Comments on: Microsoft, the GPL and Linux: The Q&A

By: tecosystems » Microsoft Frees CodePlex: Now What? The Q&A

tecosystems » Microsoft Frees CodePlex: Now What? The Q&A — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 02:33:35 +0000

[...] Apache, Eclipse, Mozilla, and PHP (via Zend). Two months ago they even announced their intentions to contribute to the Linux [...]

By: Mike Dolan

Mike Dolan — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:57:29 +0000

I think the most significant implication is that at least 1 year ago, Microsoft realized Hyper-V had no chance of gaining market support unless Windows could support Linux as a guest. Once Microsoft realized that, GPL’ed code was inevitable. The need to support Linux just confirms how much penetration the OS has made into Microsoft’s own territory.

Zimmerman is absolutely right – at the end of the day, Microsoft has “given” the Linux codebase nothing useful… it’s only self-service for enabling Microsoft’s own product in the market.

By: On Microsoft’s Contribution of Drivers to Linux « The Wayward Word Press

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:16:20 +0000

[...] On Microsoft’s Contribution of Drivers to Linux Microsoft recently made its first significant contribution to Linux in the form of GPL-licensed code recently. See the>analysis of Redmonk’s Steve O’Grady for a good summary: Microsoft, the GPL and Linux: The Q&A. [...]

By: dave shields

dave shields — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:02:51 +0000

Good summary, as usual.

Re patents, the issue is not about MS picking a fight with the open-source community.Since all enterprises run Linux, at least on some machines, for MS to file a patent infringement suit would put it in the same sad postion as SCO — suing some of its own customers.

Re MS motiviation, see Linus’s apt response at http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7439/1.html:

“I agree that it’s driven by selfish reasons, but that’s how all open source code gets written! We all “scratch our own itches”. It’s why I started Linux, it’s why I started git, and it’s why I am still involved. It’s the reason for everybody to end up in open source, to some degree.

So complaining about the fact that Microsoft picked a selfish area to work on is just silly. Of course they picked an area that helps them. That’s the point of open source – the ability to make the code better for your particular needs, whoever the ‘your’ in question happens to be.”

By: Why Linux Did Not Need Microsoft’s Code Injection | Boycott Novell

Why Linux Did Not Need Microsoft’s Code Injection | Boycott Novell — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:32:04 +0000

[...] There is also a Q&A from RedMonk. [...]

By: ssl1900's status on Thursday, 23-Jul-09 10:10:13 UTC - Identi.ca

ssl1900's status on Thursday, 23-Jul-09 10:10:13 UTC - Identi.ca — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:10:47 +0000

[...] microsoft code for linux http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2009/07/22/microsoft-linux/ [...]

By: Once More unto the Breach

Once More unto the Breach — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:57:44 +0000

Microsoft and the Release of Linux Drivers Under the GPL…

Microsoft announced that it is releasing a collection of software drivers under the GPLv2 to better enable Linux to run as a first class citizen on their Hyper-V technology. Matt Aslett and Stephen O’Grady provide excellent commentary [as always] and….

By: 451 CAOS Links (caostheory) 's status on Wednesday, 22-Jul-09 15:27:21 UTC - Identi.ca

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:27:56 +0000

[...] http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2009/07/22/microsoft-linux/ [...]

By: Simon Phipps

Simon Phipps — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:18:17 +0000

The one other angle on this is related to timing. Microsoft thought it worthwhile to fabricate an announcement so they would be in the news cycle at OSCON in a positive and concrete way. That in itself is news, regardless of the technology involved.