Linux is Microsoft's biggest enemy. It is Unix come back for revenge. Microsoft beat Unix because NT was cheaper. Linux is free, though. Linux is going to win most of the Server market. Why? Because it is like Unix, only better and faster growing and free. No matter what happens, SOMEONE, somewhere will be running Linux, whether it be in a set-top box or whatever, Linux will be around. Since Linux will be around, SOMEONE will be developing for it. The MS vs. Linux battle will never, ever end, until one or the other is dead. Since I just discussed why I think that Linux will never be destroyed, the battle will either rage on forever, or Microsoft will lose. I don't think that it will be soon, but I do think that either Microsoft will take over the world (improbable, but a curious and/or amusing possibility...), or Linux will win. I am not a Linux nut. I just don't see a way that Linux can lose, that's all.
Keep in mind that IBM is a big backer for Linux, as is Walmart, which is the biggest corporation in the world (at least it's the biggest in the US). Does anybody think that Microsoft will ultimately win? If so, tell your reasons. This is an exciting discussion (for myself, at least ).
I just found out about this interview (The name "The Inquirer" scares people, but it is a reputable source.) which says basically what I have been saying (I find it remarkably similar in the details to what I have been saying!). It says that Linux is Microsoft's biggest competitor, according to Rick Belluzzo, formerly the third highest Microsoft executive and now is at Quantum. I think that I should write articles about this or something...
Don't you think that I am smart? ~
Ouch!
*hurts arm patting himself on back*
Okay, I'll bite, robotbeat.
I just hope I don't get slashdotted to death for it...
1- LINUX is *good* for MS.
2- LINUX will never replace Microsoft.
That contrarian enough for you?
On point one:
a- LINUX is good for MS for a wide range of reasons, chief among them that it provides the *appearance* of competition in the microcomputer OS markets, while doing nothing to erode the cash cow of MS finances. (Anybody notice how, at a dire time in the computer industry, for all the bad-mouthing they get in the tech media, MS just keeps on growing their market share and raking in the cash?)
b- LINUX is a consolidation product that grows its market share out of existing markets rather than creating new markets. (As MS is doing with say, Tablet PCs and Multimedia PCs, and the Mira displays). In other words, instead of looking for customers amoung people who *don't* use computers, LINUX looks for customers among people who *already* use computers and for the most part get them from UNIX-fans and IT types. Now, I think most rational folks would agree that LINUX is an alternative to Windows but *not* a replacement for Windows. After all, if LINUX were a true replacement for Windows there would be not need for Windows emulators, multi-boot-LINUX, or virtual machines to run Windows on the same computer, no? Anyway, the fact is that LINUX is a product of techies, designed *for* techies. And techies, are a very small part of the market. How small? In the corporate world, the ratio of users to techies runs at 50 to 1 in a well-run organization; 100 to 1 in others. And that doesn't even begin to factor in the home or education markets where the ratios are far greater. Translation: LINUX's maximum market share, in real-world terms, is a maxium of 2%, and that only if *all* techies adopt LINUX. But then, we all know that the ratio on techies is at best a fifty-fifty split between the ABMers and the NBMers. So, when you next look at published reports that say only 0.25% of all internet users are running on LINUX, don't assume they're wrong. Chances are, they're *exactly* right. LINUX makes a lot of noise but very impact. Just the kind of competition MS needs in thse post-antitrust days.
c- Finally, LINUX itself is a replication technology born out of a culture of reverse-engineering rather than trailblazing. This is taking LINUX into some "interesting" directions that surely must make MS smile. (It will be a cold day in Brazil when patents and IP are abolished on *this* planet!)
Besides, the near-religious zealotry of the anti-IP crew gives credence to the worst legal interpretations of the GPL. All it takes is *one* GPL-based lawsuit to put the fear of God in corporations thinking of building their business on GPL'ed software. Or, consider this: what's the biggest schism between LINUX zealots? The split between the GNOMErs and K-crowd, no? And what are they arguing over? The best way to replicat the object-oriented environments of APPLE and Windows, an issue that with Windows was settled in 1996. Or, how about the LINUX response to Microsoft's vision of meta-computing, .NET? Did they conjure up a different, alternative vision? Did they think of a different, possibly better way to achieve the same functions? No, they devoted their full efforts to trying to copy .NET into MONO. In other words, we are talking of a community of followers, not trailblazers. Don't expect to see any new computing paradigms coming out of *that* crew.
Here's a true story from the late 80's for you:
Way back when, there were three dominant vendors of UNIX workstations; Apollo, HP, and, SUN, with DEC and IBM behind.
One day, Apollo got into trouble and they decided to sell out to HP.
Some bright reporter asked Scott McNeally what he though of the number 1 and number three workstation vendors merging to compete with him.
Mr MacNeally's answer went something like this:
"I like it. That's one less competitor to worry about. Within a year, *we* will be number one, while HP is still trying to digest Apollo."
And he was right.
Remember last year's HP/Compaq merger?
Has this year's HP market share added up to the sum of the two market shares they had last year? No.
Partly this is because Toshiba got into the game with some very interesting Pocket PCs.
But partly it is because every time you consolidate different markets, some of the users don't migrate to the "natural" heir.
When SGI IRIX died, their customers didn't all go to LLINUX; some took their ALIAS files and moved to a MAC. Or to a DELL NT box.
When Somebody ditches their old ALPHA TRU064 system, they're as likely to move to a Windows box as a LINUX box.
As LINUX undercuts commercial UNIXes, a portion of that customer base migrates, not to LINUX, but to Windows.
Let this go on long enough and you have a world divided between nothing but LINUX and Windows.
And, considering that LINUX generates no revenue that can be reinvested in R&D it means that MS wins, by default.
Personally, I don't think this is good.
But I do think it is an inevitable consequence of the LINUX "business" model, which is designed *on purpose* to prevent people from making money off their software. (That is what GPL is all about, remember?)
Well, it succeeds; to date nobody makes money directly off LINUX.
Oh, there is some money to be made off services or pushing LINUX hardware but the reinvestment there goes mostly into newer hardware and better staffing and very little into exploring new computing technologies.
The LINUX crew expects to wait until somebody else (most likely MS) invents something so they can then replicate it and give it away. But it takes time to replicate something someone else invented.
And while you wait to copy that development, the creator of the product gets to make money off their ideas.
So the answer to how does MS compete with a free product becomes obvious: you keep changing your product and enhancing it continually so the opposition, which started out 5 years behind your technology, is always 5 years or more behind you. That difference in technology then becomes the added value you bring to the table and allows you to survive or, if you're the only alternative to the free product, prosper.
Think again; what are Pocket PCs, Tablet PCs, and Media Center PCs? New kinds of PCs that take Windows into previously non-existent markets. And where is the Apple reply? The LINUX counter? Nowhere. Those are markets MS can own by default. (Well, maybe some token ristance from SONY, but Palm? Dead meat judging by the Tungsten boxes.) Right now those markets are tiny. But in time, they will be big. And they will more than make up for any sales MS might possibley lose to LINUX in the enterprise market which, BTW, has always been owned by IBM and UNIX, not MS. They are not losing anything they ever had, guys.
LINUX will not kill Windows. ONLY MS can do that.
But it can and likely will kill everything else off.
This is not good.
But try telling it to the Slashdotters.
All they see is "LINUX is free."
I will not flame you, because you bring up some valid and interesting points.
I do, however, disagree that Linux will never replace Microsoft. Did you follow the link that I posted?
I think that Microsoft wants the server market very badly, and I think that the biggest competitor (and one that does, in fact, erode MS's marketshare in this market) in this area is Linux. Isn't Apache the most popular web server on the net? If I am wrong, someone please give some solid numbers (like I should have done).
I do see Linux bringing in new users who don't use computers (or who just aren't techies like us). Mandrake is pretty easy, and those behind it are trying to make it easy enough for most newbies to learn to use it at least as easily as a MS OS. As I said before, Linux is being pushed through Walmart in low-end PCs designed for low-end usage and newbies (although a lot of techies are buying them). This is only the beginning for Linux. You just wait and see.
Also, I would like to point out that Linux has many, many different flavors, and that development is going very fast, as it is open-source. Many people make programs for free. This is freedom. GNU is a utopia of the digital sort. A sort that works. Think of it as a sort of software-socialism, a socialism that works, because the digital world is a world unlike our own. Computers aren't greedy. Anyways...
Yeah, Linux doesn't need to pour money into research and development. They are both free. You apparently don't quite understand how the open-source community works. People make programs because they love to program and they love the community. It is wonderful, it really is.
There are Linux PDAs and such out, of course. As far as the media center, yes, there is a Linux answer. There is an Xbox hack that let's you do Media Enter type things. I think that either TIVO or some competitor uses embedded Linux to run the thing, so there is something there, too. Linux is spreading, just like MS is. Anyone who has newer IWILL motherboard drivers that come on CD has a small version of Linux. Linux is in a lot of places. Linux is fast. Linux is easy to use, and is getting easier. Linux is bigger than you think.
Right now I’m mulling over taking a few Linux classes in January. Why? Because I firmly believe that Linux is going to overtake Windows.....In the enterprise environment. MS can fling as much monkey **** about Linux at its customers as it wants but at the end of the day any CIO who does their homework can add 1+1 and at the end of the day the potential TCO of Windows IS higher then Linux. I can’t tell you how many patches I’ve applied to Windows in the last 6 months. From OS patches to IE patches to Media Player patches to VM patches. Patching 100 PC’s and keeping track of all the patches MS puts out is almost a full time job.
I would say that ¼ of the time spent in my work week is spent testing patches to confirm that they don’t break the OS then rolling them out. The TCO for Windows is, and IMHO always will, be high. Heck I have yet to see a patch that can’t be applied to Linux where you need to reboot your system. My XP box at home can’t stay up for more then a week to a week and a half simply because whenever I install a patch I HAVE to reboot.
Now let’s look at the other reasons I believe that Linux will win the Enterprise. Unlike a home user who is constantly installing things. Has to maintain his/her own box. Is updating the hardware. Enterprise environments are generally static with an occasional app being released. Really for the most part what apps do most enterprise computers deal with? MS Office? Internet browser? E-Mail? Acrobat files? Zip files? Maybe multimedia? AS/400 apps? Network shares? Printers?
All of the above can be done on Linux. Heck with Crossover office http://www.codeweavers.com/products/office/
You can run office 2000. Internet Exploder 5.5 among other apps. Heck you can tweak the interface to closely emulate MS Windows.
For those dealing with custom apps. Well depending on the time and the original investment they could be converted over to Linux the problem is that I’m guessing that the developer, either in house or out side the company, is most likely ONLY fluent on the VB development platform so they would be clueless when it comes to creating Linux based apps. (I have to imagine cost of development IS higher on Linux then on Windows.)
There is no real need for the user to have to go in and edit system settings. No need for them to have to alter any settings on the system at all. Once set up the user should only need to access the apps installed on the system. Anything more they should be calling tech support. (Sorry but I don’t think the end user should be altering any system settings without letting me know. I’m anal that way )
And as for file servers. MS should be VERY worried. Simply put why should you spend $1000+ (5 user lic) for just an file server OS when Linux can be a perfectly acceptable file server that can integrate into existing Windows environments. Yes it takes some tweaking but with a little time, effort and pulling some of your hair out you can save thousands.
Don’t underestimate the power of the word FREE. People are getting sick of MS’s BS licensing practices. There is some seriously pissed off people that have been burned by MS’s licensing 6 scheme. My company just renewed our contract with MS. The amount that we have spent on it has not been disclosed but I’ve heard rumors of Linux testing being started. I have to imagine it’s because our company just spent an *** load on MS software. Felix you said the “LINUX will not kill Windows. ONLY MS can do that.” They are doing that with shoving product activation on the server down business’s throats and with licensing schemes that are pissing off companies.
Finally Felix you mentioned moving into new directions. Linux is in the PDA market. They are only starting but right now you can replace the OS on iPaq’s with Linux. You have the Sharp Zaurus SL-5600. It’s a very impressive device optimized for the 400Mhz X-Scale. Its only problem? Lack of software right now. And now you have this: http://synce.sourceforge.net/synce/ Syncing a pocket PC with Linux. Granted its in its initial stages but given enough time it will happen.
I liken the Linux community to a drip of water falling on a rock. It’s slow. WAY slow. But given enough time it will erode that rock down. There is very little MS can do against the Linux community. Their methods of embrace and extend can’t work on Linux since its open source and the Linux community would counter with a compatibility patch.
I don’t think MS windows is going anywhere but I do believe that if MS continues on its present course of alienating the Windows community with product activation, passport, DRM, major security issues, Palladium *spits the word* and the like I think you are going to see a steady decline in the number of people who will use Windows. Then again I’m hearing more and more rumors of the RIAA, MS, MPAA teaming up to push legislation through congress that would actually make ANY OS that doesn’t have copyright protection built in illegal in the US. Something like that would kill Linux. Let me see if I can find that article again.
Oh yeah, I have built NAS (network-attached storage, basically a dedicated file-server) boxes before. One of them that I built has a dual-cpu Athlon MP motherboard with (most importantly) 64-bit PCI slots with a good 64-bit IDE RAID card in it. It is currently running embedded Linux. Free is the way to go. I mean, Linux is higher-performance (partially because it's just a console running, no Xwindow display thing, but other reasons, too) than any other MS solution, besides the software is open-source so the company that provides us with the special version of Linux can alter the OS itself if needed. Try getting MS to let you have access to their source code so that you can alter it! Anyways, Linux is definitely the way to go with NAS devices that you are building customized as an OEM.
).
LINUX VS MS?
)
Linear Mode
