Microsoft and Interoperability: Buzz-word or Promise?
A public service announcement, for those of you who are interested: the sixth annual SambaXP conference will be held from April 23-25, 2007 at the Hotel Freizeit in Goettingen, Germany. This Samba developers' conference should prove to be an interesting one, given some of the licensing choices and technology breakthroughs coming for the Samba crew.
And while I am happy to put in a plug for a community event here and there, that's not the sole reason I am mentioning this particular conference. What interests me about this SambaXP is who's not (thus far) coming to the event: Microsoft.
I know, big surprise there, right? Well, in this post-Novell deal world, it actually is--if you accept the interoperability premise Microsoft purports in the media.
Let me explain. First, right now no one from Microsoft--engineering, development, or otherwise--is currently scheduled to attend the SambaXP conference. And while a specific reason hasn't been given, an important clue to Microsoft's stance can be found from comments made by Director of Platform Technology Strategy Sam Ramji at MTS07, quoted in a blog by consultant Ben Galbraith:
"Would I like to contribute to Samba? You bet. Am I constrained by the fact he testified against us in the EU and the general politics between Steve and Jeremy? Yes. My hands are tied. That sucks. If Jeremy [Allison] would just shut up, I could help him, but that's a different issue," Ramji is quoted as saying.
For those who don't know, Ramji is actually responsible running the Open Source Software Lab at Microsoft--so when he says that political conflicts are preventing him from working with the Samba folks, that's fairly significant. Curiously, though, this reluctance to meet and work with the Samba team is apparently a one-sided affair.
I have it on very good authority that members of the Samba team have gone out of its way to reach out to Microsoft on technical issues, including inviting them to this year's SambaXP. So whatever beef Microsoft thinks the Samba developers have against them doesn't seem that bad. Frankly, it seems like these remarks by Ramji are disingenuous (and a bit rude). They're just an excuse to maintain the real status quo at Redmond.
I were a Microsoft customer looking at all of their claims of interoperability (especially made in concert with new partner Novell), I would expect that working on such a huge interoperability project like Samba would just be a given.
Evidently not.
So, as a hypothetical customer, is Microsoft really doing its best to achieve interoperability, or is it just paying lip service for the benefit of its new partners, while playing a stalling game with every other project that could accomplish integration and interoperability?
Looks to me like interoperability is not Microsoft's true objective.
I have no doubts that people within Microsoft and Samba disagree on a lot of issues, but the whole goal of Samba has always been to achieve the very interoperability that Microsoft is now suddenly touting. Surely a common ground can be found to work together on the technical issues.
So, Microsoft, what's it going to be? Samba's reaching out. Will you accept their call to work together?
it's as easy as that but then again, you have no interest what so ever of working with SAMBA so this excuse is quite convenient.
bg
@bproffitt:
It's unfortunate that you are taking specific comments out of context, having neither attended my session nor been part of my phone conversation with Jeremy Allison.
It is this kind of uninformed hostile attitude that impedes the progress that I am trying to make in the industry. If you wish to improve the state of interoperability between Linux and Windows, please demonstrate that by taking the time to understand the issues at hand. I am available for email discussions - sramji@microsoft.com - and will be fair and transparent with you.
If you need references as to my sincerity or candor, you can ask Jeremy Allison or Mike Schroepfer.
Sam Ramji,
Director, Open Source Software Lab,
Microsoft Corporation
(mailto:sramji@microsoft.com)
Sam:
I welcome the opportunity. I have just sent you an opening message, because if I have indeed mis-reported something, I will want to correct it.
Peace,
BKP
Come now, Mr. Ramji. You are a corporate executive. Nothing personal, but the default assumption on sincerity and candor is that however much of them you might wish to have, your employer will not allow you to deploy them if that gets in the way of their legal responsibility to put profits ahead of everything else. You may be sincere and candid in your private life, but in your official communications you must be assumed to be neither. In a world where PR definitively forces honesty into the back seat, your claims to personal integrity themselves seem essentially like a PR ploy to attempt to put questions out of bounds.
I might add that looking at your quoted words and the broader context, I don't see what narrower context might give them a different impact. The fact is that the story of Microsoft is one of talking interoperability in theory but avoiding it at all costs in practice--which is doubtless what Mr. Allison testified. Presumably he was under oath, and simply being sincere, candid and transparent--attributes you appear to value until their exercise is to your detriment.
Rufus:
Your comments are fair - my point is that there is missing context which makes the situation more sensible. As you inadvertently point out in your statement, it is the nature of missing context that you would not be able to see what would change the meaning of the statements and actions - or inactions - reported.
I respect Jeremy's technical ability and the interoperability work he has done; in fact my lab has supported some of his team's work by documenting smbtorture and by working with the Vista team to overcome issues between Vista and smbclient prior to Vista's release.
I realize and accept that in general Microsoft - and thereby me and my team - are seen as "guilty until proven innocent" by many in the Samba community. The point is that I am committed to interoperability, and have both a research lab and now a development lab that can contribute significantly to interop between Windows and Linux. This is a step-by-step process as it entails both software and community development.
I have shared more context with Brian and look forward to a broader dialog both with him and with other Linux journalists in the future. As you can see, I have posted my email address and am open to 1:1 conversations as well.
Cheers,
Sam