Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Chief Linux Strategist Interviewed
sl0wp0is0n writes "Computerworld has published an interview with Microsoft's chief Linux strategist, Martin Taylor. It's interesting to find out that Microsoft thinks and predicts Novell (SuSE) will be the dominant Linux distribution they'll have to compete against. The interview also has Taylor talking about indemnification, IBM and his realization that customers generally adopt Linux to get a better TCO than Unix, not Windows."
He is basically saying that different companies are using different kernel versions, and changing/tailoring the kernel to meet their individual needs.
Oh, there's no regression testing.
1. Not always true.
2. Admins don't (and shouldn't) rely on Microsoft's or anybody else's regression and breakage testing anyway.
I just setup a linux file server for my business. If I bought a windows server with enough licenses for the computers in my store, it would cost me $3000. Linux on the other hand cost me $0.
Now if a person who needed a server like this didn't know anything about linux, I'm sure he could hire someone for less than $3000 to set it up for him. $100 to hire someone for an hour would be reasonable.
I just thought I'd throw in that example...
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
Novell own SuSE.
Novell owns SUSE, they bought them out a little while ago.
ummmm....Novell owns Suse.
It is a good solid distro using KDE as the default desktop environment. It has one feature that IMHO puts it at the head of the list for non-geek use, YaST. It makes maintenance a lot easier than the standard LINUX methods. Since YaSY is now GPL, maybe we will see other distros adopt it. Now if only SuSE would adopt apt-get from Debian. I hate resolving dependecies..... Luckily it doesn't occur very often.
apt-get isn't the only thing that resolves dependencies. urpmi in Mandrake Linux does, as well as emerge in Gentoo. In my experience, both tools have done a good job at automatically finding and installing dependancies, even searching multiple mirrors for them. Besides, isn't apt-get ported (or being ported) to other distros? I seem to remember being able to install some version of apt in mandrake, or was it red hat? I have nothing against Debian (never having used it myself) but I seem to find a lot of people bragging about Debian because it has apt-get.
Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
Okay, let's look at the XP license:
That's really backing up your software guys.
Is that the purpose behind the Linux Standards Base?
[quote]My company is trying to migrate to linux to get away from the nightmare that is windows security. we have the best firewalls you can buy and buy all the software scanners we can yet spyware sneaks into the machines because of the gigantic security holes that windows 2000 and XP has in them. none of this crud should get installed, yet it does, it bypasses the security settings and wiggles in there because of the flaws in IE and outook and Word.[/quote]
I think you should be educating your users on things not to do. At home, I have the cheapest firewalls I can buy and buy none of the software scanners and I have had zero problems with my home network. Our work network has better (higher cost) firewalls and some machines that tend to have to be exposed to the world have scanners on them. Spyware and other crud doesn't get installed because the users here know and understand how these things are spread and don't do those things. Both my home network and our work network are heterogenous (contains both Windows and Linux boxes).
[quote]we Had a Regional VP visit here during the last virus outbreak and he saw that the research department was working away without being bothered while we had to run around and fix machines because the patches and fixes would not reliably push out to the windows machines. He asked why, and the response from one of the IT guys was, "Oh, they run linux and are immune to all this."[/quote]
Obviously phrased so that it implies that linux is immune to all virii, spyware, and other exploits. I can show you my past patch logs for Mandrake and SuSE 9.1 that prove your IT guys wrong. Your IT guys are simply allowing their emotional stances to cloud their professional advice, which is not a good thing at all. In general, when someone turns zealot and gets OS religion, he will tend to ignore things that he should be paying attention to, and would have been if he were more platform agnostic. This makes him a poor person for the job.
A stack is a vertically integrated solution. For example, it can be a combination of OS, network severs, application servers and management tools all provided in one package by a single vendor. Ideally, all of the components of the stack have been pre-tested to work together smoothly.
Do you have any lined up for the future? They're going to continue to be around the scenarios that customers say are important -- TCO, security and reliability.
So, when Windows "wins" any one of these, we know the research is pure bullshit.
I love the talk about indemnification, too. People are worried that they won't be indemnified, so they'll run to Microsoft. Brilliant. Is that the same Microsoft as here? Surely it's another Microsoft we're talking about...
For those who don't want to click:
Do you have ESP?