Comment Money: Reason for no Microsoft Linux (Score 1) 207
Money will keep Microsoft from coming out with MS Linux. Operating systems have been Microsoft's cash cow for nearly two decades. Microsoft is used to having that incredibly rich stream of income. They won't do anything to hurt that cash
flow.
Linux has already hurt Microsoft in the pocketbook - to the tune of millions, perhaps billions of dollars (remember the decision the Mexican educational system made to go with Linux instead of MS products)?
If Microsoft introduced MS-Linux they would be supporting the competition. Every ten free downloads of MSLinux would represent a loss of X sales of Microsoft 98/2K/whatever. MSLinux would have to be very cheap to sell in any significant numbers. A purchase of a $50 copy of MSLinux might lose Microsoft a sale of a $10000 copy (with Cals, etc...) of WIN2000.
MSLinux would also help "legit" Linux in a big way. Big businesses who fear to buy non-Microsoft-blessed software would rush to MSLinux (and away from Windows) in droves.
Linux would finally have that penetration into
the fortune 500 market! B-)
Now wouldn't that be ironic?
To add insult to injury MSLinux might mean Microsoft would probably have to contribute source code, which would (arguably...)
make Linux more competitive with Windows.
There's also the expert factor. Expert Linux users are likely to be ABMer's. When an expert Linux user makes a recommendation to a business customer, will s/he recommend MSLinux unless it was dramatically superior to all the alternatives?
Microsoft *BSD is marginally more likely. *BSD hasn't taken off like Linux and will therefore be much easier to co-opt. However, there is still the money issue - every sale of Microsoft BSD will probably represent a lost sale of a much more expensive Windows product.
I'm an ABM'er and I'm proud.
flow.
Linux has already hurt Microsoft in the pocketbook - to the tune of millions, perhaps billions of dollars (remember the decision the Mexican educational system made to go with Linux instead of MS products)?
If Microsoft introduced MS-Linux they would be supporting the competition. Every ten free downloads of MSLinux would represent a loss of X sales of Microsoft 98/2K/whatever. MSLinux would have to be very cheap to sell in any significant numbers. A purchase of a $50 copy of MSLinux might lose Microsoft a sale of a $10000 copy (with Cals, etc...) of WIN2000.
MSLinux would also help "legit" Linux in a big way. Big businesses who fear to buy non-Microsoft-blessed software would rush to MSLinux (and away from Windows) in droves.
Linux would finally have that penetration into
the fortune 500 market! B-)
Now wouldn't that be ironic?
To add insult to injury MSLinux might mean Microsoft would probably have to contribute source code, which would (arguably...)
make Linux more competitive with Windows.
There's also the expert factor. Expert Linux users are likely to be ABMer's. When an expert Linux user makes a recommendation to a business customer, will s/he recommend MSLinux unless it was dramatically superior to all the alternatives?
Microsoft *BSD is marginally more likely. *BSD hasn't taken off like Linux and will therefore be much easier to co-opt. However, there is still the money issue - every sale of Microsoft BSD will probably represent a lost sale of a much more expensive Windows product.
I'm an ABM'er and I'm proud.
