Of Open Source, Patents et al

As the open-source v/s closed source debate rages on with companies and brands on either side of the fence each trying to gain the upper hand, it seems that Microsoft has started to change its policies to ensure sustained control of the software markets.

A perfect example of this is Microsoft's policy in China which includes tolerating piracy - one of the reasons why China has not yet woken up to the Linux-driven open-source revolution. Apparently, it took Microsoft nearly 15 years of struggle in the Chinese markets and billions of lost dollars to formulate its plan of pricing its products at the lowest possible rates and working in sync with the Chinese government - a policy that has paid dividends. Apparently Bill Gates says that while it was terrible that people in China pirated so much software, if they were going to pirate anybody's software he'd certainly prefer it be Microsoft's.

So does this prove that Microsoft is worried about maintaining its long-standing dominance of the software markets? You bet. Open-source is both the present and the future. Why must Windows be priced exorbitantly when all its features (and even some more powerful than those) are present in Linux which you can all download and use for free? The people in Redmond realize this grave threat to business and there are some policies which indicate changes are afoot.

For example, take the instance of Microsoft releasing Visual Studio Express Editions for free. Maybe it realizes that with so many languages all packed with platform-independent features available in the market (Java, Python to name a few) it can't afford to rely on its Windows environment to ensure the survival of its Visual Studio suite. And hence the available free downloads (albeit with restricted features yet enough of them to be going on with.)

So is Microsoft going the 'free' way? Apparently not, if reports of patent terrorism are to be believed.

So will it finally give up its policy of trying to preserve its intellectual property by obfuscation? Will it realize that opening up their source codes will accelerate the development of computing? Doesn't look like it.

For the biggest argument that closed-source has is the attempt to protect intellectual property at all costs. Time for that to change, methinks.

Speaking of protection of intellectual property, there is interesting and most disturbing evidence emerging of an increasing number of lawsuits by inventors of new treatment technologies, citing infringement of their intellectual property that is threatening to interfere with effective treatment of patients. I mean, imagine what happened if you went for a surgery where it would take three weeks to recover fully instead of one where you could be up and running in three days flat only because the latter is protected by patents all over the board.

Perhaps it is time we looked hard and long at the concept of intellectual property and patents and did something to change the fact that the current system is proving to be a hindrance to progress and innovation.