Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Mark Kent on Sunday 21 October 2007 09:09 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 20 October 2007 13:48 : \____
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Friday 19 October 2007 21:08 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>>>> Ballmer: Microsoft Will Buy Open-Source Companies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>>>>| "We will do some buying of companies that are built around open-source
>>>>>>>| products," Ballmer said during an onstage interview at the Web 2.0
>>>>>>>| Summit in San Francisco.
>>>>>>> `----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.crn.com/software/202404305
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They have already snatched XenSource (by proxy), SpikeSource (IIRC), and
>>>>>>> Zend.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So long as the code is GPLed, then it won't be a problem, since it can
>>>>>> be forked if Microsoft attempt to do the wrong thing. They won't like
>>>>>> it, but buying the company will not buy them control.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It can but them programmers though. It remains to be seen if they touch
>>>>> more open source companies or just Web 2.0 (O'Reilly cr**talk for SaaS).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, don't underestimate the power of the mash-up. I don't really like
>>>> the term very much, but they are becoming extremely popular!
>>>>
>>> Were mashups his invention? His page on "Web 2.0" is very different in terms
>>> of definition. FWIW, Microsoft binds mashups to the Windows APIs as means of
>>> blocking its loss of power (shift to the Web). I can give you the URL to a
>>> video which shows this if you want.
>>>
>>
>> I think mash-ups were the natural evolution of the web, to be honest.
>> Computer experts have been doing mash-ups for years; we used to call
>> them screen-scrapes in the days of the VT100 terminal! The difference
>> now is that the kind of content which can be "mashed" is very consumer
>> oriented, like maps, GPS information, directories, 2nd-life, phone
>> calls, photos, stuff like that. Non-technical people's view of things.
>
> Mashups are as 'new' as AJAX (DHTML and other technologies). It's a shame that
> people take credit for words like "Ajax" or "Web 2.0" and claim/inherit credit
> for the invention of something that is associated with it. Gore+Internet?
> Garret (Jesse?) James actually won an award for "Ajax". He worked closely
> with Jeff Veen, whose joint consultancy is where the term was probably
> introduced. I have followed his blog (Veen) for years, so I probably heard
> about Ajax before most people (Jesse's article in the consultancy's site was
> probably the first). Anyway, Jeff is in Google now (he has a blog analytics
> startup that got acquired), so he barely blogs these days. The Big Vendors
> disassemble ('dissipation'?) the small entrepreneurs and good minds. Brain
> drain? Industry approaching oligarchy? I don't know, but I don't like it...
>
> Prepare for a year when Ballmer snatches and dismantles more than a single open
> source company per month. It's worth the money. You buy a company to be left
> with no competitors on price and quality. I'm still bitter about
> XenSource.... :-(
>
Don't worry about XenSource. If we really need this technology, then it
will be re-launched in a fully open way!
Personally, I think middleware (like OpenSAF, OpenClovis etc.) is going
to be far more important in the long run; virtualisation on a single
machine is a very 1990s way of doing things. We need virtualisation in
a distributed way, like Beowulf etc.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
