Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer Sends Wakeup Call to Staff
Puneet writes "An MSNBC article outlines details of how the world's biggest software company seems to be facing a technology gap. Steve Ballmer, chief executive officer of Microsoft, sent a memo across the company basically saying that with no immediate breakthroughs in technology coming, and with the Linux computer operating system and a batch of other open-source programs biting at its heels, Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need.
. Microsoft must "improve business consistency" so that customers are not hit with unexpected - and unwanted - changes. Also covered by Forbes but in lesser detail."
Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need
sounds like a few tobacco companies I know....
"get 'em hooked young, then they'll never stop!"
I'm sure if Microsoft could nicotine to a product, they would.
Mike
I'll bet that their innovations aren't technical though, and will involve innovative new licenses :-(
To back up this new push to promote a more customer-friendly Microsoft, Ballmer promised that the company would âoeincrease our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences.â
This pretty much sums it up.
An equal headline and probably more accurate one would be "MS launches new media campaign to portray company as customer-friendly".
All marketing, no real changes.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
You known, Perception Is Reality.
Is this connected with .NET failing to deliver its promises and the fact that Smartphone idea met stronger resistance from cellphones vendors (especially Nokia) than MS expected?
These two were - arguably - two biggest things MS pushed in last two years. Does that memo mean they don't have anything else up their sleeve? What then with all the money spent and effort at "Microsoft Labs"?
Obviously Steve doesn't seems to like the linux takeover in munich.... :)
...all of a sudden that iLoo isn't looking like such a bad idea...
Apparently their attempts to "improve business consistency" are nothing more than them patenting the very process (not the idea) of improving business processes by way of sending out company-wide memos. By this they hope to force other companies who wish to improve their own processes to pay a license fee to them. Dirty business, if you ask me.
I can just see Steve going around to all the lackies cubes and saying: "Did you get the memo?? because ive just realized that Linux is a real competitor! Who would have thought, so are you sure you got that memo..?"
Maybe Ballmer should be pushing his employees to create the breakthrough..
If Microsoft emails keep leaking like this, it is about time they came up with a "Trustworthy employee" program before the "trustworthy computing" initiative.
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
More than anything, Microsoft has really hurt itself through it's new licensing plan -- and this with a competitor who offers an initial software cost of zero. That defies market logic -- to raise your prices when faced by a seemingly lower cost competitor. It almost forces the hands of IT engineers (who already face much tighter budgets) to consider open source solutions instead of Microsoft when they need an implementation of, say, an extra file and print server to hold all of the new graphics files generated by the marketing department.
At the end of the day, it is money that makes the corporation go 'round. And, if I can offer my management and users a better solution that costs less money, it is in my absolute best interests to do so.
First he identifies a problem - Microsoft has no new and innovative ideas for improving their products.
Then he comes up with the perfect solution - "improve business consistency!" The best way we can serve our customers is by not introducing any new and innovative ideas to improve our products!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Knowing the "mess" they're in and fixing it has always been one of their strong suits. When they released Windows 3.x and found lukewarm support by WordPerfect and Lotus, they admitted it and took a course of action to correct it. When they realized they were too late in jumping on the Internet bandwagon, they admitted it and started development on a browser to compete with Netscape. Now, they realize that they are falling behind in the security and "features people need" area and will most certainly strive to correct the situation. So, don't just sit back, point your finger, and laugh; take a good look within the open source world and see what needs fixing.
Microsoft must âoeimprove business consistencyâ so that customers are not hit with unexpected â" and unwanted â" changes.
So long as they conduct monopolistic practices, they're going to be slow to understand what is and isn't acceptable with customers. In the mean time, as in the case here, they can only pay cursory lip service to what the consumer is demanding. It's just like Gates' security initiative - I'll believe it when I see it, and all I see now is either a half-assed attempt or a complete joke.
"...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
For quite a while, MS has been in the position of waiting, without much to do, while its competitors gradually catch up with it, adding easy-to-use languages, component systems, and GUIS to their offerings. MS's reaction has been to try and break new markets so that they have a space to innovate in, but their PDA, phone, and game system initiatives have all been kind of mediocre-to-awful in terms of how much opportunity they give MS to create compelling products.
MS profited hugely from the increase in commodity processing power that came with the i386, but they are not managing to profit from the increase in connectivity which we are seeing now. Unless they can do so, they'll find their lead gradually eroded...
--easy to use from Java (jdbc) and COM-based programs
--has stored procs, foreign key constraints, subqueries, etc
--runs on linux and 2k/xp
--either a gui management system or at least easy to manage in general
MySQL will *not* do it. Currently I'm leaning toward firebird but connectivity (odbc and
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
This could be the announcement of a new dotcomboom :
:-)
The bigggest software company of the world just admits being stalled.
It's high time small development structures came with new things in order to convince the investors to empty their pockets.
Now, if we consider Microsoft's usual tendency to buy interesting startups, then the above-mentioned investors will for sure be there to re-sell them their shares.
Or, of course, I could be dreaming but I hope not : I have some nice new software concepts for sale
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Developers! Developers! Developers!
Ah! Competition. Don't you just love it?
Monopoly kills the incentive(s) to innovate. Since 'we' are the biggest why should we change? That's why many contries, including the US, have anti-monopoly laws. Somehow Microsoft managed to circumvent these laws. (I wonder why?) And now that the monopoly is slightly fading (it's not gone by a long shot), Microsoft is realizing that if they want to survive they need to innovate.
Let's see how the big M will be doing in the real world.
I think it's odd the article doesn't mention apple. Sure GNU/Linux is the most immediate server threat, but apple is more likely to threaten the desktop. Also, no mention of software solutions threat (IBM, etc).
-t
http://unmoldable.com W:"No one of consequence" I:"I must know" W:"Get used to disappointment"
Must have been posted by an MS weenie.
Sudden arbitrary demands outside the scope of one's role, like "Hey, make the customer need us more." Fine, I'll add it to my tertiary goals list (and ignore it). If you want to make a customer need you in a competing market, just telling your staff to make them need you is not leadership.
Anonymous Coward.
I think that basing your model on purely technological mindset is not really the way to go - sure, technology drives the computer industry, however I believe we're moving to a more fundamental factor in choosing Information Technology:- Lifestyle.
This is what Apple has moved to as their model - sure they provide technological goodies, but the aim is improving lifestyle, not technology for the sake of technology/innovation.
Consider the strategy of providing Music/Movie/Image/Organiser products - Lifestyle products.
Consumers have been fed a steady diet of new gizmo's and gadgets but it takes many years for them to actually *GET* what they can do with them.
Bluetooth is such an example - been around for years, but only now am I using it (the technology) because I need to synchronise my Address Book and Calendar (Lifestyle).
I believe that the industry will gain momentum over the next few years by not plugging a particula technology but marketing Lifestyle Devices/Software using new technology in innovative ways...
-- Dan =)
Microsoft must ÃâÅ"improve business consistencyÃâ so that customers are not hit with unexpected Ãââ and unwanted Ãââ changes.
This message sent to you using FastTCP v.ÃâÂ
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
To back up this new push to promote a more customer-friendly Microsoft, Ballmer promised that the company would âoeincrease our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences.
Customers are failing to see the need for what we offer. Our technology rocks, we must work on the customers perception. We rock. Yea us!
The only real advantage that MS has over *nix/BSD is its' easy of use. Don't get me wrong I love *nix/BSD but would I install it on my parents computer or even my non-techie friends computers ... I don't think so. , however they are quickly losing their lead in this area as the other OSes mature.
... who knows soon they may have to realease a *nix version of MS Office just to stay competative ... that will be the day ;)
Maybe this will force MS to write some quality software
We don't need no stinking sig!
From the article [quotes are Ballmer's]:
Companies âoehave not yet seen a tangible return on dotcom investments.â Add in the weak economy, and âoethere is less passion and enthusiasm for technology, and greater focus on doing more for less.â
(Close up of Steve-O in his office)
Hey, it's not 1999 any more!
Uh oh. What now?
(Steve-O curls up in fetal position under his desk. And sweats.)
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
"Longhorn will come when we think itâ(TM)s really ready.
you have to wonder whether he thinks some of the changes are too extreme and possibly of little value to the user.
__
Dragon action figures in Australia Cheap web reseller hosting
When I first got into computers around 94-95ish, it seemed like once a week a new technology or use for current technology was being created...
....then once every couple of months... ...and now maybe once a year at best..
then once a month...
And when I think about it, it all seems to coincide with the increase in lawsuits against "patent violators", the DMCA, "intelectual property violations", etc etc. Basically, the big guys are stomping the little guy if he thinks outside the box, and it happens to present a challenge to their technology.
Perhaps Microsoft needs to wake up to this big tech killmachine that they have had a hand it making, and try to reverse some of the damage that it has done. Now people are afraid to issue security warnings for fear they might be arrested for breaking the DMCA...
insane...
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Smartphone sucks all right, but
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
With all OS development concentrated on Longhorn, which is several years down the road, they can't hardly do anything else. They have no new products to present to the consumer, so they have decided to hype up Longhorn instead.
Now, with Mac OS X and several free operating systems doing being able to do jsut about anything you can do with windows, companies are beginning to realise the alternatives. Managers have references of successful OSS-implementations in Office settings, and are willing to do a cost-benefit analysis to determine which suits their needs, instead of merely scoffing at OSS on the desktop.
Their mudslinging campaign agains OSS hasn't proved to be the success they thought it would be, and more draconian licensing schemes are making customers re-evaluate their need for Microsoft Products.
Notice, how I'm not talking about Joe Sixpack. Joe Sixpack will be happy to use whatever his machine comes with, as long as it does what he wants it to do. When computer manufacturers stop delivering OEM installations of Windows, we can talk about a level playing field where each OS will be judged on its own merits.
"What's this? OS X for x86? Let's just start a rumor we're dropping Office for Mac..."
People, and I mean the general public, are starting to wake up to the fact the word processing pretty much hit a peak with Word 97.
Considering office is one of the few things Microsoft makes money on (quite a lot of course), if they don't come up with something to keep it interesting, then they will be in a lot of trouble.
Or of course, a brand new technology that can be another profit maker for them. But it's been a long time between drinks I'm afraid.
It's called brainwashing. "Do not run. We are your friends."
do a better job of persuading customers
Maybe they should forget the spin and actually work on producing a stable, reliable and secure product that persuaded people by example.
Oh, sorry, I forgot... it is far cheaper to just lie than to actually produce the goods.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
The new licensing is part of MS's 'Make Sure People Stop Using Our Stuff' strategy.
This strategy will, it is hoped, cut costs by up to 100%.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Notice that the single significant tangible move is to increase advertising budgets?
Good luck, Steve-o.
I'm afraid you're facing a stealth advertising campaign that's hard to buck -- the very same one your company rode to the top in the early 80s.
It's the "I can't get signoff to buy the stuff I need, but I can put this together on my own authority and put it into place" ad, the "What do you mean we're already using it? Get it out now. What? We're doing THAT with it? Hmm. OK, maybe just this once" kind of advertising.
Microsoft knows the power of that publicity very well. It's what led PCs to prominence and the power of IT (Whoops! It was MIS back then) staffs to shrink.
First, Microsoft should dump all money losing divisions. As I'm sure everyone here has heard, Microsoft's OSes and Office products generate over 80% profits, which the company uses to fund losers such as WebTV, MSN, the Xbox, etc.
By dumping those loses, Microsoft could drastically drop prices AND continue making the same profits. I'd be a win-win situation.
Second, drop product activation. No one likes being treated like a criminal. And as I've written here before, product activation does NOT stop real piracy, i.e., piracy for profit. The ISO for XP Professional was readily available and instructions for installing SP1 were easy to follow via tweaktown.com's instructions. Simply put, pirates were still able to copy and sell XP Pro without ANY impediment.
The real purpose of product activation is to stop friends and family from sharing copies. If Microsoft's software was lower in price, (see my first point) people would simply buy their own copy.
Third, stop the egregious software assurance type deals that only serve to piss off your customers. If you really want Linux to fail, stop giving your customers a reason to use it!
Fourth, stop with those outrageous deals to stop Linux. You know the ones, when India, China, or Germany wants to switch to open source, Microsoft bends over backwards to give practically free software. This totally pisses off customers paying way too much via software the draconian deals imposed in my third point. Secondly, it gives them an incentive to look into switching to Linux.
Fifth, stop using the BSA police to force deals. When public schools canâ(TM)t afford your software, donâ(TM)t send the police force a deal. When I didnâ(TM)t buy a GM car, they were kind enough NOT to send the police to check out my garage. We expect the same courtesy from Microsoft!
Sixth, I could go on and on and on. But since my boss expects me to work for money, Iâ(TM)ll quit here and let others post some suggestions.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
The Ballmer response: Microsoft will have to do a better job of producing software whose benefits are clearly apparent to customers
... And for the fun, since it's been talked about much recently : M$ has some 10% stake in SCO :-)
Most of Microsoft's value-add has been stolen^h^h^h^h^h^hcopied or acquired. MSDOS ? bought from the Seattle Computer Company. Windows GUI ? copied from Apple, itself borrowed from Xerox. Flight Simulator ? bought from Sublogic. Stacker ? bought from Stac, etc etc
No, Microsoft doesn't create software. It just borrows, enhances and markets better. That memo Ballmer sent means "guys, it's time to look out there again and see what we can copy/purchase and claim our own innovation".
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
The issue for Microsoft is that to keep their stock prices high, they've got to show continually rising sales.
.NET - next big thing....
But they're not going to convince anyone to switch to MS product at this point...everybody already runs a MS OS or MS Office, so there's no growth there. The market has matured.
The server market has slow turnover, and growth will come slowly there (if at all).
I see them doing two things:
1) Putting license key schemes in place on their OS's, this will get a marginal revenue increase by eliminating the bulk of casual piracy for the OS
2) I imagine the same thing will happen with MS Office soon
3) Hope to god the console business takes off...
4) Come up with a DRM scheme and convince the record companies and users its a good thing. Unfortunately, they don't have a good reputation as a strategic partner.
5)
6) Palladium - next big thing....
I mean, Ballmer's right, there's nothing there that will mean a big revenue increase for MS; its just a lot of nibble around the edges.
Frankly, MS would have been better off splitting into an application company and an OS company; each individual company would be forced to innovate and take chances. But as they are now, MS is a very very conservative company, and that's not going to lead them to any big breakthroughs.
They are equal to IBM in 1975.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
The article says that Ballmer plans to "increase our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences". Does anyone else see that as treating the symptom rather than the disease? The point of the article was that Microsoft doesn't seem to have anything to persuade people to buy its products, so instead of INNOVATING, they're going to "persuade" people that they need Microsoft. The problem isn't that people don't need Microsoft, the problem is that Microsoft isn't creating anything new and exciting in the computer world... and increasing the advertising budget by all the money in Fort Knox isn't going to change that.
"It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
The actual article at MSNBC says:
It's not kosher to lift a complex sentence like that from the article, preceded by "basically saying...."
When I read slashdot I expect journalistic integrity [insert laughtrack here]. Okay, but I at least hope that y'all can do better than the New York Times.
...Nothing interesting here. Just move along...
The Slashdot editors are at the mercy of Microsoft's ÃâÅ"smartÃâ quotes, one of the innovations we need more of, apparently.
There are several important differences between how
Ballmer is well known for blowing a lot of hot air, so it's often hard to know What Exactly He's Really Saying.
My translation is that he's saying Microsoft is appearing to reach either an upper asymptote or a maximum (with decreases to follow) in terms of company growth, revenue, etc.
I'm inclined to believe this translation based on his recent failure in Munich to stave off a large scale Linux desktop deployment and on his large sale of MSFT stock "to diversify his portfolio".
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Microsoft must âoeimprove business consistencyâ
The best way to improve "business consistency" is to stop upgrading your Microsoft products. Just keep them the same.
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
Don't you find it ironic that the worldâ(TM)s biggest software company got there not by innovation but rather by other means, and now they're bemoaning that very fact? They started off by buying OS code and licensing their way into most computers built. As their warchest grew and grew, they simply swallowed up other innovative companies or put innovative companies perceived as a threat to their death.
This company was never based on customer service and now they want to be perceived that way? It's going to be quite tough for this large company to change the corporate culture that has run deep in its veins since the beginning of its existence, if it's even doable at all.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
"I actually think that they earnestly think they're inventing the future, as well as they know how. They've looked at every Microsoft product, from Hotmail to SQL Server, and tried to fit them into a Bold New Vision Thing. But the trouble is that nobody there is actually inventing anything earthshaking. Which isn't surprising: not because Microsoft is stupid, which they're not, but because earthshaking new inventions are so rare and Microsoft only has a finite number of smart people. Only one person in the whole world invented Napster, and he didn't work for Microsoft. Microsoft desperately wants to believe that it can manufacture revolution, but even in the Cambrian explosion of the Internet, there are only a handful of truly revolutionary ideas per year, and the chances that one of them will happen inside the tiny world of Bill Gates and the knights of the Redmond table are vanishingly small. The chances are even smaller when you consider that a typical smart programmer working in the bowels of Microsoft on display drivers for Windows NT, who has a great idea, is probably not going to get his idea listened to." This is a qoute from Joel on Software
r ti cles/fog000000049.html
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/printerFriendly/a
I think this sums up pretty much why MS is stalling.
-P
- To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion -
Better
Net
Accountability
Throughput
2
Keynesian
Equity
Efficiency.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
I think the employees need another big meeting where Ballmer can jump about a stage, screaming and shouting rather uncontrollable!
Sorry, I haven't seen a failure of .NET. I'm just curious where you're looking. I work for the US Army Corps of Engineers, and we use the heck out of .NET and everyone loves it. There is some Java development here, too, but most of our new stuff is in C# (which is, of course, essentially a Microsoft-ized Java).
.NET on a regular basis. Personally, I think it's great.
I haven't heard any complaints from people who use
Quoting the article, "...companies have turned to Linux and other open-source software programs, seeing them as cheap but adequate alternatives." I think that this quote paints only a half-truth, and I also think that this quote does not do justice to a lot of the open source developers out there. Some companies may view certain pieces of open source software as "cheap but adequate," but I think many view them as technically superior. As a user, I turned to Linux because it allowed me to do many things that Windows did not. And as a developer, I don't try to produce only "adequate" software. I try to produce the best software possible. :-)
Their last bout of screwing their customers with Licensing 6.0 and the sneaky underhanded tricks they pulled with Media player and other "upgrades" by silently adding insane clauses in the EULA they slit their own throats.
I have shown MANY people the EULA's they "agreed to" and all of them have been outraged to the point that they are seeking alternatives and have ZERO trust for microsoft.
Hell I know a few people that bought Windows 2000 to downgrade their XP machines based solely on the licensing and "copyright violation prevention measures".
There is a way for microsoft to get back on top. but Ballmer and anyone who thinks like him will never be able to do it...
The era of bullying your customer into submission is coming to an end. and until they realize the basics of doing business... they will start to slip faster and faster....
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I just checked, it looks like I haven't followed the SCO-Microsoft for too long : M$ has no SCO shares anymore, since 2000. Sorry ...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
What's wrong with people? No need to insult the editors of this website, as I am sure they are doing their best. If you don't like it, at least try to be civil when saying so. Another option is of course to leave.
That defies market logic -- to raise your prices when faced by a seemingly lower cost competitor.
The music industry is doing exactly that.
Where are my moderator points when I need them ;-)
I think the whole thing is a big PR blitz. Like when MS announced how it was going to crack down on bad code. It must be tough to be Microsoft, once you make the sale, you need to keep them coming back for me, like a heroin dealer, you need to keep them hooked and wanting more and wanting better.
Microsoft Excel was great back at version 4. I don't know what they added since that has been an amazing thing for me personally. I am sure there are many people dying to get the newest version. Word 5 was insane, and they were able to improve with the XP version. Powerpoint bores me, both using it and viewing it. Access, damn people, get friendly with mysql or postgresql, forget access, it will ruin you! Windows itself, never really found a version that I "liked" (why my primary machine is a Powerbook). I don't think that the folks in Redmond have a chance at making something that will make me happy.
Thank goodness for Windows though... Thanks to Microsoft we of the world of Linux and BSD can buy cheap hardware to run a very powerful operating system on.
to...
so that customers are not hit with unexpected â" and unwanted â" charges [as they are now].
But then it wouldn't be Micro$haft would it?
Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas
[May God give you double that which you wish for me]
The issue for Microsoft, is that ANY strategy they adopt could backfire. Let's see:
.NET - next big thing....
.Net, except for the Vis Studio. Developers are the only ones who can proudly stay ignorant of what they're letting loose on their customers! BTW, what is .Net?
1) Putting license key schemes in place on their OS's
OTOH, when Joe SericePack gets pissed by the license-key thing, he's likely to switch over.
2) I imagine the same thing will happen with MS Office soon
Joe ServicePack is already running OO.o
3) Hope to god the console business takes off...
That's like retiring from the bread and butter business, and hope to sell lots of jam. Won't work.
4) Come up with a DRM scheme and convince the record companies
Too late, and too little. Apple's already done a good job. And music buffs already have MP3 firmly entrenched. Zero sum game.
5)
Only drawback being, MS is shit scared to brand anything with
6) Palladium - next big thing....
They've already hit a raw nerve with that one, it's got them tons of negative publicity. Renamingit as NGSCB will not make it better.
Now we know why His Baldness sold a million shares.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Damn, dude. Preview. You dropped a "p" somewhere in there, and really threw off the whole comment...
--Fesh
Kill -9 'em all, let root@localhost sort 'em out.
With a lot of corporate customers moved over to the newest Microsoft Licensing formula, Microsoft is feeling the pressure to put up with what they have promised. They have been putting very little in the pipe with regards to updates with their latest products.
Mind you, they have put out Windows 2003 server, but as far as new features, it lacks in that departement. There are still organizations who are just recently migrating over to Windows 2000 server.
So, to make up for the technology gap, they will market over the gap. Doesn't surprise me one bit.
âoeOur ability to hear is quite good. We have to know how to respond,â says Ballmer Didn't your mommy teach you anything? What a buffoon.
Considering that SGI and Sun write their Unix operating systems to help sell the hardware, it makes sense for IRIX and Solaris to be able to scale so high; they have to or else SGI and Sun can't sell the really big iron.
Then why can Win95 run certain DOS programs that Win2K and up cannot?
Why can WinME run older Windows 95 programs that WinXP/2K cannot? Dare I even mention Windows 3.1 programs?
Windows "compatibility" is a myth. But I'm sure you'll just disregard me as a "zealot" for pointing this out.
I've had more people thank me profusely when I've handed them a copy of Open Office, just because they didn't have to shell out big bucks for the MS product. They didn't even know an alternative was available.
It's probably even money that they'll bow to internal pressure to get something out, sort of like a WinME for XP or something, a stop gap to make people buy something.
Otherwise, all those people who paid extra to be in the guarenteed update program will be upset, because it will become obvious that they are not getting very much for their money.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Suprise, we now have Microsoft giving the reason they licensed SCO Unix: They believe IBM to be the biggest threat to them.
See these articles on the same memo: here, and here
He also is afraid that there is a "...greater focus on doing more with less" in business, which could spell trouble for Microsoft.
"So, don't just sit back, point your finger, and laugh; take a good look within the open source world and see what needs fixing."
is that they can do exactly that! Sit back, point finger and laugh - when (and if) MS does anything notewirthy, simply implement it in open source, and repeat!
I mean, if something were wrong with Open Source, would MS and SCO be raising such a hue and cry. Don't fix Open Source, simply lie back and relax - it's perfect already.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Apple may be marginalized, but they're the ones on the consumer end who keep building the bridges Microsoft has to walk across. No new technology coming forward? Apple built their own with the iPod. They were late to the game with iTunes, granted, but iPhoto, iMovie and iDVD are still leaps and bounds ahead of any competition in terms of ease-of-use.
The "digital hub" strategy they're embracing is working very well for Apple. The only problem, natch, is that digital camcorders (and camcorders and DVD burners) are still too expensive to be casually embraced by most consumers. But then, prices are getting lower all the time -- simple digital cameras under $100 are easy to come by, and used iPods can be found on eBay for as low as $100-$150. Apple knows that people are doing less and less with their personal computers but more and more with the other "computers" around them, and constantly works on ways to tie those peripherals to Apple's hardware and software.
What Microsoft ought to be throwing it's money towards, then, is building easy-to-use consumer software that consumers actually *want* to use, not because they're gimmicky but because they're easy to understand. Media Player is a good start. Their video editor needs much work, and integrating it with the ever-cheaper DVD burners and VideoCD writers could only help them.
Then let's try some new ideas, just to see if they take off. Skip the Tablet PC thing; build a cheap (like $50-$60) e-book reader that people can actually afford and will want to own, then get the magazine and newspaper publishers to sign on. Try to really integrate webcams and IM. A Flash-format animation creator for under $50 so people can make their own cartoons. They don't have to give this stuff away with the OS, if they make it cheap enough to buy separately. (I'm keen on that $50 price point, which is the most your average consumer will spend on non-profit-making software.)
Microsoft is, IMO, so bent on keeping the business markets that they've all but neglected their consumer market. Aside from some pretty colors, self-customizing menus and Apple-chasing software hacks, they've not done anything new for the home market since Windows 95 was released. It's good for them to spend time building tools that developers and managers want to have, but it helps their image immensely to add the stuff home users would want to have -- even if they don't make as much profit from it.
Like their patches?
Millions of lines of code WILL NOT be error free. Patches are expected and wanted by reasonably intelligent customers.
Weren't they behind the curve when the Internet took off. Weren't they behind the curve when it came to computer security?
It is happening. They have no compelling products anymore. They have no compelling business model. They are faced with A. do the same as they have always done (won't grow the market share) B. manhandle future and current customers some more (at this point the customers are pissed and won't take it anymore) C. spread some more FUD or manipulate companies like SCO to try to destroy Linux et. al. (won't work either). They should indeed break themselves up... they are unwieldy and non-competative. I find it so laughable that they think they can innovate a "quantum leap in computing" that will put them ahead of all competitors when they've never innovated anything in the entire history of the company. MS software by definition cannot be ahead of everyone else due to Draconian license and activation measures... ahead of everyone else means unencumbered user experience among many other qualifiers... I'd certainly sum it up by saying they'd have to make the user feel like they not only have a choice but that their software is the right choice...and still on equal footing in terms of resources spent to make such a choice.
---rramble...
At one level Microsoft has so much cash in the bank that it could live off the hump for years and years and years. They identified the problem: lack of a recurring revenue stream, and the need to sell more OS/Office licences to create revenue.
There are two solutions for this problem:
1) Develop a strong services and solutions offering, where business will trust you with their IT and pay lots of money for good service
2) Invent a way to squeeze recurring revenue out of your installed user base without offering anything substantially more
IBM chose (1), Microsoft chose (2).
Consider the phases of IT: firstly there was the traditional IBM phase where by far the largest cost was hardware, even allowing for teams of people writing in-house software. This characterises the period up to, say, 1980, and by 1990 IBM was almost dead on its feet; secondly there was the phase where commercial packaged software was a major part of IT decision making, starting with putting Lotus 1-2-3 in front of decision makers, and continuing through the Windows/Office age. This phase was characterised by the PHB saying "I want 10,000 computers running Wordperfect and Lotus".
Now we are into the next phase, where both hardware and packaged software are commodities within a solution or service. This is why companies such as EDS, CSC and IBM (and smaller players in this market) matter more than Microsoft. If Ballmer thinks that some new technological gizmo will get people spending again then he's wrong: there may well be a lot of individual buyers for new toys, but neither the business desktop nor my mum need or want a new killer technology. They need, and already have, a working toolset to send email, browse the web (and use web enabled applications) and create documents. Essentially we have now commoditised the information rather than the software (yes, I know this process isn't complete, but it's under way).
Now the good bit: Microsoft has so much cash that it needn't deal with this issue for years yet. IBM got into deep doodoo before reinventing itself. Microsoft is showing the signs that it expects to spend several years yet digging the hole in the same place.
Dunstan
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
Thank you for your suggestions, i.e. postgresql all the way. I have some doubts about postgresql at the moment, perhaps someone who knows more than me can help me out:
--It seems to be very unixy. I need a db to do exactly the same thing on linux as on win32, but postgresql seems to be more 'compilable on win32 if you really have time' than 'completely cross platform'. Am I wrong?
--It seems to be very quirky -- most people (here) can pick up firebird and use it because it's just like Interbase, but postgresql seems to redo everything from the ground up. \d to list tables? 'Postgres query language'?
--It seems to require considerable knowledge of rdb's. For instance, you remove a foreign key constraint my manually finding and deleting some automatically-generated triggers?? That's going to confuse anyone from a SQL Server background... actually, it's not going to happen at all
Anyway, I will continue researching. Perhaps postgreSQL will suddenly seem freindlier after a bit more poking...
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
After having big success with the Rolling Stones' "Start Me Up" and Madonna's "Ray of Light", Microsoft is hoping to license the popular "American Life" MP3 for this new campaign. "Microsoft. What the F*** do you think you're doing?"
Obviously millions of code will have errors, that's a given. But the ammount of things that break in MS patches tend to be somewhat disturbing. I've been pretty happy with patches on windows 2000 aside from 2-3 catastrophies, but I have a lot of servers on my network that people refuse to patch or upgrade because they've been hit hard with problems due to them.
Freudian slit?
Why can Windows 95 and Windows ME run DOS applications better than Windows 2000? Are you really so clueless that you cannot understand a simple product line history?
I'll try to use simple words for your benefit.
Windows ME is a direct decendent of Windows 98, which was a direct decendent of Windows 95, which was a direct decendent of Windows 3.11 and DOS 6.2.
Windows XP is a direct decendent of Windows 2000 which was a direct decendent of Windows NT 4, which was a direct desecendent of Windows NT 3.5, which was a brand new product. Windows NT 3.5 was not based on DOS.
The two product lines are generally refered to as Windows9x and WindowsNT. The 9x line of systems contains a lot of legacy code back to DOS. It can thunk to real mode and often does. When you run a COMMAND.EXE shell in a Win9x OS, you really are running DOS. Code thunks to real mode and can call real BIOS functions via. software interupts.
When you run a COMMAND.EXE (Not CMD.EXE) shell in WinNT, you're not really running DOS. You're running something that is a lot like DOS, but it is really running in a virtual x86 machine. You can't thunk directly to the BIOS from inside this machine as software interupts get caught by the virtual machine and redirected via. NT. So its not really DOS, it just tries to act like it.
I'm sure I've lost you in this vastly over simplified explanation, but I figure you can't possibly be any more clueless after having read it.
Now, if you'd said say, extensions to Win32 across the Win9x and WinNT product lines causing incompatabilities, you might have been onto something. Not much, mind you, but a better bet than trying to talk about Windows compatability using DOS as an example.
then win with propaganda. This is exactly the line of thought that Microsoft is following here.
That would be a no-brainer. It already runs under Apple-UNIX. They would make hundreds of millions on this product. No, in the insane effort to crush Linux, they deprive themselves and stockholders of a large source of revenue.
They could put other apps like the Visual developers series on Linux. Many of these were original cross-developed on UNIX minis before PCs got powerful enough in the early 1990s.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
Help me become a Porn Star Guru
First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.
MS has been trying to figure out a way to stop the upgrade cycle for some time now. They've been looking at software rental and time limited licensing.
In 1999(ish), customers wanted to keep Office 97. It did everything they needed.
Microsoft wanted people to buy new software. They crammed all the features they could into Office 2000, but aside from making Clippy easier to get rid of, people weren't compelled. It wasn't until Microsoft refused to sell Office 97 licenses that Office 2000 sales really picked up.
OpenOffice has a competitive edge here. As long as the Win32 api sticks, or Linux is ported to modern CPUs, you will always be able to put OpenOffice on a new machine.
So, Microsoft needs to be competitive (long term... short term OO is unnoticable). Microsoft needs revenue. Customers need to write, read and share information.
.Net offers them this ability, and their new licensing offers them this ability. If they supported fat client software with the tenaciousness of IBM (e.g. Office 97 will be supported until some nutty year like 2020 and the file format will always be supported), or if they went to that screwed up ASP model with .net, they can lock customers in to regular fees, but they can also offer continual improvements and pay-per-use features.
People hate the upgrade cycle. Where I work, we're only deploying Windows XP and Office XP because Microsoft will eventually drop support for 2000.
It's unlikely this email will wake up the Windozers from their slumber. Ballmer's mulling on a few better wakeup calls:
1. Linux! Linux!! Linux!!! (message comes out the speaker at full volume at every reboot, or logout!)
2. Sells a million shares a day!
3. Sends money to Linus - a million a day, for his IP!
4. Decides to work from home, to cut costs.
5. Hires Indians exclusively - that should wake up everyone!!
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Mr. Ballmer should have sent a wake-up call to his business and legal departments, not his technology people.
The changes in licensing and rapant abuse of their customer base, forced upgrades and incredible arroagance of Microsoft has done what only the phone company has done in the past -- alienate their customer base.
What would be even weirder
US leaves other countries alone
-- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
- his lips move.
You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
"Math in a song is good."-Linford
Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need
How can you be this smart and this delusional at the same time? You want to make Linux functionally irrelevant as a business OS? Here are some **REAL** ideas off the top of my head:
1) Abandon Palladium. We really don't want to use our PCs to watch movies - we have $50 DVD players for that -- see #3. 'Nuff said.
2) For that matter, your EULAs are WAY THE F___ OUT OF CONTROL. "Hmmm, it sure is an important OS security patch, but damned if I'm gonna install it because it sez right here that doing so gives MS the right to control my PC." I don't care what you *intend*, that's what it sez. If you want to control what's on my PC and what I can do with it, then you buy it for me, Mkay?
3) Quit stalking your customers like a collections company. Abolish Open Licensing 6.0 and this *STUPID* software-by-subscription idea of yours. (If you want me to re-buy your software every year, those annual subscription fees are going to have to be lower -- a **LOT** **F___'IN** **LOWER**. Office '95 was good enough for me.
4) Admit that your security problems are a direct result of your insistance in violating the #1 rule of software design: YOU NEVER MIX CODE AND DATA TOGETHER. You have specifically engineered every product you sell to be scriptable. STOP IT! Remove the OS-level scripting capabilities from your products and provide patches to your current customers to do the same on previous versions.
5) You guys are acting like the software engineering divisions at HP! Stop trying to improve things that don't need improving and realize that the only perfection is simplicity. Go out and play some golf, maybe take some dancing lessons.
Sure, I like Linux, but I also like Windows. My problem is that even though I have already given you my hard-earned money many times over, I feel like you've nailed a bulls-eye on my back and handed out shotguns to all your beer-swilling pals.
I am exploring alternatives because sticking with you is like being a hostage (as in gun-to-the-head) in a car speeding down a desert highway. If I jump out, it'll hurt, but once I stop rolling, get up, brush myself off and walk back to town, I'll be in control again.
Wow, not-so-ironically, it **really** **is** much more about 'freedom' than 'free'-dom.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
"...with no immediate breakthroughs in technology coming..."
Translation: We've run out of other people's ideas to steal.
Ruby on Rails Screencast
Brilliant. You sealed a 5 with a tried-and-true play.
"Ever seen Linux go above 64 CPUs in an SSI? IRIX can and I believe so can solaris"
No, we Linux fanatics leave the hard jobs to SCO Unix.
Yes, you are correct. Grandmas, Suzy and Joe ServicePack are the users that Linux should focus on. ssh, telnet, cp, rcp etc should be removed from the kernel and substituted with GUIs.
Do you even know the MS FUD about telnet and copy? The very fact that these commands exist, indicates that there are users who can't be bothered to use GUIs and clicks, and get enslaved to a gorilla in return. Grandmas, Suzies and Joe ServivePacks better start learning Linux fast.
Unless they can afford $500 every year to license crapware and subscribe to nonsense.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Do I think M$ is going to just engage in marketing? No, I don't. M$ will move with the times - when they can't drive them. They blew off the Web then came back with a vengeance.
So, I expect that the bad of lame and FUD-filled marketing campaigns will be coupled with some attempts to make actual, serious improvements. I don't expect any of them to be that original, but I expect them.
M$, being on the top, doesn't have to try as hard to stay there or react as quickly as others. I'd say they know that.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
Actually, this raises a very interesting issue. You know, I happened to be chatting with a CEO of a leading Indian software company once, asking him why most Indian software is catered for the international market and not the Indian market per se. In particular, I was concerned about the lack of application development in Indian language software, and asked him why the companies couldn't develop a viable Indian market for their products.
I expected he'd say something about "improverished" India and all that crap (actually went prepared with a few references to squash just that argument), but his point was, to say the least, unexpected. He said, "The world's largest software maker, Microsoft, spends nearly a billion dollars for marketing its flagship product, Win XP, and that too in its home ground. Imagine how much we small fishhave to spend". Or something to that effect.
Since you raise this point about marketing, I'm curious:- what's the view out there in the Valley? How much do you guys have to spend on, or how important is, marketing your software?
More than mere navel gazing.
Microsoft must âoeimprove business consistencyâ so that customers are not hit with unexpected â" and unwanted â" changes.
You mean like finding out after you've bought into the expensive Windows 2003 Server upgrade, you find out that many of your mission-critical software packages, even Microsoft's own products are incompatible with 2003 and you'll have to buy those all over again too?
The other major part of this is to accuse all their customers of being thieves (which is where the BSA comes in).
:)
It really does seem like MS is trying to speed up the conversion of all their customers to Linux.
The only other piece they need to have their products be viewed as less secure, then their strategy will be complete.
Take a look at how theyÂve progressed.
Consider this.
When Linux hit the streets (OK, wires), what version of Windows was out? 3.1. And most businesses used it. It sucked, but was usable. Remember your first Linux install (if you happened to be around back then)? My first install was Slackware. Downloaded the floppies from the net on a 14.4 modem. It also sucked. I couldnÂt tell you how usable I thought it was - I was 100 percent Unix clueless, but wanted to learn. Now think about when Win95 came out. Big improvement over 3.1. Still had a lot of problems, but you didn t have to worry about a third party TCP stack anymore. Around that time, I started to use Caldera OpenLinux 1.1 through 1.3. Quite stable, but it had itÂs own set of problems. Notably, the desktop. Nowhere NEAR a finished as the then-current Windows. But networking as solid. Then I went to RedHat 4.2, then 5.x, then 6.x. Overall very nice. BUT...
Do you remember when you upgraded and (whether you realized it or not) GLIBC changed major versions and broke all you existing programs? I do. Initially painful, but not undoable.
Now go to Win2K. MUCH, much better than Win9x (no arguing that). Desktop rarely crashes. Networking is childÂs play. And we jumpt to RedHat 7.2 (7.3 sucked, as far as IÂm concerned). Also a very big improvement desktop-wise. This was the first Linux desktop I actually got management to sign off on, thanks to me having to also manage a Linux cluster. For all the Win apps I had to use for work I got VMWare. Worked great. Then I moved up to RH8. VMWare broke. ThereÂs that GLIBC thing again. Around the same time I installed WinXP on a machine at home. Not as stable for me as W2K (desktop locks up, I lose the printer if it s left on for more than three days), although IÂm told by everyone IÂm doing something wrong. But nobody can tell what it is IÂm doing wrong. Now I upgrade my RH* machine to RH9. Not as stable as RH8 for me. Although it would seem that wireless is a bit more integrated, once I actually use it for any length of time I realize itÂs not great. At least once a day I have to restart the interface because it just stops working. And people tell me I must be doing something wrong, yet noone can tell me what it is that IÂm doing wrong.
So whatÂs my point? While IÂve had the stability and reliability problems you refer to on Windows, IÂve also had them with Linux. Both OSes have advanced at about the same rate, and both have their share of problems.
"...companies have turned to Linux and other open-source software programs, seeing them as cheap but adequate alternatives."
I'd amend this to say companies find that Linux and Friends aren't just "cheap but adequate." Instead, we find on the server side that they are cheap, rock solid, effective, and simple. In my opinion, Microsoft does do many things well. But MS continues to believe that "featurization" is what companies want, and that corporate types will see additional features as being worth additional time, trouble, and money. What MS might finally be seeing is that more feature-laden, more trouble-prone, and more expensive is NOT what we're looking for. Open Source code should serve as a model for Microsoft, at least in the back office, because it's written by geeks, for geeks. And, obviously, it works.
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
They can just treat their employees as they plan to treat their users: as would-be criminals. IIRC, Palladium is supposed implement intrinsic document permissions, so they can set up all their memos to be unprintable and unforwardable.
Sure, there will still be ways to leak the info, but once Palladium is here it will be much more difficult. And in our society, no-one will consider a human solution to security issues when they can just slap more DRM on them instead.
My mom is over 50, and for all intents and purposes computer illerate.
I have installed a locked off version of RH on the laptop I gave her so she could surf the web and send emails (with photos) to her sisters.
The FUD of saying you require skills to use Linux is long over.
Does either product resemble in the least the intial, base product?
Just because they bought/licensed something doesnÂt mean they didnÂt do anything with it or improve on it.
Get a job and maybe you can get a real distribution.
Um, you pay for your distro? Ah, maybe you just suck cock for one...
resistance is futile.
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
In that environment, companies have turned to Linux and other open-source software programs, seeing them as cheap but adequate alternatives. Around half of the 1 million corporate computers in the United States that run the Unix operating system are candidates for migration to Linux, according to Ballmer â" a significant challenge to Microsoft, which has set its own sights on winning over those customers for its Windows operating system.
Cheap but adequate? WTF?
(MSNBC is a Microsoft - NBC joint venture.)
Oh yeah. Thanks. Forgot about that.
Not that License v6 has anything to do with them losing customers. Expensive lock-in is not a way to endear anyone with brains enough to find an alternative...
Chris
So Buddha walks into a pizza parlor and says: "Hey, make me one with everything."
Ballmer's memo comes down to this: "increase our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences."
So there you have it. No product. No technology. No innovation. Just advertising. I think that tells a lot about how Microsoft regards their consumers (that's the right word, I fear). If it works, maybe they are right.
>> 1) Putting license key schemes in place
... andden ...
>> on their OS's
They've done that and do that on a number of retail versions I have seen. Andden (to quote the Chinese Drive-Through lady in "Dude Where's My Car") you just go to your favorite alt. newsgroup and get all the S/N's you could ever want. Guess that's why they went to that Product Activation scheme that was essentially throwing lead balloons at their customers.
>> 2) I imagine the same thing will happen
>> with MS Office soon
And it already has too
It's my firm belief that Microsoft has an unwritten policy of actually relying on piracy to get penetration of their products. For example, how many folks do you know that have slipped a copy of Office into their coat and "upgraded" their home PC from the free version of Works that came with their Dell?
Microsoft could have put a stop on this a long time ago, with real Product Activation instead of 16 (or however many) digit schemes that are about as hard to copy as writing them on a Sticky.
So, if they really DID starting charging the full ride for Office, or whatever, folks would all of a sudden become quite interested in WordPerfect Office, OpenOffice, any Office that was cheaper and effectively typed letters to Grandma. Once they got used to that other software, they'd certainly feel free to suggest it to their IT staff and management as a fine way to save the company money.
...school sales literally kept [Apple] afloat while the IBM PC ate their lunches (...)
:P
What do you mean? They had swimming on their schedule or something?
You mean Better F.U.D ?
[My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
How can this statement be true if:
1) Sun Java, by many developers admissions, is one of the most poorly written technologies in this day and age?
2) One of the biggest Drawbacks for Distributed Transactions is not the Operating Systems mentioned above but the limited protocols available for the Distributed Transaction Model to use? This is an issue on all operating systems on the market.
3) Interoperability will continue to be a roadblock for years to come?
4) Solutions like these and any alternatives are restrictive in it's archetecture?
5) No matter what the OS, language, or application is, resource conflicts will still be a major problem in this model.
6) Many of the current applications used in the Distributed transaction model are old, outdated, and are an increasing liability to the problems inherent in said model.
7) Scalability. There is no mention of this at all. Even the link above implies a single server architecture.
8) Ease of Development. Even you mention above that Java Classloaders are a hard thing to grok. How are Developers to create an application with such a complex language to wade through?
The problems and limits with the Distributed Transaction model is hardly an OS or a programming language issue. It's a much, much more broader issue that needs to be recognized and addressed.
No one can say Unix/Java is much better at Distributed Transactions when it's in the same boat as Windows Operating systems with the same strenghts and weaknesses.
Dolemite
_________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
innovation and chaos are not something you can PAY for ...
...
...
...
innovation is like art. sometimes someone shows up and
everybody goes "AEWH! WOAH!"
everytime i hear the word "persuading" my neck-hair stands up
and i go all cold.
"better job of persuading" my god! in other word:
we need a better "propaganda-machine".
either they got something new, or they are just trying to
buy a new yacht, mansion or porsch
-
even though everybody by now knows "bill-the-borg"
he and and all the other handfull of "senior-nerds" (by now)
helped create this "multi-billion" industry and workplaces!!!
the problem is "bill-the-borg" got sucked into his maschinery.
jobs went for an extensive holiday and came back refreshed
it sucks to be the inventor when all you eventually have to deal with is
the SUPER-STUPID-LAZY marketing department.
everybody knew way back (well not everybody, my grandma didn't) at
the beginning computers were/are super-cool! no marketing was needed.
now 90% is marketing and 10% is programming/innovation.
first thing i would do is fire steve ballmer. finish. that should leave a
vacuum, which could leave some space for innovation.
look at the US military. since the germans invented rockets, fission
and jet-engine nothing new happend. good god, even the laser is
a german invention. i'm not a racist. but instead of lamenting(!, which
is a serious case of LAG(!), one should create an environment were
inventors are alowed to experiment. i don't mean a lab and we pay them
for innovation, but rather on a freelance basis. this means on a global scale.
all those 10% of humans who own 90% of all the money should come to realize
that they live on the same planet like all us poor folks...
what does it matter if THEY live in a super expensive environment, but
can't set foot outside their front door because a revolution is going on?
we have seen this in the french revolution: where IS all the bread for paris?
in versai
bottom line: you can't PAY for innovation or creativity. sorry.
BUT you CAN pay for propaganda!
I agree. I would guess that the average man in the street has first and foremost on his mind to get the hell outta the street...
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
Is BeOs going to mow everyone down out of left field?
Come on, you're holding out! Spill it!
Dolemite
_____________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
VA Software and RedHat stock prices are apparently up sharply on news of the memo.
Because Linux Developers keep changing the os around as often as George Steinbrenner keeps spending money on his overpaid and overly spoiled Yankees.
OK, that whole white boy as "best rapper" and "German's not wanting to go to war" was funny. But it was funny when Charles Barkley said it.
Next time, try to credit your quotations. And, if you can't properly credit them, at least admit you stole the joke from someone else. The actual quote (from Sir Charles) goes like this:
"You know the world is off tilt, when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest basketball player is Chinese, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and US citizens are pouring wine on the ground."
If MS spent their time focusing on making their software better instead of trying to destroy everything else, they probably wouldn't have any competition. They have the skills and resources to create the best product out there, but they never do it. There's something wrong when a software company has more attorneys on it's payroll than programmers...
OK, maybe it was Chris Rock. When I received the quote in an e-mail a month ago, it was credited to Charles Barkley.
But don't crucify me. I at least admitted that it wasn't my quote, unlike the parent comment.
Compatibility is a strong suite that MS has been pushing ever since it came out. Ease of install and ease of use is argue-able.
Linux install is also "click a few options", however, it is argue-able since the options available are not quite as lay.
Solution: Making the first question option on the install of Linux "Easy install / Expert Install" would immediately alleviate this. Upon selecting Easy install, configuration of partitions, IP addresses, screen-resolutions, security, packages, etc. would have a stock template and require only user supplied information. Not SysAdmin supplied information (with the exception of a root password). Post installation, this is where a question and answer manual would be usefull in determining what doesn't work from the stock install, providing steps in how to get it working the way you would want it.
Ease of use is very argue-able as well. That is once the GUI is up and running. Though gettin XFree or Gnome to work has been less than perfect.
NeverWinterNights server argue-ably runs far better on Lunix than windows IMHO, and I've tried both, without a bent to either since my objective for running that server was to run an NWN server, not run windows or linux. I was able to run far more concurrent users, far longer, and have far easier access to administration tools than in windows. On windows, it could hang the whole machine and disable a remote reboot (the only solution at that point). The windows box was hacked the same day we installed the server piece. After re-install and configuring security, we had issues with functionality and visibility due to the miserable firewall. Automatic scripts for cleanup, archive, logging, moving modules around, upload, and all were much easier to handle as well. Yes your argument was about the player application. Specifically, the graphics. Personally I think it was money. Their market was windows for the players. The fact that NWN Player on Linux finally showed up at all proves that it was only a matter of priorities for a company trying to make money. If I were Bioware, I'd do the same. Infact, I might have not even put out a Linux Client at all. I think that may have been just to appease the Linux server admins that also played, since the better servers (uptime, popularity, good module designs) ran on Linux.
My point, for Linux to be technically superior to windows in a user environment, the tools for it need to be geared toward a user environment.
"Last one in is a rotten goblin!" - Kepp
" . . . and with the Linux computer operating system and a batch of other open-source programs biting at its heels, Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need."
"I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid. You're afraid of us. You're afraid of change. I don't know the future. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone, and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a world....without you. A world without rules and controls. Without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there, is a choice I leave to you."
...from the last user in the world on a Windows 3.11 machine who wonders why his DFS connection doesn't work in DOS.
Microsoft will be almost out of the OS/Office market. Now mind you, they will still sell the current versions, but their revenue will drop sharply each year for the next few years. They'll even keep current penetration (for the most part).
They will have to rely on new forms of revenue to keep afloat. I suspect their gaming division will be a large part of it, at least from the PC side. (I suspect the X-Box 2 will be locked tight as a drum, and therefore bomb huge.) As well, sales of accessories and other hardware will make up a lot of their profit as well.
It sounds like everything being asked for could be done with something like a customized Knoppix. As you say, a friendly set of utilities for lightly customizing the final disk would be nice. If the parent in question has a spare PC that meets a minimum set of requirements then chuck in a nice friendly "Permanent Install icon" on the desktop. That would sidestep the repartitioning issue pretty handily.
A less heavy handed approach would be something like those FOSS cds for Windows we heard about a few months ago. Put the Windows ports of some schoolwork relavent projects on some CDs and hand those out.
Microsoft must "improve business consistency" so that customers are not hit with unexpected - and unwanted - changes.
To be honest, my opinion of Microsoft's constant money grubbing behavior made me think what he said was this on the first pass.
Microsoft must "improve business consistency" so that customers are not hit with unexpected - and unwanted - charges.
Which is what they are planning in the future.
Take the rescent Neverwinter Nights fiasco. It took Bioware forever to choose a platform to handle the graphics and even longer to choose one to handle the sound.
This has nothing to do with Linux being inferior in not compatible. Bioware made the mistake of choosing technologies that were not crossplatform with which to build their software. They used Fink for video and some other proprietary sound system for building NWN. Neither of which was ported to Linux and neither made the source code available to make a port possible. As a result, they had become dependent on technologies they had no control over. This was their stupidity, not a failure on the part of Linux.
If Bioware had used SDL and other open and portable technologies, they would be able to run on virtually any platform with minimal porting effort.
This is alagous to saying "I used to MFC to write my application instead of Qt (which exists on most GUI platforms today). As a result, it doesn't run on Linux because there is no MFC for Linux. I do not have the source for MFC and the vendor who supplies MFC will not port it. Ergo, Linux sucks."
That makes no fucking sense.
Join Tor today!
Most of Microsoft's value-add has been stolen^h^h^h^h^h^hcopied or acquired.
I continually wonder when people who continually spout the nonsense you do are going to wake up and realise that the thousands of developers and researchers employed by Microsoft aren't just sitting there and playing Minesweeper all day.
Yes, MS sometimes buys products off other companies. So does Apple (Logic and Shake, and of course NeXT/BSD). So does IBM (Lotus, Informix). Furthermore, MS puts enough development into those products that they properly evolve: the current version of SQL Server retains no remaining code from Sybase (which the original version was based on). But WinNT was a completely new OS, not based on VMS (though it was designed by VMS's lead architect).
The idea that MS never innovates is just nonsense. Examples like their using a WIMP GUI (which, if you recall, was ripped off from Xerox by many different OS companies, yet no one ever accused Amiga of not innovating) are total red herrings, especially given the number of times that the Windows UI has been ripped off by others. (Mac OS X dock = shinier Win98 taskbar, and all the things that GNOME/KDE have ripped off)
It's almost always possible to take any computing innovation and point to a precursor, saying "Ah, that's not new, look - it's just an evolution of that previous thing." But "Just" Is A Dangerous Word.
The reason MS has a this reputation is that it rarely innovates in big ways, just as creating new markets or completely new types of products. This is not from lack of innovative ability (spend half an hour wandering through Microsoft Research and realise just how innovative they can be) but from a corporate philosophy of deliberately not pioneering technology advances. Remember that they've been burnt in the past (Windows For Pen, anyone? And MS Bob, of course) - the saying "Pioneers are the ones with the arrows in their backs" is a very wise one for the tech industry. Much better to let someone else take the risk and prove the market before moving in.
However, while MS rarely innovates in new product types, it does innovate in small product features - IntelliSense and Cleartype (sub-pixel rendering had research precursors, but had never been part of a windowing system before) are two examples that stick in my mind. But the reason they stick is because MS actually gave them names and touted them as innovations, which it doesn't often do.
To summarise: MS develops and produces thousands of products. To pull a couple of ancient examples and claim that this shows MS does nothing other than sell boxes makes me wonder if you know anything about the company besides what you read on Slashdot.
-- Yoz
I've said it before, and I'll say it again...
If microsoft would only stop looking at Linux as it's enemy, and port some of it's software to the platform, Balmer and his lackeys would only reap the profits.
If MS were to face the fact that businesses and governments (as well as home users) are switching to Linux from a POSITIVE perspective, they would realize that there is a new market for them to provide software for.
Why do they care what operating system a user has? An OS is nothing without software. So, give the people software. I'd consider paying a reasonable sum for a copy of Office for Xfree. Or perhahps even IE(!), considering that most websites now seem to be geared towards it, and not the non-ms browser.
ok. enough of my painfully obvious fact-pointing. back to my editor.
Isn't this what we customers have been saying, nay, *screaming*, for years now?
I recall the days when U.S. automakers tried to sell cars by telling the buyer, "you need what we build", before they got clobbered by the imports with their "we'll build what you need" attitude. I wouldn't be looking elsewhere if Microsoft's products met my needs.
OTOH there's a big *natural* market for a company with the Features Uber Alles culture. If Microsoft would be content with a large, secure slice of the pie, instead of trying to grab the whole pie, they could do very well without revolutionary change.
The trouble comes when you try to *impose* your vision of the market on a segment which holds to a radically different vision. Lose the vision, or lose the ambition to own the market; you'll never achieve both together.
In Norway some entusiats have done exactly that: http://www.skolelinux.no/
By the way, skole is school in Norwegian.
> I mean, if something were wrong with Open Source, would MS and SCO be raising such a hue and cry.
cd /usr/local/src
./configure /usr/local/pgsql/data /usr/local/pgsql/data
/usr/local/pgsql/bin/initdb -D /usr/local/pgsql/data
/usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -i -D /usr/local/pgsql/data >logfile 2>&1 &
/usr/local/pgsql/bin/createdb test
/usr/local/pgsql/bin/psql test
tar -xvzf postgresql-7.1.2.tar.gz
cd postgresql-7.1.2
make
make install
adduser postgres
mkdir
chown postgres
su - postgres
Ecology.
They've killed and eaten just about every other vendor in the Windows environment. All that is left is anti-virus.
This is the problem because MS has never created the technology that they sell. They just buy/steal from others and "integrate" it with their other products.
This would be fine for them. No competition means they could charge whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted.
But then Linux comes along (and other Open Source projects).
Linux exploits a different ecology. One that relies upon donated effort rather than sales and lock-in.
Look at the functionality of Mozilla or any other browser compared to IE. IE doesn't even have tabs. Windows still doesn't have multiple desktops. And so forth.
All the marketing in the world won't help MS at this point. Many financial companies have switched to Linux in the server room (instead of buying MS). Munich is going to switch to Linux on the desktop.
MS will lose more desktop space in the next 12 months. MS will lose a LOT more server space in the next 12 months.
MS made lots of people VERY rich, very quickly. But that required destroying their future options.
buh bye, MS.
It's slow enough on my dual-proc 1000MHz athlon board with 512M RAM. I can not begin to imagine how much patience you would need to run it on a 90MHz pentium.
More like Linux is steam rolling right over Microsoft!
Brought to you by the InstaKarma engine.
"Trustworthy Computing" means that suppliers (primarily Microsoft) can trust it, not the owner or user.
Longhorn will break everything, which is a feature they'll have a real problem selling to end-users without an enormous helping of new value somewhere (and possibly even then). By which time, the Linus Torvalds World Domination Programme will have caught up with them. (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
....the wakeup call to management?
You know, build the infrastructure so a f'ing quality product could be built, instead of slamming the next round of features in? I'm sure plenty of people here can come up with quite few more....
Nuff said.
2. OCR
3. Profit...? (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
- Forever. Amen.
+ Forever and ever. Ament.
Name one product that Microsoft invented on their own.
Whoo, that was tough! (-:
Yes, I know, you might use "apt-get install" instead of "urpmi" - but User Redhat Package Manager Installer has that proper unixy "acronym" feel to it...
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Admit that your security problems are a direct result of your insistance in violating the #1 rule of software design: YOU NEVER MIX CODE AND DATA TOGETHER. You have specifically engineered every product you sell to be scriptable. STOP IT!
For years Apple has had AppleScript, an extremely powerful scripting language. Almost every worthwhile Mac application is scriptable. In all the years that AppleScript has been around, how many times has this been exploited? Once, and it was a pretty poor job.
The problem is not the scriptability of Microsoft's products, it's just that they chose to make it a gee-whiz feature and get it out in the marketplace, instead of taking the time and doing it right.
~Philly
I think it is unfortunate that most people think Linux = Redhat. Redhat's primary focus has been the server market, so when people try to install and use it as a Desktop they say "hmm, Linux is not ready."
A little research will show that there are indeed distro's out there that install themselves and are so easy to use, certain species of monkeys have been using them for YEARS. But I guess we get to the crux of the problem here, it is not the technology but the MARKETING of the technology. Hopefully, one day, the majority of people will start to think for themselves and the differences between actual technology and perceived technology will vanish. However, until that time, idiots like Ballmer will be 100% correct when they say they need to increase advertising expenditures in order make up for their lack of technology.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
When is Microsoft going to offer free consumer versions of Windows and Office? That'll keep the masses hooked, so they can continue to sock the corporate clients. Instead, they are pulling their best-loved free product (IE) and bundling it with Windows that you have to pay for. Now if they make that version of Windows free to consumers, maybe they'll have something.
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
Instead, they just add more bloat and more useless features that get in the way of productivity with every release.
No thanks. I'll stick to my linux box with some highly-tuned specific task apps and my windowmaker + rox desktop.
When both schools and parents buy computers, they come with Windows (or MacOS) pre-installed, as well as some sort of service contract and warranty.
What I think would be the biggest hurdle would be to convince both the school and the parents that they should abandon the OS they paid for and switch to something very different. Not to mention that dumping the pre-installed OS would probably void any service contract or warranty that was also included in the price of the computer(s).
A great idea at first glance, but there are a lot of hurdles to overcome.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
audiocd:/ (yes, put an audio CD in your first CD drive before you click)
fish://luscious@your.fave.ssh.server
smb://nearestdozebox/c
There are plenty of others.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
"It's my firm belief that Microsoft has an unwritten policy of actually relying on piracy to get penetration of their products."
Oh sure. But they're not trying to eliminate piracy; if the scheme results in 5% higher revenue with no cost, then why not try it? Its all about tryign to maximize revenue at this point; its very clearly not about customer service or satisfaction.
My lab just bought several Dell boxes with RedHat 8.0 and HP boxes with Mandrake 9.0 pre-installed, including support contracts. The Dell boxes were US$1500+, but the HPs were all less than US$1000.
So some OEMs are ready right now and I was happy to buy from them.
I thought not.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
by Balmer? Does anybody see a corelation?
Pick, now known as D3, has been doing the everything-in-a-database bit for decades, no innovation there. Oddly enough the Pick clone uses PostgreSQL as a backend.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
"We've bought up all the good companies and stifled all other innovation; we're screwed unless we can come up with something original on our own!" -- "And no, buying Red Hat isn't an option!"
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
eom
Well, not *right this second* but it's been eating up all of my spare time the last couple of weeks.
:)
7th/7th sorcerer/ranger, currently on the second level of the "Ruins of Illusk" under Luskan, chapter 2. Whoohoo!
And as for installing it... I just bought the game, DLed the latest NWN client from Bioware, DLed that 3rd party installer, ran the installer, unpacked the client, and started playing - just that easy.
So I don't see a "fiasco" here.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
Uhh, you do realize that the "course of action" that they took to correct their own defects were to break interoperability and strike up OEM deals to rub out the competition, right? It goes back to before Win3.1 to the DOS days. They shut out DRDos, a superior product. This is well documented. As is the fact that Windows 3.1 reported false errors if you tried to install it on DRDos instead of MSDos.
So no, the Open Source doesn't need to look to Microsoft for any examples on how to fix things. We need to look at them for reminders of what NOT to do.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I could be wrong, but I believe IBM is the world's largest software company. MicroSoft is the world's largest PC software company.
But don't crucify me. I at least admitted that it wasn't my quote, unlike the parent comment.
I stand corrected - i assumed it to be in public domain. Kudos and apologies to [ ] Charles Barkley [ ] Chris Rock (tick whichever applies).
RedHat, SuSe, and Mandrake have gotten pretty much point-n-click installation. KDE and Gnome are so easy to use that non-technical people can find their way without help.
However, the OS X has got them all beat. It's not perfect, it's still missing multiple desktops, but OS X is stable, easy to use and loads of familiar applications, plus it has exceptionally easy maintenance. That it also looks good, makes ideal for places where you have to look at it a lot -- home or a public reception area.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
MicroSoft seems to realise that they can no longer branch out as much as they had hoped. They will need to refocus their main money maker of Windows based products and offer it in a more competetive and cheap fashion. They'll most likely have to can the huge profit drains sometime soon as shareholders are sure to be getting anxious of seeing losses double every year (As with the dud of a console, XBox). If they trim the dead weight, they'll be able to start offering stuff cheaper instead of asking for more to cover un-needed losses. Byebye WebTV, MSN and Xbox.. They shouldn't have bothered to begin with..
The beta version of Win 3.1 reported that the OS was unsupported. There might have (ha!) been FUD involved, but I wouldn't have wanted to handle support calls for a beta version of Windows running on top of someone else's OS either. The release version still had the warning, but basically commented out by changing a conditional jump to an absolute.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Microsoft does a lot more than just Windows. Think of Office 2003 that's due out soon, Server 2003, SQL Server, new programming languages (we've seen C# and J# with more promised to follow) Visual Studio .NET 2003, plus a bunch of new forays into different markets such as Class Server -- just to name a few.
This is besides the hardware aspect, with the X-box and their new Smartphone. Don't bank on Microsoft just waiting around for a new OS, they have several tricks up their sleeves.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
There was an interesting editorial in eWeek recently, that compared Microsoft to IBM of the early 1980s: IBM was the biggest gorilla and for practical purposes, the only game in town, and used that status to bully its customers into higher prices and ever-more-onerous contracts. This eventually backfired, eroding IBM's marketshare and forcing them to rework their business model. The article opined that M$ is going to suffer the same market erosion as IBM did, for the same reasons, and that M$ will likewise eventually have to find a new marketing model, and become a tolerably good corporate citizen like it or not. It predicted that this would occur in the next 4 to 5 years, which I think is reasonable given the deliberate pace at which enterprise customers consider and deploy infrastructure changes.
From what I've read, M$ is already internally run as an OS division and an apps division, in that they are competing workspaces that really don't speak to one another much. So I doubt that being two separate companies would do much for innovation, especially since each would still have the lion's share of its respective market. Now, if M$ actually had to compete on its own merits again, that would likely do it.
BTW, as a M$ shareholder, my observation is that their strongarm tactics are *damaging* my stock value, and as a shareholder I want them to knock it off and let the market (piracy included as a market force) do its own thing. After all, before Activation reared its ugly head, M$'s non-inflated stock value was peaking around $80, and splitting regularly. Now it's lucky to peak at $40 (and in fact is hovering around $25 and hasn't split in a couple years). Coincidence? I don't think so.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I need to sue SlashDot for all the Hot Coffee I spilt on myself laughing!!!
HenryJamesFeltus.com
The advertising and marketing budget is where Microsoft draws from to offer insanely low prices to anyone they are about to lose to competitors.
Of course, doing that sort of thing as a monopoly is actually illegal. But I don't want to say that too loudly.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
I've been at TechEd2003 this week, and it's interesting to see what parts of the industry Microsoft is trying to get into. From products like Class Server to Sharepoint, Microsoft is trying to broaden itself to get into other markets that are still making money. Simply because they are such a big company, they can do this kind of horizontal innovation because they don't have to put out a good product now, they can wait for the 3rd or 4th version to be good. It makes a lot of sense acutally...
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
Linux and Windows are both great OS's. Linux is great AND Windows is great.
The ongoing MS bashing is the most boring part of SlashDot.
HenryJamesFeltus.com
There was one important point reported by the Wall Street Journal that was left of these other accounts of the memo. Balmer mentioned lowering licensing fees to attract young developers to working with Microsoft tools over Linux.
Certainly one of the factors contributing to the growth of free software is that there is no entry fee for aspiring coders to jump in and start working with a range of free tools available. Thus, MS is not only at risk of loosing end users but also pontential contributors to add to the "value" of their products.
Not everyone's mom has a Linux expert to clean up their messes. Now go let mommy recompile the kernel in order to update her network card drivers by herself. I can't wait to see her reaction to tens of "RTFM Grandma!" responses she gets from the helpful people in #Linux.
They've never had anything that was a breakthrough in any version of windoze. They just copy what they see and 2 years later bring it out to the consumers.
OpenOffice's source code is available, what about writting a slimmed down but format compatible version for 90 MHz 32 MB 2 GB machines?
Any teacher that demands my little girl uses some crappy vendor lock in format like Word, is going to get lots of help from me. I'll bring them over and show them how to be free and make better use of scarce resources.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
When Apple releases OS X Panther, it will give Microsoft a few months of new innovations to work on.
Ordinary Linux folks abandoned Netscape in droves when AOL began to ruin and remove all the cool things that Linux/Unix users loved about this formerly cool product.
AOL's priorty, at the time (late 90's) was:
- Remove LDAP functionality
- Ignore major security issues before RTM
- Focus all efforts on making a cool GUI for shopping.
It's not entirely unlikely that something like this can happen.
Dolemite
__________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
But can Mozilla keep up with this?
The solutions? More adverts and a continued effort of dominate every facet of computing. It's stupid because they can't maintain what the've already got. Though hoplessly outnumbered, they continue to try to take on new projects, X-Box, moble phones, servers, handhelds. Nuts, their greed is their undoing.
It's only going to get worse for them. They have entered the typical downward cycle of a failing company. Their basic model of software development through aquisition and minimal maintenence was never nice but is now dysfuncitonal as fewer people take the bait and develop for M$ platforms. Look for them to become ever less capable of making decisions and more erratic. They will concentrate on silly things like tablet PCs and bet the company multiple times on hardware their software can't support in a competitive way. At some point their declining stock price will trigger panics and layoffs. In the end they will engage in more silly SCO type lawsuits because that's all they will have left.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Key problem with MSFT these days is right here....Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need. Why didn't Balmer say Microsoft will have to do a better job of making new products that customers need. I think people are ready to start rebelling against the whole MSFT, Clear Channel model of devouring competition and forcing their empty products down peoples throats by moving to vastly superior alternatives.
It's going to hurt in the short term, but Microsft's elimination will be better for everyone. Free software answers people's needs more directly and efficently. The difference will be kept by consultants, programers and the compaines being served. All your base is free, get you some!
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Enron, too, was rolling in dough until they got audited. Regarding the mythical $40 billion, although Microsoft reported a profit in 1998, it was later corrected to be a loss of $18 000 000 000 USD. Now that was when times were good and they had product to sell.
If Microsoft were to dry up and blow away, the IT sector would actually pick up. With Deflation/Depression/Recession hanging over the U.S. the last thing needed is economic sabotage caused from trying to keep the dead company afloat at the expense of the rest of the economy.
Time to cash out.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
MS copies everything Apple does, right?
;-)
Looks to me like Longhorn is MS's rerun of copland: trying to do everything while maintaining backward compatibility, with no clear idea of what they need to do.
They'll blow a couple of billion on it, and it will go the way of IBM's 'office vision'.
Of course, Apple had Steve Jobs to turn to when copland tanked. I wonder who MS can call in to clean up the mess? Gil Amelio?
The "enhancements" are dubious and often come before a purchase. No, M$ coders don't sit around playing solitare, but they are instructed to make error messages for competitor's programs. Outside DRM, new widgets for XP and futile ventures into TV, cell phones, and tablet PCs, I'm not sure what M$ has been doing. Only they can tell.
In any case, there's not much out there to buy. M$ so squashed all the software firms that bought into the M$ way, that there have been few dumb enough to follow in their footsteps. As Lotus, Corel and other huge firms failed, VC went to zero and developers exited to free software. They won't buy GPL, what's left to them?
They have borged themseves into so much software they can't keep half of it competitive. IE can not keep up with Mozilla. Word never was as good as Word Perfect and now a slew of superior editors are rising. Their email client is a hopless security nighmare. Their aging GUI is hoplessly outclassed by modern well thought out windowing systems like X. Their kenrel still lacks fundamental archetecture to keep track of running processes and users. Their inability to see various file systems is also a liability. Most of the problems they foist onto their users in a vain attempt to lock them in. Free software is, for that reason, eminsly easier to use and maintain. The differnce between the two systems is so huge now that people are realizing that they not only don't need Microsft, they are better off without them. That's what Steve's complaint is all about. This is just the start of their flailing.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
back in the mid 80's, microsoft made some noise about their software being 'copied', but stated that the copyers were the ones also 'selling' the use of the product to businesses. back then, most businesses would rather pay for the license than face court time.
i do agree that ease of installation, and use is important. for purchasers, its the main selling point. from a purchasers point of view, the easyer install means less problems in the future. i just find it to believe that hardware vendors think they will make more money ONLY selling to windows users. to ignore apple, and linux users makes you more money? doesn't make sense, but i'm not a multi-billionare either.
You can already find P150's in the trash. Soon enough, 400 MHz and better machines will be there. If not, they are available cheaply through coprorate "asset recovery" schemes which do very well.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Here's what the message really said:
"To generate enthusiasm for our company and innovations, we must also communicate more broadly and in a more human and compelling voice. We will increase our advertising budget significantly for all audiences â" developers, IT, information workers, consumers, small business, and business leaders â" becoming one of the largest advertisers in our industry. We will explain our mission to help people realize their potential and discuss the amazing work we and our partners are doing."
Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?
Read this. Longhorn will not be backwards compatible. Windows Server 2003 is not compatible with Windows 2000, so what makes you think they wouldn't further break compatibility? As my employer has found out they are in the continual process of making customers re-write their applications to run on Windows. This continues their revenue stream. Why do customers put up with this? Past investment in Microsoft makes people reluctant to give up. Desktop monopoly is also a major factor.
Developers: We can use your help.
I'm going to sue^H^H^H KILL you, for after reading your puny post; I spilled my Arogant Bastard Ale all over my pants. It's time to kiss the knuckles, silly boy!
Not true -- MSFT split 2 for 1 in February.
That thing didn't read like a wakeup call at all. And it certainly wasn't something Ballmer will regret got leaked. In fact, quite the contrary...
It read very much like a piece of "sure hope this leaks quick" propaganda.
Everything semi-critical of MS, or anything suggesting that "we have work to do", etc...was carefully worded to be pretty light work, while at the same time seeming honest and responsible. People respond well to those thin veils of apparent sincerity.
The real purpose of the note was to press forward with that same old stuff about the lack of accountability behind OpenSource. Tell us again how nobody is responsible for OpenSource. Lacking a commercial interest, OpenSource is a hodge podge of buggy software built by faceless hackers who have no long-term interest and might even care to purposefully endanger your IT system with notions of anarchy!!
Run for the hills!!!
Yep, sounds like the same old stuff. Been reading that stuff for years. Where else did we just read this a few days ago? Oh yeah, Darl McBride's / SCO's comments...
Soon the Gimp will get some little improvement that will have Adobe shouting the same stuff. Maybe they already should.
[These comments best converted to PDF using GhostView]
"Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need" Balmer.
He is absolutely right they will have to do a better job at persuading the not so techie computer users because they know that after using M$ once most people are enlightened and they never use another M$ product.
Boot it from CDROM and use some directory on C: (if present) as storage.
Drop in, set timezone, go. Daddy's pre-installed WinXX remains safe.
You're clearly onto something.
Oh, You'd probably be better off with a version "Linux for Schools (Servers, Proxies, CUPS, and stuff)" AND "Linux for School Kids". Maybe even ones for grades K-6 and 7+.
"As the market for server technologies continues to diversify it is more important than ever that people with MCSE certification expand their knowledge base. Configuring and administering BSD and Linux servers and interoperating with the Microsoft server platform are skills no sef-respecting IT person should be without."
"Although we have a wide base of users now there is no guarantee that our market penetration will continue to expand, especially as more and more trend-setters in the enterprise sector awaken to the advantages of Open Source, Open Standards, and free alternatives to our overdesigned proprietary solutions."
He continued, "It may surprise you to know that at Microsoft we have many departments running Linux, BSD, and other Unix platforms on a day-to-day basis. Many of our programmers contribute to Open Source projects in their personal time. Historically we have discouraged this kind of activity, but we have had a culture shift in Redmond - an "Enlightenment" if you will. We have come to understand that communication between manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, support, and customers is the essential thing, and we can no longer narrowly focus on market dominance for its own sake."
"You may recall the embarassing flap over Open Source in Peru in which a local politician upbraided one of our representatives but good. We were essentially handed our hat on that one. At the time I was upset, Bill was upset; even Stuart Allchin - who normally shows no emotion at all - was clearly bothered by the incident. That politician, a Mister Villanueva, was the David to our Goliath, and it was a wake up call for us. Since then more and more governing bodies - from Germany to Italy to local, municipal, and state governments here in the United States - are mandating Open Source and Open Standards to meet their essential fiduciary responsibilities. We can't ignore the realities, and we have to face facts. Our software is slow to evolve and slow to recover when flaws are found. Security flaws aren't found as often or fixed as quickly as they could be. Open Source has a lot of lessons for our industry."
"We've been asked many times, by a large share of our user base, to open our software's source code and make it available so that they can customize it to their needs or address the flaws I mentioned. Up to now we've been very reserved about this. It goes back as far as Bill's open letter, where he defended his right to make a little money from programming. That was a big step, and in many ways it was the birth of Microsoft. That same ethos has guided our relationship with our partners and developers. Our partners expect to make money on our Windows platform, whether desktop or server, and they have been more than willing to give something back for the privilege. These partnerships are a continuous exchange of knowledge and innovation. Take a look in the back room of any respectable enterprise and you'll find the evidence. Thousands upon thousands of MSDN disks have been provided to developers over the years. Trillions of lines of source code have been provided to document our APIs and frameworks. The evidence can be weighed in tons."
"Where am I going with this? I'm not really sure. The culture of Microsoft has been sick for a long time. The problems we experience are endemic, and too numerous to list. Recent audits uncovered over twenty development projects and five whole departments we didn't even know existed. Obviously the reforms we need are deep. I hope we'll continue this dialogue for the sake of the whole information ecosystem."
"Normally I would take questions at this point, but I've run a little long and I'm late for my dance lesson."
-- thinkyhead software and media
I really think momentum is moving away from microsoft these days, especialy outside of america. Maybe it's just that I read too much slashdot or something.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
MS did not lose $18B, what the report said is that if you deduct the cost of the options that are out there, there's a net loss, but its not GAAP to do that.
So lets not get carried away with ourselves:
"For instance, Microsoft, the worldâ(TM)s most valuable company, declared a profit of $4.5 billion in 1998; when the cost of options awarded that year, plus the change in the value of outstanding options, is deducted, the firm made a loss of $18 billion, according to Smithers."
The markets they're trying to enter taken as a composite are large, but individually, they aren't very big.
Take Sharepoint. The entire market for portals isn't that big, and so while they could make money, they won't. Sharepoint is a *bad* portal. If it was free, you'd use it, but its not, so nobody purposely chooses it.
I think MS is throwing a lot of crap at the wall right now and praying that something sticks... cable, Video games, software...I think their corporate motto right now is "please sweet jesus make something work!"
Customers will buy Longhorn for the same reason they've bought all other Windows systems. It will come on all new PC's, it'll break compatibility with older versions, and eventually, it'll get to be too much of a hassle NOT to upgrade.
So what else is new?
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
The stock of VA Linux (LNUX), Slashdot's corporate parent, rose more than 30% on this news while Transmeta (TMTA) was slightly down. LNUX has nothing to do with Linux development. TMTA employs Linus Torvalds and while they don't own the copyright on Linux or the trademark "Linux" (Torvalds retains them both) they arguably have much more influence on the direction that Linux will take than LNUX does.
/me wonders if there will be a 256-bit kernel for TMTA's soon to be released Astro CPU.
This proves a few things: 1. Daytraders are still out there. 2. When MS talks, day traders listen. 3. Choosing the symbol LNUX was certainly slick marketing.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Why don't you fix the crap you've already shoved down everybodys throat before you try to create new and innovative garbage.
Their initial ideas are sound but with the business model that they've been following since 1995 (release faulty software at an inflated price, make more money on the 'upgrades')the innovations are lost among programming errors and security faults.
It's understandable why M$ is so scared of Open Source. For one thing it's free. Secondly, if you produce faulty software someone else is gonna fix it and improve upon it. No chance for those 'upgrades'. You won't even have time to charge $15 to cover the cost of putting it on a CD.
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
MS's prices are higher compared to what? Linux? Yeah, can't beat zero. Oracle? Sun? Guess what, the MS solution is cheaper...
Re sig:
Aiko deshou! (sp)
A history of paper-rock-scissors? Might I ask just one question...why? *g*
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
From the article: Also, following its recent commitment to delaying software releases until it has ironed out all the bugs â" a marked departure from the companyâ(TM)s earlier practice â" Microsoft seems more than prepared to wait.
//=0 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.substr(navigator.a ppVersion.indexOf("MSIE ")+5))>=4 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSN "))==-1) {document.write(' \n');document.write('on error resume next \n');document.write('g_bShowFlash = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFla sh.4")))\n');document.write('');} if(g_bShowFlash == true){if(!g_OTPhasCookie('OTPFRQ')){var expiredate=new Date();expiredate.setHours(expiredate.getHours()+2 4);document.cookie="OTPFRQ=1; path=/; expires="+expiredate.toGMTString();if(g_OTPhasCook ie('OTPFRQ')){document.write('');}}} //]]>
But, what was at the bottom of the ASP page?
For MS, whenever something stops getting advertised regularly, it means that it, really, has failed. This applies to .NET as they USED to put many ads in magazines like Newsweek and spread them all over the internet, proclaiming brazen slogans like "1 degree of seperation between you and your customers", when they don't really say WHAT .NET even is.
.NET advertisements in circulation. Now, they're advertising things like "empower" and all sorts of other overhyped stuff. For MS, .NET was a failure, not because it wasn't useful, as in your case, I can clearly see that it was, but because it was not as profitable as hoped.
If you go around now, and look around, there are many less, if any,
Apple isn't mentioned because most people in IT have figured out Apple is content to stay in their botique niche collecting obscene margins on low volume from a cult like fan base. And considering they are making a healthy profit at it it is hard to argue with the merits of the strategy.
Consider the arguments in favor:
Customer support is expensive; raking in a lot of money from a few customers sure beats the PC vendor model of hoping a customer doesn't call support because one call can eat up the entire margin from the sale of a lowend machine.
As a practical matter, growing marketshare beyond a couple of points is impossible without licensing other OEMs. OS licensing isn't nearly as profitable as selling hardware+OS until you reach M$ market share levels, and Apple has zero chance of taking out Microsoft since M$ can kill Apple anytime it pleases by removing MacOffice.
So Apple contents itself being Microsoft's official 'token competition' and laughs all the way to the bank. Sure Steve will never be as rich as Bill in this situation, but he makes plenty of dough. But neither of them counted on the Penguin to come along and snuff both of them, and it will be both since they have evolved a unhealthy symbiosis and probably can't survive alone.
Microsoft can't invent so they need Apple, Apple needs M$ to be better than to maintain the loyalty of their user cult. Just wouldn't be the same to have M$ stealing ideas from Linux and Apple won't be able to keep the zealots whipped into a frenzy of haughty condescension and hatred of Linux users.
Democrat delenda est
In the past three months I've sold exactly one machine with linux on it that I expected the user to keep and use linux. All the rest people reformat and install a cracked corporate edition on.
For linux to reach the non-technical public, it needs to be so easy to use that anyone can. Most people are baffled by a new version of windows, let alone a new operating system entirely.
Got Apathy?
I agree about the ease of use argument, though. Until Linux becomes easier to install and use, it's not going to be as popular as Windows.
Don't you mean Until you can buy a box with Linux installed , it's not going to be as popular as Windows.
Microsoft punished Dell severely when they tried it.
Brought this one on yourself, you did. ;)
-T
It was very thoughtful of Ballmer to wait until after he dumped all those shares to send the memo!
I know that the moderators of this board are also Open Source advocates, so I am sure to get negative Karma for this. The replys to this thread are absolutely hilarious. What you remind me of is Iran in 1979. The Islamic fundamentalists running around yelling "Death to America!", and they had (and still don't have) the ability to do anything about it. Everyone here is running around yelling "Death to Microsoft!" Thanks for the humor. Using the picture of Bill Gates as a borg just shows the maturity level of all the zealots here. To quote William Shatner.. "Get a Life!!!!"
The average non-technical computer user can't switch to linux if his/her "AOL doesn't work on it". Most ISPs that have their own software can be connected to via PPP, but most end users still want that pretty client software. Good luck.
"To generate enthusiasm for our company and innovations, we must also communicate more broadly and in a more human and compelling voice. We will increase our advertising budget significantly for all audiences â" developers, IT, information workers, consumers, small business, and business leaders â" becoming one of the largest advertisers in our industry. We will explain our mission to help people realize their potential and discuss the amazing work we and our partners are doing."
The only misquoted part is they did not put "our" in brackets. I'm sure they story was approved by Ballsack anyway, it came from MSNBC. Do you really think MSNBC is going to run a story about MS without it being approved first?
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
6) Palladium - next big thing...
More rather the next *huge* change. People hate huge changes, especially if it fucks up how they love to do things everyday on their computer.
Palladium could be a huge hit(amongst M$ and the middlemen/third part "goons") or it could be a BIG failure. I anticipate it would be the latter, and sudden big changes don't make people happy.
If anyone is considering of joining the OS business, it should be NOW and pounce on M$ when their Palladium business model fails.
Hell, every behemoth(sp?) died when trying to due some so wacky and stupid that no one liked it(i.e. The car Homer Simpson designed for this brother).
Kashif
Why do customers put up with this? Past investment in Microsoft makes people reluctant to give up.
;-)
I think this falls into the "fool me once, shame on you..." category.
Windows has no advantage over Linux except for the limitation which it places on it's users.
And the fact that I don't need seven different text readers to read a doc (ex. Latex, Ghostscript, etc.).
I have used other products and Unix gurus love to invent and standardize text readers and other 'one-off' crap I shouldn't have to install.
There's even a article today about yet a new reader standardization. Ye Gods! When will this lameness end!
It's amazing how comments like drix's seem to forget that AOL single handedly killed Netscape's foothold in the marketplace in the 90's.
Furthermore, wasn't Netscape bundled with all Unix flavors before the AOL flub?
Out with LDAP support and security features and in with the slick GUI!
Shop, shop, shop!
Don't blame MS for AOL's mistakes.
Dolemite
___________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
The only people who *want* palladium aren't consumers. There's no benefit for consumers, and a very large downside. .NET is already a collosal failure; palladium will be the iceberg to MS's titanic.
In fact you can install various GUI systems on one machine if you want, giving users the choice of which one to use.
I think this is the key to the evolution of the desktop. The file formats will change to standard formats and then the proprietary enhancements will be "viewable" with the appropriate GUI. The appplication itself will become synonymous with providing the appropriate GUI to "view" the data with the application's paradigm.
The GUI then will be based on the "programming" that can be done to the "data in the standard formats." The XML-framework is the best candidate for transferring the user from the view of one application to the view provided by another application. Thus, the user will really be navigating from one view to another view (with the ultimate being where 2 applications can provide contradictory views of the same data without being inconsistent) using either a top-down (hierarchical etc) or bottom-up view.
Microsoft has a good shot at getting to this first because the fundamental design of Windows (from GUI standpoint) has all the requisite tools to allow this). Microsoft has moved away from this direction as it evolved to Win XP - but from what I have read about Longhorn, I think they are coming back to right direction.
The conceptual elements of Longhorn, I am sure will be released and tested much before the LongHorn CD comes out - for what is really important is what is the power of GUI in allowing the tranformation of the data to information to knowledge.
By releasing Longhorn - Microsoft will then move over to even dominate the "standard formats", in addition to the GUI paradigms which it would have tested earlier.
In essence, I believe, Microsoft is best placed to capitalize the combination of an XML framework, and a GUI method of describing the transformation, to allow the common man Intuitive Graphics Based XML Programming (IGBXP) - just coooked up this acronym in the last 30 seconds.
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
The problem with SlashDot is a lack of objectivity. A large number of people here seem to want to see Microsoft fall, and interpret any news about Microsoft as evidence of MS's impending doom or as proof of their evil ways. Umm, gee, guys -- take a reality pill, will ya? Some things MS does might be stupid and unethical, but for the most part, it acts just like any other big business. And just like any other business, it wins some and loses some.
In this case, Steve's message is simple: we just shipped Windows Server 2003, and our next big Windows release isn't for several more years. Until then, we still have to make money, and we have to improve our image. Lets do it in every way possible: fix our bugs, fix application inconsistencies, fix marketing and licensing problems, and work hard to advertise our advantages over our competition.
So a question to all those doomsayers: what is wrong with that statement? All companies have up and down times. Microsoft has just come off of two years of lotsa releases (a lot of projects got finished and released at about the same time), and now they're going to hit a few years with no major releases. Steve is charting the strategy for that span of time to make sure that during this time the company is productive.
Two additional points that I wanted to mention after reading a lot of other posts: Microsoft's "innovation" and Microsoft's "doom".
First, there is a continual accusation that Microsoft doesn't innovate, that everything done by Microsoft was done by somebody else first. To the extent that this is true, it is also true of everybody else in the industry: few software companies can actually claim to have invented the program genre that they produce. On the other hand, coming up with a good idea isn't everything -- creating a good implementation of the idea and getting it on the market is a lot of work, too, and Microsoft has done plenty of that. In addition, whatever anybody else says, Linux and related technologies are doing a heck of a lot of catch-up with Microsoft, simply implementing stuff that Windows has had from the beginning. Kernel-mode threading? Windows NT 3.1 had it, as did Windows 95. Fully re-entrant kernel? Windows NT 3.1 had it. Standard printing system? Windows 3.0 (perhaps before, I don't know). Kernel modules, loadable drivers, etc. -- NT has it. It also has COM (messy, but it works) which offers great support for component sharing and interoperability (Gnome is starting to pick up some similar stuff, and CORBA has some similar functionality, but none are heavily integrated into and supported by the OS). A developer can write an application that uses a GUI, threads, fonts, COM, etc. without having to worry about widget sets and without the user having to run "configure" to adapt the program at the source level to whatever stuff is available on the system. Sure, the sharing goes both ways, but don't knock Windows as an OS -- it has a lot of useful stuff under the hood that is still lacking in Linux and even BSD.
Now granted, not all of that stuff is necessary for every user. There is no reason to have all of that running for, say, a static web server or a database. I run my home firewall on FreeBSD, not Windows. This is forcing Microsoft to focus on more advanced features and to provide additional features and functionality for the more complicated scenarios where the extra capabilities of Windows give it an advantage -- ASP.Net, SQL Server 64-bit edition, Remote Desktop for managing the servers, etc. For application servers, complex database apps, desktops, etc., Windows still has functionality that people want that is missing from Linux. Linux will continue to create pressure for Windows to innovate as it picks up on these features, and I think that is a very good thing -- it forces Microsoft to focus on core areas that it might otherwise have ignored (reliability, security, etc.). But at this point, Windows is still way ahead on many features that are very important to me.
So Micro
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
MS will remain mighty and powerful, with it's users as it's licensing mercy until two things happen:
- An Office-style software suite alternative emerges that is FULLY compatible with MS Office. (Note: I've tried Open-office, it's not quite there yet, but it's looking promising). Until
there is FULL compatibility, those darn Word, Excel, and Access files which dictate business
standards, will force MS software.
- That alternative platform is easy to install,
run, and configure for the average Joe. (No, Linux is not easy for the "average Joe").
Until we see these two things my MS stock is very safe.
...and it runs Red Hat 7.3 well enough. I won't even try any Windows version above 98 SE (which works, but I never use it). It even runs X, albiet veeerrryyy sloooowwwly. Try getting a webserver to run on Windows 98. It doesn't have the network capability. I'm not going to post the link though, it might get /.ed. ;)
I'm a C++ programmer. The new Visual Studio.Net and Platform API licensing have forbidden me from linking in any open source libraries, which I use extensively in all my programs. I could keep using Visual C++ 6.0, but that's going to be totally obsolete sooner or later... (Not that I want to use VS.net: the MS marketing folks ruined the nice VC 6.0 IDE!)
You know, I didn't understand all the linux advocacy until something Microsoft did actually affected me. Now they are forcing me to consider alternatives. Being shut out like that is serious and not a laughing matter. I guess they must not have wanted me to be one of their developers. ;(
Ballmer seems like a spaz to me. If he and Microsoft weren't so desperately greedy, I would have just kept on using their products. Now, Microsoft has incovenienced me, which is quite possibly the worst thing they could have done (meaning, no lawyer can sue me to get back lost business.)
You are thinking like a rational engineer. Unfortunately, many purchasing decisions are not made by logic alone. Advertising and marketing (and SCO lawsuites) play important factors when making purchasing decisions.
Nor should you forget that the cost of switching to linux is still large when the user retraining and more importantly their downtime during this period is factored into the equation.
Additionally, competing on price is a sure road to failure. M$ by jacking up its price leaves the purchaser with the sense that if this product costs twice as much as another it *must* be because it is twice as good, why else would anyone buy it? If you don't buy into that argument you'll at least realize that if M$ attempts to compete on price with Linux they'll loose.
On the flipside M$ is stating that they are going to compete against Linux where Linux can't win -- advertising.
Linux is winning and Bill Gates might want to cash out while he can ...
> --- All Of The Above --- >
Sorry, pad'res, but no-big-fan of *nixers myself I've had the opp to recently install/configure both WinME & RedFat_8 in a LAN environment. No comparison actually ... RedFatty beat-the-pants off my fav WinME for installation ease -- castrated mm excepted. Course, RedFatty promptly X-ed me-the-buyer out of its upgrade program, while M$lime keeps those newbytes free-&-flowing. For paying customers, who's got the deathwish, pad'res? WTF
"Improve consistancy" is an oxymoron, when you improve it, you change it, and when it's changed it's not consistant. No wonder MS is dying. Balmer is an idiot
What about their SQL based file system?
1) Putting license key schemes in place on their OS's, this will get a marginal revenue increase by eliminating the bulk of casual piracy for the OS
That's a brilliant idea! Maybe they should require, I don't know, a 25-digit alphanumeric code. They could include it on the back of the CD case. That would *completely* get rid of piracy!
Even better, if they wanted to be *absolutely certain* it was impossible to pirate software, they could have their operating system connect over the Internet to a central server for authorization. They could use some sort of a hash of the hardware to make sure it was the same computer.
Yes, I think it's a pretty sure thing that those two ideas together would squash piracy once and for all. You should suggest them to Microsoft. They'd probably hire you on the spot.
Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
No, there is definately stuff left to steal. I wish windows would steal the multiple desktop concept which I believe originated with HP Openview. I am getting to the point where I loathe working on my windows box because there are windows stacked on top of windows. It's impossible to organize my windows desktop when doing work. Under Linux/KDE I can create multiple workspaces and keep everything nice and separate.
:)
I know I could add a second video card and monitor and have done that in the past only to have it screw me up when using Direct X applications. So do you hear that Ballmer, steal the UNIX desktop already!!!!
Also, you could add tab browsing to IE just like in Mozilla. That cuts down on desktop clutter as well.
If you need more ideas of stuff to steal, let me know. There is still lots of good stuff out there to steal and of course there are always things to be innovated. If I had M$'s money I'd open a cross between Bell labs and the MIT Media Lab and put an delusional genius in charge. The unfortunate thing is that most delusional geniuses hate large corps like M$. It's so sad that our time holds so much promise for innovation and that those with the most resources aren't pulling us forward. At least the DOW is up today
I still think the ultimate gift to geek kind would be for Bill Gates to personally license all the ROM's that work with MAME (Multi Machine Arcade Emulator) and release a polished version of X-Box MAME, Image the entire history of the coin-op arcade on a single DVD playable on the XBOX in 2003. I wonder if the kids today would play MS. PAC MAN if they had the option.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that -- probably because after it split it stayed at the split price and shows no sign of climbing any time soon. Previous splits have been followed by a rapid climb back to the pre-split price.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
You people are so far off in Linux-land, you really don't have a clue. Do you. Jobs is slowly. methodically, beautifully putting into place every piece of the future. I've nothing against Linux--but do have any idea how not on even on the screen (no pun intended) Linux is for normal people? Consumers? Have you not seen that kids want nothing but an iBook, OS X and wireless? The Digital Hub in not some cute little marketing device-it's the seamless kind of computing and data exhange we are all going to expect, and very, very soon.
.is what I'm going to do.
Look, I'm as creatively alienated as anyone--and kinda geeky--but I'm also a writer who appreciates tools that work. That are a pleasure to use.
There are incredibly significant issues emblematic in the Microsoft / non-Microsoft divide. We know who the good guys are, and it's going to be train wreck-interesting, watching Microsoft code crumble under its own weight.
Nonetheless, when you diss Mac, you betray a certain ignorance of, like, the rest of us? The future rest of us?
If I see Mac users referred to as a cult one more time, I'm, I'm. . . I'm gonna slash some dots around here. .
So shape up.
Zo
hum... audiocd:/ so how is this easier that double clicking your CD drive and having a media player play the music?
smb://
uh IE has this to \\nearestdozebox\c
Media player doesn't CDDB, rip and encode it for you in a choice of formats. Nor can you drag and drop individual tracks as cdda, WAV, MP3 or Ogg file.
I notice you were silent on fish:// - perhaps you want some more protocols to try? How about rlogin:/host.name.here or rdate:/time.uwa.edu.au ? print:/ or print:/manager take your fancy? No? Try man: and catch you jaw. imap://username@mail.host.name/ and manage your email folders?
The list goes on. Sufficient to say that IE's lunch has been well and truly eaten. (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Okay, Ballmer is telling the employees that they have to work harder to convince the world that Microsoft products are a good deal. But I am amazed that nobody seems to be wondering how they plan to do this? For example, how does Microsoft plan to get users to buy Longhorn? They've stated very clearly that there will be no backward compatibility. Customers will have to buy all new Palladium-equipped hardware. That's fine for people who always want the newest thing, but right now in the US alone there are 40 million people still running Win98. Microsoft must be counting on something to motivate or compel these customers, who haven't seen fit to upgrade to NT, Millenium or XP over the years. Surely they are't suddenly realizing just now that this might be a problem. Are they?
...unexpected - and unwanted - changes You mean like the return of Microsoft Bob?
You get to wonder if Ballmer didn't buy some RedHat stock with those billions that received from dumping Microsoft: His memo sent RedHat stock soaring by almost 10 percent. What's this called, "outsider trading"?
A "Free" OS will also never make things like audio production "Free." Anyone really interested in computer audio production will have to spend tons of cash on hardware, regardless of platform. And if you're going for a Pro-Tools or equivalent setup, the $3k you spend on that top-o-the-line Mac is peanuts compared to EVERYTHING else.
I tried the linux turn-key solution from Eastman and found jackit to be a bear for my novice experience. Everything seemed like it should work, but in theory and all that. Ecasound is definitely a cool idea, but c'mon. Too many technical details that have nothing to do with music production.
Not to mention that ANY free plugin will never sound anywhere near as good as a WAVES plugin.
He painted a unicorn in outer space. I'm askin' ya, what's it breathin'?
I agree, and although I want to see Linux succeed, I still think some of our geek brethren are too far off in Linux land. The lure of the Mac is that it works, and does so beautifully. It's BSD so it has a Unix command line for übergeeks, and a great GUI interface for non-geek folks. The only drawback is that is too damned expensive for most people (I can't afford one, yet). I've been a long time windows hater that has switched to Linux three times, tried my best, and switched back to windows. Why? because it just wasn't (still isn't) ready for the desktop, however it is steadily improving with time. I enjoyed using several distributions of Linux but just got fed up with the ugly fonts and lack of hardware support. I've never got a printer or a wireless nic to work correctly under Linux (even after compiling my own drivers). I know these things will be corrected with time, but the Mac has them corrected now, and thatâ(TM)s why I've resolved to dump my Wintel box in the near future. Since, I have indeed been a windows user, I'm sick of tinkering with the machine trying to fix all the damned problems and, software issues aside, Iâ(TM)m also disgusted with Microsoftâ(TM)s corporate greed. I really hope its behavior (contempt for its customers and the industry) will cause it to crumble like a Greek temple in an earthquake. So, to all those Linux people out there, I wouldn't knock Apple too much, at least its a computer company that's friendly to computing culture.
If you want a faster version, get the code and compile with the array bounds checking and other expensive traps turned off. It will run on your P90, and if you turn off all the "here, let me type this for you" cruft, it runs faster still.
Compile with bounds checking and other expensive traps off, and then run like the wind on your P90.
If OpenOffice is too slow for you, then compile it yourself without bounds checking and other expensive trappings.
First of all, OpenOffice does not compile on my machine. I get screenfuls of compile errors and it stops. Sure, real programmers debug everything, but did you look at that ugly code? The directory tree goes a dozen levels deep, there is no obvious logical separation of components, and heaven forbid you ever try to figure out where some data structure is defined. Report it as a bug? Ppplease... They'll just mark it off as non-reproducible (after all, I assume it compiles fine on their machines.), blame my compiler or tell me I'm not setting some environment variable right (something like the latter is probably the case). In a cleaner project it might be worth debugging some and sending a patch, since you can understand the code; OpenOffice code is beyond understanding. And when a regular user wants to install a package like this they would not even try compiling it themselves just for such reasons.
Anyone remember this?
.NET? Nowhere to be seen.
.NET is perceived as inmature and of course has the little disadvantage of being a WIndows only tool (unless you know a good way to use it under Solaris and Linux).
It may be the fines we are paying don't leave much for dEvelopment (fucking traders) but the reality is that
n/m
There is no force on earth that could convince the bulk of Windows users to install a browser other than IE, because IE works pretty darn well, and it is preinstalled. Therefore commercial web developers will never stop developing with IE foremost in mind. The best we can hope for is cross-browser compatible design. Nobody is going to switch away from IE in large numbers. It's a chicken-egg thing.
RealCommentary from TheStreet.com
Microsoft's Split Raises Eyebrows
Friday January 17, 2:52 pm ET
By James J. Cramer,
It's hard to find consensus about anything involving this Microsoft (NasdaqNM:MSFT - News) quarter, except one detail: Why the heck did they split the stock?
That's right, when you ask the purists and the critics and the spectators why they did it, they all say the same thing: to gussy up a blah quarter.
So I doubt that being two separate companies would do much for innovation, especially since each would still have the lion's share of its respective market.
If Microsoft were split up like that, there's a freakish-sounding scenario that actually becomes highly probable:
The application-half will try to get back into the OS market as quickly as possible, and will soon release a "Microsoft Office" CD that optionally installs a bootable image to your hard drive. How will they leapfrog over the year of time it takes to write a reliable OS? Build it on Linux, of course!
This is reasonable, because if the companies are truely split up, then they'll have no reason not to undermine the other's monopoly position. The backstabbing will be relentless. And with Linux out there, an OS is much closer to a free commodity than Office Suites are (since OpenOffice is still a marginal competitor). So it will be the Office half, not the Windows half, that will be victorious.
Unless the application-half were prohibited from being in the OS business in any form whatsoever, I think that's a possible scenario -- except I think what would happen is that they'd license the most basic Windows boot and runtime modules from the OS-half.
:(
The part of Windows actually needed to boot and to run apps is pretty minimal, and the cost to license it would probably be much less than the cost to get a linux-based OS working 100% correct. Not only that, but you can bet they'd not want to have to "give back" the source for a perfected linux-runs-M$Office boot image.
And then we'd be right back where we are, if not worse. But more likely, they'd simply agree to each have their own monopoly, and the backroom deals to maintain this new dual monopoly would be relentless.
So I think the upshow is that instead of having two competing companies, we'd have two separate monopolies, with the most amazing mutual backscratching arrangements. I don't see how this is progress.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
"gussy up"? define!