-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue August 10 2004 09:30, LRivas@oxiquim.cl wrote:
Ballmer and Taylor are really sick, and have none knowledge about the open source or linux philosophy, seeing linux as a rival who is trying to beat them... poor guys
Quit the contray. M$ runs several linux boxes at their devel labs. Also a recent article release confirmed that M$ is now running 1/3 of their server farms with Linux for studies purposes. A friend of the family is a M$ dev and runs a couple of Linux distros at his desk at M$. What gives M$ fits is that there is no head to swing at. It is not corporately owned. Sure IBM, Novell and others are using, supporting and developing linux - but no one out and out owns Linux in the manner that M$ is used to dealing with. They can't cripple the business that makes x, y, or z products. M$' tactics have been to wound competitors companies and then let them bleed out. There is no one company to wound or attack. They understand the OSS philosophy all too well and it scares the shit out of it them. What GNU, OSS and Linux do is turn software into a commodity and this threatens M$ market share and profitability. So they only have one or so tools in their Embrace, extend, extinguish strategy. That being FUD paired with a their now weakened efforts at strong arming their partners (e.g. OEMs and ISVs). Weak and toothless as the DOJ settlement is it still brings a lot of M$' dirtier tactics to the light of day and therefore they just can't run off carte blanche and tell their vendors and partners if they don't do things the way M$ wants then life will be very difficult. What F/OSS and Linux are doing are taking away the draconian tactics that shackled the market for competition. They actually have to start trying to make a product that is now "compared" to something else - in this case and alternative OS that runs on commodity hardware - e.g ia32/64 on x86 architectures. Mac was rescued by an M$ loan because it a) ran on non x86 arch and was not a commodity hardware market and B) it gave them the abiltiy to dispell (to some extent) that they were out and out a blatant monopoly. Wintel converting to Lintel is what really scares them, along with commoditized software - M$ charges too much, their software is poorly designed in many ways and it's only at the state of functionality it has because the OEM/ISV market had not other place to go. Now enterprise is switching Unix to Linux and this was not the M$ plan - it was to switch Unix to Windows. M$ is about vender and client lock ins - Linux is the antithesis of this - and if the masses fall in line with mandating a comparable choice and starts to compare M$ verse whatever then M$ will be seen for what it is - an overpriced and second rate product. But how would anyone know if it is indeed overpriced and second rate if there's nothing to compare it to - Linux is the comparison and now their is a metering stick in which to make comparisons - this is what M$ really really doesn't want. Look how many times they have pushed back Longhorn - at its present state M$ doesn't have anything that can be developed as fast or congently as Linux. Being able to look and change source code is a benefit to the client and a detriment to M$ - M$ wants to keep its secret and Linux has no secrets - nothing to hide, which is something M$ can't claim. Just MHO! Cheers, Curtis.
Greg,
On Tuesday 10 August 2004 08:46, Greg Lumpkin wrote:
Interesting article.
But there's really no "new tune," is there? To wit:
"In January Taylor poached one of IBM's former Linux technical leaders, William Hilf, to test 20 versions of open-source software in Redmond. Hilf two years ago was in front of audiences touting the cost effectiveness, reliability and performance of open-source software. Nowadays he's working the Microsoft spiel: "There's no set architecture in Linux. All roads lead to madness," and "the devil is in the details. This stuff is not easy to run."
" ...
" ... Microsoft is actively sowing uncertainty and doubt among potential Linux customers over who, if anyone, owns the intellectual property behind open-source software."
Classic MS FUD.
And this one is just a joke:
" ... Can Linux really handle crucial areas such as security and e-mail?"
Randall Schulz
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
- -- Spammers Beware: Tresspassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again! Warning: Individuals throwing objects at the crocodiles will be asked to retrieve them! If pro is the opposite of con, then the opposite of progress must be congress! In the Ocean it's called salvage, on land it's called grave robbing! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBH9G27CQBg4DqqCwRAjTMAJ4m1+HoH3AyM/eDDzPN6GZ9YxeZTQCgh2xb rVoqz4OKxSaIWwurCvtyB/M= =TKaW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----