Many people don't take MS based Open Source seriously. And DotNetNuke 3 is a painful and glaring example of why. What is the primary difference between DNN 3 and say Mambo Server (Linux)? Give up? Mambo can be run over a free database server (MySQL) supported by a majority of Linux hosting providers at no extra cost in the hosting plan. DNN 3, well since the group supporting the MS Access DB provider “went under” anyone who wants to use DNN 3 in a hosting environment is stuck with SQL Server. Although hosted SQL Server costs have dropped over the years, they are still expensive for developers and small businesses who are the ones typically drawn to Open Source solutions.
If you want to put a finer point on the problem, a good deal of non-MS based Open Source runs on free or low cost software (i.e. Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP). If you wanted to split hairs, you may even say that requiring the use of MS Access is problematic as the office suite isn't all that inexpensive either.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a LAMP fanatic! In fact my bread is buttered by Microsoft based solutions. I'm simply trying to point out that as long as we are required to use what people perceive as expensive core products to prop up an “Open Source” solution, the MS-Open Source conga line will remain small.
A first step is to bring back the MS Access provider for DNN 3. Once we have done this we should try something courageous like creating a provider for MySQL. Wouldn't that shock the world? Rumors might fly that MS developers were actually serious about “Open Source“.
--chaz