I heartily recommend it. They've done well.
Regards, Ivan
Posted on 05/30/2006 11:51:59 AM PDT by N3WBI3
The opening of Beta 2 testing at WinHEC for Windows Vista has once again raised serious questions about Microsoft's ability to keep its promises. We have witnessed up until now the inexhaustible reservoir of excuses coming from MS's officials, who have continuously fed us with plenty of reasons for Vista's delay: they're working on security, they're trying to make it more reliable for business, etc. Although it was initially destined to make its public debut way back in 2002, following years haven't shown us more than small bits of what was to become Microsoft's best product in more than 10 years.
The Beta 2 testing last week didn't bring much hope for most of us, including software and hardware producers too. Developers' feedback, although not a big surprise, turned out to be more than reserved concerning the overall quality of Vista, inducing the-again-not-so-unexpected idea that there is still a lot of work to do in this domain. Moreover, rumors concerning a yet another delay of Vista, previously announced for public appearance in January 2007, came out from CEO Steve Ballmer himself this week, despite his subsequent declarations that "Vista is on track". Developers that have tested Vista even suggest that it is possible for Microsoft not to reach its goal of delivering Vista to corporate customers in November 2006.
It would be a mistake to consider that we are now heading for disaster. Maybe Ballmer's declarations are true and MAYBE Vista shall publicly appear in January 2007. But what's done is done. Microsoft cannot erase what it has implemented in customer's mind: "the best product in 10 years". All the delays pinpointed to one thing: "we are working at improving Vista". So a public release next year without the superior quality that customers are longing for would be an even harder hit to MS's already shooked-up image. The smallest security flaw in Vista would immediately become a gap of global proportions, capable of allowing all the Evil things in the world enter through it (including viruses of course...). Any oversight of a particular aspect in Vista will have huge repercaussions for the entire OS, casting a dim shadow upon the overall impression. And Aero will definitely not be able to compensate it...
There are other reasons to consider while investigating the possible failure of Redmond-giant flagship product. First of all: the price. Microsoft announced that Vista will not show its beautiful face (Aero) to those who possess pirated copies. So if you want to have 3D windows on your screen you'd have to pay a larger sum than for XP (after all, Vista requires 15 G of free space on your hard drive).
Jack Messman, CEO Novell, had already stated since september 2005, during Novell’s Brain Share, which took place in Barcelona, Spain, that switching from Windows XP to Windows Vista will be more expensive than switching from Windows XP to Linux. So far, Microsoft hasn’t published any details about the price scheme it plans for Windows Vista, but ever since the Redmond company announced the hardware requirements, many experts have started to link the fee for a license with the amounts of money that will be invested in a PC that would allow you to run the OS.
And thus we have reached the second reason for Vista's envisioned failure. In order to run it properly not only that you'd have to license it, but you'd also have to think of spending more money on hardware. And this is bad news not only for retail customers but also for middle to small size companies, that don't possess enough money to change their computers like corporations do. And when we think that Vista might not be as reliable and secure as everyone expects...
This is where Linux comes on stage. It's totally free (well, most of the distros are). It has proven its reliability over time and it has convinced IT managers from large corporations (like IBM) to local authorities (like the French Gendarmerie or the Norwegian and Spanish government)to switch to it instead of Windows XP. Servers or desktops running Linux don't suffer from hoax, worms or spyware and they do not provide BSODs (blue screens of death, typically a source of irony for both Windows and Linux users). As for Aero, KDE desktop did long time ago a lot of the things Aero shall do in 2007, and with a whole lot less hardware resources. Not to mention that Novell's XGL Desktop is already not one, but two steps ahead of Aero: at least 1Ghz processor, a minimum of 256 system RAM and an old GeForce MX 400. And visual effects are staggering compared to Aero (just imagine a cube- which is your desktop- and a film being presented on two of its sides...). And last, but not least, the many "flavors" of Linux, which allow the user to turn freely and with no supplementary cost from one distro to another, or even run it from a live-CD/USB flash. And if that's not enough for you, just think at how much will Vista resist getting its Aero GUI pirated...
All in all, the probably unanimous conclusion is that with or without Vista's release in 2007 the winner is Linux. Paradoxically enough, just as many have suggested before, Microsoft shall boost Linux's popularity no matter what Vista will bring new to the OS market. Still, if rumors concerning a new delay of Vista are true, MS's credibility (already at low levels in recent years) will drop significantly, and with it, the finances too.
No I'm just aware that most open source programmers who are getting paid to program work for software companies, and not banks like you dream in your fantasy. Many of them don't tell their paying employer about it either, and are actually stealing the time they contribute. Wake up to the facts pal.
Hilarious, coming from the political science student who posts BS as fact constantly. Just a day or so ago you were insisting only hardware could be emulated, what new idiocies do you have on tap for us today?
Speaking of "facts", where did you find this gem? Got a source?
Face it, Open Source is good for business. I know you won't face it, you enjoy being FR's resident jackass, but there it is.
Ivan
No it's mostly good for those that live outside the US, such as yourself, since it allows you to use foreign clones of our software for free, instead of having to buy the original products owned by American companies.
I know that my company depends on it. All our products are built on top of Linux--and we're the market leader in our industry.
I doubt all your products use linux, what's the name?
And no, I won't provide the name--for the same reasons you wouldn't provide your company name.
s/run linux/run on linux/
I've said countless times I work for the US Department of Defense. If you want to doubt that put your money where your mouth is. So who is the company you supoosedly work for? You can PM me, I won't let everyone else now I just want to investigate your claim ALL your products use Linux. Where I work most all open source is starting to be banned.
No, what's hilarious is that I'm probably one of the few here that isn't in any way, shape, or form connected to IT--and eve I've kicked your butt enough times in the past few weeks.
You use that in a desperate attempt to discredit me, but apparently the sheer fact that I'm a PoliSci (pre-law) major doesn't mean diddly.
As for your spew, I'm sure Mike and I are going to have a heck of a time today...
pre-law, good, so you can donate all your time to defending the mass open source lawsuits on the horizon.
Here's the funny thing. Thus far, there has been no cases in the American legal system. There is no precedent or case law applicable here--so you can't say that there are going to be successful lawsuits.
Companies can try, but until there is some precedent, neither you nor I are in any position to state what's going to happen. Unless of course you're an understudy of Miss Cleo...
From what I can see, the biggest thing is whether OSS licenses are going to be viewed as being under contract law or copyright law, and whether other acts such as Sarbanes-Oxley are going to have an impact.
LMAO! While you've hardly posted anything correct in the whole time you've been here, the level of your cluelessness still continues to amaze.
They are compensated by not having to maintain the software themselves. As an example take Samba and IBM;
IBM could have went out and created yet another SMB suite an then had to maintain it but instead they went out and hired the Samba development team to do the enhancements IBM felt it needed. IBM by doing this saved a ton of time and money and it does not have to forever be the sole or primary maintainer of Samba its an open source product..
Its not the best business model in every situation but it does often work for everyones benefit..
swc,
its not an os its server software that runs on windows.
Or if he wants the big bucks he can fall in love with a pump and dump stock scam the next time a sco comes up...
And I'm just waiting for somebody, maybe Apple or maybe a bank, to turn OpenOffice into something that matches or surpasses MS Office in a way that no one can dispute.
When that happens, well, at least Bill still has Xbox.
I heartily recommend it. They've done well.
Regards, Ivan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.