Warnings:
- This article represents my point of view. You may think whatever you want.
- My native language it is not English.
Last April (April-29-2010) there was a local event in Ecuador organized by AESoft, the Ecuadorian Software association. This event was names “Integrated Technologies” and was sponsored by Microsoft, CodePlex, Port25 and The Apache Foundation.
On this conference Microsoft sent a message saying that they are Open Source friendly and they support Open Source development. I saw this even as a Microsoft response of the growing “Free Software” (as in Freedom) movement here in Ecuador. So Microsoft tried to convince the audience that they care about Open Source and there are a lot of OSS software they promote.
There was one presentation that I was hoping to see, the speaker was James Utzschneider, the “General Manager of Marketing and Communications for the Unlimited Potential Group at Microsoft Corp”, his presentation was called “New Developments of openness and interoperability” (Nuevos Avances de apertura e interoperabilidad)
But James Utzschneider didn’t show up, the organizer said that something happened and he could not make it to Ecuador. So Jimmy Figueroa, from Microsoft Costa Rica stepped in. I think his current title is “Director of Developer & Platform Technologies at Microsoft Caribbean Central America”
After some introduction talking about local soccer teams and how the software development business was going on in Costa Rica, Jimmy Figueroa showed an interesting slide about Microsoft Open Source Strategy.
Since the presentation wasn’t shared, I did a re-make of that slide for us to evaluate it.
(Again: This is a remake of the slide according to my notes, not exactly the MS one since I haven’t found it posted on the web )
The question: What you can see in this slide?
Yes, the strategy is upside down. Let me explain myself.
The graphic categorize software in three layers or blocks:
Bottom Block – Office – Windows – Windows Server: I know that as today (Jun 2010), the more solid OSS products are the foundational ones (the one on the bottom of the chart). Open Source Software like Linux Servers, Ubuntu and OpenOffice.org are solid/stable technologies, but we know that Microsoft doesn’t want to hurt its business, so they ignore Linux and put Windows and Office there.
While other big vendors like Oracle/Sun, IBM, HP strategy keep telling us to use OSS as foundational software for operating system, web servers and other software commodities, Microsoft lies in a very comfortable zone and ignore OSS on this area for their strategy. Microsoft had always been focus on creating software only for Windows (with some little exceptions) and now ignoring the foundational OSS software seems to be on the same track. So, open source is good, as it runs on Windows, Windows Server and Office platform.
Middle Block: Here goes Middleware software like web and applications servers. On this block now we see Microsoft more open. Sure, you already have Microsoft software as OS base, so now they accept that OSS software here. This is an area where OSS software is also good and solid, but MS didn’t put too much attention on this are for OSS.
Upper Block: This is where Microsoft put the attention for OSS. The upper block will be representing the business applications. Core Banking, Retail Core, ERP, CRM, CMS, etc, etc, etc. In this area/block, I can put myself at risk by saying that these kinds of solutions are not as solid in the open source software world as in the commercial software world (yet – as today), with some exceptions. But on this Upper Block is where Microsoft says, “Yes, let´s put all the OSS you want here”.
This could be good: Microsoft is promoting to create OSS in the most weak part that is “Business Applications”.…but also….
This could be bad: If the OSS business applications are developed under a platform that depends 100% in Windows or in Microsoft Patents we will be stuck forever with the same vendor (Microsoft) for the foundational software which is turning into a commodity.
So, do they want companies and users to crash and burn using OSS in the area that is less solid?
While other vendors like IBM or HP in a very OSS conservative way says that OSS is good and solid for Operating System and Middleware, we are seen Microsoft with an Upside down strategy. Strategy that makes sense to don’t hurt their business since the are the Operating System sales leader in the world, but make no sense from a technical side.
About Business Solutions (The Upper Block)
Microsoft has a few business solutions applications like Dynamix (CRM and ERP), but let’s be honest, it is not their sales core. Microsoft sales core is Office and Windows. For business applications Microsoft relies a lot on Business Partners that create custom solution over their platform.
A typical Microsoft Business Partner had always heard from MS that selling software licenses is a good and respectful business and that we need to hide the source code and protect the IP of it. And now MS shows off saying something like “OSS is good, but let’s use it only where my Business Partners get license money from, so it doesn’t hurt my business.”
Conclutions
So, the message that Microsoft sends about OSS:
- It is OK to use OSS under Microsoft platform.
- OSS Middleware over Windows is OK, but MS Middleware is better.
- OSS is good while it does not compete with Microsoft
- You need to use OSS on its weakest link, the business applications.
- Developers need to create OSS software over MS technology and limit their software to only run on one platform – Windows.
- Customer can use OSS software over MS technology and get a single vendor lock-in.
The Open Source strategy for Microsoft seems from my point of view very weak and comfortable. They do not want to hurt their business or risk anything; they prefer to put their Business Partners software license business at the fire line before losing their license money.
So seeing Microsoft supporting OSS under this conditions doesn’t show a dramatic change of mind or a commitment. I will have to wait for the next MS OSS event to see if their strategy progress in a good or bad way.
Links:
It isn’t surprising. Their business model is a “platform model.” Once they have you hooked on Windows and Office you’re done…for life. I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried yet again (like with Samba in Europe) to charge for access to API and ABI documentation.
Thank you. Good Article. Helpful. As a native English speaker, I understood everything clearly, and appreciate the articulate points made.
Excellent analysis…… a couple of things though. MS Office and Windows OS are and always will be Microsoft’s cash cow/safety zone. I don’t think it would be realistic to expect them to flip the building blocks of their strategy.
Also, you state that ,”You need to use OSS on its weakest link, the business applications.” In my eyes that statement may be subjective depending on who is reviewing their OSS strategy.
But still, this was a very good analysis.
dg
MS just don’t want to learn … their OSS hasn’t changed in the past 2 years and what’s clear to you right now, was clear to me back then:
http://shlomil.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-you-probably-dont-want-to-get.html
I’m reminded of IBM in the eighties, with its IBM PC being comfortably out of the way of their profitable mainframe and minicomputer systems.
Oh when will they ever learn, oh when will they ever learn?
Good anaiysis ….. it is just a trick playing by MS it won’t work !
the future will be OS … there won’t be place for MS r Apple ……
Well, it simply shows a consistent policy on the part of Microsoft. Remember Steve Balmer crying “Developers, developers”? This is the consequence: Microsoft doesn’t mind any kind of application software (FOSS or otherwise) as long as it is on top of and dependent of a Microsoft stack. I say (a) you don’t need the Microsoft stack; (b) the Microsoft stack simply lacks quality compared to a FOSS stack (especially where servers are concerned – note MS conveniently left out the desktop: it’s a different story down there).
It’s a trap. Don’t listen to anything they say.
Seriously.
The only thing they’re good at is to kill competition with non-technological (legal, contractual, …) tricks and then pushing their inferior technology onto that void.
With that kind of friends, I ‘d rather like enemies.
Thank you for excellent analysis. Of course, Microsoft’s strategy would be upside down. They would like to include Windows and Windows Server as a base for every “solution” they would propose. Being cash cows, MS would promote them overtly and covertly where ever and when ever possible.
Fortunately, there are great OSS alternatives at that level. Also, OSS is getting better faster, leaving MS far behind. For example, just compare Ubuntu and Windows releases over the past 5 years.
Currently, I am warm and fuzzy in my own small OSS world. Thanks to all the contributors, I can enjoy computers like never before. Microsoft?, I wouldn’t pay any attention to them, as they have little impact on my daily IT existence.
Doublespeak is ever so humorous.
To even think that Microsoft would even be open to Open Source-no pun intended-is ludicrous. Microsoft will never ever let go of its hold it has to corner the market, or at least try to. I am already seeing that in real life. I approached the Bay County Schools Education Department about going OS. I provided them copies of Edubuntu, OpenSUSE-Ed-u-Li-fe, and Qimo. I even got an e-mail about a possible meeting concerning the subject. That meeting never happened.
Microsoft is never going to honor any thing they say at risk of losing their control and losing a profit. I guess some of us Americans (myself not included) are just gullable and afraid of change. And that includes getting rid of the status quo by going Open Source.
Pingback: Microsoft view of open source is upside down?? « CyberTech Rambler
Unfortunately MS is quite good at promoting their products.
Even though linux is as good on the desktop as windows is, only about 1% of people use linux. On the server market things look better, but not as good as they once did.
The good thing is there are big companies promoting open source software (Redhat, Canonical, Novell) on all levels and any CTO will probably check their offers too.
In case you haven’t noticed, SharePoint and Windows Live services are now the control points for Microsoft office/productivity applications. The locus of control has moved to the data centers and the cloud. Microsoft is a late-comer to this game, and has to share the space, eg. by participating in standardization of an interface to content management systems (CMIS). MSFT used to be tied to the harddisk on PCs, and that isn’t exactly where it’s at in the future. To keep the mindshare not just of corporate drones but also truly innovative developers, MSFT has to cultivate the relationship to the open-source community, e.g. by making .Net an attractive alternative to Java. It is happening in the corporate environment. What’s really at stake is the mobile environment.
Personally, I find Microsoft to be on the right path for open source. While guarding it’s newer core Windows OS and Office secrets for business sustainability, reveals the relevant technologies for better software development and integration. For a more elaborate opinion, feel free to visit: http://rambletech.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/microsoft-is-also-part-of-open-source/
Hi Osorio.
I had replied in you blog. You are confusing “Free of Charge software” with “Free Software” and “Open Source”. But please also notice that this comments were from “2010″ and MS open strategy has changed.
I still consider it a timid open source strategy.
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/openness
None of the important MS products had been open sourced. They just try to support open source software that fits their ecosystem.