Microsoft is scared of Ubuntu [Archive]

motang

February 7th, 2009, 03:53 PM

From article (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10159100-16.html):

Ubuntu must be giving Microsoft fits on the desktop. That's the only reason I can come up with for Microsoft's LinkedIn search for a new director of open-source strategy, with a focus on the desktop:

The Windows Competitive Strategy team is looking for a strong team member to lead Microsoft's global desktop competitive strategy as it relates to open source competitors.

Given Red Hat's relative inaction on the desktop, this position likely will focus on Novell and Canonical's Ubuntu, but of these two, only Ubuntu's desktop is really catching the imagination of the market.

And, frankly, only Ubuntu is really changing the game around desktop enough for Microsoft to need to staff a position to counter the threat. Novell's SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop is good but it's somewhat staid (i.e., enterprise-like): locked-down and very much conservative.

The Microsoft job description requires the candidate to "think strategically [and to] put yourself in the mindset of our competitors." In other words, the candidate needs to think about bludgeoning Microsoft with a free price tag, a global community of determined developers, and absolutely no sacred profit cows like Windows or Office to protect.

Sounds like fun.

All I can say is "Excellent!" ;)

Skripka

February 7th, 2009, 04:05 PM

From article (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10159100-16.html):

All I can say is "Excellent!" ;)

Microsoft=~90% market share

ALL flavors of Linux combined=~1%

Srsly-they ought to be skeeered.

gletob

February 7th, 2009, 04:11 PM

Microsoft=~90% market share

ALL flavors of Linux combined=~1%

Srsly-they ought to be skeeered.

Actually that's just a ball park estimate. Some say it's 2, 4, or some even 6. Some say it's one and will never go higher. There is not a very good way of knowing the number of linux users.

Skripka

February 7th, 2009, 04:15 PM

Actually that's just a ball park estimate. Some say it's 2, 4, or some even 6. Some say it's one and will never go higher. There is not a very good way of knowing the number of linux users.

True. In any case it is a tiny minority-that by even by any realistic appraisal does little to Microsoft's bottom line. Microsoft's people should only be skeeeered if they've been staying up all night and watching horror movies for too long.

phrostbyte

February 7th, 2009, 04:21 PM

True. In any case it is a tiny minority-that by even by any realistic appraisal does little to Microsoft's bottom line. Microsoft's people should only be skeeeered if they've been staying up all night and watching horror movies for too long.

Microsoft is not scared of Linux current marketshare, they are scared of Linux potential marketshare. They are scared that Linux and FOSS isn't just another company they can pummel to the ground or buy out. They are scared of what a little investment from a world government or an OEM can do to increase the competitive advantage of Linux.

Oh by all means Microsoft is scared about Linux, much more then the (apparently) higher marketshare Mac OS X. Because Linux and the community that supports is more then just a company or a product, it's a movement. And there is not just one target they can fight, they have to fight Intel, AMD, Red Hat, the US Department of Defense, China, IBM, and even random people on the Internet. This is just a shortlist. Almost any one of these entities could bury Windows.

eragon100

February 7th, 2009, 04:25 PM

I think they do have reason for worry:

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9121938

In the last month, the record of big one-month drop was improved once more

In addition, Internet Explorer now, globally, has less than 70% market share.

Also don't forget about the server market either. Linux server has a market share in the double digits, windows marketshare doesn't have a monopoly at all.

eragon100

February 7th, 2009, 04:27 PM

Microsoft is not scared of Linux current marketshare, they are scared of Linux potential marketshare. They are scared that Linux and FOSS isn't just another company they can pummel to the ground or buy out. They are scared of what a little investment from a world government or an OEM can do to increase the competitive advantage of Linux.

Oh by all means Microsoft is scared about Linux, much more then the (apparently) higher marketshare Mac OS X. Because Linux and the community that supports is more then just a company or a product, it's a movement. And there is not just one target they can fight, they have to fight Intel, AMD, Red Hat, the US Department of Defense, China, and even random people on the Internet. Almost any one of these entities could bury Windows.

Add russia, Vietnam, Brazil, france, the EU, spain, IBM, Dell, HP and a 1000 others and you're right :wink:

hyperyoda

February 7th, 2009, 04:32 PM

Linux adoption is really picking up in the so-called developing countries. It's obvious Microsoft Windows has market dominance but that isn't because it is a better OS nor does it mean it will always enjoy dominance. A lot of users don't even *realize* they have any options. Most of the non-techy people I talk to have never even heard aboput Linux or Ubuntu. Christianity also started small and was expected to die out quickly but it became the #1 faith in the world. So don't give up on Linux. If every Linux users would put in some effort to spread the word, get involved in their local LUG (or start one if it doesn't exist), link to Linux on their blogs and websites, add a Linux blurb in their email signatures, and spend time teaching nebies I'm sure we'll see that percentage of Linux users rise!

Zach

MikeTheC

February 7th, 2009, 04:33 PM

I've said it before, but I'll paint the picture in this thread as well.

Picture a frozen river. The solid (and obviously largest) ice sheet is Microsoft. The chunks breaking off are those switching to Mac OS X and Linux. Customer base-wise, Microsoft is in no danger of going out of business today, tomorrow, next week or next month. But you have to see the ice sheet is slowly eroding.

Now is *not* the time to give up, folks.

Skripka

February 7th, 2009, 04:33 PM

Microsoft is not scared of Linux current marketshare, they are scared of Linux potential marketshare. They are scared that Linux and FOSS isn't just another company they can pummel to the ground or buy out. They are scared of what a little investment from a world government or an OEM can do to increase the competitive advantage of Linux.

They shouldn't be.

Most consumers barely have the computer knowledge to run Microsoft Office to a basic level. 9/10 computer users should never dare try partitioning a HDD for Linux, this group doesn't even knoe what "partition" means. And that same 9/10 are helpless if anything goes wrong with their computer. IME.

Until computer users are far more proficient in knowing and understanding more than the most basic of computer skills-Microsoft has nothing to worry about on the desktop from FOSS and or Linux. And until driver support by 3rd parties is as good on Linux as it is on Microsoft, and as idiot-proof, they don't have to worry too much.

They do however have to worry about people refusing to buy their product, and going to OSX though.

BuffaloX

February 7th, 2009, 04:33 PM

If Linux didn't exist, we would have MS enterprise server costing $5000,
Linux cost MS loads of money, by competing in the potentially most profitable of all markets, the enterprise server.
IF Linux establishes itself with a REAL market share on the desktop/laptop market, MS profits will plummet.
Linux has not won on the desktop, but it is a real and present danger to MS.

Apple is a more manageable threat, because they compete in a way MS understands better, and MS owns part of Apple, so Apple profit is also profit for MS.

I guess the MS fear for Linux is that if Linux for some reason suddenly really caught traction, it could potentially wipe MS out (probably never will) in a worst case scenario, This threat is not as likely from Apple, because Apple is just one vendor, where the rest of the PC industry is a mix of many vendors. HP Dell Asus Acer etc. Which incidentally all now offer Linux alternative to Windows on their netbooks.

Linux may never get above a few percent of the market, but the threat is none the less real.

Grant A.

February 7th, 2009, 04:37 PM

Microsoft can't even touch Linux legally, as if just one of their patents gets taken to court and fought over, chances are that there will be a non-infringing replacement in the source tree within a month. But not just that, Microsoft would have to sue many, many, many companies and people, and they would just spread themselves too thin and die like SCO.

hyperyoda

February 7th, 2009, 04:37 PM

Microsoft is not scared of Linux current marketshare, they are scared of Linux potential marketshare. They are scared that Linux and FOSS isn't just another company they can pummel to the ground or buy out. They are scared of what a little investment from a world government or an OEM can do to increase the competitive advantage of Linux.

Oh by all means Microsoft is scared about Linux, much more then the (apparently) higher marketshare Mac OS X. Because Linux and the community that supports is more then just a company or a product, it's a movement. And there is not just one target they can fight, they have to fight Intel, AMD, Red Hat, the US Department of Defense, China, and even random people on the Internet. Almost any one of these entities could bury Windows.

Don't forget IBM dude! They have done a *lot* to support Linux. Especially on the legal side.

Zach

BuffaloX

February 7th, 2009, 04:48 PM

They shouldn't be.

Most consumers barely have the computer knowledge to run Microsoft Office to a basic level. 9/10 computer users should never dare try partitioning a HDD for Linux, this group doesn't even knoe what "partition" means. And that same 9/10 are helpless if anything goes wrong with their computer. IME.

Until computer users are far more proficient in knowing and understanding more than the most basic of computer skills-Microsoft has nothing to worry about on the desktop from FOSS and or Linux. And until driver support by 3rd parties is as good on Linux as it is on Microsoft, and as idiot-proof, they don't have to worry too much.

They do however have to worry about people refusing to buy their product, and going to OSX though.

My mom 64 knows nothing about partitions or how to fix computer problems, or even installing simple programs.
But she knows about virus, and she got it somehow, even though she never downloads anything except clip-art.
She does lots of stuff on her computer, like keeping photo albums, photo editing, listen to music, using internet and e-mail, she is even on face-book, and she is now a very happy Ubuntu user.

Namtabmai

February 7th, 2009, 04:50 PM

Microsoft=~90% market share

ALL flavors of Linux combined=~1%

Srsly-they ought to be skeeered.

With Microsoft's annual profits estimated to be in the $60 billion region, even taking into account the profit from other areas (Office etc), 1% of what ever remains isn't to be sniffed at. Even for Microsoft.

dox_drum

February 7th, 2009, 05:14 PM

Add russia, Vietnam, Brazil, france, the EU, spain, IBM, Dell, HP and a 1000 others and you're right :wink:

And add Venezuela and Argentina as well.

Grant A.

February 7th, 2009, 05:17 PM

And add Venezuela and Argentina as well.

Don't forget about the US and China! China has its own official Linux distribution, and the US NSA and DoD have been very active in F/OSS.

BuffaloX

February 7th, 2009, 05:23 PM

And add Venezuela and Argentina as well.

But not Chile?
South America could very well be a big driving force for Linux, if they committed.
They should even be able to help each others tremendously, since the language barrier is small. AFAIK.

I think Glest is from Argentina, it's quite cool. :D

cmat

February 7th, 2009, 05:30 PM

Microsoft=~90% market share

ALL flavors of Linux combined=~1%

Srsly-they ought to be skeeered.

Well think about it. Even though they have 90% market share, how many people are actually buying new versions of Windows? Vista only has single digit penetration in corporations given it's been around since '06. Also how many PCs are out there in the world? Say there are 100 million PCs for argument's sake, That means 90 million PCs have Windows and 1 million have Linux (the numbers may be higher). 1 million PCs is still a lot of PCs.

Skripka

February 7th, 2009, 05:38 PM

Well think about it. Even though they have 90% market share, how many people are actually buying new versions of Windows? Vista only has single digit penetration in corporations given it's been around since '06. Also how many PCs are out there in the world? Say there are 100 million PCs for argument's sake, That means 90 million PCs have Windows and 1 million have Linux (the numbers may be higher). 1 million PCs is still a lot of PCs.

What this argument proves, is that Microsoft is in greater danger from it's own screw-ups (real and imagined), than from FOSS. The surge in talk about Linux seems more due to the Epic Publicity Fail that was Vista, and tech pundits needing some imaginary great battle between FOSS and Evil Empires to write about, than about the quality of Ubuntu/Linux/FOSS.

Linux is always at a disadvantage-because people are scared with the unfamiliar; and where $1000 of money is on the line for a new machine, they tend to be conservative. Computer manufacturers OEM installing Linux is about the only way Linux would achieve any higher market share. Root-canal installing WinXP is slightly more "scary" than installing *Buntu. So long as people have to choose to download the 700MB ISO, burn it--and partition their drives themselves, Linux is going to stay a tiny minority. For better or worse.

I like an interesting argument as much as anyone, but I honestly don't get why anyone actually cares, apart from tech new outlets needing their monkeys to type something, or how it makes that much of a difference on a practical level...apart from perhaps encouraging 3rd party device driver development.

dr.silly

February 7th, 2009, 05:39 PM

I think they are scared. Its not like Microsoft can put prices below ours. And Vista wasn't exactly what you call exceeding expectations. Thats what makes Windows 7 so important. Notice how they are releasing betas of Windows 7.

Grant A.

February 7th, 2009, 05:43 PM

ts not like Microsoft can put prices below ours.

Yes they can, negative integers with money means that they give us money. I would definately buy Vista Ultimate for -$298

And Vista wasn't exactly what you call exceeding expectations. Thats what makes Windows 7 so important. Notice how they are releasing betas of Windows 7.

They released betas of Vista too.

cmat

February 7th, 2009, 05:46 PM

manicmario

February 7th, 2009, 05:57 PM

Coming from South Africa I'm proud a saffa has helped bring Ubuntu to this stage and kept it alive so long. Since discovering Ubuntu I've actually found my brain being awakened from the MS brain dead click and tap routine.

Though I sometimes think developing countries should ditch the windows and use Linux in schools to teach the children on. The skills you learn in Linux are much more than you'll learn in windows. In that way just one or two generation Linux would grab the market share and generate more interest.

But its just an idea. Lets remember IBM was the computer supremo until they made a wrong decision and gates took advantage. MS reign wont last forever - people will realise they don't have to put up with the dribble MS turns out and Linuxians will have the torch to show the way :)

chris200x9

February 7th, 2009, 06:01 PM

They are going to bash Vista make it seem like 7 is a better product. They did that with every other version of Windows.

"Hey know that Vista we sold you a few months ago. Turns out it's not as secure or reliable as we said it is. Spend another $300 and use Windows 7 Ultimate Mega Supreme Premium Platinum Edition, honestly this is the last OS you'll ever need to buy and is totally secure and reliable."

Haha I've noticed this too, I was installing win XP on my mom's work computer and while it was installing it was telling me about all the great features win XP had to offer. One screen said and I quote "expeirence the best windows ever" this theroughly confused me. The word ever takes into account past present and future, so they make vista and windows 7 although the reached there climax with XP.

jrusso2

February 7th, 2009, 06:02 PM

Microsoft is not scared of Ubuntu per say but the idea of Open Source Free software goes right for their juggler vein. That's what they are scared that free open source software will become the norm.

ugm6hr

February 7th, 2009, 06:07 PM

A relatively small investment from MS to ensure their business model survives (and defeats) open source desktops (inc Ubuntu).

I think "scared" is an over-statement; wary is perhaps a better reflection of MS current position.

dr.silly

February 7th, 2009, 06:14 PM

haha yeah im all for negative numbers

HavocXphere

February 7th, 2009, 06:27 PM

dr.silly

February 7th, 2009, 06:31 PM

or better yet google just endorses ubuntu!

Skripka

February 7th, 2009, 06:32 PM

Thread should read "MS scared of Open Source".

As a desktop OS the marketshare is too small to make a dent....but take all the FOSS together and it looks a bit scarier for MS. e.g. IE vs FF.:twisted:

I don't understand why IE versus the world is something people care that much about anyway, it isn't like Internet Explorer is something that you can individually buy, it came as part of the OS. FF might hurt Microsoft's pride a bit, but that is it-unless I'm missing something.

theDaveTheRave

February 7th, 2009, 06:35 PM

MS aren't scared of Ubuntu / Linux / FOSS.

They are concerned that the various governments are begining to stipulate methods of information interchange that are "backward compatible"

You can soon imagine opening (or rather attempting to open) an MS~Word document in the newest most beautifull version available, and then finding that because it was produced by windows 98 version of MS Word the format is all skewed, and the character encoding isn't what it should be!

So now all the governements are thinking... "all that data we hold on our citizens, only microsoft products can open them"

Then they say "who controls MS?" and they realise that it isn't the current group of superwealthy politicians!

So for the first time ever the super wealth class have a real chalenger to thier power base, and they are wrapping up the whole "make MS do things that are going to make our lives easier" as being good for the community (which in general it will be) but I'm sure that they have thier own ulterior motives as well.

If they can convince MS to have an "open document standard" all the secret documents they have can remain in their hands, and don't need to be passed to a third party to be "translated" into meaningful information!

Or maybee I'm just a paranoid schitzophrenic communist fascist!?

Either way... I use ubuntu because I prefere it!

I once contemplated getting MS certified, but after getting the first of the books and realising that there where several ways to do the same thing, and sometimes you could get to the "setting" in the wrong fashion and hence it wouldn't, work really frustrated me (and that was just trying to get the "users and setting transfer wizzard" to function! ~ give me a separate home partition any day!)

ugm6hr

February 7th, 2009, 07:12 PM

I don't understand why IE versus the world is something people care that much about anyway, it isn't like Internet Explorer is something that you can individually buy, it came as part of the OS. FF might hurt Microsoft's pride a bit, but that is it-unless I'm missing something.

MS cares. As does Mozilla. And Google. They don't care (much) about pride... Money matters.

IE makes money for MS by defaulting to the MS live.com search engine, just as FF makes money for Mozilla (and Google) by defaulting to Google.

AOL care too - Netscape was the leading browser until IE came bundled free with Windows.

Remember, just because something is free, doesn't mean it isn't profit-making.

Johnsie

February 7th, 2009, 07:17 PM

Microsoft has very little to worry about. Ubuntu works for basic applications, but has many appearance issues. Compiz is still very buggy and has been for years. It actually doesn't work on many systems. Companies don't like linux because they don't want to retrain their staff... and then there's the so-called 'windows equivalent' programs which are usually cheap knockoffs. Ubuntu still suffers from bad packaging. The packages in the repositories are often out of date and when it comes to installing packages from external websites they are often split into several files. For example, yesterday I went to install Hedgewars on my Ubuntu machine and had to download and install 2 package files but when I installed it on Windows it was just one setup exe. Today I went to install pykaraoke... for Windows there was a single exe but for Linux there was a whole load of packages that you need to manually install and a lengthly howto explaining how to do it. Who wants to spend their time following lentghy howtos all the time? I ended up just installing the older version in the repositories. IMO opinion Vanbasco for Windows is a better program but that's another story. Drivers on Linux are good but they provide basic functionality. So as long as Microsoft keep the hardware manufactures (who don't want to give competitors their technology) on their side then Linux is a very small threat.

Ubuntu is great, but I believe that the above issues, money and many other things that I have not bothered to mention will keep Ubuntu from being a serious threat to Microsoft.

dr.silly

February 7th, 2009, 07:36 PM

Microsoft probably doesn't think we are a threat but thinks we will be a threat.

lancest

February 7th, 2009, 08:06 PM

Just check Google if you don't believe Ubuntu/Linux and ODF are making great progress in adoption around the world. The free software ecosystem is very powerful and Microsoft has got to be quite wary of it.

Sealbhach

February 7th, 2009, 08:15 PM

They shouldn't be.

Most consumers barely have the computer knowledge to run Microsoft Office to a basic level. 9/10 computer users should never dare try partitioning a HDD for Linux, this group doesn't even know what "partition" means.

But consider the scenario where they buy their computer with Linux on it already, with everything already configured...

.

jrusso2

February 7th, 2009, 09:28 PM

speedwell68

February 7th, 2009, 10:13 PM

This really has more to do with the idea that you won't even need Windows. That a minimal Linux or other FOSS operating system will just be enough to connect you to the internet where all your apps will be. The kernel will just run the hardware and make it able to connect to the internet.

Microsoft will be gone because all the apps will be online and the minimal OS can be Linux or other FOSS.

Exactly right, Microsoft will just become obsolete. Microsoft don't control the Internet and are nowhere near doing so. The bigger the cloud gets, the more it'll start to rain on M$' parade.

Skripka

February 8th, 2009, 12:07 PM

This really has more to do with the idea that you won't even need Windows. That a minimal Linux or other FOSS operating system will just be enough to connect you to the internet where all your apps will be. The kernel will just run the hardware and make it able to connect to the internet.

Microsoft will be gone because all the apps will be online and the minimal OS can be Linux or other FOSS.

Hurray for the the opiate of the tech masses and CNET that is cloud computing!

Sealbhach

February 8th, 2009, 04:41 PM

I don't believe the cloud will be as a big a deal as people say.

.

yse

February 8th, 2009, 05:27 PM

What a lame topic...

So, the 4% share market from all linux distros again 90% MS...

Guess what?

Linux was free from begining, and is still a crap overall. Except some server stuff, who regular user does not need them at all.

Do you really compare a poor little distro with Windows, where peoples are PAID to make drivers, test software, and so on?

Open source is great, but reach the limits some times...

sydbat

February 8th, 2009, 05:28 PM

bakedbeans4life

February 8th, 2009, 05:55 PM

pitje

February 8th, 2009, 06:00 PM

while a few percent for linux against around 90 percent for microsoft still is a big difference, microsoft should be alarmed.

why is linux a greater threat for microsoft than apple?
To use apple, the average user needs special hardware, while linux installs on virtually everything, including old windows boxes that can run nothing more than win98.
Microsoft already makes money by selling office for macs, they can make more money by converting more of their apps to mac-versions. Only when apple decides to become less gadget-minded and starts promoting their computers more agressively with better office-productivity microsoft will consider them as a serious competitor.

Also, the rise of linux on the desktop looks to be on a logarithmic scale: more and more people tell their friends to install linux, who tell other friends, etc. That, combined with the fact that the average consumer gets more and more wary of microsoft because of the continious need for better hardware for their newest OS should make microsoft at least a bit nervous....

jrusso2

February 8th, 2009, 06:00 PM

Microsoft is always afraid of something just offhand I recall them being afraid of the Mac, CP/M, what was the name of that other DOS I forgot, caldera was the last one making it DRDOS. Then Mac OSX, Netscape, Mosaic, and now Linux I am sure I forgot some.

hyperdude111

February 8th, 2009, 06:08 PM

Osamabingandhi

February 8th, 2009, 06:56 PM

Microsoft is going to go away. It will happen cause soon there is no reason to pay for a os. Platform independent programs and virtualization.

I install ubuntu on computers i am in charge of, like my familys. Mostly it works so much better cause there is no viruses or spyware and they can't mess upp everything like they do in windows.

Windows you need to take care of pet it treat it like a sick person that could die anytime soon. If you have persons that have no clue how to do it you have a big problem.

As soon as ordinary people understand that there is a really good alternative things will change. Right now most people don't now about the greatness of linux and how seriously good it has become lately.

I have to admit i have window on one machine, and am about to install ubuntu on that one. Three days ago windows locked me out, said i had to pay them to get it to work. My first thought was of the maffia....That gave me a big laugh. They force me to uninstall. I haven't deleted windows from lazyness, but now i have to it seems....

yse

February 8th, 2009, 07:12 PM

Microsoft is going to go away. It will happen cause soon there is no reason to pay for a os.

Keep dreaming, there is NOTHING free in that world.

Platform independent programs and virtualization.

That will not happen to soon.

I install ubuntu on computers i am in charge of, like my familys. Mostly it works so much better cause there is no viruses or spyware and they can't mess upp everything like they do in windows.

Thats a stupid myth, Linux is "secure" for the moment because virus creators dont target it. When they will do, will probable be a disaster as they got the sources for everything.

As soon as ordinary people understand that there is a really good alternative things will change. Right now most people don't now about the greatness of linux and how seriously good it has become lately.

Thats discussable. Linux have some good points. But honestly, i dont really understand, Linux is free from several years, every year i keep hearing "Linux is better" and so on.. and is still under 4% market share. Explain that please?

I have to admit i have window on one machine, and am about to install ubuntu on that one. Three days ago windows locked me out, said i had to pay them to get it to work. My first thought was of the maffia....That gave me a big laugh. They force me to uninstall. I haven't deleted windows from lazyness, but now i have to it seems....

Again, you make a BIG confusion between OPEN SOURCE concept and an OS.

bakedbeans4life

February 8th, 2009, 07:47 PM

yse

February 8th, 2009, 07:57 PM

"Thats a stupid myth, Linux is "secure" for the moment because virus creators dont target it. When they will do, will probable be a disaster as they got the sources for everything."

Apache is the most popular webserver, yet Microsofts's IIS has more security problems than it's open source counterpart.

yse, do you rely on Microsoft for personel or professional reasons? I'm just curious.

Apache IS NOT A LINUX DISTRO.

Again peoples stop swapping terms as you like, try to understand the difference between OPEN SOURCE, KERNEL, LINUX DISTRO.

And to answer you, NO, I have no reasons to defend Windows or Linux or MacOS.

Frak

February 8th, 2009, 08:19 PM

1. You'd be surprised that Microsoft Server is still pretty much the dominant server OS. Apache is the dominant web server application.
2. Linux is strong in the number crunching, internal networks used by companies, organizations, and corporations. It's cheap, fast, scalable, and modular.
3. Apache != Linux
4. Microsoft is a company; it is their job to try to defeat the competition.

Like, yse, I do not defend Microsoft or Apple. I correct the whole "truth" thing, you know, the thing that gets left out in these kind of conversations.

bakedbeans4life

February 8th, 2009, 08:27 PM

Apache IS NOT A LINUX DISTRO.

Again peoples stop swapping terms as you like, try to understand the difference between OPEN SOURCE, KERNEL, LINUX DISTRO.

And to answer you, NO, I have no reasons to defend Windows or Linux or MacOS.

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make, I didn't say Apache was a Linux distribution. I was simply saying that just because Linux has gained popularity does not mean it will suffer the same fate as Windows security wise. Apache was just used as an example of something popular being superior and more secure than it's proprietary competitor.

And I certainly know the difference between the various parts that constitute a Linux distribution and the plethora of terminology associated with it.

Sorry if you took offence.

bakedbeans4life

February 8th, 2009, 08:34 PM

BuffaloX

February 8th, 2009, 08:35 PM

1:
Keep dreaming, there is NOTHING free in that world.

2:
That will not happen to soon.

3:
Thats a stupid myth, Linux is "secure" for the moment because virus creators dont target it. When they will do, will probable be a disaster as they got the sources for everything.

4:
Thats discussable. Linux have some good points. But honestly, i dont really understand, Linux is free from several years, every year i keep hearing "Linux is better" and so on.. and is still under 4% market share. Explain that please?

5:
Again, you make a BIG confusion between OPEN SOURCE concept and an OS.

Your ability to present everything upside down is simply amazing.

1:
What about Gnu/Linux. :confused:
2:
Virtualization is already happening.
3:
Linux is more secure than any version of Windows, if you research it just a little bit, you would soon realize that.
4:
Linux is getting better, and marketshare is rising, but only slowly.
5:
Nothing from the quote mentions either concepts of open source or OS.

Looks like you don't get anything, or are just having fun annoying people.

Brightbelt

February 8th, 2009, 08:42 PM

I agree with SKripka. Most of the world is pretty clueless about computers.

During Christmas, my sister asked me to help her learn how to "get pictures off her camera into her Dell PC" because she was simply lost at it. (More than a few people have remarked how much money one could make if they did this kind of assistance for a business on the side.)

After seeing my sister's Dell take 10 minutes to reboot on XP, my response was to give her a Mac Mini for Christmas. Really. Within days, she was doing things on a computer she had never dreamed of doing before.

If Apple offered OS X to install on other intel machines besides Apple's, MS would really have a problem then. My bet is that they have some pre-existing agreement regarding each other's territory. They are a lot more aligned together as companies than people realize. I saw an interview on TV with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs in which they both agreed that MS Office for Mac was one of their better business relationships.

yse

February 8th, 2009, 08:45 PM

Your ability to present everything upside down is simply amazing.

4:
Linux is getting better, and marketshare is rising, but only slowly.

Looks like you don't get anything, or are just having fun annoying people.

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Prove me wrong please.. i wait to see that from about last 15 years.

Frak

February 8th, 2009, 08:51 PM

1:
What about Gnu/Linux. :confused:

That is based on what you define as "free". Even though those applications are developed free of charge, the development time is cut down by a lot when the person still needs to hold a job. Some people say that multiple developers help this out, but while collaboration brings innovation, it also brings problems... in bucket-fulls.

2:
Virtualization is already happening.

Only goes so far.

3:
Linux is more secure than any version of Windows, if you research it just a little bit, you would soon realize that.

Because more people use Windows, so there are more people targeting Windows, which in turn brings more media of Windows? I can say popularity, people would say I'm wrong. You say Windows is insecure by default, and people would say you're wrong. I for one can tell you that a modern version of Windows, such as Vista or 7, are very secure. I do not say XP, as XP was built against security issues known as of 2001. Eight years have passed since then. An eight year old version of Linux would be terribly insecure compared to a new version of today.

An OS is only as secure as the user who makes it secure.

4:
Linux is getting better, and marketshare is rising, but only slowly.

True. Some years it will increase, and some years it will decrease. That's market share for you.

Seaco

February 8th, 2009, 09:48 PM

i really think that linux is getting there. the distro are getting more powerful and i hope the programs will get there to. openoffice is a great "enemy" to msoffice, if this continues we never know where will go... but i think to better place

cardinals_fan

February 8th, 2009, 10:07 PM

3:
Linux is more secure than any version of Windows, if you research it just a little bit, you would soon realize that.

An incompetent user will have security issues on any OS. Responsibility is key.

BuffaloX

February 9th, 2009, 10:39 AM

An incompetent user will have security issues on any OS. Responsibility is key.

What is the purpose of such a statement?
Do you really mean OS security doesn't matter for average users since they do something stupid anyway, which will break it?

Linux security is better than Windows by a huge margin, it has been proven on several occasions that a Linux security is much harder to break into than any version of Windows including Vista.

Incompetent users don't have security issues with Linux, at least I have never experienced it. The same users have had their Windows systems infected at least once although they strictly followed guidelines like never open mails which look "strange", never run anything you download from the internet. When my mother used Windows, she sometimes used to call me, asking about stupid fake pop up warnings. She has been using Ubuntu now for two years, and not once called about idiotic security issues.

PhoenixMaster00

February 9th, 2009, 11:08 AM

Microsoft should be scared :p. I wonder if there main target is Linux though... For me it would be OpenOffice and other similar products since Microsofts Office Suite is one of their biggest cash cows (maybe even only second behind OS sales). Then it would be IE because people are moving towards Firefox which is supported by Google and people will be using their service over the Windows Live service. Then maybe we can start talking OS. Linux is a threat because younger people are becoming more tech savvy they grew up with technology and eventually the amount of people who do nd dont know how to do much with their computer will become closer and people will start using alternatives. Plus this is a threat that cant be bought off or scared away this is a very different threat to them. And if you cant beat them then join them (and then beat them after that...).

Johnsie

February 9th, 2009, 11:42 AM

If you spend most of your time on sites like this and slashdot then you could easily be fooled into thinking more people use Linux than really do. It's hard to make people switch to something they don't understand.

Frak

February 9th, 2009, 11:46 AM

Do you really mean OS security doesn't matter for average users since they do something stupid anyway, which will break it?

Do you? I don't know where you contrived this from.

Linux security is better than Windows by a huge margin, it has been proven on several occasions that a Linux security is much harder to break into than any version of Windows including Vista.

Show me the proof. Also, there is no such thing as "proof". There is no such thing as a bullet "proof" vest. I can assure you that with repeated attempts, one can fire a bullet through a bullet proof vest. There is no such thing as scientific "proof". Everything in science has a chance of having nonsupporting evidence. You can't "prove" one OS is more secure than another.

The less information a system takes, and the less information a system gives, the more secure the system. Therefore, the most secure system is one that takes no input and gives no output.

Johnsie

February 9th, 2009, 11:52 AM

I'm pretty sure any OS can be broken if hackers put their mind to it. There's a reason why Ubuntu has security updates every so often. The vulnerabilities are there, but not too many people have a desire to exploit them.

Unless you understand the underlying code you can't say it's more secure, but you can say it's less likely to be compromised.

Skripka

February 9th, 2009, 12:29 PM

The less information a system takes, and the less information a system gives, the more secure the system. Therefore, the most secure system is one that takes no input and gives no output.

Now if I could just get my Linux Cinderblock to POST....

simtaalo

February 9th, 2009, 12:41 PM

yse, do you rely on Microsoft for personel or professional reasons? I'm just curious.

he relies on it for trolling purposes :p

well i hope s/he does. if these are serious responses to the thread then yse has serious problems with their mental capacity ;)

wolfen69

February 9th, 2009, 01:05 PM

South America could very well be a big driving force for Linux, if they committed.

brazil's ministry of education just ordered 325,000 linux desktops for its schools. and last year, they ordered 150,000. i would say microsoft should be concerned.

Dragonbite

February 9th, 2009, 05:00 PM

Microsoft is not scared of Linux current marketshare, they are scared of Linux potential marketshare.

Agreed (also known as +1 :lolflag: )

BuffaloX

February 9th, 2009, 11:09 PM

1:
Do you? I don't know where you contrived this from.

2:
Show me the proof. Also, there is no such thing as "proof". There is no such thing as a bullet "proof" vest. I can assure you that with repeated attempts, one can fire a bullet through a bullet proof vest. There is no such thing as scientific "proof". Everything in science has a chance of having nonsupporting evidence. You can't "prove" one OS is more secure than another.

The less information a system takes, and the less information a system gives, the more secure the system. Therefore, the most secure system is one that takes no input and gives no output.

1:
I asked for the meaning of a statement, and gave my interpretation of it, it should be more than obvious that i believe security to be an issue, which you seem to want to downplay. Why?

2: Proof...
There is much evidence that proves Linux to be more secure than Windows.
I can present proof, but you can choose not to accept it, no-matter how strong. Instead of weirdo definitions of proof, and quibbling let's just use the ordinary meaning of the word proof shall we. :)
And remember English is second language to me.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/security_report_windows_vs_linux/#rpc2
http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200814/579/CanSecWest-Vista-taken-down-%E2%80%93-Linux-last-one-standing
http://www.scmagazineus.com/BLACK-HAT-Vista-ineffective-against-browser-attacks/article/113577/
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-149111.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/131167/vista_security_woes.html

Also issues like Speech recognition, UAC, RPC,

unplugged23

February 9th, 2009, 11:35 PM

You tell me how they plan on doing that with an idea like this floating around.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1065179

Dragonbite

February 10th, 2009, 10:01 AM

What is the purpose of such a statement?
Do you really mean OS security doesn't matter for average users since they do something stupid anyway, which will break it?

I think what he is trying to say is that most security problem stems from people clicking on things because they pop up instead of understanding what is going on. PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair).

Also, people don't update or scan their systems which make them more vulnerable.

This doesn't matter whether they are running Windows, Linux, Mac, Solaris, BeOS, BSD or BFD!

Just don't get lulled into a false sense of security. All is good for now, but even Windows didn't have many virus' when it first came out.

Now, how did an article about Microsoft's anti-Open Source desktop initiative turn into THIS?!?

saulgoode

February 10th, 2009, 12:04 PM

1. You'd be surprised that Microsoft Server is still pretty much the dominant server OS. Apache is the dominant web server application.
Yes, I would be surprised, as would Microsoft:
Forty percent of servers run Windows, 60 percent run Linux. How are we doing? Forty is less than 60, so I don't like it. ... We have some work to do. -- Steve Ballmer, September 2008 (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/151568/ballmer_still_searching_for_an_answer_to_google.ht ml)

JK3mp

February 10th, 2009, 12:18 PM

Linux is getting competitive with servers. But microsoft has an even split in that and a great bit of a lead on desktop computers ;) plus other endeavors...xbox,microsoft games etc. There not going out of business any time in the future.

Dragonbite

February 10th, 2009, 12:49 PM

Yes, I would be surprised, as would Microsoft:
Forty percent of servers run Windows, 60 percent run Linux. How are we doing? Forty is less than 60, so I don't like it. ... We have some work to do. -- Steve Ballmer, September 2008 (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/151568/ballmer_still_searching_for_an_answer_to_google.ht ml)

Thank you for that link!

Frak

February 10th, 2009, 06:05 PM

nathan28

February 10th, 2009, 06:22 PM

But the moment Google brings out a *nix based OS MS will be mortified.

The moment "We Are Viewing Your Location By Satellite"-oogle comes out with an OS, I will also be mortified

flyinraptr

February 10th, 2009, 06:39 PM

To understand why Microsoft is keeping a close eye on Linux/Ubuntu all one has to do is look back to the early days of personal computing .... IBM was the "Evil Empire" for not only software but hardware as well .... at one point I believe they owned 90%+ of the pc hardware market. Clone pc's from overseas tried to make a dent into the market share but most people didn't take them seriously until a mfg. named "Compaq" came along - combined with IBM shooting themselves in the foot with bad designs .... the rest is history and IBM never recovered that marketshare.

Dragonbite

February 10th, 2009, 10:31 PM

It depends on what you consider a server. Many of the webservers are Windows. Many of the other servers, SQL, File, Print, etc. are Linux.

And then there are Virtual Machines running servers, how are they counted?

At work we have Exchange, SQL Server, web server, file server and others in separate virtual machines (not to mention clones we use as dev boxes)

theDaveTheRave

February 12th, 2009, 04:37 AM

I can't believe I'm going to put another post in this thread.. Oh well here goes....

Market share:
currently 90%MS 10% Other (of which approx 4% Linux ~various flavours).

So for a big company to go from 90% share to 91% share they will need to take away 10% of the competitions current instalations

So some number...
ms have 900 terminal
linux 40
apple 60.

for MS to get another 10 it needs to grab 4 from Linux and 6 from apple - these "small" companies can put in less effort to hold onto their "small" customer base than is required for MS to grab those 4 or 6 extras.

conversely if MS drops the ball, just temporarily (eg Vista!!! ARRGH!!) then it is easily conceivable for both Linux and apple to grab a 10% increase in their market share (ie the same 4 or 6 from MS installs)

Initially this won't be "noticed" by MS as they have so many to start with, anyhow in the mean time everyone has more customers as the number of total installs is now 2000 not just 1000!

so in this scenario MS have 89% (ie 1780)
BUT... and here is the difference...
Linux now have 5% (ie 100 terminals - they have effectively over doubled in size!)
apple still only have 6%(ie 120 terminals - a double in thier size)

On the bottom line, everyone is happy, but the "accountants" and "shareholders" are only seeing the fall in market share for MS, not the whole picture.

Now things look a little different... don't they!?

it all comes down to relations of scaling in the market place.

I Think the following is a good example...

The first of the eeePC's were all running an open source platform (as all they needed to do was access the internet).

But now the eePC has more "internal" storage space (everyone likes how small they are), and suddenly they are now all running vista or XP.

Running the open source was a very savvy move by asus.
They cought the imagination of everyone with this tiny little network connected machine that worked, and became hugely popular (partly due to its bargain basement pricing).
Then they expanded their market, with more powerfull machines, then they added internal HDD and XP (as everyone knows XP!). They never made a big thing of it running a linux distro at the outset, it was allways "it's small, preety, functional - great for surfing the net and staying connected" (ie. an oversized PDA).

This worked for them on a number of levels....They got 2 parts of the market.

Those people who can't stand PDA's as they don't have a full keyboard, or enough power / memory, can't connect to the internet etc.
The PDA people who wanted something with more connectivity.

Finaly they got the people who wanted a little machine just for getting online.

The SIZE (or rather lack of it) was also the big selling point. Which can be seen by the plethora of other products now attempting to do the same thing, but maybe not quite so effectively... and they are running to try to catch up with the eeePC, but you aren't going to sell a netbook to the same person twice in 2 months!!

The eeePC also cought the imagination of the FOSS market! I wonder if thier current products are still "run straight out of the box with linux" type of functionality? How long will it be before we start seeing people on these forums not being able to get the wireless working on thier shiny new eeePC's??

I wonder how many of these individuals are actually the bods at asus??

David