Attacking Linux from Apache?

WE recently commented on Microsoft's prominent participation in Apache's big event. Microsoft is paying big bucks for the privilege (it's a sponsor) and there are solid reasons for caution [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. Microsoft wants to use this relationship with Apache as an attack on Linux and an attack on the GPL, which Microsoft hopes to substitute with Windows and other software licences, respectively. It gives Microsoft leverage.

We have already seen -- quite recently in fact -- how Microsoft uses its money to harm the competition and polish its increasingly-tarnished image [1, 2]. By allowing Microsoft to enter, Apache enables Microsoft to deceive developers some more, under headlines like "Microsoft jumps on open source bandwagon." Here's what it's all about:

Microsoft's quick approval of a major financial commitment to the conference is "quite significant" and reflects increasing collaboration between the two, with Microsoft most recently seeking ASF's help to improve Apache Web server performance on its Vista operating system, he said.

Is that really about Free software? Or is it about the DRM-riddled operation system and about financial gain? Using ApacheCon as an opportunity, eWeek jumps right into the "i" word (interoperability), which is standards-hostile. It also says:

Ramji also said Microsoft has been working with open-source SOA (service-oriented architecture) infrastructure software provider WSO2 to demonstrate interoperability using Microsoft's StockTrader reference application. "Today, the WSO2 announced they would build an open-source version of the sample application under 'Project Stonehenge,' which is a new Apache incubation project," he said.

For those who are new to this WSO2 affair, it's also to do with Microsoft's .NET.

Sadly, Microsoft is successfully bending the media to sell the impression that it likes Open Source. Truthfully it concedes that it intends to simply devour it and it tries to recast "open source" as "collaborative development" [1, 2, 3.

The following article was spread all over the place in order to deceive and to do for Microsoft the PR work Bruce Perens recently referred to and warned about.

“Open source is not a product but an approach to software development,” said Matthew Hardman, platform strategy manager at Microsoft Singapore. “Microsoft does not compete with open source, just as Nike does not compete with running.”

Do Redmond's sociopaths suddenly pretend to like the very same thing that they actively fight? Only media spin can achieve that.

Here is another new example of the media control we that speak of.

MICROSOFT GAVE US a call Tuesday asking whether we were interested in seeing their all new and improved dashboard. We took them up on the offer and this morning found out what all the fuss was about.

This is not the first time that Microsoft 'invites' journalists for coverage [1, 2]. It also does this to spread its confusing messages regarding patents and open source. By doing so, it must be hoping to lure in and to fool developers, letting them think that they can co-exist with Microsoft under Windows. History teaches that this would be naive. Microsoft is trying the infamous "embrace and extend" strategy it's so familiar, not just at a technical level; they 'extend' open source with their own licences that they control (if only they are embraced first [1, 2]).

Paul Krill is helping Microsoft again [1, 2]. He posted this article with the headline "Microsoft's openness stressed."

Expressing a now-familiar theme, a Microsoft executive at the ApacheCon conference on Friday morning touted Microsoft's efforts to be more open, highlighting moves such as offering the company's "M" modeling language under the Microsoft "Open Specification Promise."

The Open Specification Promise is no friend of Free software [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. It's a wolf in sheep's clothing and it's misuse of the word open (or at least its connotation). It's about road tolls

Speaking of the "M" language, Microsoft is once again spoiling the reputation of other innocent people.

Microsoft is in hot water again for again taking the name of someone else's software for one of its fledgling products

It's emerged Microsoft's M programming language shares the same name as a 30-year-old open language used by the US Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) along with tens of thousands of users in medicine and business world wide. Even the former Soviet Union's iron-fisted rulers and its KGB spooks used the language.

Microsoft did the same routine to harm OpenOffice.org, potentially the nation of Fiji and even the software called "VistA". Does Microsoft just hate the US Department of Veteran Affairs? Or does it love it so much that it feels urgent need to nick its names? ⬆

"In this business, by the time you realize you're in trouble, it's too late to save yourself. Unless you're running scared all the time, you're gone."

--Bill Gates