Friday, September 17, 2010

Microsoft hates "open"?

You may recall from 2001 when Microsoft CEO referred to Linux (and open source in general) was a "cancer". Remember a few weeks ago, when Microsoft reversed this position and declared they love open source. Microsoft had finally come to its senses in regards to Linux.

In an interview with Network World, Microsoft's general manager of their interoperability strategy team said: "We love open source [...] We have worked with open source for a long time now."

That was quickly reversed.

Brazil's ran an article last week in which president of Microsoft Latin America, Hernán Rincón, was quoted saying:
"When you can not compete, you are declaring open. This masks incompetence. [...] When convenient, the companies say they are open. They use it for their own benefit." [translation]

Oops. Seems like this guy didn't get the memo.


  1. I could turn this statement on its head:
    "When you cannot compete, you declare your product proprietary. This masks incompetence [(e.g. Haystack, Windows ME)]. [...] When convenient, the companies say their products are proprietary [(e.g. Microsoft's past noncompliance with the GPL)]. They use it for their own benefit."
    How does that sound for a business model?
    a Linux Mint user since 2009 May 1

  2. Hi PV. Glad to see you back!

    Yes, that's pretty much the implication I was going for. If you want to hide incompetence, then putting it out there, for everyone to see, isn't the way you do it. Rather, you'd make your code closed, so that only you [Microsoft] can see what you've done.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.