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?
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 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/
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
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?
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".
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.