Slashdot Log In
Microsoft Sponsors Apache Software Foundation
Posted by
timothy
on Fri Jul 25, 2008 02:56 PM
from the it-has-an-excellent-license-after-all dept.
from the it-has-an-excellent-license-after-all dept.
gbjbaanb writes "Ars Technica reports that Microsoft is to sponsor the Apache Foundation to the tune of $100k. From the article: 'I asked him if this could possibly be the beginning of a broader initiative by Microsoft to increase Apache compatibility with .NET web development technologies, but he says it's still too early to guess Microsoft's future plans for Apache participation. ... He doesn't anticipate a confrontational response from the developers working on individual Apache projects ... The response of the broader open source software community, however, is harder to predict.' (In related news, MS also intends to participate in the RubySpec project.)"
Related Stories
[+]
News: Microsoft Blesses LGPL, Joins Apache Foundation 425 comments
Penguinisto writes "According to a somewhat jaw-dropping story in The Register, it appears that Microsoft has performed a trifecta of geek-scaring feats: They have joined the Apache Software Foundation as a Platinum member(at $100K USD a year), submitted LGPL-licensed patches for ADOdb, and have pledged to expand their Open Specifications Promise by adding to the list more than 100 protocols for interoperability between its Windows Server and the Windows client. While I sincerely doubt they'll release Vista under a GPL license anytime soon, this is certainly an unexpected series of moves on their part, and could possibly lead to more OSS (as opposed to 'Shared Source') interactivity between what is arguably Linux' greatest adversary and the Open Source community." (We mentioned the announced support for the Apache Foundation earlier today, as well.)
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Cliche? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe the term is "embrace".
Extend and extinguish to follow.
Microsoft Support of OSS (Score:4, Insightful)
That is the only logical conclusion, as nobody just gives money to the competitor. Right?
Re:Microsoft Support of OSS (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
They do tho...
Look at the netcraft web server survey over the last few years, microsoft have paid several companies that park thousands of domains in order to increase the market share of IIS.
Re:Microsoft Support of OSS (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not so sure... IIS serves as a tie-in to quite a few different (and damned profitable) Microsoft products... starting with Exchange (for OWA), and branching out a couple thousand different directions from there.
Microsoft's income depends way too heavily on products having exclusive interoperability (e.g. IIS, Exchange, Active Directory...)
Start breaking that up, and enterprises would be more easily liable to start choosing solutions that don't have acronyms like "CAL" anywhere in the invoice.
While yes, IIS is pretty much a money hole for MSFT in a direct sense, they have way too many enterprise products that rely on its existence, and it in turn requires Windows, and only Windows.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So as I said, perhaps this is to get Apache working with Windows COM objects so that they can still have Sharepoint creating content in a compiled application, but the stdout is just changed to html and passed to $webserver.
This is my first conspiracy theory, dammit. Give me a break!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the 100k is for working on Windows API's and such?
I'd hate to be cynical, but I'm guessing it's just PR. I mean, MS giving $100K? What, did they find it under the sofa in the exectuive lunch room?
That's like selling 3 copies of Vista. =P
Competitor is 'your' perspective (Score:2)
Non Zero-Sum Game = contribute to everyone; grow entire pie; so your own little percentage yields a high profit.
Zero-Sum Game = control hardware, software, and even services; shrink entire pie; so that you own a large piece that yields more profit relative to others' profit.
If you believe contributing to Appache would be good for everyone, and hence good for you, then you su
Re: (Score:2)
The IIS team is actually expanding internally
Exactly! They are tired of hiring you people. It would take just a handful of QA guys and a few Apache on Windows experts to utilize Apache for the webserver work. The community would take care of the rest.
Just becuase you are expanding, doesn't mean you are making money, and doesn't mean your safe.
How to interpret this. (Score:3, Insightful)
Based on Ballmers history, I'd say this is inroads by which to "divide and conquer". So; with the check, what was on the document saying what they wanted in return. Microsoft never gives anything away and usually takes everything it wants?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It was in Italian. Loosely translated it said "Apache may someday be called upon to return the favor".
It begins (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
a language/framework that is not competitive enough to be recognized by itself will be ok if there is broader support for it ? dont think so.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying we should scratch PHP, Ruby, and Pearl off as well because they don't have nearly the penetration or recognition of .Net?
Silverlight 2* is still pretty low-key, but it's in Beta (a real beta, not the "this thing isn't ever going to leave beta" definition that Google likes to use). But I keep hearing more and more bounce back from developers, and the head hunters are starting to pick up on it too. When SL2 is released, it's going to rally up some decent press, and I wouldn't be surprised at
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so it was a slight hyperbole ;) The combined presence of VB.Net/C#/ASP.Net and the rest of the .Net language does by most measures, out weigh PHP, Ruby, or Pearl individually in terms of distribution and use. But it's all arm chair statistics anyway, change the metrics and you can easily show any single element out performing any other single element.
no, they dont.
do you know how many millions of websites use php on shared hosting ? as opposed to asp servers being generally standalone, serving only one site ? this example should by itself be enough to draw a picture. im not even gonna go into what perl means for linux.
The point, hyperbole aside, still stands. Do you feel that if a product is of lesser popularity, it should be forsaken in favor of the market leader?
the popular is decided by the market itself. php did not became popular because some big buck company pushed it through various means. or spent big marketing cash on it.
no one is saying that anyone should drop their own brainchild. w
It's nice (Score:2)
Apache 2.4 (Score:5, Funny)
Apache 2.4 release notes
new modules:
mod_drm
mod_ooxml
mod_reject-firefox
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
hey! you forgot the most important
mod_bsod
mod_clippy
Developer, developer, developer....! (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Trying to appear more "open" (what with all the lawsuits in Europe & the oh-so-enthusiastic reception of OOXML), so they can have more influence in the real standards body.
2) Simply trying that old trick (to pretend suck up to developers) & then turn around & do something else.
Eitherway, its a PR stunt because it's hard to believe Microsoft wants to change its definition of "industry standards" from "something we came up with" to---wait for it---"industry standards". Unless I'm missing something
Ill summarize the response of broader community : (Score:3, Insightful)
and rightly so too. look at what happened to all those who got affiliated with microsoft in any way.
microsoft has huge negative karma to alleviate.
spot on !!! (Score:2)
M$ has not brought much to the table. In return their marketing department is going to pretend there is community support for OOXML and other proprietary formats.
thats probably the thing they are going for.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how to tell you this man... but if I may, the repeated use of M$ in your posts makes you look like a moron, which I'm sure you're not (well, I hope).
Just a thought.
You must be new here.... (Note: GP is Twitter)
Re: (Score:2)
To push for wider adoption of M$ standards (Score:2, Interesting)
He believes that this move is based on a legitimate desire by Microsoft to foster collaborative development of Apache technologies that implement Microsoft standards.
If that's true, then we have a grave situation. M$ can make apache compatible with M$'s home-grown standards and then claim that the standards themselves are open standards. Since the percentage of IT people who mistake an open-source implementation as an open standard is almost 100%, M$ can even be very successful at this. Since the standards themselves are not open, all web servers, except Apache and M$-IIS, will soon die out. Finally M$ withdraws support for Apache and thus giving it a final bl
What do you get crossing Microsoft & Apache? (Score:2)
Q: What do you get when you cross Microsoft and Apache?
A: Microsoft.
Infection complete? (Score:2)
When I heard about this at OSCON, I had the same disbelief as anyone on slashdot. But then I thought.. what if it's true? What if MSFT isn't going to fold up and die a relic of the days of propriatry software? I wanted to see that, and I'm sure I'm not alone. But they have new management and can see how the software world is shifting just like everyone else. The "enemy" might be infected with "good", and we might get a powerful new ally instead of a vanquished foe. (What if this happend to the MPAA?)
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:5, Insightful)
Couldn't the same argument be used in reverse -- quit developing for KDE/GNOME, Windows already dominates, develop for that?
Oh, that's right -- monoculture is ok so long as its your monoculture.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
So, err, where do I download this mystical .rpm or .deb file that puts a Windows GUI on Linux?
Is it in one of the unsupported repos, perhaps? Not that I have a use for it, but it'd be fun to play with, I guess...
Re: (Score:2)
I was mostly referring to application development which depends on a certain desktop, rather than "independent" apps or other *nix-specifics.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:5, Funny)
Who do you think deserves the market in this case?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If market share were determined by who deserved it, we'd have non-profit pharmas, home-based rapid-production kits, and most "work" would be a thing of the past.
However, the future will probably be more like Minority Report than Star Trek.
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:4, Informative)
Uhh.. no, that's not true at all. Since IIS6 was released in 2003, there hasn't been a single critical security vulnerability in IIS. Not one.
The same can't be said for Apache.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
While I agree IIS security has improve dramatically, you might want to do your own research when you claim that there are no critical security vulnerabilities.
http://secunia.com/product/1438/?task=advisories [secunia.com]
There are two remote system compromise vulnerabilities listed there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well to use an analogy, if Apache and IIS were car companies, one is manufacturing cars that get 200 MPG, with keyless entry security systems that are highly customizable and can be purchased for $10. The other company makes a car that runs on baby kittens, can be hijacked everytime you go under 30 MPH (and whose top speed is 35 MPH) and can be purchased for $100,000.
Who do you think deserves the market in this case?
The guy that sold a few thousand copies for $100k each. Considering that the other product w
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Doesn't that run counter to the idea that monoculture is bad in computing?
Re: (Score:2)
So let me get this straight... you are lobbying for an elimination of competition, collusion, and handing a controlling interest of Apache over to MS?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for compatibility between IIS and Apache, but to beg for either one of them to get snuffed out seems like an awfully huge risk.
-Rick
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When it is closed (such as IE was) you can sit on it and not develop for years. Keeping things open causes more people to force you to stay on your game or else they will eventually fork it. Thats kind of what happened with Mozilla and Firefo
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:5, Informative)
I sure as hell hope not, I cannot begin to list all the advantages of running IIS+.NET on Server 2003 over [insert language] and mod_whatever on Apache. Having to muck around with httpd.conf and chmod wouldn't exactly be an improvement over their current stack, especially for intra-corp applications.
(I realize the above paragraph might hurt some fanboys - sorry. You can have your platform, I recognize its strengths. Just leave mine alone)
This is probably part of Microsoft's push to make things like PHP and Ruby work better on Windows. After all, they'd rather you run WAMP than LAMP. They've been engaged with Zend on the FastGCI implementation for IIS that makes PHP so much better on Windows. I don't think they see IIS as some sacred cow to be protected. Again, as long as you're running everything on Windows Server =)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Never had a problem with it, it works as advertised. I like my security to be slightly more granular though, which is why I'd rather have ACLs on NT.
This is for internal corporate applications though, irrelevant in the context of where I'd run my blog or picture gallery.
Re:A better sponsorship (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, I can't list any advantages, either.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
A better sponsorship would be to quit developing IIS and focus all of its development staff on Apache for Windows,
NOOOOOO!!!!In general I dislike most of Microsoft's technologies. First they make MFC. Code usually looks like someone threw up on the monitor. Then they go and get the same guy that came up with MFC to write C#, which is also horrible. And to top it off, on top of the crap that is C# they pile on things like Forms, WPF, and 1000s of other things that are all hideous.
No company in history has made uglier looking API's. The nice thing about open source is that if you don't like some API, there is a goo
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Anders Hejlsberg wrote MFC? While working at Borland in 1992? Huh, I never knew that...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Uhh.. you really have no idea what you're talking about. First, MFC is a library, C# is a language. Second, C# was developed by Anders Hjelberg, who Microsoft hired away from Borland. He's the guy that basically wrote Delphi. And no, he did not create MFC.
Re: (Score:2)
This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Apache HTTP server. Apache also does tons of Java stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)