Forrester Report: Linux Hysteria Will Fade In 2000 238
sirch wrote to us with the latest research from Forrester Reports. The report alleges that this year's massive hyping of Linux will fade in 2000, as well as stating that it's not probable that CIOs will be switching over in massive numbers to Linux. However, the report than goes on to say that Linux will probably see continued growth, through "dominating new application segments." Not really that surprising of a report. One of the interesting points is the prediction that by 2004, the other Unices and Linux will have converged to the point that binaries for any one will probably run on all the others.
Less Java hype but... (Score:1)
Re:first haiku (ot) (Score:1)
with you though, if i were to
meta-moderate
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
Re:It's probably true... (Score:1)
people everywhere had java shoved in their faces, constantly told it was this huge new revoloutionary thing. After being told over and over how great it is, most of them actually went and looked at it, to find it was horribly slow, usually unusable, that "write-once-run-anywhere" was a joke, and that most java more or less didn't work. The simple fact was that java was not _ready_, that it was still in growing pains. But java was treated as if it were ready for _anything_, and it was all over the place, where it didn't belong. You'd open up random webpages, have your computer stall for 10 seconds while a little message that said "java VM loading" blinked, and be treated to an ugly banner app written by a 14-year-old that would sometimes crash your computer.
so yes, people got exposure to java, but they also got dissilusioned with it. It stuck in their memory but the memories were of something highly dodgy. Now that java has matured a bit and, thankfully, retreated to server applications wehre it is much better suited, i'm still sure a bunch of people are left with somewhat bad memories of it. Java seems like it does have a future ahead of it, though, despite Sun's valiant efforts at self-destruction.
What i'm hoping is that the linux hype _does_ die down before it starts getting pushed in places where it doesn't belong, paving the way for people to think linux is as dodgy as java is because they use KDE, discover it's horrid, and think that's all linux is. Hopefully linux will go from sheer unrestrained hype to steady growth and winning on its own merits in those areas where it is very strong.. and not wind up being pushed as the Next Big Thing on the desktop, where it probably isn't ready quite yet. (hmm, that's kind of what you were saying, isn't it?)
This isn't a great thing to be comparing, though, since linux is much stronger than java ever was, infinately more useful, and DEFINATELY much more mature. In fact it's about as mature as you could help for in every area except GUI, which isn't neccicarily important. ah well. Either way, we are left with one incredibly irritating byproduct of the java hype, namely that LiveScript got renamed JavaScript, forcing us all to constantly explain to people that there is no connection whatsoever between java and javascript..
-mcc-baka
i hope to God that 24 hours ago i will not be running IRC.
Re:And if you like O'Reilly books & are a cheapska (Score:1)
--
Re:first haiku (ot) (Score:1)
You wasteful moderator..
Mark stuff up instead
Re:cross platform binaries? (Score:1)
Writing portable code is getting out of fashion. With many small utility-type programs, we're seeing it today: "Use this with Linux, or don't use it at all!"
Re:What hellacious requirements? (Score:1)
Just like Win95 ran fine on a 486 DX50 with 16 megs of ram, eh?
Ahh, it's always so much fun being told my experience really didn't happen by a moron who's never even used the product. Let's all bow down to the eleet skillz of C.Lee.
Happy trollin', zealot.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Re:yup... (Score:1)
Re:Well thought report (Score:2)
Windows has a bunch of hype going for it... check out any paper magazine aimed at PHBs/Real (L)users and 30-50% of the ads are for one MS product or another. And, of course, when W2K is released, there will be more commercials and banner ads than you can shake a 10baseT at. RedHat/VA/Penguin Computing/whoever will have to fight back with hype of their own, so the hype will not die down anytime soon.
When the hype does die down and Linux is on store shelves all over the world, the Linux community/distro packagers will face a new problem. To borrow from business-weasel jargon, the market will be "mature" or "saturated" and no longer "the Next Big Thing." This means less quick money for those involved, and there will be some sort of backlash when/if Linux becomes really popular. (Maybe the backlash has already started, if you check the more extreme BSD-phile comments posted along with this article...)
Anyway, Linux needs no hype to survive or even thrive, as people can see by looking back to the 0.XX kernel days. This is foreign to marketing peoples' experience, thus they probably can't write about it with any degree of accuracy :-]
Re:yeah right.. (Score:1)
I cannot tell you how sick I am of trying answering the questions with a straight face:
Where will your company be in 1 year? 3 years? 5 years?
For example, I'd like to have seen Netscape's "Business Plan."
1 year: Dominator of the huge upcoming Web Browser market. Oh, by the way, the WWW is going to be the biggest, most widely used used part of the internet along with e-mail. Really.
3 years: Defunct. Bought out by America Online for oodles of $$$. We all will be on yachts and starting "Remember Netscape?" websites (remember that the WWW will be the biggest, most widely used...you know...).
5 years: Not Applicable.
For some reason I don't think their business plan looked anything like that.
(Microsoft's crystal ball was working, though...their plan was something like: 1 year--dominate the market; 3 years--dominate more markets; 5 years--dominate even more markets; 10 years--dominate more markets; 15 years--dominate any markets missed in earlier years.)
But I don't place any faith in these kinds of things because if the people at the companies that these predictions are made about don't even know what the next year will bring, how would an outsider?
And that goes double for a phenomenon like Linux that's not even tethered to a single company.
Re:Thank you Win2K (Score:1)
Windows Scripting Host (Score:1)
Microsoft realized this was a weakness, and that's why they release Windows Scripting Host.
And part of what makes Microsoft's scripting so much more powerful is that they've presented within their scripting engines easy configuration of the entire system.
Much the same happened with OS/2 (Score:1)
It's something the media does... they have to report on things, but when the current product is stagnant and you're sitting around waiting for this promised new version... you get bored.
So Windows 2000 has been late by about 18 months or so, the media got bored and started looking at Linux.
Next year Windows 2000 will dominate all the media, and in another year or two they'll start looking for some other product to look at. (Well now that linux hasn't lived up to it's hype, remember) Maybe it'll be BeOS, or MacOS X, or whatever.
Different meanings of "cross-platform" (Score:2)
For instance, PA-RISC Linux and HP-UX would be binary-compatible, as would SunOS (on SPARC) be with SparcLinux. This would require some amount of work, but it is not wholly infeasible.
I don't believe they mean that you would be able to run the same binary on, say... ia32 Linux, Tru64 on Alpha, and MacOS X on PPC.
Linux for the desktop... HA! (Score:1)
And if you like O'Reilly books & are a cheapskate (Score:2)
You can get the entire Using Samba online at O'Reilly's web site [oreilly.com].
Note that Samba currently has problems with most PDC and BDC scenarios and share ACLs among other things, and I'm not too sure that Win2K hasn't also introduced some issues with Samba compatibility.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Cross Platform Binaries? (Score:1)
or do they predict that we will all be using the same processors by then as well..
Re:Less Java hype but... (Score:1)
The Great Byte Hype (Score:2)
Of course, I'm just pulling that thought out of my ass, but I have personally brought linux to about 10 people, but I'm out of technically-competent people who are open-source virgins. They either love it, or use it, or don't understand it, or tolerate it, or hate it, but they've all been acquainted with Linux/BSD.
I think the Linux hype is over because there was never really anything to get insanely excited about. Linux is just better-distributed and packaged BSD, with a license that is trivially different from BSD style licensing. Wee. I think Linux still the greatest thing since sliced bread and oxygen, but it's not going to knock Win9x off the Common Desktop, it's NOT going to stop MS from owning the mid-small server market with their trillion dollar cap and Windows 2000 (which is a STUNNING improvement over NT4), it's not going to displace Commercial Unixes by virtue of technological superiority (or even parity for that matter), and it's NOT going to revolutionize life as we know it.
Bah humbug.
Hype & Hysteria (Score:3)
See my point?
Oh, and power to the stocks.
Well thought report (Score:3)
Re:first haiku (ot) (Score:1)
(response to anon. coward)
do not challenge me
void recursion (void)
{
recursion();
}
while(1) printf ("infinite loop");
if (true) printf ("Stupid sig quote");
Cross Platform Binaries? (Score:1)
iBCS has been running SYSV binaries for a while.
FreeBSD has been running Linux binaries for a while too
As long as the underlying instruction set is the same, and the api is the same (good ol' UNIX standards), then it ain't too hard.
Of course, cross platform across different instruction sets is simply painful, involving either an emulator or transmeta black magic
--
How do you keep an idiot in suspense?
Tell him the next version of Windows will be faster, more reliable, and easier to use!
Re:first haiku (Score:5)
To this silly thread; waste points;
Scores will rise and fall
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
we have to.. (Score:1)
as much haiku as we can
for post-Y2K
It's neccicary.
We are not just paranoid.
Please stop mocking us
Re:cross platform binaries? (Score:1)
Many commercial applications have NO open source rivals - and won't for some time. Examples include damn near anything by Oracle, Alias|Wavefront, Legato, Veritas - the list goes on.
Many of these applications aren't supported on different patchlevels of the same OS - nevermind just having a simple recompile make them work on multiple platforms.
The issue is more than whether or not the program will run, or whether it's ``programmed correctly'' -- it's how to offer support on ``n'' unknown platforms.
As I'm sure any coder will tell you - just because it compiles, doesn't mean it works.
-Jeff
Re:Any credibility? (Score:2)
Dont you remember in the Hithhikers Guide to the Galaxy? Deep Thought took some 7 million years to find the Answer to The Ultimate Question of Life, The Universe, And Everything. In the meantime, the philosophers got insanely rich by arguing pointlessly over what the outcome would be.
It doesnt matter whether or not their prediction turns out to be false. All that matters is that they get people in a frenzied debate and pay them for their ideas. They know that their predictions are nonsense, but they also know they are being payed to make them, accurate or not.
Clever, I must say...
Dilbert: I have become one with my computer. It is a feeling of ecstacy... the blend of logic and emotion. I have reached...
This is probably true... (Score:2)
Using predictions for growth. (Score:1)
Why not use these "predictions" as directions to work towards. They think all *nixes should be able to run each others binaries? To work! We've got code to hack. Let's do it. This may involve writing a generic Linux/x86 environment so other architectures can run x86 code, but it can't be a bad thing....
Just an idea.
first haiku (Score:3)
i piss off moderator
he no like haiku
Re:not surprising (Score:1)
Re:The Second Haiku (On Topic, too!) (Score:1)
Far too many syllables!
No haiku for you!
Uh... huh? (Score:1)
I can also remember when people would tell me that macs and windows computers would soon be able to run programs interchangeably... And (thank god) that hasn't happened....
If anything, i'd think they'd be more different...
Re:Def Leppard = glam metal? Not. (Score:1)
FADING??? (Score:2)
=======
There was never a genius without a tincture of madness.
Never (Score:1)
Re:first haiku (ot) (Score:2)
I would moderate you down
but I don't have points
void recursion (void)
{
recursion();
}
while(1) printf ("infinite loop");
if (true) printf ("Stupid sig quote");
Re:Then why does Yahoo stock look like Intel? (Score:1)
going slightly off topic, you have to wonder about the intentions of these groups. Often times they have vested interests in influencing stocks one way or the other.
Notice how often analysts who have a 'strong buy' rating on a particular stock, will switch all the way to 'hold' or 'sell' when the stock takes a dump after dissappointing quarterly results.
You can bet they sold their stock prior to changing their recommendations.
Re:Thank you Win2K (Score:2)
Your basic point seems to be, Linux ain't like Windows! No, it isn't -- that's why it's called LINUX. There was a good post on this subject recently, and the guy has a good essay [suninternet.com] on his site which deals with this in greater depth; but, in a nutshell, if you want Windows, use Windows!
I love Slashdot (Score:2)
<Putting on glasses and a "Yoda Lives!" t-shirt> Screw Forrester! Why was this even posted on Slashdot? Everybody knows this is bogus because with Internet time being so fast, nobody can predict what's going to happen in the next few years.
Now shut up so I can tell you that Linux will soon achieve world domination and Microsoft will be bankrupt by 2002!
:-)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Cross platform binaries? (Score:3)
Re:Any credibility? (Score:2)
People who are making decisions have to base these decisions on SOMETHING. Reports like this give them something credible to fall back on when they are trying to explain their actions. :)
Inventors, financial analysts, etc., like to know this stuff so they can more accurately predict whats going to happen in the future, and maximize their profits.
Business owners and those in change of deploying IT solutions like to know this sort of thing so that they can plan for the future, and maximize their profits.
Basically, it all comes down to money, but hey, doesn't everything?
Oh, and I love the source of this article: The E-Commerce Times. Ahahahaha. I love it.
I think the hyping has barely begun. (Score:1)
Some thoughts on this... (Score:3)
Meanwhile, Windows will continue to lose terrain, both on the server market (which has already started), and on the client market (just starting)... on many cases, the giving away of StarOffice by Sun Microsystems will be the drip that overflows the bucket, since some 90% of office users use only, well, Office.
Re:pointless Forrester report that covers all base (Score:1)
Massive Hyping? (Score:1)
Nowhere near the massive multibillion dollar ad budget overhyping of those other guys. Linux is real, the other guys are the smoke and mirrors that are destined to dissapoint (and don't blame ME! It's THEIR property - YOU bought it, I NEVER recommended buying their licenses!)
Boojum
Re:Cross platform binaries? (Score:1)
Is it possible this report is correct? (Score:2)
Ok, let's start with Linux fading. Assume that's true. Ok, now what's going to replace it. It has to be closed-source, otherwise the conditions wouldn't be right for Linux to fade. But, by the mass market switching back to closed-source, you create the conditions necessary for Linux not to fade. (Unfixed security flaws, instability, over-pricing, etc.)
Reducio Ad Absurdium.
Now, let's take the argument that Unixes will move together in a way that they will be binary-compatiable. This is already the case with iBCS and *BSD's Linux binary system. It would seem to follow that this is not a meaningful prediction as it has already occured. Indeed, iBCS has been a fundamental part of Linux for some considerable time, and was probably instrumental to Oracle porting it's database to Linux, owing to the large number of people running the Solaris version under Linux.
Conclusion - by trying to prove the report valid, I seem to always be reaching the conclusion that the report is invalid. This shows that the report really IS invalid.
Re:Convergence (Score:1)
Look how far we've come (Score:1)
Then it was this Minix stuff is a toy.
Followed by "this Linux stuff is just for hackers".
Then: "Well, they've only got 1% of the server market" - followed immediately by "... 15% ..."
Now the Linux craze is over.
Same negativity. Perhaps someday they'll get something right. But no one keeps track of this stuff.
Just like weather predictions.
(Psst - don't let the moderators know that this is haiku!).
old ways of thinking (Score:3)
I think it's only a matter of time before CIO's start to see the benefits. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but it will happen eventually. I won't got into the reasons since you know them already. Forester is only saying this because of what's true today. I certianly don't look to them for future trends.
These research organiazations are simply too entrenched with the way things are today and how they were yesterday. An open source business model simply doesn't compute in their minds, therefore, it can't work.
Highly profitable open source corporations and widespread use of linux or whatever other flavor don't have to be related. Redhat doesn't need a market capitalization of $100 zillion like microsoft to have a large share of the OS market.
Re:The Second Haiku (On Topic, too!) (Score:2)
On slashdot it says:
They do not trust in Linux!
The shame, oh the shame.
they dont know crap (Score:1)
virtually all of the time being untrue as well as
all the other "prediction firms"
they want to tell me my horoscope too and read my palm
they have no benefits for saying anything either way so they are not accountable they spout bullshit and since most of the time its untrue it must be dealt with
Re:Win2k no threat (Score:1)
Compelling Reasons, volume 1:
IIRC, there was a report from Gartner or whomever that stated that companies would start thinking about migrating in 2001, when the first service packs should begin arriving. That's a year after; and Win 9x-users will have to wait for their next Big Thing, the allusive Windows Millennium.
Re:Some thoughts on this... (Score:1)
While it is functionally equivalent to MS Office, Star Office has two primary problems -- speed and stability. Star Office crashes often on the two systems I have run it on (Mandrake 6.0 / GNOME / Enlightenment), and tends to take the window manager down with it. Add to that, it is at least 5 times slower than MS in many cases. I have used both to create a graph in Excel/StarCalc with 13,000 points. Excel takes about 2 seconds to create the graph, Star Office, 30 seconds or more. Or it crashes.
Star Office may be free, but it's not an Office-killer yet.
Dave
Re:not surprising (Score:1)
Do you have a clue ? Companies just spent billions on y2k and now you think they will upgrade to Win2k just because it is there? You need a really good reason to spend millions on a new OS. I think that it is MSFT that is in for a real shocker here. I think you might see the Linux hype die out and some stock prices drop, but
you will see Linux gain market share as well.
Re:we have to.. (Score:2)
I have a gun. Now I have
both gun and haiku.
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
Re:not surprising (Score:1)
Re:Any credibility? (Score:3)
For example, their feeling that the prominence of Linux will fade is based on the misapprehension that its rise has been based on hype, like so many other media darlings. But, as so many here can surely testify, this is not so. Linux is where it is today because of the real benefits and the real potential it has.
Their prediction that CIO's will not switch to Linux is based on a similar theory that Linux is in some fundamental way not a serious OS, and also on an assumption that Microsoft will continue to represent the safe choice for budget holders. We already know the truth about the former. My own prediction as regards the latter is that Windows 2000 will be an unmitigated PR disaster because of the risks inherent in such a bloated product stuffed with such a huge amount of new and relatively untested code. Sensible CIO's will at least recognise the possibility of major technical problems and will keep W2K at arm's length at least until the first major service pack appears. In the meantime they will be much more open to experimentation with alternative platforms such as Linux.
Finally, to suggest that binary compatibility will be achieved by 2004 is to betray an embarrassing level of ignorance about the subject they're discussing. We already have binary compatibility by and large across a number of OS running on the x86 platform by virtue of compatibility libraries; applications compiled for Linux will already run on SCO and BSD and I believe Solaris will provide this too very soon. In any case, Linux has provided iBSCD compatibility support in the kernel for a number of years, allowing one to run compliant native SCO and (as was) Interactive Unix applications under Linux.
With Linux's current substantial (and increasing) market share and developer mind share, this level of compatibility only needs to advance modestly for across-the-board compatibility to be commonplace within two years at the most.
Their predictions are worthless nonsense. I say again, these guys have no clue; their opinions are only of interest in that they are indicative of how equally clueless PHB's think.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Point? (Score:1)
Re:FADING??? (Score:1)
1: What sort of installation did you do for RH6.1? Server/Workstation/Custom?
2: What were the error messages?
I ask because I've had no problems with RH6 (well, a few, but they were of my own making - one of the joys of being able to tinker, I suppose
Cheers
Rich
Forrester and LinuxMyths (Score:2)
Win2k no threat (Score:1)
On the other hand it will continue to have benefits for some users on the desktop.
Basicly Linux and Windows advantages/disadvantages are converging - Linux from the server end to the desktop and windows in the opposite direction. What happens when they meet?
Economics wins. Linux is free and windows is not. One day, soon or not-so-soon Linux wins because the cheaper product always wins, especially when it's better to boot.
Re:FADING??? (Score:2)
And that includes error messages for really stupid things too. Like if I hit the "logout" button in Gnome, then say "No", it puts an error message on tty1 that looks pretty serious.
--
Re:FADING??? (Score:1)
=======
There was never a genius without a tincture of madness.
Re:cross platform binaries? (Score:1)
Re:not surprising (Score:2)
One of the things I have noticed about MS product introductions is that they rarely live up to the pre-hype, and there is always some backlash after the product hits the street. People installing the prerelease versions are generally early adopters who focus on the upsides of the product - building the prerelease hype. After introduction the media tend to focus on the problems that occur. I don't know about you, but I sure remember the wave of problem reports that hit once people learned that Win 95 didn't support their legacy sound or network card, or some archaic software they had. Not to mention it had a number of very annoying bugs on introduction, and the the first patches/upgrades generally caused more problems than they fixed.
This makes me believe that there will be some hype associated with the the release, but as soon as people start finding that the software isn't perfectly 100% back-compatable, AND that it has a higher price than they expect AND it really isn't a consumer OS AND like any major new release there are going to be a lot of bugs you are going to see a lot of backlash in the media. There will be a lot of business organizations that will delay implementation because they don't want to beta test on enterprise servers, or because their techs are not yet W2K certified, and the media will also pick up on this.
It's the same thing you saw with Linux - as soon as you saw media the hype start about Linux as a Windows replacement there were a raft of articles about how hard it was to install, or how it wasn't ready for the desktop. That Linux as a Windows replacement stuff has mostly died out already.
Right now the media hype associated with Linux has little to do with Linux as a Windows replacement; it is driven by the stock market's appetite for technology stocks. I think that the Forrester report is making a big assumption that this enthusiasm for Linix IPOs is going to die out any time soon. The growth potential for Linux in all sorts of applications is still there, and somebody is likely to find a workable business model. The internet appliances Forrester cites positions Linux too strongly for what a lot of people think is the strategic direction for the growth in computing. This is precisely where Microsoft has seems to be it's weakest with it's losing Wince product.
Article is probably close to target. (Score:2)
That's stock fading (Score:3)
Lots of great applications - technically proficient, even brilliant - were dogs when it came to sales.
Companies which marketed them lost money, went belly-up. IBM lost five billion dollars in a single fiscal year - more money than most third world countries take in - while holding 10% of the US's patents and an immense share of R&D expenditures.
Linux will continue to be a fine operating system. I'm quite sure of it (now, criticise *my* almost wholly uninformed guess
How many software companies from ten years ago are still in business, anyway? It's the nature of the high-tech industry: live fast, die young, and leave a pretty corpse.
--
not surprising (Score:5)
And it's not just because, come Feb. 17, the same clueless media types babbling about Linux today will be talking up Win2K equally cluelessly. Hate to say it (well actually I don't hate to say it at all), but from all reports it looks as if MS has finally put together a competent OS. Now that they've reportedly fixed most all of the glaringly laughable faults of NT 4 (low uptime under strenuous use, DLL hell, forced reboots after minor reconfigurations, etc.), Linux will have to compete more on philosophical issues--open vs. closed source; full control and modularity vs. one consistent interface--than on obvious superiorities.
Frankly, folks, we have to realize that a big part of the reason Linux got its day in the sun this past year-and-a-half is because NT 5^H^H^H^HWin2K was about...a year-and-a-half late. Now, I think in that time Linux has made some important and irreversible changes for the better in the computer industry. For one thing, you can bet that without any credible server-side competition, Win2K would be a lot less polished than it will be now, and that's a change for the better. For another, I think even MS has to think twice nowadays about trying to fool the public into adopting new, closed standards (witness their recent support of XML in Office 2000 and elsewhere). Finally, I think the old "you can't get fired for buying Microsoft" climate is beginning to be questioned in many if not most companies.
But, suddenly Linux won't have the advantage of competing with patched-up 3-year old software. Now, on the other hand, three years from now Win2K will probably be on SP 6 or 7, awaiting the next much-delayed overhaul, while Linux (or perhaps some other free unix-alike? HURD perhaps??) will be chugging along with its steady organic improvements.
But for the next little while, Linux will have some real competition. And, while it may slow up corporate adoption in the short term, that's a Good Thing. I know most all of us here believe in the superiority of open-source development. Now it'll have the chance to really prove itself.
Re:first haiku (ot) (Score:2)
Whatcha gonna do 'bout it?
Sue me like eToys?
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
Re:There never was any Linux hype! (Score:2)
Remember Windows 3.0, 3.1, and 3.11? They happened all over again, except they were prettier and they were called Windows 95, 98, and 98SE.
--
Re:FADING??? (Score:3)
I went through this once when I worked in a busiess where it was policy set by the CEO that the financial software had to run on a Mac. This was in the days of the Mac Plus. We had to use a product called Insight. Our receivables were a bloody mess, because we were the first user with more than 2048 customers (the lookup functions failed after that). We used to ship our GL to the developer every month because we could not close the prior month with the volume of data we had (which was modest). We were constantly racked over the coals because we didn't have a bloody clue where we were financially. When it finally became clear that we were past going to hell in a handbasket, we had to go through a exhaustive search to prove the nonexistence of any decent Mac accounting software.
That said, no accounting software that was any good appeared on the Mac because the Mac had no appeal to accountants.
I think it's only a matter of time before we see some good financial packages for Linux. Linux has a number of virtues that appeal to accountants. In fact, a good accountant and a hacker have a lot in common. Accountants are probably the only group with a higher degree of contempt than hackers for overdecorated, wussie GUIs. Accountants don't expect everything to be easy from the get go, they only want things to repay effort. Finally what accountant could resist free beer?
disagreement (Score:2)
Re:Some thoughts on this... (Score:2)
Sadly, it's probably only a matter of time before the media starts the "BSV vs Linux" wars with the same salivating stupidity and hype that's powered many "MS vs Linux" stories.
Re:Cross platform binaries? (Score:3)
All that is required is to have a small compiler written for each system for a common language. Normally this wouldn't be done simply because each platform has it's language(s) of choice.
However, currently each platform does have an interpreter for a common language, Java. Because of this, it does not strike me as impossible that the concept of creating a Java compiler (java bytecode to machine code) for each machine would be that far off.
There are applications that this will not work with well. Applications that traditionally require massive speed and driver tweaking (Quake IV) will probably still be written in languages that let you do just that. However, it is possible to believe, especially with the current state of Microsoft, that word processors, spreadsheets, databases, and other home and office programs could be written in Java.
The payoff for doing so is large. Java programs can be created with less effort than similar C++ programs. Even when compiled they will not be as fast or as small as a well written C++ program, but let's face it, bloatware is common, speed is no longer an issue for these types of programs, and portability is a BIG selling point. When you can decrease your time to market and increase your target market you're making a good business decision.
I fully believe that the future is good for a powerful open source Java set of Office tools. (Spreadsheet, database, word processor)
I only fear someone else will be hired to do it, instead of me. I could use a better job.
Re:not surprising-open eyes (Score:2)
Like what? Load-balancing component server support? NetWare file system support? 24-way CPU support? It's not like Linux has these things either, and it's doubtful that shops will miss them.
Windows 2000 is two years late, but the major pieces are there - ActiveDirectory, dynamic DNS, remote installation support, plug-n-play. The real question isn't the missing features, but the fact that the average MS shop is going to be scared of the complexity of this stuff.
--
Re:Some thoughts on this...What about FreeBSD? (Score:3)
BSD coders encourage the use of their code in commercial products.
This has been proven time and time again with BSD OS's, apache, X and a ton of other products.
Oh, and your argument that hype will kill them is as absurd as Microsofts Linux myths page killing off linux.
Thank you Win2K (Score:2)
--
Re:cross platform binaries? (Score:2)
True, but so what? (Score:2)
When do CIOs ever do anything in large numbers? These people seem to think that Linux "happened" in 1999 and that, if it doesn't take over the world by 2000 it's "failed". I suppose this comes from following commercial efforts that need to generate a certain number of sales before they run out of venture capital.
1999 will be remembered as the year that Linux gained credibility as a server OS. Commercial vendors of server software have started producing Linux versions. The adoption of Linux in the data center has now gotten some momentum, but it will take a few years before we see Linux everywhere. Even NT didn't infiltrate companies over night.
2000 will be known for the year that Linux gained credibility as a desktop OS. GNOME and KDE will release new, more polished versions. Corel will release it's desktop suite. A bunch of other vendors will release versions of their end-user software for Linux. You're still not going to see massive adoption, but it'll be enough to continue the growth curve that's been going for the last nine years.
Remember the cause and effect => Linux growth caused the hype (not the other way around). Obviously the hype can't last forever, but there's nothing to indicate that the growth rate will decline.
Re:It's probably true... (Score:3)
And now, where is Java? Well, the exposure it got through this "hysteria" has served it well - it got to people's attention, and is now widespread in applications best suited to it. All around success story (so far, Sun's maneouvers may put paid to that but that's another story)
So I wish the same to Linux - eventually the hype will end as the media moves elsewhere (though I predict they won't get over it until the David-and-Goliath type battle with Microsoft has a resolution one way or the other, however minor), and it will come to be used as a solid, great desktop and server environment for the technical user. and the non-techies will have their webtv boxen or interactive tv or what-have-you, and everyone will be happy.
Fross
Then why does Yahoo stock look like Intel? (Score:2)
If stock price were just about the P/E, then Yahoo would not be valued at $100B with earnings of less than $100M, and Yahoo is actually really interesting parallel to Red Hat. It was one of the first, it has a doubtful profit model, and its valuation seems largely to be a function of its first-ness and how quickly people go to Yahoo when they think "search engine". That's important for advertising revenues, but also for the ease with which they can release product themselves. And what do you know? Yahoo is not a flash in the pan. It's stock price has been going strong for over three years, now.
Red Hat is also one of the first Linux companies, it has a doubtful profit model, and I think its valuation is based on where people go when they think "I want to know something about Linux." In fact, I'll bet Red Hat can show that they're one of the most heavily-hit sites in the Linux community. People scoff at Red Hat's "other" business model of selling CD's you can get for free, but if you're getting all the eyeballs first, it's nothing to sniff at. They are selling different features on essentially the same product for $30, $80, and $150, respectively. You can buy them online at their own site, where all the eyeballs are ending up.
There's an undefinable sense of "potential" that I (and obviously others) associate with Red Hat, and I think if the Forrester folks really want to put their theories to the test, they should try to twist up the courage to short RHAT. Red Hat is a risky stock, but shorting it is going to be riskier in 2000 than buying it.
A Grain of Salt (Score:2)
What disturbs me most about them, however, is their unrelenting effort to cash in on the good name of Dr. Forrester of MST3K fame. Shame on them!
-Bish
It's probably true... (Score:2)
Win2K and the potential for fiasco. (Score:3)
First of all, there is a simple basic journalistic instict, even deeper and more atavistic than the slashdotter's anti-MS knee jerk: where there is left there is right, where there is up there is down. OK, everyone says Mother Teresa was a saint, so find somebody who says she was a cross-dressing profiteer who sold homeless peoples' organs to Arab transplantees. Journalists call this "balance", but it has nothing to do with fairness: it's just that where there is no conflict, there is no story. While on a relative scale Win2K hype will outshine Linux hype, the Linux hype will go nova too -- the question is which story will burn out first.
The other big factor is that guy in the funny black robes that MS definitely did not invite to the party. He's got a bucket of -- ice water? Watch out, it may be more like Helium 2.
And then there is technical risk. While it is clear that Win2K cannot reverse the tide of Linux, it may be able to ultimately marginalize the inroads of all Unices the way Windows 95 capped the potential growth of MacOS (generously helped by Apple's contempt for the bourgeousie). To do so, Win2K will have to be a nearly unqualified technical success -- not perfect, but as near as dammit. If it fails to do so, it will be a tremendous strategic setback.
This is because Win2K's heroic proportions reflects a Microsoft philosophical position: that there should be two operating systems: NT on anything that we currently call a computer, and CE on everything else. Aside from the degree to which this serves Microsoft's stockholders, MS's ideological defenders will tell you that the software market is a "network" market that benefits from consolidation. Fewer platforms to target means a more efficient applications market.
Win2K is the first OS that has the potential to do this. Current entry level desktops are incredibly powerful, and Win2K is stuffed fully of goodies to tempt the enterprise user to put all his eggs in the MS basket.
On the other hand, having two operating systems that span the entire range of applications (except maybe real time) seems rather like trying to build a swiss army knife with a functional metal lathe and a bread machine built into it. It's an impressive accomplishment, but unlikely to deliver the kind of convenience you expect in a pocket knife.
As I've said before, the opposite of NT isn't Linux: it's having a range of OS's each suited to each purpose.
Win2K may open up some new enterprise markets for NT, but somehow I doubt it can do much to seure the low end: the workgroup and small business servers. It may also prove problematic on the desktop, as we enter the era of near zero cost computing power and ubiquitous networking, and as free desktop systems get sufficiently good to be usable by people who think of an RPM as a something an LP has 33 1/3 of.
Re:Cross platform binaries? (Score:2)
** shudder **
I think I'll find a pyschotherapist and have my memories from that era replaced with ritual abuse.
In any case, packing two binaries in one file hardly seems practical across N systems, does it?
Re:Is it possible this report is correct? (Score:2)
Unfortunately, some of your proofs may be incorrect.
The fervor to try Linux may very well be peaking right now as we speak. I'm sure that a number of poeple got a boxed version of for X-Mas, mostly because someone in their life knows that they are "into computers" and saw a blurb piece on CNN.
A lot of those users may well be giving it a shot, and running straight into this. [slashdot.org] This whole scenario may be enough to turn them off Linux, and back to Windows for a long time.
This will do 2 things:
1) Kill the buzz, as everyone who's had a bad Linux newbie experience will tell 10 friends, who won't even bother trying, and
2) Convince the CIO's not to roll out Linux on the corprate desktops, as his personal secretary's son tried it out during his X-Mas break, and inadvertently wiped his hard drive, or was told to RTFM while asking for some help.
As for the Unixes moving together, the logic behind the report seemed to be that the Big Companies were researching both *nix and Linux, and they may well combine the research into one unit. Less duplication of expenditure and all that.
So their logic seems to bear some fruit, and it is something we should all keep in mind, especially when asking ourselves "what does Linux need to be viable on the desktop?"
expectations of *future* growth. (Score:2)
Re:Some thoughts on this...What about FreeBSD? (Score:2)
1) The License: Like it or not, some people just don't agree with the GPL. I don't have a problem with the license itself, but some certainly do.
2) Technical differences: Different Layout, longer history, technical superiority in some areas (perhaps only perceived, I don't want a flame war).
3) Empirical: FreeBSD has been gaining users faster than ever.
I don't know that I'm right, but if someone has a reason why I'm wrong I'd like to know what they are. Linux is certainly a good OS, I know many who swear by it, and an increase in available apps helps FreeBSD too (Linux emu is a good thing IMHO). If nothing else, personal preference keeps me with FreeBSD, and I don't see any reason why that would change. Btw I agree that AIX and Solaris will remain, and that UnixWare, OpenServer, and other Unixen that simply replicate Linux/FreeBSD functionality at a greater price will probably fade away...
PS. Looking back at my comment, FreeBSD is my OS of choice, but OpenBSD will survive too (security) and NetBSD at least has a chance (don't know enough about it to say for sure)
Happy New Year everyone, we're getting close...
Yawn (Score:3)
Convergence (Score:2)
Re:FADING??? (Score:2)
Currently Microsoft has
1. Games
2. Word Processors, spreadsheets
3. Financial Software
4. Established user-base in corporations
Linux has some decent word processors, but barely any games, and no financial software.
Since people use MS products at work (#4), they want something they can use at home that they are familar with.
Flame away...
Any credibility? (Score:5)
Consider that linux is much much bigger than a few hackers or even a large group of hackers. I've been using linux since the brand new 1.0 kernels, and things have changed so incredibly fast.
Really, if Linus were to write a report about where linux is going to be in 4 years, I don't think I'd believe him either.
I don't think I'm the only person who thinks that as far as technology is concerned, 4 years is practically forever. There are also so many other companies (like transmeta) that have things cooking that nobody knows about yet, I think it's foolish to make predictions about what things are going to be like 1 year from now.
That said, I'm not sure what purpose articles that try to play fortune teller serve.
Just my $0.02
Its crrrrap, purrrre crrrap (scottish accent) (Score:3)
pointless banter
-=chiphead
The thing about pundits... (Score:2)
Linux "Hysteria" (Score:5)
Linux has been over-hyped somewhat in the past year. By over-hyped I mean that valuations of Linux-related stock has far exceeded revenue. Fair enough - it has, by huge margins. Most likely this overvaluation is exacerbated by the paucity of Linux stock out there; most of it remains in the hands of their directors. This is endemic to the high-tech industry, of course, but it does mean that when they do cash in (hello, ESR) stock values will plunge.
I work with a number of business analysts (I'm not one, but they make for good lunch-time conversation), and they've come to the same conclusion: Linux doesn't offer strong enough added value to induce a CIO to switch corporate desktops outright. On the server side, it may well, but the majority of OS licenses are sold on desktop computers rather than servers (good thing that Linux isn't in the licensing game, no?).
In any case. While companies may come and go, and I fully expect at least a couple of Linux pioneers to fold in the new year, it's important to remind ourselves that no company has a monopoly on Linux. If Red Hat should fold, it would be a tragedy to lose so many talented developers who would have to work elsewhere for their suppers, but it would not be the end of Linux as an operating system. So long as people contribute to it, Linux as a phenomenon remains vital.
We all may be a bit sadder for a crash in stock values, and some of us much poorer, but it's nothing unexpected and nothing to worry about.
Hysteria indeed.
--
Re:FADING??? (Score:2)
Unsurprisingly, they say that Linux will be used in embedded devices. Well, it's kind of hard to say that Linux has "faded" if it's going to dominant the most important computer market coming up. It's like people who say, "yes, Linux will take over the desktop, but only when we are all talking to our voice activated wearable PC's." But what is running our vioce activated wearable PC's? Not Windows. No, Linux is ready for that market now, Windows is playing catch up.
And they talk about "friendly interfaces" for Linux. Haha, I thought they were claiming that Linux couldn't have a friendly interface. Guess they are finally seeing the light.
Sure, perhaps Linux will fade in some markets, but that's only because those markets are fading.
Weep and cry. Windows die.
-BrentHysteria VS market share (Score:5)
Just a quick reminder: It's the linux hysteria that's going to fade (according to the report; I reserve judgement). Not the market share; not the value; not the number of users. But look for Linux IPOs to be less spectacular; look for linux announcements from companies to slow down (partially because, hey, many are already on the bandwagon!); and, look for Linux stock prices to drop. Possibly a lot. The day traders and capital gains types will eventually figure out that a company that doesn't make money (with apologies, many do not, at least yet, turn a profit) isn't a "good" investment.
Just some thoughts.
-Strauss
Probably right ... (Score:3)
If Microsoft could've released Windows 2000 this year, I think the hype for Linux would've been drowned out by the hype for Windows 2000 which, face it, has a much bigger hype generating engine.
This says nothing about Linux's capabilities, only about its marketing. Linux didn't need much this year because in terms of news, it didn't have much competition. While this may benefit Linux's acceptance into the marketplace, I think the larger overall effect will be that Linux will be seen as a bright supernova that fades once again into the background when the sun that is Windows rises again in 2000 (and I'm not making quality judgments here, I'm just making statements about perceptions of visibility).