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.
After TWENTY FIVE years of effort.
2009-1992 = 17
Ok, SEVENTEEN. My point still remains. I'm just bad at math.
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
Yeah but if the growth goes exponential, it could be bad news for Redmond in a short amount of time. With other big vendors starting to use Ubuntu on their equipment (see HP and Dell), Microsoft had better be careful.
Personally, I think in the next 5-10 years, the market is going to go through a big equalization. Microsoft will still be important but not the huge Monopoly like they are now. The current recession is a good way to get the ball rolling on that. A lot of places are interested in switching to Linux-based OSes, but they don't want to deal with the costs associated and their current Windows stuff works.
But with Vista and Windows 7 being lackluster, it makes good business sense to start looking at migrating to other solutions. Linux is really the only other game in town. You can't "upgrade" to Mac OS X like you can upgrade any machine to Ubuntu and have it just work. And Ubuntu has made the GNU and Linux systems easy to use for anyone from Grandma to business drones.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
Maybe Microsoft has finally realized what the rest of the world knows. They simply have nothing new to offer. They have to find some way to beat Linux because they can't compete with it. It's only the momentum of their monopoly, 20+ years in the making, that is keeping them ahead now.
After releasing Windows XP-ME, er, Vista, it's obvious to see that Microsoft, despite its numerous "reboots" in the development process, is still so mired in its Soviet-style bureaucracy and upper management that thinks it is entitled to its 90%+ market share.
They are going to have to fall back on FUD more and more as more people (like me) are sharing success stories of unburdening themselves from Microsoft's shackles, even if the actual percentage of users is still small. What Microsoft is realizing is that number of people who are now seeing them as we've always known them to be, arrogant to the point of blindness, utterly contemptuous of users and completely beholden to their shady business practices and monopolistic behavior to be able to do anything else.
In short, time for more FUD.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
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?
Actually no it doesn't. When did this drive to the desktop actually start? in 1992? not likely..... Try maybe 1998 or something. So we are talking 10 years and developed by "volunteers". I would say that is a formidable threat to a multi-billion dollar international corporation. So laugh all you want, but if I were you I would get by (ba/c/tc/k)sh skills up..... Your gonna need them when your company says we are going linux. Windows admins need to get their resumes together.....
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?
Yes, but you forget that decent desktop environments have only been around since the early 2000's or so.
Look at what Nextstep did. They took BSD and made their OS built on that foundation. For a decade they sold it only to a select technical user base. During this time, they worked on improving the interface. Then Apple bought them used that as a base for Mac OSX. A little bit of polish and you have a very nice Operating System.
As you can see, there are many parallels there with Ubuntu and other nice Linux-based distros.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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
Maybe it's that mighty 2% market share. After TWENTY FIVE years of effort. Microsoft must be terrified at that sort of "rapid" growth.
Do u mean all linux had tried in past 17 years was to outpace MSFT in the *desktop* market and has failed.
Clue: there is something called a server market too.
You realize major PC vendors are now shipping Linux desktops on mainstream retail hard you can buy RIGHT NOW, right?
It's not exactly speculation... the Linux mothership is arriving and its pissed.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
If Microsoft would put half the effort into R&D that they put into "owning" the market they would crush everyone. I cannot believe that a company with their resources cannot come up with great new ideas in computing. They are being threatened by a bunch of "kids in their moms basements?" (I know that is BS) Really? If that is true then it is time for them to move aside.
All points of time and space are connected.
I just realized that the last sentence is much more funny for my UK friends.
Just say no to drunk driving, k? :)
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
Desktop environments only around since the early 2000s? I guess I just imagined all those PCs we had in high school.
Or is this one of those magical cases where you define "decent" as whatever it needs to be to make you right?
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
Sorry, I forgot to add "Linux desktop environments" for my context clue detection impaired buddies.
By decent, I mean ones that weren't fugly that revolve around terminal windows.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
It is GNU/Linux you insensitive clod!
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Hm. Is the fact that it's headed by a *white South African* entrepreneur related at all? Maybe that's Mark Shuttleworth's unique perspective at work - he has a country legacy of apartheid we don't have to deal with, so I think there's a background there somewhere.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If you try to start thinking straight for a second... ...you might start wondering about the correlation between the lowering prices of hardware and the impact this has on a company which depends on software license fees. There is a hard bottom limit to the price of any computing device with for-pay software: the price of the hardware (design, manufacture and distribution) + the ongoing costs of supporting said software + the desired profit for the software distributor. In case of Microsoft those profit margins are traditionally very high for the operating system and application software business, and that is the software which we're talking about here. The same hardware with for-free software can be priced much lower. Now that the for-free software is largely equivalent with the for-pay alternatives (and hold the incessant 'aslongasitdoesnotlookandworkexactlylikewindowsorofficeitisnotreadyforthedesktop' complaints) it is a very attractive proposition for a hardware manufacturer to use the for-free alternative. They can either keep the prices similar and reap much higher profits or lower the prices and most likely see higher sales, again leading to higher profits. They also don't have to bend to the will of an unreliable business partner which has shown time and time again that it has no qualms about backstabbing its partners.
Now I leave it to you as to whether free software is better than, worse than or equivalent to proprietary software. The answer to that question wholly depends on what you expect from the software, what you use it for, what you have used in the last few years and in what discipline you use the software. It has however become clear that for many common purposes there is free software which is fully adequate, and in several cases the free software is better than the closed alternatives.
--frank[at]unternet.org
A mac is expensive (i know, not always) and since OSX only comes with apple hardware (in theory) there isn't as much to worry about. With Ubuntu, any Dell, HP, Acer, etc, can have Ubuntu installed. That is a threat, since it runs on the hardware made by your best partners. Not to mention, new versions of Ubuntu (or other linux flavors) run great on Netbooks with a very small flash drive and ram. The only comparable Microsoft product is 9 years old, and about to be two versions behind.
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
and it's already happened with the HP 1000 which has a very nice GUI on top of Ubuntu.
Windows is slow, buggy and not a good desktop as well.
And it's the market leader.
What's your point?
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
I get less than 1%, and with a growth rate of only around 40% over the last two years there's really nothing to be afraid of?
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.
Someone should move you to marketing, Sir. "X is so great that everyone will want it!" is the standard cry of any corporation (when they want your money) and cult (when they want your love).
Also, I "bothered to write so much" because, unlike the average Linux geek, I am aware of the power of good and bad marketing. Anything that patronises black men by making sure to "token black" every page is likely to discourage them from using it.
To put it bluntly, you don't appeal to someone of a particular race/gender by making sure to display a smiling photo of that race/gender in artificial proportions that would never have come from chance.
See how Apple does it? See how their efforts are more advanced than I'd-like-to-buy-the-world-a-Coke groups of smiling twenty-somethings (I guess Ubuntu's not for anyone not 18 to 30)? Good. Now learn. Because for all the supposed technical appeal of Linux, it's doing really badly at targetting the average desktop user, and you're not going to get anywhere by blaming people who try to offer constructive criticism.
w32 can keep its lions share - that way the malware writers don't target much else and all the clueless users clog up the windows forums, leaving a high signal to noise ratio in the unix groups.
It is not immoral to create the human species - with or without ceremony, Samuel Clemens.
2009 is going to be the year of linux on the desktop! THIS time I mean it! Not like the other TWENTY FIVE times.
In the last 6 months, 3 real persons (not geeks) around me migrated from Windows to Ubuntu. Before that, nobody that I am aware of.
I am still happy with my Mac OS X, which is much more polished. But I am glad to have a fallback solution for the day when Apple begins to behave badly...
maybe it is a response to this benchmark :)
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/05/1919259
This is slashdot if you are going to post something like that we require proper regex syntax.
m/(ba|c|tc|k)sh/
Thank you
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.
2% might not be much, but the rise (and fall) of linux (like all things in statistics) will be a bell curve. 2% is the bit where the graph starts to look pointy.
That said, first microsoft have to do something about the fact that half of their customer base can't tell the difference between windows 7 and kubuntu..
http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/software/soa/Is-it-Windows-7-or-KDE-4-/0,139023769,339294810,00.htm
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
if linux makes a version that any idiot could install their fucked.
Let Microsoft go after Ubuntu. Because Ubuntu is slow, buggy, and not a good desktop.
I don't know which Ubuntu you are talking about but the three machines that I run don't have any problems that they wouldn't have under (or because of) Vista. And I can maintain all three free of cost. Let's not forget that Ubuntu still beats Vista in benchmarks. A "good desktop" is a matter of expectation. Ubuntu with it's GNOME interface is much more than Windows ever was for me. Just because it doesn't fulfill your expectations doesn't mean it's not a good desktop. Windows doesn't fulfill mine ... so what do you say to that?
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.
With Microsoft it's literally IMPOSSIBLE for an end user to track and patch bugs. So you're saying?
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.
Correction: It's a FREE Ferrari that outruns the MS Ferrari at many many occasions and you don't have to buy a special screwdriver for thousands of dollars to open the hood. What is KDE then? A Lamborghini in first gear? Same here, they do a lot of stuff but it has it's problems too. Yeah, the lack of dedicated mechanics makes GNU/Linux less competitive in some areas (namely gaming) but that's not Linux' fault but that the mechanics focus on making more money with special screwdrivers. If some more people would dedicate their time to improve OpenSource interfaces like GNOME, KDE, Xfce, E17 etc. you'd probably get the results you're demanding. Right now there is not much of a coordinated effort to push this into the right direction because the people who COULD work on this are either to busy making money in the closed source market or don't care about Linux at all.
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.
Oh so you're just a KDE fanboy? Nevermind that KDE copies Windows usability in all aspects even the bad ones. I like what GNOME does and compared to KDE4 I'd choose it any time of the day. Simply because every time I start KDE I'm reminded why I stopped using Windows in the first place.
Btw. in case you didn't realize it. The Ubuntu Desktop is all variants of Ubuntu. They're not losing market share to GNOME they're losing market share to free Linux distributions with usable interfaces. Which includes RedHat and as window manager your beloved KDE.
Actually it will be just like that other twenty five times with a small but steady and increasing GROWTH rate.
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 think you're partially correct in your statement. They *do* put a LOT of money into research, and do actually grind out some interesting ideas, prototypes, etc. Where they seem to be dropping the ball is turning those ideas into marketable, usable commercial products.
I think it has to do with Apple's culture. They don't want to be the next Windows, in fact they like to openly mock Windows. The want to stay exclusive and cater to their niche.
There's a reason you don't see Ferarri trying to compete with Chevrolet's economy cars.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
Microsoft has been actively fighting FLOSS since at least 1998. Just read Halloween documents or internal documents regarding EDGI group from Iowa case (dated 2002 IIRC) with ist infamous "under NO circumstances lose to Linux" quote.
You may also read Bill Gates' concernes about how they can cripple ACPI so Linux won't be able to use it (they have made their own DSDT compiler which allows for much more errors than industry-standard intel compiler Linux uses).
They were afraid back then and fought tooth and nails, they continue to do it now. And if you read the documents I mention, you'll see that they have understood that the relative success of Linux on servers was due to open standards. What we have now is that main reasons which hinder Linux' adoption has nothing to do with Linux itself. Office formats, Exchange, DirectX, ActiveX -- all of the above are closed standards and technologies not to mention crippled HTML. Combine that with iron grip on OEM's and you'll get some more reasons for relatively slow growth.
Ultra-cheap netbooks and falling hardware prices have changed the landscape though. Now MS isn't able to threat OEM's with raising per-CPU lincense costs if they sell something else pre-installed. They have prolonged XP's live and give it away for a bargain price instead. They will be able to maintain their grip for some time but this time they'll have to lower the prices. Sure, they remain profitable as all they sell is hot air, but they'll raise much less money than expected.
I sort of agree with your general message, but I would recommend not to write in such a hostile tone if you want people to listen. And you may think that your tone was not hostile, but thats the way it comes across.
Furthermore, you may want to think about whether most people really DO care about it as much as you think - they might not. Personally it bothers me as well, because as you said, the entire thing looks/feels artificial. But I still use ubuntu for its own merits.
Also there is more than one measure of pace for the desktop market.
There is the measure that compares number of desktops running system A vs system B.
There is also the number of new desktops that run a vs b.
Also keep in mind that many of the Linux systems are often reported twice as dual boot systems with both windows and Linux.
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.
Dude "Scratch an Itch"? You do know that philosophy has been mostly out for nearly a decade now? You do know that most Linux development is down by programmers who are being paid by a company to do so?
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.
In Soviet Mircrosoft the Operating System owns You.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
that is 40% pro anno, sorry.
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
Don't forgot hexboots like mine! Not kidding! XP, 7, Gentoo, Arch, openSUSE, and Ubuntu. Sometimes i set Firefox's useragent to IE/Windows Vista for compatability and forget to reset it too. And that carries across all 4 linux OSes with their shared /home directory (lets see MS do THAT!)
You have no idea how to extrapolate? What's your education level?
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
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.
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 ----
I agree, 25 does seem a bit on the low side...
Just remember all the Internet-Years in between 1995-2000 alone! ;-)
You are right! Only a fool would mess around with Linux for a DVR. Linux is clearly not capable of such tasks. You should stop wasting your time and just get a TiVo.
-rd
"A mac is expensive (i know, not always)"
Yea, sometimes they're SUPER expensive!
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
I cannot believe that a company with [Microsoft's] resources cannot come up with great new ideas in computing.
Microsoft employees come up with all sorts of new ideas, but the company they work for consistently fails to execute.
I sometimes wonder if it's because the smartest people (those who have the luxury of ethics) usually choose to work elsewhere, and if they don't, their brilliance is stifled by the fools around (and especially above) them.
I think Microsoft will make an intriguing case study for years to come.
http://outcampaign.org/
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
Species 8472? It was Voyager that negotiated a truce in exchange for detailing how to defeat 8472 (reprogrammed nanites?).
It's not the install that is the problem..
It's getting your wireless headphones, web cam, windows only software such as game to work that is the problem.
The install is much better than windows and has been for years. Post install is where the problems occur, the highest one being on my list right now being sound and the mess which surrounds it.
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 know, usually things that are 17 years old are very ready for my desktop. If I like the performance, I may just take it to the kitchen table!
2% might not be much, but the rise (and fall) of linux (like all things in statistics) will be a bell curve. 2% is the bit where the graph starts to look pointy.
2%? Everyone knows the 3dB point is where it all starts to change.
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.
The desktop PC market is ENORMOUS. 2% of a gigantic market is still tens of millions of machines. MS of course wants to turn these tens of millions of systems that aren't paying for their software into ones that are.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
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.
I hate to break this to you, but the nerds already took over... ever seen Bill Gates?
This is more like Nerds: The Next Generation. ;)
Far superior and less campy than the original.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
Underpaid: a lot of us do it because it's fun, too, and we can sleep at night. We're kind of like nurses and teachers that way.
Actually you CAN double click to install applications on Linux. See Applications -> Add/Remove software. It's actually easier to use than Windows, since you can just search for what you want, click on it, and it's done, no need to schlep to a store, enter a product key, insert a USB dongle or whatever.
For applications that are not part of a distro, there is Autopackage - http://autopackage.org/ . We use it for Oolite. Our Oolite autopackage installer is a simple double click on pretty much any Linux install that came out in the last 5 or 6 years. Autopackage is better than Windows installer as it includes dependency resolution (yes, Windows packages often have dependency hell, especially Windows server software).
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Absolute bullshit. I have many friends who are both tech suave and aware of Linux and I'm the only one who runs it at all and I still won't run it as my main. This rambling on about much it works out of the box is a lot of propaganda. And when it comes to basic functionality out of the box Windows does just as good there for the average home user. If you don't already know, let me clue you in: the average home user never touches a spreadsheet app, a database app or a presentation app. That's why MS has been offering up Word without office through a lot of OEMs.
The Average person on the street simply isn't interested in Linux. It's a large Slashdot spun fallacy that the majority of Windows users are pulling their hair out over issues that exist in Windows and don't exist in Ubuntu. It's also a fallacy that a majority of Windows users are frustrated over Vista. A Majority have never even seen Vista. Those who I know who run Vista have had no real issues with it.
Also note that the difference between Slashdot and the real world is that a large number of users out there do not care about the politics of open source versus closed source. Most people do not want to see Microsoft die. Most people don't hold a grudge against Bill Gates. Infact, more people probably admire the man than those who detest him. He's an icon of success to most people.
Until you Linux advocacy bunch can join us in the real world you'll never understand why Linux has taken roughly two decades to do what Apple has surpassed 5 fold in the past 2-3 year. It's not about the politics, it's not about open source. People really don't care about these things but these are the first two things off most of your lips. You guys are desperate to fight the good fight but, plainly, it's getting you nowhere. Most people just don't have that kind of attachment to their OS and, frankly, it makes you guys come off like loons to people who just want a working computer and not a soap opera or a political campaign.
Since Ubuntu is a UK distribution with a company registered in the UK, a website hosted in the UK and is in no way related to Africa apart from the name could you respectfully shut up with the off topic black suppression speeches or at least come back with something insightful to say which isn't troll gibberish.
So why exactly don't you double click on the .deb?
Downloading the .deb is an unnecessary extra step unless you are trying to install something not in the repos (skype, opera).
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.
Besides, MS can always undercut Apple in price. If Linux ever gains widespread acceptance, where is Microsoft's price floor then?
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
At first I laughed and called the devices "crack-berries" as everyone else did. Now, I think I am seeing the beginning of a trend away from the classic desktop. I am getting more an more communication from them via Blackberries than their desktops. All they need in the future is SAP access via Blackberry and their contact with me could be mobile from that point on. It's not likely to happen soon because the company would be very skittish about allowing confidential company data to flow over the air like that, but I am starting to wonder.
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
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.
Citation needed.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
You can install linux on any PC. Can't say the same about a mac.
The only way to reduce windows' market share, without flooding the market with a billion macs, is by intsalling linux on those PCs. MS is terrified of the move to slower PCs, like what's happening thanks to the Atom, because it means they can't force people into new machines for new Windows, which means OEMs lose out, which means they won't have to stick with MS anymore.
There's living proof of this MS/OEM push forward .Like it or not, Vista was good for something: The price of RAM and a lot of other hardware parts dropped dramatically (RAM is climbing back up because of a German DRAM company going belly-up, but there's already so much DRAM on shelves that this won't impact supply).
Think about it. Convert all of those Win95/98/ME/2k boxes into Linux. And in two years, all of those XP boxes into Linux. Linux forced them to rethink their strategy.
I know. I really don't expect the Mac fad to last for yet another 25 years, do you?
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Bug Number One
I bought one four years ago. works beautifully. The wife uses it. She knows it's not a Windows machine, because I told her. It just works for her. I showed her the Firefox icon and told her to click that for the internet and she is totally happy.
My plan is to introduce her to OpenOffice.org when she needs word-processor or spreadsheet capabilities. This should work just fine as she rarely brings work home with her. Besides, I think her office uses the 2003 suite, so this might be easier to pull off than I think. :)
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
Was 2008. Microsoft blamed the failure to meet their latest quarterly numbers on netbooks, i.e. having to sell XP cheap to actually compete for once.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Ninnle? what is this with Ninnle?
He said decent desktop environments. Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98se, me, xp.....oh fuck it none of them are decent.
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?
m/(ba|c|tc|k)?sh/
Facebook is the new AOL
pervert
If you're a big company, you've got a lot of recorded history that you legally must keep. The bigger you are, the more this is true.
If you've got a legacy of MS documents that you can't easily move, you're kind of stuck with MS.
This represents an increasing amount of costs that you must pay before you make or sell anything whatsoever, just to be allowed to operate.
Meanwhile, new companies who do not have that legacy can use free software to handle their administration, and they don't have to pay the "MS tax." This means that they can be less efficient, have lower economy of scale, but still be more competitive than the established businesses.
MS is never going to open up their technology. Financially, it's better for their investors to watch it waste away to meaninglessness and gain tax benefits from the depreciation than to do so.
Personally, I think the final legacy of Microsoft will be the death of a multitude of business enterprises that have stood for decades. In the end, the decision to participate in Bill's little scheme is going to kill businesses, and the bigger and more firmly established they are, the more they are at risk.
In a way, it might even make the whole Microsoft experience worthwhile in the end, like yucky medicine that makes your whole body convulse with disgust but poisons the cancers in you and causes them to die...
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
"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
I think the world is waking up that these kind of practices are anti-competitive in any market. For too long people seamed to think IT was an exception and ignored 'nerds' pointing to problems with anti-competitive practices. I think MS are going to find foul play harder and harder to get away with. They will be forced to competitive on equal terms. Lack of competition equals expensive and rubbish, which even the most docile consumer will notice. One day the question will come up how can you ever compete equally with a company's software if they do the operating system too. As for MS targeting Ubuntu, no publicity is bad publicity, and people will question why are they so bothered?
Ubuntu also means kubuntu, which is the KDE version of Ubuntu, so it's not ubuntu vs. KDE.
As for KDE 4.2, it really is a nice looking desktop, and even though it looks a lot like Windows' particularly on default installation, it's easy to customize it and make it look different. With Windows you hardly have anything like the options KDE gives you.
I've been a GNOME guy for awhile but KDE 4.2 has me hooked.
Exactly. If you're talking 2% of the desktop market, that's two machines per every hundred. If the desktop market is a billion users, Linux gets twenty million. That's a lot of people Microsoft wants on their side.
"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
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).
Please everybody, stop using the M word so lightly. Monopoly is more about lack of free entry than market share. The Federal Reserve is a monopoly in issuing money. Google is not a monopoly in search engines.
And Windows 7 is really far better than Vista. I'm typing this on Ubuntu 9.04 alpha 3, but gotta give some credit for them for fixing that huge pile of Vista.
Send your spendthrift head of state this
I agree. Every few years Microsoft was able to up the ante of the hardware requirements: XP needed more computer than 98, 98 needed more than MS-DOS, etc. But they tried the same strategy with Vista, and it failed. They've run out of ways to make their users upgrade, aside from a few UI polishes that really only the MS fans care about (and DirectX 10, of course). Rather than upgrade to Vista or 7 to get some new features and improvements, people move to Linux for free rather than suffer through the purchase of a new computer. Microsoft is worried that if people have an alternative for XP they won't buy a new computer; hence, they won't be buying Windows 7 or Word or whatever.
"f you've got a legacy of MS documents that you can't easily move, you're kind of stuck with MS."
There's a lot of truth in this, but just the same, for the vast majority of organizations it's the content of those documents which is really important, not the exact layout (think about how quickly in real terms most large organizations managed to transform all those business-essential forms and documents from paper to electronic form - less than a decade for most - and that was a much more costly transition in terms of the human hours involved than merely reformatting some .doc-formatted files).
My suspicion is in years to come there's going to be a lot of demand for tools like the (open source) Australian government-funded Xena, an "XML Normalizing tool" for converting almost any digital document format you care to name to an open XML format for archiving and re-use.
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.
No, Windows 7 is a lot of paid hoopla and shinanigans going on.
It's basically just Windows Mojave again a slightly different interface tacked onto it to make it seem more less of a change. Granted, Vista wasn't as bad as most people make it out to be.
And I'm typing this on Windows 7.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Linux has far more marketshare in servers than Microsoft does.
Search for it.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Ubuntu does marketing AT ALL? They have their whole "brown" thing going on, but other than the smiling happy people on the Ship-It cover (which were picked to match the Ubuntu logo colors) they aren't really trying. Yet.
what is it about desktop Linux
Maybe it's the fact that no-one really knows how big the Linux share really is. The Linux "share of the market" is undefined, since it doesn't really take part in the "market" as such. The Mac or Windows share can (I guess) more or less be inferred from their bottom line on the balance sheet, but unless Linux users take the trouble to register at the Linux counter, the only stats that are available have to come from their browsers' useragent tagline, which is easily spoofed for convenience.
actually with that FOSS is your friend. Open Office works better with Office 97 documents than MSFT word 2007 does. Up until at least 2003 a lot of legal departments were using Corel office as that is what they had all their stuff for the past decade.
you want to open tons of random and obscure formats then only FOSS apps supports them all. Comapnies that are stuck with MS Office are begiinng to realize that archiving it requires tons of secondary apps that either cost lots of money or FOSS products that can be upgraded to new hardware/software combinations faster and with minimal effort.
You have a format that only worked in Red Hat 5.0's version of star office. you have the source. you can pay someone to install that app to run, or pull out the format from the source and make a converter for it.
When office 95 doc's don't open for you right you can only beg MSFT to fix it, or try to manually convert them all, however they are giant binary blobs.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
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.
Brig it on!
Maybe it's that mighty 2% market share. After TWENTY FIVE years of effort. Microsoft must be terrified at that sort of "rapid" growth.
Growth is probably exponential, which would justify Microsoft's worry.
Go visit the Microsoft Research website. It might be informative for you.
You know sir that Tivo runs Linux?
Thanks for the tip! :)
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.
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.
Looks fake to me.
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.
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!
Why?
I believe a man should be allowed to drink his scotch anywhere he likes - drinking on the desktop or kitchen table does not a pervert make!!
http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
m/([bd]?a|t?c|[kz])?sh/
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.
..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.
That is the case today, and only for the higher end games and poorly written software. However considering how far linux (and especially Ubuntu) has come in terms of hardware support in the past few years, it's only a matter of time before decent software support is available. Locking people out of the newer Direct X upgrades, like Microsoft did with Vista/DX 10 - can only play into our hands. Every day wine and cedega get better.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
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.
Big companies do not encourage innovation (although Google seems to try). Big companies have many mechanisms for mitigating risk.
Innovation is risk personified. The reason garage startups could penetrate the IT market was because they were small - they had one product. Win or lose. People like that are focussed on making their one product fantastic. They go the extra mile.
Software doesn't need big capital for development (you need a computer and an reasonable supply of Xena tapes and Hot Pockets). So, for an MS sized R&D budget, you could foster a very large number of garage startups, any of which could produce the New Hotness. Only that's not what happens - big heaps of money develop this crawling infestation of MBAs that try their darndest to prevent the money blowing away, which means not taking risks with it. Anything that is not understood is a risk. If they understood the New Hotness already, they'd be selling it. So paradoxically, the New Hotness is less likely to emerge from organisations with R&D budgets to rival Steve Ballmer's Ikea bills.
Wow, you got Windows 7 to connect to a network. I decided to give it a spin and it didn't detect the VirtualBox network adapter. As far as I can see, it has no log telling me which hardware it has no drivers for, and I've never had to manually install a network driver within VirtualBox (even for previous Microsoft operating systems) so have no idea what to do.
Follow me
Exactly!
-rd
You might wanna get some scuba gear on...the grandparent post has the sarcasm up to your neck and you didn't catch it...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Excuse me...some of those things "Joe Sixpack" wants are where the damn security issues with Windows comes from .
The customer's MOSTLY right MOST of the time. The customer always being right lets you have them walk all over them and sometimes they're just so wrong they should be told so. Nicely, mind, but told all the same.
And it doesn't happen the way you talk to in your examples in most cases. Spare us the crap, please.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
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.
Once you go *nix you never go...back.
Windows 7 hasn't even fucking been released yet!!!
Are people so totally deluded with Linux that they have lost rational thought? Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only sane man on Slashdot.
Or, more appropriately, shell syntax
{ba,c,tc,k,}sh
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.
You have a format that only worked in Red Hat 5.0's version of star office. you have the source.
Actually, StarOffice was closed source back then.
So what? Windows became leader because it *was* the best desktop (at least, the one that offered the best value) at one time. It became the leader then, and since then, it has maintained that position aided by monopolistic practices. All this is commonplace.
And I say, it's better for them to distract their gaze on slow, buggy implementation of Linux while the best ones (say, LinuxMint, PCLinuxOS, gah... there are many of them) begin to steal MS's lunch.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
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
That's a good clarification, and was sorely needed after the flames of some less enlightened Ubutu fanbois.
However, I'd like to point out that there are several problems with Kubuntu's implementation of KDE 4.x. You can also check this. Funny thing is, most of the problems people experience with Ubuntu are absent in other distros (e.g., in my box I use Slackware and I haven't seen those horror stories).
That's why I say that Ubuntu is buggy. Ubuntu's QA needs to be better, and the distro layout should be better (i.e., include Flash and Java out of the box, make things stable, and so on).
Ubuntu undoubtedly has potential; but there's something that's killing them. I don't know what it is, but it's making them do releases that are more and more unstable. In this way, they negate whatever advantage they could get. ("Linux? Oh yea, it came in my netbook but I wiped it clean, it never got my screen right and apps crashed every time!").
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
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.
What you are talking about is not monopoly but contestability of monopolies
Let's agree that the Linux Desktop still needs polishing.
And KDE4 needs to mature.
Basically it is all about bug hunting.
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.
Agreed in a 99%. My only nitpick is that depending on the user's level of technical wizardry, there might be a Linux desktop good enough for him.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
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.
Oh boy, let's see...
I ain't saying nothin'. It's the users the ones who are doin' the talkin'. Ubuntu is buggy. Period. The fact that Vista, or any Windows for that regard, might be buggy too, does not invalidate that perception.
Don't compare apples to oranges. Compare Ubuntu (a distro, or a complex of distros) to other distros: CentOS, PCLinuxOS, LinuxMint, Mandriva, OpenSUSE, Slackware... you get the idea.
I stand by my point. Putting a slow, buggy distro with a GNOME frontend = big mess. I've seen that before (summoning Red Hat Linux versions from the dead...).
You might get a decent implementation of GNOME on another distro, who knows... (Debian, perhaps?). You might also get a good, stable distro who also happens to be very fast (Vector Linux).
But these two damning factors (GNOME and a slow, buggy linux) are present in Ubuntu and this is a trend that is only going to get worse as far as I can see.
Having that handed out as a flagship Linux desktop is like having a Ferrari in first gear.
btw, want a decent Linux desktop and don't want to use KDE? Great, just use XFce, which is a great desktop too.
So, who is the fanboi here...? ;-)
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
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"
The Windows desktop is twenty-five years old. OS X (via NeXT) is over twenty years old. The first versions of Gnome and KDE are barely over ten. Does Linux Lag Windows? If So, Why?
Put identity in the browser.
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"
So we are talking 10 years and developed by "volunteers"
The actual progress on the desktop Linux has begun when the likes of RedHat, IBM and Google started actively sponsoring select F/OSS projects.
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.
Pervert.
You've argued that kubuntu may have a few quirks (your first link, I think, if anything argues against you though) but not ubuntu... You haven't really backed up at all what you've said.
I can't vouch for KDE 4.x beyond 4.2, which is what I'm using now, and I'm loving it on kubuntu.
As for "normal users", I installed ubuntu hardy heron for some computer-clueless person and they've had no problem with it, it does everything they need it to.
Yes, I was talking about monopoly.
The classical economists were correct to define it as the grant of exclusive right to a given trade by the sovereign.
'Contestability of monopolies' is a word game. If there are competitors on the market, then there isn't a monopoly to begin with.
Send your spendthrift head of state this
I could handle a smartphone dock, especially if it contained a "co-processor" or something similar and used some kind of standard interface. I hope that's the way things move in the future.
Put identity in the browser.
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
Good replies. And you did more work than I did.
I couldn't figure out where the name came from. I just stumbled on Mark's bio and took a guess.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I don't really forget. I think adding a browser and an email client falls under "owning" the market. I am sure they can do lots of nice things with current tech as far as windows is concerned. I was kind of talking about them using their might to advance a new computing paradigm. Whatever that is....
I get that their hands are tied in many ways. Unfortunately there are rules, and even the companies that are wildly successful have to follow them.
All points of time and space are connected.
What about FISH shell? http://www.fishshell.org/
It's built for humans, not shell scripts, so it's a lot more amenable to everyday use.
Consider yourself spoken to.
Getting your Windows-only software to work with Mac is much harder, but people seem to have no problem there. Why is that?
PulseAudio is a mess right now and the Linux desktop is in the worst shape it has been for years because of it. Fedora claims that's all under control now, though, so some relief may be in view.
Put identity in the browser.
The Gnome 2 move was inspired from Sun's usability study on Gnome 1. The HIG gives quite a few references: http://library.gnome.org/devel/hig-book/stable/id2671625.html.en and there are others: http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1146301 who agree.
Put identity in the browser.
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!
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 ;-) )
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!
Oh for fuck's sake. Have you never heard of "add/remove programs" or synaptic - both available in Ubuntu? The *only* common reason command line stuff gets recommended for software installs in forums like the Ubuntu forums is because you can just copy-and-paste it easily.
I looked at all of these links and personally I never experienced ANY of these bugs during my 2 1/2 years with Ubuntu. I did have some problems, granted, but I also installed Windows XP at least 20 times in 3 years because it screwed itself up so badly that it couldn't be saved. So this is a common experience for all OSs. I don't want to play that blame-game anymore. Windows is buggy, Linux is buggy. Windows has shit support hotlines and costs lots of money, Linux has enthusiastic users (which sometimes don't know their ass from their face) but is free. Some of the things you linked here were "I hate Ubuntu because I had that problem" type blogs. No explanation of what actually happened just "I used it and it was shit". A post titled "Ubuntu sucks ... get a Mac" is not exactly what I would want to use to make a point. One of the things you linked was an OpenOffice bug. How do you make an argument out of that. That's like saying "MS Access crashed on my SQL database ... windows sucks". Apples and Peaches wha...?
Ubuntu is buggy. Period. The fact that Vista, or any Windows for that regard, might be buggy too, does not invalidate that perception.
Ack! You're right about that. But let's be fair. You use Ubuntu's bugginess to discredit it as a "good desktop" and I do the same for several Windows versions. We're all happy.
Don't compare apples to oranges. Compare Ubuntu (a distro, or a complex of distros) to other distros: CentOS, PCLinuxOS, LinuxMint, Mandriva, OpenSUSE, Slackware... you get the idea.
It was YOU who started the apples and oranges cars against Operating systems analogy. Nevermind.
I stand by my point. Putting a slow, buggy distro with a GNOME frontend = big mess. I've seen that before (summoning Red Hat Linux versions from the dead...).
You might get a decent implementation of GNOME on another distro, who knows... (Debian, perhaps?). You might also get a good, stable distro who also happens to be very fast (Vector Linux).
But these two damning factors (GNOME and a slow, buggy linux) are present in Ubuntu and this is a trend that is only going to get worse as far as I can see.
Maybe slow and buggy is the compromise to make for the regular user? No, but seriously. I use Ubuntu for a while now, I did have problems, still have some inexplicable bugs but compared to some of the other distros the work that has been put into the usability outweighs these minor flaws for me. Compared to the non-existing debugging in Windows I even fixed a host of my problems myself simply by analyzing the error logs and actually looking through the sources. That might not be the average user's business but at least I can do it here. Back to Linux in General: I tried installing Arch Linux one of the distros that is heralded as exquisit, I got it onto my machine and got stuck. Gentoo, same thing, compiling everything as a guy like me with ten years Windows experience and all time already spent on learning other Linux basics? I tried but failed miserably. I don't know
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.
OTOH, Apple has been at it since 1984 with the Macintosh.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Nevermind me. If we went back to 1994 and subjected YOU
to a Windows machine, you would be the very first person to
whine that such a machine doesn't have a "decent" desktop.
Some of us (namely ME) even went so far to try and use
3rd party desktop replacements.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You and 3 of your friends...
In 1987 the average PC wasn't up to Windows.
HELL, in 1995, the average PC wasn't up to Windows.
It was still a swapping nightmare.
Windows didn't become somewhat usable until after the 1996 crash in RAM prices. ...that and being more of a Mac clone also helped.
Windows was around mostly in name only in the 80s.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The only downside I see in lacking Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 Linux support is that Blizzard have lost a customer. I don't want to hand out additional 100$ in order to simply being able play their game. Many Linux users would support a vendor who makes good quality games for their favorite platform (I bought Penumbra Black Plague last year). Sure, our numbers are small but there are still more Linux users then WoW players not to mention good publicity among the geeks.
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 :)
Believe me, after living for a decade in the United Stats, the Australian Government looks incredibly professional and competent..
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
Windows 7 finally breaks the mould, it comes with flashing eyes!
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.
Only in the most marginal sense could Apple be said to compete with Microsoft. Apple competes with HP and Dell.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
A granted monopoly is a priviledge.
A monopoly is a superdominant position in the market (empirical).
Firefox could become a monopoly in the market, IE is.
If we regard the monopolist as a winner in a winner-takes-all scenario where it wins based on its merits, e.g. because firefox is the best and most user friendly browser, there is nothing wrong about that.
If the monopoly is contestable a better market player on performance based criteria can overtake the role of the leader.
In a two party system the winning party takes all the minister seats, the other party becomes the opposition. But that "monopoly" is contestable in elections as opposed to a single party system.