Recently I have been reading a lot about how Microsoft is becoming more open. Plenty of the articles are nice and long. The content is so bland that at the end of the article you feel "nothing". The only thing is that the word "open" will be used profusely and will be present in almost all the sentences. It is like you typed "open" 100 times and then started typing text around them. In one of the article, the author writes how Microsoft has started leveraging "open" source software instead of re-inventing the Tyre. This is what is happening. So, Microsoft will not acquire any proprietary company for an application.
They will hunt for software available in public domain and use them without spending a single dime, which for Microsoft is definitely a major shift. This got a boost with the acquisition of github. Majority of software available on github are hobby projects satisfying the creators itch. They are now ready to use the model made famous by Apple(with Macos and webkit) and google(Android, chrome). If a piece of software is available with sufficient maturity include it. No licensing fees. Microsoft wanted a collaboration and versioning system, they went and bought github. How does a proprietary company justify acquisition of a platform used by FLOSS and OSS developers. Start rebranding the proprietary company which wants to become open.
To this day not a single key proprietary software has been released in the open. How are they now open? But github was a key cog in the wheel of the upgrades for windows 10. Now, Microsoft wants a rolling release strategy for windows 10. That is there will not be a windows 11. github is the component Microsoft lacked. Now, the upgrades for windows 10 is much easier. With this methodology all the users are beta testers. But, the catch here is that people pay for a windows license. A wrong upgrade can be costly to the company. Now with the present acquisition, it will be easy for the company to roll back changes and release a downgrade. The best example for the openness ad per the organization is its decision of using chromium browser to replace its nonsensical attempt at browser. The worlds biggest company cannot make the most important software of the internet world. If you cannot fight them embrace them.
Why chromium? Holes. Microsoft likes holes. It creates holes and sells holes. To start with Microsoft cant make a browser so it cannot make a browser with good holes. So, take a browser created by a company with holes, lots of holes and made by an advertising company. What is the result of such a dangerous combo? Holes, Lots of holes(re-quoting Keanu Reaves). Now, Microsoft is "open" for business on the internet. Is google complaining? No, why? They will be getting to know the holes created by Microsoft. Together they are ever happy while exposing the consumer to the highest amount of data collection. Why didn't Microsoft fork Firefox? Just because the Xbox team is sitting beside the surface team, have they become open. Just because all its employees are sitting in open spaces, has Microsoft become open? Just because the "notepad" team is sitting beside the "office" team, are they now "open".
Microsoft is creating a new definition for "open". It is out to malign the word "open" create confusion among users regarding the meaning. The openness withing chronically closed systems. If the kids just sit beside parents and discuss can the system be called open. Yes withing the family, they can be called open, but doesn't mean that this family honors the society as a whole. All this PR about open is Pure PR. What is in it for the end user. Will you get a better windows experience and so on.....
For us FLOSS enthusiasts, Until Microsoft matches the phrase "show me the code" there is no relation between the word "open" and Microsoft.
They will hunt for software available in public domain and use them without spending a single dime, which for Microsoft is definitely a major shift. This got a boost with the acquisition of github. Majority of software available on github are hobby projects satisfying the creators itch. They are now ready to use the model made famous by Apple(with Macos and webkit) and google(Android, chrome). If a piece of software is available with sufficient maturity include it. No licensing fees. Microsoft wanted a collaboration and versioning system, they went and bought github. How does a proprietary company justify acquisition of a platform used by FLOSS and OSS developers. Start rebranding the proprietary company which wants to become open.
To this day not a single key proprietary software has been released in the open. How are they now open? But github was a key cog in the wheel of the upgrades for windows 10. Now, Microsoft wants a rolling release strategy for windows 10. That is there will not be a windows 11. github is the component Microsoft lacked. Now, the upgrades for windows 10 is much easier. With this methodology all the users are beta testers. But, the catch here is that people pay for a windows license. A wrong upgrade can be costly to the company. Now with the present acquisition, it will be easy for the company to roll back changes and release a downgrade. The best example for the openness ad per the organization is its decision of using chromium browser to replace its nonsensical attempt at browser. The worlds biggest company cannot make the most important software of the internet world. If you cannot fight them embrace them.
Why chromium? Holes. Microsoft likes holes. It creates holes and sells holes. To start with Microsoft cant make a browser so it cannot make a browser with good holes. So, take a browser created by a company with holes, lots of holes and made by an advertising company. What is the result of such a dangerous combo? Holes, Lots of holes(re-quoting Keanu Reaves). Now, Microsoft is "open" for business on the internet. Is google complaining? No, why? They will be getting to know the holes created by Microsoft. Together they are ever happy while exposing the consumer to the highest amount of data collection. Why didn't Microsoft fork Firefox? Just because the Xbox team is sitting beside the surface team, have they become open. Just because all its employees are sitting in open spaces, has Microsoft become open? Just because the "notepad" team is sitting beside the "office" team, are they now "open".
Microsoft is creating a new definition for "open". It is out to malign the word "open" create confusion among users regarding the meaning. The openness withing chronically closed systems. If the kids just sit beside parents and discuss can the system be called open. Yes withing the family, they can be called open, but doesn't mean that this family honors the society as a whole. All this PR about open is Pure PR. What is in it for the end user. Will you get a better windows experience and so on.....
For us FLOSS enthusiasts, Until Microsoft matches the phrase "show me the code" there is no relation between the word "open" and Microsoft.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Nobody can deter me away from "free as in freedom" concept seeded by Sri RMS. See to it that u dont make fun of my belief. If u think otherwise, no need to comment.