Microsoft fights Bundestag (GE) Linux switch

ITworld.com ^ | 2/6/02 | Rick Perera, IDG News Service, Berlin Bureau

[Smile-n-Win]

Anyway, I think we both agree on one thing: Microsoft's rivals should try and increase their market share by selling superior software, rather than by using the vague and murky anti-trust laws. I believe it's possible to overcome Microsoft's dominance by relying solely on free market mechanisms. It's not easy, but it's possible if you try hard enough.

[HamiltonJay]

I fail to see honestly the point you are trying to make here... Believe me the machines that MS brought in were NOT paltry desktops, they were replacing each ultraSparc 20's with RACKS of what were then HIGH END COMPAQ SERVERS! I know I was there. Now, I will conceed a high end PC compaq is not in the same ballpark as a Solaris machine but these machines did only 1 thing, they accepted HTTP connections, and and passed the data through to the query servers on the back end... all they had to do was PUSH data over the pipe, very little processing related to the application, and Windows with NT could not cut it! In fact internal testing found we could do more with 1 rack of Linux machines (same hardware) than the multiple racks of NT boxes they brought in. I tell you this as well, I was privy to of some testing a few years ago where we measured the impact of adding multiple processors to an NT box, adding a 2nd processor increased performance of the NT box by 25%! That was with INTEL and MS both being involved in configuration and setup! You can get easily 75% improvement on any of the free Unix/Linux operating systems without trying.. the OS's just don't have the beef, pure and simple.

Now as to the web server market, APACHE owns this market as it well should, there are some out there that can perform better, but dollars for donuts Apache is the leader and leads for a reason. I won't even get into the numberous issues IIS has launched upon the web...

You are correct no one other than developers are asking for Linux on their desktops. But there is no guarantee that this will not change, and MS knows it just as well as anyone. Its nowhere near happening today, but 10 years ago the graphical web didn't exist, 8 Netscape was the greatest thing since sliced bread. So to dismiss out of hand that it won't ever happen is foolish. I am no advocate of it, but I do see honestly a time when installing and using Linux will be as simple and user friendly as Windows. Its not here for sure, but people are working on it, and sooner or later they will figure it out.

Windows has its place, Linux has its place... and if you want to run servers, my experience shows you don't do windows. Windows servers will always have a place smaller companies and divisions will likely always run windows servers for something or another, because they know how to run windows and don't have a pressing demand for high performance and can't justify bringing in non windows SA's etc.

My original objection was your classification of Linux as a college Dorm OS... this is just not the case anymore. Quite honestly, I have come to the conclusion that the OS is going to go the way of the hardware, it will become a commodity, and MS I think knows this, and is doing everything in their power to attack and degrade anything that is opensource or platform independent, particularly Linux and Java (C# is another joke). Its hasn't happened yet, but I believe honestly the day is coming. Sun and others now give their OS away with the hardware, wasn't that long ago you paid for it... MS is many things, but they aren't dumb. They see the writing on the wall, and I can't blame them for trying to stop it, 70% margins are worth fighting for, but we are now in an age where the OS (if you buy windows) can cost you as much if not more than the hardware (can build a current CPU generation low end PC for under $300)... the days of 70% margins are ending, one way or another.

[Psycho_Bunny]

"Free Republic is a not-for-profit organization--but would you call it a "collectivist" organization?"

Can we avoid the straw-man arguments please?

[Psycho_Bunny]

"I just don't see the analogy."

You missed part of the conversation....The incorrect analogy was a response to an incorrect analogy.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Not even a monopoly which is both horizontal and vertical need be 100%.  Market share > 50% constitutes a definate monopoly.  In certain instances, even < 50% market share can be a monopoly.

BTW, monopolies are not necessarily bad...

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Tell that to Largo, FL.  They've saved a ton of money by switching from MS to Linux.

[Dominic Harr]

BTW, monopolies are not necessarily bad...

As someone here recently said, anyplace you have just one grocery store or gas station in a town, that store has a monopoly. As long as they don't abuse the position, using that as a weapon, no problem arises.

Monopoly is about control of a market, not necessarily the whole world.

If 100% control of the whole world was the criteria, then even the old Soviet state wasn't a monopoly, since there was a black market, and people could just buy from out of country.

[Bush2000]

Most importantly, the API's that are the meat of .Net will not be ported. M$ can submit the semantics and language constructs as well as the CLR to a standards board but the true power of .Net and Java is the standard gauranteed libraries. I will wager that most of the .Net libraries make native calls to existing technologies which means any effort to port the entire .Net suite of products to a non-M$ OS will entail porting a great deal of the windows platform itself. Maybe people can create helloworld applications that are cross platformed, but any serious programming endevour will certainly not be crossplaform. COM on UNIX, anyone?

I would suggest you actually read about what Mono is doing. Their implementation looks pretty sound and full-featured. They're planning on incorporating nearly all features of .NET -- and they're even including COM support. As for whether it can be cross platform, you're joking, right? It's a framework. This isn't rocket science. Linux and various shades of Unix provide all the APIs that the framework needs.

[Bush2000]

Tell that to Largo, FL. They've saved a ton of money by switching from MS to Linux.

So's China. But I wouldn't wanna live or work there, either...

[AaronAnderson]

Mono may be a nice effort but without M$ approval and certification there is no guarentee that all code written in .Net running on a windows OS will run in mono on linux. Given M$ history of monopolistic tactics there is no gaurantee they will not sue ximian since the API's and class libraries are M$'s intelectual property. For years WINE has been trying to completely implement all of M$'s api's so windows applications could run under Linux flawlessly. However, it is dificult to hit a moving target and it would be naive to believe one should create misson critical apps in .Net and think they will run flawlessly on an unsupported platform. .Net plaform independence is all hype but no action. Until there is a real M$ supported alternative implementation, no one who values independence from M$ will develope in .Net.

[Bush2000]

Mono may be a nice effort but without M$ approval and certification there is no guarentee that all code written in .Net running on a windows OS will run in mono on linux.

As they say, there are no guarantees in life -- other than death and taxes -- but I'd give the Mono folks a fair shot at getting it right.

[AaronAnderson]

Seeing that Java has muliple platform implementations today and certification tests for standards compliance, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, so to speak.

[Bush2000]

a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, so to speak

I prefer bush... ;-)

[Justa]

"So's China. But I wouldn't wanna live or work there, either..."

You're working? I was under the impression you were taking-a-breather, living on MS stock options.

Btw, have you considered the fact that .Net will allow MS-users to employ programmers remotely via India, Bangladesh, etc.? In that case Bapoo2000 has your number.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

So's China. But I wouldn't wanna live or work there, either

I'd rather live in Largo than Redmond...

Seriously though, I use both Windows 2000 and Linux at work.  The KDE gui under Linux 2.4 just blows away windows 2000 (IMHO).  Linux does have its problems, but even a newbie using Linux will have far less worries with virii infecting an entire machine than an expert will have with Windows.  Admittedly, installing Linux is still not for the faint of heart, but then, neither is installing windows.

You may believe that the open source community is socialistic, and it is certainly your privilege to believe so.  And some in the open source community do trend that way (Richard Stallman, for example).  But having worked with the community for years and having ported many apps to VMS and help port others, I can tell you that I've never found it so.  Many of us are not in the field just for the money (unlike MS).  Rather, it is also our hobby and we love doing what we do.

Some of us (including myself) view MS with a little bit of dread because of their anti-capitalistic tactics.  The fact that such companies as MS and Oracle are still around argues against evolution, since they have managed to triumph against many superior products.