Mubix comments on the fact that a number of open-source project leaders have mentioned, on their respective blogs, acceptance of employment from Microsoft. For anybody that has even a passing knowledge of most open-source communities (which, in many cases, can be best read about in the comments of Microsoft-tagged Slashdot articles), the Redmond company is a sworn enemy, and so accepting a job from them is tantamount to treason.

Daniel Robbins, founder of the Gentoo Linux Project, has previously worked at Microsoft, but moved on as he was feeling that his skills were not used to their fullest. After that, more and more commentators began speculating that Microsoft might simply be interested in acquiring a lot of open-source leaders more as a way of undermining their projects — as well as, on a larger scale, future projects that might never be founded if the would-be leaders decide to join Microsoft instead. While the view may be quite left-field, Microsoft’s generally poor reputation certainly does not help. Microsoft may be interested in undermining various OSS projects, though they may as well be on the lookout for talented developers and software designers, and the open-source community is a good training ground. After all, more and more interviewers ask candidates whether they have been involved with open-source at any time.

I have been contacted, once, by a Microsoft recruiter. Both his e-mail and the in-person sales pitch played on the fact that my blog was quite critical of Microsoft. I agree that, as much as we may like to bash Microsoft (and, rest assured, I still have enough to rant about them), we need to be part of the change that we want to see. For some, that means pushing OSS further into different markets, to completely undermine and cause the eventual fall of proprietary, closed software systems — like Microsoft and Apple are. For others, the vision focuses on the users, on making their lives better, so working at Microsoft on a piece of software that many will use has a real impact.

I am not one to judge the path one takes. If you become part of the ‘problem’¹ I do hope you help improve their reputation by offering good software and driving for honest business practices. If you work on OSS, I hope you see your software more than just a ‘rebel yell’ against the corporations: remember that your software has users.

1. Microsoft [↩]

Ars is running a lengthy piece on modularized Windows and why it would suck. There are quite a few reasons why I do not believe this to be true, mostly looking at the increased control modularized Windows would bring to all categories of users.

«Continue Reading»

From a Computer World article detailing the reasons a CTO switched back to Windows after a stint on the Mac:

«Continue Reading»

Joel Spolsky (the famous Joel writing “on software”) had a lengthy comment today yesterday on the impending war between the supporters of IE 8’s standards mode versus the rest of the world (as he argues it, that means the majority of web developers out there) that will have their websites broken in IE 8. (Mark Pilgrim hosts a translation of the article which pretty much captures the essence of the thing.) While he makes a compelling argument as to why he believes IE 8 will eventually revert to the old way of rendering, I take issue with some of the finer points of the matter. Specifically, I believe, for once, that Microsoft is not the only one to blame for the current state of the web and they should not backtrack because it might be a cause of inconvenience to some people in the short term.

«Continue Reading»

My world is largely at peace right now, but that doesn’t mean all is well on this western front. Welcome to the brief! «Continue Reading»

A few of the new and old, coming right up:

«Continue Reading»

It seems today’s the day: Microsoft in Richmond, B.C. opened up with somewhere around 200 employees. They moved fast and they’ll still be growing, seeing as how only about a quarter of the space is available for use. Since it was originally touted as an R&D centre, I’m very curious to see what they’ll be coming up with.

For the rest of us in the free world, we’re waiting on Apple and/or Google to come to Downtown Vancouver and open up shop. Then, once a month, I suggest paintball wars between the various companies. I see unholy alliances forming every time :)

The big story of the last few days is Microsoft’s claim that Linux and FOSS infringes on 235 of their patents and that it is time for businesses running Linux to start paying up for that IP. Beyond the rather shady approach Redmond has taken with this - mainly because it resembles too many ‘tales’ written by Puzo - it gives rise to a few questions that others have already answered. I will share my thoughts on a topic that deals with only a small subset of the patent issue at large.

«Continue Reading»

So my University, like all respected Universities around the land, has a Microsoft Student Ambassador. The dude [or dudette] has the task of advertising MS events, products, get students in touch with MS etc. And, unlike some other places that I’ve heard of nowadays, there was a Vista launch event last week. We got the e-mail - spam, as it may be, I think there’s something useful to be gained from knowing when these things are, professional connections are never a bad thing.

But then the guy posts the same thing [below] to the course newsgroups.

«Continue Reading»

[This was part originally of the previous post.]

A big reason for why Microsoft is still ‘playing catch’ stems from the fact that Windows is so very used in corporate environments. My opinion is that Microsoft should fork off the versions of their OS into Business and User components. So far they’ve been trying to nail two birds with the same stone - despite the relative differences between Home, Pro and Corp. editions of XP, for example. Sure, they’ve made their market research and know better what many companies want. This is me talking.

Average corporate users have little need for multimedia, eye-candy and all of that. They want familiar user interfaces, stability and teamwork-ready applications - and support. No crippleware, no services opened for things that don’t belong in their corporate environments in the first place but that cost them large amounts of money when a cracker gets through.

The end-user wants a machine that does everything around the house. House. Multimedia, IM, socializing. And something that looks good doing it without requiring a machine stolen out of NCERT to run the OS.

For those people that want more control over their machine there can always be the Ultimate, Super-Mega, Meta edition. Although there doesn’t need to be one.

If the entire system would be more modular, the components can be thrown together easier to make the generic technology behind the OS-es relatively the same but the special ingredients present. Corporate users would benefit from a stable UI and a core that’s being constantly improved on in terms of security with new features thrown in gradually [this can even be a good source of profit for Microsoft with a Custom Solutions division where low-level modifications to the OS can be made and sold for a nice development and support taxation.] The User edition, however, could explore more cutting-edge features and a more aggressive take on innovating. Even the target demographic can vary — bring Microsoft Bob back for the retired ladies please!. Most importantly, backwards compatibility can be thrown out of the consumer editions because most users don’t need to run old things and would be much happier with better response times or a smaller install size.

Just a thought.