For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been Wintel, the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft’s Windows operating systems and Intel’s microprocessors. But Lintel, or the Linux operating system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is the entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the Windows industry.
Could Linux overthrow MS?
Possibly … in dozens of years.
Market dominance + $40 billion = longterm stability for MS.
Money usually wins.
I’ll go out on a limb and predict that MS will eventually collapse under its own weight well before “Linux” can displace it.
I agree with both of you.
“I’ll go out on a limb and predict that MS will eventually collapse under its own weight well before “Linux” can displace it”
No, you see, like in Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back, the penguins will all pilot these little machines which will fly and deploy ropes around the beasts’ legs and M$ will collapse under the power of the FOSS force.
Use the source luke!
“I’ll go out on a limb and predict that MS will eventually collapse under its own weight well before “Linux” can displace it.”
I dislike the effect of Microsoft on the USA’s lead in computing technology by soaking up competition and destroying it, in addition to charging excessively while doing it. Microsoft is a monoply and has become inneficient internally is uncompetitive. Microsoft’s anticompetitive practices will certainly destroys the US’s lead…
However, MS eventually collapsing under its own weight of cash is rather unlikely and is a great pity for the US.
The USA (including other Western countries (UK etc), and Japan) has only been technologically and economically superior in the past because of its competitive free-market economy. Now there is no competitive free-market economy in the OS market…
China, with its competitive free-market economy to be, will surely overtake the US if the US has no such economy, but is instead populated detrimentally with monopolies.
Microsoft feels your pain, too, and Windows Vista should soothe it.
Windows Vista offers systems engineers, deployment engineers, and support center operators a possibility of life outside of work.
Easier Engineering?
The late nights usually start even before you deploy an operating system. First, the platform engineering team has to make sure all the organization’s applications work correctly on the new operating system. This is a tough job in highly managed environments, in which users might not have sufficient privileges to run legacy applications without logging on as an administrator.
urfixed……? holding my breath
aka
NovellisBetter
Brilliant article. However, I would like to see a Linux duo with AMD crumbling the whole monopolistic, and perhaps proprietary, structure in the IT industry.
They have a lot of work ahead of themselves.
To begin with, they would need to solve the whole usability problem, set up end user support centers and a lot of other things.
These are things that will take way too long if no money is injected into these things. I don’t expect developers to handle these problems, but they will see some of their freedom disappear, as they suddenly have to listen to end user demands rather than developer demands if they want to see their work be used at all.
End user support costs. You can’t expect Joe Sixpack to download an iso, burn it, and then head out on forums to figure out how to use the stuff he just got.
In the end, it won’t get as cheap for the end user as a lot of people in the “community” seems to think, and what do you think the end user will think when he goes to pick up a Linux distro and learns that he has to pay for it to get the level of support he needs when he has heard everywhere that Linux doesn’t cost anything?
We already know end user support costs.
That’s the whole idea. You get the software as is for free – and you pay for the support…
It’s still cheaper than MS – and lot easier.
It’s not only end user support.
How will you finance all the other things that need to be done to catch up, and after that stay ahead?
Take the money generated from end user support? Good luck with that. A for-profit company would never get their owners to approve such a thing, and if you’re not for-profit, you won’t have any money to funnel to other projects.
Hope that the F/OSS community will do the work? Again, good luck with that. As most of the “community” is only interested in doing what they feel like, they would have to be paid to do stuff they don’t really want to do.
No. You’d have to charge for the product as well. Don’t want to pay? Don’t expect to get it all for free. Sooner or later you will end up paying for the product anyway. The only question is how little you can get away with, and I personally don’t expect it to be much less than what a normal OEM license for Windows costs today.
No. You’d have to charge for the product as well. Don’t want to pay? Don’t expect to get it all for free. Sooner or later you will end up paying for the product anyway. The only question is how little you can get away with, and I personally don’t expect it to be much less than what a normal OEM license for Windows costs today.
Er…that’s the point. Pay for support and polish if you want support and polish.
Linux is valuable beyond the initial OS price. You keep focusing on price where you need to focus on capabilites and costs (not the same as price).
Because of that, Linux is not a 1:1 replacement for Windows in all situations. Sometimes it is superior, sometimes it is not. For most average people, there is no real difference.
Microsoft feels your pain, too, and Windows Vista should soothe it.
Windows Vista offers systems engineers, deployment engineers, and support center operators a possibility of life outside of work.
Easier Engineering?
The late nights usually start even before you deploy an operating system. First, the platform engineering team has to make sure all the organization’s applications work correctly on the new operating system. This is a tough job in highly managed environments, in which users might not have sufficient privileges to run legacy applications without logging on as an administrator.
urfixed……? holding my breath
aka
NovellisBetterMicrosoft feels your pain, too, and Windows Vista should soothe it.
Windows Vista offers systems engineers, deployment engineers, and support center operators a possibility of life outside of work.
Easier Engineering?
The late nights usually start even before you deploy an operating system. First, the platform engineering team has to make sure all the organization’s applications work correctly on the new operating system. This is a tough job in highly managed environments, in which users might not have sufficient privileges to run legacy applications without logging on as an administrator.
urfixed……? holding my breath
aka
NovellisBetter
They have a lot of work ahead of themselves.
Let’s make one thing clear: The only people who want to use Linux as a hammer to bash Microsoft are the newbies and current Windows users.
Long time Linux users don’t care about Microsoft except where they form a barrier to interoperability.
To begin with, they would need to solve the whole usability problem, set up end user support centers and a lot of other things.
This alone shows that you are either in the newbie or Windows user group. Maybe an OSX user.
To continue, this…
These are things that will take way too long if no money is injected into these things. I don’t expect developers to handle these problems, but they will see some of their freedom disappear, as they suddenly have to listen to end user demands rather than developer demands if they want to see their work be used at all.
…makes no sense at all. Can you restate what you mean?
End user support costs. You can’t expect Joe Sixpack to download an iso, burn it, and then head out on forums to figure out how to use the stuff he just got.
Meet Joe the bartender. He uses Linux. When he used Windows, he did not download a Windows ISO, burn it, and head out to the forums to figure things out. He had someone else do the installation…and he did the same to use Linux.
Joe is a real guy. He’s my house mate. He is a bartender. Knows exactly jack about how to configure Linux and never uses the shell prompt.
In the end, it won’t get as cheap for the end user as a lot of people in the “community” seems to think, and what do you think the end user will think when he goes to pick up a Linux distro and learns that he has to pay for it to get the level of support he needs when he has heard everywhere that Linux doesn’t cost anything?
Most people don’t install Windows…why do you think that most average Joes will install Linux????
http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0184…
http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0184…
I am a Linux user, but I don’t see a ‘takeover’ happening anytime soon. Nor do I really care that much. Linux provides me an OS that I use and enjoy. For me it has been easy, as my hardware all “just works” – which is good, because I don’t have time nor desire to get into debugging or compiling. And, if the threat of competition keeps Microsoft (and others) making efforts to improve their softwar, then Linux benefits all.
As to your points:
To begin with, they would need to solve the whole usability problem, set up end user support centers and a lot of other things.
Linux is quite “usable”. Setting up and administration take some experience, but my wife and kids can all use my Linux PC without any special training. A box that is pre-setup (or just installs without problems) is not inherently “more difficult” than Windows.
You can’t expect Joe Sixpack to download an iso, burn it, and then head out on forums to figure out how to use the stuff he just got.
These things can be purchased pre-burned. They can be legally copied and shared. Heck, Ubuntu will ship them for free (you have to wait a while, but there are User Groups around that will give free copies).
The problem of ‘not knowing how to use what you have’ isn’t Linux-specific, either. I help moderate a large Windows-entric forum. There are a lot of users that have problems understanding and using things on Windows systems, as well. They use the forums there, and it seems to be an OK solution to them. Some even talk to friends that use Windows (or their other specific app in question) and get direct help. Linux isn’t nearly as ubiquitous as Windows, so this part isn’t quite as easy for new Linux users starting on their own without any friends already using it. Learning anything new has this issue. Is there room for improvement in Linux? Sure. But basic computing isn’t going to be a complete mystery to someone just starting.
and what do you think the end user will think when he goes to pick up a Linux distro and learns that he has to pay for it to get the level of support he needs when he has heard everywhere that Linux doesn’t cost anything?
Anyone that has gone around saying that Linux is ‘free’ as in “free beer” needs to have their ears boxed in.
Many new Linux users often use this meaning of “free” when talking to others. They are missing the point. I have paid for a boxed set of Linux. I have paid for it when included in books I was interested in. Linux is ‘free’ to copy and use as much as you want. And, if you buy a boxed set of SUSE at the store, you get phone support. Red Hat offers phone support (but their product is not as easy to buy as it used to be, since they stopped the RHL boxed set sales).
Many of your points have a valid complaint, but also have answers. Linux is a minority OS. It is often referred to as an ‘alternative’ OS, and being in a low marketshare position does generate some additional difficulties due to lack of ubiquity. Few hardware vendors write drivers for Linux. Few PC retailers offer Linux on any of their products, much less across an entire product line.
Linux has an ubhill struggle, but something like this, that has (and is living up to) the potential to be exactly the OS that any user may need will be a difficult force to stop. Indeed, we may be witnessing a practical example of the theoretical question of “what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?”
End users are a tax, nothing more. Seriously. The users you speak of are often not even willing to click “send bug report” for fear that you’re attempting to invade their personal lives… Much less are they willing to take 30 minutes out of their “busy” lives to tell you why they’re mad at your program and tell you how to reproduce a problem so that you can fix it.
Not that all end users are bad, just that the type he speaks of is neither a bonus nor a detractor. They’re good only for their good word. I see no reason to setup call centers for them; not unless they’re paying for it with money: Which is exactly what every company has said about end users…
That, to me, is another advantage of OSS. There’s no coding down to the idiots (common uneducated men). You code up to the power users and often you try and make some very sane defaults that the idiots won’t break things with. Wanna change some options? Try reading
.
I think that presently Linux’ best hope for rapid adoption is in businesses. Businesses train their employees, who are bright enough to figure some things out themselves anyway. Then, later, schools notice the current fad and jump on board. So then kids learn about it. Kids grow up and hey look, everyone’s using it.
But of course, businesses switch because 80% of their IT department is clamoring to get them to switch (don’t think IBM, think Small CO INC
). And the IT departments are already getting in bright young people who are very much enamoured with OSS. Maybe it’s not enough yet, but it will be.
So, maybe OSS developers should try and appeal to power users. It is what they know best.
Microsoft feels your pain, too, and Windows Vista should soothe it.
Windows Vista offers systems engineers, deployment engineers, and support center operators a possibility of life outside of work.
Easier Engineering?
The late nights usually start even before you deploy an operating system. First, the platform engineering team has to make sure all the organization’s applications work correctly on the new operating system. This is a tough job in highly managed environments, in which users might not have sufficient privileges to run legacy applications without logging on as an administrator.
urfixed……? holding my breath
aka
NovellisBetter
They have a lot of work ahead of themselves.
Yes we do, and it’s quite fun to do!
To begin with, they would need to solve the whole usability problem,
What’s that? I find modern Linux distributions very easy to use.
set up end user support centers and a lot of other things.
Have you ever called Microsofts call center? I have, but just for the registration. You simply can’t get any practical help from Microsoft. For FLOSS you can easily read the documentation or contact the people who did the software. With Windows you can’t find all documentation and you cannot contact the developers.
These are things that will take way too long if no money is injected into these things. I don’t expect developers to handle these problems, but they will see some of their freedom disappear, as they suddenly have to listen to end user demands rather than developer demands if they want to see their work be used at all.
Do you think that our work is not used at all? Find a clue.
End user support costs. You can’t expect Joe Sixpack to download an iso, burn it, and then head out on forums to figure out how to use the stuff he just got.
No, they do not. They’ll buy a computer and have the system preinstalled, or someone they know will install it.
In the end, it won’t get as cheap for the end user as a lot of people in the “community” seems to think, and what do you think the end user will think when he goes to pick up a Linux distro and learns that he has to pay for it to get the level of support he needs when he has heard everywhere that Linux doesn’t cost anything?
Compare that to level of Microsoft: they pay and get nothing in return.
…I for one, welcome our Linux dominating overlords.
😀
Gandi said
“First they ignore you
Then they laugh at you
Then they fight you
Then you win.”
A lot of pro-microsoft thinking is additive (one thing after another) Don’t forget that sometimes small factors can have big consequences (think exponential equations) and when a system (such as the software market) is in an unstable state small factors can have BIG consequences. The British did not regard Gandi as a threat. Interesting, heh? Just a thought to play around with, systems theory and Microsoft…
From the article
“Furthermore, open source is largely a copying machine, doing reimplementations of existing products; there”s very little innovation, in part because the rewards for it are so low.”
I’ve always felt this about a lot of open source. It seems so many projects are basically just taking some proprietary product and making a free clone of it, then letting it sit there until the next version of the proprietary product comes out, then the OSS crowd copies the new parts. There’s not too many OSS created applications that are new and original. Heck, look at the big OSS successes – Mozilla/Firefox, OpenOffice.org, NVU, Thunderbird, Blender – these were all applications donated to the community. The GIMP is nice, but nothing really original in it. Hopefully when the OSS community is done playing catch-up they can start coming out with original applications.
And where are original proprietary applications? Let me see them please.
*LOL*
Proprietary software has been years behind for almost a decade by now. Just look at MS struggling to implement ideas in the GUI, ideas whichs has been a part of F/OSS GUIS since beginning.
You ought to read the halloween documents if want to understand the whole image better.
>>
From the article
“Furthermore, open source is largely a copying machine, doing reimplementations of existing products; there”s very little innovation, in part because the rewards for it are so low.”
I’ve always felt this about a lot of open source.
<<
And how is this different from the msft model? I defy you to name one prevelent technology that is a msft invention.
LANs? Internet? Word Processors? Spreadsheets? 32-bit OS? GUI? Browsers? Databases?
Is this a joke? You honestly think there isn’t a single innovation that came out of Microsoft?
Your trolling is terrible.
LANs? Internet? Word Processors? Spreadsheets? 32-bit OS? GUI? Browsers? Databases?
I hope you are joking.
Microsoft did not invent the LAN, the Internet (Arpanet was around long before Microsoft existed), Word Processor, Spreadsheet (they bought Excel), 32-bit OS’s, the web browser (Mosaic, Netcape, and lots of others), or databases.
LANs? Internet? Word Processors? Spreadsheets? 32-bit OS? GUI? Browsers? Databases?
I hope you are joking.
Microsoft did not invent the LAN, the Internet (Arpanet was around long before Microsoft existed), Word Processor, Spreadsheet (they bought Excel), 32-bit OS’s, the web browser (Mosaic, Netcape, and lots of others), or databases.
I believe that that was the point of the original poster: Microsoft did not invented any of these things but most people here and everywhere act as if they did.
Open Source Innovations:
Internet
ION
Plan9
Croquet
Archy
Wiki
The actual list is MUCH longer, but really, to say that nothing new comes from open source is just stupid.
Linux might take over 51% of the market right after hydrogen powered cars take over 51% of the automotive market.
Hydrogen powered cars are already here.
In approx. 25 yeers they’ll be the majority (at least in Europe – USA tends to lag behind in general – apart from drugs production and weapon production and that kind of stuff)
Linux will probably never reach 51% , but it will bring MS down below 15%… but the *BSDs and microkernel OS’es might take quite a bit of that gap.
same old crap spouted every few days..
get over it.
I have used Linux off and on since the first version of RedHat came out many moons ago and it still suffers many of the same problems that I encountered with it years ago. Just yesterday I downloaded the latest Ubuntu and Fedora Core 4 installations and tried loading them up on my HP laptop just to see how things are progressing. To my surprise Ubuntu loaded but XWindows failed to start upon login. Fedora did better with a clean install process and X started albeit only in VESA mode. Wireless failed to work on both distros. I mean I was fighting with X windows start problems back in Redhat 1.0 and it is still the same. Wireless is a little more understandable but still the bottom line is until Linux can work out of the box on pretty much any hardware just like Windows it is not going to de-throne anybody much less Microsoft. Microsoft is currently doing more damage to themselves by mucking up their next OS release than Linux is doing to them. And my prediction is if Microsoft doesn’t get off their butts and start delivering regular good OS upgrades just like Apple is doing they will lose market share because of their own problems not because of Linux. Linux still has a long ways to go in my opinion before it gets close to the usability of XP and its no where near as nice as Tiger. As a software engineer I like the idea of being able to freely give away software when I like too but I also know that for those of us who do this for a living we have bills to pay, kids to feed, etc. etc. and that is not going to happen if all software is just free to the world. I don’t think that helps anyone.
i wish there was a clone of the windows desktop system that worked on unix. i woudl switch hands down.
and simplify the boot process would be better.
i wish there was a clone of the windows desktop system that worked on unix. i woudl switch hands down.
Why? Seriously. Windows isn’t very easy to use, and it changes from release to release so consistancy isn’t much of a reason.
The desktop portions of both Gnome and KDE are as easy as Windows if not easier, plus you get more and better bundled applications. For example, compare MS Paint to Koulorpaint;
http://www.rdg.ac.uk/ITS/info/training/notes/windows/paint/paint.gi…
http://kolourpaint.sourceforge.net/screenshot2_big.png
and simplify the boot process would be better.
Expect this to occur and become standard in most Linux distributions over the next year.
“Why? Seriously. Windows isn’t very easy to use, and it changes from release to release so consistancy isn’t much of a reason. ”
No offense mate, but if you think that Gnome or KDE or the rest of the Windows Manager from OSS is easier to use from Windows, why do people switch back to Windows after they use a distro within 15 mins ?
I don’t intend to flame your statement but this is a fact that most people do try to install linux, run kde/gnome and switch back to windows just because they don’t feel comfortable with new environment. If OSS community can make a suprise in this area, I am pretty sure these migrate users will stay longer in Linux.
“The desktop portions of both Gnome and KDE are as easy as Windows if not easier, plus you get more and better bundled applications. For example, compare MS Paint to Koulorpaint”
It’s good and bad for KDE/Gnome because for me personally I don’t have to install extra applications, most of them are being handled during the installation of the whole distributions. But sometime I get annoyed with other extra software that I don’t think I need. And I have the feeling that they’re crowding my HDD (I know their size is small, probably less than 10 mb, but I still get the feeling that they’re crowding my HDD)
Every distro has an installer in which you can choose which apps to install.
No offense mate, but if you think that Gnome or KDE or the rest of the Windows Manager from OSS is easier to use from Windows, why do people switch back to Windows after they use a distro within 15 mins ?
I don’t intend to flame your statement but this is a fact that most people do try to install linux, run kde/gnome and switch back to windows just because they don’t feel comfortable with new environment. If OSS community can make a suprise in this area, I am pretty sure these migrate users will stay longer in Linux.
It’s not ease of use. My bartender housemate Joe is proof of that. My little sister also had no problems with it, and her roomate seemed to be mostly confused where IE went to — missing the fact that it was more than the browser that was different.
If I knew the real answer, I’d give it to you. As long as you stay with the desktop, I really don’t see much of a difference in ease of use between the major desktop environments out there.
You can make a case for people freaking out when they encounter the command shell, though most people don’t use that under Windows so it would not be a fare comparison.
It’s good and bad for KDE/Gnome because for me personally I don’t have to install extra applications, most of them are being handled during the installation of the whole distributions. But sometime I get annoyed with other extra software that I don’t think I need. And I have the feeling that they’re crowding my HDD (I know their size is small, probably less than 10 mb, but I still get the feeling that they’re crowding my HDD)
Whenever I set up a system for people, I remove the default programs they won’t use and then pop into the menu editor and delete what they have no use for.
It makes the menu much easier to deal with — elminiates the shock some people feel.
What happens when you install windows on that same laptop? I bet you need to install video drivers, wireless drivers, etc.
Windows doesn’t work “Out of the box”. You’re just trained to install lots of 3rd party applications to get your hardware to work. It’s the same in linux.
Agreed to some extent. What happens when I install Windows? Well it works! Everything works! And until that happens with Linux it just is not going to gain much traction on the desktop. Even if you have to run several different install programs to get all the drivers installed in Windows ( which is the same for all OS’s ) it all works in the end. Contrast that with my experience with Linux in this case where the ATI xPress 200 chipset was the culprit and even after downloading the latest drivers from ATI and installing them in Fedora it still didn’t work. I am still trying some different things to get it to function and thats ok for me since I love computers and like tinkering with them, but the average user is not going to have my patience and that is my point. The Open Source community has to do a much better job addressing the driver issues in Linux or its DOA with most people. Thats just a fact of life. If it doesn’t work right 99% of the time out of the box, it will not gain on MS in the desktop space. Still Linux has come a long long ways and is looking very nice. It does have a lot to offer for those with the stamina to deal with it’s idiosyncrasies. There is a lot to like, but for now I am still running XP more than Linux and will continue to do so until everything works as well as it does in XP.
What happens when I install Windows?
That’s a trick question. Nobody installs Windows, it comes pre-installed.
I installed Windows XP SP2 from scratch. Let me tell you the installed package do not come close what a full install distro like Fedora Core has.
Basically, you need to buy applications like Microsoft Office seperately.
or you can install OOo like on Linux.
Didn’t people complain when Microsoft loaded up Windows installs with their own software?
oh i dont know, i installed it on two old computers.
>That’s a trick question. Nobody installs Windows, it >comes pre-installed.
ROFLMAO! I know a lot of nobodies then 😉
There are very many people without any real knowledge about computers and many of them do a new windows install every 6-12 months because their system is broken.
Ever heard about that phenomenon that windows gets slower with every install/deinstall of software your do?
I myself don’t reinstall windows regularly (although I don’t think I know a lot about computers) but I know quite a lot of people who do.
There are very many people without any real knowledge about computers and many of them do a new windows install every 6-12 months because their system is broken.
I bet most of them don’t.
They moste likely run the ‘recovery’ or ‘restore’ CDs. They’re using Ghost, not Microsoft’s installation from scratch, or at most they are using MS’s installation program with custom tweaks from the manufacturer specifically tuned for the computer they bought it bundled with.
In either case, the CD they use won’t work on other machines and a full boxed copy of XP won’t install the same way.
Go ahead. Ask them.
so you’re telling me you didn’t have to install drivers for you’re ATI xPress 200 in windows to get the most out of it?
Here’s an example, my brother recently purchased win xp 64 bit ed. and is not very computer savvy and was wondering why it kept asking him to install drivers for the PCI bridge and why it kept locking up on him.
I’m betting had he installed any _decent_ 64 bit Linux he would’ve had far fewer problems, and would’ve still asked me (the computer literate friend) for help.
I agree that OSS drivers have a long way to go to being user friendly, for example I recently installed SuSE (which with all it’s flaws is one of the better put together OSS linux distros, compared to the bug ridden ubuntu, my GOD what a clusterf**k!) on my personal computer, and during the installation process it does a self update… just don’t update the kernel or it’ll screw up you’re modules for the sound card and usb and who knows what else.
I agree that, unfortunately, only MS can kill Windows at this point. More specifically it would take a scandal of massive proportions such as financial misconduct (on the scale of Enron or worse) among higher echelon management, to result in the demise of Windows and Microsoft. Arguments in favor of Linux’s technical and moral superiority are not enough to overcome the massive inertia that would have to overcome to switch to GNU/Linux. Our economy is so tied in with MS Windows and Office that if MS were to suddenly declare bankruptcy tomorrow, and they announce that they could no longer support Windows or Office, including patches for viruses and worms, I suspect that Federal intervention would ensue to make sure that Windows remains supported if for no other reason than to allow people time to switch to something else.
Can such a scenario arise? I don’t know. But experience has shown that there is little if any corporate oversight to stop corrupt and unscrupulous CEO’s. Do I think that the present management of MS would allow Wiondows or MSFT to fail. No, if only because Bill Gates is also, or was a developer of Windows, and he is invested in the success of Windows and MSFT in an emotional way that goes beyond its financial success. But can it happen in the future when a new crew of more cynical managers takes control of the helm? Absolutely!
As more and more of our economy, identities, and healthcare become dependant on digital exchanges the more imperative it becomes that standards be set, and that proprietary formats, be either opened up or forbidden in communications with and within government, in the delivery of health care information (the much vaunted electronic medical record), or in any aspect of the national defense. It seems clear to me that too much is at stake to be allowed to be hostage to a single very fallible corporation.
microsoft has had a what? 25+ year headstart on the desktop?
I think microsoft would start giving windows away for free before they are overthrown by linux.
I think they may be moving more toward using windows as a service. If you noticed they are increasingly doing this antivirus, spyware, etc. stuff… trying to tie in windows media, msn.com, etc.. into their os.
looks like they are slowly positioning the OS to be a huge utility service.
I DONT LIKE THAT.. but that bad thing is that all the linux companies are doing it too–more so..
No i don’t find this article anymore intresting than any other crappy article. But what is intresting is fact that most of these kind a articles are made when Microsoft makes some big news about they new OS(like Vista), not when Linux has some big new feature. Why not make these kind a articles when Linux takes next step closer to desktop usage, it’s still long way to walk.
Well this year can’t be the year of Linux, because Apple already claimed this year as the year of HD video.
Oh well, there’s always next year…
And that word is “Inertia” which is why we still have COBOL systems and all sorts of things still in use that were created before many people posting here were born.
It’s much easier to create a new environment than it is to get people to change which environment they are using, and this is why Microsoft won’t fade away completely, short of their own foulups and going out of business. Perhaps it’ll get to the point where they don’t make much money on new mutations of Windows, because it gets harder to justify buying a new version of something that has some minor added features, when you already have more features that work (at least most of the time) and do what you need than you can figure out how to use.
It’ll take something that can offer those dealing with their own inertia a way to both continue along that path, while at the same time providing a significantly better path, before the old path is dropped, or contemplation of dropping the old system happens.
Same old s***, different writer. Of course its possible and of course the chances are going up for it to happen but WE ALREADY KNOW THIS! This has been written about too many times. I’ve also read quite a few Mac OS X will kill Windows articles – its just getting old now.
So what if one copies the basic fundamental function from the other ? MSFT did it, OSS did it, what matter is whether the user wants to use it or not eventually. Whether the user migrates eventually. The only OSS that managed to do that is Firefox (although it lacks feature such as windows media player and quicktime plugin [i think], but it is still acceptable.)
Maybe someone ought to do a very serious research to why when MSFT copied somebody else product, people use it, people glorify it, people feel comfortable to it but when OSS copied it from MSFT or from someone else, only a small portion of the comunity really embrace it because either they are die hard fans or hate MSFT (the smaller portion of this community really embrace it for the right reason, but unfortunately not all of them)
Same old ideological arguments presented over and over again. Linux is in growth and Windows is in slight regression, that’s what happens in business. Windows is a mature product and has probably peaked in its life-cycle.
We see the same arguments as to why Linux can overthrow it, but even this author tells us that Windows XP has many advantages for the common user, like ability to work with hardware out of the box.
I think the oddest part of the article is the part about Office. He argues that office has reached a plateau somewhat and that revenue from Office is down 3% for M$. Well, yeah, there have hardly been any amazing advances in the world of word processing and spread sheets recently, so that is understandable. He also tells us that openoffice.org is a far from perfect replacement (I think personally he gives it too little credit, I have had very few problems with it) so who will this overthrow Ms Office? I don’t think the 3% drop has anything, or much, to do with open source software, but more to do with there not being a compelling reason to upgrade office (I am still using Office 2000 because I don’t need to upgrade and M$ are losing my money…)
Linux has been going to be a Windows killer for about 5 years and we see this speculation in every tenth article on this site and on slashdot. It’s far better researched than most MicRosOft SuCks and LiNux is L33t articles though…
….never. Get over it
Just my 2c.
Linux isn’t going to overthrow anybody as it stands now. Linux has tens of thousands of it’s supporters wasting all their damn time blashing MS, arguing about license models, fretting over copyright, and bitching about patents and prior art. If thats a formula for incredible success.. I’d sure hate to see the plan for miserable failure.
Everywhere I look many people have switched to Linux lately. Our entire company runs Linux now and my daughter’s school is switching to Linux in September. Our household has become Windows and virus free and even our neighbors’ kids have discovered Linux and like it so much that they run around in “Tux” shirts. Now that’s what I call a victory.
I think you live in a very enlightened environment. I work in a very large institution with otherwise intelligent people who still sport only Windows XP on their desktops and laptops. In an institution with well over 20,000 employees, I would surmise that less than 10% know about Linux, and only 1% of those have tried it and are using it daily now. Only a guess, but probably close to the truth.
Windows doesn’t work “Out of the box”. You’re just trained to install lots of 3rd party applications to get your hardware to work. It’s the same in linux.
————————-
In my experiences in most cases you will atleast have basic functionality of your device on Windows.
When you do need to install drivers to get something working on Windows, its a heck of a lot easier than when you need to perform the same task in many Linux flavors I have used…
It wasn’t even about linux, but open source in general. And, once again, it was more speculation.
All we know is that proprietary Unix is on the decline at the expense of both Microsoft and open source unix.
Of course he didn’t even mention OSX which has a much better chance of chipping away at Microsoft’s desktop monopoly than the current Linux desktop models ever will.
I don’t know. He spoke about things like:
1.) Price for the poor. Yes, $500 for a Mac Mini is pretty fair. But if you compare that to $FREE for your neighbours clunker it’s no comparison. And when you make $5 an hour you have a lot of hours to spend setting it up!
2.) He talked about the maturity of stuff like Office. I wish he’d talked about the maturity of Windows as well. Vista has some cool stuff, but a lot of it is very ho-hum to non-enthusiasts. They’ll probably be far more impressed with the “pretties” than with the search functionality; where the enthusiast will see it the opposite way. The OS of course always has to keep changing, but not like it did from DOS->Win3.11->Win95->WinXP. I just don’t think you can make Vista sound like as big of a deal as either XP over 98 or 95 over 3.11. As things get more mature, the room to be ahead gets a lot smaller…
The author actually goes on to talk about the biggest problems with OSS later on. Things like innovation, which is often lacking. And things like big decisions, which is always lacking (because OSS solutions to it are slow..) but usually made via forking, threats to fork, major patches, version forks + testers; etc.
The article was about OSS. I don’t see a reason to mention OS X. Besides, Apple’s future is anyone’s guess at this point. And it’s not a question of what Apple can do, it’s a question of what Apple is planning to do..
I’d love to know what this “other” category consists of: http://cache.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/images/feature_lin…
This was actually a really good article if you read it in its fulness.
I posted this http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/conclusion.html link in the Shuttleworth interview thread, but you should take a look at it.
The problems he cites with linux as a desktop platform are spot on – and something I’ve been saying for years around here.
The bottom line is that until someone pulls an Apple then linux will be relegated to niche, hobbyist status on the desktop and a server platform.
Sorry but i predict Mac OS as the one that will damage Microsoft the most. Mactel is the wave of the future.
I just recently did an (involuntary) experiment. I spent 4 days waiting for my, late ordered, recovery disks from IBM. during that time I used Xandros on my laptop. Most things worked. The ones that didn’t were annoying. I hated fighting with the system to automount my flash drive, each time. I know how to do it…it just shouldn’t be necessary. In addition, couldn’t change trackpoint setting without crunching code….didn’t want to crunch code. Don’t like MSFT, use OSS when possible, LOVE IBM, but I cannot afford the missteps that occur from kernel to kernel. 2.4 modem works, 2.6.9 no it doesn’t, 2.4 software works, 2.6.9 nope….too iffy, should be able to upgrade more easily.
t’s an interesting race.
Microsoft’s worst enemy is Microsoft.
They’ve burned a lot of bridges.
They consider their customers as livestock, who need to be controlled with a cattle prod.
OSS’s worst enemy is OSS.
If they had spent less time thumping their chest and bitching, and worked towards a common goal, Linux would have been prime time a long time ago.
Open source didn’t start out as a “movement … launched 20 years ago by an antiestablishment technologist.”
Open source has always been there since the first computer.
Used to get it off the BBSs.
Linux didn’t start out as a ‘movement’ – it was people excited about creating an OS for the fun and the experience of it.
Now, it’s full of dual-booting, distro-shuffling, self-appointed ‘movement’ spokesmen.
The winner will be whoever can overcome their worst enemy.
We may not have a winner.
Everywhere I look many people have switched to Linux lately. Our entire company runs Linux now and my daughter’s school is switching to Linux in September. Our household has become Windows and virus free and even our neighbors’ kids have discovered Linux and like it so much that they run around in “Tux” shirts. Now that’s what I call a victory.
Now that’s what I call SAD! “Tux” shirts indeed.
Anything’s possible but it probably won’t happen. Not to say that it doesn’t present credible competition …
MS is merely a solution to a need, everpresent and powerful at the moment. Others like RedHat and Novell will follow. They have momentum thanks to MS’s licensing and security blunders of late.
But don’t count the giant out yet. It could reinvent itself; no, it must reinvent itself.
MS is now it’s worst enemy. The desktop and Office suites are cash cows but people are resisting the upgrades. These products have been stagnant for so long that big competition is close, and worse yet free. Not enough people are buying new computers, so where is MS going to get the cash to maintain the empire?
Diversification.
But there’s Linux again in the server market. It has good footing on phones, PDAs and internet appliances, too. It so flexible it can run on virtually all hardware and for any purpose. Vendors love it for the freedom and cost. How do you compete with that?
I guess there’s always the X-box.
I would be cashing my MS stock soon.
They control what you use when you buy a computer.
It’s like when you buy a new car and keep the stereo.
Linux would be the most used OS if you paid the OEMS like what Microsoft does.
Linux will take the market by storm. It is already happening. First it gets windy and then the rain gets harder and eventually its ripping through houses and neighborhoods and knocks on Redmond’s front door. Then it will be too late. The storm will be too close and too big to stop.
The only way to keep Linux from taking over the market is to make the perfect OS, or at least one that is good enough and never needs updates. Each update cycle you will lose more customers to Linux. Each check they write will be another reminder that there’s a cheaper way to do it without losing the quality or performance. Each day more Linux users means more potential Linux developers and more free stuff.
These tides will never eb.
Microsoft feels your pain, too, and Windows Vista should soothe it.
Windows Vista offers systems engineers, deployment engineers, and support center operators a possibility of life outside of work.
Easier Engineering?
The late nights usually start even before you deploy an operating system. First, the platform engineering team has to make sure all the organization’s applications work correctly on the new operating system. This is a tough job in highly managed environments, in which users might not have sufficient privileges to run legacy applications without logging on as an administrator.
urfixed……? holding my breath
aka
NovellisBetter
Innovation on the OS is nearing death. There is just very little that anyone can envision an OS doing that hasn’t been done. This is the battle Microsoft is fighting, and it is not a battle they can win. The proprietary software model assumes that the software will continually improve and customers will pay for upgrades to take advantage of new features. If there are no new features, there is no reason to upgrade, and there is no reason to pay those 57,000 employees.
Microsoft becomes a victim of the “good enough” principle that got them were they are today. In the short term, Apple can make inroads because they have a better implementation of what people expect in an operating system. OSS will then set their sights on commodifying the capabilities of Apple’s operating system as they did (or are doing) with those of Microsoft’s. Is is not a tipping point scenario when it comes to “innovation,” it is a function of the OS becoming an appliance that sits on top of another appliance (the computer).
The support and grunt work issues come from 3rd party investment. When the potential to leverage OSS is large, the incentive to invest increases with it. Big companies first, small companies later. Instead of companies buying the software (as they do/did with proprietary software), they invest in the development of the software.
The innovative part of OSS is the view that the OS is a commodity. Commodities are not innovative in and of themselves. Almost everybody wants the same thing out of an OS. That’s why so many people can work together toward that goal with very little management overhead. Of course, because the code must be maintainable, there is an inherent goal of modularity and flexibility, which takes care of variations in usage profiles. The only profiles that the free software systems cannot easily reach are the extremes, and these thresholds push farther and farther out from the center all the time.
Then there is the “it just works” issue. There are some pockets of problems that must be worked on within the community. However, these shortcomings are dwarfed by the issues that are next to impossible to solve within the community. Graphics drivers are a big issue that many within the community have invested large efforts towards, but in the end we’re limited by the specifications revealed by nVidia and ATi. Document and media formats are another, and I fail to see why it should be legal for publish content in a proprietary format. Finally there’s obscure hardware support, which might be the only tipping point issue that really exists for OSS.
Finally we have the killer app issue, which is really the synthesis of previously mentioned issues. First, this can be solved by selective investment by businesses. How many digital media creation firms need to invest in Adobe before there’s Photoshop for Linux? Or how many of them need to invest in the GIMP project to achieve the same goals? Then there’s standardization. The Linux APIs are moving quickly towards standardization. It is becoming very easy to write/port an application that works on all Linux distributions. Finally there’s the graphics driver issue, particularly if your killer app is a game.
I’m sorry, but who the hell really cares? Seriously people, is it actually important to you that linux topple the microsoft corp? And even if the the potential to overtake the 80% of the market that MS controls, was there, who cares? Isn’t linux about choice anyway? shouldn’t I be able to choose a non-linux windows based platform if I want? Seriously this debate is stupid, it should not be a topic, and this thread should die a horrible, flaming, searing, mind bogglingly painful death. Smoochies.
Another day, another “How <insert underdog OS here> can beat Microsoft” article, in this case followed by legions of dillusional Linux fanboys who think Linux already has beaten Microsoft.
I have a PC running Ubuntu and an iBook with OSX 10.3 in my house. My money’s on OSX, not Linux, to make significant inroads against MS. The difference is that I very clearly understand that neither of my preferred OSes are anywhere close to challenging Microsoft yet. Just because you and your neighbor and your cousin are using Linux doesn’t mean there is some unstoppable tide of Linux switching going on. Most people don’t even know what Linux is, or, for that matter, that Microsoft Windows is an operating system. I have my parents using Fedora, and trying to explain these details to them was painful.
I’d probably agree that OSX is more user-friendly (not saying that Linux is unfriendly) but the fact that there’s a lot more PCs than Macs is IMO a gain for Linux. Offering to install a new OS might be ok, but convincing someone to go and buy new hardware might not be as easy.
I also agree with you about articles such as this one: 500 fucking people a week claiming that “Linux might actually crush MS because the voices told me it is so” wont gain Linux, or OpenSource. They are usually very presumptios and full of wishfull thinking and only make the entire Linux/FOSS community look like trolls and fanatics. It’s better to post articles that discusses where improvement is needed (or that brings out some of MS’s filthiest strategies in the light if you want to bash MS a little).
It’s not Linux but GNU/Linux. And it’s not Linux vs Windows but copyleft vs copyright. No, I did not read the article!
Hire me.
I have all the strategies set: a lethal action plan.
Just need time + just need cash.
Meanwhile I’ll just watch the bozos running round in circles.
It’s damn easy to make Linux #1.
Hey Soros .. got some cash to spare?