Politics is more dangerous than war, for in war you are only killed once - Winston Churchill
|
|
|
Microsoft wants Open Sauce on Windows
SAM RAMJI, senior director of platform strategy at Microsoft has said that the Vole wants to see a world where lots of Open Sauce software runs on Windows.
He said that with businesses currently not being able to afford software, it makes sense for the Vole to make sure that open sauce software runs on its proprietary operating systems.
Ramji told Internet News that the work that Microsoft has done to support PHP and Java on top of Windows is key to the company's continued ability to weather the worst of the slowdown.
"We've made so much progress in demonstrating a consistent and rational process for open source adoption of Microsoft technologies and interoperability with non-Microsoft platforms," Ramji said. "I feel like we've gained some credit in that area and we do our best." µ
L'INQ
Internet News
Share this:
Share
How high up the pecking order is Ramji? Because the anti-open-source feeling comes right from the top. So below Ramji there will be an isolated pocket of open-source-supporting people at Microsoft, surrounded on all sides by an organization trying to exterminate them.
That’s the only way I can make sense of Microsoft’s schizophrenic behaviour towards Open Source.
Who does he think he works for ? Microsoft has been competing with open source software (eg. against Java, PHP, Office). MS fought with Sun over the Java runtime in IE6 and made their own. MS created C# to compete with Java, ASP.NET vs open source scripting, MS even tried to stop Open Office with proprietary file formats and patent/copyright attacks. MS create undocumented protocols, API’s and libraries which are changed or replaced at will.
Even those who may use the high cost MS development tools are hit with regular re-writes because of incompatibilities created by MS every few years. MS have a habit of wanting to take back control and design their own so if MS see your Open Source project as a threat it will either be silenced or purchased.
This is already happening, literally, at US national labs. Here is why and how.
Security is important. So important that we cannot pay enough for it, tax money that is. Less than a decade ago, DOE decided that they wanted play the security game. Most things at the DOE labs are not classified, and hardly anything is a real secret (ask the Russians). But, administrators find new opportunities in defining new security measures, and congress can applaud itself for playing such good overseers.
The secure operating system was found quickly: Microsoft Windows. So, MS Windows became the standard. But, there was trouble. Real researchers (those who actually do the work) do not use MS Windows. Therefore Linux became the only sanctioned alternative. And it cannot be just any Linux. No, it has to be Red Hat Linux. If you use anything else, Linux or not, the security forces will terrorize you into submission.
Then came phase two of the security offense. All computers had to be managed by the computer center of each lab. Most researchers take pride in their ability to do that themselves, and they do that much better than the computer centers. However, the force was with the security administrators.
Still, some students were just not convinced that this is good. Actually, they were pissed. With no functioning Internet left at the labs (only censored web browsing left), the students wanted to have a least control over their software.
And that is why Microsoft Windows became popular again. The students would get MS Windows XP installed on their computers by the computer center, and then they run Open Sauce Linux of their choice as a virtual machine with Windows as host. Congress is happy, DOE is happy, the administrators' are happy, the computer center morons are happy, and the students are happy, too.
Made in USA
multiply convicted.
i'm actually trying to figure how closed source model has helped
Even though you may be installing Open Source Software on a Windows Server platform, you must still purchase Client Access Licenses from Microsoft for each client that wishes to connect to that server to access the Open Source Software service. This still sux.
The point is not that MS may or may not have made JAVA work better on their proprietary OS that is highly encrypted and they have been known to use it to make applications not work (as compatible) with their OS in the past to make people use their crap. No, that is not the issue. The issue is they do underhanded dirty business practices, they are a convicted monopolist.
Right, a total rewrite of the OS. It's not the OS, it's the API. If you want to run a Windows App on Linux, use Wine.
It runs them just fine.
Microsoft's implementation of a Java compiler was faster and more stable than anything that came out of the Java camp
It was not 100% Java compatible. Also it was windows only.
I don't care if it's faster if it is NOT 100% Java and is not multiplatform.
Lest ye not forget dear fanbois - take your medication so you can remember that Microsoft's implementation of a Java compiler was faster and more stable than anything that came out of the Java camp and that's why it was killed. I have a linux box that I use as a router for my windows network. The thing is great but has required about $1200 worth of my time to get it running... I could have bought a copy of SBS 2003 and the hardware for a lot cheaper than $1200 and put it all together... So think about that before you blindly bash Microsoft because it's in style today.
As for OSS on Windows - it's a good thing for OSS and MS - why not get more people using your OSS so you people that built the OSS (that is you, right? You're not a leech?) can get jobs fixing bugs and leveraging the software so you can feed yourself and your family.
Windows users want the security of Linux!
Linux users want windows apps to be converted to Linux!
The only solution that would favour that, is the Windows OS's converted to
Linux. Or a total OS rewrite in Linux.
Are you listening powers at be?
It's but a dream, but who knows, time seems to make things either fall into place or muck it up.
Just a note, April 1st has a possible worm to launch on this date, anybody that have both Linux and windows, please use your Linux instead on this day.
The only entity I trust less than Microsoft is the Government. I remember MS trying to change and steal JAVA and that fight that went on. MS has a plan but it involves proprietary control and money. Look at the ISO stand fiasco they did with the Open Document Standard. I like Open Office (only really use the writer) and am currently (slowly) switching all my documents to the .odt format. MS can take their so called ISO XML crap and shove it! MS reminds me of the story of David and Goliath.
looks like all the anti-ms monkeys climbed down their trees. first you complain that they dnt support OSS now you complain that they do...
The most important thing is "On Windows". Whatever run on windows it's fine for MS, Because they just have to sell an OS (sell not devellope).
Typical monopolist spin,they want "open source app's to work on their OS's".
What users want is, propietary software app's to work on open source OS's.
Uh, let's see now...
Do I want the OS under my apps to be an over-priced, under-performing pile of bloatware, hacked to allow OSS to execute imperfectly, or do I want an OSS OS that was developed to run OSS natively? Gosh, what a difficult choice!
Not to mention that Micro-soft will only allow OSS to run on Windoze until their sales recover (if ever!), then they'll pull the plug, claiming (lying) as they always do, that they have the end users' best interests in heart (as if MS had a heart!)
I can't trust them since i can't see what they actually did in the code.
The don't do it because they are nice people, they do it because they don't have a choice. At least in case of PHP.