Interesting the past few days in the Microsoft camp. First the community promise and now they submit source to the linux kernel.
I think the question to ask is “Why are they taking this new stance?”.
I remember reading the Halloween documents and all about how they planned on tackling Free Software through FUD (Fear, uncertainty and doubt). Recent events have seen a major shift in policy.
Dont get me wrong I think its not a bad thing and the fact that the addition of the source code to the linux kernel is licensed under GPL. Im still left thinking “Why?”.
Of course it adds support for a Microsoft product (Hyper-V hypervisor technology) but really they havent been all that helpful before why now?
Its very confusing but it good that they are helping out and in a way supporting GPL.
Regards
Shane_Fagan
I think the move is to continue to make Windows as a platform relevant in the market of mixed environments of today.
Here Microsoft is adding code to Linux to make the kernel run better on products from Microsoft. This gives Microsoft the ability to sell Hyper-V on Windows Server with the tagline, “runs Linux.”
As far as the term helpful goes. This helps IT departments run Linux on a Microsoft product. I think helpful would be to support running Microsoft products on open source solutions. However, helpful is really in the eye of the beholder. Who knows, maybe IT departments will now take this chance to plunge into Linux more.
I think that these guys already deserve a “piensa mal y acertarás” approach. I think they’re using hooks to play dirty someday…
they just try to get better rankings on google, just check the keywords on that over lengthy pr-trick article…