Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
According to CNET (at http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9790863-7.html), "The
source code will be released under Microsoft's Reference License. This means
that you can only use the source as a reference for debugging, maintaining
or enhancing your applications. You cannot modify or distribute the code for
any purpose. This happens to be the most restricted shared-source license
that Microsoft has. This announcement confirms that .Net is going to be
shared source, not to be confused with open source."
So, it seems that Microsoft is trying to *look* like an open company while
keeping the shackles firmly around the ankles of its users.
It's quite ingenious actually. There have been a large number of issues
with .Net ( www.kbalertz.com is a good place to start your search if you want
to see just how many Microsoft has reported). And, what better way to fix
those than to basically recruit everyone else to debug your framework.
It's like open source....only without the open part. Microsoft calles it
"shared source". Which I think is deceptive. If I told you that I was
going to "share" my ice cream with you, would you think that I was going to
give some of my ice cream for you to eat (or do with as you please) or would
you think that I was merely going to allow you to look at my ice cream while
I ate my fill?
"Shared source" indeed.
jim 16  1221 
I don't see anything objectionable about this. It is laudable that a
commercial software vendor is willing to release source code. They are
under no obligation to give up their rights to it!
jim <ji*@home.netwr ote:
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
<snip>
Way to look at the negatives. Interesting how you completely ignored
the positive sides of being able to debug into the framework code, see
how it works, and potentially spot bugs to report and work around.
And, what better way to fix those than to basically recruit everyone
else to debug your framework.
Interesting how open source advocates will use "you can fix the bugs"
as a plus point, but as soon as Microsoft lets you spot the bugs, it's
getting everyone else to debug your framework.
Do I get the feeling Microsoft can't win here?
I'm sure that most of the time that I debug through the framework code
I *won't* be finding bugs in the framework - I'll be understanding what
the framework's doing with *my* code, which is rather more likely to
contain bugs.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love the framework source to be even more open
- but I'm quite astounded at how miserly some folks can be when it
comes to this action of Microsoft. Anyone would think they were
*forcing* people to read the code. If you feel it makes your life
worse, don't do it. The rest of us will accept the restrictions, and
get on with being more productive.
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
jim wrote:
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
According to CNET (at http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9790863-7.html), "The
source code will be released under Microsoft's Reference License. This means
that you can only use the source as a reference for debugging, maintaining
or enhancing your applications. You cannot modify or distribute the code for
any purpose. This happens to be the most restricted shared-source license
that Microsoft has. This announcement confirms that .Net is going to be
shared source, not to be confused with open source."
Why not read the group before posting. This was posted yesterday.
So, it seems that Microsoft is trying to *look* like an open company while
keeping the shackles firmly around the ankles of its users.
It's quite ingenious actually. There have been a large number of issues
with .Net (www.kbalertz.com is a good place to start your search if you want
to see just how many Microsoft has reported). And, what better way to fix
those than to basically recruit everyone else to debug your framework.
It's like open source....only without the open part. Microsoft calles it
"shared source". Which I think is deceptive. If I told you that I was
going to "share" my ice cream with you, would you think that I was going to
give some of my ice cream for you to eat (or do with as you please) or would
you think that I was merely going to allow you to look at my ice cream while
I ate my fill?
I think you are being rather negative.
You are basically saying "what MS is doing is not as good as
what I think they should be doing".
You could just as well be saying "what MS is doing now is better
than what they used to do".
Oh - and you completely misunderstood the debugging part. MS are
trying to help you debug your apps - they are not asking you to debug
the .NET code.
Arne
PS: BTW, I am not so happy about the license either due to the
"residual" intellectual property aspect, but that is another story.
Dang dude.
I'm excited about being able to just see the code. Learn from it.
I don't have any issue with them keeping control of the code. They spent
the $$$ to make it, they can keep it.
I still think its the best thing going. (<< My opinion, I'm sure you have
one as well)
There are several different licensing models.
CSLA has one that might be criticized as well. If you look at the glass as
half empty.
I'm taking the half full approach to this annoucement.
Thank you MS for doing this.
"jim" <ji*@home.netwr ote in message
news:ZW******** **********@bign ews8.bellsouth. net...
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
According to CNET (at http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9790863-7.html),
"The source code will be released under Microsoft's Reference License.
This means that you can only use the source as a reference for debugging,
maintaining or enhancing your applications. You cannot modify or
distribute the code for any purpose. This happens to be the most
restricted shared-source license that Microsoft has. This announcement
confirms that .Net is going to be shared source, not to be confused with
open source."
So, it seems that Microsoft is trying to *look* like an open company while
keeping the shackles firmly around the ankles of its users.
It's quite ingenious actually. There have been a large number of issues
with .Net (www.kbalertz.com is a good place to start your search if you
want to see just how many Microsoft has reported). And, what better way
to fix those than to basically recruit everyone else to debug your
framework.
It's like open source....only without the open part. Microsoft calles it
"shared source". Which I think is deceptive. If I told you that I was
going to "share" my ice cream with you, would you think that I was going
to give some of my ice cream for you to eat (or do with as you please) or
would you think that I was merely going to allow you to look at my ice
cream while I ate my fill?
"Shared source" indeed.
jim
I'm quite new to .Net but I have to agree with Jon that shared source will be
valuable when own workaround is needed urgently. However, I think MS should
create some incentives for people to find/report bugs.
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" wrote:
jim <ji*@home.netwr ote:
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
<snip>
Way to look at the negatives. Interesting how you completely ignored
the positive sides of being able to debug into the framework code, see
how it works, and potentially spot bugs to report and work around.
And, what better way to fix those than to basically recruit everyone
else to debug your framework.
Interesting how open source advocates will use "you can fix the bugs"
as a plus point, but as soon as Microsoft lets you spot the bugs, it's
getting everyone else to debug your framework.
Do I get the feeling Microsoft can't win here?
I'm sure that most of the time that I debug through the framework code
I *won't* be finding bugs in the framework - I'll be understanding what
the framework's doing with *my* code, which is rather more likely to
contain bugs.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love the framework source to be even more open
- but I'm quite astounded at how miserly some folks can be when it
comes to this action of Microsoft. Anyone would think they were
*forcing* people to read the code. If you feel it makes your life
worse, don't do it. The rest of us will accept the restrictions, and
get on with being more productive.
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Having access to the source code is of tremendous help to us, .NET
developers. I don't think you understand the reason why they're sharing the
code. I haven't encountered any bugs in the .NET Framework and I've been
using it since .NET 1.0.
"jim" <ji*@home.netwr ote in message
news:ZW******** **********@bign ews8.bellsouth. net...
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
According to CNET (at http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9790863-7.html),
"The source code will be released under Microsoft's Reference License.
This means that you can only use the source as a reference for debugging,
maintaining or enhancing your applications. You cannot modify or
distribute the code for any purpose. This happens to be the most
restricted shared-source license that Microsoft has. This announcement
confirms that .Net is going to be shared source, not to be confused with
open source."
So, it seems that Microsoft is trying to *look* like an open company while
keeping the shackles firmly around the ankles of its users.
It's quite ingenious actually. There have been a large number of issues
with .Net (www.kbalertz.com is a good place to start your search if you
want to see just how many Microsoft has reported). And, what better way
to fix those than to basically recruit everyone else to debug your
framework.
It's like open source....only without the open part. Microsoft calles it
"shared source". Which I think is deceptive. If I told you that I was
going to "share" my ice cream with you, would you think that I was going
to give some of my ice cream for you to eat (or do with as you please) or
would you think that I was merely going to allow you to look at my ice
cream while I ate my fill?
"Shared source" indeed.
jim
Jim,
I think they mean Static source, however use the VB.Net term for that.
:-)
Cor
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co mwrote in message
news:MP******** *************@m snews.microsoft .com...
jim <ji*@home.netwr ote:
>Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the
.Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
<snip>
Way to look at the negatives. Interesting how you completely ignored
the positive sides of being able to debug into the framework code, see
how it works, and potentially spot bugs to report and work around.
>And, what better way to fix those than to basically recruit everyone
else to debug your framework.
Interesting how open source advocates will use "you can fix the bugs"
as a plus point, but as soon as Microsoft lets you spot the bugs, it's
getting everyone else to debug your framework.
Do I get the feeling Microsoft can't win here?
I'm sure that most of the time that I debug through the framework code
I *won't* be finding bugs in the framework - I'll be understanding what
the framework's doing with *my* code, which is rather more likely to
contain bugs.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love the framework source to be even more open
- but I'm quite astounded at how miserly some folks can be when it
comes to this action of Microsoft. Anyone would think they were
*forcing* people to read the code. If you feel it makes your life
worse, don't do it. The rest of us will accept the restrictions, and
get on with being more productive.
The only thing is -- with .NET Reflector, the framework source code was
already very open. You could use it in any way allowed by the .NET runtime
license or the Visual Studio license.
With shared source, they're trying to get you to agree to an extra license
which will only restrict your rights further. I haven't read the license,
but I suspect that it's worded to apply to any use of .NET regardless of
whether the information was gathered through the shared source initiative or
not -- if you accept the license that is.
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Jordan S. <A@B.comwrote :
<snip>
Beyond those I experienced with that particular product, I have asked a
number of open source advocates over the years what the big benefit is - of
open source. They all pretty much point to the fact that if they don't like
the way some feature is implemented, or if it is broken, that they can fix
it. Notice "CAN fix it." When I ask them how many times in their entire
lives that they *have actually* modified the source code, they all say ZERO
times! The reason? Version control - plain and simple. They don't want to
have to maintain their own branch as the open source community races ahead
with the mainstream offering. I have separately asked dev group managers who
loudly bang the open source drum. None of the managers I have talked with
would permit any of their developers to modify open source code - or put it
into production - again because they don't want to create a whole new body
of code they must now maintain.
So I'm still left wondering what the big draw of open source is - given that
it's advocates #1 claimed reason to use open source is an advantage they
also state they would NEVER take advantage of. Bizarre.
Well, personally I've either found and fixed bugs, or contributed extra
features to various open source projects, most notably Ant and Log4j.
The version control is only an issue if you don't give your source back
(or if it's not accepted for some reason).
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Billy Jacobs |
last post by:
I have created a DataGridColumnDatePicker Component so
that I can put a datetimepicker control in my datagrid.
It almost works.
When I put my mouse in the cell it changes to a
datetimepicker control. I can then select a date which
displays in the cell. When I leave the cell however I get
the following error:
|
by: ipellew |
last post by:
Hi;
I 'e been developing a little application based on MS Access (I am
usually in Informix) and have to say the Web is full of sites that
offer little in the way of help.
I have to say that this forum has been the only place I can find help,
Usually sharp and to the point. As I would expect.
The Access web ring just seems full of, well, advertising.
|
by: jim |
last post by:
Microsoft announced that it will be releasing its source code for the .Net
libraries. But, don't get too excited at Microsoft's new SHARED source
initiative.
According to CNET (at http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9790863-7.html), "The
source code will be released under Microsoft's Reference License. This means
that you can only use the source as a reference for debugging, maintaining
or enhancing your applications. You cannot modify or...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
| | |
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one.
At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image.
Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
| | |
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| |
