Author: leonid
Date: 07:58:38 12/01/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 1999 at 17:45:50, Pete R. wrote: >I don't see Linux mounting a serious challenge to Windows anytime soon, or >perhaps ever. > >Linux is technically superior to Windows 95 or 98 (with the difference in >application support this is irrelevant though) but comparisons with Windows NT >are not so easy. The few complaints I have about NT will be addressed in >Windows 2000, and once Win2000 is the norm arguments about technical superiority >will be the province of supergeeks, while most of the world will not see enough >of a technical difference to make this much of an issue. In other words, Linux >will be cool, but not so much better (if at all) than Windows that it's worth >switching. What will be left then is application support, technical support, and >features. The Windows 2000 platform will have even more of all the myriad >features businesses want, along with a world of third party apps and full tech >support for everything. Windows will have directory services that integrate >with Cisco routers, automated software distribution, automated regeneration of >corrupted configurations, and on and on and on and on. > >The government will have zero impact, unless they force MS to port Office to >Linux. That's about the only thing that will really have an impact on the >competitive landscape. Office enjoys about a 95% market share, and the average >user doesn't want to learn a new office package when they've been using MS >Office for 10 years. Techies that can learn new software overnight can have >their Linux and StarOffice and whatnot at home, but at the corporate office it's >still going to be MS Office running on Windows. > >Application support is another issue. Writing things for free in your spare >time is one thing, but coding for Windows puts food on the table, as does IT >support for Microsoft products. :) MS has a huge and growing army of MCSEs and >other support people for their products, who end up not only making businesses >feel comfortable that they can find support people everywhere, but who actually >willingly market for Microsoft through their efforts. Application developers do >the same: the more apps there are for an OS, the more clout it has, the more >people want to develop for it, and the momentum rolls on. > >As far as updates to Linux itself, I have my doubts about people continuing to >volunteer their time and effort writing free stuff for Linux when guys with >business degrees set up a company like Red Hat and become overnight billionaires >with an IPO. :) Yeah, they tried to distribute some of it to people who worked >on Linux, but why continue to make other people rich on your altruistic >efforts?? I think the whole mindset of a cool worldwide opensource project will >be torpedoed by this. So then companies like RedHat will have to rely primarily >on their own paid programming teams to get the OS competitive with Windows, and >MS has more money, more clout, a dominant market position, and a long head >start. > >In short I think Linux is always going to be a niche thing, like people that get >their skirts blown up by using Macs. If it helps light a fire under MS to >improve their products, so much the better, but that's all it will ever amount >to. Just my opinion. I found that almost everything that you have said have sense, as much as I disagree with you. Reason for this is strange duality in everything that is said. Will try to explain this obscure statement by saying only what I see differently. "Linux is technically superior"... but Windows NT... Never mind if Linux or Windows is technically superior - open code is the key for success. Don't forget that Macintoch (Apple) had the superior Windows system years before IBM compatibles. DOS was more widespread that Apple's Windows. Even talking about the dismay of Windows system became relevent only when Windows became "exclusive property" of Microsoft. IBM OS/2 already demostrated where all this politics could lead. Interesting enough, Apple was superior not only because of its Windows like system but also because of its hardware. Where is this wonderful Apple now? Still alive but all the time looks like sick and ready to die. Proprietary own system (hardware or software) lead to the higher prices. And it is not only student that don't like to pay some extra money. Many men have the same tendency. And when the prices of PC is so low, why not make them even more attractive? Why not to use free system? And once it will become the common practice, the number of Linux owners will can theoretically jump to the heaven. And don't confuse the price of a new computer with the software purchase. Program price is small compared with the price of new computer. Once you have your computer home you can find some extra $ to buy exactly program that you need. For sure, there will be huge choice of software when the number of Linux users will grow for some reason. Even if some company will do some profit from distributing the Linux, providing CD and books, system still will stay as open system for a long time. And this could be beginning of new success. Leonid.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.