Information Week: Windows must go open-source to keep developer base

**Foster Grant** · February 5th, 2009

Interesting read, if a bit long-winded.

But people are wrong when they assume that Microsoft will never move Windows down the open source path. To neutralize the advantages of Linux and other open source competitors, Microsoft will have to make Windows more like them. If it doesn't, it risks losing the 6-million-plus developer base that's made the Windows platform great. Microsoft may not want to open up Windows to the world, but it will. Indeed, it must. ...

Windows XP reportedly brings in about $34 each time it's loaded on a new PC shipped by a manufacturer, the way most people get a new copy. Microsoft Office, on the other hand, brings in four to 12 times as much, depending on which version of the suite comes bundled with a PC.

Not only do Office and related applications, like Publisher and Office Mobile, generate a torrent of license revenue, they tie into Microsoft's server applications. SharePoint starts at $4,350, when discounted, according to NexTag, the online service that seeks the lowest software prices available.

In other words, Windows may be what established Microsoft, but Windows can't sustain the company. Applications are what give it a competitive edge--and what generate billions of dollars in pure profit.

http://www.informationweek.com/story...leID=212903501

If Windows were properly open-sourced, Linux would be essentially dead within a year.

**karellen** · February 5th, 2009

Originally Posted by Foster Grant

Interesting read, if a bit long-winded.

http://www.informationweek.com/story...leID=212903501

If Windows were properly open-sourced, Linux would be essentially dead within a year.

I don't see why MS should open-source Windows. it's (still) very profitable as it is

**donkyhotay** · February 5th, 2009

Originally Posted by Foster Grant

If Windows were properly open-sourced, Linux would be essentially dead within a year.

I disagree, if windows became a true open-source (i.e. GPL compliant) rather then the faux "shared-source" then I foresee a gradual merging between windows and linux until they become so similar there are less differences between them, then between linux and BSD now. Apple would quickly go under though unless they got smart and open sourced as well, at which point their GUI would eventually be ported and then the rest of the system eventually forgotten (except for maybe some die-hard fans). M$ won't open source windows however unless they literally have no other choice, they've been maintaining their userbase for years due to the rigid control they maintain over systems and (unfortunately) many people have gotten used to it. If they were to open-source windows, it would give people a taste of what computers *used* to be like before serial numbers, activation codes, DRM, and all the other restrictions most windows users don't even think about anymore. Sure that doesn't matter for windows, they can still make money selling products like office. Except... So now you have people realizing 'open source doesn't @#$%' like they all the FUD they've been spreading around for years. People start thinking things like "If open source works so well why doesn't it work with other things like office? Oh wait, it DOES! Hey check out this openoffice program!" So open office becomes an even more popular alternative. This brings down sales of MSoffice. Then as openoffice becomes more popular it becomes the standard and you have people using MSoffice complaining that *they* aren't compatible with the open office standard anymore. So while microsoft tries to use Extend Embrace Extinguish tactics against openoffice this takes time while more sales are lost. In the end they finally end up with a business model like red hats. They sell enterprise solutions to businesses and tech support to end-users but essentially give everything away (especially test applications) in some project. Sure they'd stay in business, and probably do very well with that business model (just look at red hat) but they wouldn't make anywhere near the amount of money they make now.

**pmicheal** · February 6th, 2009

they are not billionair even without 0 sale so i dont think so they will opensource there product

**bakedbeans4life** · February 8th, 2009

I doubt this will ever happen, Windows contains code licensed from other companies. This is the same reason why IBM could not open source OS/2.

The Windows code base must be huge, making this amount of information available would be a logistical nightmare.

**cmat** · February 8th, 2009

Yeah right. It's going to be a cold day in you know where if this ever happens. What they can do is open up their APIs and that will seriously help developers create products,

**dca** · February 10th, 2009

Did that say six million plus developer base??? That's impossible... This one puts Windows 7 @ 1000:

http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/200...5F00_team.aspx