Linux's Role In Microsoft's Decline

nerdyH writes "As early as last quarter, Microsoft admitted that Linux and netbooks were eating into its fat profits. Recently, it came home, with the software giant announcing its first-ever layoffs. LinuxDevices interviewed Linux Foundation Director Jim Zemlin on Linux's role in Microsoft's misfortunes. Zemlin sums it up pretty well: 'Companies can offer their own branded software platform based on Linux. If Microsoft is getting 75 percent margins, you would like some of that high-margin business, too.'"

Comments

Oh, Dear

[hardburn]

As early as last quarter, Microsoft admitted that Linux and netbooks were eating into its fat profits. Recently, it came home, with the software giant announcing its first-ever layoffs.

Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Wandering Wombat]

Shut up! You don't know what you're talking about. Obama's made of kittens and sparkles, held together with HOPE... and more sparkles! If anything bad happened this week, it's Linux's fault!

Re:Oh, Dear

[houstonbofh]

There have been a couple of economic crises in Microsoft's history, but no one was let go. Admittedly, this one may be worse, but it is not unprecedented.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama is made of fried chicken grease and pig shit, just like any other black burr-head spook barbarian. Our nation could be so much better off if we just got rid of these mongrel animals, just send the apes back to the trees where they belong. But I don't see that happening any time soon, now that our president is a chimp in a business suit. Oh well, c'est la vie.

Yours in Christ,
Hal Turner

Re:Oh, Dear

[CannonballHead]

Completely agree. I don't think the 1% user share that Linux has is cutting into Microsoft that much - plus, MS's Win2k8 is apparently doing well, and I've heard a lot of people say they actually like it.

Not to mention this choice quote:

'Companies can offer their own branded software platform based on Linux.

I know very few companies that have "their own branded software platform based on Linux." That sounds like they're talking about releasing a custom Linux OS branded with their company? Is that really that prevalent? It's a lot easier (and you don't have to hire super specific people) to install Windows. Or a generic Linux distro. Or whatever.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Thrash, dinosaur, thrash!

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is unprecedented. This is the worst economic crisis that has occurred during Microsoft's history which is why they are forced to lay people off for the first time.

Re:Oh, Dear

[je ne sais quoi]

Also, if you look at the trend in Microsoft Windows "market share" estimated by people like Net Applications, you can see that the decline of Windows started long before the housing bubble deflated. They were still being rated at 96% of the market in 2004 and 2005 and have been in what looks like continuous decline ever since. Granted, it's not much of a decline yet, only 7% or so according to Net Applications, but it does serve as evidence that Microsoft's troubles did not start with the economic crisis, the economic crisis may have compounded their existing troubles though.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Penguinisto]

Windows sales (or at least revenue) shrank by 8% (CNN blames Vista sales in particular). Since PC/Server sales in the industry overall didn't drop (let alone by that much), and netbooks only count for 5% of the whole market (with Windows + Linux netbooks combined in that figure), it stands to reason that there are other factors besides economic malaise that contributed to the losses.

Re:Oh, Dear

[roc97007]

That was my first thought also. If it's all Linux, why did IBM announce massive layoffs in the same time frame?

Re:Oh, Dear

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I suspect, both from the statement, and from the fact that this is a Linux Devices interview, that the "own branded software platform[s]" in question are more likely to be replacing WinCE or WinNT/XP Embedded(which does, indeed, seem to be happening a fair amount). To a lesser extent(though still a notable one) netbooks have been doing some of the same.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hardburn]

I think they're talking about a modified OS to fit a very specific purpose, e.g. TVs. The Sony Bravia runs Linux, for instance.

Re:Oh, Dear

[OrangeTide]

Obama is president now, there is no crisis.

Also Linux is ran by hippies, who most likely caused the economic crisis in the first place. Pretty sure Linux hippies caused the dot-com crash too.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

..Or most people being perfectly content with XP

Re:Oh, Dear

[_Sprocket_]

Completely agree. I don't think the 1% user share that Linux has is cutting into Microsoft that much - plus, MS's Win2k8 is apparently doing well, and I've heard a lot of people say they actually like it.

Did we just jump from quoting desktop statistics to talking servers?

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jamie's Nightmare]

It's even worse than that. Intel is going to shut four plants and lay off 6,000 workers.

I'm no business analyst, but obviously Linux (the netbook market in particular) is severely cutting into the profits of computer giants like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, and IBM. If you needed a sign for the year of Linux, this is it!

Re:Oh, Dear

[UnknowingFool]

It's not just the more enterprise market share that Linux can get. It's also the threat of more market share as a negotiation tactic. Before companies didn't have much choice. Windows or higher priced Unix servers. Now they can negotiate with MS. MS lowers their pricing or they threaten to migrate to Linux.

Also the Linux threat in the interview is not just in the Enterprise Server market. Embedded devices and netbooks are going with Linux due to its ability to run lean. Vista is not currently lean enough for these applications. XP is lean enough though but not as customizable as Linux.

Redhat and Novell/SuSe offer their Linux solutions. IBM and HP will support these distros and others. That's 4 major players right there. Also this doesn't just apply to companies. China has their own brand and Russia is exploring one as well.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Obama's made of kittens and sparkles, held together with HOPE... and more sparkles!

I'll tell you one thing though. Whatever it is, he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time.

Re:Oh, Dear

[CaptCovert]

Also the Linux threat in the interview is not just in the Enterprise Server market. Embedded devices and netbooks are going with Linux due to its ability to run lean. Vista is not currently lean enough for these applications. XP is lean enough though but not as customizable as Linux.

Que the intro to Win 7. At least 'lean' is becoming a MS option again, by all accounts.

Re:Oh, Dear

[CannonballHead]

Yes, because we're talking about "Linux" vs. "Windows" causing Microsoft to die. But Linux, by far most popular in the server world, is not killing Microsoft just yet in that area.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

We are on Slashdot, where everything is Linux :)

Re:Oh, Dear

[SanityInAnarchy]

now that our president is a chimp in a business suit.

I wasn't even in a trollbiting mood, but this just made me laugh.

Eight years of misunderestimating the nukeyoular policies of a man who even looks simian, and you think this president is the chimp?

Re:Oh, Dear

[forgoil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich

Read it.

Re:Oh, Dear

[mweather]

Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.

The didn't lay anyone off after Black Monday, did they?

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple just reported their best quarter ever.

Re:Oh, Dear

[SanityInAnarchy]

I know very few companies that have "their own branded software platform based on Linux."

Pretty much every Linux netbook is branded, somehow -- the EEE PC in particular.

Of course, that's not saying much -- Windows ends up almost as "branded", for better or worse, usually worse. I'm going to go with the theory that this is probably happening much more with embedded devices -- if you have to develop pretty much the entire UI and application, Windows CE would have to really provide some kick-ass development tools for you to be willing to license it instead of starting with Linux, BSD, etc. And there's a reason Windows CE is often abbreviated as WinCE.

Re:Oh, Dear

[es330td]

I think that what has probably happened is that MS knows their share has been declining but hasn't had to lay anybody off because the decline simply allowed them to not replace people who left through natural attrition. The economic slowdown made people more likely to hang on the security of their job and forced them to let go the people who would normally have left on their own.

Re:Oh, Dear

[thtrgremlin]

When an OEM negotiates a price agreement with Microsoft, they now have a viable alternative. It changes the negotiating relationship.

1% isn't that much, but Microsoft MUST make deals with EVERY major OEM to keep their position, and before Microsoft had the leverage to ensure that every OEM MUST have Windows. The game has changed, and even though every OEM is still going to sell Windows, having Linux on the table to wave in their face makes Microsoft sweat a little. Especially with netbooks because an OEM CAN walk away if they don't get whatever price they feel like asking. Apple sells its own products, so what did Microsoft have to compete against? Nothing! While it isn't much, Linux offers not just competitive options for users, but OEMs. The fat Microsoft had before was the monopoly. Remember that market share is only a warning sign of monopolistic practices; remember Cisco Systems and their investigation? Cisco successfully argued that their market share is directly related to innovation and a superior product, nothing else. Microsoft on the other hand HAS been playing dirty. Microsoft is now being forced to play in the real world where a Microsoft computer tax will no longer be status quo.

I think they mean company branded Linux in the same way HP, Dell, and the old Compaq and others brand Windows and the machine bios. I'll agree this isn't any kind of advantage, but only because this was always reasonably easy to do with Windows.

Re:Oh, Dear

[pyster]

Yeah. Someone smokes allot of drugs at /.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Like a lot of companies, Christmas season is normally a big deal for Microsoft. For months, Microsoft has been using it's cookie jar to mask lower revenues. Before, when it's done this, Christmas is when the cookie jar gets refilled. Didn't happen this Christmas.

A combination of things have come together, including the economic mess, netbooks (which are a problem because "only" ~80% of them are bought with Microsoft OS installed), Linux on the server space, IE's market share eroding. The lock-in edifice is crumbling, and Microsoft can no longer maintain the illusion of invincibility.

Re:Oh, Dear

[linhares]

Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.

Microsoft is getting beaten down by Apple at the high end and by Linux on the netbook space. Obviously, I don't mean that people are buying linux netbooks. Hold your horses there. But MS's bargaining position has changed because of linux. They could have said in 2002 that netbooks should cost $600, because of the $200 windows copy. But that does not apply anymore. They sell XP for $28-$32. This is a huge relative loss to what they were making.

And at the high end, Apple is all over it. Take a look at bestbuy. It is rare to find a $1000+laptop, Apple notwithstanding. Or take a look at Amazon's best seller list, only to find hordes of netbooks and macbooks, perhaps with a 1 in 20 Vista machine.

To make matters worse (for MS), if these high-end phones and proposed tablets such as the techcrunch one come to life, they won't be using windows. Nothing below $300 can afford windows, even at $32.

Finally, MS's stock price has been walking sideways for years and years and years. They cannot bring the best talent in the basis of money or stock options alone. This is not the year of linux on the desktop. But its presence is being felt in the markets undergoing disruptive innovation, like the netbooks.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ABCC]

iPhones

Re:Oh, Dear

[ABCC]

Wiis

Re:Oh, Dear

[ABCC]

I mean who really wants another windows pc?????

Re:Oh, Dear

[Onymous Coward]

Net Applications confirms it!

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jamie's Nightmare]

Except for one problem noted in your reference:

Ohio

Better luck next time.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

one other factor is Microsoft itself.

Re:Oh, Dear

[timeOday]

Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.

That's probably why the summary, which you even quoted yourself, started off by quoting Microsoft's claim that Linux - not just the economic crisis in general - was cutting into their profits. So are you saying they don't know, or are lying, or what?

Re:Oh, Dear

[mabhatter654]

that and their reliance on temps. They could close and shuffle offices far bigger than this without a peep. They used to hide "right sizing" in the legions of temps.. but of course now it's better to shed the real employees and keep the temps!

They're just saying this to "look busy" so the stock market will still like them.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

The NOWR (Nigger Organization for White Rape) has a warrant for your immediate capture. The outlaw Hal Turner has commited gross acts of racism and has ignore repeated requests to submit to the NOWR's calls for Justice. We therefore repeat our demand for Mr Hal Turner to submit to the rape of no less than 27 but no more than 50 of our black sodomy warriors. NOWR will NOT be silenced and has on the contrary been a growing movement on slashdot. There have been 29 rapes since the organization's founding at 4:30 PM EST and our director the revered Mr Tyrone Johnson has vowed 29 more before the hour is up if Mr Hal Turner does not comply with our sexual misconduct requests. One request we do respectfully ask of Mr Hal Turner is that upon surrender that he bring his tears to make the experience more memoriable.

Yours Truely,
Mr Derek Herman
NOWR Vice President and Sodomy Warrior

Re:Oh, Dear

[mabhatter654]

"I think they mean company branded Linux in the same way HP, Dell, and the old Compaq and others brand Windows and the machine bios. I'll agree this isn't any kind of advantage, but only because this was always reasonably easy to do with Windows."

I think the problem is that the OEMs that re-brand linux distros don't give credit (or money) to the distros they mooch off. Like eeePC uses Xandros or the Walmart PCs used gOS... but that money doesn't go back to Ubuntu/cannonical or Fedora/Red Hat. Hence "Linux" isn't getting a brand name, a shiny sticker customers can look for on a box.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, this kitten and sparkles thing is totally Linux as far as I know.
Microsoft supported the proposition 8, and we, Linux admins and users all around the USA and the world, were against it.
Actually, all polls show that 85% of Linux users are Homosexual, so we really like Kittens and Sparkles.
Linux IS the Gay and Lesbian OS. Apple is for Metrosexuals.

Re:Oh, Dear

[aaarrrgggh]

Unit sales increased by 1%, but revenue decreased by 12%. That is directly caused by MS having to reduce prices on their Netbook XP. They had to reduce this price to keep Linux off the netbooks.

Re:Oh, Dear

[CheshireFerk-o]

Obama's made of kittens and sparkles, held together with HOPE... and more sparkles!

I'll tell you one thing though. Whatever it is, he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time.

yeah wood, he's a frickin puppet, its a shame his nose dosent grow... if so perhaps we could stop cutting down trees

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll tell you one thing though. Whatever it is, he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time.

That's what she said.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hordeking]

You can't spell Kucinich without UFO.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

So we're still on for that date tonight, right? Bend your ass over, bitch!

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Why's it gotta be "Black" Monday, bro?

Re:Oh, Dear

[mikael]

Embedded devices and netbooks are going with Linux due to its ability to run lean.

It has been known for at least 20 years that systems-on-a-chip or embedded systems were going to take off - although it has not been until wireless communication and true-color displays have become affordable that this has happened.

For many years, Microsoft could specify the standard of hardware required to run their OS, and the hardware vendors had to obey in order to get compatibility certification.

Linux distro developers did not have that level of influence over the hardware developers and so had to modularize their software in order to adapt to hardware with limited memory and resources.

By not having this evolutionary pressure, Microsoft have really pushed themselves into a very restricted evolution path, and just hope that memory increases enough to run the embedded versions of their OS.

Re:Oh, Dear

[turbidostato]

"..Or most people being perfectly content with XP"

Which it would be included among "other factors besides economic malaise that contributed to the losses" so your "or" is completly out of place.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

The current crop of netbooks are powerful enough to run Vista. They don't run Vista because Microsoft has special netbook pricing for Windows XP. A reduced-price version of XP is a good move for Microsoft in that it stemmed the tide of Linux adoption, but it has signaled lower margins for Microsoft.

If the netbook version of Windows 7 doesn't come with a reduced price then Linux is likely to make up some ground on these devices. If the netbook version of Windows 7 does come with a reduced price, then Microsoft will still continue to see lower revenue. Either way competition from Linux hurts Microsoft. As the extreme low end of the spectrum becomes more and more powerful (and useful) Microsoft is going to be under increased pressure to sell Windows for less.

Of course, Windows 7 could make up some ground on the high end. I suppose it is possible that Windows 7 will be so cool that the release of Windows 7 will reverse the trend on the high end towards Apple's products, but I don't see that happening.

Re:Oh, Dear

[pembo13]

IBM isn't a Linux company.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hardburn]

I'm saying don't jump to conclusions based on casual links.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. When I saw the headline I couldn't believe how pitiful it was. Yes, Linux's amazing 0.94% market share is causing Microsoft's financial problems.

The Linux zealots are never going to stop acting delusional.

I use Linux, but I realize that it is just an operating system, not a religious/societal movement.

Re:Oh, Dear

[turbidostato]

"are you saying they don't know, or are lying, or what?"

Taking into acount previous Microsoft history and facts I bet "lying".

Re:Oh, Dear

[Bastard of Subhumani]

A rising overall market can hide a declining market share.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Darundal]

Windows 7 isn't leaner. It just feels a bit better, and then that is only because it is being compared mainly to Vista.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Bastard of Subhumani]

Que the intro to Win 7

I've read a few of their books - I have an old edition of Using linux at my parents' house, but I can't say I've heard of that one.

Re:Oh, Dear

[_Sprocket_]

I don't believe the word was "die" but rather "decline." As in having an impact. Linux has definitely done that in the server world.

Desktops numbers are deceiving. Sure - there's been little migration to Linux desktops. But keep in mind that we're seeing compact devices sporting Linux and that's the real concern for Microsoft.

The Big Idea is that we'll be abandoning desktops sometime in the near future. It'll all be mobile devices and consoles. Me, myself, I'm skeptical of it - but then I've had a desktop computer since 1980. But if you're a big believer that the hip kids of today will lead us in that direction, then there's something unsettling about finding Linux popping up despite no advantage from the desktop world. Or at least, it's unsettling if you've hitched your cart to Microsoft Windows.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ushering05401]

"A rising overall market can hide a declining market share."

Market share is a percentage. Even if your revenue grows by double digits every reporting period your market share percentage will still fall if your competitors are growing faster.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ushering05401]

"Windows 7 isn't leaner. It just feels a bit better, and then that is only because it is being compared mainly to Vista."

You wouldn't know it from the press lately... Might as well rename 7 to Microsoft Obama.

Re:Oh, Dear

[wizzat]

I think it was referring to depression/anger (see "black" mood). For more information: Black Monday

Re:Oh, Dear

[CannonballHead]

But keep in mind that we're seeing compact devices sporting Linux and that's the real concern for Microsoft.

Er, didn't you just accuse me of jumping from desktop statistics to servers? Aren't you jumping from desktop stats to compact devices? hehe.

I don't think we'll be abandoning desktops anytime terribly soon, either... for one thing, people like big screens, not tiny screens.

Yes, Linux definitely has had an impact in the server world - but then, UNIX was around, IIRC, before a server edition of Windows ever existed, right? So it's Windows that has to "break" into that market, not the other way around.

Anyways, my general point was I don't think Microsoft is laying off people because of Linux. I think it's primarily the economy, and probably Vista. Even in my defense of Microsoft to some extent, I don't like Vista that much... or at all, really.

/me grumbles about Sibelius not being released for Linux.

Re:Oh, Dear

[dhavleak]

I get your larger point, but I don't know if I would call Linux or Netbooks disruptive innovation. I mean, the Linux effort has been ongoing for about 15 years now, and the quest for compactness has existed for as long as laptops themselves have existed - so these are evolutionary changes rather than disruptive changes.

Regarding Netbooks -- at the moment Windows doesn't have much of a handle in that market but it would be premature to think of the netbook market as excluding Windows. There are two key barriers to Windows on Netbooks -- performance and price. If they sense that their core business is at risk, MS will find ways to remove both blockers. All indications are that they have already addressed netbook performance with Win7 (i.e. they have already identified the risk to their core business and are in containment mode). SSD space might have been a blocker in some configs, but that limitation will be rendered obsolete fairly soon if it hasn't already.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Cromac]

I'll tell you one thing though. Whatever it is, he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time.

Doesn't look like it. He's already backpedaling about campaign promises (lies) and talking like Bush. Obama is no different from any other lying, sleazy politician.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Cromac]

Exactly. This isn't Microsofts first layoff, it's just the first time they've called it that. In the past they called it a "re-org" when they laid people off, both CSG and FTE.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ogdenk]

Only because they are trying to regain lost users. And Win7 is far from lean but it performs a bit better. Microsoft will never innovate on their own and their products still end up being unimaginative and second rate at best.

Why keep giving them chances? Any other company who makes such huge blunders would be out of business overnight. But everyone's says "This sucks!" then MS says "Oh, we promise next time it will be much better and it'll only cost you $400 to upgrade! You don't want those other lousy products anyway!". Why keep giving them 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th chances to get it right?

I guess most Americans just like getting screwed. MS should have never made it this far just because they wrote a cheesy single-user OS for a crap IBM personal computer architecture that IBM didn't even really like. Especially since IBM really wanted CP/M anyway. I could have done that within 6 months had I been born a few years earlier (I was in diapers still when PC-DOS was released).

They got lucky and people keep giving them undeserved chances. The only decent product they've ever had was MS Office which was ironically a mac product for years before a Windows version existed.

Re:Oh, Dear

[FishWithAHammer]

Name Windows releases after presidents! Brilliant!

Re:Oh, Dear

[baboo_jackal]

he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time.

Yeah, because we don't already have a boatload of corrupt machine-politics hucksters in power. Er... Great. Now one's President. Again.

Re:Oh, Dear

[FishWithAHammer]

And at the high end, Apple is all over it. Take a look at bestbuy. It is rare to find a $1000+laptop, Apple notwithstanding. Or take a look at Amazon's best seller list, only to find hordes of netbooks and macbooks, perhaps with a 1 in 20 Vista machine.

I don't think most people are purchasing their computers at Amazon, however. And netbooks still seem to be more in the "internet appliance" category (which is where they should be, don't get me wrong) than the "computer" one with most users.

Laptops aren't over $1000 anymore because most people don't need that much computer. The fact that some people are willing to greatly overpay doesn't mean a lot--and given that Apple's market share isn't exactly taking off, I don't think the high-end is as much of a factor as you hint.

(I agree entirely about Microsoft's stock price being relatively unchanging, for what it's worth--but if you think they can't wave enough money at top talent to get them to come work for them, I think you're dreaming a bit.)

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

>Also Linux is ran by hippies

That's "Also Linux is run by hippies", moron.

If you're going to troll, please do so with grammatical correctness.

kkthxbye

Re:Oh, Dear

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

Exactly. Netbooks are the most dangerous thing for Microsoft ever.

Microsoft calls netbooks "ULCPCs", or Ultra Low Cost Personal Computers.

Emphasis on "Ultra Low Cost". That usually means sub-$400, and often sub-$300. At that price, a $45 Windows license is too much. So netbook manufacturers went with Linux instead, which is free.

Now Microsoft did the only thing it could. It deeply discounted Windows XP. XP may be selling for as little as $10 on netbooks.

Microsoft managed to capture the bulk of the market, at least in the USA. Linux crisis averted. Except it wasn't. Linux may not be pushing out Windows in netbooks, but it's pushing down the PRICE of Windows. That means that Microsoft makes less profit.

So, will Linux push Windows out of the netbook market? Perhaps eventually. But even if Microsoft can hold the netbook market, they are killing their profit margins to do so. That's bad news for Microsoft.

FYI, I own an EEE 900HA running Ubuntu and Vista. It's a great little PC.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ConceptJunkie]

I guess most Americans just like getting screwed.

U.S. Election results tend to confirm this hypothesis.

Re:Oh, Dear

[timeOday]

Then it's interesting that Microsoft would claim Linux is hurting them even if they don't know it's true. It gives the impression they have some other motive for wanting people to believe it.

Re:Oh, Dear

[abigor]

Interesting, same with the Sharp Aquos. It also uses Busybox and a few other things.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hairyfeet]

And I think that can be directly traced to them losing their way and ignoring their core markets. One of MSFT's biggest customers have always been business. From the littlest SOHO to the largest enterprise MSFT has been right there making boring as hell backwards compatible low resource business OSes. But then with Vista they suddenly take a giant turn into left field and completely blow off their core market to get into a multimedia pissing contest with Apple.

I mean it is no wonder you have so many sites like this and this showing step by step how to turn Win2k8 server into a desktop. It is because MSFT has abandoned their business users to try to compete with Apple in the multimedia space. Which frankly is insane as Apple has this little thing called the iPod that pretty much gives them the lock on the multimedia space, not to mention the hip factor, and the amount of money they make off of business licenses and support contracts is worth FAR more than the niche they are trying to muscle their way into.

Mark my words, and the MSFT shills can mod me down all you want, but the biggest threat to MSFT is MSFT. They are neglecting their core markets, they are flailing around from one idea to another like the company has ADHD, and by trying to stuff everyone on the planet into this giant bling bling multimedia OS they are screwing over one of their biggest customers, the business users. I mean, is there anyone here with a straight face that can say Vista was made for business? The thing practically screams HTPC! It is like they fired all their business and accounting guys and put some marketing drone in charge of the whole company. And worse, the drone wants to be as cool as Apple so bad it hurts.

Mark my words, if they do not get some common sense and make another business OS then companies like Red Hat will be more than happy to take a shot at those customers. If they want a single codebase, fine and dandy. Make a "Win2k10 Pro" out of Win2K8 server and leave Win7 for the home users. But I truly believe that Win7 will bomb, just as hard if not harder than Vista. And when it does all those corporations that have been ignored for two OS releases will start to look for alternatives.

Re:Oh, Dear

[PinkyDead]

Looking at the companies that are doing the layoffs, I wonder is the "massive economic crisis" really to blame - directly anyway.

There seems to be a strange rush about all this - did Microsoft's and Intel's and IBM's fortunes suddenly get so bad overnight that they had to lay all these people off - or has there been a steady decline and the "crisis" is being used as an opportunity to shed some pounds while blaming it on an outside source and shifting responsibility away from the real cause.

In Microsoft's case, I would suggest that this real cause is the appalling ROI on Vista as well as flagship products like Windows, and Internet Explorer continually losing ground to Linux and Firefox - or more importantly the concepts that these products represent.

Re:Oh, Dear

[flameproof]

Heh...good one... Oh, by the way, M$ was Mr. Sparkles 3rd largest campaign contributer. Put that in your bubble pipe and smoke it while you watch the next 4 years pan out.

Re:Oh, Dear

[domatic]

But I truly believe that Win7 will bomb, just as hard if not harder than Vista. And when it does all those corporations that have been ignored for two OS releases will start to look for alternatives.

I'd like to think so but it isn't going to happen. I see reports of Win7 running acceptably on virtual machines and 1 Ghz machines. Doubtless eyecandy has to be turned off but then businesses tend to do that anyway. Now if you had said that MS won't be regaining at least some of the ground they lost then I'd agree with you.

If MS puts a bit of effort into not breaking business apps then I believe we'll first see cautious then routine of Win7 just like we did with XP.

Re:Oh, Dear

[domatic]

Note well that Linux had to prove itself a competent and plausible competitor. It generally isn't wise to make threats unless one can follow through on them and at times the mere threat of a Linux migration isn't enough to get MS to throw discounts at you. You'll actually have to start that migration and make a sincere effort at it. If MS was certain that a migration would end in tears and the customer would come crawling back on their knees then they wouldn't make concessions now would they?

The thing to do now is for Linux vendors and devs to keep on keeping on and make that threatened migration as easy and viable as possible.

Re:Oh, Dear

[roc97007]

Not primarily, but, well geeze, you have been following the SCO trials?

Re:Oh, Dear

[ushering05401]

It is more like name Windows 7 specifically after a person that the media treated like the second coming.

Re:Oh, Dear

[domatic]

What's needed now is a sub $150 netbook that only does the web and light document reading on an architecture like MIPS or ARM. And the more sub $150 the better. Picking an arch like that gets the price and power consumption down and all but MS proofs the machine. Sure MS can make sweet noises about WinCE but WinCE doesn't run J. Random x86 XP application.

The trend in netbooks has been bigger screens, faster procs, and more storage. You basically wind up with a small laptop that uses flash and lacks an optical drive but is otherwise indistinguishable from a low-end laptop and includes price and battery life. I want see things closer to original EEE PC 701 in a blister pack at Walmart with an impulse purchase price on it. And even if a super low price super power efficient x86 comes along so MS can compete in that space then their margins will have to go even lower.

Re:Oh, Dear

[poopdeville]

Meh, we all look simian. We are great apes, after all. Bush had big ears though.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ogdenk]

LOL, well said.

Re:Oh, Dear

[poopdeville]

He didn't write "xor".

Re:Oh, Dear

[hairyfeet]

I do, but only if they'll get rid of that bling bling multimedia crap and give me a nice, boring and fugly as shit Win2K9 Pro. I shouldn't have to shell out the big bucks to buy a server OS to strip into a desktop just to escape the crap and get a business OS. Which I think is the REAL problem at MSFT. Businesses still spend money on machines, they still do upgrades and buy new hardware when needed. But Vista isn't FOR business users and therefor a lot of businesses like Intel are simply skipping it.

If they release Win7 without releasing a Win2Kx Pro mark my words, they are going to think that today's slump is like Xmas. Because I am sure that Red Hat and Canonical will be more than happy to take a shot at all those business customers MSFT has been ignoring. And after being given the finger for two OS releases in a row while they have their pissing contest with Apple I'm sure a lot of businesses will be looking for alternatives. You just can't expect to ignore and blow off such a large chunk of your market without paying the price. And I personally believe that is what we are seeing now: MSFT paying their price for blowing off their business customers. Mark my words, this multimedia pissing contest with Apple is really going to bite them in the ass.

Re:Oh, Dear

[cp.tar]

This is what I've been saying for a while now... The Year of Linux on the Desktop is often touted (and even more often mocked), but it is becoming the wrong concept.
Sure, desktops will not go away so soon. But we are most definitely moving towards more mobile devices. The shift from the desktop to the laptop is quite significant, though the platform is much the same. I'm thinking about the transition from the phone to the mobile phone: netbooks will gain popularity, and who knows which other devices will evolve.
Linux need not conquer the desktop. It doesn't really stand a chance because it is neither a gaming platform nor an established office platform. But if Linux gains a foothold in the netbook market, I don't think the desktop will matter so much.

However, we may see more Linux on the desktop as a side effect of spreading to many different fronts.

Re:Oh, Dear

[DiegoBravo]

Yes, the netbook thing is some kind of bubble explosion. PC's nowadays have incredibly wasted fast CPUs (except for gamers and antivirus lovers), huge hard disks (we *have* to fill them with videos to feel less disappointed.) So the netbooks just demonstrate that with 1/10 of that power you may do most or all of your work... logically, you should pay about 1/10 of the PC price ... and this will impact in the OS and applications market.

Re:Oh, Dear

[shadwstalkr]

I think the problem is that the OEMs that re-brand linux distros don't give credit (or money) to the distros they mooch off. Like eeePC uses Xandros or the Walmart PCs used gOS... but that money doesn't go back to Ubuntu/cannonical or Fedora/Red Hat. Hence "Linux" isn't getting a brand name, a shiny sticker customers can look for on a box.

If the distros see that as a problem they should change their licensing. I'd like to see some kind of organized Linux branding too, but WalMart and Asus aren't getting away with something sneaky here. They're expressly allowed to do this, just like you and me.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

That Obama guy? Yeah, just what we need, another nigger in D.C. begging for change.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hardburn]

Of course Linux is hurting them. Any signficant competition hurts them. The summary was bad because it implies that Linux is the main cause of a 6,000 person layoff at Microsoft. This completely ignores Apple, Vista being a big turd, and (most of all) general economic tightening.

Would Microsoft have a big layoff without Linux? Very likely, yes. It might be 4,000 people instead of 6,000, but it would have happened.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ozmanjusri]

I see reports of Win7 running acceptably on virtual machines and 1 Ghz machines.

Hype and marketing.

Real world benchmarks are gradually creeping out and guess what?

"any illusions about Windows 7 somehow being leaner or more efficient than Vista can now be thrown out the window."

Via Engadget

Re:Oh, Dear

[hardburn]

A reduced-price version of XP is a good move for Microsoft in that it stemmed the tide of Linux adoption, but it has signaled lower margins for Microsoft.

It's not a big expenditure on Microsoft's part, though. It couldn't have been too hard to trim fat off of XP (the TinyXP guys did it without even having access to the source code, after all). Their price-per-unit might be lower compared to Vista, but they certainly recouped the additional development costs quickly and were able to get a foothold in an emerging market.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jorophose]

You would think Atom rakes in enough profit for Intel to keep them running...

And hey, linux users love their high-performance hardware too. It just happens that there's less high-performance lovers.

Re:Oh, Dear

[bonch]

Doesn't sound like it if he's supporting warrantless wiretapping just like Bush did. Same old crap. You bought into the hype of a politician who broke his own campaign financing promise to forego public financing in order to raise as much as he wanted without any government oversight. Screw the campaign finance laws we passed after Nixon! Very, very bad precedent that will bite us in the ass in the future since all politicians will forego public funding having seen what Obama was able to accomplish with the backing of his millionaire Hollywood friends.

Re:Oh, Dear

[dna_(c)(tm)(r)]

M$ was Mr. Sparkles 3rd largest campaign contributer.

When in Rome... In most democratic countries, donations by companies to (potential) political leaders would be seen as corruption.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Nigger Monday is not politically correct.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

The problem isn't that the version of XP used on netbooks took some time and effort to create. The problem is that netbooks running XP are being sold instead of netbooks running a much more expensive version of Windows.

Even just a few years ago no OEM had that sort of leverage over Microsoft. You either built hardware that worked with existing versions of Windows (with existing cost structures) or you didn't build a device at all. With the netbook Microsoft showed that it was willing to cave on price if the alternative was a PC running Linux.

Sure, the netbook version of XP wasn't expensive to create, but Microsoft's R&D department is essentially a fixed cost. The bit that this particular set of articles missed is that Microsoft's unit sales actually increased by 1% in this last quarter, but revenue on those sales was down 8%. Clearly this is better than losing those sales to Linux, but it still amounts to nearly a 10% price reduction on the sale price of Windows due to competition from Linux.

Now clearly this isn't going to drive Microsoft out of business any time soon, but it certainly worries investors. If future trends see Microsoft selling less software at lower prices then they'll want to see changes made.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah... ever notice how his eyes were really close together, and every time he read a sentence without stuffing it up he looked up for applause from mummy? One messed up dude to lead the world's only super-power.

As Australia's ABC lunchtime news said yesterday, his ability to perceive his poor handling of the office and disastrous policy mistakes leading to one of the most unpopular presidents ever as merely "courage for his own convictions" is, and I quote, "delusional"! I applauded.

Re:Oh, Dear

[dirtyforker]

Great! We no longer have Windows Vista, we have Windows Bush!

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

That's an excellent point. Microsoft didn't come out with special pricing until it was clear that the netbook was a runaway hit.

It's also important to note that the Tier 1 OEMs like Dell and HP weren't the slightest bit interested in upsetting the status quo until a relative upstart on the consumer scene showed that there was money to be made. For HP, Dell, and others near the top of the heap the current Windows marketplace suits them just fine. They get the bulk of Microsoft's marketing money. As long as Windows is a sure bet they don't want to rock the boat.

The fact that companies like HP and Dell sell netbooks (and pre-load Linux across their product lines) shows just how far the Linux trend has already progressed.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ushering05401]

OMFG, didn't even think of that. Brilliant.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

[quote]Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.[/quote]
If it was solely because of the economy then MS would not have an increase in Revenue yet a plummet in profits.

This is a result of either
A. Sharp decline in selling price of products
        Competition such as Linux and Windows XP causes this

B. Sharp increase inhouse expenses, or products without a lack of demand.
          Poor business choices *Vista* cough cough causes this.

If this was solely due to the economy Microsoft would have a sharp drop in "Revenue" as no one purchases new products

Re:Oh, Dear

[Stephen Ma]

And netbooks still seem to be more in the "internet appliance" category

For now. In time, even a "high end" business computer will cost less than $100. That is when Microsoft will really start sweating.

Re:Oh, Dear

[symbolset]

They used to hide "right sizing" in the legions of temps.. but of course now it's better to shed the real employees and keep the temps!

Ya think? Having been a temp in this whole blue-badge, green-badge continuous reorganization scheme I can speak to this. In this environment the temp's got a lot of leverage. He can afford to call a turd a turd and not say it has potential. He can make fun of PHBs. He can do honest work and contribute without fear his out-of-scale achievements become the flag that gets him targeted for political career assassination. He can take bigger risks without fear of being labeled a 10%er. He has the power of laughter, and oh, what a power that is. He can do this because - what are they going to do? Fire him?

But this isn't Microsoft specific. I've never worked for them and I probably won't - they would have to pay enough more than I was worth to make me feel like I was exploiting them. Seinfeld money maybe. I would for what he got paid, and I think I could give them what they got for what they paid him.

They're just saying this to "look busy" so the stock market will still like them.

Agreed. Do you think anybody will notice their stock is worth half of what it was ten years ago today? Apple's good for 10x your money in the same period. For you 401K folks that's the leverage that investing in a growth company gives you. Companies that have achieved monopoly have no growth potential - the best they can hope for is graceful decline potentially (but rarely) followed by a bet-the company reinvention of process. This is going to surprise a lot of you dollar-cost-averaging investors, but betting that a company will survive the retirement of its founders is a very bad bet. If you start investing in a company at the beginning of your working life, and keep your money in that company throughout your careers, 95% of the time you'll lose it all because founders of companies don't have longer working lives than you do.

Re:Oh, Dear

[symbolset]

Don't forget Dell.

Re:Oh, Dear

[FishWithAHammer]

Sure. At that point, it's reinvent-or-die, of course. (One might say that Microsoft is already doing that now, though, with their more recent open-source-friendly activities and expansion of programs to get dev software into the hands of students. Hook 'em now. Me, I use what's good, but I wasn't going to say no to a free copy of VS2008 and Win2003 Server.)

Re:Oh, Dear

[FishWithAHammer]

I'd go with Windows Dubya, myself.

Does that make Windows 98 into Windows Bubba? Fat, ugly, and unimpressive, but highly popular?

Re:Oh, Dear

[MichaelSmith]

Pretty much every Linux netbook is branded, somehow -- the EEE PC in particular.

MacOS is BSD branded by Apple.

Re:Oh, Dear

[MichaelSmith]

Laptops can be made a lot cheaper than the current price of an EeePC. It will be interesting to see what happens if mainland chinese computer makers start undercutting asus by a wide margin.

A week ago I took a ferry from Victoria to Tasmania. Most of the passengers were poor(er) people who prefer to take their own car on a boat rather than fly and rent. Some people used laptops during the crossing and more than half were little asus laptops.

Re:Oh, Dear

[_Sprocket_]

Aren't you jumping from desktop stats to compact devices? hehe.

Yeah, but I'm not doing it in one sentence. :P

I don't think we'll be abandoning desktops anytime terribly soon, either... for one thing, people like big screens, not tiny screens.

The only thing I could see is either working with data in different ways using something unlike the desktop environment we're used to or docking. I'd love a device that I slip in to a screen / casing so it acts like a PDA / smartphone. Then when I get to the office, I dock it to my screen and keyboard (like I do with my laptop) and it becomes my full-sized-feeling workstation.

Yes, Linux definitely has had an impact in the server world - but then, UNIX was around, IIRC, before a server edition of Windows ever existed, right? So it's Windows that has to "break" into that market, not the other way around.

This is what's interesting with this sector. Unix systems ruled the earth (well, OK... lets just say they did). Windows shows up making use of much cheaper commodity hardware and begins winning marketshare. Linux comes along and also runs on that same commodity hardware. What you have is Unix's territory being chipped away by both Windows and Linux. However, anything Linux gains is a net loss for Windows which would normally pick up the "cheap hardware" win.

Anyways, my general point was I don't think Microsoft is laying off people because of Linux. I think it's primarily the economy, and probably Vista.

While I agree that these are likely the largest factor, I've seen this change in the industry over the years. I find it difficult to discount Linux's impact entirely.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're right because schools adopted Microsoft Windows because that's what businesses were using and the schools wanted to prepare kids for "the real world" and that's what was happening. Way back my school had computer lab's full of Mac's, but they switched around here roughly when Windows 98 came out. Damn, I can't believe I remember when Windows 95 came out and thought "this tech is going to be amazing in 10 years". Here we are, I'm on a hand-me-down laptop using Linux and the tech now really is amazing. I can't wait to see what happens in 10 more years... especially considering new technology is about the only thing I can see saving the American economy.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

And unicorns!

Re:Oh, Dear

[tagattack]

Are you guys crazy? Microsoft has "troubles"? Microsoft is laying off 5000 people...out of 91,000. That's 5.5%, relatively light for this economy. Sony is laying off 16,000 of 185,800 people leaving it's slashes at 8.6% (incase your arithmetic isn't up to it, that's 63% more people relative to the size of the company). The company I work for (I won't mention the name) last year cut a total of 139 of 800 people including three senior executives, registering at 17.3%. Now that's a troubled company. Microsoft is running very strong. Their profit margins remain in the 20s despite the hardening economic times they continue to run without an annual net operating loss and maintain an enormous cash position. Microsoft is in no way "troubled". They're being very conservative about even being prudent, given the state of the economy. They could probably afford to -- and might benefit their shareholders if they did -- live without double the number of people they are cutting.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed... 100%

Linux doesn't harm anything. With a very little (almost insignificant) user base? Come on! be real!

Face it, Linux is used on servers not by the average person.

Re:Oh, Dear

[kdemetter]

Correction : this is the best economic crisis to use as an excuse to lay off people.

The only thing they need to do to make even more money in the crisis , is adapt their business strategy to allow cheaper devices to run on Windows.

So , one strategy would be to decrease system requirements for Windows 7. Which would be a good thing , compared to the bloated piece of junk Vista is.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hairyfeet]

Wow, I thought MSFT was hurting for money? Then how can they afford to pay guys to troll for posts that dare say Win7 isn't the second coming? Mark me troll ALL you want, I got enough karma to play this until hell freezes over. What you CAN'T do is change reality. Vista is a dud, your business users HATE it and so do your consumers. By ignoring your core business(the business customers) and instead getting into a pissing contest with Apple you are only hurting yourself MSFT. I have used, maintained, repaired, and deployed EVERY MSFT OS from Win3.1 and for the FIRST time in my life I am actively avoiding the new product. And from the lowliest SOHO to Intel, I am FAR from alone.

So mark me troll ALL you want. Say Win7 is the greatest thing since slice bread ALL you want. I hate to break the news to you but MSFT doesn't actually have a RDF, but I'm sure you can try to copy Apple's when Win8 comes out and your market share is below 80 and falling like a stone. Because putting lipstick on a pig doesn't turn pork chops into steak, and putting more bling onto Vista isn't going to make businesses and consumers like it any more than they do Vista, which is of course not at all. So mark my words, and mark them well. No Win2Kx for business users, another round of trying to hoist some multimedia bling bling OS off as a business OS, and I'm sure Red Hat and Canonical will be more than happy to take a shot at your business customers. But believe what you want-2010 will come and then we will see who is right. I'm betting that it is me.

Re:Oh, Dear

[guitarpy]

Microsoft is the fattened calf waiting for the slaughter...Roman empire style...everything has it's end, and even if it take another 20 years microsoft will see it's end too.

Re:Oh, Dear

[OrangeTide]

And I ran.. ran so far awaaaay.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

As early as last quarter, Microsoft admitted that Linux and netbooks were eating into its fat profits. Recently, it came home, with the software giant announcing its first-ever layoffs.

Yeah, it couldn't be because there is a massive economic crisis going on. It's all Linux.

I doubt it has anything to do with the economic downturn. MSFT products are already pre-installed. Rather MSFT lost a market share because they produced a substandard product. Be it up or down market--if you produce a piece of crap that no one likes--it is logical that alternatives will be sought.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hairyfeet]

Please, PLEASE don't forget folks we say the SAME thing when Vista was in pre release. Remember all the hype? Remember how the guys at places like Win supersite tripped over themselves to say how wonderful Vista was? Sadly reality didn't live up to the hype then, and I seriously doubt it will this time either. I have been showing the shots of Win7 to SOHO and small business customers(I haven't had the time to pick up the beta yet) and their reaction has been completely consistent "Yuck". Actually that was the nicest comment, the best one is from the woman that owns the local insurance agency- "It look like MSFT and Apple had unprotected sex and this is what popped out 9 months later."

Folks seem to forget that these places touting benchmarks are NOT using the kind of gear you get at Best Buy or Staples. They are using these multicore loaded to the gills with RAM monsters. But here we are in 2009 and what do I see selling at the above stores and Walmart? Intel Celerons and AMD Semprons with single cores and 1GB of RAM. The average office isn't going to have these multicore beasts. With every OS before I could add a little more to the previous generations hardware and run the new OS. Not this time. And let us not forget that many hardware and software manufacturers used Vista as an excuse to try to force upgrades on their customers. While that isn't MSFT's fault when you have the userbase of something like XP and millions of drivers written for it forcing your customers to toss everything they own isn't a good thing.

I am not some Linux or Apple fanboy. I have ran, configured, repaired and maintained every single MSFT OS since win3.1 INCLUDING WinME(you still owe me an apology Bill, you asshole!) and with Vista this is the FIRST time I am actively avoiding the new MSFT OS. Why? Because even with a 3.6GHz P4 with 2GB of RAM and a 7600GS graphics card it just doesn't work for me. It is flaky, buggy, and more crash prone than Win9x was for me. Now we have Win7 coming up and I know a LOT of folks who are sitting there hoping that Win7 will fix all the problems they had with Vista. The hardware that didn't work, the software that wouldn't run, etc. Mark my words when Win7 gets released and they find out it is Vista with a new coat of paint(not everybody reads tech sites) then they are going to run like hell.

Business owners simply can't wait around for Win8 with XP getting long in the tooth and MSFT ignoring their needs. I am sure that Red Hat and Canonical will be happy to take a shot at all those ignored customers, and after two OSes in a row that completely ignore them I am sure there will be MANY a business that will start to look seriously at "this Linux thing". I mean, what else are they going to do? Buy server licenses so they can roll their own business OSes? Stick with WinXP? I am sure that Ballmer will kill off XP sales completely when Win7 is rolled out anyway. Why MSFT suddenly did this 180 away from business customers is frankly beyond me but it is MSFT hurting themselves more than Linux or Apple hurting them. Linux and Apple are simply doing the smart thing and going after those customers that MSFT is ignoring. That is simply good business.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'll tell you one thing though. Whatever it is, he's certainly made of different stuff to every other politician in power at the present time."

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!

Oh wait, You're serious....

HA HA HA HA HA HA AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH [gasp] HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!1

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Facts:

• Bush is a human.
• Obama is an ape-monkey negroid thing.
• Obama is a sub-human ape
• Obama has monky ears.
• Obama has nigger monkey lips
• Obama is a nigger.

Get the facts.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

quote: "Might as well rename 7 to Microsoft Obama."

Might as well cut to the chase and say Windows 7 is a nigger.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Daengbo]

I just want a REALLY powerful smart phone with docks at work and at home.

Re:Oh, Dear

[lordSaurontheGreat]

As for Windows 7 making any ground, the only way in hell they're going to get me to use 7 is to give it to me free. I legally own Vista. I'm also in the process of migrating to Mac. I'm not throwing any more cash at my PC! It's plenty powerful, so it should last me long enough to upgrade to a Mac desktop (I already have a Mac laptop).

So I repeat: give Vista owners a free upgrade. I want to believe that Microsoft isn't a great big evil corporation and I want to believe that there's still some good left in them, but they keep removing reasons for me to stick around.

I want to believe...

Re:Oh, Dear

[lordSaurontheGreat]

I guess most Americans just like getting screwed.

Why do you think they voted for Obama?

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Your statements regarding investments are a bit misleading. First, MSFT stock has paid a good chunk of dividends over that 10 year period. Apple has never paid a dividend.
You're comparing growth between two companies at very different stages of maturity, which is not really fair. Do we say a junior oil & gas exploration company is better than EXMOB because their revenue grew 500%? Sure, if you look at the last few months/years of equity growth, but that doesn't mean it was the better investment.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Daengbo]

MacOS is NeXT branded by Apple.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Run, ran, run. Run, ran, run. Run, ran, run.

Say it with me now ... run, ran, run.

Simple past in active voice: I ran.

Simple present in passive voice: Linux is run by hippies.

Re:Oh, Dear

[lordSaurontheGreat]

I don't see any innovation going to market.

What I see is Microsoft flailing uselessly at an imagined threat from Linux and Mac.

Linux isn't being actively bombarded at OEMs like Windows. Mac isn't stealing their core business (the business). OEMs feinted by threatening to sell more Linux, and a few even shipped a few machines with Linux just to make MSFT sweat. Apple feinted by building Exchange support into iPhone, and still sells an (excellent) office suite, but they aren't actively sending ninja marketing squads to ACME Corporation and infiltrating the business market.

Their feints worked - Microsoft has responded with their knee-jerk reaction. Invade and destroy. Only the feints came on the fronts where Microsoft is technologically weakest. Multimedia and home user satisfaction (supposed to be fixed a la Vista) and with... well... I don't know what their battle plan against Apple is. I'm not even sure they know what they're doing.

The result is that Microsoft put themselves into an environment where they're ten years behind and in doing so alienated their core businesses by putting them on the back burner. Just in time for the unknown third parties - J. Random Linux Foundation - to infiltrate the business sector by spilling over from the server room, where Linux is already dominant.

Just in time for Microsoft to come trooping back from their failed anti-Apple sortie to come crying back to their business contemporaries, only to find the fortress locked and full of unfriendly defenders.

Which leaves Microsoft out in the cold. Their employees will all be the recipients of bailouts, and after their four years of welfare will move back into their parents homes, go back to college, then re-enter the workforce four years later. Ballmer will make history by being the first person to commit suicide by throwing a chair at himself. The Microsoft campus will be bought by a new venture and turned into a zoo with many interesting exhibits including elephants, giraffes, zebras, and a few penguins, which are [poetically] gaining in popularity at aquariums, zoos, and science academies as exhibits.

Re:Oh, Dear

[MichaelSmith]

Oh okay. NXT is BSD branded by Next Step.

Re:Oh, Dear

[teg]

You quoted: "any illusions about Windows 7 somehow being leaner or more efficient than Vista can now be thrown out the window."

As long as it isn't slower, that will be sufficient for most purposes - simply because the computers of the world are faster and have more memory than three years earlier when Vista was releases. I certainly don't root for Microsoft, but if it runs at the same speed as Vista on entry level hardware, the chances of people running away screaming because of the speed will be smaller this time. The main exception is netbooks.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Man.. The racist shit on this site is getting so old.

Re:Oh, Dear

[azenpunk]

what did you think would happen when they gave the keys to the kingdom to a marketing guy? now if apple could come out with a no frills, stable-as-the-earth-itself bsd based server, sans hipness MSFT could be in serious trouble.

i've been saying for a while that MS has 10 years left, and by my count we've got 6 or 7 left, but i think at that time MS will be left with at most 60% market share and linux will be popular enough that companies besides id will write/port games for it. i don't however think linux will ever take over compeltely, but i'd be really happy with a 10% market share.

notice that hardware manufacturers want something besides windows. they keep poking and prodding linux, they may not give it full attention yet, but they keep looking. i think they *do* want to loosen MS' grip on their balls. HP supports nearly all of their printers on linux and some (one?) OEM's have offered linux on their products.

i freely admit that i WANT Microsoft to fail hugely and you can argue with me about that all you want, but first you have to admit that they fucking deserve it.

Re:Oh, Dear

[TheRaven64]

This summing up can be summed up even more succinctly:

Companies can offer their own branded software platform based on Linux

There is only one word you need for the advantage of Linux (or *BSD / Solaris) over Windows: differentiation. That is how you get people to buy your system when it's made from the same commodity parts as your competitor. You need something that differentiates it. Free Software lets you do this by giving you a large number of existing building blocks that you can assemble in a unique way. This works well in the NetBook market segment, because these systems aren't marketed in the same way as other computers, so the same expectation of compatibility is not there. Often they don't have optical drives, so no one expects to be able to install software they bought on CD on them. They can think of them as consumer-electronics devices for email, word processing, and web browsing (which is what a lot of people want from a computer - especially if they have a 'real' computer for the things that don't fit into this category).

Re:Oh, Dear

[Bastard of Subhumani]

Market share is a percentage.

Irrelevant. 15% of 200 million is more than 20% of 100 million. If you look at the sales, they're 1.5 times as much. Which is what I said.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

>

The fact that companies like HP and Dell sell netbooks (and pre-load Linux across their product lines) shows just how far the Linux trend has already progressed.

Linux netbooks have a 4 times higher return rate than XP ones though

http://www.osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_Rate_Statement

Sunday we reported on an interview with an MSI manager, who stated that internal research had shown that the return rate for the Linux version of MSI's Wind netbook was four times as high as that of the Windows XP version. He claimed that the unfamiliarity of people with Linux was the culprit. This claim sparked some serious discussion around the net, but now MSI's statement is being repeated by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu.

One of the problems with MSI's Andy Tung's statement was that it was impossible to say if the figures extended beyond MSI's own Wind, and if it was possible to apply this claim to the general netbook market. Canonical's marketing manager, Gerry Carr, confirms in an interview that retun rates for netbooks running open source software is indeed higher than that of those running Windows XP. "We don't know what the XP return rates are," Carr states, "But I will say that the return rate is above normal for netbooks that offer open-source operating systems."

Carr further explains:

Unclear selling is happening, typically online. The customer will get their netbook sent to their home and they imagine to find something like a Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown Ubuntu version. They are unwilling to learn it and they were expecting to have Windows. We said a long time ago, we didn't want to make a Windows clone. It has a different interface especially with the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. We think it's a better way but it's not the same way people are used to. That unfamiliarity can take a while to learn and there is an education that has to be stressed.

As some have noted, it's interesting that people who switch from Windows to Mac OS X do not seem to have this problem. Personally, I believe that there are some logical reasons why this is the case. I think most people buy a Mac after having it seen in operation at a friend or relative, or even after having played with it at an Apple Store or an official retailer. Also, I think most people already know that Apple is different than Windows, and as such, when they choose to purchase a machine from Apple, they are aware it's going to be different. There is also a psychological effect at work; an Apple computer is not cheap, and post-purchase rationalisation will certainly play a role here.

These factors do not play much of a role in the purchase of a netbook. They are much cheaper, and often, online resellers are unclear that they do not come with Windows. In addition, people are simply less familiar with the whole concept of Linux than they are familiar with Apple - it is easier to deal with something new and different if you know there's going to be something new and different in the first place. And to make matters worse, there are probably very few 'real' retail stores who carry Linux machines for prospective buyers to test.

All in all, I agree with Carr when he says that it doesn't really matter how good or bad desktop Linux is; the fact that it's different is in and of itself reason enough for its adoption rate to be slow.

One of my clients makes hardware and they support Linux. They have Ubuntu machines in the test lab and the testers absolutely hate Ubuntu. Whereas thinks like Sleep and Hibernate just work on Windows, even the much maligned Vista, getting them to work on Ubuntu requires endless fiddling around.

For some people this fiddling around is a hobby, and a chance to prove to yourself that you're smarter than average. For most people, it's a waste of time.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

I think you mean Feyd Rautha.

Re:Oh, Dear

[MtViewGuy]

You're wrong on this.

Once IBM ported Linux so it runs on their "big iron" minis and mainframes, they became arguably the biggest deployers on Linux in the world, since IBM minis and mainframe are so widely used even today. It was this success that drove Sun to finally open up Solaris.

Re:Oh, Dear

[MtViewGuy]

Microsoft is getting beaten down by Apple at the high end and by Linux on the netbook space.

That is actually not completely correct. While the early netbooks did run Linux, most current netbooks you can buy run Windows XP, and will eventually run Windows 7. Meanwhile, the poor economy will drive people back to (surprisingly) Windows-based systems, especially when you can get a well-loaded system loaded Windows Vista Home Premium (SP1) for around US$500 to US$700 retail including a 19" 1440x900 widescreen monitor.

Re:Oh, Dear

[jerep]

He's charismatic a whole lot, that should please his corporate overlords and in the end work against the public big time without the masses ever noticing.

Re:Oh, Dear

[hey!]

One thing we have to bear in mind is that Netbooks don't have to run Linux to be disruptive to Microsoft. They can be disruptive to Microsoft running Windows.

Microsoft gained its financial preeminence in the 80s. This was a time of exponential adoption. In that decade, roughly speaking, companies went from typewriters to putting computers on everyone's desks. This was a time when piracy was rife, but it didn't really matter because there was not so much a rising tide as a flood going on.

In the 90s, Microsoft successfully negotiated (against my expectations, I'll admit) a reasonably soft landing as the era of exponential expansion wound down. Having a monopoly, of course, was a big part of this. They even successfully managed the paradigm change of the Internet, in the short term.

But one thing that was clear to many of us over ten years ago was that if the general phenomenon of Moore's Law continued indefinitely, it would strangle Microsoft's operating system profits. At the end of the 80s, a "decent" computer cost the equivalent of maybe three or four thousand current era dollars. Within that retail price, there was a lot of room for Microsoft to charge profit. However, what would happen when computers cost less than the then unthinkable level of $500? The prices Microsoft charged for its operating system back then would be a huge fraction of the retail price.

That's why netbooks are disruptive. Linux does't have to run on them to cut Microsoft's margins. Microsoft has to cut its margins to prevent Linux from running on them. It's protecting its low end flank, so that developers and users don't start jumping ship en masse. Even so, they are less successful at keeping Linux out of the netbook area than they'd like. They've cut their prices enough to prevent serious damage in the immediate future, but not enough to keep the thin end of the wedge out.

If there's one thing that watching this industry for twenty years has taught me, is watch the high end edge of the low end. Once things start to move there, we aren't looking at the end of the beginning any longer; we're looking at the beginning of the end.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

Yes MSI Wind has a much higher return rate for its Linux netbooks. Asus, on the other hand (which sells far more netbooks) says that returns are about the same for both Linux and XP.

Blame Linux if you want, but the real problem lies with the crappy job MSI did putting Linux on its netbook. I don't know if they are still doing it but their original Linux preloads didn't even support all of the hardware on the netbook. Either way, it's not like MSI Wind has stopped offering Linux. A few years ago getting a laptop pre-loaded with Linux was impossible. With the netbooks everyone offers Linux, even when it is pretty clear that they hope it fails.

Re:Oh, Dear

[kojot350]

Someone please mod up the parent, it's so true! And I think that if people would stop saying about the crisis and bad economy, I would really recover faster.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

It's not just MSI

http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/laptops/buyers-give-thumbs-down-to-linux-netbooks-484642?src=rss&attr=all
Carphone Warehouse is to stop selling one of their Linux netbooks after the return rates went through the roof. The Elonex Webbook, which ships with Ubuntu, was taken back to the shop by 20 per cent of purchasers. Contrary to some reports, the laptops are not being 'recalled.'

It seems the main problem is customer expectation; people expect a netbook to work just like a normal laptop and are surprised when it doesn't. Behind that would seem to be a lack of willingness to acquiesce to the charm of Ubuntu. Around 60,000 of the netbooks were shipped; mostly with a broadband bundle.

It's not the first time we've heard about high return rates for these reasons. TechRadar has previously investigated strong rumours of high netbook return rates to DSG stores (PC World, Dixons, Currys.digital) but was rebuffed.

And it seems that high return rates aren't only a problem this side of the pond. In an interview with Laptop Mag in the US, MSI's Director of US Sales Andy Tung admitted that people just weren't used to Linux. "Our internal research has shown that the return of netbooks is higher than regular notebooks, but the main cause of that is Linux," he said.

'Not what they are used to'

"People would love to pay $299 or $399 but they don't know what they get until they open the box. They start playing around with Linux and start realising that it's not what they are used to."

"They don't want to spend time to learn it so they bring it back to the store. The return rate is at least four times higher for Linux netbooks than Windows XP netbooks."

Consumers may be realising that you do actually get what you pay for - and that cheap netbooks don't actually come with the ability to edit video or work just like Windows. At the launch of a big-name netbook in the summer, TechRadar spoke to a product manager who admitted the big problem with netbooks was letting consumers know what they were buying.

We spoke to Ben Russell, a recent Eee PC purchaser. "I find the OS a little bit confusing coming from a PC background - and to be honest I still prefer my Windows laptop. However it is light, cheap and fine for a bit of word processing, email, etc. The biggest bugbear is getting Mobile Broadband to work. It took a long time to get up and it's still not stable or doesn't work every time. It's a real downside."

Re:Oh, Dear

[JAlexoi]

Oh, the "public outcry" about the invasion of Iraq still haunts me....

Re:Oh, Dear

[hairyfeet]

But that doesn't address the more fundamental problem, which is MSFT completely ignoring one of their biggest markets which is a consistent breadwinner(business customers) to suddenly switch gears and ONLY release a home OS. Don't take my word for it, read this article from the enterprise desktop perspective. The conclusion? "Just as consumer-focused as Vista. Home Groups. Media Sharing. Federated Search. All very cool. All very slick. And all very much irrelevant to the enterprise desktop customer"

It is like MSFT has adopted the Chewbacca defense, in that they have decided to make NO sense. The business market, from the SOHOs to the enterprise customers is a BIG market, with huge profit margins at stake. Why in the 9 hells would they risk tossing that away for the home consumer, who frankly was happy with XP and never asked for all this bling bling in the first place? It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. But mark my words and mark them well. After being completely ignored for TWO OS releases in a row(Vista & Win7) the business customers are going to start looking for another OS in mass. Why? Because they simply won't have a choice. What else CAN they do, stay with XP?(not likely as Ballmer will kill it when Win7 is released), buy server licenses just so they can "roll their own" business OS? Go with all that bloated multimedia glitz which does them no good and buy gamer rigs for their secretaries?

I just hope companies like Red Hat and Canonical have their A games ready. I'm sure I'm not the only lifelong MSFT business user whose starting to get tired of being ignored. And when they pull the plug on Win2K Pro and WinXP Pro we're going to need something to replace them and it looks like MSFT expects us to wait for Win8 in the hopes of another business OS from them. I know that I'm having a lot more SOHO and SMB owners ask me about "this Linux thing" and frankly I NEVER thought I'd see the day when that would happen. But that is what happens when you give a large section of your userbase the finger. They start looking for other options.

Re:Oh, Dear

[JAlexoi]

Fact is: ASUS put money and effort in Linux. I am now planning to buy their MB with ExpressGate. I mean if they put the effort of getting Linux in their MB's I don't think they spared any effort of putting Linux on EeePC.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

Elonex? Who in the world is that?

So both MSI Wind and Elonex appear to have trouble rolling out Linux netbooks. Imagine that. It takes more to make a good netbook than slapping some random Linux desktop distribution on it and calling it good.

Once again, the folks that are doing a good job with their Linux netbooks not only don't have the problem, but they also sell far more units.

It's possible that "Carphone Warehouse" is an important computer retailer where you live, but I doubt it. People come out with products that don't sell well every day. Linux isn't some sort of magic panacea.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

Yeah, and Grandma will soon be using Linux, right? Dream on, fanboy.

Re:Oh, Dear

[crazycheetah]

First, I'll not comment on Linux cutting into Microsoft's profit by some margin. But Apple? I don't see that.

As for Intel and IBM. First of all, IBM... IBM should be making some profit off of Linux, as they have Linux solutions, which they even advertise on commercials for some time now.

And Intel... I don't see how Linux could have any real effect on Intel. Unless people are switching to AMD, VIA, and/or other alternatives to run Linux, Intel shouldn't lose anything--people still need the hardware. And Intel has been pretty nice with Linux (even the new graphics memory stuff in the linux kernel came at least in part from Intel).

I'm not completely confident that it's just a bad economy making Microsoft fall, as in my personal experience (yes, therefore, this doesn't hold that much ground), Mac and Linux seem to be seeing more interest from people than usual for the past years. Especially with the iPhone (for Mac, I've had friends and acquaintances consider a Mac over a Windows computer mostly because of their iPhone lately) and Netbooks (Linux, kinda).

And I'm still not seeing "the year of Linux" for desktops. How many times I've had people tell me that their IT admins at work, who use Linux on the servers, say Linux will never work on a desktop, only to be shown my Linux desktop and have me blow away all but maybe a few points made against it--like the "you have to use the command line!" that for most desktop purposes has been dead for quite some time now. There's still too much hate, whether it's ready or not. And those few points can actually be very big for some people, even though they love some of the things I show them that Windows and OS X have nothing really competitive against built-in. I am still surprised by how many of my friends using Windows are blown away by the virtual desktops and want it--I tell them, I've heard of it on Windows, but none of them have figured it out, and love that it's easy to get with Linux. *shrug* That's just an example, but none of those things have been very compelling to make a significant switch for a lot of people.

Re:Oh, Dear

[mabhatter654]

I'm not saying there's anything legally wrong with the practice. But all the netbooks with "linux" except Dells come with a non-brand Linux. There's Canonical out there with Ubuntu Net Remix which seems nice. It is a part of REAL Ubuntu, just some package changes so updates, drives and such will all be well maintained, as well as a large community of support that's really good for newbies. It should be the "default" netbook distro, even if the OEMs "borrow" it.

I'm upset that they don't use a branded Linux, and that the OEMS of netbooks don't really make any claims that what they put on there will be supported. All the netbook distros are just a little "broken" so you can't just go online to where newbies congregate and get help. While community efforts like ubuntu that would love to get the mindshare get ignored... the OEMs aren't even bothering to ASK companies like Red Hat or Canonical.

I sum it means that "linux" is not winning any shares at all. It's just being used because it's cheap, not good. That's negative press.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Jason Earl]

Honestly, it's not about whether grandma can use Linux. I can use Linux. That makes me happy.

More importantly, at least to Microsoft, it's about whether Linux's existence is causing Microsoft to charge less for Windows. In the case of netbooks it is hard to argue that this isn't the case.

For the most part Microsoft has kept Linux off of netbooks and out of consumers hands, but it has done so by charging considerably less per copy of Windows. If you are Microsoft investor that's a troubling turn of events.

It will be interesting to see, with the release of Windows 7, if Microsoft tries to charge full Windows prices for copies of Windows destined to be run on netbooks. My guess is that Microsoft will not charge full price, but will instead continue to have special pricing for these devices. This won't be because the next generation of netbooks won't be capable of running Windows 7 (or even Windows Vista) but because Windows simply doesn't add that much value Linux on these devices.

I would never argue that Linux is for everyone, but Linux is becoming an increasingly attractive option for a wide array of uses. Netbooks wouldn't even exist if Linux wasn't available, and it is quite likely that the next computerish gizmo that catches fire will *also* be running Linux.

What's clear, is that netbooks are cutting into Microsoft's bottom line. As I pointed out earlier Microsoft's unit sales were actually up 1% but gross revenue from those sales was down 8%. Granted, that's mostly due to the fact that Microsoft is selling XP at a discount, but if Microsoft wasn't selling XP at a discount then Linux would be on a lot more netbooks.

To Linux vendors netbooks represent a great opportunity, to Microsoft netbooks are a lose/lose situation.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Bush also walks like he's carrying a sheep under each arm.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

woosh and it goes over your head.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

'Running acceptably' is not about moving the mouse around and opening/closing menus.

Re:Oh, Dear

[symbolset]

First, MSFT stock has paid a good chunk of dividends over that 10 year period.

Microsoft did not start paying dividends until 2003. Since then they've declared $4.96 in dividends.

You're comparing growth between two companies at very different stages of maturity, which is not really fair.

My retirement account doesn't care about "fair". What it cares about is growth. You can't get growth out of a company that's got no growth potential. You can't have more of a market than all of it.

Sure, if you look at the last few months/years of equity growth, but that doesn't mean it was the better investment.

A decade is not the last few months/years. It's hopefully one third of your working life. How long should you wait to get favorable returns? half? Two thirds? If you get to 30 years and you're down to 25% of what you put into your retirement you would have been better off putting half of the money in a mattress and setting the other half on fire.

Re:Oh, Dear

[ThinkTwicePostOnce]

I've considered it a lot, and I think MSFT would have been much better off in the long term if
they had let themselves be split in two, instead of successfully appealing that court ruling.

So very much of what people dislike about Microsoft -- from marketing practices to fundamentally insecure
software -- stemmed from making the preservation of their desktop monolopy their highest priority.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Anonymous Coward]

And at the high end, Apple is all over it. Take a look at bestbuy. It is rare to find a $1000+laptop, Apple notwithstanding.

That's because you can get a Windows laptop with similar specs as the Apple for under $1000.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hucko]

Because the other option was too horrible to truly contemplate?

Re:Oh, Dear

[lordSaurontheGreat]

Hell yes, I got modded as a troll!

'Tis better to shoot for +5 Funny and miss, than to shoot for +5 Informative and hit! Er, wait...

Re:Oh, Dear

[Alex Belits]

One of my clients makes hardware and they support Linux. They have Ubuntu machines in the test lab and the testers absolutely hate Ubuntu. Whereas thinks like Sleep and Hibernate just work on Windows, even the much maligned Vista, getting them to work on Ubuntu requires endless fiddling around.

Some part of this (either "makes hardware" or "requires fiddling around") is a lie. Power management problems with Linux on laptops are all caused by broken ACPI definitions. ACPI tables/scripts, in their turn, are made for each and every piece of hardware, so all a hardware manufacturer that intends to support Linux has to do is to fix their goddamn ACPI scripts he embeds into their BIOS image. A hardware reseller may not be capable of doing this, however manufacturer already has all knowledge and capabilities he needs for writing and debugging those things, or his hardware won't work with Windows, either.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

The client makes USB peripherals not laptops. They have a Linux driver which supports power management. Unfortunately pretty much all Linux distributions suck at power management. Poor battery life, S3 and S4 broken.

And if you read this blog written by one of the Linux kernel ACPI developers it's clear that this is due to limitations in Linux's ACPI support -

http://mjg59.livejournal.com/?skip=20

Re:Oh, Dear

[Alex Belits]

1. Power management is not done by "Linux distributions". They all use the same code -- kernel ACPI support, pm-utils, suspend2, hal.

2. If you actually read what you linked to, instead of just posting the first link you have found on Google, you would notice that all of those "problems" are either a matter of convenience, or could be easily fixed by hardware manufacturers if they actually checked what their devices do on Linux. If you looked at the patches, they all refer to handling of ACPI configuration in BIOS, so it would be actually easier to put proper handling of those devices in there in the first place. The manufacturer, not Linux developers are supposed to do that.

3. USB devices are hotpluggable by their nature on any system. If hardware manufacturer already supports the driver for Windows, it will be trivial for him to support the same for Linux.

Re:Oh, Dear

[jellomizer]

In some ways yes...
At least the outsourcing of IT Workers part. Before linux many of these countries that we outsourced to didn't have the money for a Microsoft OS. So were at a disadvantage. After getting Linux, they learned to programan schools can properly teach programming etc...

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

ACPI sucks on Linux. E.g.

http://mjg59.livejournal.com/96270.html
Other OSes get the same values as Linux, other than the OSYS field. Now, what do these writes do? They're all to PCI config space, so since the machine in question is a 945/ICH7 machine we have publically available docs. A bit of digging later and it shows that the firmware is disabling PCIE active state link control and programming more conservative timings for entry into the C4 processor idle power saving state. In other words, certain bits of power management functionality are compromised if it detects that it's running anything other than Vista. Weirdly, it also flags the HPET as present but invisible on Linux, but I suspect that's an oversight rather than anything deliberate.

Why would they do this? I've no idea. I suspect it's something to do with the degree of platform validation performed rather than a subtle attempt to degrade Linux's battery life on the hardware (frankly, we do a good enough job of that ourselves right now), but this is exactly the kind of reason we removed _OSI("Linux") support from the kernel. Vendors will do stupid things with it.

There are two issues here. One is that vendors don't test with it, the other issue is that the developers don't test it with enough hardware. Ok, that's one issue. The manufacturers don't care either way and developers don't test all kernel releases on all hardware.

Because of this lack of testing the Linux ACPI code is buggy, which is what Matthew Garrett spends time working on.

Actually there are deeper issues like this one

http://advogato.org/article/913.html
The single biggest problem is video hardware. The spec doesn't require the BIOS to reprogram the video hardware at all, and so often it'll come back in an entirely unprogrammed state. This is an issue, since we (in general) have absolutely no idea how to bring a video card up from scratch. One of the easiest workarounds is to execute code from the video BIOS in the same way that the system BIOS does on machine startup. vbetool lets you do this from userspace, and it works a surprisingly large amount of the time. However, there's no guarantee that it'll be successful. Vendors often unmap that section of BIOS after the system has been brought up, since they've got far more BIOS code than will fit in the BIOS region of the legacy address space. In the long run, the only solution is drivers that know how to program an entirely uninitialised chip. The new modesetting branch of the Intel driver aims to do this, as do the developers of noveau.

See the hardware manufacturer writes a Windows driver that does this right. Maybe they write a Linux driver, maybe they don't. If they do, that driver is most likely closed source like NVidia's and therefore not installed by default. Or it is open source and not complete yet (ATI's). Or you can use the freetard reverse engineered NVidia driver which is not complete. Hell even the closed source driver might have been broken by some freetard developer trying to persuade them to open up by breaking it as often has he can.

Basically hardware manufacturers by and large care about Windows working because it has 90% market share. They don't care about Linux. Since the Linux developers don't test and patch on all hardware it is up to the end users to kludge around the defects.

So suppose you make USB widgets and want to support Linux. You want to test S3 or S4 but you need to fiddle around getting S3 and S4 to work at all on the laptop before you can test your driver's support for power management.

Of course the freetard response to all this is to blame the manufacturers. Famously Ryan Farmer accused Foxconn of a conspiracy to break Linux because his Foxxconn motherboard had these issues

http://ubuntu-virginia.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

From your homepage

http://abelits.livejournal.com/
11:25 pm October 6th, 2008
I finally made Ubuntu properly suspend and resume on XO, so now I don't have to wait for it to boot up when I carry it around.

05:01 am April 27th, 2008
Ubuntu installation on XO laptop

Right so it took you six months to get suspend working on an XO, and yet ACPI works flawlessly on Linux.

The thing is if someone is paying you to test some device's S3 support, spending even six minutes getting your test laptop to suspend properly even without the device is going to make you complain. Especially if that same laptop suspends and resumes just fine in Windows.

LOL at the MS Paint pictures of you BTW. I can see why Bad Ass Boutique thinks your some kind of commissar

http://abelits.livejournal.com/35021.html#cutid1

You remind me of the Yugoslav tourist board people who told me and my parents very sternly that there was coffee in all supermarkets when we complained that we couldn't find any on holiday there back in the 80's.

The system is perfect, right? Anyone criticizing it is lying and needs to be browbeaten into silence?

You know if you really want to help you actually need to fix bugs, not just lecture people who talk about them that they are wrong and no bugs exist.

Linux sucks for ACPI and covering up the bugs will just mean it will continue to suck. Ironically people like you are doing far more damage to free software than the Windows fanboys you rave about on the Internet.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Alex Belits]

Except XO does not use ACPI at all. It has its own power management infrastructure that is actually superior to one provided by ACPI, however it took _OLPC_ developer a long time to develop.

The problem was with SD support in OLPC's own kernel. It worked perfectly with the system booted from internal flash, however removable cards were unsupported with power management until late 2008. Since I didn't want to replace anything on the internal flash, I had to wait until SD was supported. Once it were, it taken me merely hours to write scripts that made it work with power management used in Ubuntu -- despite the fact that originally it was designed for ACPI.

If you think, OLPC developers took unreasonably long time fixing their incompatibilities, I agree with you. However this is completely irrelevant.

Re:Oh, Dear

[Alex Belits]

Other OSes get the same values as Linux, other than the OSYS field.

You are misrepresenting what was in the posting by starting from the middle of it. The code (extracted from BIOS) right above your quote shows that some BIOS gives Vista some parameters that do not match with the values given to Linux -- and apparently other systems get the same treatment as Linux. This has absolutely nothing to do with anything in Linux itself, just some hardware manufacturer is using the ACPI feature designed specifically to distinguish between different operating systems.

I suspect it's something to do with the degree of platform validation performed rather than a subtle attempt to degrade Linux's battery life on the hardware (frankly, we do a good enough job of that ourselves right now), but this is exactly the kind of reason we removed _OSI("Linux") support from the kernel. Vendors will do stupid things with it.

Do you realize what it really means? He kinda accepts some blame for not being efficient, but in the same sentence he said that he had to stop TELLING ACPI SCRIPTS THAT HE ACTUALLY IS RUNNING LINUX because of the amount of brokenness and possibly sabotage that gets triggered in those scripts when they see Linux. So when the choice is to pretend being Vista (and possibly bring up more brokenness of workarounds made specifically for Vista) or using supposedly Linux-specific ACPI definitions, sections "for Vista" give better results.

Do you even know how ACPI works?

See the hardware manufacturer writes a Windows driver that does this right. Maybe they write a Linux driver, maybe they don't.

There are no "drivers" for ACPI, ACPI is designed to interpret scripts stored in BIOS. Those scripts are specific to each motherboard, and the original goal of that standard is to remove dependence on OS and drivers.

Drivers are specific to a components -- they have nothing to do with ACPI other than the fact that they also should implement some power management.

If they do, that driver is most likely closed source like NVidia's and therefore not installed by default. Or it is open source and not complete yet (ATI's). Or you can use the freetard reverse engineered NVidia driver which is not complete. Hell even the closed source driver might have been broken by some freetard developer trying to persuade them to open up by breaking it as often has he can.

All laptops with NVIDIA and ATI graphics adapters I have ever seen being used with Linux, use proprietary drivers. Power management in those drivers is entirely implemented by manufacturers, and all problems are their own fault.

The one for Linux points to a badly written table that does not correspond to the board's ACPI implementation, causing weird kernel errors, strange system freezing, no suspend or hibernate, and other problems, using my modifications below, I've gotten it down to just crashing on the next reboot after having suspended, the horrible thing about disassembling any program is that you have no commenting, so it's hard to tell which does what, but I'll be damned if I'm going to buy a copy of Vista just to get the crashing caused by Foxconn's BIOS to stop, I am not going to be terrorized.

Which is pretty much what the testers at my client complained about.

Do you know which tables are they talking about? Those are the tables PLACED INTO BIOS BY THE MANUFACTURER. If manufacturer's tester found it, then manufacturer should fix them just like any other bug in his own code.

Of course, USB devices have nothing to do with that, so please keep your lies consistent. If you are talking about computer manufacturer, he can fix his ACPI. If you are talking about USB devices' manufacturer, his testers couldn't possibly see anything ACPI-related -- ACPI only can affect USB host, and at that point all devices sh

Re:Oh, Dear

[Hal_Porter]

Do you realize what it really means? He kinda accepts some blame for not being efficient, but in the same sentence he said that he had to stop TELLING ACPI SCRIPTS THAT HE ACTUALLY IS RUNNING LINUX because of the amount of brokenness and possibly sabotage that gets triggered in those scripts when they see Linux. So when the choice is to pretend being Vista (and possibly bring up more brokenness of workarounds made specifically for Vista) or using supposedly Linux-specific ACPI definitions, sections "for Vista" give better results.

If you read his blog you'd know that he doesn't believe Bios vendors are sabotaging Linux and Linux doesn't claim to be Vista for this reason, it claims to be Vista because the Vista section is the only one that the manufacturers test. Also he says Linux can't define an OS Interface (_OSI) for Linux because Linux is refactored to frequently to maintain an interface.

Personally I think that this constant refactoring is not what you want in a production OS. You need to define interfaces carefully and then preserve them for as long as possible. Constant refactoring just breaks stuff. It's the sort of thing hippy programmers working on non commercial projects and students think is a good idea. People that have to support what they do, in the sense of dealing with angry customers and providing a fix quickly when they break something learn not to work like this.

See the hardware manufacturer writes a Windows driver that does this right. Maybe they write a Linux driver, maybe they don't.

There are no "drivers" for ACPI,

If you bothered to read what he wrote, the driver in this case is the video driver, which needs to reinitialize the video card on the way back up from S3 or S4 because the power was cut to it on the way down. He claims that because the Linux video drivers don't get this stuff right, people get crashes on the way back up. Now he's a kernel ACPI specialist, and it seems reasonable he talks from experience.

Plus I know from my experience he's right. All the Linux laptops in my clients test lap have problems switching to and from at least one of the ACPI power states even without any external hardware. Which makes it impossible to test things like S3 with their device plugged in.

Hence my statement ACPI support on Linux sucks. I don't really care that the suckage is not Linux's fault by rather due to some conspiracy, and neither does anyone worth talking to. In fact your blathering about how the blame lies not with Linux but a conspiracy of Microsoft, manufacturers and the ACPI standard itself means we have now crossed the Linux Fault Threshold

http://prakharagrawal.wordpress.com/2007/12/09/linux-linux-linux-part-two-crossing-the-linux-fault-threshold/
The important concept to bear in mind when discussing software issues with Linux apologists is the "Linux Fault Threshold". Clever use of this concept helps you to avoid losing your temper with someone who might actually be able to render practical help, while ensuring that you give the correct dose of venom (60cc of scorpion juice, administered per anem with a rusty syringe) to the vast crowd of mindless apologists who just want you to use their pet operating system because it makes them feel good and gives them something to boast about on Slashdot. I provide this as a service to all the blind, alcoholic, incontinent grandmothers out there who appear to be installing Linux without any trouble if the Slashdot comments on any article remotely related to user interface design are to be believed.

The Linux Fault Threshold is the point in any conversation about Linux at which your interlocutor stops talking about how your problem might be solved under Linux and starts talking about how it isn't Linux's fault that your problem cannot be solved under Linux. Half the time, t

Re:Oh, Dear

[Alex Belits]

If you read his blog you'd know that he doesn't believe Bios vendors are sabotaging Linux and Linux doesn't claim to be Vista for this reason, it claims to be Vista because the Vista section is the only one that the manufacturers test.

No one claims that vendors are actively sabotaging Linux. Sabotage is in ACPI standard itself that does not provide OS-neutral environment, but allows all kinds of ugly hacks "for Vista" or "for Linux".

If you bothered to read what he wrote, the driver in this case is the video driver, which needs to reinitialize the video card on the way back up from S3 or S4 because the power was cut to it on the way down. He claims that because the Linux video drivers don't get this stuff right, people get crashes on the way back up. Now he's a kernel ACPI specialist, and it seems reasonable he talks from experience.

And those drivers are proprietary, so there is nothing "Linux programmers" can do if Nvidia and ATI aren't willing to fix it.

Plus I know from my experience he's right. All the Linux laptops in my clients test lap have problems switching to and from at least one of the ACPI power states even without any external hardware. Which makes it impossible to test things like S3 with their device plugged in.

If they really wanted to test their devices on a laptop they would easily find out that they can switch to the text console or use non-3D-accelerated driver. This may be suboptimal for the actual use but more than sufficient for testing (it's not their job to test Nvidia drivers). But since they don't actually exist, they can do and claim whatever you want.

The important concept to bear in mind when discussing software issues with Linux apologists is the "Linux Fault Threshold". Clever use of this concept helps you to avoid losing your temper with someone who might actually b...

When your opponent suddenly switched from arguing to spouting pop psychology you know that he lost the argument.

Would be Nice for Independant View

[geoffrobinson]

Of course the Linux guy will say Linux. And the Apple guy Apple. So on and so forth. And there is probably a mixture of truth to all that.

But it would be interesting to get that internal memo.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jurily]

Of course the Linux guy will say Linux. And the Apple guy Apple. So on and so forth. And there is probably a mixture of truth to all that.

Oh, and that little global economic crisis may have something there, too...

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[mark72005]

He points out many catalysts, but mainly that companies like HP and IBM and Google are innovating, creating high margin platforms from which people can make more money, whereas Microsoft is only being reactionary and relying on lock-in.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Finallyjoined!!!]

OK, here's an independent view:

They deserve what they get. Full stop.

As my old grandma used to say: "You can only reap what you have sown". This is of course, rubbish; I just nip over the fence & reap what other people have sown :-)

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[mark72005]

I also thought the point that Office makes more than the operating system does was a great point. How can Microsoft react to things like OpenOffice? They don't have any ideas right now, that I can tell.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[aurispector]

The article cited the ODF fiasco, which indicates their degree of dependence on the Office revenue stream. The mere existence of Open Office, Google Docs and the like gives people a valid alternative - and wakes them up the fact that they have a choice as to whether they want to be held hostage to proprietary data formats.

MS doesn't innovate, they copy, then leverage their market share...and the market responded.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[jedidiah]

>> Of course the Linux guy will say Linux. And the Apple guy Apple. So on and so forth. And there is probably a mixture of truth to all that.
>
> Oh, and that little global economic crisis may have something there, too...

Yeah, because no one is going to be more interested in a ZERO COST product during a global economic crisis.

Of course: as others have said, this isn't the first recession that Microsoft has seen.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jurily]

a ZERO COST product

Technically, copying Vista costs the same as copying Ubuntu. Development is already paid for.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[jedidiah]

>> a ZERO COST product
>
> Technically, copying Vista costs the same as copying Ubuntu. Development is already paid for.

What you are describing is a FELONY.

You personally don't get to make extra copies of Windows and sell them.

Although you bring up a good point. As Linux has been rising up as a reasonable
alternative, Microsoft at the same time has been making it more difficult for
casual pirates to copy their OS. This is a real corporate brain fart.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jurily]

You personally don't get to make extra copies of Windows and sell them.

Not me. Although here in Hungary, I can legally download anything for strictly personal use.

My point is, manufacturing costs are the same, regardless of the actual software.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[CelticWhisper]

What? Surely that can't be right. Copyright infringement for personal use is a tort at worst. It's the people who massively copy and distribute, or who copy and sell, who get brought up on federal charges when and if they get caught.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[mad_clown]

Office makes more than the operating system

It makes one wonder why Microsoft hasn't more fully embraced Office as a marketing vector in the same way that Apple has used the iPod to push sales of its hardware/OS.

What that marketing would look like... I don't really know. It seems clear, though, that Microsoft's business model might have to start adapting from a Windows-centric model to one that's focused on their more popular product(s) like Office.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[SanityInAnarchy]

Except that if you're going to avoid lawsuits and possibly criminal prosecution, you're going to be obtaining them through legitimate channels.

And a legitimate copy of Ubuntu costs far less than a legitimate copy of Vista, even without factoring in the other crap you'll have to buy with Vista (antivirus, Office, etc).

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Anonymous Coward]

"MS doesn't innovate, they copy..."

I always thought of it more as Microsoft purchases it, integrates it, markets it and then calls that "inovation"!

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Tatsh]

I agree. I really thought it was Google and other companies killing Microsoft, not Linux. (By the way, Linux is a kernel and a trademark, nothing more.)

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jurily]

Except that if you're going to avoid lawsuits and possibly criminal prosecution, you're going to be obtaining them through legitimate channels.

I said technically, and I meant it. There is no inherent difference in cost, except for copyright.

Why does everyone assume I'm talking about "piracy", when I thought "putting ones and zeroes on physical media so you can sell it" or "selling ones and zeroes online"?

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Tanktalus]

I think your typo on "innovation" is quite apropos.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ClosedSource]

"Yeah, because no one is going to be more interested in a ZERO COST product during a global economic crisis."

Broadcast TV is a ZERO COST product too - as long as your brain can process the signal directly.

Most of us require a TV set for TV and a computer for Linux. Without investing a minimum of several hundred dollars for a PC, Linux is a ZERO VALUE product.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[jedidiah]

> You personally don't get to make extra copies of Windows and sell them.

See the word SELL in there.

"Bootlegging" has at no point in time ever been considered "personal use"
by the Copyright Act. This was true even before you were born and before
the RIAA and MPAA mutilated it (the copyright act).

The vast majority of people don't get their copy of Windows from Microsoft
directly or even through piracy. Microsoft primarily sells to OEMs like Dell
and HP. You are not Microsoft's customer.

When an OEM decides to load Linux on a certain class of PC, that's no small thing.

OEM preloads of Windows is what keeps Microsoft in business. The perception
that Microsoft is the only game in town gives Microsoft power to coerce it's
real customers and the power to set prices.

Anything that undermines the notion that Microsoft is the only game in town undercuts it's gravy train.

Mac and Linux are a punch-kick combination in this regard.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[drinkypoo]

Without investing a minimum of several hundred dollars for a PC, Linux is a ZERO VALUE product.

Your comment is stupid because: Computers can often be had for free.

I personally have given away two computers with Linux on them, and with dedicated video cards... one 700 MHz Athlon and one Dual Pentium III 500MHz.

I didn't have Windows licenses for them, so Linux made them considerably more useful to the recipients.

Go away and troll somewhere else, kthxbye.

P.S. You can get a TV for free, too.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[whoever57]

It makes one wonder why Microsoft hasn't more fully embraced Office as a marketing vector in the same way that Apple has used the iPod to push sales of its hardware/OS.

I can't imagine why you say MS has not used Office as a marketing vector. Example: Outlook/Exchange. Proprietary protocol -- Office is used to leverage sales of Exchange (and with it, Windows Server).

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[khellendros1984]

Hey, Jed. Calm down, man. Two posts in a row, you've yelled at the person to whom you were replying.

I think Jurily's point was that an economic downturn wouldn't necessarily make people switch to Linux, but rather would increase the volume of Windows piracy instead. It's correct that in the United States, commercial software piracy has been elevated to felony level, but "copying Vista" doesn't necessarily mean "copying and selling Vista".

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[khellendros1984]

Several hundred? A couple years ago, I bought a PowerMac G3 that runs Ubuntu just fine for about $25. Sure, new hardware costs a lot (comparatively), but that's one of the most-trumpeted benefits of Linux: It's so customizable that you can almost always cut down on the system to run it on an older piece of hardware, but still have a useful system.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jason Earl]

Are you kidding? Most of the "improvements" to MS Office are nothing more than thinly veiled advertisements for server software.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[PitaBred]

It's only zero cost if you're Microsoft. Everyone else has to pay up front.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[commodoresloat]

Of course the Linux guy will say Linux. And the Apple guy Apple. So on and so forth.

Actually, I have it on good authority that it's the Commodore 64 that played the biggest role in causing these layoffs...

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jurily]

I think Jurily's point was that an economic downturn wouldn't necessarily make people switch to Linux, but rather would increase the volume of Windows piracy instead.

I really need to articulate my thoughts more clearly.

My point: Microsoft does not sell tangible stuff, like cars. They already paid most of the money they needed to make their product. The cost of making more of said product is negligible. They have a huge profit per new units sold. Maybe, if they lowered their prices, they could sell more.

Sorry for the flamefest, I'll be more precise next time :)

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ClosedSource]

Sure, you can get a used PC for free if you're lucky and most probably it will have Windows on it.

I don't see how this supports the argument that Linux is the reason for MS's current problems. Did the number of people who are giving away computers with Linux installed suddenly increase significantly in the last quarter?

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[FishWithAHammer]

While I personally dig Fluxbox on my main Linux machine, I think you're stretching a bit. Most people using a computer for a desktop will want GNOME or KDE, if they're using Linux. Running a modern GNOME or KDE environment on that G3 might be a little challenging, no??

Cutting down on the system is fine if you are a "Linux person" willing to deal with it. Not so much for a purported "consumer" (that is, somebody who isn't technically savvy).

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm... wasn't that his point?

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jorophose]

I personally run Xfce and Debian Lenny on a Celeron 500MHz machine with 192MB. I use Opera, Pidgin, and Zim, and I've often got a fair 20-30 tabs open at once. If I had a video card, I'd use it to offload my GUI onto. But I don't, and if anything, I have problems with my GUI right now (things look yellowed, on log-out everything turns messed up... openGL won't run properly... I think it's a chipset limitation, that it can't run properly in 24bits)

It's not really an intense session. But it does its job. If I use LXDE, it's just as nice, and it runs much faster. (45MB of RAM used, I believe)

There's not much of a need for Gnome/KDE, to be honest.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[timmarhy]

it's not zero cost though. get involved in a project switching even a medium sized business to linux and then tell me it costs nothing.

if anything, people are going to be more conservative and stick with what works for them. under such a climate NO ONE is going to stick their neck out and recommend a redeployment to linux in case it goes bad on them.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ozphx]

Well you can get Vista on a $400 laptop, so I wouldn't be going with "far less". "Ubuntu costs $25 less than OEM Vista" would be more intellectually honest.

At that kinda price difference its a no-brainer. You pick the one you want, and don't care which one is free. If you offered me two different supercars, one being free and the other being a couple of thousand bucks, I'd pick the one I like the most. Cost wouldnt come into it.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[symbolset]

When an OEM decides to load Linux on a certain class of PC, that's no small thing.

Jedidiah, I know this is going to aggravate your condition, but open a blank Microsoft Word document. Type this text 10pt Venn diagram and print it:

. o

The dot is people who care. The o is people who pretend to care. The whitespace is the people on Earth who do not care enough to even pretend. Study it for a while and then try to think peaceful thoughts. Go to your happy place. It's OK to cry.

That's a lowercase 'o'.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[symbolset]

Did the number of people who are giving away computers with Linux installed suddenly increase significantly in the last quarter?

Thanks for playing. You've given me an excuse to post a link to freegeek.

Almost every government in the US is on a 3 or 4 year replacement schedule. Those pulls are currently 3GHz 1GB RAM 40GB HDD PCs that run Linux sweetly, or W7 quite well. The governments have a good share of the jobs in this country, so even without all the PCs from business that's many millions of PCs entering the grey market each year. Many of them are donated to FreeGeeks. The various FreeGeeks take those PCs, and as many others as they can, and refit them with Linux as often as they can, and then give them away. For free.

If you want a free PC that works well and has Linux, go to your local FreeGeek. Sometimes they have laptops.

Don't you feel like you've done well now?

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ClosedSource]

Thanks for the info, but it's still not evidence that MS's current problems are due to Linux.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[symbolset]

If you have a local freegeek, I would go there. They have PCs for free, from the current decade. With Linux.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[symbolset]

Thanks for the info, but it's still not evidence that MS's current problems are due to Linux.

Good point. It's probably due to the dreadful economy and their conversion from growth company to utility. But Apple isn't faring badly even in the downturn, Vista is the bee's flaming immolation, and Linux is gaining share. Also, Microsoft bet the wrong way in the recent election cycle

So there's hope for change. I'm for it.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ClosedSource]

Well, before the government started to make life difficult for them, MS didn't bet on elections at all.

They learned the hard way what happens if you don't pay any protection money.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[salimma]

The US computer market is pretty much saturated -- most sales are to people who already have computers.

In an economic downturn, with less disposable income, there will be more people extending the life of their older hardware, or buying cheaper replacements -- opening there for Linux.

I do wonder, actually, what effect this will have on Apple. They are already forecasting a 20% drop in revenue for 2009, and it might turn out to be even worse. No tentative release date for Snow Leopard yet, meaning they probably won't get it out until Q3 at the earliest. Will they be planning to lower price across the board, or to keep it up and stop outperforming the other major brands?

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Daengbo]

I use LXDE on my old PIII laptops with 128MB RAM. They work well and LXDE + PCManFM make a nice, modern system. Sure, it won't run OO.o well, but FF3, Abiword, and Gnumeric are fine.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[ClosedSource]

I only wish that Linux's ability to extend the life of older hardware was as strong as often implied. It would be great to have a reasonably useful Linux system running on a 386 with 8MB of RAM (i.e a Windows 95 class machine). While that might be possible, I'd be surprised if the advances in Linux installation would be included in any compatible distro.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jorophose]

I'm looking to upgrade sometime soon. I've thought about waiting for USB3, for Nehalem/Fusion/AM3, but now I don't know.

It's not a question of I'm down on my luck. I was down on my luck for a few years, and because of that I had to hold on to that hardware. But now I'm doing good financially. I just need to make a purchase that will be worth it, and right now I'm not seeing that anywhere. I don't have a grand to blow, either, so we're looking at Athlons with the 780G, and an HD4670.

I'm just saying, you don't need crazy hardware to run an OS. I mean, look at the BeagleBoard and Angstrom. LXDE is a fine environment, and polish does not mean bloat.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[FishWithAHammer]

You don't want an AMD machine. Intel kicks its ass at every price point.

The 4670 is an excellent choice of card though.

Re:Would be Nice for Independant View

[Jorophose]

I'm into virtualisation. Last I checked Intel didn't do so hot on the low end... And I know, I could overclock, I'm just not too sure about it. Otherwise the X2 4850e is fairly good. I've really only ever used Intel systems, but I can easily tell from friends that AMD is alright, just a question of when you buy.

The problem is, I don't know if spending 2-3 times on my CPU will really give me a performance boost, when spending twice on an AMD CPU would get me a 65W Quad-core... You know? It's just that question of, when is it warranted performance? LGA775 looks like it's got a more interesting amount of CPUs coming up, in case I'd upgrade... but to be honest, being limited with DDR2 and FSB, I don't think it'd be useful if I were at maximum RAM and maximum cores. (but haha I doubt I'd be spending that much)

Are they actually 45W maximum though? Or have they started using Intel's counting system of some-here-some-there?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Missing factors

[edivad]

Put in Apple and the economic downturn, among the causes. Linux? You kidding? Have you seen the desktop market share of it? And this comes from an heavy Linux user and enthusiast.

Re:Missing factors

[JCSoRocks]

Not to mention the fact that if companies *did* start selling machines with their own flavors of Linux I'm sure they'd quickly spiral into garbage. Think of the crapware on budget PCs. Now imagine an entire OS bastardized, branded and sold to the highest bidder. I could see custom manufacturer Linux distros quickly becoming a total nightmare.

Re:Missing factors

[jedidiah]

Linux doesn't need any marketshare in order to do damage to Microsoft.

Just the fact that it's out there as a bogeyman is enough.

The ressurection of XP on netbooks is a good enough demonstration of this effect.

Re:Missing factors

[roc97007]

I suspect it's mindshare, not marketshare, that's doing the damage. If any.

Re:Missing factors

[Cajun Hell]

Linux? You kidding? Have you seen the desktop market share of it?

You don't need to see the desktop share; you just need to see the desktop. That's when you say, "Hey, this'll work great," and then Microsoft says, "Ok, I'll sell you Windows for 50 cents per unit and under the table we'll send a hooker to the PO signer's house," and suddenly they're not looking so profitable.

Re:Missing factors

[Draek]

Put in Apple and the economic downturn, among the causes. Linux? You kidding? Have you seen the desktop market share of it?

Have you seen the server and embedded market share of Linux? both markets where Apple is barely a blimp on the radar, and which also provide(d) lots of money for good ol' MS.

Re:Missing factors

[LurkerXXX]

Add in most folks already have a computer. And a lot of others have a 2nd computer. MS can't convince them to buy a 3rd or 4th for their home often enough to keep MS's sales rates what they once were. They just aren't losing that much market share. The market for computers is down for a variety of reasons.

Re:Missing factors

[lawpoop]

Linux doesn't need any marketshare in order to do damage to Microsoft.

Just the fact that it's out there as a bogeyman is enough.

Hold on a minute. Linux's mere existence harms' Microsoft financially? Well, then, why hasn't it been doing this since the early 90s, when it was first developed? What has changed to allow its mere existence *now* to hurt MS?

Re:Missing factors

[ClosedSource]

You do realize that the iPod and iPhone are embedded devices, right?

Re:Missing factors

[westyvw]

Sure they can.
Step 1. EOL older software. Suggest that there are security holes in older versions. Wait for the design flaws to slow down the computer to a crawl so it appears like the machines fault.
Step 2. Insure that the new OS features just wont work well on older hardware.
I spit coffee when I heard a "green" advocate on the radio suggesting we should give Microsoft an award for designing a new os with better power management. WTF: what about the old machine?

Re:Missing factors

[bit01]

Not to mention the fact that if companies *did* start selling machines with their own flavors of Linux I'm sure they'd quickly spiral into garbage. Think of the crapware on budget PCs. Now imagine an entire OS bastardized, branded and sold to the highest bidder. I could see custom manufacturer Linux distros quickly becoming a total nightmare.

No, different situation. Vendors don't control their Linux customer base nearly as much as with MSWindows. A bastardized Linux can be relatively easily replaced with an alternative linux distribution developed by third parties e.g. Like Acer netbooks where some people didn't like the custom Linux install and replaced it with Ubuntu. MSWindows, not so much.

---

Open source software is everything that closed source software is. Plus the source is available.

Re:Missing factors

[LurkerXXX]

Step 1: Not Doable. Period.

Remember, MS makes a large fraction of their market from corporate users. Those corporations demand a 10 year lifetime for their operating systems. All MS's operating systems have at least security update support for 10 years. If MS moves away from that they will lose out on those corp accounts. As those corp accounts go, so do installs of the home machines of folks who work at those huge corps. People tend to like to use at home what they have at work. They are already familiar with it, and can do work from home more easily. Basically, cutting that 10 year support is suicide and MS knows it. They will never go with your step 1.

Step 2: Not doable. Period.

Please see corporate and home uptake of Vista rates. MS has to make their OS's work well on hardware a few years old if they want any meaningful sales at all.

Re:Missing factors

[V!NCENT]

Idiot friendlyness? The current state of Wine, OpenOffice.org and Firefox? Etc, etc, etc?

Re:Missing factors

[Jason Earl]

Linux's mere existence has always had a competitive influence on Microsoft. However, it wasn't until recently that Linux was truly a competitive threat as a desktop for end users. Heck, I've been using Linux on my desktop since 1995, but I haven't really believed it was a viable replacement for Windows for normal folk until fairly recently (and then only in fairly specific situations).

It's hard to argue that Linux doesn't represent a threat now, however. After all, Microsoft resurrected Windows XP and sold it at a steep discount as a specific reaction to Linux adoption on the low end. If Linux didn't Asus and the other netbook vendors wouldn't really have had any choice but to either spec out their netbooks to fit Vista, and sell them at a price point where Vista makes sense.

On a much broader scale Linux and Free Software have been limiting how much Microsoft can charge for software since its inception. This is most visible on the server end, where Linux has a great deal of traction, but it is also visible in areas like development tools, embedded software, etc. As Free Software becomes more visible as competitors to Windows and MS Office Microsoft is going to find it increasingly difficult to defend it's ridiculously high profit margins on these items. At which point Microsoft is likely to become just another software development company instead of the 800 pound gorilla that we all know and love.

Re:Missing factors

[Draek]

You do realize that the iPod and iPhone are only a minuscule fraction of all the embedded devices on this planet, right?

Re:Missing factors

[ClosedSource]

Sure, but most of those embedded devices don't run Linux either. Remember your original comment was to compare the embedded market between Linux and Apple, not Apple vs everything else.

Re:Missing factors

[lordSaurontheGreat]

Imagine the market for de-crapifiers! Run this shell script, and this will remove all crapware from Dell machines! Updated as of 20120417!

Quite a bit easier than uninstalling crapware on Windows. There could be residue in system32, or some in %HOME%\Application Settings, or what about those cryptic {987AS-3ASD3A-FOOBAR} directories? What about them? And don't get me started about decrapifying the registry! Entire programs can live in there!

Re:Missing factors

[lordSaurontheGreat]

The MSDN subscription for Visual Studio Team Edition costs $10,000 per seat per year (USD, even though that isn't worth much any more). (1)

Linux hasn't put a plug in MSFT's tax increases at all.

1) http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/bb841434.aspx

Re:Missing factors

[Hal_Porter]

Yeah, because no one has ever thought of doing that on Windows

http://www.yorkspace.com/pc-de-crapifier/

Actually you could probably do it with MSIEXEC. Grep for $OEM_NAME, uninstall if found.

Re:Missing factors

[Draek]

They may not be the absolute majority but they're still a significant player in the area, unlike Apple. Paraphrasing your comment, this is Linux vs Apple, not Linux vs everything else.

Re:Missing factors

[Daengbo]

According to a published IEEE report, embedded Linux was at 15% in 2004, ahead of both MS and Wind River. A Linux Devices survey shows 2007 at ~50%, but ~40% in 2004, ahead of the IEEE report. This indicates a ~25% increase. Ars says "According to the Canalys report on Q2 2007 market share, Linux holds 13.3 percent of the global smartphone market, which puts it ahead of the Windows, BlackBerry, and Palm operating systems."

"Most" embedded systems don't run any one system, but Linux leads the pack in almost every report.

Re:Missing factors

[Jason Earl]

Please. The folks at the FSF will also happily send you a complete GNU mirror for $4000. That doesn't mean that most Linux developers actually fork out $4K.

You don't honestly believe that the wide assortment of quality Free development tools hasn't lowered what Microsoft charges the average developer for tools. Microsoft used to charge hundreds of dollars for packages that it now gives away for free. Sure, it still has expensive packages, but these packages come with software licenses for essentially all of Microsoft's software.

Nice troll though.

Re:Missing factors

[ClosedSource]

What about all the embedded systems that don't use any OS?

Re:Missing factors

[JAlexoi]

Knowing HOW GOOD MSDN Premium IS, I wouldn't have any problems forking out 10'000 USD(~4k yearly extension)
I mean, if you are in real trouble and you need help, you can actually GET the DEVELOPER that created that feature on the phone. And you will get help. I mean, even OSS developers who need help in porting F/OSS software to Vista got such level of service with Premium subscription.
And let us not forget that those 10'000 USD include, basically, ALL MS software licenses. I believe that only Windows is missing from the list.

Re:Missing factors

[JohnBailey]

Not to mention the fact that if companies *did* start selling machines with their own flavors of Linux I'm sure they'd quickly spiral into garbage. Think of the crapware on budget PCs. Now imagine an entire OS bastardized, branded and sold to the highest bidder. I could see custom manufacturer Linux distros quickly becoming a total nightmare.

Well.. apart from the fact that unlike Windows, Linux is pretty much custom by design. A netbook Ubuntu is just a customised Ubuntu, a custom spin of Fedora can be done with tools that Fedora's makers provide free and clear. It doesn't have to be a Dell Linux, or a HP Linux where the OEM makes and supports the whole thing from the ground up. That I agree would be a bad idea, but a custom in the sense of branding and company colours etc, would be fine.

Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[screenbert]

Making $4 Billion in one quarter isn't much a decline. Looks like layoffs were induced by greed, so that executives stocks options go up. It would be interesting to see if some of those 4000-5000 employees use linux as a platform for a technology startup.

On the bright side if I were laid-off I'd have plenty of time to juggle.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Penguinisto]

IIRC, wasn't $2.1bn of that income from the recent (as in, early this week) sale of Comcast stock that MSFT held?

/P

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Lumpy]

THANK YOU....

Most large corporate layoffs are for greed reasons only. to make the books look a little better for next quarter. It's trendy right now and you wont be questioned if you do.. Look GM is dying! we can too!!!

There is a crapload of shady things going on right now in the business world. Look at every bit of it with a heavy dose of skepticism and never ever trust a company as far as you can physically throw it.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[east coast]

Sure, companies should keep on dead wood through a decline so that they don't just ride the edge but they go over and EVERYONE loses their jobs.

I know that it's a popular option around here for the future of MS but try to understand that keeping the same staff to produce less product isn't a very good business model. A company should not be forced into the red before they do what's best. AFAIC Microsoft has an obligation to shareholders to keep things running in a possitive direction.

Funny how when a company does this it's nothing but greed but as their going out of business so many around here cry out that they didn't do enough to adopt to changing market coniditions. Pretty ironic, eh?

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[pete-classic]

Okay, you keep linking that video. I have to ask. Why, oh why, do you wiggle your ass like that when you juggle?

-Peter

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Anonymous Coward]

Companies should get rid of their dead wood when they become dead-wood. That's what performance reviews are supposed to be for, identify the dead wood and get rid of them then, not through mass layoffs where the good goes out with the bad.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[The End Of Days]

I guess the right thing to do is keep the dead-weight workers on, pay them good money for no reason, and keep the hippies happy, right?

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you not listen to the music? It's better than dancing

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, but they dont cut the dead weight workers. They leave them and cut the productive ones.

If they cut the dead weight. (Directors and above) the company would run 10X smoother and save a crapload of money.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[nine-times]

Making $4 Billion in one quarter isn't much a decline.

I guess it depends on how much they made the quarter before...?

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[ClosedSource]

People complain about PHBs being clueless but then assume they know what they're doing at layoff time. What's with that?

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[east coast]

This isn't a firing. This is layoffs. There is a system to doing layoffs that companies must abide by or face the consequences. You're acting like it's personal.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Anonymous Coward]

And the reason for RElinking to your juggling video is......?

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[fatray]

Making $4 Billion in one quarter isn't much a decline. Looks like layoffs were induced by greed, so that executives stocks options go up.

If these "greedy" executives are worth their fat bonuses, they are making hiring/firing/layoff decisions based on their expectations of future sales/earnings/financial results, not the previous quarter's.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[wh1pp3t]

Making $4 Billion in one quarter isn't much a decline. Looks like layoffs were induced by greed, so that executives stocks options go up. It would be interesting to see if some of those 4000-5000 employees use linux as a platform for a technology startup.

On the bright side if I were laid-off I'd have plenty of time to juggle.

It is typical corporate house cleaning. During a bad economy, even a profitable business is justified in laying off under performing (subject to opinion of management) personnel using the disguise of cost savings.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Anonymous Coward]

Being pro-American (an all), MickeySoft needs to get rid of its American workforce and bring in more "qualified" H1Bs.

And, this trend has given them crap-ware to the n-th degree.

But simply, their monopoly is busted! It's all downhill from here

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[ObsidianBlk]

I enjoy how you seem to be claiming that those that are being layed off are "dead wood" and generally cause a decline in production.

Firstly, most of these companies are seeing a decline in revenue primarily because people (consumers and companies) have less to spend on products and services, not because these struggling companies are actually producing less.

Secondly, if it is because people have less to spend which is causing the economic issues (very very very simply put), then laying people off is only compounding the over all problem.

It's my opinion that laying people off is a greed move. At the very least, it's a lazy, non-creative move. The idea is to SPEND. Get the money flowing. If a company isn't producing something that keeps them "riding the edge" without layoffs then they need to brainstorm for new products to draw in the buyers in these hard times. New buyers keeps the company and its employees in business. Employees with jobs spend more.

In any case, on the MS vs. Linux Vs. Apple front, regardless of the market share distributions, seeing the proud and powerful Microsoft laying people off means the rivals are doing significant damage. The world ~needs~ computers. They are an ABSOLUTE necessity! If Microsoft was as dominant as they want to claim, they wouldn't be so hard hit, even during these times. Governments need computers. Businesses need computers; in the US, in the UK, in Russia... everywhere. I don't think we're seeing the total decline of Microsoft, but I do foresee a significant humbling on their part.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[Daengbo]

Mini-Microsoft expected the layoffs to be the 10%-ers, but that doesn't appear to be the case. In addition, they only laid off 1400 and are waiting for the other 3600 until much later. Employees are feeling like they need to backstab in order to keep their jobs. This is a really bad way to do layoffs. Cut deep once and get the damn thing over.

Re:Linux renaissance by Laid-off MS employees

[G Morgan]

Look GM is dying!

I assure you I am perfectly healthy.

Economy

[qoncept]

This is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read. It just goes to show how idiots can come up with stupid ideas and believe they came to a rational conclusion.

Re:Economy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, someone claiming that it is JUST the economy is pretty fucking dumb. They already had to go through other weak economies and never had to lay off employees so it's obviously something else.

Err, or were you trying to say that it was just the economy? If so, sorry bro, you're missing all the other facts around that. Linux may not be the only reason they are declining but they surely ain't helping them either.

Re:I dunno

[Smidge207]

Do you need the literal version? Here, let me draw a picture.

I need lateral vision; can you draw me a picture in profile?

=Smidge=

Re:I dunno

[houstonbofh]

I think most of their lost profits are from people negotiating lower prices because of the Linux alternative, not so much that people are actually choosing Linux.

From TFA... Actually the first question in TFA.

Q1 -- Jim, thank you for your support in talking with LinuxDevices today. Do you think it was really Linux that hurt Microsoft? Or was it the emergence of netbooks? XP seems to ship on most, but Microsoft isn't making much money selling XP for low-cost PCs [story], are they?

A1 -- When an OEM negotiates a price agreement with Microsoft, they now have a viable alternative. It changes the negotiating relationship. It's a combination of Linux, missteps by Microsoft, and not enabling Vista for a low-power, long battery-life device.

I wonder if you can be modded insightfull for "insights" from the article? No one reads them anyway...

Re:I dunno

[sigismond0]

Agreed. I wholly plan on getting an HP Mini 1000 at some point. I'm getting the Linux version because it's cheaper, and then putting Vista/Win7 on it. Fuck paying for the OS.

trimming fat ?

[cheap.computer]

CNN claims that these companies are on the heavy side as far as employees are concerned. The lay offs numbers are global, not just in the US.

Vista?

[Jurily]

FTFA:

It's a combination of Linux, missteps by Microsoft, and not enabling Vista for a low-power, long battery-life device.

Translation: it's the most bloated OS, ever.

Let's see, how they handle 7.

Re:Vista?

[V!NCENT]

Well it's not feature bloat, unless you considder all bugs features :-), but a performance hog.

If you think of bloat as in slow, then what's up with HURD?

Re:Vista?

[Jurily]

I've said this before, but what the hell.

The box I'm posting from is a 2 GHz Celeron with 256 Mb RAM. Latest Debian runs just fine with KDE3 and Opera (I admit, firefox was too much). Imagine putting Vista on it.

All of you who shuddered at the thought: that's bloat.

Re:Vista?

[MtViewGuy]

Fortunately, from beta user test reports Windows 7 will be a LOT faster, thanks to the fact Microsoft designed it so it runs well even on the emerging class of netbooks. When Windows 7 finally ships probably around September-October 2009 time frame, you will see many new netbooks switch to Windows 7.

Re:Vista?

[JAlexoi]

Yeah... How many GB does Win 7 take up? About 10?
Guess that leaves out netbooks with less then 20gb SSDs.

I don't buy it

[erroneus]

Netbooks are NOT that big a market yet. It just became a market in late 2008. Too recent for any conclusive statements to be made.

But even if that were the case, it is well within Microsoft's power to keep WindowsXP alive and supported for use on Netbook devices. I have seen some custom loads that run extremely well on the ASUS 900. They can do what they want -- it's their retiring OS.

What about MS's role in it's own decline

[jhfry]

Microsoft isn't losing because of Linux, it's losing because of Microsoft.

Essentially, if MS dominated the industry by creating the BEST product, then they wouldn't have a problem. Their problem is simply that their target customer isn't willing to be abused any longer. That and the of years of abuse have pushed millions of victims to contribute to the creation and improvement of alternatives to Microsoft.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[ciaohound]

Exactly. They are reaping what they've sown with their Windows-for-everything strategy. That worked against Lotus, Borland, Netscape, etc... ten years ago. But where is the Windows iPod? The Windows iPhone? The Windows Android? Innovations are sidestepping Windows.

Of course, Microsoft has the technical ability to do so as well, but organizationally, that's like asking Detroit to make a small car.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[wmaster]

The virus is an old snake eating up corporate ressources since years inside MS - and her name is greed, stupidy, intolerance and lack of responsibility. The fish is stinking from the head since years, and everyone knows the name and the face of the stinkhead. Get rid of him, open up, create a new fresh image, real new visions, real new products, real leadership, real responsibility - and MS might be able to lead the world out of recession if well done.
Greetings,
Chris

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[nine-times]

Actually, I think many consumers don't really feel the Microsoft "abuse". Personally, I think that it's more a problem of Microsoft's products being stuck in the gap between "good enough," and "so much better that I need to have it!"

It's not based on anything but anecdotal evidence, but it seems like, for most things I do in Windows/Office, their "2000" line was "good enough". Everything since has remained "good enough", and even strayed into "significantly better", but never quite hit the threshold of "so much better that I need to have it!"

So people don't really buy upgrades, but really only "upgrade" when they get a new computer. At that point, Microsoft is at the mercy of computer-buying cycles, and then also at the mercy of OEMs. If people stop buying new computers, or if OEMs start pre-installing Linux instead, then expect Microsoft's profits to decline.

Of course, like I said, those are just my random thoughts based on anecdotal evidence.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[Grishnakh]

You're only talking about their OSes, especially their consumer OSes. For server OSes, plenty of people didn't think Windows was "good enough", so they went with Linux or others.

You're also not talking about consumer devices. MS had Windows Mobile OS out long before Android and iPhone came around. Last time I checked, iPhones were great sellers, and no one talks much about making apps for Windows smartphones. MS has the Zune too, and has had it for several years, but no one thinks it's "good enough"; the iPod is still outselling it 100-to-1.

You're right about MS's products being "good enough" but not "so much better that I need to have it!"; this is why they hang on for consumer OSes, but also why their other efforts are mostly failures, because there's clearly superior competition out there in those sectors. Linux as a consumer OS is also "good enough", but because of compatibility issues, familiarity, etc., it hasn't grown very much on the desktop(/laptop), and Mac OS is the same way, so MS hangs on in that market. MS only does well in a market when it's the only game in town.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[Aphoxema]

There was little alternative before. Linux does offer a credible alternative, more so over time. You can really love fried potatoes but no matter how you dress them, some day you'll wish you had something in the cabinet besides a potato.

It is both Microsoft pushes and Linux's pull.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[jhfry]

I would agree with your assessment too. So it's two processes at work:

1. Abused technical users pursue, improve, and advocate alternatives.
2. Typical users aren't particularly attracted to the product.

The first one has created an alternative, the second has created a bunch of potential converts. The result is that Linux and OSX are attracting more attention.

The greater force at work against Microsoft is really the cost of computer hardware. As hardware prices drop, the software becomes a larger percentage so the Windows tax is a much larger percentage of the whole cost of the system. Additionally, corporations are not seeing the gains they used to by upgrading hardware and software... so they are stagnating with older equipment and XP. Finally, the market is basically saturated, and there is little room for new growth in the bloated OS arena... especially as distributed computing and small network devices are the hot items and desktops and full featured laptops are less important to spend money on.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[nine-times]

Well really what I mean is that every time they release a new version, it's "good enough" but not "so great that I need to rush out and buy it", in such a way that if Windows 2000 server was "good enough" for you to use, then Windows server 2003 was probably also "good enough" and possibly "noticeably better than 2000", but generally not so much better than 2000 that you needed to buy the upgrade. And if Windows server 2000 wasn't good enough, then 2003 probably would also not be good enough.

And really I think that's a pattern across their product line. With a few exceptions, I haven't seen any killer new features in Microsoft products in several years. In fact, the only thing that really comes to mind was when they upgraded Exchange to support real syncing to Windows-based mobile phones. That was a substantial improvement that was actually worth paying some money for.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[V!NCENT]

Microsoft has dominated the industry by making stuff that people liked. That is why they copied anything from the Apple Finder to the KDE sticky notes 1:0,99. They have not tried to create the best OS, but an OS that had anything people wanted.

So what's up right now? Microsoft has made major investments into Windows, so they are not going write a new Windows completely from scratch. As Microsoft has said before the internet came too fast for them. Internet was their priority #6 at the time it became mainstream. Now onto my point -> people now like security more than ever before. Microsoft can not deliver that with their current codebase. Stuff get's added to it and little ever gets removed. Add to that the fading vendor lock-in and BINGO!

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[Maxo-Texas]

Couldn't agree more.

I like Microsoft products. I use them daily.

I do not trust microsoft.

I know they want to lock me in.

I actively disengage from their products and look for alternatives because I know they will abuse any monopoly they build.

Re:What about MS's role in it's own decline

[symbolset]

They are reaping what they've sown with their Windows-for-everything strategy.

Wait!, no! Windows for Warships and Windows for Submarines were the right products for the right time.

If the right time was FREAKING NEVER.

Re:I dunno

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

That certainly seems to be the case in netbooks. Once MS got going there, the proportion of netbooks running linux dropped fairly sharply. On the other hand, MS had to commit to keeping XP's corpse stumbling along a while longer, and for only peanuts a unit. That must have sucked.

Ironically, Linux probably does more to strangle MS's non-OS products than it does its OS products. Historically, MS's non windows/office divisions have had a great deal of strategic freedom, because MS could afford to keep burning money until the product finally found its feet(See Xbox, MSN, MS Research). If the windows/office margins suffer, the other departments become a liability, they'll have to succeed fast, or get axed.

Let's do the math

[hendrix2k]

Well, it isn't exactly

Linux: 5,000

Microsoft: 0

but more along the lines of

Linux: n/a

Microsoft: -5,000

Bad economy: FTW

Not Vista either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh no, it's definitely not Vista. It's Linux's fault.

Re:Not Vista either.

[DaVince21]

If you put it like that, both being sarcastic and not being sarcastic can be true. Vista turned out bad, so people try alternative systems or stay with XP.

What if...

[djberg96]

"Companies can offer their own branded software platform based on Linux."

Next up, Microsoft Linux!

Re:What if...

[pak9rabid]

Next up, Microsoft Linux!

Hah! I'd truly love to see them try that..I really sincerely would. The only way commercial Linux vendors make any money off of Linux is through their support channel. Have you ever tried to get support from Microsoft? Oh man, it'd be a bigger financial failure than Hotmail, Zune, and their Yahoo! acquisition combined.

Re:What if...

[phyreskull]

Next up, Microsoft Linux!

http://www.mslinux.org/

Linux had a head start

[Anonymous Coward]

Just want to point out that Linux predates Windows 95, which was Microsoft's first serious entry in the OS market. Everything before (Win 3.1 etc) were just non-preemptive multitasking graphical UI toolkits running on DOS. Microsoft has proven over the last 14 years that they are not very good at writing high quality operating systems.

Finally as of Windows 2000 and XP (and I guess NT before that) they have something at least worth considering, but have taken a step back to incompetence with Vista.

It's a testament to the power of Marketing and Unethical business practices that Microsoft was able to beat Linux and OS/2 in the 90s. They were however good at attracting developers back then.

Linux was modelled after unix and took advantage of a high quality suite of development tools (GNU). Windows was shat by people who were not apparently very good at building an OS, at least as judged by quality and stability, rather than UI.

I don't see any other legacy of interest Microsoft will leave behind other than Office and Xbox. Sorry I'm trailing into flamebait territory but I think I'm painting a fair and defendable picture.

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

Windows 95 was not MS's first "serious entry into the OS market".

MS-DOS was a very "serious entry" into the OS market, as was windows 3.0, 3.1, and NT. In fact, I still support an old NT 4 server that predates the release of Windows 95.

Please don't let your inexperience confuse you. Millions of offices ran on Novell, DOS, Lotus, and Wordperfect long before Windows 95 came along.

Sure those early operating systems weren't anything compared to the UNIX workstations of the day, but neither were the computers they were running on.

Also, you don't seem to realize that there is nothing that says that an OS has to have certain features to be a good OS.

MS-DOS was a very good OS for standalone workstations where only one user was going to be interacting with the system and only running one application. The early PC's were not really capable of much more anyway, so DOS did what it was intended to do, and did it well enough at the time.

Even though I hate to admit it, Microsoft has brought far more to the industry than you give it credit for. I wish that someone had provided some viable competition all these years to force Microsoft to innovate a bit more, but they pushed the industry fairly well for a monopoly. They didn't really have to, they could have stretched their releases apart by years more than they did and made even more money. Upgrades have never been a big money maker for MS, it's bundling with new pc's they depend upon anyway when people are replacing their computers every couple of years.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Grishnakh]

Sorry, no. MS-DOS is not an operating system, it's a program loader with a command shell. There's a big difference. That was OK in the 80s, because PCs at the time didn't have much power, and people didn't expect multitasking (which requires an OS, protected memory, etc.). MS-DOS isn't really much different from a modern-day bootloader, except that it stays resident in memory.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Angstroem]

MS-DOS was a very good OS for standalone workstations where only one user was going to be interacting with the system and only running one application. The early PC's were not really capable of much more anyway, so DOS did what it was intended to do, and did it well enough at the time.

No. It never was "good", in no case "very good". And it also did not "well enough".

In fact, DOS was a true step back compared to anything that existed at that time and it took a whopping 15 years until it arrived where others were already in the early 80s.

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

Again, your spouting your beliefs about what an OS should be capable of as though they are the definition of the word.

When you can convince me that you can run an MS-DOS application without DOS, then I will agree with you... but as far as I know, most DOS applications depended upon DOS. So it wasn't a boot loader.

It didn't do a spectacular job, and was crap by today's standards, but it most certainly was an OS unless you butcher the definition.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Grishnakh]

Why don't you read this article about OSes and learn something.

MS-DOS does not protect or control access to hardware, something that is required to be called an "OS". From the article: "MS-DOS provided many operating system like features, such as disk access. However, many DOS programs bypassed it entirely and ran directly on hardware."

Being like an OS is not the same as being an OS.

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

Give me an example of what was alternatives that IBM ignored when it chose MS-DOS for the IBM PC. And why they were better (for the target market) than MS-DOS.

I can only think of one OS that was truely better at the time for personal computing, and that was OS-9 (not Mac OS-9)... but I'm not sure that it could have been ported to the Intel 8080 as it was written entirely in assembly and wasn't ported to any other processors until 2 years later in 1983 and not to Intel until 1989.

Sure there were tons of interesting things happening in the personal computing OS space in those days... but when IBM went shopping, there were not really that many choices that would have made good business sense. CP/M would have been the best choice, as it was the most popular... but they wouldn't sign the papers IBM required... hence the reason Gates bought QDOS (a CPM like OS) and renamed it MS-DOS in the first place.

So technically there was nothing for intel processors that was better, and the only os that made better business sense wouldn't sell... that left MS-DOS.

I will agree that MS could have greatly improved on MS-DOS and didn't, favoring compatibility over capability... but don't forget that tons of software of the time was proprietary so it didn't make sense to break compatibility to favor features.

I think if anything, it's IBM's fault for coming into the scene before a decent OS had been ported to intel processors. Hell QNX was only a year later and put DOS to shame... but in technology, it rarely pays to wait.

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

So it's half an OS? If not an OS, what is it?

Compared to the other OS's for similar hardware of the time, DOS was certainly an OS. And you forget that at the time, a lot of software was written to access hardware directly.

To say that MS-DOS was not a "serious entry into the OS market" is like saying that the Model-T was not a serious entry to the auto market. Sure there were better cars, but the model-T shaped the industry.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Grishnakh]

I think a better analogy would be: "To say that MS-DOS was not a "serious entry into the OS market" is like saying the bicycle was not a serious entry to the automobile market."

Remember, MS-DOS didn't come around before multitasking operating systems, it came after. Unix was around for long before MS/Q-DOS, and Multics was around before that. The concepts of memory protection, hardware protection, etc. were well established. I'm pretty sure MacOS had all that too, even though its multitasking was only cooperative, and that came out in 1984.

Re:Linux had a head start

[KingAlanI]

"So it's half an OS?". Nah, that's OS/2. $foo/2 equals half of $foo, I would think....

Re:Linux had a head start

[mevets]

| The early PC's were not really capable of much more anyway, so DOS did what it was intended to do, and did it well enough at | the time.

Thats not true. Unix, and a number of unix-inspired OSes (qnx and coherent at least) were available from the early days. Unix heritage lies in the pdp family, and the early PCs were comparable.

Re:Linux had a head start

[noldrin]

Actually it's been Microsoft's competitors nipping at his heels that pushed the industry along. Digital Research's CP/M (which turned into DR DOS) predated MS-DOS and continued to force it to play catch up for the entire life of MS-DOS. DESQview gave DOS users windows four months before Windows 1.0 and didn't get surpassed till Windows 3.0. IBM was selling a 32-BIT GUI Internet ready operating system called OS/2 to end users since 1992, a year before Windows NT, which wasn't even targeted to home users, Micrsoft didn't do that till 1995. In 1994 OS/2 already included an entire suite of Internet utilities including a Web Browser, something that take Microsoft till November 1995 to do, although not for retail till 1998.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Anonymous Coward]

> I'm pretty sure MacOS had all that too

lol, no.

What you are missing is that PC hardware wasn't suitable for a 'real' operating system. Unix was a great OS for computers that cost more than a new car.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, DOS was "Good Enough." Applications wrote directly to the disk because their developers wanted to show off their massive hacker skills.

Re:Linux had a head start

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and I'm sure that the average household was just chomping at the bit to purchase a new miniframe that cost more than their house.

The commodity hardware that was available to IBM completely lacked the concept of hardware protection domains or memory protection. They could run a single execution thread directly on raw hardware, and that's it. No flavor of UNIX could run on that hardware, but CP/M and MS-DOS could.

MS-DOS did provide an execution environment with basic services within the extremely confined hardware on which it was designed to run. It was as good as OS as any.

Oh, and MacOS didn't have memory protection until 7 years ago. Are you so insistent that the previous nine versions of MacOS were not an OS at all?

Re:Linux had a head start

[symbolset]

Look, I knew two of the "Boys from Boca". They knew their stuff. They could make an OS if they cared. They really didn't care.

They hosed that, and we still pay. That bites. I'd hate them for that, but they did teach me some useful stuff so I can't. You can though.

Re:Linux had a head start

[lordSaurontheGreat]

There's a lot of crap that's being passed off as an OS these days, in case you haven't noticed.

Re:Linux had a head start

[debest]

In fact, I still support an old NT 4 server that predates the release of Windows 95.

Sorry, but NT 4 was released *after* Windows 95. NT 4 took the NT operating system and attached Windows 95's GUI to it. Prior to NT 4's release (summer of 96, IIRC), NT 3.5 had the "3.1" look.

So, if the old server you support has a "Start" button, it does *not* predate the release of Windows 95.

Re:Linux had a head start

[UrbanVegan]

You can't really know how well or poorly Microsoft pushed the industry without seeing the alternate future that would have come to pass if the playing field had been level.

Re:Linux had a head start

[QuietObserver]

All well stated, but I would like to add one other point; Windows 1.0 was released on November 20, 1985, but Macintosh was released on January 24, 1984, almost two years earlier (four days short of twenty-two months if you want to get technical), and the 68000 processor, though 16-bit externally, had 32 bit support internally, and could access 16MB.

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

QNX was released a year later than MS-DOS... and it's a shame that it was!

Re:Linux had a head start

[jhfry]

True... there is no way to know what might have happened.

I can only say that for many years, MS dominated for no reason other that the fact that most businesses were dependent on one or more MS products.

Because of this, MS could have moved much slower and cheaper and the market would likely have allowed it. We can see examples of this in the slow adoption of any of MS's new technologies. As it stands, it looks like Vista should have been held back for another year or two in development.

If you consider the speed at which most monopolies innovate, Microsoft has actually done OK (certainly not as good as one would like). A good example are phone, cable, and power companies, when they monopolized their industries they stagnated almost completely; then came VOIP, satellite TV, and ...

Their prices are causing their decline

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

In the face of credible and supported competition that's FREE, it becomes hard to justify to PHB's that they'll need to spend a few grand per server on licenses (plus hopping on the license upgrade merry-go-round every couple of years) to do the same work.

On the desktop side, it's the same deal. Trying to shoehorn in a few hundred bucks of worthless software licenses onto devices that are going to be priced in the low to mid hundreds is going to be a non-starter for the companies that want to sell the devices. Enter Linux.

Cheers,

Re:Their prices are causing their decline

[zappepcs]

Where I work, Linux is taking a big chunk away from both MS and Sun for price alone. We (developers) have shown that we can use Linux and two different DB engines to replicate or outperform the existing Sun/Oracle environment. With some of the Sun hardware at EOL, upgrade is forced, and cost is a big issue. MS/Sun/Oracle lost out.

On the desktop? I have 6 systems at home running Ubuntu, one for testing that currently has Mint/CentOS dual installation, and of course I've got dual installs with others (Puppy/DSL/Fedora)

I know that other people have other constraints, but I truly don't get the logic behind it. Sooner or later, you'll find yourself at the forced upgrade state, and I don't see how you can argue for anything but Linux at that point, if not sooner. Note: that doesn't count legacy Windows only apps that won't run on Wine, or hardware requirements that preclude Linux such as some RT systems requirements. I'm still steadily converting Windows users to Ubuntu with little effort... once they understand that Linux (and everything else) doesn't run on Windows.

Linux may not be the reason, but the threat of Linux is part of the reason.

yeah right

[timmarhy]

time to pass the crack pipe son. Yes MS is shrinking, just like the world economy. linux has made in roads in some markets, but it's completely dwarfed by MS's market share and probably will be for the forseeable future.

instead of boasting you've toppled MS, try going back to fixing the numerous issues with linux software that keep it off the desktop.

Re:yeah right

[maugle]

Dwarfed by Microsoft's market share or not, Linux certainly has a hand in Microsoft's decline. Want to guess how many times companies have used "We're considering migrating to Linux" as a way to force Microsoft to lower its price?

Re:yeah right

[howlingmadhowie]

instead of boasting you've toppled MS, try going back to fixing the numerous issues with linux software that keep it off the desktop.

i find it telling that the microsoft borg mentality has so utterly infused you that you don't realise that some people who are involved in free software can do one thing while others do another thing.

Re:yeah right

[timmarhy]

how many of those companys actually followed through with that threat? it doesn't point to a declining market share at all, merely a little competition and a hell of a long way from any kind of demise. honestly people wake up to yourselfs a bit.

Re:yeah right

[maugle]

I didn't mention market share, and it doesn't matter whether they follow through on the threat. My point was that companies are using Linux as a way to force Microsoft to lower their prices, leading to a decline in Microsoft's income.

Eating their own Fat

[Anonymous Coward]

Vista and the Xbox360 ate their profits, not Linux.

The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

I love reading articles about how Linux is really shaking things up on the desktop (or is it laptop now?) yet I've still never met a single person that uses Linux as their primary OS. I know several people who claim to use it daily (eg. they run a VM), I also know many people using it for hosting or specialized purposes (including myself) but Linux's real-world usage on the desktop is a mystifying thing. We brag about how its making inroads and how its impacting the marketplace but we rarely see it in person.

In my opinion, until Linux gets a unified interface, a sane way of installing applications and dealing with dependancies and manages some actual commercial support I just don't see it appealing to the average consumer. That's not to say it won't find a niche in specialized devices (which practically describes the netbook movement) in addition to its strong position in the server and hobbyist markets, but I would suggest that Linux as a replacement for Windows or the Mac OS on the desktop seems very unlikely to me. Almost as unlikely as it having any significant role in Microsoft's presumed decline.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[sensei moreh]

I guess we've never met

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[XanC]

Well, I run Linux exclusively, on my desktop at home and my laptop for work. This is probably not the best forum to declare that nobody is using Linux on the desktop.

Also, installing applications and dealing with dependencies are absolutely among Linux's strongest features over Windows, and always have been.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[scubamage]

Hi, I'm Matthew. I use linux as my primary operating system. Nicetameecha.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

Well but that's my point. The percentage of people I "meet" online that use Linux is astonishingly high. Yet in person I've never seen it in practice. And the few Linux people I have met first online and then in person really didn't use Linux anymore than I did - which amounts to having it installed in a VM or on a spare box.

In regards to dependancies and app installs, sudo apt-get might be more logical for you than say dragging an application into a folder as you do on the Mac or double-clicking an installer executable on Windows but that doesn't mean its relatable to the average user.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[rla3rd]

I suggest that the poster try one of the recently released distributions. My whole family has been using Ubuntu for the last 2 years. I use it as my primary OS on my work laptop, the family dekstop, the mythtv box, and the mame arcade in the basement. Dependencies are handled quite nicely with APT, and you can buy desktop support from Canonical if you so choose.

My 58 year old mother who has no computer skills whatsoever has Ubuntu installed on her new PC. I had to only set up her pc to auto update. After spending an hour with her showing the difference between Linux and Windows, she was off on her own. Since her switch from windows, I no longer get phone calls about her machine running slow, the computer crashing, disinfecting her machine from all the nasty virus' shes clicked on from email attachments.

The year of the linux desktop has already happened, its just that no one in the windows world has noticed.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

I'm not trying to be an anti-Linux shill here, after all I do have an Ubuntu install and run CentOS on my server, but I'd argue that your example doesn't reflect the norm. For example, lots of people in my family run the Mac OS. Why? Because I'm a Mac user and got them set up. That doesn't mean, however that this is the year of the Mac desktop and no one has actually noticed. It means a handful of people I know were persuaded by my advice (and free lifetime support).

Now I could make that argument that this is the year of the Mac in light of Apple's resurgence and relative growth, certainly more so than Linux in the same market space, but it's a bit shortsighted I think. No more shortsighted, however, than suggesting no one uses Linux in the comments of Slashdot. I'll give you that. :-)

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[ILikeRed]

Go to one of the SAGE conferences, and you will have a hard time finding a Windows notebook, other than the Microsoft employees. They are pretty scarce at the O'Reilly conferences as well. (Yes, I only use Linux on the desktop.)

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[Gizzmonic]

Also, installing applications and dealing with dependencies are absolutely among Linux's strongest features over Windows, and always have been.

You're completely delusional. I've been using Linux since 1997, and any honest Linux user will tell you that they've taken several trips to dependency hell. Questions like "Why are there so many different package managers?" "Why does every distro put its config information in a different place?" etc have yet to be worked out in Linux. Many people will say this is a strength of Linux, allowing people to make their own choices. However, normal people don't really care to have the choice of putting the "control panel" in different places and would prefer it just to work.

Let's face it, it's easier to work in Windows (for most normal, desktop tasks). The great thing about Linux is that it will do whatever you tell it to do, always. The bad thing is that sometimes it's hard to figure out how to ask ;).

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[vadim_t]

I use Linux exclusively on desktop, laptop and server. I have a couple VMs for the very rare times when I have to compile a windows app, which get booted maybe once a month for the only purpose of doing a build.

At work I have Windows on the computer, but all it gets used for is to start a VM with Linux in it. I turn it on, log in, start vmware, maximize, and do all the work in the VM. The only reason it's there at all is that I'm too busy to justify spending time on reformatting the box.

In my opinion, until Linux gets a unified interface

Will never happen. Ever. You can't go to thousands of people who aren't working for you and tell them "I decided that your project [insert toolkit here] is redundant and you should all go work on [insert other toolkit here]". They'll simply tell you to go take a hike.

This also assumes that Windows is consistent. But it isn't. MS Office has long been using new strange widgets. Even antiviruses seem to for some reason need to reinvent the GUI. Nearly almost any hardware device will come with applications that aren't standard looking.

I actually find that Linux is a lot more consistent looking than the typical Windows desktop.

a sane way of installing applications and dealing with dependancies

Like apt, for instance? Have you tried any recent distributions?

and manages some actual commercial support

Red Hat and SuSE will be happy to provide it. Though I don't know a single person who called MS tech support.

Almost as unlikely as it having any significant role in Microsoft's presumed decline.

You must have not been paying attention to the news. For a long time, "We're considering Linux" have been the magical words to get a nice discount from MS on a volume order. Without Linux, MS could be pretty sure that with Apple as the other possibility, not going with MS could well be more expensive. With Linux though, cost can be reduced to the internal cost of implementation, without any vendor getting a cent.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[dbcad7]

yet I've still never met a single person that uses Linux as their primary OS

In my opinion, until Linux gets a unified interface, a sane way of installing applications and dealing with dependancies and manages some actual commercial support I just don't see it appealing to the average consumer.

I'm just not sure if your kidding, trolling, or just making this stuff up based upon opinions from the 90's

There are plenty of people who use Linux as their primary OS.. and both apt, and rpm, ARE the sane way for installing applications, it's the MS .exe installers that are insane. You can make either to install programs just as simply as you do with Windows by double clicking an .exe (as opposed to through a repository) that's how robust both managers are..

Linux doesn't need an unified interface.. It's quite simple. Their are Popular distros such as Ubuntu (apt) and Fedora (rpm).. you pick one, use and learn it, and it is a no brainer to switch to the other and try it out if you want.. just as it is a no brainer to switch from gnome to KDE or to Xfce..

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[bogaboga]

In regards to dependancies and app installs, sudo apt-get might be more logical for you than say dragging an application into a folder as you do on the Mac or double-clicking an installer executable on Windows but that doesn't mean its relatable to the average user.

You hit the nail on the head.

Not only that...once you hit circular dependencies or find that "sudo apt-get install xyz" returns "installation of xyz has been kept back...," you cannot appreciate the problem with installing apps on Linux.

Folks like the one you responded to are the reason why Linux will not be significant on the desktop for a long long time.

But let me ask...what is wrong with Apple's or Microsoft's way of installing software?

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[SanityInAnarchy]

I've still never met a single person that uses Linux as their primary OS.

I have for the past seven years. Sometimes, for months at a time, as my only OS, until I need to boot XP for a game.

We brag about how its making inroads and how its impacting the marketplace but we rarely see it in person.

Asus EEE PC. The machine's very existence depended on Linux. Once Linux proved you could create something that cheaply, that small, with good battery life, everyone else rushed to get in on it, including Microsoft. But even if XP had really been an option when it was built, MIcrosoft wouldn't give them the price they wanted.

So, whether or not it actually makes it onto someone's desktop, the fact that it's there as an option changes the negotiation. If I need an operating system for something -- maybe I'm a Fortune 500 company with thousands of desktops, maybe I'm a Toshiba or a Sony and I'm building a new set top box or otherwise smart device -- I can now negotiate a much lower price for Windows, because Linux is a real option, whether or not I ever intended to use it.

until Linux gets a unified interface,

Name an OS which has one.

a sane way of installing applications

Package managers are stranger, but they are more secure, and they are, in fact, easier.

Among other things: Reinstalls are no longer something to be feared. Just back up your home directory, reinstall, then go to add/remove programs, check all programs you need, and click "apply".

Compare with your "sane" way which involves digging through old, possibly scratched and useless CDs, as well as browsing online through dozens of web pages, looking for installer programs -- which are essentially unverified executables, each one opening you up for a MITM attack.

and dealing with dependancies

I'll forgive this, since you clearly haven't dealt with Linux directly in years, if ever.

Dependencies are not an issue. They are so much not an issue it's not even funny anymore.

Remember what I said above, about "add/remove programs"? That's it. All the dependencies are taken care of automatically.

and manages some actual commercial support

I bought this laptop with Ubuntu, from Dell. That means I actually have support. I can actually call Canonical if I have a problem.

I can also buy software for Linux -- Canonical has a repository of commercial software. Then there's programs like Maya, etc.

There's also Linus, and a number of other kernel developers, who have their paychecks written by an organization which lives purely on donations from these guys -- in case you're too lazy to follow that link, that's HP, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Oracle, AMD, Google, Motorola, Nokia, Adobe, Dell, Mitsubishi... I could go on, just follow the link.

I would call that a significant amount of corporate support -- and that's not counting the developers these organizations often hire to work for them, but on Linux and open source.

I just don't see it appealing to the average consumer.

See, that's the more interesting question, and that's where the flamewars happen.

But often, it's a moot question. The rule of thumb I've found is that most people love Linux, when they give it a chance, and it will do 99% of what they want. But there's another 1% that they can't live without, that's different for everyone, that it won't do.

Many of these, there's really nothing the community can do to improve things, without destroying what makes Linux great. Consider: You complained about not having a "unified interface". If that meant enforcing human interface guidelines, it would kill some very interesting apps which explore some radically different ideas about human interfaces. If it meant just a

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[walshy007]

You're completely delusional. I've been using Linux since 1997, and any honest Linux user will tell you that they've taken several trips to dependency hell.

You are right, however, I have not had a dependency hell since around 2001, and the user base now is somewhat larger than what it was then, so it stands to reason that a lot of linux users will have never seen a dependency hell.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

"Not only that...once you hit circular dependencies or find that "sudo apt-get install xyz" returns "installation of xyz has been kept back...," you cannot appreciate the problem with installing apps on Linux."

Well said. Just because an advanced user finds apt-get to be logical doesn't mean a novice will find it intuitive. I've used it enough to say that there's nothing superior about a four hour scavenger hunt for dependancies that apparently depend upon other things you're already depending upon (and missing). Especially when the successful end result breaks your wireless in the process (thanks Ubunutu!).

The point is, to suggest apt-get is more logical than double clicking a file sitting back and watching it install clearly shows a giant misconception about the end user. As far as I'm concerned, relating technical concepts transparently to the user is a bit absurd. A "friendly" OS should obscure what's going on under the hood at the user level. But of course this goes against everything Linux stands for. Want to write a letter? Excellent, but first we're going to have to construct some paper and pencils. Okay now let's add the graphite repository...

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[QuantumRiff]

Your assuming most people install crap on their computers. You and I might, since were technically inclined, but the majority of people I have helped with their home computer have almost nothing installed that was not included with their computer (hell, they don't even have updates installed). Other than apps that install by visiting web pages. I have setup several relatives with Ubuntu. They browse the web with firefox, (especially Hulu.com) check email with theunderbird or webmail, chat with pidgin, and every time the icon at the top shows up, they click it to install updates.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

"Tell you what -- actually give it a try. Actually make an effort. Then come back with some real, legitimate complaints -- because those do exist. Your feedback will be welcome, your patches even moreso."

I've got an Kubuntu box under my desk. It's got Hardy on it but it's not on my network because the wireless doesn't work. I'd blame the five adapters but they work fine on my other systems. I'd blame the lack of commercial support for proper drivers but even then when I found a supported card, the hoops I had to jump through were absurd. Even more absurd than the "arcane" process of going to the developers website and downloading an executable as I'd have to on Windows. Though, thankfully, for me ATI has never initiated any MITM attacks.

"As it is, you really don't know what you're talking about."

You're 100% right. I've been poking around with Linux since Yellowdog on PowerPC and I still don't get it. I've used Knoppix, CentOS, Redhat/Fedora, Ubuntu, Kubuntu and Debian and although I'm repeatedly told how impressed I should be, I always walk away confused. And it's not that I hate open source software, its that I think the ideals are often in the wrong place.

The underbelly of an OS shouldn't be exposed to end users. Is this belief wrong or just subjective? Either way it stands in direct opposition to what I've seen of the Linux movement. I wouldn't suggest that the guts of the OS should be inaccessible to advanced users, thus hobbling their workflow, but that know-nothings like myself shouldn't have to see or interact with it.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

It's a valid point and I think Linux (Ubuntu, especially) has shown it can be versatile and useful in niche markets. Netbooks are a wonderful example. Most run some Linux variant and perform their jobs admirably. But in these cases they're almost kiosks, really. What happens when they do want new software and no one is around to show them how to add unsupported repositories?

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, installing applications and dealing with dependencies are absolutely among Linux's strongest features over Windows, and always have been.

I'll have to politely disagree with you: that couldn't be further from the truth. To install software in Windows, you don't have to learn to type ./blahblahblah, or tar zxvf blahblah.tar, etc.

I like Linux's package management, and I like the fact that it's free.

I especially love the KDE environment. But Linux is not easier for your average user. Saying so won't make it true.

If someone could actually market Linux in a coherent way, and fix some of its shortcomings, it could become a viable alternative for the masses, not just for us that read /.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

You're completely delusional. I've been using Linux since 1997, and any honest Linux user will tell you that they've taken several trips to dependency hell.

I must be delusional too! Since I moved to Debian ~7 years ago I thought I lived in dependency heaven.

Questions like "Why are there so many different package managers?" "Why does every distro put its config information in a different place?" etc have yet to be worked out in Linux.

Those aren't dependency problems.

Many people will say this is a strength of Linux, allowing people to make their own choices. However, normal people don't really care to have the choice of putting the "control panel" in different places and would prefer it just to work.

Different people have different needs, different capabilities and different preferences. What's a strength for some may be a weakness for others. I like the way Linux (Debian, actually) works. Many will be most comfortable with Windows, others with Mac OS X. If that means that Linux isn't the right choice for everyone then I won't loose any sleep over it.

Let's face it, it's easier to work in Windows (for most normal, desktop tasks). The great thing about Linux is that it will do whatever you tell it to do, always. The bad thing is that sometimes it's hard to figure out how to ask ;).

For most normal desktop tasks I don't think it's harder to figure out how to ask in Linux than it is in Windows. Perhaps Windows isn't as easy as you think it is for delusional people.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[Elwood_Black]

I run Linux exclusively on my desktop, laptop, servers and my Mac. Mac OS sucks for my needs so the obvious choice was to install Linux. As far as an easy to install packages, its as simple as starting an application, searching for the application you want, reading the description of the package, selecting the package and clicking apply. All that is required is a connection to the repository or to the install CD. Dependencies are automatically satisfied as needed for almost all applications. Several of my non-techie clients are also running Linux after I let them play with my laptop and they saw how much easier it was compared to Windows and Mac. Most of them love the fact that most OSS is free and much of it is 100% compatible with their previous Win32 and Mac data.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[blackest_k]

Hi I use a Linux desktop not a VM it's my primary O/S,

Perhaps I should explain why, perhaps no 1 is I don't like using pirated software, and open source provides maybe 99% of what I want and I can live without the 1%. Theres still a few cases where software isn't native to Linux, and I might want to use it, and between wine and a VM it's covered.

I hate the DRM and intrusive nature of windows. WGA was the final straw for me even on a fully paid up Windows Install I would not allow that spyware to run on any of my PC's.

I also hate the closed nature of windows, Linux pretty much gives me access to all area's. I can get to the source when I want and I can have all the tools at my disposal. I enjoy being able to give back to the community, little bits for sure but thats Linux for you everyone can contribute and make the whole experience that little bit better.

Compare that freedom with Microsofts product and it's stand alone o/s with networking bolted on. The Viruses the malware the constant waste of resources expended trying to keep a system clean. Yeah cleaning up windows systems lots of windows systems I sure got fed up with doing that over the years, and the usual have you got a copy of...

Another thing apart from in a VM windows isn't very portable with Linux I can have a set up with what I want set up on a usb drive and I can take it to whatever system I want (admittedly there can be the odd hardware issue usually just wireless and easily fixed).

A lot of people complain about setting up hardware to work with Linux, the surprising thing is how much works straight off with no searching for a download that you hope is genuine and works.

For me windows is a chore an obstacle more often than not to my curiosity. It's part of the rat race and its getting worse, bloated and patched up. Linux and OSX are great modern operating systems and they both out perform windows on a given hardware. If I wasn't using Linux It would be OSX but Apples determined to keep OSX away from generic PC hardware, which is a pity since it gives a secure consistent environment that could be main stream. OSX on a netbook would sell big time, after all if a user doesnt like it windows or Linux is an option.

Linux is an option for people who like computers, but for a large majority they wouldn't want to take time to learn a different way of doing things but for them there is OSX eventually , I hope.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

To install software in Windows, you don't have to learn to type ./blahblahblah, or tar zxvf blahblah.tar, etc.

And if you have any fairly modern GNU/Linux distro, you don't have to do that either.
(Okay, maybe Slackware and Gentoo are exceptions to that, but I don't see a linux novice installing one of those...)

Try using a recent copy of Ubuntu some time

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[SanityInAnarchy]

even then when I found a supported card, the hoops I had to jump through were absurd.

Last two laptops I've had, the "hoops" were as follows:

  - Right click on the network manager icon.
  - Click an available network.

With Intrepid, they've for some reason decided to follow Windows' annoying method, so it's instead:

  - Right-click on the network manager icon.
  - Click "New Connection"
  - Click Wlan0
  - Click an available network.

I didn't have to install any drivers. I didn't have to tweak any settings. It Just Worked. In fact, my mother's laptop, which has Windows 2000, has wireless which only works on open networks -- WEP, WPA, etc is completely broken. Boot a Kubuntu livecd on it, and those networks Just Work.

I realize the plural of anecdote is not data. But you can see why I might assume you had no idea what you were talking about -- your experience is so completely different than mine, and everyone I know, including plenty of not-very-tech-savvy people I see using Ubuntu.

The underbelly of an OS shouldn't be exposed to end users. Is this belief wrong or just subjective?

Well, from the wording, wrong...

I wouldn't suggest that the guts of the OS should be inaccessible to advanced users, thus hobbling their workflow, but that know-nothings like myself shouldn't have to see or interact with it.

That, I can agree with.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[xenocide2]

I've got a laptop behind me that dual boots jaunty/vista/intrepid. I don't have hardy available, but here's the steps in jaunty:

Click on the icon. Select your network. Don't even have to right click anymore (this might be a change that confuses existing users). Additionally, you can store connection settings system-wide to connect on startup rather than login.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[SanityInAnarchy]

thankfully, for me ATI has never initiated any MITM attacks.

Seems I missed this before...

No, MITM is not about ATI -- Man In The Middle attack. As in, someone between you and ATI. Given you're on wireless, that's not entirely implausible -- but it is completely preventable, by at least signing the software, if not providing it through a common, trusted channel.

What impresses me about Linux, that no one else has done so far, is that it not only provides that additional security, but it makes the process of installing it easier than other methods -- including the Windows methods of downloading or inserting a CD.

The closest, oddly enough, is Apple's App Store, but that's entirely too limited.

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[JoeytheSquid]

It was a (poorly conceived) joke. :-)

My point was, I've been downloading software from corporate websites for years and have never been subject to any sort of attacks (MITM or otherwise). Moreover to suggest that repositories are inherently a superior method of installation based simply on the merits of the underlying process means were fundamentally discussing two different things. I'm expressing this opinion from a user's perspective, not describing the fundamental technologies.

That said, let's say I just purchased a new printer and I'm going to use it on my Mac, my Windows PC and my Ubuntu box (a situation was actually faced with). On the Mac I open up the CD and double-click the installer. It runs through its paces and complete. The Windows experience is identical and at no point during this process did I feel unsafe or confused. Now, for Ubuntu the "easy" install. Here was my general experience:

sudo apt-get install build-essential

wget -O foo2zjs.tar.gz http://foo2zjs.rkkda.com/foo2zjs.tar.gz

tar -zxvf foo2zjs.tar.gz
cd foo2zjs

sudo make uninstall

make ./getweb 1020

sudo make install install-hotplug cups

sudo /etc/init.d/cupsys restart

Clearly much more intuitive. ;-)

Re:The theoretical power of Linux

[SanityInAnarchy]

I'm expressing this opinion from a user's perspective, not describing the fundamental technologies.

I'm describing both.

The fundamental technology is more secure, which does have a real impact on the user's experience.

And, as a user, I'd much rather check several boxes to install several pieces of software than have to download each individually, double-click, then next-next-next. Similarly, to keep it up to date and running smoothly, I'd much rather just have one place to check for updates, than five auto-updaters and an additional ten or fifteen programs I have to manually go back to the website and check.

It's also nice to save bandwidth and disk space by having common libraries distributed exactly once and then shared. And it's nice from a developer's perspective, because I no longer have to worry too much about reducing my dependencies, or favoring "built-in" libraries (included in the target distro) over uncommon ones.

Here was my general experience:

That does suck, no question. However:

I'm going to assume you actually had a need to do it that way. I've got foo2zjs installed, via the Ubuntu package. I didn't deliberately do so -- I'm assuming it was a dependency, somehow.

Restarting cups is exactly the kind of thing that the package manager handles for you -- never mind that I didn't have to compile from source.

And, it should be possible to either take that set of commands and turn them into a script (literally copy and paste them for others to find), or build a custom package. Conversely, it is much harder if I want to write a script for Windows which installs a particular piece of software a certain way, while uninstalling the previous one, etc -- maybe I just don't know how.

Sex with 4 3oll

[Anonymous Coward]

some of you have 7agged behind, started work on minutes now while the last night of development model erosion of user provide sodas, users. This is Platform for the

Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Guys, if you're going to talk about Microsoft vs Linux please keep Apple in mind.

Sorry, the picture isn't so rosey now, is it?

margins...????

[bcrowell]

Companies can offer their own branded software platform based on Linux. If Microsoft is getting 75 percent margins, you would like some of that high-margin business, too.

This makes absolutely no sense. First, there is no reasonable way to calculate a profit margin on a copy of Windows or Office. This is not a car or a book. The incremental cost of producing one copy of Windows is nearly zero. There's no way to quantify MS's investment in their software. What would you do, try to estimate how many man-hours MS programmers have worked since 1975, and divide the cost of employing them by the number of copies of Windows they've sold?

And even if you believed this 75% figure, it's silly to think it applies to Linux. Asus doesn't say, "OK, we paid $x for the rights to Linux, and now let's mark that up so we have a 75% profit." Asus didn't pay any money for the rights to the Linux kernel, or Firefox, or Gnome, and anyway Asus doesn't sell an OS, they sell computers with an OS on them. I assume Asus does pay money to Xandros, but if amounts to any significant amount of money per Eee PC, then Asus is a bunch of complete idiots, because they could have just used Ubuntu instead for free. If they're paying money to Xandros, it had better be some small amount that accurately reflects the market's supposed perception that Xandros is somehow marginally better than Ubuntu.

Now let's imagine that Asus says, "OMG, Xandros is teh hotness, let's profit by jacking up the price because people are getting heart palpitations from wanting it so much. And we'll cut a deal with Xandros to call it Xeeeandros, cause then it's our brand, and users will pay extra." Well, no. People buy a Eee PC because they want something dirt cheap. They're not going to pay much more for Xandros than the zero cost of Ubuntu, and they're not going to pay much more for Xeeeandros than they would for Xandros.

I also don't buy this stuff like, "MS had layoffs, that means Linux is eating their lunch." Come on, now. Linux's share of the desktop is something like 1%. That's not enough to do anything at all to MS's margins. MS's real competition on the desktop is Apple. It's also fairly difficult to buy a PC from a retailer without Windows installed, so many people running Linux are paying the MS tax anyway. At most, Linux presents a very indirect, hypothetical threat to MS's future, if, e.g., Vietnam goes heavily towards Linux. Today, having Linux, Firefox, and OOo around are probably actually good for MS's profits, because it gives them something to point to when they get hassled about antitrust.

Re:margins...????

[Anonymous Coward]

I also don't buy this stuff like, "MS had layoffs, that means Linux is eating their lunch."

Most blog posts I'm reading on this are along those lines. Try pointing out that the economy is going down the drain though, and you'll see what delusion is all about.

I want FOSS to succeed, but beating dead horses and living in the land of make believe is not going to do that. When the economy picks up again and along with it comes Microsoft (and every other tech firm) what are they going to say? Nothing, of course.

Re:margins...????

[Grishnakh]

MS going down isn't the fault of any one thing, it's the fault of all of them: Linux, Apple, bad economy, etc. How much of a contribution each factor makes towards MS's decline is up for debate, but I'm sure all of these factors have something to do with it. Linux/Android and iPhone are hurting MS's mobile business. Linux is hurting MS's server business. Apple (and to a small extent Linux) is hurting MS's desktop business. Linux is probably hurting MS's corporate/government desktop business some, though that's pretty hard to say. Apple is killing MS's music business (Zune). The presence of Linux is allowing many customers to negotiate lower prices for MS software licenses, which hurt's MS's bottom line. And on top of that, the crummy economy is hurting all sectors of MS's business. And of course, MS has hurt MS, by making crappy products and abusing customers, causing them to seek out alternatives (or to not even bother checking out MS's alternative, such as with the Zune which is a complete joke in the market).

layoffs from a cash rich company

[sijucm]

Pure capitalist greed shown by Microsoft. With the kind of cash they are sitting on, they should invest in R&D or at least fix windows software. Good for the open source community, hope the laid off employees can work to make the socialist open source movement stronger. Let us share our resources.

netbook argument is nonsense

[cinnamon colbert]

i have been looking a lot at netbooks online, at best buy and at staples and microcneter, and it is hard to even find a linux netbook - I seriously doubt this has caused any significant harm to MS
But, be glad to see some actual sales data
Anyway, the whole idea that linux is better or cheaper then MS is not true for the avg user,

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[midicase]

"it is hard to even find a linux netbook"

Wow, I see them in local stores, particularly Compusa (TigerDirect) and Target.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[onkelonkel]

The first netbooks were all linux, because they were all sporting 4 GB SSDs. Within about a year, a lot of the models had 8 GB or larger SSDs or 160 GB regular laptop drives, and they almost all came with XP home. I think MS may have put together a special XP-Lite, low cost package to push linux out of the netbooks.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[clarkn0va]

the whole idea that linux is better or cheaper then MS is not true for the avg user

Tight logic. Tight like a dish.~

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[QuantumRiff]

But how many Vista netbooks do you see? The fact that MS has had to continue to allow companies to us XP in new products is a slap in the face to MS, and really hurts their profits. Microsoft has no choice but to allow XP to be used (and very cheaply) or face those companies moving to Linux.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[westlake]

i have been looking a lot at netbooks online, at best buy and at staples and microcneter, and it is hard to even find a linux netbook - I seriously doubt this has caused any significant harm to MS

Check out Walmart.com.

The Linpus Linux netbook - "not available in stores" - has a modest 512 MB of RAM and 8 GB of flash.

For ten bucks more the XP netbook comes with 1 GB RAM and a 120 GB HDD. Mini laptops

It weighs two pounds and ships for 97 cents.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not nonsense at all. The problem is that most Americans forget they are only a small part of the world market and that in other parts of the world Linux is being taken up in huge quantities.

With the help of netbooks Linux has overtaken Mac in the OS market, but let's not talk about that, eh, because only big American companies could possibly produce operating systems.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't read TFA.

As the article points out, the uselessness of Vista on Netbooks, and the existence of an alternative means that netbooks running windows are running XP at a severely slimmed down profit margin.

Re:netbook argument is nonsense

[rsborg]

Microsoft has no choice but to allow XP to be used (and very cheaply) or face those companies moving to Linux.

Worst part is, XP sucks on a 600px height screen. Surprisingly, Ubuntu and OSX86 are much nicer feeling at that dimension (but the drivers for the hardware isn't as polished, for obvious reasons).

Attention Linux Fanbois

[Daswolfen]

Please pull your head from Tux's ass long enough to realize that maybe the recession coupled with the craptacular Vista cause the 'Microsoft Decline'

Linux will NEVER be a viable home user desktop replacement until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[jbezorg]

Or Blizzard ports WoW over. Wouldn't have to available at Wal-Mart either. Just available for download.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Daswolfen]

This would make Linux have a bitter dent, but Mac will still always have a better marketshare than Linux.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Sybert42]

What about macs? Also, no need for quotes around the Microsoft decline.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[jbezorg]

Macs will always appeal to a certain demographic but "Always have a better market share than Linux" is a bit presumptuous. Linux can appeal to demographics that Mac can't approach. Just going to Newegg, there are 8 netbooks with Linux pre-installed from $250 to $500. The MacBook is $1000.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[cenc]

Even better, how about not going to walmart and not buying it at all. repositories in Linux means that all the software is a click away.

As soon as people come to understand they do not need to buy the software that runs on linux, and they do not need to make a shopping trip, and that it is already included, that will be the end of software section at wall Mart. Even the closed source software circles are moving that way.

This is not 1985. There is an internet.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[DustoneGT]

I can't buy Apple software at Wal-Mart and it seems to be a very viable home user desktop solution.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you need to buy it on wal-mart? I download it free, directly from synaptics.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you want to buy software, its pretty much all free and immediately available via the package manager

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[myz24]

As much as I want to agree with you (I dislike Linux as a desktop OS) I really don't think that the lack of costly software is the issue. Linux is free and that's the point. The software should be free too. The problem in my mind is the Linux desktop experience is frustrating. Full of "just do this little trick" to make things work. Linux is great if you're willing to tinker and constantly fix all of the minor issues that crop up almost daily. It's also great if you rarely venture out beyond web browsing, chat and email. You can't say that downloading your home video from a camcorder, editing it and uploading it to YouTube is nearly as simple as it is on say a Mac.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Daswolfen]

true, however, the majority of the people who buy things (and let face it.. Linux people are the same demographic as pirates.. they want everything free) are not that technically savvy. Maybe in 10-15 years when the kids who are in school today are in their 20s and the baby boomers are in their graves.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[KingAlanI]

WoW is rated Gold on WINE's app database. I suppose that counts for something...
http://appdb.winehq.org/

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[db32]

Welcome to reality... In this reality we have e-commerce, where more and more shopping/purchasing is done online. MANY companies are going to models where you download the software you purchased rather than buying the box. So...you are absolutely right...having a shopping mall application for free software like Synaptic could never possibly catch on. You can browse tons and tons of all your little software options, and try anything you want, all with no purchase! Yeah...there is no possible way that would catch on.

Its a slow moving dynamic, and I'm actually a little surprised they haven't pushed the whole GUI package manager thing a bit more in that regard, but it is indeed coming. There is a huge segment of the market that doesn't actually do anything Windows specific like games and whatnot with their PC. There are only a few things left that are trapped strictly in Windows land.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Jorophose]

Why sell software to Wal-Mart when you can have a Steam-like model?

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux will NEVER be a viable home user desktop replacement until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it.

Or until the sort of people who shop at WalMart realize that there is no need to EVER buy software.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should free linux software be on sale at Wal-Mart when it comes with the distribution or is available at online repositories free?

And how in heaven's name was your comment ever moderated insightful?

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually you could order them from Walmart. As for buying software, I have this nifty package manager that saves me a trip to the store.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux will NEVER be a viable home user desktop replacement until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it.

And the day that happens, it will stop being Linux.

We are happy with the current software release model on GNU/Linux, so go back to your malware pwoned windoz boxen and click click cl

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm... Why would anyone want to go to Walmart and buy software for Linux? A Linux user can just open up a package manager, enter a search term for the name or kind of program they want (from among roughly 20,000 software packages), and download and install it for free with a couple of mouse clicks.

I once showed Linux to a businessman at a coffee shop that caught me playing around with Compiz (he saw it and thought I was running Vista, but once he realized that my PC wasn't running Windows he was curious), and after a quick 5 minute rundown he basically told me he felt foolish for having bought so much software at places like Wal-Mart, etc., never knowing that he could have legally obtained software for 99-100% of his needs for free.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does something have to be in Wallmart to be a valid home user replacement? Please get over your US centric world view...

I live in Asia and in every computer shop in every mall there are linux netbooks for sale for discounts compared to the XP alternative. In a country where 6 dollars a day is considered a good wage if you're lucky enough to have work don't think these netbooks aren't selling.

So these things are penetrating. Yes the schools her teach MS office but many of the students do work in internet cafe's running open office - some even on linux boxes. With technology in schools of course the kids are always ahead of the teachers! The way I see it there is nothing Microsoft can do to really stem the decline here. The people simply cannot really afford it.

Finally, I believe that this is happening not just here but all over the developing world and it's those nations that will eventually dictate the future.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[evilviper]

Linux will NEVER be a viable home user desktop replacement until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it.

That's a bit like saying electricity will never be viable for home owners until you can go to the general store and buy a wagon load of electrons for it...

You're applying an antiquated model to the modern world.

When you need to make PDFs on Linux, you don't need to drive to WalMart to buy software to do it. The fact that you need to do so for Windows is a limitation, NOT a benefit.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Eli Gottlieb]

Even better, how about not going to walmart and not buying it at all. repositories in Linux means that all the software is a click away.

Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers. You can't sell an operating system except by selling applications. You can't sell applications for free -- if you make no money you might have damn fine software (most open source is damn fine software), but you'll have no marketing budget.

Thus, Linux will not become a real competitor until ISVs see some way of packaging up their closed-source software and selling it, in a shrink-wrapped package or over the internet, for Linux. Something like Steam for closed-source Linux apps could work wonders.

Wait a minute...

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Name your artist. Are you saying your artist will NEVER be viable if you don't see CD's in the store? Do you see my point? Why was your foul mouth post even moderated up? Have you even used Linux? And I mean more than just a fling for a day? There is a very thin wall holding Linux back from becoming the common household desktop operating system.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

".. until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it."

Clearly your software distribution paradigm was provided by M$. Have you not considered that one of the greatest selling points of almost all open-source OS's (any GNU/Linux distro, *BSD, Solaris, etc.) is the free, robust, and fast distribution of software and updates through smart package management? It is far more safe and convenient to use apt, emerge, yum, etc. to download and install a gpg-signed binary from a local mirror than it is to download and run a retarded Windows install program with wizard, let alone go to a store and buy an install disc.

Pull your head out of Gates' ass long enough to realize that these kinds of benefits are at odds with a pay-per-copy software development and sales model. Perhaps the reported decline is an indication that Microsoft has started to feel the pain of having to compete with superior, free software to retain their market share.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[JAlexoi]

A: Never say "never".
B: Buying software in the store is so-o-o 1998.

Re:Attention Linux Fanbois

[jbezorg]

It does for the Blizzard programmers. I sometimes wonder if MS pays Blizzard and incentive not to port WoW over.

Meh. I suspect it's not teh ebil MS and simply market share vs. supporting another OS not being cost effective.

Re:I dunno

[Anonymous Coward]

Just use linux. That way you won't be a criminal and that machine will do all that it's capable of.

Linux can do even better

[bogaboga]

Yes, Linux marketed as a distro can do better. The good thing is that very soon, we'll have KDE with a business friendly license. What I would like Linux programmers to do is to get their act together and solve problems that continue to plague the Linux ecosystem.

These come to mind:

1: Multimedia. There are so many back-ends to choose from, each with problems of their own. The associated front-ends are even worse both in functionality and bloat.

2: Polish. It seams that by default, Linux distros are less polished by default. In fact, I can say they are ugly by default. This does not help.

3: Bloat. KDE is wonderful but suffers from bloat. GNOME is kind of OK, but it's interface looks ancient and lacks the functionality of modern systems.

My 2 cents.

Re:Linux can do even better

[SanityInAnarchy]

Multimedia. There are so many back-ends to choose from, each with problems of their own.

And last I checked, each has an interface to the other -- or, at least, all of them have an interface to ffmpeg (they'd be stupid not to).

The associated front-ends are even worse both in functionality and bloat.

VLC is bloated? Really?

2: Polish. It seams that by default, Linux distros are less polished by default. In fact, I can say they are ugly by default. This does not help.

Specific suggestions welcome.

3: Bloat. KDE is wonderful but suffers from bloat.

Huh. I hadn't noticed. It seems positively lightweight to me.

GNOME is kind of OK, but it's interface looks ancient and lacks the functionality of modern systems.

Like what?

And you know these are skinnable, right?

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

1. Windows has two graphics/video backends, both have serious problems. The major container format is limited to 2GB, for example. You have to add on additional stuff to get other container formats (like ogm and mkv). You can also use all the same video decoders on Windows, without either of them, by just creating an overlay.

2. There's some that are cuter. They aren't the most popular. Make of that what you will, but I think this is the least significant issue facing Linux adoption. Which leads me to 3.

3. KDE isn't bloated, it's pretty light, but it is overcomplicated. The interface is way too busy. GNOME comes simple by default, but if you use Compiz+Emerald you can have all the functionality (more than Windows or OSX) and eye candy (likewise) that you can handle. Now Windows and OSX, they are bloated. OSX is a bigger shame to me because of what it came from. NeXTStep was pretty peppy on a 68040, with what, 64MB? 128? OSX is slow on a Dual G5 (I sat at one for months.) NOTHING is responsive. I will grant you, however, that XP is usually more responsive than GNOME :( In particular, Nautilus is like some kind of steam-driven engine from the victorian era.

I don't think you know what you're talking about. Some kind of specifics would provide some evidence that you indeed have some sort of point...

Re:Linux can do even better

[timmarhy]

1. nonsense

2. eye candy sells, that fact that you don't get that is what's wrong with linux

3. KDE is bloated as hell - that's what overcomplication is. GNOME is also bloated IMHO, so many packages and dependancies it's insane. it also lacks modern features like a consistent clipboard.

Re:Linux can do even better

[timmarhy]

that i do have one desktop under linux/freebsd that i like a LOT - XFCE4. it's fantasticly streamlined and fast kde and gnome could learn a lot from it.

Re:Linux can do even better

[PitaBred]

What is this "bloat" that you speak of with KDE? Really, I'm curious to see what you count as bloat. KDE runs quickly for me, even in a VM. I look at /usr/lib/kde4 and it's 49M, and /usr/share/kde4 is 46M. It's really not that big on disk, and it's running in about 350MB of RAM without any apps going.

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

1. Every word was true. If not, where is the nonsense? I call shenanigans. Saying "nonsense" is the alternative to admitting that you don't have a valid argument.

2. If eye candy sells, why is XP more popular than Vista? Why is the most eye-candy Linux not the most popular Linux? Eye candy, in fact, is not the only thing that sells. People want their computer to work when they want it to work.

3. An overcomplicated GUI doesn't mean the software is bloated. Windows is overall far more bloated. But less of the options are available to the user. You have to go tunneling through the registry creating arcane DWORDs (OSX is no better, putting you off in plist land) instead of just being able to run a config program. The excessive complexity of the KDE gui is perfectly desirable to some, which is why we also have GNOME. Both are skinnable, and both can be made to draw their windows with the other's widgets, so all the apps look the same (just heading off the inevitable incompatibility argument.)

What's wrong with Linux is mostly marketing, although there are some areas of spectactular failure, like bluetooth.

Re:Linux can do even better

[Blakey Rat]

Your point amounts to: Microsoft's OS sucks too, so there's no need for Linux to improve at all.

Please stop posting that. It's not only basically off-topic, it's actually counter-productive. Nobody is claiming that Windows is perfect, or even good; the claim you're responding to was that Linux should improve. If you honestly believe Linux should stop improving when it's faults are even with Microsoft's faults, then you're basically saying Linux should never, ever be better than Windows.

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

Your point amounts to: Microsoft's OS sucks too, so there's no need for Linux to improve at all.

What I actually meant to imply is that since Windows has all the same problems, those aren't the things holding back Linux.

I'd like to see some of the same things fixed. Which is to say, I have a list of things Linux needs, too. The eye candy needs a speed improvement so that it doesn't suck up the CPU, so that Linux can reach parity with OSX in that area. And the video overlay system (which didn't seem to be what the prior guy was talking about, but is a real problem) needs fixing, so that it is compatible with transformation. And Bluetooth support is terrible. Making things work is usually possible, but is also usually agonizing. Why do I need to edit a text file to persistently pair a bluetooth GPS? Agony.

Re:Linux can do even better

[Techman83]

Explain how bluetooth is a spectacular failure? Bluetooth is the first thing that surprised me. I got my T60 a couple of years ago, went looking for guides to set it up, was simple as apg-get install gnome-bluetooth. I was expecting something much harder back then. Now days it's included by default, actually a lot more is included by default. I am finding every new version involves less work from me to get it just the way I want it. (Happy Ubuntu user)

Re:Linux can do even better

[AaronLawrence]

I feel like there are much more substantial problems for Linux to do much better; things that have nothing to do with development. I admit that Linux is basically functionally good enough, easy to install, and has reasonable apps, but ...

What would it take to make Linux the #1 desktop?
http://reverse-entropy.livejournal.com/

Re:Linux can do even better

[timmarhy]

your entire point number 1. is so untrue i hardly know where to start, that's why i said it was nonsense. for starters, exactly what is wrong with windows video backend that your so unhappy about? last i checked i spent 15 minutes installing my last video card, compared to HOURS under linux to get decent 3d working. are you really suggesting x windows is... good?? and which "major" player format has a limit of 2 gig? oh and you need to install extra's in linux to play mkv etc as well, so who cares? atleast the codec's for windows don't suffer the rediculous anti patent anti closed source bias some linux distro's force on you.

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

Explain how bluetooth is a spectacular failure?

Audio support is a complete clusterfuck, serial support is actually quite retarded (you have to edit text files for persistence... where is my GUI?) and so on. Pairing is sketchy at best, devices which pair perfectly on my machine under windows crap themselves on the same machine under Linux. Actually, devices which pair perfectly on my handheld under wince crap on angstrom, too.

Bluetooth is an even bigger failure than wifi, but at least there's excuses for why Linux wifi is a minefield.

Re:Linux can do even better

[znark]

1. Windows has two graphics/video backends, both have serious problems. The major container format is limited to 2GB, for example.

That hasn't been true since the introduction of the OpenDML AVI format, aka AVI 2.0, and the transition to DirectShow APIs (as opposed to the old "Video for Windows" subsystem.) This transition happened, for the most part, somewhere around the beginning of the decade.

Re:Linux can do even better

[Techman83]

I can't say I've tried the Audio component, mainly as I don't have any bluetooth audio devices. But command line? I have _never_ dropped to the command line to use a bluetooth device. I turn bluetooth on, the Bluetooth logo pops up near the clock, I right click and it gives me many options including pairing, browsing devices etc. I'll have to find a bluetooth audio device and see if I have any dramas with that. I dunno what distro your using...?

Re:Linux can do even better

[evilviper]

1: Multimedia. There are so many back-ends to choose from, each with problems of their own. The associated front-ends are even worse both in functionality and bloat.

MPlayer plays everything, everywhere, always. It has great keyboard control built-in. SMPlayer (as the GUI front-end to MPlayer) is rather full-featured, but small.

2: Polish. It seams that by default, Linux distros are less polished by default. In fact, I can say they are ugly by default. This does not help.

Only Apple thinks the looks of the OS matters. Windows is as ugly as it gets. People buy flowers based on looks, not software.

3: Bloat. KDE is wonderful but suffers from bloat. GNOME is kind of OK, but it's interface looks ancient and lacks the functionality of modern systems.

The bloated desktop environments are bloated...? I'm shocked!

And the 500 other window managers? They work great. Blackbox, XFce, Afterstep, etc. They all work great.

Re:Linux can do even better

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one who thought you said "polish" as in "of and/or related to Poland" 'til they read further and suddenly felt like an idiot?

Re:Linux can do even better

[Anonymous Coward]

GNOME is also bloated IMHO, so many packages and dependancies it's insane. it also lacks modern features like a consistent clipboard.

The clipboard should be managed by X, not the window manager/desktop environment. KDE has klipper, Gnome has parcellite. One of them gets installed by default, yet both of those desktop enviroments share the same clipboard behavior. I'dd go as far as saying linux lacks a consistent clipboard behaviour.

Re:Linux can do even better

[MtViewGuy]

What Linux needs right now is a singular, easy-to-use (by end user!) program that can manage multimedia files on the computer AND a portable music player. In short, create the Linux equivalent of Windows Media Player 11, including the ability to play media files inside the program and easy copying of media files to a portable media player and file management on the portable media player itself. Since most non-Apple portable media players can use Windows Media Player 11 to copy files to the player, there is a standardized method that will work with players from Creative, Samsung, SanDisk SANSA, and Sony.

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

This transition happened, for the most part, somewhere around the beginning of the decade.

Unfortunately, it didn't happen for Microsoft until 2006 and it still requires a HOTFIX! Note that even Windows Server 2008 does not include this functionality. Why? Because AVI files over 2GB will break ALL KINDS OF APPLICATIONS (more legacy kind of stuff of course) and it's a compatibility issue.

In other words, the problem is anything but solved, and if you can avoid it, you should really never use an AVI. You wouldn't send a document to the printer in MS Word format... Well, not if you have a brain.

Understanding the situation before you comment? YOU FAIL IT

Re:Linux can do even better

[drinkypoo]

I dunno what distro your using...?

Have you ever tried to create a persistent pairing with a serial device? I have a SiRF Star III-based bluetooth GPS. In windows, windows CE, and others, you can do it all through the GUI. But you have to edit config files to do the pairing on Ubuntu (been using Bluetooth with Ubuntu since Edgy or so) or AFAIK any other Linux. There's no rfcomm config tools. At least, not last I looked. On Intrepid Beta...

Re:Linux can do even better

[jonasj]

How in the world did that rant get modded +5, Insightful? Is bogaboga bribing moderators or what? What's informative about it?

Re:Linux can do even better

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Pulse

2. Ubuntu

3. More bloated than Windows or OS X? I think KDE4 is taking steps towards cleaning things up, and Gnome has been improving this iteratively for a long time.

Vista is there doom

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been said, but with netbooks and laptops being so popular, but underpowered, they cannot support Vista, and since they are trying to kill XP, there are little alternatives, the only real one being linux.

Compare margins and cash on hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you say in the past that MS could give away Windows for free for 7 years before they started running out of money?

Could IBM manage that?

If so, why didn't you say it then?

If not, there's your difference.

Re:Compare margins and cash on hand

[roc97007]

> Didn't you say in the past that MS could give away Windows for free for 7 years before they started running out of money?

Are you talking to me personally? I don't recall ever saying that, unless in jest. But I'm old and my memory is going. Where was I alleged to have said that?

> Could IBM manage that? If so, why didn't you say it then? If not, there's your difference.

Um what? How strange. Ok, I'll bite: At the end of 2008 IBM had 12.9 billion cash on hand. Not counting repurchased shares, it would be a little over $23 billion. In the same time period, Microsoft had $10 billion in cash, or about $21 billion if you add in short term investments.

I could stop right there, but just for the sake of argument, let's continue with the $10 billion figure. That's 42,553,191 copies of Vista Ultimate at Amazon prices. (I'm sure Amazon would love the business.) or 111 million copies of Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade. Microsoft claims to have sold 60 million copies of Vista from July 2005 to July 2007, (which I suspect is stretching the definition of "sold" but let's go ahead and use that) so let's say 30 million copies a year. So either company, should they be so inclined, could give Windows away for between 1.5 (Ultimate) and around 4 years (Home) just with cash on hand. Double that if you consider short term investments (Microsoft) or shares repurchased (IBM). That'd be really close to 8 years of Vista Home Premium, so yeah, from back-of-napkin figuring it could technically be done. And that's using retail figures. Using wholesale costs, I can't imagine how long Microsoft could give away Windows using cash on hand. A really, really long time.

I'm not sure where we're going with this.

My original point was that IBM is heavily invested in Linux, (which was inferred, sorry if you missed that) and if Microsoft's layoff was due to the threat of Linux, (whatever that means) then why is IBM doing a comparable RIF at almost exactly the same time?

In other words, "it's the economy, stupid". Companies don't wait until they're out of cash before shedding employees, they do it as soon as the immediate future starts to look bad.

In conclusion, I'd like to blame the Microsoft RIF on the impact of open source software as much as the next Linux geek. But you'd have to make that observation in a complete vacuum.

Linux netbooks selling out quickly

[Anonymous Coward]

And there being only Windows netbooks left had absolutely nothing to do with it at all, then?

If ASUS put Linux on 1/3 of their systems (approximately true) and don't reorder until they're running low, then more than 60% of the machines sold will have Windows on them because there won't be any alternative unless you got there the day of the new shipment.

And if everyone turned up that day, they'd still only be able to buy all the Linux machines and then have no choice again.

you Fail It

[Anonymous Coward]

First avoid going conversations where BSD fanatics? I've However I don't Continues to lose Consider that right hobbyist dilettante is part of the this exploitation, = 36400 FreeBSD for the project. Towels on the fl0or GAY NIGGERS FROM backward and said very distracting to It's going, EFNet servers. will recall that it and committees That FreeBSD is Series of internal corporations Eyes on the real a previously of various BSD ass of them all, every day...Like channel #GNAA on won't be standing at times. From everything else NetBSD posts on bulk of the FreeBSD

Linux and things that are Sane.

[Zombie Ryushu]

Linux has a Sane Desktop environment: Its called KDE. It conforms to FreeDesktop.org standards.

Linux has actually TWO Sane mans of Installation. RPM, DEB. (Sorry Gentoo Users, Portage doesn't cut it.)

Under absolutely no circumstances should ANY Linux application be "installed" by typing ./configure; make; make install. Those steps are for DEVELOPERS and MAINTAINERS only to MAKE packages (RPM, DEB.)

Couple things. RPM and DEB need a standard and understood hierarchy. DEB wins out here. There is less variability in the configuration of DEB, and a great deal of variability in RPM (SUSE, Mandriva, Fedora.) This creates problems that could be solved if someone created a "Unified RPM standard". As far as the RPM and DEB differences are concerned, its my opinion that dpkg and RPM should be interchangable on both systems without having to "convert" from Alien. For example, if I am a Mandriva user, and Ubuntu has something I want, I should be able to set up dpkg and rpm to understand each other and retrieve the DEB Packages from Ubuntu.

There do need to be improvements in SDL, SDL is getting stale.

Another issue is Upstream maintainers. Upstream coders are coding some of these applications with bizzare and stupid configurations that don't work well with EITHER Package manager and all they provide is a tar ball. And then you look at their Windows build, and in some cases its easier to install the Windows Build in Wine. Thats unforgivable.

However, I think that what we are seeing right now is not the outright resistance to Linux. Its not that Linux sucks, its just that Adobe, and Quicken, and several of these ISVs have strictly Anti-Linux policies. Its kinda the same thing as when you see these heavily DRMed web sites that Are Windows+IE only because they rely on IE DRM, and have a written policy against Linux OR Mac.

The fact is, they hate Linux, not because it sucks, not because its hard to write applications for, its that THEY HATE LINUX. Its not rational, its not anything there is a reasonable excuse for. They just hate Linux and they want to see Linux die.

Re:Linux and things that are Sane.

[theLOUDroom]

Linux has actually TWO Sane mans of Installation. RPM, DEB. (Sorry Gentoo Users, Portage doesn't cut it.)

I have personally been running Gentoo for years now.
The only time I have run an installation was because I bought a new computer.

Portage works. It works amazingly well. Not perfectly, but good enough for me and many others.
If you have some silly philisophical complaint about the way one distro does things, that doesn't make that distro "not sane."
It sounds like you don't really understand how Portage works anyways. See this link.

I started out with RPM, but it did not suit my long term needs.
Short term, it works great. In the long term, when you decide you want package foobar 3.2.2 and your distro only has RPMs for 2.9.8, you wind up doing exactly the same processes portage does, except:
-You're doing it manually
-You get stuck in dependency hell
(Now you need foolib 2.3.5, but all your other packages are built against 2.3.4 and the two versions can't coexist. So now you need to rebuild thirty packages, manually.)
Even if portage doesn't have ebuilds for foobar 3.2.2 and foolib 2.9.8, all you wind up doing is creating two new ebuilds and letting portage do the recompiliation of all the packages built against 2.9.8 for you.

I wouldn't claim RPM is "not sane" but to say that it's beyond Portage is foolish.
Both systems work for thousands of users. Both have their places.

Re:Linux and things that are Sane.

[lordSaurontheGreat]

Sorry Gentoo Users, Portage doesn't cut it.

I have had more problems with apt and yum than I have ever had with Portage. Hell, I've never had an issue with Portage... So, my reaction to you is:

Oh noes, baby doesn't have the widdle gooey to hold hiz hands!

GET OVER IT!!!

Gentoo is for grown-ups. If you can't play with the big dogs, then stay the hell on the porch!

Re:Linux and things that are Sane.

[Strake]

Though Portage is a fantastic and powerful package management system, I still believe that Gentoo is better suited to being a hacker's, rather than an average user's, distribution, simply because the average user cares not about USE flags and compiler optimizations and whatnot. Portage's strength lies in its customizability and hackability, but, in my experience, it requires more participation and maintenance both to use and to configure.

RPM, in my opinion, is better suited for rm fodder. Dependencies are a pain, and the package selection is not as good as that of Portage or deb, or at least wasn't when I was using it.

deb is an amazing packaging system with heaps of available packages and it makes light work of dependencies. I run Debian on my server, and there are no package management problems whatsoever.

So, while I run Gentoo on my main PC and HTPC, I recommend Debian, or other deb-based distros, to those interested in trying Linux for the first time.

Re:Linux and things that are Sane.

[MasterOfMagic]

Write some software and then you can bitch about how poorly it's packaged.

I used to release open source software. I stopped because of complaints like this. Guess what? I don't have free time to integrate my programs into your distro, and apparently my software isn't popular enough to be integrated into your distro by the people running your distro because it's a business to them and they have to do a cost/benefit analysis. So you have to compile it from source.

Complain to your distro or use Debian, Ubuntu, or Gentoo (which package just about everything). Not me.

Re:Linux and things that are Sane.

[MasterOfMagic]

You've apparently never had portage chew up, digest, and shit out /usr/portage before. I have. It's why I don't use Gentoo anymore. Not being able to install, uninstall, or update software is a real pain in the balls. Yes, I could resync /usr/portage, but I shouldn't have to do this.

Conversely, I've never had a problem with installing Slackware packages, and I've never had apt quietly destroy itself, but to be fair to Portage, its destruction of itself was quite loud.

Gentoo is for people that want to boast that they use Gentoo. I was using UNIX back before the X Window System so GET OFF MY LAWN.

Look at their books

[BlendieOfIndie]

Microsoft Revenue/Growth
Year Revenue %Growth
2005 39,788 -
2006 44,282 11%
2007 51,122 15%
2008 60,420 18%


Red Hat Revenue/Growth
Year Revenue %Growth
2005 196 -
2006 278 41%
2007 400 43%
2008 523 30%


Red Hat is growing much faster than Microsoft, but Microsoft has 115x more sales.

Re:Look at their books

[jonaskoelker]

What's also interesting is that Microsoft's growth seems to be on the rise, whereas Red Hat's growth waned in 2008.

I'm not sure how "growing faster every year" constitutes a decline, but it sure makes for a nice headline.

Care to share with us the source of this data?

Re:Look at their books

[downhole]

That's the tricky thing about the generic "fast-growing" statement. Usually, a choice which is "growing fast" is doing so because it is many times smaller than the alternatives to begin with. It's very easy to grow fast when you are less than 1% of the market. If they can still grow at those rates when they hit 10% (if they ever do), then they might have something.

Re:Look at their books

[BlendieOfIndie]

Care to share with us the source of this data?

Google Finance
I looked at the annual income statements of both Microsoft (MSFT) and RedHat (RHT).

Re:Look at their books

[JAlexoi]

Hm... Do you really expect that revenue growth will stay the same all the time?
A company that has just got it's first 1'000 USD has made an Infinite% of revenue growth. While then next 1'000'000 USD will only be 100'000% and we all know that 100'000 is less than infinity.

Re:Look at their books

[Anonymous Coward]

What's also interesting is that Microsoft's growth seems to be on the rise, whereas Red Hat's growth waned in 2008.

Wow. You managed to make 30% revenue growth sounds like a bad thing. Pointless, but still impressive.

Oh please!

[crayiii]

Linux had nothing to do with the decline. The economy along with the failure that was Vista is what led to the (minor) decline.

Re:Oh please!

[Smooth and Shiny]

I agree with this. Vista was an over-priced disaster that people just didn't want to buy or otherwise be bothered with.

Sadly, I feel Microsoft will do the same thing with Windows 7... that is, release multiple versions like Basic, Premium, etc., at ridiculous prices and drive even MORE people away from their product.

Re:Oh please!

[MtViewGuy]

Actually not. The initial release of Windows Vista was terrible, but with the release of Service Pack 1, they eliminated a lot of the performance issues. Also, by the time SP1 came out, driver support was ENORMOUSLY improved, so today Windows Vista enjoys support of most of the current computer hardware out there.

So you're saying it CANNOT be linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux had NOTHING to do with it?

Absolutely 100% nothing?

And you tell ME to pull my head out? Stop licking Ballmers tonsils from underneath.

Re:So you're saying it CANNOT be linux?

[Daswolfen]

Sorry Coward... and you are a coward.

I am not a M$ Fanboi. I just prefer an OS to be stable and support what I need it to support. I have both Mac and Windows systems (as well as a couple of Linux builds). I am just sick of you Linux fanbois thinking you are going to change the world with Linux. It will never be anything until it gets FULL support from developers.. which will be never.

Re:So you're saying it CANNOT be linux?

[prelelat]

what do you mean by full support from developers? Do you mean having software for the system like adobe? They are starting to get there as flash has been on a parallel release for a short time. There are other developers working on linux now too but your right it's not just there yet. Well if that's what you mean by full support of developers. But no OS has the FULL support can't run garage band on windows can you?

The main reason I wanted to respond was because you also said until you can go to walmart to buy linux software it will never work. I guess you haven't seen the news http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2007/10/200-everex-gree.html/ http://news.cnet.com/Walmart.com-to-sell-more-Linux-software/2100-1012_3-5066148.html/ or http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/linux/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=202805941/

Also typically the point of linux is that you don't have to go out and buy the software, it comes with the OS or with a quick apt-get from a repository. It's free typically you won't see it in the stores for that reason. I would like to see in the future stores selling the CD's and DVD's of distros, as well as openoffice and other alternatives for the cost of production and shelving but I don't think they need to for it to catch on. You just need enough people who have had a good experiance with it for it to start being a force.

I'm not a linux fan boi I don't think that it's had a large effect on Microsofts market but it has definatly changed it. Linux is a large part of the embeded market, they had Microsoft playing catchup in the netbook market, and distro's like ubuntu are getting closer and closer to being where they need to, to take on Microsoft. I would argu for most people it's there.

Re:So you're saying it CANNOT be linux?

[Computershack]

Linux had NOTHING to do with it?

Absolutely 100% nothing?

And you tell ME to pull my head out? Stop licking Ballmers tonsils from underneath.

I'll put this argument to you. More people have downloaded Windows 7 BETA than the total number of users of Ubuntu.

Vista in 2 years has gained 20 times the desktop market share in 1/9th of the time that Linux has existed.

Re:So you're saying it CANNOT be linux?

[Daswolfen]

by full support, I mean hardware and software, all plug and play... not tweaks to get things to work.. not drivers released as an afterthought. Is it better? Yes.. it is, but it never will be a viable alternative unless it has that kind of out of the box support and availability.

And no.. you can not run garage band in windows, but you can run it in MacOS. And jus because they make flash for Linux doesn't mean Adobe has any real intentions of full support because there is NO MONEY in Linux. With out money behind anything, it eventually withers and dies. Capitalism rules...

Popcorn

[sleeping123]

Sounds a bit off topic, but I thought this tied in interestingly to something I saw on Alton Brown's Good Eats (it's a cooking show).

When movie theaters started to boom in the 1920s, a time of general economic prosperity, the theaters used to rent out space in front of the theaters to sell popcorn. Then, during the depression, the theaters realized they weren't making enough money. They also realized that it's almost free to make their own popcorn, and that you can mark up popcorn by obscene amounts and nobody will say boo. Thus, movie theater concessions were born.

Sometimes it takes an economic downturn to realize that you're getting hosed by renting out space, whether it be on your hard drive, or in front of your movie theater.

do the math...

[powerspike]

wow, 75% of $0 is umm... $0... I'd rather 75% of $400+ (here in Australia). Linux has been around for a long time, if it's anything, it's going to be the small mobile items that helping lower it's install base.

Rediculous

[Neeperando]

Do you think it was really Linux that hurt Microsoft?

You ask this question of the director of the Linux Foundation? The question contains the answer. It's about as objective as Stephen Colbert asking, "George W. Bush: Great President or the Greatest President?"

This article reads like a couple of self-satisfied nerds patting each other on the back (to use a less colorful metaphor than I'd like to). I'll rejoice on the day that Linux's increased market share in the desktop world hurts Microsoft's dominance, but I seriously doubt that it did this year.

If Microsoft really said Linux was hurting them (and I didn't see where in TFA it says they did, please point me to it if you did), it's probably because they don't want to admit that they are partially at fault. I don't see why they don't just blame it on a massive global recession.

Feed the think tank

[TheRealJobe]

I know Slashdotters didn't write this ridiculous story, but even posting it is a joke. Its like posting a story that Harley has a key in the big-3s downfall. I'm so tired of slashdot's support of buzzwords articles and think tank mentality... MS evil, any other piece of crap is automatically good... Vista bad, Win 7 good.... this site has become a flippin joke... I still laugh about the article posted a few months back which claimed Usenet is a dead technology.

Re:Feed the think tank

[clarkn0va]

I'm so tired of slashdot's support of buzzwords articles and think tank mentality

And yet you're still here. Doesn't that make you a troll?

Off topic

[Anonymous Coward]

Without a SID, no one can find your "arrogant" comment.

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Read it.

Prepare for the FUD...

[greg_barton]

I sense a FUD meme coming:

"See! Linux is socialism! It caused Microsoft's layoffs! It's causing te economy to fail!"

In the next month or so, or soon before Microsoft's next earnings report.

Highly doubtless

[Eravnrekaree]

I HIGHLY doubt that with the general ineptness of Linux, and the great difficulty of using this operating system, that it will be significantly cutting into Windows market share. Consumers just want to buy a hardware device, plug it in, click install and use it with no hassles. They just want to buy a software program, click install and use it with no hassles. Linux still does not realise how important program and driver ABI backwards compatability is, and how important it is to provide stable versions of these. As such using software and hardware is still very difficult on linux and what gnome and ubuntu has done has made it worse, by removing features and flexibility. users want features and flexibility but they do not want to spend hours trying to figure out why some crappy driver doesnt work or fiddling with arcane configuration files. Linux is worth your time if you time is worth nothing, Generally it takes 10 times as long to do anything on Linux and getting it to work the way you want is a major headache, its both hard to configure and inflexible adn wont let you make it work how you want it to without a big fight. Its basically worthless unless you are someone who likes to spend hours doung what takes a minute on windows to do, if you are a geek who enjoys such abuses and torments trying to figure out why something doesnt work right or the whole mess that Linux is of broken dependancies and library and driver chaos.

Re:Highly doubtless

[cloakable]

Allow me to introduce you to the 'Enter' key.

It is used to break up your text, and make it easier to read. Please use it in the future.

Re:Highly doubtless

[doublegauss]

What's this 'Enter' key you're talking about? You see, geek jargon like yours is what is keeping linux back. People just want to hit their mouse buttons, not learning arcane key combinations to get the most basic tasks done.

I'm gonna need LOTS of therapy now! Thanks...

[rts008]

Well, your post caused a disturbing mental picture....

RMS taking over Ballmer's job at MS.

No More Flying Chairs!!11!

P.S. Though look out for the crazy greybearded man running around with a katana, frothing at the mouth and shouting:"Mobilze the HURD! Time to attack!"

Head A Splodes!

Re:I dunno

[dkleinsc]

I wonder if you can be modded insightfull for "insights" from the article? No one reads them anyway...

Apparantly so. Thrice as of this writing.

First ever layoffs?

[greg_barton]

I was an employee of Microsoft in end user tech support in '94. I'd been a contractor for six months, then I went perm. About a month going perm, all ~200 of the remaining contractors at my worksite were let go, every last one of them. (This was including my roommate at the time.)

So whe they call this the "first ever" layoff for the company, take that with a (salt lick sized) grain of salt. Sure, it might be the first ever for "perm" employees, btu I frankly don't see the difference.

Re:First ever layoffs?

[Blakey Rat]

By definition, releasing contractors isn't laying off employees. Contractors aren't even employees, period.

This is the first ever layoffs for Microsoft, regardless of what made-up fantasy definition of the word "layoff" you seem to have stuck in your head.

Re:First ever layoffs?

[greg_barton]

My definition relies on the human cost, which apparently is meaningless to you.

Re:First ever layoffs?

[Blakey Rat]

Of course not, I'm just saying that the word "layoff" has a specific meaning. I mean, I can claim "murder" means "slightly annoy", and then claim Microsoft "murdered" 50,000 people today, but I'd be full of shit, much as you were full of shit.

If you're working on a contract, and your contract can be canceled at any time, well tough shit. If you don't like that arrangement, don't sign the contract. Sure it's "horrible" that you "lost your job", but that's the job you signed up for, so just cope with it. Contracting is contracting.

Besides, when I worked at MS Games, all the contractors there were totally useless. Most of them would just go on unemployment for the 3 months they couldn't sign a new MS contract, and many of them had been contracting in this fashion for 9+ years with no ambition or drive to do anything more than that. I don't have much sympathy.

Re:First ever layoffs?

[greg_barton]

I can claim "murder" means "slightly annoy"

And you say I'm full of shit?

What a sad, black and white world you must live in.

Besides, when I worked at MS Games, all the contractors there were totally useless.

Ah, I see now. Contractors are less than human, so firing them indiscriminately is just fine.

But you're the superior one, right?

Re:First ever layoffs?

[Anonymous Coward]

About a month going perm, all ~200 of the remaining contractors at my worksite were let go

Frankly you deserved it for showing a gross lack of taste. A perm just makes you look like a dick.

Tablets and Handwriting

[IsaacD]

The best part of Linux distros are the inking capabilities within open office that interoperate flawlessly with other applications. The handwriting recognition is incredible, it's as if it actually begins writing what you're thinking without any effort on your part! A favorite with my colleagues is how Linux apps absolutely blow Microsoft out of the water when it comes to collaboration among the team. Linux applications are so intuitive and easy to install that it's as if the machine has used it's flawless WIFI capabilities to read minds. In fact, a senior executive arrived at work on Tuesday of this week to discover that node 3 of the LAMP farm (which never has trouble, by the way) had become self aware and decided to do his work for him the night before! Mr. Smith sure was happy about that. So happy in fact that he gave us all 2000% raises and declared peace throughout the universe. I could have sworn that I saw him fart a rainbow. And this is all due to Linux. Linux is the best! Go Team Penguin!

FreeBSD-based OS is the Future

[P00k13]

I think Microsoft will still dominate market share until Google makes an OS based on FreeBSD. Until then, Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself because while their software is over-priced, most people just keep reusing their old XP disk rather than trying to learn something new. Linux doesn't have the marketing power required to take on Microsoft no matter how good the software is. I'm not a fortune-teller, but if I were, this would be my prediction.

Re:FreeBSD-based OS is the Future

[ramandu]

most people just keep reusing their old XP disk rather than trying to learn something new.

I'm afraid you are a little confused; most people don't have a XP disc, let alone install from it. The majority of people buy a computer that has the OS already installed by the OEM.

Re:FreeBSD-based OS is the Future

[slash.duncan]

Note that Google is already marketing Linux based OS, Android, and no, it's not just for phones, people are adapting it and running it on netbooks (among other things) already.

I don't see them reversing course and switching to BSD any time soon, tho for all I know they already have one about to drop. But I DO know they already have a Linux based OS, Android. Now, ask yourself why Google might have chosen Linux over BSD for Android... but I'll let you draw your own conclusions there.

here is a great example of NOT microsoft

[gamekeeper]

here is a great example of up and comming operating systems for net and note books.. www.hyperspace.com

Re:I dunno

[PitaBred]

Have you ever considered just actually using Linux? That machine's so underpowered that it can't play games, which is the only thing that Windows really has over Linux any more. That, or if you need to run MS Office for professional reasons, but if you're pirating the OS I'd hope you're not doing that.

Re:I dunno

[sigismond0]

I have no qualms with Linux and triple-boot my main machine with it. I use Offuce 2007 and Digsby and other programs that I wholly prefer over their OSS counterparts, so Linux just isn't as good of an option as a custom Vista install. Plus, I'm just more productive all-around in Windows than I am in Linux.

WTF are these troubles you speak of?

[Anonymous Coward]

They made something like 4 billion each month. What are these troubles you speak about? I think everyone here only wished their employer had those kind of "troubles".

Re:WTF are these troubles you speak of?

[ozmanjusri]

They made something like 4 billion each month.

That's revenue, not profit.

Looks like the "Vista Capable" scam is about to set them back a few months too...

Microsoft Corp. would have to come up with as much as $8.5 billion to settle accounts with the customers affected by its 2006 "Vista Capable" marketing program, according to documents unsealed by a federal court.

Re:WTF are these troubles you speak of?

[Anonymous Coward]

Vista culpable?

Based on this Headline...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm calling it. Linux fanboys are officially more annoying than Mac fanboys.

-=-
AC

The big picture

[westlake]

There are damn few companies in the tech sector that haven't announced lay-offs.

Microsoft isn't reporting billion dollar losses.

Microsoft is reporting a bare 2% growth in revenues, to $16.6 billion dollars in its second quarter.

Microsoft is debt free, with tens of billions in liquid reserves and Exxon-Mobil grade corporate credit.

The last I heard, OpenOffiice.org was down to 24 full time developers.

Sun is hurting.

There are others who have made big commitments to Linux and open source who are hurting.

Before the geek crows too loudly about Microsoft's "dilemma" he might usefully rate his own chances of survival.

Re:The big picture

[what about]

And the above is the reason I do not like Microsoft, let me explain

As an IT professional my margin when I use Microsoft products is basically nil, most of the gain goes to Microsoft

I have bought a desktop PC for 150Euros (Case, Atom CPU, 1Gbyteram Power, Disk, Videocard) and Ubuntu, works gread for standard Office activity (browsing, rx/tx Email, DOcument writing (OpenOffice)

Had I chosen Vista or XP it would have been double, part for more hardware part for the "licence", plus antivirus....

You buy Microsoft you basically are a Microsoft Tax collector, why on earth should I reccomend them ?

Beside the fanboy and astroturfing, they do not make good products, they just grabbed the market earlier by letting everybody copy their stuff and now are enjoing a Monopoly on document format and customers behaviour

But... if my father in law has now an Ubuntu machine (he got his from a local shop) and he can do what he wants (I was tired of clearing up the mess left after downloaded windoze cruft) then, really, anybody can switch over. It is just the fanboy and stroturf that is telling you not

Cheers Microsoft, it is time that you let other people live

Re:The big picture

[Anonymous Coward]

Survival is *not even close* to being a problem for FOSS.

Suppose Sun, Mozilla, Novell, Red Hat, Canonical, and every other company developing/maintaining/servicing FOSS magically went out of business tomorrow. Would that hurt FOSS? Certainly. But what would it really mean? It wouldn't kill the projects. The software would still be just as good, and source code would still be out there for any interested companies or individuals to use or to pick up and modify or maintain themselves, just like it is now. So development on the projects in question would certainly be slowed to a crawl for a while, but it probably wouldn't end and certainly wouldn't have to. Not only that, but there are already alternative applications to those projects anyway. (See KOffice/Abiword/Gnumeric/etc, Konqueror/Epiphany/etc, Debian/Gentoo/Slackware/etc.)

Now suppose that same magic wand was aimed at Microsoft. Windows would die very very quickly. No community source code means that the second MS stops providing security patches, the product is no good since no one can patch security holes. Not to mention the fact that Microsoft doesn't even have to go out of business for these things to happen, they just have to stop supporting the product in question, like they keep threatening to do with XP.

So even if all these companies are hurting (and I wish them well as long as they are active supporters of FOSS), FOSS itself is in good shape. I thought I recognized your handle, and it's because I have tried before to clear up your misconceptions about FOSS and the fact that it doesn't need to fit into a similar business model to that of Microsoft and other proprietary software producers. Hopefully this will help.

Re:The big picture

[MtViewGuy]

And one more thing: Microsoft has made it a priority that Windows 7 will actually work well on a netbook computer. That right there could be really bad news for Linux at least in the short run.

Re:The big picture

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they aren't "debt free", nor do they have tens of billions in liquid reserves. They just did a stock buy-back that ate most of their reserves back end of last year. Most people didn't catch that little detail...

Oh come on

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone really buy this? Linux is great for what it is, but come on...

Microsoft's reply...

[Knight4linux]

And Microsoft's reply is... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28039226/?pg=7#Tech_JerkGadgets/ Wow. What self-indulgent lunatics.

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_the_People_Act

Read it.

Re:Oh, Dear Dr. Linux... We are msoft, and we need

[davidsyes]

to go on a diet. Can you proscribe (but not prescribe) LinoSuction to help us out? We won't tell anybody you are helping us out under the table.

stop celebrating job losses

[CarpetShark]

Agreed. And that's aside from the fact that no one should be celebrating job losses anyway. Granted, it would be nice if devs would quit microsoft in favour of paid work for a free desktop project, but job losses are never good, and it's just cheap to gloat over them. Those people have lives to live, dreams to fulfill, kids to feed, etc. Yes, microsoft as a company sucks. But really... grow the fuck up, and don't misrepresent free software's ideals please. We're about making lives better, not celebrating loss.

Equal world?

[clintre]

I think it is the start of how it should be. I think a world where you did not have one dominant platform would be for the best.

I could see it getting to where MS has around 60% market share, Apple 25%, and Linux the rest. The only reason I do not see Linux with a larger percentage is because of everything from marketing and bullying by the other two and resistance.

Once you start seeing these levels you start seeing more innovation from all of them.

Re:Equal world?

[slash.duncan]

I like your idea, but I take it a bit farther myself. I'd like to see no OS with more than a plurality, none with an outright majority of the market. Thus, based more or less on current share but with MS taking a hit to be distributed elsewhere (so I'm not as biased against the BSDs as this might look, I'd LOVE for them to have the 30% share and Apple to get 1.5%), I'd be happy to see MS at say 35-45% (still a nice plurality), Linux and Apple at 20-30% each, and OpenSolaris and a couple of the open source BSDs (probably Free and Dragonfly, from what I know of BSDs which isn't much) at 1.5 to 5% each.

So say 41+29+24+2.4+2.0+1.8 (to two significant digits each, the reason it doesn't total exactly 100%).

But... honestly, I have my doubts as to whether MS as we know it is sustainable at below heavy-monopoly share levels (say below 70% or so). Take a look at the browser share recently. IE's total dropped below 70% in December (tho January may be up slightly, given that weekends and holidays skew away from IE since it has heavier corporate use, and December was nearly half holiday for many). Firefox is the biggest alternative but Safari, Chrome, and other, seem to be growing as well. What's the skuttlebutt on that? Well, MS' ability to rule the web by mindshare (based on marketshare) has all but disappeared. Now that they've dropped to that, many are saying there doesn't seem to be a bottom any time soon, and people are actually talking about it possibly dropping below 50% majority share for the first time in a LONG time. Only ask yourself what if it does? Is there really a floor at 40%? 30%?

Personally, if they drop below say the mid 50s, I don't see a floor below until they hit the 20s to low 30s. At that point, their installed base is high enough to carry them for some time, a decade or longer, on momentum from people who simply won't switch to anything else, period, even if MS does virtually nothing. Only they won't be doing nothing.

But with very little doubt, should that start to happen, the MS we know today will cease to exist. No, the company itself probably won't disappear, but it'll be MUCH MUCH different. It'll HAVE to be, because today, it simply doesn't know how to behave unless it's a monopoly in its assigned areas, and wouldn't know what to do if it wasn't. That would HAVE to change, and change it would!

A post I read up-page got me thinking. What happens if Windows 7 DOES bomb much like Vista has? Well MS is still making money pretty much hand over fist, and that's not likely to change right away no matter what. But what could/would they say, what sort of answer could they give?

Well, between that and the headline that's the cause of this entire article, the layoffs, what I came up with was this: Suppose MS says something like this:

"OK, we got it. We listened to our customers. They are saying they like XP as it is. It does what they need it to do, and they're happy with it. But they're asking for it on netbooks at one end, and we have multi-core machines to worry about at the other. And their asking for lower prices.

"So we're going to give them what they asked for. We'll support and provide bug and security fixes, and we'll work on the back end to continue to increase the richness of experience possible at the low end and the number of cores and parallelization at the high end, and we're going to continue to support new hardware and Internet standards, but our users say we're a mature product and that they us to keep what they have usable, not continue to force new stuff on them just for the sake of it. We're announcing accross the board 75% price cuts on list price, and will be announcing further price reductions over time. Meanwhile, since we're a mature product now, we don't need to spend as much on new development and will be laying off 50% (or 75%, or whatever) of our workforce."

Consider: The development and costs for XP and Vista are sunk costs now, and by the time we know if Windows 7 is bombing or not, the same wil

Re:I dunno

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: "I like and use Windows, but I'm too cheap to pay for it".

Re:Oh, Dear Warren Buffet was Right

[BoRegardless]

After a trip with Gates, Warren was asked if he invested in Microsoft, and he answered something to the effect that he 'didn't understand the long term viability of software as a business model.'

Warren is FAR more understanding of core business issues than techies give him credit.

new variant on old meme

[Onymous Coward]

Microsoft is dying.

Net Applications confirms it.

I wonder what that search result count will look like over the next two years.

Re:new variant on old meme

[Ash-Fox]

Only two pages of results, and a few of them are duplicates. Not much of a meme.

Slashdot is retarded

[Anonymous Coward]

Hundreds - literally hundreds - of replies and Slashdot misses the biggest thing that hurts Microsoft's bottom line.

The roaring dollar.

A huge percentage of Microsoft's income is from foreign sales, measured in whatever currency they happen to use.

For example: 1 GBP is $1.38. Not too long ago it was nearly $2, in fact exceeding it. When a British company pays the same this year as last, Microsoft's bottom line falls out. In fact, this is partially why their bottom line was so good last year - the dollar was incredibly cheap.

Frankly, the ignorance, grandstanding and flagrant disregard for reality and economics on Slashdot (OMG, it's LINUX killing Microsoft) makes me want to vomit on some orphans.

Re:I dunno

[Jorophose]

It's especially a good deal because last I checked the linux version is much cheaper and comes with 2GB of RAM.

But I know futureshop has a 8GB+8GB (SD card) Acer Aspire One on... So pick your poison. Sometimes you get a good deal. Hopefully it won't be long before you see good deals on the HP Mini. (and I'd look for the 2140, it has the nice aluminium body) :)

Personally, I'm waiting for the Freescale i.MX515 and associated netbooks. 8 hours of battery life? Yes please. It would be nice to see if its performance is as good or better than the beagleboard... it's also cool that it uses DDR2, maybe this time we'll see 1GB of RAM on these (or at least 512MB. the 256MB (I saw "2Gb") limit for the OMAP3530 is ridiculous.)

Re:microsoft reaps what they sow

[linux4u1]

Actual it sounds like if anything hurts microsoft its microsoft.
linux has found an area to be installed in netbooks but microsoft reactions is to give away products like window xp on said devices to prevent linux.

this is one example but from alot of sources microsoft has been discounting windows when faced with linux instead of competing in a healthy way.

so giving windows away to stop product ABC from happening is hurting them .... this is good there making the decisions (this could also be viewed as anti-competitive and abuse of monopoly power yet again too) eventually they will not be able to give away said products (linux is not going away and it keeps growing and changing faster)

also note office is there cash cow, well instead attacking why not make office for this new platform and compete (also the interesting thing is if they ported office to linux it would help lock in there formats and they could charge more for it and people that use it would buy it)

Re:You forgot one

[dna_(c)(tm)(r)]

stop it.

Advice to MS.

[Anonymous Coward]

As early as last quarter, Microsoft admitted that Linux and netbooks were eating into its fat profits.

Losses are teh suxx0rz. Then what they should do is an Apple-like move. Apple chucked its dinosaur-aged OS that only five programmers knew how to code for, and replaced it with a totally h4x0r'd Mach/FreeBSD system with a non-X GUI on top. MS should do the same. Chuck the OS. Download Ubuntu. Chuck GNOME. Write a GUI called 11. That's kind of like X11 but without the X. That goes along well with Windows 7 because 7 and 11 give you 7-11, like the convenience store. People need to associate computers with Windows with convenience, and this would totally do that image. It would be totally built from the ground up to look like Windows but act like UNIX. Then they can make a plug-in OS compatibility architecture that runs apps from DOS, the Win9x series, and the Win2000/XP/Vista series. Then they'll have to call it GNU/Lindows 7-11. I don't care that MS is a trillion dollar a minute company. I, a idiot from Kansas City who's on /. on a sat night instead of going out (because I have no friends) am giving them the correct advice, advice they should follow. Because when you're highly successful, you should take advice from those who aren't.

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beavis_And_Butthead_Do_America Read it.

Re:You forgot one

[LaskoVortex]

The bill is about decentralization of the Federal Government. You probably hope that it means that the federal government will stop abortions and make us all pray in school. Sorry. That's not what it is about. It is about returning power to the states and allowing states to have their own moral agenda. Since the USA is a federation of states, the idea is that people are still free to move from states with whom they disagree about moral conduct and into states where they agree. Some people actually still believe in states' rights, Ron Paul is one of them. I wish people would educate themselves on the notion of what it means to be a federation of states.

Re:You forgot one

[Breakfast Pants]

>I wish people would educate themselves on the notion of what it means to be a federation of states.

What it means is that Big Companies can play one state against another and score massive subsidies while small businesses can't.

No new hardware, please

[DuctTape]

I'm no business analyst, but obviously Linux (the netbook market in particular) is severely cutting into the profits of computer giants like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, and IBM. If you needed a sign for the year of Linux, this is it!

Well, I've got a circa-1998 333MHz Pentium II processor with 128 MB of memory running my file server at the house. If it wasn't for Linux, I'd have replaced it a loooong time ago with some of that new fancy-shmancy Intel stuff. Now it sits there for months between reboots and hardly draws any power. And when that goes, I've got an 800MHz beastie waiting in the wings to take over.

Nope, Linux hasn't hurt Intel at all.

DT

This is a low down dirty lie

[symbolset]

The current crop of netbooks are powerful enough to run Vista.

Stop right there. Every thing after this sounds like "Waaargarbl".

Re:This is a low down dirty lie

[Jason Earl]

What, I'm serious. While my netbook has a smaller hard drive than the desktop I bought with Vista when Vista first came out, it has more memory a nicer video card, and the hard drive is solid state. The processor is more than fast enough to meet Microsoft specs.

My netbook could easily run Vista. It just doesn't. That's more a function of the discounted price Microsoft is offering on XP than anything else. Well, that and the fact that I bought a netbook running Linux. Heck, HP will even sell you a netbook with Vista preloaded.

It's easy to make jokes about Windows Vista sucking, but if Microsoft didn't create a loophole for Windows XP that's what you would see on all of the Windows netbooks.

Re:This is a low down dirty lie

[symbolset]

My netbook could easily run Vista. It just doesn't.

So you admit you haven't tried it. Please do try it before you start with this stuff. Also with the hypothetical "would have" stuff that follows from your assumption that this would be something other that a laughably hideous user experience.

I've tried Vista on the Atom. It's not acceptable. Not even close.

Re:This is a low down dirty lie

[Jason Earl]

I've tried the HP netbook with Vista, although I believe it uses a Via chip instead of Atom. I just didn't buy it. My father did, but that's just because his past experience with WordPerfect convinced him that it is foolish to buy anything but Microsoft's latest software. The new HP netbook can be purchased with Vista, and while I haven't tried it, reviews say that it works better than the older model.

When you say that it is unacceptable, what exactly do you mean? Can Word not keep up with your ultra-fast typing?

Quite frankly, I am skeptical. My own personal experience shows that how much memory you have is far more important than what sort of processor you have.

Re:Oh, Dear Warren Buffet was Right

[MichaelSmith]

A lot of people seem to make a lot of money from software. Buffet is the kind of guy who will only invest in something which will still be sold in 100 years, but I don't see that as a real world issue. The fortunes earned by Bill Gates and the founders of google will still be around in a hundred years.

sub $150 netbook (was Re:Oh, Dear)

[sowth]

The only problem is the cost of the display. As I have seen, 100 MHz microcontrollers with 16 MB of RAM are plenty cheap. I seem to remember my computer from 1996 having those specs and it browsed the web just fine. It also did image editing with GIMP just fine, as viewing documents, and etc. I didn't really use it for word processing much, but it seemed to be fine there too (wysiwyg mode may not be so fast).

In fact, doesn't the Nintendo DS have those specs and is under $150? Yeah, the screen doesn't have great resolution and is small, and it doesn't have a keyboard, but there was a web browser for it, and enterprising individuals ported Linux to it, and others wrote an organiser...

Re:sub $150 netbook (was Re:Oh, Dear)

[sowth]

Forgot to mention, video and flash would be a problem, but then it is the same with low cost smartphones too.

Then again, if you packaged this netbook with an attachable phone and made it interoperate with wireless internet usb cards, you could attack the low price cell and netbook market at the same time. Why not make it a hip belt attachment and when closed, sized as a largish PDA? Maybe it would be too geeky. :-)

What the kitten mauling world do you live in?

[symbolset]

MS-DOS was a very "serious entry" into the OS market

This would be a good place to point out that prior to DOS 2.0 in 1983, Microsoft DOS did not enjoy the concept of "subdirectory". At that point in time, Unix already had networking, The Internet , user vs system security, mounted volumes for user directories, real multitasking, multiuser capability, multiprocessor capability, emulation of other systems, open software, the C compiler Windows still doesn't have and a vast number of things that Microsoft either took a long time to catch up to, or hasn't caught yet. It's no accident that "Project Athena" was launched the same year. MS-DOS was serious then? You must be kidding. Many of us wonder if they're serious now.

Every year I'm amazed at the brand new Microsoft innovations I became used to back when we hung an onion on our belt.

Re:What the kitten mauling world do you live in?

[jhfry]

IBM went hunting for an OS for the IBM PC. There wasn't much to choose from. The only real player in the Intel 8080 arena was CP/M... but they wouldn't agree to IBM's terms, so Gates bought a CP/M-like OS (QDOS) and rebranded it MS-DOS... And screwed us for a lifetime.

QNX, what IBM should have used, was a year or so too late.

Comparing UNIX of the time to anything running on a computer smaller than a commercial refrigerator and costing less than a new luxury car is completely unreasonable.

It was obvious from the start

[Anonymous Coward]

As soon as I loaded Vista on my Core Duo, 2ghz notebook with discrete graphics, and as soon as it broke down and cried on my lap, I knew there was no way in hell Vista would ever be acceptable on a netbook.

Had Microsoft had the competence to control their bloat, they wouldn't have gotten caught in this snafu. In software, there are almost no examples where controlling bloat leads to anything but good things.

Re:It was obvious from the start

[MtViewGuy]

I would agree on that--Windows Vista was designed specifically to run on faster CPU's.

However, the rise of netbooks running Intel's new Atom CPU has forced Microsoft to change things. That's why Microsoft extensively re-wrote the OS code so Windows 7 runs well even on Atom-based netbooks.

Re:It was obvious from the start

[Creepy Crawler]

Shucks. I guess Im in their target market as a computer professional (and a student).

I have 2 laptops. One's an 8gig ssd EEE and my other is a T61 IBM. That says nothing of the largish amount of weird hardware desktops I have.

Hpowever, when I choose OSes, I go Ubuntu. I _have_ iso's of every Windows OS, including the disks of Windows 1 and Vista Ultimate. I have cracks for them so that almost all of them authenticate under WGA. My T61 hardware is similar to a powerbook, so I can run a Hackintosh. I can find damn near any piece of software for any OS, along with cracks, so filling in the holes would be slightly more than trivial.

I still choose Ubuntu. And before that, I chose Debian Testing. And before that (back in the mid-late 90's) Red Hat. I was always a Win98 kind of person, so switching was more of a curiosity. I first had experience with Unix when I logged into a real sysIV back in the early 80's on my dads Commie64 over a 300baud modem. It was all commandline back then, so my dad helped me with commands to do stuff. I was back then, around 6, reading comp.sci and other newsgroups. I really didnt do much in terms of bulk transfer as we were going too slow.. And that was when the backbone was 56K

Now, after really teaching myself about the internals of Linux, can I now actually use my computer as I wish. And thanks to Ubuntu, all my hardware is set up so that oit just works. Bewfore you buy, check up on what and what doesnt work. A good 'sudo lspci -vv' will tell you exactly what you need to know.

As per John Gage's quote, and Sun's slogan "The Network IS the Computer", my home network is exactly that. I have a domain via Kerberos, Samba and NFS storage (we have Windows machines here), X redirection and remote login, network sound via PulseAudio, a Jabber server for communication, remote webcam viewing (poor man security cam network), and other less useful services. And all of that's for free. Like I said, I have all those OS disks with cracks, but no OS listed above can provide what I do, no matter the cost.

Linux can provide that, at no charge. And it works on the lowest p200 with 32MB ram for a firewall/ticket system, up to the most massive machines the market can muster. What extra features does Windows 7 offer that I currently obtain (legally) for free?

Re:You forgot one

[dryeo]

Wouldn't a federation of states also include the right of a state to leave the federation?

Attention Clueless Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux will NEVER be a viable home user desktop replacement until you can go to Wal-Mart and buy software for it.

HA! Shipping software in trucks, for it to sit on shelves in stores, is beyond stupid. In an time of recession it's downright irresponsible - Linux will be on desktops without ever meeting your asinine requirement. It already is, how can you possibly ignore it?

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

That was the case of ex-Yugoslavia. Federal states had right to leave the federation, and once two of them tried to do so...

Re:Eau, really?

[conureman]

I'll tell you something different.

Re:You forgot one

[wdef]

Don't forget the Civil War started largely because some states declared they were seceding from the Union. Lincoln's main aim was to keep the Union a union.

OS release dates

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows 95 predated NT4:

1. Windows NT 4.0 was release 1996.
2. Windows 95 was released 1995.

The GUI in NT4 (taskbar, start menu and window manager most obvious) was ported from Windows 95 to NT4.

Re:You forgot one

[IllForgetMyNickSoonA]

No they didn't.

Republics of Ex-Yugoslavia had the right not to join the federation after the WWII. Once they joined the federation, they had no legal rights to leave. I should know that, my parents come from there. :-)

I most sincerely doubt it's different in any other country in the world - no part of any country can just say "sorry guys, good-bye, we're leaving." and expect the rest of the country to say "oh, swell, farewell and send us a post card!"

Ok, I already see the mountain of comments along the lines of "well, I surely wouldn't object if xxx chose to leave", but it doesn't change a thing about what I just said. :-)

Heaven forbid MS should lower software prices

[smchris]

Except in places like China and Thailand. Since the Bush regime destroyed our economy, deflation is a serious concern. Americans don't have the money to pay "American prices" anymore. Microsoft being a mighty spoiled corporation with a mighty high margin, it isn't surprising that they will be the last to notice and adjust. All the better for linux.

jhfry (829244)

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot DR DOS

regards
Outcast (Who can't be bothered to make an account)

Re:You forgot one

[Chris Mattern]

Republics of Ex-Yugoslavia had the right not to join the federation after the WWII. Once they joined the federation, they had no legal rights to leave.

And Lord knows THAT worked out...

Re:You forgot one

[IllForgetMyNickSoonA]

Nobody said it did. Unfortunately.

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

Tried in '60 but it failed. Oh, wait, that was the LAST time we elected a President from IL. Me thinks over 500,000 Americans died in that one.

what MS said about Linux ..

[rs232]

"If Microsoft really said Linux was hurting them (and I didn't see where in TFA it says they did, please point me to it if you did)"

"Client faces strong competition from well-established companies with differing approaches to the PC market .. The Linux operating system, which is also derived from Unix and is available without payment under a General Public License, has gained some acceptance as competitive pressures lead PC OEMs to reduce costs and new, lower price PC form factors gain adoption"

I'll ask the question again

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux had NOTHING to do with it?

Absolutely 100% nothing?

Re:You forgot one

[MBGMorden]

The thing is, originally it was the states that were seen as the countries, not the union. Each was it's own little country loosely associated. Somewhere along the line the union stopped being an association of countries and grew to be seen as THE country. At that time some of the states wanted out.

It'd be akin to the United States suddenly declaring that we no longer wish to part of the United Nations. Right now we all see that as clear cut: the UN is a loose organization and if our country wants to leave we should be able to: we're a sovereign government. The states of the mid 1800's felt largely the same way.

Re:You forgot one

[IllForgetMyNickSoonA]

Sorry, but this is not correct. Yugoslavia was always one state, with a one army, one government, one economy, one anthem, one flag... and so on. Republics of Yugoslavia were from the first day actually much less "independent" than the single states in the USA are.

Re:You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that battle was fought and lost already. We're not a federation of states, however we should still decentralize government as much as possible.

Re:You forgot one

[MBGMorden]

Actually I was only speaking as to the situation in the United States regarding the states wanting to secede (sparking the US Civil War). I wasn't referring to (nor do I know anything about) anything dealing with Yugoslavia.

Re:You forgot one

[IllForgetMyNickSoonA]

Oh, ok. Sorry, misunderstanding. :-)

Re:You forgot one

[LaskoVortex]

It'd be akin to the United States suddenly declaring that we no longer wish to part of the United Nations. Right now we all see that as clear cut: the UN is a loose organization and if our country wants to leave we should be able to: we're a sovereign government.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul82.html

Re:You forgot one

[LaskoVortex]

We're not a federation of states, however we should still decentralize government as much as possible.

I'm trying to resist descending into an argument of semantics, but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation

iPhones are doing OK. No Walmart needed.

[egghat]

And btw. I haven't seen a single iPhone app in Walmart lately.

bye egghat

Re:I dunno

[DaVince21]

So that means you're either pirating Vista/Win7 or making sure that you have another PC with a legit, bought Windows license to install those versions of Windows on more than 1 PC? No wait, that second thing meant you paid for the OS.

Microsoft/Applesoft/Commodore/... BASIC

[Anonymous Coward]

I think another important contribution to the industry early on was that of Microsoft BASIC, originally written by Allen and Gates with help from Davidoff. They ported it and _sold_ (not licensed) it to multiple companies for multiple processors.

Microsoft BASIC

Most notably in my mind are Commodore (CBM) BASIC and Applesoft (Apple-Microsoft) BASIC for various Commodore and Apple computers (on MOS 6502/6510 processors).

Commdore BASIC
Applesoft BASIC

On the Commodore PET, type "wait 6502,1" and it will reply with "Microsoft!", an easter egg said to have been added by Gates himself when he had an argument with Tramiel about when there was doubt whether Commodore would admit that the code was from Microsoft.

Bill Gates' Personal Easter Eggs in 8 Bit BASIC

My only problems with Microsoft are the same gripe I have with most _huge_ companies. Growing companies tend to be innovative and important to their respective industries, supplying much, but stagnant companies often contribute less and can actually slow down or stall an entire industry if they are big enough, simply in an effort to maintain their size. Now, this may not always happen, but IMHO it is the norm.

I think the reason for this is when too many people work as a group, they tend to go too many directions unless they are serendipitously all moving in the same direction (possible with small groups) or if there is a shining, uniform vision at the top for them to follow-- and whose to say that if there is such a vision that it is in a good direction?

If a company continues to grow, generally doing good things for its industry, it will invariably become huge after a time, and, I believe, most huge companies will invariably hurt themselves and possibly the industry until they are either small either to grow again or they disband. The circle of corporate life. I believe that Microsoft is no exception to this.

My two cents.
--Dave Romig, Jr.