CEO Steve Ballmer began the discussion two weeks ago when he said he considered Linux a threat.
So when Jim Allchin, Microsoft's Platforms Group vice president, said last week that open source destroys intellectual property and stifles innovation, message boards all over the Internet were abuzz. For some open-source proponents, Allchin's comments were only the latest example of Microsoft's ongoing campaign to put a negative spin on a movement that threatens its dominance.
"As you're going through a time of tremendous change, as we are now, the players with a vested interest [in the status quo] are going to detract as much as possible, and that's what we're seeing right now," said Allen Shaheen, CEO of ArsDigita, an open-source e-business platform company.
"People feel Microsoft has a vested interest in maintaining ownership of the desktop, and now they're working to make inroads in the server world," Shaheen said. "Linux presents a real threat to that because it's an alternative to their platform."
Allchin's concerns stem from a GPL article that requires any work published under the GPL to be licensed as a whole at no charge to third parties. In other words, Microsoft representatives stated, "anyone who adds or innovates under the GPL agrees to make the resulting code, in its entirety, available for all to use ... [which] might constrain innovating stemming from taxpayer-funded software development."
Allchin, according to Microsoft officials, does not have the same concerns about all open-source approaches. However, to some, the distinction is a moot point born of damage control.
"They're just digging themselves into a bigger hole," said Jim Jagielski, executive vice president of the Apache Software Organization and chief technology officer of Zend Technologies. "This makes a lot of people in the open-source community angry but also kind of sad. After all this time, Microsoft doesn't get it."
As far as innovation goes, several pointed out that the Internet itself was built using open-source techniques. Others say that it is possible to make money and use the GPL.
"I make my living writing open-source software. The only thing you can't do with open-source software is make monopoly profits," said Jeremy Allison, senior engineer with VA Linux Systems and co-author of Samba. "I really don't think [Allchin's argument] flies. I can see why they don't like itââ,¬"because they're not used to sharing."
Open-source advocates also said they believe Microsoft would benefit if it opened up its source code, saying the result would be better software. However, Microsoft developers said no one in their camp is clamoring to open up the company's source code.
"I don't need to see the source code," said Chris Toomer, technical architect for Interlink Group, who added there is risk for developers if the code base is changed. "I don't think some things should be tampered with."
