Microsoft to Storm Linux Strongholds 319
VitaminB52 writes "Microsoft is only winning about one out of four deals where IT shops are trying to move off of proprietary Unix. To turn that trend around, there are four specific Linux strongholds where Microsoft is focusing its attention." From the article: "After discussing server clustering, Web hosting, and server appliances, Ballmer was cut off by the interviewees before he could identify the fourth. But my guess is that, given the way Ballmer emphasized Software as a Service (SaaS) as a core theme for all the work that's taking place at Microsoft right now, the fourth stronghold of Linux that Microsoft wants is the SaaS stronghold where Linux is the operating system behind a Java-based application server technology ... Ballmer knows he's got a long roe to hoe. 'The day I come in front of the Gartner audience and say we have a better Unix than Linux, that'll be a good day.'"
Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:5)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:3, Funny)
So it really does have that monty pythonesque feel of penguinistas hurling humorous insults down to the bumbling windrones who are threatening them with their imminent demise yet again ;-).
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:4, Funny)
Whoa
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:3, Funny)
There's something very fishy about that comment.
But I wouldn't want to start a row over it.
We now return you to... (Score:5, Funny)
Mandriva: 'Allo! Who is it?
G: It is King Bill, and these are the Programers of the Square Table. Who's castle is this?
M: This is the castle of my master, Guy de Linus!
G: Go and tell your master that I have charged myself with a sacred quest. If he will give us food and shelter for the night he can join us in our quest for the Holy OS.
M: Well, I'll ask him, but I don't think he'll be very keen... Uh, he's already got one, you see?
G: What?
Balmer: He says they've already got one!
G: Are you sure he's got one?
M: Oh, yes, it's very nice-a (I told him we already got one)
G: Well, um, can we come up and have a look?
M: Of course not! You are Windows types-a!
G: Well, what are you then?
M: I'm Linux! Why do think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king!
B: What are you doing in our computers?
M: Mind your own business!
G: If you will not show us the OS, we shall take your castle by force!
M: You don't frighten us, Windows pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called Bill-king, you and all your silly Windows kaniggets. Thppppt!
B: What a strange person.
G: Now look here, my good man!
M: I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough water! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
B: Is there someone else up there we could talk to?
M: No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time-a!
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:2, Interesting)
Although it is interesting that for many years now many linux related headlines have been something like:"Linux makes inroades into windows territory X".
Now suddenly we are seeing microsoft execs talking about making inroads into GNU/linux markets. I think this, more than any "get the facts" paper points to how Free systems and open standards are slowly but steadily becoming more common.
Re:Go away or we will taunt you a second time! (Score:2, Funny)
"Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries! Elderberries!"
Why... (Score:5, Funny)
No wonder he gets angry!
Re:Why... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Why... (Score:2)
I think the poster meant "Row to hoe" (Score:2)
Re:Why... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why... (Score:4, Interesting)
"1592 R. GREENE Quip for Vpstart Courtier sig. Ev, He..gropeth in the dark to find a needle in a bottle of hay. 1690 W. WALKER Idiomatologia Anglo-Lat. (1695) Pref., A labour much like that of seeking a needle in a Bottle of Hay. 1711 E. WARD Vulgus Brit. VIII. 95 Seeking we may say, A Needle in a Truss of Hay. 1742 T. GRAY Let. 24 May in Corr. (1971) I. 203 A coach that seem'd to have lost its way by looking for a needle in a bottle of hay. 1779 W. ROGERS in J. Sullivan Jrnls. Mil. Expedition (1887) 262 But agreeably to the old adage it was similar to looking for needles in a hay stack."
Your suggested origin makes absolutely no sense. Do you have a cite for it?
Fortunately I am able to read and therefore benefit from the experience of others. You might want to give it a try yourself rather than attempting patronising comments.
Re:Why... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why... (Score:2)
I think he is huffing paint.
JBoss (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, that makes sense, especially considering the big announcement [jboss.com] last month of JBoss partnering with Microsoft to build up interoperability with Windows servers and the JEMS stuff.
Re:JBoss (Score:2, Interesting)
time will come (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:time will come (Score:5, Insightful)
Execs are warming up to Red Hat and Novell. They know IBM and other large companies are behind Linux. They are learning that they can get "enterprise" support.
What will really change things is when today's 15 - 30 year olds are more often the people making the decisions. Many young people have grown up messing around with Linux. High school students are installing it on old computers right now. Once there is a generation of execs comfortable with Linux you'll see major migration rates.
Re:time will come (Score:5, Informative)
Not just Redhat.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be too sure... (Score:2)
Re:time will come (Score:4, Insightful)
More companies can stand behind Linux because is Inclusive. If you don't like the service your getting from one you can simply migrate to another one with minimal pains.
Try that switching between various versions of windows, then buying the upgraded software, then buying the new tools to control that software.
Don't forget about us! (Score:4, Funny)
Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:5, Insightful)
When it comes to configuring Apache or a SQL database, nothing compares to being able to directly edit text files and run services easily from the command line. This is what UNIX, Linux, BSD and Solaris offers.
They'll at least need to get Monad finished, and it will have to trump the existing UNIX command line in some fashion. But if they keep throwing bubbly interfaces as professionals, the bubbly interfaces will hamper the ability of such professionals to get work done.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2, Insightful)
The boss likes bubbly then the boss mandates Windows in the server room.
Tom
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Insightful)
They'll say "will it cost money to switch"
You say "yes but
The rest of your sentence would be "but we'll save a lot in the long run by having better control of our processes, no license fees and regular updates to keep us current." They don't care.
If it costs $10 today to say $100 tommorow it's not worth it.
And that's why capitalism fails. Nobody does anything that makes any god damn sense anymore.
Tom
Must be just with American managers. (Score:2)
It sounds like it's just American managers who do not listen to their employees.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:4, Insightful)
"If it costs $10 today to [save] $100 tommorow it's not worth it.
And that's why capitalism fails. Nobody does anything that makes any god damn sense anymore."
Capitalism only fails for those who are a failures at capitalism. A successful capitalist might just as easily elect to spend the $10.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Insightful)
unfortunately "serious managers" aren't as common as they should be.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:5, Interesting)
I would love to agree with you but unfortunately I can't. There are lots of people in senior IT purchasing positions who really don't understand the technology at all and just know buzzwords and are easily swayed by sales people.
Just a couple of days ago I was talking to a senior IT person explaining the advantages of a particular web server configuration. I went to demonstrate something on a terminal monitor, and the guy started laughing said "What, it doesn't have a Windows interface? And you're trying to tell me that this is advanced server technology? We're not going to use primitive Unix systems here. We're a state of the art Microsoft shop. You've got to admire Bill Gates, haven't you? You Unix guys crack me up..." and carried on like that for about half an hour. I didn't say anything and decided to just forget ever talking to this guy again.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:5, Funny)
Next time you see him, please take a postit note, write with big letters "-1, Troll", and staple it to his head
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Insightful)
Those people are not "serious users".
Also, "lots" doesn't counter "most".
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Funny)
The appropriate response is to laugh and say "Good one, sir!"
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:3, Insightful)
I would love to agree with you but unfortunately I can't.
He said most serious users, not managers. Managers are managers because they're too incompetent to be workers, and they are placed within the organization where they can do the least damage.
Asshats like the one you just mentioned are probably best dealt with by a public competition on a playing field that is unfairly tilted in your favour. His arrogance and confidence in the high techness of windows will mea
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
The first thing I do with a new Windows XP box is to set everything back to the plain Windows 2000 "classic" look. It's simple, efficient, and doesn't look like I'm running an OS designed by Fisher Price.
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
Believe it or not, MS is listening to this. I only say that because I have some experience with and training on IIS 6. IIS 6 stores it's settings in XML and has command line tools. What's more significant is that in the training courses provided by MS they teach both ways to administer the server, via text file and command line or via GUI.
Obviously, they ha
Re:Bubbly GUIs don't go well in the enterprise. (Score:2)
two presentations, 1 from a pro full of facts and information laid out trating the executives like intellectuals giving them full data.
the other presentation looks and feels like the superbowl ad's full of flash, style, excitement, devoid of real content or honest numbers.
the Executives will be all over the flashy presentation. even if it was not right for their needs.
it's called marketing, and never has quality ever stood over marketability. Just look a
"Bubly GUI" != "ease of use" (Score:3, Insightful)
If you have to ask yourself that question then you don't have a lot of experience administering servers--or have only been tasked with administering a very small number of servers.
GUIs make desktop computers easier to use. You don't want to mess around typing arcane commands to write a letter to your mum or balance a chequebook or play a game (hmm..brings back memories of the 1980s and typing
Missing small points (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article: ...in many of these cluster and grid scenarios -- scenarios that often involve home grown setups with versions of Linux that aren't supported by any of the various Linux distributors -- the people running them are again not incurring any licensing costs on the operating system.
Yeah... it seems like there is a basic concept here, that the kind of people who need clusters are also the kind of people who can generally take care of them, themselves. Or is Ballmer trying to suggest that MS can make clustering so easy and slick that any old researcher with a few processors could set it up?
As for the "better UNIX than Linux" quote... uh... what??? Microsoft Unix? Isn't it obvious that Solaris and AIX users migrate to Linux 75% of the time because they're familiar with the basic OS underpinnings? It's a knowledge reuse issue. Does Ballmer really expect MS to create an OS that is similar enough to capitalize on this reuse?
Re:Missing small points (Score:2)
Re:Missing small points (Score:2)
Re:Missing small points (Score:2)
Re:Missing small points (Score:3, Insightful)
Better unix than linux has a long way to go (better linux than linux even more).
To MS: some filesystem advice:
1. case sensitive file system
2. make file locking advisory, not mandatory (essential to have "make" work well)
3. allow deletion of files that are in use
Re:Missing small points (Score:3, Insightful)
Case-sensitivity in a filesystem is about the dumbest idea in Unix, if not *the* dumbest idea. It's a pain in the ass for *everyone*, and I've lived my entire live and have never, and likely *will* never, find an application that uses the files "farmdata.dat" and "FarmData.dat" at the same time to store two different things. The only way most people cope with this stupid idea is to just make all their filenames all lowercase.
Next, allow deletion
POSIX Subsystem (Score:2)
It's a far cry from POSIX. Actually, it only includes a (not really finished) POSIX API. There was no real effort to make it anything more than a selling point to the gov't though...
And to top it off, NSA strongly recommends that you disable it, so it doesn't get used -at all- (at least on DoD systems). Odd, the subsystem that was added to satisfy gov't requirements has to be disabled to put the OS on a gov't network...
the bloat (Score:3, Interesting)
a long roe to hoe? (Score:2)
Another? (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux is like water (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Linux is like water (Score:2)
Re:Linux is like water (Score:2)
Who'da thought the old man would be so demonstrably right?
None
More gentle and tender than water
None
Better in breaching strongholds
None can replace it
Gentleness can overcome strong
Tenderness can overcome hardness
None
Ignorant of these in the world
Re:Linux is like water (Score:2, Insightful)
It might have been a huge deal perhaps 5 or 6 years ago, but who doesn't run Windows whenever they want to now anyways?
The hacker kids growing up now all ran pirated versions of dos, Windows, OS/2, whatever. And they're still headed towards Linux.
As far as a company, now a days, it's not even all about the License fees, it also about the fact that Linux systems are simply more robust when it comes to getting the job done the way you want it to get done. For a
How about the 5th Stronghold? (Score:4, Insightful)
and besides... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:and besides... (Score:5, Interesting)
A Unix admin with some experience has had the opportunity to become more and more effective. It has to do with tweaking the routine, making shell scripts which makes your job much easier, and generally working with the command line. As time goes and knowledge comes, one can have a remarkable arsenal of scripts and tools at hand. Since most stuff is quite portable (you can compile bash or any other shell of your preference for every Unix there is, I think), and the *basic* unix things can be expected to be there always, one tends to rely on it in ones day-to-day tasks, and reuse whatever can be reused as new Unix-machines comes in.
Windows, however, isn't like that. At least not initially. Good Windows-admins know their way in the GUIs, know exactly where to click, and can navigate quickly to get stuff done.
I know you can script, you can do *some* stuff from the command line, but it quickly becomes a challenge, and of the wrong kind. You can get a bit of the way with Cygwin and such, but you'll end up constantly trying to make Windows into Unix.
Never mind that all monitoring-tools, scripts, things set up to run through cron, and all that stuff, has to be changed. No, a Unix admin truly does *not* want to migrate to windows. I know, I am one.
We just won a Linux deal here (Score:4, Interesting)
New research and office space, ~300 users. MS came in with a partner firm and said they could make all this work for "only" $1.5M over 3 years. 12 servers (Yeah 12!), one each for email/exchange, AD, file, dns, dialup, blackberry, applications, etc.
I presented something which will cost ~$90K for the hardware, zip for the software and give us more. The users will still have Windows on the desktop and won't care about the backend stuff. And I know this will work, it's a virtual duplicate of 2 other places I set up for this org.
MS & partner firm hate me.
Marketsprach (Score:2)
Ballmer will say he's got a better Unix than Linux before it's true. I suppose that will be a good day for him. If Linux really can compete with Windows, the next day someone will show that Ballmer is lying.
A what? (Score:2)
I guess if it helps him to make the sale...
Re:A what? (Score:2)
"I guess if it helps him to make the scale..."
Oh God, that's terrible. Glad you didn't say it after all.
Microsoft is getting squeezed on price (Score:4, Interesting)
I know that the clients I deal with are VERY hesitant to migrate from Windows XP (many have not migrated from Windows 2000 or 95).
Embedded devices have been a problem for Microsoft; Their XP embedded is much better than CE, but both are overly complicated and do not have a good reputation with people I've worked with, and I don't especially like them either. Even the classic RTOS makers are getting hurt by things like RT linux.
Web services are another potential front microsoft is going to lose big on; unless MS is able to tie in propietary hooks to IE, they're going to lose there in a big way just by the nature of the product. If it doesn't matter to the user what platform they interact with, the back end can shuffle around between vendors so long as the end user experience remains the same. Does anyone care what OS google runs, so long as it works (Fast)?
You want to know where Microsoft and Windows have a huge lead? It's in development environments and integration and third party libraries. Even the Mac is a little behind there, but is in much better shape than Linux. Companies like Borland et. al have come a long way, but the tools don't seem to have picked up widespread adoption with the FOSS people.
Interesting times.
I fail to see (Score:2)
-Rick
They can never defeat us (Score:4, Insightful)
What I'm getting at is the way a number of important SW projects seem to be run increasingly by people who are no longer interested in listening to what people want, but instead pursue their own pink clouds and visions about what would be 'great' or 'cool'. Fortunately this hasn't hit the kernel as such, but I think there is a clear trend.
I think the problem is that some of the big, central projects, like GNOME, Mozilla and others have reached a stage where they are no longer really open and approachable to outsiders. In many cases there's a feeling that they see themselves as 'the holy church of
It's not all doom and gloom - there are many projects where the developer group has kept an open mind. But it requires an ongoing effort to stay that way. We should learn a lesson from Microsoft: In the very beginning they won the hearts and minds of a lot of people, not because their products were outstanding, but because people saw them as something great, something that enabled you to get close to the computer, and from that a lot of great SW was created. Then they got greedy and thought they were the infallible 'Church of PCdom', and a lot of people lost all respect and trust in the company. Now they try to win it back, and perhaps they can in time, who knows.
But if we blindly follow in their footsteps and commit their errors of hubris, we deserve our defeat.
Nonsense. (Score:2, Insightful)
Missing the cost factor (Score:3, Insightful)
That big target that MS needs to hit is the manageability target. We need to be able to install a light OS, pre-configured for our environments, in a fraction of the time it takes today, and it needs to be centrally monitorable and manageable without having to purchase a very expensive commercial package to do so. The entire OS has to be scriptable from the commandline. In server environments, commandline is king.
Linux is similar to Unix (Score:2)
It's the easiest migration path.
Money Or Lack There Of (Score:2)
If you are going to build a server farm, cluster, or any large install with heaps of machines then you already have enough money considerations. Adding the Microsoft tax is just one more expense, so if you can do it with free OS software then you reduce your initial costs.
The other reason that Linux has a stronghold in these markets is because it works so well there and is very tried and true. Then you have to think why would someone switch from what is alre
Consider this. (Score:2, Insightful)
Linux community is often misorganized; programs and information is hard to find. Slashdots sister site, freshmeat, is hard to use. There is to many distributions available. The choices of distributions and programs are boundless to the point where it confuses the consumer. Confuse the consumer and it will run the other direction.
Moving right along, it is also gaming in
Re:Consider this. (Score:2)
I suppose I should tip my hat to the troll for getting modded up.
Re:Consider this. (Score:2)
I beg to differ.
There is no reason that Win32 and DirectX cannot be implemented on Linux at least as well as Windows, if not better.
I'd say Wine has already passed Windows 95, and
Re:Consider this. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, common stuff is widely available in both kinds. Say, MS Office, OpenOffice, etc. Big products with big visibility, who everybody at least heard about, and which are easy to see somewhere.
Now move into more confusing grounds. Let's say, I want a
Inferior Microsoft Clusting (Score:4, Informative)
Microsoft and Ballmer just don't get clustering at all and I feel sorry for the 25% that got sucked in by M$ BS. Ballmer is bringing spoons to a steak party.
An OS that is graphical wastes resources in a clustered environment. It wastes CPU in managing it; it wastes electricity in powering it and adds to the total BTU output that raises A/C costs. Forget about the complexities added in that M$ solutions are new, poorly tested and of beta quality when compared to any UNIX/POSIX type OS. None of the aforementioned adds value to the compute task and often detracts from it. Most can be critical project problems if not managed and planned for.
One also has to look at the software acquisition economics. Say you have a 1024 node cluster. 1000 * 1024 for server licenses is $1M $$. FC4 is out and even if you used commercial Linux you would never pay $1M for this quantity of licenses unless they tossed in the installation and configured the cluster for you.
There are also other issues such as kernel/network performance and tuning but I will skip this.
My dream cluster would be few thousand Linux AMD 64 dual core, dual CPU systems with 16GB of ram in a 2 or 4 U package with front loading drives and can be managed without a VGA... hm... this OS/hardware exists without Microsoft!
Storm Linux? (Score:2, Funny)
Getting There (Score:2)
We're almost there. Remember the famous saying whose authors is unfortunately lost to time? "Given enough time and money, eventually Microsoft will re-invent UNIX."
Not /. editors' fault... (Score:2)
Admittedly, they should've put a big old [sic] after it.
(Well...maybe there is some bizarre fish species Mr. Berlind knows of?)
Re:Not /. editors' fault... (Score:2)
Why Linux On Clusters? (Score:5, Informative)
Doug - a genuine Cluster Monkey
Bring it on, punk! (Score:2)
Hope they nailed those chairs down tightly ... (Score:2, Insightful)
So now they want to be a Unix vendor? To push themselves into a market packed with Linux solutions and proprietary companies that survived the 80s Unix battles. The ones that al
Even better... (Score:3, Funny)
"...Ballmer responded to a question about how Microsoft plans to deal with the remaining 75 percent by saying "We are not winning more than we're losing."
Eeeshhh... Balmy needs to go to work writing for the Firesign Theater. [firesigntheater.com] Grammatical talent like that doesn't just (g)roe on trees.
Some ideas (Score:5, Interesting)
Second -- Apache. There's no reason people should have to run IIS, so build up Apache to be first class on Win32. Give it windows authentication and a GUI manager.
Third -- Java. It's not going away, so even with
You're right that POSIX->Win32 is a bogus migration plan. So the real solution is to provide better *nix-like tools that bridge the gap between the unix world and the Windows OS. If the capabilities are there, people will migrate.
Re:Some ideas (Score:2)
If they supported Apache, people could use the new windows Apache now and then move to the linux Apache later when they feel comfortable enough.
As for packamge management, something based on the sucessfull Microsoft Windows Installer (i.e. *.msi files) would probobly work.
So you would download a
Re:Some ideas (Score:4, Insightful)
Second - yes, they could throw IIS down the drain where it belongs and get serious about supporting Apache. Smart move? Undoubtedly. But again, one that goes completely against the grain of everything MS has ever stood for. Plus the customers that did drink the MS kool-aid and love IIS would be royally pissed about it, and linux or bsd would STILL be a better choice to run IIS on, so I'm not even sure this one would make sense for a sane company in MS' place.
Third - MS has done everything in their power to mutilate and kill Java. They're completely commited to '.net' instead. So, again, while it might be a good idea to give it real support, I just can't see this company doing that.
At best, they might decide to try to *appear* to be doing these things, but actually sabotaging themselves on the issues. Use the appearance as an argument to get customers, then tell the customers to move to Win32/IIS/'.net' as the solution to their problems once they're invested. THAT would be perfectly consistent with MS' MO, but unfortunately for them, that MO is pretty well known now, so not many are likely to be suckered like that.
Re:Some ideas (Score:2)
Of course there is: The copy/emulation/rip-off is never as good as the original.
A point that windos proves again and again and again and again and [loop detected, breakpoint forced]
Re:What can he do? (Score:2)
Well...unless of course, you count the fact that it's been disseminated into SCO Unix. And I think we've all learned a lot from SCO: There are worse things in the night than Microsoft ^_^
Re:What can he do? (Score:4, Insightful)
What can they do? Revive Xenix? SCO would love that, but who else would care? Do the NT POSIX subsystem again, only this time for real? Sure, they could do something like that, but why would anyone buy it even if they did? It will never, ever, be Free, so it would simply be yet another commercial *nix. And commercial *nix is dying.
Re:What can he do? (Score:2)
Wait until SCO drives itself bankrupt, buy out the company, and rebrand SCO Unix as Microsoft Unix. My bet is that they'd then push that as a server option and possibly even come out with MS Office for it (as an attempt to garner support for their new Unix over the other options). Microsoft isn't stupid, and you can bet that if the world decides to go into Unix full force, they'll be in the sway too.
This would really throw a monkey wrench into things, as a lot of people f
Re:The Day I... (Score:2)
That's about when it could possibly be true... maybe.. kinda... he hopes.
Quoth a good Buddy: Yeah, that'll be the day... (Score:2)
Naaaa (Score:2)
I started this as a joke, but it does seem to be a workable idea. Thank goodness there are some massive egos that