- Related Stories
-
Microsoft looks to extinguish LAMP
June 15, 2005 -
Open-source companies chase steady money
April 5, 2005 -
Microsoft to release more source code?
February 7, 2005 -
Gates taking a seat in your den
January 5, 2005 -
Open source's next frontier
November 22, 2004 -
Microsoft raps open-source approach
May 3, 2001
(continued from previous page)
Martin Taylor, general manager of Microsoft's platform strategy, who was tapped in 2003 to create a more "fact-based" competitive reaction to Linux. "Part of that is having a phenomenal line of sight. When you're driving in the fog and you don't know what's ahead, you're maybe more on edge."
With Linux widely installed among its corporate clients, Microsoft has chosen to accommodate it rather than ignore it.
"We've moved from being more emotional and more reactive. Part of that is having a phenomenal line of sight. When you're driving in the fog and you don't know what's ahead, you're maybe more on edge."
general manager,
Microsoft's platform strategy
There are other indications that Microsoft is learning to live with Linux and open source.
According to sources, Ballmer met with Matthew Szulick, CEO of Linux distributor Red Hat, in New York earlier this year, though neither company has acknowledged the meeting.
Microsoft has hired a number of programmers who have a high profile in open-source circles, including Gentoo founder Daniel Robbins, who joined the company last month under Bill Hilf to help Microsoft development teams understand open-source development. Another employee, Jim Hugunin, is working on the IronPython project to support the Python scripting language--popular among open-source Web developers--in Microsoft's .Net software.
Indeed, as open-source development products, such as Eclipse or the so-called LAMP stack, become more widely used, Microsoft cannot afford to ignore them. The application written with open-source tooling can lead to more Windows sales, for example.
"We understand ways that have to support the (open-source) community as well," Michael Werner, director of the emerging business team for Microsoft in New England, said at a recent conference on open source. "We have a vested interest if a MySQL (open-source database) developer is developing on our platform--we want to make sure it's a successful interaction."
"Allergic reaction"
Still, there are no illusions that Microsoft management has embraced the economic model of open source or that the company's hard-charging competitive ways have slackened.
"Microsoft is now interacting more with the open-source community, which is good, but at the same time, they're doing it along with protecting their core markets and environments," said David Patrick, vice president and general manager of Novell's Linux, open-source platforms and services group.
Patrick noted that Microsoft is interoperating with Linux and other third-party platforms. But that work doesn't involve deep technical integration.
On the licensing front, too, Microsoft's fortunes rely on a proprietary approach. Yet, through its "shared source" initiative, in the past year it has released a handful of development-related products under open-source licenses, including Windows Installer XML toolset (WiX), which the company says has been downloaded by almost 150,000 people from SourceForge.net.
Open-source practices are particularly important in the realm of software development where a community of active users can be far more effective than traditional marketing efforts. And programmers, who can influence the decision of big-ticket server software to run business applications, have shown a liking for free tools and the ability to see how they work.
"In the past, there wasn't a sense of community in the Microsoft world," said DotNetNuke developer Walker, who is president and CEO of Perpetual Motion Interaction Systems. "It took longer to emerge than the LAMP community, which came together more quickly."
Indeed, the IT industry's largest companies--IBM, Sun Microsystems, Novell, Hewlett-Packard--have all sought to harness or sponsor open-source projects to curry favor with developers and take advantage of Linux.
Some company observers contend that there is a split within the ranks of Microsoft over how to approach open source. The company remains deeply committed--financially and philosophically--to a proprietary software model.
"It's a culture around, 'Look, you can't tell us we're wrong, because look at how successful we are with packaged software.' So you protect your intellectual property at all costs. You don't share it--you license," said former Microsoft employee Stephen Walli, now vice president of open-source development strategy at services company Optaros.
In 2003, Walli met with Microsoft's head of Windows development, Jim Allchin, in an effort to convince Allchin to distribute an open-source product. Even though he understood the potential benefits, Allchin "couldn't take that step" because the product would have been shipped with every copy of Windows, Walli said.
De Icaza said Microsoft's shifting stance on open source is pragmatic. After management realized that Linux was not going to upend its business entirely, the company adjusted its strategy.
"You can tell they are learning--Microsoft is not a stupid company," said De Icaza. "They had an allergic reaction to open source...I think it's a wound that needed to heal."
"Software Manufacturing" vendors such as Microsoft and IBM are making moves which on the surface look like they accommodating, but I believe this is a distraction away from the harmful political activism they are engaged in around technology policy.
While Balmer was quoted as saying "We compete with products. We don't compete with movements", the "software manufacturing" movement has changed its anti-competitive techniques away from technical work to the political and legal activism. Rather than trying to offer the best software at the best price, they are actively lobbing to change Patent and Copyright laws to favor (or mandate) "software manufacturing".
Shared Source is neither shared, nor open.
MS is steadily losing out to OS because they still don't get it. People are tired of overpaying for software that is buggy, unsecure and bloated.
They are reacting to what open source does, not trying to compete and that is where they are screwing up. Their web browser is a perfect example. Firefox has taken a noticable chunk of market share, and how does MS compete? Putting in a lame tabbed feature for IE6, when tabs are not the main reason for its popularity. It is its security. MS is finally getting with solid programming practices and making IE7 a standalone app, but who knows if it can match the security of other browsers. The history of Microsoft says it can't, but time will tell and will be a strong indicator if they have learned anything and are going to legitimately compete or merely react.
B. The Screaming Penquins to lose the "Hate Microsoft" religion.
2. At least people who dislike Microsoft has legitimate, tangible reasons for it.
Security is not "a bonus", it is one of the prime requirements for a web browser. Nice GUI elements are not. Other prime requirements are how well numerous protocol and scripting languages are implemented. IE fails on the standards compliance and security tests, that it also has less GUI features is inconsequentional. It is not like tabs are some new invention, they have been around for a long time now.
Ask yourself: If Firefox had no more functionality then IE, but still has the better security, would I still use Firefox?
If the answer is no, then you are the problem. Security should be the #1 priority for everyone. The tabs and extensions of Firefox and other 3rd party browsers are very nice, but not when weighed against important factors.
'Nuff said.
;-)
I think however that Microsoft isn't warming up to open source or anything like that. Here is a program/platform that benifits Microsoft. It could be a good marketing tool for Microsoft to sell servers for web or intranet use. It also gives them the ability to claim open source ties regardless of how hollow those claims might be.
Open source philosophy has been around since the first time man set foot on this earth, I think. Microsoft has been fighting it since the begining of Microsoft and before. Bill Gates simply wants to be paid for anything he or his company sells. In a lot of ways I admire his competitive nature. It's some of his tactics I don't like. He is a ruthless business man who goes for the throat every time. I have learned that people don't need to fear Microsoft or Bill Gates you just don't want to underestimate him. He is the kind of guy that will attack before and after he smells blood.
Not sure I'd agree with this one.
Ever hear of mono?
http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page
Standard ECMA-335
Common Language Infrastructure (CLI)
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm
- tabs
- by Bill Dautrive July 13, 2005 10:31 AM PDT
- Tabs are bells and whistles, they are nice, but hardly critical. For any app that uses an internet connection, security is #1. For every other app, it is still important.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- truce?
- by tsm26 July 13, 2005 7:31 PM PDT
- In my opinion, buffer overflow is not the easiest exploit nor the best way to go for an attack, finding a blank password is. Read the article on the hacker getting into government computers. The credit card companies that got things stolen lately were from a physically stolen non secured laptops and some non secured web pages.
- Like this
-
(23 Comments)Why are there so many problems with security? Viruses, worms, phishing, buffer attack exploits, ect, are caused by 2 things: inept programmers(or management forcing out software that isn't finished) and stupid end users who don't want to learn anything other then how to click on buttons and links.
GUI's are nice, but does not make learning basic computing knowlege like using the command line and configuring your computer obsolete.
Who said I base security off a browser. It is not everything you need to do but is important. But if someone is not concerned enough with security of a browser is unlikely to be concerned about firewalls, good passwords, ect. I never said the browser is the first line of defense, perhaps you should learn to comprehend.
Saying no software is secure is true, but not trying to make it perfect is unexcusable. Most people who say what you said usually know little to nothing about programming. Did you know that the #1 abused exploit is buffer overflow? Do you know how simple it is to avoid it? The #1 exploit is one that every sophomore computer science student knows how to avoid.
Most bugs and security problems are due to not paying attention and missing something elementary, but something complex and easy to miss.
Yes, anyone who defends Microsoft is an idiot, and/or somehow has a financial interest in them, directly or indirectly. Defending their shoddy programs is not a smart thing. Defending their insular attitude in regards to interoperability is not a smart thing. Defending their illegal and moral business decisions is not a smart thing. With very few exceptions, every piece MS software is the most buggy, bloated, expensive, and unsecure in its respective category. How can anyone defend that?
And just as an interesting side not, it is actually easier to perform buffer overflow attacks in Linux because of the way Linux organizes things in memory. That doesn't mean that there are more attacks for Linux, just that they are easier to perform.
You are right, there aren't many products that Microsoft makes that don't have a better alternative, BUT, when the Linux platform has better alternatives to things like Macromedia Fireworks, Adobe Photoshop, Power DVD, Final Cut, Excel(don't say open office), Visio etc, then I will switch, not until then.
I am all about open source, and hope more companies develop for Linux, so lets just agree on something. I may think that GIMP is a paralized brother against Photoshop, or open office's spreadsheet being crappy against Excel, but that doesn't mean I love Microsoft or Windows. I don't work for MS, and never will work for MS. In fact, my company is moving into the Open Source Development Office for small businesses at Novell. I only use the LAMP stack for web development, and I have PLOG and SugarCRM installed. Here is to many more quality open source programs and good competition all around.