Slashdot Mirror
Bashing MS 'Like Kicking a Puppy,' Says Jim Zemlin
jbrodkin writes "Two decades after Linus Torvalds developed his famous operating system kernel, the battle between Linux and Microsoft is over and Linux has won, says Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin. With the one glaring exception of the desktop computer, Linux has outpaced Microsoft in nearly every market, including server-side computing and mobile, Zemlin claims. 'I think we just don't care that much [about Microsoft] anymore,' Zemlin said. 'They used to be our big rival, but now it's kind of like kicking a puppy.' From Android and the Amazon Kindle to embedded devices, consumer electronics and the world's largest websites and supercomputers, 'Linux has come to dominate almost every category of computing, with the exception of the desktop,' Zemlin argues as Linux approaches its 20th anniversary."
So 2011 will be the year of the Linux desktop, right?
Linux has gained recognition. It's something that IT managers won't usually dismiss immediately. Sure, that's important, but the average user out there still doesn't know that Linux exists, let alone what it is. There's a long road ahead of us, even longer than the path we've just traveled. Wear good shoes.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
You're assuming the one goal of Linux (and by that, I mean the community around Linux and other FOSS projects) is to beat MS
While some may wish to see Linux raise above Windows in market dominance, others (and I wager, most) do not see this as important, and only wish to produce a better suite of software than MS
In this, Linux has most definitely won
and it won many years ago
But MS is still really big in the server market. Yes, Linux is big in webserver market. However that isn't the only server market out there.
Where MS is really big server (and desktop) wise is enterprise servers. Active Directory really works well and a lot of companies use it. No, OpenLDAP is NOT "just as good" or any of that jazz. I'm not saying AD is the One True Way(tm) but it is good and there's a reason a lot of companies like it.
This "Linux has beaten MS," crap is just that: crap. Linux is doing well and that is wonderful. However it hasn't "won" by any measure. Rather they are finding different markets. Linux is not popular on the desktop and it does not seem to be headed there. However embedded it has really found its niche and has become extremely popular.
Neither has won, neither has lost, they both continue to exist alongside one another.
'Linux has come to dominate almost every category of computing, with the exception of the desktop' The desktop still dominates every other category of computing combined. Zemlin's statement that Linux has won is disingenuous.
The XBOX 360 begs to differ. Where exactly is the open source video game console that is dominating the home market? Linux and FOSS more broadly has done some incredible things, but let's be real.
Windows Server may not be as dominate as Linux but it certainly is not dead. They compete in every server category and have decent market share while it is not dominate like desktops it is still a multi-billion dollar business that is certainly successful. Active Directory, SQL Server, ASP.Net, IIS these are all major products that run on WIndows Server, you can find thousands of jobs on any major job search engine. I think it is a mistake to say MS only has desktop operating systems, it is clearly still a player in the server market.
The problem with giving the desktop market to Microsoft means that corporations are stuck with a Microsoft-heavy server environment too and it's hard to move to other server platforms.
Once you include Active Directory, print servers, fileservers, sharepoint, system center, exchange, sql server and other support servers to run it all, a mid-sized company might have 20 or more servers just to run their Microsoft infrastructure. (many of those applications *could* run on Linux, but MS products integrate together and have interdependencies that make it hard to break loose)
So since they are already paying for Windows Admins to run their Windows infrastructure, when it comes time to add a web or application server, the easy choice is to go with MS -- licensing doesn't cost much more on top of their existing MS licensing costs and they already have Windows expertise in house.
It seems that where Linux has succeeded is where Linux is completely hidden behind the scenes, as far as the consumer is concerned. Even in the case of Android, with a stock device, it would be utterly impossible to know it was running Linux. In fact, there's an entire Java layer between the user and Linux. My point is that Linux, the brand, has failed when it comes to the masses. In other words, Linux has done well where companies can take their time and make an informed decision about which OS they wish to embed in their hardware. That is where Linux has succeeded, and a big part of that is simply that Linux is stable, supports ubiquitous hardware, and is free. But as far as end consumers choosing Linux, that hasn't happened yet.
Better known as 318230.
Well put. They're dominant on the desktop and they own office productivity. They're strong in the server market and they're strong in the gaming market. I'd guess they're not doing too shabby with set-top devices (all uverse devices is quite big in itself). And let's be realistic, you can't count them out of the 10,000 other markets they have their fingers in. They have a certain history of throwing money at some things until they win (xbox, anyone?).
That's hardly a sad-little-puppy situation.
This is just an absurd conversation that has gone on far too long.
The way of measuring your own success should not be dependant on somebody else's market share, or even relative to it. It should be based on your own mission and your own goals. There's plenty of market for everyone in the world to be successful if they want it badly enough. Linux is certainly doing well, and revenues and profits at Microsoft seem healthy as well -- so I don't get this obession with MS.
I don't get the obsession with stamping out proprietary software either. It's a choice that some companies make for their business model, and a choice that some customers make for their software (not choosing proprietary so much as choosing software that is proprietary because it meets their needs). It's a proven and successful business model too -- just like FOSS. You can have failures/successes in FOSS and you can have that with proprietary software as well. People just seem to be on the lookout for something to get inflamed about all the time. Absolutely nothing of interesting here.
You guys bitch and moan when some Microsoft shill pumps up Microsoft; well, this is some Linux shill pumping up Linux. I don't give this guy any more credence then I would Steve Ballmer.
It has very little to do with the distro; the problem is largely with hardware support and software availability. Even Ubuntu, arguably the most user-friendly distro has problems with sound playback on modern, commonly available sound hardware. Maybe I don't mind running 'sudo killall pulseaudio' every now and then when there's no sound playback - try explaining that to the common user. Then there's the software, of course. I love the open desktop, but Linux is nowhere near the point where it can compete with Windows on that front - even if it has gone quite a ways since its humble beginnings.
I'm glad you have no issues with your recent versions of Ubuntu, a quick perusal of the Ubuntu support forums tells a different story though.
Just because it works for you, doesn't mean it works for everyone. This seems to be the most common reaction to problems with Linux. One user says such and such is broken, another user it works fine and they call him a liar.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
My gut reaction is the same, but at the end of the day, linux users' lives would be a lot easier if we have 10-30% market share on the desktop.
Why? Just because at that point we would have decent hardware support, games would be ported, Netflix would run on linux, and people would be aware to not use proprietary formats to exchange data.
But I agree, my gut reaction is that if it works for me, I don't care what other people use. And I'm sure as hell not going to make the mistake of evangelizing for OSS and then get stuck supporting it indefinitely.
Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
"With the one glaring exception of the desktop computer, Linux has outpaced Microsoft in nearly every market, including server-side computing and mobile, Zemlin claims. 'I think we just don't care that much [about Microsoft] anymore,' Zemlin said. 'They used to be our big rival, but now it's kind of like kicking a puppy.'", says Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin.
I'm sorry, but I like Linux and hate Microsoft, yet I still can't stomach this marketing'esque spew of BS. If Microsoft said the reverse of this this topic would hit 500+ comments.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Aw, c'mon. Any user who has only used Linux systems will call the Windows method weird. At least the Linux FIlesystem Heirarchy is logical. Compare that to Windows were you can install suff anywhere, the help could be located anywhere, the config files could be located anywhere. And Synaptic does show a list of installed files. Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V do work on Ubuntu, but the Linux versions Shift-Insert and Ctrl-Insert, are of course, better supported. Hell, support for Windows style shortcuts is better in Ubuntu than in OS X, for all the 'just work'-ability of OS X. You do know that disk/partition images need to be mounted or opened as an archive so that you can see what's inside for any OS, don't you? You can't expect to adopt an OS which by it's very character implies a different lifestyle and expect not to relearn stuff. Just because MS does some things the way it does, should everyone else do that? Or because you are used to stuff one way, that should be the only way? There is *no* right way. Variety is the spice of life, friend, and you should have some. And while I'm batting around idioms, when in Rome, do as the Romans do.