Coffeehouse Thread

34 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Microsoft claims that it loves open source

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/082310-microsoft-open-source.html?hpg1=bn

     

    Paoli's recent work involves a new Microsoft initiative to promote interoperability among the key components of cloud networks. The initiative, described in July at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention, is attempting to promote data portability; use of standards-based technologies; ease of migration and deployment across cloud networks; and developer choice.

     

    Am I the only one who notices that Microsoft is enthusiastic about promoting standardization and data portability on other people's platforms, but when it comes to promoting standardization and data portability on their own platforms, their enthusiasm quickly fades? Is this Microsoft's way of saying "we want you to help us move people to our platform so that we can lock them into it"?

     

    It seems to me that developer choice only goes in one direction with Microsoft. Can anyone demonstrate an instance where Microsoft has not tried to migrate people to some version of Windows?

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    Sure, but you certainly didn't mean "migrate people to some version of Windows", because that has nothing to do with data portability; standard based technologies; ease of migration and deployment across cloud networks; and developer choice, right?

  • User profile image
    Bass

    I find it funny that the article mentions IronRuby.

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    PaoloM said:

    Sure, but you certainly didn't mean "migrate people to some version of Windows", because that has nothing to do with data portability; standard based technologies; ease of migration and deployment across cloud networks; and developer choice, right?

    Actually, it does. Cloud computing is a market dominated by Linux and Microsoft wants it get into it, so Microsoft promoting things that make it easier for them to get people to migrate away from Linux, which benefits Windows. If this convinces people to migrate, Microsoft will attempt a vendor lock-in as people switch by introducing them to a ton of Windows-specific things with no intention of providing them to other platforms and every intention of having them use it, making developer choice go only in one direction.

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    PaoloM said:

    Sure, but you certainly didn't mean "migrate people to some version of Windows", because that has nothing to do with data portability; standard based technologies; ease of migration and deployment across cloud networks; and developer choice, right?

    Paolo, you're into D&D, right? You need to find a nice profile picture for Shining Arcanine.  Is there such a thing as a level 20 troll?

     

    Just another Troll

     

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    JoshRoss said:
    PaoloM said:
    *snip*

    Paolo, you're into D&D, right? You need to find a nice profile picture for Shining Arcanine.  Is there such a thing as a level 20 troll?

     

    Just another Troll

     

    -Josh

    I think I have a valid complaint. At the same time, your ad hominem attack is invalid.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Shining Arcanine said:
    PaoloM said:
    *snip*

    Actually, it does. Cloud computing is a market dominated by Linux and Microsoft wants it get into it, so Microsoft promoting things that make it easier for them to get people to migrate away from Linux, which benefits Windows. If this convinces people to migrate, Microsoft will attempt a vendor lock-in as people switch by introducing them to a ton of Windows-specific things with no intention of providing them to other platforms and every intention of having them use it, making developer choice go only in one direction.

    Well it depends. Data storage is pretty portable. However once you start coding for the cloud, well, as ever, if you're writing ASP.NET (Mono aside) then you're going to have to use IIS. PHP gives you options of linux/bsd/windows. Rails, well, rails doesn't work that well on Microsoft, so now you're locked into Linux, and that's only a little better because you might have more linux cloud suppliers.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    Wait what? Microsoft is trying to selfishly gain profit at the expense of the rest of the industry? They have a word for that I think. "Competition" Smiley

     

    Don't try to assign human qualities of purpose to public corporations. They all exist for only one purpose: accumulation of wealth.

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    Shining Arcanine said:
    JoshRoss said:
    *snip*

    I think I have a valid complaint. At the same time, your ad hominem attack is invalid.

    Josh is vulnerable to electricity so you should attack him with Thunder Fang

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    blowdart said:
    Shining Arcanine said:
    *snip*

    Well it depends. Data storage is pretty portable. However once you start coding for the cloud, well, as ever, if you're writing ASP.NET (Mono aside) then you're going to have to use IIS. PHP gives you options of linux/bsd/windows. Rails, well, rails doesn't work that well on Microsoft, so now you're locked into Linux, and that's only a little better because you might have more linux cloud suppliers.

    Ruby on Rails is available for Windows, it is MIT licensed, and there is nothing stopping people from running it on Windows under cygwin if they do not like the Windows version. If people do not like the Windows version, there is nothing stopping them from modifying the source code to produce something that they do like.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Shining Arcanine said:
    blowdart said:
    *snip*

    Ruby on Rails is available for Windows, it is MIT licensed, and there is nothing stopping people from running it on Windows under cygwin if they do not like the Windows version. If people do not like the Windows version, there is nothing stopping them from modifying the source code to produce something that they do like.

    Ah yes, the if you don't like it rewrite it argument of open source. What a crock, I mean really. How many companies have developers skilled enough to redevelop a language, or something like Apache?

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    Bass said:

    Wait what? Microsoft is trying to selfishly gain profit at the expense of the rest of the industry? They have a word for that I think. "Competition" Smiley

     

    Don't try to assign human qualities of purpose to public corporations. They all exist for only one purpose: accumulation of wealth.

    Talking about data portability, standards, etcetera is nice only when it is applied consistently. It is a truly vulgar to expect your competitors to adopt practices that help your business without reciprocation commitments.

     

    If Microsoft is serious about data portability, standards, etcetera, then it can start by modifying Microsoft Office to depreciate the current .docx format in favor of a standard implementation of OOXML. Microsoft can continue by making the DRM components of .NET available to the Mono project. Then Microsoft could depreciate Direct3D, DirectAudio, etcetera for their OpenGL, OpenAL, etcetera counterparts. Next Microsoft could modify the software for which it charges a fee that is separate from the cost of Windows to be available for the major UNIX-like operating systems and not dependent on any version of Windows. Such software would include things like Microsoft Office, Visual Studio, the games it publishes, etcetera and they would need to run under major Linux distributions, FreeBSD and Mac OS X. Finally, Microsoft could produce versions of Windows for ARM processors.

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    blowdart said:
    Shining Arcanine said:
    *snip*

    Ah yes, the if you don't like it rewrite it argument of open source. What a crock, I mean really. How many companies have developers skilled enough to redevelop a language, or something like Apache?

    I am not a user of Ruby on Rails, so I do not understand what you find to be wrong with it under Windows, but I think just about every possible option that could be made available to rectify your complaints is available.

     

    If you are such a fan of how it operates on Linux and you do not want to touch source code, you can run it under cygwin on Windows. It should work just as well.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Shining Arcanine said:
    blowdart said:
    *snip*

    I am not a user of Ruby on Rails, so I do not understand what you find to be wrong with it under Windows, but I think just about every possible option that could be made available to rectify your complaints is available.

     

    If you are such a fan of how it operates on Linux and you do not want to touch source code, you can run it under cygwin on Windows. It should work just as well.

    Its nowhere near as fast. MS put a lot of work into making PHP a first class citizen under IIS, it would have been lovely if IronRuby had gone the same way. The saffolding of Rails isn't anywhere near as interestting as the language.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    Shining Arcanine said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    Talking about data portability, standards, etcetera is nice only when it is applied consistently. It is a truly vulgar to expect your competitors to adopt practices that help your business without reciprocation commitments.

     

    If Microsoft is serious about data portability, standards, etcetera, then it can start by modifying Microsoft Office to depreciate the current .docx format in favor of a standard implementation of OOXML. Microsoft can continue by making the DRM components of .NET available to the Mono project. Then Microsoft could depreciate Direct3D, DirectAudio, etcetera for their OpenGL, OpenAL, etcetera counterparts. Next Microsoft could modify the software for which it charges a fee that is separate from the cost of Windows to be available for the major UNIX-like operating systems and not dependent on any version of Windows. Such software would include things like Microsoft Office, Visual Studio, the games it publishes, etcetera and they would need to run under major Linux distributions, FreeBSD and Mac OS X. Finally, Microsoft could produce versions of Windows for ARM processors.

    This is typical off the open sores crowd. When you say "interoperabilty" you really mean, "dump everything you are doing and do it our way". That's every bit as anticompetitive as you accuse Microsoft of being.

     

    You want to compete? Make a better product. It's that simple.

  • User profile image
    intelman

    Microsoft should embrace open source. Bring their closed source products to open source environments. I would love to see a Zune App for Android.

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    Chris, this is getting pathetic.

     

    Charles, maybe the new Channel 9 should have Class-C ban capabilities Smiley

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    intelman said:

    Microsoft should embrace open source. Bring their closed source products to open source environments. I would love to see a Zune App for Android.

    Microsoft should embrace open source.

    They do.

    Bring their closed source products to open source environments.

    They do.

    I would love to see a Zune App for Android.

    Really? Why? I wouldn't want a fine application like the Zune client beign raped by that OS.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.