Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/announcements/microsoft-fortifies-commitment-to-open-source-becomes-linux-foundation-platinum

by jpalomaki • 10 years ago

426 181 10 years ago

linuxfoundation.org

devereaux• 10 years ago

So much has changed in 10 years! The old me would never believe how the future me moved more "Micro$oft sucks" to "wow another great product!"

I am happy to use Office in wine, as it gives me a very stable experience, full unicode supports even with my Xorg keymaps.

I use Visual Studio in wine - not as good as Office, but still very good.

I have a Windows phone, a priced relic since Microsoft abandoned them. Rock stable, last for a week in airplane mode.

I have a Windows 10 LTSB in a separate partition. Initially I just wanted to test it out. Now I consider running it in KVM for Visual Studio, in case I want more than what wine can now offer.

Hell, I am considering replacing my Thinkpad by one of Microsoft surfaces. As soon as it runs Linux as well as a Thinkpad, can get 32G of RAM, a user replacable SSD, wifi and lte module, I buy one. Seriously, even if the keyboard is not as good. And given Microsoft new focus on developpers, I wouldn't entirely dismiss the idea of a Surface Developper, bulkier but sturdier and user upgradable.

People say "hell froze over". I don't care. I look forward for more change from Microsoft. Because their tools are innovative again.

pbhjpbhj• 10 years ago

I am happy to use Office in wine, //

It'd be great if companies would support this sort of use if they're not going to bother creating native versions.

I used to play games using PlayOnLinux but the company, Origin (IIRC), updated their game manager software seemingly in order to break the Linux compatibility. The games were paid for and worked perfectly well.

Annoying as hell when companies appear to be actively hostile to you buying their product.

ascendantlogic• 10 years ago

Me from 2001 is pretty blown away.

tracker1• 10 years ago

Yeah... the me from that era would never have thought that MS would be where it is today.

floopidydoopidy• 10 years ago

Me from 2001 is astounded that people keep falling for same lie, year after year.

LyalinDotCom• 10 years ago

Hell has frozen over, but that's just my opinion :)

ekianjo2• 10 years ago

Except that Microsoft is still hostile towards Linux with patents at the same time but no one talks about it.

adrianN• 10 years ago

It's a big company. The people being hostile with patents probably don't talk to the people donating to the Linux Foundation.

SSLy2• 10 years ago

Microsoft loves Linux (the kernel), but they hate with passion anything userland that could ever have the dreaded "GNU" or "GPL" letters anywhere mentioned.

lagadu• 10 years ago

Hell has indeed frozen over and it's time to get the skis out and enjoy it!

organsnyder2• 10 years ago

Another example of how far Microsoft's focus has changed. Rather than focusing on products, they're focused on selling solutions.

cmdrfred• 10 years ago

Aren't all products essentially solutions?

rbanffy2• 10 years ago

Not Microsoft products.

/me ducks.

JBReefer• 10 years ago

Not according to http://bad.solutions

organsnyder2• 10 years ago

Yes, but if your focus is on selling hammers, everything looks like a nail. If your focus is on selling fastener-drivers, you realize that sometimes you need a screwdriver instead.

atomic772• 10 years ago

I also think the shift is genuine. The parallels with how IBM evolved from being the Prime Evil in the tech world to a large but relatively benign tech company are interesting.

vvdcect• 10 years ago

Embrace(check), extend(check), and extinguish(?)

oedenfield• 10 years ago

MS employee here - the new Microsoft is: Enable (make sure open source runs well on MS platforms) Integrate (make sure MS platforms work well with open source) Release (release key MS technology into open source) Participate (commit MS engineers to participate in communities)

BentFranklin2• 10 years ago

Nice of you to say but what about this:

https://eugene.kaspersky.com/2016/11/10/thats-it-ive-had-eno...

Obviously Kaspersky isn't open source, but the tiger's stripes certainly haven't changed.

Also, Microsoft bundling Windows 10 upgrade malware into its security update channel has turned me off Microsoft, probably forever. Still don't understand why installing 10 after being told not to isn't a CFAA violation.

SSLy2• 10 years ago

Release (release key MS technology into open source)

Will you help wine devs with some source code?

loudmax• 10 years ago

That's encouraging, and it's fantastic that MS is moving in that direction and that new stuff like VS Code runs Linux. But outside of Silicon Valley, a lot of the world still depends on old stuff like MS Office and SharePoint. Outside of the startup scene the biggest challenge for many of us running Linux is still working around Microsoft's proprietary protocols and file formats.

Please continue moving in this direction. There's still a ways to go.

brongondwana• 10 years ago

Hi there MS employee - can you tell me if you're ever going to send anyone to CalConnect events again? We've been struggling to get contact with anyone we can talk to about making sure IMIP interoperates, even just the basics.

Of course there's still the licensing situation of FAT32, ActiveSync, etc - it's hard to interoperate when the other party will only speak restricted protocols.

ss2483• 10 years ago

I don't get why people downvote this post. It's like everyone completely forgot about Halloween documents[1].

We should be very careful with Microsoft.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents

cwyers• 10 years ago

Or everyone very much remembers the Halloween documents and it doesn't add anything to the conversation to, without an attempt to say anything substantive about the documents or the current event, remind all of us about something that nobody has ever forgotten. You see four or five of these posts at least on any major Microsoft thread on HN, and they add nothing to the discussion.

andyjohnson03• 10 years ago

That was 1998. Eighteen years ago.

13of40• 10 years ago

It's hard to find someone who was there as an intern in 1998, much less in a leadership position.

jepler• 10 years ago

first they mock you, then they fight you, then they coopt you, then they win.

mtgx• 10 years ago

Kill it from the inside.

1281281918• 10 years ago

Don't forget that we have the New Microsoft[tm]! Source: Hacker News.

An9238• 10 years ago

Hacker News is really the site with the least amount of self criticism on the entire Internet.

'dang, go ahead and do you thing.

pksadiq• 10 years ago

I don't think they are going to support GPLv3, ever.

SEJeff2• 10 years ago

FWIW, the same could be said for the Linux foundation. They're not really pro GPLv3 either. Linux is GPLv2 and will stay that way.

Open Source != Free Software

cyphar3• 10 years ago

And note that many of the new Linux Foundation projects (kubernetes, runc, etc) are under Apache licenses.

forgottenpass• 10 years ago

The new game is to use as much open source as possible to build a closed source ecosystem with vendor lock-in.

Microsoft was late to the game, but we gotta give them props for contributing back something more useful than "open core", platform onboarding or "hire me" piles of code.

blackaspen4• 10 years ago

I guess the other thread was the one that became the dupe:

I'm fairly certain all of 2016 is a mass-hallucination. Or something. In all seriousness though, I don't think this is surprising. Visual Studio on macOS is more surprising to me. Azure runs on Linux and that's a really, really big business for Microsoft. And they've also built a Linux Subsystem into Windows. Rock on Microsoft, rock on.

ekianjo2• 10 years ago

If they could contribute to WINE that would be most welcome.

rufius3• 10 years ago

Azure runs on Linux? What? Small portions do, but it's misleading to say it "runs on Linux".

Edit: clarifying

blackaspen4• 10 years ago

Sarcasm? I imagine that they're not emulating the Linux Kernel on Windows... From what I've gathered from job postings and whatnot, their virtualization system is in line with AWS's (Xen) on Linux.

thejj• 10 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extingui...

Let's see how they'll try the next step.

airesQ• 10 years ago

I really don't see how that strategy would work with open source projects. Wouldn't most contributions for the "extend" phase be open source?

Once open source, it's much harder to extinguish.

ocdtrekkie2• 10 years ago

Mostly just ignore the parent comment, some people are inherently compelled to link a twenty year old business strategy on EVERY Microsoft-related thread.

nilved• 10 years ago

Nope. In fact, that term is almost always applied to open technology. Right now Red Hat is doing it to Linux and Google is doing it to the Web. See the list of examples on the linked article for more.

akerro• 10 years ago

Open source means nothing and is same easy to extinguish, it's only more visible when someone is trying to. Microsoft, Google, Apple do open source work for publicity, if you as a single developer want a change in a projects, you submit PR... and wait weeks. First you need to write RFC, at some point RFC will be discussed behind closed doors by corporatisation members, you can have your vote in it on GitHub, but nothing else as we saw once already with MS. All you can do is fix documentation and tests for them, means they get free labour to improve their products, you can have an important repo forked on GitHub.

quickben2• 10 years ago

It would probably be some proprietary extensions in something like systemD. Increase the complexity to code about 10x to eliminate the small devs, etc. Nothing we haven't seen with the open doc standard, ActiveX, Java portability, etc.

You have to think more business like. Why extinguish Linux when every copy running somewhere can give you licencing income. Maybe they'll partner with redhat and provide them something that has to be paid. Unlimited possibilities really.

jpalomaki• 10 years ago

I don't think this strategy would work anymore on these fields. Microsoft does not have dominant market share in cloud, server operating systems, development platforms or databases and it does not look like they could gain it. The dominating position is key for the embrace, extended, extinguish because that's the way to push your own stuff to market.

I believe Microsoft is doing these moves, because they have decided that the old business model where all products are required to support the sales of each other is too risky. It served them well, but now there are too many good alternatives on many areas. If Azure does not support Linux, customers are not going to migrate to Windows because of that, they just pick another cloud. The old way was risky, because it meant that if customers moved away from Windows, they also had to move away from .NET and SQL Server.

lwn• 10 years ago

The strategy fits perfectly: Embrace Ubuntu into Windows, let the dev community grow. Then add windows-specific hooks and additions for open-source software to build against. At last destroy the backward compatibility to end linux. This is what they have always done, why should this time be different.

anonbanker• 10 years ago

Extend/extinguish everything that isn't GPLv3, replace whatever is.

bomdo• 10 years ago

Apparently, being a platinum member entails donating $500k [1], so it's not that big a deal for Microsoft ($85B revenue[2]). And as the article states, there has been negativity in the linux community regarding the old arch-enemy joining their ranks. Looking at the new Microsoft however, I think it's fair to assume that the days of "embrace, extend and extinguish"[3] are over and they are genuinely interested in cooperation.

It's an important political gesture that Nadella goes in this direction. Since they also added a linux subsystem into the latest Windows release[4], I get the impression that he wants to leave the cloud to linux and try to position Windows as a user-facing client. This is a difficult decision to make, but it makes sense. Microsoft without Ballmer is seeing its position in the Corporate world as it is and I hope we will continue to see more openness as a result.

[1] http://www.slashgear.com/hp-pays-500000-for-linux-foundation...

[2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-2016-Q4...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12234735

simosx• 10 years ago

While Microsoft was the effective monopoly, they stayed as a monopoly trying to reap the fruits of the new status quo.

It makes financial sense for them to join the Linux Foundation. Joining the Linux Foundation does not make them to, for example, start contributing to WINE, since that does not make financial sense to them.

paulddraper3• 10 years ago

being a platinum member entails donating $500k

HP's donation isn't necessary Microsoft's

so it's not that big a deal for Microsoft

So what? It's a big deal for the Linux Foundation. And that's what matters. It's not about everyone paying "their fair share". It's about ensuring a good future for the high-quality very popular open source OS Linux. The circumstances of the donor doesn't affect the efficacy of their donation.

I hope we focus more on the outcome than the drama.

zanny4• 10 years ago

Linux is a kernel, not an OS, and Microsoft has been abjectly hostile to the OSes that use Linux and respect user freedoms.

If they weren't, they would have never pushed hostile proprietary vendor lock in tech like DirectX12 or Universal Windows Platform in recent years.

veuge_c• 10 years ago

HP I think it was just an example. In fact all platinum members pay $ 500K [https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/bylaws] to be able to join the meetings and being able to participate in the ballotings.

executesorder663• 10 years ago

and they are genuinely interested in cooperation.

In my opinion, they are not at all interested in cooperation until they port Office and Visual Studio to Linux or open source them.

wmccullough• 10 years ago

Do you not count SQL Server, VS Code, ASP.NET core running Linux as cooperation? They are genuinely trying here.

pliu• 10 years ago

The thing that stuck out to me about the presser was the quote from the VP of Cloud and Enterprise Group, and that someone high up on Azure team is joining the Linux Foundation board of directors. This indicates to me that it's really a desire to compete effectively with AWS and Google Cloud that drives this co-operation, rather than a desire to expand Linux. Nothing wrong with this of course. Azure is a major cloud platform, personally I think it's better for everyone if Linux runs well there.

serge2k• 10 years ago

Not even when they are making huge investments into Azure, which pretty much requires linux to be a viable alternative to AWS?

astrodust3• 10 years ago

You can cooperate without having to give up all your proprietary tools.

How do you think the internet was made? By setting aside proprietary protocols and agreeing on open standards. Each vendor's free to do whatever they want so long as they use those standards.

finid• 10 years ago

I get the impression that he wants to leave the cloud to linux and try to position Windows as a user-facing client.

Is that why they're pushing the Azure cloud service - to benefit Linux?

mhall1192• 10 years ago

Considering 50% of Azure instances are Linux, perhaps?

qplex• 10 years ago

Reading your comment, I was suddenly reminded of the days when the Windows vs. Linux TCO (=total cost of ownership) debacle was all aflame... ah the sad irony.

zekevermillion2• 10 years ago

This is the ultimate embrace, extend move. Hopefully it means MS has reconciled itself to the fact that it cannot easily extinguish Linux. I would expect MS to use this position to divert headlines away from the concept of free software, and toward the MS brand; and to introduce dependencies to third-party software that makes it difficult to extract MS proprietary code entirely from the Linux ecosystem.

Ezhik2• 10 years ago

I think we need a bot to call EEE every time Microsoft is mentioned.

tn132• 10 years ago

being a platinum member entails donating $500k

The important thing about this news is not the title or the amount. The important thing to notice that Microsoft has moved from extreme hostility to active co-operation with general Linux community. This is a good move and it benefits Linux community lot more than Microsoft.

I always felt that it was needless to paint MS/Linux as some kind of zero some game to begin with. Sad that MS's top leadership fell prey to it in the initial years trying to hurt Linux.

sqeaky• 10 years ago

I don't see how this means they have stopped being hostile. For example, they are still suing android manufacturers.

I think they are doing this because they think they have to and not because they have actually embraced anything. I think they are trying to buy goodwill.

drvdevd2• 10 years ago

We must also not forget that other companies have since proven that the idea of a proprietary operating system (or just kernel) as the main base of IP has started to look somewhat obsolete anyway. Now we have proprietary services and systems like Android and macOS have demonstrated that you can take an (at least partly) open source OS and slap most of the proprietary bits in userspace quite successfully. For that matter the "next version" of Windows might as well be a rebranded version of Android or something. Why keep maintaining your own OS kernel when you can have the community do it for you with a modest donation?

NT will be with us for a while yet, though I can't understand the business case for not end of lifing it at some point, especially when most of the engineers you hire don't know it well.

hueving3• 10 years ago

How does this benefit the Linux community even more? Microsofts move to include shells and a kernel compatible with Unix may end up being one of the most damaging things to Linux in a long time.

All of the casual users that don't care about open source will just give in and use Windows as their OS when they hit a driver snag or something since they still get the userspace tools they like.

cheiVia0• 10 years ago

I think you misspelled co-option.

nitrogen• 10 years ago

Half the HN frontpage right now is MS articles. Seems oddly coincidental.

We can't forget about the bad MS is still doing: forced Win10 upgrades, Win10 spyware, Android patent extortion, FAT/VFAT/exFAT patent suits and licenses, etc.

The developer arm seems to be working hard, which is commendable. But looking at the rest of the org, this just seems like another Embrace round of the EEE cycle.

Analemma_• 10 years ago

It's not "oddly coincidental", it's Microsoft's developer conference today, which is where the announcement was made. During WWDC and I/O the front page is filled with Apple and Google news too.

baybal2• 10 years ago

Let's wait for Linux Millenium Edition

canada_dry• 10 years ago

We can't forget about the bad MS is still doing

This.

It doesn't take much skepticism to suspect MS has the ultimate agenda of eliminating all things Linux (as it exists today).

frik• 10 years ago

Yes, sadly MSFT PR drones invaded HN since BUILD 2015. They are worse than the were during Ballmer days, their current CEO is bad for end consumers, the spyware in W10 and many other shady actions like forcing DRM EFI are very bad. Who (developer) in the right mind would fall again for their shit? Only noobs fall for them - you will get burned sooner or later, remember that. Their software aren't a good fit for startups, so why are they fearured on HN nowadays? Usually you don't want to burn your money on software licenses, or you will fall like MySpace. Read PG articles.

shmerl3• 10 years ago

I think it's fair to assume that the days of "embrace, extend and extinguish" are over and they are genuinely interested in cooperation.

I'd welcome that, but MS still needs to fix several very major issues which stand in the way of such cooperation.

1. Stop the patent aggression.

2. More support for open standards. Especially in 3D graphics (DirectX lock-in), filesystems on removable media (exFAT lock-in), and so on and so forth.

3. Stop Windows tax / Windows bundling anti-competitive practices.

Once those are changed for the better, I'd say MS really changed. There is some progress with the above for example in case of the browser. MS joining Alliance for Open Media is one such case. But quite a lot still remains problematic.

merb2• 10 years ago

3. Stop Windows tax / Windows bundling anti-competitive practices.

well bundling is not a problem for me. I mean most people will use windows no matter how much better linux gets.

however the bigger problem is that windows actually allows vendors to create shitty drivers and fix shitty hardware within there kernel, that should not happen. windows should ONLY allow signed drivers for companies that are willing to create specifications for their devices.

kovach• 10 years ago

3. Are they still doing that though, I don't see any evidence? Over here (Macedonia) you can buy laptops/PCs from most brands without Windows, cheaper.

4. What really irks me, is a point you missed: they are dealing with corrupt governments everywhere to make sure all government and education computers have Windows and Office, and that is what gets taught in schools.

2bitencryption• 10 years ago

Assuming Platinum is the highest membership, wouldn't it be fair to consider the possibility that MS contributed MORE than 500k?

Roritharr• 10 years ago

Everytime I see a big corporation donate money to a software project, I like to imagine what the software project would do with 10 or 1000 times that amount. What would a Billion Dollar funded Linux Foundation do?

MikusR• 10 years ago

Fight about who gets the money.

winter_blue2• 10 years ago

As the Mythical Man-Mnth says, you can't build software faster by adding more programmers.

So not much, unless the work they have to do is highly parallelizable (i.e. can be broken up), and would truly benefit from more developers.

I can imagine KDE benefiting from this, because KDE is an umbrella organization with hundreds (if not thousands) of projects underneath it.

ssalazar• 10 years ago

? Thats a pretty negative/limited view. Tons of open source projects could benefit from additional roles/resources aside from programmers: project management, graphic design, UI/UX, technical writing, QA engineering. Additionally, longer-term funding for the main contributors to a project might allow them to elevate a project's status beyond a nights-and-weekends hobby, with likely improvements for code quality/overall quality.

zanny4• 10 years ago

I can't imagine how much great software KDE could produce with another 50k, let alone 500k, in corporate sponsorship. It has fewer developers with a broader reach than Gnome and an even older legacy.

Just a really easy example is how they now have the Kirigami UI framework, and they released their software store redone in it a few months back (Discover) but the man hours and work required to port more of the collection to that toolkit would be immense. And even Discover is missing a lot of polish since its primarily a demo product at this point.

Throw another 10 developers in there (at 50k a pop?), and all those complaints about "it looks like Windows" with toolbars and dropdowns would be abated.

vidarh• 10 years ago

The vast majority of the kernel code is a massive number of drivers and subsystems that can be worked on independendly.

A better funded Linux Foundation could also invest in better tooling (better compilers, better test rigs), and in research on speculative improvements to pretty much every subsystem.

beachstartup• 10 years ago

uh, well, redhat is worth $14B and i'd say at least $1B of that value has been dumped into its open source projects over the years (of which there are a LOT), so we already know what that looks like.

i think the frontier you are speculating about is currently at 2 or 3 times that magnitude. what does a $100B-$1T of market capitalization behind linux and its ecosystem look like?

i think the major players are aligning to answer that question... we'll find out soon enough.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/rht?ltr=1

0xmohit• 10 years ago

  The company has become an enthusiastic supporter of Linux

Curious to know from any users out there: How well does Mono work, especially on Linux?

MichaelGG• 10 years ago

Works fine for me in the server-side backend apps I've done. Telecom processing, routing/call records. Handled billions of messages a week. Code/debug/etc. on Windows, copy exes to Linux and run it. There's a few discrepancies here and there but overall it was fairly easy.

pionar• 10 years ago

Mono works really well. But, Mono's not the future. The future is Roslyn, CoreCLR, and CoreFX, basically the compiler, runtime and standard library for .NET applications.

They all work really well on Linux. They're part of the .NET foundation (https://github.com/dotnet).

pasbesoin• 10 years ago

This. All the Visual Studio stuff (shame, as their tools have long had a good reputation). .NET . Etc.

It's a trap.

Been around long enough to have formed that singular impression of such Microsoft initiatives and to have it confirmed, repeatedly.

They failed in mobile. They are losing mindshare elsewhere.

It's a trap.

I'm not going to try to back up my statement, here and now. Just keep it in mind. The more wary you remain, the quicker you can move away when the noose tightens.

Cheers

atomic772• 10 years ago

Yes, it's a trap, but not much different than the traps other companies are attempting to lay for you.

Remember that the majority of people working at Microsoft today probably have little to no memory of the tech world of the early 2000s. They don't seem too much better or worse than others in attempting to shape open-source projects to their benefit - that's something you should always be wary about.

rbanffy2• 10 years ago

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

Still, it'll be a while before they are worth our trust. They fought dirty and hard.

sterex2• 10 years ago

So a person buying a Windows license is indirectly paying for my Linux usage? Interesting!

chipperyman573• 10 years ago

Microsoft has $85B of revenue[0] and joining as a platinum member costs $500k. Even if Windows licences are the only ways Microsoft makes money (they're not, by a longshot), every copy would only account for 0.000008% of the donation.

[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-2016-Q4...

sterex2• 10 years ago

Right. But you know, it's a nice feeling. Even if it brings 0.000008% of joy. :)

unixmask• 10 years ago

but they still getting money for the patents over linux ...

B1FF_PSUVM• 10 years ago

MS is going all Oracle-y on us, they'll probably release a full fledged MS Linux distro soon.

(Social game: what will they call it? I'd say something like Unsinkable Linux ;-)

They should also have their own filesystem - ow, right, NTFS. I was thinking they could take another go at the database FS that stalled Vista a decade ago ...

mevile• 10 years ago

This thread is full of people making the familiar mistake of treating an organization with hundreds of thousands of employees as a single entity with a single mind instead of a vast organization with multiple departments and different teams.

acd• 10 years ago

Microsoft are doing good by supporting Linux and shipping Ubuntu as an option in Windows 10 which is good for developers. In the past Microsoft has released a UNIX based operating system called Xenix and there has also been a subsystem for Unix in previous Windows NT versions.

Windows subsystem for Linux https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/07/22/fun-with-t...

Xenix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix

Microsoft Interix, Windows services for Unix historic link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix

thebspatrol• 10 years ago

I think most of us are feeling extremely cautious about the recent Embrace-Extend-Extinguish overdrive.

jaxondu• 10 years ago

Is there a possibility that MS buy Canonical/Ubuntu?

shmerl3• 10 years ago

Does it mean they'll stop patent aggression against Android now?

jordigh• 10 years ago

The Linux Foundation troubles me a little. They have vested interest in making sure Linux's copyleft is not enforced. For example, VMWare is part of it, and has used its clout to refuse funding to Software Conservancy, due to the ongoing GPL lawsuit.

I guess the money from the LF is helping pay Linus' paycheque, but it has also become a bit of a lobbying group to steer Linux into more proprietary software.

joelbondurant• 10 years ago

embrace && extend && extinguish

native• 10 years ago

Pride gets in the way of many things, especially progress and innovation, in Microsoft's case, it's holding on to the Window's O.S. If I were the new man at Microsoft, I would immediately set course to release two versions of Windows, and let people make the decision: One with the standard Window's filesystem and one built on the Unix/Linux kernel, like Apple has done. And above all lead with design. The possibilities of what they can do at that point would be endless. But you gotta let go of that pride first!!!

eevilspock• 10 years ago

Open source is "Un-American", Linux "a cancer", and should be made illegal. Microsoft in 2001.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/3042247/open-source-tools/b...

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/5015

https://slashdot.org/story/04/07/11/1714235/gates-open-sourc...

Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

Related Stories