I don't think Microsoft has anything to compare with this (yet), and fears those who are already in the arena
You're right. Microsoft doesn't have a worldwide consulting service (*cough* MCS), doesn't focus on services even though MCS is one of their most rapidly growing divisions, and didn't just hire one of the VPs for IBM GS away to run MCS. Yep. You're right. Not competing at all.
More of Ellison talking out of his ass.
What did he say to CRN 11 months ago?
Let's see...
"Our database runs very well on Linux, but I would not try to run our applications live on any scale on Linux," http://www.crn.com/sections/BreakingNews/dailyar ch ives.asp?ArticleID=24116
...Ellison talking out of his ass. He consistently makes statements that he can't back up (and most of them directed at Microsoft). I'll believe it when I see it.
For every person getting rid of their cable modem or DSL adapter and going back to 56k, there are 20 people who will be staying with their broadband.
I, for one, am thrilled with my broadband service. I have cable through Charter Communications (owned by Paul Allen) and their service has been outstanding. I actually get 1.5mbps (even during peak times), the latency is typically very good (and when it gets bad it usually lasts for a week, then they address the problem) and every service outtage was due to a physical cable problem somewhere, not a network issue.
I think this is the story with most broadband users, it's just that the horror stories are the ones in the press, and the happy people don't feel the need to brag about how good their service is.
Jeremy,
With all due respect, I wasn't the one who made the original comparison, asking if this was going to cut into Windows 2000 server sales (which it won't, many SAMBA converts would have just pirated Windows 2000 anyway).
First of all, Novell doesn't do seat-based licensing. It's server-based. IE X amount of licenses on a server, once you're past that point, no more connections allowed.
Their idea of seat-based licensing is to give you an enterprise license which gives you unlimited licensing per server. Yeah, that's great.
Let's see, you're a company with 60 Windows 2000 Servers in multiple departments scattered around the world. What would you rather have, the management of dealing with server-based concurrency licenses for each server (gee, does this server have 25 or 10 or 5?) or simply buying a CAL for every client you have, and just buying your 60 server licenses?
The latter is pretty damn simple to keep track of. I've been involved in environments with tons of server-based licenses all over (NT environments). It's a pain to deal with. CALs are easy. You can add servers anywhere in your environment and you don't have to worry about whether or not you have enough licenses to support its client load, since every client is already licensed to access any Windows 2000 server in your organization because of the CAL.
I think 2k Server comes with 10, not 5. I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections you're allowed on 2k Pro and ME. Not that it matters much...
Nope, you're wrong. There is a retail version of Server that comes with 10 licenses. These are server-based licenses, not CALs. IE concurrent user licensing, not enterprise-wide CALs. Unless it actually says "Client Access License", it's a server-based license which means every server has to be licensed for 25 users if 25 users at a time will be connecting in any way. As soon as you have multiple servers, it's cheaper to go the CAL route and buy them seperately from your server license (you can get server licenses with no cals or concurrent licenses).
Win2k Pro has an inherent limitation of 10 connections for the native services (ICS, PWS, SMB, et al). This does not vary and cannot be increased without hacking the machine and violating the license agreement.
My question is what kind of affect, if any, this will have on Microsoft's Win 2k Sever Family sales. Having to bend over to pay for networking liscences (on top of server and workstation liscences) can't be all that popular among their customers.
Next to none. Generally businsses don't deploy Windows 2000 Server solely for authentication and file sharing. And medium, large and enterprise businsses make up more than 99% of server sales.
SAMBA will provide the most basic of directory services. Nothing like what NDS or Active Directory provide. Not to mention the other native services that Windows 2000 provides that Samba doesn't (IIS, RRAS, Media Services, Terminal Services, DHCP, DNS, PKI, etc.)
UPN will be doing "regional" type coverage, whereas NBC will carry nationally televised games.
Remember the NFL is shown on four networks as well (ABC, CBS, ESPN and FOX).
IBM might be the exception to the typical OEM however, considering their involvement with Linux (*heavy involvement*). What about Compaq, Toshiba, Dell, et al?
Desktops shouldn't be an issue with most OEMs, but laptops have a much higher degree of sophistication.
I'd also be interested in knowing about BSD and Linux on newish laptops. Most OEMs are focusing on Win2k for laptops in terms of drivers/compatibilities. For example, Compaq's MX00 line is fully Windows 2000 Logo'd. The brand new M700's run 2000 without a single driver needed outside of the Windows 2000 CD, with full ACPI/USB/PCMCIA support. Hard to beat that.
Does Linux or BSD install? Do you get network functionality from the built-in NiC? How difficult is it to get X to run on something other than the standard VGA server? I'm not flaming here, I'm pretty curious, I've never even tried a BSD or Linux on a laptop.
Re:More like BeOS's filesystem?
on
MySQL FS
·
· Score: 1
NTFS 5.0 already does this as well, with alternate data streams and native property sets (COM object attributes like author or title, or even custom properties).
The fact that it can be indexed so both content AND properties are searchable sounds a lot like a database to me.
Re:Just because you can ...
on
MySQL FS
·
· Score: 1
Aren't all file systems truly just databases? FAT is just a table of file pointers and physical locations, isn't it?
Oracle is doing (or has already done?) this with an implementation of their database server.
Heck, I think that MS should run NTFS (and probably Active Directory) off SQL in some way.
Makes sense.
.NET is hard to define...it's quite a large umbrella. MS is even having a hard time defining it.
It's truly a platform move...despite comments from the zealots here at/. MS is actually moving towards using standards and open APIs..NET is that direction. The core of.NET is truly Visual Studio.NET, the.NET framework, the.NET enterprise servers (such as Exchange 2000, SQL Server 2000 and BizTalk Server), and Whistler (probably Windows.NET 1.0). These core applications and services will have a high degree of interoperability (with themselves AND with 3rd party applications).
The basic idea is to have a standardized way of communicating between these applications and services, in order to create a better experience for the developer, business, end user, et al.
Yes, it sounds fuzzy, because it still is. The core is there, however. Almost all of the.NET enterprise servers are out (or RTM'd) and VS.NET is now in public beta.
You can download the.NET Framework SDK here.
It isn't system administration. Any halfway decent shop will have centralized purchasing going through an administrative department (NOT IT). Their jobs would be to track all purchases (what a purchasing department DOES).
How screwed up are they? What kind of sane business policy allows users to purchase their own software? That's incredibly dumb. No wonder they have no idea what's going on.
MS can't keep track of what the business purchases if the business doesn't go through a purchasing agreement such as an EA. When you buy MS product through a purchasing agreement, the sales are reported by to MS and they keep records. If you buy through a retailer without an agreement (like buying directly from CDW), there is NO way for MS to track this.
Microsoft DOES help the customer in providing its own records. But if the customer isn't going through a purchasing agreement (such as an EA) there's no way for MS to keep track of what they're buying.
Then have a printer next to the terminal that gives you a written copy of your identification and how you voted. You can then confirm that information against what's really the case and people could avoid problems like Palm Beach before they happened.
They can't support Java because of the lawsuit (and they've publicly stated this)..NET is much more than a VM... C# (or Perl or VB or C++ or whatever you want to use) runs through the CLR, which compiles your applications on the fly. I've seen the CLR used in several presentations now, and it makes a JVM look slow.
Microsoft has made it clear that it is going to embrace the command prompt in Whistler even more than it did in Windows 2000. You should be able to do everything from the command line interface that you can do from the GUI. With tools included in the OS (and not having to use the Resource Kit or something like we had to with NT 4.0). With things like visual basic scripting support, ADSI, and XML support in active directory, you can manage 100,000 user directories from the command line much more effectively than in Windows 2000.
However, he consumer version may not come with all the CLI tools that the professional, server, DC, etc versions come with. Might have to get them elsewhere.
This is the first consumer version based on the NT kernel. I wouldn't really call it a convergence of the 9x and NT OSes, only because Whistler is totally based on 2000 with some UI changes for consumers and a load of changes in Active Directory.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think Microsoft has anything to compare with this (yet), and fears those who are already in the arena
You're right. Microsoft doesn't have a worldwide consulting service (*cough* MCS), doesn't focus on services even though MCS is one of their most rapidly growing divisions, and didn't just hire one of the VPs for IBM GS away to run MCS. Yep. You're right. Not competing at all.
More of Ellison talking out of his ass.r ch ives.asp?ArticleID=24116
What did he say to CRN 11 months ago?
Let's see...
"Our database runs very well on Linux, but I would not try to run our applications live on any scale on Linux,"
http://www.crn.com/sections/BreakingNews/dailya
...Ellison talking out of his ass. He consistently makes statements that he can't back up (and most of them directed at Microsoft). I'll believe it when I see it.
That soon we'll be seeing Spiderman, Wolverine and The Thing roaming the streets?
This just smells bad.
For every person getting rid of their cable modem or DSL adapter and going back to 56k, there are 20 people who will be staying with their broadband.
I, for one, am thrilled with my broadband service. I have cable through Charter Communications (owned by Paul Allen) and their service has been outstanding. I actually get 1.5mbps (even during peak times), the latency is typically very good (and when it gets bad it usually lasts for a week, then they address the problem) and every service outtage was due to a physical cable problem somewhere, not a network issue.
I think this is the story with most broadband users, it's just that the horror stories are the ones in the press, and the happy people don't feel the need to brag about how good their service is.
Jeremy,
With all due respect, I wasn't the one who made the original comparison, asking if this was going to cut into Windows 2000 server sales (which it won't, many SAMBA converts would have just pirated Windows 2000 anyway).
First of all, Novell doesn't do seat-based licensing. It's server-based. IE X amount of licenses on a server, once you're past that point, no more connections allowed.
Their idea of seat-based licensing is to give you an enterprise license which gives you unlimited licensing per server. Yeah, that's great.
Let's see, you're a company with 60 Windows 2000 Servers in multiple departments scattered around the world. What would you rather have, the management of dealing with server-based concurrency licenses for each server (gee, does this server have 25 or 10 or 5?) or simply buying a CAL for every client you have, and just buying your 60 server licenses?
The latter is pretty damn simple to keep track of. I've been involved in environments with tons of server-based licenses all over (NT environments). It's a pain to deal with. CALs are easy. You can add servers anywhere in your environment and you don't have to worry about whether or not you have enough licenses to support its client load, since every client is already licensed to access any Windows 2000 server in your organization because of the CAL.
I think 2k Server comes with 10, not 5. I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections you're allowed on 2k Pro and ME. Not that it matters much...
Nope, you're wrong. There is a retail version of Server that comes with 10 licenses. These are server-based licenses, not CALs. IE concurrent user licensing, not enterprise-wide CALs. Unless it actually says "Client Access License", it's a server-based license which means every server has to be licensed for 25 users if 25 users at a time will be connecting in any way. As soon as you have multiple servers, it's cheaper to go the CAL route and buy them seperately from your server license (you can get server licenses with no cals or concurrent licenses).
Win2k Pro has an inherent limitation of 10 connections for the native services (ICS, PWS, SMB, et al). This does not vary and cannot be increased without hacking the machine and violating the license agreement.
My question is what kind of affect, if any, this will have on Microsoft's Win 2k Sever Family sales. Having to bend over to pay for networking liscences (on top of server and workstation liscences) can't be all that popular among their customers.
Next to none. Generally businsses don't deploy Windows 2000 Server solely for authentication and file sharing. And medium, large and enterprise businsses make up more than 99% of server sales.
SAMBA will provide the most basic of directory services. Nothing like what NDS or Active Directory provide. Not to mention the other native services that Windows 2000 provides that Samba doesn't (IIS, RRAS, Media Services, Terminal Services, DHCP, DNS, PKI, etc.)
UPN will be doing "regional" type coverage, whereas NBC will carry nationally televised games.
Remember the NFL is shown on four networks as well (ABC, CBS, ESPN and FOX).
IBM might be the exception to the typical OEM however, considering their involvement with Linux (*heavy involvement*). What about Compaq, Toshiba, Dell, et al?
Desktops shouldn't be an issue with most OEMs, but laptops have a much higher degree of sophistication.
I'd also be interested in knowing about BSD and Linux on newish laptops. Most OEMs are focusing on Win2k for laptops in terms of drivers/compatibilities. For example, Compaq's MX00 line is fully Windows 2000 Logo'd. The brand new M700's run 2000 without a single driver needed outside of the Windows 2000 CD, with full ACPI/USB/PCMCIA support. Hard to beat that.
Does Linux or BSD install? Do you get network functionality from the built-in NiC? How difficult is it to get X to run on something other than the standard VGA server? I'm not flaming here, I'm pretty curious, I've never even tried a BSD or Linux on a laptop.
NTFS 5.0 already does this as well, with alternate data streams and native property sets (COM object attributes like author or title, or even custom properties).
The fact that it can be indexed so both content AND properties are searchable sounds a lot like a database to me.
Aren't all file systems truly just databases? FAT is just a table of file pointers and physical locations, isn't it?
Oracle is doing (or has already done?) this with an implementation of their database server.
Heck, I think that MS should run NTFS (and probably Active Directory) off SQL in some way.
Makes sense.
No, it's abbreviated ISA because it's Internet Security and Acceleration Server, dumbass.
.NET is hard to define...it's quite a large umbrella. MS is even having a hard time defining it. /. MS is actually moving towards using standards and open APIs. .NET is that direction. The core of .NET is truly Visual Studio.NET, the .NET framework, the .NET enterprise servers (such as Exchange 2000, SQL Server 2000 and BizTalk Server), and Whistler (probably Windows.NET 1.0). These core applications and services will have a high degree of interoperability (with themselves AND with 3rd party applications).
.NET enterprise servers are out (or RTM'd) and VS.NET is now in public beta.
.NET Framework SDK here.
It's truly a platform move...despite comments from the zealots here at
The basic idea is to have a standardized way of communicating between these applications and services, in order to create a better experience for the developer, business, end user, et al.
Yes, it sounds fuzzy, because it still is. The core is there, however. Almost all of the
You can download the
Absentee ballots in Florida were overwhelmingly for Bush...by nearly 2-1.
It isn't system administration. Any halfway decent shop will have centralized purchasing going through an administrative department (NOT IT). Their jobs would be to track all purchases (what a purchasing department DOES).
How screwed up are they? What kind of sane business policy allows users to purchase their own software? That's incredibly dumb. No wonder they have no idea what's going on.
MS can't keep track of what the business purchases if the business doesn't go through a purchasing agreement such as an EA. When you buy MS product through a purchasing agreement, the sales are reported by to MS and they keep records. If you buy through a retailer without an agreement (like buying directly from CDW), there is NO way for MS to track this.
Microsoft DOES help the customer in providing its own records. But if the customer isn't going through a purchasing agreement (such as an EA) there's no way for MS to keep track of what they're buying.
Then have a printer next to the terminal that gives you a written copy of your identification and how you voted. You can then confirm that information against what's really the case and people could avoid problems like Palm Beach before they happened.
They can't support Java because of the lawsuit (and they've publicly stated this). .NET is much more than a VM... C# (or Perl or VB or C++ or whatever you want to use) runs through the CLR, which compiles your applications on the fly. I've seen the CLR used in several presentations now, and it makes a JVM look slow.
Um, what polls are you looking at? Every single poll I've seen has shown between 55-70% of people against a breakup.
*sigh* Windows 2000 Server (and versions up) already include built-in terminal services. This isn't new.
Microsoft has made it clear that it is going to embrace the command prompt in Whistler even more than it did in Windows 2000. You should be able to do everything from the command line interface that you can do from the GUI. With tools included in the OS (and not having to use the Resource Kit or something like we had to with NT 4.0). With things like visual basic scripting support, ADSI, and XML support in active directory, you can manage 100,000 user directories from the command line much more effectively than in Windows 2000.
However, he consumer version may not come with all the CLI tools that the professional, server, DC, etc versions come with. Might have to get them elsewhere.
-witz
This is the first consumer version based on the NT kernel. I wouldn't really call it a convergence of the 9x and NT OSes, only because Whistler is totally based on 2000 with some UI changes for consumers and a load of changes in Active Directory.
-witz