Welcome to Port 25 - Port 25: The Open Source Community at Microsoft
< Back to Blogs
Welcome to Port 25 by admin on March 28, 2006 06:00PM

Roblimo from Slashdot warned me. 

Last Fall, I did an interview on Slashdot and put my email address at the end of the interview, following the statement that if “If you'd like to contact me directly, I can be reached at billhilf at microsoft dot com”  Roblimo told me that I might want to rethink including my email address, and suggested possibly a link to a Web page as a way to redirect possible spambots and general bedlam. 

I didn’t get the spam (or the Microsoft Exchange spam filters are really good) but I did get some feedback.  Approximately two thousand emails of feedback.  The interview posted a few days before I presented at Linux World San Francisco, which meant I was getting most of the email while I was on the road and preparing to discuss Interoperability and the Open Source Software labs I run here in Redmond.  Although it was somewhat of a deluge of email, the feedback was extremely valuable (thank you to all of you who wrote to me) and really helped me realize the importance of this subject.

Tim O’Reilly has talked about the importance of architectures for participation.  The value of building an architecture to allow participation was never more clear than reading (and responding!) to thousands of these emails.  Now you may be reading this saying “Amazing, it took this guy how long to learn about blogs?” and that’s a fair criticism, and Jason Matusow and Robert Scoble have been telling me to do this for a long while now.  But hopefully by the time you finish reading through this site, you’ll understand why Port 25 is somewhat more than just a place to blog.

So why is it called Port 25?  Some background on port numbers first.  SMTP is short for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol and is the protocol for sending email messages between servers or from a mail client to a mail server.  On a server, the port for SMTP is 25.  When you open a port on a server, such as to allow for SMTP traffic, it is commonly referred to as ‘listening’ on the port.  Port 25, therefore, is a metaphor for how we are opening the communication lines to for a discussion around Open Source Software and Microsoft.  Cute, huh?

As someone who has many hours at the command line, debugging things such as protocol states (LISTENING?) and getting software and servers working to provide some type of service, the concept of server ports and being open is well engrained in how I and the team here in our lab think about communications – so we thought it was applicable to how we want to start the dialogue around this subject.  I guess it just took a Slashdot interview and a couple thousand emails (and consistent nudging from friends) to really drive the point home that having a participative discussion around OSS and Microsoft technologies is a good thing, not –as many people may believe- something we want to ‘hide’ or shy away from. 

What will you find here?  This will be the place we not only blog, but also where we put analysis from our OSS labs and also where we discuss and show other parts of Microsoft that we think are just plain cool or interesting.  I think what you’ll see here over time is how a bunch of open source guys inside Microsoft think, as well as people and technologies inside Redmond that we think other folks like us would find interesting as well.

So, there will be much more to discuss, debate and learn from together – but for now, port 25 is open.

Comments RSS
  1. sbenson said:

    Not feeling very welcome.
    WMVs?
    It's pretty elementary.

    posted at 12:45PM 04/06/2006
  2. One-time Visitor said:

    Well, isn't this site off to an auspicious start? Please, people, can't you find something constructive to say? Say, Bill Hilf, what are you going to do about the spam here? And why is the "Submit" button, below, blank on my (non-IE) browser? Get a profanity filter, or at least a comment moderation/banning system.

    This site sucks.

    posted at 04:42PM 04/06/2006
  3. I don't think a profanity filter is needed.  I don't know if they fixed the "submit" button or if it's just you, One-time Visitor, but I'm using Firefox 1.0.7 on Debian GNU/Linux Etch/Testing, and I see "SUBMIT" on the submit button.

    What's needed here is someone tasked with cleaning up flame wars on the Port 25 comments (possibly with an interpreter for Russian that can read Cyrillic characters on hand).  Normally, I'm not too keen on any kind of censorship, but spam and pointless flamage is in desperate need of moderation here.

    As for a response to Bill Hilf:
    I'm generally a pretty vocal critic of Microsoft business practices, and the technical issues that arise in software from Microsoft that results both directly and indirectly from those business practices.  I'm glad to see that MS's Open Source Lab is presenting this opportunity on the Web for interaction with the wider Internet community, however.  It would be a good thing for MS, as a whole, to learn more about open source software development, as long as it learns the "right" lessons (rather than simply learning how best to lock it out of compatibility and how to most effectively attack it in court and through lobbying, which is an all too likely result of MS studying the phenomenon).

    I see from MS a lot of clumsy stabs at trying to reap the rewards of open source development without really understanding why such techniques work.  The recent request for malware identification and fix help from the MS users' community seems distinctly influenced by open source development methodologies, but it seems doomed to failure (or at least mediocre performance) because Microsoft not only doesn't open up source code to public view, but doesn't even inform the public of its software vulnerability status until it becomes unavoidable.  The draconian lockdown policy on vulnerability reporting coupled with this request for public aid indicates to me that Microsoft is trying to solve the wrong problem: it's trying to ensure, like usual, that vulnerabilities get fixed before the customers know about them, rather than before they are exploited.

    At the root (pun intended) of all these problems is the set of fundamental goals of Microsoft as a corporation.  It is ruled by a board focused on short- and mid-term statistical "success" measured in market dominance figures.  At best, one might hope that Microsoft reforms itself to the extent that it focuses on measures of success involving profitability above dominance and usefulness above marketability, instead of the current circumstance where those priorities are reversed.  Any attempts by Microsoft to capture the successes of open source software in the areas of market dominance and marketability are misguided by an insititutional misunderstanding of what's really happening:

    Market dominance and marketability of open source software is accidental.  The goals of open source developers are largely focused on quality, useful software development.  These are people developing for their own use.  Security is user-focused, not vendor-focused, and as a result the entire security patching process is transparent: open source projects aren't trying to obfuscate vulnerability reports, just to fix them.  When vulnerability reports are released to the public, they increase general security by providing the knowledge needed to work around vulnerabilities until a fix is available, and by informing the greatest number of programmers possible with the means to create and submit fixes faster and better than is possible in a closed environment.

    These are the sorts of lessons I hope Microsoft's leadership will learn from its open source lab and the Port 25 project.  We'll see.

    posted at 05:08PM 04/06/2006
  4. Selecter said:

    Seizing a great opportunity I would like to say that IE (Internet Explorer) is the worst  product from Microsoft. It is not only the buggiest and insecure browser in the world, but also very expensive to support for websites developers. By saying that IE is the best browser by market share, Bill Gates lies as he always does. I wish you (MS) to develop a good browser this time.

    P.S. And put Vista into your butt

    posted at 05:08PM 04/06/2006
  5. I administer the network for a small company. Our network is a mix of RedHat and CentOS installations, as well as OpenBSD sitting out in my DMZ's. I have Windows desktops and they run well enough (WSUS is a godsend), but here's the rub. I have two Windows servers on the network and they constantly need rebooting. My Linux boxes run under heavy load for months and years at a time, my Windows servers last a week before needing a "pre-emptive reboot". Maybe it's MS's fault, maybe it's the software I'm running on top of it, maybe its both, all I know is that my servers have to just work 24x7 and I don't get that with Microsoft products. Hopefully this forum will help you guys handle that instead of just being a marketing ploy/PR spin like I think it is.

    posted at 05:14PM 04/06/2006
  6. joetest said:

    "So, there will be much more to discuss, debate and learn from together" - WHAT!?  There is nothing to discuss here, nothing to say, nothing to do, and nothing but marketing crap from MSFT.  You don't even run this web server on an open source alternative.  Too much, too little, too late.

    posted at 05:15PM 04/06/2006
  7. Shaun Laughey said:

    Great news. I have some requests and questions.

    Does that mean you'll be able help the WINE project now? If they want help.

    Can we have some documentation to let us work out how interoperability should work ourselves?

    How about releasing your source code under an open source licence especially re: SMB and Active Directory?

    How are you getting around unicode and codepage issues that seem to plague Microsoft products when trying to "interoperate".

    Any chance you are going to publish these work arounds? Or may be you'll be contributing to the Linux Documentation Project?

    How about releasing the specifications for your other protocols rather than have poor hackers have to reverse engineer it only for you to move the goal posts and change what we thought we'd worked out?

    What Microsoft did in the past, even recently, has left a lot of people suspicious and hostile. I'd like to believe your department isn't just a "Know your enemy" department in which to try out new Microsoft attacks in the name of vendor lock in.

    Good luck on your attempts but one criticism echoed by many posters:

    Can you redo the videos not as WMV?
    They are definately vendor lock in.
    Don't you have mpeg4 encoders? I'm sure one of those linux boxen you have should do it happily.

    posted at 05:15PM 04/06/2006
  8. Beavis! said:

    Unfortunately it looks like this site is going to be plagued with some problems unless it incorporates some kind of login system (and I'd suggest avoiding Passport since it will keep most open source folks uninsterested) and as mentioned above a moderation system (take a look at Digg.com for a decent example).  But let me start off by saying that I am not a Microsoft user.  I used to be but the products that Microsoft provided didn't satisfy my needs as a user so I turned to open source.  I'm not talking about business needs either.  I am a musician and back when I didn't have enough money for a Mac (I'm not a Mac user either) I had no choice but to buy a Windows 3.1 PC.  It was a revelation to know how little value Microsoft put on artistic applications and creativity at the time.  To be honest they haven't put any thought into it until the release of XP.  As a result I started wondering what open source/free software could offer me and along the journey I grew into someone who knew a whole lot more about computers than Windows could teach me.

    This is one of Microsoft's failings.  In their effort to encourage "ease of use" and rapid application development, they've completely ignored the people who want to understand the inner workings of the machine and the software.  This is why open source and free software appeals to us.  We can mix and match and alter code to do EXACTLY what we want it to do with little fuss and no need to worry about licensing.  Some people would call us "hobbyists" but that term is really an umbrella for a lot of very creative people that doesn't do justice to what we are about.  I use Linux at home and at work.  It's a business tool and a creative tool as well as an entertainment tool.    This is something that Microsoft can't accomplish other than superficially unless it changes.  At home, Linux is my mail server, my web server, my file and print server, my PBX server, my time server and I also have a "Media Center" of my own design.  But I'm not a hardcore "tech".  I barely know anything about programming.  It's just that Linux makes getting under the hood to connect things in interesting ways immediately available in ways that Windows can't.

    I'm curious about how Monad might change some things.  But you still get into the issue of licensing (and of course cost).  For someone like me who runs eight to ten machines simultaneously at home with various connections between all of them, the last thing I want to have to do is worry about whether I've got all the licensing I need and CALs.  Can't you offer us something like licensing packs at a reasonable price?  I'd happily pay $400 if I knew that that would cover my ten systems running Windows XP Pro and a copy of Windows 2003 Server to tie it all together.  So there's a few complaints anyway to send up to whoever cares.  Just letting you know the reasons I left the Microsoft customer base.  You just didn't care enough to take care of my needs.

    posted at 05:16PM 04/06/2006
  9. dfoesch said:

    УЧИТЕ АЛБАНСКИЙ!!!
    ---
    Ok, sorry, it's Albanian.  Whatever.  Either way, there needs to be someone who can actually read and understand what you're writing here.  Speak English, it's obvious that the post is in English, and that you understand English (enough to get upset that someone said you were speaking Russian), so why aren't you posting in English?

    posted at 05:54PM 04/06/2006
  10. Dave said:

    Damn shame people are using this site as a "why MS sucks" forum. To me at least it really seems like they're trying to extend an open hand to the OSS community. Would you prefer they go back to the old practice of closed standards? I don't. Show them some respect and maybe they'll return the favor. Linux isn't perfect either you know;)

    posted at 05:55PM 04/06/2006
Post a Comment
*
*