Check our site out, it provides a number of links that may help you out.
I.e., the way I would calculate the cost to change would be to make a list of all the software that needs to be purchased. Then compare the prices. You will end up with a base cost for Windows and for Linux. Linux is probably going to be more difficult to train people on and to install, so figure out some sort of a multiply factor for that times the price of the software. My factor would be 2.
But the costs of all the Linux software times 2 when compared to the cost of the Windows software will still leave you in a situation where Linux looks to be the smarter choice.
There are hundreds of things Microsoft can do to make the auctioning off not work.
Here's a scenario:
- Microsoft gives the source to NT 4 to 3 companies. - Microsoft then ships NT 5.0 - Microsoft makes changes to the API that aren't compatible with the source they gave to the 3 companies. - Everyone wants NT 5.0 for the bug fixes that should have been in 4.0, that are now in 5.0. - The third parties licenses are totally worthless.
This is a stupid stupid stupid solution. Without the engineers behind the OS, it's going to take a minimum of 6 months for any licensee to even get started doing anything.
A port of MFC to Linux would, however, be very interesting. It would allow developers to port apps very quickly to Linux.
So I'll bet Microsoft releases Office for Linux, but does not release any of their development tools for it. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
I'm not sure if I should cheer or scream about this possible event.
Microsoft doing this is not a good thing for Linux in the long term. Why? Because Microsoft intends to embrace, extend, and eventually control it. This is MS's first step.
It is good in the short term, however as it could potentially increase Linux' market share dramatically and give it the boost it needs to become a desktop OS. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
The vast majority of us will be productively involved with computers for the next 15-40 years. We are at a really important crossroads at this time.
That crossroads is the choice of living, working, and being controlled by one software company.
Does the strong commentary people offer against Microsoft in any way compare to wars and the many other problems of the world? No, not in the slightest. We are arguing about what we build our global information architecture on. But the value of that pales in comparison to the value of real, human life. But even with this pale comparison it is still a very
The Linux model where people are driven by ingenuity and passion is so much better for the whole world, then a world driven by a company that follows
Too many people charactize others as Microsoft-Bashers. That is not the case for the vast majority labeled in this category.
At the end of the day, we each have 15-40 more years to work on computers. That is a lot of time.
Do you want everything you do w/ regards to technology to be dictacted by Microsoft?
Or would you prefer to have freedom, to see new ideas, and, well, to have fun?
That's the fight here. Good engineering, fun, creativity, and freedom versus dictation by a company that will always choose control over good design.
Microsoft does not care about "making up" for anything.
They case about 2 things only:
Control
Money
That's it. They don't care about building great technology, as is evidenced by the Halloween memos and their idea of developing complex proprietary APIs. And all that horseshit from Muth about, "Well, naturally the normal APIs don't have the technology we need, so we must extend them."
What crap. Microsoft will always choose market control over good design/engineering. That is why their software has so many problems. They would prefer to make software complex/proprietary and tie ISV's forever to their code then to create a really brilliant technology that the world can work on.
MS has some of the sharpest people in the world working there (interestingly enough, they have a place that they pay many of them huge salaries just to keep them from working at other places, that place is called Microsoft Research). It's great to have the power to pay some $300k per year just to keep the competition from having them.
But it is a horrible thing, because really great ideas and technology isn't coming to life. Instead we are left with things
That's why Linux is very exciting to me. It has the potential of being a platform where the best ideas written by the best developer for that idea gets used in a widespread manner. Not proprietary and designed for market control.
Microsoft will always choose market control over good engineering. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Embrace & Extend - Windows API and MFC on Linux
on
MS Office for Linux
·
· Score: 1
THAT! is the future MS will push Linux to.
There needs to be some really strong Linux leadership with regards to (1) a standard installation procedure for Linux and (2) the GUI that people develop apps for.
If these two technology cores remain splintered, MS will have a very real shot at this. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
The terms of the GPL already pretty much prevent MS from ever using any of the code.
I'm not sure if "pretty much" will cut it. They should be very strong with regards to preventing MS from creating derivative products from any GPL code.
And specifically, the GUI code to Linux should be very firmly free, as in the case of Gnome. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
GPL Authors and other Open Source license authors / code originators. Change your GPL licenses to be available to anyone but market share dominant companies.
This will protect and encourage new ideas, and at the same time, keep Microsoft from grabbing all of the technology you have written.
Best dollar says Microsoft does port Office to Linux. Microsoft's entire business model is based on two words, EMBRACE & EXTEND.
Microsoft has 4 major categories of revenue, of which one is Office, and the other is it's OS's. Microsoft gets to sell everyone who is already running a copy of office, another copy of office when they switch to Linux. So they get to sell you the same software twice. At the same time, they begin the process of embracing and extending Linux.
The thing that is cool about Linux, is we can always switch distributions.
It needs to be ingrained in every executives mind that if you fail the community, you will fail as a company. If you help the community, you will be spectacularly successful. Red Hat has been doing this to date, and is successful. Let us make clear to RH that if they keep supporting the community in good faith, they will have the community behind them. And we all know that this is very valuable.
The cost of failing the community needs to be so prohibitively high that no business would dare risk losing the communities support or risk damaging the relationship.
The community should applaud companies that are successful and making money from Linux.
While applauding, the community needs to serve as a watchdog to make sure they follow the goals of the open source and open linux enhancements.
But be nice about it. Disparaging a successful company serves no purpose whatsoever.
We should all look for ways to make money on Linux. Why? Because the number one thing preventing Linux development from going balistic and totally leaping years ahead of Microsoft's technology is that the smartest people can't work on it full time. And why can't we? Because we don't have a business model (yet) that will allow us to.
But imagine a world where we are all working full time enhancing Linux and getting paid. That is a good world, and the Linux community should try to create ideas that enhance the possibility of doing this. Red Hat is successful. Let's help other companies to be successful. Let's help other people to create very strong Linux brands.
Other distributors are doing a great job at this.
The community should be a friendly watchdog. Companies should want to turn to the community for advice on things.
The community should not alienate the business stars of the Linux movement. What the community should do is help create many business stars. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
One thing that is interesting is that the US Military has over 300,000 installations of Microsoft software and is using IE4 as it's browser. Just the fact that these systems are so widespread (and people could find leaks that they don't report to MS) makes it a security risk. ----- http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Slashdot Mirror
Check our site out, it provides a number of links that may help you out.
I.e., the way I would calculate the cost to change would be to make a list of all the software that needs to be purchased. Then compare the prices. You will end up with a base cost for Windows and for Linux. Linux is probably going to be more difficult to train people on and to install, so figure out some sort of a multiply factor for that times the price of the software. My factor would be 2.
But the costs of all the Linux software times 2 when compared to the cost of the Windows software will still leave you in a situation where Linux looks to be the smarter choice.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Where did the article go?
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
There are hundreds of things Microsoft can do to make the auctioning off not work.
Here's a scenario:
- Microsoft gives the source to NT 4 to 3
companies.
- Microsoft then ships NT 5.0
- Microsoft makes changes to the API that
aren't compatible with the source they
gave to the 3 companies.
- Everyone wants NT 5.0 for the bug
fixes that should have been in 4.0,
that are now in 5.0.
- The third parties licenses are totally
worthless.
This is a stupid stupid stupid solution. Without the engineers behind the OS, it's going to take a minimum of 6 months for any licensee to even get started doing anything.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
This guy's article has absolutely no point. But, at least he said the word "Linux" a bunch of times.
The more everyone says the word, the more confidence people will have in it.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Do we really want one distribution to have 51%? I think that many distributions is cool.
Development tools/libraries need to be standardized to one body of really good code, however.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
A port of MFC to Linux would, however, be very interesting. It would allow developers to port apps very quickly to Linux.
So I'll bet Microsoft releases Office for Linux, but does not release any of their development tools for it.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
I'm not sure if I should cheer or scream about this possible event.
Microsoft doing this is not a good thing for Linux in the long term. Why? Because Microsoft intends to embrace, extend, and eventually control it. This is MS's first step.
It is good in the short term, however as it could potentially increase Linux' market share dramatically and give it the boost it needs to become a desktop OS.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
"Yes, that's very nice, but really, who cares?"
The vast majority of us will be productively involved with computers for the next 15-40 years. We are at a really important crossroads at this time.
That crossroads is the choice of living, working, and being controlled by one software company.
Does the strong commentary people offer against Microsoft in any way compare to wars and the many other problems of the world? No, not in the slightest. We are arguing about what we build our global information architecture on. But the value of that pales in comparison to the value of real, human life. But even with this pale comparison it is still a very
The Linux model where people are driven by ingenuity and passion is so much better for the whole world, then a world driven by a company that follows
Too many people charactize others as Microsoft-Bashers. That is not the case for the vast majority labeled in this category.
At the end of the day, we each have 15-40 more years to work on computers. That is a lot of time.
Do you want everything you do w/ regards to technology to be dictacted by Microsoft?
Or would you prefer to have freedom, to see new ideas, and, well, to have fun?
That's the fight here. Good engineering, fun, creativity, and freedom versus dictation by a company that will always choose control over good design.
It's a fight worth fighting.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Microsoft does not care about "making up" for anything.
They case about 2 things only:
Control
Money
That's it. They don't care about building great technology, as is evidenced by the Halloween memos and their idea of developing complex proprietary APIs. And all that horseshit from Muth about, "Well, naturally the normal APIs don't have the technology we need, so we must extend them."
What crap. Microsoft will always choose market control over good design/engineering. That is why their software has so many problems. They would prefer to make software complex/proprietary and tie ISV's forever to their code then to create a really brilliant technology that the world can work on.
MS has some of the sharpest people in the world working there (interestingly enough, they have a place that they pay many of them huge salaries just to keep them from working at other places, that place is called Microsoft Research). It's great to have the power to pay some $300k per year just to keep the competition from having them.
But it is a horrible thing, because really great ideas and technology isn't coming to life. Instead we are left with things
That's why Linux is very exciting to me. It has the potential of being a platform where the best ideas written by the best developer for that idea gets used in a widespread manner. Not proprietary and designed for market control.
Microsoft will always choose market control over good engineering.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
THAT! is the future MS will push Linux to.
There needs to be some really strong Linux leadership with regards to (1) a standard installation procedure for Linux and (2) the GUI that people develop apps for.
If these two technology cores remain splintered, MS will have a very real shot at this.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
The terms of the GPL already pretty much prevent MS from ever using any of the code.
I'm not sure if "pretty much" will cut it. They should be very strong with regards to preventing MS from creating derivative products from any GPL code.
And specifically, the GUI code to Linux should be very firmly free, as in the case of Gnome.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Don't underestimate any company that has $20 billion in cash.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
GPL Authors and other Open Source license authors / code originators. Change your GPL licenses to be available to anyone but market share dominant companies.
This will protect and encourage new ideas, and at the same time, keep Microsoft from grabbing all of the technology you have written.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Best dollar says Microsoft does port Office to Linux. Microsoft's entire business model is based on two words, EMBRACE & EXTEND.
Microsoft has 4 major categories of revenue, of which one is Office, and the other is it's OS's. Microsoft gets to sell everyone who is already running a copy of office, another copy of office when they switch to Linux. So they get to sell you the same software twice. At the same time, they begin the process of embracing and extending Linux.
With the eventual goal of controlling Linux.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Which Library does each Distributions use? KDE, Gnome, or something else?
Red Hat - Gnome right?
Debian - Gnome?
Mandrake - KDE?
Slackware - ?
Open Linux - ?
Stampede - ?
SuSE - ?
Corel - ?
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
The thing that is cool about Linux, is we can always switch distributions.
It needs to be ingrained in every executives mind that if you fail the community, you will fail as a company. If you help the community, you will be spectacularly successful. Red Hat has been doing this to date, and is successful. Let us make clear to RH that if they keep supporting the community in good faith, they will have the community behind them. And we all know that this is very valuable.
The cost of failing the community needs to be so prohibitively high that no business would dare risk losing the communities support or risk damaging the relationship.
The power center needs to be the community.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
The community should applaud companies that are successful and making money from Linux.
While applauding, the community needs to serve as a watchdog to make sure they follow the goals of the open source and open linux enhancements.
But be nice about it. Disparaging a successful company serves no purpose whatsoever.
We should all look for ways to make money on Linux. Why? Because the number one thing preventing Linux development from going balistic and totally leaping years ahead of Microsoft's technology is that the smartest people can't work on it full time. And why can't we? Because we don't have a business model (yet) that will allow us to.
But imagine a world where we are all working full time enhancing Linux and getting paid. That is a good world, and the Linux community should try to create ideas that enhance the possibility of doing this. Red Hat is successful. Let's help other companies to be successful. Let's help other people to create very strong Linux brands.
Other distributors are doing a great job at this.
The community should be a friendly watchdog. Companies should want to turn to the community for advice on things.
The community should not alienate the business stars of the Linux movement. What the community should do is help create many business stars.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
One thing that is interesting is that the US Military has over 300,000 installations of Microsoft software and is using IE4 as it's browser. Just the fact that these systems are so widespread (and people could find leaks that they don't report to MS) makes it a security risk.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
You can read a print of the article on News.com at:
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33413,00.html
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)
Troll should make Qt completely free. No holds bared.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org (Submit your Links)