Advanced

Why Microsoft Wants Us to Get All Mixed Up

Posted by Scott_Ruecker on · 1 comment
Linux Journal; By Glyn Moody
Mail this story
Print this story

“What's in a name?” some bloke in the sixteenth century once asked. As Microsoft knows, quite a lot. What you call something can have a major influence on how you think about it. So how Microsoft talks about free software is important – not least for the clues that it gives about its latest tactical move to defang the open source threat.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: News Story; Groups: Linux, Microsoft

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (1)

A blend of this concept called "mixed source"
Quoting: Having made this partial rapprochement – so that Gutierrez can claim with a certain plausibility that Microsoft too is releasing loads of open source stuff – the company is now trying to effect a sleight of hand: since Microsoft is releasing open source, and open source companies often have proprietary offerings, ergo there is now no difference between the two, and we should just call it all “mixed source”.
Then comes the "mixed-source" kicker:
Quoting: Indeed, Gutierrez's invocation of them [companies selling proprietary versions of open code] shows that they represent a subtle danger to real free software: not so much for what they are doing or might do, as for the succour it gives to Microsoft's attempts to play down the core strength of open source – putting users in the driving seat – compared to its [Microsoft's] own model of unbending, centralised control.

Microsoft's Mafia-like obsession with enforcing “control” and demanding “respect” is reflected in a later statement from Gutierrez in the same interview – well, more of a threat, actually:

"If every effort to license proves not to be fruitful, ultimately we have a responsibility to customers that have licenses and to our shareholders to ensure our intellectual property is respected," he said.


Intended parallel to Web 2.0 as the "new, mixed" FUD -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0 -- and perhaps much more subtly deceiving than the previous FUD 1.0.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post