Shared Source Device Emulator from Microsoft 29
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has posted a shared source version of its device emulator (which ships with Visual Studio 2005) for download.
Primarily meant for academia to experiment with and build upon, it is licensed under the Microsoft Shared Source Academic License. Since it emulates the ARM processor, it can run all modern Windows Mobile and Windows CE operating systems. Barry Bond, the architect behind the emulator (and also Rotor, one of Microsoft's previous shared source offerings) has a blog post on the release."
Microsoft paradigm shift? (Score:1)
Are we seeing some kind of paradigm shift from Microsoft here? Or is it merely an attempt to increase recently waning market share?
Either way, this seems like it can only be good for consumers.
Re:Microsoft paradigm shift? (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically, yes, Microsoft could learn a lot of lessons from open source. It's learning them. But how exactly has the open source community learned from Microsoft?
There is one and only one mechanism Microsoft uses to stay in power: find out what the biggest competitor is doing, and do it better. The open source community may scoff and claim Microsoft can't do this, but the fact is THEY CAN. There's very little you can't do when you can afford to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at a problem, but when you have minimal funding and only fair-weather support from most of your adherents, there's an awful lot you can't do. The open source community needs to be very worried and start looking very hard for ways to respond to this.
ObDoomsdayTheory: Consider the competitive implications of this. We have an ARMV4I emulator for Windows which is released as shared source under the academic license, a close parallel to the GPL which forbids any derivatives that do not run on Microsoft operating systems. Is it feasible that the open source community can EVER develop an ARMV4I emulator for Linux without facing the impending shadow of a lawsuit demanding they *prove* nobody on the project made use of Microsoft's shared source release? Could that ever be proven?
The flaw in the open source model here is that most contributors are anonymous, do not get held accountable for their contributions, and never face any scrutiny as to whether their code is free of trademark and patent claims. If this case went to court, could all the developers on the project be located to appear in court? How could any of them demonstrate that their code was clear of any "contaminant" effect from the Microsoft Shared Source release?
And exactly how much interesting and useful technology *is* Microsoft going to dump onto the market under the Academic Shared Source (ASS... hehehehe oh wait I'm not twelve) license? Will that create a problem for open source developers who want to provide similar functionality? How high *is* the wall Microsoft has created around ARMV4I emulation? Can open source even *contemplate* surmounting it?
Microsoft has a history of learning its competitors' tactics very, very well and using them to slaughter those competitors in the marketplace. There was a time that the saying was nobody ever got fired for buying *IBM*, and everyone was worried about how IBM was going to take over the world and nobody could stop them. But Microsoft stopped the unstoppable, so calling open source invincible and unstoppable doesn't exactly give me warm fuzzies when you look at how IBM is doing these days.
Re:Microsoft paradigm shift? (Score:2)
As for the source, you can easily compare two codebases to catch potential infringement. Given that the source for each is open, there should be no worries at all; the developers could start by setting up the comparison tool. The real worry would be any patents that Microsoft acquired during the course of creating the emulator.
Cleanroom reverse engineering is a way of b
Re:Microsoft paradigm shift? (Score:2)
Now try and do that for an open source project. Who wrote this change here? How do you know? Where is he? What's his real name? Will he come out and testify?
It's a much harder question. The courts are also far more likely to believe a professional software developer, where they might not be so quick to
Re:Microsoft paradigm shift? (Score:2)
Will he come out and testify?
Identifying developers is not the same as identifying infringement, whatever they testify. Nobody is going to admit to copying in court, that is self-incriminate, unless they're forced to.
Comparing source for simularity, and using some commonsense about what constitutes simularity, is really the only way to verify whether something is copied.
Just look at the current SCO circus [groklaw.net] to see how complicated this "he said/she said" argument can get.
---
Commercial software big
Nope, usual tricks (Score:2, Informative)
"(E) If you distribute the software or derivative works in source code form you may do so only under this license (i.e., you must include a complete copy of this license with your distribution), and if you distribute the sof
Article also includes information on Optimisation (Score:1, Informative)
The information he provided is fairly indepth and can really be applied to many a cpu emulator.
Quite an informative read.
Re:Article also includes information on Optimisati (Score:1)
Re:Article also includes information on Optimisati (Score:1, Informative)
So what can mortals run on this? (Score:2)
For those who don't know... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:For those who don't know... (Score:2)
The 'shared source' license isn't an open source license.
Re:For those who don't know... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:For those who don't know... (Score:1)
A no go for hobbyists (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A no go for hobbyists (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A no go for hobbyists (Score:2)
Last time I looked, 99 percent of the world's population lacked the resources, intelligence, or inclination to write computer code. That's -2 orders of magnitude from six billion.
So a full 10% of people who MIGHT be interested in this shared source product currently meet the terms of the license, and most others can qualify simply by enrolling at a community college or su
**yawn** ... nothing to see here (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:**yawn** ... nothing to see here (Score:2)
An emulator is more than a CPU core (Score:3, Interesting)
But do they also emulate the I/O of a Windows Mobile device, to the point where a PDA owner could backup his handheld and restore it to the emulator?
How short sighted ... (Score:1, Interesting)