Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Jan 2014 21:43 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Microsoft

Microsoft has joined the Open Compute Project, a consortium that Facebook created to share the designs of servers and other equipment that power the internet's largest data centers.

Like other internet giants, Microsoft designs its own servers to be more efficient than standard boxes sold by the likes of HP and Dell. While Google has mostly kept its designs secret, Facebook has made its server and rack specifications public and has urged others to do the same. In theory, companies can swap best practices, and any vendor can sell servers identical to the ones that power Facebook's data centers.

Microsoft joining Open Compute boosts the chances that the project might have some impact on the server industry.

Good move.

Thread beginning with comment 581896
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Tue 28th Jan 2014 23:31 UTC
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

They went with the Apache license (v2.0) for their source contributions, which I guess is slightly surprising, since Microsoft has it's own OSI-approved license (MS-PL).

While the Apache license is far more suitable than MS-PL for these pieces of software, which are just various chassis control mechanisms (Fan speed, external LEDs, etc), I'm surprised Microsoft didn't roll their own license with identical terms anyways.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by Lennie on Tue 28th Jan 2014 23:40 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Looks to me like many original works on Github from Microsoft (MSOpenTech) use an Apache license:

https://github.com/MSOpenTech/azure-sdk-for-php/blob/master/LICENSE....
https://github.com/MSOpenTech/azure-activedirectory-library-for-ios/...

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by shmerl on Wed 29th Jan 2014 00:56 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I'm surprised Microsoft didn't roll their own license with identical terms anyways.


May be they started taking first steps in learning common sense?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Wed 29th Jan 2014 02:23 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Microsoft's Microsoft Pubic License (MS-PL) is actually a good license - BSD/Apache-like, only with a patent sharing clause.

It's also simple, written to be used by users and programmers, unlike some OSI licenses that are essentially incomprehensible to anybody not a lawyer.

I'm looking at you, Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Kochise on Wed 29th Jan 2014 12:40 in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Nope, Zlib-Png license is even more sane...

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by d33tah on Wed 29th Jan 2014 14:15 in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
d33tah Member since:
2010-04-04

I pointed out the same on slashdot. You can see the rest of discussion there:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4723221&cid=46090199

Reply Parent Score: 2