Microsoft to Split into Four Groups? 217
An anonymous reader wrote in to say "ZDNet is
reporting that Microsoft is going to announce
next week that it is splitting into four separate groups. Maybe we'll see Office for Linux after all..."
Megaserver? I fart in your general direction MS! (Score:1)
This sounds Microsoft wants to take us back to the days of Ye Olde Mainframe. Funny. This was the computing model that he was up against in the early days of the PC. Yeah, it stands for Personal Computing. And now he wants a "Megaserver"? Lets look at Bill's other shining example of this kind of computing: WindowsNT. Trust everyones important data to an NT server? Riiiiight....
Of course it's in Mircosoft's interests to promote this kind of system:
Furthermore, this silly scheme is the antithesis of all the the Internet is or aspires to be: it will not suffer such an attempt at centralization! I say when MS eventually looses the DoJ case, as part of the punishment they should be denied the Internet. Strip them of their domain, MSN, and IE!
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
To its credit, Hotmail was bought! (Score:1)
> email. Any self-respecting computer that can
> give you web access should give you telnet.
But, in the interests of security, what about my server, where we only allow shell access from certain IP addresses? If I'm travelling, and my laptop gets fried, or my pilot gets smashed, or whatever, I can go to ANYone with net access and check my mail. No problem.
I don't use it as my main account (it's a pain in the ass) but HoTMaiL is definitely good insurance.
4 M$ groups? (Score:1)
-- Memorandum --
From: Bill Gates
To: All borg
Re: Microsoft Corporation "Divide and Conquer" Regrouping Plan
Here are the groups I intend to split M$ into.
1) Marketing
2) Sales
3) Lying
4) Ripping off other people's concepts
So basically, just stay where you are and keep doing what you're doing. Sales should not attempt to sell to the marketing, lying, or rip-off teams, however.
Sincerely,
bg
This is NOT A BREAKUP (Score:1)
Seems like this reinforces integration not hinders it.
Just a reorg. (Score:1)
Office on Linux? I still wouldn't buy it... (Score:1)
4 M$ groups? (Score:1)
Group 2: Grease
Group 3: Sugar
Group 4: Monosodium Glutamate
;)
Pre-emptive strike (Score:1)
Folks, this has been a long time coming, and has been reported on before. This gives MS a couple of things. It lets them focus more on the interactive/Web side, where they're still trying to figure out how this whole Internet thing works, and it gives the DOJ a blueprint for divvying up the company along product lines. If indeed Microsoft is going to be broken up (which is possible, though far from likely), Microsoft would prefer to split along product lines.
Just my two cents. Take it or leave it.
Only if they open-source it (Score:1)
I will use Office for Linux if, and only if, Microsoft open-sources it so I can inspect and build it myself. With all of the latest revelations of the prodigious privacy violations by MS and its software, I just don't trust them anymore, period.
And since the odds of MS open-sourcing Office are, in the (approximate) words of Berke Breathed, "about the same as those of Reagan handing Nancy over to Bruce Springsteen's roadies," I don't think Office will ever make it to my Linux box.
Steve Linberg, Systems Programmer &c.
National Center on Adult Literacy, University of Pennsylvania
The etemology of "Troll"... (Score:1)
The term "Troll" comes from "Dungeons&Dragons" role playing games. Specifically, a "Troll" is an almost indestructible creature with great strength.
Because of this, "Trolls" became popular as characters for individuals who wish to engage in minless mayhem. On the internett, "Troll" means "someone who deliberatly starts a flame war".
So no - you definatly arn't a Troll.
As to your comments about "Linux Rules/Microsoft Sucks!", well, on that point I will say only this. A lot of us have to work with M$ products in our daytime jobs and alternate OS's ( like Linux ) are just something that we do as a hobby.
Because of this, I'm a fully paid up, card carrying member of the "We hate Microsoft" brigade. When you spend long hours at night and on the weekend trying to find your way around some bug in an M$ product, a certain amount of rancour and intolerance is inevitable. In short, you take it *very* personally simply because it directly impacts on your own personal life ( or lack thereof because your too busy patching around bugs to have a life of your own ).
So while I certainly agree with you that OS bloat has pushed processor development much faster than it would otherwise have gone, I would ask that you keep in mind that my hatred and loathing of M$ is not a matter of fashion, but rather the direct effect that M$'s marketing practices have had on my life.
Likewise with my advocacy of Linux and other open source OS's. There is nothing new about what M$ is doing - IBM did the same all through the 1980's when I was at university and during my first few years as a commercial programmer.
To me, open source systems are the only way that we can concievably break us out of this viscious cycle. Why re-invent a propriatory wheel all the time? Why not just use a standard wheel? This is why I have very little patience for closed source OS's ( such as MS-Windows or OS/2 ). To me, M$ isn't the problem, but the whole propriatory mind-set that it seeks to foster.
So while Linux isn't perfect, it's currently the flag-ship of the open source movement and the OS that I support. Call me immature if you like, but
"Linux Rulz!/M$ Sux!"
And no, I'm not going to flame you. You haven't been deliberatly rude or offensive, so it's not required.
Windows 2000 not expected this year? (Score:1)
Whiff....I smell BS... (Score:1)
Carnegie or Rockefeller (Score:1)
I'm sure this line of thought has already been posted at some earlier point on
Misfit - Member of the department of redundance department
Microsoft Strategies (Score:1)
No, not what you wrote, but the scenario..
To its credit, Hotmail was bought! (Score:1)
Most people I know use HotMail as a dumping ground for spam from their USENET postings. They really don't use their HotMail email adress for serious mail.
Office suite is for PEOPLE, not GEEKS (Score:1)
MSOffice is hardly the pinnacle of either the spreadsheet or wordprocessor.
Steve Ballmer (Score:1)
Why is it that EVERY picture of steve balmer looks as though it was designed to make him look like a blithering idiot? You'd think they would want to project an image of
I'm constantly amazed that I live in a society in which a company like that can take control of so much of the worlds business and finance.
-cm
Megaserver??? (Score:1)
It'd certainly be nice to go over to a friend's house and have access to the same applications and information as I do at home or at work. Forget synchronization.
Though, of course I'm speaking about my Windows apps. I can already use an X server at work or at a friend's house to get at all of my apps and information on the Linux side of things, but this doesn't extend into my "real world" work (where I need access to NT apps/data).
Megaserver? I fart in your general direction MS! (Score:1)
This is bad?
Guess where your web cache is stored kiddies? "The better to taylor banner ads, um i mean content for you."
Of course, you're making the assumption that temporary files like browser caches (assuming they even exist) will exist on the server-side. Wouldn't a simple proxy be more efficient? A web cache is designed to be super-fast (pulling from the local disk). A server lookup wouldn't be any more of a gain than any proxy would.
Also, don't judge an idea based upon what an evil mind MIGHT be able to do if it were POSSIBLE that he were allowed to do it. It's possible for credit card companies to monitor your purchases and sell your name and address to targeted vendors for junk mail. It's possible for your ISP to monitor which newsgroups you read and send the information about your porn tastes to various X-rated junk mail firms. It's possible to do a great many things in the world today but you don't see it happening. Why? Because it's not in the company's best interests to do so. The resulting PR mess and the number of customers who would switch to a competitor would make the prospects seem very bad for a company trying to abuse information it has access to. Microsoft is no difference, except they seem a bit bolder. Don't judge them for something they haven't done yet.
If they control the server, then they can control the communications protocol
I agree that having an open standard and open protocols would definitely be a good thing. If they do keep everything proprietary, though, it won't be too difficult to figure out. After all, look at ICQ and the number of Linux clones. I don't believe they had much of a real standard to go upon until someone did a bit of packet snooping. Also, this "Megaserver" idea seems especially well-suited for multiple platforms. It would be a shame to limit their customers to only those that are running a PC with Windows or an appliance with WindowsCE.
YES! Nicely said! (Score:1)
The loud, uneducated majority (IRC script kiddies, high school Unix admin wananbes, college Unix admin wannabes and the mentally disturbed), or more affectionately, the "slashdot sheep", are all about killing the big-bad, evil (insert noun of the day here, ex. Microsoft), castrating those that oppose the (insert noun of the day here, ex. GPL), and touting (insert noun of the day here, ex. Linux) as the complete, should-be-used-everywhere-by-all-people-at-all-ti
The relatively silent, educated minority, affectionately referred to as the Real People with Real Jobs doing Real Things that actually Make A Difference, know that it all boils down to using the best tool for the task.
Let me say that again:
It all boils down to using the best tool for the task.
For my Unix, WWW, CGI, SQL, etc. development, I will work on my Linux box using my vi text editor, Apache web server and copy of mySQL. Why? Because I'm familiar with those tools and they are ideally suited for my work environment and habits. For my graphics, work e-mail, XML and stylesheet development, I use my NT system, Photoshop, Outlook and Internet Explorer. Yes, I have to reboot my NT machine every week or two. Yes, applications occasionally crash. My lost productivity there more than makes up for the productivity I've gained by taking advantage of these Microsoft products to get my job done. There are no suitable equivalents available under Linux. (And for every Linux alternative you mention, I'm going to offer you several reasons why it's inferior, not as productive as its MS counterpart, or why the MS version is better suited to my needs or work environment.)
The bottom line: All you sheep looking for a cause to fight for, stop thinking with your single uneducated, paranoid, immature collective virtual "brain" and start thinking with the gooey one between your ears. A hear a lot of, "You're a Microsoft guy. Open your mind up a little bit to other alternatives," when you OS bigots are guilty of exactly the same thing: closed-mindedness. It's not about what's cool and "making a stand". It's about using the best tools for the task at hand. Grow up.
Office suite is for MICROSOFT (Score:1)
This is true, but do you know of any Office suites that can truthfully be classified as "overwhelmingly better" than MS Office? I can't. I've used 'em all, and nothing beats Word or Excel for the tasks they're designed for. And what about Powerpoint? Is there even a Linux alternative for that, much less an "overwhelmingly better" one?
Office "features" (Score:1)
It's pretty trivial to disable this.
When I'm using variables in a document (ie i) and it makes them uppercase.
It's pretty trivial to disable this.
When it tries to format lists for me, but always does it wrong
It's pretty trivial to disable this.
When it stops responding for 4-5 minutes while it talks to NT 'bout something
Sounds like you have more serious problems. Occasionally Word will take advantage of the "auto save" feature to avoid lost data (trivial to disable). That's the only thing I can imagine that it would be doing. A four to five minute lock-up is an indication of a much more serious problem. I would consider checking the disk surface of your drive for errors and running some generic system health tests. Naturally, a decent-speed CPU and a good amount of RAM would be the first thing I'd check. If you're using an application with anything below the recommended system specifications, you're asking for problems like this. You might also try closing any other major applications that you may have open, because each one uses its own share of memory, as I'm sure you're aware. Of course, I'm assuming you're not exaggarating by your 4-5 minute delay. I've never seen that before.
When it tries to autocorrect my spelling as I type
It's pretty trivial to disable this.
In general, anytime it tries to think for me
In general, most of Word's "intuitive" features are trivially disabled.
Don't bash a product because you lack the competance to configure it correctly. I mean come on, it's a Windows app. Point and click. It's not like you're having to edit a
Megaserver??? (Score:1)
Then this "Megaserver" venture will fail and Microsoft will lose money. Microsoft operating systems tend to be unreliable. You know it, I know it, and most everyone at Microsoft knows it (though they aren't going to say so). Since everybody knows that implementing this "Megaserver" thing with out-of-the-box Microsoft solutions will result in an unreliable and unstable "Megaserver", logic dictates that a better solution will be devised to ensure reliability and data integrity.
If they build this thing using known unreliable software, it will fail. They know this, which is precisely why a better solution will be (or has already been) devised. Microsoft's business tactics may be questionable, and their consumer products tend to be unreliable, but they're not a stupid company, and they do have some intelligent programmers in their pay. I haven't seen any real problems with that Terraserver lately, for example.
Office "features" (Score:1)
I think you're just feeling bitter because I'm actually committing Slashdot-blasphemy by actually *defending* Microsoft. Yes, I'm defending them. I don't like them and I think their products tend to be unstable and bloated, but dammit, I'll defend anyone that's being mislabeled and flamed unfairly. Get over it.
Office "features" (Score:1)
I'm sure this is it.. Word has keyboard shortcuts of its own, and I'm sure any die-hard Word user (which I am not) would say they had similar difficulties converting to WordPerfect.
I actually don't know how to make an uneven 3 column document with differing widths.
I'm not stupid either, the argument of point and click is worthless because the complexity is above point and click.
Forgive me for sounding condescending, but I guess I left out "drag" when I said "point and click". In Word, there's a ruler bar across the top with things like your table edges marked off. To adjust your widths, just drag those marks to the left or the right. Depending on how you've set your toolbars up, creating visible borders on one or multiple edges of a table cell is as easy as selecting the cell and clicking on the toolbar button that most closely matches your desired outline type. I'm sure WordPerfect has just as much functionality, but they just approach it entirely differently, which is why you might be having a hard time with it in Word. This is to be expected, and I don't feel it's a failing of the product. One should not criticize product X because its behavior differs from product Y. (I'm not saying you were or anything, but others are.)
I've personally created pamphlets, brochures and flyers using Word without much difficulty. I had to learn the terminology and what a few of those obscure Word features were for in the process, but again, this is to be expected, and I doubt it'd be any easier in any other Office suite.
Though you're right, Word (or any other word processor for that matter) isn't well suited for certain tasks. I've had to use PageMaker when building full-color magazine advertisements, for example.
It's all about using the best (most efficient/productive) tool for the task.
Office "features" (Score:1)
Your aerospace professor may be damn intelligent when it comes to aerospace, but your comment merely tells me that he simply does not read manuals. I bet he had problems following directions back in college.
I remember a thread a while back about how Microsoft was evil (again) *because* these MS Office products were "dumbing down" the general population, making things so intuitive and easy that the people using the applications didn't have to be smart. It saddens me that you people do not know how to perform the simplest of configuration tasks under Word.
I've used Word perhaps 20-30 times in my life, for, say, a cumulative 8-10 hours. I haven't touched Word for the last 9 months, but I have no doubt in my mind that I can open it up now and locate the preferences in question in under 30 seconds.
What Else Does "De-Facto Standard" Mean? (Score:1)
Ubiquity.
M$ got where it is through the ubiquity (every-where-ness) of dos. It was a tacit conspiracy between M$ and the user community. M$ said "hey, you big corporate users, you better be licensed!" and at the same time left basic DOS unprotected when everyone else (competition) had pro-lok and dongles and god knows what else. They KNEW dos would spread like a virus. They KNEW win 3.1 would, too. Win 95, they were taking some measures (remember the registration wizard uproar?) But backed off. Serendipity time. Made them even richer by allowing the pirating of W95.
They were gonna be a de fucking facto fucking standard, dammit! Piracy was their secret partner, regardless of the protestations of fearless leader.
To be serious for a sec, M$ attempted to do the impossible; to specify a generation of IT needs and processes apriori. These things must grow organically.
It's sorta like spec'ing out a life form's DNA without the benefit of evolution (the ultimate OSS project. Worked rather well for me. Don't like my nose, though. Wish I had a pull-down for that.))
Open Source is the ONLY way this high minded project stuff can work effectively. Try to plan it from on high, and the leader and his followers all tend to get psychotic. Only a cult can get a big enough gathering of people together to make the illusion seem real. Gates got a small cadre' to believe. They had a narcissistic, bill- centered vision to build, and to hell with truth.
To finalise...
They almost made it!
:cue bwahaha;
"BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Guess who's singing dat tune now, eh?
Pinheads!!!!!
(str)
Office suite is for PEOPLE, not GEEKS (Score:1)
Daniel
Office suite is for MICROSOFT (Score:1)
Just to be clear, people need office software. I don't dispute this.
But Microsoft doesn't design their office software to help people be more productive. They design their office software to sell a lot of copies. These goals sometimes overlap, but not always, and sometimes come into conflict.
This is a gross oversimplification. More accurately, the amount of time invested in using one product can be considered an advantage of that product when comparing it to something new. If the new product is overwhelmingly better, people will switch. Otherwise, we'd all still be using paper and pen, right?
Agreed! Slashdot ignores OS/2 submissions (Score:1)
Slashdot should remove the banner "News for nerds" and replace it with "News for Linux users". At least that way, they won't be deceiving anyone.
--
Timur Tabi
Remove "nospam_" from email address
Here's what "they" think... (Score:1)
brought it over, just to balance the discussion here
t_t_b
--
Who cares..... (Score:1)
how do you type all that in this tiny little box?
t_t_b
--
Applix ain't so bad. (Score:1)
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
Not a breakup, just a reorg (Score:1)
With Alzheimer's Regan might give Nancy to (Score:1)
Too bad for the roadies though...
I do agree that you can't trust any software that you did not build your self.
Dancing paper-clip never mentions how to (Score:1)
Instead he invites you to turn on more annoying features.
I recently read somewhere that the future is with leaner apps that have only the essential features so they can run on wearable computers. I believe that freed software has the best chance of implementing the new paradigm. M$ and all the other proprietary vendors are too busy enforcing the status quo to innovate much of anything except cramming another exotic feature down our throats.
cheers
smithdog
MS stunt for the DOJ? Yep. (Score:1)
This reorg means that M$ realizes that they have lost the federal anti-trust trial. Now that M$ is in a defensive posture, they begin to lose their competive edge. It will be interesting to see what remedies the US DOJ requires the software behemoth from Redmond to implement.
These are interesting times.
Office suite is for MICROSOFT (Score:1)
This is true, but do you know of any Office suites that can truthfully be classified as "overwhelmingly better" than
MS Office? I can't. I've used 'em all, and nothing beats Word or Excel for the tasks they're designed for. And
what about Powerpoint? Is there even a Linux alternative for that, much less an "overwhelmingly better" one?
Aboslutely there are better Office packages out there. I've been using WordPerfect Suite since the blue-screen days it was a lonely wordprocessor. I watched the Suite build up around it, and each time I compared it to the contemporary MSOffice, I found WP several steps ahead. So why isn't everyone using Wordperfect? They used to before Win3.1, but MS withheld vital programming information from other companies until Win3.1 was released, surprisingly in parallel with MSOffice for Windows. So WP had a six-month lag between the release of Win31/MSOffice, and managers in the meantime snapped over to MS because they feared "being behind".
Each time I take a look at Word, however, I find myself searching for features I'm used to in WordPerfect and just not finding them in Word. (Reveal codes, shadow cursor, and so forth). There used to be a tabulted comparison of Wordperfect 8.0 and the latest MSOffice. Sadly, that site is down, and I never saved it (thought I did). But, it showed how limited Word was compared to WordPerfect. Businesses aren't going to use what's better because those decisions aren't made by people with any critical thinking skills. Rather, the managers will cave to peer pressure just like they did in HS and college, being nothing more than sheep following the curve.
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
uh... okay (Score:1)
10 - 50 years from now, there's still going to be closed, proprietary software. There's still going to be GPL'd and BSD'd software (or similar). There's still going to be good software (both proprietary and open) and there's still going to be bad software (both proprietary and open).
There will still be people making a lot of money by screwing over the little guy, and there will still be a bunch of insecure, teen-age egotists pissing all over each other in forums like these.
--
Mark Fassler
fassler at frii dot com
"insecure, teen-age egotists" (Score:1)
--
Mark Fassler
fassler at frii dot com
Ballmer ... (Score:1)
That is one butt ugly motherfucker. Can some Gimp enabled soul please borgify his ass, like the /. pic of Gates?
The Four (Score:1)
(just like in Brazil)
No way (Score:1)
I would not, not for all the money in the world, want to look like that fat-no chin-disgusting pockmarcked Goring fucking look-alike.
Not to mention to make his salary you pretty much would have to be just as much of an asshole as he is.
Frankenballmer (Score:1)
Office "features" (Score:1)
Bill Gates, FIX THE DAMN MASTER DOCUMENT FEATURE IN WORD!!! It sucks. It doesn't act as documented, and it EATS documents! Word absolutely, completely SLURPS OUT LOUD when it comes to producing manual-length documents.
Bill, I sure hope somebody shows you this rant.
OK. Whew. I feel better. Sorry, folks....
Office "features" (Score:1)
It's a good thing to jettison, although it's not quite as trivial to disable as turning off features in Word's Tools>Options dialog box.
I know how to do it in 95, but I don't know my way around NT, but basically, it's a control panel. Under '95, you open the Fast Find control panel, delete the Fast Find database file(s)corresponding to the drive(s) you'd like Windows to just leave the hell alone, confirm your choice(s), and close the control panel.
OS Office??? (Score:1)
Oh brother - more marketing (Score:1)
Who knows if this will make any difference, as the DOJ is about 50 points ahead with 10 seconds to go....Can't wait to see that gavel come crashing down.....
ROTFLMAO!! (Score:1)
What Else Does "Industry Standard" Mean? (Score:1)
I think that's when it becomes a "de facto standard". Which is exactly what Office is.
"Knowledge workers" (Score:1)
Revelation 6:1-8 (Score:1)
---------------------------------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
"insecure, teen-age egotists" (Score:1)
Like you?
You must be if you cannot see the humour in
comparing four "Baby Bills" with the horsemen of
the Apocalypse.
Humour.
I guess you cannot see it through all the piss.
Nobody who understands free software gives two
shits about Bill Gates or Microsoft.
---------------------------------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
and would we want Office for linux? Not really but (Score:1)
(I don't use Excel for anything else, so I figure I might as well have some fun with it, right?)
and would we want Office for linux? Not really but (Score:1)
All the easier to monitor (Score:1)
Some day it will be illegal to have local storage > a certain small amount. After all, if you don't have anything to hide, why would you not want to put all your data on a distant server?
The Four Horsemen of the Apolcalypse (Score:1)
MS Privacy Record (Score:1)
on privacy, including recent revelations that private information was stored on Microsoft databases.
Only speaking for myself, I don't think Microsoft
is going to purge jack from their databases, despite promises to do so.
The only Microsoft product I want is Age of Empires.
I'm not even sure that Age of Empires is worth it.
Learn Some Microcomputer History, dork! (Score:1)
Hmmm... let's see... 'geeks will never learn what business people want'...
A clue for you, Buckwheat; the app that made micros acceptable to business people everywhere was VisiCalc... which was developed by a math and computer geek named Dan Bricklin (and he's still a genuine geek today).
I guess that makes the score:
Geeks 1 - Know Nothing Dork 0
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
I thought the "true hacker ethic" was "the best code will win."
Do you honestly think MS Office qualifies as the best code? Best-promoted, probably; best-protected-from-competition-by-crushing-alter
Jay (=
... (Score:1)
... case of a rabid typist?
4 M$ groups? (Score:1)
Group 2: Uncertainty
Group 3: Doubt
Group 4: Embrace and Extend
I heard of a BG / JDR wealth comparison... (Score:1)
Exxon,
Mobil,
Chevron,
Amoco (the only one that still uses the Standard name much),
Sohio (now part of BP),
and Conoco. And Rockefeller got to be in on the ground floor of gasoline and heating oil. Billy got to help develop (let's give him his proper credit, after all) ROM BASIC.
Microsoft Strategies (Score:1)
What would their options be? (Brief look back) We all know that MS cannot afford to lose its dominance in the server realm at all, hence their attempt at destruction of Netscape. Why was Netscape so threatening to them? Perhaps because they saw the potential of the browser being the determining factor of the server technology (among other desktop applications) that gets implemented in companies. Perhaps they wanted to implement the "de-commoditizing" of protocols as the Halloween Documents suggests, thereby locking out or at least shifting the Linux/UX momentum into a catch-up mode instead of leading mode (Which it has been and still is on
the Server side), if only to to be used as FUD tactics.
Having failed at this, what are their alternatives? How else can they claim this "un acquirable" software allowing them to once again
control every aspect of the computer software technology?
Well, perhaps there is a way... Microsoft can get into and establish control of not only the linux operating system but also the direction of Linux through its application and development tools. None of which, has to be GPL'ed. The other thing to consider from a suit stand point (only because they are the driving force of the funding, which means marketing, which means public opinion shaping of the mass purchasers) is : What are the competing products of both MS's Office Application and Development tools on the Linux platform? How
many people are already familiar with them? Even... how many Linux people would love to have an "Office Equivalent" and VB/VC++ Type Development System for Linux? I suspect its too many to take the "Well I won't run it stance just because its MicroSoft" stance, A very dangerous stance to take considering companies ~will~ invest in "functions" before stance. And if companies begin to invest big dollars towards a specific application, that, will determine need, hence determining the product.
Once Microsoft, manages to at least capture the Office market, and the development tools market on linux, a possible strategic move they could make is then issue an MS Linux, which of course would be geared towards being NT slave domain controllers and other nice things. Now comes the questions... Well Linux is GPL'ed.. and one could say "So What?".
Possible scenario:
a) MS Makes Application Level Office and DEvelopment Tools for Linux and capture a "significant" Application market share.
b) MS Makes MS Linux and distributes all of wonderful Microsoft only source code (unnecessary source code, but necessary for MS products to work) to include kernel modifications and "specialized" libraries back in the linux community.
c) RedHat, Caldera, SuSE, Debian and other Linux distributions (whom are already working with far less capital than MS) are now successfully behind. Now they not only have to keep improving the kernel, GNU distros (which microsoft will automatically have), but as well as the new Microsoft source, probably very undocumented (perhaps even a special edition undebugged GNU version) and convoluted Bloat ware that everyone (or at least their market share) now wants in Linux.
d) Now the marketing/FUD starts, "Why buy RedHat or Download RedHat" or which ever to run MS Application for Linux, when you can simply download a "Supported" MS Version of Linux ? and if you give MS 250 - $500.00 for a Book/Supported Version of Linux, you will get all of the beautiful proprietary application binaries to run on it too already configured. Further More... " Its MicroSoft " !
e) Microsoft can now potentially direct, dictate and govern the direction, applications and even "GPL'ed version of de-commoditized" protocols that get embedded within Linux and their interaction with NT/Windows 2000.
Am I paranoid? may be, but perhaps it would be safer to assume that MS is not just going to stand there and allow this Linux movement to sweep the server market from under their feet without a serious battle. Knowing this, it would be wise for everyone involved in linux to expect their intrusion, as they have always intruded in the past... through the "applications". They've done it to Novell (at one point owning more that 52% of the world's file server/network market). Look at them now. What does the Novell name mean now in
comparison to NT? Did NT do this? Nope... the integration factor of Application to NT, marketing and MS branding did it.
It's my opinion that before we get all comfy and feeling safe under the GPL protection as the savior of all evil, that we serious start addressing desktop applications as a serious hole that could potentially destroy "your" linux as you know it in the commercial arena.
On this note, I would like to take this small opportunity (and I hope I totally wrong and surprised and beating Microsoft is as easy as
everyone thinks it its) to name some of the biggest fools in the business.
Top 8 List of fools
1 - Borland / Inprise corporation.
2 - IBM Corporation
3 - Sun MicroSystems
4 - SCO ( Probably the Biggest fools in all business senses)
5 - Novell
6 - The KDE/Qt - 40 column terminal flamers
7 - The Non-Gui for text based EMACS for absolutely everything extremists.
8 - The Gimme everything fo' free mongers.
What makes these companies and select individuals fools.
Borland, left with Microsoft reject crumbs of a market, a company (Bor), who just happens to be responsible for main stream application development to custom enterprise level applications sit there and has not, till this day ported a single visual development tool for Linux
(and Interbase Ain't good enuff). An untouched market, MS no where to be found, the whole market to themselves... and they are going to wait for Microsoft to take it over. Smart move people.
IBM, Where's the lotus suite? It should of been here 2 years ago. Installing Linux on IBM Systems is nice, but seeing they "have" the office suite to compete feature for feature and claim immediate market with, it seems a little odd that's there has not been and is no "solid" commitment on having this anytime soon. The idea is to have it "before" MS is there gobbling up the market and convice suits that the MS way is better rules once again, even on a different platform (which may change).
Sun, GNU Solaris? That's nice and dandy, but how' bout applications and network tools for linux that works and introduces a seamless integration between your very powerful servers to be administered by linux desktops, or should we all buy a sparc with linux on it? Invest real money , put real effort please...
SCO? Yeah, let me wait on skunkware to compile anything off the internet and don't you dare release a hint of source code to implement linux integration. Perhaps on day lxrun may "actually" run a linux program. Perhaps they should wait for someone to pay their $50,000.00 for their Xenix source code they so generously offer. May be I'll just buy a 5 user edition Unixware based Tarrentella Server for 4700.00 so I can run your SCO apps or my linux apps.
Novell? where's client 32 or equivalent so I do a simple thing like may be add a user to a netware box? PS I don't want to ~have~ to run Caldera and their client blows, its install on RedHat is upseting at best and is anything but serious... sorry, All credit due to Caldera, but no one saw serious Novell development help in development. 4.01 NDS for Linux? no thanks let's get up to date here. Java based, Server Side X only administration on netware 5.0 servers? no thanks. Netware's IP connectivity? no thanks. How about
NetAdmin, pconsole, filer.. how about those? (PS thanks for telnet rconsole, at least that's a start). Porting IE as an administration tools for netware just says it all... I'm sure Microsoft will reward them heavily by letting them keep a small portion of the print server market. Get off you asses (Netware) and provide ~real~ integration and linux based management tools for netware NOW! I'll consider Border Manager later how's that?
The kde flamers / non-gui, At least get a glimpse at someone else's clue. No one is "removing" text based administration from linux, its always there, always will be, and don't install X. The difference between Linux and NT is "choice" and "Freedom", not X and Text Based.
The gimme fo' free mongers. What about an Economy? A business plan ? Bills? College Fees? Paying for food? Legal fees? Accountants fees? I suggest reading a book somewhere. Yes! Open/Free software is good and creates numerous opportunities, yes! Its what allowed Linux to get where it is today is largely due to the fact that its "free" and "open", (as much so open in my mind but any ways..), However, for corporate and enterprise level based apps to compete with MS level apps "require" corporate funding and people and small developing businesses to dedicate near 100% of their time in development, which means they need money period.
Even RedHat's business model is based on "income" for them to survive, not how many people download the RH distro and banner advertisement. Sorry folks, part time development, splintered development in distros and spare time hobbyists may make a good kernel and base tools but they aren't gonna beat MS applications. Once we come to this firm realization and deal with the facts, perhaps we stand a chance when MS decides to engage in war, dirty tactics, blood bath marketing methods, fear mongering and corporate bribing
(which we have have only seen the tip of the iceberg towards linux).
PS: the free version of star office or applix ware won't save thee and for some reason I doubt development will get any better on your promise to download it free to show them how much you care.
The visionaries - some late, but better than never,
Of course the Linux developers, kernel / apps / docs coders/writers
RedHat,Caldera., SusE and others...
Troll-Tech
The KDE Team
The Gnome Team
Computer Associates
Slashdot
Freshmeat etc
Corel (out of complete lack of alternatives)
And the late, but better late than never.
Intuit
Oracle
Sysbase
Informix
And some others
Finishing thoughts,
For us to go around at this point, parading on how linux has and will destroy, or claim Micrsoft's market only shows complete ignorance, underestimation and flawed over optimistic theories about Microsoft. Linux needs, IBM, Sun, RedHat and other distros to put forth a "massive" effort towards the desktop apps hole which Microsoft will surely use to get in. This requires Money, Investment, the OSS and everyone else to work towards this goal "without splinter". And buy the damn cd from time to time! Especially if your not developing anything.
This will insure the growth and continuation of Linux both on the server side and desktop side, free and commercial and choice.
Allright, I feel better now
Office suite is for WORD GEEKS (Score:1)
At least it's hard to spread virii in the emacs macro language. In fact, there are specific features in emacs to prevent this from happening because some smart person realized that's what it would be used for if the features weren't there.
Office "features" (Score:1)
Well, if I have to wander around the interface to figure out how to disable all of those annoying defaults then it's not very user friendly is it? It certainly doesn't seem like something that J. Random Casual User is going to like and enjoy if (s)he doesn't spend 1-2 hours a day typing up word documents.
Office "features" (Score:1)
- The paper-clip guy - I would like to smash his head in.
- When I'm using variables in a document (ie i) and it makes them uppercase.
- When it tries to format lists for me, but always does it wrong
- When it stops responding for 4-5 minutes while it talks to NT 'bout something
- When it tries to autocorrect my spelling as I type
- In general, anytime it tries to think for me
help, they're mutating... (Score:1)
why stop at flight sim. (Score:1)
Sorry, I'm done ranting now
/. (Score:1)
Office will never be on my computer you see,
cuz it costs $600 and emacs is free.
It's buggy and broken and slow
And it's toolbars remind me of Windoze
So what if WordPerfect has even more bloat
And Applix is broken and StarOffice is choad
Their not from Microsoft you see,
And then my peecee is emmess free.
Which makes me so morally superior to the guys in the dorm
Who'd rather drink beer and chase girls than compile xforms.
The respect that I've gotten from my honorable stand,
hasn't got me laid yet but I'm sure that it can.
Now if only the boss didn't use fast save,
I'd format my FAT partition, even the games.
--
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
No, it's not a breakup, and it's not important new (Score:1)
Companies do it all the time, and in this case, who really cares? The only thing this *might* do is make more games, etc, for the home user.
Office suite is for PEOPLE, not GEEKS (Score:1)
If MS deserves any of their "monopolies" it's in the office suite category. My company owns Corel WP Suite, Lotus Suite and Office. Office blows them all away. Sure it has it's bugs but show me a piece of software that doesn't. I don't want to see any reply's to this mentioning StarOffice either. It's not ready for primetime. I use it to write a letters to Granny but that's about it.
I'm also sick of hearing the "bloatware" argument. Show me an office suite that isn't bloatware. Just because the Linux kernel is small doesn't mean we are seening the beginning of the end for bloatware. Distributed apps are about the only solution to that problem at this time. Until they become a reality apps will continue to get bigger. All these people who want to go back to booting Lotus from a 5-1/4" floppy need to get a life.
MS is not going away. Now or ever. Gates is too smart and too good of a business man. MS apps for Linux can do nothing but good. It will convince people who once turned their backs on Linux to open their eyes and take a look. It could be what Linux needs to be pushed into the mainstream. You people may not agree with it but it's the truth. Users are the reason that 95% of us have jobs and collect those nice paychecks. Users buy MS software. They want it. They trust it. And guess what, most of them have never even heard of Linux. It may suck but it's a reality.
For the programmers out there who only use Linux to hack out apps, don't worry. The kernel will always be there. The command prompts will always be there. No one is ever going to force you to buy, download or install a Microsoft program. Speaking for myself, I would love to exclusively run Linux on my machines to I welcome anyone and everyone who brings that closer to a reality for me. Stop trying to squash the growth of Linux, there are alot of us out there who want to use it for something other than programming.
M
Maybe it's just me but.... (Score:1)
Huh? (Score:1)
Do you really think that these people port to Linux for our "cause". Wake up and smell it. These guys don't run their companies for causes. They run them to make money.
M
Who cares..... (Score:1)
Know how to get 200+ comments on a slashdot article? Post about Microsoft looking at Linux. "Microsoft can't rule the world. WEEEEE want too!!!" seems to be the general attitude of the "Borg Bill" comments these days. "Oh look, Linus was mentioned in the paper again today! Oh sorry, that's Linus from "Peanuts" Yes, he is a very respectable person, but geez, how many people know who's "heading" FreeBSD, or NetBSD, or any other Free OS effort? don't hear about them, do you?
Yes, I -despise- Windows. I have to use it for work every day. It's frustrating as hell, watching Netscape, or Powerpoint crash while being productive. It's -sickening- that -ANY- program seems to be capable of taking out the kernel on a whim. Unacceptable that I should need to reboot because Word didn't like alt-tabbing to Excel so it crashed and killed the kernel. But how many people here have never touched a Microsoft product? Or been required to use it for work? What percentage of people here cut their teeth on Windows, or DOS. Yes, their business practices are Wrong. Yes I feel that their marketing department needs to be beaten senseless. I feel that they should not bother with deadlines, and forget about releasing a product until it's bug free. They want to make a deadline? then stop adding bloated features one user in a thousand will use. STOP taking a known standard, altering it, and try to pass it off as the same standard. Yes, it's easy to hate MSFT. even easier when "Borg Bill" can't respond. the internet.. great equalizer, everyone can bitch equally loud. No fear of retribution or accountability.
Sure, MS Office on Linux would be nice. Good publicity for the OS, and validation from MSFT that linux is a valid market, and support from a big software name. Sure, it most likely won't be open source, sure it'll be bloated... So don't run it. nobody is holding your hand and forcing you to install it. Just like nobody forced you to install linux..
I am -glad- Microsoft puts out horridly bloated software. I hope the trend in bad software continues. I hope Windows 2000 takes a full DVD to install and needs ten gig of HD space and a gig of ram. Because I -still- won't be using it. I could care less about what Msft puts out next, I'll still be running my free unix variants, free software, and getting my job done without uberfrequent crashes. Every line of bloat Msft puts out, pushes the hardware envelope cheaper and faster. Because thanks to Microsoft, (as a friend of mine commonly says) I can go out and buy a cheap-ass 486-120, install FreeBSD on it, and smoke the hell off people running P-200's.
Next time you brag about your P-II 450, or your Celeron, or your SuperHighEndTodgerWaving system, just take a moment to ponder how fast your "high end" system would be, right now, if Windows -didn't- need all that horsepower to run with a semblance of useability. You think that there'd be 450mhz chips this soon, if there wasn't a big need for more power to overcome OS bloat?
Thank you Rob for the filter system.. After today, at least in my eyes, slashdot will be less biased again. Maybe one day I'll see an OS article on something other than Windows or Linux.. heaven forbid there's more than -two- OS'es in the world. Some days, slashdot comments give militant OS advocates a bad name... I have an urge to scream "It's an operating system, a tool, not a religion." It's like "Keyboard" advocacy, "My keyboard allows me to flame at people faster than yours does!"
Am I a troll? I don't wholly agree with your opinions, isn't it standard posting procedure on the internet to label me a troll? I've got an opinion on these things.. That what forums are for. At least I'm using my login to post my opinion, instead of hiding behind the anons, letting a faceless visage strengthen my resolve and backbone.. I believe in what I say. I have a pet peeve of people who expect me to believe their words, if they lack the conviction to stand behind them.. Yes. There are reasons for anonymity. I have nothing to hide here. I feel that it will always put more weight, seriousness, behind words that have a name behind them. How often does a "posted by anon" mean "Flamed without merit or justification"
Yes... my spelling is not the best. My grammar sucks. I've survived the american public school system. I've got better things to do than go back over my post with a spelling checker, grammar checker, and six billion other proofreading tools. This is a rant, an opinion, not an English term paper.
Shit... and here I told myself I'd stop long winded posting... Flame on.
Who cares..... (Score:1)
>hard drive with 48 megs of RAM. MAN does linux
>fly on this baby! It does what I need and I never
>have to reboot.
>I wonder if FreeBSD would perform better?
>Any diehard freebsd users out there to comment?
From my experience with both, (I am running FreeBSD-Current on my systems, I haven't run Linux since the release of RedHat 5.1) There really won't be a hugely noticeable difference. Yes, some things will run differently, but that's true for any OS. Once you "tune" your system up under either one, there really shouldn't be too big a difference.
I personally use FreeBSD over Linux, because A: I'm used to it. Less learning curve inertia to stay with FreeBSD. B: It runs every Linux app I need, C: I like the "One Software Repository" (aka ftp.freebsd.org ) instead of having to track down patches. D: I find it easier to install/configure a base level system. E: Less of a "We're using it because it's COOL! to use it instead of MS" mentality in many of the user circles I have participated in.
However, unless you're running a server, you shouldn't see much of a big difference between FreeBSD and Linux. You will probably see many, many more drivers for Linux than FreeBSD (or at least more drivers sooner)
However, for a rock-solid server OS, I'd have to say FreeBSD.. ftp.cdrom.com is a -single- P-200 running FreeBSD. When's the last time you've heard it being down? Yahoo? Hotmail? It's not a "turn key" server OS, and like any OS, it -does- need configuring and maintenance to achieve and maintain that stability. But year+ uptimes aren't uncommon.
Personally.. Use what suits you best. Isn't that what "Free" OS'es are about in a way? doing something for -you- ? *smile*
Hope this helps... or at least tries to..
Old News and Purely political (Score:1)
The reorg lines being drawn around customer groups will serve M$ in the DOJ trial - only! None of the resultant groups can survive on their own, they still share the same tech pool. But, being separate on paper, the DOJ can't bitch about monopolistic practices.
M$ is admin heavy, and this is either a bad decision, or a legally driven one.
If/when M$ redraws the reorg lines around Operating Systems, Developer Tools, Application Software, and Other (hardware, media, content); then we'll be looking at real news.
As for LinuxOffice - do we really want to introduce closed source turnkey application suites into our open pasture??
You actually believe ZDNet? (Score:1)
Remember what Microborg did to Apple (Score:1)
Then, blackmail Linux into whatever you want by threating to discontinue Office development. Once it becomes the "industry standard" on your platform, your platform is dead without it.
Hey, it's happened before -- how else do you think they got Steve Jobs to say "Internet Explorer is my browser of choice"?
Maybe it's just me but.... (Score:1)
It's just you.
Office suite is for GEEKS (Score:1)
Office suite is for WORD GEEKS (Score:1)
About the emacs thing, I didn't know the the guy you replyed to mentioned emacs, at least in that message.
hmm.. and i thought.. (Score:1)
-Z
Agreed. Why is no one excited about WP for Linux? (Score:1)
get real. =)
Learn Some Microcomputer History, dork! (Score:1)
i hated Applix... StarOffice is pretty good IMO... i just hate that Win32 clone interface...
WordPerfect8 is the shit if you ask me...
the free edition needs goddam fonts though.
mabye i should stop being a tight wallet and buy it? =)
mabye when i get a job =)
oh yeah my point
why use MsOffice when there is WP8?
GEEKS are people too! (Score:1)
i agree with some of the others who commented to this that i wont be going anywhere near the MS Office suit, on or off Linux.
>it doesn't matter whether MS Office is bloated or
>not, people need it anyway.
hmm people need it? the bloat? people need to write in word processors equals true, people need to have things installed on the hard disk they will never use? false. bloatware is not needed, the "someone somewhere will need it so lets put it in" doenst work, with open source the people who need it can add it or get another too or jsut find someone who has if your not a "geek", why should i have the html extensions in a word processor when i dont want to use them? or have a pile of clipart i never use, or what about the other functions i not found yet? will i use them? no
people do not need bloatware and people do not need microsoft.
Office "features" (Score:1)
>and click. It's not like you're having to edit a
>.mswordrc file.
give me a
~ is where settings that affect how a user works belong.
too much LGPL kills off the power of GPL (Score:1)
Who cares..... (Score:1)
I agree with you in most or your points.
Not every linux user is antiM$ like it's a religion. And OS is just a tool.
I think linux and free unix users are just fed up without having any choice. It's like the only choice is M$ and M$OS is just way too buggy, slow and bloated. Sure there's the MAC but it's too heavy GUI'd for my taste.
It's not just M$ I hate but every body that supports it's platform.
Maybe it's just me but I feel it's just part of some kind of conspiracy to come out with such bloated software just to force people to buy new chips.
Think about it.
Computer prices are always dropping if suddenly everyone came out with resource effiecient software, computer companies would go out of business!
You can't push someone into buying a pricey Pentium III computer while a cheap P100 MHZ will do the job just as well.
Anyways, I really liked this comment:
"Because thanks to Microsoft, (as a friend of mine
commonly says) I can go out and buy a cheap-ass 486-120, install FreeBSD on it, and smoke the hell off people running P-200's."
I still run an old P100 Mhz (non MMX),a 6 gig hard drive with 48 megs of RAM. MAN does linux fly on this baby! It does what I need and I never have to reboot.
I wonder if FreeBSD would perform better?
Any diehard freebsd users out there to comment?
All this is just my opinion.
Cheers!
Microsoft IS porting office to linux (Score:1)
MS-DOS runs nice in dos-emu under Linux.
Megaserver??? (Score:1)
I see one big disadvantage, the same one we had with terminals attached to central mainframes: lose the server, lose everything. If your network connection is down, regardless of why, you can't even work locally. Not to mention the fun when the central staff "upgrades" the software to a version that breaks half your stuff with no warning whatsoever. What joy.
Megaserver??? (Score:1)
Hopefully any initiative along these lines will be constructed a bit more reliably than your 20-year-old mainframe.
Microsoft's software, which they presumably are going to use as the basis for the central server, is about 2-3 orders of magnitude less reliable than that "20-year-old mainframe", based on uptime figures. And the central server is only one part of the reliability chain, a failure in a router or network hub will take down the system even if both the server and the client system are running perfectly. Maybe a distributed, redundant database system, but distributing the data wipes out the gains from centralizing it.
I do the same at-work, at-home stuff you probably do. The difference is that I'm not dependent on the work system when at home. I need it to be reachable to pass data back and forth, but I still have all my apps, config data and such locally when the connection is down. For syncing things up, rdist and the occasional bit of diff and patch magic works nicely.
And, as you pointed out, X11 and Unix already have complete remote access to the desktop, apps and config data on another system down pat. Rather than creating yet another standard, why doesn't NT simply adopt the network- and location-independent approach we're used to using X11?
Carnegie or Rockefeller (Score:1)
Rockafeller = oil
-J. Pierpont
http://dino.res.cmu.edu [cmu.edu]
MS stunt for the DOJ? (Score:1)
and would we want Office for linux? (Score:1)
pahleez
Paranoid?! (Score:1)
On the other hand, providing ubiquitos access to ones data from "any device" would require a much better understanding or encryption and security than MS has demonstraighted to this point.