Somehow I missed that Microsoft loves Open Source. There is a reason I missed it. When Microsoft is not threatening to sue people for using/distributing open source they are setting up semi-secret consortiums to hamper the use of Open Source. Microsoft loves "embracing" open source. This "mixed IT" and (uni-directional) "interoperability" is frankly a silly ploy. I WISH Microsoft was sincere but actions speak louder than words.
Recently, there has been debate in the press about "Open Core". I don't care to debate the minor points but make a simple declaration:
One of the most interesting things to happen in the past couple of years, is Microsoft's embrace of Open Source. This means different things to various people I've spoken with at Microsoft. Some seem genuinely sincere. Some seem less so. What hasn't changed is Microsoft's behavior to the Open Source community at large.
When you have a startup you ego-surf a lot. It isn't for the normal reasons people ego surf (indeed there is something inside of me left over from my punk adolescence that dies a little every time I do this). It is for the reasons that PR firms ego search. To informally report how effective you are at making noise for your firm. In the process I discovered this vision document which explains why we (myself and Marcus Johnson) were creating a project that eventually became POI, a project hosted at Apache. I was curious so I looked around. It appears to me that this is a course on doing software the wrong way.
Along with the Free and Open Source Developers European Meeting, the Open Source Business Conference was one of the two best conferences I've been to recently (I generally hate conferences). I got my geek on at: FOSDEM and actually enjoyed and learned from the technical sessions. Where OSBC is at the other end of the spectrum with business sessions, so I got my suit on.
Michael DeHaan has an excellent post entitled "How Open Source Is Your Open Source?". I dare say it is his best post despite getting in a few (Linux) distro biased comments. He proposes a set of community standards that determine the real health and openness of Open Source. In my opinion, a major problem with OSI at the moment is that it perpetuates (mainly indeliberately) that a mere license makes something Open Source. In my view, an Open Source license is really the first step in making software Open Source.
I have been working with Sam Ramji and Robert Duffner from Microsoft, and I have been very pleased to resolve the issues that I had with the work they are funding for the Apache POI project. Not only has Microsoft addressed the concerns that I had with regards to patents and OOXML, but they have gone a step further and added the binary formats to the list.