Microsoft recently contributed some 20k lines of code to Linux, so it can work better under Microsoft’s virtualization technologies (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2009/Jul09/07-20LinuxQA.mspx). Not only that: the code is being released under a GPL license, something that Microsoft has been demonizing for years.

The move surprised not only the Microsoft camp but the Linux/Open Source camp as well (http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6567014545.html). Many in the Linux camp complained – of course - usually along the lines that the move was “selfish” or that it’s “too little”. This is one such comment: http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2009/07/21/how-microsoft-made-open-source-selfish/.

Now no less a person than Linus Torvalds himself, the creator of Linux and its moral voice, said some interesting things in an interview to Linux magazine (http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7439/1.html):

“I’m a big believer in “technology over politics”. I don’t care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don’t have to worry about licensing etc issues.

There are ‘extremists’ in the free software world, but that’s one major reason why I don’t call what I do ‘free software’ any more. I don’t want to be associated with the people for whom it’s about exclusion and hatred.

I agree that it’s driven by selfish reasons, but that’s how all open source code gets written! We all “scratch our own itches”. It’s why I started Linux, it’s why I started git, and it’s why I am still involved. It’s the reason for everybody to end up in open source, to some degree.”

So it seems that the “jihadists” at both sides are being put at bay and we will have an “ecosystem” where both proprietary and pen source software co-exists with less political colors. Maybe Bill Gates got this one wrong and IBM policy of “embracing and cashing in” was the right one all along.

To the astonishment of my friends, some very technically capable, I’ve voiced my opinion over and over that writing 64-bits applications has many disadvantages and few advantage and that currently few apps beyond database servers and the OS itself should be ported to 64 bits at all (http://maurosjungle.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F3CEB0849B03B6CC!650.entry).

Now the development team of no less a product than Visual Studio itself voiced pretty much the same opinion. Here are some quotes:

“First, from a performance perspective the pointers get larger, so data structures get larger, and the processor cache stays the same size. That basically results in a raw speed hit”

“So, the only way you’re going to see serious benefits is if you have scenarios that simply will not fit into 4G at all.  But, in Visual Studio anyway, when we don’t fit into 4G of memory I have never once found myself thinking “wow, System X needs more address space” I always think “wow, System X needs to go on a diet.”

They also touch the all-important issue of using your limited resources on things that really deliver value to the users instead of joining a marketing hype. Kudos to the Visual Studio team.

Read the full article at http://blogs.msdn.com/ricom/archive/2009/06/10/visual-studio-why-is-there-no-64-bit-version.aspx.