Microsoft, OSI Discuss Shared Source Licenses

October 24, 2005 Leave a comment

It seems that Microsoft is talking to the OSI about licensing. Now, I know that license proliferation is a very real problem, but I think Microsoft having a bona-fide OSI approved Open Source license that they are willing to consistantly use is probably a good thing. It would be ideal if they felt comfortable with one of the current ones, of course, but that may not be the case. Considering one of the main mantras of Open Source is that choice is good, I never understood the “GPL is the one true way” mentality. The Red Hat rep rails Microsoft for not using th GPL, but then goes on to say that out of 800 RHEL 4 source packages, only 400 are under the GPL. The OSI is still working on the proliferation issue, but surely “no new license under any circumstance” isn't a stance I can see them taking (for good reason). IMHO, if choice is good then the ability to choice from a variety of bona-fide Open Source licenses is good too. The obvious downside is that code licensed under one license can't be used in code licensed under another. That is a huge downside and one of the main reasons that proliferation is a problem at all. Like most things that are worth while though, this is a balancing act and is going to take some work to get right. Danese Cooper and Tim O'Reilly weigh in on the issue.
, , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Microsoft Says "Maybe Someday" on OpenDocument

October 18, 2005 1 Comment

A follow up to this post, it looks like Microsoft may consider adding OpenDocument support after all, based on “customer demand”. I'd guess that just one or two state Governments alone would be enough demand. I hope MA stands firm here. Unfortunately, one thing I can see happening (which could potentially be quite damaging) is substandard support. By adding deficient support, Microsoft could make using OpenDocument sufficiently painful that it would almost be useless. They'd have the “supports OpenDocument” checkbox to get the contracts, but people who had to use it would suffer. This could have two possible outcomes; 1) People hate OpenDocument and just keep using .doc out of a fundamental lack of understanding what the problem is. 2) People turn to a Word alternative that properly supports OpenDocument. I could see either happing depending on the situation, so it would certainly be a calculated risk on Microsoft's part. They have done something similar in the past with WordPerfect support and we know how that ended up. This story keeps getting more interesting though, and is definitely one I'll be keeping a close eye on (hint: you should too).
, , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Ward Cunningham leaves Microsoft for Eclipse

October 18, 2005 Leave a comment

Ward Cunningham, the father of the Wiki, has officially left Microsoft and will be joining the Eclipse Foundation. Luckily for Ward, when Ballmer said “just tell me it's not Google”, he could calmly say no and avoid another aeron getting tossed. This marks a huge change for Ward. Not only is he going from proprietary to Open Source, but he's only Eclipse's 10th employee. His new title is Director of Committer Community Development, but the article seems to indicate that he'll be doing more than just that (which you'd expect in an organization of 10). It's great to see names like this join the Open Source world and hopefully at some point, moves like this will stop the silly you can't make any money with free software that Microsoft and other keep spouting off. This is a great time to check out WardsWiki or the LQ Wiki, which aims to be the largest general Linux knowledgebase on the web.
, , , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Desktop Apps Coming to the Web: Google

October 18, 2005 Leave a comment

In this article, a Google engineer makes a couple comments on Google Maps. That's not what I find interesting though. While Google Maps is amazingly slick, it has some major usability holes IMHO (no ability to save your location, no ability to do multiple-stop trips, an odd propensity to label streets with names that no one actually seems to use). Those problems aside, there is no question that the design of Google Maps fundamentally changed what people expect out of a Web app – and that is a good thing. So, if I didn't find the Google Maps bit interesting, why am I pointing you to the article? About half way down, you get this: “A number of people are now working on a Linux port of Google Earth, but Rasmussen did not offer a release date.”. Fantastic to see that Google is continuing their commitment to support Linux in their apps. I've commented on this before and was extremely happy to see this reaffirmation. I also found the comment “According to Rasmussen, Google's design philosophy centres on end user loyalty not money, going beyond the browser's lowest common denominator, to develop simple Web applications that are as dynamic as native applications, and to launch early and often to learn from users.”. I'd have thought it was clear that, for Google, “end user loyalty” and “money” are inextricably tied and quite possibly always will be. The kind of lockin you see with Microsoft just will never be possible for Google. In the online world, the barriers to using another search engine, another ad publisher, or another are exponentially lower than switching something like an OS.
, , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

20 Years of Windows

October 14, 2005 Leave a comment

Microsoft Windows just turned twenty. For a full history of Windows, here's the Wikipedia article. What I find ironic, and didn't know, is that the very first version of Windows shipped quite late and vastly understated hardware requirements. Seems not much has changed ;) Truth is, I never used Windows 1.0 so I can't testify to how it was. My first version of Windows was Windows/386. From there I went to 3.1->3.11 and finally the “Chicago” (Windows 95) Beta. That beta was the last version of Windows I have used as my daily desktop. I've played with various versions of Windows after that, from 2000 up to and including 2k3. The one notable exception is XP, which sans a single class I took I've never really logged into. While Windows 2003 isn't all that bad, to me the sad part is that it's not all that good. There's finally some semblance of stability, but it still has myriad security issues, questionable architecture decisions and lacks so much basic functionality that it's astounding. To me, Windows represents just how far you can get in the computing world by being good enough. In fact, Microsoft seems to have turned that into an art. Rarely the first to market, rarely the best value and rarely the best. BUT, they are perceived to be good enough and are a known commodity. The reality though is that after billions of dollars and twenty years of work, Windows is still only good enough. To me that is a monumental failure. It could have been so much more. When you put it in that perspective, I think Linux has made great strides and has done so with way less money behind it and only twelve years of development. In the Windows world, twelve years puts you just past Windows95. Linux is way beyond that in comparison, IMHO. Now, Linux still has a long long way to go and has a ton of places where it needs improvement. We'll get there though and it's been a pleasure to be along for the ride.
, ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Open Debate About OpenDocument

October 13, 2005 1 Comment

FOXNews recently ran a story about the MA decision to move to an OpenDocument standard. The article was quickly blasted by their own readers, who pointed out that the article was one sided, full of FUD and neglected to mention that the author was funded by Microsoft. From the followup article: “The column “Massachusetts Should Close Down OpenDocument” that appeared on FOXNews.com Sept. 28 identified author James Prendergast as executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership, but failed to disclose that Microsoft is a founding member of that organization.”. Now, it's good to see them update the article, but why is this practice so prevalent? Kudos to the readers who took the time to mail FOXNews, you clearly made a difference. It's time news agencies started doing more news reporting and less headline grabbing. Educated viewers and readers is what is going to get us there.
, , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

The Value Dell Puts on Microsoft Windows

October 11, 2005 1 Comment

Anyone who's dealt with Dell knows the voodoo involved in their pricing. It does seem odd though, that a PC with no OS would cost more than one with Windows. Now, I know the argument – the companies that pay to preload Windows only trial software offset the cost of the Windows license. But is the claim seriously that it covers that and the price of a 17″ LCD? If so, I need to get into the preload trial software business I guess. The reality would seem to be the Dell is still quite inextricably tied with Microsoft. Why else would they make non Microsoft systems so convoluted and difficult to find? Now, they are a business and need to do what the can to maximize their profits, but it's just another case of the consumer coming absolutely last. On a side note, it was interesting to see that Dell accidentally hosted their anti-Sun campaign on Solaris 9 for a while due to an ISP snafu. Hilarious.
, , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Massachusetts Finalizes Plan to Use the OpenDocument Standard II

September 27, 2005 Leave a comment

A follow up to this post. I was more then a bit perturbed when I read this “open letter”, from Alan Yates. It seems some people within Microsoft just aren't ready to compete fairly. He is brazen enough to bring up words like due process and acts as if Microsoft is the only one looking out for the good of the people. He insinuates somehow that Microsoft software is standard and that anything else is odd, non-standard and unprecedented. He claims that the OpenDocument format is “untested in the marketplace” while ignoring that the Microsoft XML format hasn't even been released yet. He flat out lies and says that all the office suites that support OpenDocument are derived from the same codebase. 30 seconds of due diligence would have cleared that up, but the response from KDE is here. He also insinuates that Microsoft is the only one that could possibly innovate and even brings into question the government procurement process, which has heavily favored Microsoft in almost every case I've seen. He somehow misses the fact that only Microsoft can officially support their current format and the future format is patent encumbered. He also leaves out that Microsoft is more than welcome to both join OASIS and implement the OpenDocument format into MS Office. I don't have time to tear this piece down line by line, but luckily some others have. The amount of shear FUD in this is astounding though and it'll be interesting to see how MA responds.
–jeremy
, , ,

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Microsoft is Going to ReOrg

September 21, 2005 5 Comments

Microsoft is going through a reorg and Allchin is going to retire after Vista ships. Scoble likes the news (although he's pulled his comments for being too “rah rah”) and even Mini-Microsoft has hope. The one interesting thing that I've gleaned from the press release and ensuing coverage is that Microsoft is going to try to shift to more of a platform or hosted software services company. That is huge news and a huge shift. For a long time, Microsoft has focused on shipping boxed software. The most obvious change here is that MSN will be brought into the core group. Can a company that had focused on shipping boxed software morph like this and still succeed? There is going to be some huge internal struggles here, that's for sure. We may see the company polarized in a way we never have before. Some within Microsoft clearly get it, but others don't. How much the ones who don't will resist this change remains to be seen. One thing is clear though – Microsoft has seen what companies like Google and Yahoo! are doing and they want in. One classic Microsoft thing that I noticed about the release is that it had a 100% positive spin. They want you to believe that they are making all these changes because of forward looking positive reasons, not because because they took a hard look in the mirror and saw slipping ship dates, decreased profits for the first time in ages and more competition then they have seen in decades. Unlike many OSS people, I don't wish bad things on Microsoft. In fact, I'd like to see them succeed in the long run. Not in the predatory and monopolistic way that they have “succeeded” in the past, but in a fair and balanced marketplace. There could be room for everyone. Can the company deal with not being the towering #1 in ever market they're in? Can they stand to not crush every competitor by predatory and quite frankly illegal means? That remains to be seen and the companies recent history makes it really hard to trust them on almost any level. Not impossible though and if they play nice they should eventually be welcomed back into the party.
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft

Newer posts →