Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Launches Free Web Software Eco-System

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the and-i'm-sure-it-will-be-bug-and-bloat-free dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft, inspired perhaps by the ease of selecting and installing iPhone apps, has taken a similar approach to gather back market share of its IIS web server in a predominantly Apache/PHP market. 10 open source CMS, gallery, wiki, and blog tools were chosen to populate the eco-system, dubbed Web App Gallery. Developers must agree to principles and can now submit their PHP or .NET application for inclusion. Once an application is in the gallery, Windows users use Microsoft Web Platform Installer, released in a keynote at MIX this week, which inspects the the local system, and installs and configures dependencies like the IIS webserver, PHP, URL re-writers, and file permissions. Screenshots show this to be quite easy for the typical computer user. This could provide some real competition for WAMP and Linux shell install processes."

33 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does it run Linux?

  2. Microsoft and what? by Kickboy12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not every day you see "Microsoft" and "Free" in the same headline.

    You think this is a sign Microsoft is legitimately trying to reach out to the web community? Or is this just another attempt to grab server market share from Apache and the Linux community?

    Generally, I think the last thing the web needs is more servers running IIS.

    --
    google.slashdot
    1. Re:Microsoft and what? by qoncept · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You think this is a sign Microsoft is legitimately trying to reach out to the web community? Or is this just another attempt to grab server market share from Apache and the Linux community?

      Um.. what's the difference? One thing I can promise you is that Microsoft, like any other company, does what it feels is in its best interest. ie, they aren't trying to do anyone a favor here, they're trying to make more money.

      --
      Whale
    2. Re:Microsoft and what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not every day you see "Microsoft" and "Free" in the same headline.

      Nonsense

    3. Re:Microsoft and what? by Andr+T. · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's not every day you see "Microsoft" and "Free" in the same headline.

      Search for 'Microsoft' in google. One of the top results will be "Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    4. Re:Microsoft and what? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'll notice, "free" applies to other people's software. Microsoft, ever infinitely gracious, deigns to allow you to give your software away so that they can sell more of theirs.

      Nobody should be surprised by a move like this. Web applications, CMSes and the like, are complementary goods to web servers and OSes. Everybody wants goods complementary to their own products to be cheaper, so as to drive demand. This isn't some sort of philosophical revolution, just Econ 101 + self interest on MS's part.

    5. Re:Microsoft and what? by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or is this just another attempt to grab server market share from Apache and the Linux community?

      This is MS trying to show everyone they can play in the "cloud" with the cool kids. It's the Zune for SAS.

      Back in the day MS came out with Explorer and hosed Netscape. Seems like ever since they wait for the trend to establish itself and then come in with a competing product trying to recreate that market capture moment from years ago. Only they show up late with products that are usually tied to their OS platform and maybe a little dorky.

      Microsoft trying to be hip and trendy sometimes reminds me of a middle-aged guy hitting on his daughters college-age friends.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    6. Re:Microsoft and what? by Firehed · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm inclined to think that they want to put IIS (and ASP.NET) in front of as many casual Windows-based web developers as possible. Of course with both WAMP and XAMPP taking about three minutes to install I'm not sure that will work - especially since a number of PHP web apps require some odd hacks to get them to work under IIS.

      In order to be "deployable" under these settings, new developers will have to use the same hacks and/or workarounds, and could well forget to address how the standard behavior will act on *AMP servers, theoretically creating a bunch of new PHP web apps that will only deploy properly on PHP/IIS servers.

      Of course, the number of hosts that are offering PHP/IIS rather than *AMP is absolutely miniscule, so these apps catching on (if this is the case) is slim to none.

      Part of me thinks that it's more a ploy to get .NET in front of PHP developers, trying to sell them on the "look at all of this premade, drag-and-drop functionality" thing, but I doubt that will make a difference. Devs that need what .NET offers are going to already be using IIS setups and PHP devs will probably ignore it due to the relatively steep learning curve (or just being forced to work in Visual Studio unless you want to memorize an entire framework).

      So... I have no idea. If my cynicism is correct, then I see what they're trying to do but don't see it working that well. If not, then your guess is as good as mine.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    7. Re:Microsoft and what? by Kz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only they show up late with products that are usually tied to their OS platform and maybe a little dorky.

      Doesn't that describe IE?

      --
      -Kz-
    8. Re:Microsoft and what? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Of course with both WAMP and XAMPP taking about three minutes to install I'm not sure that will work

      Ah but it will, Microsoft developers don't tend to look outside the box to see if there's anything else out there - they generally assume that MS provides all they would ever need, and if MS doesn't provide it, its either not available at all, or they never needed it anyway.

      This is why this will succeed, the MS blogs and communities will pick up on it and suddenly they'll think its the best thing ever. I doubt they'll actually use much PHP, that's just the teaser to pre-populate the site with apps, they'll all get taken over with ASP.NET MVC stuff before too long -the MS crowd just don't like to install 'foreign' stuff like PHP when they will think nothing of installing over a gig of .net framework to start playing with C#.

      So - I don't know if it'll work well either.

    9. Re:Microsoft and what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not every day you see "Microsoft" and "Free" in the same headline.

      Not "free" as in beer, "free" as in cheese in a mousetrap...

    10. Re:Microsoft and what? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2, Informative

      The redistributables are not exactly a gig - though I always think like that because they are huge (I have to download the full ones to install on my customer's site as they're not connected to the internet)

      But: add them up, its not a gig, but its getting there:

      .NET Framework 1.0 Redist: 19.7MB
      .NET Framework 1.1 Redist: 23.1MB
      .NET Framework 2.0 Redist: 22.4MB
      .NET Framework 3.0 Redist: 50.3MB ( x86 )
      .NET Framework 3.0 Redist: 90.1MB ( x64 )
      .NET Framework 3.5 Redist: 197.0MB

      plus another 50 odd Mb for the service packs.

      .Net 4 will be out soon too.

  3. Great, another PHPNuke and Wordpress by guruevi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    PHPNuke and other CMS'es or weblog thingies like Wordpress made it simple to create websites for the masses of people that just wanted something simple to host their website. Of course, they never kept up with any of the updates or didn't even give a hoot about security. Next thing you know you have a bunch of websites that are cracked and now serve ads and malware.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Great, another PHPNuke and Wordpress by tearmeapart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...and I think the others are usually a lot easier to install. Microsoft's takes at least 5 steps (with steps like 1. "Download, Configure, Install MySQL").

      Meanwhile, on many other systems, it is a lot less work:
      Ubuntu:
      1. In the Programs menu, click "Add/Remove"
      2. Select the CMS (or whatever) that you want, and click "Install"
      3. Enjoy.

      Other debian systems:
      1. apt-get install my-favourite-cms

      Freebsd:
      1. cd /usr/ports/www/my-favourite-cms; make install

      And finally, a quick comparison between this new Microsoft way and the usual ways with GNU Linux/BSD:
      Installing is easier with GNU Linux/BSD
      Configuration is easier with GNU Linux/BSD
      Support is generally more available with GNU Linux/BSD
      Writing plugins is generally a whole lot easier with GNU Linux/BSD because the code is available

      Especially with the new tools available, I believe IIS deserves to die.

    2. Re:Great, another PHPNuke and Wordpress by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't apache (the webserver) that provides the comfort you describe. The package managing system is. So why should IIS (the webserver) die?
      Someone should provide a package managing system to enable the comfort for IIS. Oh, look at that, the summary says Microsoft is doing that.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    3. Re:Great, another PHPNuke and Wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you need access to the source code of a system write plugins for it, the plugin system in place isn't a very good one IMHO

  4. This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Spider invites flies into web. Film at 11.

  5. Big deal. by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Microsoft, inspired[1] perhaps by the ease of selecting and installing iPhone apps, has taken a similar approach to gather back market share of its IIS web server in a predominantly Apache/PHP market. 10 open source[2] CMS, gallery, wiki, and blog tools were chosen to populate the eco-system, dubbed Web App Gallery.

    [1] I think submitter mis-spelled "feeling threatened".

    [2] Big deal. Two open source tools? How many closed-source tools are in the "ecosystem"?

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    1. Re:Big deal. by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Big deal. Two open source tools? How many closed-source tools are in the "ecosystem"?

      Open Source != Good. Closed Source != Bad. Just as open source and bad are not mutually exclusive, closed source and good are not mutually exclusive, regardless of what Stallman thinks. I have used quite a few closed source programs that I like quite a bit, and quite a few open source programs that were plain awful. And vice versa. The idea that in order to be a Good Thing (tm) it has to be Open Source (tm) is a Weird Thing (tm).

    2. Re:Big deal. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is probably tangental; but Stallman takes no position on the quality of proprietary or free software programs. His position is strictly concerned with the ethics and implications for freedom of the two.

      It is the business side guys, the ones who talk about "open source" who advance the argument that the development model produces better, as opposed to freer or more ethical, software

      You don't have to agree with him; but you should, in that case, at least disagree with him rather than somebody else entirely.

    3. Re:Big deal. by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 2, Funny

      [1] I think submitter mis-spelled "feeling threatened".

      I think you misspelled "misspelled." ;-)

    4. Re:Big deal. by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I choose Microsoft they will strive to trap me, perhaps not today but someday and for the rest of my life.

      The fact that Microsoft is a greedy little spider is not something that should ever be ignored.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  6. Not needed for server apps by saibot834 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Servers are maintained by people who are not computer newbies and need a GUI. Normally they know how to handle a shell.
    Extremely ease install routines for server applications suggest that maintaining a server and keeping it secure is a trivial task, just like clicking those shiny "install" buttons. This is not the case, and you better know how to keep your server save if you run it on the web, especially if you make the somewhat disturbing choice to run it under Windows.

    1. Re:Not needed for server apps by rackserverdeals · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are plenty of people with servers out there that don't know what they're doing and couldn't restart a service if their control panel software got hosed.

      --
      Dual Opteron < $600
    2. Re:Not needed for server apps by MeanMF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That may be true for larger sites, but there's a huge market for low-cost, turnkey web hosting usually fronted with cPanel or Plesk. Microsoft wants to get into that market.

    3. Re:Not needed for server apps by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And we shouldn't encourage those sort of people to run servers.

    4. Re:Not needed for server apps by iamhigh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pffft. Real administrators don't download others software... they rewrite everything from scratch themselves.

      --
      No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
    5. Re:Not needed for server apps by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Running a server requires some technical knowhow. The more you attempt to "dumb it down" the higher chances you have with someone who really doesn't know what they are doing to admin a server. This is a bad thing for a few reasons, A) A GUI or any other "helper" program makes your server more insecure, a simple command line install running only Apache and a firewall is going to have less security holes by default then the person running Apache, a Firewall all under X and KDE. B) It is very, very, very, easy to socially engineer GUI attacks. On the other hand, its a lot harder on a command line because most of the documentation is standardized. C) If you don't even know what you are doing, how are you securing your box? If someone can't understand a command line, how are they possibly going to understand the complexities in making a server reasonably secure?

      The overworked IT guy should know how to run a server using the command line if one of his principle duties is running a server. A command line is no slower than a GUI (its faster in most cases) to someone who knows how to use it. If you hire someone to run a server, they better know what they are doing.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:Not needed for server apps by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, "elitist nerds" just realize that if you screw this up you could end up being responsible for hosting kiddie porn.

      Being "easy to setup" and "easy to setup correctly" are worlds apart.

      Even the shiny happiness of Windows doesn't alter this. (despite all the propaganda to the contrary)

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  7. Can you avoid lock in? by EvilIntelligence · · Score: 2, Funny

    And since it only runs on Windows, its just more reason send Microsoft some more money! Oh wait! I LOOKED at an ASP page earlier. I think I owe Ballmer another quarter....

  8. Open source used to undermine Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The reason why Microsoft is giving support to open source applications is not because it wishes to support open source.

    It is because it fears the open source operating system more than anything else. It imagines that if they welcome open source application developers onto the Microsoft platform they will be able to undermine support for the rival operating system (Linux).

    If and when the rival operating system fades into disuse, those open source application developers will find that the Microsoft embrace can be every bit as fatal as a boa constrictor's

  9. Yeah, The App Store by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft, inspired perhaps by the ease of selecting and installing iPhone apps

    Yup. Cuz nobody's every thought about a package manager before. Especially not one with a nice, GUI front end.

    Hey, maybe Microsoft will adopt something similar for the Xbox 360. You know, to make it easier to download add-ons, small games, videos, and so on. They could call it, I don't know, Xbox Live Marketplace or something. Too bad it's too late for them to have done it for the Xbox. Real shame that.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  10. Web Software Eco-System by nizo · · Score: 2, Funny

    If it is an entire Eco-System it must include the viruses too I assume?

    --
    I Am My Own Worst Enemy