3 ms·
Part of the problem is the open source movement's increasing antipathy towards Microsoft. This is an understandable attitude to have, of course, but it doesn't
by benwerd 16y ago
Part of the problem is the open source movement's increasing antipathy towards Microsoft. This is an understandable attitude to have, of course, but it doesn't win you fans when you try and acquire users outside the movement itself. For most people, computing isn't a political stance or a way of life; it's just another thing they need to use to do their job.
Integrating with Active Directory to some extent, for example, shouldn't be incredibly difficult - and you would have thought that full integration with the new Office XML-based formats should be possible. But I suspect there isn't much appetite to actually do the work without substantial commercial incentive. I agree that a million dollar bounty would do the job, but then you'd have to do it again the next time a version of Office came out, and again and again. When it's so difficult to actually make money through an open source project (see LibreOffice's recent plea for 50,000 euros), that's difficult to justify.
Despite what many people who run projects say, the open source business model problem is anything but solved. I know from experience that running an open source project as a business can occasionally be a soul-destroying experience (although, particularly if you're socially orientated, the good times far outweigh that). When there's a reliable way to make payroll and grow companies through producing open sourcing software, as opposed to packaging it or selling customization services, all of these problems will go away. Until then, we're - as ever - reliant on developers and teams within companies scratching an itch.
- Starmonkey 16y ago"Integrating with Active Directory to some extent, for example, shouldn't be incredibly difficult " I get confused on this one. I am trying to implement some simple software at work, and the software (not Open Source) is supposed to be LDAP compliant. The Unix admin in charge of the LDAP Directory insists that Active Directory itself isn't LDAP compliant, and that when people gear their software towards Active Directory they "break LDAP." So far, his comment is correct. The product keeps trying to pull in windows AD objects just because the server is running Windows. Frustrating. Sorry, I guess my point is, that for some of us, it gets really difficult to figure out who is breaking what in terms of compatibility. "For most people, computing isn't a political stance or a way of life; it's just another thing they need to use to do their job." 100% agreed.
- stcredzero 16y agoSorry, I guess my point is, that for some of us, it gets really difficult to figure out who is breaking what in terms of compatibility. Welcome to life as a software professional dealing with Microsoft.
- stcredzero 16y agoI agree that a million dollar bounty would do the job, but then you'd have to do it again the next time a version of Office came out, and again and again. Way ahead of you. Note I said the bounty would be for establishing a process and demonstrating currency for a year. The goal would be to take the project over and keep it going (for much less than a million a year).
- benwerd 16y agoDon't get me wrong, I actually think it's a great idea. But I suspect it's not above Microsoft to deliberately change things so radically that this becomes untenable in the long run.
- stcredzero 16y agoThen if the compatibility project was tenacious enough, it could get Microsoft to increase it's rate of inconvenience to customers, to the point where they might want to switch, or realize how bankrupt their lock-in strategy is.
- contextfree 16y agoIncreasing antipathy? Since say the late nineties? Seriously? Increasing indifference, maybe ...