Microsoft's Man in Open Source: Sam Ramji on Redmond's Linux Strategy (Datamation)

maybe he would be "glad" for the question to be repeated...

Sounds like doubtalk, full of the standard buzzwords but content-free.

The only possible way that microsoft could "expand interoperability" is to adhere to standards, and I don't see them doing that yet.

"""
Microsoft believes that the next ten years of software will be a time of growth and change where both open source and Microsoft communities will grow together.
"""

Reminds me of something old Landru used to say: "You are not of The Body. You will be absorbed or destroyed."

To bad we can't just destroy MS with logic. ;-)

Damn! MS has managed to hack into my machine and steal the random .signature file that was created recently!

bill@jumbo:~> cat .signature
Proof techniques #1: Proof by Induction.

This technique is used on equations with "n" in them. Induction
techniques are very popular, even the military used them.

SAMPLE: Proof of induction without proof of induction.

We know it's true for n equal to 1. Now assume that it's true
for every natural number less than n. N is arbitrary, so we can take n
as large as we want. If n is sufficiently large, the case of n+1 is
trivially equivalent, so the only important n are n less than n. We
can take n = n (from above), so it's true for n+1 because it's just
about n.
QED. (QED translates from the Latin as "So what?")

The last sentence of the quote imagines Microsoft technologies and open source technologies as separate but interoperating. I'd say Microsoft intends to make a profit by putting its resources into Microsoft technologies, for which it can charge a fee. Any open source it produces will be incidental to its main aim because of that business model.

So is it true that Microsoft will never actually produce open source software? When you think about the answer, Mr Ramji is saying "Yes".

Microsoft already produces open source softwares like IronPython and IronRuby, so I am not sure what this is about.

Huh? It sure looks like English and even
sounds like English but appears carefully
crafted to be 100% content-free.

Then again trying to extract intelligence
from a m$ PR brain fart is particularly
challenging with any shred of logic and
truth buried so deeply in the noise floor.

Rule of thumb here is to trust m$ about
as far as one can toss an elephant, and
most likely considerably less.