Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Olivier Bloch Explains Microsoft Open Source (Video)
Most of us don't think of Microsoft when our thoughts turn to open source. This is probably because the company's main products, Windows and Office, are so far from open that just thinking about them probably violates their user agreement.. But wait! says Olivier Bloch, Senior Technical Evangelist at Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc., we have lots and lots of open source around here. Look at this. And this and this and even this. Lots of open source. Better yet, Olivier works for Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc., not directly for the big bad parent company. Watch the video or read the transcript, and maybe you'll figure out where Microsoft is going with their happy talk about open source. (Alternate Video Link)
Roslyn should be considered a flagship product (you know, once it's released). It's open source. http://roslyn.codeplex.com/
Look at this. And this and this and even this.
Raaawrgh. Not the "this, this and this" dance again. ;) Let me FTFY...
"Look at Microsoft Open Technologies. And .NET Foundation and a Computerworld article about Internet of Things and even Codeplex."
A good rule of thumb is that the sentence should be readable even without seeing which URLs the hyperlinks point to.
Little bit of Microsoft history for you crazy kids
'In a CSI job posting in December, Microsoft said candidates would need to be able to
“Win share against Open Source Software (OSS) in the cloud, on devices, and in traditional workloads by changing perceptions of Microsoft and winning the socket.”'
“The core of this role is to win mind-share so that Microsoft can win market-share.” ref
> it's been a long time since they've been actively hostile to open source
Here is an alphabetical list for you just regarding the ooxml, just so that you understand the scale of the problem:
http://techrights.org/ooxml-abuse-index/
It is hard to prove anything. But why would poor countries vote against free solutions. Why would small companies do a study that looks like FUD and makes Microsoft products look better compared to open source?
OOXML and the continued, though as yet unactioned, threat of patents over Linux both come to mind.
Microsoft is still every bit as evil as it once was. The chief difference between now and the 1990s is that its market, at least on the consumer side, is shrinking. For now that means they're forced to live with major open source projects like Linux, but I refer you back to Ballmer's patent threats. If it really goes down to the wire, you don't think Microsoft would try to litigate Linux out of existence? After all, we already know it bankrolled SCO's attempts.
Microsoft has never been, nor shall it ever be, a friend to open source. It hates it, fears it, is forced at times to cooperate with it, but you don't think there's a day that goes by that its executive don't wish open source would shrivel up and die?
There's no change in sentiment, simply in ability to act on the sentiment. The mere fact that they're sending out their latest psuedo-FOSSite quisling demonstrates that Redmond is the same as it ever was.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
...any time Microsoft has tried to pass itself off as reasonable and interoperational, it was a springboard attempt to find out who in the industry wants that from them, and then apply thumbscrews, handcuffs, hookers and blow as required to get those companies to see the world its way. That is, the Microsoft-centric, homogenous and locked-in up to their eyeballs, way.
Never. Ever. Ever. Ever.
EVER.
NEVER EVER trust Microsoft. They are the most self-interested company in the history of companies. Even Oracle looks shiny compared to Microsoft.
...Steve
> wasn't talking about open source in general
Quoting Ballmer:
If you use any open-source software, you have to make the rest of your software open source
He went on to claim software written for or by the government shouldn't be open source because commercial companies are not allowed to use open source software.