

Why Can't Microsoft Ship Open Source Software? - bdfh42
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001144.html

======
gizmo
NIH is the right attitude for MS. Microsoft makes a subversion clone. If the
clone turns out better than subversion then a lot of .NET developers will use
it voluntarily. A lot of businesses will start using it because it has the MS
logo on it. Result? Microsoft owns a part of the development tool chain -
which makes it harder for people to write software on different platforms.
Microsoft wins.

And if the clone is worse? Doesn't really matter. Some people will still use
it, version 3.0 may be "good enough", and Microsoft will have a new technology
to market. Having new products is a goal by itself - the .Net magazines need
fresh content to keep their audience captivated. Even vaporware can be very
valuable. Microsoft wins again.

Conclusion: cloning popular products is good business for MS.

------
Herring
> So if you think Microsoft's particular flavor of source control is
> redundant, you'll really hate Diet Cherry Chocolate Dr. Pepper.

ugh i hate analogies. Ryan's main point --which this article didn't address
(he talks shipping)-- was that software builds (should build) on previous
software. Can dr pepper do that? This analogy is supposed to say there are
subtle differences between the products, but that's irrelevant to the original
point.

>

>There's simply no reason for MSTest to exist except to satisfy some bizarre
corporate directive that Microsoft never ship open source code in their
products.

Both you authors could do with an econ class. MS spends tons of money to
reinvent subversion because they want to lock you in, thus getting more money
to spend reinventing something else to lock you in. This has worked for them
so far & it will continue to work in the foreseeable future.

------
froo
Umm, this is a simple answer - they had $51 billion in sales last year and is
a publicly traded company.

They have to realistically do whatever is best to protect the interests of
their shareholders and as long as their current business model works, I'm sure
they're not really going to change it drastically.

Thats the sad reality of it all.

~~~
raganwald
_they have to realistically do whatever is best to protect the interests of
their shareholders_

I took the article as suggesting that NIH is not in the best interests of
their shareholders, as things like MSTest simply frustrate their users.

The debate about whether NIH is good or bad for MSFT is interesting.

------
liaohaohui
In Asia, M$ has a real strong support because people think that Linux and
other free OSes are for geeks only. And they won't when everyone here thinks
that M$ is the `standard' and won't mind locking themselves in it.

