Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:00 PM EDT

It looks like a big wooden horse to me. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: ankylosaurus on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:03 PM EDT

Please use a meaningful title, such as "mitsake -> mistake".



---

The Dinosaur with a Club at the End of its Tail [ Reply to This | # ]



team building - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:16 PM EDT

Authored by: Holocene Epoch on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:03 PM EDT

You know what goes here [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Holocene Epoch on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:05 PM EDT

Please use the article name in the title line. And remember the rules for

clickies [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:11 PM EDT

I wonder, How OOXML is related to Blender, and why a Blender developer wants to

know more about OOXML.

Maybe i'm ignorant, but this is really mind boggling for me.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:22 PM EDT

I have no doubt that Microsoft really wants to see Open Source projects target

running on Windows. Otherwise they've got a lot of work to do trying to keep

up.



Unfortunately for them, all the things they've done to hinder commercial

competition also impedes Open Source projects. It's also created the disaster

which is called Vista.



Nice to see them starting to realize they're getting just what they deserve :-)





Sadly I doubt that they're anywhere close to "playing well with

others", but if the Blender developers ask for information about file

formats and a covenant not to sue over any relevant patents they might begin to

consider behaving better.



rhb [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: bbaston on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:33 PM EDT

Just cut and past, guys and gals: Yes, Microsoft, we have a format problem which interferes with interoperability of our GPL project with your operating system. However, the solution is simple. Just send us the full format specifications for all your products - and we'll work it out on this end. If you like, please include an "all patents are waivered" statement - but that is optional as we can work around or invalidate any patents you might claim anyway. PS - don't forget to forward every change to your format specifications too. Yours truly,

Open Source Project Manager ---

IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO

imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:41 PM EDT

That's surely the answer needed. Don't cripple it and hang it over DirectX, use

OpenGL.



A 3D application never uses the widget/look'nfeel of the host OS because any 3D

application is already having to work against a multi-dimensional problem space

with 2D output and 2D (or 1D) inputs.



So, MS, if you want Blender to work better on Windows, use OpenGL. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: SilverWave on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:54 PM EDT

http://elitemrp.net/iat/



knock your selves out ;)



http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c252/cholizo/its-a-trap.gif



---

Phorm is highly intrusive - it's like the P.O. opening all my letters to see

what I'm interested in, merely so that I can be sent a better class of junk

mail. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: vruz on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 01:55 PM EDT

Blender runs just fine on Windows, and has been doing so for years without

Microsoft's "help".



One should ask, what's in it for Microsoft ?



The only way Microsoft can help is by letting us be, respect our culture, our

copyrights.



Keep the change.



Thanks, but no, thanks.



And a honest suggestion to Microsoft: focus on your products and do something

about the lame state of your company and the awful treatment you give to your

customers.



We'll be alright.







---

--- the vruz [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 02:14 PM EDT

Hey people, you should all read this Wikipedia article on Cartels. Specially the European Union part. Whoever has the ability to talk to the right people at the European Union this is the time to do it. It starts with: The EU's competition law explicitly forbids cartels and related practices in its article 81 of the Treaty of Rome. 1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the common market, and in particular those which: (a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions; (b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment; (c) share markets or sources of supply; (d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage; (e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts. In one way they hope to get out of paying the fine: Microsoft Appeals 899M Fine On the other: Microsoft to Limit Capabilities of Cheap Laptops Microsoft plans to offer PC makers steep discounts on Windows XP Home Edition to encourage them to use that OS instead of Linux on ultra low-cost PCs (ULPCs). To be eligible, however, the PC vendors that make ULPCs must limit screen sizes to 10.2 inches and hard drives to 80G bytes, and they cannot offer touch-screen PCs. The program is outlined in confidential documents that Microsoft sent to PC makers last month, and which were obtained by IDG News Service.... Microsoft hopes to secure its place in the ULPC market and reduce the use of Linux, according to an official at one PC maker, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to discuss the program. "[Low-cost PC makers] have made some good inroads with open-source, and Microsoft wants to put a stop to it," the official said. Clearly, instead of dropping the fines, the European Union should start thinking on others ways to punish Microsoft for their anti-competitive behaviour. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 02:15 PM EDT

Ask them to document and open source tools to read/write the FBX file format. FBX is the 3D file format of choice of Microsoft and Autodesk, and as far as I know the tools are closed source, which hinders free developers. [ Reply to This | # ]



Open Source the FBX file format - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 12:32 PM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 02:19 PM EDT

The brutal reply - better MS support for KDE4 or GTK2.



I'm not sure if that is what MS had in mind though.



_ [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Steve Martin on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 02:34 PM EDT

Because our battle is not sort of business model to business model. Our battle is product to product, Windows versus Linux, Office versus OpenOffice. Which makes me wonder right off why Microsoft even cares about Blender. Microsoft is not in the 3D content production business. "Product to product", indeed. What's really on your mind, Mr. Ballmer? ---

"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night" [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 02:45 PM EDT



How much would it cost Microsoft to employ the open

software community? MS's people are too busy trying

to please the boss to write decent apps. FOSS developers

are only trying to please their users.



Look at Microsoft's most recent failures:



-- Vista

-- OOXML

-- XP SP3



All of them are essentially unusable. Why would you entrust

your business to these people?



Maybe I'm a little too harsh on Microsoft's code writers. Maybe

they do have what it takes. But Ballmer and Gates won't let

them.



Microsoft's comments are aimed at governments, not their own

customers. Microsoft can't win new customers, so it will have

to bribe governments to force their citizens to use Microsoft.



My frame of reference for Microsoft are the U.S. automakers.

Toyota, Nissan and the German automakers captured U.S.

customers with quality, while U.S. quality declined.



Microsoft is following the same path as U.S. automakers.



[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 03:22 PM EDT

Am I the only one who looked at the headline and wondered why Microsoft was

e-mailing a character from Futurama?



...and then deciding that considering the somewhat nebulous morality of

Blender's character on that show, considering it to be entirely appropriate to

be offering him Ballmer's position... [ Reply to This | # ]



typo? - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 05:52 PM EDT typo? - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 10:24 PM EDT

- Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 05:52 PM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 03:33 PM EDT

We're all familiar with "FUD" and "Embrace, Extend,

Extinguish" as descriptive names for MS's proven

strategies (as in proven to work, and proven that they do

it).



But this needs a new name. The old ones don't quite fit,

and their names lack punch.



I suggest "Lulu" or "Lulu Lock": Lure, Lull, Lock.



You can see them doing it all over the landscape lately,

and it isn't pretty.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 03:34 PM EDT

Maybe they should suggest to Microsoft to buy Autodesk to really open Autodesk

format, the later being (supposedly) one of the huge barriers of adoption of

Free Software in CAD.







- H [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 03:34 PM EDT

"I would love to see all Open Source innovation happen on top of Windows.

"



But I thought that OSS never innovated. We just copy you. Isnt that what you

said in the past? The best thing we can do to Microsoft is just ignore them.

Exclude them from the market. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: gdeinsta on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 04:43 PM EDT

Ever noticed that packaged bread companies never advertise that their product is "fresh"? That's because "fresh" means made this morning. So they advertise "freshness", which means precisely that their bread is not fresh. So too with "open" and "openness". BTW this is what Orwell meant by doublespeak. He had worked as a copy writer, so he knew all about it. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: joef on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 04:47 PM EDT

If Microsoft really wants FOSS applications to work on their platforms, it's quite simple. All they have to do is top provide the resources and authority for their own employees to work on the projects. These individuals simply join the projects and start contributing. They contribute on the same basis as other contributors, and under the same license. Are there any projects that would deny their participation under these groundrules? [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: mikeprotts on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 05:14 PM EDT

Classic tactics, but poor strategy.



Divide and conquer relies on the opponent having the same goals, i.e. vanquish

the opposition. For a battle you may pick up some easy wins, but the FOSS

vision doesn't have a winner/loser mentality. Every one wins with FOSS, and

every one loses without, so the long term will favour FOSS, even if there are

some casualties on the way. Think of vi vs emacs, KDE vs gnome. There is no

loser, as the best is shared, and the preferences are kept. With proprietary

the commercially viable is kept, the best and the preferences are irellivant.



Accepting that there is a choice is so difficult for some companies, but choice

and freedom are always the winners in the end. It may be a painful path but it

is the one that prevails.



If you want to change a system you have to become part of the system, and with

FOSS becoming part of the system means you accept it, so changes can only be for

the good. That is where non FOSS companies can't cope, so are doomed to

failure.



Cheers

Mike [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: TiddlyPom on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 06:18 PM EDT

I know it hardly need to be said here but there are so many people who do trust Microsoft. I did for a number of years and when I discovered how devious they are it opened my eyes. I saw this in a small way when I worked with a team producing an intra-net application for banks and building societies for booking appointments (with searches across multiple branches).



We started with a clean slate and could have used either Java or (as it was then) the recently released C# .NET (1.0). Microsoft claimed that they would help fund the development of the new system *if* it was written in C# rather than Java. Most of the banks used Java so in many ways this would have been lower risk although my colleagues had been using VB6 in the previous project so using Microsoft products was also seen as a lower risk. Inevitably we used C# for ASPX pages rather than Java Servlet Pages (although in hindsight I do not think that JSP would have been any harder than ASPX and the language itself is almost identical). Of course the funding never materialized and I expect that it never would have. The application was pretty successful in its own field but rather specialized so had no mass market appeal. I suspect that Microsoft would have tried to buy it out if it had had more mass market appeal. As the more open source/cross platform friendly member of the team, I felt betrayed and rather angry. Microsoft would (of course) just chalk this up as another victory for them.



I am (as I type) in the process of setting up my Father's PC as dual boot between Windows XP and 64 bit Ubuntu and I swear this will be the last Windows PC I build. If this was not for my Father then I would have refused to load any Microsoft operating systems (and indeed I did try and persuade him to make this Ubuntu-only). These days I find myself hating Microsoft with every fiber of my being simply because of what they do. They will do *anything* (however underhanded or devious) to remain in power (by which I mean retain market share) and the Blender team should *never* trust them no matter how meek and gracious they might seem.



---

Open Source Software - Unpicking the Microsoft monopoly piece-by-piece. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Toon Moene on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 06:27 PM EDT

OK, lets have a vote.



How many of you read this as:



Microsoft email blunder.



(in the sense that a ... hmmm how will I put this ... sensitive e-mail in the

Sarbany-Ox sense was accidentily discovered during one of the many lawsuits MS

is involved in).



---

Toon Moene (A GNU Fortran maintainer and physicist at large) [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 06:38 PM EDT

I just wanted to comment on the first bit of text quoted, I read it as what new

file formats can we rush to patent to hamper your development. I did actually

laugh out loud when I read the bit about OOXML been giving' as an example of

increased interest in open standards.



What I like about reading tech news over the last few years is that Microsoft

doesn't get that increasingly 'people don't care' what they do,

we're finding alternatives. (maybe slowly but very steadily). [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 06:54 PM EDT

If it isn't already (i only see version 2 license on blender.org), they should

probably accelerate any consideration of upgrading to version 3.



That ms are even flirting with a gpl product is quite amazing really, but gpl3

might just make sure they cannot subvert it also.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 07:11 PM EDT

The OOXML thing, now this.. It strikes me as something that MS can't lose

doing.



If they 'win' then they get their way.. in this case, who knows what they plan?

A nice big fat cheque offering to the Blender guys to move to the "all new

MS 3d file format" ?



If they 'lose' (ignored, criticized) then they can play the 'poor me, we keep

trying to extend our hand but they keep ignoring/criticizing us' line.. and then

they can just do whatever the hell they want (which they would have anyhow) but

all the while playing the 'poor me' card to offset their evil doings.



It may well be a smart move from a business sense but it's been said a thousand

times - actions speak louder then words and MS's actions, time and time again,

show themselves for what they really are. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 07:21 PM EDT

While PJ is pointing to the 'battle' mentality of Ballmer and his merry barons,

I think the initial query contains a comment that is more honest and

straightforward than was intended:



<i>'The ISO standard Office Open XML is an example of the direction we are

moving towards.'</i>



What more need be said? [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: argee on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 07:39 PM EDT

Blender runs on Windows, therefore ...

Linux is not needed. Therefore ...

People stay with Windows. Therefore ...

Try to change Blender from GPL to BSD. Therefore ...

Microsoft can take the Blender Code, and

put it into Windows. Therefore ...

Profit!



An Excellent Business Model!

Those MS Guys are good!

And its good for the economy!





---

--

argee [ Reply to This | # ]



An Excellent Business Model! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 06:55 PM EDT

Authored by: SirHumphrey on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 08:36 PM EDT

Microsoft email BLUNder? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 10:54 PM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 09:25 PM EDT

Their view of open source is this:



(1) We use them to develop for us and on our platform.

(2) They are to be stunted by any means.

(3) They're a threat to our business model.



So whatever gestures they make to open source, it is often filled with catches,

conditions, and hidden agendas. They're really not worth doing business with in

the long run. They're not interested in genuinely working with people and being

part of a community. In fact, they've even tried to create their own imitation

of open source! Heck, even re-defined the term "open" to suit their

business!



They are only interested in getting leverage over others. ie: To get control and

to do anything to maintain control. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 09:46 PM EDT

Sorry, but this just looks suspicious to me. Am I really supposed to believe

this story? Who is Ton Roosendaal and who exactly did he contact a Microsoft?

Has any of this been verified? [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 10:53 PM EDT

Get it? They view everything as a battle. "All Open Source innovation" means to him, I gather, that Windows runs the applications so well, the GNU/Linux operating system dies off. If that's the plan then I think they are going to be disappointed. The easiest people by far to move to Linux are ones that already run FOSS apps. on their Windows boxes. Of course it's in MS's best interest to support those FOSS apps. that don't already have popular propriatary competition on Windows (like blender) and it's in our best interest to support those apps. that do (Gimp, Apache, OO etc). [ Reply to This | # ]



Microsoft emails Blender - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 06:59 PM EDT

Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 11:28 PM EDT

Blender is a cabable application but is is not dominate in any market I'm

familiar with.



So why is Blender targeted for this special attention?



---

Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.



"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."

Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: overshoot on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 11:29 PM EDT

And in reply: Blender is an open-source project. As with all open source projects, our roadmap is driven by the needs that our development community perceives --- "scratching an itch" is the common phrase. Microsoft apparently "itches" to add support for more file formats to Blender. This is good, as we understand that Microsoft also employs programmers who are intimately familiar with those file formats. By all means submit your code supporting them to the project. As always, we do require that you legally license your submission compatibly. Thank you for your inquiry, etc. [ Reply to This | # ]



No problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 03:42 AM EDT

- Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 03:42 AM EDT and this... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 09:09 AM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 11 2008 @ 11:35 PM EDT

Microsoft emails Blender - Authored by: tknarr on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 01:28 AM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 12:11 AM EDT

When M$ approaches you remember that they are doing so not for your benefit but

for theirs. Don't trust them, and don't sign a deal with them. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Wesley_Parish on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 06:46 AM EDT

Firstly, I think Microsoft would be wise to explain this sort of licensing: Also, the license for the free (Express Edition) of MASM 8 precludes commercial use of the binaries it produces. This is odd because the VS2005 Express Edition C++ compiler has no such restriction, nor does any version of MASM 6. And as we know, Linux's licensing now permits commercial use - or rather, does not discriminate against commercial entities making use of it, nor commercial entities earning profit from supporting it - , whereas previously - Linux 0.01 did not permit any commercial use at all: The very first license used for the kernel was _not_ the GPL at all, but read the release notes for Linux 0.01, and you will see: 2. Copyrights etc This kernel is (C) 1991 Linus Torvalds, but all or part of it may be

redistributed provided you do the following: - Full source must be available (and free), if not with the

distribution then at least on asking for it. - Copyright notices must be intact. (In fact, if you distribute

only parts of it you may have to add copyrights, as there aren't

(C)'s in all files.) Small partial excerpts may be copied

without bothering with copyrights. - You may not distibute this for a fee, not even "handling"

costs. Microsoft's confusion about the GPL and "non-commercial" licensing and use of their software is about as useful as an udder on a bull. That they then extend this confusion to the Free and Open Source Software communities throws that confusion into sharp relief. Secondly, we need to see that Microsoft is indeed taking the responsibilities of being an active part of the FOSS communities seriously. When IBM approached Apache about becoming part of their community, they were told the only way to do so, was simply to contribute. If Microsoft wishes to take part in making Blender run better on MS Windows, then openly submitting bug reports and fixes is the way to go. Merely talking about it just gets people's dander up. And muttering incomprehensibly about "file formats" is a good way to get your face laughed in. Of course, I would also like to see Microsoft release the source trees of MS Windows 95, MS Windows NT 3.51, MS Office 97, MS Visual C++ and Visual Basic 4.x, Visual [Programming Language] Express [Studio], etc, under the GPL v3, just to convince us that they have buried the hatchet with the FSF GNU Project's General Public License, and furthermore have no intentions of exercising any software "patents" against anyone in any of the FOSS communities. Until they do so, I feel I have very specific reasons to doubt any claim of Microsoft's that they have foresworn the use of software "patents" against the developers of FOSS. ---

finagement: The Vampire's veins and Pacific torturers stretching back through his own season. Well, cutting like a child on one of these states of view, I duck [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 07:22 AM EDT

Maybe Blender will learn from OLCP. If you find a snake on

your doorstep asking to come in because it is cold outside

it is always better to leave the snake outside regardless

of how you may feel. One doesn't need to speculate on M$

motives or goals, you already know what the end result will

be. Blender are fools if they get involved with M$.



[ Reply to This | # ]



Microsoft emails Blender - Authored by: davecb on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 08:57 AM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 07:41 AM EDT

I assume some of the point is with regard to the file format blender uses, is it

an ISO specified format or just some custom thing they bashed together like many

people before and after them will do. Answer at...



http://www.blender.org/community/blender-conference/blender-conference-2004/proc

eedings/kent-mein/full-paper/



Trying to link FOSS with standards compliance is a complete red herring, some

does many dont. I'm sure I'd have great fun coding up something to read file

that blenders own docos describe as



"basically a dump of the data structures in blender with some information

on the "version" of the .blend that tells blender how to deal with

things"



lots of people need to learn about open specifications not only MS.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Hmmm... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 01:56 PM EDT Hmmm... - Authored by: lukep on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 04:05 PM EDT

- Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 01:56 PM EDT

Authored by: philc on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 08:57 AM EDT

There is no need for MS to deal with FOSS projects. The source is available and

the forums are available. They can spend the money, do the port, and make their

source changes available to all according to license requirements. Just like

anyone else.



If they are really interested in interoperability, they could contribute to WINE

to get it complete.



If they work with the projects, they can make their changes in a fashion that

will be accepted back into the project.



Open source is open to all to participate and contribute. Its all about open

availability to source to everyone. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 09:30 AM EDT

If Bender goes along, they get swallowed.

If Bender does not go along, MS gets to claim the FOSS side isn't interested in

interoperability.

Either way, MS wins.

Requiring licensing terms that MS can never accept might be a viable way out...

[ Reply to This | # ]



Could be? - Authored by: Darigaaz on Thursday, May 15 2008 @ 12:20 PM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 09:37 AM EDT

"Get it? They view everything as a battle. "All Open Source

innovation" means to him, I gather, that Windows runs the applications so

well, the GNU/Linux operating system dies off. Who needs it?"



PJ.



This is a knife that cuts both ways. OpenOffice.org, Gimp with GTK runs

beautifully on Windows. I know because I use the two products all the time.

They also run beautifully on Linux and Mac OS X.



"GNU Linux operating system dies off."



This will never happen as long as Microsoft is the champion of OGA, WGA and

DRM Lockin, and an inherently insecure, bloated, nagging operating system.

Microsoft is bound and determined to make the Windows WOW experience as painful

as possible.



If you put the open source applications on the Windows desktop and get people

used to using them, then when the next MS Office release comes down, requiring

another hardware upgrade, people will say "why bother, this open product

runs just fine." When you need to buy another computer or recycle a

perfectly good one with Ubuntu, with all the same open applications people have

gotten used to, it becomes a no brainer.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 09:46 AM EDT

"If they continue to avoid truly open standards and their own file formats

provide a sub-optimal experience for Windows users, then it is not the open

source community that has a problem imho"



While this is technically true, it is the wrong answer.



This is not a user centric response.



I don't bother trying to make web pages I write for personal use work on

Internet Explorer. I can get away with this because the only browser I trust is

Firefox, and they are only for my own use.



But if I were to write a page for public consumptions, I had better follow the

W3C standards, and add whatever checks and adjustments needed so the thing

behaves on IE.



So, pick your audience, and code for the audience. If that means MS c... then

so be it. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 11:27 AM EDT

...so to make the project safe from Microsoft's exec's greed.

Seriously, now that Blender is in MSFT radas, is time to consider the extra

anti-patent-FUD protection the GPLv3 provides. Then Microsoft won't dare touch

Blender. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 12:11 PM EDT

P.J. has: It's to have Windows do everything, including running Linux applications, better than anyone else. There's just one little problem with that. In MS' history, they have never allowed anything to run better on Windows then their own product if they could prevent it. Which means they'll be in an interesting position if that's their goal. Do they: Allow FOSS apps to temporarily run better then their own bloated products while hoping the end result of those apps is that they actually perform better then on the "native OS"? Allow FOSS apps to run on Windows, but in a hobbled environment so their own apps appear much better in comparison? If they're actually going down that path, it'll be interesting to see which of the above MS chooses. If they choose to allow FOSS apps to run "as built" then MS' own products will suddenly be obviously lower grade material even to "Aunt Jane". If they choose to hobble FOSS apps then anyone showing the app running on both a MS platform and a non-MS platform will easily be able to identify the fact that the problem resides on the MS platform. Note: I deliberately used "native OS" instead of Linux because a good number of FOSS apps are built targetting multiple platforms and not necessarily built on Linux first. I suspect MS is asking the FOSS app what it "most needs" in order to have a better idea of what they need to do to lock it out further. I say that because I can't imagine MS is impressed with apps such as Wine, Cedega or ... argghhh.... that network file access one (for some reason, I can't think of the name of it at the moment). In short: although it's more difficult to make sure the FOSS apps can run on Windows without MS' help then with, the reality is it's happening. MS must also realise there is no way they can hope to keep up with the release cycles of the key FOSS apps/OS. For example, MS took approx. twice as long to produce Vista then the FOSS world took to produce the same additional functionality in Gnome and KDE. In that time, KDE required an external app to add the 3D functionality. Today, it has that 3D functionality built into it. I also understand it's being setup to be able to be your main desktop GUI on MS as well. If that's true, ouchies to MS. If MS wishes to keep on building it's own apps to sell for full profit, their only hope is to hobble any FOSS apps that are built to run on MS. Based on that, I'd expect they want as much information as they can get from Blender so they can be in a better position to hobble it. I'll be surprised if they actually want to help blender be able to run better on MS. RAS [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Jose on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 12:46 PM EDT

>> "I would love to see all Open Source innovation happen

on top of Windows. So we've done a lot to encourage, for

example, the team building, PHP, the team building, many

of the other Open Source components, I'd love to see those

sorts of innovations proceed very successfully on top of

Windows.

"Because our battle is not sort of business model to

business model. Our battle is product to product, Windows

versus Linux, Office versus OpenOffice."



What this reconfirms (maybe unintentionally or even

through selective quoting by groklaw ??) is that the

threat to Monopolysoft is principally from Linux and from

Openoffice (as they see it.. and you only have to glance

at their 10K to understand why). These are two of the more

visible and obvious components of their interlocking

monopolies.



WinFOSS helps preserve Monopolysoft's power because it

helps "Windows". "MSO" is also helped if Monopolysoft can

manage to get you to use UhOhXML, as they appear to want

the Blender project to do.



Users will most appreciate your project (eg, Blender) the

day Windows is replaced by Linux. You can prepare

maximally for that day by not wasting time with Windows

ports, or you can push that date further off into the

future.



A custom Linux LiveCD is the best way to create the best

experience for your target audience. It is a free download

and can be run on a VM or spare computer. That platform

can be designed completely to spec (eg, as Blender folks

would want it). It is completely free, customizable, and

shareable (royalty free) by Blender users.



See post #8/9 http://ostatic.com/161583-blog/read-t h

e-fine-print-on-open-source-software

>> First, coding Microsoft protocols is a rat race....

>> Two, remember that it is in Monopolysoft's best

business interest to preserve their monopolies and, where

such monopolies can be leveraged (skirting the law for the

time being), to make sure the interfaces they provide to

third parties are broken or break (perhaps even after a

software update that happens transparently at night while

you sleep, changing key software you lease from them and

files you own.. as I am sure their EULA stipulates can

happen)....



Why doesn't Microsoft move to ODF and then come back to

talk? I imagine Blender's file formats (of which I have

limited knowledge) and most other file formats will

eventually integrate with ODF or with something from the

W3C.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Preserving the seat of their power - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 05:28 AM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 12:52 PM EDT

Their goal, however, isn't true interoperability. It's to have Windows do everything, including running Linux applications, better than anyone else. Why should you settle for Brand X "interoperability"? Considering the technical limitations of the Windows platform in the realm of 3d graphics, I doubt that. Considering also the technical limitations of blender and the average hardware that will use it, I highly doubt that. At worst this is just Microsoft realizing that it is shooting itself in the foot with their shoddy support of the most popular FOSS 3d application. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 01:43 PM EDT

Hello, this is (Campbell Baton/ideasman42)

As a blender dev I can tell you this is really going to have no impact on

blender.



Our requests from Microsoft are a MSVC license to compile blender on Windows,

and better OpenGL support. (which they claim to have... pfft, yeah right)



There is really no formats microsoft use that is directly relevant to blender

anyway. - aside from BMP and AVI which we already support.



Agree that OOXML is a load of crap and Im not sure why the MS guy would suggest

this as a reason to become buddies with MS.

Again, Blender and Microsoft have very little in common so blender users have

nothing to worry about.

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 12 2008 @ 07:20 PM EDT

why don't we all ask peter quinn how he feels about microsoft openness and

interoperability stance.



I am sure he is well educated about that and will give an objective point of

view.



[ Reply to This | # ]



Microsoft emails Blender - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 09:07 AM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 04:08 PM EDT

Microsoft is a company. A BIG company that needs to make money for their

shareholders.



GET IT? [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 05:05 PM EDT

Please dont ever fall to crap microshaft has to say.. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 05:45 PM EDT

I don't care if microsoft can run my software (which I go to great lengths to

make cross-platform), and I can't run their software on linux. It's not a

competition, we're not keeping tabs of how many programs can run on which OS.

I'm not "fighting the corporation" here, because we're not a

corporation, and we don't stand to lose against them. If we are

"defeated", anyone can pick up our code and continue where we left.



It's Gandhi used to say: "First they ignored me.. then they just kept

ignoring because I was irrelevant, and then I went away". It's a good

strategy :)

[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 13 2008 @ 08:35 PM EDT

How about, "Do your own work, M$oft!" You want some information?

Don't just ask 'them that's doing' for the answers, join the Blender community

and contribute some hacks to the Windows port. Formulate your own opinions and

in the process actually participate in the Open Source process. Try it, it's

the Future! [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 14 2008 @ 12:15 AM EDT

I think this is a 2-way street.



I'm sure that there are many developers that would love to have the source code

for the C# development environment.



While I am a bit new to this, I do think the world would benefit from a good

cross-compiler / development system that would generate stable executables for

LINUX, Macintosh, and WINDOZE.



Or..



Perhaps one should ask Microsoft to provide a dozen developers with unlimited

access to improve the WINE project (as open source, of course).



And, verify that all Microsoft software is stable under WINE without any tedious

hacks.



[ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 14 2008 @ 11:01 AM EDT

Obviously Microsoft wants FOSS developers to make their applications work better

with Windows. They DON'T HAVE TO PAY THEM to write and maintain those

applications, and they (hence the OS) isn't responsible if/when problems with

the app appear.





And, there's another reason: In an interoffice email written on January 6,

2000, the retiring Microsoft Technical Evangelist pointed out to the fellow

starting up a Microsoft Evangelism Team that "Every line of code written to

Microsoft's Standard is a small victory for Microsoft; and every line of code

written to some other Standard is a small defeat for Microsoft".





Do not be deceived. Microsoft considers competition with FOSS to be WAR! Not

only do they win by having FOSS developers writing to Microsoft's Standards, the

presence of high quality FOSS software on XP gives Windows users LESS incentive

to try or move to Linux. [ Reply to This | # ]



Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 14 2008 @ 01:06 PM EDT

Glad you came in... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 16 2008 @ 04:59 PM EDT

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 16 2008 @ 01:23 PM EDT

here is one example of what microsoft does and is still doing today.

look at what they did for live meeting.

they bought the company the created live meeting and it was a cross platform

tool worked on linux all you needed was sun's latest java package.

now it doesn't work on linux as of 5/16/08 - and here is the help file from it -

nowhere does it list linux but it lists sun, mac, and everyone else.



so if the developers of blender have any doubt about microsofts intentions than

look no further than live meeting.



enjoy:





Introduction to the Web-based Meeting Console





If you have been using a previous version of the Web-based Live Meeting console

or if you have been using the Windows-based meeting console, you will notice

some differences when you use the Live Meeting 2005 Web-based meeting console.

What's New in Live Meeting 2005 Web-based Console



The following are new features of the Web-based meeting console:



* Send Invite . Presenters can now send e-mail invitations from the

Web-based console.

* Active Presenter. Presenters can be designated as the Active Presenter.

There is a meeting option that allows only the Active Presenter to navigate

through slides.

* Sharing slides. Users of the Web-based console on Apple Macintosh and Sun

Solaris computers can create Sharing slides.

* Taking control of Sharing slides. Users of the Web-based console can be

granted control of the contents of a Sharing slide.

* Live Meeting Presentation (.lmp) file format. Live Meeting presentation

format (.lmp file) replaces the PlaceWare Presentation (.pwp) file format.

Web-based consoles on Windows-based computers can use an uploader tool that will

convert PowerPoint presentations (.ppt files) into .lmp files so that they can

be imported to, and presented in, a meeting.



The following features were removed from the Web-based meeting console:



* Presenter Notes

* Presenter Images

* Snapshot slides



System Requirements



You can use the Web-based Live Meeting console to join meetings without

installing any Live Meeting software on your computer. The Web-based console is

initialized and accessed entirely in an Internet browser window. The Web-based

console does, however, require the following software and hardware in order to

run:



Software Requirements:

Operating System Internet Browser Java Virtual Machines

Apple Mac OS X 10.3 Safari 1.2.3 MRJ (Macintosh Runtime for Java) 1.4.1 or

higher

Sun Solaris 9 Mozilla 1.4 or Netscape 7.0 Sun JVM 1.4.2

Windows XP SP1 or higher

Windows 2000 SP4

Windows 98 SE Netscape 7.2 Sun JVM 1.4.2

Windows Server 2003

Windows XP SP1 or higher

Windows 2000 SP4

Windows 98 SE Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1, SP2 Sun JVM 1.4.2 or MS JVM

(5.0.0.3810)  preinstalled configurations



Hardware Requirements:



* 64 MB RAM

* 56 Kbps modem (DSL, cable, or better recommended) with Internet or

intranet connection

* 800 × 600 screen resolution required for meeting attendees

* 1024 × 768 screen resolution required for presenters



Recording Playback Requirements:



* Live Meeting Replay format: Windows Media Player 9 or later.



Note There is no Live Meeting Replay format support for Mac OS X or for

Sun Solaris.

* Basic Recording format: Any supported browser on a supported operating

system



Was this information helpful? [ Reply to This | # ]



Microsoft emails Blender - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 23 2008 @ 06:35 AM EDT

Authored by: thombone on Saturday, May 17 2008 @ 11:37 PM EDT