Microsoft Says IBM/Linux Their Biggest Threat
krypt0n0mic0n writes "An article at The Register shows that Microsoft sees IBM and Linux as the biggest threats to their market domination. Microsoft's Eric Rudder is quoted as saying that Linux is a "formidable" challenge and that "IBM is our greatest competitor. In the way they sell products and compete in corporate accounts." It goes on to say that they believe the NET server will be a challenge to these competitors."
To defeat Microsoft, dominance of non-M$ technologies in the enterprise area is key.
.NET CLR is either a non-starter (as it's been thus far), or .NET in such a way that business software will .NET, and that solutions .NET applications. The point of .NET is to sell more
If they gain a significant foothold there, their control will be near total, and they'll
have a cash source with which to fund the ultimate destruction of all competetors.
Conversely, if Linux/Unix/Java win the enterprise space, Microsoft will have no new source
of revenue and the encroachment of deskop alternatives (OSX and Linux and BSD) will
eventually destroy their financial base.
It's important to ensure that the
that quality, truly open source, implementations exist on non-MS platforms. Whatever they
say, Microsoft wants to control the uptake of
really only run on their platforms. They're not producing a public standard for the sake of being
good corporate citizens. They're going to try to ensure that they're the . in
that would have gone Java will go their way on their software. There's no incentive to have
real competition in server platforms for
copies of windows, SQLServer, and Visual Studio.
Let's all get in our good old Way-Back Machines, and travel back in time... Does anyone remember that joint venture product IBM was putting out? OS/2, version 1.3...then later version 2...and Warp, etc..? For anyone whose been fortunate enough to really work with any of the old OS/2 products, you'll remember that when correctly installed and configured, they're still a very rock solid product. Not much the same can be said for most of the current M$ products, save perhaps Win 2k.
:- While our "friends" and M$ could sell sand to a man stranded in the desert, sometimes the products they rush out aren't as solid as we'd like them to be.
The difference between these two corporate giants is that they really are opposites of one another. You see, IBM -can- make good, rock-solid products...however, they couldn't market themselves out of a wet paper bag.
I can see how M$ would be threatened. If IBM learned how to market things, they could be a formidable player.
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
"Linux is free like a puppy." I've used Linux for years and it only occasionally craps on the carpet or chews my shoes. Now Windows on the otherhand...
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Microsoft has to become a major player in enterprises services. If they don't they won't be able to sustain their past growth rates. The OS is rapidly becoming a commodity, now that win 2K is stable enough that that most people don't need to upgrade ever again. Win 2K already does what most people want and more, so the only way to continue to grow is new markets.
That everyone already knows. Microsoft is doing all these interviews to paint a picture that .NET really is ready for the enterprise world of 24/7 computing. Back in 98 MS commissioned some company to prove SQL Server was good enough to run the NY EX, but everyone in the RDBMS business knows Sybase ASE run the stock market. Is it possible that if MS can't get it's act together with .NET, that they have reached their peek?
We have still not finalized the penalty phase. So now that MS has "true competition" the DOJs
proposal makes perfect sense. MS has been pushed aside in the onslaught of the IBM/Linux OS machine.
While the sarcasm light was on, let's face it, MS announces nothing that does not benefit them directly. If they are claiming IBM/Linux is a threat it is because they need to be seen as having a competitor.
Now the question remains "Why?"
Yes, implementation always costs money. GNU/Linux is no different from any other operating system in this respect. But why is nobody in the media pointing out that *implementing and maintaining Microsoft software is similarly time consuming* and that, over any reasonable period of time, it's *at least as costly* as Linux? By allowing these constant references to "Linux being free like a puppy", and by not responding with incredulity, we're aiding Microsoft. It might seem obvious to you and me that the spin is silly, but journalists appear to be buying into it -- and so will potential users who are already frightened by the concept of arcane shells and incompatible office documents.
The true benefits of Linux need to be restated - as well as being 'free', it's also robust, powerful, usable. I'm concerned that these concessions by Microsoft are really just new forms of attack upon Linux - attacks that are potentially more damaging than the previous tactic of ignoring the operating system completely, since they play to the concerns of non-technical users (and management).
Thousands of happy Linux users can -- and must -- attest to the fact that Linux just works better for a large number of tasks. The ideas that it's more difficult to use well and involves more effort and money to deploy successfully are simply untrue, at least on the server market.
I just love the Slashdot news filtration system:
Routers story: Microsoft announced today they are changing one of the business plans of one of their departments for a limited amount of time in order to better compete with linux.
----SLASHDOT FILTER ACTIVATED----
MICROSOFT, THE SCURVY DOGS OF REDMON, HAVE ADMITTED UTTER DEFEAT!! EARLY THIS MORNING, BILL GATES HIMSELF, THE HIVE MIND OVERLORD, WAS DRAGGED KICKING AND SCREAMING INTO THE STREET WHERE HE WAS JUSTLY AND FAIRLY BEAT TO DEATH BY 20 SCRAWNY, PALE TEENAGERS. THIS IS A GREAT DAY INDEED FOR LINUX FANS, AND LET IT BE KNOWN SUCH IS THE FATE TO ANYONE WHO MAY CHALLENGE OUR O.S.
WORD IS BOND!
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
Ford announced IT'S biggest competitors were other car manufacturers.
Duh...
Who else makes OSs for PC architecture.
...and in other news, Stallman is demanding that IBM henceforth refer to itself as GNU/IBM...
Picture clubbed baby penguins
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
However, Flessner articulated Microsoft's response to Linux. "Linux is free like a puppy. It looks free but when you get all the pieces around it, it doesn't work out so free. There's a lot more than I/O and memory management to make up an operating system."
Whereas Windows is like a puppy that you can only take to one vet when he gets sick, and it is the same vet everyone else is taking their puppy to. And the vet has a very busy schedule, he is deaf and blind, and tells you that the puppy got sick because of something you did. Even though the vet sold you the puppy knowing he was sick. And the medicine he finally gives you for your sick puppy to cure his barfing gives him the shits.
What a dumbass analogy. They still don't get the concept of Free vs free, do they?
Libere, Gratis, Linux
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.