Another 'open source' faker. Nothing to do with open source apart from
something in the company's name...

Open Source Storage and DISC Partner to Enhance Open Archive Initiative

http://www.clickpress.com/releases/D...033005cp.shtml

Another 'open source' faker appears to have just been acquired.

Fonality Calls In Acquisition

,----[ Quote ]
| Telephony vendor Fonality has made its first acquisition by purchasing
| open-source CRM provider Insightful Solutions.
`----

http://www.channelinsider.com/articl.../218663_1.aspx

Open source integrator (moocher)...

GigaSpaces, GridGain to Provide Robust Grid Solution

,----[ Quote ]
| The GigaSpaces-GridGain partnership is part of an ongoing initiative at
| GigaSpaces to work closely with the open source community. As part of the
| relationship, GridGain is distributing GigaSpaces XAP Community Edition, a
| free version of GigaSpaces' flagship product. Other open source projects that
| are integrated with GigaSpaces include the Spring Framework, Mule ESB and
| Hibernate.
`----

http://www.gridtoday.com/grid/1866383.html

It's companies like these which make "Open Source" look bad/worse.


Recent:

Is Microsoft Hijacking Open Source?

,----[ Quote ]
| What really worries me is what looks like an emerging pattern in Microsoft's
| behaviour. The EU agreement is perhaps the first fruit of this, but I predict
| it will not be the last. What is happening is that Microsoft is effectively
| being allowed to define the meaning of “open source” as it wishes, not as
| everyone else understands the term. For example, in the pledge quoted above,
| an open source project is “not commercially distributed by its
| participants” - and this is a distinction also made by Kroes and her FAQ. * * *
|
| In this context, the recent approval of two Microsoft licences as
| officially “open source” is only going to make things worse. Although I felt
| this was the right decision – to have ad hoc rules just because it's
| Microsoft would damage the open source process - I also believe it's going to
| prove a problem. After all, it means that Microsoft can rightfully point to
| its OSI-approved licences as proof that open source and Microsoft no longer
| stand in opposition to each other. This alone is likely to perplex people who
| thought they understood what open source meant. * * *
|
| [...]
|
| What we are seeing here are a series of major assaults on different but
| related fields – open source, open file formats and open standards. All are
| directed to one goal: the hijacking of the very concept of openness. If we
| are to stop this inner corrosion, we must point out whenever we see wilful
| misuse and lazy misunderstandings of the term, and we must strive to make the *
| real state of affairs quite clear. If we don't, then core concepts like “open
| source” will be massaged, kneaded and pummelled into uselessness. * *
`----

http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1003745


Related:

Using open source as a marketing ploy

,----[ Quote ]
| This is typical trend riding fluff. If you go the Aras website you
| read about "Microsoft Enterprise Open Source Solutions", which is
| comical in and of itself.
`----

http://weblog.infoworld.com/openreso...pen_sourc.html