SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Under Steve Ballmer's reign, Microsoft Open Technologies was founded as a subsidiary of Microsoft. It is now being shut down and folded into Microsoft under Satya Nadella. The subsidiary, staffed with an interoperability strategy team tasked with extending Redmond's open source initiatives, will be embraced back into into the mainstream of the company.
MS Open Tech's president Jean Paoli said "It's now time for MS Open Tech to rejoin Microsoft Corp., and help the company take its next steps in deepening its engagement with open source and open standards." Some claim that a separate subsidiary is no longer needed. Microsoft could easily be the world's biggest vendor of open source software, which is probably one reason some people don't like the term...
Paoli goes on to say:Team members will play a broader role in the open advocacy mission with teams across the company," he said. "The Programs Office will scale the learnings and practices in working with open source and open standards that have been developed in MS Open Tech across the whole company. Additionally, the Microsoft Open Technology Programs Office will provide tools and services to help Microsoft teams and engineers engage directly with open source communities, create successful Microsoft open source projects, and streamline the process of accepting community contributions into Microsoft open source projects."
Roy Schestowitz at TechRights has a different view of MSFT's recent actions:
"Not much as changed except pretense (face change).
Microsoft dumps its proxy (misleadingly named 'Open Tech') and other attacks on Free software persist from the inside, often through so-called 'experts' whose agenda is to sell proprietary software
Microsoft's long-term assault on GNU/Linux is in some ways worse than ever before. Changing Ballmer's face with another is about as effective as swapping Bush for Obama. Things are only getting worse, even if it's branded differently. The attacks on users' rights (DRM, blobs, spying) have exacerbated. It's just not as visible as before (like the infamous "Get the Facts" marketing campaign), it's more subtle or altogether covert.
There are concrete sign of Microsoft's strategy to destroy FOSS from the inside (entryism) not quite succeeding, which leads to a Plan B, like infecting Android with proprietary spyware, controlling GNU/Linux through Azure, etc.
"For Microsoft, "Open Tech" shutting down is somewhat symbolic, even poetic.""So," some people ask, "what's new at the 'new' Microsoft?"
There's nothing new except worsening levels of aggression.
So how should this new move be viewed?
Is Microsoft bringing the subsidiary in-house to more fully integrate open source in view of a challenging market landscape, or are they surreptitiously trying to take down the open source world from within, using their old tactics?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by arashi no garou on Wednesday April 22 2015, @02:21AM
The only thing I'm defending is the concept of a middle ground. As I said in another comment, take Microsoft out of the picture and drop in something like systemd and I'd say the same thing: There is room for improvement. Even though I don't like what systemd represents, I still consider the possibility that it can become something good. I don't just blindly say "I fucking hate it and it will never ever be a good thing" because I can't predict the future, and neither can anyone else.
Since you're so quick to put me in a box, I'll put you in one too: I think you and many other people are taking this to religious extremes, and that's a dangerous thing in any situation. You're no different than the stereotypical birther types with the "Piss on Obama" bumper sticker and confederate flag in the rear window; you're always going to spew hatred and disdain even if you have no clue what you're talking about.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday April 22 2015, @04:52PM
They are a business, busy protecting their business... and they know the only way to protect it is to SCREW EVERYONE ELSE unless it protects their business.
They will screw linux, apple, minix, unix, (EVEN themselves-- if it means protecting that business).
I have seen nothing that says they are a 'nicer, friendlier, more open, fuzzy and wuzzy little teddy bears' business that is willing to work with free open source without trying to screw everyone else but themselves, because they are protecting their business.
They are a business... 'screw everyone else!' is their motto (as it should be, i guess (and as it legally is (the way i understand it) because they have shareholders))... but don't put them on an angelic pedestal.
They will fuck open source, linux, etc if they get a chance (if it means protecting their business).
They would let linux users fuck THEM if it meant protecting their business.
They are a business and are in business for THEMSELVES!
Screw everyone else... if it protects their business... this is what it ALL boils down to.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by arashi no garou on Thursday April 23 2015, @01:38AM
don't put them on an angelic pedestal
I said "there's room for improvement" and in other comments I've made it abundantly clear that I'm a Slackware geek who is hoping that Microsoft might be changing for the better, but I'm not convinced yet. How is that putting them on any kind of pedestal, angelic or otherwise?
As so many others have, you're proving my original point that even if it could be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that Microsoft is a brand new company that is honestly doing good, you and most others here would just plug your ears and cry foul for the sake of it. And just to be clear, no I don't trust Microsoft, I'm just willing to acknowledge that they are trying to improve, because it's obvious they are trying. Whether they succeed is another story, and to be honest I'm not holding my breath. But I'm also not throwing out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday April 24 2015, @12:26AM
Sorry... maybe i didn't explain what i meant:
They may (to you) seem to be 'improving', but to me that is only because they feel it is in their best interests to do that.
As soon as they feel it is no longer in their best interests (or is no longer necessary if they regain their monopoly), they will stop. They will have to, because in the end they have to report to their shareholders. If they are doing something the shareholders feel is not in their best interests, they will rattle the cage and the company (Microsoft) will back off.
Simply put, they are a company on the stock market, owned by the shareholders and must do what the shareholders want (aka, what Bill/Ballmer want).
If Ballmer, etc say to stop open sourcing things, they will... if the stocks price drops, they will stop.
And cheers to you for using Slack! :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by arashi no garou on Friday April 24 2015, @01:21AM
*sigh*
I didn't say they are improving. This is what I said:
I'm just willing to acknowledge that they are trying to improve, because it's obvious they are trying. Whether they succeed is another story, and to be honest I'm not holding my breath.
It boggles the mind that I can't even talk about an effort that I observe (and don't quite trust yet) without everyone assuming that I'm a big fat fucking shill. That's the kind of preconceived opinion that stifles any real conversation about a topic.
And I'm not saying you're wrong; in fact (and if anyone cared to actually read what I've been writing they would have already realized this) I fully expect Microsoft to fail or at least mishandle this whole pro-open-source push. I've said since the beginning that I don't fully trust it. I am just willing to acknowledge that, if it's for real, it can be a good thing. And for that I'm being lambasted, called a shill, an apologist, a liar, and many other names just for daring to hope that a bad actor will clean up their act?
You know what, fuck it. Don't take this personally Gaaark, because you have been civil in our conversation and I'm not addressing you here, but I'm done trying to have an adult conversation with a bunch of children. I've been ignoring the "hive mind" mentality here since before I made my account, but this is getting ridiculous. This place has devolved into a circle-jerk of Reddit sized proportions. Peace out, and for fuck's sake, grow up guys!