< Back to Blogs
A Brief History of Open at Microsoft by Sam Ramji on February 22, 2008 02:06PM

Four years ago, we started the Linux Lab at Microsoft.
Two years ago, we established the Open Source Software Lab at Microsoft.
One year ago, we initiated the Linux Interoperability Lab at Microsoft.

Yesterday, we announced the broadest change to the way the Microsoft builds software and works with open source communities and developers.

By now you’ve probably read the announcement – “Microsoft Makes Strategic Changes in Technology and Business Practices to Expand Interoperability” and are wondering what it all means, and where it came from.  In a nutshell, the documentation for the APIs, document formats, and protocols used in Windows Vista, the .NET Framework, Windows Server 2008, SQL Server 2008, Office 2007, Exchange Server 2007, and Office SharePoint Server 2007 will be made publically available.  All developers will be able to access the documentation with no need to sign a license or pay any fee. 

We are also announcing the launch of the Open Source Interoperability Initiative – a framework that will let us consistently support community development teams who build implementations of these specs with labs, technical support, plugfests, and joint testing and development.
 
To me, it’s a logical progression from the work and learning we’ve done with the Mozilla Foundation, the Eclipse Foundation, the Linux Foundation, the Apache Foundation, the Samba Project, MySQL, and PHP.  We’ve learned how to make agreements with community projects – including those which lack a legal entity for formal agreements; how to deliver technical support; who to listen to; and how to prioritize our work.  We have seen how positively developers and users respond to these kinds of collaborative efforts.  This is reflected by the progression of our approach: the creation of the OSP (Open Specification Promise), the IECC (Interoperability Executive Customer Council), the IVA (Interoperability Vendor Alliance), the submission and approval of the Ms-RL and Ms-PL by the OSI, and the PFIF/Samba agreement and ongoing collaboration.
 
It’s also a major evolutionary step, and significant commitment for our engineering teams.  Ray Ozzie says it best:  “Customers need all their vendors, including and especially Microsoft, to deliver software and services that are flexible enough such that any developer can use their open interfaces and data to effectively integrate applications or to compose entirely new solutions.  By increasing the openness of our products, we will provide developers additional opportunity to innovate and deliver value for customers.
 
In order to meet these new and higher standards that we’re setting for ourselves, engineers will need to build public documentation of the new formats, protocols, and APIs they develop as they advance our products.  For those of us who write (or have written) code, we realize that this is a significant additional phase to the development cycle: design the feature, specify the feature, implement and test it, then proof and test the documentation of the specification, build user documents and sign off on the whole thing. 
 
Because we are a platform company first and foremost, it will be entirely worth the investment both due to the increased transparency to developers, and due to the expanded range of innovation that can be built on Microsoft technologies.
 
I think this is a great day not just for Microsoft, but for the software industry.  And I thank the people who have helped us learn what it’s taken to get here – most notably Jeremy Allison, Matt Asay, Mike Schroepfer, Andi Gutmans, Jim Zemlin, Mike Milinkovich, Zack Urlocker, Marten Mickos, Andrew Tridgell, Miguel de Icaza and Stephen Walli.  We will continue to look to their perspectives and advice as we continue down the open road.

Here are a few of the responses we’ve seen – and I’ll quote from the industry publications and blogs:

LWN.net: “The announcement is sweeping enough to make one check the calendar, but we are still a month and a week early for pranks. Microsoft is making available specifications for APIs and communication protocols for Exchange, Office, SQL Server, SharePoint, and others without requiring a license or royalty payments. They will indicate what patents they believe cover any of the protocols and "will license all of these patents on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, at low royalty rates." There may be lurking dangers, but it appears to be a sincere effort at providing interoperability.”

Matt Asay (Alfresco/The Open Road): “As a Microsoft admirer, critic, and competitor, I can't help but applaud the depth and breadth of this move ...  All in all, a huge day for Microsoft. Will there be gaps in Microsoft's efforts? Undoubtedly. For one thing, it hasn't really made much progress on its covenant not to sue commercial open-source providers, despite what Ina writes. But I'm impressed that it's even bothering to try.”

Andi Gutmans (PHP/Zend): “I believe Microsoft has finally understood that their closed nature has significantly hindered the growth of their eco-system. In many ways the threat of Linux has by many been interpreted as a threat of open-source (wrongly so in my opinion) …. Microsoft is now enabling the open-source community to grow its contributor base around such technologies and significantly improve the delivered quality. As most open-source developers and users live in heterogeneous environments this will benefit many.”

Jeremy Allison (via The Register): "It's definitely a positive step.  Doesn't mean any change for us [Samba] as we already had all these docs, and the promise not to sue is only for 'non-commercial' open source, which is a bit meaningless. But that's the same thing we had really (they're listing the patents etc.).  At least everyone now gets access to the same info, which I'm very happy about.  As for the rest, the devil is in the details. If they can follow through with this, the world will be a better place.”

Zack Urlocker (MySQL/Open Sources): “… even if it was legislated, it's still good for the industry. And it’s good for Microsoft customers. And ultimately, it's probably good for Microsoft to be more open. If Microsoft wants to attract the next generation of developers and users, they should take the hint: Open works.”

We recognize that the communities’ judgments of the significance of this announcement will be entirely based on the actions that follow.  The optimistic undertone that I’ve seen so far suggests that we can make real progress. 

We will report back frequently on the progress and details of this work – especially on the Open Source Interoperability Initiative – here on Port 25.  This announcement is the starting point of the next phase of Microsoft’s work with open source, and as Port 25 readers know, we are here for the full marathon.

The interoperability principles are posted here: http://www.microsoft.com/interop/principles/default.mspx

Comments RSS
  1. Hi Sam,

    Agree this is a significant development for the whole industry.  We've heard consistently from customers that interoperability between open source and Microsoft products is important to them, and something the industry has collectively done the least to resolve.  Opening its APIs is a positive step and makes it possible for integrators and developers to deliver integration that customers want.  Nice work.

    Dominic

    posted at 01:36PM 02/22/2008
  2. There is an interesting post over at port25.technet.com

    posted at 02:00PM 02/22/2008
  3. evil paulie said:

    Why? I stumbled on this site, and I am still laughing. As a Linux user, this is a joke to the legions of real Linux users and Admins. Who cares about the "token" OSS that MS spits out? Until I see and OS from Microsoft that is OSS, I will finally give them credit. Not to mention the fact that this is to drive people to buy more MS Server crap. This is not to benefit Linux, or OSS.

    posted at 11:36PM 02/22/2008
  4. Edgar said:

    Sam -- Any idea when will Microsoft post the list of patents that apply to each protocol?  It is nice they posted the protocol documentation, but each protocol says "Microsoft may have patents" for this protocol.  Before people dig into the protocols, it would be nice to see if any of the protocols have patents to determine if a commercial software developer should consider leveraging the protocol. Also where, ie what URL is/would this be posted on?  Thanks.

    posted at 02:39AM 02/23/2008
  5. In spite of differents opinons around OSS MS Strategy, for business is a big day for technology. There´s still a lot of road to travel, but would be useful, that port25 helps to start new OSS projects focused on code accesibility. Making business is not a "human merit", but its good to make the choice capability to customers more affordable.

    posted at 09:11AM 02/25/2008
  6. cim said:

    "Sam -- Any idea when will Microsoft post the list of patents that apply to each protocol?"

    NEVER ;-)

    Or at least not in the foreseeable future.

    posted at 10:08AM 02/25/2008
  7. Andy Jones said:

    In some ways I agree with 'Evil Paulie', although not about an OS from Microsoft being OSS.

    Until this so called covenant not to sue also covers commercial products or vendors then it is not worth the paper it is printed on (or screen it is displayed on). This is an attempt by Microsoft to control the market and to control standards, and to attempt to kill off open source competitors, nothing more. You either do it Microsofts way or not at all. Who is to say that once everyone is locked into 'the Microsoft way' that Microsoft will not backpedal on the open bit and then raise their patent prices?

    Finally, your list of 'responses from the publications/blogs' is missing the EU's statement which sums up the whole affair:

    "Nonetheless, the Commission notes that today's announcement follows at least four similar statements by Microsoft in the past on the importance of interoperability."

    posted at 10:29AM 02/25/2008
  8. Sam Ramji said:

    Here’s what the protocol program team had to say:

    Patent lists are posted already for the docs that are up on MSDN.  For the time being, they are contained in two separate lists with some overlap.  Here are the links to the main pages – the patent maps are part way down the page.

    www.microsoft.com/.../mcpp.mspx

    www.microsoft.com/.../wspp.mspx

    As we progress with this initiative, as we publish each set of documents (including the beta documents coming out in April), we will also publish lists of protocols in that set that are covered by patents, make a patent map available that shows the specific patents on the protocols, and the licensing and pricing information for those patents.

    posted at 11:46PM 02/25/2008
  9. cim said:

    Why would people be prohibited in EU to implement these things in commercial programs?

    After all there are no SW-patents in the EU. Is this a sideway to still make them somewhat valid for MS only?

    These protocols/specs are a farce and dont do anyone any real good. Unless one can use it commercially I dont see anything special. Also MS has been touting interop and openness ever since the Novell deal. I've yet to see any real substance and not just de Icaza and his continual praise for MS stuff.

    posted at 09:07AM 02/26/2008
  10. Sam Ramji said:

    cim:

    I recommend you do some fact-checking with the leaders of the Samba project (Jeremy Allison and Andrew Tridgell) before you come to conclusions on the value of the documentation we're releasing.

    On interoperability, you can find more information on what we've been achieving at http://microsoft.com/interop.  PHP support, Web Services standards interop with Apache Axis, JBoss optimization and certification of SQL Server JDBC drivers, IPSEC and Kerberos interoperability testing and development, and Xen/Hyper-V support for Windows and Linux virtualization are just a few of our achievements in open source interoperability.  You can see the Xen/Hyper-V work in the current release of Windows Server 2008 and more information here: port25.technet.com/.../Interoperab-on-the-metal-and-on-the-wire.aspx

    posted at 07:58PM 02/27/2008
Post a Comment
*
*