A FEW DAYS AGO, Bradley Kuhn
explained why Microsoft is unlikely to be really interested in open source. In fact, at the beginning of this month, Microsoft unleashed a press release that explicitly insulted open source for bearing higher TCO (it's
Gartner-speak by the way) than Microsoft's proprietary technology. How can this two-faced approach stand?
Well, Microsoft appoints all sorts of
people who pretend to live in an entirely different universe, from which
they deceive the competition. One of these people is Sam Ramji, to whom SDTimes gave the soapbox a few days ago (SDTimes belongs to or is affiliated with IDG [
1,
2], of which it is a member). In response to this deceptive article, which came across as though it was just parroting
Microsoft on open source, the same publication released
this rebuttal that echoes Bradley Kuhn.
The number of lines of code Microsoft has given back to the community is tiny compared to other software companies of the same size, he said. "Microsoft has made tiny contributions under BSD-style licenses and is making big noise about giving code back. They are making a mountain out of a molehill. Sam's job is to put a clean face on Microsoft's involvement with free and open-source software, and to make the community feel that they are giving back."
Sam Ramji, whom we mentioned in [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11], does not even have any real background in Free software. The closest he got to it was Software as a Service (SaaS). Lack of experience can be an excuse for imposed ignorance. Further, states the article:
Kuhn's biggest point of contention is that Microsoft is still refusing to participate with the General Public License (GPL), the most widely used open-source license. "They basically have the opposite position of every other company involved with open-source software," he noted.
Kuhn also dismissed Microsoft's work with the Samba project as being nothing more than a consequence of court-ordered mandates.
This never prevented Microsoft from pretending that they love Samba and complied due to the goodness of their hearts. We must all
remember the truth though.
⬆
"Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer [...] I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business. I'm an American; I believe in the American way, I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don't think we've done enough education of policymakers to understand the threat."
--Jim Allchin, President of Platforms & Services Division at Microsoft
Comments
Diamond Wakizashi
2008-12-30 18:28:58
And
2008-12-30 19:11:12
"Evil" is neither a categorie of foreign policy nor business.
The fact that Microsoft fights Open Source and falls a trap of public expectations is good as the company bets against market reality in a changing environment. The Novell deal was a cheap way to have a stake in the new world. Via Novell as its proxy Microsoft can do what they can't do officially i.e. embrace open source. I am pretty sure that was the plan from the very beginning when Novell overtook Ximian and SuSE.
It is like the church which is not homosexual, the pope just funds art http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelangelo-Ignudi.jpg
twitter
2008-12-30 23:07:23
Goblin
2008-12-31 02:26:40
I may have misinterpretted things here, but isnt MS's portfolio and anti-trust in conflict with each other? If MS threatens in a big way cant that be construed as unfair competition? MS has been burned by monopolies commision here in the UK already, so what will be the response should MS bring out its portfolio and force others down similar routes to Novell? or worse, out of the market completely?
I have to admit when it comes to this level Im talking from an outsider looking in point of view, but this is how I interpret it. Am I wrong?
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-31 07:48:44
Is it true that the UK lifted a finger against Microsoft? The whole 'solidarity' thing has always meant that the UK government was an ally of Microsoft.
David Worthington
2009-01-05 19:14:22
-DW
Roy Schestowitz
2009-01-05 19:36:14
Your front page states that you are "Member Site of IDG Tech Network". My understanding of this, based on Phoronix which is on a similar boat, is that this means IDG carries advertising in SD Times?