Robert Young on Linux and Microsoft 42
Johnny Taporg writes " I came across this article in today's Washington post, where Robert Young talks about Linux's chance of being competitive with Microsoft. He says wait a decade or so. " It's interesting he's saying this, will Microsoft is arguing that Linux is a present day competitor. How trials can so change people's opinions.
This article was right on target. (Score:1)
We all know what Linux can do, and we know where it's going. We shouldn't let our pride or chauvinism assist Microsoft now.
Linux is a wonderful OS, it's a lot more stable, and it's an easy thing to love. It has lots of advantages of MS.
But at the same time, if you go out into the real world and look at what businesses are doing, it's pretty clear that in many industries, there are no alternatives to Microsoft.
I just bought some screenwriting software (I'm a diletante, not a professional), for example. The package communicates with popular scheduling tools and Avid editing equipment. It's part of a collection of tools that simply don't exist on linux. If you want to write screenplays that other people can work with, there are very strong forces pushing you towards Microsoft. Linux simply isn't an option.
I have a friend in the supermarket business. They have software that ties together their ordering, the database that the checkout scanners use, inventory control, and all the rest. It all runs on Microsoft machines. You can't run a modern grocery business on linux. Your software has to talk to your vendors software, to the scanning hardware, and to the portable bar code readers the clerks use when they check inventory in the aisles.
It's great that word perfect is out for linux, it's a huge step forward. But Microsoft's hegemony is derived from tens of thousands of packages written for almost every industry in the world. If you want to do very generic, middle of the road stuff, linux is starting to emerge as a *possible* competitor. It is possible, technically, to use linux for word processing, but I can't believe anyone who had to supervise 100 typists would want to run linux instead of MS. In the real world, no one does it. Yet. I believe they will, but it's going to take time.
It's easy to sit at home surfing the web and sending email, and to believe that's what computers are all about. There's a lot more diversity than that out there. Microsoft's got breadth and depth that linux can't approach yet.
Now linux works better, it adds features more quickly and more intelligently, and its economics are better. Eventually it's going to win, for the same kinds of reasons that capitalism beat communism. But that took half a century. Microsoft's lead and it's wealth being what they are, it's going to take an awfully long time before they come down.
That whole "pardigm shifts" every six months thing is bs. Legacy apps exert a powerful force in this industry, and they're going to continue to do so. And that force is almost completely MS in direction.
Forget "reality". We are Linux. We have a DREAM! (Score:1)
So forget all this "get back to reality" stuff. Reality is what we make it, and there are a hell of a lot of people out there who have a hell of a big dream vs one or two nerds in Redmond who have a big dream.
One super successful person once said "My only mistake was that I didn't dream big enough".
System Administration ... (Score:1)
MS has a large installed base, inertia alone will preserve a large fraction. Consider this: AT&T retains 66% of the long distance market.
Another factor to not under estimate, is the stupid, sophomoric opinions of those that think that Linux is their personal toy. Many will be put off, even MS stupidities no not come off as offensive as some (self appointed) protectors.
If Linux can take a major fraction of the corporate server market, (which depends upon other factors than price, performance and reliability) I would be quite satisfied. The desktop will be a much harder sell, unless MS persists in pushing NT onto the unsupported home users, then Apple or BE might be the more logical winners.
Help for a port to Linux? How?? (Score:1)
Are you aware that all version of Access back to 2.0 has a flaw for large tables where a deleted record can cause an edit to be misplaced when some weird conditions are met? Supposedly this has been fixed, but the patch (for Office) has failed for a number of installations. That was weeks ago, has the new patch been released?
My last check of Wine showed VB 5.0 would not even load, so it would have to the exe file of your application that must be checked.
Basically, I am confused on the plans to port to Linux using a closed development tool and database.
Help for a port to Linux? Your site is down ... (Score:1)
I would like to have an email address to converse with you more directly. If you see this contact me by email.
I have some interest - Herschel
I don't think so.... (Score:1)
There may be dominance in the server arena, but it will take quite awhile for Linux to replace the 90 percent of wintel boxes out there. Come into reality please. And you can't leave out BeOS and Mac OSX server and consumer OS's...it's not just Linux and Winblows here people....
yer right on target.... (Score:1)
My company runs on NT and NT alone. We cannot afford to uproot and start using Linux. TIme is money. We have to many specialty applications that won't run on linux from data entry to archiving. We do have alot of IT guys who love Linux and wish it were different. But our WAN is NT and NT it will stay. All of our customers run NT. It would take quite a long time to switch it all over so everyone could talk to everyone else. Face it, Microsoft saw the opporitunity and took it. People adapted well and they made some critical moves to their benefit early on. As much as I can't stand to work on this NT box, there is really no alternative for us and thousands of other companies. Does this piss me off? Does this make me want to throw my computer out the window? Yea, sometimes. But I go home to my computers everynight and relax and not worry about the crap that goes wrong with NT.
I love Linux just as much as the next geek, but the hard cold reality is, Windows is here to stay for a long time to come...pretty lame huh.
Being Finish.... (Score:1)
there is an accent factor here. Linus's name is pronounced LIH-nus, not like LIE-nus from Peanuts. The correct pronounciation is with the short i. I've even have spoke with relatives back in the homeland, they say the same. WHat you are hearing is Linus's accent.
Microsoft is right, Young is wrong. (Score:1)
What a load of crap. I seriously doubt that microsoft's lawyers believe their arguments, but they are correct this time all the same.
Whether Linux takes 2 or 5 years to overtake MS is a worthwhile question. The process is 80% complete already http://muq.org/~cynbe/rants/lastdino.htm
There will be a dip in rate of increase as early adaptor market reaches saturation, but Linux is nicely into the bowling alley (read "Inside the tornado"). I doubt whether even Linux will make sense on the computers we have 20 years from now (how do you write a kernel for a quantum computer ?).
Possibly sooner? (Score:1)
hmmmm (Score:1)
--
Linux doesn't rhyme with cynics (Score:1)
You're still missing something here.. (Score:1)
You're missing something here, though.
As more and more vendor support rallies behind Linux, critical mass will soon be achieved and vendors will be forced to write both Linux and Windows versions of their software, especially since Linux is seen as the next big thing.
Vendors will have to consider that they can increase the number of sales significantly by porting or writing for Linux. Once that happens, and Linux can compete more fairly with Windows on the desktop, Microsoft will lose on the subpar quality of their operating systems.
Even with such a tiny desktop installed base, Word Perfect took off (500,000 attempted downloads in one month), because there is a demand for desktop applications for Linux. A demand will create supply, if not from the current large software companies then from somewhere completely new, and new companies will start commanding a growin market share as Linux grows.
Perception is behind us. Linux is almost seen as inevitable, just like Microsoft was. Linux is heading in the right direction, if we can keep the FUD from overtaking us.
Your site is broken [Help for a port to Linux?] (Score:1)
Once you fix this, you might want to post a notice back to this forum that it is fixed.
It is also a good idea, if you want people to be able to reach you, to give out your e-mail address broadly.
Linux (rhymes with cynics)... (Score:1)
...Just how many of you know how to pronounce cynics?
hehe..
--
The sound clips (Score:1)
Of course, I still call it Lie-nucks.
I'm liking Bob Young (Score:1)
MS Lawyers must mean Debian (Score:1)
You're right - Apps just aren't there yet. (Score:1)
I think the reality is, Unix in general is ill-suited as a desktop replacement for Windows. I love BSD, and use it at home and at work, but I can't see giving it to non-techies. If it was ever made easy enough for them, it would have to be crippled so much I would no longer find it useful.
Linux will replace NT in server room functionality - I think NT Server is clearly on the extinction list. NT Workstation will leave a long fruitful life - Win32 is how 95% of users in the world run their day to day apps. Readers:please, don't respond "Use WINE!!" because I will burst out into laughter. No one who has used it would recommend it as an NT Workstation replacement.
Microsoft is right, Young is wrong. (Score:1)
We're also at a critical point, where there is enough stability, features, and even commercial software available to push the platform forward.
I blatantly predict that in December of this year, everybody is going to look back and say Wow!
Microsoft is not the enemy... (Score:1)
The enemy is closed software and proprietary protocols.
Even if Microsoft is around 10 years from now it won't matter. We just need to succeed in banishing closed software and proprietary protocols.
Perhaps 10 years from now, Microsoft will be reduced to supporting NT after releasing it as open source software. Perhaps Windows will remain the most popular OS. Perhaps, perhaps not. It doesn't matter what Microsoft does, as long as the important protocols of the industry remain open.
It won't matter to me if the majority of users use NT - what matters to me is individual companies holding the industry to ransom. If NT were made open source (unlikely as it is) and the API made non-proprietary, it wouldn't matter if they retained 90% of the market.
It doesn't really matter if Linux takes over either. It doesn't have to be Linux... it could be a BSD, it could be Hurd, it could be an open source MacOS or an open source BeOS... the important thing is that the dominant OS which sets the pace for the industry remains open so it can be peer reviewed and is not locked by individual companies.
RedHat says it'll take decades for Linux to overtake Windows. I have my suspicions Rob Young said this with his tongue firmly placed in his cheek. Regardless, it is a meaningless statement, because not only is it impossible to predict where the industry will go six months in advance - it is also impossible to predict that Microsoft will remain the champion of closed APIs as it is today.
Get it? Microsoft is not the enemy, though it is currently the champion of closed APIs and proprietary protocols. Conversely, Linux is not the end-all, be-all. The battle between Linux and Windows is a mere side-issue, a shadow of the real battle. The real battle is between open and closed software.
And that battle is almost already won - even if we don't know what will happen with Windows and Linux 10 years from now.
System Administration ... (Score:1)
There is a great drive now to push Linux out onto the desktop. Moreover Linux plus GNOME or KDE is fundamentally technically superior to Windows by virtue of being designed carefully from the ground up with the knowledge of all the mistakes in microcomputer and minicomputer OS design over the past twenty years. Sure GNOME and KDE are still immature but they are still only about a year old. Where the hell was Windows when it was a year old?
Technical superiority under the hood will not win the desktop directly, but the concomitant stability, security and performance benefits are already proving themselves.
It's not easy to extrapolate forward, but given the current rate of development it is almost unthinkable that Linux could fail to equal Windows by every criterion of usability within three years, even if the size of the developer pool doesn't expand from where it is now. And yet as more and more people are still piling in to contribute to Open Source projects, it could happen in even less time than that.
The sheer potential of Linux is not even the only important factor. Microsoft can't even manage their own code base any more! Windows 98 was a flop. NT 2000 has slipped yet again. More and more people are getting completely pissed off with their computers glitching, crashing and locking up several times a day. It's clear that it is beyond Microsoft's capability to rectify this situation or they would have at least shown some signs of attempting to do so.
I'm not saying that Linux machines are devoid of the odd software problem but in my experience it is rather less serious, even with fully-loaded systems. Right now, on the Linux system I'm sitting at this minute I am running 72 different processes, and the 20 windows I have open are three or four layers deep. If I ever tried to do that on Win95 it would grind to halt or die! On this system there isn't even any performance degradation. Given that as a starting point, its obvious Linux will beat Windows on every criterion in a very short time. The only difference that mitigates against that is Microsoft's marketing clout. And even with a public composed of frightened sheep, Microsoft can only go on peddling the same tired old lies for so long.
Microsoft is right, Young is wrong. (Score:1)
Hmmm, I thought that 30-some percent of the installed base still runs DOS or Windows 3.1. In the server market, there are still tons of Netware 3.x boxes out there.
Migration is a *slow* process, and it certainly might take 10 years for linux to displace WinNT for applicaiton servers. On the other hand, linux can sneak in *now* for apps that NT isn't good at or doesn't run (Oracle, proxying, firwall, DNS, etc).
And why should I trust Marcus Welby anyway? (Score:1)
Sheeesh.
This article was right on target. (Score:1)
Screwing Microsoft and fear of sucess. (Score:1)
I too have a feeling something big is coming for Linux. A scary feeling. I just cant get the image of trying to help people (who can never connect to the internet because of their caps lock) try to connect using Linux.
God help us.
Linux doesn't rhyme with cynics (Score:1)
The sound test in Redhat has Linus say it as
lee-knucks. Hmm. I sometimes prounouce it lie-knicks. Its the whole tomato thing.