| 6:27 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Microsoft and Open Source were words i didn´t expect to see in the same sentence. Are things going to change since Bill Gates is no longer active?
| 6:58 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
One thing you can be sure of --- you won't be able to work with the source code with a text editor and an FTP tool ... you will have to buy "Something Microsoft".
Unless you can read the cryptic MS classes and the bloated HTML produced by the generators (ie, MS-Word export ala FrontPage style, .NET, .ASP, etc..), you will have to "keep updated" with the latest MS developer tool$.
Oh yeah--- and the code will need to run on a Windows server --- try to FTP a file in place and blow out all the permissions... not fun.
Funny they chose to use "Plex" (as in GooglePlex) in the name --- typical MS marketing. Unoriginal and late to the table.
[edited by: tedster at 4:00 pm (utc) on June 28, 2006]
| 7:15 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for this link - good stuff.
| 8:47 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Not really open. Most of these projects are "shared source"... meaning they aren't actually "open"... you can't really incorporate it into other projects. None of the projects I looked quickly through had an actual open source license attached.
For something to be open source, you need to use an OSI-approved license:
| 10:31 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
From the license:
Microsoft grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to reproduce the software, prepare derivative works of the software and distribute the software or any derivative works that you create.
Microsoft grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under licensed patents to make, have made, use, practice, sell, and offer for sale, and/or otherwise dispose of the software or derivative works of the software.
| 8:18 am on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
lexipixel - Actually you can do all of that!
I'm not sure why you are having a go at MS for trying to head in an open source direction. Would you rather they didn't?
| 8:48 am on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I Think its great...nothing like open source and a good move as Bill makes his exit.
However, there isnt a dang thing in there...
| 9:33 am on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm a bit sceptic of using CodePlex. I sounds more like a marketing move than a real service; It's not like they are making money, so I wonder if they keep dedicated to it by improving the service over time (more than 2 years) and really listen to user feedback.
| 9:37 am on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yeah I'm wondering why they didn't load it with more software too... that and why a new website? Why not just plop this into the msdn?
| 5:12 pm on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Microsoft is to software development as AOL is to the internet.
| 6:09 pm on Jun 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
can i earn money threw this programme by participating…?
| 6:42 am on Jun 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Can I use the source code and change it according to my need to incorporate the same into my software/application?
[edited by: engine at 11:29 am (utc) on June 30, 2006]
| 9:40 am on Jun 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
mandarseo, yes. The license refers to that as "any derivative works that you create".
Welcome to Webmaster World! You can't self promote urls here.