Linux Today: Linux News On Internet Time.
Search Linux Today
search.internet.com
Linux News Sections:  Blog -  Developer -  High Performance -  Infrastructure -  IT Management -  Security -  Storage -
Linux Today Navigation
LT Home
Preferences
Contribute
Link to Us
Search
Linux Jobs

Become a Marketplace Partner

internet.commerce
Be a Commerce Partner














The Linux Channel at internet.com
Linux Today
Enterprise Linux Today
Apache Today
JustLinux.com
Linux Planet
PHPBuilder
All Linux Devices
Technology Jobs

JustTechJobs.com

LinuxToday Newsletters
Subscribe News
Subscribe PR
Subscribe Security

internet.com
IT
Developer
Internet News
Small Business
Personal Technology
International

Search internet.com
Advertise
Corporate Info
Newsletters
Tech Jobs
E-mail Offers

 







Current Newswire:

Our Linux Dream 2008

Will a Linux Certification Help You Get a Linux Job?

WordPress Being Slow, a DNS Problem

Ubuntu or Fedora?

Microsoft's Tired TCO Toffee

WFTL Bytes! for Dec 3, 2008: Now Open Source Is Broken, Viruses Eat Army, Microsoft Buys Friends

IBM Virtual Desktop Bundles Lotus, Ubuntu Linux to Freeze Out Microsoft

Firefox Nightly Beats Chrome in Speed And Webkit Nightly Eats Them For Breakfast.

Intel, Hitachi Make a Splash in Solid State Storage

Does Google Have a Secret OS?




Unix/Red Hat Systems Adminsitrator
The Computer Merchant, Ltd
US-PA-Lansdale

Justtechjobs.com Post A Job | Post A Resume
:Eric S. Raymond -- Microsoft is right, for once
Eric S. Raymond -- Microsoft is right, for once
Jul 28, 1999, 06 :52 UTC (164 Talkback[s]) (64626 reads)

(Other stories by Eric S. Raymond)

By Eric S. Raymond

Indeed do we live in interesting times. Today Microsoft, the Borg from Redmond, is on the right side -- the open-source side -- of a dispute about network standards. I expect water to begin flowing uphill any second now, and look out for pigs on the wing.

For those of you who have been living under a rock somewhere, the story to date is well summarized on ZDNet. The basic plot is this: some time back, AOL published on the Web the protocols for its hugely successful Instant Messenger (IM) service. Their stated intention was to make it possible for Unix (and especially Linux) developers to write clients for IM. Which said developers indeed did.

And all was well until last week, when Microsoft and Yahoo and several other companies launched IM clients. AOL promptly tweaked its protocol to lock them out -- and then repeated its action when Microsoft's programmers found a way past the block. AOL has declared that it has people monitoring Microsoft and will continue to take active measures to block Microsoft out of Instant Messenger's patch of cyberspace.

Microft has fired back by declaring itself for open messaging standards, and attempting to organize an industry consortium to pressure AOL into conforming to the published IM protocols.

Microsoft's stance in this brouhaha is, of course, hypocritical to the point of being nauseating. In the past, Gates's minions have been notorious for sabotaging and corrupting open networking standards at every possible opportunity, and Microsoft's own "Halloween Documents" explain why with almost brutal frankness. If your goal is to maintain a monopoly, jack up prices, and limit consumer choices, then you can't live with open standards -- a lesson AOL seems to have just taken to heart.

Now, you may think I'm harshing on Microsoft too much here. If so, you can refute me instantly by pointing me at the Web page where Microft has published the wire protocol for its Exchange message servers. Hey -- turnabout is fair play.

But. But. When all is said and done, Microsoft is right on this one. Their intentions may be predatory, but if the history of open source and the Internet is any guide, we should back them to win this fight. Why? Because once an open standard becomes entrenched, asserting the kind of control that Microsoft ultimately wants over it is very hard to do. Thus, for example, the failure of MSN to subsume the open Internet.

If we in the open-source community really believe in the power of openness and peer review and our development model to give users better choices, then we have to believe that an open standard will lead to good outcomes even when Microsoft is pushing it.

Also, this fracas gives us a perfect opportunity to refute the people who write off Linux and the open-source movement in general as an "anything but Microsoft" manifestation of resentment.

So say it loud and say it proud: Microsoft is right about open messaging, and deserves to win this battle. Say it even if it makes you gag (it took me several tries, I can tell you that).

And win it they almost certainly will; I wouldn't bet money on AOL's block holding for as long as another week. AOL's ability to tweak its protocol is sharply limited by the fact that it can't break compatibility with the huge existing base of clients (the whole point of the exercise is to keep them, after all). So AOL can't invent a new protocol, just twiddle some limited set of parameters on the existing one.

All Microsoft has to do is keep a couple of bright network programmers chasing AOL through the paramater space, extending the adaptive capability of the Microsoft client. Sooner or later (probably sooner) AOL will run out of dodges, and Microsoft will ship a client with all the adaptive capability of the existing AOL programs. Game over.

And if Microsoft isn't smart enough to do that, someone in the open-source community (a group very good at reverse-engineering) will be -- at which point Microsoft will get to use the results. So AOL loses either way.

So congratulations, AOL. You've taken a black eye in the press. You look as much like a villain and an obstruction as Microsoft ever did. You've managed to alienate the Linux/Internet/open-source community -- the largest, longest-established, and most creative tribe of programmers on earth. Indeed, you've made a good start on pushing that tribe into helping your worst enemy. All for an advantage that will probably evaporate in days or weeks!

After stupidity like that, I wonder what you do for an encore?


Index Mode   |   Flat Mode   |   Thread Mode   |   Thread Flat  
  Talkback(s) Name  and Date
I had a thought that MS is no more intri ...   MS and other companies.   
Ilya Tsindlekht
Jul 28, 1999, 07:34:19
 
As much as I hate to admit it, he's  ...   a reasonable point   
Sonny
Jul 28, 1999, 07:52:50
 
Well Jeff Prothero said it right:
"
To d ...   A quote from your site   
Jurij
Jul 28, 1999, 08:04:12
 

Microsoft has a way of muddying the wat ...   MS is right   
king lee
Jul 28, 1999, 08:06:51
 
The IETF is working on a standard, the I ...   standards   
trevor
Jul 28, 1999, 08:33:09
 
Both AOL and Microsoft are lame.... Who  ...   AOL/MSN Messengers   
Poul Thomsen
Jul 28, 1999, 08:35:41
 
When Windows2000 comes "integrated" with ...   You forget Windows is in 95% of computers   
Eduardo Silva
Jul 28, 1999, 09:03:50
 
I hate MS for all they are worth. There  ...   bitterness   
bitter
Jul 28, 1999, 09:33:09
 
However, there is one important differen ...   Access to server != access to protocol   
Alain
Jul 28, 1999, 09:43:06
 
I agree with you that there should be op ...   But.....   
Ronald van Kuijk
Jul 28, 1999, 10:21:58
 
Well, open standards seems to be the new ...   Dinosaurs   
Andreas Trawöger
Jul 28, 1999, 10:33:29
 
Step 1: Microsoft gets AOL to write to t ...   Embrace, extend, lock-in.   
Duncan McIntyre
Jul 28, 1999, 10:42:12
 
AOL have to use real-world resources to  ...   There's one point you're missing.   
K.
Jul 28, 1999, 10:45:47
 
Why did they publish it in the first pla ...   Damn right!   
Bojan Smojver
Jul 28, 1999, 10:55:51
 
Hmmmm.
	Well, they could pull the plug o ...   Encores:   
dinotrac
Jul 28, 1999, 11:08:08
 
Microsoft -only- starts whining about &# ...   Some 'victory'...   
Frobozz
Jul 28, 1999, 11:22:23
 
What's the new CTO Andreesen up to?  ...   Is marca invovled?   
Anonymous Coward
Jul 28, 1999, 11:37:18
 
I don't agree with your call for ass ...   I don't agree   
Sjaak Zomer
Jul 28, 1999, 11:38:14
 
What's wrong with talk(1) and IRC? T ...   But the real point is..   
Steve Dodd
Jul 28, 1999, 11:42:00
 
As soon as I read this story, I knew tha ...   I *choke* agree   
Robert Elliott
Jul 28, 1999, 11:52:26
 
In my opinion, the most important aspect ...   It's about communication, stupid   
Dave Finton
Jul 28, 1999, 11:53:39
 
Even a blind pig finds a acorn every onc ...   pigs   
Phil Lewis
Jul 28, 1999, 12:01:39
 
Microsoft, I hope turns about some day i ...   Right, but let's not forget who made the rules   
Paul Ferris
Jul 28, 1999, 12:07:49
 
Clearly, any such open messaging standar ...   Forecast for Hell: Light snow?   
Jerry Fass
Jul 28, 1999, 12:11:44
 
Playing Devil's Advocate for a minut ...   Unauthorized use of systems   
Mike Schiraldi
Jul 28, 1999, 12:16:09
 
  AOL made an effort to say that they di ...   Open Standard Yes, MS right? No!   
Steve Kirkup
Jul 28, 1999, 12:37:43
 
MS is not really supporting open source. ...   But...   
Joe Kaplenk
Jul 28, 1999, 12:38:44
 
Sure a standard would be good, but right ...   I have to agree with AOL on this one   
Patrick Lambert
Jul 28, 1999, 13:08:19
 
In addition to the question of Microsoft ...   Free AOL Accounts for All!   
Dennis Gies
Jul 28, 1999, 13:19:00
 
will be obvious when and if MS open up M ...   The Real MS Intentions   
Joe Kaplenk
Jul 28, 1999, 13:22:17
 
Sorry. Folks like you and Eric have miss ...   Re: a reasonable point   
Rick James
Jul 28, 1999, 13:26:59
 
Do you have a problem with the Linux AIM ...   Re: I have to agree with AOL on this one   
Robert Brady
Jul 28, 1999, 13:27:40
 
I agree about the Hardware situation.  M ...   Re: There's one point you're missing.   
Damion Hancock
Jul 28, 1999, 13:40:06
 
Let the bastards tear each other down.   ...   Good   
Dan Barber
Jul 28, 1999, 13:50:03
 
Microsoft is not on the side of Open Sta ...   Absolutely incorrect. Microsoft is a wolf in sheep   
Chris Nelson
Jul 28, 1999, 13:57:17
 
This is a wonderful point. Microsoft is  ...   Re: There's one point you're missing.   
Chris Nelson
Jul 28, 1999, 14:05:54
 
Does anyone know what licence the AOL IM ...   Open Source MSN ?   
John Walker
Jul 28, 1999, 14:06:24
 
It is different no company is profiting  ...   Re: Re: I have to agree with AOL on this one   
Y
Jul 28, 1999, 14:08:09
 
Standards! I wish MS would follow standa ...   Standards?!   
Cecil Watson
Jul 28, 1999, 14:16:00
 
Well, this issue is certainly going to f ...   Hot Potato   
John Griggs
Jul 28, 1999, 14:25:42
 
Many people commenting seem to have miss ...   Re: Absolutely incorrect. Microsoft is a wolf in s   
Jon Choy
Jul 28, 1999, 14:30:28
 
Unbelievable.  This is exactly the kind  ...   Re: bitterness   
Mark Bainter
Jul 28, 1999, 14:36:50
 
I have no reason to think that MS is rig ...   I dobut it   
Prasad Samarajiva
Jul 28, 1999, 14:47:14
 
There is an IP war being waged, and Linu ...   Devalue your competitor's IP   
Dale Pontius
Jul 28, 1999, 14:55:54
 
The point here is that MS reverse engine ...   God, MS better win this one.   
Bill
Jul 28, 1999, 14:55:55
 
Yes to your posting, with one detail:
ki ...   Re: I *choke* agree   
Anonymous Coward
Jul 28, 1999, 14:57:05
 
The serial murderer has parked his car i ...   er comments   
steve clark
Jul 28, 1999, 15:02:30
 
Seriously though,
what average user is g ...   Re: But the real point is..   
Derek Martin
Jul 28, 1999, 15:17:42
 
First, congrats to ESR on this article.  ...   Looks like some misunderstandings out there   
Jason Fletcher
Jul 28, 1999, 15:18:29
 
Here's why talk and IRC aren't t ...   Why this matters. (Bad Microsoft!)   
Lumpish Scholar
Jul 28, 1999, 15:19:40
 
When I log into Slashdot, or get my Yaho ...   "Password" red herring. (Bad AOL!)   
Lumpish Scholar
Jul 28, 1999, 15:23:14
 
Bruce Perens and Richard Stallman were r ...   OK, ESR, that's it. "Open Source" is DEAD.   
Christian R. Conrad
Jul 28, 1999, 15:23:21
 
Imagine how useful it would be to the Op ...   Open Standards   
Larry Clapp
Jul 28, 1999, 15:32:48
 
"Do you have a problem with the Linux AI ...   Re: Re: I have to agree with AOL on this one   
Charles Hixson
Jul 28, 1999, 15:33:25
 

Let us imagine for a second that AOL al ...   Let us imagine that MS got what they want, 'Op   
FallLine
Jul 28, 1999, 15:37:22
 
I think people are really missing the po ...   It's unapproved network use, not open source   
Jo lee
Jul 28, 1999, 15:41:20
 
Windows is/may be (still yet to be numer ...   Re: You forget Windows is in 95% of computers   
Unix Geek
Jul 28, 1999, 15:41:22
 

	So Microsoft is now a big open standar ...   Microsoft & open standards   
JCA
Jul 28, 1999, 15:46:13
 
I can't see the people at AOL being  ...   Don't be too quick to judge.   
Mike Glover
Jul 28, 1999, 15:46:40
 
> The user has to have an AOL account, s ...   Re: God, MS better win this one.   
Larry Clapp
Jul 28, 1999, 15:47:58
 
OK. 

This fight is about M$ using AOL&# ...   The way things outta be...   
Benjamin Smith
Jul 28, 1999, 15:53:24
 
It's clear that Microsoft has been f ...   How Microsoft can kill Linux, WWW, et al.   
dinotrac
Jul 28, 1999, 15:55:22
 
"the best strategy for dealing with open ...   Halloween   
Cecil Watson
Jul 28, 1999, 15:57:08
 
Support of Open Standards is great.  Tha ...   Re: Looks like some misunderstandings out there (1   
Charles Hixson
Jul 28, 1999, 15:58:27
 
yeah, one may be missing that point, but ...   Re: There's one point you're missing.   
Drgan
Jul 28, 1999, 16:01:05
 
This is not about "open standards."  I w ...   Microsoft is wrong   
Rhet Turnbull
Jul 28, 1999, 16:07:06
 
I was thinking the same thing! I'm g ...   Re: You forget Windows is in 95% of computers   
Bruce Bigby
Jul 28, 1999, 16:07:25
 
If MS wants to embrace open standards, I ...   Re: Looks like some misunderstandings out there   
Carl Stafford
Jul 28, 1999, 16:14:42
 
If one thing should be clearly understoo ...   For sure..   
lukaku jones
Jul 28, 1999, 16:20:05
 
The messenger program must have your use ...   Re: Hot Potato   
James Ray Kenney
Jul 28, 1999, 16:22:06
 
If the IM spec is really (accurately) pu ...   So how about an open source IM implementation?   
Philip Marlowe
Jul 28, 1999, 16:25:28
 
While thats true, you also must remember ...   Re: Access to server != access to protocol   
Andy
Jul 28, 1999, 16:31:00
 
Perhaps Windows does represent 95% of th ...   Re: You forget Windows is in 95% of computers   
Nick Shane
Jul 28, 1999, 16:34:54
 
    Unfortunatley this isn't about s ...   What MS really wants   
Bob Lamothe
Jul 28, 1999, 16:35:20
 
The story states that Microsoft is using ...   WRONG about the AIM protocols   
Kriston
Jul 28, 1999, 16:54:17
 
>If I kept coming into your house at nig ...   RE: There's one point you're missing.   
Luke
Jul 28, 1999, 16:56:55
 
If Microsoft, IBM, Yahoo, et al. are so  ...   Then get on with it   
Andy McLaughlin
Jul 28, 1999, 16:57:13
 
Three words:  EMBRACE. AND. EXTEND.

Thi ...   Are you all wearing rose-tinted glasses?   
Cynic
Jul 28, 1999, 17:05:30
 
Microsoft has an IM client: winpopup.exe ...   WINPOPUP.EXE   
Mike T
Jul 28, 1999, 17:06:51
 
"Microsoft" is not asking for your AOL s ...   Re: Free AOL Accounts for All!   
Thom Nelson
Jul 28, 1999, 17:07:56
 
Gee, after all the warm fuzzies they&#39 ...   Poor MS...NOT!   
Jason
Jul 28, 1999, 17:10:42
 
"Because once an open standard becomes e ...   Re: Halloween   
Justin Ryan
Jul 28, 1999, 17:17:24
 
Getting in bed with M$ OR AOL, even for  ...   What we all know   
Rene Peralta
Jul 28, 1999, 17:20:59
 
Eric S. Raymond is right on the money.   ...   I agree.   
Walter White
Jul 28, 1999, 17:21:39
 
Shouldn't MS have to meet some stand ...   Shouldn't MS have to comply   
Kris Lilley
Jul 28, 1999, 17:22:48
 
Eric, you've been disappointing me f ...   A personal note, Eric   
Jay
Jul 28, 1999, 17:28:48
 
I think people should be watching this v ...   Be very very careful   
Gregory E. Amenta
Jul 28, 1999, 17:29:41
 
read subject ...   Eric was brainwashed after his talk at MS (-msg ;)   
Alex
Jul 28, 1999, 17:38:13
 
As usual the open source pundit is
tryin ...   ESR and Misinformation   
Filthy Rich Bill
Jul 28, 1999, 17:51:16
 
Every so often, a strange thing happens. ...   Re: Re: Free AOL Accounts for All!   
Dennis Gies
Jul 28, 1999, 17:52:43
 
Nice little bit of hogwash.
In case you  ...   Stupidity? Hardly.   
Todd Threadgill
Jul 28, 1999, 18:20:38
 
The main issue for AOL should be (in an  ...   I agree...but here is a better solution...   
Brent Woodard
Jul 28, 1999, 18:22:55
 
One thing I've not seen anything on  ...   Why Wasn't Gaim broken?   
Scott Moser
Jul 28, 1999, 18:23:55
 
I keep expecting to see comments like "I ...   Ignorant question - where does ICQ fit into this&#   
Sean Clark
Jul 28, 1999, 18:36:45
 
Re Charles Hixson, thanks for your comme ...   Some further thoughts   
Jason Fletcher
Jul 28, 1999, 18:40:36
 
Lets face it, the way these products are ...   Why support bad technology?   
Ack
Jul 28, 1999, 18:41:03
 
Although it does tend to want to make yo ...   Right on.   
BePatient
Jul 28, 1999, 19:01:18
 
AOL and MS are both proprietary.

We sho ...   Bite me.   
Khasim
Jul 28, 1999, 19:01:32
 
The only reason that MS wants it to be o ...   You are being BLINDED by MS   
Justin
Jul 28, 1999, 19:07:25
 
You have a very good point there.  I agr ...   Re: Access to server != access to protocol   
Vincent
Jul 28, 1999, 19:20:45
 
At first I thought AOL was right for sma ...   Help a demon or the devil?   
Sean Darrenkamp
Jul 28, 1999, 19:27:01
 
Microsoft must have given Eric a year su ...   Why did anybody need MS Messenger or whatever it i   
Fred De Van
Jul 28, 1999, 19:41:59
 
I agree with ESR on the whole Open Sourc ...   Mixed Feelings   
Forrest Samuels
Jul 28, 1999, 20:06:45
 
Actually, the specification MS is using  ...   Re: So how about an open source IM implementation&   
Jeremie
Jul 28, 1999, 20:13:02
 
MS has never been driven by altruistic d ...   This is not about open standards   
Cedric Orban
Jul 28, 1999, 21:36:22
 
If MS was trying to be nice to the commu ...   If MS was trying to be nice to the community...   
Kenn R.
Jul 28, 1999, 22:36:43
 
Eric Raymond is right on.

AOL should sp ...   AOL should have better things to do...   
Dennis G. Allard
Jul 28, 1999, 23:31:00
 
With the editorial. MS will never change ...   I absolutely want to disagree   
babu
Jul 29, 1999, 00:06:27
 
Has anyone thought about what life on th ...   if microsoft didnt exist.....   
Adam
Jul 29, 1999, 00:09:56
 
Scenario
Big meeting in the MS boardroom ...   AOL vs MS   
John
Jul 29, 1999, 00:13:35
 
I've got a question? If Microsoft is ...   Hmmm   
Gord
Jul 29, 1999, 00:35:05
 
Adam, of subject "if microsoft didnt exi ...   I shall descend to petty namecalling   
Philo Vivero
Jul 29, 1999, 01:21:24
 

But, you forget, since the Microsoft Me ...   Re: Access to server != access to protocol   
Jeremiah Gowdy
Jul 29, 1999, 01:34:25