How Microsoft lost the office file format battle

http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;535961040;fp;2;fpid;3

There are two main ways to fail at the standards game: You can create software that handles documents in formats for which no true standards exist, or you can create a standard that exists only on paper and in committee, with no reference software implementation. Amazingly, for all its hype and bluster, with OOXML Microsoft has managed to do both.

I couldn't describe it better. OXML seems to be a dead standard at this point! Even if it it's no longer "MS OOXML" and is managed by ISO. In short: OOXML is defective by design

How open source has influenced Windows Server 2008

http://port25.technet.com/archive/2008/02/27/opening-windows-server-2008.aspx

Writing a kernel module for FreeBSD

A "hello world" FreeBSD kernel modelue, with basic setup and procedure described:

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/writing_a_kernel_module_for_freebsd

Also a nice set of resources is listed at the end of the linked article.

Fractured YEARFRAC and Discounted DISC

It is obvious that Excel OOXML has currently many small, but serious flaws:

http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/05/fractured-yearfrac-and-discounted-disc.html

In fact the problems described makes me think about throwing away the whole MS Office 2007 forever! Boy, am I glad I have never installed it. :-)

Book: Autotools - a practitioner's guide to Autoconf, Automake and Libtool

A nice and interesting thing to read:

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/books/autotools_a_guide_to_autoconf_automake_libtool

Fight Microsoft with their own weapon

So, Microsoft puts out its hand and offers help with porting open-source software, to make it run best on the Windows platform. How mean. Understandable from marketing and business point of view, but mean anyway (and hey, that's my opinion!).

I have a proposal then, a simple one. Since Windows users are already used to trial versions, time-limited, feature-limited, shareware and other pieces of software which they constantly have to "unlock" by using codes found on the net (or keygens), so let it be!

Let's give Windows users what they already know:

1. Limited editions of Free and Open-Source Software for Windows.
2. Full-featured versions, including source code, for all other Operating Systems.

So if someone from Microsoft (or other third-party company) wants to keep working on a port for Windows, let it be. Let them even capitalize on the effort! This way THEY will have to keep up with the upstream. Or if they create substantial improvements, they will HAVE TO release their modified source code (that's the beauty of the GPL license!)

Your offer was insincere, so you won't get what you asked for.
Have it your way, Microsoft!

Ballmer: We'll outsmart open source

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-959112.html

"Linux is a serious competitor," said Ballmer. "We have to compete with free software, on value, but in a smart way. We cannot price at zero, so we need to justify our posture and pricing. Linux isn't going to go away--our job is to provide a better product in the marketplace."

And Thomas Lee said about "most valued professionals" on Microsoft platform:

The [MVP] title is highly regarded. "You are recognized by your peers, not by an exam that you can cheat in." Linux and its community have a symbiotic relationship, he said: "You don't have that same thing at Microsoft, but there are people who are passionate and technical who are committed to doing a great job."

In FOSS, such people are called Hackers, or the White Hats (compare with Black Hat).