There are some very important lessons to be learned here.
IMHO, this represents a huge step backwards in respect for the Linux crowd. After seeing the vitriolic comments about Mindcraft and anyone supporting MS, well, sadly, this tells managers that Linux advocates are simply ABM folks.
I'm not arguing ABM, but from an MIS standpoint, when you've got someone whith a huge, working MS investment, too many people have acted like children over the past few weeks.
And for those saying "we've got a fix in the works," let's not forget that MS has a fix in the works as well. I doubt it will be a cure-all, but certainly we should expect the bar to be raised.
I wouldn't quite jump to that conclusion. In fact, I'd be inclined to say that the Judge's comment of "Use your time wisely" prior to the recess was actually directed at the DOJ.
The DOJ demonstrated a number of issues, such as Microsoft's rather aggresive business tactics. All of which, should it be determined that Microsoft is a monopoly, weigh heavily against it.
But that's the true key issue. *HAS* the DOJ proven that no one can succeed against Microsoft? Netscape's final sales valuation of 10 Billion dollars is a major point showing that one CAN take a small business and make it worth billions -- something that's not supposed to be able to occur in a monopolistic environment.
The judge also has to view certain convienent manuvers (such as the timing of the AOL/Netscape deal and when testimony occurred) with just as much skepticism as the Microsoft claims.
I suspect the Ju8dge would certainly like a settlement, rather than a ruling that's bound to be unpopular or potentially overturned.
1) I find it hard to believe that Microsoft was able to tailor their kernel (which was essentially rolled out in 4.0 beta 1, back in, oh, 1995?) for benchmarks tests that didn't even exist yet! (And if they did, we should be afraid; very afraid).
2) PC Week just got similar results in THEIR test. I'm just not enough of a conspiracy person to believe the world is against us.
3) In that PC Week test, Solaris 2.7 was found to be the strongest in several areas. Does that mean Sun has also been looking into the crystal ball to try and optimize to beat Linux?
The fact is, a number of the things that make Linux SO effective and practical to run on low-end equipment (I'm damn proud that my 386/33 has run Linux since 1994 and keeps on trucking -- albeit with a 2.0.36 kernel running on a Slackware 2.1 distribution) are the precise factors why Linux doesn't do as well in the enterprise environment.
And yes, given the choice between hiring another system admin, or spending an extra $2,000.00 for a quad-cpu NT box, many, many departments are going to go the NT route.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone know if Merced ran the 64bit version of Linux?
Because if we're saying that it didn't run Win64, but ran plain old 32bit x86 Linux, that just reminds of the old Mindcraft thing:
"If a Linux advocate says it, it's probably not true."
There are some very important lessons to be learned here.
IMHO, this represents a huge step backwards in respect for the Linux crowd. After seeing the vitriolic comments about Mindcraft and anyone supporting MS, well, sadly, this tells managers that Linux advocates are simply ABM folks.
I'm not arguing ABM, but from an MIS standpoint, when you've got someone whith a huge, working MS investment, too many people have acted like children over the past few weeks.
And for those saying "we've got a fix in the works," let's not forget that MS has a fix in the works as well. I doubt it will be a cure-all, but certainly we should expect the bar to be raised.
I wouldn't quite jump to that conclusion. In fact, I'd be inclined to say that the Judge's comment of "Use your time wisely" prior to the recess was actually directed at the DOJ.
The DOJ demonstrated a number of issues, such as Microsoft's rather aggresive business tactics. All of which, should it be determined that Microsoft is a monopoly, weigh heavily against it.
But that's the true key issue. *HAS* the DOJ proven that no one can succeed against Microsoft? Netscape's final sales valuation of 10 Billion dollars is a major point showing that one CAN take a small business and make it worth billions -- something that's not supposed to be able to occur in a monopolistic environment.
The judge also has to view certain convienent manuvers (such as the timing of the AOL/Netscape deal and when testimony occurred) with just as much skepticism as the Microsoft claims.
I suspect the Ju8dge would certainly like a settlement, rather than a ruling that's bound to be unpopular or potentially overturned.
I've got to disagree here.
1) I find it hard to believe that Microsoft was able to tailor their kernel (which was essentially rolled out in 4.0 beta 1, back in, oh, 1995?) for benchmarks tests that didn't even exist yet! (And if they did, we should be afraid; very afraid).
2) PC Week just got similar results in THEIR test. I'm just not enough of a conspiracy person to believe the world is against us.
3) In that PC Week test, Solaris 2.7 was found to be the strongest in several areas. Does that mean Sun has also been looking into the crystal ball to try and optimize to beat Linux?
The fact is, a number of the things that make Linux SO effective and practical to run on low-end equipment (I'm damn proud that my 386/33 has run Linux since 1994 and keeps on trucking -- albeit with a 2.0.36 kernel running on a Slackware 2.1 distribution) are the precise factors why Linux doesn't do as well in the enterprise environment.
And yes, given the choice between hiring another system admin, or spending an extra $2,000.00 for a quad-cpu NT box, many, many departments are going to go the NT route.
World Domination is still a ways off, I'm afraid.