Microsoft Pressures for WAMP While Novell Helps 'Infect' AMP
- Dr. Roy Schestowitz
- 2008-10-18 15:34:12 UTC
- Modified: 2008-10-18 15:34:12 UTC
Windows advantaging and patent encumbering
TWO DAYS ago we explained why Microsoft had invaded Apache, its competitor. It's about benefiting the Microsoft stack through various enhancements. Yesterday we showed Microsoft's latest move toward Windows-isation of AMP, which is a strategy that Microsoft's internal documents expose as well.
Glyn Moody, taking both developments into account,
reaches the same conclusions. This could be an "Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish" move.
This is how it will go. Purely in order to “improve” the performance of Apache and Hadoop on the Windows platform, Microsoft will helpfully offer some really cool hacks....which will of course only work on the Windows platform.
This will effectively fork the Apache/Hadoop/whatever code – all for the good of their communities. Of course, there may be some “patented” technologies in there, but Microsoft will promise never, ever to sue anyone using this “optimised” open source – cross its heart and hope to die. Look for Microsoft to get involved with other leading open source projects in the same way.
This was predicable. They have already done the same thing to PHP (the "P" in LAMP) after a deal with Zend in 2006.
Another trend worth highlighting is Microsoft's attempt to sway developers in .NET's way.
Novell is helping Microsoft's cause. This has various motivations, but one of them stands out. "[It's] all written in .NET, just for
patent ambush purposes and infection," says one knowledgeable reader. Only
Novell customers are said to be 'protected' and, according to this reader, "all the "free tools" that Microsoft releases are strangely written in .NET for infection purposes."
Do not allow this to happen. Microsoft and Novell rely on people's ignorance -- for now.
⬆
Image from Wikimedia
Comments
AlexH
2008-10-18 16:33:23
Roy Schestowitz
2008-10-18 16:37:34
AlexH
2008-10-18 16:44:11
He calls it "Apache/Hadoop/whatever code" - that's a bizarre nomenclature if ever I've seen it. It suggests he doesn't know what Microsoft are contributing to.
He then says:
Actually, they will do better than that. They will grant a royalty-free perpetual license, and if anyone sues the project or user of the project they will terminate it.
The fact that Glyn doesn't know these things makes me think he's at best uninformed. Sowing fear of patents where there is nothing to be afraid of is classic FUD.
Shane Coyle
2008-10-18 17:33:08
That's the right way to do it, which is why I hated so much their deal with Novell that grants some sort of protection to only Novell 'customers', and any contributions to opensuse.org that make it into SLE, since Novell has agreed to pay a royalty already.
xISO_ZWT
2008-10-18 18:46:51
You can take a sow and clean it up, but a sow will always return to the slough. You can't change what is totally corrupt and infected by wishing it not to be.
AlexH
2008-10-19 09:22:55
That's why I think it's important not to knock situations like this, where everyone can agree that it's a good idea.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-10-19 10:39:59
AlexH
2008-10-19 11:38:54
I've already demonstrated why this "patent" FUD against Apache is ill-informed.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-10-19 12:00:19
AlexH
2008-10-19 12:01:33
So, what exactly is the problem with Microsoft contributing code to Hadoop, then?
Roy Schestowitz
2008-10-19 12:03:11