Moving on. While i still agree with void main 100% i would like to just comment on a couple of parts of the blog entry in question to clarify my own position re what i "want".
A promise by Microsoft not to sue for infringement of unspecified patents has no value at all and is not worth paying for. ...protection money...
I welcome Microsoftâ€™s stated commitment to interoperability between Linux and the Windows world - and believe Ubuntu will benefit fully from any investment made in that regard by Microsoft and its new partners,
really? i have to disagree 100% since all the evidence of the past would suggest that microsoft has a similar attitude towards free software and linux systems as a demented paedophile might have towards a defenceless prepubescent child in the middle of the woods.
as that code will no doubt be free software and will no doubt be included in Ubuntu.
again, does shuttleworth actually know anything about microsoft? when have they ever helped to develop free software? ever?
I don't think it's realistic to claim this to be a sarcastic paragraph, surely shuttleworth is aware that his words will be read by many and he should expect to be taken seriously.
I would invite Microsoft to participate in the OASIS Open Document Format working group, and to ensure that the existing import and export filters for Office12 to Open Document Format are improved and available as a standard option.
i agree, however i think this is unlikely given microsoft's long standing policy re: breaking standards to define and leverage proprietary "de facto" formats and protocols.
And we should engage with companies that are committed to the values we hold dear, and disengage if they change their position again.
ok. i agree with this, but microsoft are not Sun. Just a glance at the history of microsoft shows that every deal microsoft has ever dealt has ended up looking very similar to the deal chamberlain cut with hitler which said germany wouldn't invade poland under any circumstances.
But I donâ€™t believe that the intent of the current round of agreements is supportive of free software, and in fact I donâ€™t think itâ€™s particularly in Microsoftâ€™s interests to pursue this agenda either.
again, i agree.
My goal is to carry free software forward as far as I can
ok, fine. sounds good to me.
In the Ubuntu community, we believe that the freedom in free software is whatâ€™s powerful, not the openness of the code.
and then he says this. clearly this man uses words as bargaining tools first and foremost. What does this comment even mean? none of us would say free software should not have freedom, but surely openness of code is integral to this? has he ever read cathedral/bazaar? he seems to be saying closed source, but still somehow "free" (as in lunch?) code is ok. I disagree, for reasons that should be apparent and which are too lengthy to go into right now.
All the deals announced so far strike me as â€œtrinkets in exchange for air kissesâ€