Here's some big news

Microsoft, Red Hat to Offer Joint Technical Support

Port 25: The Open Source Community at Microsoft — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:39:04 GMT

Microsoft and Red Hat announced this morning that they have recently signed agreements to test and validate

re: Here's some big news

Danny500 — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:25:30 GMT

Why are you saying that Microsoft products are intellectually thought out? Thats, 100% wrong. Everything that ever comes out from Microsoft always has major problems with them. Like windows for example. Windows has been out for how long now and it still has bug everywhere. That pathetic. And Linux isn't unstable for use as a server. Windows is. I can't even run windows for 6 hours without have to reboot because of instability and I'm running the most up to date Windows XP SP2 that I can possibly get.

I have Ubuntu run on my computer as well and I can have it running for months on end with out ever having to be turned off except when it needs to be updated. Put it to you this way, if Linux was compatible with everything Microsoft Windows is, Microsoft would go under. And I use open source everything and I get better customer service from those people that make the open source programs then I do from Microsoft. Half the time I get the most retarded response to a simple question and most of the time it's like their talking about a who different thing. Microsoft needs to smarten up and get people who know what their doing to reply to help emails.

We're Writing Firefox Plug-ins? Interview with Ian Gilman and Thoughts on 10 Months at Microsoft

Port 25 — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 03:19:58 GMT

Hank Interviews Photosynth Developer Ian Gilman and shares his thoughts after 10 months at Microsoft...

re: Here's some big news

davidmeyer — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:56:38 GMT

SUN doesn't know what to think about the GPL, Linux or Open Source. Under Scott McNealy, SUN released several contradictory statements about Linux, Open Source and the GPL, which finally lead me to post a note to Newsforge and Slashdot that really ticked a few people off. In short, I said "Will the real Scott McNealy please stand up" because his opinions kept changing. one day he LOVES Linux, the next day he said "Stay away from Linux..."

When it comes to SUN and Open Source, I think they were too little, too late with Solaris 10. I have customers all over the world...NOT ONE of them is using Solaris 10, because they started with Red Hat, SUSE, Debian, Red Flag, Mandriva or something else and standardized on it, off of expensive SPARC hardware and closed Solaris 9.

Open Source is here to stay...period. MS opening the Open Source lab is how this HUGE software company will adjust to the new world we live in. Companies like SUN, I am afraid, are seeing the sun set. It will only be a matter of time before they are another DEC.

re: Here's some big news

davidmeyer — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 23:35:31 GMT

I have to say that as a long-time Linux and Open Source fanatic, evangelist, etc. that I think this is an absolute God-send for Linux, Open Source and IT customers world-wide. Who I think is going to not be happy about this is:

1. SCO

2. Red Hat

3. Oracle

Those are the ONLY three companies that I see not being thrilled about this. Other than that, EVERY customer that I talk to in my day to day role at my current employer tells me that they are either going to either integrate SUSE into the environment away from Red Hat, or that if the are going to put any Linux into their environment, they will start with SUSE from the get-go.

The fact is that this is needed for the enterprise customers...period. We don't like to admit that as Open Source and Linux people, but CTO's and CIO's around the globe say this is a good thing, and they are ultimately the ones that pay our salaries (if you're in IT) so I think we should give some consideration to what they say and not be so fast to cry foul.

A few points

einhverfr — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:53:46 GMT

I understand your point of view, and I disagree. Also, I actually think that the Novell/Microsoft deal is bad for everyone. Bad for Novell, bad for Microsoft, bad for the end user.

It is bad for Novell because under the GPL version 2, they cannot distribute GPL'd software that they can't grant undefinite downstream sublicenses to. So this means that anything they know is patented, they cannot contribute to open source. This thus creates the illusion of safety, but if a latent is found to be infringing in Samba, then Novell could well be guilty of infringing the developers' copyrights.

But it is also bad for Microsoft. Perhaps nothing has characterized the acceptance of Linux more than this agreement. If I had to guess at Steve B's motivations, I would wonder if there was a plan to push open source vendors like Novell into illedgally distributing in violation of the authors's copyrights or Microsoft's patents (depending on who is distributing hte code), wait 5 years, and the start aiming legal cannons. I hope I am wrong because nothing would lead to Microsoft's demise faster than this sort of legal extortion. And despite what many may say, you folks have historically been as many sources of good things as bad in the industry.

Oh well, smart people do stupid things sometimes.

Interesting side-effects

Wesley Parish — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 03:13:18 GMT

Steve Ballmer may have shot his mouth off too fast. Jonathan Swartz has this to say:

http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/fueling_the_network_effect

"And in closing, I want to put one nagging item to rest.

By admitting that one of the strongest motivations to select the GPL was the announcement made last week by Novell and Microsoft, suggesting that free and open source software wasn't safe unless a royalty was being paid. As an executive from one of those companies said, "free has to have a price."

That's nonsense.

Free software can be free of royalties, and free of impediments to broadscale, global adoption and deployment. Witness what we've done with Solaris, and now, what we've done with Java. Developers are free to pick up the code, and create derivatives. Without royalty or obligation.

Those that say open source software can't be safe for customers - or that commercially indemnified software can't foster community - are merely advancing their own agenda. Without any basis in fact."

Even admitting he is advancing his own agenda in making such a statement, he is right in pointing out it all comes down to the "basis in fact". That is, what is happening, what material effects, what this-and-that is being done?

And one of the effects of the recent Microsoft-Novell agreement-set is that Sun has changed its mind about the GPL.

re: Here's some big news

fluke — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 22:02:56 GMT

hjanssen: It is pointless to create a portal claiming to support FOSS concepts and leave out the discussions of legal restrictions being placed on software use and development. But if you want to try discussing things from a purely technical point of view, I'll play ball:

What are the *technical* problems using Xen to run Vista Home or Vista Premium on a processor supporting VT-x?

I agree that we all have a stake in CodePlex. But in my opinion, developers that care about the concepts behind FOSS have much more of an indirect stake in CodePlex. You can find Muslims and Mormons who have retirements funds that are partly invested in the production of beer. They have an indirect stake in the brewery doing well. But that relationship will never evolve to the point where they can provide constructive criticism on the flavor of the beer.

Developers that accept the current terms of the VS SDK, even if contributing to a project covered by a SS license, are making a compromise to have artificially imposed restrictions on what can be accomplished. The same issue does not occur when contributing to such projects as Eclipse instead. It appeared to me that Port 25 announced the availability Power Toys for VS on CodePlex to try to get developers like myself to contribute. I'm providing feedback as to why my focus remains with Eclipse and what would have to be done to change the situation. You can consider that a constructive way to help change the situation or not (I do not really care). However, as long as I can legally release to the public unstable plug-ins for Eclipse to help solicit beta testing and I can't do the same for VS, I will not be contributing to VS plug-in development. The only party that can change those type of restrictions is Microsoft.

Btw, I am aware of the ODF converter. I already use an application that can read/write both ODF and MS-Office formats so for my purposes the ODF converter project really does not provide any additional functionality.

jwelch: I actually view the "nothing happen" deals as preferable to the possible alternatives. There are also the type of Microsoft deals such as the one made with Corel (kiss Corel Linux goodbye). Even more undesirable would be the supposed MS/BayStar/SCO "deal" that some people claim took place. And reading between the lines of an announcement that Novell won't be sued mean that RedHat will be sued?

In terms of being left with crickets chirping after a bunch of PR, I am not sure that can be considered intentional PR misdirection or is even specific to Microsoft. Sun also has it's own history of PR noise that wasn't worth taking the time to read.

re: Here's some big news

jwelch@bynkii.com — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:38:21 GMT

Well, let's all realize that nothing's been done but Lawyers Making Money. Remember, about three years ago when Sun and Microsoft mad The Big Anouncement. So far, not much came out of it on the Sun side, and on the Microsoft side?

Nothing but crickets chirping.

I'm not taking this seriously as anything but another case of well-played PR misdirection until I see actual code and product available *for sale or download on a non-experimental basis*. Microsoft has done this kind of thing so many times that to take them seriously before product is available is, quite frankly, a waste of time.

Creative Technology owns patent to music player menuing.

beanie — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:29:33 GMT

I believe Creative Technology owns the patent to the music player menu system. Creative came out with an MP3 player before the IPod appeared and was issued a patent for the menuing system. A couple of months ago Apple paid $100 million to Creative to settle the patent infringement.

Recent Novell MSFT Agreement

Dave Gardner — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 13:24:29 GMT

I am sure I will get lots of questions from my education customers about the new Microsoft and Novell

re: Here's some big news

hjanssen — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 01:31:17 GMT

Honestly, I do not know much about the PHP and VS-SDK bindings, but I can check into it. Based on some of the things we are doing here at port 25 there might be some things possible.

As to licensing, you are really talking to the wrong person, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one. The best I can do is pass on comments.

As to technology questions, and interop possibilities, now there we can have a discussion.

Mozzila seemed to really like the time they spent with us, and where surprised to the level of openness they encountered here (See my blog with the link to Vladimir’s blog)

As to your bazaar comment, codeplex is fairly new. As you well know, building a community takes tame, this is no different. Microsoft is branching out in this area. And I am sure it will evolve over time. What it will look like in the end? I have no idea. But we all have a stake in it. So help change it. Criticizing gets you nowhere unless you help change it constructively.

Are you aware that an ODF converter was written for Office? And that it is posted on sourceforge? I can tell you that it did not magically appear out of thin air.

I read yesterday also that OpenOffice had favorable comments to the deal with Novell. It looks like a lot of the large OSS projects seem to like it.

What you see here at port 25 is just some of the work we are doing, and you will see more things in the next few months.

Hank.

re: Here's some big news

fluke — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 05:22:02 GMT

Yes, I purposely avoid providing an full explicit list of companies and organizations that are not hobbyist developers. Not much has changed has change since the release of MSDN, depending on who you work for and what you want to do would effect the level of "support" and if you are *permitted* to do it.

You bring up Mozilla group. I have gotten involve in that project from time to time. I have been interested in the Mozilla Minimo project. One of things that would help such a project is having an emulator environment to run Windows CE on a Linux system. It seemed like just my luck that Microsoft would release the source code for such a thing under Shared Source. Only the actual wording of the license is a little odd. It turns out to be the SS-Academic license which also excludes employees of commerical educational institutions (I guess DeVry is out?) and non-accredited schools (there goes public high school employees). So, to work on porting the code it boils down to me and anyone else looking to work on the port must belong to an University. And when the port is completed then the users must also belong to an University. Highly restrictive. Does the "bridge" to Mozilla change this? Or is the bridge just designed to be a catalyst to getting people to upgrade to Vista?

The bridge with Zend is also something worth being proud of. But how it is a bridge to me? Can I create bindings with the VS SDK for creation of plug-ins written in PHP? Can I write a VS plug-in that exposes parts of the SDK API to use in an XML-RPC connection?

I really do not see how the bridges being built with these FOSS affiliated companies/organizations change what I'm permitted to do with a CodePlex account. Microsoft is still only offering Cathedral style policies and results. The bridges just change who it is done with.

I have heard Port 25 called the "Slashdot" of Microsoft which will reach out and listen to the individual developer. And CodePlex compared with SourceForge. But without policies in place to support the Bazaar style development model that this individual developers use, isn't both Port 25 and CodePlex just a waste of Microsoft's resources? Couldn't the bridge to MySQL/Novell/Mozilla/Zend just as easily be built without Port 25 or CodePlex?

We will never see a member of Port 25 make an effort to contact the ClamWin project to find out what changes Microsoft would need to make for them to make a real-time scanner. Instead, we will most likely see even fewer FOSS developments involving the IFS kit. So, features like being able to mount ext3 partitions as a Windows drive letter will no longer be available to users that "upgrade" to Vista. And OpenAFS releases for Vista will be non-existent or updates/bug fixes will come at a much slower rate.

I have checked the Port 25, CodePlex, WinQual and other websites. And I have also taken a look at how often these sites are brought up on FOSS development forums and I am sure that no bridges is being built to the bazaar. Instead, if anything, there are complaints about the catheral style method of telling FOSS projects what can't be modified or extended by even more restrictive EULAs or code-signing.

Bottom line: What Microsoft provides with Vista is less of the capabilities that I desire for a higher cost.

So what would qualify as having burned bridges then?

Hey Fluke

hjanssen — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 03:21:01 GMT

Good to see you again, it has been some time :)

I see that you conveniently forgetting the other interop work we have been doing, such as Mozilla (See my blog on it) and working with PHP (See Bill's blog on that, one of the points in there is that Zend will put all code back into the community). To name a few, but there are more just check this website. I would hardly call that burning down bridges. We have done things nobody even as short as 6 months ago would do here at Microsoft.

I understand your frustration with what you think you are seeing in the Microsoft/Novell announcement. But I think it is a great step forward. Even though you might not agree with it. A bunch of my contacts in the OSS world on large projects seem to think it is a positive step. But it is like Bill stated, it is how the patent system works today. Wait and see when the FAQ comes out, I think it will clarify things better.

I believe Port25 and its contributors have added a lot to the way Microsoft deals with Open Source in a very positive sense. And we will continue to do so.

Always willing to listen to constructive criticism.

Hank.

re: Context of Stuart Cohen quote

fluke — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 20:42:32 GMT

Stuart Cohen has a history of telling the press that the day will come when Microsoft Office for Linux is released. Clearly he sees the Microsoft and Novell deal as a milestone towards his goal of MS-Office for Linux. What he doesn't take into account is *WHY* Microsoft release their Office software for Linux and at what cost to Linux adoption would it be provided. The answer seems very clear to me based on the MS adoption of a "solution" to VMs. The EULA for Vista is written to increase the TCO of using a Linux Desktop with Windows in a VM. Any release of MS Office for Linux will most likely continue this trend of a method of pushing up the TCO of the Linux Desktop. I think Stuart Cohen is right that it's only a matter of time for MS Office for Linux to be released but it will cost at least $100 more to buy than the Windows version. This won't be because there is $100 more worth of features in the Linux version but just so that future Microsoft funded "independent" research shows that the TCO of the Linux desktop is much higher.

Stuart Cohen has promoted the idea that someday Microsoft will have to "accept" Linux. And in his mind, Microsoft's moves to "help" the Xen project so people can *NOT* legally run either Vista Home Basic or Vista Home Premium might be part of accepting Linux. But I see *responding* and *accepting* as being two very different things. I think Stuart Cohen is missing the big picture.

Btw, your reply style is exactly what I expected where you in effect saying: "look over here where FOSS affiliated [insert company/organization here such as MySQL or OSDL] is happy with the current situation"

There will never be an admission that something has to change to build a bridge to the *community* instead of burning them down like your company continues to do.