Microsoft Acknowledges Open Source As a Bigger Threat Than Google

ruphus13 takes us to ZDNet for an analysis of comments by Microsoft's Chief Software Architect, Ray Ozzie, about how open source is "much more potentially disruptive" to Microsoft's business strategy than Google. Ozzie also spoke about the future of Microsoft's search technology, which will develop with or without Yahoo. There is a related interview at OStatic with several Microsoft employees about how they view and interact with the open source community. The head of Microsoft's global open source and Linux team is quoted saying: "The other thing I think is missing is implementation of a basic principle of economic fairness. Thousands of developers have put very hard work into building software used by millions of people and companies, yet only a fraction of these developers are rewarded financially. Currently there are perfectly good projects that have been abandoned by their developers despite being used by large corporations. Subsequently the projects fall out of use. This is unnecessary waste that would often be prevented by making it easy for companies to pay the developers directly. I think it's important to solve this so that the sustainability of open source projects is improved."

Comments

Re:No all we need...

[morgan_greywolf]

Well, maybe Google didn't do it, but someone released an OS bery, very similar to 'GoogleOS'. It even includes Google Apps.

It's the law

[SgtChaireBourne]

... Open source is killing them.

Yes. Now that (effectively) no closed source player are left. Darwinian natural selection has left us the strongest, open source projects. Many precede MS attack on the Internet. Open source is now killing Microsoft. It's a one-two, knock-out. Even most of the yahoo bid was based on stock not cash, and even some of that which is actual cash looks like it would have to borrowed.

Further, there's no market for MS, not even public-sector corporate welfare. See the mandates:

• develop open source encryption tools
• use encryption
• provide training in encryption
• closed source
• develop and use open source
• provide training in open source

Source: A5-0264/2001

For all new European projects:

• open source is the preferred development platform
• open source is the preferred deployment platform
• support open, well-documented standards is required

Source: European Commission technology strategy.

So rather than listen to nerdy Bill, slobby Ballmer, or their media proxies whine, listen to others: go open source, open standards. You save work, you save time, you increase security and you recession-proof your company.

Re:False Dichotomy

[citog]

No, Google uses Open Source to power their business. Their business model i.e. Google the company is based on proprietary methods and solutions.

Re:FUD FUD FUD FUD. FUDDITY FUD. FUDDITY FUD.

[ElizabethGreene]

Companies have been "doing for themselves" for decades. They come to realize that something is a critical part of their business and they take ownership of it. They take on the ability or responsibility to maintain the system themselves.

Therein lies the fundamental difference between open or paid source vs closed source. We have a number of issues with our > $100,000 accounting system that Microsoft simply refuses to fix. If we could buy the source and fix it ourselves, we would. If we could download the source and release patches, we would. Unfortunately, we bought a Microsoft product and to them the "There is a (painful) workaround, so we aren't going to fix it in this version" answer is good enough for _them_. Our opinion on the matter is quite irrelevant.

-Ellie