS has, of course, had nothing but trouble from the DVD conspiracy/consortium.
Would you elaborate?
BTW, since you seem to be posting on this article with many of your accounts (inTheLoo, gnutoo, Mactrope), I reiterate my request that you reply to my earlier post, if you have time.
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
It is awesome BTW, Microsoft should probably make "Microsoft (r) Logic" a new ISO standard.
1. Open source is popular.
2. Most open source is written in a portable way hence they run in many platforms including windows.
3. There are a lot of windows users out there.
4. (miss the point)
----
.: Windows is a popular open source platform!
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Are these "OMG it's twitter" posts some kind of new slashdot troll?
I mean this story is so littered with this anon posted crap that I can't read anything anymore.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
The idea behind open source is that the users certify the software. The early adapters are the ones who will wring out the bugs. Later users will continue to comment. The idea of a large corporation certifying Open Source goes completely against the idea of open source. Once again Microsoft does not get it and wants to take control.
Typical for a company run by a bunch of Willy Lohmen's (Salesmen for those of you in marketing
In the most recent push Microsoft is partnering with a small Silicon Valley company called SpikeSource to certify open source software on Windows 2008.
Wait a minute. Microsoft's "interoperability" aside, how is open source software certification supposed to work? By definition of open source, I, being the idiot that I am, can freely modify the thing and therefore break whatever signature protects the version that was certified. Then my version becomes lesser by virtue of not being certified anymore. Nevermind that I've fixed those bugs.
How is certified open source any more open than TiVo? "You can look, but you can't touch!"
Wow... fanboi galore.
Windows Server, which im atempting to install right now into a vmware machine so i can finally work in my damned laptop instead of connecting through a ridiculously inefficient scheme such as terminal services, is a PIECE OF SHIT.
ASP.NET is ANOTHER PIECE OF SHIT in which one can BARELY do a browsable table with filters, let alone some decent ajax.
You now tout it as a platform for running the "great" php language (which, BTW, is ANOTHER PIECE OF SHIT as far as programming languages go) because it now (after 10 damned years) supports fastCGI? JEESUS CHRIST!!
Do you think its ROCKET SCIENCE to get THAT to work?
I mean. You KNOW microsoft is in trouble when they come out with their "great" "new" feature: we now decently run languages that actually get the job done, not VB for the web only.
NO SIG
Wow, I can't believe you got modded troll. Well said.
It's interesting to wonder what would have happened if the talented folks working on Samba has spent the time instead building a next-generation networked filesystem that Microsoft could only dream of and implemented clients and servers for the three major platforms.
Things would have turned out differently, that's for sure.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I'm thinking they do understand, all too well, because they wouldn't otherwise fight so hard to circumvent the rules. Imagine the neighbor scoffing and saying, "Finders keepers" when you give him said cherished object. Then, when censured by the community, he breaks into your house and steals other valuables. You report him to the police, but he has bribed the local law enforcement and judiciary, and he's filled the legislature with his allies. Microsoft was never interested in playing by rules that impeded their path to wealth, and their overtures into "interoperability" is worse than outright opposition, because they are all based on lies.
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
But, we applaud the efforts of the FOSS community to make every effort to run Windows apps on *nix operating systems.
Setting aside the fact that a LOT of people think making Windows apps run on UNIX is a bad idea...
We applaud the efforts of Microsoft to make every effort to run UNIX software on Windows. That's where real interoperability comes in - the core UNIX API is much simpler and more complete than the corresponding parts of Win32, so you can write a native UNIX app once and run it anywhere (it's not so easy as it once was, perhaps, especially if you insist on integrating the GUI tightly... but it's not all that hard). And then when Microsoft drops the ball, either deliberately (with POSIX) or through neglect (with Interix) we get upset.
Condemn them for doing what their competitors are doing?
They're not doing the same kind of thing... at all.
I don't see Microsoft destroying the *nix marketplace any time soon.
They don't have to, the bits of the Open Source community who don't seem to understand what really makes an open system are going to do it for them.
Beware... and read the license. The Heros Happen Here disc, except for VS2008 and Vista Ultimate, everything else was trialware. The windows server, sql server, etc. were all 1 year trial licenses if I remember correctly.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
I'm curious, why exactly do you find it to be a problem that someone would praise IIS?
Well I do not know why someone would, but here is my annoyance:
I came here to bash MS and you guys managed to insert marketing points about IIS into our little bash fest. I stopped watching TV exactly because I am tired of people selling me things I don't need. And now I see the same on slashdot. Why don't you keep your fanboy poodle-extatic bubbling happiness with IIS7 to yourself?
Thanks a bunch. Don't bother replying - you ruined my day already.
Very true. One of the presenters did say that if will be unlicensed after that period, but will not cease to function after that period.
In either case, don't run your business on it.
Right, because anybody who happens to be smart enough to learn as many languages and platforms as possible is automatically labeled an MS AstroTurfer. In the real world, it's called being versatile and being marketable. When an open source programming gig comes along, I can get it. When a MS programming gig comes along, I can get that too. Boy that sure is a bad position to be in in todays economy.
So you can't get the source. Big deal. This isn't Stallman World. Most companies don't need the source. If you need source, use open source. If you need something that works more out og the box because your current staff aren't all complete geeks, then use MS. This religious battle of there only being only One Right Choice is getting old and outdated.
Not a fanboi. I just live in the real world.
.NET programmers program shitty .NET
Shitty PHP programmers program shitty PHP
Shitty
Shitty OOP programmers program shitty OOP.
Shitty Perl programmers program shitty Perl.
From the sound of your rant, you sound like both a shiyty ASP.NET programmer and a former shitty PHP programmer.
All languages have their own issues. None are perfect. Most can do what needs to be done cleanly in the hands of experienced programmers.
I never claimed that PHP was this shit, or that FastCGI is some new science, or that IIS7 was being more inventive than Apache/Lighttpd. I simply said that they are clearly learning from this things and improving their products.
A little bird told me this:
echo microsoft interoperability \
| sed 's/ i/ e/;s/per/ops-/;s/bi/h-sh/;s/l//;s/.$//'
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
I mean that, right now, Microsoft pretty much owns the market. They're not worried about growing their userbase, they're worried about keeping their user base.
Ok.
Linux and Mac are still looking at growing their userbase. I wonder how long until the tables are turned.
Linux and Macs are growing in market share but I think it'll take years before either has a sizable desktop market share. Apple has increased it's laptop market share a lot more than the desktop market share which suggests to me than people are still using Windows PCs for desktop systems. And with Linux, though it's knowledge with general users is increasing, for many it's still perceived as difficult and the apps they think they think they need won't run on it. Distros, like Linspire and Ubuntu, are disproving this however. Not only are they easy to use even for newbies but they also make it easy to install software, though not as easy at it is to install software on my Mac.
FalconShould there be a Law?