Slashdot Mirror


Does Microsoft Have the Best App Store For Open Source Developers?

WebMink writes "Microsoft seems to have been in combat against the GNU GPL throughout the history of free and open source software. But that may be changing. They have recently updated the terms of use for software developers in their Windows Phone app store to allow any OSI-approved open source license — even the GPL. They include extraordinarily broad language that gives the open source license priority over their own license terms, saying: 'If your Application or In-App Product includes FOSS, your license terms may conflict with the limitations set forth in Section 3 of the Standard Application License Terms, but only to the extent required by the FOSS that you use.' Could it be that the most open source friendly app stores will be the ones run my Microsoft?"

19 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Bill? by lorinc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Could it be that the most open source friendly app stores will be the ones run my Microsoft?"

    Bill, is that you?

  2. Apple bites the hand that created them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apples entire software ecosystem rides on top of free and open source software. There aren't enough superlatives to describe the hight of their hypocrisy. Come on Apple, stop the the stupid bullshit. Your business was rescued from the trash bin of history by your decision to refactor your entire operating system strategy around open source components. The very genesis of Apple was the result of communal sharing of information. Now you stiff arm the very same developers who made your success possible. There is no excuse for this.

  3. People seem to forget by andydread · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ms has always tried to get popular FOSS applications running decent on their platform in a futile attempt to negate the need to run GNU/Linux for those said apps. Then when Linux became the killer app Ms went out of their way to accomodate Linux on their hyper-v system. This is not because they want Linux or FOSS around in the marketplace. They know that if they do not accomodate FOSS their system will become more and more marginalized by emerging tech.

  4. Not Bill Gates' Microsoft by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's look at the bigger picture...

    1) Windows 7 is arguably the best desktop OS out there right now for the vast majority of the public. Even many of the Apple fans I know, myself included, have been forced to concede that Windows 7 is better than OS X in many ways.
    2) Microsoft has started to really become an advocate for open standards to the point of throwing IE 9 under the bus and repeatedly rolling the bus over it in front of their customers.
    3) Microsoft's tools produce standards compliant web output.
    4) Microsoft has officially incorporated jQuery into their web process and extended it in an open way to make it really work with Visual Studio.
    5) Microsoft has never once threatened Mono or any open source .NET effort even as the Java world was nearly torn apart recently.
    6) Microsoft has spent the last decade really ramping up their security efforts in what amounts to a "come to Jesus experience" on security.
    7) Microsoft is starting to allow their own products like ASP.NET MVC to go FOSS.

    I give them credit as a former Microsoft-hated, Apple-loving Java/JavaScript/Groovy/Ruby developer. This isn't Bill Gates' Microsoft. It's actually a damn shame that it's not Steven Sinofsky's Microsoft because that might have played a truly dangerous stalking horse to Tim Cook's Apple.

    1. Re:Not Bill Gates' Microsoft by geek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let's look at the bigger picture...

      1) Windows 7 is arguably the best desktop OS out there right now for the vast majority of the public. Even many of the Apple fans I know, myself included, have been forced to concede that Windows 7 is better than OS X in many ways.

      I work in a mixed environment, Windows 7/OSX and Linux. I've never heard an OSX user claim Windows 7 is better. Especially on a portable where the gestures on OSX make it absolutely the best experience out there, if you bother to learn it. I've never in fact seen someone with a MacBook Air, for example, switch it to windows. I've never even seen them run boot camp.

      I can't think of a single thing Windows 7 has that OSX doesn't but better. Windows 7 is a decent OS, emphasis on decent. It's the best Microsoft seems to be able to do. That doesn't make it good, nor does it make it better than OSX in any way shape or form.

    2. Re:Not Bill Gates' Microsoft by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative
      Wow. Just wow.

      "Microsoft has started to really become an advocate for open standards to the point of"

      No, they have not. Microsoft is an advocate of what benefits them. Have you forgotten already the OOXML problems? They will only support open standards until they can extend and extinguish them. You are confused because right now they've been forced to move back to the Embrace step, but if they could find a way to own access to the internet, they would.

      "Microsoft's tools produce standards compliant web output."

      Great, maybe they can attempt to implement C99 now 12 years later. I am still required to cripple my C code so it will be accepted by Microsoft's crappy compiler, years after everyone else has moved on. Respecting standards in one place doesn't mean they actually respect standards.

      "Microsoft has never once threatened Mono or any open source .NET effort"

      OK, but they have threatened patent action against open source. Do you REALLY believe they won't attack Mono if they find it in their interest? They will, whether you believe it now or not. Don't be naive.

      "Windows 7 is arguably the best desktop OS out there right now for the vast majority of the public."

      OSX is Unix with a usable GUI, that's basically the win right there. Microsoft does deserve credit for respecting backwards compatibility, though.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. Re:No by causality · · Score: 5, Informative

    Companies don't survive (and thrive) as long as they do without some forward thinking.

    Or a strangehold monopoly on an entire market. That helps too.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  6. Re:No by causality · · Score: 4, Informative

    Or a strangehold monopoly on an entire market. That helps too. I'm sure that'd help if it were true, sure. I don't think what you're saying applies in this particular situation, though.

    So you cannot fathom how the Windows monopoly on 90+% of all PCs sold for the last couple of decades may have provided them a steady revenue source? Interesting.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  7. Re:so they can steal your code by kthreadd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They want all the FOSS stuff first to have the first crack at stealing your code. That's what they've always been good at

    Stealing FOSS code? What does that even mean?

  8. Re:Microsoft and Open Source don't mix by kthreadd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I personally would never code open source software for Microsoft APP store to benefit... #deathtowidowsphone #longliveandroid

    Microsoft has published some of its software as open source, including their F# compiler and several .NET libraries like Entity Framework and ASP.NET MVC. They have also contributed to the Linux kernel.

    Microsft and Open Soure clearly mix; what could be said is that Microsoft is not (yet) open source first.

  9. Re:so they can steal your code by d33tah · · Score: 5, Informative

    Improving the code in a proprietary product without releasing the patches to the public. That's stealing. And that's what Microsoft had already done at least once: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ms+gpl+violation

  10. Re:BSD License by geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple doesn't hide the BSD code. They freely distribute it as Darwin, which is OSS and freely available. Its the entire under system of the OS. Apple has contributed a great deal to OSS over the years. There is no "blame" for using a license that freely allows them to do what they need to do. The GPLv3 is a non starter in the enterprise world.

    Not everyone is a basement dweller like RMS. Some people have lives and families to feed.

  11. Re:Microsoft and Open Source don't mix by Dave+Emami · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They have also contributed to the Linux kernel.

    That's a bit deceptive. Microsoft contributed code needed for its VMs to host Linux, nothing more.

    If they contributed, they contributed. Does it matter that they did so because there is a demand for their VMs to run Linux, rather than out of the goodness of their hearts? One of the benefits of having something be open source is that numerous different parties can fix bugs or add functionality that may (per consensus) improve the project, but which only one party has the time, knowledge, and motivation for. For folks other than the project's core developers, that motivation will often be "I need it to do X" not "I want to help everyone who uses this and promote open source software."

    --

    "The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
  12. Re:Microsoft and Open Source don't mix by worldthinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, but you deal with Microsoft at your peril. It is in their DNA to "steal", misappropriate,, strong arm, and every other dirty trick to disadvantage technical partners and they do it to this day. Ask Nokia how they feel about their business prospects. Or the legions of companies that have experienced the same rapacious partnerships.

    Ask HP how they feel about MS potentially buying Dell?

    Oh, and lest we forget, the legal suits against Linux are still winding their way through the courts and it was MS chief in the background backing those suits.

    I am in agreement with Admiral Akbar.

  13. Re:so they can steal your code by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nope. A select few started using that word "steal, in relation to copyright infringement. A very select few. It's not a "language evolves" thing at all. It was a deliberate form of indoctrination. Non-savvy people read news articles about "stealing music", and they believed that nonsense.

    The indoctrination continues. I refuse to be indoctrinated, thank you very much.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  14. for now... because it's empty by stenvar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have yet to find any useful app in the Microsoft app store. Microsoft is probably desperate to get anything in there.

    But they can change their TOS at the drop of a hat, so just because they may be "open source friendly" right now doesn't mean that they won't become quite open source unfriendly again when their app store picks up.

  15. Re:Microsoft and Open Source don't mix by kthreadd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They contributed code that only benefitted their product.

    Nothing wrong with that.

  16. Re:so they can steal your code by stenvar · · Score: 4, Informative

    The code was "written" by a contractor, and MIcrosoft immediately took action. I think turning that into "Microsoft has already stolen code" is unfair. Much as I dislike Microsoft and their business practices, I'm pretty sure they don't make a habit of "stealing" GPL code themselves. It would make very little sense for them to do so.

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-admits-its-gpl-violation-will-reissue-windows-7-tool-under-open-source-license/4547

  17. Aptitude/Yum by RedHackTea · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure that Linux Distros' Package Management Systems are the best "App Stores" for FOSS developers, or is that just me?

    --
    The G