Slashdot Mirror
Steve Ballmer on MS Server, Linux, Yahoo & More
yorugua writes "Furniture trembled as Steve Ballmer was to be interviewed by InformationWeek. He then went on to talk about Linux: 'How does Microsoft beat Linux? The same way "you beat any other competitor: You offer good value, which in this case means good total cost of ownership," Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer says.', Embrace-Extend-Extinguish: 'We say when we embrace standards, we'll be transparent about how we're embracing standards. [...] If we have deviations, we'll be transparent about the deviations.'"
I'd rather NOT hear about Steve Ballmer's deviations. Maybe that's just me.
"It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
He'll never live that down :D
Microsoft will beat linux the same way they beat any competitor: by purchasing a rival (or in this partnering with Novell) and offering the same product with ten times the marketing force.
If you're deliberately not complying with the standards, that's not really embracing them, is it?
Though it's nice that they'll now start being up front about how they're introducing incompatibilities, as opposed to the quiet evil way they used to do it. Baby steps, I guess.
If we have deviations, we'll be transparent about the deviations
And if we're threatening IP litigation through surrogates, we'll be transparent about setting up pipe funding to finance IP litigation through surrogates.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Eventually it will believed to be true. I think even the liar will start believing it.
Sadly many IT professionals believe Windows saves money because its an integrated platform. But ignore the reboots and being forced to buy alot more servers as Windows is not friendly with using one or 2 more apps on a single server compared to Unix.
Oh and lets not forget about the blanket licensing fees. What is the average? $12,000 per year for licensing and support per desktop? Uh yeah thats true TCO.
If it were not for Microsoft already setting the standards for Office the corporate world would have abandonded them years ago. Linux is alot cheaper and has 1/10th of the issues if only it could the VB apps and Office.
http://saveie6.com/
Because, frankly, Debian is making my life easy.
Deleted
The one page, no ads version:
http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=206900810
"How does Microsoft beat Linux? The same way you beat any other competitor: You offer good value"
So what were Vista, Zune and the Xbox 360 all about then..? ;)
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
They wouldn't need to mess around with protocols, etc.
But they already admitted that lock-in was necessary to stave off competition - in the famous "Halloween documents".
Bill Gates also said that open file formats and interoperability could be the death of Windows.
So this is all just spin. What's really going to happen is delays, obfuscation, API churn... and as many other spanners in the works as possible while still "complying" with the letter of the law, if not the spirit.
No sig today...
... who called Linux a "cancer". Somehow I imagine what he has to say about Linux is neither going to be informed, balanced or interesting, just more deluded BS from the king of deluded BS.
...apart from cmdr taco raking in cash (in the form of ad revenue) off of the slashbot hordes that are queing up to post the usual "M$ sux" comments (which will race to +5 insightful) and lame jokes about ballmer throwing chairs (which invariably get rated +5 funny)?
No point at all.
You can't handle the truth.
Just let them state that they intend to continue with their undermining of standards, compatibility and other dirty tricks against 'partners' and other 'Microsoft Friends(tm).' Let them state that they are willing to take huge losses against just about every activity they are involved in and that these losses, which are propped up by their abusive monopoly, are designed to keep any competition down and prevent them from becoming a threat.
Aparently his version of TCO doesn't include buying completely new machines in order to run Vista. After all, Vista is only 1/2 as slow on the same hardware... I remember the day when your programs took more resources than the operating systems... those were the days.
What does ownership have to do with anything? Ownership of a great license? Because if I remember correctly, you don't actually own the product.
Technicality? Not if the restrictive/intrusive license is your biggest objection to the product.
Maybe I'm daft, but I'm not seeing this statement in this interview, although the original post seems to imply it's there.
Don't get me wrong, I don't LIKE Ballmer, and I'm no MS fan (as I type this from my Ubuntu desktop with Firefox, etc. etc. etc.) I just think they do their own damage, we don't need to add to it.
-- I really need to bleed off some of this
Single page link without the trailing slash, so that it actually works.
I thought we had moved past this and on to the fear of possible litigation for use. TCO is pretty damn easy to debunk. A few years ago I set up a little intranet server with LAMP and some scripts to retrieve and parse data that was scattered all over the place. Add in some ModbusTcp stuff and it was chugging along. Our instrument tech, who was working on a similar line gave us crap every day. The worn lines of "It's only free if your time is free", "linux is an OS for people mad at microsoft", "It's a hacker OS" and the wonderful "Microsoft knows how to do enterprise software, they make it easy". My answer was the simple one... It was free. I don't have a budget for this project, and this works. Forget arguing the deeper issues. It works and it didn't touch our budget.
Three years later, we've now moved a separate workstation over to linux for all of our operator functions such as data entry and trending.
End result... He's still working on implementing the reporting aspect. He pulls much of his data from our DB and is no longer quite a hardline about sticking with a single vendor. He's beginning to look at RT linux solutions for the next iteration of our embedded MCS system. Wow, hell of a tangent. Yeah, MS should leave the TCO alone... It's simply too easy to just set something up in a back room and let the technology prove itself.
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
I wonder why I had never heard of TCO until relatively recently (measured in years), and in terms of a comparison of Linux to Windows.
I now know: becuse TCO is a meaningless measure which is not used in the real world. The real world measure used is ROI (return on investment).
As a silly example, a windows box might have 50% of the TCO of a Linux box. If it does nothing useful then it has a vastly smaller ROI.
That said, it's a somewhat dubious claim that windows does have a lower TCO.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
A very illuminating Microsoft Confidential presentation from the antitrust discovery process. If you're in a hurry start with the slides at page 9. This is what he should have been asked about...
Comes-3096.pdf
OK. You "offer a good value". Let's ignore how tough it is to offer good value compared to something really cheap, how do you compete with free? Consumers can't judge "free" properly, the Consumerist just posted about that the other day. Wouldn't that make competing with Linux even tougher? As it gets closer and closer to acceptable for most people (and it's WAY better than it was 2/4/6+ years ago) the free thing makes it even worse for MS.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
First they ignore us.
Then they laugh at us.
Then they fight us.
Then we win.
Unfortunately for Balmer, the world just continues laughing at him.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Well, Mr. Ballmer, if you think that adding even more crap to Windows is going to make Windows appeal to Linux users, go right ahead.
Open your source, the we (the rest of the world) can fix your code...
Don't bet on it; it may be beyond repair.
Aparently his version of TCO doesn't include buying completely new machines in order to run Vista.
No one does bloatware like Microsoft!
...and an almost fanatical devotion to developers, developers, developers!
You're missing the Total part of his equation. Basically, their premise is that Linux isn't free (as in beer) as you put it, it actually has a cost attached. TCO includes not only license costs, but support personnel costs, hardware cost, training costs, maintenance contract costs, actual maintenance costs, etc..
Their argument is basically that Windows has lower cost because there are more professionals out there that are trained to support/maintain Windows based system, and these professionals usually have lower wages/consulting fees than their equivalent Unix/Linux professionals. They also argue that Windows training in general is cheaper, that it is easier to maintain through their many support/update tools and include some highly dubious claims about Linux legal costs by up there because you don't have a single vendor backing you and that you will be liable for copyright/patent infringement and that the IP holders will go after you directly as a customer.
So that's basically why he thinks Windows is better TCO.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Slashdot didn't evolve into a "Microsoft sux" since you joined. It always was one. You're still here after all these years.
It's self moderated and you're right -- posts that disparage Microsoft and discount Ballmer do fly to the top of the moderation. That's not because some corporate sponsor has a geek lab in Bangalore with 1,000 blogdrones astroturfing the moderation. It's because Slashdot attracts geeks and that's what the geeks really think. That's honest opinion survey for you. I think a lot of that is because the observation that "M$ sux" actually is insightful, and the Ballmer's futile thrashing of a chair in helpless frustration over Google really is funny.
When you add that slashdot is still one of the popular sites on the intertubes you have to ask: does Microsoft have a problem?
And remember, an answer to every Microsoft problem is available all over the web.
They have to be running scared now. Vista has been out for a year and a half and OEMs are still introducing new machines that not only don't run Vista -- but never will be able to, and people are buying them up like crazy.
Help stamp out iliturcy.