[cooldeal]

You seem to be looking at this from only your narrow perspective of your own development and hosting environment.

There are a whole bunch of places with mixed environment where this is extremely useful and can get Node.js approved for use by management who don't want to deal with the headaches of managing, hosting, securing and administering yet another database server like MySQL or PostgreSQL when they already do that for SQL Server and want to run Node on Windows to avoid having to deal with another OS like Linux.

>Except, this isn't so much openness as it is an underhanded attempt at migrating more developers to their proprietary platforms

In these cases, aren't they helping Node get a toe in the door which can lead to further Open Source usage(which in some cases can lead to ditching of SQL Server and going to MySQL or PostgreSQL to save on licensing)?

>but I wish they wouldn't beat around the bush. The "Open Source" community that they're trying to cater to is more bullshit-averse than they seem to realize.

Your comment comes off as incredibly short sighted and negative. If it doesn't work for you, just move on. Where's the beating around the bush? I don't see any claims on the linked blog that they're doing this for openness. Slagging on them for making things more compatible doesn't make sense. If they make it compatible with Linux, some people will say "they're trying to sell their stuff on Linux, it's on FOSS". I think some people will only be happy with open sourcing SQL Server and making it absolutely free which will make them lose 95% of their revenue and I am glad Microsoft is not looking at catering to RMS.