OSNews

I agree. In fact, I was just about to write the same thing.

If Microsoft does not want to help Linux, perhaps they'll help ReactOS. They most certainly could.

Or open up specifications so that people could help ReactOS and/or Wine.

nobody is claiming that open source=linux. but, it's fairly clear that microsoft is pulling this stunt as a direct result of linux. it's ridiculously naive to believe that isn't a part of it. and, the barfingly shady position of miguel de icaza on the board certainly proves that.

(edited for formatting)

Edited 2009-09-11 01:43 UTC

Please keep personal insults out of OSNews. Thank you.

it's not a personal insult. it's an observation of the choice to put miguel de icaza on the board. it's a flagrant conflict of interests, and is a very shady move. how is this a personal insult?

How is it a shady move to have a fairly well known OSS developer/supporter on the board of an OSS foundation? Where is the conflict of interest? Because he works for an OSS company, Novell?

give me a break. play dumb all you want.

give me a break. play dumb all you want. "

No answer, is what I thought.

ooh, are we going to play a 'who gets the last word' contest? i'm not going to feed that particular troll.

you are playing dumb. you know exactly why people would be concerned about this. you can disagree, but don't pretend like you don't get it.

you're not worth my time, troll.

Do you have a rational reason for finding this "shady" or is it a purely an emotion-driven response? Share your insightful "observations" with the rest of us… please.

while i feel like i may be feeding a troll by replying:

- miguel de icaza purports to act in the interests of the OSS community
- microsoft, widely regarded as duplicitous and averse to fair competition, has stated time and time again how it feels about open source
- miguel de icaza is now serving on the board of an organization founded by microsoft.

it's not difficult to ponder. and, it's absolutely deserving of scrutiny. don't pretend like it isn't.

It's simple really. Miguel is driven by technology, not dogma. So he steps wherever he wants and follows ideas that he finds interesting or useful. He won't choose a side in the FSF vs. proprietary software war, and, like most of us, probably doesn't even acknowledge that this war actually exists. Throw in the fact that he is the father of GNOME which is the de facto face of the Linux desktop, and this absolutely infuriates people who are firmly entrenched in the Free Software camp.

considering that he was a gnome founder and on the fsf board, I would say that him being there adds a certain air of credibility to the whole thing...

actually, it lends an air of (for lack of a better word) INcredibility to him. but, don't color me surprised.

actually, it lends an air of (for lack of a better word) INcredibility to him. but, don't color me surprised. "

I'm not sure who's worse: The people you criticize -- or YOU. Why do you believe that everyone in the open source marketplace needs to be goosestepping in lockstep with Richard Stallman in order to be "righteous"? You're just selling a different brand of bigotry and, seriously, what have you ever done that rivals what Miguel de Icaza has accomplished professionally? Seriously, what?

did i even mention stallman? no, i didn't. you know why? because this has nothing to do with him. and when did i say anything had to be 'righteous'? i didn't, because it doesn't have to be. but, what is a problem is the complete disregard for two things:

1) the best interests of the FOSS community that this is riding on the back of
2) the fact that MS has bluntly called FOSS a cancer. why would anybody interested in open software be inclined to assist them in any way? it's idiotic.

and, i'm not comparing myself to miguel de icaza, so why are you? i'm not so self-loathing that i use others as a metric by which to judge myself.

how am i being bigoted? really? what i'm being is *cautious*, and *contemplative* with regard to a topic that i find interesting. therein lies a huge freaking difference. bigoted? hah! somebody needs to fetch the webster's.

Or Linux'ers providing anti-BSD training.

... which seems to be much more common.

In fact, I believe dismissing the products and communities of other open source projects has always been an integral part of the abusive Linux (sub)culture.

Reader, pick your favourite Internet Linux-meme to demonstrate this.

Now, now, strcpy. Don't start throwing mud from the *BSD camp, thus providing a concrete example of what I referred to in my original post. Soulbender was right to point out the converse. And in fact, I can think of a couple of people right here on OSNews who regularly serve as examples of it.

If I were going to make a sweeping generalization, which I would never do, I would say that while neither viewpoint is representative of either community, I do happen to notice a little more mudslinging from the *BSD side. But... mostly it seems to be of the understandable "sour grapes" variety. In contrast, the mudslinging from the Linux side tends to be less understandable, and of a somewhat scarier "fanatical" variety, often involving irrational licensing-hatred.

Edited 2009-09-11 16:34 UTC

I know you guys are talking about operating systems, but when it comes to license hatred it does go both ways, especially in the ruby/python communities (where people who release under GPL get A LOT of flack). Granted, its not the moulineuf nonsensical license hatred, but MIT/BSD vs GPL is probably the most polarizing issue in the open source world.

I can't really speak about the Ruby community due to relative lack of experience. But I spend a lot of time around the Python community. And I've not noticed much of any actual flak. What I *have* noticed is a distinct preference for more permissive licenses, and something of an apprehensiveness about copyleft. One thing that I really like about the Python community is its "down to earthness". Violent verbal conflict is actively frowned upon. And mutual respect is the order of the day. About the only thing that Pythonistas get anal about is "proper" coding practices. Not coding style, mind you, though we do have our PEP 8. But coding practices. "Doing stuff right", as it were.

There is a bit of apprehension about getting anywhere near copylefted code. But not an irrational apprehension. I remember a discussion on the TurboGears list regarding the potential use by that project of an LGPL library. The initial mood was that it might not be a good idea. Research was done and presented. And in the end there was a fair consensus that LGPL, per se, was not a reason to avoid it. I'm not sure whether it ended up actually getting used or not. But if it was not used, licensing prejudice was not the reason.

Even though I, as a user, tend to prefer copyleft, I can say without reservation that I have great respect for the attitudes and philosophies prevalent in the Python community. And am proud to be a part of it, albeit a not particularly notable part.

Edited 2009-09-12 03:48 UTC

Sure, sorry. But, you know, BSD is dying.

considering that was the reason for codeplex.com, i wouldnt be suprised