For a long time, Microsoft was public enemy number one for Linux and the open source community. But in recent years, Microsoft has made efforts to embrace open source and build bridges with the Linux ecosystem. This raises the important question:
Can Microsoft, with its history of animosity, ever truly gain full acceptance into the Linux and open source community?
The relationship between Microsoft and Linux has been complex. To understand whether real reconciliation is possible, we need to dive deep into the history, analyze Microsoft‘s recent open source overtures, and examine the cultural barriers that still remain.
Contents
The Deep Roots of Distrust
To appreciate why skepticism persists, we first have to understand the deep well of distrust between Microsoft and the open source community.
In the 1990s through the mid 2000s, Microsoft was engaged in an all-out assault on open source and Linux. Their aggressive tactics included:
- Waging a disinformation campaign: Steve Ballmer notoriously called Linux a "cancer", and Microsoft ran misleading advertising claiming Windows was cheaper and more secure than Linux. They spread exaggerated legal concerns around Linux.
- Funding the SCO lawsuit: Microsoft bankrolled SCO‘s lawsuit against IBM, which claimed Linux illegally copied SCO‘s Unix intellectual property. This raised unfounded patent concerns around Linux.
- Strong-arming OEMs: Microsoft threatened OEMs like Dell and HP that they would lose access to Windows if they pre-installed Linux. This limited Linux market growth.
- Leveraging Windows dominance: Microsoft would not release Office for Linux, and made Windows incompatible with open document standards. This took advantage of their desktop monopoly.
- Intimidation with patents: Microsoft claimed Linux violated hundreds of their patents, without revealing specifics. This fostered fear and uncertainty around Linux adoption.
This aggressive campaign bred immense distrust toward Microsoft within the open source community. As late as 2001, then-Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer called Linux "a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches".
In response, the Linux and open source ecosystem saw Microsoft as an existential threat. The ideological gulf seemed unbridgeable, with Microsoft seeking to crush the open source movement for competitive gain.
The animosity ran so deep that reconciliation seemed nearly impossible.
Microsoft‘s Open Source Charm Offensive
Facing continued growth of Linux and realizing open source was here to stay, Microsoft began shifting tone in the late 2000s. They initiated a series of open source overtures to win over developers and address enterprise demand for open source software:
- Joining the Linux Foundation in 2016 as a Platinum Member after 20 years of vilifying Linux.
- Acquiring GitHub for $7.5 billion in 2018, recognizing developer affinity for the open source code repository.
- Open sourcing the core of .NET and porting it to Linux. This acknowledged open source as a viable development approach.
- Extending Visual Studio Code to Linux and Mac, and later open sourcing it under the MIT license. This lowered barriers for non-Windows developers.
- Supporting Linux distros on Windows 10 and Windows Server via the Windows Subsystem for Linux. This boosted Microsoft‘s open source credibility.
- Partnering with Red Hat, SUSE and Canonical to bring enterprise Linux to Microsoft Azure cloud. This signaled acceptance of Linux on Azure.
- Releasing a full Linux kernel inside Azure Sphere OS, their microcontroller operating system. This demonstrated deep Linux integration.
Microsoft also joined the Open Invention Network (OIN) patent pool and inked pacts with companies like Red Hat to stand down from asserting patent claims against the Linux kernel.
On the surface, these seem like radical transformations for a company that once called Linux a "cancer". So is Microsoft now a committed open source citizen? Let‘s examine the other side.
Factors Raising Continued Suspicion
Despite the overtures, pockets of deep suspicion remain. There are still reasons why full acceptance of Microsoft is an uphill climb:
1. Ingrained Distrust from Past Attacks
The open wounds from Microsoft‘s past hostility toward Linux and open source still run very deep. For an entire generation of Linux developers, Microsoft was the nemesis.
Mutual trust was utterly demolished during the wars of the 1990s and 2000s. After years of viewing Microsoft as an enemy, it is extremely difficult to suddenly see them as a friend and ally. The skepticism runs strong and cuts against years of "embrace, extend extinguish" behavior.
This doesn‘t disappear overnight. Time and sustained good faith efforts by Microsoft are required to demonstrably prove they have changed. Right now, many Linux veterans view the open source charm offensive as a "Trojan Horse" until proven otherwise. Past wounds heal slowly.
2. Concerns Around Patent Threats
Patent aggression was one of Microsoft‘s main weapons against Linux in the past. Some remain concerned that Microsoft‘s promises not to assert patents against Linux are insufficiently broad.
For example, Microsoft joined the OIN patent pool, which immunizes Linux against attacks from OIN members. But OIN coverage only applies to the Linux kernel, not the broader ecosystem. Also, Microsoft still ruthlessly collects patent royalties to the tune of over $3 billion annually from Android vendors [1]. This hints that their patent arsenal could still be used against Linux if strategic interests dictated it.
Until Microsoft explicitly disavows ALL patent claims that could affect Linux and open source software, fears persist that the other shoe could still drop. Past threats left deep scars that make it hard to take new patent pledges fully at face value.
3. Windows and Office Still Closed Source
Another critique of Microsoft‘s open source endeavors is that they are largely strategic self-serving. Almost all their open source efforts center around Azure, cloud, dev tools, and interoperability. These areas strategically benefit Microsoft‘s core proprietary platforms like Windows and Office.
Windows and Office themselves remain completely closed source, which prevents Microsoft‘s open embrace from being "whole hog". Open sourcing Windows would be the ultimate proof of commitment, but is unrealistic given Windows‘ immense strategic value. This "open core" reality breeds continued distrust.
4. They Remain a Direct Competitor
Further, while no longer outright hostile, Microsoft still competes vigorously with Linux and open source in cloud, developer tools, and enterprise. Concerns around Microsoft "embracing and extending" open source to disadvantage competitors remain.
Many partnerships between Microsoft and open source players have a spirit of "co-opetition" – keeping collaborators close but competitors closer. As long as Microsoft competes directly on core open source turf, doubts exist about the underlying spirit and motives.
5. Cultural Misalignment
Finally, a massive culture chasm separates Microsoft and the open source world. Microsoft thrived on closed ecosystems, vendor lock-in, and top-down corporate control. Linux favors openness, user choice and bottom-up community collaboration.
Bridging this ingrained ideological gap will require profound cultural transformations on both sides over many years. It won‘t happen easily or overnight, especially with Microsoft‘s monopolistic legacy. The cultures, while not completely irreconcilable, remain sharply opposed currently.
So distrust runs deep. But with sustained effort, Microsoft can gradually turn skeptics into advocates.
The Thorny Road Ahead
Given the skepticism, Microsoft clearly has an uphill path to acceptance. Here are some recommendations for winning over the Linux ecosystem:
- Patience – Change won‘t happen fast. Consistent good behavior over years is needed to prove change is real.
- Walk the walk – Microsoft must go beyond press releases and really embrace open source ideals in actions: collaboration, transparency, decentralized governance.
- Dissolve divisions – Dismantle barriers between Microsoft and "outer" open source communities. Bring them into the inner circles.
- Open up more code – Proprietary offerings like Office and Windows likely stay closed, but open source peripheral projects to the extent possible.
- Patent reassurance – Go farther to completely diffuse patent concerns. License all Microsoft patents under OIN terms for all open source projects, including Linux.
- Friendly partnerships – Collaborate closely with Linux/open source firms like Red Hat, Canonical, SUSE – but don‘t try to co-opt them.
- Change incentives – Reward Microsoft employees for contributing to external open source projects, not just inner/self-serving ones.
- Support Linux growth – Enable and champion Linux in Windows without crippling it or putting Windows first.
- Accept Linux merits – Admit Unix/Linux have many advantages; don‘t imply Windows is superior in all regards.
Ultimately, trust follows sincerity. Microsoft must patiently walk the open source walk before Linux and open source fully accept them into the fold.
It won‘t be easy or quick, but better relations are possible. The door is open to Microsoft – they now must step through and prove themselves. The future remains unwritten.
