Hello Luggers! I will play the Devil's Advocate here. Consider, for a moment, that the folloing *HYPOTHETICAL* situation is true. Microsoft Corp. has been losing market value rapidly(but it still is the number 1 software company) due to the advancement a much more "stable" and "secure" operating system called GNU/Linux. Since the GNU/Linux operating system, licensed under the GPL is completely open source, *anybody* is allowed to *see* the code. Lets say that Microsoft, to stay at the top, employs a few developers who are skilled at both GNU/Linux and Windows. Microsoft, then asks them to write a clone of the linux kernel for incorporating large chunks of it, maybe even the kernel in its entirety, into the next version of windows. Since M$ is the still the leader, they have the highest market share. Now if almost everybody switches to the new version of windows(based on the linux kernel), they will be in for a pleasant surprise. They will now get a much more stable and secure OS, which unknown to them, is running a replica of the linux kernel. This new OS will please major IT companies, using M$, too, as they will not have scratch their heads over switching to a more stable operating environment. This will mean an increasing demand for the now, stable and secure, OS from Microsoft. Since all patches applied to OSS are open too, M$ can easily incorporate those into windows update. M$ in the meanwhile, does NOT disclose to *anyone* the ingredients of the new OS. Thus M$ keeps making more money, and its market grows, thereby condemning GNU/Linux to realms of geeks, where it had its humble beginnings. Since M$ does not disclose source code, there is no way for others(Read GNU/Linux supporters) to make a claim that the new Windows is a rip off of the Linux kernel. My question is, (discounting the ethical and moral concerns as these cant be counted as legal arguments and assuming that M$ pays enough $$ to the developers to keep their mouth shut) what contract/law/clause/license/etc is there right now to prevent M$ from doing something as dastardly as this? P.S: i dont think that the GPL can be used at M$ is too smart at code obfuscation(i think it means obscuring source code) for people to be able to disassemble their OS and claim it to be a rip-off of linux.
Bhargav Bhatt, Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University. --------------- Is it a co-incidence that Red Hat and Robin Hood share the same initials?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Bhargav Bhatt wrote:
Lets say that Microsoft, to stay at the top, employs a few developers who are skilled at both GNU/Linux and Windows. Microsoft, then asks them to write a clone of the linux kernel for incorporating large chunks of it, maybe even the kernel in its entirety, into the next version of windows. Since M$ is the still the leader, they
but the kernel architecture (monolithic / macrolithic / hybrid (?)) of Windows and Linux is different right ? Also there is difference between Windows 9x and NT kernel
AFAIK Linux kernel was written keeping in mind POSIX nd I guess POSIX nd Windows don't go together
Also I think you are assuming that Linux is the *best* kernel available (BTW what happened to HURD ?) which arguably is not the case
I've seem ppl on Usenet (Microsoft Developers well versed with GNU/Linux) refer to Windows 2000 with reverence. I too think that Microsoft did come up with something 'stable' with Windows 2000
I mean when I look at Windows Xp ; it iz a hybrid of Win 9x and Windows 2000 right? I guess Microsoft will continue to improve the existing Win2K kernel in its quest for the most stable Windows Operating System...
So IMHO Microsoft may take 'inspiration' frm Linux Kernel nd I think it is perfectly ethical and legal (acc to GPL) to do so...
-- Nikhil Joshi
At 05:11 even 9/24/02 -0700, Bhatt wrote:
Microsoft Corp. has been losing market value rapidly(but it still is the number 1 software company) due to the advancement a much more "stable" and "secure" operating system called GNU/Linux.
It may be loosing some market share, but the loss of market value is more related to the US economy going down. More on that must come from an economist...
Since the GNU/Linux operating system, licensed under the GPL is completely open source, *anybody* is allowed to *see* the code. Lets say that Microsoft, to stay at the top, employs a few developers who are skilled at both GNU/Linux and Windows. Microsoft, then asks them to write a clone of the linux kernel for incorporating large chunks of it, maybe even the kernel in its entirety, into the next version of windows.
IIRC others have done so, albeit legally. AFAIK, the Mac OSX is based on the (:very) stable BSD kernel with their (Aqua?) GUI on top. Anyone have more info on this?
Since M$ is the still the leader, they have the highest market share. Now if almost everybody switches to the new version of windows(based on the linux kernel), they will be in for a pleasant surprise. They will now get a much more stable and secure OS, which unknown to them, is running a replica of the linux kernel. This new OS will please major IT companies, using M$, too, as they will not have scratch their heads over switching to a more stable operating environment. This will mean an increasing demand for the now, stable and secure, OS from Microsoft. Since all patches applied to OSS are open too, M$ can easily incorporate those into windows update.
sheez 8-@
A few things first. The choice of using Linux for many is the 'open' nature of the source code - stability & security come second. Though on the PC scene and when compared with M$ windows, GNU/Linux is indeed superior, for more robust & critical systems one would prefer the traditional Unices - BSD, HP, Solaris or the IBM machines with their preparatory OS's.
Secondly incorporating 'ideas' [read stealing] is not new to Micro$oft. Not even MSDos was developed inhouse from scratch. Windows has seen extremely bad days but they have the muscle, technical & monitory, to upgrade it regularly [much to the pain of customers].
My question is, (discounting the ethical and moral concerns as these cant be counted as legal arguments and assuming that M$ pays enough $$ to the developers to keep their mouth shut) what contract/law/clause/license/etc is there right now to prevent M$ from doing something as dastardly as this? P.S: i dont think that the GPL can be used at M$ is too smart at code obfuscation (i think it means obscuring source code) for people to be able to disassemble their OS and claim it to be a rip-off of linux.
The GNU/Linux uses mostly open standards. Due to this M$ would not have any problems implementing them if they so wanted. But reimplementing the kernel is not a cake walk. As for stealing it outright - it is not so easy. Obscuring 'alf a million lines of source code is daft to say the least. It will be easier to M$ to just patch up their own OS. Which is goodish at present.
quasi SSC pass. '-)
--- Bhargav Bhatt bbb20004@columbia.edu wrote:
Hello Luggers! I will play the Devil's Advocate here. Consider, for a moment, that the folloing *HYPOTHETICAL* situation is true. Microsoft Corp. has been losing market value rapidly(but it still is the number 1 software company) due to the advancement a much more "stable" and "secure" operating system called GNU/Linux. Since the GNU/Linux operating system, licensed under the GPL is completely open source, *anybody* is allowed to *see* the code. Lets say that Microsoft, to stay at the top, employs a few developers who are skilled at both GNU/Linux and Windows. Microsoft, then asks them to write a clone of the linux kernel for incorporating large chunks of it, maybe even the kernel in its entirety, into the next version of windows. Since M$ is the still the leader, they have the highest market share. Now if almost everybody switches to the new version of windows(based on the linux kernel), they will be in for a pleasant surprise. They will now get a much more stable and secure O
--- They are already at it. Check out the project Services for Unix (SFU) on Microsoft site ... Although in developmental stages still.. this simulates the unix shell on windows 2000 an upwards. - Nikhil
===== Nikhil Kale Software Engineer Mahindra British Telecom Ltd.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
-
Bhargav Bhatt -
Nikhil Joshi -
Nikhil Kale -
q u a s i