ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Three things Microsoft need to do NOW to prove it loves open souce

By | August 25, 2010, 5:50am PDT

Back in 2001 Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer called Linux a “cancer” that threatened the company, but now the Redmond giant claims to “love open source.” Well, actions speak louder than words.

Here’s the background at Network World:

“We love open source,” says Jean Paoli of Microsoft in a recent interview with Network World. “We have worked with open source for a long time now.”

The mistake of equating all open source technology with Linux was “really very early on,” Paoli says. “That was really a long time ago,” he says. “We understand our mistake.”

Paoli is the general manager of Microsoft’s interoperability strategy team, which touches on some open source issues. A Microsoft veteran of 14 years, Paoli is also the co-creator of the XML specification.

Well, if Microsoft really does love open source, here’s three things that the company can do, and should do, now:

  1. Put an end to the wholeopen source infringes on our patents” rhetoric/FUD/nonsense. If not put an end to it, come clean as to what these infringements are so that the it can work with the open source community to rectify outstanding issues. As CEO, this job should fall to Ballmer, and the open source community should expect a statement shortly (although I wouldn’t hold my breath).
  2. Make available all/much of the source code for older, obsolete operating systems under GPL v3 license. This would clear up a lot of issues and
  3. Work to offer greater interoperability between Microsoft products and open source products.

Without taking measurable actions to prove that it supports open source, Microsoft’s love of it as it stands could be little more than a return to the old ways of embrace, extend and extinguish.

Actions speak louder than words.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

23
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

D. Blankenhorn beat you to it
thx-1138_@... 26th Aug 2010
@Gis Bun "..Why does Microsoft need to go into open source? What is the point? IT's no big deal. You don't see Apple or IBM doing it. "

http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-87217?viewtype=c&tag=mantle_skin;content

.. and for the most part, you don't see cat's 'n dog's "doing it" either (..or more accurately "doing each other").

But seriously, OSS as a whole may actually wan't exactly what you're asking. Truth is, it's a little late to be asking. MS and IBM took the plunge .. so you're years off with the wishful thinking.

Besides, as AKH and DB both correctly allude to: MS getting into OSS *ain't ever been* about "philanthropy". In other words, this was never a case of MS saying "what can i do for you?" but actually "what can i do you for?"

I just figured that needed clearing up.
0 Votes
+ -
Could not agree more (nt)
Economister 25th Aug 2010
nt
@Economister

Open source is not just Linux battlers and publicity seeking foundations. The vast majority of open source is written with the development tools MS gave us. Billions of lines of code are available without even a GPL in sight. There is more open source code running on Windows than any other environment.

If people want to spend a long time nailing jelly to a tree then they have a right to expect some compensation, just as they also have a right to donate their work for the general good.

Open source gives us a safety net and may even give us a killer app one day, but so far it's very much trailing edge and has much of the problems associated with products designed by committees.

I see no need to make open source compulsory wink
0 Votes
+ -
it's actually one thing
Linux Geek 25th Aug 2010
GPL all the code.
@Linux Geek

Shut up... you're worse than LD. devil
Yet ANOTHER Microsoft hate article? C'mon now.

Now to crush your dreams. Microsoft does not need to prove anything to you or me about open source. They can use it, they can release it, but they do not have to prove it.

1. Put an end to the infringements? That would be plain out stupid. Microsoft needs to protect its patents. If they give it to the open source people they will modify the code and Microsoft could lose a lot of money on that deal.
2. Not going to happen. First there is no need to open source its previous operating systems. Second, they couldn't even if they wanted to because you would need to get permissions from third parties to open source it. Third, who's going to look at the code if its open sourced? You? I didn't think so. Fourth, what good would open sourcing the code, especially under the worst license possible do?
3. They already tried to work with open source. They had an entire lab set up for open source and invited the public to view it, but the open source crowd was much too stubborn to accept the invitation.
@Loverock Davidson

They accepted the invite. Mozilla was involved in looking at how to implement the sandbox element of Internet Explorer into Firefox. This was a great thing because it allowed Mozilla to be used as a browser and also keep Microsoft Windows 7 protected. Microsoft realized that people were shifting to Firefox and that they could do little to stop that, but they could at least keep their OS safe so that they couldn't be held accountable for using their market dominance to influence browser usage and bring on another Antitrust suit.
@nucrash
I remember that. Mozilla was the exception, they took the invite and the rest of the open source community came down hard on them calling them traitors and every other name.
@LD, reference pls that Mozilla was the exception. Otherwise you're just a demagogue.
@Loverock Davidson can be removed from the software is infringing on Microsoft. Also I feel that if software is no longer supported by the company that made it there should be a law that states it must be released to open source simply to allow people to continue to use it and make updates for it, or be they must support it until it is released to open source. It would put an end to the waste of thousands of dollars by everyone and all companies.
I disagree. There is nothing M$ can do. Even if there is they will not. Too little, too late.
0 Votes
+ -
Too late for what?
Qbt 25th Aug 2010
@kirovs@...

Too late for what? They already won the war.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpct=2
0 Votes
+ -
What I'd be interested in seeing is:
mtgarden 25th Aug 2010
I'd like to see MS sponsor some OSS projects the way Rapid7 has done with Metasploit and W3AF. Those are specific to their industry (security), but support for Thunderbird, nmap, Pidgin, or other various popular opensource projects would do a lot.
@mtgarden

Microsoft donated $100,000 to the Apache Software Foundation to become a platinum sponsor of the open source organization.

In addition, they have contributed to the following projects:
Apache Qpid
OpenPegasus
PHP Core Engine
Apache POI
HBase/Hadoop
@mtgarden : And to add to ababiec there is also open source versions of Silverlight, .net Framework, ....
1. If they put a reasonable date on releasing source such as 8 years, that would include Windows XP at this point and would possibly allow all businesses to be the risk of further exploits.

2. If they did a case by case basis, this would cost a lot of time in the fact that they need to manage the overhead of releasing source code.

3. Older products could be then forked to complete with newer products, say like Revolution OS would could become a support nightmare.

4. How much code isn't re-used from OS to OS. That is a major problem with this is that if there is an exploit in Windows NT, sometimes it's still valid in Windows 7. This could introduce an entirely new slew of bugs.

All and all, I wish they would release source code on products that they choose no longer to develop, but past that, I don't see a reason for them to release the code other than the few exceptions that they have done so far.
I think the CoApp project is a great example of them helping to enable open source projects to flourish on windows.
The 2 concepts certainly compete agasint one another, so who cares if MS loves or hates open source!

A better question you "journalists" should be asking is what are companies like Google giving back to the open source community? Google takes everything and produces nothing but ads and hyperlinks!
0 Votes
+ -
Hey! get it right ..
thx-1138_@... 26th Aug 2010
@omdguy "..Google takes everything and produces nothing but ads and hyperlinks! "

That's not true! They code & implement industry-leading, "bleeding-edge", in-house, spyware too ..

;p
Well Ballmer was [again] wrong. linux hasn't done much with a rough 1% OS market share.

Why does Microsoft need to go into open source? What is the point? IT's no big deal. You don't see Apple or IBM doing it.
0 Votes
+ -
D. Blankenhorn beat you to it
thx-1138_@... 26th Aug 2010
@Gis Bun "..Why does Microsoft need to go into open source? What is the point? IT's no big deal. You don't see Apple or IBM doing it. "

http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-87217?viewtype=c&tag=mantle_skin;content

.. and for the most part, you don't see cat's 'n dog's "doing it" either (..or more accurately "doing each other").

But seriously, OSS as a whole may actually wan't exactly what you're asking. Truth is, it's a little late to be asking. MS and IBM took the plunge .. so you're years off with the wishful thinking.

Besides, as AKH and DB both correctly allude to: MS getting into OSS *ain't ever been* about "philanthropy". In other words, this was never a case of MS saying "what can i do for you?" but actually "what can i do you for?"

I just figured that needed clearing up.
0 Votes
+ -
IBM and Open Source
dvm 25th Aug 2010
Based in your article, Microsoft need to work on three points you mention. But it looks like IBM failed in one of them since they are keeping close OS/2 and SmartSuite, two very old but excellent applications. Does it means that IBM doesn't love Open Source?
0 Votes
+ -
Open sourcing old OS code
daboochmeister 25th Aug 2010
Given the nature of code reuse, I would bet they CAN'T open source even Win95 ... too much reuse into existing supported OSes, and they would end up having to open source their OS cash cows.

And not sure of the value -- what issues do you see that clearing up, Adrian? Confirming/refuting old patent claims?
0 Votes
+ -
Doesn't matter what MS think or do.
peter_erskine@... 26th Aug 2010
Quite simply, FOSS is software by the people, for the people. Gates always said, anyone could sit down with a text editor, and start coding. They can't take it away.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix