Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Launches Its Own Open Source Foundation

darthcamaro writes "Microsoft already had its own open source (OSI-approved) licenses, its own open source project hosting site and now it's adding its own non-profit open source foundation. That's right, the company that is still banging the patent drum against open source now has its own 501(c)(6) open source foundation. Officially called the CodePlex Foundation, it's a separate effort from the CodePlex site and is aimed at helping to get more commercial developers involved in open source. Considering how they continue to attack Linux and open source, will anyone take them seriously?"

38 of 344 comments (clear)

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

    It's a trap, don't give them your code!

    1. Re:trap by Icegryphon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      keikaku doori
      Translators note means: Just as Planned.

    2. Re:trap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      embiggen?

    3. Re:trap by DesertBlade · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apparently you haven't used it. It is now my daily user at work, while it is a million times better than Vista, I still would rather use my Ubuntu at home or even my wife's Mac. The cool visuals wear off after about 2 days, and the long load times, random hangs start to become more noticeable. While Ubuntu is not perfect, it is free. And the cost to upgrade my wife's mac to Snow Leopard was a reasonable $29 versus the nearly $200 for windows.

      --
      Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
    4. Re:trap by Adelbert · · Score: 3, Funny

      embiggen?

      That's a perfectly cromulent ending, but I think AC was going for "extinguish".

    5. Re:trap by MynockGuano · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With Windows I can just point out the "Designed for Windows X" logo and my customers will get devices that work every. single. time.

      Normally, I wouldn't nitpick to this degree, but you seemed to place great emphasis on this point. Are you saying that you've never encountered a Windows user complaining that their printer just "stopped working?" It seems to me that every nontechnical person I know has expressed this frustration to me at one time or another.

    6. Re:trap by Shotgun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with Ubuntu, or any other Linux for that matter, is that the lack of a stable ABI and certification process for hardware makes it damned near impossible to sell at retail. Which wifi sticks work out of the box at Walmart? Which of the half dozen all in ones that are on sale this week at Staples work, and which are paperweights? Will this laptop at Best Buy work out of the box, INCLUDING wifi, and will it continue to function after the next update without jumping through CLI hoops from hell?

      Which one of these devices will continue to work after the next Windows upgrade?

      I tend not to throw out perfectly working equipment just because Microsoft decided to gratuitously change their device driver model. I find that 5yr old video and sound cards work just fine in recent releases of Linux, but aren't worth the manufacturers time to create new device drivers in order to operate under the latest versions of Windows. How much hardware was thrown out in order to update to Vista?

      You keep buying your cheap crappy hardware at the Staples clearance sales. I'll buy decent equipment that is built to last longer than 6 months, and use an OS that doesn't obsolete it.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    7. Re:trap by dwiget001 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think Microsoft, for public relations purposes, needs to update the 3 E's (Embrace - Extend - Extinguish), to something more warm and fuzzy, and at the same time, descriptive of what they actually do:

      Hug (you know, like you hug the one you love).

      Stretch (like you do when you get ready for a good work out).

      Cut Off Air Supply (like Netscape).

      New acronym to HSCOAS - to be pronounced Husk-o-a$$.

    8. Re:trap by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Notice how I got modded down? That is the usual "response" I get from the Linux users instead of actually responding to my post. But unlike those that use modpoints instead of their voice, I actually respond to those that post.

      To respond to your post, yes I have had machines that have "stopped working" in my 15 years as a sales and repair guy, and you know what? A good 90%+ of the time the "fix" is simply re-installing the driver. Boom, no muss, no fuss, and MOST importantly-NO PAPERWEIGHTS! How is a retailer supposed to sell your product? How are we supposed to keep your product on our shelves? We don't have time to compile current lists of all the hardware being sold at the big three, and then spend countless hours trawling forums looking to find which 30% work, only to have to start all over again when more hardware comes through.

      What are the answers I get when I put this before the Linux community? I always get variations on three themes-Bundle, Support Contract, or "demand that they give their code to kernel developers", and here I will respond and shoot down every single one of those arguments and show why they do not work. 1.-Bundle-Unless your name is Michael Dell, bundling will break you. The big retailers will ALWAYS be able to undercut your price, and unlike what most Linux users think folks do NOT feel "privileged" to run Linux or any other OS. They are looking at price and features and bundling makes Windows the cheaper option, as I don't have to carry all this non PC gear just to sell a machine,strike 1.

      2.-support contracts. This little ditty is popular with corporate IT, who fail to understand that home sales are an ENTIRELY different animal than corporate IT. Home users HATE support contracts, see the Best Buy extended warranties for example. Again that pushes Linux into a more expensive bracket than Windows, as I will be spending more time trying to fix whatever problem they have with unsupported hardware than simply doing what I enjoy, building, fixing, and selling computers. Strike 2-

      3.-Finally there is the "demand they give their code to the kernel devs" crowd, which I hate to break the news to them, is so full of fail it isn't even funny. First of all, have you ever worked retail? The brands there are NOT the same brands being sold by corporate. The companies that have released code-IBM,Intel,HP,ATI-what do they have in common? All have a large patent warchest and interest in the server/HPC platforms. That is nothing at all like retail, not even close. Any lawyer with half a brain would advise against giving source, just look at how Facebook today had to hand out source to a patent troll. The risk of patent trolls is simply too high for a lousy 2% market. A market I might add that thanks to the RMS "source code or nothing!" brigade have made it VERY hard to write binary drivers for Linux that will even function past a single point release. It has been 15 years, if the companies were gonna release source for all the items at Walmart they would have done it by now. Strike 3 and your product is off the shelves!

      I apologize for the length, but I really do want this to change. I WANT to sell Linux, as I believe its superior security model makes it a better choice for those that simply surf and watch video. This would make for a nicer experience for the customers, and lower prices for me. But until they can actually go into Walmart and buy hardware without studying for a test, well I simply can't have it on my shelves. Because when an item doesn't work they will say their new machine is broken (which to them it is) and bring it back to me to fix it (which of course I can't without drivers) and then I have to either take the box back and eat the cost difference between new and used, or burn the customer and watch my rep going down the shitter.

      I'm sorry if this offends Linux users, but in 2009 this is just insanity. Printer drivers should NOT need to be in the fricking kernel to work! Hardware manufacturers SHOULD be able to put a "Linux 32/64" driver folder on

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re:trap by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Cut Off Air Supply (like Netscape)."

      Do they have agreements with Gordon Russell and Russell Hitchcock as well ??!!!

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  2. Wait a sec... by wumpus188 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are we in Soviet Russia now?

    1. Re:Wait a sec... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, my brother, Soviet Russia is in you now.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  3. Oh yeah? by Zarf · · Score: 5, Funny

    we'll make our *own* Open Source only ours will be better and it'll have beer and hookers! Ha! Forget the beer and hookers! ... wait ... that's not how that goes...

    --
    [signature]
    1. Re:Oh yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I try to avoid the girls with open sores. Though ironically a trojan can actually protect you from malware and viruses.

  4. Parental oversight by proslack · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the link "The CodePlex Foundation will complement existing open source foundations and organizations, providing a forum in which best practices and shared understanding can be established by a broad group of participants, both software companies and open source communities."

    Seems like a meta-organization for open source entities, under the watchful eye of Redmond.

    --


    Floating in the black seas of infinity without a paddle.
    1. Re:Parental oversight by Delkster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or even more like "Major industry vendors will be able to get together and keep working on open source software projects, and MS will convince their customers to run that open source software on Windows rather than on Linux".

      MS realizes that a lot of open source software (servers, scripting languages, etc.) are in broad use and will stay that way. It's useless trying to make them go away. What MS can try to do is prevent that open source software from dragging people away from Windows.

      MS wants visibility in the same space with specific open source projects. If they doesn't have that visibility, open source software (Apache, MySQL, whatever) will be associated mainly with open source platforms, but if MS can break that association, many organizations might end up running their open source applications on Windows. That means keeping their customers, and many open source projects don't even compete directly with MS products because MS doesn't have a similar offering, so MS might not even lose that much by advocating selected projects.

      Creating bindings between open source software -- say, a scripting language -- and MS platforms such as .NET may help MS with that as well. You know, the whole embrace, extend, etc. thing.

  5. Re:This is mainly a Tax Strategy by nschubach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not sure it it's that or the fact that they are still trying to be the "center" of technology. It's been revealed in internal docs that they'd rather see their system or standard being used rather than someone else. If they can push their way into Open Source development and corner the market on it, they can phase out licenses they don't agree with and form the community how they like instead of how the community does.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  6. Jealousy by mollog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think Microsoft sees a lot of good work going on in the open source community and it wants to tap into that source of innovation. Regardless of what they say, Microsoft is sorely lacking in true, original innovation. Their best plays have been rip-offs of established ideas.

    They have the money and they have to try, but I am doubtful that they'll do much else besides foster Microsoft-centric development of tools and programs similar to the Windows Powershell IDE by Dr. Tobias Weltner.

    --
    Best regards.
    1. Re:Jealousy by sopssa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even if they take the best ideas elsewhere, MS products are usually solid and just work. Visual Studio is *still* considered the best development environment there is and with a reason. Windows is still the major mostly used OS in desktop (mac, the only competitor, doesn't really come even close).

      Even if you have original ideas, you have to know how to put them together. Now to do something other than car analogy. Even if you have the best ketchup in the world, you cant make your hamburger better if its all burned up, rotten and full of bugs and worms. You need the *whole* thing to be good.

    2. Re:Jealousy by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cloning proprietary applications and OSes is innovation?

      MS-DOS 1.0 was originally QDOS, Tim Paterson's clone of Digital Research's CP-M. MS-DOS 2.0 was an attempt to clone some UNIX features. Some (folders, file handles, I/O redirection) were implemented successfully; others (namely pipes) are simulated due to the lack of any sort of task switching.

      Pot calling the kettle black? Almost any app you see in the Linux land is either a clone of a proprietary app or a clone of a clone (and so on).

      Windows is a clone of Mac OS classic, and Excel is a clone of VisiCalc and 1-2-3. Real or malarkey?

    3. Re:Jealousy by tepples · · Score: 3, Funny

      and how much is XCode?

      $600, but it comes with a free computer.

    4. Re:Jealousy by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you're rather abusing the word "clone" here. A clone would be identical. DOS was not a clone of CP/M, Windows was not a clone of MacOS, Excel is not a clone of VisiCalc. They have similar functionality, common concepts (I mean, there are only so many ways you can do a spreadsheet) and probably some operability or low-level rip offs, but they ain't clones.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  7. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 4, Informative

    They have attacked Linux (or more specifically, Linux distributors) using the FAT long filenames software patent. I would call that an 'attack'; those who are a bit more twitchy about such things also use the word 'attack' for FUD-laden marketing materials and other run-of-the-mill corporate tactics.

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  8. A little naive, as usual. by gillbates · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We believe that commercial software companies and the developers that work for them under-participate in open source projects," Microsoft stated.

    While I applaud the intent to appear to be open source friendly, they haven't yet begun to address two of the major issues with Microsoft and open source:

    1. What happens when a Microsoft developer inadvertently contributes to their Open Source repository something better than a commercial Microsoft offering?
    2. Most of us developing commercial software *CAN NOT* participate in open source projects due to overly broad non-compete clauses in our contracts. The extent of our participation is not up to us, or Microsoft - it's up to our employer, and Microsoft's recent action in this regard does nothing to change this.

    Now, here we have Microsoft reinventing the wheel, aka sourceforge. I could even go for a BSD style license, or even public domain. But I have one question:

    Would they host, and allow development on ReactOS? (for those who don't know, it's an open source Windows clone)

    How Codeplex and Microsoft deal with this question would reveal far more about their true intentions than what their pundits say about their open source attitude.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  9. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish by MoxFulder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... doesn't seem to be working so well against open-source stuff. Maybe Microsoft's new strategy is to split and balkanize the open-source community with a bunch of conflicting licenses and communities.

    Division, Discord, and Destruction

    1. Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish by Desler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe Microsoft's new strategy is to split and balkanize the open-source community with a bunch of conflicting licenses and communities.

      Microsoft doesn't need to do that. The open-source community has been doing that just fine by themselves for years now.

  10. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here, they are trying to dip their toes into Open Source, and the summary bashes them. Geez, guys, get a life!

    The problem is that it is far too early to tell if this is just another attempt at "embrace, extend, extinguish" -- something MS has a very long and well documented history of doing, or the final stage of "ignorance, denial, attack, accept."

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  11. Lurking in the inky blackness of the void... by paiute · · Score: 5, Funny

    Remember that butt ugly fish with a mouth full of razor-sharp teeth that lives way down deep and has a worm-like appendage that dances tantalizingly just in front of its mouth? That's what I thought of when I read this story.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  12. It's perfectly utlitarian by malevolentjelly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe they're trying to develop a functional open source movement within their development culture? After all, Microsoft sells a platform. The DOS free software movement was a boon to their platform, not a detraction.

    We're not looking at a war of ideas, we're looking at a basic platform war. Take Apple, for instance; they sell a high-end commercial platform which heavily leverages the open source ecosystem to augment and flesh-out their platform. Commercial software can be obnoxious, even to a platform vendor: it works against its platform, it puts branding over adherence to user experience, and it makes computer usage frustrating.

    If the Windows platform were viewed from the angle of its development community instead of as a vessel for shareware, then they might be able to preserve and further their platform against more open markets (even Apple) coming up against them.

    The full F/OSS stack (Linux-FOSS-and above) is a weak platform technically, but a strong idea. Microsoft doesn't have to give up the idea of a professionally maintained platform to leverage an open source third party software ecosystem. Better within their sphere of influence than outside of it. Microsoft is offering an extremely friendly and accessible development environment to its users already; it would be a boon to foster an influx of new platform-defining free applications that add value while not becoming an issue of anti-trust.

  13. Distinction without a difference by mollog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sir, you make distinctions without a difference. All of Microsoft's work is derivative.

    Yes, they are hugely popular and they have the major market share. They make billions of profit, yet smaller companies like Apple seem to be the ones coming up with new products.

    Microsoft has been a drag on innovation for more than two decades. Its best, and seemingly only, plays continue to be copies of new technology.

    --
    Best regards.
  14. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Informative
    Actually, MS sold the patents to AST, and then encouraged AST to auction them to a litigation troll (to attack Linux), but OIN stepped in and bought the 22 patents.

    Link

    Note that MS tried to keep the auction secret, but apparently someone within AST clued OIN in as to what was happening.

    Even though AST claims they are not into litigation, there be demons within.

    Codeplex will be no different.

    Did you hear the news? Buy a copy of Windows7, and get a discount on new designer sheep clothing.

    --
    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  15. mixed signals by Jeek+Elemental · · Score: 3, Insightful

    http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/09/linux-foundation-to-microsoft-stop-secretly-attacking-linux.ars

    While I dont think theres some grand plan to kill open source, I see absolutely no reason to trust MS at all.
    Even if Ballmer swears on a stack of dried lawyers, that means nothing tomorrow if someone else gets the job.

    The MS engineers probably mean well, but have no say in the end.

    And ofcourse theres all the crap theyve pulled in the past, should this just be forgiven?

  16. My guess by neiras · · Score: 5, Funny

    MS is tying up traffic in Seattle today to bring all of their people together in one of the city's sports stadiums. Anybody know if that is the usual monkey-boy chair toss or is something up?

    The stage is dark. Suddenly, a catchy theme pours from the speakers. It's... could it be... YES! Rick Astley! The crowd groans uncomfortably.

    One of the screens showing the Microsoft logo goes blue. "Stop 0x0000000A or IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL".

    Steve Ballmer appears through a fine mist of perspiration twisted into delicate symmetrical whorls by an army of desperate interns, hair dryers in hand, all aiming at his armpits from just offstage. The humidity in the room increases by an order of magnitude.

    "Seven, Seven, Seven! GIVE IT UP FOR ME!"

    The stage erupts in blue flame. Mystical symbols are traced on the faces of aghast onlookers as Crawzogorium, the Infernal Keeper Of Ring 0 materializes above the podium.

    "WHO DARES SUMMON THE MASTER OF THE HIERARCHICAL PROTECTION DOMAINS?"

    Crawzogorium notices the bluescreen. "TAINT! WHO HAS DISREGARDED MY LAW OF KERNEL PROCESS ACCESS? I WILL PUNISH YOU NOW!"

    The light in the rooms fades to a dark brown, and a tortured scream is heard. It's Ballmer. His interns have dropped their hair dryers and fled the scene. He's fallen to his knees and is scrubbing at his underarm area with the tatters of his shirt.

    Things look bleak for our hero and his audience? How will it all end? Tune in next post!

    This post brought to you by AXE - It's how dirty guys get clean.

  17. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by Requiem18th · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since you have already been modded troll I shouldn't be feeding you but just this time.

    Yes they are obligated to maximize profit for their shareholders, to that goal, it makes no sense to release Windows or MS Office as FOSS, that's not what I want, nor what the majority of FOSS users want either. Except for the minority of loons that actually do want that, the majority of FOSS users and developers understand MS is under no obligation to release Windows or MS Office.

    Still we need a Free, Open Source operative system and office suite, a non hostile system that doesn't regards its users as thieves by default, An office suit that doesn't antagonize us, insert malicious secret codes in our documents, and OS that has the features we want, not the features someone else wants us to have and be limited to.

    So we make our own. No actions from MS are required. But MS has acted. Against us, every time they poison and flood an open standards forum, every time they bribe a politician who is considering going free, every time they they build intentional incompatibilities in their software, every time they scare clients with bogus patent threats, every time they come up with deceiving names to inject noise in the conversation, like .net, like officeopen instead of openoffice, like shared source instead of opens source, and now this fake open source foundation.

    That is what we are complaining about, we don't want them to release their products as FOSS, we just want them to stop playing dirty.

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  18. Re:now that IS a TASTY burger by HitoGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't worry. It's just Microsoft giving more fodder to the gullible Micropologists to futily argue to those who are rightly suspicious or even hostile to Microsoft's actions (I STILL don't trust Mono, for example.). I remember having an argument with one where he insisted that Microsoft not only stopped its "war" on Linux, but was now helping Linux.

    Now, very recently I am sure you are aware Microsoft launched yet another "Get The Facts" style FUD campaign against Linux, this time aimed at Best Buy employees! It's filled with the same inane dishonest bullshit you'd expect from a Microsoft-created FUD campaign.

    Microsoft isn't trying to bury Linux? Bullshit. Microsoft wants to help open source? Jury is still out on that one, but I still think in the end Microsoft has no long-term FOSS interests and just wants to find a good way to mutilate as many FOSS projects as possible.

    Many think I'm blindly hating on Microsoft here. No. Blindly hating on Microsoft usually involves simply hating Microsoft simply because its "trendy" without actually understanding WHY I'm hating Microsoft. I *know* why I hate Microsoft, and in my opinion, it's a damn fine reason (Or reasons.). I don't trust Microsoft because I am all-too-familiar with their past behavior. And this looks like just another case of Microsoft starting the "embrace" in "embrace, extend, extinguish." They did in with so many other things in the same way it looks like they're doing it with FOSS. And I'm expected to NOT be suspicious of Microsoft when they do this? Their history has taught me one big thing: Microsoft "helps" until they get what they want, then they get backstabbing.

    Thus, it takes more than a Micropologist saying Microsoft no longer wants to harm FOSS and a little inane Microsoft PR (Like their "community promise.") to convince me Microsoft is anything BUT harmful.

    --
    I am beginning to think that maybe Darl McBride was attacked viciously by a penguin as a child.
  19. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by harmonise · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wrong. Microsoft sued first and TomTom responded with a countersuit.

    See http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE52J1IE20090320

    --
    Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  20. Re:Coal.. Kettle? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

    The way it went was actually this:

    1. TomTom warned Microsoft that the latter infringes on TomTom's patents. This isn't the same as suing, but it can only be interpreted as the first step towards doing that. The purpose of notification is to make sure that, as far as law is concerned, the infringing party infringes knowingly; if they don't stop, the penalties grow significantly (3x, if I recall correctly).

    2. In response, Microsoft sues TomTom.

    3. In response to that suit, TomTom sues Microsoft over the same patents it warned about at step 1.

  21. Will anyone take them seriously? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Believe it or not, there is a vast world of non-linux developers out tehre - people who have no interest in developing for linux - who actually are interested in building and using oSS Windows tools. People will take them seriously, and they'll meet with a fairly large amount of success amongst windows-only developers.