Why 2004 will be like 1984
January 6, 2004 8:53 PM   Subscribe

A dim view of Microsoft's 2004. Not that there aren't plenty of predictions out there, but this is the most in-depth look at the new face of our favourite anti-competitor I've seen yet.
posted by bonaldi (7 comments total)

 
"In-depth?" It's one long rant. "In-depth" implies, to me at least, to be without bias, and this chucklehead is loaded with bias. A biased rant with a bibliography is still a biased rant.

This guy is apparently thinking, "no one's ever gone broke slamming Microsoft - some incendiary press, and my name's all over the place!" And, if your business is Linux, slamming Microsoft is apparently just part of the sales pitch. I'm not the only person who thinks this guy's a little over the top - this link on ZDNet (granted, not exactly an unbiased source) refers to this guy as a "well-known Linux fascist." Andrew's to Linux what PETA is to animal rights.

Besides, how can I take seriously a guy who's newsgroup tagline is "Resist Metric!"
posted by FormlessOne at 9:55 PM on January 6, 2004


aaxnet.com is one of the 'Rah Rah Linux' sites that exist on the Internet.

What put the twists in his knickers was Microsoft buying Great Plains....rained on his parade. Don't turn to site for an 'objective' view.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:59 PM on January 6, 2004


I think Longhorn is going to be amazing. Whether it will be amazing enough to keep Microsofts 2008 releases from being 'nix based I do not know.
posted by rudyfink at 10:07 PM on January 6, 2004


The best rants are fact-based, so it'd be great if any of the folks dismissing this one would offer some refutations of the facts presented in the linked piece at aaxnet.com. Thanks.

And, on a related note most of you have probably already heard: Israel snubs Microsoft, moves to open source software:

The government is unhappy with Microsoft's refusal to sell individual programs at a reasonable price, Cohen said. "Office includes software that we don't use, and if you buy individually it costs much more than as a package," she said.

"We already have XP, and so the government decided that, as we're not in a high tech industry, there's no need to upgrade every year," Cohen said...

On its part, the Israeli government has also decided to encourage the development of lower-price alternatives to Microsoft, to encourage computer use across Israel, Cohen said.

"We have worked with Sun (Microsystems Inc.) and IBM (Corp.) on designing a Hebrew version of Open Office software and distributing it as an alternative to Office. It depends on the government office, but the government is now using Office, Linux and the Open Office software," she said.

Open Office is free, open source office software that was originally based on StarOffice from Sun.

The adoption of Open Office by the government has already raised interest in the software among Israelis, including those who normally are not interested in technology, said Shoshannah Forbes, who works as a software tester for Open Office.org, the organization that develops the open source program...

The government decision has been key, because people did not know about alternatives and also because many government online services required that things be submitted in a Microsoft Office format, Forbes said. The change will make open source software much more useable, she said.

There has been no response so far from Microsoft in the Hebrew press, Forbes said.

posted by mediareport at 12:00 AM on January 7, 2004


Despite the obvious Linux-cheerleading, the article is chilling, if only as a sobering reminder of the lengths Microsoft has gone - and will go - to maintain their dominance of computing. Discard the article's proposed remedies, and you are left with a litany of offenses past and present that makes me wonder how anyone with any degree of choice could possibly conclude that doing business with Microsoft was in anyone's best interest other than Microsoft.

How about it, formlessone, rough ashlar, rudy fink... Give us some substantive rebuttal to the article's accusations against Microsoft. Leave off the Linux-bashing; despite the author's obvious bias, there are alternatives to Microsoft that don't involve Linux. Can you provide back up for your assertions that those charges against Microsoft are not true?
posted by JollyWanker at 6:02 AM on January 7, 2004


there are alternatives to Microsoft that don't involve Linux.

And Mr. Grygus doesn't even mention them.

Now, Mr. Grygus makes the SAME mistake others do. Look at
http://aaxnet.com/design/linux0.html
Bullet point:

Both are far more capable, stable and secure than Windows95/98/Me.

Linux is a kernel. GNU/Linux is OS tools bolted on top of (sometimes) a fork from the main Linux kernel as released from Linus T.

Windows 98/ME ship with a (poor) word processor, a web browser, an e-mail client and all kinds of other 'crap' To get BETTER than 98/ME you need other NON LINUX software like Mozilla, SAMBA, OpenOffice.org and others. If Mozilla/SAMBA/OpenOffice.org were "Linux":
1) Why seperate names like Mozilla/SAMBA/OpenOffice.org?
2) Why do Mozilla/OpenOffice.org run on FreeBSD/Mac OS X/ or even Windows? (SAMBA doesn't need to run on Windows, but perhaps a port should be done for a better SMB server on the Windows platform)


Microsoft beat UNIX back in the 1990's by pointing out the fragmentation of UNIX. The GNU/Linux market is SO fragmented that a company that got IPO money because they were offering up A GNU/Linux version. This company that made its money suing Microsoft over DOS then took the new IPO money and bought the UNIX intellectual property license, then started suing other companies involved with the Linux kernel. During the UNIX hey-day...when NT was 3.1, there weren't over 200 versions of SYSV UNIX, and there were no 4 billion dollar lawsuits. This time around Microsoft has to beat 'free'....but the fragmentation and the instistance of the Linux Zealots to call anything that touches a Linux kernel "Linux" means plenty of market confusion for Microsoft to keep on winning.


Oh well. Perhaps one day the Linux Zealots will learn, though I doubt it.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:15 PM on January 7, 2004


This time around Microsoft has to beat 'free'

Not exactly. Microsoft is already dominant beyond belief. What they're trying to do now, which is how they've succeeded in the past, is to implement their own, proprietary technology to lock everyone in to their standard, even if it's not a good standard, and on top of that planned obsolesence, so you're in a continuous buying-cycle of upgrades. MS is in a position now where they would do well to embrace the open standards of the internet, and sometimes they claim to (a la Office and XML, but that's dead), but they want to implant theirs in its place, and also store all your data on their servers and control all the software on your computer, effectively turning your machine into a MS workstation hooked permanently to their server in order to operate, for a fee. OTOH, regardless of the price tag (most enterprises pay for their software, even if it's linux), the refusal of MS to adhere to standards already in place and to force theirs on top of everyone else did work for a while, at least on a software-OS level, but I don't think people are going to go for a system which doesn't allow the user control of their own data, and one which locks up entirely unless a license fee is paid periodically, as upgrades will be mandatory - under their already-operative license with XP and 2000 SP3, they have the right to install software on your computer without your consent and charge you for it. Looks like my next upgrade will be to permanently wipe any MS software off my computer unless they change direction, though this has been their direction for quite a long time, it's just that now they are taking real steps to implement it. Good luck with all that, but the last thing I need is to cough up a damn subscription fee to something I don't particularly like anyway - at least give me the choice to upgrade, or you lose me as a customer.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:19 AM on January 9, 2004


« Older morphases...  |  acid trip... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments