Open Source Advice from a Former Microsoft Employee

[John Bailo]

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/developer/open_source_advice_from_a_former_employee.html

In the first post, Walli suggests Microsoft start by releasing the
source code for SQL Server and repackaging the product licensing into a
subscription for SQL Server Network, similar to the subscription-based
offerings from Red Hat Network and MySQL Network.

He also suggests that Redmond use the GPLv2 as the license and construct
a patent grant that allows any patents in the space to be used
royalty-free for database-related work released under the GPLv2.

In the second post, he argues that Microsoft should publish SharePoint
Server as open-source software under the GPLv2 and create the Microsoft
SharePoint Server Network product.

Walli also recommends that Microsoft engage with the Eclipse Foundation
and the Mono community, and release the interesting Visual Studio and
Rotor 2.0 bits under the Eclipse Public License and the (Rotor) ECMA
Base Class library code under the MIT X11 so it is compatible with the
rest of the Mono Base Class Library.

 

[Rad [Visual C# MVP]]

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/developer/open_source_advice_from_a_former_employee.html

In the first post, Walli suggests Microsoft start by releasing the
source code for SQL Server and repackaging the product licensing into a
subscription for SQL Server Network, similar to the subscription-based
offerings from Red Hat Network and MySQL Network.

He also suggests that Redmond use the GPLv2 as the license and construct
a patent grant that allows any patents in the space to be used
royalty-free for database-related work released under the GPLv2.

In the second post, he argues that Microsoft should publish SharePoint
Server as open-source software under the GPLv2 and create the Microsoft
SharePoint Server Network product.

Walli also recommends that Microsoft engage with the Eclipse Foundation
and the Mono community, and release the interesting Visual Studio and
Rotor 2.0 bits under the Eclipse Public License and the (Rotor) ECMA
Base Class library code under the MIT X11 so it is compatible with the
rest of the Mono Base Class Library.

It will be a cold day in December before Microsoft even *think* of
*discussing* such notions. They've invested too much time, money and
research into those products to just give them away

 

[Maverick]

It will be a cold day in December before Microsoft even *think* of
*discussing* such notions. They've invested too much time, money and
research into those products to just give them away

It appears so on the surface to the casual observer, but the fact that
they are giving away their compilers known as Express versions shows
that they are slowly going down that path.
In a ways, I sort of like that part for those that want to start
learning about the programming process. M$ does make a good compiler
and I've used a few of their headers to solve a few problems on the
Linux side of the fence in regards to stdarg.h problems inside gcc.

 

[Rad [Visual C# MVP]]

It appears so on the surface to the casual observer, but the fact that
they are giving away their compilers known as Express versions shows
that they are slowly going down that path.
In a ways, I sort of like that part for those that want to start
learning about the programming process. M$ does make a good compiler
and I've used a few of their headers to solve a few problems on the
Linux side of the fence in regards to stdarg.h problems inside gcc.

Giving away compilers is a win win situation. Borland for example used to
give away their C++ compiler for nothing. They have nothing to lose having
their compiler out there. It just serves as bait for people to get the real
thing