Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer Wants to "Stomp Linux" Using MS community
StefMeister writes "According to this article on CNet, MS wants to fight Linux by using their community support (of course by community they mean the few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge). My favorite quote of the article is this one "Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way.""
...REMIX!!!!
So uhm, after they stomp out linux, what then, stomp out BSD? And uhm, after that? Apple's OSX? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.. I'm shaking in my Open Source boots.
Can all fish swim?
I'm imaging it's like the /. community except all the posts will be s/microsoft/linux.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
As opposed to Microsoft, which, of course, will simply end up bankrupt...
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
Erm, how about CNet's title: 'Ballmer: United, we'll stomp on Linux'
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
What a FUDfest! Well, folks hopefully have seen the Register story on this. A couple of comments.
Technology like clustering would be better in Windows than Linux eventually, said Ballmer: "We will beat Linux on clusters. We can't beat them on price, but we have to add value."
Given the current market for Beowulf, I don't see MS competing on clusters, especially with "add[ed] value."
Asked by one lateral-thinking MVP whether Microsoft planned to offer applications software on Linux, Ballmer said no, adding that the big issue was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software.
"We do not anticipate offering software on Linux," said Ballmer. "Nobody pays for software on Linux." Even StarOffice, sold by Sun, was originally a free product, he said. And IBM, arguably the No. 1 player in the Linux market, promotes Linux to big users, but does not actually sell Linux: "It's weird. IBM says 'Hey British Aerospace! Buy Linux...from SuSE.'"
StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft. And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?
So, they plan to "beat linux on value" in the
clustering area because they realize that they
really can't beat the price.
But -- how would a 100 node microsoft cluster have
any better value than the same cluster running some
linux clustering sw? The microsoft system would
be around 100 times more expensive, and the
licensing would be outrageous.
Imagine you want to add 20 nodes to your cluster.
With linux -- no problem, cable it up and go.
With microsoft, well, you probably have to get
some more licenses, and another 20 copies of
windows to install. That's around $3500 just
for the os software.
And finally, there are lots of linux clustering
installations running today, and many of those
have been using clusters for years and have a
history of upgrades and improvements. I really
doubt these people will be interested in
switching to a microsoft monolithic cluster.
More and more, microsoft is getting desperate.
I'm kind of offended by the "few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge" line in the main post. There are a lot of advantages to Linux or ANY coding system in use today. So Linux has a very large and vocal community. Does that mean you have to give people another reason to dislike you by flaunting it instead of just appreciating it? There are a lot more M$ coders out there than you think. Just look for the .asp pages on sites both small and large. [insert joke about hacking them next here]
--- Don't be a player hater: I meta-mod ALL negative mods as Unfair.
is Balmer is a crack monkey. For evidence see here
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Dammit Balmer! that's GNU/Linux ...
-Sean
They should stomps the annoying Bugs in their software before stomping the competition with FUD... A better product always sells by itself, especially in a monopoly situation. They could have an happy userbase and a more pro-microsoft community by doing so.
RIght now they are focussing their energy in stomping both consumer (DRM) and market rights, stomping competition, and stomping whatever or whoever dares to say something bad against them. This is such a waste of energy only a PR departement with too much staff can afford.
Stupid yet annoying bug to give ONE example out of probably 1000+ that people could bring up:
Since windows 95, when I'm dragging a huge folder, explorer STILL doesn't display the remanining time correctly, saying example 2 minutes remaning, and then 388432 minutes (and going down by 600 minutes every 2 seconds), I mean, for god's sake, 5 years later, 3 service pack later, windows 2000 *STILL* has that bug. This is one dumb example, but imagine all the bugs that you don't directly see.
So please microsoft, don't focus on the few users you don't have, focus on making your current userbase HAPPY so that they aren't bleeding off to your potential competitor as soon as they get a chance or get too fed up, because THIS will cost you.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
(of course by community they mean the few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge)
Are you kidding me?
Want to make some cash?
Get a group of guys together who have MCP's and MCSE's, maybe an A+ and Cisco guy for cool logos to put on your business cards.
Go around 'consulting' networks for the local small businesses for $60 an hour, $120 an hour for the SE's
If you can find the business and there's not much competition, it's like taking sugary treats from an infant.
*laugh* Ballmer only seems to see things in terms of money. It should be painfully obvious that Linux didn't start off "bankrupt", it started off free, which is hardly the same thing.
Quoth kalidasa: StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft.
It isn't, of course -- well, there's one crucial difference. MS doesn't get any money out of it.
And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?
They keep dancing around that issue. They have, one the one hand, tried with EULAs and so on to get out of liability -- but they are also starting to realize that that lack of responbility has meant that they release shoddy software and have no immediate need to fix it. But now their reputation for less-than-good software is starting to come around and bite them in the *ss. A symptom is all the buzz that Linux and UN*X is getting. So they are starting to acknowledge *moral*, as opposed to *legal*, liability for their software products ("Trustworthy Computing").
Which could be dangerous, 'cos you can't have it both ways, really. Eventually someone's going to start suing the bejeezus out of them, once some NT-based thing goes blooey and costs someone a fortune...
Cheers,
Ethelred
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
"Linux... making me angry... can't... contain... emotions... third-person... narration... taking... over... RAAARGHHHH!!!"
*Ballmer transforms into a giant, green-skinned version of himself, tearing his clothes and exposing his enormous gut*
"BALLMER STOMP LINUX!!! RAARRGHH!!! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!!"
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Even with a Slashdot attention span (eg. none), I'm surprised that someone could miss that.
Another option is to use the 'Find' feature in your browser (be it IE, Lynx, Mozilla, Galeon...) and search for 'stomp'. It worked for me.
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
"Stomp Linux" is an excellent production, clever choregraphy and wonderful Celtic tunes. A truly worthwhile followup to "The Sprit of The Dance." I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats...
> A social movement is not a busness.
And linux is not a social movement, it's an operating system.
Seriously, I'm sick of all the lame typecasting based on what OS happens to be on my box at any particular time.
Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.
If you want to brand yourself, go ahead. Keep me out of it. It's just as lame as the 'nintendo vs ps2 vs xbox' crapfests that 12 year olds have on irc.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
What I find sad about it is that its quite obvious that the people who edit this site don't bother to actually read it all that much. Now to give credit where it is due, most of the other /.ers haven't noticed the dupe as they are ranting and raving just as they were yesterday about it. I've only seen three comments mentioning this thus far.
What makes this really bad is the fact that it was CLEARLY pointed out yesterday that Ballmer and perhaps others were misquoted in the referenced article. On one hand you guys complain about the FUD Microsoft spews yet on the other you obviously have no problem doing the exact same thing yourselves. (Hint: Never take read anything from CNET or ZDNET literally - their articles are usually fluffed up).
Now on an ontopic note - MS' Developer community drawves the size of the Open Source community by at least a few hundred if not a thousand fold. They generally have a richer centralized repository of information and technical knowledge (MSDN) to draw from and their development tools are widely considered to be superior. They also sell a platform which offers the best chance for close to 100% market saturation.
Laugh all you want - but it sounds to me like the man has the right idea. Afterall its not like he said, "We are planning on leveraging the power of our preceived monoply to crush the oppositionary force known as Linux". No he actually said something along the lines of, "By continuing to foster a rich developer community as we have in the past we can make sure the bulk of the talent is writing code for Windows and not Linux".
Whine all you want but that sounds legal and fair in my book.
J
I love idealists not because I am one, but because they make life bearable for pragmatists such as myself.
Favorite quote: "Nobody pays for software on Linux." given as a justification for not porting MS apps to Linux.
I guess I am the only one out there who paid for Oracle on Linux, can't imagine why Oracle keeps producing the new versions.
How about "We won't be porting our apps to Linux because that will kill sales of our less than useless OS" isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
Of course, the fact that most of the Novell sites are site licensed and have a significant commitment, the fact that they're making money, the fact that they have no significant debt and that some decent property holdings doesn't factor.
/. poster, but integrating this stuff makes a huge difference in a large enterprise. And you're not going to hear an integration story from Microsoft.
With products like DirXML, Netmail, Zenworks for Desktops, and yes, even Netware, trust me, they're going to be around. A Netware 6 cluster offering native Netware, NFS, Apple FS and CIFS support is pretty amazing. So are products like Account Managment, which lets you sync AD and eDirectory users, as well as Unix accounts, IBM mainframe user accounts, etc. Probably doesn't mean much to the usual
Sure, it's not always flashy, but you can get real work done, which is what those of us getting paid to do IT work should be focusing on.
Um, am I to take it the "stomp Linux" in quotes implies that Ballmer said this?
Because even though it's in the article headline, Ballmer is never QUOTED as saying it in the article. It is just the author's interpretation of what Ballmer said.
Ballmer gave a very calm, non-confrontation argument (pro-Microsoft, yes, but what did you expect?).
Come on, people would be up in arms if a Slashdot headline wrongfully said "FSF says 'fuck you' to those not using GNU/Linux".
If anyone needs me, I'll be tearing my hair out...
slashdot!=valid HTML
Follow these steps for shoddy journalism: (honestly, can someone please explain the difference between
- C|Net gives a title to an article about Ballmer that uses the word "stomp" as if Ballmer had said it. They don't quote him saying it.
- /. picks up the story (again) without reading it, and further butchers it by altering the title again and attributing a quote that's entirely fictitous but sounds really inflammatory and good, presenting it as fact.
- People who angrily point this out get modded -1, Panties In A Twist, and they disappear into the Troll Pits, and the site is run by those who remain and who don't give a fuck. Repeat from step 1.
Like the demise of Wired all those years ago, it's just really sad. This place used to be a great source of information. It's fallen a long, long way.-- http://frobnosticate.com
Essentially, thought, Ballmer says "United, we'll stomp on Linux"
Who was he speaking to? MS MVPs.
So he's saying that MS CORP and the MSMVPs need to unite, and that after they are united they will stomp on linux.
First problem: Uniting the MS MVPs to MS.
Second problem: Getting MS and the MVP to do some stomping (regardless of what is being stomped). That would imply that MS and the MVPs would somehow be "in-step". I wonder how many MVPs will actually dance that dance.
Third problem: Stomp on Linux? Are they going to download distros and pile them in the street and physically stomp on them? Ahh, of course not, it's figurative. They are going to fight them. But how? Are they going to buy them out? Nah. Are they going to try to make their system so much better that linux will seem to be the "worst" alternative? Yes. That's what they meant. But what does that really mean, making their systems so much better? I think it means compete. So microsoft is saying that it will compete against Linux and the developer community behind it. But what does that mean? I mean, Microsoft the monied MNC needs help from MS MVPs to compete against a non-business run by a bunch of volunteers?
This brings me to my point. Ballmer essentially feels directionless. MS is financially directly being impacted by the GNU/Linux operating system and the various distributions. Yet there is no one company to compete against. There is no company to compete against. There is no way to underprice linux until they can't pay their devs and go BK. There is no way to advertise better than linux since MS can't buy word-of-mouth, and word-of-mouth is the best form of advertising. So in effect MS is losing sales and there's nothing they can do about about it.
But MVPs can. They can do the word-of-mouth. These people recommend solutions to large and medium customers. MVPs are are consulting comapnies, solutions providers. They can be the MS advocate and Linux bad-mouthers.
Except that there are more Linux Zealots (and I use the term endearingly) than MS MVPs.
So in fact ballmer hit it on the nose. Together they will stomp on Linux.
Of course, Linux will stomp right back... But that's another story altogether. Goodnight children.
"Piter, too, is dead."
"Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way.""
Did he mean fiscally bankrupt? As opposed to, um, someone else who is ethically and morally bankrupt?
Your self-righteousness is amusing.
And linux is not a social movement, it's an operating system.
Are you kidding me? Thousands of developers worldwide spontaneously volunteer millions of hours into a collective pot, the fruits of which eventually rival the biggest software companies on the planet. Sounds like a social movement to me.
Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.
Straw man. No one is making judgements about users based on what OS they are running on their desktop. The claim is that you can't try to discuss the development model of Linux based on terms that only make sense for businesses (such as "bankrupt") since they simply don't apply (there is no entity involved that can have assets or debt).
"It's not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money..."
Steve almost has a clue. Linux has very little money, no central base to be attacked or bought, and it's massively distributed into residential basements and dark corners of IT departments.
This has to be Microsoft's worst nightmare -- an enemy that doesn't care about money or "winning" market share. An enemy that takes Microsoft's "clone and lowball" strategy and turns it back against them. Indeed, Linux is the Viet Cong of the internet.
I find it fascinating to watch Microsoft fumble and bumble with ineffective strategies against an enemy that they truly don't understand. When Microsoft decides to concede the OS battle and tries to take over the Linux desktop, then I'll be worried about the monopoly being perpetuated. They keep denying any intention of porting Office to Linux, so maybe it's Microsoft that will run out of money.
Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.
Although I agree about not subscribing to archtypes, you need to pick some better examples:
I'd rather invest my money in a company with fiscal assets than one with moral and ethical ones.
I doubt you'd get any of the former Enron employees to agree with you - or any of the investors, for that matter.
Enclosed, careful descriptions of how Microsoft is (1) going bankrupt; and (2) ripping everyone off in the process; and (3) effectively stealing from every US taxpayer; and (4) thereby destabilisiing the whole economy. Who needs terrorists?
t ml and Microsoft Collapses AOL Part II - FTC Inquiry Requested
...and so on, ad nauseum, plenty more waiting to be read...
Proposed HP Merger: Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) Found Not Independent and along with Barclays plays key Role in Microsoft Pyramid Scheme
Inside Story on Microsoft and Enron
Senate Proposal Could Cost Microsoft Billions
Microsoft Circles of Influence and Enron's Collapse
http://www.billparish.com/20010404americaonline.h
Buybacks Backfire, Microsoft Loses $8.4B Speculating on Own Stock
Microsoft Scheme Costs Seattle Its Largest Employer, Boeing
"How Cisco Systems and Microsoft Avoid Tax"
Microsoft Financial Pyramid Summary and Microsoft Financial Pyramid Summary Updated
How Microsoft Pays No Federal Income Tax on Current Income
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing