Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bush2000
"What possible benefit would there be for MS? Losing market share to a free version of Windows isn't any better than losing market share to free Linux."

One benefit would be to gain marketshare. TiVo, for instance, would have easily gone with a free Open Source Windows 95 instead of a free Linux release.

Now TiVo units are not only in millions of homes connected to millions of TV's, but they are also being connected to millions of home networks.

However, instead of that new networked computer being MS Compatible, they are all Linux.

Instead of game developers writing MS compatible code for TiVo games (hey, it's a computer that's already connected to a remote and a TV), now they're writing for Linux.

MicroSoft is losing the Consumer Products marketshare for operating systems...all because ancient Windows 95 code wasn't licensed at minimal cost (but with important MS restrictions included in the license) to consumer products developers like TiVo.

This is in direct contrast to Bill Gates' stated dream of seeing MS dominate the convergence of the computer, TV, and telephone.

Instead, new consumer products are rolling out running on Linux. Gain enough marketshare on consumer products, and suddenly the TV becomes the new desktop instead of the computer.

Lots and lots of people watch TV and play games on TV and TiVo TV. That's an awful lot of potential desktop marketshare...and MS isn't in the hunt for any of it, even though they could have *owned* all of it now and in the future by giving away something that MS has locked up inside safes: ancient Windows 95 code.

72 posted on 02/05/2005 12:02:20 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]


To: Southack

Interesting hypothesis... but if I'm a Tivo developer and I had my choice of free *old* windows code and free *new* linux code (and with linux you have a pretty much guaranteed upgrade /migration path for kernel upgrades, security patches etc.) why would I choose Win95?

IOW, why would someone choose to be frozen in 1995 instead of starting in 2001 and whatever with every prospect of moving forward as technology improves?

I'm not saying there isn't a good reason, I just can't see what it would be.


73 posted on 02/05/2005 12:07:20 PM PST by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson