(Credit:
Microsoft)
Microsoft, long the bastion of proprietary thought, is increasingly adding open-source DNA to the fold. And it's adding to its roster of open-source veterans: Dick Hardt, founder and CEO of Sxip Identity and ActiveState, announced on his blog earlier this week that he will be joining Microsoft:
I will have the title Partner Architect and will be working on consumer, enterprise and government identity problems. My open source, open web and digital community experience will continue to guide my thinking. For me, this is an opportunity to work on the identity problems I have been toiling over for the last six years, but now with massive resources.
Hardt insists that this isn't a sell-out move (He likely doesn't need the money, having sold ActiveState to Sophos a few years back), arguing that he "was recruited to Microsoft because (he is) an independent thinker." He's probably right. Microsoft has been seeking to bring more contrarian outside counsel into the company in the past year or two. The fact that Hardt won't "fit right in" is probably a big selling point to his hiring manager.
As noted above, Hardt won't be alone. Microsoft now employs Bill Hilf, former Linux technical strategist for IBM; Sam Ramji, a former executive at Ofoto which was a heavy user of open source; Bob Duffner, another IBMer who worked with its open-source Gluecode acquisition; Rob Conery, founder of MPL-licensed SubSonic; Tom Hanrahan, former technical lead at the Linux Foundation; Daniel Robbins, former chief architect of Gentoo Linux; and more.
It's a clear trend, though clearly these hires constitute a tiny minority of total Microsoft employees. Even so, "a little leaven leavens the whole lump," to quote Paul's words to the Galatians. Here's hoping that Hardt and the others will continue to make headway within Microsoft on open-source issues.
News on Hardt first found via Mary Jo Foley at ZDNet.
This post by Microsoft (disclaiming its need to adhere to GPLv3) has me depressed. Not because of what it portends for open source, but because of how dumb it makes the company look, as Mary Jo Foley of ZDNet points out. Not to mention that it makes Novell look really dumb for trusting Microsoft to play nicely. (But then, that foolishness was never in doubt.)
Still, Novell has just released this response to Microsoft's position:
Shortly after the GPLv3 license was released, Microsoft issued a statement in which they expressed their view that Microsoft is not a party to the GPLv3 and it is therefore not applicable to them. Yesterday, they also articulated that, "to avoid any doubt or legal debate on this issue, Microsoft has decided that the Novell support certificates that we distribute to customers will not entitle the recipient to receive from Novell, or any other party, any subscription for support and updates that includes the receipt of any code licensed under GPLv3."
Microsoft's current position, taken unilaterally, is intended to eliminate any perceived ambiguity about the applicability of GPLv3 to Microsoft. Nonetheless and independent of Microsoft's position, we would like to make clear our commitment to our customers that Novell will continue to distribute SUSE Linux Enterprise Server with its full set of functionality and features, including those components that are licensed under GPLv3.
In other words, we'll carry the water for Microsoft since they really have turned out to be a terrible Linux partner. Who knew?
PJ at Groklaw rightly castigates Microsoft for backing out of its commitment. Stephe Walli goes one step further, chastising Microsoft for foolishly backing out of an entire future (which might well be perfectly rosy for Microsoft):
... Read more
At least Microsoft is back to normal. In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, Bill Hilf takes a familiar (if a bit worn and tired) swipe at Linux in the enterprise:
In the enterprise, it's not enough just to be a cheap operating system. You need to have applications for it, and it needs to be highly supported.
Fortunately for Bill, he need not worry. Linux comes with superior support to Microsoft's because, oddly enough, the business model around Linux is predicated on support, not licenses, so Linux vendors like Red Hat, Novell, and Canonical/Ubuntu can't get by on marketing and sales sleight of hand. It's really Microsoft that needs to answer Bill's critique, not Linux. Linux also has applications in multitudes and, despite all that, still delivers significantly more value than Microsoft's Windows operating system.
But you don't have to believe me. It's the customer who consistently delivers this message. CIOs rank Microsoft a distant #6 to Red Hat (#1) and Novell (#5) in terms of value, according to CIO Insight's annual report. Truth really stinks, at least if you're Microsoft.
... Read more- prev
- 1
- next
