Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Jul 2009 09:43 UTC
Microsoft Sometimes, some things are just too good to be true. Earlier this week, Microsoft made a relatively stunning announcement that it would contribute some 20000 lines of code to the Linux kernel, licensed under the GPL. Microsoft isn't particularly fond of either Linux or the GPL, so this was pretty big news. As it turns out, the code drop was brought on by... A GPL violation.
Permalink for comment 374869
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
microsys
Member since:
2009-07-23

Someone is a bit full of oss here ;) ( i will comment the news a bit down ;) )
I do like OSS very much, i am even a bit active in programming there, but i do not think OSS is the answer for every software available. A lot of applications can be replaced by oss, but with heavy disturbance in workflow or similar... It is possible to replace it if you do not need every feature in the closed version. Or you can replace it one app by 3 oss aps, which do the same. But it makes it a lot more complicated for the users.

So as long as a lot of the OSS Apps are designed and implemented from a developers narrow view without having feedback with inhouse use or wide professional use at production which can point out where the design needs to be changed, they will not be a fully countable alternative. Also the decision process takes some times to long or is steered in the wrong direction by the maintainer(s) since he does like the feature. A lot of OSS Apps are not focused on providing a comfortable work flow but pressing as much features available in or being defaulted to the already seen UI.

I have to say there are some exceptions, which i accept open hearted.

There is one more problem within the interoperability within the different alternatives or "alternativ collections". There are sure a lot more operabilities inbetween groups or versions of applications, but the overall communication between different OSS apps sometimes really gives you a burdon. Even more problematic is the users need to accept the new system and especially ppl you have a long time in your company can have problems with adopting to new systems or completly different workflows.

So you want them to just get fired and take some other guy, then i have to say i am happy i am not working in your company if your play with the "life" of your employees like this ;) .

i just thought to tell that ;)

PS: I would appreciate if there would be even more OSS Software which were real alternatives to some closed source apps, but i think there will always be a market for closed source ... always!

PPS: Just one example: Collaborative Software (Exchange, Kolab Mailserver, OpenXchange, .. ..). And do not come up with the "Webserver packed" Colabs like egroupware, .. .., they are no real alternative. I tried, believe me ;)
They are quite usefull, but not in full production system which need a lot of "luxury" features and "Easy to use" widgets having fast response times on their clients. And native running apps will most likely have a faster response time than an browser based collab client system.

PPPS: For the news i think it does not weight that much what makes them release a part of code under the GPL but that MS does release it at all under GPL. Even if they were forced to. To do this without a big comment or trying to get around it is something what nobody was expecting from MS. I think it is a small step to a more open future ;)

PPPPS: But Vista is still crappy ;)

Edited 2009-07-23 16:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1