Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft

Ballmer Wants to "Stomp Linux" Using MS community 557

StefMeister writes "According to this article on CNet, MS wants to fight Linux by using their community support (of course by community they mean the few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge). My favorite quote of the article is this one "Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ballmer Wants to "Stomp Linux" Using MS community

Comments Filter:
  • by Carnage4Life ( 106069 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:29PM (#4329488) Homepage Journal
    ...REMIX!!!! [slashdot.org]
  • Well, taking his famous, ah, 'performance' into account, this might not be too far from the truth, if one takes 'stomp' to be in the sense of Godzilla trying to 'stomp' Tokyo.
  • by rmadmin ( 532701 ) <rmalekNO@SPAMhomecode.org> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:31PM (#4329501) Homepage
    So uhm, after they stomp out linux, what then, stomp out BSD? And uhm, after that? Apple's OSX? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.. I'm shaking in my Open Source boots.
    • by Lxy ( 80823 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:59PM (#4329827) Journal
      If they stomped BSD, then where could they get code from?
      • by bark76 ( 410275 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @05:44PM (#4331229)
        Anyone want to write an FAQ on why it should be called BSD/Windows?
      • Duhhhh (Score:3, Funny)

        by orius_khan ( 416293 )

        If they stomped BSD, then where could they get code from?

        Duhh, they'll just keep copying the code of independent open source high school graduates which they get by reading their monitors via the secret cameras they have installed in everyone's house. Then the programmer dies in a freak accident/hate crime so he can't dispute the origin of the code.

        Geez, I guess some people just don't pay attention to what their television tells them anymore...

    • by Alien Being ( 18488 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:25PM (#4330028)
      After that... Monkeyboy appears on stage with a flock of penguins doing his rendition of "La Cucaracha".
  • by MongooseCN ( 139203 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:31PM (#4329509) Homepage
    I'm imaging it's like the /. community except all the posts will be s/microsoft/linux.
    • by KelsoLundeen ( 454249 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:43PM (#4329664)
      Close.

      Try: ActiveWin.com [activewin.com]

      • by orkysoft ( 93727 ) <orkysoftNO@SPAMmyrealbox.com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:04PM (#4329877) Journal
        Quoth ActiveWin.com [activewin.com]:
        Sorry for the slower site last night, we got a little over-run because we managed to get a lot of Xbox screenshots before any other sites last night and thus about ten big name sites were linking
        too us. (emphasis mine)

        Amazing! They even make grammatical errors in the editorials, just like Slashdot!

      • by The J Kid ( 266953 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:29PM (#4330065) Homepage Journal
        Even closer than you think:

        From ActiveWin.com: [activewin.com]
        -------------
        #24 By cschweda
        I installed Linux for a friend last week and Slashdot posted it as a headline.

        Then a bunch of 14 year old zealots posted 345 comments about how (a) Windows sucked, (b) linux didn't, (c) CmdrTaco misspelled a word in the headline, (d) JonKatz sucked, (e) no he doesn't, you suck, (f) Natalie Portman is one hunka svelt flesh, (g) a beowulf cluster would be cool a thing to do, (h) Slashdot isn't like how it was in the old days, (i) yes, it is, STFU.
        --------------

        Kinds of says it all doesn't it?
      • That's the worst site ever. Its like a mirror for slashdot except only the worst of. There literally are no resonable people there. Take for example a post yesterday where some guy said XP sucks for wireless and a bunch of us rebuked him. That would never happen there. Its a one way street. Every post is "linux sucks" and if a non-MS product is ever mentioned all they do is crap all over it. Truly Sad.
      • by Coplan ( 13643 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @05:29PM (#4331127) Homepage Journal
        Hehe...after browsing through that site a bit, I get this whole image in my head resembling "West Side Story". Except the Windows guys are carrying switchblades while the Linux guys are carrying Plastic explosives, heat seeking missles and anything else that is "geeky-cool"

        Honestly, I don't understand the whole "religious wars" as I like to call them. I'm a huge supporter of Linux. Most of the reason is because I feel I can actually offer something in that scene. But I'm not entirely against Microsoft. I have a lot of respect for what both factions are trying to do. I am leaning most of my support towards the linux world though for two reasons: 1) I like to support the little guy and 2) even if Linux were the big guy, the profit to be made from open source is in support, not monopoly. This sorta puts in its own checks/balances -- something that I don't believe Microsoft has the benefit of. What it comes down to is "the right tool for the right task". You're not going to see me doing music on Linux any time soon. Most likely, MAC is still the best for that (throw your bottles now, but it's true from a professional level). For net development and servers, e-mail and so on, I choose linux. Joe-schmoe desktop user won't find home in Linux any time soon. Yes, it's getting there...but it's still far from idiot proof.

        A little aside about Open Source vs. Closed Source: There are faults to both, but I believe the Open source model could potentially be much more beneficial to the computer world -- not necessarily to the individual company. That's not such a bad thing though. Anyhow, supposing there's a huge security loophole in a closed source project, the consumer identifies the problem, and the company has to spend time and money to fix the problem. However, that's part of overhead at that point, as the consumer has already paid for the product and a service contract, one would assume. Meanwhile, in the open sourced project, said consumer can report the loophole across the 'net. Someone using the product (not necessarily the company) might be able to fix the problem and offer his code to the company. However, said company should take measures to make sure that the code doesn't open another exploit put in there by the devious programmer (not to say it happens often, but it could).

        Meanwhile, the chief benefit of Open Source? Your undies are hanging out in the breeze. So your product is no longer the software...its trust. Redhat, Slackware, Mandrake, SuSE, and so on...how do they earn their money? Trust. People trust them to check the submitted code. People trust their product, no matter how different or similar it is to someone else's product, simply because it's released by said company. That's where competition should lie, in my opinion. Quality, quality, quality. Don't like it? Use some other flavor of the same damn thing. The most will flock to that which has the most quality. Reinstall the uncorruptable medium for competition.

        Now say it together: We Love Open Source!!!!

        (Coplan needs to go relax now)

      • ActiveWin? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by llywrch ( 9023 )
        If this is the best the pro-MS crowd can do, then MS really is in a lot of trouble!

        A selection of topics that look like what an intern at MS's own PR department would pick, most of the fora empty, & the few fora that have any comments
        degenerate within 15 minutes into Linux vs. Windows flamefest.

        Someone even thought a car accident one month ago was worth an article on this site. It took me some digging (the way they link to stories suck) to confirm what I suspected: Heikki Kanerva, one of the victims in this accident, was an employee at MS. In other words, a story so poorly written a reader really had to work at to care about it.

        There *HAS* to be a better pro-MS discussion forum somewhere. Any suggestions?

        Geoff
    • by suss ( 158993 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:53PM (#4330290)
      Nope. It's hidden somewhere in the EULA for XP SP1.

      By clicking this, you agree to do MS Community Service for the period of 1 year.
      This includes so called "trolling" on "slashdot" and shouting your mouth off in channel "#Debian" on irc.openpro^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^Kfreenode.net

  • by back_pages ( 600753 ) <back_pages AT cox DOT net> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:32PM (#4329512) Journal
    Sorry, this is not the same article as this [slashdot.org] Slashdot article. The ZDNet article is exactly the same as the CNet article, except the ZDNet article includes this INSIGHTFUL EASTER EGG OF KNOWLEDGE at the end:
    "The big issue there, he said, was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software."
  • Umm... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by necrognome ( 236545 )
    Obviously one editor has no idea what the other is doing. Can we not have back-to-back stories [slashdot.org] about the same article? That was like, yesterday.
    • Re:Umm... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by chrisd ( 1457 )
      Well sometimes we do step all over each other, but all things considered, it is not the end of the world :-)

      chrisd

      • Re:Umm... (Score:3, Funny)

        by Ian Wolf ( 171633 )
        It isn't!? OMG! Slashdot editors are human! What will I ever do?

        My life is a lie.
      • What colour is your red face? :-)

      • Re:Umm... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gamorck ( 151734 ) <jaylittle AT jay ... com minus author> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:58PM (#4329817) Homepage
        What I find sad about it is that its quite obvious that the people who edit this site don't bother to actually read it all that much. Now to give credit where it is due, most of the other /.ers haven't noticed the dupe as they are ranting and raving just as they were yesterday about it. I've only seen three comments mentioning this thus far.

        What makes this really bad is the fact that it was CLEARLY pointed out [slashdot.org] yesterday that Ballmer and perhaps others were misquoted in the referenced article. On one hand you guys complain about the FUD Microsoft spews yet on the other you obviously have no problem doing the exact same thing yourselves. (Hint: Never take read anything from CNET or ZDNET literally - their articles are usually fluffed up).

        Now on an ontopic note - MS' Developer community drawves the size of the Open Source community by at least a few hundred if not a thousand fold. They generally have a richer centralized repository of information and technical knowledge (MSDN) to draw from and their development tools are widely considered to be superior. They also sell a platform which offers the best chance for close to 100% market saturation.

        Laugh all you want - but it sounds to me like the man has the right idea. Afterall its not like he said, "We are planning on leveraging the power of our preceived monoply to crush the oppositionary force known as Linux". No he actually said something along the lines of, "By continuing to foster a rich developer community as we have in the past we can make sure the bulk of the talent is writing code for Windows and not Linux".

        Whine all you want but that sounds legal and fair in my book.

        J
  • by Brento ( 26177 ) <brentoNO@SPAMbrentozar.com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:32PM (#4329517) Homepage
    But we've got nowhere to go but up....
  • by medscaper ( 238068 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:32PM (#4329519) Homepage
    "Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way."


    As opposed to Microsoft, which, of course, will simply end up bankrupt...

    • by scoove ( 71173 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:52PM (#4330289)
      "Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way." said Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer, as he noticed he could not pull up a ticker symbol for Linux on the NASDAQ or NYSE and concluded it could not be any sort of threat.

      Wow... I've heard of confused paradigms and misunderstandings leading folks down the wrong path before, but this is amazing (and I think reflects a very deep fear and circling of wagon mentality coming from the top of Microsoft).

      At a minimum, Balmer's comment here reflects a complete inability to grasp that the competition this time is different. It's not another Microsoft, another software company that they can pin a name to, use the same strategy and crush it through whatever mechanisms.

      I just don't get it, Bill. I know there has to be an evil Linux conspiracy organization out there, but I can't find their headquarters. How can the Microsoft Storm Troopers 2.1(TM) infiltrate an enemy we cannot find?

      It's intangible. It's an infectious meme. It'd be like King Charles I dismissing the threat of Parliment because they didn't possess a throne.

      Not to get too esoteric, but I'd suggest Balmer read Milton's Areopagetica quickly. He might just learn the answer to all their inherent security problems, as well as the probable long term failure of the current strategy (which he apparently will ride to the ground given present thinking). Then again, maybe he shouldn't and business students can have a good case study of why closed source is a bad idea in the long run.

      Closed source doesn't permit "grappling of truth and falsehood." It hides, obscures, conceals falsehoods (such as security problems or bugs) and relies upon official persons of the Microsoft kingdom to be allowed to discuss and determine what truth/falsehood is. Recent aggression with EULAs and service packs prohibiting public exposure of such defects nearly mirrors a sort of Star Chamber - a certification from Microsoft permitting one to speak (and those that criticize are not permitted).

      Given the rapidly increasing defensiveness (much of which can be attributed to antitrust, I'd guess), I don't see an ability to change until its probably too late.
  • by kalidasa ( 577403 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:33PM (#4329526) Journal

    What a FUDfest! Well, folks hopefully have seen the Register story on this. A couple of comments.

    Technology like clustering would be better in Windows than Linux eventually, said Ballmer: "We will beat Linux on clusters. We can't beat them on price, but we have to add value."

    Given the current market for Beowulf, I don't see MS competing on clusters, especially with "add[ed] value."

    Asked by one lateral-thinking MVP whether Microsoft planned to offer applications software on Linux, Ballmer said no, adding that the big issue was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software.

    "We do not anticipate offering software on Linux," said Ballmer. "Nobody pays for software on Linux." Even StarOffice, sold by Sun, was originally a free product, he said. And IBM, arguably the No. 1 player in the Linux market, promotes Linux to big users, but does not actually sell Linux: "It's weird. IBM says 'Hey British Aerospace! Buy Linux...from SuSE.'"

    StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft. And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?

    • >And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?

      Thats just the funniest part about this whole OS/CS business. The CS folks have their lawyers ensure they are never liable for use of their software, and then turn around and bash OS because theres no legal liability.

      I suppose b2b contracts for software might contain certain 'performance metrics', meaning companies can back out of contracts if the software doesn't perform up to spec, but do they usually include legal liability for malfunctions, etc? Can anybody tell me this? Doesn't it just come down to the ability to pass the buck? I mean, by now, "Well, we thought we were okay because it was an MS product" is nearly an allowable defence for IT projects gone wrong.

      You can't say the same thing with OS because nobody is making the $$ off of it to be the figure^H^H^Hscapegoat that you can claim should have been a good choice because gee, they make tons of money, and that means good products and culpability gosh darnit!
    • Balls to the walls (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ethelred Unraed ( 32954 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:47PM (#4329706) Journal
      Quoth Ballmer: It's not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way.

      *laugh* Ballmer only seems to see things in terms of money. It should be painfully obvious that Linux didn't start off "bankrupt", it started off free, which is hardly the same thing.

      Quoth kalidasa: StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft.

      It isn't, of course -- well, there's one crucial difference. MS doesn't get any money out of it.

      And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?

      They keep dancing around that issue. They have, one the one hand, tried with EULAs and so on to get out of liability -- but they are also starting to realize that that lack of responbility has meant that they release shoddy software and have no immediate need to fix it. But now their reputation for less-than-good software is starting to come around and bite them in the *ss. A symptom is all the buzz that Linux and UN*X is getting. So they are starting to acknowledge *moral*, as opposed to *legal*, liability for their software products ("Trustworthy Computing").

      Which could be dangerous, 'cos you can't have it both ways, really. Eventually someone's going to start suing the bejeezus out of them, once some NT-based thing goes blooey and costs someone a fortune...

      Cheers,

      Ethelred [grantham.de]

    • by iceT ( 68610 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:57PM (#4330337)
      ...have to add value...

      Is that what they're calling the BSOD these days?

      "Added Value"?
  • clustering (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zrodney ( 253699 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:33PM (#4329534)
    So, they plan to "beat linux on value" in the
    clustering area because they realize that they
    really can't beat the price.

    But -- how would a 100 node microsoft cluster have
    any better value than the same cluster running some
    linux clustering sw? The microsoft system would
    be around 100 times more expensive, and the
    licensing would be outrageous.

    Imagine you want to add 20 nodes to your cluster.
    With linux -- no problem, cable it up and go.
    With microsoft, well, you probably have to get
    some more licenses, and another 20 copies of
    windows to install. That's around $3500 just
    for the os software.

    And finally, there are lots of linux clustering
    installations running today, and many of those
    have been using clusters for years and have a
    history of upgrades and improvements. I really
    doubt these people will be interested in
    switching to a microsoft monolithic cluster.

    More and more, microsoft is getting desperate.
    • The numbers have probably changed since I last ran them, but last I looked, in terms of the raw compute power available on a cluster, {Linux/BSD/Solaris} delivered almost twice as many usable processing cycles as a Windows solution. No matter what, the windowing system was consuming a fair number of cycles even when not in use. Has this changed or has it gotten worse under XP?
    • Re:clustering (Score:5, Insightful)

      by splume ( 560873 ) <splumes@hotmail.com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:43PM (#4329657) Journal
      I think you are confusing "value" with economic cost. There is a difference. If Microsoft makes it so clustering takes less time, with better monitoring and configuration tools than the current Linux tool set, then they have created better value. Yes, it is going to cost a hell of a lot more, but if your Boss wants a cluster setup by tomorrow, and you only have a Windows Admin on hand, what is going to be more valuable to him? Value is created when something is offered that makes the job at hand easier, faster, more maintainable, etc.

      Note: I do not disagree with you that the cost is going to be much much much higher in a Windows cluster.
    • Re:clustering (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Ian Wolf ( 171633 )
      He's obviously losing his mind. I'm too lazy to do the search, but there are plenty of articles out there about how Dreamworks, WEGA, and other special effects companies have switched to Linux cluster farms because of price. Their arguments have been that to implement the same cluster with MS or proprietary UNIX products would cost them three times as much money.

      "Check this out! It's an active-active SQL2K cluster! It actually works!", said the highly ecstatic SQL Server admin. "That's nice.", said the unimpressed Oracle DBA without looking up from his latest copy of -insert favorite magazine here-.
  • Usually it takes a few weeks for a dupe to cycle back in. Apparently chrisd hasn't been taking his daily dose of slashdot???
  • by Pov ( 248300 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:35PM (#4329554)
    I'm kind of offended by the "few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge" line in the main post. There are a lot of advantages to Linux or ANY coding system in use today. So Linux has a very large and vocal community. Does that mean you have to give people another reason to dislike you by flaunting it instead of just appreciating it? There are a lot more M$ coders out there than you think. Just look for the .asp pages on sites both small and large. [insert joke about hacking them next here]
  • by Yohahn ( 8680 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:35PM (#4329555)
    These people crack me up.

    They have to turn everything in life into a business.

    "In a way they started out bankrupt"

    You have to have debt in order to go bankrupt.
    A social movement is not a busness. There is no way it could have been bankrupt. Stop trying to spin business terms where they don't apply.

    Microsoft probably started more bankrupt than Linux. They were a business, and they probably had alot of debt. This is how most businesses start out. You get a little funding to start (if you can't pay it back.. you're bankrupt).
    • by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:57PM (#4329804) Journal
      > A social movement is not a busness.

      And linux is not a social movement, it's an operating system.

      Seriously, I'm sick of all the lame typecasting based on what OS happens to be on my box at any particular time.

      Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.

      If you want to brand yourself, go ahead. Keep me out of it. It's just as lame as the 'nintendo vs ps2 vs xbox' crapfests that 12 year olds have on irc.
      • From dictionary.com:

        "Society - A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a common culture."

        Linux users would be a society, having their muterial interests be Linux.
      • by CoughDropAddict ( 40792 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:47PM (#4330239) Homepage
        Your self-righteousness is amusing.

        And linux is not a social movement, it's an operating system.

        Are you kidding me? Thousands of developers worldwide spontaneously volunteer millions of hours into a collective pot, the fruits of which eventually rival the biggest software companies on the planet. Sounds like a social movement to me.

        Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.

        Straw man. No one is making judgements about users based on what OS they are running on their desktop. The claim is that you can't try to discuss the development model of Linux based on terms that only make sense for businesses (such as "bankrupt") since they simply don't apply (there is no entity involved that can have assets or debt).
      • by Srin Tuar ( 147269 ) <zeroday26@yahoo.com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @04:12PM (#4330464)


        Right now I'm running Windows 2k, working through some bugs in a custom DCOM object. So I guess I'm a corporate sheep. In an hour or so I'll be working through some fortran code in unix. Then I'm a greasy peace loving hippy.


        Although I agree about not subscribing to archtypes, you need to pick some better examples:

        • Windows 2k, DCOM: corporate sheep
        • Fortran, commercial unix: old corporate sheep
  • "(of course by community they mean the few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge)"

    I think we all could have gotten the point of the story without the editorial. I'm not talking about censoring the guy, I'm just saying that it detracts from an otherwise decent story.

  • Yeah, right. Keep stomping [enemy.org] monkey boy... ;)
  • by afidel ( 530433 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:38PM (#4329593)
    is Balmer is a crack monkey. For evidence see here [fuckedcompany.com]
    • It's understandable. For a few billion dollars I'd jump around like a monkey on a stage too. I'd even gain 100 pounds and pull out all my hair just to make the effect complete. And I would have sweat glands surgically implanted so I could effectively soak a shirt.

  • by smoondog ( 85133 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:39PM (#4329604)
    Dammit Balmer! that's GNU/Linux ...

    -Sean
  • by tcc ( 140386 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:39PM (#4329606) Homepage Journal
    They should stomps the annoying Bugs in their software before stomping the competition with FUD... A better product always sells by itself, especially in a monopoly situation. They could have an happy userbase and a more pro-microsoft community by doing so.

    RIght now they are focussing their energy in stomping both consumer (DRM) and market rights, stomping competition, and stomping whatever or whoever dares to say something bad against them. This is such a waste of energy only a PR departement with too much staff can afford.

    Stupid yet annoying bug to give ONE example out of probably 1000+ that people could bring up:

    Since windows 95, when I'm dragging a huge folder, explorer STILL doesn't display the remanining time correctly, saying example 2 minutes remaning, and then 388432 minutes (and going down by 600 minutes every 2 seconds), I mean, for god's sake, 5 years later, 3 service pack later, windows 2000 *STILL* has that bug. This is one dumb example, but imagine all the bugs that you don't directly see.

    So please microsoft, don't focus on the few users you don't have, focus on making your current userbase HAPPY so that they aren't bleeding off to your potential competitor as soon as they get a chance or get too fed up, because THIS will cost you.
  • by L1nuxGuy ( 588760 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:41PM (#4329630)
    Did'ja catch this little gem?
    The (MVP) title is highly regarded, said Thomas Lee, a Windows 2000 MVP who specializes in directory issues, and has just been appointed as chief technologist at QA Training. "You are recognized by your peers,
    not by an exam that you can cheat in."
    Sure makes ya respect those pricey pieces of paper.
  • M$ shift Strategies. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by buswolley ( 591500 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:42PM (#4329645) Journal
    M$ no longer seems to claim that M$ products have a lower "Total Cost Of Ownerhip" than its competitors, namely Linux. As Balmer admits:

    "We have to compete with free software on value, but in a smart way. We cannot price at zero, so we need to justify our posture and pricing. Linux isn't going to go away--our job is to provide a better product in the marketplace."

    M$ knows that it has to make a better product than Linux to survive. I think they have a long way to go.. **Evidence**that people/community can shake huge corporations!!! C'mon M$ is afraid of /.

  • Bankruptcy (Score:2, Redundant)

    by Lxy ( 80823 )
    Linux will always be financially bankrupt.

    Microsoft will always be morally bankrupt.

    So, "in a way", hasn't Microsoft always been bankrupt?
  • by PrimeNumber ( 136578 ) <PrimeNumber@[ ]ite.com ['exc' in gap]> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:44PM (#4329679) Homepage
    To quote houseparty 2....

    Wasnt the link [com.com] in this [slashdot.org] Slashdot article essentially saying the same thing?
  • by bogie ( 31020 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:44PM (#4329680) Journal
    Linux is a Cancer!

    We'll stomp on Linux!

    I'm taking my ball and going home!

    How embarassing for Microsoft, their CEO sounds like a ranting 3 year old. Time for a timeout.

  • Stop the madness (Score:4, Interesting)

    by qurob ( 543434 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:44PM (#4329681) Homepage

    (of course by community they mean the few guys they personally know and who make money using their MS knowledge)

    Are you kidding me?

    Want to make some cash?

    Get a group of guys together who have MCP's and MCSE's, maybe an A+ and Cisco guy for cool logos to put on your business cards.

    Go around 'consulting' networks for the local small businesses for $60 an hour, $120 an hour for the SE's ;)

    If you can find the business and there's not much competition, it's like taking sugary treats from an infant.

  • They can pull all of their collective necks together into one, making it easier for us to cut it off.
  • Bankrupt?? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AltGrendel ( 175092 ) <ag-slashdot@eDEBIANxit0.us minus distro> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:46PM (#4329701) Homepage
    I perfer to call it "poor but honest".

    Better fit, don't you think.

  • That seemed quite obvious in the recent poll in which the majority of /. readers who identified themselves as programmers at all identified themselves as specicially professional programmers. You wouldn't think Balmer would be such a stranger to such notions, but I can't say I know the guy.
  • by i_want_you_to_throw_ ( 559379 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:47PM (#4329707) Journal
    They progressively look more and more stupid.

    If Microsoft would put out something that works better than Linux then I would use it. It's that simple. They haven't so I won't. We're deploying more and Open Source here in my defense agency corner of the government. Why? Because we can do more with it.

    Services not platforms Ballmer.

    After all these unsuccessful, goofy misguided attempts to kill Linux they still haven't figured out the futility of just bullying? Haven't they learning that bullying just galvanizes the open source community more?

    They really DON'T get it do they? I, for one will just do more to insure they don't get stronger here because I make decisions at that level. Yes, I am biased. They have screwed up that badly with us and I will not waste tax dollars on crap.

    The genie is too far out of the bottle now.
  • by trippyd ( 307143 )
    oooh... 1200 whole MVPs... I am sure our little community is scared.

    95% market share and all they can come up with is 1200 people?
  • There'll be thousands of post bashing balmer in /. after that headline

    But, its been 2 days since IDC came up with the server figures for 2001. None of the Linux sites have mentioned it. As usual they seem to live in an anecdotal world like Mac zealots where everybody & their grandma uses Mac/Linux but fail to register a blip in the marketshare radar

    Looks like Microsoft is winning in the server side too & everybody is having their heads buried in the sand
  • Raarghhh! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dirtside ( 91468 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:50PM (#4329732) Journal

    "Linux... making me angry... can't... contain... emotions... third-person... narration... taking... over... RAAARGHHHH!!!"

    *Ballmer transforms into a giant, green-skinned version of himself, tearing his clothes and exposing his enormous gut*

    "BALLMER STOMP LINUX!!! RAARRGHH!!! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!!"
    • by haggar ( 72771 )
      I can almost picture that thing running back and forth on a podium, screaming, jumping and sweating profusely.

      Oh, wait...
  • Perhaps Linux is bankrupt in a sense but one thing is for certain, Linux is not morally bankrupt. Be honest, can you say the same Steve?
  • by flacco ( 324089 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:52PM (#4329748)
    MS has made its fortune turning its "community" into a gaggle of hand-held idiots; now they're going to turn to THEM for their salvation?
  • We can't beat them on price, but we have to add value.

    M@cr$s&ft must be getting pretty desperate if they are going to start adding value to their products.

  • United, with who? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by schowley ( 415879 )
    In reading the article I find it ironic that some of Ballmer's statements are similar to practices M$ employed in the mid 90's. I believe it was M$ that provided Internet Explorer free in order to displace Netscape's market share. As for the Microsoft community goes, I would rather use an OS that has been reviewed by many eyes than one that seems to have only been reviewed by the elite M$ few!

    Sounds to me like M$ is getting a taste of their own medicine.
  • by DrXym ( 126579 )
    Most Valuable Primate?


    I've never taken this guy seriously since he came hunkering across the stage like a deranged orangutan.

  • Cash wise, perhaps. At least we aren't morally bankrupt. At least we, the Linux community, can look ourselves in the mirror and not be ashamed that we have fucked over anyone at any time for a few bucks. We don't destroy someone's business because we hate competetion, no matter how insignificant. We don't extort money from cash strapped schools to improve our balance sheet a few more pennies. We don't lie to our "customers" about our quality and security.

    I have a one question for you, Ballmer. What's it like to have so much money and yet do so little for the good of mankind?

  • Ummmm... Not really (Score:3, Informative)

    by cascadefx ( 174894 ) <morlockhqNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:58PM (#4329812) Journal
    "We do not anticipate offering software on Linux," said Ballmer. "Nobody pays for software on Linux." Even StarOffice, sold by Sun, was originally a free product, he said.

    Well, actually, Star Office started as a commericial product from a company called Star Division. The company was eventually aquired by Sun who in turned offered Star Office as a free download and then open souced a version of it and has now gone back to selling branded versions of the open source project (wheww!!!).

  • "adding that the big issue was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software. "

    I'm sorry but whem has anyone tried legal action against M$ for selling you duff software. There's a big disclaimer in the license if I remember correctly. Something along the lines of ...

    "If you lose data and your business suffers financially as a result, Microsoft accept no liability for any errors in our sofware. Tough"

    Or am I wrong...???
  • by TheLastUser ( 550621 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:11PM (#4329945)
    Favorite quote: "Nobody pays for software on Linux." given as a justification for not porting MS apps to Linux.

    I guess I am the only one out there who paid for Oracle on Linux, can't imagine why Oracle keeps producing the new versions.

    How about "We won't be porting our apps to Linux because that will kill sales of our less than useless OS" isn't that a bit closer to the truth?
  • Novell, huh? (Score:4, Informative)

    by The Second Horseman ( 121958 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:19PM (#4329993)
    Of course, the fact that most of the Novell sites are site licensed and have a significant commitment, the fact that they're making money, the fact that they have no significant debt and that some decent property holdings doesn't factor.

    With products like DirXML, Netmail, Zenworks for Desktops, and yes, even Netware, trust me, they're going to be around. A Netware 6 cluster offering native Netware, NFS, Apple FS and CIFS support is pretty amazing. So are products like Account Managment, which lets you sync AD and eDirectory users, as well as Unix accounts, IBM mainframe user accounts, etc. Probably doesn't mean much to the usual /. poster, but integrating this stuff makes a huge difference in a large enterprise. And you're not going to hear an integration story from Microsoft.

    Sure, it's not always flashy, but you can get real work done, which is what those of us getting paid to do IT work should be focusing on.
  • Oh jeez. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zapfie ( 560589 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:30PM (#4330081)
    Um, am I to take it the "stomp Linux" in quotes implies that Ballmer said this?

    Because even though it's in the article headline, Ballmer is never QUOTED as saying it in the article. It is just the author's interpretation of what Ballmer said.

    Ballmer gave a very calm, non-confrontation argument (pro-Microsoft, yes, but what did you expect?).

    Come on, people would be up in arms if a Slashdot headline wrongfully said "FSF says 'fuck you' to those not using GNU/Linux".

    If anyone needs me, I'll be tearing my hair out...
  • by TomatoMan ( 93630 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @03:31PM (#4330088) Homepage Journal
    Go ahead and take my friggin' karma, I can't imagine what I'm saving it for. Nowhere did Ballmer say MS would "stomp Linux." I hate MS as much as the next geek, but I hate dirty catfighting even more.

    Follow these steps for shoddy journalism: (honestly, can someone please explain the difference between /. and a $0.50 supermarket tabloid?)
    1. C|Net gives a title to an article about Ballmer that uses the word "stomp" as if Ballmer had said it. They don't quote him saying it.
    2. /. picks up the story (again) without reading it, and further butchers it by altering the title again and attributing a quote that's entirely fictitous but sounds really inflammatory and good, presenting it as fact.
    3. People who angrily point this out get modded -1, Panties In A Twist, and they disappear into the Troll Pits, and the site is run by those who remain and who don't give a fuck. Repeat from step 1.
    Like the demise of Wired all those years ago, it's just really sad. This place used to be a great source of information. It's fallen a long, long way.
  • by autopr0n ( 534291 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @04:05PM (#4330411) Homepage Journal
    Unite, and be used!
  • by dcavanaugh ( 248349 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @04:10PM (#4330441) Homepage
    "It's not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money..."

    Steve almost has a clue. Linux has very little money, no central base to be attacked or bought, and it's massively distributed into residential basements and dark corners of IT departments.

    This has to be Microsoft's worst nightmare -- an enemy that doesn't care about money or "winning" market share. An enemy that takes Microsoft's "clone and lowball" strategy and turns it back against them. Indeed, Linux is the Viet Cong of the internet.

    I find it fascinating to watch Microsoft fumble and bumble with ineffective strategies against an enemy that they truly don't understand. When Microsoft decides to concede the OS battle and tries to take over the Linux desktop, then I'll be worried about the monopoly being perpetuated. They keep denying any intention of porting Office to Linux, so maybe it's Microsoft that will run out of money.
  • by ShieldWolf ( 20476 ) <jeffrankine@@@netscape...net> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @04:30PM (#4330655)
    Compare Balmer's talk with the new foreign policy Bush just gave congress.

    With both you have a large seemingly unbeatable force with money to burn that believes it can outspend the competition to maintain a monopoly. This monopoly is widely loathed yet many people cherish the stability it brings. Meanwhile you have a DIY group of individuals who are trying to bring down said monopoly with ingenuity and far less funds.

    Not that I think Linux hackers are terrorists IN ANY WAY, likewise I am not condoning terrorists either. I just find it interesting as a comparison.

    Thoughts?

Money may buy friendship but money cannot buy love.

Working...