Slashdot Mirror
Linus On The Future Of Microsoft
An anonymous reader writes "There's a pretty good interview with Linus over at Good Morning Silicon Valley. The discussion seems focused predominantly on the future of proprietary software and what the tech landscape might look like if Microsoft's market share declines. 'Says Linus: I do not believe that anything can "replace" Microsoft in the market that MS is right now. Instead, what I think happens is that markets mature, and as they mature and become commoditized, the kind of dominant player like MS just doesn't happen any more. You don't have another dominant player coming in and taking its place -- to find a new dominant player you actually have to start looking at a totally different market altogether.'"
Easy - take a long hard look at IBM.
So it's no wonder that Microsoft is one of the very few players who really don't seem to like open source.
Define "like open source". Do you think IBM or Sun "likes" about open source? Sure, they open source their products, but they're not doing so because it's a good development model or will produce better code. They're doing it for marketing and I guess it is working -- Seems to have Linus fooled.
Also, lest we forget Microsoft has open source'd code too.
Free of Flash! Free of Flash!
He wants his story back.
Was born 15 years earlier...
I'm not so sure about that. Think about foreign automobile makers and GM in today's world. GM is arguably a behemoth, and that in itself can be what drives a monopoly out of power. Even though this market is arguably very mature, market share can change fairly rapidly with innovation. Once you conquer enough of the market share, you will have a hard time keeping up with innovation in all the corners that could propel your rival to be serious competition someday.
Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. -Thomas Cardinal Wolsey
Therefore, while I would like to believe that what Linus says is true, I sincerely doubt it will happen, at least not in the forseeable future.
Many Bothans died to bring you this sig.
OMG .. Im gonna faint !!! Hail our Kernel-writing overlord !!
the kind of dominant player like MS just doesn't happen any more.
Tell that to Google.
Slashdot should put these stories in a dedicated section like they do with Linux, and Apple.
Oh, and they should get rid of the Gates borg icon. It was never funny, and it just looks so lame and childish. How come no other topic beside Microsoft gets that kind of immature treatment?
How does he remain a hero of fanboys and flamebaiters?
As long as Microsoft has the money to throw at new projects, it will be a VERY long time before it looses any significant market share. All the new and inovative technologies coming out to compete with Microsoft, are either later copied by them, or bought out by them. And when 95+% already uses MS and doesn't care about alternatives, they'll stick with them when it comes to new technologies.
"A war over religion is like fighting over who has the best imaginary friend."
Linus is basing what he thinks will happen on his experience of past monopolies. How many of these have there been? Really? Maybe 10, 20? Nowhere near enough to start predicting the future on. We have had four and a half billion years of weather, and we still can't get that right, and god knows, big business is nearly as complex. The other problem, of course, is microsoft is learning every day how to protect itself from those other companies fates.
A company that could replace Microsoft may not come directly from the computer industry. It could very well be Wal-Mart putting a squeeze on their inventory software that they decide own the entire the computer industry to get better effeciency out of their software.
Then again, it could always be a humble Chinese vegetable seller bent on world domination one cabbage at a time.
Here's the way I see it.
I understand completely why consumers, especially us, want there to be OS choice and
OS competition for everyone. Having three or four major OS's that end user every-day
Joes would use sounds like a Utopia. In fact, if I had it my way, there would be Windows,
Mac OS X, a revolutionary easy to use, yet powerful, Linux (shh.), and another free OS.
However, since most consumers don't know very much about computers, they're not going to
understand that their software doesn't work between OS's without hard-to-use (for them)
emulation software. With all of those choices, people are going to stick with the name
and software package they trust. Windows is going to win no matter what, unless Microsoft
goes the way of the dodo. The vast majority cannot handle the confusion and differences
between OS's, and they don't want to understand it. Even if somehow all the OS's could
use each other's software natively, then what would be the point in having more than one?
I hate to see one operating system dominate the market just as much as you guys do, but
there will always only be one primary operating system for (at least) the consumer market.
Whether it's always going to be Windows, I cannot say. I just know that people are happy
with standards, and they don't want to have to screw with migrating to something new, even
if they know it could be better for them.
nothing.can.stop.me.now
a market based upon supporting "Abstraction Physics" and "automated - code generation to execution".
Steps in this direction can be seen with MS's "Software Factories ideology" though its of course biased to feed MS more than being genuine about Abstraction Physics. And there is Apples "Automator" and plenty of other "code generation" and "automation" efforts all leading to the same "different then now" market.
This is relative to the "Software Patents battle ground"
Consider that the average user is willfully clueless with their machines and software. Consider just how much. Now imagine AOL throwing their resources at a tight, polished, bootable AOL-ified Linux which they push on all those CDs.
Linux will continue to move places in the techie arena like with workstations and servers. End users who can't grok Windows? No, not until it gets polished.
So from that perspective, Linus is right that Microsoft isn't just going away. Are they going to continue to have share eaten in serverspace? Yes. Not going away though.
Overall very good replies by Linus, one billionth the level of intensity of the zealots who squak the most in the Linux world which is reassuring. I do think he's wrong that there won't be future Microsofts. There's plenty of innovations in tech to be made that one really lucky company may corner the market through sheer chance and idiocy of their competitors. Microsoft won where Apple, IBM, SCO, Oracle, Netscape, and Sun failed to take them down in various areas despite throwing massive energy into it. It could happen again.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
You misspelled *Is*.
Take a look at the Roman Empire. When they became a "monopoly", their morals lowered and they became disorganised.
It was just a matter of time before the barbarians took over. Wait a minute... shouldn't the virus writers be considered barbarians? Deja vu...
It seems everyone I've talked to in the last 6 months is using FireFox. Plus everyone I tell FireFox about thanks me later. Everyone loves the tab feature and the "natural" defense against spyware. Anyhow... sure it's just a browser.
--- Strange but true facts. I can't cook
...People look to Microsoft for brand name recognition and "trust." (I hear you laughing, but think like a consumer, not like a tech person.)
People still don't know "Linux" even if they have seen the IBM ads. So there's not a lot of established consumer trust. That will have to come from company trust really... and let's be honest, we're still quite a way from that at the moment. (I don't deny the progress but I can't ignore the distance to the destination either.)
When people realize that the OS and the Software as the means of operating on data instead of as "the thing" then we'll start to see an appreciation that software can be a commodity especially when they see that by divorcing Microsoft, their business data becomes free to be used by ANY software and not just Microsoft's. We've got a long way to go before that happens.
Still, I like the language Torvalds is speaking on this matter...
It seems everyone I've talked to in the last 6 months is using FireFox. Plus everyone I tell FireFox about thanks me later. Everyone loves the tab feature and the "natural" defense against spyware. Anyhow... sure it's just a browser.
Now, if I were Bill Gates, and there's no truth to that rumor, I'd be much more concerned with the open-source browser adoption and implementation.
Why? Because if people aren't using IE - tightly bound into my OS or so I would claim - then they might realize they don't need my OS. And that would be double plus ungood.
So, in a way, projects like FireFox could make it easier to switch from my OS (Windows Daddy Longlegs) to an open source OS (insert name here).
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
gcc didn't exist on the x86 platform until 1987 or so. The 386 didn't come out until about 1985. There really wouldn't have been anything that Linus could've done until gcc was out (and C compilers are not his strength).
And don't forget the GPL didn't come until 1983. Even if Linus had written on OS for the 8086,
no one would've cared.
If he had been born 15 years earlier, he would probably wouldv'e been too tied up with a real job
to write Linux
English, French, Spansish, all the other human languages... we also rely on them to communicate things to be done.
I don't see Linux going away any more than I see English going away. It, like English, may change from year to year, to reflect the the current usage of the day. But to obliterate years of legacy usage, nah...
What I do see though, is proprietary controlled systems disapearing as they become spoken by the few that pay to use them, while everyone else does the functional equivalent for free.
But they ( like COBOL ) will be around for a long time as some are highly ingrained in the infrastructure of the corporation which built using it. Look at the problem we have in the US with the English and Metric measurement systems!!! It is so ingrained over here we stubbornly hold onto feet and pounds despite the rest of the world possessing a much more elegant system! Quick- how many inches in a mile? How many centimeters in a kilometer?
Now imagine the Metric System was free to use for all, but we had to track royalty payments to use the English system... would us stubborn Americans finally give it up then? Or would we insist that the rest of the world use it if they were gonna do business with us? Does the threat of us not doing business with them if they don't comply with our demands hold much strength if year after year, we slip further and further into international debt?
Yes, I feel strongly that the basic operating system for all machines will be commoditized, much like generic foods.
I would venture to say that the Operating System of the future will be some standardized machine interface that allows one to communicate with a machine in much the way English ( or other language ) allows us to communicate to another human. I don't think cost will even be mentioned.... as it will be just part of the basic educattion of both Man and Machine. I don't think one would even think of it being a sellable concept any more than paying to use any other language!
However, this paradigm hinges on whether the United States Government continues to pass law to penalize anyone trying to participate in the "free enterprise system" by trying to compete in the market by doing the same thing others are doing... and trying to do better for less.
Well, if it can't be done here in the States anymore, it can always be done overseas... and just re-imported. Just don't expect the jobless Americans to put much down on the 1040 forms. And while they legislate things that keep us little guys in the courtrooms instead of the labs, Congress also needs to consider new ways of paying for their war toys.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
MS isn't a company, it's a part of the economy.
I work for a small biz computer/network consulting business and there are dozens of companies like is in our area, and 90% of what we do is Microsoft. Add this in to the really big players that feed off of MS as well, and you have almost an economic segment unto itself.
It's hard to say "topple MS" when you have an economic entity almost as big (bigger?) than MS itself that makes money off of it.
I for one am sick of the usual /. flaming against MS that smacks of jealousy and extreme idealism for "their pet OS". The point of Linus makes a lot of sense, and I think that yes the market will correct some of the rather hefty prices, as he says. Of course, the question is for the next 5-10 years, "What OS can my company bank on in the meantime?" I'd say MS is a pretty safe bet if (a)you have a lot of infrastructure that works well (Win2K/Win2K3/whatever) for the intranet where you have the knowledge and experience (and also support for the near future) and (b)you diversify with some *NIX (or even Windows Server) offering for the webserver where you have enough knowledge and experience to support it sufficiently yourself rather than rely on some company (RH) or other (pick your company).
Basically, those who bet against MS have the burden of proof on their specific OS over the MS offerings that have worked for a lot of people...and their view may be right for their situation.
This sig donated to Pater. Long live
Remember, Microsoft made its first millions selling mice.
Let's see... MS sold DOS to IBM--no mouse. MS sold apps for the Mac--already had a mouse.
It wasn't until Windows that there was a market for an MS mouse. I'm pretty sure MS will have already made more than a few million by then.
Although I'd like the symmetry--MS's dark reign bookended with it being merely a mouse company.
From TFA:
I think Linus is a lot smarter, or at least a lot more realistic about the long term future of MS, Linux, and IT in general than most of the early responses to this article give him credit for.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
Torvalds sounds pretty smart, even when he's not talking about kernels. The same is true of Gates, even though he's rarely quoted anymore talking about kernels, or actual tech nuts & bolts. And Gates' speech is always informed by the best research, filtered through the best marketing, that money can buy. Yet Torvalds seems to be speaking from personal conviction and his own research.
How do we stage a nerd-off?
--
make install -not war
Please RTFA. Linus doesn't believe the MS empire will be crushed any year soon either. The closest he comes to saying that is
That part comes at the end. Probably because the interviewer wanted to finish on a strong note. Earlier in the interview however, Linus said and, continuing backwardsIn general, I'm rather annoyed with the way people have been responding to the article because it seems like they're not reading it, or if they are, they're only looking at it from out of the corners of their eyes. Linus has always seemed to me to be a very level headed, easy going, and above all realistic individual when it comes to discussing the future of MS, Linux, and IT in general. It should come as no surprise then that he's not really predicting the sudden and apocalyptic death of MS, but rather a very slow, very gradual, possible(!) marginalization of the company.
You can leave the "imminent death of X"-style predicting to lesser people.
Oh wait! This is slashdot! Oops, I'm sorry my bad... I forgot where I was posting for a while. Please. Forget everything I said. Thanks.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
Who do you buy mainframes from today? That's right, it's IBM, still the mainframe monopoly after all these years. But we're well past the period of "all computing is done on mainframes." How many of you have a 3270 on your desk?
.NET/XML runtime embedded in your browser to do rich, functional web apps. And that means we get to continue on our merry way, towards a network-dominated future where if any operating system has an advantage, it's the one that serves well as an infrastructure component. You guessed it: Linux.
Similarly, even if Microsoft's desktop monopoly is never dislodged, the market will move on anyway. We're all starting to see it; applications are leaving the desktop and being absorbed back into the network. A network whose components are most certainly not monopolized by Microsoft. You can be sure that the Dark Lord of Redmond knows this quite well; that's why he wants to push XAML as the future of web based apps -- to keep a nice monopo-lock on things. Fortunately, the geniuses at Google have been showing us that you don't need a
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
OSX? ... "upgrades" are too frequent and expensive.
So then don't upgrade. You haven't from W2K. Is W2K even supported by MS anymore? (I'm ignoring the expensive myth, as it has been beaten to death. If you want cheap go ahead and buy cheap.)
Linux? - Too expensive to implement.
W2K - Cheap to buy. Cheap to implement. Works well.
Curious, Linux is cheaper to buy (can't get much better than free). And Linux certainly works well (although in fairness we don't know what you business is). And Linux is as cheap to implement as W2K, unless of course you were already a Windows shop when you started the analysis. Then this was a momentum thing.
OS/2! Why didn't you mention VMX or System 360?
So I call bullshit.
SteveM
I was looking at MMC chips the other day. They have a 1GB flash memory chip the size of a postage stamp. Does anyone else find that amazing?
A large part of the break-neck progress of electronics we see is due to the competition in the industry.
Imagine the amazing features of the OS and desktop we would have if only MS didn't have a monopoly. With real competition MS would never get away with releasing a new OS every 5 years.
If Linus had actually posted on Slashdot "I do not believe that anything can replace Microsoft in the market that MS is right now.", then he would have probably been modded as a troll by the proLinux crowd on Slashdot.
I would like to add a bit to this. Windows is what everyone as a beginner is introduced to, either as a kid, or a non-techie in office here in India. The reason for that is that here the cost of a Windows box is just as much as a Linux box -- it's free!! Why you ask? Thats because most of the PCs sold in India are through private vendors who have one copy of a Windows CD which they had bought from Lamington Road for 100 Rs ($2 approx.) and use that to install Windows on every machine they sell. For subsequent installations the CD is just copied onto the hard drive. I guess only some corporates in India have their systems on licensed copies of Windows.
Now I mention this because now Microsoft is hoping to crack down on piracy by including measures in the OS itself (dialling home to ensure validity, etc.). Once they get this right the large user base that it boasts of will face a major hit as all the users who depended on the pirated version (a million or two in India itself) will be locked back in the older desktop and will eventually look for other alternatives as their needs increase.
As long as people's computers are predomentantly their desktops - MS will dominate for a long time coming. Yes linux in the desktop widespread will come, but by that time - noone will won't care and maybe there won't even be a "linux community" like there is today.
RIght now the consumer behaviour more/less is to interact with a single computer at home period. But as we do more interesting things with computers, it makes more and more sense for people to actually have their own *server* for sharing files with friends and families, automated data backups**, media streaming, storage. These functions require a very different level of interaction that linux is very well positioned to provide.
As an example - the idea of having two cars in the family is not uncommon. One sedan and one truck/minivan/heap/whatever. Obviously it's not entirely analogous, but you the idea (hopefully?).
**its freightening to see how people don't really backup their data, but as we get more reliant on computers - it will be as natural as the air we breathe
I just read today that they are expecting a wave of OpenOffice use in local governance here. source in Norwegian How many people are that? About 430.000 of a workforce of 2.4mio. Linux OTOH is used on servers, but no real plans of Linux desktops yet (except in schools where we have the "School Linux" software).
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
In that case, I have no choice but to be incorrect; I work in an academic institution currently, and yes OpenOffice2.0 does flawlessly open word and excel documents sent to me by MSWord using colleagues. Earlier iterations of OO however weren't so reliable with that format.
Sadly my MSWord using colleagues can't open my *.sxw or *.abi documents in MSWord, I guess Microsoft will have to work on this; the wide number of people using OO here is encouraging the department to consider default OO installs on all office systems.
In some goverments here in the EU, there is a move to make FOSS alternatives like OO mandatory.
Powerpoint, I don't know. I make my presentations in HTML.