Skip to main content

Microsoft Lovers versus Open Source Lovers versus The Battle Itself

The battle has gone on for a very long time. The Microsoft developers hate the open source hippies. The code huggers hate the corporate dogs. When does either side realize the dagger they're digging in is piercing themselves, because we're all the same.

We code because we like it. Software is our craft and development tools, languages, and software ecosystems are the spice racks for us chefs of bytes. Some chefs enjoy working on the grill, and others can't get enough from the stove. But if backyard grillers love a good lasagna and bakers enjoy a barbecue, why can't our camps live and let live? Joe likes GNU tools and Mary builds Silverlight apps in C#, so obviously they need to glare at one another with malice, right? Wrong.

Can't we all just get along?


Comments

Paul said…
An interesting collection of metaphors in use here to frame anyone who disagrees with your message almost as some kind of extremist, but anyway...

Can Microsoft and the Free Software movement get along? Yes and no: there are certain areas where Microsoft actively seek to undermine Free (and open source) Software by, for example, promoting software patent legislation, and there clearly is a need to oppose this in the wider software development community - yes, even amongst proprietary software vendors, too. I imagine that Microsoft feel threatened by Free Software, too, but as long as Microsoft have the "consumer" market locked down with obligatory Windows on every machine, I don't much care for what they don't like.

Can Joe and Mary get along? Well, even though Mary's toolmaker wants to stifle competition from, amongst others, Joe's toolmaker, they'll still have mutual technical interests, yes. But the referenced article shows what happens when you put your head down and claim that cool tools and "the code" is all that matters.

Popular posts from this blog

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this. CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer.  One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC? It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on

Statement Functions

At a small suggestion in #python, I wrote up a simple module that allows the use of many python statements in places requiring statements. This post serves as the announcement and documentation. You can find the release here . The pattern is the statement's keyword appended with a single underscore, so the first, of course, is print_. The example writes 'some+text' to an IOString for a URL query string. This mostly follows what it seems the print function will be in py3k. print_("some", "text", outfile=query_iostring, sep="+", end="") An obvious second choice was to wrap if statements. They take a condition value, and expect a truth value or callback an an optional else value or callback. Values and callbacks are named if_true, cb_true, if_false, and cb_false. if_(raw_input("Continue?")=="Y", cb_true=play_game, cb_false=quit) Of course, often your else might be an error case, so raising an exception could be useful

How To Teach Software Development

How To Teach Software Development Introduction Developers Quality Control Motivation Execution Businesses Students Schools Education is broken. Education about software development is even more broken. It is a sad observation of the industry from my eyes. I come to see good developers from what should be great educations as survivors, more than anything. Do they get a headstart from their education or do they overcome it? This is the first part in a series on software education. I want to open a discussion here. Please comment if you have thoughts. Blog about it, yourself. Write about how you disagree with me. Write more if you don't. We have a troubled industry. We care enough to do something about it. We hark on the bad developers the way people used to point at freak shows, but we only hurt ourselves but not improving the situation. We have to deal with their bad code. We are the twenty percent and we can't talk to the eighty percent, by definition, so we need to impro