Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Android Cellphones Handhelds

First Phone Out of Microsoft-Nokia -- and It's an Android 193

Posted by timothy
from the glorious-or-inglorious? dept.
An anonymous reader writes BBC reports that the first phone resulting from the Microsoft-Nokia merger has been announced: the Nokia X2. And foiling everybody's ability to guess what OS it would run on, the answer is Android. But this being Microsoft, do expect some embrace-and-extend — the user interface is similar to the Windows phone. And it is being offered as a way to hook users into its cloud-based services, several of which come pre-installed as apps. Is this the first Linux product being offered by Microsoft? Can we upgrade Microsoft's social rating from CCC to CCC+?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Phone Out of Microsoft-Nokia -- and It's an Android

Comments Filter:
  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @11:49AM (#47306657)
    I wouldn't say MS is a "major" kernel contributor. They've submitted a number of patches so that their Hyper-V VM so that Linux servers can run Windows in VM. But even with contributions they ranked in 2012 as #17. I don't see them actually contributing anything more than that.
  • various (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @12:36PM (#47307145)

    Can we upgrade Microsoft's social rating from CCC to CCC+?

    For the benefit of those, such as myself, who did not get the reference, CCC is a low bond credit rating. [wikipedia.org]

    Also, a couple of things to keep in mind here about the history of MS corporate strategy. First, MS has a record of adopting (e. g. Kerberos) or imposing (e.g. OpenXML) open standards for the purpose of corrupting or abusing those standards. A record of unscrupulous behavior breeds distrust and it would be reasonable to suspect that MS could have something similar on mind for the Android platform. Good summary of the Kerberos episode here: [vanwensveen.nl]

    In November 1998 an internal memo leaked out of Microsoft which clearly stated that Open Source software not only performs and scales much better than Microsoft Products (it discussed especially the quality and availability of Linux), but also proposed that Microsoft attack these superior products by "de-commoditizing protocols". In other words, when faced with a superior competitor, Microsoft's preferred approach is to corrupt global standards and to introduce proprietary protocols that bind the user to the Microsoft environment.

    Don't believe me; see for yourself - read the Halloween documents, made available by Eric S. Raymond. Incidentally, Microsoft has acknowledged the authenticity of these documents and actually responded to them. It's interesting reading. Very.

    A good example of this policy in action (apart from the HTML and Java deviations described above) is Microsoft's attempt to appropriate the Kerberos protocol. Kerberos is an authentication protocol developed by MIT, distributed as Open Source software. Microsoft added an "innovative improvement" to Kerberos, by misusing a reserved field to specify whether or not an NT machine was allowed to authenticate another Kerberos system, rendering this corrupted version of Kerberos incompatible with Open Source versions in the process. (The misuse of a reserved field, or any field for that matter, is of course a gross violation of protocol standards.) Then Microsoft went on to state that they had "created" an "improved version of Kerberos", called the result their own intellectual property, and threatened to sue anyone who would dare to put it in their software, including Kerberos' inventor MIT. Only the global uproar that followed caused Microsoft to reconsider this nonsense.

    Secondly, and more innocuously, someone at MS might have wised up and realized that profits from their Android patent licensing [zdnet.com] would be better than losses from another round of failed MS OS phone investment.

  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @12:50PM (#47307279)
    According to the most recent contributions [arstechnica.com], MS doesn't even show up. So MS only contributed enough to Linux to make sure that their product would work. I still don't consider that a major contribution.
  • by bmajik (96670) <matt@mattevans.org> on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @01:41PM (#47307719) Homepage Journal

    Microsoft has a long and interesting Linux/FOSS history.

    I remember in the late 90s, Microsoft actually released a Front Page Server Extensions module for Apache on Linux, so people using FP could publish sites to Linux servers.

    During the early 2000s, MS shipped a bunch of GPL'd stuff via the Interix/SFU product.

    Currently, System Center (enterprise management tool) can also monitor and manage Linux machines along side windows (and Mac) machines.

    As noted elsewhere, Microsoft has made Linux a 1st class scenario for Hyper-V on-premise and Azure hosted uses.

    Microsoft has opened some its internal projects to the external community, with acceptable licenses, and Microsoft has also contributed to existing FOSS projects where it has made sense. Internally, "should we use existing FOSS" or "should we open source this?" are questions that are coming up now where in the past, they never did, and asking them would get you some funny looks.

    In the future, you're going to see Microsoft doing a better job of meeting customers in mixed/heterogenous settings. We've got a new CEO that has provided this guidance to the entire company. The market changes have certainly become too large to ignore, but the bottom line is that we're adapting.

    On the business side, getting some of a customer's business is better than getting none of their business.

    As always, we partner with everybody and we compete against everybody. For example, I sit in a building where most of the developers here work on Microsoft's own ERP products, yet I worked on features that let Visual Studio talk to SAP.

  • Re:So what? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @07:29PM (#47310827)

    You are an idiot. All Android devices can access and use apps from the Amazon store.

    It's funny how you go around shilling for Apple and condemning Android when it's extremely clear that you haven't even used an Android device to be able to make any judgements. You are exactly the unthinking, prejudiced type of customer Apple enjoys raping.

Pause for storage relocation.

Working...