Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux? - Linux

This is a discussion on Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux? - Linux ; Matt espoused: > Linonut wrote: >> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo: >> >>> Mark Kent wrote: >>>> William Poaster espoused: >>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should- >>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

  1. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    Matt espoused:
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>> William Poaster espoused:
    >>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should-
    >>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market share, do you really think
    >>>>>>> Microsoft is worried about losing out to Linux?

    >>
    >> Ballmer seems to be, a little bit.
    >>
    >>>> My suspicion is that 17% would be a singularly underestimated figure for
    >>>> 2008.
    >>> nuts

    >>
    >> I think Mark needs to find an independent link for that figure.

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    >> It might mean 17% of developers, for example.

    >
    > That wouldn't justify his post.
    >
    > To clarify: my post was not referring to Charlie.


    I saw the idiocy, I knew who it had come from, did I need to know
    anything else?

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  2. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    Mark Kent wrote:
    > Linonut espoused:
    >> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>> William Poaster espoused:
    >>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should-
    >>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market share, do you really think
    >>>>>>> Microsoft is worried about losing out to Linux?

    >> Ballmer seems to be, a little bit.
    >>
    >>>> My suspicion is that 17% would be a singularly underestimated figure for
    >>>> 2008.
    >>> nuts

    >> I think Mark needs to find an independent link for that figure.
    >>
    >> It might mean 17% of developers, for example.
    >>

    >
    > eh? I just posted some *real numbers* of what's selling. You've
    > deleted them (not sure why), but they were *real numbers*. The same
    > figures have been used elsewhere, recently, showing that in the top-ten,
    > there are only two vista-based machines. As these are *not in the top
    > five*, then it's highly unlikely that they're getting anywhere near even
    > 1/5 of sales, whereas the linux machines are selling in far greater
    > numbers.
    >
    > Matt's just confused about stats and what they mean.



    Confused? Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    deluded. Who puts the `loon' in `Linux loon'?

    How about if you just put your so-called "real numbers" and stats up
    again and explain exactly what they mean?

  3. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:55:47 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    >> "Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
    >> newsan.2008.03.29.18.16.57@users.easynews.com...
    >>> Yes. Microsoft has the weight of inertia to help perpetuate the
    >>> Windows brand. We will see how much longer that inertia holds.
    >>>

    >> The inertia is the mass times the velocity and to change that you have
    >> to apply some force in the opposite direction. With next to zero force
    >> being applied as is the case today, the inertia isn't going to change
    >> very much and certainly not very soon.

    >
    > To extend the metaphor even further, you need to take friction into
    > account. Friction in this case is the cost of a Windows license.
    > Individual users don't notice it because it is hidden in the cost of a
    > new system and may be offset by crapware fees. But for businesses,
    > software licenses are a big expense. If they can reduce or eliminate
    > that expense, they will. Until recently, most businesses have concluded
    > that the extra training/file conversion costs of Linux are greater than
    > the savings to be had by eliminating license fees. But Linux is getting
    > better all the time, and so the value equation is changing. If large
    > companies start converting their office computers to Linux, OEMs will be
    > more than happy to accommodate them, and some of the people who get
    > accustomed to Linux in the office will start to use it at home, too.
    >
    > SaaS is also a factor. We just had the Photoshop Express announcement as
    > the latest confirmation that this is really going somewhere. And Google
    > is pushing hard to sell SaaS to businesses. Someone whose frame of
    > reference is a web browser may not notice or care about the underlying
    > OS, as long as everything works right.


    Not sure that you are generally appreciating the concept in that last
    paragraph. The essence is OS-independence, whether it comes from SaaS
    or directly from cross-OS application-development tools such as Qt,
    Gtk+, wxwindows, Java, etc. Ultimately OS-independence does come
    through those tools since they are needed to build cross-OS browsers
    such as Firefox.

    Once the typical user can work mostly unaware of the OS, there can be
    competition among OSes, some of the main criteria being security and
    cost. If the leading OSes are about equal in the important criteria,
    they move toward equal usage shares. So if there are three equal OSes
    with unequal shares (say 93%, 5%, and 2%), usage stabilizes eventually
    with each OS having a 1/3 share. If an OS is more secure and freer than
    the others, it will get a usage share bigger than the others'.

    Hopefully after Windows is brought low, no OS every again gets above say
    80% due to the dangers of monopoly and monoculture, including a possible
    return to OS-specific programming.


    >
    > On Usenet, there seem to be two hostile camps: Linux evangelists who
    > claim Microsoft is on the verge of going out of business because Vista is
    > so bad, and Windows reactionaries who insist that the Windows monopoly is
    > as strong as ever and basically immune to forces of change. Between them
    > lies a scarred and pitted no man's land, deadly to all but those who are
    > interested in the truth.
    >
    > Charlie


  4. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    Matt espoused:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >> Linonut espoused:
    >>> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>>> William Poaster espoused:
    >>>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should-
    >>>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market share, do you really think
    >>>>>>>> Microsoft is worried about losing out to Linux?
    >>> Ballmer seems to be, a little bit.
    >>>
    >>>>> My suspicion is that 17% would be a singularly underestimated figure for
    >>>>> 2008.
    >>>> nuts
    >>> I think Mark needs to find an independent link for that figure.
    >>>
    >>> It might mean 17% of developers, for example.
    >>>

    >>
    >> eh? I just posted some *real numbers* of what's selling. You've
    >> deleted them (not sure why), but they were *real numbers*. The same
    >> figures have been used elsewhere, recently, showing that in the top-ten,
    >> there are only two vista-based machines. As these are *not in the top
    >> five*, then it's highly unlikely that they're getting anywhere near even
    >> 1/5 of sales, whereas the linux machines are selling in far greater
    >> numbers.
    >>
    >> Matt's just confused about stats and what they mean.

    >
    >
    > Confused? Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    > deluded. Who puts the `loon' in `Linux loon'?


    You are some kind of fool, Matt. You have no idea what I believe. You
    seem to fall into every single one of the most basic traps going in
    terms of economics analysis. What is this market of which you speak?
    What do you include in it? What do you exclude?

    If you spent less time ranting in this out of control fashion, and more
    time thinking, these conversations would be much easier. Get a grip,
    mate.

    "the market"? What *is* that, exactly? "the"? There's only one?
    It's the "whole thing"? Do you understand what a market segment is? Do
    you understand that x86 is a small part of the personal computing market
    as a whole? Do you understand that mobile devices outsell PCs at a
    massive ratio?

    >
    > How about if you just put your so-called "real numbers" and stats up
    > again and explain exactly what they mean?


    You are welcome to go back through this thread, where I posted Amazon's
    real sales stats. They're not *my* figures, they're Amazon's. If you
    don't like them, well *tough*, I merely reported them here.

    But please, stop pouting.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  5. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 11:02:38 +0100, Mark Kent wrote:

    > Matt espoused:
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>> Linonut espoused:
    >>>> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>>>> William Poaster espoused:
    >>>>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should-
    >>>>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market share, do you really think
    >>>>>>>>> Microsoft is worried about losing out to Linux?
    >>>> Ballmer seems to be, a little bit.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> My suspicion is that 17% would be a singularly underestimated figure
    >>>>>> for 2008.
    >>>>> nuts
    >>>> I think Mark needs to find an independent link for that figure.
    >>>>
    >>>> It might mean 17% of developers, for example.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> eh? I just posted some *real numbers* of what's selling. You've
    >>> deleted them (not sure why), but they were *real numbers*. The same
    >>> figures have been used elsewhere, recently, showing that in the
    >>> top-ten, there are only two vista-based machines. As these are *not in
    >>> the top five*, then it's highly unlikely that they're getting anywhere
    >>> near even 1/5 of sales, whereas the linux machines are selling in far
    >>> greater numbers.
    >>>
    >>> Matt's just confused about stats and what they mean.

    >>
    >>
    >> Confused? Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    >> deluded. Who puts the `loon' in `Linux loon'?

    >
    > You are some kind of fool, Matt. You have no idea what I believe. You
    > seem to fall into every single one of the most basic traps going in terms
    > of economics analysis. What is this market of which you speak? What do
    > you include in it? What do you exclude?
    >
    > If you spent less time ranting in this out of control fashion, and more
    > time thinking, these conversations would be much easier. Get a grip,
    > mate.
    >
    > "the market"? What *is* that, exactly? "the"? There's only one? It's
    > the "whole thing"? Do you understand what a market segment is? Do you
    > understand that x86 is a small part of the personal computing market as a
    > whole? Do you understand that mobile devices outsell PCs at a massive
    > ratio?
    >
    >
    >> How about if you just put your so-called "real numbers" and stats up
    >> again and explain exactly what they mean?

    >
    > You are welcome to go back through this thread, where I posted Amazon's
    > real sales stats. They're not *my* figures, they're Amazon's. If you
    > don't like them, well *tough*, I merely reported them here.
    >
    > But please, stop pouting.



    Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    deluded.

    M$ must be seriously deluded then.

    As I said, in another post, do they *seriously* think that if linux users
    were only at 1% or less, Ballmer would have stated that Linux was The
    Number One threat?

    And do they *seriously* think that M$ would be worried enough to add
    "Item 1A. Risk Factors" (about their losing markets to OSS) in their
    quarterly SEC filings *if* Linux users were only at 1% (or less) of all
    Internet users?

    I've stopped responding to his rants.

    --
    Mandriva 2008.1 64-bit.
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.

  6. Re: Does Microsoft fear Linux? Should it fear Linux?

    William Poaster espoused:
    > On Fri, 09 May 2008 11:02:38 +0100, Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Matt espoused:
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>> Linonut espoused:
    >>>>> * Matt peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>>>>> William Poaster espoused:
    >>>>>>>> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/28...x-2008-should-
    >>>>>>>>> microsoft-be-afraid-of-linux/
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> But really, with a 0.65 percent market share, do you really think
    >>>>>>>>>> Microsoft is worried about losing out to Linux?
    >>>>> Ballmer seems to be, a little bit.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> My suspicion is that 17% would be a singularly underestimated figure
    >>>>>>> for 2008.
    >>>>>> nuts
    >>>>> I think Mark needs to find an independent link for that figure.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It might mean 17% of developers, for example.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> eh? I just posted some *real numbers* of what's selling. You've
    >>>> deleted them (not sure why), but they were *real numbers*. The same
    >>>> figures have been used elsewhere, recently, showing that in the
    >>>> top-ten, there are only two vista-based machines. As these are *not in
    >>>> the top five*, then it's highly unlikely that they're getting anywhere
    >>>> near even 1/5 of sales, whereas the linux machines are selling in far
    >>>> greater numbers.
    >>>>
    >>>> Matt's just confused about stats and what they mean.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Confused? Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    >>> deluded. Who puts the `loon' in `Linux loon'?

    >>
    >> You are some kind of fool, Matt. You have no idea what I believe. You
    >> seem to fall into every single one of the most basic traps going in terms
    >> of economics analysis. What is this market of which you speak? What do
    >> you include in it? What do you exclude?
    >>
    >> If you spent less time ranting in this out of control fashion, and more
    >> time thinking, these conversations would be much easier. Get a grip,
    >> mate.
    >>
    >> "the market"? What *is* that, exactly? "the"? There's only one? It's
    >> the "whole thing"? Do you understand what a market segment is? Do you
    >> understand that x86 is a small part of the personal computing market as a
    >> whole? Do you understand that mobile devices outsell PCs at a massive
    >> ratio?
    >>
    >>
    >>> How about if you just put your so-called "real numbers" and stats up
    >>> again and explain exactly what they mean?

    >>
    >> You are welcome to go back through this thread, where I posted Amazon's
    >> real sales stats. They're not *my* figures, they're Amazon's. If you
    >> don't like them, well *tough*, I merely reported them here.
    >>
    >> But please, stop pouting.

    >
    >
    > Anybody who believes Linux has 17% of the market is seriously
    > deluded.
    >
    > M$ must be seriously deluded then.
    >
    > As I said, in another post, do they *seriously* think that if linux users
    > were only at 1% or less, Ballmer would have stated that Linux was The
    > Number One threat?
    >
    > And do they *seriously* think that M$ would be worried enough to add
    > "Item 1A. Risk Factors" (about their losing markets to OSS) in their
    > quarterly SEC filings *if* Linux users were only at 1% (or less) of all
    > Internet users?
    >
    > I've stopped responding to his rants.
    >


    I'm on the edge of putting him in the killfile. I wouldn't mind a
    discussion, but he's off the deep end all the time. It's difficult
    enough have a 12 year old lad around the house, I don't need someone
    behaving the same way on here, too.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3