Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft & Linux Should Co-Exist In China
alabamarasta writes "In a recent report from China titled "Embattled
Linux fights back", it appears that Microsoft is just as embattled." From the article: "Citing an executive at Microsoft headquarters, Lu said Linux and Windows should co-exist. Microsoft in recent years has been struggling with an increasing number of security flaws on its Windows platforms while Linux is generally regarded as more secure. 'For users, openness increases the trustworthiness,' said Lu."
Lu, also a former senior government official, was responding to a report released by the China Software Industry Association (CSIA) in late August which called for the government to review its preference for open-source software. The government's "excessive preference" for the open-source Linux platform is harming the domestic software industry, and Linux's business model is flawed as the low, or no, charge is thwarting the profitability of Linux developers, the CSIA asserted in the report.
/.ers make a living writing code and take offense at the notion that they should have to give up a living because someone else does their job without asking for money. But consider the fact that no one charges you for the air you breathe. I'm sure that someone, somewhere, would love to charge you for that air and the fact that you get it for free means some poor schmuck can't make a profit from it. Hell, we should demand that the government get involved and require everyone who breathes to pay a toll to some company who will ensure that air is always available for us to breathe.
Now while I am not opposed to people making money from their work, nor am I opposed to people making huge profits from their businesses, I find rediculous the whole idea that government should intercede in a free market because somebody can't make money from a commodity. If you can't make a living or profit from something, then find a new line of work or business. Why should the government demand that something make money?
So what is the solution to their "problem"? Are they going to ban open source software because it drives profit making companies into the ground? Does this mean you have to get a license to write software, or work for a profit-making company to write code? Where does this protection racket end?
I know that many
What is funniest about this whole 'software industry can't make money' discussion is that no one considers the huge profit potential of every thing someone does for another person just because they like them or want to help.
Charities rob profit-making enterprises.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
If this is the spread of a flawed business model with nearly no ad budget, just think how successful it could have been if it had followed the antitrust-attracting model of some well known competitors!
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
M$ has been aiming at countries like china, thailand, india, brazil etc. with stripped down Win XP. Who on earth would in right minds pay $300 or so in these countries for a full fledged OS when alternatives are available for free. Even pirated copies are sold at every street corner with no watchdog around. M$ seriously needs to rethink its marketing strategy to penetrate these economies and counter growing support for OSS. Maybe a different pricing strategy or leasing out the lisence for a period of time might work.
IMO, it is currently very difficult to make a profit selling software (or indeed anything distributed digitally) in the Chinese market. Protections against illicit copying (which is rampant) are rarely enforced, and black-market copies are ubiquitious (this goes for Windows, DVDs, music CDs, other software titles). As China evolves these protections will have to be developed and enforced; they'll need them to protect their own content-creators, not just foreign ones. Only then will it make sense for Microsoft to aggressively pursue the Chinese market. Until then, "co-existing" with Linux is the smart strategy to adopt.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
Hell, most of the networks I encounter have Linux and Windows co-existing. Sometimes even interoperating!
Click here or here.
It depends on what regions you're considering, with respect to how many families own computers. Not as many people in the rural areas have computers, but that's offset by them being very prevalent in the cities. Of course, the population of just the cities of China are several times the population of the entire United States. But then again, individuals and families aren't the only computer users. Businesses also require PCs, and operating systems to run on them.
Remember, China is just beginning its growth as a modern country. It's perhaps where the US was in the mid 1800s. It's transitioning from basically a slave-based economy towards a true enterprise economy. It'll be a mature market before you, the US and the EU know it.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
The Chinese market will be the decisive battle ground between Linux and Windows. Indeed, whoever manages to become the leader in that market will soon become the world leader. Why is that? Because the Chinese market has the potential to completely dwarf both the American and European markets.
This doesn't make any sense at all.
Firstly, there is no single battleground between Linux and Windows. There are a number of separate battlegrounds: mobile devices, embedded systems, home desktops, corporate workstations, small servers, mid-range servers, enterprise servers, e-mail servers etc. Winning or losing in any one of these may not have much of an impact in any other.
Secondly, what happens in one area of the world in terms of OS dominance does not imply or force success elsewhere. For example, Microsoft technologies have far more dominance in the USA than in Europe.
Thirdly, there is a huge and growing market that has a tendency to appreciate open source - India.
So, the idea of there being a 'decisive battleground', and this being China, does not make sense.
Once the Chinese market has matured, investors will think of American and the EU as they today think of Luxembourg and Jamaica.
Extremely unlikely. America and the EU are far too large and skill & resource-rich by comparison.