Slashdot Mirror
The Competition for Developers
Ray Cromwell writes "Software competition a concern is a major concern, according to Steve Ballmer.
Amongst other things, Steve says
that the growing amount of development done for the Linux operating system by the work of volunteers developers worldwide is "scary."
Ballmer also characterized the free-form Linux community as "somewhat crazy," but said Microsoft now has "a real server competitor."
"
Despite the fact that this is largely a bogus argument in the here and now (that Microsoft is not a monopoly because of this *potential* threat), over the long term, I think this is Microsoft's greatest fear, and constitutes a threat that is very, very real.
I think this article indicates that it is currently "top of mind" at Microsoft.
I don't know how they are going to keep developers away from Linux/BSD/etc., but they sure as hell are going to try.
--
It's funny that Microsoft wants us to believe that Linux and NT are the only real competitors in the server market. They're trying to defeat IBM, HP, and Sun (their real competitors in the high-end market) by excluding them from the contest.
The next step is to publish white papers like "Linux or Windows 2000, which is better for your enterprise?". Lets face it, neither Windows nor Linux is ready for seriously massive enterprise deployment today. But if MS can make it seem like these are the only choices they might take market share away from the companies that really have viable products.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
1. MSDN CD's cost $500 per year last time I
subscribed. Linux API docs and source are free.
2. Visual C++ subscriptions costs $250 last time
I bought it (circa 1996). Linux dev tools are free.
3. Microsoft constantly assures developers that their
new XYZ API is the way of the future "Port all
your code to XYZ now before it's too late!"
then a few months later they either abandon
XYZ or change the rules of it completely. How
long do you expect me to tolerate that?
4. Microsoft constantly competes with it's own
3rd party developers and beats them senseless.
5. With the Open Source paradigm it's not about
selling software anymore -- it's about *using*
the tools available to build entire systems
and content. If you you reach the limits of the
software then open your code editor and dig in.
6. Geeks are leaving Windows because it's not
interesting anymore. Linux, BSD, Apache, Perl,
GNOME, KDE, GIMP, etc.. those things are
interesting. News things are happening everyday
in those areas and people are contributing code
because it's useful, interesting, challenging,
and other programmers are actually listening
to their suggestions rather than letting a group
of marketing droid design the software using
zombie focus group of morons.
Look at your Windows computer (if you have the great misfortune of having one, of course).
What software is on it?
I'll tell you what software is on mine.
Microsoft FoxPro, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Access. Do you see a pattern here?
At least with Linux or Be, third-party developers have a fighting chance. In the last couple of years, Windows has changed from an open platform to one that's proprietary in all but name. Third-party applications? Bah! Who even uses them anymore?
Microsoft is bound to lose developer mindshare in this type of situation. After all, 0% of 100,000,000 computers is still, well, zero.
D
----
- We all know M$ is deep in their DoJ trial. Check.
- They are in this situation because of bad (illegal?) marketing practices which prevent competition (Yes, I saw it up close and in person).
- One of their biggest "defenses" is that Linux is "competition" to them.
- We've probably noticed that M$ has let up a little on their OEM restrictions since this trial began (e.g., we're now actually seeing some OEM's selling linux boxen).
Now.. consider this article, and Ballmer's statements, and also the article earlier today on MSNBC about *BSD.- Right in the middle of the *BSD article, they placed a link to "Discuss Linux and BSD on the BBS", opening up a forum for the less tactful Linux advocates to do their less-than-tactful Linux advocacy.
- This latest article portends to cast a shadow of competition behind Linux, taking some heat off M$.
Get to the point!! Okay. Consider what's going to happen if the DoJ -does- by Microsoft's claims of competition from Linux. Consider also that having a lot of money (which Bill Gates has more of than anyone else in the world [except maybe that one sultan of somewhere.. right? ugh]) can get you a LOT of bonus points in the American "Justice" system. So, let's suppose that M$ gets out of this anti-trust suit with a "not guilty", or whatever the equivalent ruling. Or even suppose that they get off with a slap on the wrist.. then what? Then they dive head-long back into their anti-competitional business while they still have a majority of market share. OEM's and customers alike still depend heavily on M$ because they haven't had the time to switch strongly to Linux (and let's face it.. Linux isn't quite ready). Next step? M$, using their traditional brute force, retakes the market share they've lost in the past few months, summarily crushing the "Linux Movement". Wow.. don't I sound paranoid? Probably, but that's honestly how I see it. Anyone else agree? Zeitgeistperl -e 'print "zj5GuPW9b.sEiQQVgvL1Tr." ^ pack("H48","000f5c3312353e4a166e12311d363d3905172
In a perfect world, Microsoft's approach to competition should be "bring it on!", but instead they continue to think of competition as a win-lose situation; someone can only succeed at others' expense. As long they respond to competitive threats with better code, then they might not disappear off the face of the earth once thier market share slips. I guess anything less than everything can only look like a loss when you've been ahead for so long.
This is why Microsoft has already lost. The fact that entry-level programmers are migratating to OSS is disturbing. The fact that senior-level developers have seen the Microsoft-centric universe... and the fact that we have absolutely no role in it (other than as glorified button pushers) is fatal.
When I start my own software company, will I try to compete in the Windows environment where MS has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to obliterate any competition? Hell, no! Even if I didn't think OSS was technically superior, I would be *forced* to choose it since there's simply no viable alternative!
When I develop specifications for a new product for my employer, will I merrily tie my company's future to a company which has repeatedly shown a willingness to frivilously change APIs so ensure the market is forced to upgrade? Hell, no! Again, even if I didn't think OSS was technically superior, I would have to mark down the Microsoft solution since it would require constant maintainance due to the continually changing API.
When the software industry was a small piece of the economy a single company could effect a stranglehold on it. But now software is *everywhere*, and *no* single software company can long dominate the marketplace. I often think of this economic sector like a farm: the best way to ensure a solid harvest is to rotate your crops. Leaving a field fallow may look like a "waste," but those small plants inject valuable chemicals into the soil.
Microsoft is classic corporate farming. It keeps harvesting the same crop year after year, and it uses every bit of the plant while violently ripping out any non-crop plant. This depletes the soil, and its response is to pile on the shit. Sorry, the petrochemical fertilizers. But that will only work so long; it replaces the gross biomatter, but it still messes up the microculture.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I guess what realy scares M$ is that most of the young guys studying computer science has no interest what so ever in Win32.
Here in Sweden when we recruit new software engineers direct from college they show no particular interest in Win32. Instead they are fluent in the UNIX/Linux environment. I have also got the impression that this distaste for Win32 is valid in most countries.
Each time a fresh guy comes on interview and passes my room, he smiles and chuckles when seeing my Linux posters. He becomes very comfortable and often admits to use Win32 sometimes for gameplay but not for any real serious things. This is a big plus and one step closer to get an offer.
Microsoft do have every reason to be scared. They will have huge difficulties to steal any new technology from small upstart companies. Their foodchain is completly broken.
//Pingo
--- Linux or FreeBSD, it's like blondes or brunettes. I like both. ---
They are just trying to make people think this.
"BSD or Linux" equals server.
"BSD or Linux" does not equal Desktop.
He wants most people to think that it is only for servers, and that it wouldnt do them any good at home.