- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Microsoft Has Stopped Competing with Linux
Several recent articles indicate that Microsoft has finally absorbed the GNU/Linux and so-called Open Source threat. Budgeting $500 million for marketing its next iterations of Windows and Office shows that they have little concern about the adoption of their new platforms. Unlike the UNIX threat in the early to late 1990's, Linux represents what Microsoft now sees as a "me too" platform with little innovation. The worries about costs in the executive suites in the industrialized countries have now given way to implementing solutions. Sun represented the major problem for Microsoft during the build out of the Internet. Today, Sun has evolved into a shadow of its former self. With Sun no longer a threat, Microsoft has started a push toward Enterprise Resource Solutions while leveraging its monopoly on the desktop. In a recent article by Martin Lamonica, he observers:
Martin didn't make this up. He got the information for the basis of his article from Steve Ballmer. At a press conference on March 16th in New York, Ballmer spoke to 500 corporate executives about an overarching plan for business computing. Ballmer has changed his emphasis from developers to business and people with an emphasis on end-user productivity. Ballmer told LaMonica: We're not anticonsulting (referring to IBM). I just came off the board of Accenture recently. I've been on the board four or five years. This is not about being against consulting. This is about being for empowering people, so they can they can empower their company. That's a completely different tune for Microsoft. Knowing they have already won the platform wars, Microsoft has started competing for the ERP market space with its Microsoft Dynamics line of integrated business solutions aimed at financial, customer relationship, and supply chain management. Microsoft says that their business is about people—helping staff across an organization be more productive, make better decisions, and pursue business goals with confidence. Good reasons to cease its Open Source rhetoricLinux advocates have focused on getting the desktop on par with Windows. That's a "me too" strategy. In a perfect world free software should win the hearts and minds of computer users. Unfortunately, secular minded consumers do not understand that technologists need collaboration to evolve. That costs money and Linux doesn't have it. The money spent by VC's on open source companies won't help Linux. It also won't make openoffice.org a superior productivity suite or Firefox the preferred browser. Linux plays in a niche market when it comes to the desktop. Microsoft doesn't have to worry about Linux catching up like they did when NT 4.0 dominated the corporate landscape. Instead, they have created partnerships with Sugar CRM, JBoss, Apache and other open source stalwarts. What's Next for Linux then?Bob Dylan once sang "wasted words proves to warn that he not busy being born Is busy dying." Written in 1965, those lyrics proved prophetic. Without innovation, Linux remains and will remain a "me too" technology effort outside the server domain. Sun Microsystems proved that a significant business existed in delivering workstations to enterprises. They differentiated themselves by making proprietary hardware platforms that could do what Microsoft and IBM could not. Linux has shown it can dominate markets for devices. It can dominate where UNIX once ruled. It has a cost benefit and a technology benefit for people who do not want to use Microsoft's limited development tools. That's something Microsoft developers will never understand. Apple has shown that it has a significant market for consumer devices and entertainment. Even with its new relationship with Intel, it has managed to maintain a distance from the Wintel business model. One solution for Linux builds off the Negroponte model of the $100 laptop. Linux could leverage itself beyond the device market with open hardware architecture. That's a place VC's could invest and see significant leverage. With an open hardware architecture Linux could scale farther than existing platforms and combine existing devices into a robust platform unlike those running Windows. The Closer LookSun Microsystems' open source specifications for the Sparc chip has little appeal. Consider than one more attempt for McNeally to find a niche. Unfortunately for Sun shareholders, it's too little and way too late. Intel or AMD could engineer an innovative platform with solid state components to give Linux users everything they want including multi-media. That would also provide a stable environment for Independent Software Vendors such as Adobe, Intuit and others to invest in Linux. Is it time for Linux to innovate and move out of its attempt to provide a "me too" Windows machine? With the rapid innovation in wireless telephones, it might prove useful to create a docking station that turns into a PC with Linux running both devices. While that might not wind up as the principal differentiator, for free software to have a long-term future we need innovation in the Linux market. Perhaps it's time for you to "make somethng up eh". |
|
|
Comments (64)
a little miss there
Well the big point here that you miss here. Is that IBM is a very big contributor to OpenSource and Linux. Moreover IBM works whith RedHat/SUSE. So now the threat is IBM/Linux. So the point is that Linux is the biggest threat ever.
It should seem that way, but that's not IBM's strategy. They too have left the hardware/software playing field and have concentrated on services: IBM Global Services. Linux is a transition strategy until they sell all their hardware businesses.
maggrand: Agreed.
MS is simply doing some PR shuffle. They know that GNU/Linux is the one real, credible threat to their entire business model. They have spent and will spend a lot of resources trying to convince people that it is not. However, they cannot compete on price, stability, function, robustness, interoperability, evolution, adaptability, developer mindshare. In spite of every obstacle MS has tried to throw in front of GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux has caught and surpassed MS in almost every way in just 15 years.
MS and the media may claim this tactic of speaking to the execs is new, but it is not. MS did, of course, woo developers in the past, but they have always tried to dazzle the execs to get the software into the targetted company's back room. The network, viral effect of deliberate incompatibility hiding under a glitzy face has always been their weapon of choice for infiltration.
Linux doesn't do "me too". Linux has always placed function above appearance. Bill has always assumed that advances in processors, RAM and storage will hide defective code. His aim was to make it look good, then try to make it actually work. That's bass-ackwards to what happens with free software.
MS is simply doing some PR shuffle. They know that GNU/Linux is the one real, credible threat to their entire business model. They have spent and will spend a lot of resources trying to convince people that it is not. However, they cannot compete on price, stability, function, robustness, interoperability, evolution, adaptability, developer mindshare. In spite of every obstacle MS has tried to throw in front of GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux has caught and surpassed MS in almost every way in just 15 years.
MS and the media may claim this tactic of speaking to the execs is new, but it is not. MS did, of course, woo developers in the past, but they have always tried to dazzle the execs to get the software into the targetted company's back room. The network, viral effect of deliberate incompatibility hiding under a glitzy face has always been their weapon of choice for infiltration.
Linux doesn't do "me too". Linux has always placed function above appearance. Bill has always assumed that advances in processors, RAM and storage will hide defective code. His aim was to make it look good, then try to make it actually work. That's bass-ackwards to what happens with free software.
grouch: you're partially correct, and I don't think even Microsoft realizes this: it's not Linux that they're competing with, nor is it IBM. It is, rather, the inevitable forces of commoditization that makes Microsoft's business model obsolete. Linux and open source represent the commoditization of platform software. The only reason Microsoft is still strong is because they have so much momentum behind their platform (plus millions of stupid people keeping it going). Eventually, though, commoditization works its way up the stack, eliminating the value from the components it finds along the way.
grouch: I wish it was STILL true. I'm not speculating. If you know my modus operandi, I investigate everything. They started planning this in 1998. When they bought Great Plains they saw it as a future strategy. I'm still under an NDA for this because I worked for a firm that consulted a company in Redmond that did business planning for them.
Did you know they made an offer for SAP?
They know that they will not have the middle desktop market. They know it absolutely. They changed horses when the SAP merger fell through.
Sun could have purchased Novell. In fact, that was an option before they bought Storagetek. They decided to go back to selling hardware. Guess what, they're selling Windows Server. That's Sun. Why? Because Microsoft plans to compete head on with Oracle and its businesses.
Think about one other event. Larry Ellison said that Solaris10 was the preferred platform for Oracle. At one time, DEC was the preferred platform with their UNIX, VMS and Alpha 64 Bit chips, now XEONs. HP has marginal interest in Oracle. So, Oracle goes where it needs to go. That's their pattern. You may not remember but earlier Sequent was the preferred Oracle vendor.
Here's the final kicker and I have lots of support on this: Dell needs big iron. They have a serious partnership with Red Hat and Oracle. Now, they've taken on Novell. Rumor has it, Dell will buy Sun to get its heavy metal Cray Servers running Solaris and break up the rest of Sun. Then they would have complied with Oracle's wishes.
It's complicated, but Dell has no where to go without Oracle. What does Dell need? Cray UNIX boxes running Sparc and Intel with Solaris10. Also, watch to whom Dell sells the Java business. Oracle or IBM? Who will open source it? Or Microsoft? Maybe but it would be the endgame for Oracle if they did. How would you like to spend an afternoon with an angry Larry Ellison?
Commodity hardware isn't where Microsoft wants to go nor could they. But ERP with terminals - OH YEAH.
Did you know they made an offer for SAP?
They know that they will not have the middle desktop market. They know it absolutely. They changed horses when the SAP merger fell through.
Sun could have purchased Novell. In fact, that was an option before they bought Storagetek. They decided to go back to selling hardware. Guess what, they're selling Windows Server. That's Sun. Why? Because Microsoft plans to compete head on with Oracle and its businesses.
Think about one other event. Larry Ellison said that Solaris10 was the preferred platform for Oracle. At one time, DEC was the preferred platform with their UNIX, VMS and Alpha 64 Bit chips, now XEONs. HP has marginal interest in Oracle. So, Oracle goes where it needs to go. That's their pattern. You may not remember but earlier Sequent was the preferred Oracle vendor.
Here's the final kicker and I have lots of support on this: Dell needs big iron. They have a serious partnership with Red Hat and Oracle. Now, they've taken on Novell. Rumor has it, Dell will buy Sun to get its heavy metal Cray Servers running Solaris and break up the rest of Sun. Then they would have complied with Oracle's wishes.
It's complicated, but Dell has no where to go without Oracle. What does Dell need? Cray UNIX boxes running Sparc and Intel with Solaris10. Also, watch to whom Dell sells the Java business. Oracle or IBM? Who will open source it? Or Microsoft? Maybe but it would be the endgame for Oracle if they did. How would you like to spend an afternoon with an angry Larry Ellison?
Commodity hardware isn't where Microsoft wants to go nor could they. But ERP with terminals - OH YEAH.
Tadelste,
Good point about Dell. They will have trouble competing with generic white boxes from Chinese vendors. Big corporate accounts are Dell's bread and butter. Those white boxes are cheap enough for the vendors to just implement a return/replace policy and undercut Dell's support.
Why spend hours on the phone with support techs at Dell? The white box vendor will just ship a replacement overnight, you ship back the original. If your corporate users are set up so their data is all on the lan, its almost a plug and play option.
Dell sees this coming and they need to move up the enterprise stack or sell to a Chinese company and cash out.
They could really do either. Share holders might be happy with a big one time payout from a Chinese buyer. I don't know if Michael Dell's ego would allow that, however.
Good point about Dell. They will have trouble competing with generic white boxes from Chinese vendors. Big corporate accounts are Dell's bread and butter. Those white boxes are cheap enough for the vendors to just implement a return/replace policy and undercut Dell's support.
Why spend hours on the phone with support techs at Dell? The white box vendor will just ship a replacement overnight, you ship back the original. If your corporate users are set up so their data is all on the lan, its almost a plug and play option.
Dell sees this coming and they need to move up the enterprise stack or sell to a Chinese company and cash out.
They could really do either. Share holders might be happy with a big one time payout from a Chinese buyer. I don't know if Michael Dell's ego would allow that, however.
number6x: Michael is in India right now. He's setting up manufacturing facilities because he can't compete in Asia. If he get the Indians to manufacture Dell computers, he avoids taxes and tariffs and can compete. Right now, they ship fully assembled boxes and cannot compete.
He's also hiring engineering and software talent. OK. They've never done that before. And who is the largest employer of India engineering and software talent? Oracle.
Oh, Oracle. And how does Dell compete in India and China with other PC manufacturers in the consumer sector. They don't.
So, why is he there again?
He's also hiring engineering and software talent. OK. They've never done that before. And who is the largest employer of India engineering and software talent? Oracle.
Oh, Oracle. And how does Dell compete in India and China with other PC manufacturers in the consumer sector. They don't.
So, why is he there again?
tadelste:
First off, consider who is really playing "me too". Consider the direction MS Windows was taking, pre-Linux and compare it to MS Vista's alleged features. Even the pain MS went through with hotmail illustrates that they have to compete with what Linux enables people to do. They had no remote administration tools that did not depend on a GUI, for one thing. Remote terminals are just another "me too" feature they've crammed into the monolithic conglomeration of MS Windows.
Second, big iron has been a province of Linux since at least 1999. Looks like another "me too" imitation by Microsoft but too little, too late. Cray uses Linux. IBM uses Linux. You may recall that SCOG is claiming that IBM does not have the right to improve Linux by incorporating UNIX "methods and concepts" into AIX to make Linux a substitute for big iron UNIX. IBM is doing just that. Sun uses Linux. They provide Linux on that new grid they very recently fired up. Microsoft has a lot of "me too" to do before catching up with Linux on big iron.
Third, the core of Microsoft's monopoly is increasingly under threat by improvements to GNU/Linux in ease of use. This will accelerate as more people use it, because it does not prevent people from adapting their tools to suit themselves and to suit their neighbors. GNU/Linux placed core function first and convenience after. This is why it progressed from a hacker's hobby to world renown. It's not done yet; it's accelerating.
MS's "me too" approach will not stop that growth. They were content to contrive more and more features to put into the same broken mess to use to force customers, by network trickle-down effects, to dump software that sort-of worked and buy the latest. GNU/Linux shortcuts that strategy and allows users to have a big influence on what happens.
Since we're talking about history ("me too" implies following what has already occurred), look through the following and imagine an MS equivalent for that year:
1997 - 2003 - "The Stone SouperComputer ORNL's First Beowulf-Style Parallel Computer" (Be certain to note the extensive list of links and references at the bottom of that page). http://stonesoup.esd.ornl.gov/
1999 - IBM uses off-the-shelf Red Hat to match a Cray record. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/16/super.idg/
2000 - KLAT2 "Kentucky Linux Athlon Testbed 2 (KLAT2)" Record-setter. http://aggregate.org/KLAT2/
2000 - "Antarctica, Sandia’s ‘garage-built’ supercomputer, may become 20th fastest in world" "The Compaq AlphaServer systems run a modified version of RedHat Linux plus the parallel systems software developed in the Cplant project." http://www.sandia.gov/media/NewsRel/NR2000/antarct.htm
2001 - "Entrum, which provides high-speed Internet access for 500,000 private and 70,000 corporate subscribers, said it has replaced 60 different Unix and Windows NT servers from different vendors with a single computer containing 500 virtual servers running Linux software installed by Red Hat and SuSE." http://thewhir.com/marketwatch/linux1012.cfm
2001 - 'But Hess also uses 300 Linux-based servers clustered together to create a supercomputing application for oil exploration, which is "a core, critical business application," says Jeff Davis, a Houston-based senior systems programmer. The supercluster helps create three- dimensional models of subsurface areas under the Gulf of Mexico, using enormous data sets that run into multiple terabytes.' http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/3000685/2/c_3036032
2001 - "With more than 200 Linux desktops and 400 Linux servers, DreamWorks SKG is not only a leading producer of animated motion pictures but a major user of Linux as well. " http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/4803
2001 - "Test Plan Charlie Unplugged: An Interview with David Boyes" "Anyone who works with Linux on IBM's System/390 mainframes has certainly heard of David Boyes. He made history early in the project by running no less than 41,400 Linux images on a single mainframe, all of them doing real work under simulated load as web servers." http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/print/3139/
2001 - "Linux supercomputer to be used for drug research" http://www.networkworld.com/news/2001/0823supercomputer.html
2001 - "Why Linux Is Giving Microsoft a Migraine" ' If the words didn't send a chill down the spine of every Microsoft (MSFT ) shareholder, they should have. At a January investment conference, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer declared: "Linux is our enemy No. 1." A few weeks later, James Allchin, who oversaw the rollout of Microsoft's Windows 2000 software, went so far as to call Linux "a threat to the American way." ' http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2001/nf200102...
2001 - "A Grid of Supercomputers" "Globus will provide the backbone that makes the processor sharing possible. The IBM servers will run Linux. Although it will also incorporate IBM's Blue Hammer supercomputing software, the TerraGrid is based on the open source development model, meaning no one will own the software it develops." http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,45977,00.html
2002 - "Out the Windows" (U.S. News and World Report) "In the past two years, consumer versions of Linux have come a long way, with a simplified look and refined programs that can accomplish most of what home users want--to browse the Web, send E-mail, and handle spreadsheets and word processing--while easily swapping files with computers running Windows." http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/020114/archive...
2002 - "Secure Linux desktop begins shipping to UK police force" http://www.newsforge.com/os/02/10/19/1518241.shtml?tid=23
2002 - "It's Linux for IBM supercomputer project" http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-963285.html
2003 - "Unilever, a $52 billion consumer products giant, is switching to Linux to run its businesses around the world." (Note: the article is predominately about challenges IT managers face in version control). http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801...
2003 - Computer Aid ships thousands of recycled PCs with Linux to "developing" countries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2960018.stm
2003 - PeopleSoft to port 170 applications to Linux due to customer demand. ""Now, customers are telling us they want to run enterprise applications [on Linux-based systems]," [David Sayed, technology product marketing manager] said. http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0...
2003 - "SuSE To Power Fastest U.S. Supercomputer". Cray chose SuSE. http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21799.html
2003 - " The PNNL system is the world’s fastest supercomputer based on the Linux operating system and is the largest machine ever built using Intel’s 64-bit architecture." http://www.pnl.gov/news/2003/03-33.htm
2003 - Environment Canada chooses Linux, saves over $4 million. http://www.newsforge.com/trends/03/10/16/1914221.shtml
2003 - "Breakthrough Results with SGI Altix at NASA Ames" running Linux. http://lwn.net/Articles/54822/
2003 - "Lining up for Linux" "It is well-known that a handful of early adopters like Burlington Coat Factory, Amazon and Google run key back-end systems on the open-source platform." '"In 1996 or '97, we saw that Linux was here to stay, and by about 1999, it became apparent that it would be a significant force in the industry," [Ricis CTO Gregg Rosenberg] says.' http://www.varbusiness.com/sections/customer/customer.jhtml;...
2003 - " The BMW Williams Formula 1 (F1) team has dramatically improved its high-resolution aerodynamic modelling of team cars by introducing an HP Linux supercomputer cluster." http://www.cfdreview.com/article.pl?sid=03/10/13/191253
2004 - As it did in Norway, Catalonia and other places, Microsoft follows Linux lead in providing support for Welsh. http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/content_ob...
2004 - "Defense Department buys Linux cluster" http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/1_1/daily_news/2278...
2004 - Some people are so determined to have Linux, they install it between bouts of "massive gunfire and streetfights". http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7748
2004 - "One Giant Leap How NASA, SGI and Intel managed to build and deploy history's most powerful supercomputer in 15 blistering weeks." (10,240 processors, Linux) http://www.sgi.com/features/2004/oct/columbia/
2005 - "More telling, in terms of a clear enthusiasm for Open Source are countries where a stated policy of a 'preference' for Open Source has been declared. Countries where this is the case, in some areas of government IT use, include: Bahrain, Belgium, China and Hong Kong, Costa Rica, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Philippines and South Africa." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/07/gov_open_source_dyna...
Now, who's trying to catch up with whom? Show me some MS clusters, Beowulf-style supercomputers, s/390 port of MS Windows, grids, 10,000+ processor MS Windows computers, and evidence of MS Windows enthusiasts installing it in spite of real warfare around them.
GNU/Linux has been leading MS in most areas of computing for 6 - 8 years. It lags only in rapidly supporting hardware, which is a side-effect of the monopoly pressures, vulnerabilities, users, and certain niche applications, for example, DVD ripping, authoring and playback.
First off, consider who is really playing "me too". Consider the direction MS Windows was taking, pre-Linux and compare it to MS Vista's alleged features. Even the pain MS went through with hotmail illustrates that they have to compete with what Linux enables people to do. They had no remote administration tools that did not depend on a GUI, for one thing. Remote terminals are just another "me too" feature they've crammed into the monolithic conglomeration of MS Windows.
Second, big iron has been a province of Linux since at least 1999. Looks like another "me too" imitation by Microsoft but too little, too late. Cray uses Linux. IBM uses Linux. You may recall that SCOG is claiming that IBM does not have the right to improve Linux by incorporating UNIX "methods and concepts" into AIX to make Linux a substitute for big iron UNIX. IBM is doing just that. Sun uses Linux. They provide Linux on that new grid they very recently fired up. Microsoft has a lot of "me too" to do before catching up with Linux on big iron.
Third, the core of Microsoft's monopoly is increasingly under threat by improvements to GNU/Linux in ease of use. This will accelerate as more people use it, because it does not prevent people from adapting their tools to suit themselves and to suit their neighbors. GNU/Linux placed core function first and convenience after. This is why it progressed from a hacker's hobby to world renown. It's not done yet; it's accelerating.
MS's "me too" approach will not stop that growth. They were content to contrive more and more features to put into the same broken mess to use to force customers, by network trickle-down effects, to dump software that sort-of worked and buy the latest. GNU/Linux shortcuts that strategy and allows users to have a big influence on what happens.
Since we're talking about history ("me too" implies following what has already occurred), look through the following and imagine an MS equivalent for that year:
1997 - 2003 - "The Stone SouperComputer ORNL's First Beowulf-Style Parallel Computer" (Be certain to note the extensive list of links and references at the bottom of that page). http://stonesoup.esd.ornl.gov/
1999 - IBM uses off-the-shelf Red Hat to match a Cray record. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/16/super.idg/
2000 - KLAT2 "Kentucky Linux Athlon Testbed 2 (KLAT2)" Record-setter. http://aggregate.org/KLAT2/
2000 - "Antarctica, Sandia’s ‘garage-built’ supercomputer, may become 20th fastest in world" "The Compaq AlphaServer systems run a modified version of RedHat Linux plus the parallel systems software developed in the Cplant project." http://www.sandia.gov/media/NewsRel/NR2000/antarct.htm
2001 - "Entrum, which provides high-speed Internet access for 500,000 private and 70,000 corporate subscribers, said it has replaced 60 different Unix and Windows NT servers from different vendors with a single computer containing 500 virtual servers running Linux software installed by Red Hat and SuSE." http://thewhir.com/marketwatch/linux1012.cfm
2001 - 'But Hess also uses 300 Linux-based servers clustered together to create a supercomputing application for oil exploration, which is "a core, critical business application," says Jeff Davis, a Houston-based senior systems programmer. The supercluster helps create three- dimensional models of subsurface areas under the Gulf of Mexico, using enormous data sets that run into multiple terabytes.' http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/3000685/2/c_3036032
2001 - "With more than 200 Linux desktops and 400 Linux servers, DreamWorks SKG is not only a leading producer of animated motion pictures but a major user of Linux as well. " http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/4803
2001 - "Test Plan Charlie Unplugged: An Interview with David Boyes" "Anyone who works with Linux on IBM's System/390 mainframes has certainly heard of David Boyes. He made history early in the project by running no less than 41,400 Linux images on a single mainframe, all of them doing real work under simulated load as web servers." http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/print/3139/
2001 - "Linux supercomputer to be used for drug research" http://www.networkworld.com/news/2001/0823supercomputer.html
2001 - "Why Linux Is Giving Microsoft a Migraine" ' If the words didn't send a chill down the spine of every Microsoft (MSFT ) shareholder, they should have. At a January investment conference, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer declared: "Linux is our enemy No. 1." A few weeks later, James Allchin, who oversaw the rollout of Microsoft's Windows 2000 software, went so far as to call Linux "a threat to the American way." ' http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2001/nf200102...
2001 - "A Grid of Supercomputers" "Globus will provide the backbone that makes the processor sharing possible. The IBM servers will run Linux. Although it will also incorporate IBM's Blue Hammer supercomputing software, the TerraGrid is based on the open source development model, meaning no one will own the software it develops." http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,45977,00.html
2002 - "Out the Windows" (U.S. News and World Report) "In the past two years, consumer versions of Linux have come a long way, with a simplified look and refined programs that can accomplish most of what home users want--to browse the Web, send E-mail, and handle spreadsheets and word processing--while easily swapping files with computers running Windows." http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/020114/archive...
2002 - "Secure Linux desktop begins shipping to UK police force" http://www.newsforge.com/os/02/10/19/1518241.shtml?tid=23
2002 - "It's Linux for IBM supercomputer project" http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-963285.html
2003 - "Unilever, a $52 billion consumer products giant, is switching to Linux to run its businesses around the world." (Note: the article is predominately about challenges IT managers face in version control). http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801...
2003 - Computer Aid ships thousands of recycled PCs with Linux to "developing" countries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2960018.stm
2003 - PeopleSoft to port 170 applications to Linux due to customer demand. ""Now, customers are telling us they want to run enterprise applications [on Linux-based systems]," [David Sayed, technology product marketing manager] said. http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0...
2003 - "SuSE To Power Fastest U.S. Supercomputer". Cray chose SuSE. http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21799.html
2003 - " The PNNL system is the world’s fastest supercomputer based on the Linux operating system and is the largest machine ever built using Intel’s 64-bit architecture." http://www.pnl.gov/news/2003/03-33.htm
2003 - Environment Canada chooses Linux, saves over $4 million. http://www.newsforge.com/trends/03/10/16/1914221.shtml
2003 - "Breakthrough Results with SGI Altix at NASA Ames" running Linux. http://lwn.net/Articles/54822/
2003 - "Lining up for Linux" "It is well-known that a handful of early adopters like Burlington Coat Factory, Amazon and Google run key back-end systems on the open-source platform." '"In 1996 or '97, we saw that Linux was here to stay, and by about 1999, it became apparent that it would be a significant force in the industry," [Ricis CTO Gregg Rosenberg] says.' http://www.varbusiness.com/sections/customer/customer.jhtml;...
2003 - " The BMW Williams Formula 1 (F1) team has dramatically improved its high-resolution aerodynamic modelling of team cars by introducing an HP Linux supercomputer cluster." http://www.cfdreview.com/article.pl?sid=03/10/13/191253
2004 - As it did in Norway, Catalonia and other places, Microsoft follows Linux lead in providing support for Welsh. http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/content_ob...
2004 - "Defense Department buys Linux cluster" http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/1_1/daily_news/2278...
2004 - Some people are so determined to have Linux, they install it between bouts of "massive gunfire and streetfights". http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7748
2004 - "One Giant Leap How NASA, SGI and Intel managed to build and deploy history's most powerful supercomputer in 15 blistering weeks." (10,240 processors, Linux) http://www.sgi.com/features/2004/oct/columbia/
2005 - "More telling, in terms of a clear enthusiasm for Open Source are countries where a stated policy of a 'preference' for Open Source has been declared. Countries where this is the case, in some areas of government IT use, include: Bahrain, Belgium, China and Hong Kong, Costa Rica, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Philippines and South Africa." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/07/gov_open_source_dyna...
Now, who's trying to catch up with whom? Show me some MS clusters, Beowulf-style supercomputers, s/390 port of MS Windows, grids, 10,000+ processor MS Windows computers, and evidence of MS Windows enthusiasts installing it in spite of real warfare around them.
GNU/Linux has been leading MS in most areas of computing for 6 - 8 years. It lags only in rapidly supporting hardware, which is a side-effect of the monopoly pressures, vulnerabilities, users, and certain niche applications, for example, DVD ripping, authoring and playback.
What a waste of great talent. You write so eloquently in the comment section. What's that about?
From the article I wrote:
"Unlike the UNIX threat in the early to late 1990's, Linux represents what Microsoft now sees as a "me too" platform with little innovation".
"Linux advocates have focused on getting the desktop on par with Windows. That's a 'me too' strategy".
OK. So, Microshaft sees their desktop as untouchable today because IT managers are less worried about costs. That's true. Microsohaft is also willing to concede the mid-level desktop and content to let Linux occupy the space that UNIX once had. That's also true.
I didn't say Linux didn't innovate on the server side. I didn't say they failed in the device market.
But, on the desktop. I am not convinced that we're still a "me too" product and we cannot innovate because we're so busy trying to catch up and catch Microshaft.
Notice that in kernel 2.6.12 the desktop was practically ignored again. Linux was bust incorporating Oracle's clustering technology.
Now, write articles and help Lxer pay these hard working editors.
From the article I wrote:
"Unlike the UNIX threat in the early to late 1990's, Linux represents what Microsoft now sees as a "me too" platform with little innovation".
"Linux advocates have focused on getting the desktop on par with Windows. That's a 'me too' strategy".
OK. So, Microshaft sees their desktop as untouchable today because IT managers are less worried about costs. That's true. Microsohaft is also willing to concede the mid-level desktop and content to let Linux occupy the space that UNIX once had. That's also true.
I didn't say Linux didn't innovate on the server side. I didn't say they failed in the device market.
But, on the desktop. I am not convinced that we're still a "me too" product and we cannot innovate because we're so busy trying to catch up and catch Microshaft.
Notice that in kernel 2.6.12 the desktop was practically ignored again. Linux was bust incorporating Oracle's clustering technology.
Now, write articles and help Lxer pay these hard working editors.
Grouch: If you ever leave, I'm gonna leave. Powa from down Unda. Thanks! And Thank You, Tom! ALL well put.
Don't u leaf. Itz so not OK. You stole one of my considered handles. So, you stick with us. A grouch is a grouch - only kidding. What a cool handle. Grouch has already divulged his age and he can relate to the term cool. But he's so not with the jargon of today. On second thought, well, maybe with the daughter and all. I'm sure she's said "we're so over" to a boy friend or two and you heard that (daddy-o).
Word.
Huh?
Y'all ain't frum 'rounchere, air ye?
I've been mulling this over for a while and I must say I disagree. I think MS haven't stopped competing with Linux, far from it. This is throwing down the gauntlet.
MS will know that a company that starts a linux server trial will more than likely start using it for all their new departments. Also, when its time to upgrade pc's, it's quite likely that theyll chuck windows out of the server room.
This they don't want, so they start banging their drum about how IBM is their enemy and that they're going to focus on making ERP services. You can bet they'll spend a good chunk of change on this too, since locking them in is the only way they can retain their customers.
Problem is, there are some very big companies competing in that area, well known enough that they don't need to be recommended by IBM for people to trust their products.
This is more a last whimper than a chest-beating "hurrah! those linux losers are finished" cheer.
MS will know that a company that starts a linux server trial will more than likely start using it for all their new departments. Also, when its time to upgrade pc's, it's quite likely that theyll chuck windows out of the server room.
This they don't want, so they start banging their drum about how IBM is their enemy and that they're going to focus on making ERP services. You can bet they'll spend a good chunk of change on this too, since locking them in is the only way they can retain their customers.
Problem is, there are some very big companies competing in that area, well known enough that they don't need to be recommended by IBM for people to trust their products.
This is more a last whimper than a chest-beating "hurrah! those linux losers are finished" cheer.
And Microsoft has spent millions on developing and running a Linux Lab for what purpose?
to learn how to make an OS?? To figure out what makes Linux/FOSS so good and how to emulate the development process probably.
I encourage disagreement and appreciate every perspective.
I'm not hard and fast on my perspective. I think at a time, Ballmer and Gates didn't understand free software. From what I gather, they now think they understand it and have formulated ways to keep free software at bay. I hope they believe it.
Still, I don't think we can compete with them yet. But soon.
I'm not hard and fast on my perspective. I think at a time, Ballmer and Gates didn't understand free software. From what I gather, they now think they understand it and have formulated ways to keep free software at bay. I hope they believe it.
Still, I don't think we can compete with them yet. But soon.
I agree with you that FLOSS can't compete with MS on their turf. I don't think Linux on the consumer desktop is realistic in the near future. However I think MS have by no means sensed that they've beaten Linux. There are a few areas in which theyre competing directly, not just the enterprise space.
Mobile telephony looks a good bet for Linux, as does the embedded device market. For phones the trick is to get them to play nice with a windows PC, which is doable. Embedded devices should go LInux' way aswell, from what I've seen of devices running MS embedded its awful (nice to see the ol' BSOD every now and again though) What MS is trying to achieve with the media center edition is ground that has to a large extent been covered by Linux already, and in a format that the consumer is already familiar with (TV set top box/Tivo). Placing a $600 PC in the living room just to watch tv on doesn't make any sense, nor does expecting a Joe 6-Pack to lay a network in his house.
Which brings us to the this thread, MS announcing that Linux isn't a threat and saying theyre going to invest heavily in the enterprise application space. In my view it would be too costly for them to compete directly, i.e. create a better server OS. A rational consumer making a decision on technical merit alone would then choose Linux every time, excluding other factors of course. In the past MS had the advantage that many commercial enterprise apps would only run on their servers. This is changing quickly, so it becomes more likely that customers can make the decisin on merit, given that their app of choice will run on and is support on both platforms. So, customers can start leaking form MS to FLOSS, which increases the likelihood of discovering that it can also run the rest of their network etc. etc. In other words, a major headache for MS.
So, what would the rational decision be, given that the enterprise ISVs are offering their products on both platforms and thus making the OS a commodity? As Bill might have said to Steve: "same thing we do every year old boy, let's lock 'em in' In other words, let's make some enterprise apps that only work on our servers yet are 'unmissable' and sell them to top execs. If they don't, they're screwed. I'm surprised they haven't announced this sooner.
Oh, and Bill, good luck competing against the likes of Siebel, CA, IBM and such, you're going to need it.
Mobile telephony looks a good bet for Linux, as does the embedded device market. For phones the trick is to get them to play nice with a windows PC, which is doable. Embedded devices should go LInux' way aswell, from what I've seen of devices running MS embedded its awful (nice to see the ol' BSOD every now and again though) What MS is trying to achieve with the media center edition is ground that has to a large extent been covered by Linux already, and in a format that the consumer is already familiar with (TV set top box/Tivo). Placing a $600 PC in the living room just to watch tv on doesn't make any sense, nor does expecting a Joe 6-Pack to lay a network in his house.
Which brings us to the this thread, MS announcing that Linux isn't a threat and saying theyre going to invest heavily in the enterprise application space. In my view it would be too costly for them to compete directly, i.e. create a better server OS. A rational consumer making a decision on technical merit alone would then choose Linux every time, excluding other factors of course. In the past MS had the advantage that many commercial enterprise apps would only run on their servers. This is changing quickly, so it becomes more likely that customers can make the decisin on merit, given that their app of choice will run on and is support on both platforms. So, customers can start leaking form MS to FLOSS, which increases the likelihood of discovering that it can also run the rest of their network etc. etc. In other words, a major headache for MS.
So, what would the rational decision be, given that the enterprise ISVs are offering their products on both platforms and thus making the OS a commodity? As Bill might have said to Steve: "same thing we do every year old boy, let's lock 'em in' In other words, let's make some enterprise apps that only work on our servers yet are 'unmissable' and sell them to top execs. If they don't, they're screwed. I'm surprised they haven't announced this sooner.
Oh, and Bill, good luck competing against the likes of Siebel, CA, IBM and such, you're going to need it.
SOA and Eclipse
IBM Workplace, SOA hinges on the Eclipse OSS Rich Client Platform.
For example, Borland, Adobe and the like, are investing R&D dollars heavily in Eclipse based technology.
What is most significant is how Workplace is Eclipse Client Platform, SWT and plug-in component design based, which is truly revolutionary.
We are only beginning to see a new generation of applications leveraging off of Eclipse starting to appear and it will be, well, BIG.
For example, Borland, Adobe and the like, are investing R&D dollars heavily in Eclipse based technology.
What is most significant is how Workplace is Eclipse Client Platform, SWT and plug-in component design based, which is truly revolutionary.
We are only beginning to see a new generation of applications leveraging off of Eclipse starting to appear and it will be, well, BIG.
Is the sky really falling?
This editorial seems to me to have a "Chicken Little" flavor. I have no idea how to evaluate the analysis that you discuss partially but I have two reasons to be skeptical of an apocalypse.
First, recent history is the best predictor of the near future. The smart money is on betting that Linux and FLOSS continues to grow in influence. You'd also be foolish to bet on radical changes among the biggest, most entrenched IT players.
Second, if I had a nickel for every new bold new Microsoft plan, I'd be living in the Gates' $97MIL mansion. So what if they purchased Great Plains several years ago? So what if they tried to buy SAP? Microsoft has had relatively poor penetration into data centers for years and they are beating UNIX in that market (very slowly)... So what? This isn't news and if there is a tipping point on the horizon, I'd bet it's one that favors Linux with it's double-digit growth.
About Dell (from your comments), I know that Dell has a degree of interest in the big-iron field and I know that they are worried about a sea change as hardware becomes a commodity. But I have a really hard time seeing Dell acquire Sun. Sun's R&D-heavy strategy is the opposite of Dell's "me too, but with better execution" approach. I don't know why Dell would think they have strengths that could turn Sun around (or are you claiming that Dell is looking for Sun sales people to see Dell products?)
You're entitled to your opinions, but for me it just doesn't add up.
First, recent history is the best predictor of the near future. The smart money is on betting that Linux and FLOSS continues to grow in influence. You'd also be foolish to bet on radical changes among the biggest, most entrenched IT players.
Second, if I had a nickel for every new bold new Microsoft plan, I'd be living in the Gates' $97MIL mansion. So what if they purchased Great Plains several years ago? So what if they tried to buy SAP? Microsoft has had relatively poor penetration into data centers for years and they are beating UNIX in that market (very slowly)... So what? This isn't news and if there is a tipping point on the horizon, I'd bet it's one that favors Linux with it's double-digit growth.
About Dell (from your comments), I know that Dell has a degree of interest in the big-iron field and I know that they are worried about a sea change as hardware becomes a commodity. But I have a really hard time seeing Dell acquire Sun. Sun's R&D-heavy strategy is the opposite of Dell's "me too, but with better execution" approach. I don't know why Dell would think they have strengths that could turn Sun around (or are you claiming that Dell is looking for Sun sales people to see Dell products?)
You're entitled to your opinions, but for me it just doesn't add up.
Here's a comment from our assistant editor-in-chief on digg.com:
Sorry, but this is not pro-MS rhetoric. I can vouch for the author's FOSS creds. He is arguing for the FOSS community to find some solid venues for innovation. Re-read the article.
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Microsoft_Has_Stopped_Competing_w...
You can digg it if you want.
After getting 100,000+ visits yesterday on my article (mutiply that by thousand for hits) I'm out of responses. But, I love ya man.
P.S. I can see how you view this as a chicken little kind of thing. That's pretty original thinking and a good title but that's not the intent. I'd like the community to take a look at creating an open architecture in places where we are not "me too" and where we excel. If this was my company instead of a community I'd do it myself. And if it doesn't happen soon, I will do it myself.
Finally, you should write for us too. We need lots of emerging authors. You'd get a lot of support from our editors. Like I said, you can't have my Bud Lite.
Sorry, but this is not pro-MS rhetoric. I can vouch for the author's FOSS creds. He is arguing for the FOSS community to find some solid venues for innovation. Re-read the article.
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Microsoft_Has_Stopped_Competing_w...
You can digg it if you want.
After getting 100,000+ visits yesterday on my article (mutiply that by thousand for hits) I'm out of responses. But, I love ya man.
P.S. I can see how you view this as a chicken little kind of thing. That's pretty original thinking and a good title but that's not the intent. I'd like the community to take a look at creating an open architecture in places where we are not "me too" and where we excel. If this was my company instead of a community I'd do it myself. And if it doesn't happen soon, I will do it myself.
Finally, you should write for us too. We need lots of emerging authors. You'd get a lot of support from our editors. Like I said, you can't have my Bud Lite.
I'd love to write an article comparing Linux as it exists today (say FC5) and how it will be in just a few months (say, FC6) to Vista. As far as I can see, most of the innovative reasons one would have for using Vista are already present in Linux. (Seperation of administrator and user privledges, encrypted filesystems, Aero--compare to glx or aiglx)
So, we are all in agreement that you're not a MS agent spreading FUD... but what is your point? That Linux isn't innovative enough? Not only don't I agree (see above... MS is the party playing catch-up) but I don't know why you started talking about all the cloak-and-dagger stuff about acquisitions... Are you saying that there is some relationship between Microsoft trying to sell business software and Linux innovation? I'm not seeing it.
BTW, I think spending a HALF A BILLION dollars to promote Vista and office is a big deal! I think it shows that despite their new "What Linux? We don't see any Linux!" attitude, the folks in Redmond have soiled their pants. Not just (or even primarily about Linux) but about the commoditization of software. Did you notice Gate's comments about the $100 MIT laptop? He said something like "sure the hardware is commodity, it's the software that adds value". FLOSS directly refutes Microsoft's business model and it's future.
Whether Balmer knows it or not, Microsoft is in direct competition with many forces and organizations and Linux and FLOSS are definitely one of the most serious problems facing Redmond.
I think MS actually knows this but they're struck it from their talking points. If anything, I think the recent MS focus on the enterprise is an attempt to wrestle attention away from FLOSS and fresh companies like Google.
So, we are all in agreement that you're not a MS agent spreading FUD... but what is your point? That Linux isn't innovative enough? Not only don't I agree (see above... MS is the party playing catch-up) but I don't know why you started talking about all the cloak-and-dagger stuff about acquisitions... Are you saying that there is some relationship between Microsoft trying to sell business software and Linux innovation? I'm not seeing it.
BTW, I think spending a HALF A BILLION dollars to promote Vista and office is a big deal! I think it shows that despite their new "What Linux? We don't see any Linux!" attitude, the folks in Redmond have soiled their pants. Not just (or even primarily about Linux) but about the commoditization of software. Did you notice Gate's comments about the $100 MIT laptop? He said something like "sure the hardware is commodity, it's the software that adds value". FLOSS directly refutes Microsoft's business model and it's future.
Whether Balmer knows it or not, Microsoft is in direct competition with many forces and organizations and Linux and FLOSS are definitely one of the most serious problems facing Redmond.
I think MS actually knows this but they're struck it from their talking points. If anything, I think the recent MS focus on the enterprise is an attempt to wrestle attention away from FLOSS and fresh companies like Google.
Quoting:but what is your point? That Linux isn't innovative enough? Not only don't I agree (see above... MS is the party playing catch-up) but I don't know why you started talking about all the cloak-and-dagger stuff about acquisitions
The point is fairly simple, Microsoft isn't focused on Linux as a competitive threat. I don't know how to say it any other way. It's a similar way of thinking when UNIX companies didn't consider Microsoft a competitive threat. I interviewed in the early 1990's for an accounting and MIS job with one of the large business supply companies. They ran a bunch of System V machines and had a workgroup of 8-10 Windows 3.11 desktops for one small department.
Windows was no threat to anyone at that time including Apple. Microsoft has a mantra back then: Good enough.
Today, with all the great things about Linux, we don't compete on the desktop. You can say we do, that doesn't make it true. Steeleye provides the same clustering capability for Windows 2003 Server. People are still willing to pay the licenses fees. As far as the enterprise market, Linux on the desktop isn't even good enough. I'm not talking off the top of my head. I have a pretty good network of people in Fortune 25 companies who are still doing pilots with Linux and still can't get where they want to go. Some of these gentlemen and ladies did technical reviews on my last book. They don't lie. They are advocates for Linux inside their companies. Most have Red Hat certs.
All of us who favor Linux and free software need to get over ourselves. We need to stop this wishful thinking and offering evidence about how great Linux and free software competes. It does NOT compete in the market, it doesn't compete in government RFPs, it doesn't compete in the SMB space. Our wins across the board are insignificant in the scheme of things.
I'm presenting facts. If people don't want to accept facts, they can live with their reasons. But, if someone confronts you from your own community with the intention of doing good and that person is a credible source, you should take an inventory and do something about the status of the situation. Like it or not. Our community needs to warm up to the fact that we're in denial.
tadelste said:
" Linux on the desktop isn't even good enough. I'm not talking off the top of my head. I have a pretty good network of people in Fortune 25 companies who are still doing pilots with Linux and still can't get where they want to go."
All I can say is that, for my purpose, my Debian/KDE desktop is far better than anything that exists today in the Windows world. That wasn't true three years ago when I started using Linux full time. What I was seeing was when enough people got interested in an area of development, the app 'was' developed. That is one of the caveats of Linux. Because it is community driven, the demand and interest in the application(s) must be there first, otherwise no one develops for it, and it dies.
What enterprise wants, or thinks that it needs may be something else entirely, and I'm not sure there is a way to get what they want, unless, they are willing and able to do it themselves. That's the bottom line.
All I can say is that, for my purpose, my Debian/KDE desktop is far better than anything that exists today in the Windows world. That wasn't true three years ago when I started using Linux full time. What I was seeing was when enough people got interested in an area of development, the app 'was' developed. That is one of the caveats of Linux. Because it is community driven, the demand and interest in the application(s) must be there first, otherwise no one develops for it, and it dies.
What enterprise wants, or thinks that it needs may be something else entirely, and I'm not sure there is a way to get what they want, unless, they are willing and able to do it themselves. That's the bottom line.
What I don't get about some open source people is how great they are at ignoring the reality with phrases like: "Well, it works in MY Debian/KDE..." Go tell it to some corporation board, and I'll see how many seconds later you will be kicked out.
I have a feeling some people feel fine the way they are, in the comfort of their linux cubicles, and do not want to see the truth. And the truth is, that it is the CUSTOMERS who fed its money to the fledgling Microsoft and grew it into the monster it is today. What linux should have gotten round to doing long ago is fostering its user base - I mean users who create things, not just warp screens or write the umpteenths text editor.
Tom:
> It does NOT compete in the market, it doesn't compete in government RFPs, it doesn't compete in the SMB space. Our wins across the board are insignificant in the scheme of things.
While this is largely true, I don't think it's quite as bad as you're thinking. Linux on the desktop right now is about where Linux on the server was in say, 1996-1998. Most, but not all, of the pieces are in place. If you're willing to run Crossover Office, then effectively all of the pieces are in place, as the major apps that are still needed from Windows are then available. Does this mean that you can switch all of your desktops to Linux? No, but it means that your average user can be switched. You will continue to need some Windows machines around for specialized tasks. Wasn't that exactly the case in the server market about 8-10 years ago? The desktop is Microsoft's stronghold. It's where they started and where they're the strongest. Making headway there will take longer than it did on servers, but it is happening. And many of the places it's happening aren't going to say anything about it. The last thing they want is to attract Microsoft's attention. Again, this mirrors exactly what happened on servers. All of the pieces weren't in place for the server until the 2.0 kernel. The 2.0.1 kernel on kernel.org is dated 7/3/96. So it's taken 10 years for Linux to reach its current position on servers. The desktop wasn't really usable until the release of OpenOffice 1.0 (5/1/02, from Wikipedia) and Firefox 1.0 (11/9/04, from Mozilla's site). So, even if the desktop goes as quickly, which I doubt it will, we're still less than two years into that 10 year process. Given time, I expect the same success on the desktop as on the server, but it will take time.
> It does NOT compete in the market, it doesn't compete in government RFPs, it doesn't compete in the SMB space. Our wins across the board are insignificant in the scheme of things.
While this is largely true, I don't think it's quite as bad as you're thinking. Linux on the desktop right now is about where Linux on the server was in say, 1996-1998. Most, but not all, of the pieces are in place. If you're willing to run Crossover Office, then effectively all of the pieces are in place, as the major apps that are still needed from Windows are then available. Does this mean that you can switch all of your desktops to Linux? No, but it means that your average user can be switched. You will continue to need some Windows machines around for specialized tasks. Wasn't that exactly the case in the server market about 8-10 years ago? The desktop is Microsoft's stronghold. It's where they started and where they're the strongest. Making headway there will take longer than it did on servers, but it is happening. And many of the places it's happening aren't going to say anything about it. The last thing they want is to attract Microsoft's attention. Again, this mirrors exactly what happened on servers. All of the pieces weren't in place for the server until the 2.0 kernel. The 2.0.1 kernel on kernel.org is dated 7/3/96. So it's taken 10 years for Linux to reach its current position on servers. The desktop wasn't really usable until the release of OpenOffice 1.0 (5/1/02, from Wikipedia) and Firefox 1.0 (11/9/04, from Mozilla's site). So, even if the desktop goes as quickly, which I doubt it will, we're still less than two years into that 10 year process. Given time, I expect the same success on the desktop as on the server, but it will take time.
Question: What makes the opinion of someone who works for a huge corporation any more reliable, worthy or important than someone who works for a charity?
I would suggest that these companies need to learn from OSS and NOT the other way round.
Perhaps Linux needs to split in two and one half go off and play corporate whore while the rest carry on with free software. Because I seriously doubt the two are compatible.
You remember those dodgy Western films? And it's Indian drums day and night and night and day it doesn't stop until just before they attack?
I don't like it, it's too quiet.
I would suggest that these companies need to learn from OSS and NOT the other way round.
Perhaps Linux needs to split in two and one half go off and play corporate whore while the rest carry on with free software. Because I seriously doubt the two are compatible.
You remember those dodgy Western films? And it's Indian drums day and night and night and day it doesn't stop until just before they attack?
I don't like it, it's too quiet.
trueash,
I simply stated my experience with Linux, I admit that it may not work in the 'enterprise' (read large corporate) environment.... Now how is that denying the truth?
I'm certainly not saying that Linux has 'arrived', but, development of Linux and the Linux Desktop will continue, although, Linux Developers and the Linux community are motivated very differently than those in the world of propritary software. 'Maybe' they will fulfill your enterprise dream and maybe not... Now you can believe in your 'truth', but, that's reality.
I simply stated my experience with Linux, I admit that it may not work in the 'enterprise' (read large corporate) environment.... Now how is that denying the truth?
I'm certainly not saying that Linux has 'arrived', but, development of Linux and the Linux Desktop will continue, although, Linux Developers and the Linux community are motivated very differently than those in the world of propritary software. 'Maybe' they will fulfill your enterprise dream and maybe not... Now you can believe in your 'truth', but, that's reality.
Hi all,
I think it's all a matter of time, as said here before. If I do a Google search for "sapgui linux" today, it brings some 70.000 hits. A search for "notes client linux" brings out some 16 Million hits. All of the big server solutions today *do* run on Linux, like SAP or Domino and most of the ERP "solutions" I can think of. IBM is indeed a strong contender in that "enterprise" market with its Websphere and other solutions and its strong commitment to the Linux community.
I installed Websphere on Solaris first; that is some years ago already, and I bet todays Linux versions are way better than it was at that time. What is really missing at the moment is - IMHO - the numbers of desktops that make exactly the same companies consider them enough of a "target" to put their solutions on. And we're working on that, aren't we?
I saw in the latest Ingram Micro monthly adpackages that by now you really *can* order Fujitsu Siemens or HP computers without a pre-installed OS or with only FreeDOS on them. And they're about 100$/€ cheaper. This *will* make a difference, if you need many of them.
Tom said:
>It has a cost benefit and a technology benefit for people who do not want to use Microsoft's limited development tools. That's something Microsoft developers will never understand.
That's true; sadly. But this is another problem. Today we have a generation of "developers" which were obviously born with mice in their hands, and they have no clue about UNIX-like programming. If you - like we - have a whole shop full of these, you will indeed have problems in the future. IMHO. But these business guys were never actually listening to me anyway, so this is not really *my* problem, except that sooner or later I will have to find a new job... ;-)
cheers,
wjl
Tadelste:
If that is the case then that's bad for Microsoft and probably good for us. If it doesn't see it as a competitive threat yet, that only means we still have more space to grow, and we do grow. I think that if we really aren't a threat yet, we'll sure become one, and soon so.
However, all the advertising that Microsoft has put out against GNU/Linux (like "get the facts" campaign) make it rather hard to believe GNU/Linux is not a considered a threat to them at all.
But OK, maybe that is only limited to the server market, and maybe on the desktop we still aren't a threat, but that will probably change.
Quoting:The point is fairly simple, Microsoft isn't focused on Linux as a competitive threat. I don't know how to say it any other way.
If that is the case then that's bad for Microsoft and probably good for us. If it doesn't see it as a competitive threat yet, that only means we still have more space to grow, and we do grow. I think that if we really aren't a threat yet, we'll sure become one, and soon so.
However, all the advertising that Microsoft has put out against GNU/Linux (like "get the facts" campaign) make it rather hard to believe GNU/Linux is not a considered a threat to them at all.
But OK, maybe that is only limited to the server market, and maybe on the desktop we still aren't a threat, but that will probably change.
You could look at this another way.
It was not that long ago that people used to say "Well, I don't use Linux because there isn't a good web browser, or there isn't a good word processor."
Now people say things like "I design ceramic dental replacements and Linux doesn't have a certain software package that lets me quickly calculate ratios of composites I need to make the teeth. The kiln manufacturer only has a Windows version, So I'll stick with Windows for now"
Really We used to want for a good browser, now we bemoan the lack of tax preparation software we only use a few weeks out of the year.
Linux now fills most of everyone's needs. So the time is right for Linux to start leading the desktop software industry.
Its how Linux became the dominant OS in the server room.
It was not that long ago that people used to say "Well, I don't use Linux because there isn't a good web browser, or there isn't a good word processor."
Now people say things like "I design ceramic dental replacements and Linux doesn't have a certain software package that lets me quickly calculate ratios of composites I need to make the teeth. The kiln manufacturer only has a Windows version, So I'll stick with Windows for now"
Really We used to want for a good browser, now we bemoan the lack of tax preparation software we only use a few weeks out of the year.
Linux now fills most of everyone's needs. So the time is right for Linux to start leading the desktop software industry.
Its how Linux became the dominant OS in the server room.
Quoting:Now people say things like "I design ceramic dental replacements and Linux doesn't have a certain software package that lets me quickly calculate ratios of composites I need to make the teeth.
Interesting. That's exactly the kind of thing for which I see Linux used. Great example, SCO used to own the dental market. My dentist uses it. That's an easy port. Perfect example of where it fits.
My wife works at Southwest Medical School in Dallas. Those guys use Linux for numerous things where they get research grants. The even has interfaces to guess what - medical devices like heart monitors, etc.
With regard to the desktop being where the server was in 1998, I wouldn't say that. Two things put the desktop closer. 1. The Linux developers have created a dynamic underbelly for the desktop. The server with the 2.05 kernel was better than DOS and did some serious web serving, was a decent print and file server and had an illegal same sex marriage with Samba ;-)
2. Gnome and KDE are terrific desktop. Openoffice.org, Firefox, Evolution, GIMP, Gaim, Bluefish, the varous IDE's, etc. are excellent. I personally use Firefox and Gmail, which I consider a nice combination. We also have SSH and really nice terminals like gnome-terminal, screen. gftp, etc.
We excel on the desktop at Internet utilities, etc. I don't have a problem using Ubuntu in excess of 12 hours a day. People who know me will tell those hours are accurate.
But and here's the "but" about the desktop - we're at a minimum power users and probably pretty good hackers. I put myself in between there. I'm decent sysadmin, and do some programming and a lot of work on web sites. If I have a problem on the Linux desktop I can fix it.
But, the vast majority of desktop users can only click a few icons, tend to stay with autoplay when they insert CDs and DVDs we can't legally do in the US. They know where to find their MS games (maybe), Word, maybe Excel, IE, My documents and that's probably the gist. If they need X, the company buys Exceed. If the need a 5250 terminal, the company buys homebody something.
I would start by adding Quickbooks and MS Money. For one thing both of those now become an interface to every bank's on-line systems. Secondly, I'm improve GIMP to the point that it looks like Photoshop on the Mac. Then I would get several ports of tax software like TurboTax and TaxCut. Finally, we need to play all the Berlitz type courses.
Someone should also figure out how to get embedded Linux into DVD players that could fit a PC.
Then I think we become competitive.
I definitely saw that kind of specialization in the hard sciences with Linux. Geologists, Mathematicins, physicists all wrote extensive specialized software in the early days of Linux, and it continues today. Some specialists may be power users, but lack the skills or time to create the software. Sometimes a lawyer or a ceramic engineer might need something, and even have the ability to create it, but they won't have the time.
As Linux becomes more common the demand might be met by having professionals sponsor projects with money. Like the Windows port ti intel/mac was done.
And that dvd player whith embedded Linux, Who's stopping Tivo from adding a dvd? It could just be a player not a recorder. I wonder what kind of pressure their under from the MPAA to not include a dvd player, or is it just a measure to keep down the cost of a Tivo box?
As Linux becomes more common the demand might be met by having professionals sponsor projects with money. Like the Windows port ti intel/mac was done.
And that dvd player whith embedded Linux, Who's stopping Tivo from adding a dvd? It could just be a player not a recorder. I wonder what kind of pressure their under from the MPAA to not include a dvd player, or is it just a measure to keep down the cost of a Tivo box?
sean: the MPAA has allowed DVD in embedded Linux devices for some time.
http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp
This is only one of many.
Why not a DVD player-recorder as an embedded device that simply goes into one of your 5 1/2" bays?
http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp
This is only one of many.
Why not a DVD player-recorder as an embedded device that simply goes into one of your 5 1/2" bays?
I see what you mean. I misunderstood, and was thinking of a consumer set top box.
Yeah, a dvd drive with a dvd decoder daughter board. Most Motherboards come with some kind of legal dvd playing software for Windows, the Linux versions don't seem to be forth coming.
Or better yet an HDTV card with dvd decoder hardware in it. That could sell to the Linux, Windows, and Mac crowd. put it in a pc with a monitor, and a dvd drive and you've got an hdtv that plays dvd's as well.
I still think with Linux adoption outpacing Windows in much of the World, we have to reach a tipping point sooner or later. I'm in this for the long haul.
Yeah, a dvd drive with a dvd decoder daughter board. Most Motherboards come with some kind of legal dvd playing software for Windows, the Linux versions don't seem to be forth coming.
Or better yet an HDTV card with dvd decoder hardware in it. That could sell to the Linux, Windows, and Mac crowd. put it in a pc with a monitor, and a dvd drive and you've got an hdtv that plays dvd's as well.
I still think with Linux adoption outpacing Windows in much of the World, we have to reach a tipping point sooner or later. I'm in this for the long haul.
Oh, no doubt Linux adoption is outpacing MS in many parts of the world: Brazil, China, Spain, Argentina, Mexico, S. Korea, South Africa, Nigeria, Syria, Iran and Cuba. Maybe India, but one never knows about them.
tadelste wrote:
Both KDE and Gnome are closer to the Windows 98 pattern than they are to XP or Vista. I think this is because Linux users are more proficient and find this format more rational than the latest and greatest from MS, which tend to isolate the user completely. I know that the W2k and XP masking of any meaningful system functions was one of the straws which headed me over to Linux.
From the time I started using Linux (and long before that I suspect), there has been a struggle between those that want to pander to the lowest common denominator, as does MS, or to leave in access to the more meaningful system functions. So far, Linux (KDE and Gnome) has done pretty well in striking a balance between ease of use for the n00b, and, reasonable access for the expert. I don't think that existing Linux users want to see Linux any less accessible and I believe that there will be a backlash if we try to push toward a less functional interface. Duplicating Vista's terrible interface, or anything close to it, is not an acceptable answer.
Perhaps we need a child's version of Gnome or KDE with large program icons, a locked down interface and no access to anything other than specific functions for that 'vast majority'.... Oh, that's right... we could easily set that up right now. And as for apps for 'homebody', well, that can be done by an admin without much hassle. Truthfully, Linux is much easier to customize for enterprise than any of the MS stuff. I just never understand that argument.
Quoting:"But and here's the "but" about the desktop - we're at a minimum power users and probably pretty good hackers. I put myself in between there. I'm decent sysadmin, and do some programming and a lot of work on web sites. If I have a problem on the Linux desktop I can fix it.
But, the vast majority of desktop users can only click a few icons, tend to stay with autoplay when they insert CDs and DVDs we can't legally do in the US. They know where to find their MS games (maybe), Word, maybe Excel, IE, My documents and that's probably the gist. If they need X, the company buys Exceed. If the need a 5250 terminal, the company buys homebody something."
Both KDE and Gnome are closer to the Windows 98 pattern than they are to XP or Vista. I think this is because Linux users are more proficient and find this format more rational than the latest and greatest from MS, which tend to isolate the user completely. I know that the W2k and XP masking of any meaningful system functions was one of the straws which headed me over to Linux.
From the time I started using Linux (and long before that I suspect), there has been a struggle between those that want to pander to the lowest common denominator, as does MS, or to leave in access to the more meaningful system functions. So far, Linux (KDE and Gnome) has done pretty well in striking a balance between ease of use for the n00b, and, reasonable access for the expert. I don't think that existing Linux users want to see Linux any less accessible and I believe that there will be a backlash if we try to push toward a less functional interface. Duplicating Vista's terrible interface, or anything close to it, is not an acceptable answer.
Perhaps we need a child's version of Gnome or KDE with large program icons, a locked down interface and no access to anything other than specific functions for that 'vast majority'.... Oh, that's right... we could easily set that up right now. And as for apps for 'homebody', well, that can be done by an admin without much hassle. Truthfully, Linux is much easier to customize for enterprise than any of the MS stuff. I just never understand that argument.
Is the sky really falling? - Too early to tell
Sorry, I must have overreacted in my yesterday's post.
Still, I am sure that it's not technological (im)perfection that matters in the corporate sector. What matters is the bottomline, and technology is only important if it makes any impact on that. Otherwise, it's an unnecesary risk.
Another point that I'd like to make is this: being a monopolist in software market, Microsoft is also a monopolist opinion leader. The message their decision sends to the business community is not very good for FOSS: "Linux? Gimme a break... Those guys are just not serious enough for us to bother..."
To put it short - FOSS may be perfection itself, but it's worth nothing if nobody uses it.
Nothing is a big generalization but it sounds kinda sorta right. People use it, but it's more the exception than the rule. You're spot on about opinion leadership. I couldn't have articulated any better than that. I also didn't occur to me. Well done.
Who is the real me-too?
With the current Windows, do you have:
1) the security of having to have admin enable an executable?
2) a rock-solid degree of hardware support for the hardware that you support?
3) application management like either ports trees, yum, or apt?
4) a 3D desktop?
On some of these, Windows is trying to play me-too. On the others, they're either not there yet or have no plans to be. Regarding hardware support. Yes, I use an NDISwrapper with my Broadcom chipset. However, Linux has given rock-solid support to an Olympus camera, Sony CD drive, and WD hard drive that XP only supported temperamentally.
I don't use Linux because of cost. I would use it even if it cost as much as MS-Office. With Linux, I can trust that my computer will work securely, fast, and well... which is where Windows will not foreseeably come close to being a me-too.
(Not only that, but, with Anaconda, Linux is easier to install and set up.)
1) the security of having to have admin enable an executable?
2) a rock-solid degree of hardware support for the hardware that you support?
3) application management like either ports trees, yum, or apt?
4) a 3D desktop?
On some of these, Windows is trying to play me-too. On the others, they're either not there yet or have no plans to be. Regarding hardware support. Yes, I use an NDISwrapper with my Broadcom chipset. However, Linux has given rock-solid support to an Olympus camera, Sony CD drive, and WD hard drive that XP only supported temperamentally.
I don't use Linux because of cost. I would use it even if it cost as much as MS-Office. With Linux, I can trust that my computer will work securely, fast, and well... which is where Windows will not foreseeably come close to being a me-too.
(Not only that, but, with Anaconda, Linux is easier to install and set up.)
All true. Now sell that to somebody in industry and bust through the 3% market share.
I could see this
I could see microsoft becoming an IBM. Maybe they are throwing in the towel on the desktop and admitting they can't make a solid, stable, desktop and the desktop will become a commodity and so linux will eventually fill the bill. it makes sense to me and would give companies a lot more flexibility on the desktop in creating end to end applications.
maybe they become a solutions provider utilizing whatever they plan on doing with linux on the desktop. granted this would be a while and a sort of an evolution -
but I heard on the radio just today that vista is going to be delayed till after the holiday season.
but no matter how you look at it linux on the business desktop makes a whole lot better business case than having a proprietary desktop. businesses aren't about innovation they are about stability and the ability to push their own proprietary applications to their employees. And linux give them the ability to do that with the licensing cost.
maybe they become a solutions provider utilizing whatever they plan on doing with linux on the desktop. granted this would be a while and a sort of an evolution -
but I heard on the radio just today that vista is going to be delayed till after the holiday season.
but no matter how you look at it linux on the business desktop makes a whole lot better business case than having a proprietary desktop. businesses aren't about innovation they are about stability and the ability to push their own proprietary applications to their employees. And linux give them the ability to do that with the licensing cost.
I think it was interesting that Ballmer left Accenture's Board of Directors..
BTW, IBM dosn't break out income in their outside financial reports. They lose money on hardware except for the mainframe. The make almost all their profits in services e.g., IBM Global Services (IGS). They make money on the mainframe because they have like no competition.
BTW, IBM dosn't break out income in their outside financial reports. They lose money on hardware except for the mainframe. The make almost all their profits in services e.g., IBM Global Services (IGS). They make money on the mainframe because they have like no competition.
Linux also has some very innovative features - like in the future I could the see enterprises making their own live distribution for their workers on a cd - then all the worker needs is a cdrom on their computer. the computer wouldn't even need a hard drive.
then the worker could go home and boot their computer with it and it would have all the proprietary ras stuff to connect to work with a vpn and the worker could work at home just like if they were at work.
they could freshen the cd every quarter, month, semi-annually, or whatever and also have copy protection on it somehow so the employees cannot make copies of the cd.
just a thought - but to say linux is a me-too technology is not giving it it's just rewards. there is a lot of innovation going on in open source that windows could only dream of.
we just don't have the chair throwing ballmers associated with us.
then the worker could go home and boot their computer with it and it would have all the proprietary ras stuff to connect to work with a vpn and the worker could work at home just like if they were at work.
they could freshen the cd every quarter, month, semi-annually, or whatever and also have copy protection on it somehow so the employees cannot make copies of the cd.
just a thought - but to say linux is a me-too technology is not giving it it's just rewards. there is a lot of innovation going on in open source that windows could only dream of.
we just don't have the chair throwing ballmers associated with us.
Have you heard of the Linux thin client solution? Everyone believes it is just going great guns and knocking people out of the water. Nope. Barely any business there.
I'm not playing devils advocate or being negative. I just want you to know what you're up against. Companies are more likely to get a Live Windows CD and put it in their CD Roms or solid state devices that go into a 5 1/2" bay.
I'm not playing devils advocate or being negative. I just want you to know what you're up against. Companies are more likely to get a Live Windows CD and put it in their CD Roms or solid state devices that go into a 5 1/2" bay.
"Have you heard of the Linux thin client solution? Everyone believes it is just going great guns and knocking people out of the water. Nope. Barely any business there.
I'm not playing devils advocate or being negative. I just want you to know what you're up against. Companies are more likely to get a Live Windows CD and put it in their CD Roms or solid state devices that go into a 5 1/2" bay."
yes I have heard about it - I was just throwing some ideas off the top of my head.
Live windows cd - is there such a thing - if so where? I have never heard of such a thing.
this was one my points was linux has had a live cd for a long time and I still don't know of a windows live cd. in this case windows is the me-too technology if there is such a thing.
I'm not playing devils advocate or being negative. I just want you to know what you're up against. Companies are more likely to get a Live Windows CD and put it in their CD Roms or solid state devices that go into a 5 1/2" bay."
yes I have heard about it - I was just throwing some ideas off the top of my head.
Live windows cd - is there such a thing - if so where? I have never heard of such a thing.
this was one my points was linux has had a live cd for a long time and I still don't know of a windows live cd. in this case windows is the me-too technology if there is such a thing.
> Live windows cd - is there such a thing - if so where?
http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/ http://www.ubcd4win.com/
http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/ http://www.ubcd4win.com/
"[HYPERLINK@www.nu2.nu]
[HYPERLINK@www.ubcd4win.com"
okay - just looking at those links - those are more rescue cd's and not a true running windows os. yes they could look like windows but where is the browser the office application.
this is where windows is the me-too technology
I can run knoppix, ubuntu, mepis and actually do some work off the cd and save the work on my usb pen drive.
okay - just looking at those links - those are more rescue cd's and not a true running windows os. yes they could look like windows but where is the browser the office application.
this is where windows is the me-too technology
I can run knoppix, ubuntu, mepis and actually do some work off the cd and save the work on my usb pen drive.
What is BartPE and PE Builder?
Bart's PE Builder helps you build a "BartPE" (Bart Preinstalled Environment) bootable Windows CD-Rom or DVD from the original Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 installation/setup CD, very suitable for PC maintenance tasks.
It will give you a complete Win32 environment with network support, a graphical user interface (800x600) and FAT/NTFS/CDFS filesystem support. Very handy for burn-in testing systems with no OS, rescuing files to a network share, virus scan and so on. This will replace any Dos bootdisk in no time!
Bart's PE Builder helps you build a "BartPE" (Bart Preinstalled Environment) bootable Windows CD-Rom or DVD from the original Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 installation/setup CD, very suitable for PC maintenance tasks.
It will give you a complete Win32 environment with network support, a graphical user interface (800x600) and FAT/NTFS/CDFS filesystem support. Very handy for burn-in testing systems with no OS, rescuing files to a network share, virus scan and so on. This will replace any Dos bootdisk in no time!
> where is the browser the office application.
UCBD4Win includes Firefox. It might be possible to add OpenOffice to the CD, though I've never tried.
UCBD4Win includes Firefox. It might be possible to add OpenOffice to the CD, though I've never tried.
I was just making nice and showing what the guy, Bart, claimed.
Tom:
Bart's PE is a barebones boot disk with few features. It gives you complete access to the hardware and filesystem, including network access, but that's pretty much it. UBCD4Win is an supercharged upgrade to Bart's PE which includes a whole bunch of free software on the CD. Most important, from a Windows perspective, are virus scanning and spyware removal tools :), but it includes a web browser, email client, disk imaging software, CD burner, disk defragmenter, pdf viewer, registry tools, etc.
I've used it here at work, and it's an extremely nice tool if you're stuck in a Windows environment. Linux live CD's are better, but for Windows it's pretty good.
Bart's PE is a barebones boot disk with few features. It gives you complete access to the hardware and filesystem, including network access, but that's pretty much it. UBCD4Win is an supercharged upgrade to Bart's PE which includes a whole bunch of free software on the CD. Most important, from a Windows perspective, are virus scanning and spyware removal tools :), but it includes a web browser, email client, disk imaging software, CD burner, disk defragmenter, pdf viewer, registry tools, etc.
I've used it here at work, and it's an extremely nice tool if you're stuck in a Windows environment. Linux live CD's are better, but for Windows it's pretty good.
Oh, and I should mention that to legally use either, you have to have a valid XP license which is not being used at the same time as the CD, and that Microsoft frowns upon it's use.
jd: I was aware that UBCD4Win built on Barts. Like I said, just trying to redeem myself (only slightly) by making nice. :)
Tom:
I'm not surprised that you knew. I thought it worth adding for any others who might not be aware that such tools existed for Windows. Sort of like having an extra screwdriver in the toolchest.
I'm not surprised that you knew. I thought it worth adding for any others who might not be aware that such tools existed for Windows. Sort of like having an extra screwdriver in the toolchest.
Fjdixon: thanks. I smiled :-D
can any of them run on a usb stick too?
guess windows can be considered a me-too technology there too since they don't even have that.
you can run linux on a 64 and 128 meg usb stick.
can windows do that? uh? uh? uh?
ha ha just kidding - in some ways linux is me too but it is in the mundane task like open office web browsing email but how innovative can you get with word processing, email etc - with that said windows is also a me-too technology in a lot of ways to linux. just examples are the usb stick and the live cdrom - I know linux live cd was way before any of those examples you gave above - so there too windows was a me-too techology.
guess windows can be considered a me-too technology there too since they don't even have that.
you can run linux on a 64 and 128 meg usb stick.
can windows do that? uh? uh? uh?
ha ha just kidding - in some ways linux is me too but it is in the mundane task like open office web browsing email but how innovative can you get with word processing, email etc - with that said windows is also a me-too technology in a lot of ways to linux. just examples are the usb stick and the live cdrom - I know linux live cd was way before any of those examples you gave above - so there too windows was a me-too techology.
Windows is a copy of lots of other people's technology. Technological prowess isn't the issue. I was strictly dealing with market perception and who buys what.
> can any of them run on a usb stick too?
There's no technical reason I know of they couldn't, but I don't know of anyone who's done so. As long as the hardware supports booting from the usb device, any bootable OS which fits on the usb drive should work. Note, I'm not denying that Linux is better, merely trying to give the Windows hackers their due.
There's no technical reason I know of they couldn't, but I don't know of anyone who's done so. As long as the hardware supports booting from the usb device, any bootable OS which fits on the usb drive should work. Note, I'm not denying that Linux is better, merely trying to give the Windows hackers their due.
> Windows is a copy of lots of other people's technology.
In many cases stolen technology, unfortuantely.
In many cases stolen technology, unfortuantely.
Linux will always be here
For the Desktop
The thing that nobody has said is that Linux in 100 years from now will still be here and selling. Linux have time to improve itself. It was evolving at the begining, it's evolving now and in 100 years it will still evolving. In 10 years linux has evolved a lot, but imagine in 50 years or 100 years.
First I think that computer will ship at very low price like 100$ you will buy it everywhere and at that price do you think you will buy a license at 300$ dollars for an os ??? You can already see that with the laptop that will sell at 100$ for the developping country. I have no doubt that 100$ computer with screen keyboard and mouse will be avaiable for everyone sooner as we think. The most people will buy it, sure and the only os that can fullfill this demand is linux.
Ah, while I enjoy your enthusiasm, you should see the predictions of how the computer industry will fare in 10 year increments. One was from 1981 to 1990, another from 1990 to 2000. They're very funny. Take a look at the state of the art system.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/Eniac.jpg
100 years ago, the primary form of transportation was horses and carriages and trains. Human flight was a dream.
200 years ago, the US was occupied primarily by Indian tribe people.
Things change. I'd give Linux five to fifteen years maybe.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/Eniac.jpg
100 years ago, the primary form of transportation was horses and carriages and trains. Human flight was a dream.
200 years ago, the US was occupied primarily by Indian tribe people.
Things change. I'd give Linux five to fifteen years maybe.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post