Microsoft Plays Up Open Source

An anonymous reader writes "Recently Microsoft's open source software lab posted PostgreSQL on Windows: A Primer. Postgres is one of the longest running open source databases — it has been around for nearly 11 years. The powerful object-relational database is a direct competitor to other OSS databases, as well as Microsoft's SQL Server 2005. So why is Microsoft promoting it? I get Redmond's interest in boosting anything that runs on Windows as a platform. Is this simply a case of left-hand, right-hand, or is something deeper going on?"

What's going on here?

[croddy]

Easy. This is targeted at folks who have already decided they want to use Postgres, so they can't be sold on the $xx,000 MSSQL license... but maybe they can still be sold on the $300 OS license! It may be too late to lock them into our database, but it's not too late to lock them into the OS.

If they don't buy MS, they might buy Oracle or IBM

[LaminatorX]

MS is boosting Postgre because they don't want people buying Oracle or IBM's database offerings.

Bullshit summary as usual...

[jkrise]

Postgres is one of the longest running open source databases it has been around for nearly 11 years. The powerful object-relational database is a direct competitor to other OSS databases, as well as Microsoft's SQL Server 2005. So why is Microsoft promoting it?

Firstly, an article on Port 25 is not promotion. It does not count as mainstream media by any stretch.

Remember the ads on TV.. where there's a forklift, lifting up what looks like battery cells... and placing them on top of a huge building... and then you see, SQL Server 2005. If Microsoft replaces those ads with Postgres instead; we can call it promotion... not until then.

Many firms (like mine) would like to use the manpower conversant with and trained on .Net... but use a free (as in beer) database. MySQL is pretty slow with joins, so Postgres with PL/SQL and stored procedures support, may be the answer.

MS is not really so monolithic

[Felonius Thunk]

They're really several companies with distinct businesses under common ownership. Occasionally the strategy tax must be paid (e.g. no IE for linux, no java/lamp for Visual Studio, no Exchange for *nix, MSN using wmv instead of flash), but I would guess most of the inner businesses want to do what their competitors do. It shouldn't be a surprise when they do, just laughable/sad when they don't.

Microsoft is only Anti-GPL

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

So why is Microsoft promoting it?

Because PostgreSQL isn't licenced under the GNU GPL.

Am I the only one..

[Shiny One]

.. that didn't miss the most obvious comment.

Embrace. <-- You are here
Extend.
Extinguish.

Re:What's going on here? - But MSSQL is free too!

[MrZaius]

True to an extent, but MSSQL is free to many users. What's more likely is that they're promoting it as a way to break the L out of the LAMP/LAPP stack, like the recent Sun Microsystem moves.

Re:Microsoft is only Anti-GPL

[vladkrupin]

That is exactly what's going on. Non-GPL code can be easily embraced, extended, etc... you know the trick. GPL code is a much harder nut to crack. Many have tried to "get cute with the GPL" as PJ of Groklaw [groklaw.net] puts it, but none have succeeded. If you can marginalize the GPL, eliminating the non-GPL competition by embracing, extending, extinguishing is a much easier task. GPL is their only threat, really.

Re:Am I the only one..

[LordEd]

I thought that "its a trap" would be more obvious.

In any case, this isn't a case of the 3e approach. All they did was install Postgres on windows and write up a step by step installation doc with a few tips discovered in the process. There is nothing on their interpretation of whether it is good or bad.

Re:What's going on here?

[AoT]

And therein lies the genius of the plan.

Step 1: Convince company to run postgres on windows.

Step 2: Postgress run like crap.

Step 3: Convince customer that it is postgres and *not* windows that is the problem.

Step 4: Get customer to use MSSQL

Step 5: Profit ...er

Step 6: ?

Re:What's going on here?

[jkrise]

Step 1: Convince company to run postgres on windows.

Step 2: Postgress run like crap.

Step 3: Convince customer that it is postgres and *not* windows that is the problem.

The problem for Microsoft is that Postgres runs very well indeed on all other operating systems. Developers are by definition slightly more knowledgable than end-users; and will abandon Windows Server if this happened. Microsoft's moves to improve PHP performance on Windows servers might also be in the same direction.

Anyone wise enough to know about Postgres would also know how to get it running on Linux... and these days, even Solaris; along with apache and PHP.

Postgres on Windows is more useful to keep developers hooked onto .Net; the expensive MS-SQL database could be a hindrance to widespread .Net adoption; now they can replace it with Postgres; which in many ways is superior to MySQL.

However PHP continues to improve by the day; and with accelerators and compilers providing the ability to deliver 'exes' or 'jars'-like code to customers; it is becoming more and more attractive to ISVs. This move by MS might extend the active lifespan of the Windows Server and .Net development platform by about 2 years; after which LAMP or LAPP or SAPP can be expected to be the market leader.

Re:Microsoft is only Anti-GPL

[javilon]

"Many have tried to "get cute with the GPL" as PJ of Groklaw puts it, but none have succeeded."

Well, the jury is still out on the Microsoft-Novell deal.

Re:Inappropriate and unnecessary use of an analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a biblical reference. Can't have that on Slashdot.

Re:What's going on here?

[jazir1979]

I'm saying that you can't take MS-SQL on to other platforms, I thought that was pretty obvious.

If you design your app in a DB-independant way then fine, you can port to another DB, but that's alot more overhead than sticking with a DB that runs on multiple OS'es.