In my experiences with Microsoft as a content developer, Search Champ, and MVP I have found the people who work at the company to be committed, passionate, and very enjoyable to work with. I expect your experience will be similar.

I'll see you at Enterprise 2.0 and will gladly buy you a celebratory cocktail of your choosing. And I'll see if I can bring more cowbell with me too. ;^)

But just keep in mind that you'll find that your actions will come under far greater scrutiny once you have the @microsoft.com at the end of your email address

Microsoft is lucky to have ya!

Might see you next week to congratulate you in person at Toronto Tech Week or Interaction Camp, but I might have to cut it short for Microsoft TechEd (hey & shouldn't you be there?!).

You rock.

I think Mohammad Akif's comment above sums it up well. There are only a few ways to manage technology, and its healthy for advocates from one of them joining another. This cross pollination can only be healthy.

With regard to the patent issue, I agree its shocking, and frankly contradictory when we consider where Microsoft found the ideas for their original graphical interface. But business is business and law (patent) is law. Stupid, but law. The law needs to be changed.

I have no Microsoft products on my laptop, but the reason is not philosophical. The reason is stability, security, and simplicity. If Microsoft developed a better product, I would use that. I want the best, not the 'free-est'. I happen to believe open source makes better products, and that ought to be the focus, rather than worrying about the good vs evil war.

But more importantly on the philosophical side, if there are changes required and expected from Microsoft, whats the point of whining about it & better to get inside and help to change it.

I don't think that open source advocates need to be personal and visceral in their attacks, suggesting character flaws; I think those commenters need to look in the mirror, or run for political office, where we expect such behaviour. Personal attacks are not very 'open-source'.

saul

But I’d just like to add one thing for everyone reading this thread: Good can be done from the inside.

Still need that Ferrari laptop? I guess it, and the trip to whatever that UI confab was, have paid off. They were both freebies, so it's the new Microsoft redefinition of paying off, I suppose.

I believe the real culprit here is the existence of software patents. Ideally they would be abolished, but until then the solution is for Linux code to be replaced, and where the code can't be replaced because there's only one reasonable way of doing something then I'd expect that the patent can be challenged on the basis of prior art or obviousness. Let's not blame Microsoft for our bad patent laws, which it did not create; instead let the Linux community respond by addressing areas of infringement. Just because software is open source doesn't exempt it from the laws that all other software is subject to, nor should it. Those of you who treat open source as a religion, please stop.

David, I hope that you cease being conflicted about this patent thing.