Sam Ramji, Microsoft's Open Source Guru, Is Moving On 155
barking_at_airplanes writes "Some called him crazy a few years ago when he joined Microsoft to run the Open Source Software Lab, but Sam Ramji endured and made real differences to how Microsoft treats open source and how open source people view Microsoft. Ramji is now heading back to Silicon Valley to join a cloud computing startup. Sam comments in his announcement: '46 months later, I am amazed at the changes that have occurred for the company, for the team I belonged to, and the sentiments of the industry.' It's a statement which, 46 months ago, few Slashdotters would have thought could come true! With Sam leaving, can Microsoft's positive momentum into open source continue successfully? Bill Hilf says they're 'actively seeking someone to fill Sam's shoes.'"
Re:I know! (Score:2, Interesting)
Then, I had this thought of them becoming the best of buds and ruling the World.
Re:What are you smoking? (Score:2, Interesting)
The article claims Ramji has improved relations between Microsoft and open source people? Since when have relations between Microsoft and open source been anything but negative? We read stories on here almost every day about some new point of conflict.
Hang around Groklaw much?
"OMG! Microsoft is teh EVIL! Did you see Psystar is suing Apple! They're REALLY trying to destroy the GPL! Somebody (hint... hint...) really wants to destroy the GPL!!!!"
Think I'm kidding? Yeah, I know the Groklaw legions will mod this down. But seriously, read Groklaw with the same skepticism PJ aims at, say, SCO, and you'll see what I mean. For someone who basis her entire site on respect for due process, she sure doesn't need due process or even any evidence to put on the tin foil hat and start seeing Microsoft goblins behind every tree and rock.
Re:Microsoft promises to play nice *this* time (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Microsoft promises to play nice *this* time (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft actually said after Vista's release that emulation/virtualization was likely the future for Windows, as they planned to seriously break APIs moving forward. They said instead of a full virtual-PC, they'd be able to do low-level emulation or virtualization per application. Since 7 was so rushed, we didn't get to see this fully realized. Instead 7 ships with Virtual PC. But I think something like Wine on Windows to intercept old Windows API calls will literally be a part of the next (post-7) OS from Microsoft.
Re:Microsoft's Open Source Strategy (Score:5, Interesting)
In all fairness, Bill Gates used to brag how Microsoft never sued anyone (before the TomTom fiasco). They use FUD, but they didn't follow through on threats. I'm curious if the TomTom suit was an isolated incident, or the future direction of Microsoft.
One of the major failings of the United States is that money can trump justice in civil suits. Simply bankrupting another company in a lawsuit can guarantee you victory, which is why TomTom rolled over, rather than fight a battle they likely could have won in court.
Might I suggest (Score:2, Interesting)
In recognition for his outstanding achievements in bridging the gap between FOSS and Microsoft, let me suggest Miguel de Icaza [tirania.org]. I doubt there's another human who's done more to embrace Microsoft patented technologies and extend them into popular Linux distributions. With his advocacy on OOXML, his dedicated efforts on Mono and Moonlight he's proven himself a capable mimic who can transform Free and Open Source Software from the type of innovative cauldron that gave us our current rich selection into a uniform platform that consistently replicates Microsoft, only perpetually two years behind.
They should get him - if only they have what it takes to lure him away from Novell.
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
Granted, the first one isn't a true open source project in that they don't accept patches from the community
There's nothing about open source that says that the original maintainers have to accept patches from outside the initial group.
True. Although I prefer Jeff Atwood's definition of open source [codinghorror.com]:
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
They are on Wikipedia, since most of the editiots don't know the difference between common knowledge and original research.
For example see this concerning colour contrast on roadsigns [wikipedia.org]. The last sentence is clearly true to anyone who holds a driving license or has even walked down a street, yet some 'dromer has tagged it [citation needed]