Microsoft's Mundie to Continue OSS Outreach 244
Techie writes "In an interview with eWeek Craig Mundie, Microsoft's new co-head-honcho and chief research and strategy officer, says he plans to continue to push the Redmond software titan forward with its goal of greater interoperability with software licensed under the GPL." From the article: "Even in Bill's own public remarks, he pointed out that he thought his iconic status and the way that was reported tended to overemphasize his role in the company's innovation and execution. This is really a transition that has been in the works for a couple of years, with a couple to go before, and we will see the emergence of a lot of great talent that has today been portrayed as all Bill. This is a company with, in many cases, the best people in the world. "
At the risk of sounding like Fark (Score:4, Funny)
Re:At the risk of sounding like Fark (Score:5, Funny)
Bad analogy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bad analogy (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Bad analogy (Score:2)
Hm.. Aren't you thinking of AT&T?
Re:Bad analogy (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know which is more disturbing. I mean, I use windows, I form an impression about the quality of its makers, and I think how scary it is, that good management can bring such a bunch of monkeys to world domination. Then I read something like this, and I think how scary would be if he was right, that bad management really can cause the best people in the world to produce something like windows.
He can't be right, can he?
Re:At the risk of sounding like Fark (Score:2, Funny)
Re:At the risk of sounding like Fark (Score:3)
Two year transition? Come on. Am I the only one that thinks this means the moment they try to do things differently he's going to step right back in and send them packing?
Re:At the risk of sounding like Fark (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:You forgot a line. (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not supprising you have heard the line elsewhere though. George Lucas was never one for highly momentous lines, witness the usually talented Natilie Portman looking like a moron when she says pearls like "hold me like you did on naboo" and "you're breaking my heart Aniken". Hell, the only memorable lines in the 6 movies were Han Solo's which were probably snuck on the script when Lucas was visiting the shrine to himself for his daily devotion.
Re:You forgot a line. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You forgot a line. (Score:2)
Hmm. That may answer some questions...
1981...
A developer is slaving over a hot compiler. As he finishes the last line of code of MS-DOS, the operating system that was going to free us all, he recites the magic words, "Klatu, verata, nik... uh... nikaahem. Necktie! Nickel! It was an N word! It was definitely an N word!"
Re:You forgot a line. (Score:2)
That one is "its a TRICK"
So they want to be friends, eh? (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, maybe I have this backwards...
You can only trash something for so long (Score:5, Insightful)
We are already seeing huge benefits of OSS and what it can achieve and I think Microsoft have realised if they are going to have any future in it they need to work with it to some extent.
Re:You can only trash something for so long (Score:5, Informative)
Three and a half years later and they're just starting to figure out what to do about it. They've known for a long time OSS would be significant competition. So far the only thing they've proven is they have no idea what to do about it.
Re:You can only trash something for so long (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not following the question (Score:5, Interesting)
Isn't interoperability more a question of standards compliance than licensing? Or did eWeek's question pertain more to 'general interaction', as if Redmond needs to be more aware of the existence of, say, Ogg.
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:2)
OTOH, you have a lot of areas where you have serious defiencies, but these are getting worked out. IDMU now ships with proper LDAP schemas for LDAP user/group lookups via ActiveDirectory, and once open source directory servers become better at internal DS tasks (as opposed to massive web apps), then I will expect pressure to interop there as well.
I have little faith in Microsoft, b
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:5, Informative)
You can authenticate without the undefined extension, but cannot be authorized to specific resources offered by Windows machines. So it isn't hard for you to authorize *to* a MS Kerberos implementation, but you cannot authorize Windows against anyone else's implementation. You're missing group membership information and the NT ID without using the proprietary MS extensions.
This is a company that choose to ignore the Kerberos V5 spec, which was altered specifically to help them, they lied to the Kerberos developers about following the spec, lied about splitting authorization functionality, and lied about a non-NT version of the domain controller services. They attempted to undermine all existing Kerberos installations by breaking compatibility, and requiring people to run the MS version of the Kerberos protocol to have it work properly with Windows.
IOW, standard procedure for MS: they took the established Kerberos spec, added proprietary extensions to it, and made it not work properly without using those extensions, while ensuring that those extensions are only available under Windows with MS software.
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:5, Insightful)
If Ms wants to play nice all they have to do is the publish some specs. NTFS, SMB, Active Directory, Office file formats etc. I mean full disclosure. They could also remove the DRM from their file formats which prevents open office from even attempting to open their files.
Ask yourself this question. Is a company which makes sure that the sample files it ships with office can only be opened up with MS office serious about playing nice? I don't think so. NOTE TO SHILLS: The previous statement has nothing to with the capability, the files are locked and refuse to be opened by open office.
Anyway this is Mundie we are talking about. If he doesn't lie a dozen times by lunch he feels quesy.
I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:5, Interesting)
I hear this all the time, and I've come to the resignation that it's just a fact of life that people want to think this way, but frankly it's bullshit.
I am a senior editor at InfoWorld. [infoworld.com] I can tell you unequivocably that the editorial staff at InfoWorld is not in the business of sucking up to advertisers; indeed, we are not involved in the business of procuring advertisements in any way. Any reputable publication has a "church and state" policy with regard to sales and editorial. InfoWorld does, and I have no reason to believe our distinguished competition at eWeek is any different. (Of course, they're not as good at their jobs as we are, but they're not crooks.)
At InfoWorld we are also not in the business of repurposing press releases, nor do we accept any so-called bylined articles contributed by vendors. Any "advertorial" is clearly marked as such -- it's the rules.
Editorial staff at computer journals do nurture relationships with major technology vendors but that's because it's necessary to what we do -- which is report on IT. We may not print answers to the "hard-hitting questions" as often as you might like. In many cases, however, the reason you don't see answers to those questions in print is because the person we ask refuses to answer them.
You don't have to believe me, of course. But come on -- do I walk around saying programmers don't do anything but eat Cheet-Os, drink Mountain Dew, and add bugs to software?
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:2)
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who makes their living creating interoperable software with Microsoft Windows, I have to say that even with the appointment of Bill Hilf (who is a very nice guy personally) and the Port25 crowd in Microsoft's interoperability lab I haven't seen much of a difference in Microsoft's attitude to OSS and interoperability. That is, they *hate* it
Interoperability with Microsoft is actually quite easy from their side, as they're the ones who create the difficulties. If Microsoft wanted to promote interop they'd fully document the specs that the EU is asking for in the anti-trust case. A sea change from Microsoft will come if you see them actually comply with the EU judgement. Until they do they can talk up interop until they're blue in the face but they're not actually doing anything about it.
I've sat down with Microsoft execs and tried to explain they need to see GPL software as an opportunity, not a threat. They need to try and work out how to make money with it. IBM has figured this out (so have Red Hat and others). The problem is Microsoft make too much money on their current business model (a monopoly, charging monopoly rent) in order for them to easily change.
It's a problem for them, in many ways I do sympathise....
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmm - let's see. So you're saying that Microsoft, IBM, Forrester, Gartner, and BEA repeat things to you over and over again until you believe them (white papers and PR / church services), then you attempt to convert others to your beliefs (editorial articles / laws, evangelism, and public proclamations)?
haha only serious.
Editorial staff at computer journals do nurture relationships with major technology vendors but that's because it's necessary to what we do -- which is report on IT.
Treat with extreme skepticism any politician who hasn't been in the situation in question, or any editorialist who doesn't build what he writes about. Common sense has only a moderate track record in general, and is miserable in relatively new scientific fields like information science. While it is true that tech magazines attempt - perhaps even go to great lengths - to know and profess truth, how well can one understand a fish while standing on dry land? How well when most of the information one receives comes from commercial fishermen?
It makes me think of Dick Cheney's views on homosexuality. It is incredible how far personal experience can go.
Do I trust you to report what you hear with relative accuracy? Sure. Do I trust that what you hear will be from unbiased sources? It is to laugh. Do you have your own experience against which to measure what you hear? Not for the most part (Joel Spolsky and Paul Graham notwithstanding). Then do I trust that what you report will reflect the truth? Should I?
Information science is science. Not fashion. It is not about what Coco Chanelle or Bill Gates proclaims to be true. It is about what scientists discover to be true. Give me Communications of The ACM and Consumer Reports, not PC Magazine and Popular Science (except when I'm trying to impress the boss - then give me CIO magazine, haha).
Re:I resent (rather than resemble) that (Score:3, Interesting)
Now you're talking about a different topic. The grandparent was saying that computer journals write what they write because they need to woo advertisers. I'm saying that's false; that
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:3, Informative)
How many times Bill Gates and his staff lied to your magazine? Have you ever confronted any of them about it? If you have then I will subscrib
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:3, Interesting)
why it so rare to see something like "he refused to answer these questions :" ?
that might make the responder mad at you, but what's the point from journalistics that ask only the easy questions ?
there are a lot of good questions to ask about interoperability to them, especially about inter
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I resent (rather than resemle) that (Score:2)
I'd like to see what you have to say about Bennedict Arnold and Judas....
Re:infoworld industry lapdogs, not journalists (Score:2)
You may notice that this interview was not published by InfoWorld but by our competition -- eWeek, a Ziff-Davis publication.
That said, just because it's an article about Microsoft doesn't make it a "puff piece." To my eye the interviewer asks some legitimate questions and ran the answers Mundie gave. I'm willing to bet there's not a single name on eWeek's subscriber list who works
Deeds rather than words. (Score:5, Interesting)
The moral is watch what people do, don't listen to what they say.
The guys at the top of companies are all politicians, they tell you what you want to hear while continuing as always.
No question? (Score:5, Funny)
Ok here's a tip I got from my karate instructor, when someone's spoiling for a fight and are clearly about to start flailing, ask them a question, something dumb, irrelevant and obscure. When they take their eyes off you to think about it (and yup, people do exactly that when they're thinking, one of the reasons mobile phones are so dangerous in cars) you kick them in the balls and run for it.
All that leadup in your story and you didn't give us a good question? I was severely disappointed."What is the weight of an unladen swallow?" If they ask african or european, just fight them, they're a wimp.
Re:Deeds rather than words. (Score:2)
This would prove that radio talk shows cause accidents, that radio quiz shows cause accidents and that advertising causes accidents. For that matter, trying to figure out the nuance in the song you're listening to would cause accidents.
If you can't drive and talk on your cell phone, don't do it. But I've seen a lot of people who can't dr
Re:Deeds rather than words. (Score:2)
Standards may involve licenses (Score:5, Interesting)
Standards often include patented features. Most standards bodies require a minimum of RAND licensing. RAND is not sufficient to allow GPL implementations, however. Microsoft has a history of crafting licenses and patent grants that preclude GPL implementations.
The benefit of open standards comes from opening up competition, by removing standards compliance from control by a sole source. In the current market, Microsoft can crush any competitor that uses the same business model as Microsoft, so 'standards' that may only be used by similar commercial enities don't offer real competition. Only Free software, supported by a business model that can't be crushed by Microsoft, has shown a serious threat to Microsoft's domination. Yes, Apple, Sun, and others have had an impact, but they are vulnerable to changes in management direction. Sun may have saved Java from Microsoft, but they could turn around and sell it to Microsoft. I don't expect that to happen, but it's possible.
Interoperability with standards isn't enough. The standards need to be open, too. There's a lot of professional PR doublespeak about what 'open standard' means, but I rely on one test: can someone write a GPL implementation that complies with the patent licenses?
"interoperable" not compatible (Score:2)
Or maybe MS certified VPC for Linux, that would make "Windows Software interoperable" with GPL stuff.
They really isn't any mention about "documents", "media"
Re:I'm not following the question (Score:2)
Trust needs to be earned, and Microsoft's action have shown that they are not worthy.
Don't trust Mundie (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft's sins are legion. They have a hell of a lot of work to do before they should expect anyone with a brain larger than a peanut to trust them.
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:3, Funny)
I think occams razor applies here. He has lied dozens of times in the press already. What's more likely? he is lieing now or he has truly changed his mind and now wants to make sure all MS products can work with GPLed software.
Let's take a vote.
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
YOu missed my point entirely. The vote was not on what is the truth, it's was what is more likely.
Is it more likely that...
1) Mundie is lieing?
2) MS has changed their tune and wants to play nice with GPL?
My bet is on 2.
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Right. I won't and I am guessing most people won't either. Since we all lack the ability to read his mind we have to guess at which if the possibilites are more likely. Perhaps you have some special skill which allows you to read his mind and know for sure that he has changed his mind and is now sincerely interested in playi
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Err, no. Maybe YOU would call it fanaticism. More rational people might refer to it as "recognizing Mundie's stellar lack of credibility." There are politicians who tell the truth more often than this guy.
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
It seems to me that perhaps you are more like a islamic fundamentalist then I am. After all accepting the word of a known and habitual liar without any hesitation whatsoever is an act of zealotry. It's very similar to believe who still follow preachers who predict the end of the earth even when the day passes without incident.
Of the
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
I never said such a thing. You are now making up things you think I said which is the sign of a true zealot.
As I said though. It is more reasonable to think the he is lying again then to think that he is telling the truth this time. It is you who are acting like islamic fundamentalist fanatic.
Fanatics tend to believe things that they have no evidence f
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Buy hey don't let that stop you from calling other people islamic fundamentalist just because they don't believe a MS executive.
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
Re:Don't trust Mundie (Score:2)
how many times do you need to fall flat on your ass before you learn?
Please, please, please (Score:3, Funny)
Posts about people pulling material things out of their asses, such as olive branches, baseball bats, cars, factories, bridges, PR representatives and lawyers have the nasty effect on some of of us of, even if only for a second, making our imagination conjure images worse than goatse
Please don't.
Let's see if I have this right... (Score:5, Insightful)
- FLOSS reveals everything there is to know about how it operates and interoperates.
- Microsoft reveals as little as possible about how it operates and interoperates.
- Microsoft has a high-profile, highly-paid person trying to figure out how to make the two work together. So far, this appears to be quite a challenge for them.
Unless I've missed something crucial, Microsoft will never fix this problem to everyone's solution. The problem isn't in their software. The problem is in their business model. But they can never admit that, so they'll go on trying to figure out which size wrench to use to hammer the light bulb into the socket.
Re:Let's see if I have this right... (Score:2)
And I did use the Preview button!
Re:Let's see if I have this right... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Let's see if I have this right... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, but that's because Free software is a ridiculously big umbrella. Not all commercial software is particularly easy to read (even if you could get the source) nor well documented, nor well maintained. For every random crappy sourceforge project you care to point out, I can find a crappy Win>insert name here< demoware program that's just as bad. What we're talking about here is major Free software products - you know, the ones that Microsoft might actually give a crap about interoperating with, like Linux, Apache, Mozilla, OpenOffice, etc. I think you'll find those projects are actually relatively easy to read, quite well documented, and well maintained. In fact I'll bet that they are at least as easy to read, and at least as well documented as Microsofts own stuff - the issues with turning over documentation of APIs in the EU antitrust case strongly pointed to the poor and chaotic state of even Micorosofts internal documentation.
Re:Let's see if I have this right... (Score:2)
Let's go a step further. Suppose an MS team emailed the OOo people and said, "I know you're not going to believe this, but he wasn't kidding - we are actually building an ODS import/export module fo
M$ finally learning the IBM lesson (Score:5, Insightful)
Then in the future we can adjust our ire towards future threats like Apple for closing Darwin off to development and Google who is probably amassing more power than any one company should.
Re:M$ finally learning the IBM lesson (Score:5, Insightful)
How is Google amassing so much power....by launching a bunch of free services that next to no one actually use? I'd be far more scared of a company like Yahoo!, which has far more data about its customers than Google will have in the next 5 years. Yahoo! offers the full range of portal services, and unlike Google, people actually use these portal services. Portal services can amass far more data than search records ever could. Gmail is far behind Yahoo! Mail in terms of users, as is Google Finance, Picasa Web, Google Calendar, Froogle, Google Maps, Google Talk, etc. Despite having better technology (IMHO), Google is an also-ran in the portal market.
With a Calendar service, for instance, the Calendar provider could potentially view your entire life schedule and what you do in your time and use that for advertising purposes. With a Mail service, they have access to your communications. With the majority of people using google.com, they have access to search records attributed to a random IP address, and they have absolutely no way of actually tracing that IP address to a person without a court order, which they simply would not get.
Wow, Google has like so much data about like the 5 million people worldwide that actually have accounts on Google.com! Oh, and they can trace your IP ADDRESS!!!! *shivers* (/sarcasm)
Oh, wait, I'm on Slashdot, conspiracy theories and fearing all companies that make more than $10 million a year in profit is the norm here. Carry on then!
(disclaimer: I use services from both Yahoo! and Google, depending on the service, and also MSN Messenger. I have no problem doing so, because I'm not paranoid of everything that exists to make money)
Re:M$ finally learning the IBM lesson (Score:2)
Re:M$ finally learning the IBM lesson (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF? (Score:2)
By your logic Microsoft will beat NASA to mars, be around for 5000 years and then still be at the top of its business. Well that should teach them.
Who'd doing what? (Score:2)
In a related announcement, Microsoft announced that Raynard D. Fox will be their new Executive Vice-President for Henhouse Security.
With one caveat ... (Score:5, Interesting)
The best people that money can buy, certainly
Late to the Party and Overdressed (Score:2)
It's not unlikely that MS has been waiting for F/OSS to die only to watch it grow stronger. MS may now see F/OSS as something it must embrace, (images of a giant anaconda). Bill Gate's impending retirement as chief architect may in part be a way to remove himself (perhaps Ballmer will follow) as a way to distance MS from his and Ballmer's past attack
outreach? please don't bother (Score:5, Insightful)
what else do they want? (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft wants even more cooperation from FOSS developers, all they have to do is dedicate patents in areas like FAT,
So, open source is already doing all it can do under the limits that Microsoft itself is setting for open source. If they want open source to support Microsoft products even better, it's in their hands.
They don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Craig Mundie is an ass.
Hey Craig, how come I can't get Word Perfect for Linux anymore?
--
BMO
Re:They don't get it. (Score:2)
I believe you meant to say trust.
And no, I know many (even those "devoted" to Microsoft products) that do not trust them. Any further than they could bribe Bill himself. They're history (as a company) has proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy. There's really very little they could do anymore to garnish my personal interest. Yeah, I'm one of those still (grudgingly/happily?) using Win2K -- and very thankful that I'm not caught up in the
Re:They don't get it. (Score:4, Informative)
You're wrong because Microsoft invested in Corel, got them to quit making Corel Linux and WP for Linux and Unix, and promptly divested shortly thereafter.
It was so transparent that people predicted the death of WP for Linux as soon as Microsoft made the purchase. And they were right.
It's called knifing the baby.
--
BMO
Wasting our time... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Speculating WHY / WHETHER REALLY Microsoft is suddenly cosying up to Open Source and GPL.
2. Speculating WHY Vista is getting delayed.
3. Speculating WHY DNF is getting delayed.
4. Speculating WHETHER Gates really stepped DOWN
5. Speculating WHETHER Ballmer might get promoted to Chair-Man.
6. Profit! (Note... this list is always Profitable for Microsoft - not you. One last time... Misrosoft is not a philanthropic organisation - Gates might be one individually. MS is answerable to it's shareholders, and it's only motive is MONEY, not shipping Vista, developing a better Office, kicking Gates, or rewarding Ballmer.
7. If we want to spend your time PROFITably, I guess we can simply skip such articles, and start using REAL open source apps, or writing more code under the GPL.
Such articles are a real waste of time, IMHO.
Re:Wasting our time... (Score:2, Insightful)
If only the comments within
Re:Wasting our time... (Score:2)
Advance to stage 4! (Score:2)
Think for a sec: what if MS code (bits) went GPL? (Score:2)
What if MS coders across the world did F/OSS code? Is that competition for all of the coders that can lay claim to kernel trees before 2.2 in Linux? Or those that can do a conditional compile for another processor/platform other than Intel/AMD/Via?
What if those coders were actually good? O
Tipping point (Score:5, Interesting)
When Linux was only a tiny or isolated part of the OS market, it's was to MS's advantage to do everything they could not to recognize, support, or interoperate with it.
But as Linux reaches a significant size, MS's lack of interoperability becomes a liability. People start not bothering buying Windows licenses because it doesn't work well with their favourite OS (e.g., read and write common file formats), despite the fact that Windows may have functionality they would like to access.
As Windows begins its descent from dominance, it will be forced to start "playing well with others".
This prediction is worth everything you paid for it.
So amusing (Score:2)
Microsoft words: "Embrace, Extend and Extinguish" (Score:5, Interesting)
Go read those papers, the "Halloween documents." They aren't just random FUD, those are internal Microsoft documents stating exactly how Microsoft intends to destroy OSS.
"Embrace, extend and extinguish" isnt' a summary that was randomly invented by OSS paranoiacs, according to sworn testimony the phrase came out of Microsoft VP Paul Maritz' mouth in Intel's meetings with Microsoft
So we're supposed to not be suspicious when they announce that, gee golly, they're serious about embracing?
You're either a fool or a shill.
Re:Microsoft words: "Embrace, Extend and Extinguis (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft words: "Embrace, Extend and Extinguis (Score:2)
Re:So amusing (Score:2)
Proof precedes belief. (Score:5, Insightful)
But proof comes first.
1) Stop campaigning for closed standards. This is the first step towards earning trust.
2) Stop attempting to corrupt existing standards. This can be done simultaneous with 1.
3) Stop spreading FUD. If you continue to act like an enemy, there's no way I'll be willing to trust you.
Those steps are negative, but essential. Until those conditions are met there is no possible positive action that I would trust.
4) Do something positive. There are lots of options here, but if a government forces you to it, then it doesn't count as a positive action from you. Merely neutral (at best).
Possible examples of positive actions are:
1) Pushing an open standard, and adopting it in your own programs.
2) Opening the file format specifications beyond what the EU is demanding. (Alternatively, creating a new Open file format specification and adopting it...but this is 1 again.)
3) Releasing a version of MSWind that doesn't automatically remove the ability of other OSs on the same drive to boot. (Yeah, Linux isn't so good about this either. SuSE seems to do this, but most distros presume that they are the grand PooBah *AND* the Lord High Executioner wrapped into one bundle.)
4) Other. (I said there were lots of choices. There's really too many to enumerate.)
But proof comes before belief.
Best people in the...WTF? (Score:2)
Yeah - right around the time when Monkeys come Flying Out Of My Butt.
OK- I can grant that the best people in the world work there. But they sure aren't doing the programming. proof?
1. Vista
2. MS Word
3. IE
4. fill in the blank: _____________
MS makes horrible software, a nasty OS, Arf. Please, God, make it go away.
RS
How about C library redistribution? (Score:4, Interesting)
A nice start would be allowing redistribution of MSVCP71.DLL and MSVCR71.DLL as part of GPL applications? Python 2.4 switched to a newer Microsoft compiler and requires these DLLs on machines. Microsoft provides free compilers - see http://wiki.python.org/moin/Building_Python_with_t he_free_MS_C_Toolkit [python.org] However the C libraries that the compilers use can only be redistributed under terms that preclude GPL licensed software, although some debate the interpretation.
Consequently that means that people who have GPL licensed Python apps can't move to Python 2.4 or newer because of Microsoft's licensing.
"Microsoft's" Mundie... nuff said (Score:2)
LoB
Evil Microsoft agrees with many others though... (Score:2)
In the latest bit of news we once again find our villain, Microsoft, but this time they are not trying to destroy the world, but instead are joining the fight alongside many on the good side of Open Source.
Ok, drama aside, there is a fundamental issue here that should be revisited, and that is the restrictions of some of the rules of what we call Open Source and the definitions we abide by.
The GPL has flaws, and as much as we would all like to protest, these f
You are completely wrong. (Score:3, Interesting)
Look for any Microsoft license on serious new open source technology to be more restrictive and viral, not less, than the GPL.
There is a lot of silliness like this post claiming that Microsoft would somehow be more open to open source if only the GPL were not so viral.
The fact is, Microsoft would be far less inclined to release code that could be trivially redeployed against them by rivals using licenses less-viral than GPL.
The only situation where having a less viral license helps them is when their riv
Re:Evil Microsoft agrees with many others though.. (Score:3, Insightful)
This is completely untrue, as I'm sure you know. I could enumerate all the still-unknown parts of CIFS, but I don't normally engage with trolls unless it's to point out when they are spreading lies, which is what I'm doing here.
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Free as in Craig Mundie (Score:2, Insightful)
Microsoft executives have recently said they are committed to a greater outreach to the open source community and to make Windows software interoperable with that licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL). Is that a priority of yours and something you plan to move further forward?
I have been one of the principle people architecting the way we are going to step up to this bigger question around interoperability, and that will certainly be a focus
Re:The best people in the world? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Something I learned in 4th grade (Score:2)
Re:Something I learned in 4th grade (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Something I learned in 4th grade (Score:2)
No, you aren't plagiarizing in that case. That's what the phrase "your own words" means -- you own the words because you wrote them yourself.
Re:Fast Query (Score:3, Informative)
Re:3 things that I think are needed (Score:2)