Intel says Linux ready for prime time.

[davefoc]

Washington Post article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9694-2004Nov24.html

Beginning of the end of Microsoft domination or just another little ripple?

Personally, I think this is great. Long before now, major PC purchasers like the US government should have put pressure on Microsoft by theatening to develop Linux solutions and if Microsoft didn't come around, too bad for Microsoft.

So it looks like the pressure is really mounting to reduce the operating system costs in a new PC by using Linux, fueled by overseas PC builders and India.

And if Linux becomes a viable alternative Microsoft becomes just one more software supplier fighting for a place in your PC instead of the sole inside player with the market advantage of controlling the operating system and the application.

I like a lot of the basic ideas behind Linux. One of the things I like is the way that Linux doesn't attempt to pretend that stuff that has nothing to do with the OS is part of the OS. Microsoft for marketing reasons has turned the notion of OS on its head. Throwing every little piece of crap they can into the mix so that the OS becomes impossibly complex and anytime there's a problem a massive reinstall is required.

Firefox has convinced me that there can be life without Microsoft and I'm rooting for even less Microsoft in the future.

I wonder about Microsoft's patent claims. Is there any real substance to them?

 

[Grammatron]

It's nice that there's more competition but when the same amount of application is available on Linux and Windows that I actually will use is the day I fully switch to Linux instead of having a little server I play around with.

 

[Sushi]

I'm excited by this news, as I myself use Linux for home desktop use.

It is not the job of the government to coax businesses to operate in ways that they want when they are within legal means, however.

 

[davefoc]

Sushi, I think there is an important difference between the government mucking about in a marketplace where it is not a consumer and whre it often makes things worse through the unintended consequences of its actions and the government using its purchasing power to get the best deal possible for the taxpayers that are funding it.

Why should the government continue to pay a high royalty to microsoft for something that it can get much cheaper?

 

[toddjh]

As much as I dislike Microsoft as a company, Linux is not a real competitor with Windows. It wins in the operating system department, of course, but it's just not the type of interface most people prefer, and the lack of a good GUI framework for developers is a huge liability, especially since the lack of user applications is the biggest reason people cite for not using it. It's great for server applications for people who can't afford Solaris, and geeks who want to run it on their desktops, but it will never have broad appeal.

Jeremy

 

[a_unique_person]

I wonder about Microsoft's patent claims. Is there any real substance to them?

Like all actions from companies like this, it doesn't matter that much if there is or isn't. It's how much money they can throw at legal actions to make it so, and Microsoft has cash to burn.

 

[a_unique_person]

As much as I dislike Microsoft as a company, Linux is not a real competitor with Windows. It wins in the operating system department, of course, but it's just not the type of interface most people prefer, and the lack of a good GUI framework for developers is a huge liability, especially since the lack of user applications is the biggest reason people cite for not using it. It's great for server applications for people who can't afford Solaris, and geeks who want to run it on their desktops, but it will never have broad appeal.

Jeremy

So why the bitching from Microsoft. What it does it does well, most people don't really use a fraction of the capability of a modern computer, so the fact that it has these drawbacks doesnt' mean it can't compete.

As support for Linux grows, so will development, and so on. For businesses that have a clear set of functionality that Linux can meet, it makes perfect sense to use Linux. Less cost, just as/more reliable, no 'big brother' attitiude about software licensing and coerced upgrades.

With China backing Linux, there will be on hell of a userbase that will make developing products for Linux more attractive. For businesses with server farms in other countries, the price of all those licenses starts to add up to a pretty big bill.

 

[toddjh]

So why the bitching from Microsoft.

Microsoft bitches about everything.

As support for Linux grows, so will development, and so on.

Yes, in certain limited areas. Server applications is one area where Linux will continue to kick Microsoft's butt, but it will never become the operating system of choice for desktops unless it undergoes radical changes a la OS X. And even in the Unix arena, many big corporations are moving away from Linux because the low-cost distributions have substandard support, and Solaris is more stable and secure.

Jeremy

 

[Sushi]

Why should the government continue to pay a high royalty to microsoft for something that it can get much cheaper?

True, I was thinking more in terms of the "MICROSOFT IS A MONOPOLY!!!", however.

Linux works quite well as a desktop in many areas. E-mail, browser, etc, work fine. However, updating and installing usually require a little computer saavy. Most people won't know how to install NVIDIA linux drivers or such.