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."

Comments

Re:The will to be free

[Ynot_82]

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

Not only that

[Sycraft-fu]

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.

Re:Not only that

[hey!]

Well, speaking of what's in Microsoft's "DNA", it is traditionally a company that sells to people who select technology that other people will use. That's where Microsoft is successful. The places where they succeed with consumers are where consumer choices are constrained by other things. People buy Office because they have to exchange documents with people who can only use Office formats. They buy Windows because that's what the IT department lets them buy.

MS actually did pretty well in the smartphone arena because Windows Mobile was very friendly to hardware companies who were eager to cripple their products to suit the carriers' attempts to milk revenue out of bogus services. You can take pictures, but the only way to get them off is with our special Picture EMail Service. You can play music you buy though *our* music store. Apple put an end to that BS because they had the clout to give AT&T a Hobson's Choice: take it or leave it. Of course Apple had it's own version of the walled garden, but at least they didn't nickel and dime you to death by tarting up simple uses of bandwidth as some kind of special "service".

Even the XBox is a consumer device where consumer choices are driven by game titles. The games are technically impressive, so I suppose they do a good job supporting developers, but the the hardware and end-user support is pathetic.

A lot of the contempt for Microsoft's products come from our experiences as users, but making users happy just isn't what Microsoft does. They don't have a history of success through making users happy with which they could build that kind of organizational culture.

Idiotic Statement

[192_kbps]

'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.

Re:Idiotic Statement

[johncandale]

The desktop is a device mainly used by the general public to run a web browser

Keep telling yourself that. Most desktops are at the office, where we use word processing, and industry specific tools,and accounting software and email all run on windows all linked through Microsoft server software. Then we go home to our hobbies, video games, itunes, email again, tax software, adobe, and we all choose to run it on windows because it's easier. One of the worst things you can do in a competition is lie to yourself about how well it is going. Or get too involved in your own world. Of course everyone around you is using linux, and you try not to think about those other people too much. It's some form of confirmation bias. He is disregarding facts to the contrary, while he keeps reminding himself of the facts that don't disagree with his views. This is not productive

Re:Not quite done yet

[codepunk]

The desktop does not matter it is only a device on which to run a web browser. The average user spends most of his online time running pages served from linux. Then he goes and sits in front of his tv powered by linux, plays with his phone powered by linux, scrolling through his dvr running linux.

Overstatement - Windows is still a major server OS

[jbplou]

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.

Corporate desktops == corporate servers

[hawguy]

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.

Re:The will to be free

[uberjack]

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.

Uh huh.

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"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.