and THAT's been a good model for them hasn't it? Revenue without profits will only get you so far and is usually something startups are more likely to be working with. Microsoft, they've got two monopolies( one created from the other ) which bring in over 60% of their profits and all other business ventures lose money. For instance, that little OS called WindowsCE( MS PocketPC, MS PocketMobile, etc ) has provided Microsoft with over $9 Billion in loses over the last 10 years.
Anyways, Balmer is obviously envious and is attempting to show that he's dismissing them so other might do the same. But hey, atleast Google is good at what they do. But should Google find a profit in any of it's side-projects, they'll have already beat Microsoft since Microsoft has never done this outside of leveraging the MS Windows monopoly.
Hilf's background gives him a view of the business market related to OSS and how businesses approach it, touch and feel it etc. His job at Microsoft is not to help Microsoft become an OSS company or a supporter of OSS. His job is to inform them of how OSS is competing with them, how companies are 'feeling' about it, how well it is working in the field. All this information is most likely going to the MS Marketing Army, the MS Business Associate/Partnership Army, and to the MS Product Development Army and the task is to protect the MS Windows hold on the market.
Hilf crossed over the line. You just don't work for Microsoft and be any friend to OSS anymore. It's called being mutually exclusive.
come on, the MS Linux/OSS lab is nothing more than a place for Microsoft to keep an eye on what the OSS projects are doing and how they'll work within a Microsoft based environment. All this is to help them target their marketing and tweak their products so that they win and OSS loses. And I doubt if there is a single instance where befriending Microsoft will help OSS. We are talking about the "One Microsoft Way", "Linux is communism", etc Microsoft, are we not?
THERE'S 20 YEARS OF HISTORY HERE FOLKS. They are doing this to protect the MS Windows monopoly and their profits from this, noting more. So there is NOTHING in it to help you, the customer or you the developer. The game is about market protection and has been since the late 80's. IMO
...sending out the pipes? Or is this all bull shit?
if it's true then how come nobody in the medical IT business knows this? Nobody in the financial sector knows this? There are just two examples of where computers sending out unauthorized information put customers and businesses at risk.
Does this mean that every hospital needs to pull the plug on their network access to the outside world?
Huge head-ache? Just tell them to pretend it's just another MS Windows worm they have to clean the entire network of. Not sure about you but there was one not to long ago which shut down some of our city offices and it took the IT people working overnight to get things somewhat working again. It took another 2 days to get to all the non-critical systems since, IIRC, many required disk re-imaging.
So, tell them it's like another one of THOSE Windows issues but this time, it'll be the last time.
Let me get this straight, you expect the same execs who are currently dictating down to the masses that they must use Microsoft toothpicks, MS toilet paper, and all the other Microsoft crap but somehow they are going to want to get Apple Macs on THEIR desktops? Not sure what world you live in but it ain't gonna happen in the one I live in. These people don't read anything but the "One Microsoft Way" journal and are already telling their underlings to start planning to move to MS Windows Vista cause it's everything they need and wanted.
And like someone else already mentioned, Apple is but one PC seller. Microsoft has Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, etc tied to MS Windows with service contracts and advertising $$$. They aren't leaving MS Windows and Joe Public takes what's provided and wants it because it's on everyone elses computer too. So thinking Apple is going anywhere outside its niche is a pipe dream. They might grow in areas outside of MS Windows( everything non-PC centric ) but NOT on the Desktop or server. IMO.
You seem to have a handle on the 'benefits' of Microsoft but you forgot one thing and that is Microsoft pays Dell a huge about to put all that Microsoft Windows advertising all over the Dell computer, box, print ads, and web pages. Did I say a huge about? So, how can Dell even consider listening to a few thousand customers wanting Linux when they keep shoveling MS Windows out the door by the millions to the ignorant masses? They can not. End of story.
The only thing Dell can do is to ride the wave downhill until it's almost too late. You know, just like how they rode the Intel bandwagon down the hill so far they were losing server sales to HP and others. Dell can only do this with Microsoft and Windows because they are TIED TO MICROSOFT HANDOUTS and there's nothing on the Linux side that'll replace that. Nothing.
Sure, there is all that but when it comes down to it, Dell not only can't afford to lose any of those Microsoft marketing dollars( something 20% of Dells profits ) but Microsoft has already told them they can sell Linux but can't "lead with Linux". And, they, Microsoft, have probably needed to remind Dell of this and thus the public 'correction' on their stance with regards to pre-installing GNU/Linux and OSS.
If people understood these two little issues, there would be no discussion on Dell pre-installing Linux. Atleast not until Microsoft has less control of them. IMO
Just wondering since it was a personal investment by Bill Gates into Newport News Shipbuilding that was quickly followed by a statement that Newport News Shipbuilding DoD contract to build aircraft carriers would use Microsoft Windows on these ships.
Or maybe the reply by the Brits when asked was something like, "nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" and pointed to the press release from Newport News and the DoD...
Actually, just because their previous system was from the stone age, it does not justify picking something more modern but well known for catastrophic systems failures( nachi, nimbda, blaster, etc ). That just makes them look more screwed up than they already look for keeping their systems so out of date in the first place. IMO.
So, is there a connection between Newport News Shipbuilding and BAE or is this just a follow the payed-off/purchased leader?
I didn't quite get that since he said they make software for banks/etc. If they have a 50/50 customerbase on Windows/*nix it would be stupid to stop one or the other. But, if there were advantages to their customers for one over the other it might make sense for their marketing people to let those customers know about it. This is unlikely since it's far more likely that their marketing people are Windows freaks and would be lost on the *nix side of the sale.
Anyways, the fact that they don't sell an OS but sell their apps makes no sense that there would be any kind of profit loss if their customers went with Linux under the hood for some reason or another. If their application is a desktop application then it's going to be a very hard sell getting them to put *nix on those desktops if they do anything else besides run their app on that desktop. Something their marketing people are not going bring up.
Pulling the rug out from one market or the other would be silly but I would guess that with the growth of Linux, they should see some growth in that segment. Cost wise, there is no longer the large financial difference between WindowsPCs and LinuxPCs like there was with the UNIX systems.
That's right, Microsoft is a Marketing company and has no interest in making their product better faster cheaper. And it is because of this that Microsoft Windows server have a one-application per server configuration and let's not forget the 2nd replicated copy to keep uptime acceptable.
You'd think that Microsoft would still be happy with the situation where a whole bunch of licensed copies of MS Windows were running on one box since they'd still be getting their software sales. But, the problem comes up when you see that the market leading VM company puts Linux under the VMs and shimming anything between Microsoft Windows and the hardware is a massive threat to the marketing preople at Microsoft.
It doesn't hurt that running Linux in those VMs is pretty easy too so that's another reason for Microsoft to want to crush this market as soon as possible and at any cost.
And as you stated, it's all because Windows sucks as a server and doesn't virtualize process or memory well enough to keep apps from crashing the OS. Heck, I remember in the '80s and '90s how UNIX servers were handling/serving dozens of applications. In the late '90s and '00s, Microsoft Windows servers were like reproducing like Tribbles or maybe more like Gremlins in a Seattle rain shower.:-/
VMs are a major threat to Microsoft. Just show someone a pre-configured Linux VM on Windows in VMware Player and watch their face. If they are a developer, you'll hear gears moving too.
IIRC, someone is already using VMs to handle spyware and antivirus on Windows. From what I remember, they ran a VM running Linux and some filtering software and hooked the network traffic from the ethernet port to the VM and somehow connected the filtered stream back to Windowsland.
The idea was probably to use a less corruptable platform for the network traffic filtering without requiring an external computer to do this. I thought it was quite cool. I also always laugh at anyone attempting to declare their MS Windows box is fine because they run a MS Windows based firewall but still use MS Windows email, MS Windows IE browser, etc.
I wonder if a nicely tuned Postgres SQL system in a VM on MS Windows would run better than a Microsoft 'tuned' Postgres SQL on Windows??? If Postgres really does run THAT bad on Windows, maybe punching a hole in that by running it in a Linux VM with its own disk access might show it's Windows and not the database. And VMs make it an easy plugin for testing if word gets out this is the case.
This'll probably only work before Microsoft starts 'patching' the OS and ends up detuning VMwares performance. All by accident ofcourse.
Don't be fooled, the Novell deal is not about money, it's about protecting the Windows monopoly. There's just too much evidence out there to show that Microsoft is willing to lose money( billions ) in order to protect the Windows monopoly. Hey, Windows gives them 10s of billions annually AND it gives them MS Office and MS Server profits too. So there is no way in hell Microsoft is doing any of this for the money they'd get out of selling anything on Linux. With Windows, they control their destiny. With Linux, they'd have to manage to show why their stuff is better than the others, ie compete and that's something Microsoft has never done and been successful. IMO.
So don't be fooled, it's not about money. Heck, I have to laugh when Microsoft publicly says this after they PAID Novell millions in that 'deal' and there's nothing to show how anything close would be coming back to Microsoft. It was purely a trick to get Novell to sign up so Microsoft could try to get the big guys to use a version of Linux where they have a chance of infecting with their software and probably restrict to running in a Microsoft controlled VM. Again, no historical data shows Microsoft is profit driven outside of what runs on MS Windows.
I had to check on this to and yes, it is now free. The only restrictions relate to the number of CPUs( 2 max-single or dual core) and the amount of system memory( 4 GB max ):
The sad thing is, if you try to tell a Microsoft shop that they should run a Linux HOST under the VM platform they'll say they have no experience with Linux and then go for MS Windows as the host. And telling them that they don't interface with the host OS much at all only gets blank stares as they reach for the Windows install CD.
If it's the fear of thinking they'll look like fools in the vast unknown of Linux or wanting the comfort of knowing that any problems they'll have with Windows as the host will be the same problems others are having. Don't know but it happens far far more than you probably think.
This is the initial advantage Microsoft has. Throw the VM tech into the OS and it's even easier to NOT make a choice and go with the lesser product. What we need is a Knoppix-like distro which installs Xen or VMware Server and provides the remote management clients on the CD also( Linux, Windows, Mac ). Make it braindead easy to create a VM server and see how easy it is to manage and create/install VMs.
atleast this setup will make it easier for the BSA to audit your software since they won't have to walk around the building to each PC for the audit. Other than that, I don't see how this is a cheaper way to manage the system since you end up with all unique installations of both OS and applications in every VM. And with a VM for each desktop, that's alot of licenses, disk space, and dare I say, MS Windows registry settings.
Now I've seen this work small scale, 5 VMs, but 40-60 would probably still be tough to manage. Probably better off with a terminal server setup of some sort.
I've not messed with it but the Edubuntu project mentions something about having builtin support for the LTSP thinclient stuff. What that would mean is that you'd have one computer in the room feeding the OS and apps to the clients( no OS installed on the clients ). And if all you were loading was the OS and a browser, that shouldn't put too much load on the bootup traffic.
Or you might just use that to load the OS to the clients so there's no need to install anything on those clients initially. I'm not sure how this would work over wireless though so a tiny boot partition might be needed for getting the wireless hardware going.
Anyways, something to look at and since you're talking school stuff, Edubuntu is targetting that market.
Just a reaction to pressures OSS is putting on them and won't happen where MS Office is still a huge money maker and PHB's are suckered into upgrade after upgrade. You know, kinda like how MS Windows Express-edition showed up in Taiwan after HP and Dell couldn't keep up with demand for the cheap laptops running GNU/Linux.
It's only going to put a small ding into Microsofts profits and it'll help slow down the cascade to OSS.
Remember, 30% of Microsofts profits come from MS Office so they can not afford to cut pricing across the board on this productline. IMO.
yup, I'm unaware that any person or company can make public claims which harm another person or company and that it'll cost millions to use legal means to get them to product proof of those claims. If so, it's too bad because it would be great to see Microsofts death by a million needles as millions filed claims against them.
On the other hand, Microsoft is talking about Linux so much these days, it sounds like the pricks are already being felt by Microsoft.
Makes me wonder if some small garage GNU/Linux shop can't sue Microsoft for these statements. Some garage shop with an annual revenue stream in the 10's of thousands( or less ) so that any counter suit, if any, couldn't justify millions or billions, dozens of lawyers over years like the SCO case has done. Just a quiet local court case to see WTF Balmer is talking about and to get this out in the open ASAP.
I was really disappointed that Iowa was bought-out by MSFT like all the others. I was just getting used to the Friday night laughs from public court documents from that case. And was so looking forward to hearing the MSFT Execs on the stand.
Thanks for that description but it still seems strange that the press brings up the number of deaths and from what I've seen, they've never really explained the big deal about it all. Your explaination is acceptable and makes sense, though I hope those working on this might also be working on forcing it to mutate such that they can possibly get a version we can deal with before the natural mutation occurs. But they'd better not get a version which goes undetected by the scientist with epilepsy, eats rubber gaskets, and then starts killing the population atlarge.;-)
And hey, it's got everyone forgetting about the Beef Industries problems with Mad Cow. I've heard some say that the bird flu issue has been cooked up by the beef industry. A Fox Mulder kinda storyline don't you think?
I'm not a biologist but from what I've seen on the news, mostly people killing birds, more people have died in the USA last year from the regular flu then the total worldwide who've died from this bird-flu. Last I'd seen, the count was 9 dead from bird-flu worldwide.
I guess I'm missing something if the regular olde flu season in the USA kills on average 36,000 people ANNUALLY, and so far 9 have died from this bird-flu... WTF?
Slashdot Mirror
and THAT's been a good model for them hasn't it? Revenue without profits will only get you so far and is usually something startups are more likely to be working with. Microsoft, they've got two monopolies( one created from the other ) which bring in over 60% of their profits and all other business ventures lose money. For instance, that little OS called WindowsCE( MS PocketPC, MS PocketMobile, etc ) has provided Microsoft with over $9 Billion in loses over the last 10 years.
Anyways, Balmer is obviously envious and is attempting to show that he's dismissing them so other might do the same. But hey, atleast Google is good at what they do. But should Google find a profit in any of it's side-projects, they'll have already beat Microsoft since Microsoft has never done this outside of leveraging the MS Windows monopoly.
LoB
Hilf's background gives him a view of the business market related to OSS and how businesses approach it, touch and feel it etc. His job at Microsoft is not to help Microsoft become an OSS company or a supporter of OSS. His job is to inform them of how OSS is competing with them, how companies are 'feeling' about it, how well it is working in the field. All this information is most likely going to the MS Marketing Army, the MS Business Associate/Partnership Army, and to the MS Product Development Army and the task is to protect the MS Windows hold on the market.
Hilf crossed over the line. You just don't work for Microsoft and be any friend to OSS anymore. It's called being mutually exclusive.
LoB
come on, the MS Linux/OSS lab is nothing more than a place for Microsoft to keep an eye on what the OSS projects are doing and how they'll work within a Microsoft based environment. All this is to help them target their marketing and tweak their products so that they win and OSS loses. And I doubt if there is a single instance where befriending Microsoft will help OSS. We are talking about the "One Microsoft Way", "Linux is communism", etc Microsoft, are we not?
THERE'S 20 YEARS OF HISTORY HERE FOLKS. They are doing this to protect the MS Windows monopoly and their profits from this, noting more. So there is NOTHING in it to help you, the customer or you the developer. The game is about market protection and has been since the late 80's. IMO
LoB
...sending out the pipes? Or is this all bull shit?
if it's true then how come nobody in the medical IT business knows this? Nobody in the financial sector knows this? There are just two examples of where computers sending out unauthorized information put customers and businesses at risk.
Does this mean that every hospital needs to pull the plug on their network access to the outside world?
LoB
Huge head-ache? Just tell them to pretend it's just another MS Windows worm they have to clean the entire network of. Not sure about you but there was one not to long ago which shut down some of our city offices and it took the IT people working overnight to get things somewhat working again. It took another 2 days to get to all the non-critical systems since, IIRC, many required disk re-imaging.
So, tell them it's like another one of THOSE Windows issues but this time, it'll be the last time.
LoB
Let me get this straight, you expect the same execs who are currently dictating down to the masses that they must use Microsoft toothpicks, MS toilet paper, and all the other Microsoft crap but somehow they are going to want to get Apple Macs on THEIR desktops? Not sure what world you live in but it ain't gonna happen in the one I live in. These people don't read anything but the "One Microsoft Way" journal and are already telling their underlings to start planning to move to MS Windows Vista cause it's everything they need and wanted.
And like someone else already mentioned, Apple is but one PC seller. Microsoft has Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, etc tied to MS Windows with service contracts and advertising $$$. They aren't leaving MS Windows and Joe Public takes what's provided and wants it because it's on everyone elses computer too. So thinking Apple is going anywhere outside its niche is a pipe dream. They might grow in areas outside of MS Windows( everything non-PC centric ) but NOT on the Desktop or server. IMO.
LoB
OSS is not likely to have this kind of problem since there are many many options for who's going to fix the 'problem'.
So pass the word, along with no BSA worries, OSS frees you from paying Microsoft for tweaks to older software.
LoB
damn right you are. The coffee must not have made it to my index fingers when posting.
You seem to have a handle on the 'benefits' of Microsoft but you forgot one thing and that is Microsoft pays Dell a huge about to put all that Microsoft Windows advertising all over the Dell computer, box, print ads, and web pages. Did I say a huge about? So, how can Dell even consider listening to a few thousand customers wanting Linux when they keep shoveling MS Windows out the door by the millions to the ignorant masses? They can not. End of story.
The only thing Dell can do is to ride the wave downhill until it's almost too late. You know, just like how they rode the Intel bandwagon down the hill so far they were losing server sales to HP and others. Dell can only do this with Microsoft and Windows because they are TIED TO MICROSOFT HANDOUTS and there's nothing on the Linux side that'll replace that. Nothing.
LoB
Sure, there is all that but when it comes down to it, Dell not only can't afford to lose any of those Microsoft marketing dollars( something 20% of Dells profits ) but Microsoft has already told them they can sell Linux but can't "lead with Linux". And, they, Microsoft, have probably needed to remind Dell of this and thus the public 'correction' on their stance with regards to pre-installing GNU/Linux and OSS.
If people understood these two little issues, there would be no discussion on Dell pre-installing Linux. Atleast not until Microsoft has less control of them.
IMO
LoB
Just wondering since it was a personal investment by Bill Gates into Newport News Shipbuilding that was quickly followed by a statement that Newport News Shipbuilding DoD contract to build aircraft carriers would use Microsoft Windows on these ships.
s _stake_in_aircraft/
http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M000714.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/02/22/gates_buy
Or maybe the reply by the Brits when asked was something like, "nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" and pointed to the press release from Newport News and the DoD...
Actually, just because their previous system was from the stone age, it does not justify picking something more modern but well known for catastrophic systems failures( nachi, nimbda, blaster, etc ). That just makes them look more screwed up than they already look for keeping their systems so out of date in the first place. IMO.
So, is there a connection between Newport News Shipbuilding and BAE or is this just a follow the payed-off/purchased leader?
LoB
I didn't quite get that since he said they make software for banks/etc. If they have a 50/50 customerbase on Windows/*nix it would be stupid to stop one or the other. But, if there were advantages to their customers for one over the other it might make sense for their marketing people to let those customers know about it. This is unlikely since it's far more likely that their marketing people are Windows freaks and would be lost on the *nix side of the sale.
Anyways, the fact that they don't sell an OS but sell their apps makes no sense that there would be any kind of profit loss if their customers went with Linux under the hood for some reason or another. If their application is a desktop application then it's going to be a very hard sell getting them to put *nix on those desktops if they do anything else besides run their app on that desktop. Something their marketing people are not going bring up.
Pulling the rug out from one market or the other would be silly but I would guess that with the growth of Linux, they should see some growth in that segment. Cost wise, there is no longer the large financial difference between WindowsPCs and LinuxPCs like there was with the UNIX systems.
LoB
That's right, Microsoft is a Marketing company and has no interest in making their product better faster cheaper. And it is because of this that Microsoft Windows server have a one-application per server configuration and let's not forget the 2nd replicated copy to keep uptime acceptable.
:-/
You'd think that Microsoft would still be happy with the situation where a whole bunch of licensed copies of MS Windows were running on one box since they'd still be getting their software sales. But, the problem comes up when you see that the market leading VM company puts Linux under the VMs and shimming anything between Microsoft Windows and the hardware is a massive threat to the marketing preople at Microsoft.
It doesn't hurt that running Linux in those VMs is pretty easy too so that's another reason for Microsoft to want to crush this market as soon as possible and at any cost.
And as you stated, it's all because Windows sucks as a server and doesn't virtualize process or memory well enough to keep apps from crashing the OS. Heck, I remember in the '80s and '90s how UNIX servers were handling/serving dozens of applications. In the late '90s and '00s, Microsoft Windows servers were like reproducing like Tribbles or maybe more like Gremlins in a Seattle rain shower.
VMs are a major threat to Microsoft. Just show someone a pre-configured Linux VM on Windows in VMware Player and watch their face. If they are a developer, you'll hear gears moving too.
LoB
IIRC, someone is already using VMs to handle spyware and antivirus on Windows. From what I remember, they ran a VM running Linux and some filtering software and hooked the network traffic from the ethernet port to the VM and somehow connected the filtered stream back to Windowsland.
The idea was probably to use a less corruptable platform for the network traffic filtering without requiring an external computer to do this. I thought it was quite cool. I also always laugh at anyone attempting to declare their MS Windows box is fine because they run a MS Windows based firewall but still use MS Windows email, MS Windows IE browser, etc.
LoB
I wonder if a nicely tuned Postgres SQL system in a VM on MS Windows would run better than a Microsoft 'tuned' Postgres SQL on Windows??? If Postgres really does run THAT bad on Windows, maybe punching a hole in that by running it in a Linux VM with its own disk access might show it's Windows and not the database. And VMs make it an easy plugin for testing if word gets out this is the case.
This'll probably only work before Microsoft starts 'patching' the OS and ends up detuning VMwares performance. All by accident ofcourse.
LoB
Don't be fooled, the Novell deal is not about money, it's about protecting the Windows monopoly. There's just too much evidence out there to show that Microsoft is willing to lose money( billions ) in order to protect the Windows monopoly. Hey, Windows gives them 10s of billions annually AND it gives them MS Office and MS Server profits too. So there is no way in hell Microsoft is doing any of this for the money they'd get out of selling anything on Linux. With Windows, they control their destiny. With Linux, they'd have to manage to show why their stuff is better than the others, ie compete and that's something Microsoft has never done and been successful. IMO.
So don't be fooled, it's not about money. Heck, I have to laugh when Microsoft publicly says this after they PAID Novell millions in that 'deal' and there's nothing to show how anything close would be coming back to Microsoft. It was purely a trick to get Novell to sign up so Microsoft could try to get the big guys to use a version of Linux where they have a chance of infecting with their software and probably restrict to running in a Microsoft controlled VM. Again, no historical data shows Microsoft is profit driven outside of what runs on MS Windows.
LoB
I had to check on this to and yes, it is now free.
c hives/free-db2-7555
The only restrictions relate to the number of CPUs( 2 max-single or dual core) and the amount of system memory( 4 GB max ):
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/technology/ar
The sad thing is, if you try to tell a Microsoft shop that they should run a Linux HOST under the VM platform they'll say they have no experience with Linux and then go for MS Windows as the host. And telling them that they don't interface with the host OS much at all only gets blank stares as they reach for the Windows install CD.
If it's the fear of thinking they'll look like fools in the vast unknown of Linux or wanting the comfort of knowing that any problems they'll have with Windows as the host will be the same problems others are having. Don't know but it happens far far more than you probably think.
This is the initial advantage Microsoft has. Throw the VM tech into the OS and it's even easier to NOT make a choice and go with the lesser product. What we need is a Knoppix-like distro which installs Xen or VMware Server and provides the remote management clients on the CD also( Linux, Windows, Mac ). Make it braindead easy to create a VM server and see how easy it is to manage and create/install VMs.
LoB
atleast this setup will make it easier for the BSA to audit your software since they won't have to walk around the building to each PC for the audit. Other than that, I don't see how this is a cheaper way to manage the system since you end up with all unique installations of both OS and applications in every VM. And with a VM for each desktop, that's alot of licenses, disk space, and dare I say, MS Windows registry settings.
Now I've seen this work small scale, 5 VMs, but 40-60 would probably still be tough to manage. Probably better off with a terminal server setup of some sort.
LoB
I've not messed with it but the Edubuntu project mentions something about having builtin support for the LTSP thinclient stuff. What that would mean is that you'd have one computer in the room feeding the OS and apps to the clients( no OS installed on the clients ). And if all you were loading was the OS and a browser, that shouldn't put too much load on the bootup traffic.
Or you might just use that to load the OS to the clients so there's no need to install anything on those clients initially. I'm not sure how this would work over wireless though so a tiny boot partition might be needed for getting the wireless hardware going.
Anyways, something to look at and since you're talking school stuff, Edubuntu is targetting that market.
LoB
Just a reaction to pressures OSS is putting on them and won't happen where MS Office is still a huge money maker and PHB's are suckered into upgrade after upgrade. You know, kinda like how MS Windows Express-edition showed up in Taiwan after HP and Dell couldn't keep up with demand for the cheap laptops running GNU/Linux.
It's only going to put a small ding into Microsofts profits and it'll help slow down the cascade to OSS.
Remember, 30% of Microsofts profits come from MS Office so they can not afford to cut pricing across the board on this productline. IMO.
LoB
yup, I'm unaware that any person or company can make public claims which harm another person or company and that it'll cost millions to use legal means to get them to product proof of those claims. If so, it's too bad because it would be great to see Microsofts death by a million needles as millions filed claims against them.
On the other hand, Microsoft is talking about Linux so much these days, it sounds like the pricks are already being felt by Microsoft.
LoB
Makes me wonder if some small garage GNU/Linux shop can't sue Microsoft for these statements. Some garage shop with an annual revenue stream in the 10's of thousands( or less ) so that any counter suit, if any, couldn't justify millions or billions, dozens of lawyers over years like the SCO case has done. Just a quiet local court case to see WTF Balmer is talking about and to get this out in the open ASAP.
I was really disappointed that Iowa was bought-out by MSFT like all the others. I was just getting used to the Friday night laughs from public court documents from that case. And was so looking forward to hearing the MSFT Execs on the stand.
LoB
Thanks for that description but it still seems strange that the press brings up the number of deaths and from what I've seen, they've never really explained the big deal about it all. Your explaination is acceptable and makes sense, though I hope those working on this might also be working on forcing it to mutate such that they can possibly get a version we can deal with before the natural mutation occurs. But they'd better not get a version which goes undetected by the scientist with epilepsy, eats rubber gaskets, and then starts killing the population atlarge. ;-)
And hey, it's got everyone forgetting about the Beef Industries problems with Mad Cow. I've heard some say that the bird flu issue has been cooked up by the beef industry. A Fox Mulder kinda storyline don't you think?
LoB
I'm not a biologist but from what I've seen on the news, mostly people killing birds, more people have died in the USA last year from the regular flu then the total worldwide who've died from this bird-flu. Last I'd seen, the count was 9 dead from bird-flu worldwide.
I guess I'm missing something if the regular olde flu season in the USA kills on average 36,000 people ANNUALLY, and so far 9 have died from this bird-flu... WTF?
FYI, a link on the 36,000 dead number:
"Why should you get your flu vaccination?" http://www.slate.com/id/2091774/
LoB