Its the first time MS is shipping an open source component they didn’t write with one of their products. This doesn’t seem like a big deal, but its almost nuclear in its implications.
Think about it… They are saying “we support this.” In an OSS product, MS has no control over the code. So, they are putting their livelihood (in some small way) into the hands of people who don’t work for MS.
I think jQuery’s popularity, the fact that it’s not mission critical code, and that the codebase is so small all came together to make for favorable circumstances for MS to dip their toe in the water.
But which one? As I said, there are several out there that are an excellent technical choice. How do you choose? The problem is that you’re not really qualified to judge on the technical merits unless you learn them all, and who has time for that?
In this case it’s much easier and safer to just follow the crowd. Failing a clear technical superiority, most developers will want to pick the toolkit that gets the most adoption among other like-minded developers, for four reasons:
- It guarantees the skill will be useful later
- They’ll be able to find help and support for it when they need it.
- They trust their peers to do a good job picking the framework that is technically superior, or at least technically competent.
- Because the different options are all mainly open source, the most popular should also over time become the best technical choice.
So what we have is a situation where everyone is waiting to see which framework everyone else picks. Frankly, the lack of a clear winner among the various toolkits has hurt adoption; I know it’s prevented me personally from taking the plunge.
Until now. Now ASP.Net developers have a clear choice. If you use ASP.Net, you probably want to take the time to learn jQuery. Not Prototype. Not MooTools. Not something else. Your natural choice is jQuery.
So the real significance here has little to do with the whole “Microsoft using open source” thing. As far as I’m concerned it doesn’t matter as much whether jQuery is open source, though it may help in the long run. What does matter is that this will cause a significant number of developers to start using it, possibly enough to create a hegemony. And that’s what this space has really needed. We can finally start moving forward again in advancing client-side web development.
You have a 500 Pound Gorilla whose official company politics always stood against open source suddenly deciding to actively include and support an Open Source component for technical reasons. jQuery is not some legal requirement put on them by US or EU Anti-Trust lawsuits. It’s not forced on Microsoft through some standard or some “must-support” component. They are more or less solely choosing it for technical reasons instead of doing their usual “We reinvent the wheel, make it not as good as the free solutions and also not make it open source”.
It’s like the pope advertising condoms, it’s like the Washington Wizards winning the NBA Title, it’s like republicans voting for a 700 billion $ program, it’s like the OPEC supporting solar and wind energy… it’s something that seemed unthinkable before, even keeping in mind that Microsoft has some of the best talent working for them. In fact, most of the people I look up to are working at Microsoft now.
I can only imagine how much discussion and persuation work was needed to make this happen, and I lift my hat for the people within Microsoft who have proven that reason can succeed sometimes.