Microsoft and Symbian

Is Microsoft going to eat Symbian or is maybe going to dump CE?

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Symbian-partnership-787.sh...
http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=Microsoft__Symbia...

For what i've read, it seems more that symbian is bending over in reverence to microsoft

Let's just say that the last time MS drop their technology for others, is like when ... erm ... like never?

When you like what they are doing, you call it perseverence. When you dislike what they are doing, you call them stubborn mulls!

Given MS history of canabalism, most likely MS is going to eat Symbian. They must be afraid, as I am sure they know the MS record on partnerships. The Apple suit against MS for stealing their desktop remains unsettled (Gates bought 20% of Apple when the stock was very low) and Mosaic dropped its suit against MS for not paying a penny toward licensing Mosaic browser, which MS used to make IE. Mosaic was much too small to match the millions MS was going to devote to the suit.

Most of the free software included with MS-DOS and Windows was canabalized from small companies and distributed free to kill superior competitors. For the most part, it worked. A great, small, fast text editor-word processor Galaxy Lite was kept from getting anywhere by free inclusion of goofy CopyCon.

MS may be trying to eat Linux and destroy the entire Open Source, Free Software movement by way of a multimillion dollar "consultant" contract it signed recently with Linux creator Linus Torvalds. He is in his 50s and may be suseptable to some big bucks, after all these years in the trenches. Will aging Torvalds sell out?

...Of course, this is all just my humble opinion.

--Bruised

errr Bruised, last I checked, Linus is in mid 30s, specifically 35 yrs old this year (2005). http://www.thocp.net/biographies/torvalds_linus.html

Care to share where you got your info that he has aged by another 15yrs?

Actually, even if Linus sells out (which I think is a good thing!) the linux/Open Source movement will still continue. That's the whole crux of the matter isn't it? That GPLed code is not hinging on *one* person or body or company. So the legions of coders (as pro-OpenSource articles like to highlight) will just pick it up from there. After all, if he can get a few millions from billg, why not? I doubt he will be signing a life-contract nor will billg offer such a thingie. So grab a few mils, and couple of years down the road, if it does not work out, he can finance the opensource movement with real $$.

I think it is a good thing if MS adopts open sourcing. To a certain extent, part of the system code is *already* "open sourced". The partial source code for the system libraries for Windows is available as part of the installation of Visual C++, and for most part, when I was doing development work in the past, I would have the source installed, so that when I went into debug mode, I would sometimes choose to step into the system code to have a better idea of what went wrong. Granted, it is not exactly open-source, 'cos you are not allowed to modify the code, nor would modifying it make a diff, since you do not have the full code to compile new builds of the system libraries.

From my experience with my clients, most of them do not even know of this, or even want to think of looking at the system code. I mean, honest to heart, how many of us enjoy stepping through our colleague's code? And here we are talking about C/C++ code. I know that I for one would enjoy it (ok, I'm geek!) as it also means learning more about coding practises (and really crazy semantics!) but most developers, especially business apps developers, cannot really be bothered to do so. They just want the system to work. And they do not really want to know how it works.

Granted, even though there are those who will not ever want to dig into system code, open sourcing can still have its up side for windows/MS. For one, it could mean that developers will be able to strip out unwanted modules in Windows and compile customised builds for themselves or corporate-wide builds that are optimized for their specific usage.

I guess, MS will not move their butt unless there is monetary incentive to do so ... that, or if there is negative monetary incentive for not doing so.

Thanks for the correction on Linus Torvald's age. I got his age from others and bought in to it since I know Linux is over 12 years old. I didn't realize Torvald's was that young when he began developing Linux kernel. My concern stands though. He approaches middle age, a dangerous stage for an idealist.

--Bruised

.

I believe Linus is not an idealist, as he prefers functionallity over free software when needed (Google for: kernel bitkeeper CVS and you should find some articles regarding this). Also i believe if someone is a truly idealist, he won't be at risk at any age (google for: RMS or Richard M. Stallman, the guy is older than Torvalds and he's still an idealist)

Just my $0.02 (USD of course, as MXP would be around $0.002 ) hahaha

Linux is GPL'ed and Linus has let it roam freely, and though he has control over it - that does not mean that it can just die. There is already too much out there, and if he sold out (not gonna happen) it would be continued. Besides, since I already have an open-source system on my computer that I can do anything I want with, it does not matter. Things would easily continue, by another name if need be. Microsoft would not be able to suddenly take control of all the systems already out there.

...


with regards to linux and other open source software, in particular OSes, I feel that hardware vendors have a *HUGE* ... did I say *H U G E* part to play? In the past, one can quite easily get the specs for chipsets of devices. I had this book that basically documents thoroughly the port addresses, registers to set for functions etc for the Creative SoundBlasterPro. And the info included the specific info for the OPL3 chipset etc. As a result, I could write a simply app (back in DOS) in QBASIC and a DOS based volume control!

Similarly, writing 3rd party drivers is not that much far off. If hardware vendors are willing to share their hardware specs freely, without having developers sign up for expensive developer programs, OpenSource developers can write drivers for newer hardware, allowing the OS to survive changes in the hw arena. In doing so, the OS can continue on.

So ... if there is any big boys in the industry reading this, let the hardware specs be GPLed ...

Yeah, remember when products actually had manuals of some type of use? Now they have little pamphlets.

Except for Linux distributions, of course.

Do you have MAN files in mind? I never liked them too much.

err ... maybe because ppl are more savy these days, and dun need (or want) to plough through thick manuals to be able to use a product?

A Kitchen knife has no manuals ... 'cos its that easy to use! ...

MAN files are great, although info ones are much better. I was actually referring to the nice big manuals that come in the box of a distribution if you buy it.

Snappy!, don't even get me into people and "not needing manuals anymore". I mean, people are dumb enough as to get hair dryers with warning labels saying "do not use when sleeping" and peanut containers with warnings saying "WARNING! MAY CONTAIN NUTS!" (It is true too)

-Nope, people are too stupid to do without manuals. A 100 page manual could be written on all the stupid things that you shouldn't do with a kitchen knife and how to use one properly.

-

well ... all thanks to those what-were-they-thinking-judges to rule against manufacturers when consumers do stupid things with products ... ...

Parents irresponsibly leave their kids around at home and not keep their home safe ... then a little kido suffocates on plastic wrapping, and court rules negligent (I think) against manufacturers for not labelling their plastic wrappers with "Will Suffocate! Not a Toy!". As though a 2 year old without parental guidance will be able to read and think that it is not a Post-Christmas Space Mask gift ....

And those lawyers ... grrrrr ... dun even get us started ...

Actually, most idealists change after age 35 or so. I am very familiar with Stallman. He is an extreme radical. {Idealists come in various wrappers, not just marxist.} Look up Stallman's many left wing ideologue writings on his Website. Just read the titles and it is soon clear he is an extreme left wing ideologue. "Ideologue" and "idealist" are no more the same than are "Amish" and "Menonite". Many Menonites are Amish commune people, but there are also many Menonites who are not Amish, not communal and who own cars, one a MR. Sauder of Archbald, Ohio is millionaire founder of Sauder Furniture Company & founder & owner of Sauder Village (museum).

The aging idealist is a major subject of sociology, psychology and intellectual history (see: "Gregarious Saints" by Lawrence J. Freidman)

A person can also become idealist, even a fanatical idealist, in old age. Jean-Paul Sarte (the existentialist philosopher) and Bertram Russell (one of the leading 20th century realist philosophers), both went over the edge into abstract idealism in old age, embarrassing themselves with the blind way they supported and apologized for Stalin, Castro & Mao

...Of course, this is all my humble opinion

--Bruised