[ILUG] M$ open source?

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Marek McGann (marek.mcgann at mic.ul.ie):
> On Déar 26 Ean 2006 11:46, Bernhard Rohrer wrote:
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4649348.stm

> For cash. Presumably large amounts of it.
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29253

None of this will be within a country mile of open source, however.

1.  MS-Windows source code is already made available to a number of
outside institutions.  There is always a strict NDA, restrictive
covenenants covering what the information can be used for, and strict
proprietary licensing.

Please note that "Somebody, somewhere will be allowed to peek at our
source code while wearing contractual handcuffs" is nothing like 
_open source_.

2.  On the other hand, Microsoft offering _real_ open source is old hat!

Just look up MS's Interix (aka Interop Systems) group, which produces
what's now called "Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX", and quite a
number of other tools.  Some of that code is proprietary, some is open
source.  Major portions of the open source codebases are under the GNU
General Public Licence -- you know, the exact same licence that company
spokemen like Ballmer attack as a "cancer".

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,53943,00.asp