Linux is Window Manager's Product of the Year

brokeninside writes "Infoworld's 'Windows Manager' Columnist Bob Livingston named Linux his 1999 product of the year in his most recent column. I especially enjoyed his assertion that Microsoft was 'playing catchup' with Windows 2000. He said, '...Microsoft is catching up with Linux, not setting a higher standard.'"

Comments

I couldn't agree more...

[Latent IT]

Microsoft IS playing catchup with Win2k. Why?

First of all, you wouldn't believe the number of interns where I work that get their hands on a Linux workstation for the first time, and then, upon managing to screw up something, reboot. Microsoft products have been so dependant on the reboot, it's been ingrained in the minds of people without enough luck to have gotten some experience with something better.

Not only that, but Win2k is Microsoft's attempt to make NT a usefull OS - meaning you can play games on it. =) And now it seems like they're chickening out on being able to offer a product that can do both by promising Windows Millenium, which I betaed, much to my own sorrow. It seems to me that the only way they can keep the OS stable is to prevent it from doing things - using easily written video card drivers for instance.

But... but... you'll be hearing MORE about it? Perhaps Livingston's been reading his own publication too much. Last time I checked, Linux was gaining buzzword status - it's almost up there with 'intranet' now... =)

Plus, Microsoft is now REALLY playing catchup, because, after all, once the DOJ gets through with them, they might be open source. ;p

There is no sig.

Interesting article, but I have a few quibbles..

[Inoshiro]

"Linux isn't perfect. Support is still an issue. And fixes add up to patches, although you can use automated installation utilities."

At this point, the list of people not supporting Linux is likely shorter than the list of people who are. I think he's confusing support with "double click to add SP9 to your system" ease-of-fixing.


"You will like our integration. Microsoft's decision to make Internet Explorer a hard-to-remove feature of Windows 98 -- in direct defiance of an earlier order by Judge Jackson -- has ..."

I don't think there were earlier rulings by Mr. Jackson about not integrating Explorer in Win98. Perhaps he means another judge.


However, there are many interesting bits:
"icrosoft got away with this because its legal counsel convinced two out of three judges on an appeals court that Windows 98 "isn't an upgrade of Windows 95" and therefore was in compliance with the previous order. You know a company's in trouble when legal hairsplitting replaces common sense."

Can you sense the bitterness here? I can understand why the man doesn't like Microsoft: how can they sleep at night knowing they were selling IE 4 + the upgrade equivalence of a service pack to the public, for the same price as a full operating system?

It sounds like he's really cluefull about how Linux is starting to make MS sit up and take notice. Since Linux has passed the "embrace and extend," and FUD litmus tests, MS is starting to realise that they have to compete on merits. They obviously thought they could set up Linux as a nice straw men for their DoJ hearing, and later take the community down a few pegs.. But now the result is an actual form of competition, if not full out market share battles :-)
---

export posix_me_harder=""

[Signal 11]

Oh, give me a break! Linux is not leading Windows 2000. Does linux have an MS Office 2000 clone? 100% word compatibility? No, then it's dead in the water for corporate adoption. If there's one thing that linux enthusiasts should take to heart it is the lesson that MS has taught the entire industry: controlling one market allows you to rapidly extend into other (related) markets and then embrace the tech, subvert it, and take that market over.

Does anyone here, even for a second, believe that Windows 2000 will not be a major software release and developers will scramble to support it? Ignore the technical issues: The "windows phenomenon" has nothing to do with technology, it has to do with marketing, the perception of reality, and human nature.

This article is paying lip-service to the community. Given ZD Net's track record I wouldn't be suprised if it was written specifically to get posted to slashdot (like many other articles like this which seem to make it to the front page). Don't buy it.

Linux is a versatile OS but it has many shortcomings which the pundits and many linux enthusiasts want to ignore - the hardware drivers are not on par with their NT counterparts, nor is the support infrastructure there. There are some drivers which are rock solid under linux, but the majority of them have quirks, bugs, and I'd say upwards of 50% are in "perma-beta". Further, the tcp/ip lock-spin problem as surfaced in the mindcraft testing seems to prove that linux does what it was designed to do: run well on *well supported* commodity hardware, do so with good stability, and makes an excellent server for home / small business use. However, for mega corporations and so-called "e-commerce" - it's lacking. This is called Solaris Country - big iron and massively redundant servers. the BSD's also do better in this arena (although, like Wendy's, they make superior burgers but everybody thinks McDonalds is better). The above paragraph is mainly here as a reality-check: linux is not perfect. It has shortcomings. The sooner we accept them (and then work to shore them up), the sooner we stop worrying about "beating microsoft" and start building superior code, that's the same day we win the war. If you want historical proof: japanese samauri(sp?) - they held the belief that by not concerning themselves with the outcome of battle they would win. And they did. Atleast until we dropped the bomb on them.

But, I digress. Mistrust articles like these: these little "opinion" columns are just paying lip service to whatever hype happens to the popular one at the moment. Go back and search for "push technology", or even earlier to the Macintosh and the windows 3.0 days... it's all the same: the pundits say what their readers want them to say. Just like slashdot likes to moderate and post people who agree with it's values and beliefs. Boil it all away and you're left with one thing - and it isn't the truth.

Re:export posix_me_harder=""

[JoeWalsh]

Maybe you're right, and the columnist's comments are merely a cynical ploy to win ad hits from Slashdottians. That sort of thing certainly happens often enough. For that reason, I tend to take columns such as these with a grain of salt.

However, this guy seems to be different. Unlike Jesse Burst (who went from 'Linux isn't worth your time' to 'Linux is up and coming' to 'Linux is a solid bet' in an amazingly short period of time), he makes it very clear that what he wants is for Microsoft to produce better products. He's not saying that he plans to jump ship to the Linux camp because of that OS's higher quality. He's simply saying that he sees that the Linux OS has some things right (and other things wrong), while Windows NT, Windows 95/98/SE, and Windows 2000 all have some serious problems that Microsoft seems unwilling to address.

He's praising the good things about Linux and acknowledging that it has some problems of its own. That's par for the course with the average columnist, and I wouldn't trust him except that he's flat out stating that his desire is for Microsoft to realize it has some genuine competition and take the opportunity to improve their products. He's stating up-front that he's rooting for the home team, rather than unfairly denigrating the competition or praising phantom qualities of the chosen product.

I can respect that sort of forth-rightness. It's a refreshing way to approach the computer wars, which have seemingly forever been typified by the "my favorite widget rules and yours sucks" mentality.

This columnist is staying true to his beliefs, and he's doing it in a fair way. He simply believes Microsoft has temporarily gone astray, and hopes the success of Linux will lead the company back onto the path of greatness, which they will no doubt pave with many wonderful products. I don't agree with him, but the way he's stated his opinion makes me respect him.

That should be the norm, but it's not. So I solute him for his uncommonly rational stance.

Open Source Isle

[Anonymous Coward]

Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a Linux trip
That started from this Slashdot site
Aboard this Livingston ship.

The mate was a mighty Inforworld guy,
The product brave and sure.
Most votes made for Linux that day
For a free sourcin' tour, a free sourcin' tour.

The product race started getting rough,
The Win2K was tossed,
If not for the zelots of the slashdot site
The honor would be lost, the honor would be lost.

The code won praise from the home of this honest journalist
With Openness
The Kernel too,
The best OS and superior,
The Red Hat guys
The Taco and Roblimo,
Here on open source Isle.

So this is the thread of the product race,
We've beat Redmond one more time,
We'll have to make the best of things,
It's an uphill climb.

The Livingston and the public too,
Have recognized the very best,
To help Linux get some press,
With the product of the year.

No cost, no Bill and open sorece,
Not a single blue screen,
Like Robinson Crusoe,
As primative as can be.

So join us here each release my freinds,
You're sure to get a smile,
Linux got product of the year
Here on open source' Isle."

exchange servers _are_ available for Linux

[buckrogers]

HP has a clone that emulates _all_ the functionallity of echange server. The location of the site is here.

And there is even an offer of 50 free licenses! And the web based mail interface looks awesome.

I liked the article. Brian Livingstone was fair to both Microsoft and Linux. He basically pointed out that consumers want stability and security, two features that Microsoft fails to deliver and that Linux does deliver.

He wants Microsoft to improve their products and sees Linux as pointing the way to a better computer platform, one that has stability, security, and ease of use.

But Mr. Livingstone is still missing the big picture. The reason that Linux is gaining such a big share is that Linux uses open standards. Linux works and plays well with others. Linux doesn't want to be the only choice. Linux wants to be one of many choices.

And Linux runs on just about every computer platform right now that will support a multitasking OS. Everything from palmtops, to routers, to the desktop, to servers, all the way up to the most powerful supercomputers in the world.

Most of the software that runs on Linux also runs on a dozen other OSes. If your samba server under Linux doesn't have enough power, put in a Sun Enterprise server in its place, also running samba.

In contrast, Microsoft makes proprietary every standard that they touch. They can't seem to help themself. Everyone uses sendmail, they use exchange. Everyone uses java, they use j++. They are even trying to pervert perl right now by adding windows only extentions to the language. Microsoft does want to be your only choice.

Microsoft runs only on one platform. The x86. Given that there is a wide range of power in this venerable processor and the IA64 is coming, but even then you don't have much choice of vendors.

Microsoft only writes applications for one platform. Yes, they have done a little work with the macs, but only as an after thought.

I think that Linux is the tip of a new way of doing things that gives the consumer maximum choice.

I think that Bill is just now realizing that. Microsoft will need to change and change radically to keep any of their marketshare. You may not even recognize MS in a few years.