Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
KDE Programming Microsoft

Nokia Gives Some Hints On the Future of Qt 329

Posted by timothy
from the will-remain-two-letters dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Continuing the damage control following the announcement of the Nokia-Microsoft partnership, Nokia has a post on their official blog outlining the future of Qt which includes some (cherry picked) comments from Qt users. Phil from Nokia writes, 'Lots of great questions and comments coming from you all on the future of Qt. One thing is for sure: Qt remains to play an important role in Nokia. We'll have more Qt-related posts coming this week during Mobile World Congress, but for the time being, the Director of Qt's ecosystem, Daniel Kihlberg, wrote a post on Qt's official blog on the future of Qt.'" An anonymous reader points to one unattractive possible future for Qt.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nokia Gives Some Hints On the Future of Qt

Comments Filter:
  • Will Nokia send a takedown notice to that parody of their documentation website? Or just grin and bear it?

    Parody by regexp.... I love it!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:25AM (#35190826)

    KDE's Qt developers should split off and form a separate company -- named Trolltech -- and continue work on a forked Qt.

    • KDE's Qt developers should split off and form a separate company -- named Trolltech -- and continue work on a forked Qt.

      Great idea!

      Wish I'd thought of it :-)

    • Who would finance it?

      • by Zelgadiss (213127)

        Maybe Google can throw some cash their way ...

        • Why would Google do that? Qt as a desktop framework is not interesting to them because they're trying to kill the very concept of desktop, and replace it with the Web. Qt as a mobile framework is not interesting to them because they already have Android. And they're not a charity.

  • Microsoft is undoubtedly a big player in the software industry. If they add it to Visual Studio and makes Qt a first-class .Net citizen I can't see anything bad coming out of this for Qt and Qt developers.

    • Despite the fact there's already a Visual Studio Add-in for Qt [nokia.com].
    • by SuperKendall (25149) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @04:22AM (#35191030)

      When the Q&A starts you see this:
      Q: Anonymous Coward February 12, 2011 at 1:29 pm
      Thanks. Please answer one more question as soon as you are able to: Will Qt be ported to Windows Phone? Iâ(TM)d assume it would be technically possible, but would you be allowed to do that business-wise â¦?

      A: Aron (Nokia) February 12, 2011 at 1:38 pm
      Qt will not be ported to Windows Phone 7. One of the key benefits of joining an established ecosystem is that there is an established toolchain that everyone uses. All Windows Phone apps will run on all WP7 devices. Adding Qt to the mix would only cause fragmentation.

      Unfortunate from a Qt perspective but wise from a developer ecosystem perspective.

      • Qt is free software. How can Nokia prevent ports to platforms such as Windows Phone 7? They can refuse to make it part of an official Nokia-backed Qt release, but they cannot prevent the port from happening.

        On the other hand, there don't seem to be many external contributions to Qt, so such ports seem rather unlikely.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by NuShrike (561140)

          How do you port something that entirely depends on access to the underlying native APIs to an environment whose whole purpose is to keep you away from the native API? As so far as not even have a native programming layer.

          Qt's rendering is almost centered around OpenGL and shaders. Porting to Direct* is going to a huge setback, and it's not even available on Wimpy7s either!

          That is already a measure of how immature Wimpy7s is.

          • How do you port something that entirely depends on access to the underlying native APIs to an environment whose whole purpose is to keep you away from the native API? As so far as not even have a native programming layer.

            Perhaps using C++/CIL? It certainly needs quite a bit porting. (And Qt is not tied to OpenGL.)

            So Nokia could say, "we will not commit resources to a WP7 port, but will happily include a community-provided one", with full knowledge that it is quite unlikely to happen, ever. Sends a much better message to the community.

            • by NuShrike (561140) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @06:08AM (#35191318)

              This [nokia.com] is why you can't port Qt to .NET/Silverlight. This is not even pointing out the marshalling issues.

            • by NuShrike (561140)

              Qt IS tied to OpenGL. In fact, the design is centered around OpenGL ES and it's quoted many times in their docs and source.

              There's only THREE graphics systems, default (which is basically raster), raster (cpu-based) and OpenGL (1.x and 2.0). Widget system is either Qt custom, or Native. There's nothing in between, and they've gotten rid of the legacy rest.

              I've before dived into the 4.7 and 4.8 (HEAD) source and written a custom DirectDraw backend for WinMob 6.5 because there was no existing support for it.

        • It would be kinda tricky to port a C++ framework to the platform for which there is no C++ compiler (and no theoretical possibility to even write one with any decent performance of generated code).

    • Qt is a C++ framework. It cannot be a "first-class .NET citizen" by definition, since C++ itself is not a first-class .NET citizen.

      I suspect that you can already run Qt on .NET using VC++ compiling to MSIL - it can do it to almost any C++ app. But the result is only .NET in a sense that it is bytecode which runs in .NET VM - it does not tie into .NET type system. You cannot take a C++ class and use it from C# in the same way you can today with code written in VB, F# or IronPython.

  • by ryzvonusef (1151717) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:32AM (#35190850) Journal

    http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/12/nokias-marginalization-of-meego-came-as-a-surprise-to-intel/ [engadget.com]

    I wonder whether there is any point in continuing on with QT? I mean it's awesome and all *now*, but will still be awesome after one year of neglect?

    • If Nokia abandons Qt, maybe Intel or some other interested party could buy it from Nokia and continue, or if no suitable buyer can be found, maybe the Trolltech guys can fork it and start up Trolltech again.

      • by ryzvonusef (1151717) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @07:35AM (#35191526) Journal

        The key word is "abandon". Can we legally compel Nokia to give up Qt just because it's not giving *sufficient* care?

        I was looking around the net, and I found this interesting tidbit:

        http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.php [kde.org]

        The Foundation has a license agreement with Nokia. This agreement ensures that the Qt will continue to be available under both the LGPL 2.1 and the GPL 3. Should Nokia discontinue the development of the Qt Free Edition under these licenses, then the Foundation has the right to release Qt under a BSD-style license or under other open source licenses. The agreement stays valid in case of a buy-out, a merger or bankruptcy.

        In case MS buys Nokia, or the company goes bankrupt, then there is a choice, but just mere neglect might not cut the cheese.

        Also, what does "discontinue development" imply? If Nokia keeps toting out at least one update per year, would that count?

        I am not an expert at legalese, but reading that paragraph tell me that there does exist some sort of "fork now!" option. Whether that will be good enough is another question.

        • by c (8461)

          > I am not an expert at legalese, but reading that paragraph tell me that
          > there does exist some sort of "fork now!" option. Whether that will be
          > good enough is another question.

          If Qt is available under LGPL and GPL, then "fork now" is always an option. The only question is whether someone might to push for abandonment to get a different license, or to get control of the "Qt" trademark, or something like that.

          For KDE's needs, LGPL and GPL should be good enough.

    • by mickwd (196449)

      The whole Meego thing was a disastrous decision for Nokia.

      Maemo (as on the N900) works great as an OS. The UI is decent enough too. The "only" thing missing is applications.

      Have a look at talk.maemo.org. [maemo.org] The main complaints there are things like the old version of Ovi Maps (no turn-by-turn voice navigation), the old version of Flash (no version 10.1 with hardware acceleration), the poor email program, missing support for a few "nice" features like per-caller ringtones.

      Nokia found themselves suddenly trailin

  • Fork (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Daniel Phillips (238627) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:37AM (#35190866)

    The only possible scenario for QT under Microsoft's control is gamesmanship to dilute it and undermine its usefulness to KDE and other open source projects. The only rational response is a quick and clean fork under a new name. In this way QT will develop better and faster than it ever has before, guided by the needs of a community and not handicapped by the vagaries of corporate politics. This has to be spearheaded by the KDE project, the largest participant in the QT ecosystem.

    • Take a deep breath (Score:5, Informative)

      by 21mhz (443080) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @05:34AM (#35191204) Journal

      The only possible scenario for QT under Microsoft's control

      Qt is not under Microsoft's control. Nokia is not under Microsoft's control to begin with.

    • I am a nerd.

      I am a nerd who watch the stock market closely.

      After the announcement of Nokia jumping into the sack with Microsoft, this is what happened ---> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/software/elop-gambles-nokias-future-on-microsoft-partnership/articleshow/7486397.cms [indiatimes.com] " .... with Nokia's stock closing down a staggering 14.22 percent at 7.00 euros

    • by Verunks (1000826)
      Qt is not just used by open source software, but by many commercial software that probably payed a license too before it was lgpled, some of these are big softwares like google earth or autodesk maya, you can see some of these here http://qt.nokia.com/qt-in-use/target/desktop [nokia.com] and here http://qt.nokia.com/qt-in-use [nokia.com]
  • Gag me. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lexidation (1825996) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:39AM (#35190882)

    Lots of great questions and comments coming from you all on the future of Qt. One thing is for sure: Qt remains to play an important role in Nokia. We’ll have more Qt-related posts coming this week during Mobile World Congress...

    I'm used to PR people spray painting happy faces all over everything, but this is some of the gaggiest PR barf I've had spilled in my path.

  • Fool me once (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Compaqt (1758360) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:44AM (#35190902) Homepage

    Back last autumn, Nokia had promised that it had finally gotten its platform house in order:

    -S40 for dirt-cheap phones. No apps anyway, so it doesn't matter for developers.
    -Symbian for feature phones.
    -And Meego for advanced phones and devices.

    But devs would only have to use one platform (Qt) to target both Symbian and Meego. Oh, and Qt will also run on Win/Mac/Lin. Icing on top.

    That's a story. And after all the bungling, it looked like devs and users would forgive Nokia, and give it another shot.

    But now, it changes the platform story once again. No stability. No trust. And no reason why users and devs shouldn't abandon Nokia for Android.

    • Re:Fool me once (Score:5, Insightful)

      by imroy (755) <imroykun@gmail.com> on Sunday February 13, 2011 @04:16AM (#35191018) Homepage Journal

      Back last autumn, Nokia had promised that it had finally gotten its platform house in order

      That would have been before Stephen Elop, former Microsoft executive, became the president and CEO of Nokia?

      • by Compaqt (1758360)

        Actually, interestingly, it was afterwards.

        At that time I thought that Elop wasn't an MSBot, and actually had a good plan suited to Nokia's history and situation.

        I can't find a link at the moment because "Qt Nokia" just brings up the latest developments.

        Nokia's also dropped the free music on Ovi, which was a great differentiator.

    • Re:Fool me once (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Paradise Pete (33184) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @05:08AM (#35191142) Journal
      Instead we are seeing the slow-motion theft and destruction of the entire company. It started with appeasement. Then this move, accompanied by some BS hand-waving about the future of the other technology. That was necessary to keep the in-house people from a full-scale revolt. Then those systems will be, when the time is right, "deprecated," and divisions laid off, and it becomes an all-Microsoft OS operation. The company will steadily lose market share and money and eventually get bought for a song, ala Palm. But along the way they'll have shoveled a big pile of money Microsoft's way, while at the same time allowing Microsoft to prolong its own fantasy of being relevant in the future.
    • Since then they have an idiot new executive that says the company that still sells more phones than anyone is in such deep trouble that it is "an oil platform on fire" and everything has to be changed.
      That's code for firing anyone that gets in the way of bringing in as many friends into sinecures to feed their snouts at the trough and an excuse for any irrational near criminal behaviour. Expect no promises to be kept on anything and the company to decline for a while.
      Nokia is probably big enough to survive

    • by Weezul (52464)

      Maemo never had its own developers, just Linux developers who used it. Yes, the move towards Qt looked cool, but all that meant was familiarity for QT developers, you'd never get write once run anywhere, hell you don't get that under Android.

      Yet, you can easily run Andoird apps under Maemo [youtube.com], which basically resolves all app concerns for users. Nokia should have pursued this rather obvious option form the day Android was released. Ideally, they should've supported an open source product to turn GnuSTEP int

  • by Mr Z (6791) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @03:47AM (#35190908) Homepage Journal

    - Nokia also announced it will ship its first MeeGo-related device in 2011, which will rely on the Qt ecosystem – and then will continue with MeeGo as an open source project for future disruption.

    Uh... "for future disruption"? What does that mean?

    And "will continue with MeeGo as an open source project".... Does that mean the community of folks who buy it have to provide their own updates, much like what has happened with the N900? [maemo.org]

    • by SwedishPenguin (1035756) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @04:32AM (#35191052)

      Stephen Elop kept using the word "disruption", I'm don't think even he even knows exactly what he means by that...

    • Uh... "for future disruption"? What does that mean?

      I think he means disruption as in disruptive technologies i.e. technologies that make present tech redundant. So the iPhone was a disruptive technology in that it changed the market for mobile smart phones.

      I think that the statement is meant to imply that Meego was being kept so that they can produce a product in the future that was disruptive to the competition in the mobile market

      Whether that is a genuine possibility or a carrot to retain staff is open

      • by Znork (31774)
        It could be something kept in reserve in case WP gets canned when Ballmer gets canned.

        But I suspect it's mostly just words to keep Intel from blowing a fuse and to keep the ship jumping to a managable rate.
    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @06:46AM (#35191432) Journal

      For the N900? I was on the open source developer program for the 770. About a year after I got mine (a week before the official release), they released an update to the OS that only ran on the newer model. It was eventually back-ported as a 'community edition', but it was clear that Nokia had no interest in supporting older devices - if you weren't buying a new one each year, they didn't want to know.

      Trying to replace Symbian with Linux was an incredibly stupid idea. The Symbian kernel has better power management, lower memory usage, a cleaner capabilities model, better realtime support, and the microkernel design scales nicely to multicore phones (the kernel services are all in largely independent processes already). The only bad thing about it was the old C++ APIs that were heavily optimised for devices with under 4MB of RAM and made life hard for programmers who didn't care about obsessive-compulsive memory conservation, but you've been able to program for Symbian without going near these for some time now.

      They even had a POSIX subsystem for Symbian that would have been used to port *NIX apps (no fork(), but most code uses vfork() anyway).

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Trying to replace Symbian with Linux was an incredibly stupid idea.

        Right, that's why everyone and their mom is doing this or something just like it.

        The Symbian kernel has better power management, lower memory usage, a cleaner capabilities model, better realtime support, and the microkernel design scales nicely to multicore phones

        So Symbian uses less resources but now we're using more powerful devices so this doesn't matter, and their POSIX model is incomplete unlike Android... I'm not seeing the strengths here. Linux is pretty great at multiprocessing, by the way.

  • I thought Nokia had come to its senses. I thought they were defining Symbian as legacy, MeeGo as dead, and moving on to Windows Mobile 7 as the ecosystem of choice going forward with a full partnership in helping to define what Windows Mobile 7 was.

    Now I see Nokia is traveling down all three paths. What? This will work out for them every bit as well as Palm supporting both PalmOS and WinCE, never producing a great device for either OS and then eventually being subsumed by HP (although I have to admit th

    • Re:The Insane Triad (Score:4, Informative)

      by Microlith (54737) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @04:45AM (#35191080)

      Now I see Nokia is traveling down all three paths. What?

      They are not. All non-Microsoft paths will end, I suspect the remnants of the MeeGo path will be out by year's end, if not earlier. Symbian will have a longer tail due to its installed base and pipeline.

      They will both charge on down the WP7 path, pushing closed, locked down systems with Microsoft firmly in control.

    • by 21mhz (443080)

      Now I see Nokia is traveling down all three paths. What?

      It's pretty much continuing what it was doing, except now it diverts part of the insane R&D money that used to be sunk in Symbian to little effect, towards producing some WP7 devices where it does not have to do a lot software from scratch. I mean, it's an improvement.

    • Now I see Nokia is traveling down all three paths. What?

      It sounded more like an attempt at consolation of all the Symbian and Qt developers who have been drinking the Kool-Aid for the last few months, and have now found out that no future supply is coming. They were, in essence, told that it will be available for a little bit more in small quantities.

  • Are they going to finally get all their documentation up to date? For a prototype application I tried using Qt and found the documentation to be conflicting, and where it wasn't conflicting, it was just generally lacking.

    • by Noughmad (1044096)

      Wait, what? The Qt documentation is by far the best I've seen. Care to point out a few examples where it's conflicting and/or lacking?

  • by G3ckoG33k (647276) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @04:07AM (#35190984)

    Motives of Stephen Elop, doesn't own any Nokia shares, but hundreds of thousand Microsoft shares? Where is the loyalty?

    From http://www.tracked.com/person/stephen-elop/ [tracked.com]

    Aug 31, 2010: SOLD 23,250 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Jan 21, 2010: SOLD 8,434 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Sep 25, 2009: BOUGHT 136,308 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Sep 25, 2009: SOLD 12,422 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Aug 31, 2009: SOLD 11,614 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Sep 26, 2008: BOUGHT 51,301 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Sep 26, 2008: SOLD 4,675 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Aug 31, 2008: SOLD 6,939 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Aug 29, 2008: BOUGHT 76,141 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Jan 22, 2008: BOUGHT 62,520 MSFT shares [SEC Filing]

    Nov 24, 2006: SOLD 1,315 ADBE shares [SEC Filing]

    Oct 24, 2006: SOLD 1,315 ADBE shares [SEC Filing]

    Oct 16, 2006: BOUGHT 100,000 ADBE shares [SEC Filing]

    Oct 16, 2006: SOLD 100,000 ADBE shares [SEC Filing]

    Oct 13, 2006: BOUGHT 116,124 ADBE shares [SEC Filing]

    and microsoft-beware-stephen-elop-is-a-flight-risk [siliconbeat.com]

    • 1. Microsoft Fat Cat Exec leaves for heading Nokia.
      2. Nokia ditches internal Linux development and saves MSs limping phone OS.
      3. Profit!

      How could that be a surprise?

      • by 21mhz (443080)

        You did not want to wait for step 2 to become true in order to post this witty comment. This is understandable, but might be proven wrong.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Rithiur (736954)

      According to Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat, Elop wasn't allowed to trade the shares [www.hs.fi]. Nokia informed the paper that after Elop started planning the co-operation with Microsoft, trading away the Microsoft stock and buying Nokia stock instead would have been considered illegal due to insider information.

      A poor translation of the article is as follows:

      On Saturday, Nokia informed Helsingin Sanomat that the CEO of Nokia, Stephen Elop, doesn't own any Nokia shares yet due to stock market regulations. The sam

      • by Znork (31774)
        Of course, that came as an utter surprise to Elop, and his loyalty remains utterly in the company in which he would have bought shares. If only he'd been allowed to.

        Instead of waiting a few years for the request for state assistance, the Finnish state should simply go in and nationalize the company now, before it's utterly destroyed. The idea here is basically gutting the company, leaving it geared to simply be a me-too manufacturer, which will be the end of Nokia as a Finnish business anyway.
    • by Turmio (29215)
      Here in Finland the same question has been raised in media since yesterday. The official response from Nokia is that due to Finnish insider trading laws, Elop has not been able to neither sell existing Microsoft shares nor buy new Nokia shares because his evident participation in the planning of the partnership between companies and that he'll be buying Nokia shares when it's possible for him to do that legally. I don't know if this is bullshit or not...
  • by t2t10 (1909766) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @05:14AM (#35191158)

    The retention of Nokia’s 200 million Symbian-users is vital

    Yeah, it is. Good luck with that. You effectively just canceled their platform (Symbian) and the only platform with any viable migration strategy (MeeGo). You also just removed the incentive for developers to create new apps for the Symbian platform.

    You could have done something special by turning MeeGo into a platform that allows users to run Symbian, Qt, and Android, giving people a viable migration path. But none of that is going to happen with Windows Phone 7. And nobody is going to believe you are going to keep spending money on MeeGo now that you are in Microsoft's pocket and have your company run by an ex-Microsoft exec.

    Developers are perceiving that MeeGo is dead, and with it, Qt is dead for your products. You might as well stop investing money in them now.

    • by Tanuki64 (989726)

      You also just removed the incentive for developers to create new apps for the Symbian platform.

      I just cancelled all my Qt mobile apps. No more profit in it. Fortunately I don't need them. Would just have been some nice extra income. I think I might take a look into android.

  • microsoft. there is a record of this recurring in the past 3 decades, yet, corporations and boards keep making that mistake over and over. one wonders why ...
    • Greed.. They're hoping for short-term profits, no matter the impact on the long term, they'll have bailed out by then.

  • Let's imagine a bunch of upset Qt devs get together and form a company to develop Qt outside Nokia.

    What's their business plan?

    • by Tanuki64 (989726)

      What's their business plan?

      A difficult one since they would be stuck with the LGPL.

      • Open source businesses exist and do quite well in many cases. What approaches would work here?

      • So, they sell support and training. Apparently (according to a Qt blog) there are 400,000 Qt developers, so a reasonable base to support. It's really quite an opportunity to be given Qt at it's current (advanced) state LGPL'd and be able to build a support business for that, without having to incurred the $millions it took to develop or the $150million or so it took Nokia to aquire!

  • by NewToNix (668737) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @06:43AM (#35191428) Journal
    I wish I could take credit for this, but it's from a comment by "eMPee584" over on the http://blog.qt.nokia.com/2011/02/12/nokia-new-strategic-direction-what-is-the-future-for-qt/ [nokia.com] (Blog link from the summary).

    I think it just sums up the situation succinctly:

    "Nokia got trapped by that win32.elop.trojan."

    Has look and feel of a Zero Day exploit, and is creating that sort of confusion as well.

    One could easily say it's not Zero Day, but then all ZD's are developed quietly over time and simply 'sprung' on the unsuspecting and unprepared innocent victims one day. Pretty much what happened.

    QT has merit, and if the merit is good enough, and I think it is, it will have a strong future... just probably not with Nokia. (and yes I am a GNU/OSS/FLOSS fan boy, just not a zealot about it).

    Anyway much credit to "eMPee584" for such a fine summation (assuming he was not quoting some one else, without attribution).

    • by Tanuki64 (989726)

      QT has merit, and if the merit is good enough, and I think it is, it will have a strong future... just probably not with Nokia. (and yes I am a GNU/OSS/FLOSS fan boy, just not a zealot about it).

      The only chance I see for Qt is a fork and a very quick community driven development of Qt for android. Only chance for mobile devices that is. For desktops it will be fine the way it is for at least two years.

  • by bl8n8r (649187) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @07:59AM (#35191588)
    - MS. EULA agreement when installing qt
    - kde4 will now come with regedit and Tweakui-95
    - will ship with Norton antivirus
    - all kde system services will now run as root
    - system tray icons in Kde will mysteriosly multiply like drunken gerbils
  • by Verunks (1000826) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @09:09AM (#35191770)
    all slashdot icons got updated with the new design, why the hell you still use that old kde logo? those are the logo you should use http://www.kde.org/stuff/clipart.php [kde.org]
  • by Johnny Loves Linux (1147635) on Sunday February 13, 2011 @02:02PM (#35193068)
    • From the Halloween documents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_Documents), specifically document 1 (http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/halloween1.html) and document 3 (http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/halloween3.html) ESR's analysis of how Microsoft perceives interacting with others:

      To put it even more bluntly: "commodity" services and protocols are good things for customers; they promote competition and choice. Therefore, for Microsoft to win, the customer must lose.

      Microsoft truly behaves as though it corporately believes that there's only a fixed pool of key ideas, most already discovered, which software designers must squabble over in zero-sum competition until the end of time. In that game, the only definition of `winning' is cornering enough goodies to guarantee you a monopoly lock.

    • Micorosoft is a software company (even if it's run by a marketing execs); they make money selling software.
    • Microsoft is an OS company; they make money selling an operating system.
    • Microsoft is a for profit company that sells software for their operating system. They're not in the business of supporting other operating systems (example: the recent H264 plugin for Chrome is for Windows only Chrome. Some choice!)
    • Microsoft encourages developers,developers,developers,developers, only so long as it improves their market share of operating systems. Any developer who competes with Microsoft software or whose product is deemed useful to Microsoft is either eliminated or assimilated (preferrably after running them into bankruptcy first -- see Spyglass and Internet Explorer -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Internet_Explorer [wikipedia.org])
    • From wikipedia's entry on conflict resolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_resolution) there are 5 strategies of resolving conflict: accommodation,avoidance,collaboration,compromise,and competition. Here's the definition of competition:

      assert one's viewpoint at the potential expense of another. It can be useful when achieving one's objectives outweighs one's concern for the relationship.

      Here's the definition of accommodation:

      surrender one's own needs and wishes to accommodate the other party.

      • In any negotiations with Microsoft one might assume that because Microsoft is a corporation composed of many individuals that negotiations will involved either collaboration or compromise. However, you need to keep in mind that Microsoft believes in zero sum --- in order for them to win, you have to lose. Which means that in the process of negotiations with Microsoft you'll be going through the following stages of negotiation:
        1. Assume collaboration. You'll explain your requirements and assume they will explain theirs and you'll assume you'll find a way to satisfy both. However, this won't happen as Microsoft want to win by making you lose, so they won't accede to your suggestions.
        2. Since you don't get everything you want you'll assume the strategy has switched to compromise, clearly you're giving some to Microsoft, and you expect them to give some concessions in return to you as a way of compromising. But, Microsoft believes in zero sum, and its strategy is competitive. Microsoft gives no concessions, only face saving rationalizations so you can convince yourself that you're getting something from them.
        3. Whether you realize it or not, your strategy has now become accommodation. To save face, you delude yourself into believing you're an equal partner with Microsoft until it's too late.

        Let's analyze the Nokia-Microsoft "deal". What has Microsoft gained?

        • Nokia is using Microsoft's operating system. (No Linux need apply. Die symbian, die!)
        • Nokia is using Microsoft's api instead of another. (No qt is allowed)
        • Microsoft

FORTRAN is for pipe stress freaks and crystallography weenies.

Working...