Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft IT

Microsoft And JBoss Collaborate On Server Software 116

Posted by Zonk from the penguins-in-hell dept.
wellington map wrote to mention a C|Net article discussing a collaboration between Microsoft and JBoss, intended to ensure their server software is more interoperable. From the article: "Microsoft has struggled to deal with the arrival of open-source software, which is collaboratively developed with a code-sharing process that stands in stark contrast to the secrecy that shrouds most of the products from Microsoft and other proprietary software makers. After several attacks on the intellectual-property foundations and the methods, quality and cost of open-source software, Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft has begun a more cooperative phase."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft And JBoss Collaborate On Server Software More

Microsoft And JBoss Collaborate On Server Software

Comments Filter:

  • Response (Score:5, Funny)

    by gleather ( 596807 ) <gleatherman&gmail,com> on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @05:53PM (#13662229) Journal
    What is the appropriate response when you are offered a hand that started out with a knife in it?

    • Re:Response (Score:5, Insightful)

      by greythax ( 880837 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @05:55PM (#13662255)
      The appropriate response is to look for the knife in the other hand.

    • Aaahh! It's back! (Score:2, Interesting)

      by temojen ( 678985 )
      Jboss stories on slashdot with no indication of what jboss is for (or why anyone would care). Didn't we go through this last year (and figure out that they were all slashvertizements?)?
      • I'm inclined to agree with you (that they should at least link to JBoss, so you know wtf it is), but when I saw "JBoss" it took me all of 5 seconds to 1) Realize I didn't know what JBoss was, 2) Open a new FF tab, 3) type "JBoss" into the Google box.
      • Jboss^H^H^H^H Samba^H^H^H^H Gamecube^H^H^H^H Stuff-That-I-Don't-Use-And-Am-Too-Lazy-To-Google-F or stories on slashdot with no indication of what Jboss^H^H^H^H Samba^H^H^H^H Gamecube^H^H^H^H Stuff-That-I-Don't-Use-And-Am-Too-Lazy-To-Google-F or is for (or why anyone would care).

        Today is Google's [google.com] 7th Birthday. Try to be kind, eh?

      • Re:Aaahh! It's back! (Score:4, Informative)

        by laffer1 ( 701823 ) <luke&foolishgames,com> on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @07:32PM (#13662900) Homepage Journal
        Good point. Here's a summary of JBoss. Its a J2EE application server. Translation: it runs server side java code for websites and web services (servlets, jsp, jsf, enterprise java beans, more buzzwords) Its kind of like ASP.NET's runtime equivalent in java. Sun, Oracle, HP and several other companies make competing products. PHP folk make recognize it as a bloated service thats used to run code you can just write in PHP as a script. (i don't like php, but its a fair assessment for smaller projects) JBoss is included in Mac OS X and Mac OS X server (10.4).

        A little more information:
        JBoss is a greedy project which used to charge people for the documentation! Yes, it was free and open source to download jboss but the documention was $$$. Most people don't even know what J2EE is and can get away with running Apache Tomcat, Resin, or Jetty. In fact, JBoss uses apache tomcat.

  • It's a trap! (Score:1, Insightful)

    by No Salvation ( 914727 )
    So...embrace, extend, and DESTROY!

  • How is the saying? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by sploxx ( 622853 )
    If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

    But, hiding in a thick container of tin foil, I would add: Until we have the means in place to kill FOSS.

  • Proprietary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mysqlrocks ( 783488 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @05:57PM (#13662271) Homepage Journal
    I'm sure Microsoft has some plan for assimilation (this is not meant to be a troll or a flame). Hopefully this doesn't turn out like J# where Microsoft put in their own proprietary libraries that developers built on thinking they were building Java applications that could run on any JVM.

    • Re:Proprietary (Score:2, Informative)

      by hkb ( 777908 )
      Uhm, J# is a Java-language interface to the .NET Framework, it has nothing to do with any JVM.

      You might mean J++, and I don't really see what was wrong with that, other than lawsuit-happy Sun wanting to keep a maniacal strangehold on Java. What's wrong with adding proprietary libraries? Java has/had a ton of shortcomings. If you didn't like J++, you didn't have to use it.

      This same thing is being done by OSS JVM projects, and the Mono project, who had developed their own implementation of the .NET Framework

      • Re:Proprietary (Score:5, Informative)

        by rewt66 ( 738525 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:56PM (#13662687)
        What's wrong with adding proprietary stuff? Nothing.

        What's wrong with adding proprietary stuff in violation of the requirements for using the name "Java", and yet still calling it "Java"? Plenty.

        That's why Microsoft lost the lawsuit. They aren't quite the innocent victims of lawsuit-happy Sun that you are making them out to be.
        • They settled with Sun, they didn't "lose". They ceased releasing J++ due to the uncertainty of the outcome of the lawsuit BEFORE it settled.

          And basically, J++ continues on as its next iteration with new technologies as J#, so the lawsuit didn't really do much, except get Java banished from Windows by default. Who lost again?

          • Re:Proprietary (Score:3, Insightful)

            by ozmanjusri ( 601766 )
            Who lost again?

            Every computer user who would have been better off with a truly platform-independant application development platform.

            • Re:Proprietary (Score:3, Insightful)

              by hkb ( 777908 )
              So we'd be better off if Java ruled the world right now? Everyone running a slow (yes, it IS slow, thank you), least-common-denominator, powerless development environment that Sun won't allow OS vendors to tailor to a particular OS's featureset? Kiss Aqua goodbye, kiss Win32, ASP.NET, Gtk good bye. Gee. Sounds wonderful.
        • What's wrong with adding proprietary stuff in violation of the requirements for using the name "Java", and yet still calling it "Java"? Plenty.

          Right, and its not just that they added proprietary stuff, they also refused to add standard stuff that would replace their proprietary stuff.

      • What's wrong with adding proprietary libraries?

        Absolutely nothing. That is not what the lawsuit was about. All the com.ms.* stuff that Microsoft produced was appropriate - and very welcome for those wanting to write Windows specific apps.

        The lawsuit was about adding proprietary extensions to the core libraries - the java.* libraries. That was specifically forbidden in the contract. Microsoft's excuse in court was that the contract didn't mention future versions.

        The problem with extensions to core

    • Re:Proprietary (Score:4, Informative)

      by ezweave ( 584517 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:45PM (#13662622) Homepage

      Well J# [wikipedia.org] isn't supposed to be Java. I have never heard that, only that it is C# with Java-like syntax (which is to say not really that different). Now, I do remember good old J++ [wikipedia.org], which was just a plain Java ripoff. Since J# is supposedly compatible [microsoft.com] with J++ maybe it is just MS trying to be clever(ly evil).

      Back in 97 or so, J++ was actually Java. It wasn't until Visual Studio 6 that it became something else. Hence the lawsuit!

      All that said, I worry for JBoss. I don't want to see MS ruin a good product.

  • quickly... (Score:3, Funny)

    by The_DOD_player ( 640135 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @05:57PM (#13662275)
    it's a trick... get an axe!
    • quickly, it's a trick... get an axe!

      No hurry, I've got five or ten buried in my back. SCO, Get the Facts, Internet Explorer, .DOC, Windows Media, Paladium, pressure on ISPs to block ports, DMCA, the list goes on and on. All anyone in the free software community has to do to get an axe is reach over their shoulder. Any one of them is good enough to show M$'s intent.

  • The Popular Front of Judea (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cally ( 10873 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @05:59PM (#13662294) Homepage
    I was just watching this, and it seems strangely relevant in some way I can't quite put my finger on...

    Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front.
    P.F.J.: Yeah...
    JUDITH: Splitters.
    P.F.J.: Splitters...
    FRANCIS: And the Judean Popular People's Front.
    P.F.J.: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Splitters. Splitters...
    LORETTA: And the People's Front of Judea.
    P.F.J.: Yeah. Splitters. Splitters...
    REG: What?
    LORETTA: The People's Front of Judea. Splitters.
    REG: We're the People's Front of Judea!
    LORETTA: Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front.
    REG: People's Front! C-huh.
    FRANCIS: Whatever happened to the Popular Front, Reg?
    REG: He's over there.
    P.F.J.: Splitter!

  • How Different? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) * <akaimbatman@gmaYEATSil.com minus poet> on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:00PM (#13662296) Homepage Journal
    Products from the two companies are similar in purpose, but very different in design. The JBoss application server, based on Java, runs on Windows, Linux and Unix systems. Microsoft's Windows-based application server tools, based on the company's .Net programming model, are part of its Windows Server operating system.

    Oh, well that explains everything. One product runs everywhere, the other runs only on Windows. See? They're different!

    Don't worry, though. Microsoft is working hard to correct the problem. Once they "make sure that JBoss runs well on Windows", both products will be very similar. After all, who needs Linux and Unix support?
    • People who care about a decent ser...oh right, it's Microsoft. :P
    • How is anything this guy said insightful? Please enlighten me. It looks like a troll post, to me.
      • 1. It's called "sarcasm".
        2. Microsoft's "Embrace and Extend" strategy is well documented.
        3. The article claimed that they were "very different" seemingly because one ran on Windows and the other ran on Unix.
        4. Microsoft is "fixing" JBoss.

        BTW, as a Java programmer, I can say with honesty that there are plenty of things you can do to explicitly tie a program to a given OS. There are even things you can do while still being "100% Java". (e.g. File system structures, native network services, login services, com
  • True cooperation for the purpose of interoperability would be a very welcome change. The only question I have is: "Why is the hair on the back of my neck standing up?"

    • The only question I have is: "Why is the hair on the back of my neck standing up?"

      Many people feel that same thing. This is what Microsoft is up against. Everyone knows Microsoft's track record in the methods they use to take apart competition and most everyone knows that not all of those methods are truly above board. There's a logical consideration which follows,"Does Microsoft know that we knew that they know and will use every underhanded trick in the book and, if so, are they trying to fix it or

  • Does the phrase.... (Score:3, Informative)

    by SwedishChef ( 69313 ) <craig@networkessentials . n et> on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:08PM (#13662345) Homepage Journal
    "Embrace and extend" mean anything to you?

  • IBM (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CSHARP123 ( 904951 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:13PM (#13662384)
    I think this has got nothing to do with FOSS but everything to do with IBM. Hitting on Websphere will be hitting on IBM's one of the server product. If you look at Microsoft website, it always compares .Net with Websphere. By collaborating with open source product MS will kill two birds in one stone. MS open source supporter and other kill websphere as much as possible by promoting an open source product.

    • Re:IBM Indeed! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mpapet ( 761907 )
      Parent is right, but I think it's bigger than just IBM.

      I think what this suggests is that Microsoft is positioning itself to be the one that gets all the money that is supposed to be generated from OSS.

      I believe Microsoft will be able to say to their wealthiest customers, "buy our product, then use this free product and we'll support both!" Effectively leaving the market "crumbs" to the small guys while capturing the wealthiest dollars.

      If this experiment fails, I think they will litigate away their Linux c

    • Re:IBM (Score:2)

      by tgd ( 2822 )
      No its not nothing to do with IBM or FOSS.

      The issue is .NET 1.1 and the java web services stacks have different defaults when it comes to structuring a web services message -- Java stacks are RPC-oriented, Microsofts are (correctly) doc/lit oriented. Websphere's stack has the same issue the Axis stack and other Java stacks have. (In fact, I haven't looked, it may be Axis)

      The WS security interoperability and general inability for Java and .NET to pass collections over SOAP are problems that are fixed with a
    • MS has as much chance of killing off WebSphere as much as a Hotair balloon has for flying off to the Moon.
      • certainly, but IBM has an astoundingly good chance of killing of such a pathetic product.

        microsoft's os and office suite earn 150% of their profits. jboss has the largets j2ee market share atm. microsoft needs to protect its market.
    • Careful, WebSphere is a loose marketing term for a collection of software that IBM has built and acquired over the years. To say that this partnership has much to do with Microsoft's ability to compete in this area is reading much more into this than there really is. It's about WS.* interop and JBoss integration with the Windows platform. period.
  • That's the definition of Holy Crap.

    Ohhhhh. JBOSS? My bad.

  • minus and minus = plus? (Score:3, Funny)

    by otisg ( 92803 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:20PM (#13662428) Homepage Journal
    Are they trying to prove that 2 wrongs make a right?

  • Working the 5 steps of denial? (Score:5, Funny)

    by jrcamp ( 150032 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:20PM (#13662429)
    1) Denial
    2) Anger
    3) Bargaining — Microsoft, you are HERE.
    4) Depression
    5) Acceptance

    Hey, at least they're working the program. Who would have imagined 2 years ago that they would even acknowledge open source, let alone cooperate. The next 2 steps will be rough for them.

  • Ghandi (Score:1, Insightful)

    by ^DA ( 82715 )
    "First they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

  • They want JBoss to run well on windows (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:26PM (#13662468)
    That is all about positioning of windows servers. That is all. It says nothing about their embrace of open source. The market wants to run some Jboss. MS wants to sell some server licenses. While they do this to help themselves, they can still slam java, open source, and move people from java to .net all while they position server 2003 as a worthy jboss host.

  • embrace and extend... again (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WiPEOUT ( 20036 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:27PM (#13662476)
    MS: Let's work with JBos to interoperate more cleanly. Once we're done, we can always change the way ours works ... I mean improve on our protocols. Our customers can now use Windows and .NET to talk to JBoss, while JBoss users can't talk to our stuff. It's brilliant, as it makes JBoss look bad. Further, it will slow down the JBoss developers who will have to spend more time playing catch-up, while setting them up so that even if they change their own protocols in a game of tit-for-tat, we can point to them and say, "look, the JBoss developers deliberately broke compatibility with our software -- aren't they evil!".
    • Heh... it doesnt take MS involvement to have JBoss developers break compatibility. JBoss does a fine job of that on their own. Anyone who's tried to migrate from JBoss x.x.X to x.x.X+1 knows this pain well.

  • the obligatory... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oddtodd ( 125924 ) <<oddtodd67> <at> <gmail.com>> on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @06:28PM (#13662484)
    "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
        Sun Tzu (probably maybe)
    • "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
      Sun Tzu (probably maybe)

      Michael Coreleone: "There are many things my father taught me here in this room.
      He taught me: keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."

      Sun Tzu: "Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories."

      People tend to forget the "know they self" part, despite it being th
  • From the article:

    SQL Server, Microsoft's database software, with JBoss' Hibernate and Enterprise JavaBeans software.

    That's for interop - but does JBoss own Hibernate? I just thought they were heavy users.

    Not much going on there except the possibility of managing JBoss through Microsoft tools.

    I don't see how on one hand Microsoft can claim no new support for Java while at the same time saying the SQL Server will work better with JBoss. Smells like JDBC drivers to me.
  • You cooperate - they prosper. Survive the M$ legal death march? Time to the write M$ jungle code. You wouldn't survive it, but will survive longer depending on how you behave. Embrace, extend and extinguish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_e xtinguish [wikipedia.org]

  • microsoft is gonna look out for ya (Score:5, Funny)

    by flacco ( 324089 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2005 @07:55PM (#13663036)
    hey kid, whattaya in for? whadja do, kid? how much time dey give ya here in the commercial world, kid?


    my name's microsoft, but in here dey all calls me win-blows. don't worry, i'm gonna look out for ya. here, take dis left-over turkey sammwich i cribbed from da mess hall. it's yours. i want ya ta have it. no strings.


    no, really, dat's a cryin shame dey stuck youse in here wid a buncha cash-addicted boneheads like us. cryin shame. but i'm gonna watch your back for ya kid. i'm gonna make it my personal business dat you get outta here in one piece.


    look, i got some extra socks from da laundry. clean socks. outta my own pocket. you're gonna be all right, kid, don't worry about it.


    an' i got somethin else for ya. i got it taped up under my arm here. you're gonna like dis, kid. ya ever seen one a dese before? it's a SHIV, you goddamn brat! dat's right, now take off yer goddamn pants an' put dis butter on your ass.


    shaddap kid, quit yer goddamn cryin. whattaya think, you come in here an' eat a man's sammwich an' take a man's socks fer nothin'? shaddap, i said! you should feel lucky. you see oracle over dere? he don't use no butter! shoulda seen what he did to peoplesoft.


    man i hate dese goddamn punks. stupid, goddamn, punks.

  • I've been working on a project with web services running in JBoss and clients connecting in .NET for over a year now (JBoss 4.x, .NET 2.0 Beta). These web services involve objects that are fairly complex. The biggest "incompatibility" we've experienced has been upgrading JBoss versions, which unfortunately introduce pervasive changes to the application.

    So my question is, where's the incompatibility with respect to JBoss and .NET? If it exists, I sure haven't seen it. We even recently upgraded to jdk
  • That subject is what am MS guy told the ISP I worked for when he was offering us a killer deal for bundling IE instead of Netscape back in '97 or so...

    Make no mistake, guys... MS may offer an olive branch, but they haven't take down their phony studies, and what the sales guys are saying to their customers, you wouldn't believe.


  • Yes, this just sounds like a conspiracy, but it seems to me that making JBoss better is one of the easiest ways for Microsoft to hurt one of the few cash-cows in the industry that they aren't making money at: application servers.

    What do you think IBM and BEA sell a lot of? Application servers.

    I think its one of those "the enemy of enemy is my friend" things.

    I'm open to being wrong, that'd be great, I'm just not expecting it.

  • JBoss going after IBM = enemy of enemy = friend (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    1. JBoss is trying to undercut a very profitable market for IBM.
    2. Microsoft would love to see IBM be undercut.
    3. Using open source to drive down the compliments to your product increases the value of your product.
    • Well, if this becomes a real threath to components in WebSphere, there is nothing keeping IBM from packaging JBoss into their offerings. IBM would still be in a heck of a lot better position to offer both servers for it to run on, and integration services than most other companies.

      The beauty of open source is that Microsoft cannot remove competition from F/OSS by buying the technology - there is nothing to buy. The source code is out there in the public domain. So they are forced to compete.

      This is what's h
  • Collaboration phase or Embrace phase? Look at M$ track record for collaboration. Either they buy you, or you are destroyed, seems to be their basic mode. Statistically it is far more likely that JBoss is going to be dead in 18 months than that they are going to be able to do any reasonable "cooperation" with Microsoft. If they can't do business with any other company, they need a new business plan; this one is not a recipe for survival.

  • Just a few weeks ago, MS was looking for a cooperative project with OSDL or Red Hat (here [slashdot.org]). Now they anounce a cooperative project with JBoss. That is weard!

    The deal with OSDL (or Red Hat) had a clear oportunity to a backstab, but this one not.

    Very, very weard.

    • It's obvious to me what Microsoft gets out of this -- a way to sell Windows Server licenses with a cheap (actually zero cost) application server. It also allows them to go in to shops that are J2EE centric (running on IBM, Sun, and HP boxes that are not running Windows in any way, shape, or form) and pitch their product.

      The curious thing from where I sit is -- what is JBoss really getting out of this? The press release implies they'll have access to information within Microsoft to provide greater inter

  • Why we use LGPL [jboss.org]. Ironic that Microsoft supports this.

    I guess it's much easier to work with an existing company than reuse code from projects such as Geronimo, Apache's J2EE server [apache.org]. They could embed the code into their applications under the business-friendly terms of the Apache Software Foundation license. But then, Geronimo is adopted by IBM.
  • We need application servers because our operating systems are badly designed and can not handle simple stuff like interprocess communication and resource caching in an appropriate manner. An application server is nothing more than a mini operating system that can cache resources (databases, network ports, objects) and can make applications easily co-operate, something which is nearly impossible with normal processes.

    But weren't operating systems invented for just that task? they did. The original Unix model
  • In related news the check is in the mail and I won't come in your mouth.

    -
  • I thought M$ big thing was to push .NET as the biggest and baddest Language out there. And then they turn around and start promoting a 100% java based app. server. WTF??? Obviously, someone is very confused over there... Ben PS. I bet that JBoss (Inc.) will be crushed under something very heavy once M$ realizes their mistake.

Slashdot Top Deals

With your bare hands?!?

Close