Microsoft and Novell: the art of compromise

During the past couple of weeks there has been a lot of discussion around the announcement of a set of business and technical collaboration agreements between Microsoft and Novell (read here the full press announcement). A few years ago, such an announcement was virtually impossible. Fortunately, many companies (including of course Microsoft and Novell) were able to walk on the very complicated road that leaves behind the narrow-minded, senseless war between proprietary and open source code and leads to a world where, finally, the customer is the most important argument.

Personally, I think it is a huge mistake to think that in the end, closed vs. open source is what really matters for the end user. Actually, the only thing that matters is the quality/price ratio of the software. If somebody (individual or organization) finds out that a certain piece of software (OS, application, component, and so on) together with the required support (consultancy, maintenance, and so on) suits the needs and fits into the budget, that particular piece of software will be acquired. In our sometimes very limited world of developers, we can go on and argue for ever that closed source is better that open source or viceversa. My question is whether this endless (and in a sense pointless) argument provides any advantage to the ones using the software we write...

Despite extreme positions like this, I think Microsoft and Novell are doing the right thing by burying the hatchet and providing a better context for the consumer's choice. One can only hope that Microsoft and Novell are only the first from a long series of companies that realize we are sometimes too loud arguing about the closeness or openness of our solutions and we are actually covering with our voice the ones that matter the most: people who actually use the software we write.