In my last column, I observed that it's possible that Satya Nadella may be able to lead Microsoft out of the desert it has been wandering (albeit profitably) under the leadership of his predecessors. His willingness to allow Microsoft to return to its roots providing software for other platforms, coupled with creating a leadership ethos that apologizes for and reverses actions that are legal but wrong, suggested to me he's already able to devise a counterculture that might win.
Is this week's news in the same class? In many ways it's far bigger: open source for .Net and $0 pricing for mobile Windows. But once again it's a mixed story -- milestones marking the road rather than the destination.
First, the win: Many of us in the open source community had long wondered why Microsoft failed to leverage the power of the collective for its developer marketing. Open source tools, frameworks, and libraries resonate with developers and liberate them to innovate, contributing that innovation back as they go. As they innovate, they create a rich market to monetize. As an example, I helped Sun open Java in 2006; since then, we've seen the core code community around OpenJDK blossom and grow.
Open-sourcing Java gave it a new lease on life. Why, then, did Microsoft insist on keeping .Net closed? My guess is it was a matter of leadership philosophy. Plenty of staff in Microsoft understood the power of open source to harness developer passion. It had to be a senior hand holding them back.
They're no longer under that restraint. Microsoft has announced the formation of the .Net Foundation and the hosting of 24 projects within it. They include the .Net compiler suite Roslyn -- under the liberal Apache license -- plus some from independent developer Xamarin. While the administrative details of the foundation are yet to be determined (curiously, Microsoft did not use the Outercurve Foundation -- its own creation -- as a host), the very existence of this initiative screams of new leadership.
On the flip side, there's news that the mobile versions of Windows will be free of charge for small screens. This sounds like a game-changing strategic shift as well, and it is undoubtedly a sign of new leadership. But it misses the mark -- it's not open source. That matters because Microsoft might decide to charge for future updates (the "first hit is free" model initially proposed by Bill Gates in China). It matters because the license terms still restrict how you can use the software.
Those details are important in the mobile and Internet-of-things markets. There's so much going on that the freedom to innovate is the No. 1 priority for every player with a future. Any time you need to ask for permission before you can innovate, you're using the wrong tools.
Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.