(I know you know that, but I'm just saying)

Also, it provides nothing more than ilspy does (and ilspy shows the actual code on your machine)

The only advantage that the reference code is the variable names are original, and there's a few comments (but no XML documentation?).

https://github.com/msopentech https://github.com/OfficeDev https://github.com/Azure

http://github.com/aspnet

edit: maybe this will get me more down-votes --- has anyone noticed how on the 'About Openness' menu, something pops up on hover but you can't click it --- PS: to notice this wonderful effect you have to use Firefox 31

yeah, am pretty sure this site is not just for show ;)

also the copyright year is 2013 - maybe they are serious after all

There's another interesting bug, if you click on the thin part of the scroll bar, below the thick bar representing visible content, the bar centers on where you click. If you then click above the thick bar, the top of the bar moves to where you clicked, rather than centering on where you clicked. Apparently the developer(s) believe that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (either that or testing is).

On mobile (android), that scrolling section is disabled and all the content displays normally.

@dimitry it's not 1px, even in IE, when I view the page. They shouldn't have tried to make a custom scrollbar without more testing, but they evidently thought the stock scrollbar look didn't measure up to the grandeur of the rest of the microsoft openness page.

.mCSB_draggerRail { width: 1px; }

One common mistake across ALL Microsoft sites is not bothering to embed their fonts, or declare fallbacks. So it looks great on their boss' computer but everybody else gets goddamned Times New Roman.

Most of them are on CodePlex today.

Is someone flagging this as off topic?

They have treated developers (like myself) badly over the years, many are moving away.

So they've released some throw-away products as open-source, on different project collaboration site to their own. While other larger members of the industry have had their core products open source for years.

Interesting that they lead with an apology.

No apology there (nor should there be).

[1]: Disputed, as discussed here http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi#Disputed

Shame on you Microsoft and IBM!

They are not going to be able to buy community buy-in that they want, no matter who they hire and what other money they throw around.

Asking the wider populous for their input early (assuming the filtering and acknowledging of that input is done right, and they continue to "play nice" once they've got what they want) is a good thing for both them and the end user: they'll more likely be able to release something right earlier (rather than everyone hating it until version 3).

> did they sponsor Firefox?

I'm going to have to ask you to explain the IBM connection here as I'm just not seeing a logical link between these statements and your point about Microsoft. How is IBM people preferring to use Firefox instead of something else? I wan't aware that IBM had any particular axe to grind in the current browser game.

Because, you know, legacy. Anyone who's used Siebel, Oracle intranet apps, etc. knows what it's like.