Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft May Be Targeting the Ubuntu Desktop
mjasay writes "Microsoft is advertising for a new director of open source strategy, but this one has a specific purpose: fight the Linux desktop. 'The Windows Competitive Strategy team is looking for a strong team member to lead Microsoft's global desktop competitive strategy as it relates to open source competitors.' For a variety of reasons, this move is almost certainly targeted at Ubuntu Linux's desktop success. With the Mac, not Linux, apparently eating into Microsoft's Windows market share, what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?"
Reader christian.einfeldt notes Microsoft's acknowledgment of the FOSS threat to their business model within SEC filings, and suggests that this job posting could instead be about maintaining Internet Explorer's market share lead against Firefox.
east my asshole!
what is it about desktop Linux
Maybe it's that mighty 2% market share. After TWENTY FIVE years of effort. Microsoft must be terrified at that sort of "rapid" growth.
2009 is going to be the year of linux on the desktop! THIS time I mean it! Not like the other TWENTY FIVE times.
Speculation, much like the year of the linux desktop.
The reason for targeting Ubuntu is simple. Its getting attention as a credible desktop alternative by the main stream. If one Linux destop is a credible alternative than its only a short leap for the public to make that any Linux desktop solution might be a credible alternative. At that point products start getting evaluated on the merrits and how well they suit a the purchasers organization or individual needs. Windows may or may not come out on top if subjected to any rigor in the decision process.
Apple is one company and the sole provider of a Mac OS solution. They can be controled; there is a specific target to go after if they become more of a problem. Microsoft can deal Apple a good deal of hurt buy just shutting down their own Mac Business unit. Ubuntu on the other hand if allowed to become to popular can't be stopped so easily. If that popularity speads to Linux desktop distributions more generally then Microsoft no longer has a specific entity to go after. The want to make sure desktop a meaningful desktop Linux business remains something that is going to be still born so to speak.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
With the Mac, not Linux, apparently eating into Microsoft's Windows market share, what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?"
Mac OS X doesn't run natively on all PCs, so Microsoft doesn't have anything to be afraid of. Plus Microsoft has software already developed for the Mac, so they could still make money even if Macs dominate PC sales.
Microsoft doesn't have that with Ubuntu, not only does it run on the same hardware as Windows, but it's being offered as an alternative to Windows by a major player in the PC market.
Linux's "scratch an itch" GNU foundations almost by definition make it unsuitable for mass desktop deployment. You don't choose a philosophy that deems goal X irrelevant and then expect the ultimate implementation of that philosophy to be the achievement of X. (On the contrary, many admins and programmers are also the geeks who develop Linux, so Linux is successful here.)
But to my main point: why the disproportionate number of women and black men on all the Ubuntu merchandising pages? This sort of stupid appeal to political correctness died off in the early '90s (unless you're the BBC), and everyone who isn't in chronic denial knows that most Linux users are non-black men. It all adds to the horribly culty image of Linux as some cooperative dream rather than a tool to get a job done. I'm no WASP, but I am Spanish, and if I saw 50% Mexicans on the Ubuntu site to try to make me feel "welcome" (or, worse, to make liberals feel like they're giving me a helping hand) I'd be entirely put off. As it is, I look at the site and think, "How would I feel as a woman/black man?" and I'm put off downloading Ubuntu.
Advice for not looking like your page needs an "ebony and ivory" backing track:
1. Don't put a single token black man on every page;
2. Don't try to balance the ratio of women and men if it's blatant that your market isn't anywhere near 50/50;
3. Moreover, if you want to represent two typical users, don't choose one woman and one black man - it's obvious what you're doing;
4. If you're going to build this facade of "oh everyone from every background uses our product", at least don't fuck up entirely with images such as this one [canonical.com] where the truth comes out in the guy trying to cop a desperate kiss of the woman. This man is the only one to actually represent the typical Linux fanboy, and he demonstrates what is - in the same politically correct world that requires (1) and (2) - sexual harassment.
Oh, and just to anticipate it:
5. Don't reply to this post with, "Oh, I didn't notice the people's gender/race. I'm sorry that you're so put off by people's gender/race! You must be sexist/racist." It requires 5 minutes in any sort of marketing position to know that anyone involved in such a photoshoot will notice the colour and gender of participants - if juat to make the very sort of patronising faux pas that makes Ubuntu look like it's stuck in the '80s.
What if there will be an accepted alternative, for free! That's worse then a Mac, how can you compete if it is really good and really free? Competition is a threat, but this is a death threat to MS.
We'll arbitarily assume Microsft is targeting Ubuntu specifically, then post the question: what is it about Ubuntu that's making Microsoft target them specifically?
No, Microsoft is being proactive. They sat around during the early days of the internet while we struggled with Trumpet WinSock (remember this, guys?)
I kid you not, but I am responsible for three people switching to Linux this week alone, running XP in virtualbox. Their PCs got so slow they wanted to wipe everything and install Vista, but they liked XP, so this is the perfect solution.
If these people convert a few more people, the whole computing shift will change extremely rapidly. In a few years, people will potentially shift quickly and not look back. Windows 95 took hold pretty quickly. Only somewhat related, but look at hardware shifts, which also happen quickly (PATA to SATA in 2004 or so, birth of 3D cards in 1995 or so.)
It is logical for them to do this, and they are smart to be scared. In a way, I wish they would just sit on their hands.
Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
So Apple is now a stronger and more viable company than it was in the 90s, and now Microsoft is off to fight a battle for an even smaller fraction of the market?
What gives? I mean, I know Stevie's not doing too well health wise, but unless they have increased their stake in Apple beyond a few shares of stock and Office 2008, it makes no sense to ramp up efforts on something smaller and ditch what is most likely one of the biggest competitors (Server business aside)
What company in their right mind wouldn't focus their energies on challenging better markets or, how's this, making superior products?
Oh, wait. Right. Nevermind.
Maybe it's the point that linux has been doing things on the desktop for 10+ years that microsoft is just barely starting to implement. And most of that is just the eye candy, they still need to copy all the extra functionality.
*DrugCheese rants*
I bet the netbook market has their attention. I can walk into a Target, Best Buy, or Wal-Mart and purchase a sub $300 netbook loaded with Linux. That's damn near the cost of Vista Ultimate -- sans computer.
That Ubuntu is not only well supported, but secure...something they themselves have not been able to manage.
A friend is bringing his system over today for me to install Ubuntu on. Why? Because he is just sick to death of the malware.
You know what? Sick to death is one thing, but sick to death with a good alternative...Microsoft can't have that now, can they?
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
linux hydra!
When you install Windows, you have to dig around for a key. When you install Linux, you just install it.
Terrifying, isn't it...
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
just a day or two ago I was reading right here on slashdot about how MS will be adopting OSS; that the main OS was a loss and they would focus on making all their software for OSS.... ... and now MS is gonna strategize against it. Seems to me like people writing these articles actually have no effin idea what is going on.
:)
But seriously, I installed Ubuntu last night. I've been a diehard RHEL/CentOS user for years. It just plain worked out of the box for me on a relatively new laptop. It found the Wifi,sound, my bluetooth mouse, asked me if I wanted the "non free" binary accelerated Radeon X1600 video driver, etc. Pretty slick.
I realize that I'm not a typical clueless windows user, but I think this is downright easy to migrate to for a Windows user, especially when Firefox 3.x and Openoffice are bundled along with it. That's enough to satisfy a huge swath of userbase and it's completely free. The entire install only took about 10 minutes too.
Kudos to the Ubuntu team.
Microsoft is indeed in danger of losing some marketshare to Apple in the U.S. and I would say that's mostly due to college students. Microsoft is not doing nothing to counter this like the summary suggests, it's just that they haven't been very successful yet. They realize by now that they're screwed up with Vista and even their marketing efforts haven't been great, but they should be able to get back on track if Windows 7 actually turns out to be good.
As for Linux (on the desktop), that is a serious threat to Microsoft from abroad, not so much in the U.S. Face it, most (by far) Americans are not going to fiddle with Linux, even if they're told it's free and superior, merely because they don't want to relearn anything that was hard enough to learn the first time, and they just want to use whatever is on their computer (Windows). Abroad, developing countries choosing Linux for school and government is a threat because it raises generations of non-Microsoft users who they will have less control over.
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
That's awesome! I want to see a picture of that by one of y'all with talented art skills.
The only example I can think of is that episode of Voyager with that species that forced the Borg into a truce because it was so brutally lethal it was smashing them. (Now I have to go find it and watch it again.)
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
...because they recognize NinWM as the cutting edge window manager, not the Ubuntu one.
Let Microsoft go after Ubuntu. Because Ubuntu is slow, buggy, and not a good desktop.
Ubuntu is not the best GNU/Linux distribution. For starters, their quality assurance could be much better, and it is not economical in resource usage. Moreover, it was infected with the "Red Hat" disease of patching everything, introducing more, difficult to track and patch, bugs.
Worse yet, Ubuntu uses by default the GNOME Desktop. It's my personal preference, but I can't stand GNOME, period. It is so aggravating I can't even use it. A GNU/Linux desktop using GNOME is like using a Ferrari car only in first shift. Its vast potential is completely underused.
Therefore, my guess is that Ubuntu is in fact a low-hanging fruit. Let Microsoft go after Ubuntu; meanwhile... KDE will eat their lunch. 4.2 is just the harbinger of things to come and it's that terrific. Period.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
Why not Apple? Because Apple isn't selling generic OS X that competes head to head against Windows on generic PCs.
If Apple changed that, you can bet Microsoft would be on to them in a flash.
This is because there is trouble in the Linux space. We can't agree on a way forward. Look, the other day, our benevolent leader Linus stated: "Multiple Distributions "Absolutely Required..," as if that would help in stemming Microsoft's progress.
Let me say this: There will always be multiple distributions of "Linux" but what we need is a fully functional desktop with a single supported desktop environment. Nobody...I repeat, nobody is saying there should be *one* Linux desktop or server. Nobody! Other distros can continue to exist but this particular desktop should get the bulk of resources to succeed.
On the desktop now, KDE 4.2 is good and it has always shown promise. By the way, I am a die hard GNOME user who contributes to the project from time to time, but I must say the truth. What troubles me is that folks sing "Linux is great" and so on then they go ahead to dedicate resources to other projects. This approach does not help.
Then we have those who I would say are almost bigots. Why? Because users tell them "...we need a single accepted API so that apps will install across Linux distros..." What happens is that these folks' ideas are shot down but these bigots.
Microsoft need not worry for now. Look at what Apple did. They broke compatibility...took another direction but because they have a single platform with unique names at every incarnation, they own more of the desktop then all the Linux combined.
We can beat Apple because we are open. Then we have folks that create multimedia files in Flash before putting up our very own .ogg files. These folks should at least put files up at the same time. We should at least be seen to eat our own food.
Folks. Let's listen to what the ordinary user is saying.
Does one ever wonder why we who use Linux still command a tiny percentage of the desktop despite having been around for almost a decade now?
Microsoft need not worry for now.
Or shut the hell up. How does one even want to compete with something that's free. Certainly not with the quality of their own products, the incredible support services or recent history in innovation.
If you write about it enough times, maybe it will come true...
Microsoft views Ubuntu migration as one way. Once someone starts using Ubuntu, chances are they'll never buy Windows again.
This is because Linux can only get better. The idea behind open source is that quality never digresses, because if something sucks, it just gets changed or forked. So, the evolution of Linux is one way. It will always be better and better. This means it's users will always be more and more. It may be slow at times, but it's inevitable. Microsoft is beginning to realize that Linux's market share will always be increasing, and eventually that share will be larger than theirs.
I think they can fight all they want, but unless they can figure out a way to nullify the GPL, the progress will continue.
I think they're more worried about Linux because Mac is more of a fad.
I can tell you exactly what has them spooked. We have Ubuntu desktops in our office and users get along on them just fine. No massive retraining costs, no one whining they can't get their work done, no software licensing to manage, we can create a custom installation image and drop it on a network drive that comes complete with productivity software, graphics software, web browsing, everything you need. Combine that with corporate Gmail, PHP and MySQL and you have an office that runs just dandy without any Microsoft products or .NET in the mix.
That's what they're afraid of and for good reason. Because running a Ubuntu office is low-cost, low-stress and we can run twice the number of machines per admin we could with Windows. And we don't have to dance on MS's string for product activation, put up with their DRM, pay extra for anti-virus or site licensing. We don't have the virus/trojan of the day suddenly interrupting our day and we're free to focus on productive labor rather than putting so much effort into serving the software and MS.
And my wife, the most potentially destructive computer user anywhere, a person who can trash almost any computer and almost any OS. Always by accident. Ms. I wasn't doing anything and the screen just went black...the hard drive started making a funny noise...it just died...is the screen supposed to be all blue like that? A person who couldn't tell you what a command line was, let alone type anything into one. She gets along just fine on Ubuntu. I haven't had to work on that machine since installing 8.04.
MS should be worried. Ubuntu is a great product.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I submit that Microsoft need not worry that much and here are my reasons:
Joe Six Pack tells Linux Programmers: " I need to double click to install my app. Programmers response: No! Just type "apt-get install ". Six Pack's idea is shot down!
Whatever happened to "The customer is always right!"
Joe Six Pack tells Linux Programmers: Where can I get help on this application?
Programmers: RTFM! Or connect to #linuxhelp on irc.freenode.com. When Joe Six Pack gets there, he's asked to RTFM.
It's as simple as that folks!
Right now, my MythTV setup is spewing errosrs like hell...telling me that ivtv0 cannot record fast enough. Ity also says that "Mythtv mpeg buffers afe full...". This makes MythTV exit after about 8 minutes of playing cable TV. I have been asked to RTFM so many times that I am going to simply reformat and install.
Microsoft worry? I do not think so.
If Microsoft are more worried about Linux/FOSS/etc than the popularity of the Mac platform then in my opinion it wouldn't be that surprising.
Regardless of how big a slice of the pie Apple might be taking, they ultimately work in more or less the same way as Microsoft. OSX and Windows are both traditional proprietary software which are written and sold on a per-license basis. I doubt that Microsoft appreciate the competition exactly, but at least they are both playing by the same set of rules.
Free Software is different, because obviously anyone can have the source code and fiddle about with it and you don't generally need to purchase licenses or whatever. The nature of Free Software is such that if its use ever becomes truly widespread in the consumer market, it is going to change what people (both end users and computer retailers) expect from software as a whole. Since the current way has obviously been very lucrative for Microsoft, that would explain why they would be so worried about Linux etc.
P.S. I'm trying not to make a value judgement on FOSS vs. proprietary software here, this is all Just What I Reckons TM.
"With the Mac, not Linux, apparently eating into Microsoft's Windows market share, what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?"
Apple sell their OS combined with the hardware it runs on.
But Ubuntu runs on the same hardware that Window runs on. They are a direct competitor and gaining ground on several fronts.
Ubuntu is also a well known brand. Many non technical people I have met know of it even if they don't know it is a version of Linux. They even think it's cool to use it.
Ubuntu is nice and its getting better. Hardware support is very solid. Every time i get the itch to run Linux i end up reverting back to Windows because the applications are 1000X better than the crap that's freely available. I wont argue that the Ubuntu OS is better but the lack of good software is just not worth it. Will it take another 17 years (29 by some calculations)? Who knows.
The threat from Apple is somewhat contained because OS X only runs on premium-priced Apple hardware. Windows is still the OS of choice for the corporate sector and [ironically] the computer illiterate people who call upon their MS-based colleagues, friends and relatives for free tech support. I always found it amazing that the platform that needs the most tech support was so popular with the people who need the most assistance.
Ubuntu is a big threat, and it goes way beyond price. Nobody is going to take their existing Dell or HP machine and reformat it for OS X. But they can certainly do it with Linux. Ubuntu has the slickest packaging of the various Linux options, making it a "Poor man's OS X that can run on the hardware I already have." Historically, only a small percentage of users have abandoned Win2K or XP in favor of Linux. But Vista is another matter entirely.
Microsoft is a company built on the principle of Moore's law. Exponential increases in hardware capability means unlimited new possibilities for new features and a fresh desires from the user community (sometimes fueled by marketing hype but desires nonetheless). Each version of Windows was more bloated than the one before, but nothing stopped the users from merging a new version of Windows into their upgrade cycle.
Three events changed everything:
1. Vista "jumped the shark" on bloat while the rest of the market moved the other way.
2. Cheapie Ubuntu netbooks can do almost everything people really need to do.
3. The iPhone is threatening to turn itself into a hand-held OS X machine.
Running Windows XP on a netbook is like fitting a 350 pound driver into a golf cart. You can do it, but you won't carry many golf clubs. Running Vista on a netbook won't even pass the giggle test.
Windows Mobile was their only lightweight option but it never picked up enough traction to seriously compete with a "real" operating system. Apple had more apps running on the iPhone in the first six months than MS ever had for Windows Mobile.
Microsoft needs to slow down the adoption rate of Ubuntu netbooks while they figure out how to exist in the small, light, low-powered world of ultra-portable hardware. They will need a community of people other than themselves to provide a robust portfolio of applications.
MS is one of the few companies that tries to win a race by slowing the other guy down. In this case, they need to speed themselves up and get in the game.
It demonstrates one simple, incontrovertable fact that is absolute poision to Microsoft's business model: operating systems aren't all that important.
Oh,back in the day, when you couldn't shoehorn a real operating system onto a machine with a sixteen bit address bus, it was a given that operating systems for personal computers were horribly inadequate. Every time a new version of the operating system came out, it'd take advantage of something that was now affordable on a desktop that never had been before. So you looked forward to an OS release as a release from some piece of pain or another. So an operating system release was a big deal.
We are in the era of diminishing returns when it comes to new OS releases. Oh, they maybe handle new version of hardware that are marginally better than they old hardware, like Sata vs. ATA, or going back farther in time, more convenient support for things like wifi. And, of course, the OS developers fix mistakes they made way back in the old days.
The problem for MS is trying to drum up the old excitement (with its influx of cash), like when we went from Windows 2 to Windows 3, which made it easy to run more than one application at a time (which was not a concern back when you'd only had 256K of RAM). You've got to add features and treat them like they're revolutionary.
Ubuntu is not without its problems, the biggest of which is getting to work on notebook hardware whose manufacturers consider getting the BIOS to work with Windows getting the job "done". But, once you get it running, you don't sit down to work at your computer and say, "gee I'm working on Ubuntu." Good Linux distros fade into the background, where they belong. Operating systems are just packages of functionality which make it easy for you to get at your data and manipulate it with your preferred tools.
What's scary about a distro like Ubuntu is that it doesn't compete against Windows. That's how Microsoft has won for years, when competitors look at MS products and decide they have to follow Microsoft's lead, even if they were first. With each new Linux distro release, you don't get an attempt to revolutionize the desktop experience. What you you do get the same experience you had yesterday, with a few problems sorted out and a couple of modest refinements. In contrast, with each new version of Windows, MS seems to scrape the bottom of the change barrel a bit deeper, down to renaming and shifting around control panel applets so there's absolutely no way you could mistakenly think you didn't get an upgrade.
Of course, MS has a great deal of opportunity for just fixing the mistakes of the past, which is a good thing. Vista could have been the best Windows ever, except it had too many competing agendas. Windows 7 is shaping up to be the kind of incremental release on Vista that we're used to in the Linux world, and by contrast it will seem wonderful with the XP to Vista transition.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I do believe Apple and Microsoft are not direct competitors, because Apple is selling computers and Microsoft is selling software. And many people even run Microsoft Windows on Apple computers. The only thing Apple does not do is sell computers preinstalled with Microsoft Windows like the other companies that build PCs.
Since Apple is not planning on licensing their os to other computer manufacturers (they did this and the company almost went bancrupt, but was saved by Microsoft) the only os that does compete with Microsoft for coming preinstalled is Linux. If you think of all the companies that sell PCs.
Face it, most (by far) Americans are not going to fiddle with Linux, even if they're told it's free and superior, merely because they don't want to relearn anything that was hard enough to learn the first time
Are you kidding? Ubuntu's closer to XP than Vista is, and the new Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office suites are changing the user interface much more than each new iteration of Ubuntu does. Sit someone down in front of an Ubuntu desktop and they'll have a much easier time figuring that stuff out than the new version of Microsoft _____.
Not to mention there are a lot less nags and notifications in the process of using Ubuntu software. Most users can't even finish an install wizard in Windows, but they can select a checkbox in Synaptic Package Manager. The only reason people are sticking with Windows, is that using "Windows software" has made them so afraid of changes in new versions that they think moving to something other than Windows will be an even more volatile environment.
Windows users are famous for saying "OK, you have to tell me how this new version works" before they even try it out themselves, even if there is nothing apparently different, or "I was afraid to click on anything so I waited for you to take a look at it." They just don't know any better. This whole "afraid of change" thing is specious at best.
Twinstiq, game news
And still legible instead of having been ripped at sometime over the years.
While almost every other company can send you the unlocking code for the products if you cannot find it, Microsoft is one of the few companies that refuses to keep such information readily accessible in THEIR databases.
But they want you to go through hoops to be able to download updates.
Before I switched to Linux, I used to use a lot of shareware that I paid for. Their customer service was incredible.
Particularly when compared to Microsoft's.
The shareware authors would keep your unlocking code on file forever. If you skipped a version or two they would STILL offer you a discount on their newest product.
Why does Microsoft refuse to provide the same level of service?
With Ubuntu, I can even LEGALLY download the install CD for the next version (and all previous versions). If the person needing the Windows help only has a copy of the "retail" install CD ... but the unlocking code is for the "OEM" version ... what the fuck?!? Who's idiot idea was THAT? It's the SAME OPERATING SYSTEM.
And don't bother telling me about how I can hack out my own "install with any unlocking code" CD. I know how to do that AND slipstream the service packs and such. I'm pointing out that Microsoft CHOOSES to make the task FAR more difficult for the average person than there is any need for.
Why is this always seen as a battle between linux and Microsoft? Who said that we 'have to beat Microsoft'? Linux has a perfectly good but small following. I see no reason why that wont continue regardless of whatever Microsoft decides to do or not do. I do not see this as a fight to remove Microsoft from the market place. If Microsoft feel threatened, then so be it, but I do not recall anyone ever claiming that the purpose of linux is to defeat Microsoft in the market-place. Those that want to continue with Microsoft software and all that it entails - lock-in, regular 'upgrades' that break compatibility with older formats, costs etc - are free to do as far as I am concerned. BUT, Microsoft has no reason to try to stop me from using whatever software I chose and, from where I sit at the moment, I do not see how they can stop me. They cannot 'uninvent' linux, they can only try to keep their own business share. However, nothing that they seem able to produce will entice me away from the OS that I want to use. Why can't they both exist in the market place?
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
hey let them attack the linux desktop as much as they want. but lets hope it will be openly, the more the public knows the more pr linux is gona get... maybe its been 25 years but now it seems ms thinks its a threat. and i think they are right. been using linux sporadic over the last 5-10 years and it was never ready to be my only desktop, servers on the other side, well just a exchange clone is missing, for everything else ill never touch ms again. but now with this many distis and a whole lot of them are really good, ms should fear for the next few years linux could get more of the share.
but they can not make me move.
When you buy a DVD, can you watch it with friends? Or do they have to buy their own copy?
When you buy a book, can you loan it to friends? Or do they have to buy their own copy?
When you buy a CD, can you listen to it with friends? Or do they have to buy their own copy?
I'm sorry, but the license on the microwave doesn't allow other people to eat any of the food I heat up in it. And while I'm eating these nachos, I'll watch this DVD that can only be played in this DVD player attached to this TV.
Oops. The TV fell down and broke and it is out of warranty. Looks like I will have to buy all my DVD's again.
Yeah, that might be the wet dream of the execs at the movie studios. But real people don't see a problem with sharing things that you've just put down cash for.
Once anything gets on their radar, its a target. Its how they do business.
Nothing new here.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Any marketshare figure is irrelevant at best, and deliberately misleading at worst. Linux mindshare is growing steadily, and is easily competitive against MS products. I only see that trend continuing. Surely, Microsoft sees the same.
Anyway... fighting the Linux desktop? That amounts to fighting an idea --- an idea fundamental to human nature (sharing) too. Good plan, MS. What's next? The MS anti-underage-sex team?
Why is everyone assuming that Microsoft can do only one thing at a time? Microsoft is a damned big company and, you know what? They can do multiple things at once.
Right now, Microsoft's operating system units are focusing their energies on overcoming the bad press from Vista (Mojave Experiment), shunting the effectiveness of the Mac v. PC ads, and putting oil in the hype machine for the release Windows 6.1 --- err 7. The fact that Microsoft is hiring a single guy -- ONE GUY -- to look the open source competition stuff, is hardly "ditching what is most likely one of the biggest competitors".
Fact is, Microsoft is looking at ALL their competitors, which is *exactly* what they should be doing. Linux might not be a Desktop threat today. What about in 5 years? What about 10? Microsoft is smart enough to think that far ahead.
The
They probaby know Ubuntu is very, very dangeorous to them, as soon as more people find out it exists, how safe it is, how much it (usually) doesn't screw up your computer, how much more intuitive it is, how much more eyecandy it has, how everything the average computer user will ever need is already installed, Windows is in trouble. Also the fact that its cheaper by a factor that is infinitely high doesn't exactly make things better.
heart Ubuntu! =D
Pretty much all it needs to beat Windows is...more games that match the visual quality, amount, size and complexity of those being developed for Windows. *hides*
Species 8472? It was Voyager that negotiated a truce in exchange for detailing how to defeat 8472 (reprogrammed nanites?).
The SEC filings in the original post are from 2004. Not the most current evidence damning MS. And since I am all in favor or said damning, here is a quick tutorial on how to search SEC filings using the EDGAR database.
In the "company name" field, type Microsoft. Only two choices there, since it is a pretty unique name. We are going to look at the entity known as "MICROSOFT CORP."
Here is where a lot of people get messed up. You have to look for a form called the "10-K" by entering "10-K" into the "Filing type" text field. That is where all the dirt is, any good corporate researcher will tell you.
From there you have to click on the link in the "Document" column that corresponds with "10-K." After that you just choose the most recent 10-K (annual report), and there should be lots of juicy evidence against the company, written by its very own lawyers.
For example, I just did a simple text search (long document) for the term "open source."
You're thinking of species 8472.
The thing that bothers me is at least 90% of the time I see statistics on OS market share they only count the copies of linux that vendors ship with PCs. That is what puts it at the measly misleading 2%. I'm sure a lot of you will argue about that being the only number that matters, but the number of actual copies of linux in use probably surpassed OS X a while ago, especially with the help of Ubuntu. So why should microsoft worry about people putting ubuntu on a machine that shipped with windows anyway you ask? Well if they are liking ubuntu then they probably aren't going to pay for a PC with a windows license again are they? You have to look at this one step at a time like microsoft apparently is. That is my 2 cents anyway. Feel free to trash it. Honestly I don't think it can possibly be just linux that microsoft is worried about. They have open source alternatives challenging them on just about all fronts. I only hope that other open source software is as successful as firefox, especially linux and open office.
2009 is going to be the year of the Linux desktop!
Right now Microsoft and other large companies are in bed together (think *AA). They can make all kinds of backroom deals that will ultimately result in users being required to hand over more and more control over their own PCs. Now, enter Ubuntu (or linux in general). Instead of Microsoft saying, "here you have to take this because it's what we've decided to do," *AA will have to adopt a different mindset in order to cater to this growing user base. I'm not talking about giving away the farm, but I am talking about a requirement that they either play by a reasonable set of rules, or go play somewhere else. Linux doesn't have to kowtow to them like Microsoft does.
Its pretty clear from the job posting on Linked In that this guy has to know about Netbooks and mobile devices. That is explicit. Also further down in the posting it mentions not only x86 but also ARM - which is definitely mobile territory and many think will soon be Netbook territory. I'll only get a Netbook when its got an ARM in it. And of course it'll have Ubuntu on it when that happens - no Windows for ARM at the moment.
OK, what about this for an idea? We already know about "Singularity" - the byte code OS from Microsoft - they could port that to a Netbook very quickly - just port the runtime to ARM and the rest works (ok, slight simplification, but a lot easier than porting Windows 7 to ARM).
OK, that was a wild idea, but you never know.
Anyway, my 2 penneth, they are targetting Netbooks.
In many situations the OS matters less and less. If you're providing a public terminal with Firefox, for instance, it doesn't matter anymore if it's Linux or Windows. Add to that the success of netbooks and all of a sudden we've proven that Linux on the desktop is a viable solution. That probably scares MS more than anything else. If your mom and millions of other casual users manage to use Linux on a netbook, it's the end of the "Linux is too hard for the casual user" story. Ubuntu is specially scary for MS because of it's increasing popularity. One of Linux's major weaknesses is the fragmentation of the market. It's a pain for both hardware manufacturers and software developers. You need to test too many different versions. If Ubuntu becomes the dominant distribution that you can test against, there'll be more and more commercial and hardware for Linux. That's really scary for MS. It's time for some FUD.
Open source commonly refers to software whose source code is subject to a license allowing it to be modified, combined with other software and redistributed, subject to restrictions set forth in the license.
..
A number of commercial firms compete with us using an open source business model by modifying and then distributing open source software to end users at nominal cost and earning revenue on complementary services and products.
These firms do not bear the full costs of research and development for the software. Some of these firms may build upon Microsoft ideas that we provide to them free or at low royalties in connection with our interoperability initiatives. To the extent open source software gains increasing market acceptance, our sales, revenue and operating margins may decline.
Open source software vendors are devoting considerable efforts to developing software that mimics the features and functionality of our products, in some cases on the basis of technical specifications for Microsoft technologies that we make available
davecb5620@gmail.com
"We'll arbitarily assume Microsft is targeting Ubuntu specifically, then post the question: what is it about Ubuntu that's making Microsoft target them specifically?"
It's all about Xubuntu's floppy write support. Scares 'em Shuttleworthless so they're aiming at the source of competition; Ubuntu.
Don't get it? If Xubuntu makes these kinds of "feature bug" tricks common practice then they're on par with MobSoft and we all know what happens when one gets shitty enough: profit payback from hardware replacement vendors. Nothing shouts "Profit!" like disabling your users' perfectly functional hardware by completely borked OS permissions code (root ain't gonna help ya there sonny boy, chmod all you like it's not gonna make a difference when write support sleeps with the fishes).
Welcome to the dark side, Steve "Chair" Ballmer will do the rites for ya all.
I look forward to seeing you create threads at ubuntuforums.org telling your fellow bots that Micro$uck$ is targeting the Ubuntu desktop.
Perhaps this will help you understand a little about what Microsoft's afraid of.
And if you look at news from 2003 or 2004, and then fast forward to 2008 you need not be too good at math to realize that Microsoft just ain't what they used to be.
Bug Number One
hope it pays well.
Actually MS were supposed to write apps for the Apple GUI, next thing Apple found out Microsoft was selling it's own GUI on cheap clones in the far east. Apple sued them, Microsoft's defense was Apple stole the GUI from those Palo Alto guys ..
davecb5620@gmail.com
"what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?" How dumb a question is that? Linux runs on the same hardware as Windows and is free. OS X does not (without more hacking than the vast majority of computer users can do). With distributions like Ubuntu, Linux becomes an easily installed option.
As others have noted, Apple plays in it's own (hardware) sandbox. Since it's "competition," that's good to keep the DOJ off of their back. Linux, and Ubuntu specifically, can be installed on nearly any machine that can run Windows. It has a modern, friendly GUI which can be learned from scratch at the same pace as Windows. And, most importantly, it's free. When computers were $5k, tacking on another $300-$1000 for software wasn't as big a deal. Now that computers are $500, adding another $500 in software is big deal (when viewed as a percentage).
In a world where comparison shopping has yielded winners and losers over 3-4% difference in enduser pricing, the ability to strip out 20-50% of the cost of an installed machine makes Linux a formidable opponent. Apple will never compete with Microsoft for a race to the bottom - and that's by design. Hardware vendors with Linux need only determine if the manpower to make the Linux installs work seamlessly outweighs the cost of a Windows license and install budget. If the vendor is big enough, they don't even have to care about pissing off MS, since MS is dependent on that revenue.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
"The threat from Apple is somewhat contained because OS X only runs on premium-priced Apple hardware"
I thought they recently produced an x86 version. Historically, if Apple opened up the OS and allowed third party hardware manufacturers to carry it, OS X would be on every desktop in every home and office across the planet.
davecb5620@gmail.com
"why the disproportionate number of women and black men on all the Ubuntu merchandising pages?"
..
Cause, it isn't disproportionate, it's irrelevant, Ubuntu is funded by Canonical Ltd and Mark Shuttleworth is a south African, there are lots of 'black' men and women in SA and - you are a total asshole, whatever your gender or skin tone
davecb5620@gmail.com
This will bring awareness to Ubuntu, and bring people to it. I think this will have the reverse effect of what they want.
A lot of the problem is that people just don't know they have any options... or what to do about it if they did. Windows is helped by ignorance... so by them trying to convince people to stay away from Linux, people will check out what Microsoft is trying to dissuade them from.
They could cause what they are trying to prevent... so great news!
Most people aren't thought about after they're gone. "I wonder where Rob got the plutonium" is better than most get.
Linux' share of the market is in the 0.1 region, whereas Mac OS X has 9.9 percent. Windows has nothing to fear from Linux.
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
> Who said that we 'have to beat Microsoft'?
Linux has not 'said' that, but Microsoft has said that they do _have_ to beat everything else.
FOSS and Linux are the result of 'natural selection'. Microsoft has managed to kill off everything else. It paid OEMs to not install BeOS, it bought companies that might compete, where there was a market taking sufficient revenue MS bought one competitor and gave away the product to kill off the others or brought out their own product to do so.
MS wants a complete monoculture and all the revenue for everything computer, it puts up with sharing revenue (ie OEM hardware) only as long as it can't take it for itself.
FOSS has been around for decades. The only reason that it shows up in market share is that it is the only thing left after MS has laid waste all the others (leaving Apple only due to anti-trust issues).
Be careful about extrapolating from one hire to Microsoft's big picture strategy. MS is a huge company and hiring one person is a nano fraction of their operating cost. If there was a 0.00001 probability that Ubuntu could sweep away their market it would still make sense for them to hire that person. Personally I think the odds are somewhat higher.
I am a long time Windows user who just last night installed Ubuntu for the first time. I had a bunch of old PC parts lying around, bought a new Shuttle Cube case for them and burned the Ubuntu Live to CD from my Windows machine.
Hey, I am impressed. The GUI looks great, there is Open Office on there, I can surf out of the box and strangely, I don't have to load drivers. It just worked.
Now for professional applications, I am tied to Adobe CS for graphics work (don't like the GIMP and need to be print-ready and able to hand work to anyone in a pro environment, so don't try to sell me on GIMP). But for EVERYTHING else, there is no reason I see to not use Ubuntu. This little box will be in the other room for surfing, I'll hook it up to the entertainment system to play music or videos.
I tried SuSe 7-8 years ago and it was a dreadful experience, never got it to work right. But man has Linux changed since '01.
This is just the perspective of someone who finally sees some use in open source, happy to build a little system without paying M$ a dime. I haven't dug deep into the OS, but all I need is there. Cool. I will certainly pass the word in my social circles, Ubuntu makes Linux ready for prime-time.
I know many here will disagree with this, so be it.
But it isn't about Microsoft, it's about proprietary software. Right now the situation is such that people are forced, whether at work or at home, to use software where you aren't allowed basic rights to the software you use: to use your software in any fashion, to modify it however you want, and to distribute it to whoever who want.
That is the goal, and that is why we need to usurp Microsoft. They are still the number one vendor of software that most people are still forced to use. Other companies are just as bad, but none as dominant.
So if Microsoft is specifically targeting free software, I suggest we fight back.
My name is Keir Thomas and I'm the author of Ubuntu Pocket Guide and Reference. I sell the book on Amazon.com, but I also give away a PDF edition. Since the book's website went live, over 300,000 people have downloaded the book.
About two thirds of the people (according to website stats) are Windows users (for what it's worth, about 3/4 of those use Firefox -- you might describe Firefox as a "gateway" to open source).
The demand is there for Ubuntu, but only amongst the Internet digerati. It hasn't yet boiled down to the ordinary joes.
This year might not be year of the Linux desktop, but I do genuinely think it might be the start of the beginning of the Ubuntu desktop age.
Brig it on!
Linux - all flavors - has 0.8% of the "desktop."
The Win 7 Beta has 0.1%. The iPhone 0.5%
OSX 10.5 5%. Vista 23%.
These are good numbers for mass market operating systems that demand a significant investment in hardware. Operating System Market Share [Feb 7, 09].
Net Applications collects webstats.
Its clients are interested only in a head count. Hits to their sites. Not in licenses, not in product still in shipping containers on the L.A. docks.
Vista's share is currently growing at the rate of about 1% a month. Linux is still struggling to break into the single digit.
http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i121/djblinky/Subgenius-JHVH-1-by-St-Ken.jpg
* * * * *
Once you reach the end of this sig, turn your monitor over and continue the test on the other side.
I'm a recent Ubuntu convert. Installed Hardy from a disc I burned myself, and then upgraded to Intrepid (though I just read yesterday here about how LTS releases are better, update-wise, so I'll probably keep the next LTS). I've been using Ubuntu regularly for about a month, starting up Windows once in a while (once or twice a week, for maybe not even an hour per week) to do certain stuff that I haven't yet figured out in Linux. Stability, lower cost, and freedom from Microsoft were the major reasons I wanted to give it a shot, and I'm willing to learn the OS, and get used to the different stuff. I'm sure the day will come when I either cannot or will not pay for Windows, so I feel I should be functional outside of Windows, so that I have no worries when that day comes.
So, while stability and freedom were nice, the cost relative to M$ was really the biggest reason I switched, and getting this stability and such for this cost is excellent. :D
But if M$ wants me back, I'll make it really easy - If M$ will make Windows cost significantly less than Ubuntu, I will switch back. Ubuntu saves me $200-$300 if I use it instead of Vista, plus, Linux is open-source, so I can modify and rebuild the code for my own purposes if I want to. So, how about for the next Windows, M$ gives me $200-$300, an OS disc, and relatively easy access to the source code for the next version of Windows, so that I can modify and rebuild it to my preferences. For that, I shall erase my Ubuntu partition and install Windows as my main OS. It'd save me against Ubuntu what Ubuntu saved me against the last version of Windows, so it seems like a fair trade.
Hell, I bet a lot of users would switch from Linux to Windows if, along with the disc, M$ would throw in about 300 dollars and the source code. Imagine the stability that would result from custom builds!
There, Microsoft! I have checked for solutions to your computer problems, and that is what I found! You can choose to take it, or you can choose to ignore it!
. . .
O_O Holy shit! *dodges chair*
Well... actually if you go by browser statistics, Linux is around 0.9%, or less than one percent. Such statistics are a pretty good indication of "desktop" use, as servers and embedded systems tend not to go around browsing the web looking for porn...
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Doubt it. On the web, perhaps, but practically every business of any significant size has internal IIS servers, Active Directory servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, and file servers galore. There's a lot of iron out there.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
..is because a lot of products aren't supported on Linux. Sure one could run them in WINE or install a VBox with Windows, but for the average non-nerdy computer user that may be too much.
The reason that I am staying with Windows at the moment is because, as far as I know, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 will not be supported on Linux. :( And I'm pretty sure that other users would start using Linux if most software supported it.
One tool that I miss when I am using Linux is Notepad++
(Poor grammar and such due to non-sober condition)
what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?
I doubt it's so much that Ubuntu might steal desk/laptop marketshare - as stated, Apple has more - it's that it squeezes Microsofts margins. Apple are and will likely continue to be comparatively expensive, so they'll never take a huge share.... no bad thing for Apple though, 'cos they make a good margin on what they sell whilst always appearing to be a premium product.
.Net) might do it.
Conversely, Ubuntu (and all Linux variants) are from a marketing perspective, low-end/cheap products. Consequently there's no margin, and thus far, no incentive for OEMs to ship because of this.
However, time are a changing! People are looking to lower their costs, and right now, the MS component of a desk/laptop computer is the most expensive. With Ubuntu continually improving, it's getting to the point where it is viable in terms of driver availability and application availability. I guess a lot of Microsofts customers (both enterprise and OEMs) are probably asking exactly *why* they should pay what MS is asking when a viable alternative exists; these customers don't want to switch if they can avoid it -- it's a bunch of work/risk for them, but at the same time the cost savings mean MS is very likely being forced to compromise on the prices it charges.
I'm not sure what they can do though! They can try to increase the perceived value of the product... maybe... dunno how though. Or they can try to lock people in more, so I'd imagine Sliverlight rather than IE is the likely plan here? That with online services (tied to
MS gained the share they have because they were cheaper than the alternatives, not because they were particularly good. Right now, they kind of neither.... I _can_ see how a complete out-of-the-box solution for small businesses (less than 20 employees? and no actual IT manager) could be good, so if I was MS, I'd target them I think. I can't see how they're going to continue where the target market understands IT though.
What has MS spooked about Linux and not Apple, is that Apple is a traditional competitor who they know how to deal with...
Linux on the other hand, represents an evolution which renders their business model obsolete. If linux attains sufficient market share, then it will entirely break their lockin and show users that they don't need to pay for software.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
And while I did buy an OS licence with my Mac, unless you build your own PC (90% of PC users don't, I will wager) you also pay an OS licence fee.
What OS license fee did I pay when I bought an ASUS Eee PC with Xandros, or when my boss bought a Dell PC with Ubuntu? Things are starting to turn around; Dell just needs to advertise its Free product a bit more.
Microsoft didn't have to worry in the past about the Linux desktop because it was too much work to get set up and maintain. That has changed. I don't think the Linux desktop experience is quite there yet, but it is getting really close. In some ways it is already much better than Windows, and where it is not, it is catching up. What Microsoft fears is that at some point Ubuntu and > usage will reach a critical mass and explode on to the desktop scene. For this to hurt Microsoft, it doesn't mean Linux has to put them out of the market place. If Linux gained only 20% of the desktop market share, it would hurt, and probably hurt their pride the most. It may not happen, but Microsoft would have to be stupid to ignore the possibility. And quite frankly, I really don't know what Microsoft can do to stop it. They will try of course, and even resort to some of the dirty tricks they used in the past. But FOSS has no center to aim at. It's apparent weakness is its strength. It's a bunch of smart people all over the world doing what they like to do. I don't hate Microsoft and I don't want them to go out of business, but this is going to be fun to watch. I am hoping for the success of Linux on the desktop. This will be good even for the most dedicated MS or Apple fanboy. Real competition in the marketplace is good for everyone concerned. It will make whatever you choose to use better.
This is the lead to damn near every Linux conversion story posted to Slashdot.
The convert is usually a family member -
often elderly and unlikely to make waves. The geek doesn't post the story when he gets his butt kicked for trashing Dad's system, apps and files.
The real news is that OEM Linux has lost the support of WalMart in big box retail and that alternatives like Circuit City are disappearing fast.
In six months or a year shoppers will be able to walk into any of 14,000 WalMart stores and walk out with an HP Win 7 media desktop, Win 7 netbook, HP multifunction printer-scanner, a pocket HD camcorder, a half dozen or so PC games from the Windows bargain bin and an HDMI cable for their Vizio HDTV.
This is the path to exponential growth.
Microsoft want's to halt the move towards Linux ? Easy - Release Windows 7 with one version - no messing on with cut down home editions, business versions whatever - just one OS - Windows 7 Then sell it for no more than say £40 UK - and offer a home licence for up to 4 PC's for say £60 UK. Forget genuine advantage - virtually every PC in the world would be legit
my wife needs windows live messenger to communicate with her parents which live 10,000km away. That's the only thing holding us back, crap video conference interoperability in Linux.
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
Looks like a killer opportunity for Linus!
With products like CentOS, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, SuSE, etc. You have to ask the question, what does Microsoft really have?
They have a code base that's big and buggy. Being proprietary, fewer people really know how it works than Linux or BSD. Linux and BSD is better documented, better understood, and better "vetted,"
The *only* thing Microsoft has it's monopoly position.
If there was no monopoly, there would be no compelling reason for Microsoft to even exist. If you didn't *need* too, why would you buy Windows?
Once this fact becomes better know, Microsoft is screwed. They don't have a single product that represents a premium value outside of their proprietary platform.
They wouldn't have to worry if Windows wasn't overpriced. I would have bought Vista if it wasn't so expensive. My decision not to upgrade has nothing to do with the quality of Vista and everything to do with the price. Since I build my own computers, it's especially expensive to buy Windows. If I can do without Windows, I would go with Linux to save money. The only problem is Windows is my gaming platform, so I need it. But I might switch to Playstation 3, since it's not much more money to buy a PS3 than to buy a new Windows install disk.
"With the Mac, not Linux, apparently eating into Microsoft's Windows market share, what is it about desktop Linux, and specifically Ubuntu, that has Microsoft spooked?"
My guess stems from my experiences having worked as a system/web analyst for 10 years.
Summary: Basically, the server world is dominated by linux/unix variants, and the people that support those servers want their desktop as similar as possible for testing/connecting to those servers.
Microsoft, intelligently, understands that computer culture is "trickle down". What the business/educational/server admin world uses, is most likely going to effect what the next generation of desktops look like.
1. I work with a wide variety of systems. Nothing has such a complete set of cross platform tools like a good linux distro. Central software repositories using things like apt-get makes work much more efficient. ./gpm is just hackish.
2. Vmware server, free excellent virtualization, in my experience, is more robust and stable on linux. Easier to move around, easier to backup, switch machines, etc..
3. In the business server world, little things like ssh/scp/xwindow apps just plain dominate. Installing windows, then having to get something like cygwin is second best. I monitor some servers with applications like Glance Plus. cygwin, startx, ssh -X someserver,
4. Working with HP-UX, Solaris, Linux servers, and a wide variety of jsp/java/war/tomcat apps means that using linux as a desktop my skills remain in the same logical world.
5. Not having to order licenses for most of my tools. If I want to reinstall/update my desktop, its free and I don't have to go through a purchasing department.
6. Performance is generally better than Mac or Windows on the same hardware.
7. I can test most of my server services directly on my desktop.
And a host of silly little things:
For instance, www.oneofmysites.com in production might be at IP 1.2.3.4 and the test system for it might be at 1.2.3.5
In linux, sudo vi /etc/hosts to switch between the two. /etc/hosts
In windows, c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
In mac, finder, applications, utilities, terminal, vi
Sure, I could create a shortcut to terminal in a mac or a direct shortcut to the /etc/hosts file in either, but its all those little extra setup things you have to do that make windows/mac less friendly to the admins out there.
It must be exciting to be a Linux zealot, you actually think a corporation gives a shit about a market segment that doesn't have any money.
Get back to making Linux on the desktop viable and stop jumping at shadows.
I'm testing Ubuntu 9.04 atm, and the installer found my xp partition and asked me if i want to import my firefox and explorer profile, some stuff from My Documents and whatnot. Don't know about mails in thunderbird or outlook, as I don't use a mail client. But really, this is great, people can keep their bookmarks and configs.
On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.
That was my comment. I wasn't trolling; I was just expressing my point of view on the subject. How sad that some with mod points thought I was trolling -- obviously they cannot handle dissent.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
First they ignore you, ........<== you are here
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win.
factor 966971: 966971
The summary asks why MS is apparently scared about Ubuntu, and not so much Mac. In my opinion, they should BOTH be scared. Ultimately, the computing experience is about the applications that run on a given operating system. We are heading towards a time where we'll see more and more OS-agnostic applications, or web based applications that don't care what OS you are running.
Operating systems are becoming products with diminishing returns. Really, all the OS does is offer you an interface to work with those applications, and an interface to connect to your hardware. But that can only go so far. Sure, you may have innovations here and there, but things like Ubuntu will quickly copy and implement those. And that's the problem the Big Two are running into - what do you do when there's really no differentiation between your for-pay OSs and a free OS? What happens when all of your OS products run all the same applications? All you're left with is the user experience factor, and if the free offering can quickly replicate that, then what?
What I'd like to see even more is true innovation on the Linux desktop front. Sure, there's some cool things like Compiz that the other guys don't have, but I'd say 90% of the things that Ubuntu's desktop has or is working on is chasing after what the other guys are doing, imitating it but never really *improving* on it other than making it free.
The purchaser has all the power. With up-front research on the web, you can find out which manufacturers support Linux and make your purchases according to your level of support for Linux. This is the most important action you can do in order to support Linux. The other actions to encourage Linux is simply mentioning if they have computers that support Linux when you walk into the computer store. If they know nothing, then walk out of the store. They will figure out they've done something wrong by losing you as a customer.
I assure you my next PC purchase will be an AMD 790GX motherboard with a AMD Phenom IIx4. I'll get the 3D. I'm going window shopping today with the Ubuntu USB key. If the PC boots it and supports the 3D environment, I'll consider it when the time comes to buy a new PC. If it can't boot off the UBUNTU USB key, I will request the salespeople to update the BIOS for booting off of USB in order to use the LINUX USB KEY. If it still doesn't boot off the LINUX USB KEY, then I'm not going to consider the PC when the time comes for a purchase.
I recently bought an HP Deskjet D2468 because I was aware of HP supporting Linux well. This time however I literally plugged it in, UBUNTU detected the model right away and it was printing perfectly without touching a CD or installing any software. HP ROCKS! UBUNTU ROCKS! I'll certainly be trying HP computers with the UBUNTU USB key today.
Microsoft certainly has a great deal to worry about. I have no intentions in purchasing any Microsoft software. I feel a sense of ownership towards the open-source community and I support it by taking the time to demonstrate Linux to any open-spirited people willing to listen and willing to let me boot Linux on their computer.
With regards to trying UBUNTU, it has never been easier to try it. If you have new hardware that allows you to boot from USB, then trying any Linux from a thumb drive is awesome. It is certainly snappier to run than on a CD/DVD.
BUT for older machines having to try any Linux from a CD/DVD, it is still painfully slow. You need to install Linux on a hard drive for it to perform without losing patience. Unfortunately my hands are tied. Most of the time, I'm not allowed to put anything on the hard drive so the new WUBI tool for starting the Linux CD from the only existing windows file system on the hard drive still doesn't apply. Unfortunately, I've tried the USB Key on some machines that had USB ports but the BIOS didn't have the capability to boot from USB. That was disappointing for me. I personally don't try to run/install Linux on any machine that has less than 512MB. It's simply a waste of time for everyone concerned.
Some of the upper management of Airlines in the United states believe that general aviation (the Cessnas, Pipers, etc.) are destroying their business even if they are not causing a seat not to be occupied. They also believe that they are using "their", the Airlines, airspace causing problems that delay them.
Microsoft is that way about alternative operating systems.
Your company sounds big enough.. And you mention about a purchasing department.
Have you ever forwarded a Microsoft EULA to the company lawyers to check it for sanity? I would assume that legal would want to know liabilities not stated in monetary fund.
Too many hands in the dough. Sorry. I wouldnt trust it on your PC. As for the effectiveness of those PC/Mac ads, I dont see any effectiveness. Everything the Mac claims it can do, I can do on the PC and never had one problem. Dont know what all the fuss it. Really. No disrespect to Mac, Apple's products are cool too. But my God - get real people, the PC can do everything a Mac can do.
Sure, FOSS and Linux are making Microsoft into a large, proprietary desert island that becomes less competitive by the year, but since they are losing their profits to MacOS X and not Linux, but we seem to be giving them too much credit by attributing their behavior to rational reasons. Shouldn't we be considering option C? Isn't it possible that Microsoft might not know what the fuck it is doing? They are so scared of a software model to which they don't possess the lock and key that they're missing what's right in front of their face: a proprietary competitor that can chew away at their market share just by making products that people like using more, and that are (arguably, of course) superior.
Open Source is simply better quality than the sorry excuse for a technology solution that makes up Microsoft's products.
While linux still isn't accepted in the wider community (I for one have had several of my peers sigh or make nasty comments when they have seen me running Ubuntu on my laptop), have a look at Firefox.
Firefox is an accepted alternative to Internet Explorer. It has all the same features, and because it is open source it has countless plugins and modifications which allows for a great deal of customization by the average-joe computer user.
Now, if you look at the comment John Lilly makes about Firefox's shares hitting 20%, he notes that hitting the milestone is something which "just a few years ago most would have considered impossible."
In other words, Firefox's popularity increased exponentially once it became accepted and people wised up to the fact that it beat the crap out of Internet Explorer.
Linux is the same. The general view has changed from "What's Linux?" to "Only strange people with ponytails and T-shirts with penguins use Linux" to "People that know a lot about computers sometimes use Linux".
It is inevitable that that view will change to "Everyone can use Linux" and then the floodgates will open as, like with Firefox, people realize that there is an alternative to Microsoft software.
Microsoft knows this.
And they are afraid.
Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
Apple, T is for TAX, CINNAMY, TOASTY APPLE TAX, you NEED a good 'puter THAT'S A FACT, staarrrt it out WITH APPLE MACS.. Appoo Macks.....
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
hi,
/. journal here:
Like any other job offer, this job offer will eventually be pulled off of LinkedIn, and so I have archived it for posterity in my
http://slashdot.org/~christian.einfeldt/journal/223179
the parent up from the mere: "(Score:2, Insightful)".
The parent successfully upends the gp's analogies, and without being demeaning or degrading. Why the hell is mR.bRiGhTsId3's comment kept lower-scored than the comment it honestly, gently, genuinely upends, and even provides a solution to the false analogy? What is WITH this site?
Yet, again this underscores that the slashdot moderation system is not just broken, it's not got code in it to FORCE moderators to JUSTIFY and PROMOTE scoring rather than allow trite or ignorant scoring to defeat well-meaning, but better comments to be kept lower.
Sigh....
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
is that a few of the big software packages have not moved to Linux esp. the ones that are taking on MS directly. Had they done so it would equalize the playing field. Adobe and Intuit are taking on MS, but it is difficult when MS simply undercuts them. OTH, if they move to Linux, they force MS to meet them there as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I recommend decentralization of Ubuntu free CDs distribution to every nation in the world.
I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
Hey guys, it's not because of Windows or IE, it's because of office. If people use Ubuntu/Linux Desktop of choise, they won't be using Microsoft Office. On the Mac people might use Microsoft Office for the Mac but on Linux there is no such thing. Actually there is Codeweavers Crossover and even regular Wine. Anyway Microsoft cares for having their large share in Office market, because it creates file lock-in.
New things are always on the horizon
C'mon, you like Microsoft and you know it. All software is free. And, yes, I DO mean free as in freedom!
Ubuntu desktop might be targeting Microsoft!
Why on earth would Microsoft still care about Linux at this point?
Sure, you might still have the usual suspects running Ubuntu and/or Debian...but any opportunity Linux might have had to become genuinely mainstream is long gone (three years or so ago) by now.
Microsoft being worried about OSX genuinely makes sense, but them being scared of Ubuntu makes absolutely no sense at all.
OSX has taken care of every single problem that Linux was designed to solve. It is user-friendly UNIX, and has Open Group certification, and managed to do it while almost completely avoiding any association with the FSF, which means it doesn't damage the credibility of anyone who uses it.
OSX might not be free in either a monetary or ideological sense, no...but nobody who matters cares about that.
Linux is, therefore, now a solution to a problem that no longer exists.
Ok this isn't a troll, I just don't understand economics. Can somebody explain to me where "anti-competitive" fits into the "free market" model?
Surely "free market" means as little regulation as possible so if somebody can leverage advantage and beat competitors and keep on beating them by what ever means they use then this is just part of "the invisible hand of the market" and all that stuff? If Microsoft or another get really big and beat others down then this is just free market economics, linux will win if it is proved better but if it's not it loses? Doesn't 'stopping anti-competitive practices' mean state / international regulation of commerce to some degree, the acceptance of the need for controls with more power than the decisions of the market?
Disclaimer: I am actually a left of centre voting linux loving European (which probably makes me a near terrorist pinko commie in the USA, but round here just means I buy organic food sometimes and do a bit of voluntary work in my community ;-) )
Remember, it's not enough to win for Bill and Steve, they have to make sure someone LOSES.
Linux doesn't see it as a competition against windows to replace it. It's even said in another thread: "What's scary about a distro like Ubuntu is that it doesn't compete against Windows."
But Microsoft CANNOT act like that. It has to be seen to be winning. And their ideology means that Ubuntu is a competitor and must be killed.
an not Windows Live Messenger?
There are two sides to "interoperability". Windows could easily follow whatever Linux uses. I'm pretty sure there's no allowed documentation for the reverse to be true.
Microsoft is having a strange strategy now. Been in one of their "technology days" a few days ago. They were showing how good MySQL, PHP and Apache are working on Windows Server 2008.
One of the slides said: "Windows Server 2008 - a Powerful LAMP platform!". They definitely don't know what L in "LAMP" stands for.
So now they want all MySQL, PHP and Apache users to switch from Linux, then they will want them to switch to MS SQL, ASP.NET and IIS. Strange.
Chickens may have feathers.
Dogs may bark.
Geeks may view Slashdot.
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
Once you've made a switch it is just too expensive to switch back.
The only thing that changing to Linux has cost was time. I became useful experience in exchange. And the time I have spent -- I got it back by not dealing with Windows security anymore.
Now I have 6 PC's in my family (we badly need them for communication because we are spread thin across Europe). Only one of them came with XP Home preinstalled. I have either built the PC's myself or bought them without OS (one PC is a "defunct" throwaway I have repaired by installing Linux).
Consider what a switch to Windows (being it Vista or 7) would cost. First, I have to throw away at least 1 of our PC's. Maybe more -- there is no way of telling, you now, they don't offer LiveCDs so I could test without the need to reformat my hard drive. Secondly, I need to buy at least five copies cause I am not a small business and cannot buy volume licenses. And that amounts to about the cost of a new PC.
What for? I can't think of anything Windows is capable of that Linux distributions are not that is worth this money. Hardware support? All my hardware is Linux-supported, thanks (I buy only after research). Games? My parents and my sister are quite happy with their Wiis and rest of us either doesn't play at all or lives happy with dozens small games every Linux distribution is being supplied with. MS Office -- OOo compatibility is more than enough for us and MSO isn't cheap too.
Good point. 6 PCs, countless peripherials, most bought all bought after research, all works fine. No Linux support -- no money!
I dissagree with your 512 mb threshhold though. Linux works well on older hardware, you simply have to pick appropriate distribution. Of course, if you are not allowed to change anything on a machine, that's a different thing.
I have Puppy Linux on my USB stick for emergencies and ancient hardware :)
http://trends.google.com/trends?q=%22windows7%22%2C+ubuntu&ctab=0&geo=JP&geor=all&date=all&sort=1
which shows -me thinks- that Japanese folks gave Win 7 a brief look (the spike in the graph) and then said 'Nah' and went on with their business as usual.
A.C.
Working knowledge of x86 and ARM architectures a plus, but not required for candidates with strong aptitude.
Those using raw dpkg might struggle, and synaptic users needn't apply
When I say that I mean the way it is used currently as a Desktop OS. I've been using Linux a long time from the command line. Every now and then I pop my head up to see what's new in the desktop arena for Linux, but I'm always disappointed.
Here is what I think the problem is...
1. The GUIs are getting slower and slower.
2. Difficult for the GUI to take control of itself if a runaway process is eating up all the CPU time (Task Manger in Windows is much better).
3. Still not enough good hardware support. Configuring simple things like sound and desktop video modes are weak and buggy.
4. Playing movies is always a chore because one "good" media player does not exist for all possible video formats (you have to bounce between MPlayer, VLC, Noatun, KPlayer, etc).
5. Different programs compiled using different libraries (GTK, QT, XLib) all feel and look different. Simple and important features like Cut & Paste and object embedding don't always work between programs.
6. They are no good visual application development tools. A tool similar to Visual Studio is needed in Linux. IDE's like Netbeans and Eclipse are okay for small programs or web scripts, but simply doesn't cut it for full blown desktop application development.
There are more but you get the idea. In my opinion, if some of the above can remedied soon enough and Microsoft is stilling selling their latest OS in the same vein as Vista. Then yes, Linux would have a good chance on the desktop.
It's hard to compete with free. Macs are a niche market, and microsoft may have some under the table dealings with apple to keep it that way (notice how apple has done little or nothing to actually compete with windows other than some annoying pretentious commercials?) and microsoft actually bailed out apple a while back. Apple's around so microsoft doesn't get attacked by the SEC and broken apart for good. When you're the only one in town the government wants you to play fair and puts extra pressure on you, more than they're already getting.
However, with linux, linux is a genuine competitor, that actually has a good chance of one-upping microsoft. Relatively stable and secure code, updated often, etc. It also offers a perfect ui for those who want to check email and browse the net. Macs do too, but you need expensive specialized hardware; Linux doesn't. This is why microsoft wants them wiped out.