| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft: A Little More 'Open' | |
|
||
| Time: 19:56 EST/00:56 GMT | News Source: Wired | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Thanks Nathan. Microsoft thinks open source development is a pretty good way to craft software but a really bad way to do business. Due to its eclectic and egalitarian nature, open source development was, is, and will remain a small and unprofitable niche business in the technology marketplace, according to Doug Miller, Microsoft's group product manager for competitive strategies. "The two biggest issues with open source is lack of development control and a non-sustainable business model," Miller said. "By control, I am referring to the lack of a central body to define common standards across all the different projects for things like security, management, documentation, internationalization and accessibility. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:20:08 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 1/31/2002 11:12:29 PM |
|
LinuxWorld is this week in New York. Every article I've seen thus far has described it as a ghost town. Far fewer business than before, fewer people attending, etc.
|
| #2 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 2/1/2002 12:07:38 AM |
|
I've never found the arguments for open source business models very appealing, mostly because they have never actually delivered. Few can argue that Microsoft's business models havn't been successful.
The strongest point I've heard was mentioned in the above article, which is that while open source developers can expose their projects to the world and ask for advice, Microsoft employees are forced to stay inside the company. This certainly has some truth. I've worked on large projects in which I was dying for some advice, and there was nobody around me in the company that had anything really useful to contribute. I found myself simply asking open ended, fairly vague questions on knowledge community sites like Experts Exchange and Usenet. The results were less than pleasing. On the other hand, we aren't talking what makes the "best" software in this case... we are talking what makes the best business model. I don't see Microsoft's software-as-a-service paradigm as similar in anyway to the open source movement as the article suggests. Microsoft is pushing XML Web Services to create an entirely new business model of programmatic functionality sold by subscription in both B2B and B2P arenas. In no way does this suggest the same kind of business model as Redhat, for instance, which gives you their product for free in hopes you will pay them for support. UDDI and the various other directories for XML Web Services will become one of the largest centers for the sharing of programmatic functionality, but not in an "open" environment. It will be very much a closed, traditional business in that sense. Microsof realizes (and rightly so) that they must work *with* industry standards, not against them; but that's as far as that goes. |
| #3 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 2/1/2002 3:53:55 PM |
|
#4 - You should read the book "Breaking Windows" by David Bank. It's a fascinating look at the inner workings of Microsoft between 1994 and 2001.
In it he describes a heated battle between Jim Alchin's Windows group, who were desperately trying to bring together Windows 9x and Windows NT (which is the solution to the stability problems you are talking about), and Brian Silverberg's Internet team, who many in the company saw as the "internal Netscape." You make it sound as if Microsoft simply ignored the problems with Windows 9x and opted to somehow save money by not improving their product. This is simply not true. The biggest reason Microsoft took 5 years to integrate Windows 9x and NT (aside from the incredible technical problems... Windows is widely considered one of the largest engineering feats ever attempted by humans. No, I'm not kidding) is that Microsoft was forced to completely change its strategy to combat the emerging browser platform threat. The primary goal of the company, however, was to integrate NT and 9x. This is obvious and clear both of internal e-mails (which are accessible via the trial transcripts) and countless accounts of those 5 years. And what, per sais, is the alternative that is forcing Microsoft to finally release stable software? There are many alternatives to Windows, but not a single one that could possibly force Microsoft to do anything. There are no real viable threats in the industry today, at least in the desktop environment - which is what I assume you're talking about. |
| #4 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 2/2/2002 12:11:13 PM |
|
"When developing proprietary software, you can only discuss it with other people who already know about it. Closed source means closing yourself off from a lot of brilliant people," Lebor said. "Do you think Microsoft's programmers can ask the entire world of developers for help like I can? I can post a note on the Internet and get some genius ideas from around the globe, but if Microsofties did that they would be fired for exposing trade secrets."
Something tells me this guy completely underestimates the mountain of elite programmers @ microsoft. If they need help there are thousands of incredibly talented people within the company to help. This seems to me to be more of a case for laziness. If you can't figure it out ask someone to tell you how to do it. If you couldn't do that you would have to learn how to overcome the problem and in turn make yourself a better programmer. For those who frequent newsgroups about programming... usually the masses that help in those groups simply point the person in the right direction... seldom does someone actually write a module of code for someone. The most you will ever see on those groups is maybe a change of a line or two of code that fixes a broken loop or something. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:20:08 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
