MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-09-19 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] MS "Open Source"
|
Opinion: Microsoft, yes Microsoft,
admits to using open-source software
in its forthcoming Windows Server
2003 Compute Cluster Edition. But,
after all, what else could it do?
9 comments posted
Add your opinion
RELATED LINKS
* FEMA, Microsoft Tiptoe
Toward Open Standards
* One More License Down, Fifty
More to Go
* Firefox 1.5 Beta Looks
Better than Ever
* A Small Linux-Borne Light in
Katrina's Aftermath
* Wanted: Good, Open Source
E-Mail Client for Windows
One of technology's dirty little
not-so-secret secrets is that
Microsoft has been using open-source
software since the early '90s in its
TCP/IP network stack.
Now, however, Microsoft has finally
confessed to using open-source in a
forthcoming product: Windows Server
2003 Compute Cluster Edition.
The reason why Microsoft uses
BSD-licensed TCP/IP for its network
stack was the same reason almost
everyone does: The BSD TCP/IP works
well, and its socket-based API
(application programming interface)
was already becoming the accepted
way for computers to work with each
other.
Today, all Web browsers and servers
on all platforms default to using
TCP/IP socket 80 because the socket
model, rather than the now-obsolete
STREAMS model, became the world's
networking standard.
Almost all Internet-based programs,
like e-mail and instant messaging,
depend on the socket model.
The same thing is true of MPI
(Message Passing Interface).
MPI is the universal standard for
MPC (massively parallel computing)
message-passing models.
While debate continues as to what's
the best way to past messages back
and forth between nodes of a cluster
or gird, with PVM (Parallel Virtual
Machine) still having supporters,
chances are if you look underneath
the hood of a large cluster,
supercomputer or grid, you'll find
MPI.
This happened for a very simple
reason: Application developers don't
want to reinvent programs that can
make use of a cluster.
With MPI in place, they can port
their programs from one platform to
another without undue worry about
IPC (interprocess communications).
Of course, Microsoft could have come
up with something that duplicated
what MPI does, but this is one field
where Microsoft can't move in and
make up its own rules.
eWEEK.com Special Report: Enterprise
Wars: Linux vs. Windows
It took years to put together MPI.
Almost everyone who's anyone—IBM,
Intel, Sun—uses MPI in their
clusters.
The Globus Alliance, perhaps the
most important grid-computing
organization, also uses MPI.
Now, Microsoft might still have come
up with its own implementation of
MPI.
It is, after all, an open-standard.
But why reinvent the wheel when an
excellent, open-source version of
MPI, MPICH2, was already available?
Why, indeed?
Microsoft has finally figured it
out. You don't have to invent
something, or modify it to make it
semi-proprietary, as the boys from
Redmond did with the Kerberos
authentication protocol, to get
value from it.
By adopting an open version of MPI,
Microsoft has made it possible for
ISVs to easily port their
applications to a cluster platform,
Server 2003 Compute Cluster Edition,
which otherwise they would have been
ignored.
PointerClick hereto read more from
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols about
Microsoft moving toward open
standards.
Getting programs to run properly on
clusters, grids and supercomputers
is an unforgiving task. Anything
that makes it easier is welcome.
Besides, an open-source program has
already had many eyes look it over
for faults and holes.
If Microsoft had had to make its
own, they would have missed out on
the benefits of years of hands-on
quality assurance.
As Microsoft Kyril Faenov,
Microsoft's director for High
Performance Computing said: "The
interesting thing is that we are
already starting to see results.
ISVs are coming back and saying that
they just have to recompile and
relink, and their applications just
work. So we are trying to make it as
easy as possible for them to be able
to run their code in a Windows
environment."
Wow, all those benefits…from using
open-source.
Am I wrong, or is there a lesson
here?
Can it be that open-source really is
a great way to create software?
Can it be that even Microsoft has
finally figured that out?
You know what? I think it has.
Now, we'll see if they can get the
next part, which is that it's better
to give than to receive.
Faenov says Microsoft will. I hope
they do. I hope they do.
eWEEK.com Senior Editor Steven J.
Vaughan-Nichols has been using and
writing about operating systems
since the late '80s and thinks he
may just have learned something
about them along the way. He can be
reached at sjvn-at-ziffdavis.com.
Click here for an archive of Steven
J. Vaughan-Nichols' columns.
PointerCheck out eWEEK.com's Linux &
Open Source Center for the latest
open-source news, reviews and
analysis.
|
|
