Comment by maze-le

9 years ago

As long as key components like the official Microsoft NTFS implementation remain closed source, I see in this open source policy as a charade.

5 comments

maze-le

Reply
guardian5x  9 years ago

Thats a bit like saying, as long as Google keeps their search algorithm closed source, i see it as charade.

I'm happy that those companies open source more and more code. And Microsoft released some of their key technologies like .Net as open source. Personally i give them credit for that.

  • maze-le  9 years ago

    Nope, I don't think so. I don't demand Microsoft to open up the Windows sources or sources for MS-Office for that matter. They make money with these products and I understand the incentive to keep them closed. Alas NTFS is a filesystem, not the kernel of the OS. If Microsoft would recognize that there are other operating systems than Windows, and that it is valid that they operate with NTFS partitions, NTFS would be open.

    Oh and yes, .NET is open source by now, btw. I think it's great too. And I am far less critical of Microsoft than 7-8 years ago. But opening .NET is also a strategic descision. In essence, it remains a Microsoft platform, and if more software for linux is written with .NET, good for Microsoft. If more software for windows is developed on linux machines with .NET, good for Microsoft. If more linux devs switch to windows, because of the better .NET integration, great for Microsoft. It's a win-win situation either way.

    I'd love to see a development, that might be a net-loss[0] for Microsoft but a net-win for systems interoperability or the open source community.

    [0]: Opening NTFS might not even be a net-loss...

appleflaxen  9 years ago

Your sentence is the epitome of good criticism: concise, valid, fundamental.

  • wmccullough  9 years ago

    If that is considered valid, then let's also apply that broad sentence to a ton of other companies out there (Google, Apple). There's huge value to them open sourcing the things they have without giving away their core software.

    The problem I see with OSS folks is that they think if a company isn't all in, they are corrupt. This polarized view doesn't work in the real world.

    At some point, some of us engineers like making money, we do need a place to live and eat after all.