Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Storm Linux Strongholds
VitaminB52 writes "Microsoft is only winning about one out of four deals where IT shops are trying to move off of proprietary Unix. To turn that trend around, there are four specific Linux strongholds where Microsoft is focusing its attention." From the article: "After discussing server clustering, Web hosting, and server appliances, Ballmer was cut off by the interviewees before he could identify the fourth. But my guess is that, given the way Ballmer emphasized Software as a Service (SaaS) as a core theme for all the work that's taking place at Microsoft right now, the fourth stronghold of Linux that Microsoft wants is the SaaS stronghold where Linux is the operating system behind a Java-based application server technology ... Ballmer knows he's got a long roe to hoe. 'The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day.'"
Why does the title give me a mental image of the scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail where King Arthur and co are trying to get into the Castle... Except it's microsoft execs being taunted by penguins. I really need some more coffee.
Meow meow meow meow, meow meow meow meow...
...is Ballmer hoeing fish eggs???
No wonder he gets angry!
Game dev and music blog
...the fourth stronghold of Linux that Microsoft wants is the SaaS stronghold where Linux is the operating system behind a Java-based application server technology
Sure, that makes sense, especially considering the big announcement last month of JBoss partnering with Microsoft to build up interoperability with Windows servers and the JEMS stuff.
Realistically, what can balmer do?
SFU isnt the answer. Migration from heavily invested unix setups to win32 is both expensive, time consuming, and typically carries a very low ROI when compared to a linux option.
So what can he do? Bring back Xenix?
Pah!
Nothing to see here, move along.
-GenTimJS
The thing is, the execs that have to make these decisions are used to having a big company behind their Unix OS and are more comfortable with Windows in general, so just that alone works against Linux migration. Still, time will come as this generation quickly moves up the ladder and becomes the decision makers; the value of Linux and BSD will not be overlooked as it is today. While Linux has captured a good market, this will acclerate much more as the years go by.
fak3r.com
"Hey, don't switch just yet! Just hold on a few more years, and we'll provide something like what you want! No, really! Please don't forget about us!"
Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
When it comes to real users, bubbly GUIs like those shown in most Windows Vista screenshots do not appeal. Most serious users will mock such sassery.
When it comes to configuring Apache or a SQL database, nothing compares to being able to directly edit text files and run services easily from the command line. This is what UNIX, Linux, BSD and Solaris offers.
They'll at least need to get Monad finished, and it will have to trump the existing UNIX command line in some fashion. But if they keep throwing bubbly interfaces as professionals, the bubbly interfaces will hamper the ability of such professionals to get work done.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
From the article: ...in many of these cluster and grid scenarios -- scenarios that often involve home grown setups with versions of Linux that aren't supported by any of the various Linux distributors -- the people running them are again not incurring any licensing costs on the operating system.
Yeah... it seems like there is a basic concept here, that the kind of people who need clusters are also the kind of people who can generally take care of them, themselves. Or is Ballmer trying to suggest that MS can make clustering so easy and slick that any old researcher with a few processors could set it up?
As for the "better UNIX than Linux" quote... uh... what??? Microsoft Unix? Isn't it obvious that Solaris and AIX users migrate to Linux 75% of the time because they're familiar with the basic OS underpinnings? It's a knowledge reuse issue. Does Ballmer really expect MS to create an OS that is similar enough to capitalize on this reuse?
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
funny to see Microsoft realizing that it's web server offerings have "the bloat". But that's also a huge problem for appliances and high performance computing applications. Writing apps for an API on top of The Bloat is painful too, even with IDE code wizards. And what to do when the Bloated Black Box doesn't behave or act the way you were expecting?
why's he attacking a really big fish egg with a garden tool?
the coolest club on
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
It's everywhere, it doesn't have or need "strongholds". It simply flows to areas the economics make it useful. The implication of a stronghold is that it's good for one or two things and has to defend against instrusion by a determined foe. Very... Balmeresque... thinking.
Deleted
ya the first thing I am going to do is replace my critical 24x7 linux clusters with windows.
ya I would really get my money back on that move.
I'll put it on my todo list right now.
Vendor neutrality. Let's see Microsoft attack that one. Be kind of paradoxical, really.
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
First -- If SFU isn't the answer, make it the answer. There's no technical reason Windows can't have a good Unix environment on top of it. Get some sort of *nix-like package management on top of it so the OSS world can build and distribute tools. Build in a "registry file system" or whatever you need to make *nix tools work better on the Windows OS.
.NET, MS should provide better support for J2EE vendors like JBoss or BEA. (I read the biggest chunk of MS's "enterprise" penetration is actually as a platform for running Java servers.)
Second -- Apache. There's no reason people should have to run IIS, so build up Apache to be first class on Win32. Give it windows authentication and a GUI manager.
Third -- Java. It's not going away, so even with
You're right that POSIX->Win32 is a bogus migration plan. So the real solution is to provide better *nix-like tools that bridge the gap between the unix world and the Windows OS. If the capabilities are there, people will migrate.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
With jdk1.5.0 there's funally some catching up on linux.
Still in terms of administration cost and java stability - my company pushes Windows for java deployments - and we go with linux only when customer is not ok with Windows.
Sorry to say, but linux administration is hell.
A Unix admin can't take humiliation by jumping off from Unix to Windoss! Linux makes better sense to them than windows anyday!
Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
New research and office space, ~300 users. MS came in with a partner firm and said they could make all this work for "only" $1.5M over 3 years. 12 servers (Yeah 12!), one each for email/exchange, AD, file, dns, dialup, blackberry, applications, etc.
I presented something which will cost ~$90K for the hardware, zip for the software and give us more. The users will still have Windows on the desktop and won't care about the backend stuff. And I know this will work, it's a virtual duplicate of 2 other places I set up for this org.
MS & partner firm hate me.
We will choose the UNIX anyway, we are just discussing the windows alternative to minize the price the reseller is offering.
-- ministy of disinformation
Or perhaps Long row to ho' would be more accurate.
"Never let the facts get in the way of a good story." - Ken Kesey
Ballmer will say he's got a better Unix than Linux before it's true. I suppose that will be a good day for him. If Linux really can compete with Windows, the next day someone will show that Ballmer is lying.
--
make install -not war
I'm surprised they got that far!
If these people were using Windows in their phones and in their XBox, then the comfort factor might work the other way.
'First they ignore you. Then they
laught at you. Then they fight you. And then you win.'
-- Mahatma Gandhi
I guess if it helps him to make the sale...
The PC market is pretty mature at this point; things are changing. The only constant is that prices are continuing to fall, and that IS putting OEM pressure on Microsoft to drop prices. It hits with a double whammy I'd bet, as most of their applications are bundled deals.
I know that the clients I deal with are VERY hesitant to migrate from Windows XP (many have not migrated from Windows 2000 or 95).
Embedded devices have been a problem for Microsoft; Their XP embedded is much better than CE, but both are overly complicated and do not have a good reputation with people I've worked with, and I don't especially like them either. Even the classic RTOS makers are getting hurt by things like RT linux.
Web services are another potential front microsoft is going to lose big on; unless MS is able to tie in propietary hooks to IE, they're going to lose there in a big way just by the nature of the product. If it doesn't matter to the user what platform they interact with, the back end can shuffle around between vendors so long as the end user experience remains the same. Does anyone care what OS google runs, so long as it works (Fast)?
You want to know where Microsoft and Windows have a huge lead? It's in development environments and integration and third party libraries. Even the Mac is a little behind there, but is in much better shape than Linux. Companies like Borland et. al have come a long way, but the tools don't seem to have picked up widespread adoption with the FOSS people.
Interesting times.
..don't panic
"The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day."
Anybody else get that "pigs fly", "cold day in hell" feeling when they read this? Reactions to this article also came to mind.
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
That must just be a trait with American managers. I've primarily worked in the UK and other European nations. With the exception of one, every manager I ever had was responsible and did listen to the employees' concerns. We were able to explain the situation and any solutions in full. And you know what? Those firms always did well,financially and otherwise.
It sounds like it's just American managers who do not listen to their employees.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
How Microsoft increasing competition in these areas is a bad thing. So long as they bring competetive software, not competetive marketing controls.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Thats the only way to say we have better unix than Linux...
[My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
Every IT department has leeches, and has swarms of mozzies to suck the blood out of the company under the gise of infrastructure. Sure, the IT manager that can boast having the biggest (Mozzies) is the winner.
Those that bought and paid for MS suffer from both, if the medical, oops licence fee don't kill em first.
Less funny when you realise the company is about welsh on retiree benefits, because it spent money on luxuries and operating systems that did not add value. We know the companies in trouble - they ran, wait for it MS.
No wonder the majority go Linux, because it is financial crunch time.
I've heard "road to hoe", but it's "row to hoe". Roe is fish eggs. If you're going to use cliches in your writing, at least understand them.
Gates: Hallo! Hallo!
Mandriva: 'Allo! Who is it?
G: It is King Bill, and these are the Programers of the Square Table. Who's castle is this?
M: This is the castle of my master, Guy de Linus!
G: Go and tell your master that I have charged myself with a sacred quest. If he will give us food and shelter for the night he can join us in our quest for the Holy OS.
M: Well, I'll ask him, but I don't think he'll be very keen... Uh, he's already got one, you see?
G: What?
Balmer: He says they've already got one!
G: Are you sure he's got one?
M: Oh, yes, it's very nice-a (I told him we already got one)
G: Well, um, can we come up and have a look?
M: Of course not! You are Windows types-a!
G: Well, what are you then?
M: I'm Linux! Why do think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king!
B: What are you doing in our computers?
M: Mind your own business!
G: If you will not show us the OS, we shall take your castle by force!
M: You don't frighten us, Windows pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called Bill-king, you and all your silly Windows kaniggets. Thppppt!
B: What a strange person.
G: Now look here, my good man!
M: I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough water! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
B: Is there someone else up there we could talk to?
M: No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time-a!
You hoe rows, not roes (or roads, as heard elsewhere).
Quick, recommend me a weapons dealer who gives educational institutions discounts. Must be able to handle purchase orders.
I, the Principle Investigator of NIH Grant XXXX, do hearby certify this purchase of automatic weapons is necessary and will be used primarily in support of the project(s) to which the costs will be charged.
- but we can defeat ourselves.
...' who are infallible in their wisdom.
What I'm getting at is the way a number of important SW projects seem to be run increasingly by people who are no longer interested in listening to what people want, but instead pursue their own pink clouds and visions about what would be 'great' or 'cool'. Fortunately this hasn't hit the kernel as such, but I think there is a clear trend.
I think the problem is that some of the big, central projects, like GNOME, Mozilla and others have reached a stage where they are no longer really open and approachable to outsiders. In many cases there's a feeling that they see themselves as 'the holy church of
It's not all doom and gloom - there are many projects where the developer group has kept an open mind. But it requires an ongoing effort to stay that way. We should learn a lesson from Microsoft: In the very beginning they won the hearts and minds of a lot of people, not because their products were outstanding, but because people saw them as something great, something that enabled you to get close to the computer, and from that a lot of great SW was created. Then they got greedy and thought they were the infallible 'Church of PCdom', and a lot of people lost all respect and trust in the company. Now they try to win it back, and perhaps they can in time, who knows.
But if we blindly follow in their footsteps and commit their errors of hubris, we deserve our defeat.
...Novell/Suse on Intel and AMD powered boxen is making major headway as well. On the other hand there is also plenty of MCSE/MCSA people on their way into management and not just Linux fans. There will be a continuing migration from the old UNIX brands like Sun for example to Linux as Linux matures but I would not expect any migration from Windows to Linux to become an uncontrollable Exodus.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Web Hosting companies and SaaS businesses use Linux because they need lots of inexpensive servers. These companies can reduce their costs and increase profits by deploying linux on all their servers for free. This also means they don't have to track licenses and worry about audits from Microsoft in the future. Unless Microsoft either gives away their software, or provides so much extra functionality that it outweighs the cost of the OS, I don't see how they are going to gain in this area.
That big target that MS needs to hit is the manageability target. We need to be able to install a light OS, pre-configured for our environments, in a fraction of the time it takes today, and it needs to be centrally monitorable and manageable without having to purchase a very expensive commercial package to do so. The entire OS has to be scriptable from the commandline. In server environments, commandline is king.
Linux is more similar to Unix than Windows is. It's a similar matter of recompiling some apps.
It's the easiest migration path.
Is why Linux works in all of these "strongholds".
If you are going to build a server farm, cluster, or any large install with heaps of machines then you already have enough money considerations. Adding the Microsoft tax is just one more expense, so if you can do it with free OS software then you reduce your initial costs.
The other reason that Linux has a stronghold in these markets is because it works so well there and is very tried and true. Then you have to think why would someone switch from what is already working to something else?
Why would one use a hoe on fish eggs? If it is long is must be a really big fish. Not only that it would start to smell bad after a while. Yep, I can see it now, Steve Ballmer scraping up the roe at the fish factory. What a colorful image. Maybe he could hoe it into nice rows.
Mods, thank you for your attention...
For the record:
A long row to hoe
IOW... A long row of plants to weed.
-- This is not a sig
Has anyone stopped to consider that what hinders linux migration the most is the linux community itself and gaming industry?
Linux community is often misorganized; programs and information is hard to find. Slashdots sister site, freshmeat, is hard to use. There is to many distributions available. The choices of distributions and programs are boundless to the point where it confuses the consumer. Confuse the consumer and it will run the other direction.
Moving right along, it is also gaming industry that hinders Linux growth. The popular games like The Sims, Battlefield, Total Wars, Doom, and Madden 2k6 are not developed on Linux. WINE and Emulation software not the answer. It is only a temporary fix to the larger problem. Linux needs the game publishers and developers behind it.
Linux community should stop bashing Windows or OSX and focus on it's own areas of concern.
\
It's a far cry from POSIX. Actually, it only includes a (not really finished) POSIX API. There was no real effort to make it anything more than a selling point to the gov't though...
And to top it off, NSA strongly recommends that you disable it, so it doesn't get used -at all- (at least on DoD systems). Odd, the subsystem that was added to satisfy gov't requirements has to be disabled to put the OS on a gov't network...
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
I started this as a joke, but it does seem to be a workable idea. Thank goodness there are some massive egos that will make this impossible.
Think global, act loco
Like, you know, a row of vegetables in a garden. That you make deeper and wider with a hoe.
"Roe" is crab eggs.
Evan Prodromou | evan@prodromou.name | http://evan.prodromou.name/
Microsoft and Ballmer just don't get clustering at all and I feel sorry for the 25% that got sucked in by M$ BS. Ballmer is bringing spoons to a steak party.
An OS that is graphical wastes resources in a clustered environment. It wastes CPU in managing it; it wastes electricity in powering it and adds to the total BTU output that raises A/C costs. Forget about the complexities added in that M$ solutions are new, poorly tested and of beta quality when compared to any UNIX/POSIX type OS. None of the aforementioned adds value to the compute task and often detracts from it. Most can be critical project problems if not managed and planned for.
One also has to look at the software acquisition economics. Say you have a 1024 node cluster. 1000 * 1024 for server licenses is $1M $$. FC4 is out and even if you used commercial Linux you would never pay $1M for this quantity of licenses unless they tossed in the installation and configured the cluster for you.
There are also other issues such as kernel/network performance and tuning but I will skip this.
My dream cluster would be few thousand Linux AMD 64 dual core, dual CPU systems with 16GB of ram in a 2 or 4 U package with front loading drives and can be managed without a VGA... hm... this OS/hardware exists without Microsoft!
n/t
Practical Semantic Web Log
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Gartner audience, as in people listening to what Gartner has to say...
Well, why don't do that now? You have already said that wondows has lower TCO than Linux, all supported by Gartner.
Gartner, the reliable source
[lol]
Like, y'know, http://www.theosfiles.com/os_linux/ospg_Linux_stro m.htm ?
Evan Prodromou | evan@prodromou.name | http://evan.prodromou.name/
'The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day.'
We're almost there. Remember the famous saying whose authors is unfortunately lost to time? "Given enough time and money, eventually Microsoft will re-invent UNIX."
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
After all, We have already heard about MS telling David Korn the MS emulator is Korm shell compatible....
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
I'll bet the biggest chunk of MSFT "enterprise" usage is as a "desktop" computer running an "office suite".
And "Solitaire"
... and release a MS linux distro? Why reinvent the wheel? Couldn't it be as easy as "becoming part of the solution" and making their money off service & consulting + integrating whatever useful original technology might have originated in The Halls Of Redmond into a linux distro?
A central open source project can become unimportant very quickly if they start making the wrong decisions. Look at xFree86 - x.org forked their codebase and the distros followed. The same would happen with Gnome and Mozilla if they went the wrong way... though Gnome users are quite clearly insane to start with. ;) (KDE user)
...that the summary says "a long roe to hoe." That's how the ZD article has it. Guess very few folks have agricultural experience these days, and hence don't know it's "a long [though I've always seen 'hard' in this cliche] row to hoe."
Admittedly, they should've put a big old [sic] after it.
(Well...maybe there is some bizarre fish species Mr. Berlind knows of?)
Doug - a genuine Cluster Monkey
HPC for Primates. Read Cluster Monkey
All I see from them is big talk and threats. That's the easy part. Next you have to deliver on those threats. So far their track record for delivering products on time with promised features is not stellar.
Increasingly Microsoft are becoming "just another vendor" and they seem to be ill-placed to adapt to this kind of change in the market. Their recent bemusement at the MA OpenDocument decision is a good case in point. Lecturing your customers on why they're wrong, and maybe a bit stupid, isn't something most companies would try to do.
So now they want to be a Unix vendor? To push themselves into a market packed with Linux solutions and proprietary companies that survived the 80s Unix battles. The ones that allowed Windows NT to get a foothold in server rooms in the first place? Hmmmm. Yeah, that makes sense.
They're probably going through the same pain as many of the other big companies who've seen technologies they thought they owned and dominated by right become commodities.
I'm beginning to wonder if they can find a way to compete now. Without the sort of dirty tricks that everyone is becoming wise to that is.
Ame
Developers! Developers! Developers! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!!!
MS desperately wants a win. Reports are comming from everywhere on how they are loosing ground to Google. So they figure they beat their chest about the market they think they own -- systems software.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Even intelligent people tend to get distracted from subtle differences.
Up front price versus "total cost of ownership" is one of those situations, whether or not the TCO concept, pushed by microsoft, is true.
Even if microsoft can make products of similar quality for the gnu/linux niche, and do it while it still matters, they still have the price issue ( as well as terms of use ).
GNU/linux has its niche because it is free/cheap up front, and people do not need to worry about licensing issues.
Will microsoft, after spending a lot of money to develop these new things, market them at a low cost with few terms of use?
You have to give them that: They're extremely thick when it comes to grasping what this is all about.
They coudl've taken over the Linux/OSS market with a wave of a hand 3 years ago. But no, the had to bicker about anti-american OSS Licences and other BS - things people didn't give a sh*t about before that.
They even could probably take it over now with carefull marketing and loads of cash.
Buy Canonical, 150 Debian developers and Linus Torwalds, build a closed-source zero-hassle Direct X Kernel module and some other nifty things and lead the OSS bandwagon into a bright new future of unified services with commercial closed source MS Linux Extensions. Buy sourceforge, start a OSS Software of the Year Award, offer stripped top-notch IDEs for free, extended ones for cash. Buy trolltech and tell the world what Unix desktop everyone will use. They'd have the power and the cash to do it and pull through.
But no, they're sticking to their Windows crap. Zero remoting (exept with OSS VLC setups), ancient connectivity standards and the same type of hardware setup mess you get with everything else on the PC plattform.
MS inability to tap their power is the reason Apple has a real chance of taking over the entire Appliance market.
It's just like I said before allready.
If I had MS shares, I'd start selling them by now.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Microsoft might use synergy!
does anyone else remember the term B.O.G.U.S. as used by microsoft techs? Bend Over And Grease Up Steve
Soap box, Ballot box, Jury box, Ammo box. Use in that order.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
... MS Linux's gold disk is on somebody's shelf already. With GPL'd extensions, to make it difficult to move between this and "normal" distributions. The hook will be a NON-GPL Windows compatibility layer which won't
run w/o MS's licensing/changes/whatever. This layer will allow Word to run, etc.
Keeps their vendor lock in place, although it alters the order of some of the pieces. Make the cost of the compatibility layer about the cost of Windows, and there's no real hit to the bottom line. Eventually, MS Linux will introduce a fork, and as MS is the copyright holder of their changes...
I seem to remember a company that built "A better DOS than DOS, a better Windows than Windows", spending lots on publicity, and not seeing around that particular OS anymore. If I were to switch, I suppose there would be an added value of MS Unix over Linux. Right now, *the* added value of Windows over Linux is that "everyone is running it". The only way that I see that happen is if MS drops Windows, which I doubt they'll ever do if they can help it.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Given enough time and money, eventually Microsoft will reinvent Unix
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You have to be the luckiest man on earth... or at least the luckiest slashdotter to have your UID...
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
They still havn't quite gotten that their Server Software is only attractive if you have absolutely no clue what you are doing. It is a pretty decent in that you can take it out of the box and just run with it.
Linux and the like require a lot of setup time first to get everything running perfect. But, once you get that out of the way, it is generally superior in the long run. What Microsoft fails to realize is that given the proliferation of the internet and the complexities of the modern day IT world, most server techs know exactly what they are doing. So, the initial linux hurdle is non-existant.
In most cases, MS only gains a foothold in organizations where they can con the higherups into thinking MS knows better or will cut them a better deal.
You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
He might as well just nuke us and wait a few centuries to start over here.
Because that's the only way we'd switch to Microsoft. Even if 80% of the technical staf (and we're almost all technical staff here) didn't loathe it for anything other than games, our tools don't run on it and porting would cost a fortune.
Meanwhile, if they show up in less than battalion strength, we'll be happy to chain them to 19" racks, haul them onto the roof, and leave them for the buzzards.
[Can you tell we have no use for stormies?]
and I'm sure it's not right for your... idiom...
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
``The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be...
``...the day you know I found the cache of drugs Hunter S. Thompson left behind and took them all at once.''
MS cannot play fair.
but someone might find it useful.
There's a transcript of the session here.
And as mentioned in the article:
A copy of the entire 45 minute interview can be downloaded (it's 21 MB) by clicking here.
The question in the article can be found 27 minutes and 13 seconds into the audio file.
And interestingly enough Ballmer was asked the following (at: 2:37)
"I have a question for Mr. Ballmer. If you attempt to thwart Google with your acquisition of the ???????*. How many chairs will Business Week report you as thrown?"
He responded with:
"I've never, honestly, thrown a chair in my life."
* I couldn't hear what was said, if anybody knows reply to this post.
Perfect is the enemy of done.
Cluster Windows would have astronomical cost. That is one of many main deals for Linux the entire cluster is Free via the gpl. Microsoft can't compete in this area so long as Windows is proprietary.
I find this an amusing complaint because what has Microsoft given us? Is Freshmeat hard to use say compared to MSDN or TechNet? If I particular piece of software (say something like an OGG tag editor) I hit Google which indexes SourceForge and Freshmeat fairly accurately. If I try that searching MS's web site I get next to nothing. In fact I get *better* results using Google to search MS's stuff for me.
Beyond this, anytime I spy an error in a piece of software on Linux and I want to find out more I drop it in Google and see what comes up. On Windows I'm using MSDN or TechNet. Just my causual observations I have better luck finding out not only the problem behind error messages but a solution with Google and the mountain of information out there on the net than with MSDN and TechNet (again using Google to search their stuff for me).
So what exactly does MS do better when providing online help and documentation?
This is a funny complaint. Most ISV targeting the "modern desktop" are faced with this install targets:
- Windows 2000
- Windows Server 2000 (there are a couple of versions of this, 3?)
- Windows XP Home
- Windows XP Professional
- Windows Server 2003 (I believe there are 7 versions of this if my counting off the top of my head is correct)
Plus some Service Packs radically change the behavior of some of these versions and almost count as a full version on their own. If you ever have the "enjoyment" of writing installers on Windows you sometimes wonder why there are so many versions out there. The bigger sin is that Windows Server 2003 has some hard limitations on some types of software: some software is found on one version but not on another.
With all of these versions of Windows the consumer is not confused so why are they confused with Linux? What is a good number of distros to have anyway? Heck I claim there should be more very refined Linux distros than there are now.
Beyond this I find it funny that XP is considered a gaming OS. There is all sorts of services and features that can interfere with gaming performance. In my opinion, MS would be better off selling a stripped down Windows that installs in 5 minutes that does nothing but handles playing games instead of trying to make their generic desktop system work for this.
Forget Linux...as a consumer of Microsoft products why can't I critize it? There are plenty of things that Windows simply doesn't do well that other systems seem to handle more gracefully. All of us spent a surprisingly large amount of money to get Windows installed on machines but we can't ask for something better?
The mods must be pure simpletons to pass this sort of trash along without checking it. Or maybe they just don't know any better.
IDIOTS!
at Microsoft is "Never admit mistakes." This isn't just a Microsoft problem, all corporations seem to suffer from it, but it's why you'll never see MS-BSD.
To sell BSD, or any other "non-Windows-based" OS is to admit that they have failed on some level. Either at security (so you had to switch to a "real" permissions model) or stability, or whatever. If Microsoft were to admit this, the Linux and Apple fanboys would have a field day, technology analysts would be screaming about doom of Biblical proporations... You know, Biblical proportions: 30 days of darkness, dogs and cats living together, utter chaos.
And (like most corporations) an admission of failure isn't something that you're going to see MS giving anytime soon. The closest I've ever seen them come was the Clippy ads where that stupid paperclip was put out of business by Office XP Which, if you haven't seen these, you should find them-with Gilbert Gotfreid as the voice of Clippy, who is perfectly obnoxious sounding when saying "It looks like you're writing a letter" and a funny ending with Clippy in a bar.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
actually, that came from TFA - there's a cross-out & correction now.
A long row to ho, obviously.
...Is this memorable quote from TFA:
;-)
"...Ballmer responded to a question about how Microsoft plans to deal with the remaining 75 percent by saying "We are not winning more than we're losing."
Eeeshhh... Balmy needs to go to work writing for the Firesign Theater. Grammatical talent like that doesn't just (g)roe on trees.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
You are kidding right? Those applications you are talking about must be some pretty light weight stuff. I have done a lot of Java application migration off of Windows and onto Linux specifically because of how much better Linux handles the underlying JVM. Stuff like thread support (Linux nextgen threads are significantly faster than Windows 2003 server) as well as memory usage (you need to use some poorly supported hacks on Windows to allow a process to use more than 2GB RAM, it is much easier and more importantly SUPPORTED to do so with Linux).
Well, OK. Bring it on. But Ballmer et al has a *lot* of catching up to do, IMHO due to his/their own arrogance.
C|N>K
"'The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day.'"
I'll start knitting the caps and sweaters... What's the address to hell again?
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Kekekeekee!
(Does that make Linux the Terrans or the Protoss?)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's got the code name "IWANA"
Repeat many many many times:
IWANA IWANA IWANA IWANA IWANA IWANA IWANA IWAN be like LINUX!!!
For 15 years they didn't WANA adopt any standard platform, now
they WANA be a Linux box. Here comes EEE.
Tell you what MS, I don't WANA support any more users who can't
figure out how to hack the registry or ulayer DLL's. Go search
google for sAAS.
Buy your bug's here, get your bug's here, we got Bugs95, Bugs98,
BugsNT, Bugs2000, BugsXP and VistaBugs. Get a side order of patches
while your at it! - No thanks IWANA computer that works.
It's not the bubbly that is appealing, it's the ease of use. WHy would I want to use a shell to configure a server?
If you have to ask yourself that question then you don't have a lot of experience administering servers--or have only been tasked with administering a very small number of servers.
GUIs make desktop computers easier to use. You don't want to mess around typing arcane commands to write a letter to your mum or balance a chequebook or play a game (hmm..brings back memories of the 1980s and typing LOAD"MYPGM",8,1:RUN" to use the computers at school). The needs addressed on a desktop are quite a bit different than those addressed by servers, and 90% of desktop users are not IT professionals--and (hopefully) all sysadmins are capable professionals.
If you had to administer a large-ish system consisting of many servers the you'd realise how much of a hindrance a GUI can be on a server--and a poorly architected system such as Windows as it exists today makes the situation worse.
* Firstly, using hardware resources to drive a rich GUI on servers that quite often are not even equipped with monitors seems a bit wasteful and pointless to me.
* Second, GUI-based interfaces are just not scalable--they're engineered to operate on PERSONAL computers. Remote access to GUI-based servers is orders of magnitude more complex than command-line style systems--I'd take SSH over Terminal Services any day.
* Also, once you know the command line doing shell scripts to automate administration tasks is easier, faster and more powerful--I don't know of a single GUI "wizard" that is faster or more powerful than VI and a bunch of text files...which brings me to another issue: when a GUI is the only option to configure your systems then you have to rely on a special application to get your job done. If that application breaks or is otherwise unavailable you are screwed. If for some reason I cannot use GConf on my Linux box I can revert to any text editor, whereas if I cannot use REGEDIT on Windows I have no other option (editing the BINARY registry data by hand is not a workable solution so some application to interpret it is required).
To me, clinging to shells and texteditors, sometimes looks like an attempt to keep things mystical/magical/voodoo like just to make sure you get payed a smart buck to operate these servers.
That stems from a lack of understanding. Most casual Windows users do not understand Regedit or any other system-admin tools even though they are completely graphical. To me (someone with a background in electronics desgin), pointing and clicking in some special sequence looks even more like "voodoo" than the command-line as it is so divorced from the underlying system that I can't be sure exactly what the computer is doing behind the scenes. People like me are sometimes uncomfortable when stuff like that is obscured.
Unix types are like me--they are so accustomed to knowing what happens "under the hood" that they lose confidence in a system when the hood is welded shut and they have no way of confirming everything is right. That is the biggest challenge Windows has in winning converts from UNIX. It's like Microsoft is going to China and telling everyone they have to learn English, and when some of them compalin they are toald by Microsoft advocates that English is much easier than Chinese and you should support such "progress". What about "services for UNIX" you say? Well, that is like a "mostly" complete Chinese-to-English dictionary. Not only does it add to the cost of conversion--it is mostly intended to engourage migration away from the "old ways".
Why should the administration of servers and adatabases remain behind in an evolving software world?
Why should administrators have to contend with a one-size-fits-all user interface that serves every purpose at least marginally but serves no purpose particularly well? You are assuming a command-line is "less-evolved" but many would beg to differ. Some people
I'm sorry--I panicked.
Grandparent poster is essentially correct- you made the error of assuming that this purchasing guy is a serious user. I tend to disagree- if this guy had ever been good for anything, he wouldn't be in purchasing. You still did the right thing by giving up on him- this is a perfect example of that old chestnut "Never argue with an idiot, becuase he will drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience."
The downside is it's often impossible to get rid of these people because they've been around so long. I suggest buying him outright- baseball tickets, steak dinners, strip clubs. He doesn't understand the product he's responsible for anymore- he's just parroting the MS talking points that were shoveled into him along with the filet at his last 3-martini "business review" meeting with his current MS vendor. If you want to make your point, you're going to have to bribe it into him, just like the last guy did.
As far as selling something to his company- if you're talking to someone in purchasing, you're talking to the wrong guy.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Steve Ballmer=Pot Smoker
Roe Roe Roe your OS,
Gently Up The Creek,
SCSIly SCSIly SCSIly SCSIly,
Life is Full of Geeks!
(The preceding silliness is purely fictional. No penguins were harmed in the making of this filk. Any resemblance or references to actual penguins, living or dead, is not my problem).
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Linux is a kernel. Distros make or break your experience in the long run. So, if the SUSE's and the RH's want to look at making things simple for the Enterprise than so be it and let the Linspires and Mandriva's handle the DE sector. Then you have all those other distros that are geared for use enthusiasts and everyone is happy and linux is still fun
Try to do that with windows....(gives a glaring eye @ his work pc)
The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux
Please do make an operating system that's better than Linux. We've been waiting 10 years already, and you still haven't even tried.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day.
gentoo-mach is stable?
You know, I told NASA it was a bad idea to install the HAL9000 in the Mars Polar Lander.
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/27/213 209&tid=109&tid=218
or, jboss sells out linux, gets own3d
Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious