It has to be. The date on my computer must be wrong.

Did I just fall through a wormhole into Bizarro world?

Looks like Microsoft's old subversion technique. They'll get in bed with them, under their skin, and then fuck them over.

It's playing with fire

Microsoft have always made a distinction between GPL and other free (libre) software licences. They have a dogmatic problem with GPL because it is designed to ensure any software which is linked to it is also GPL - which does not facilitate the co-existence of free (libre) and non-free software. If you are RMS and believe that non-free software should not be closely associated and linked with free software this makes perfect sense - a position with which I agree - but for a seller of proprietary software it is obviously anathema.

So there is a body of free software which end users are running alongside Microsoft software. While much of it is GPL (which Microsoft will not touch) some of it is licensed under other arrangements (BSD, LGPL, Public Domain).

Microsoft is under the legal cosh, and has been convicted of abusing its monopoly position. It is also seeing public sector organisations looking for open alternatives to its secret file formats and wire protocols. Indeed, the whole debacle of OOXML and ISO was an attempt to be perceived as having an open file format in order to safeguard its position in this sector. So adding further to its "open" credentials without embracing or abetting the full fat GPL is not at all surprising, it is an essential tactic for prolonging its monopoly in the desktop OS and "productivity suite" market.

Does this signal a fundamental change in Microsoft's relationship with free (libre) software? Not really - free software is still attempting to replace Microsoft offerings, not complement them. But do we expect to see more engagement of this limited kind between Microsoft and non-GPL free software? I expect so.

RIP Apache becomes A Patchy.....

The easy way for MS to kill Apache, is to patch it as often as Windows.

It's a PR trick. It's there to make their dwindling image after the Vista fiasco look better. They do say though, you can't polish a turd...

It'll be sheep lying down with goats next - I'm warning you.....

Robert Moore said it first: was today April 1st? It's not, right?......

even El Reg's graphics want it to be 1 April!

Embrace And Extend...........

That m$ will never publish any of the sauce code to windows... for one thing the open sauce boys would fix it so it worked .... and secondly we'd all be able to see how much open sauce code m$ pilfered for windows...

If they want to see Windows taken seriously as a web platform then they're gonna have to do far more than this - simple token gestures just don't do it.

If they really want a love-in, they can start by flashing some proper cash and developing a decent Windows API module for PHP, then some decent documentation.

"it is a recognition of the rival Apache HTTP Web Server's enduring number-one status on the web and Microsoft's desire to have it run on Windows instead of Linux servers"

The only license I know in detail is the GPL, where Embrace-Extend-Extinguish is not possible. How about the Apache license? Would it be possible under it?

The only way microsoft can gain any of my trust is by relasing source code of all of their older operating system "windows 3.11 to windows 2000", and older MS OFFICE, and they must be done under GPL.

And then release an open source operating system; say windows 98SE, running on Linux kernel.

As per title....

Yes Fred,

Beware of dragging that Trojan Horse inside.

It will have Monkey Man hiding in there with other MS barbarians , ready to slaughter you , just when you thought you were safe.