Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Open Source Software IT

Microsoft Open Technologies Is Closing: Good Or Bad News For Open Source? 110

BrianFagioli writes When Microsoft Open Technologies was founded as a subsidiary of Microsoft — under Steve Ballmer's reign — many in the open source community hailed it as a major win, and it was. Today, however, the subsidiary is shutting down and being folded into Microsoft. While some will view this as a loss for open source, I disagree; Microsoft has evolved so much under Satya Nadella, that a separate subsidiary is simply no longer needed. Microsoft could easily be the world's biggest vendor of open source software, which is probably one reason some people don't like the term.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Open Technologies Is Closing: Good Or Bad News For Open Source?

Comments Filter:
  • No wonder Open Tech is closing in Microsoft. It is the brilliant minds of Microsoft that conceived of putting " shut down " in the "start" menu. It was so bad it became good, and now even Microsoft is not able to get rid of the start button. Same way they might find it impossible to close their open tech.
    • by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @02:03PM (#49495675)

      " shut down " in the "start" menu

      They fixed that, didn't you hear? In Windows 8, the option to shut down the computer is now logically found under Settings.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Sounds like you've never used Windows 8.

        The shutdown command is still right there on the start screen, next to the current logged-in user's account name and avatar.

        You can also still use Alt-F4 from the desktop to bring up the old-school shutdown dialog, too.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          That was added in the Windows 8.1 update, actually. It's not in the original Windows 8.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          I don't see an icon labeled alt+f4 you're obviously a Microsoft shill.

          I'm not going to use the keyboard like some kind of savage.

    • by zamboni1138 ( 308944 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @02:16PM (#49495773)

      If I want to start the process of shutting down my computer, why wouldn't I go to a menu of things to start?

    • by Livius ( 318358 )

      "Shut down" isn't just disconnecting the power supply, it's an operation involving a whole collection of actions, i.e. something that the user starts.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Some old-school trolling going on here. "Start" does not mean "Start Program." Rather, it's a navigation starting point where you can make many choices that range from starting programs, changing settings, or shutting down the computer. Don't you feel stupid now?

    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      It is the brilliant minds of Microsoft that conceived of putting " shut down " in the "start" menu

      I've never been able to find "shut down" in the Ubuntu menu tree - does it even exist?

  • by MouseTheLuckyDog ( 2752443 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @01:31PM (#49495419)

    Cause that is about the only person who was praising Microsoft Open Tech when it started.

    Microsoft has a long way to convince me that they are committed to OSS. So far their acclaimed commitments seem to be mostly fluff with very little real substance in them..

    • by armanox ( 826486 )
      Do we really care one way or another? I mean, honestly. Attitudes like that won't encourage them to open up more code in the future - they need to see some level of success in the small set of stuff they put out to be convinced to do more (how success is measured is a different question...).
      • by gtall ( 79522 )

        Really? How about they start by not doing anything, i.e., give up the patent nonsense on Android.

        MS is nothing more than a snake waxing all indignant while the family dog is now a lump sliding down its body.

    • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @02:18PM (#49495791)

      So far their acclaimed commitments seem to be mostly fluff with very little real substance in them..

      How about completely opening .Net, moving their build system to GitHub, and moving the compiler to LLVM? Those seem to have some real substance to me. Then there's them embracing Docker for Windows Server 10 and open sourcing that work. This is not your fathers Microsoft.

      • by FearTheDonut ( 2665569 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @02:43PM (#49495969)
        It's not just .NET. It's the .NET compiler. ASP.NET. ASP.NET MVC. The Entity Framework. .NET Core Runtime libraries. This stuff is the heart of Microsoft development. And it's all open-source. And, they are providing support for cross-platform development on Mac and Linux. The Visual Studio Community edition is free (free as in beer).

        People can be skeptical to be skeptical, but, as you eluded to, this is not the Microsoft of old. As some of my friends have said, "Haters gonna hate..." And some things won't change.
        • by Anonymous Coward

          It's not just .NET. It's the .NET compiler. ASP.NET. ASP.NET MVC. The Entity Framework. .NET Core Runtime libraries. This stuff is the heart of Microsoft development. And it's all open-source. And, they are providing support for cross-platform development on Mac and Linux. The Visual Studio Community

          Does it mean VisualStudio will run on Linux soon?

          • You might (I hope) be surprised. They did after all release the new office for iOS and Android first. The problem is probably that VS is such a margin cash cow: enterprise products that people actually pay $2k for a pop vs windows which most people who care either acquire with a new computer (for about $40 OEM license) or "acquire" by other means.

            As I said: I'd like to be surprised with it. But if not: there is still other IDEs that can handle C#/.Net source code. The more the platform matches the mindset o

          • by Phroggy ( 441 )

            Does it mean VisualStudio will run on Linux soon?

            No. Visual Studio is not open source (although there is now a free Community edition [visualstudio.com]), and "open source" doesn't mean "runs on Linux" anyway.

        • People can be skeptical to be skeptical, but, as you eluded to, this is not the Microsoft of old.

          I remember the Microsoft of old singing, "developers, developers, developers......" Sounds like the same old song to me.

          Microsoft has been giving stuff away free for a long time to get an edge on competition. There was a huge lawsuit about that with IE.

          TBH I'm not sure exactly what you think has changed.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Sorry, but it will take more than this to counter 30+ years of hostile MS behaviour and shenanigans.

      • by shutdown -p now ( 807394 ) on Friday April 17, 2015 @03:57PM (#49496573) Journal

        Speaking of MS OpenTech, people just don't understand what it is (or rather, was) about. Back when MS was still in the "dark ages" wrt open source, but slowly coming out of them, OpenTech was set up as an independent org that could work with open source without the fear of "contaminating" MS proper - remember, this was back when Ballmer with his "GPL is a virus" notions was still around, and lawyers were super-paranoid about people copy/pasting some code snippet and inadvertently exposing the code to some OSS license, or a patent claim or something like that. They were even more paranoid when people wanted to contribute something upstream; with a few exceptions, this was something that you had to go to OpenTech to do.

        Now that this is no longer the case, and regular devs inside MS are allowed (in fact, actively encouraged) to use and contribute to open source, the legal separation that was the whole point in the first place has lost its relevance. Notice how the announcement specifically notes that this is not about laying people off, just closing down the legal entity.

        • by sad_ ( 7868 )

          OpenTech was set up as an independent org that could work with open source without the fear of "contaminating" MS proper - remember, this was back when Ballmer with his "GPL is a virus" notions was still around, and lawyers were super-paranoid about people copy/pasting some code snippet and inadvertently exposing the code to some OSS license, or a patent claim or something like that. They were even more paranoid when people wanted to contribute something upstream

          and it is sadly still like this in many many companies.

      • So far their acclaimed commitments seem to be mostly fluff with very little real substance in them..

        How about completely opening .Net, moving their build system to GitHub, and moving the compiler to LLVM? Those seem to have some real substance to me. Then there's them embracing Docker for Windows Server 10 and open sourcing that work. This is not your fathers Microsoft.

        ...and how much of that is usable on any non-Microsoft platform? A percentage would be fine as an answer.

        They're not doing it out of a sense of freedom or charity, so forgive me if I don't swoon with joy...

        • by ljw1004 ( 764174 )

          So far their acclaimed commitments seem to be mostly fluff with very little real substance in them..

          How about completely opening .Net, moving their build system to GitHub, and moving the compiler to LLVM? Those seem to have some real substance to me. Then there's them embracing Docker for Windows Server 10 and open sourcing that work. This is not your fathers Microsoft.

          ...and how much of that is usable on any non-Microsoft platform? A percentage would be fine as an answer.

          I think it's close to 100%, on mac+linux. When Microsoft open-sourced their VB+C# compilers a year ago, Miguel was on stage as well to show it running on mac.

          • Yes ... sort of I think. Ex: System.IO is just wrappers around COM calls to Win32 apis as far as I know. On Mac yes you could use the compiler but you'd have to include the mono or whatever version of System.IO which might insist on changing API signatures in subtle ways to be more "mac like" and mean you have to learn everything from scratch. Not only that but a lot of .Net developers (myself included) have been spoiled so much with tooling that we really have to think about it if we try to write a compile

        • 100%. Why do you ask?
        • They're not doing it out of a sense of freedom or charity, so forgive me if I don't swoon with joy...

          If that's the bar you're setting, no business will ever live up to those expectations. You're absolutely correct that this is simply a pragmatic strategy, made to help secure their place in an era where Windows no longer is the dominant platform. I'm completely fine with that. I don't expect Microsoft to suddenly turn into nice guys. I do expect them to act consistently with their own interests, and right now, that means accepting that they need to embrace a cross-platform development strategy. That's

    • They are committed when it impacts large contracts.

      Seen stuff in the news lately regarding the push for open document standards on the web? Governments are now specifying published government documents can not be propriety formatted. This forced Microsoft to support open formats or lose large contracts because Microsoft Office is not meeting specifications of the document requirements.

      Compatibility with internet standards has forced open standards onto Microsoft for a long time from TCP/IP over NetBios, to

      • Remember when Microsoft had Windows for Workgroups?

        Yes....

        The Internet put them at risk of a end run past them. They had to adapt or die.

        So they stole from IBM. Yes, it's coming back to me now. OS/2. Thanks for clearing that up.

        Oh wait, I see the problem - you're equating networking and internet. Networking was easy - little resistance from Bill there, the "internet" was something he hoped was a passing fad (tcp stack was trickier than cifs, and then their was the whole browser thingie - damn standards). Netscape, Mosaic, that's a whole 'nuther barrel of fish in the sun.

    • .NET is fluff? The C# compiler is fluff? What specifically does MS need to open for it not to be fluff? Windows? It's obviously a topic within Microsoft.
  • You sound like a dick taking cheap shots at GNU.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Well, you have Richard Stallman on your side. Not only is he a dick, but he's also fat, eats his own toejam, and throws a fit when things don't go his way.

  • >> Microsoft has evolved so much under Satya Nadella

    That's a funny way of saying "your SQL Server and other Server pricing went through the roof"

    The whole Microsoft "open source" strategy seems to be based on getting as many software applications and developers ("it's free!") to depend on the Microsoft crown jewels of AD, SQL Server and Windows Server (2012) as they can, and then squeeze cash (e.g., core pricing vs. CPU pricing) from IT departments as they try to build out a stable backend to support all these apps. That's Balmer's "developers developers developers" plan anyway...and I don't see Satya doing anything different yet.

    • Except...

      Microsoft has pushed in the next-to-be-released version of .NET all of the libraries to support the Microsoft technologies running on Linux or Mac. If this is true, then Microsoft can't really charge for core pricing / cpu pricing on operating systems / database platforms that it doesn't own.
      • 1) Last I checked, MS SQL Server does not run on OSX or Linux, and .NET does not run anywhere near Postgres, Oracle, MySQL, etc... so why are you saying "database" up there?

        2) GP forgot to mention pricing on MS Office in the pricing squeeze (sure, you can get Office 365... subscription models are effing delicious to MS, especially when compared to set-pricing for licenses that may or may not renew within the next 3 years).

  • Well, actually, not really.

    Nobody ever believed them.

  • the obligatory, (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Victor Tramp ( 5336 ) <info&ross154,net> on Friday April 17, 2015 @01:57PM (#49495613) Homepage

    ..and nothing of value was lost.

  • Microsoft has evolved so much under Satya Nadella, that a separate subsidiary is simply no longer needed.

    This is far from true (or at least, there is little evidence of it). Perhaps Microsoft will become a good (or at least nonmalevolent) player in the software space eventually, but to say that it's there right now is seriously jumping the gun.

    • "Microsoft has evolved so much under Satya Nadella"

      Before, Microsoft was just another pile dog crap. Today under new leadership, H1B stewardship, and dead culture guidence, it is a steaming ignorable pile of dog crap. One can only wonder at the surprizes* that the thrid world will have to offer planet earth.

      * a surprize is, flatulence with a lump in it.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    are doom to be exploited by Microsoft.

  • "Like an abusive partner, Microsoft says it 'loves' Linux -- when what it means is that it desperately needs Linux .. While Microsoft doesn't appear to have crowed much about its victims since Hoeft & Wessel two years ago, its strategy of shaking down Android users with broad threats seems to be continuing unchanged" ref [infoworld.com]
  • Do you trust his ideological commitment?

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...