Microsoft Attacks, Then Tries to Hijack Free Software

Dr. Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 17:15:42 UTC
Modified: 2008-12-06 17:15:42 UTC

Deadly embraces, deadly extensions

A Microsoft press release which we mentioned the other day demonstrated the fact that Microsoft remains hostile towards Free software (Microsoft calls it "open source"), yet people are expected to believe that this is not happening. Glyn Moody has explained what all this FUD means (or doesn't mean).

Those with good memories may recall a phase that Microsoft went through in which it issued (and generally commissioned) a stack of TCO studies that “proved” Windows was better/cheaper than GNU/Linux. Of course, they did nothing of the sort, since the methodology was generally so flawed you could have proved anything.

Worth remembering are the recent attacks from the Gartner Group, which is behind "TCO". Here is a new InformationWeek essay that describes Microsoft as "Open Source Schizoid", not just "Open Source Xenophobe".

The best word for Microsoft's attempts to deal with open source is schizoid. On the one hand you have the folks at the Open Source Lab, who are building what bridges they can -- and on the other, you have the rest of the company, including its marketing and PR divisions, who may end up undoing what good is done. At the end of the day, they're still a proprietary-platform outfit, and they have to uphold that.

Who would be fooled by such a two-faced monopolist with a long history of well-documented crimes?

Embracing and Extending Free Software in the Philippines

Winston Damarillo is a renowned Free software advocate, but he seems to have just sold out to Microsoft.

Microsoft's motives and strategy are very clear. It's something along the lines of: "Here some money. Stop promoting freedom. Help Windows. Promote 'open'. Help us sell proprietary Microsoft stacks."

Here is the main report about this (in English).

Microsoft Philippines is looking to pursue more collaboration with open source developers in the country through its Open Source Interoperability Lab project.

The current Open Source Interoperability Lab is housed in the Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) office at the University of the Philippines Diliman in Quezon City.

As part of this increasing collaboration with the open source community, Microsoft Philippines has inked a partnership with open source software engineering firm Exist Global headed by Winston Damarillo.

This created a small wave and it's exceptionally disappointing.

Embracing and Extending Python with Microsoft XAML

IronPython, like JPython, is an attempt to 'bastradise' a programming language or framework. Companies want to 'monetise' a community.

For reasons that are similar to IronRuby's, this is s mistake [1, 2, 3], but Microsoft has already hijacked such a project and transformed developers in it so that they adopt its own licences that it (Microsoft) can control and change at any time [1, 2, 3]. Here is an example of a new 'extend' phase.

Dan Eloff has announced the release of Silvershell 0.6. (Also known as Python/E - Python Everywhere!).

[...]

It runs in the browser with Silverlight 2 or on the desktop with a WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation - which means it won't run on Mono) User Interface.

We wrote about IronRuby in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. It's similar and it's a thing to be avoided. Microsoft wraps Free technologies with proprietary ones that impede interoperability and introduce patents.

Embracing and Extending Perl with Microsoft Influence

Microsoft is applying to Perl a tactic so similar to one which it applied to Apache [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. A reader has just alerted us to this development.

Commencing this month, Microsoft will be providing every CPAN author with free access to a centrally-hosted virtual machine environment containing every major version of Windows.

For those not realising what Microsoft has in mind, the following vanishing article is worth a look. Microsoft is making some stuff up about intellectual monopolies to undermine Free software, which is wants to police. From the Web Archive: "As far as making the source code available, we at MS strongly feel that there is a need to protect intellectual property (IP) as it is the economic incentive to create better solutions." This article as a whole is worth a read while it lasts.

It's the same old story, not the exception. They try to tame developers. First they put them on Windows and ensure all the programmers empower the monopoly and leave GNU/Linux isolated, if not neglected. At the earlier stages, it's just flirting. ⬆

Scandal

Comments

Needs Sunlight

2008-12-06 17:55:49

This explains the astroturfers stepping up low-profile attacks against6 Perl. Perl is about as close to write-once, run anywhere as we have ever gotten. It's also the glue that holds the Internet together. And the web. So as former MS-based PHP developers are realizing the benefits of perl, it becomes more of a threat to MS little cult.

Virtualization or not, Windows is simply not relevant in the web world and perl makes it that much easier to rule out Windows. Just ask the banks how well it went with that little .NOT fail. Perl and Java rule web development, while PHP gets the limelight.

We hope that the CPAN maintainers collectively "grow a pair" and turn away these time-wasters. Time wasting can ruin an otherwise good developer.
AlexH

2008-12-06 17:58:31

IronPython, like JPython, is an attempt to ‘bastradise’ a programming language or framework.

Given I obviously missed the memo... exactly what is wrong with Jython?
Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 18:01:30

Sun hired two prominent Python developers, IIRC, in order to attract developers to its stack.
AlexH

2008-12-06 18:04:38

And what's wrong with that?
Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 18:05:13

Solaris is not GNU.
stevetheFLY

2008-12-06 18:08:03

So, that you can use Python to program within the .NET framework is an attack on Python? Compelling argument... :p

Next thing you'll say that Linux-PCs being able to connect to a Windows-network is an attack on SAMBA! (Yes, I know this is absurd; and this should demonstrate the absurdity of your claims.)

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
AlexH

2008-12-06 18:08:10

Java doesn't care what OS it runs on top of. What does Solaris have to do with it?
Dan O'Brian

2008-12-06 18:08:39

But Jython is free software, isn't it? What does Jython have to do with Solaris?
stevetheFLY

2008-12-06 18:09:49

Roy constantly makes the most absurd claims; don't let him irritate you too much... It's just the twisted, mischievous way he thinks.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
G. Michaels

2008-12-06 19:59:44

@Dan:

The thing that is wrong with IronPython/IronRuby is that they're associated with Microsoft. That's it.

@Roy:

For those not realising what Microsoft has in mind, the following vanishing article

That proves absolutely nothing whatsoever. Microsoft Australia is giving Perl developers an environment where they can test Perl so that it can run better on Windows. That will not affect the state of Perl running on other operating systems, since the amount of people working on them is, to put it mildly, far greater than those trying to make it better on Win32.

Why don't you just save everybody a lot of time and write your articles like this:

X is associated with Microsoft. I hate Microsoft. Nothing should work on Windows, no one should work with Microsoft under any circumstance. I want Microsoft to disappear and die. Therefore X is bad, and you should not use it. If you do, you have sold out and you're an apologist. If you attempt to tell me any different then you're an astroturfer, obviously paid by Microsoft. You should be hunted and put down like the worthless dog you are, and that would solve all my problems, because I won't have to remember to insult you every three days on my blog. Now, look over there, a point release of some obscure GNU/Linux package and pictures of coerced kids with funny signs in India! Weee!

That would cut down on your bandwidth bills something fierce.

Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 20:26:25

I was away for several hours (gym) and it's clear to see that a Munchkins festival was here. :-(

G. Michaels

2008-12-06 20:27:50

Stick to pasting red text on people's comments, Roy. You're much better at that.

Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.

jo Shields

2008-12-06 21:02:19

Roy. You’re much better at that.

Nope. He isn't. That's the problem.

AlexH

2008-12-06 23:15:58

Another drive-by shooting on another innocent free software project...

... actually, counting "not GNU" Solaris, that's another two.

Sad.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 23:21:40

Solaris is UNIX, Alex. You already know that.

AlexH

2008-12-06 23:29:19

And? So what of it? It's free software. As is Jython.

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-06 23:31:33

Roy: Solaris is also free software these days.

G. Michaels: I'm fully aware why Roy wouldn't like IronPython, but Jython is completely separate from Microsoft.

Ian

2008-12-06 23:32:25

http://www.opensolaris.org/os/

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 23:48:04

CDDL.

AlexH

2008-12-06 23:51:19

This is a free software license.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-06 23:59:27

So?

AlexH

2008-12-07 00:08:35

So for a "free software supporter" you do a pretty good job of unjustified drive-bys of projects.

Jython's "bad" because Sun has the temerity to pay people to work on it, and apparently Solaris is "bad" because it's under the CDDL.

Your anti-Microsoft and anti-Novell crusades are at least somewhat internally consistent, but this new stuff is BS.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 00:11:55

I want GNU/Linux, Java, OOo, and MySQL to succeed. I'd rather see btrfs succeed, not ZFS. The same goes for Solaris. Linux hardly has an owner (kernel.org). It's healthy that way.

AlexH

2008-12-07 00:15:55

Yeah, so you've picked your favourites and everything else is to be criticised.

Nice work, I look forward to running this GNU/Roy monoculture.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 00:17:38

Here's what RMS told me about Solaris: http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/article.php/3717476

G. Michaels

2008-12-07 01:35:25

This wannabe name dropping is so ridiculous. Who do you think you're impressing?

Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.

jo Shields

2008-12-07 01:53:54

This wannabe name dropping is so ridiculous. Who do you think you’re impressing?

His groupies. Duh.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 01:59:11

His groupies. Duh.

The only "group" I see here is a group of hecklers that try to ruin each and every post with off-topic insults.

jo Shields

2008-12-07 02:10:53

The only “group” I see here is a group of hecklers that try to ruin each and every post with off-topic insults.

Your little fan club on IRC doesn't count, then? Unlike them and you, I've never contacted any of the "hecklers" directly (and I doubt they've contacted each other).

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 02:26:41

We think of it as a team, not a group (as in "groupie"). A lot of people are concerned about Novell.

jo Shields

2008-12-07 02:33:58

I'm not so sure. The funny thing is, for a site called "Boycott Novell", Novell is only third in your category cloud - by a wide margin, most content is about Microsoft. Most posts are about Microsoft.

I strongly suspect most people are concerned about Microsoft - and simply attack anything vaguely Novell related because theirs is the most recent deal made with the hated enemy

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 02:36:32

Stories that we cover which are about Novell naturally have Microsoft involved. We don't cover the proprietary sides of Novell, such as GroupWise. We do so in the weekends.

The site "Explor~~ing~~es the reality behind exclusionary deals with Microsoft and their subtle (yet severe) implications."

G. Michaels

2008-12-07 06:55:22

We think of it as a team

An enormous team.

Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.

AlexH

2008-12-07 09:41:09

@Roy: RMS' comments were about the system as a whole. He does not endorse any system which uses non-free software, which includes every GNU/Linux distro bar gNewsense and Blag.

Given you can run GNU/Solaris it's in exactly the same boat.

And I notice you studiously ignore the Jython comments again..

Seriously, Roy. You see this as "heckling". I see this as you attacking free software projects without any justification, because this isn't even related to your anti-Novell jihad. Your only excuse thus far is "I don't like them".

I wonder how many other of your attacks are veiled in thin reasoning but are actually because you have a chip on your shoulder about various products.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 09:44:57

This was not an attack. It was an observation, which I stand by. Care to comment on Python that's tied to Windows and to XAML? is that a good thing Microsoft is doing?

AlexH

2008-12-07 10:17:00

@Roy: it looks like an attack from here, and it's continued in your comments where you're urging people not to use them.

The "Python tied to Windows and XAML" - if you're talking about IronPython, it isn't tied to either of those things. It doesn't even come into contact with XAML.

jo Shields

2008-12-07 11:44:24

It doesn’t even come into contact with XAML.

It can do if you want it to, but it's hard work: http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/silverlight/index.shtml

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 11:53:44

AlexH,

It's a gentle push for developers to embrace WPF and Windows.

AlexH

2008-12-07 12:01:32

@Roy: by that measure, every language is a gentle push, because they're all supported within the .net CLR. Sorry, no dice.

Bob

2008-12-07 14:02:53

What about the C and C++ programming languages? Are they languages controlled by Microsoft because of the fact that Microsoft encourages C/++ developers to target WPF and Windows?

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 14:05:34

No, but Visual Studio is the danger.

Needs Sunlight

2008-12-07 15:43:15

The CDDL is not a Free Software License: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CDDL

The gist is that the CDDL does not apply to a whole package as do other licenses, but instead causes intermixture of proprietary binaries throughout.

CDDL a step in the right direction, but a junk license nevertheless. The binaries present maintenance, security and portability problems. Look up the BLOB discussions from the past ages up through current times, especially around Linux and BSD kernel discussions.

Java, Python, Perl all run best on non-MS platforms, due very much to the failure of MS to design and implement quality systems. Some of that failure is intentional, some through incompetence and lack of experience of the MS engineers, and some through technology being the lowest priority of the MS movement.

AlexH

2008-12-07 15:46:09

@Needs: did you even read the link you're providing?

Or do you have some other definition of "free software"?

jo Shields

2008-12-07 15:53:11

Or do you have some other definition of “free software”?

Another prime example of reality taking a holiday here on BN.

From gnu.org: "This is a free software license."

I wonder whether people like Needs Sunlight are liars or stupid. One or t'other.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 15:58:18

Not all FS licences are created equal.

AlexH

2008-12-07 16:04:39

"not being equal" isn't the same as "not being free", though.

Decrying CDDL as non-free is Newspeak.

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 16:05:06

It's irrelevant whether FSF licenses are created equal or not, CDDL is still a Free Software license.

I find it amusing that both Roy and his supporters (in this case, Needs Sunlight) clearly fail at reading comprehension and both like to link to articles and summarize them as saying something that they do not say (often times the articles say just the opposite, just as in this particular instance).

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 16:09:29

I didn't say it wasn't Free. However, as ms-pl shows, the FSF is willing to explicitly encourage against the use of some free licences.

AlexH

2008-12-07 16:10:17

@Dan: particularly ironic that they attempt to re-define CDDL as "non-free" in an article attacking Microsoft of hijacking free software :)

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 16:12:05

AlexH: yea, that is amusing ;-)

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 16:17:41

Roy: You may not have said that CDDL was not a FS license, but Needs Sunlight did - which is who I was responding to.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 16:35:21

Maybe it's a lesser appreciated Free software licence. There were already fine ones, e.g. GPL, that Sun could choose.

Jo Shields

2008-12-07 20:22:37

Maybe it’s a lesser appreciated Free software licence. There were already fine ones, e.g. GPL, that Sun could choose.

Perhaps. But fighting license proliferation isn't the same as saying "this Free license is non-Free because I don't like it"

Could MPL have achieved the same goals as CDDL? Very likely. I think the decision not to use GPL was consicous, as an effort to prevent code sharing by Linux.

Similarly, Ms-PL *IS* a free software license - largely pointless given it's almost identical to the more common Apache 2.0 license, but still Free.

GPL does not "mean" freedom, GPL is a great example of it. Not the same thing. Saying "you may not use that license, because I say so" is, ironically, pretty non-free as a thing to do.

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 20:39:58

I'd just like to point out that by Roy's and Needs Sunlight's logic, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD are not free software (they aren't GPL and are not maintained by GNU) operating systems and should be avoided.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 20:45:32

Don't put false words in my mouth, please.

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 21:40:36

Well, you said Solaris should be avoided because it is not GNU. Then Needs Sunlight backed you up and said that the Solaris license (CDDL) is not a Free Software license.

Did I mis-summarize?

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 21:42:39

Yes, you did.

Dan O'Brian

2008-12-07 22:53:16

How quickly you forget history... Good thing your nonsense is "well documented" here in this thread:

Here is you saying that Solaris is not GNU (your reasoning for avoiding Solaris, since that's what AlexH and I were asking):

http://boycottnovell.com/2008/12/06/attack-then-hijack-two-face/#comment-43590

and after AlexH and I mention that Solaris is under a Free Software license, you reply with a single acronym "CDDL" here:

http://boycottnovell.com/2008/12/06/attack-then-hijack-two-face/#comment-43711

As far as I can tell, your reason for mentioning CDDL is that you somehow thought that CDDL was not a Free Software license (or at least that's what it seemed you were trying to say since "CDDL" wouldn't be a rebuttal to what AlexH and I were saying otherwise).

That's when Needs Sunlight followed up and claimed that CDDL is not a Free Software license:

http://boycottnovell.com/2008/12/06/attack-then-hijack-two-face/#comment-44296

Sure seems like I summarized quite well.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-07 23:53:48

The way you put it made it sound like you portrayed me as arguing the CDDL is adverse to the FSD.

Jo Shields

2008-12-07 23:58:49

Not all FS licences are created equal.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-08 00:03:48

word up.

Jo Shields

2008-12-08 00:51:17

Quite. You know, you could end a lot of this by simply saying, in plain English, whether or not you agree with Needs Sunlight's assertion that Solaris (and CDDL) is non-Free - or whether you badmouth it simply because it isn't your favourite, and anything you don't think is best is automatically worthy of attacks and derision (as seems to be implied by http://boycottnovell.com/2008/12/06/attack-then-hijack-two-face/#comment-43716)

AlexH

2008-12-08 08:53:42

@Jo: yeah, good luck with that ;)

Getting clear answers to simple questions is usually impossible at this point.

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-08 13:44:15

Yesterday:

http://systembash.com/content/howto-installing-zfs-and-setting-up-a-raid-z-array-on-ubuntu/

"ZFS is a relatively new filesystem created by Sun. It is released under the CDDL License which is incompatible with Linux’s GPL License, meaning that it can not be installed natively in the kernel."

People are aware of these issues.

AlexH

2008-12-08 13:53:27

@Roy: being incompatible with the Linux kernel isn't "bad". If it was, the GPLv3 would be "bad".

People are aware of the issues, yes, but it doesn't make something "non-free" or somehow suspect.

Bob

2008-12-08 22:40:50

“ZFS is a relatively new filesystem created by Sun. It is released under the CDDL License which is incompatible with Linux’s GPL License, meaning that it can not be installed natively in the kernel.”

I'll give you a little hint here: ZFS is free software licensed under the CDDL which means that redistributors are not allowed to distribute it together with the GPL'd Linux. That doesn't matter too much, the most important thing is that ZFS is free software. What people can do is practise their right to freedom 1 and study the code to ZFS to make a ZFS clone.

RyanT

2008-12-08 23:01:58

"It has a copyleft with a scope that's similar to the one in the Mozilla Public License, which makes it incompatible with the GNU GPL. This means a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the CDDL for this reason.

Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term “intellectual property”."

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-08 23:05:00

That's one of the things that make Linux hackers shudder. They spoke about it.

jo Shields

2008-12-09 02:01:58

If you want to play that game, though, what about the poor BSD developers? They're unable to gain access to the neat features of Linux due to the nasty restrictive GPL

Roy Schestowitz

2008-12-09 02:16:28

I have nothing against BSD. They choose not to sustain the freedom of their software.

Bob

2008-12-09 13:20:12

If you want to play that game, though, what about the poor BSD developers? They’re unable to gain access to the neat features of Linux due to the nasty restrictive GPL

I’ll give you a little hint here: software licensed under the GNU GPL free software. The BSD developers reject GPL software because they don't wish to incur the requirements of the GPL. That doesn’t matter too much as the most important thing is that GPL software is free software. What people can do is practise their right to freedom 1 and study the code to the GPL program to make a functional clone to license as they wish.

PS, I'm not addressing you, Jo Shields, but the argument that BSD developers cannot access free software licensed under the GPL because of ideological reasons.

Jo Shields

2008-12-09 13:45:09

But how is that different from Roy's accusations towards OpenSolaris's Free Software CDDL?

Microsoft Attacks, Then Tries to Hijack Free Software

Embracing and Extending Free Software in the Philippines

Embracing and Extending Python with Microsoft XAML

Embracing and Extending Perl with Microsoft Influence

Comments

Recent Techrights' Posts