Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Motley Fool on Microsoft vs. Linux

Posted by jamie on from the unix-streams-go-mainstream dept.

Simon Janes writes "In a two part article series, Rob Landly (aka TMF_Oak) discusses Network Effects and how they make a product more valuable to users. Rob continues his series the next day with a discussion of Microsoft vs. Linux. This is excellent 'outside of the industry' press for Linux because 'Fools' are people like nurses, teachers, accountatnts and retirees who are not normally exposed to this."

1 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. After the trial... by kcarnold · · Score: 5

    Microsoft probably won't want to try to conquer Linux. Sure they have the money and the influence, but Linux, to the DoJ and friends, embodies anti-Microsoft-monoply, and if Microsoft starts messing with Linux, DoJ will jump on them. Microsoft knows this.

    Microsoft's high end is the desktop, and that's the last markey Linux will take over.
    That's a telling point ... only after all the other markets have fallen.

    GNOME and KDE have made significant strides on making Linux a contender in the desktop environment. In some ways Linux has already overtaken Windows:

    • Customization: How many window managers are there for Windows? How many are there for Linux?
    • Remote Apps: What's X designed for? And why does the VNC server work best on Linux? Remote connectivity was a core design element for X.
    • Stability: People get mad when their apps crash. People notice that for some reason their apps don't crash as much when they run them under Linux. Netscape seems to be an exception, at least for me.
    • Cost: If two things were equal in every way except that one was $90 and one was free, which one would you buy? And what if it turned out that the free one was better?

    I'm sure I missed a few. Sure, Win has its advantages. But they are probably not going to stay for long.

    Ken