Linux the Tortoise to Microsoft's Hare?

LukePieStalker writes "TheStreet.com is running a story by Ronna Abramson that makes a case for Linux cutting into Microsoft's server business and forcing Redmond to trim margins. A particular vulnerability is seen in overseas markets, but the heat should be turned up everywhere once Unix replacements are pretty far along by then end of next year. A quote from one CTO: [Linux is] "going to force Microsoft to spend more time on security and stability, and less time on adding new features.""

Comments

Er, I think the point is ...

[Dlugar]

"Slow and steady wins the race"?

Sheesh. Don't people read Aesop any more?

Dlugar

The real battle in the overseas market

[andy1307]

Is going to be over "open" office suites. Most companies go with windows because their worker driods are accustomed to Ms Word, MS Excel and Ms Outlook. If we can keep the new emerging markets from being addicted to MS office productivity suites, that will be a big boost for open source.

This is a good start

Haryana(State in India) signs pact with Sun Microsystems
The Haryana government has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Sun Microsystems to adopt open source office productivity tool, the StarOffice 7, for departments and educational institutions.

Linux may carve out bigger niche in desktop PC market
On Feb. 4, it announced the sale of 10,000 copies of its StarOffice desktop suite to United India Insurance, one of India's largest insurers. StarOffice can run on Windows or Linux desktop PCs. Sun aims next to persuade United India to replace 10,000 Windows PCs with Linux-based Java Desktop PCs.

Did Anyone Catch MS Admission to Paid Studies?

[TheWanderingHermit]

I thought this paragraph was most telling, the 1st one on the last page:

Taylor also said the company is countering Linux's unbeatable price tag by commissioning studies that show the total cost of ownership over the life of the software is higher with Linux than Windows.

Taylor is Martin Taylor, Microsoft's general manager of platform strategy.

Basically, they are admitting to paying for studies that show the results they want.

I'd love a direct quotation of his answer -- it'd be a great rebuttal when MS publishes another "Windows costs less" study.

Re:Linux will beat Windows in the security battle.

[Ryan Amos]

This is a common misconception. Linux is more secure than Windows because it's a lot easier to micromanage your system. But it also places a lot more of the responsibility for security on the administrator's head, which means if you have a Linux admin who doesn't know how to properly secure a box *and maintain that security*, it'll probably be more insecure than a Windows machine. Most hacks for Windows aren't widely exploited until after a patch is released anyway, whereas on Linux it's often in reverse (though the patches are usually available within hours.) Linux just better allows you to micromanage things than Windows, which can either be a good or a bad thing depending on the skill of the admin.

Re:Look, I LOVE my Mandrake BUT...

[Thanatopsis]

Clearly you have never run a larger scale software project. I would love LOVE MS to do that. Why? Because that project would be one enormous sink hole of MS resources and focus. You cannot throw 20,000 engineers at something and have it work. Read the Mythical Man Month for a great example of how throwing more resources at a project can cause it to run off track. . Keep in mind that would represent roughly 1/3 of MS's workforce. MS already has a server OS, it's called Windows XP. MS wants to have a single OS so that they don't have to support the multiple OSes they do now.