Extending this logic, we should be able to sue Microsoft for allowing virus writers execute code on My Computer.... looks like when it comes to pubic interest, frivolous lawsuits are okay;-)
Seeing that most OSDL projects are licensed under the GPL unlike Java, MS can't embrace, extend and extinguish OSDL projects.
Secondly, this is not about co-operation, it is about 'research' or 'study' or whatever else you call it. Looks like MS wants the OSDL to endorse an opinion about the Windows Server OS - so they can FUD the market with something like : "The OSDL, of which Linus Torvalds is a member, has admitted that the Windows Server Operating System has been found to deliver superior performance and TCO in 326 out of 1,028 customer situations... including Clippy, DRM, Windows Media Player, the registry, MSN messenger...."
Nice analogy, but one key difference. Windows got to where it is now, through the route of 'independent studies' 'fu(n)ded research' Gartner reports etc. Linux and the FOSS projects have gained market share by being accepted by the market. It doesn't need 'MARKETING', the way closed source products do.
I'm inclined to think the OSDL would be better off focussing on Open Source Development in their Labs; rather than engage with research projects with MS. The OS is not the only concern of the OSDL, it's the mainstay of Microsoft. OSDL projects can be deployed on Linux AND Windows, MS products are increasingly OS and h/w specific.
Why should the fox spend time researching how it can co-exist with the hen?
Actually, MS has little to fear from Linux or the OSDL. Linux replacing Windows on the desktop is still a few years away. The 'server' side is where they should focus their energies. And the GPL... that's the one biting MS more than Linux.
Should be nice if "Bill Gates meets Stallman to FU(N)D an independent study of the GPL..."
Why is this funny? That's 1 user who's got the guts to post his opinion about social engineering going on in this site, and it gets modded funny! Read my first journal on this subject and mod the parent up so it gets seen prominently.
Google Linux? Instead of plug-ins for the most common desktop OS, it'd be nice if Google actually released a complete desktop - open source, fully configurable and fast! -
Google Linux? Rather than writing plug-ins for the most popular Desktop OS, it'd be nice if Google released a complete desktop OS - with plug-ins / replacements for Outlook and Office.
-
"I was never arguing the relative merits of Windows vs Linux."
So why post your views on an article that specifically talks about Windows vs Linux?
"Anyone so imcompetent as to not even have an idea of their system costs is also probably the kind of person to hand their existing admins a "Linux for dummies" book between them instead of properly cross training."
Considering that Linux is primarily deployed on servers, companies can simply outsource the server deployment and merely train their sysadmin staff on maintaining the servers. And BTW, Linux isn't for dummies. If it were, it would be called Windows.
I would say even 'advice' isn't in the article. The so-called TCO study contains a lot of recycled FUD couched in nice-sounding words. It also leads to the mistaken impression that it is possible to assess the cost of a Windows box, network or server.. with any degree of accuracy.
Half the article talks about Linux desktops and the rest aims to spread the FUD about Linux based servers. Where is the advice in this article?
If it's such a vital point to "have a clue how much their systems are costing" it's very difficult to put a figure on the costing in a Windows network as well. When you factor in the cost of anti-virus, the CPU and RAM resources needed to serve mails, files etc.; the lack of decent tools and scripts that can be run by the systems administrator in any decent network of over 50 systems etc. etc.... it soon becomes clear TCO isn't what we read in the mags.
Having managed a network of over 300 systems for 4 years, I can say it with emphasis that managing and administering a Windows server/ network is far more time consuming and resource intensive and headache-prone compared to Linux servers. Not to mention benefits of cost, ease of configuration etc.
I would go further than that. The author seems to imply that it's very easy to calculate the TCO of a Windows box, network or server. Far from the truth. It's difficult to factor in Subscription (Dis)Advantage, countless patches, network bandwidth costs for patching, separate servers for logon, mail, proxy, file etc.
At the end of the article, the conclusion is "Buying software without analysing all this is like buying blind"... atleast with Linux on the servers, the cost of the decision is negligible. With Microsoft servers and services, the initial costs are high. And the headaches are just starting.
In further unrelated news, Windows 2000 is still supported by Microsoft. And further, Unix is more than 30 years old. Linux is more than a decade old. And further yet, upgrading desktops from Win98 to WinXP hasn't resulted in any great benefit to the end users - worse, it calls for needless upgrade in the hardware resources.
Here's what she said a while ago... "But if Linux is really to take its place alongside Windows... then the vendors in this space cannot act like a bunch of hippies in a '60s commune or ashram"
And now... "Neither server system will consume the other. Both will coexist..."
Is it her point that Microsoft has in recent days started acting like a bunch of hippies in an ashram?
Or she has acknowledged that Linux is not about free lunch or beer, but true freedom for the customer, and hence compatible with capitalism?
Looks like after her FUD in the SCO affair fell flat, she's presnting more scientific FUD in doing a TCO comparison... why should she choose to study the methods of hippies, outcasts ans communists? -
I think the GP points out rightly that it isn't 'charity' when the intention is not noble... read PR. Also, 5mn is a miniscule microscopic portion of the amount MS spends in R&D anyways, so it's doubtful this money is gonna help fight crime or spam. Or improve the IT skills of the average New Yorker. -
"The United States developed the internet, with many large investments (DARPA etc.), and now we are expected to just give it up?"
Considering that the present United States is itself a colony of people from all over the world, your point is a bit moot. The internet transcends geographic boundaries and the control must be international.
"The internet has become a security issue- Aside from all the defense networks etc, we need to be able to keep tabs on extremist groups..."
The more important security issues we deal with everyday are caused by poor design and regulation of the internet and related services - DDoS, spam, etc. The UN could make a fresh beginning and make the internet really secure.
"we still believe in freedom of speech..." You seem to have forgotten Freedom of spam?
This would be a great time to implement IPv6 as well... The US invented and implemented the internet... thanks for that, but we need to move on. Starting from scratch in conjunction with IPv6 should be a good idea. -
How does the US system of patents apply to a product manufactured in China and marketed in the US? iRiver could be violating a lot of patents in the US, I guess...
Excellent point! I think we're very lucky that mfrs. of these items do not have a near-monopoly situation:
1. Memory. 2. CD, DVD drives and media. 3. Network cards. 4. Hard disk drives.
If one or more of these items were controlled by patents / monopolies; the situation could be alarming... Just wondering - can Intel patent it's chip pin-outs / signal levels (not the internal design) in such a way other mfrs. cannot replicate the function?
Much as any politician would hate to accept, the economy is now well and truly in the hand of the Corporates, not the political forum. Anyone getting elected to the presidency will hardly make a difference to the economy. Consider the strength of the Chinese and the Indian economies, and consider for a moment who's been in power in those countries for some years now....
The USA, in isolation, is a relatively free market..
The problem is that most people in the USA like to believe that this statement is true. If the USA is is isolated, it would **NOT** be self-sufficient in all areas of the economy - including technology workers. The reality is that, when isolated, the US relies on Mexico, China, India etc. for all kinds of work - unskilled, military and technical.
It is not very wrong for these other countries to demand their pound of flesh.
Slashdot Mirror
Extending this logic, we should be able to sue Microsoft for allowing virus writers execute code on My Computer.... looks like when it comes to pubic interest, frivolous lawsuits are okay ;-)
Seeing that most OSDL projects are licensed under the GPL unlike Java, MS can't embrace, extend and extinguish OSDL projects.
...."
Secondly, this is not about co-operation, it is about 'research' or 'study' or whatever else you call it. Looks like MS wants the OSDL to endorse an opinion about the Windows Server OS - so they can FUD the market with something like : "The OSDL, of which Linus Torvalds is a member, has admitted that the Windows Server Operating System has been found to deliver superior performance and TCO in 326 out of 1,028 customer situations... including Clippy, DRM, Windows Media Player, the registry, MSN messenger
Nice analogy, but one key difference. Windows got to where it is now, through the route of 'independent studies' 'fu(n)ded research' Gartner reports etc. Linux and the FOSS projects have gained market share by being accepted by the market. It doesn't need 'MARKETING', the way closed source products do.
I'm inclined to think the OSDL would be better off focussing on Open Source Development in their Labs; rather than engage with research projects with MS. The OS is not the only concern of the OSDL, it's the mainstay of Microsoft. OSDL projects can be deployed on Linux AND Windows, MS products are increasingly OS and h/w specific.
Why should the fox spend time researching how it can co-exist with the hen?
Actually, MS has little to fear from Linux or the OSDL. Linux replacing Windows on the desktop is still a few years away. The 'server' side is where they should focus their energies. And the GPL... that's the one biting MS more than Linux.
..."
Should be nice if "Bill Gates meets Stallman to FU(N)D an independent study of the GPL
"approaching the OSDL (Open Source Development Labs) to work with it on a joint, independent research project "
How can this be 'joint' and 'independent' at the same time? Specially when MS is one of the parties?
Why is this funny? That's 1 user who's got the guts to post his opinion about social engineering going on in this site, and it gets modded funny! Read my first journal on this subject and mod the parent up so it gets seen prominently.
Cheers
Google Linux? Instead of plug-ins for the most common desktop OS, it'd be nice if Google actually released a complete desktop - open source, fully configurable and fast!
-
Google Linux? Rather than writing plug-ins for the most popular Desktop OS, it'd be nice if Google released a complete desktop OS - with plug-ins / replacements for Outlook and Office. -
"I was never arguing the relative merits of Windows vs Linux."
So why post your views on an article that specifically talks about Windows vs Linux?
"Anyone so imcompetent as to not even have an idea of their system costs is also probably the kind of person to hand their existing admins a "Linux for dummies" book between them instead of properly cross training."
Considering that Linux is primarily deployed on servers, companies can simply outsource the server deployment and merely train their sysadmin staff on maintaining the servers. And BTW, Linux isn't for dummies. If it were, it would be called Windows.
"Neutral isnt even on the map."
I would say even 'advice' isn't in the article. The so-called TCO study contains a lot of recycled FUD couched in nice-sounding words. It also leads to the mistaken impression that it is possible to assess the cost of a Windows box, network or server.. with any degree of accuracy.
Half the article talks about Linux desktops and the rest aims to spread the FUD about Linux based servers. Where is the advice in this article?
If it's such a vital point to "have a clue how much their systems are costing" it's very difficult to put a figure on the costing in a Windows network as well. When you factor in the cost of anti-virus, the CPU and RAM resources needed to serve mails, files etc.; the lack of decent tools and scripts that can be run by the systems administrator in any decent network of over 50 systems etc. etc.... it soon becomes clear TCO isn't what we read in the mags.
Having managed a network of over 300 systems for 4 years, I can say it with emphasis that managing and administering a Windows server/ network is far more time consuming and resource intensive and headache-prone compared to Linux servers. Not to mention benefits of cost, ease of configuration etc.
I would go further than that. The author seems to imply that it's very easy to calculate the TCO of a Windows box, network or server. Far from the truth. It's difficult to factor in Subscription (Dis)Advantage, countless patches, network bandwidth costs for patching, separate servers for logon, mail, proxy, file etc.
At the end of the article, the conclusion is "Buying software without analysing all this is like buying blind"... atleast with Linux on the servers, the cost of the decision is negligible. With Microsoft servers and services, the initial costs are high. And the headaches are just starting.
In further unrelated news, Windows 2000 is still supported by Microsoft. And further, Unix is more than 30 years old. Linux is more than a decade old. And further yet, upgrading desktops from Win98 to WinXP hasn't resulted in any great benefit to the end users - worse, it calls for needless upgrade in the hardware resources.
I can go on and on...
Here's what she said a while ago... "But if Linux is really to take its place alongside Windows... then the vendors in this space cannot act like a bunch of hippies in a '60s commune or ashram"
And now... "Neither server system will consume the other. Both will coexist..."
Is it her point that Microsoft has in recent days started acting like a bunch of hippies in an ashram?
Or she has acknowledged that Linux is not about free lunch or beer, but true freedom for the customer, and hence compatible with capitalism?
Looks like after her FUD in the SCO affair fell flat, she's presnting more scientific FUD in doing a TCO comparison... why should she choose to study the methods of hippies, outcasts ans communists?
-
I think the GP points out rightly that it isn't 'charity' when the intention is not noble... read PR. Also, 5mn is a miniscule microscopic portion of the amount MS spends in R&D anyways, so it's doubtful this money is gonna help fight crime or spam. Or improve the IT skills of the average New Yorker.
-
"Another $1 million will go to New York State to "expand computer-related skills training for youths and adults"
Youths...(sic) and adults to get computer-related skills training? Like, MS Office and How-To-Start-Windows-XP?
-
"The United States developed the internet, with many large investments (DARPA etc.), and now we are expected to just give it up?"
Considering that the present United States is itself a colony of people from all over the world, your point is a bit moot. The internet transcends geographic boundaries and the control must be international.
"The internet has become a security issue- Aside from all the defense networks etc, we need to be able to keep tabs on extremist groups..."
The more important security issues we deal with everyday are caused by poor design and regulation of the internet and related services - DDoS, spam, etc. The UN could make a fresh beginning and make the internet really secure.
"we still believe in freedom of speech..."
You seem to have forgotten Freedom of spam?
-
This would be a great time to implement IPv6 as well... The US invented and implemented the internet... thanks for that, but we need to move on. Starting from scratch in conjunction with IPv6 should be a good idea.
-
would be in the form of free copies of WinXP and Office XP to schools in Europe. And a dinner with Blair while making the announcement, perhaps? -
How does the US system of patents apply to a product manufactured in China and marketed in the US? iRiver could be violating a lot of patents in the US, I guess...
Excellent point! I think we're very lucky that mfrs. of these items do not have a near-monopoly situation:
1. Memory.
2. CD, DVD drives and media.
3. Network cards.
4. Hard disk drives.
If one or more of these items were controlled by patents / monopolies; the situation could be alarming... Just wondering - can Intel patent it's chip pin-outs / signal levels (not the internal design) in such a way other mfrs. cannot replicate the function?
-
Matrix! Free to download, of course!!
-
I think many IE users are setting their browsers to the "Behave like Firefox" option!
-
Much as any politician would hate to accept, the economy is now well and truly in the hand of the Corporates, not the political forum. Anyone getting elected to the presidency will hardly make a difference to the economy. Consider the strength of the Chinese and the Indian economies, and consider for a moment who's been in power in those countries for some years now....
-
The USA, in isolation, is a relatively free market..
The problem is that most people in the USA like to believe that this statement is true. If the USA is is isolated, it would **NOT** be self-sufficient in all areas of the economy - including technology workers. The reality is that, when isolated, the US relies on Mexico, China, India etc. for all kinds of work - unskilled, military and technical.
It is not very wrong for these other countries to demand their pound of flesh.
-