• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

E.E.E. Microsoft submits GPLed code to Linux.

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Adragontattoo

Trailer Chasing Senior
http://www.networkworld.com/news/20...ml?source=NWWNLE_nlt_special_alert_2009-07-20

n an historic move, Microsoft Monday submitted driver source code for inclusion in the Linux kernel under a GPLv2 license.
The code consists of four drivers that are part of a technology called Linux Device Driver for Virtualization. The drivers, once added to the Linux kernel, will provide the hooks for any distribution of Linux to run on Windows Server 2008 and its Hyper-V hypervisor technology. Microsoft will provide ongoing maintenance of the code. Linux backers hailed the submission as validation of the Linux development model and the Linux GPLv2 licensing.


E.E.E.


This is bad.


Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.


Behind Microsoft's strategy

While observers hail Microsoft's Linux kernel code submission as good for the industry and a substantial step forward, the move isn't pure altruism.
The drivers will make it easier to support Linux guest operating systems in their emerging cloud infrastructure, and it will guarantee Windows is a part of every enterprise conversation around virtual Linux servers.
And virtualization integration baked into the Linux kernel appears to provide Microsoft with a heavy stick with which to beat up VMware.
"Why should Microsoft let a religious distaste for Linux get in the way of making a lot of money on Windows Server 2008 being the hypervisor under all those Linux servers?" asked Jeffrey Hammond, an analyst with Forrester Research. "Microsoft's desire to take money away from VMware and other alternatives has outweighed its distaste for embracing Linux and the GPL. That is a sign of the opportunity they see here."
Microsoft, however, won't have an exclusive on virtualization drivers in Linux. VMware has certified kernel mode power virtualization drivers but administrators have to install them separately because they are not part of the mainline Linux kernel.
"Microsoft is taking a short cut," said Chris Wolf, an analyst with the Burton Group."This is a big deal. When you get in the mainline Linux kernel it is a competitive advantage for Microsoft."
Microsoft's Ramji used a gentler spin. "We see more opportunity to work together and grow open source on the Microsoft platform," he said.
Ramji called virtualization a crucial technology for consolidation in the data center. "The question becomes am I going to pick multiple versions of virtualization technology; one for each operating system or workload, and if I do that, will I get the benefit that I need? Or can I pick one virtualization technology, one management technology and have one set of skills to support that whole infrastructure regardless if it is Unix, Linux or Windows running on top of it. We can clearly and consistently state we are a great choice to be your virtualization infrastructure provider."
 
So they are 2/3 into that plan and wish to get rid of linux in virtualization? Yeah... >.>
 
I don't see what the hype is about with this particular submission.

At the end of the day yes, it benefits MS, but then, what company submits code that doesn't benefit themselves?
 
It's not a problem that it benefits them, the issue is that they can use it as a foothold to monopolize another market segment. no one would care if it gave them an edge, but they tend to use brute force to oust competition.
 
quote



While Tuesday's release certainly is not as significant as Monday's unprecedented release of 20,000 lines of code to the Linux kernel, including drivers for virtualizing the open-source OS on Microsoft's Hyper-V software, it is indicative of a trend the company started about two years ago to work more closely with the open-source community. This trend is in part a nod to the growing heterogeneity of IT environments, in which Linux and proprietary technologies like Microsoft software are increasingly being deployed side by side.
But even while on one hand Microsoft is working more closely with the community, on the other it continues to strike patent deals with open-source companies to collect royalties for patents it says it holds on technologies found in Linux and other open-source software. In general, Microsoft continues to uphold its proprietary intellectual property licensing strategy -- the opposite of the philosophy behind open source.
The most recent patent deal came last week with the Japanese company Melco Holdings -- the parent company of Buffalo Inc. and
Buffalo Group. Microsoft and Melco agreed to provide Melco customers patent coverage for their use of Buffalo-branded network-attached storage devices and routers running Linux. In exchange, Melco will pay royalties to Microsoft.





/quote

MS is only releasing items which benefit them as a company and do NOTHING for Open source beyond enabling MS to make more $.
 
That's because Microsoft is a business.

Stockholders all over the globe I am sure agree. Why create something that does not help the bottom line?

Why spend thousands on code development for people running free software? Unless there is some hook that it means either broader market establishment or direct profit.

It does not make sense.
 
The most recent patent deal came last week with the Japanese company Melco Holdings -- the parent company of Buffalo Inc. and
Buffalo Group. Microsoft and Melco agreed to provide Melco customers patent coverage for their use of Buffalo-branded network-attached storage devices and routers running Linux. In exchange, Melco will pay royalties to Microsoft.

I find this to be more disturbing since I thought they use OpenWRT in their routers and correct me if I'm wrong but the OpenWRT project started when Linksys used a linux base for some of their routers (the WRT series) and I assume this, with other open sourced code from Linksys, is what they used to start the project. So MS is providing patent protection on a project that was open sourced by Linksys (Cisco)? That is messed up.

Also is Hyper-V even being taken seriously? If VMware has anything to be scared of it would be VirtualBox. But the thing with VMware is they are owned by EMC who sells many storage products, software, and services in to data centers. VMware at the end of the day in many deals could just end up as a bundled piece of software with support services attached to it. Who cares if Hyper-V is free when you just dropped millions on storage hardware with a software suite to control it plus got a bundled discount for buying this virtual machine thing that they claim will save you millions more in servers that you don't need to physically need anymore. And on top of that they will install it all and manage it for you.
 
I do not think the intention was to release the code in the first place, I think they did so to avoid an embarrassing situation both in the media and legally, they then tried to paint the situation as being something else, it is simple as that imho as a few days before this it was discovered that the Hyper-V code used open-source components under GPL that had been combined with Microsoft binaries. The violation was confirmed here. Microsoft has yet to comment.

Under the terms of the GPL, any module that's been combined with code licensed under GPL must be released under the GPL.

Microsoft not only failed to mention this violation when announcing its contribution, it came out guns blazing to say it was acting to help customers running Linux on Windows.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_source_science/
 
I do not think the intention was to release the code in the first place, I think they did so to avoid an embarrassing situation both in the media and legally, they then tried to paint the situation as being something else, it is simple as that imho as a few days before this it was discovered that the Hyper-V code used open-source components under GPL that had been combined with Microsoft binaries. The violation was confirmed here. Microsoft has yet to comment.

Under the terms of the GPL, any module that's been combined with code licensed under GPL must be released under the GPL.

Microsoft not only failed to mention this violation when announcing its contribution, it came out guns blazing to say it was acting to help customers running Linux on Windows.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_source_science/

:clap: Excellent, we all knew there was a twist. Same old Microsoft.
 
Here's another question. If VMware felt threatened by this why haven't they done the same thing. VMware could just as easily release kernel mode drivers into the mainline of Linux to improve this or that. it's not like Microsoft went in with checks blazing and bought out another company. So, though it is a underhanded, its not outside of the playbook for VMware. I just hope VMware wouldn't combine closed and open source drivers and call it GPL like M$ did. That's about the only dirty thing happening here.
 
Back