Posted on 07/13/2004 5:31:44 AM PDT by TheEngineer
Bump for later.
Give Linux another 4-6 years and it will be a top notch operating system that will knock Microsoft for a loop. At this time it is still too heavy handed but it is getting better.
of interest
You are talking about Linux on the desktop.
Linux/Apache is already the number one webserver on the Internet, by far.
The point of this article is that Linux is already a dominant force in the embedded applications market - programs like the ones that run on the chips that run your car.
The embedded market is where the real growth potential is over the next decade, as more and more consumer products incorporate processors to perform taks that used to be performed mechanically.
This is indeed a classic case of Microsoft's greed coming back to bite em on the butt!
Even with its problems Linux is winning that battle because of Billy boy and his charge per seat mentality.
You're a communist! Only communists, Bill Clinton, and the Chinese use Linux! A true American patriot would only use Microsoft! </sarcasm>
Linux already is a top notch operating system. What you meant to say that in a few years it will be dumbed down to the point that even clods whose computer experience is surfing for pr0n and reading email will find it easy to install and use.
Linux is a good fit for many embedded applications. The economics of the situation make it a good investment to get the configuration/setup/etc. issues just right, because there will be thousands of identical copies put into production.
The desktop has completely different economics. The variation in systems, processors, peripherals, and, perhaps most importantly, levels of users mean that configuration must be both flexible and easy. That's hard to do, and it takes lots of time and money to do it right. Linux nibbles away at that, but Microsoft and Apple have a huge stake in continuing to do a better and better job there. So it is not at all clear that Linux can close that gap, because it's not obvious who will invest the money to do so. Even the head of Redhat says home users should just use Windows XP.
Servers are in-between. More variation than embedded, but less than desktop. A higher level of proficiency in users. So Linux can be competitive there, but so can Microsoft and others. Microsoft's strengths are in the small to mid-size company that doesn't really want to have a full-time IT staff, and companies that need very leading edge capabilities. Linux does better when a company expects to use lots of servers, but doesn't need them to be leading edge on technology like Web Services, or use lots of weird peripherals.
There's room for both. It continues to astonish me that Linux partisans sound like religious zealots in promoting their case. Technology is just a tool, folks. You use the tool that works best for you, and let the other guy do the same. And sometimes, any one of several tools will do the job.
No what I am saying is that I & the rest of the world stopped using the command line interface 10 years ago and I am not willing to go back now. The GUI is the future and Linux is sorely lacking in this arena. If I was younger I may put forth that effort however I have too much time and money invested in Microsoft products to do an about face now. I have one Linux server and it works well enough but is a nightmare to work on for me because I am now used to a GUI interface, as is the most of the rest of the computer using world. But it is far from a top notch operating system for the average user.
To each his own.
I'm not so sure that the level of proficiency required to police the security of XP as a multiuser home platform isn't approaching, or even exceeding, that required to install/maintain a recent release of Linux. It's at least getting to be near the same ballpark.
XP SP2 might change that but I'm beginning to think Windows might be a fatally flawed design with depth of the imbedded browser.
Great post.
How very interesting. In order to compete, MS has had to change paradigms and become more like its enemy.
Furthermore, the company last week took pains to note that the so-called "derivatives" don't have to be shared with Microsoft or anyone else. That, Microsoft executives say, gives Windows CE a leg up on Linux.
Smart move. While the GPL has been a catalyst for hobby-style development, the value-added business guys don't like it... for good reason.
"[Wind River's Vice President of Corporate Marketing, Curt] Schacker says Wind River is seeking a clear definition from either the Free Software Foundation or Linus Torvalds of what the GPL really means when it comes to embedded design. 'We want to offer anything that is of value to embedded developers and support that customer in that way. But as long as there are questions about the legal implications of the GPL, people are going to be very careful about moving forward' . . . "
"Stallman says that while he is going to try to clarify some of these issues... in the GPL version 3.0, he is not going to distinguish between embedded and non-embedded use in the GPL . . ."
So this is a very good strategic move by Microsoft, which needs to capture mindshare among third-party developers. These guys are not fools; they are professionals who are not swayed by doctored TCO studies and various other FUD. The GPL really frustrates their development efforts (see Linksys), and since most of Linux is "locked up" by the GPL, something's gotta give. (Hey Stallman!)
Maybe CE will get some help with its quality too.
Advantage Microsoft.
I agree. (Did I really just say that?) ;-)
Like you said in your post, the Linksys router case was a wake-up call to embedded developers to be on the lookout for IP grab by the GPL.
My interpretation of Microsoft's move is that it will continue to charge a per-device license for WindowsCE, yet still allow proprietary source code modification and redistribution.
The Linux's Hit Men article that you posted here on FR back in October underlined one of the biggest problems with the GPL in embedded systems. Microsoft is moving to take advantage.
Maybe CE will get some help with its quality too.
The article that you referenced stated: "the onboard computer crashed". Was it the WinCE operating system? The application written by BMW? The computer hardware itself?
"So it is not at all clear that Linux can close that gap"
Time is on Linux side. It has become obvious that there are only a finite amount of things left to do to the desktop that make any difference to the end user. After that, it is only a matter of time for Linux and FreeBSD to catch up. Longhorn is the last hurrah for Microsoft, mostly useless bloatware.
Touché.
I was actually looking for this article, which describes software problems in the 745i. Some 745i problems are fairly well-known now and upon further reflection I will concede that it looks like there are problems with BMW's applications, generally, not necessarily with CE itself.
The article I linked earlier was about a problem with the 5xx series and it wasn't clear whether that model even runs CE.
Ping!
Microsoft and Sun are slowly but apparently surely moving towards "sharing" more of their code. This does not mean giving their code to anyone in the world for free, and granting that person unlimited to rights to modify, duplicate, and even resell the software with no return revenue to them, as would be foolish. They will use non-GPL license agreements that grant access to the code and possibly the right to redistribute without release, but prohibit "forking". Makes perfect sense, and it is my long held belief that forking will ultimately stunt Linux, just as it did Unix. Microsoft has shown that standards are the future of computing, and the Linux crowd can't even seem to standardize on a desktop.
"Everything that can be invented has already been invented." (1899 U.S. Patent Office official, though the attribution is possibly apocryphal)
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.