Nik Butler writes:
Bill Thompson, writing for the BBC, talks about the long hard road to Open Source.
Microsoft, having submitted two licenses for consideration of the Open Source Initiative, have certainly stirred the usual feelings of angst and concern in the Open Source community. Thompson suggests that many may view the move as some grand manouever designed to hide some other attack:
Those who see only the machinations of a corporation intent on damaging free and open source software will therefore imagine this latest move as part of a complex game of corporate chess, where the open license knight moves closer to the free software king only to disguise the real attack, coming from the patent-carrying bishops
hiding behind the pawns.
In this case the pawns are provided by Novell, a Linux distributor that struck a deal over patent infringement with Microsoft in 2006.
Some credit must go to Bill Hilf, the Open Source world's Man on the inside, who works for and with Microsoft to help them understand and engage with the Open Source community.
Microsoft however seem to be suffering from the effects of their own success. Having dominated and secured the Desktop market, they have not been able to move as swiftly or as quickly into managing and securing the internet market. Control over the browsers is not enough to help Microsoft maintain control, as developers and manufacturers are finding ways to move directly between their own client applications and servers over the net.
Don Reisinger describes it as Microsoft's Albatross and also puts forward suggestions as to how Microsoft need to reconsider their current market share. With manufacturers now openly selling Ubuntu and other Open Source distributions on their desktop PCs, it's clear that the distributors are looking for ways to avoid a possible lock-in and starvation in a market which is now, if slowly, heading away from desktops as the primary or exclusive domain of connectivity and the internet.
Whilst we are nowhere near a tipping point, there are certainly trembles in the market that point to a shifting interest in investment and delivery, and history has shown that the monolithic corporations rarely survive the changes.