Show and tell for Microsoft

TalkBack 10 of 46:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

"Shared Source" is marketing, not technology

[Before you only got a binary and you were stuck with it. Mostly depending on expensive MS support to help fix your problems. And many times it took forever to fix it (you can NEVER be fast enough for those above), or worse, support wasn't smart enough to understand how to.]

You still are stuck with the binaries. NOBODY outside MS can change the code in any way for any purpose. It is in their "shared source" license. Just in case, they do not provide enough code to be able to compile it, so you cannot make changes. The only thing "shared source" allows is that you can read the code to learn about the bugs so you can attempt to work around them. Not fix. Not even report them to MS because they don't care. But you just might be able to do something useful with Visual.net if you can see where the bugs are below your code. Of course it is easier to find a better platform, but sometimes management makes the technology decisions without bothering to consult anybody who understands technology.

[Now, people can be a little bit more independent of MS, and actually go further with their IT staff to fix problems. They don't need to bring MS on stuff they don't want outsiders to know about.]

NO!

And you wouldn't use MS software for "stuff you don't want outsiders to know about." The next worm or virus would be sending files from your computer to everyone on the internet. And the servers allow access to anybody. Go check the CERT logs for remote access holes for Windows, IIS, and MSSQL. Those are just he ones that habe been found, and some still do not have a patch available.

[DeGroot said. "This helps to defuse the argument that Microsoft is secret and closed, and Linux is open," he said. "Microsoft has been reasonably successful in taking that off of the table. It's no longer a deal breaker."

But, I totally disagree with this statement. I think enough of MS's code is withheld that it still falls into the 'secret and closed' category when compared to GPL/BSD/MIT type software. Also, even if I found it for them, I am still dependent on MS to fix problems with their code.]

If you cannot recompile, you cannot make changes.
If you cannot make changes, it is not open.
"It's no longer a deal breaker" because thay are using the SharedSource hype to convice upper management that they can keep up with the OpenSource community.

[I wish the article told a bit more about the contract involved in seeing the code. Its obviously not for individuals and small businesses. I guess MS doesn't trust it with them. Well, its their property, they can do what they want, and its our money, we will do what we want.]

Just assume the worst you can imagine, then assume it is worse than that. This is MS we are talking about. They still have not kept the agreements made from the 1995 court case. The courts are trying to make them keep to the terms of the recent case, but Billy just says, "We're working on it." What he means is that they are working on finding ways of making anything they do for the courts completely irrelevant to their business.

[From what I see, GPL/BSD/MIT type open source and this shared source aren't even comparable. They are totally different (its like apples and oranges... they are both fruit, but you can't really compare).]

Agreed. They are completely different. All the OpenSource licenses allow you to change the code for your own use. MS does not even allow you to send them patches.

[This is for programmers who want a little bit more control in solving problems, and that's something better than what they had before.]

No. This is for companies who are already tied to MS, and want to say they saw the code as a marketing ploy. The "shared source" is useless for techies, but the marketing people at MS and its partners will hype it. MS says "Look. We're open." The partners say "We saw the code!" It might have been in a 2-pitch symbol font scrolling at 200 lines per second, but that is good enough for marketing.

Just remember that anything to do with "Shared Source" is Microsoft hype that will not affect techies in any way. But it is not targeted at techies, it is targeted at upper management types who hear that OpenSource is better and want to hear that MS is following the trend.

Posted by: solprovider   Posted on: 01/17/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now