Does Microsoft even matter?
According to recent IDC reports Microsoft does not own the enterprise market; favoring UNIX and Linux Operating platforms (read below). Although one needs to be reminded that it is not Microsoft’s primary market. It is the end-user that Microsoft is concerned with and it has been that same market that has helped Microsoft get to the position it is currently in. But does that really matter?
Thanks to the many pioneers out there, such as Google, modern day computing had experienced a paradigm shift; and away from locking the computer down from outside threats and installing and running every application/service locally. Everything is slowly moving towards the cloud. In all reality, the only tool that is really needed is the web browser. Almost everything is done or can be done on the internet. What matters of course is what is running behind the cloud.
Lately I have been paying careful attention with how the economy has impacted the data storage industry and I have tried to understand why certain technologies have remained somewhat unaffected during these times of trials and tribulations. I have also been attending technical seminars and summits to realize what the focus has been directed toward: Virtualization + Consolidation + Reduced Cost = a lean, mean and GREEN machine.
For example, the Red Hat Road Tour literally focused its Operating platform presentations on nothing but virtualization and simplicity. The simplicity included the ability to manage all node from a centralized service to even (at a click of a button) configure, update and enable all nodes within a cluster. It is amazing at what the Linux Operating Platform has turned into. I started using Linux back in 2002 (Red Hat 7.3) and back then the focus was more on stability and security rather than user-friendliness. Well, now the tables have turned and I can admit that the Linux Operating System has gotten it right in terms of being graphically appealing and user-friendly. It has even forced Microsoft to redefine their graphical environment in both Windows Vista and Windows 7. Although I have heard of recent problems in Microsoft keeping these new Operating Systems stable. Who knows if it will enter into the enterprise market anytime soon.
In a previous post I had mentioned:
———————————————————————–
…recent reports have shown that year-after-year the Linux Operating System has taken a firm hold in the overall enterprise market. As of 2008 it had been holding a share of at least 13.4% (according to recent IDC reports). UNIX Operating Systems on the other hand report 32.7% usage in the same market. Combined (46.1%), Linux and UNIX out-weigh Microsoft’s share of 36.5%. I am filled with joy when I see that every year Linux increases its share by an average of 10%. With leaders such as Red Hat, Novell and Canonical, I see an even stronger future for the Linux Operating System.
———————————————————————–
I feel confident that we will continue to see the influence of Linux rise. In recent articles it has even been noted how interoperability with other platforms including Windows is still a concern for Linux vendors. The focus to providing a complete enterprise class solution is there on the one side but what is really happening on the other? Do we know?
Microsoft has also recently begun to show a more humble side (maybe with some sneaky motivation behind it) by admitting how superior Apache is to its IIS web server and sponsoring the project. And face it, a significant number of applications have moved towards the usage of open-source and freely distributed variants. I see Apache over IIS and mySQL & postgreSQL over SQL Server. End users are now aware of Mozilla Firefox and choose it over Internet Explorer. In the end, the only thing that truly matters is what is serving those clouds. The Operating Platform utilized by the average end user may eventually become transparent where there will be absolutely no reason to care about which operating system someone is running. This can create a great future for Linux. The recent adoption of the sub-notebooks and other related forms of computing have gained more grounds for Linux. This new form of computing has even threatened Microsoft by forcing them to rebuild Windows Vista into Windows 7 which is now faster, less power and memory hungry and a lot more lightweight than its predecessor while also extending the life of Windows XP.
As for consolidation, the only storage-based vendors to truly survive the market have been the providers of affordable Storage Appliances (i.e. EMC, Netapp, etc.). On the back-end you are managing your SAN while on the front-end you are serving HTTP, FTP, NFS and CIFS shares all from a couple of decent performing nodes. In smaller environments, this reduces the overhead of cost, space and power to run multiple blades in order to accomplish the same task(s). These NAS solutions in turn utilize a FreeBSD or Linux embedded Operating System.
So in the end, does Microsoft even matter?
Paul Graham wrote almost two years ago that ‘Microsoft is dead’, meaning that MS and its platform are no longer a consideration for start-up companies:
http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
Comment by Mike — 22. January 2009 @ 05:10
I agree with Paul Graham, thanks for the link!
Also to add to my topic, there are some laptops that are already being setup and configured with Splashtop (http://www.splashtop.com/); which is a Linux based OS flashed onto a local ROM on the motherboard and allows the computer to be turned on and able to access your hard drive and internet in a matter of a couple seconds. This is done without even loading the main OS on the system.
These methods show the future of the client-based OS and how Microsoft may be in for a bit more of a struggle.
Comment by admin — 22. January 2009 @ 07:21
What’s a “Microsoft”? ;o)
Comment by Tux — 22. January 2009 @ 11:38
“What’s a “Microsoft”? ;o)”
That is what you call your company when you only have a 3.5 inch floppy, thus you have a micro-softie.
Comment by Mick — 22. January 2009 @ 12:24
It’s odd that you use “Linux Operating Platform”. I hope it’s a mistake; and why should Operating Platform be capitalized? (Sorry, I’m a finicky nerd)
Why say Linux Operating System, and capitalize it on top of that, when you should be saying “Linux”, period.
I’m no Microsoftie nor have I ever spoken up for MS, but all around me, in the corporate world, MS still dominates. They have momentum, lots of it, and muscle. It’s all about the hundreds of thousands of applications available for the “Microsoft Operating Platform” that makes MS still matter.
Stop trying to wish MS away, or try to gain traction with catchy article titles.
Otherwise, you do have a point about cloud computing.
Comment by Ram Sambamurthy — 23. January 2009 @ 09:17
Ram,
Thank you for your comments. As for the capitalization, that is just a nasty habit of mine and I do apologize for any confusion that it may lead to; but I would prefer to not call it “Linux” primarily because Linux is just a kernel and combined with other environments/applications/toolsets it becomes a complete operating system (no capitals). Hence the name GNU/Linux.
As for “wishing Microsoft away”; that is far from the case. Competition is always needed and without it there would be no motivation to create new interfaces and solutions. Prior to 2001, I do not know if you remember but there was little change in the revisions of Windows; not much change appeared between 95 to 98 and 98 to ME. It was XP (based on the NT kernel) that really started pushing the envelope but that was after the fact that they took notice of GNU/Linux. Nothing inspired them to enhance their operating system until then. They were still concerned in 2002 (http://boycottnovell.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/px07168.pdf)
Also, there is always money in Microsoft. A consumer is willing to spend money for Microsoft related products because that is what they have grown accustomed to. So I do not wish it away. I just want users to understand that they have choices.
>>It’s all about the hundreds of thousands of applications available for
>>the “Microsoft Operating Platform” that makes MS still matter.
Five years from now, as more and more applications move into the cloud, will that still be the case?
Comment by admin — 23. January 2009 @ 09:34
What I can’t understand is why we aren’t seeing the SplashTop-like / InstantOn base GNU/Linux operating system on EVERY new system that is sold today.
The SplashTop and InstantOn base operating systems cater perfectly from the cloud, and also have the additional benefit of saving MUCH energy. This makes PCs with SplashTop/InstantOn much GREENER than most systems out there.
Besides, the Internet is the sole resource that most typical people buy a computer for in the first place. So to have EVERY system come with SplashTop/InstantOn - for people to surf - only makes sense.
Perhaps one reason SplashTop/InstantOn aren’t more popular is because of certain Vendor-locked software that people “think” they MUST have…For instance, if I am a SplashTop user, and I go to a website to get my email - imagine if that particular website said “this site is not compatible with your browser”…. This should NOT be allowed to happen. We as computer users MUST DEMAND that the Internet STAY compatible with OPEN STANDARDS.. this way we can use ANY W3C standards compliant web-browser (i.e., Firefox and Opera) to access ANY website. The exception to this would be the flash player, which allows people to watch movies and what not. My point is this: The Internet MUST continue to use Open (not Vendor Locked) standards so that EVERYONE can play, whether they are surfing from SplashTop/InstantOn, or from a full system boot into their favorite Operating System.
Don’t let big, rich companies walk on your rights to use technology to access the Internet!!!
DEMAND OPEN STANDARDS COMPLIANCE!!
Shannon VanWagner
http://humans-enabled.com
Comment by Shannon VanWagner — 23. January 2009 @ 22:58
Shannon,
I understand exactly where you are coming from; especially with the well known problem of compliance. For years (on the side) I have done web development and the biggest frustration is IE. Even IE 8 doesn’t comply well to CSS, Javascript, etc. standards. Run the same webpage in Firefox and Opera, it displays as coded.
But the problem lies with a lack of knowledge or just laziness which is why a lot of websites cater only to IE; whose market share is decreasing significantly to Firefox, Chrome and Safari. My wife uses Ubuntu and has no problems doing what she needs to do but there has been the one situation where a website she needs to pay her bills intentionally restricts access any other browser but IE. I had to install IE through wine just so she can access that one site.
So again, I understand your frustration.
Comment by admin — 24. January 2009 @ 07:18
admin…
I’ve heard many stories like yours and I’ve come across sites myself that have been resistant to other browsers/OSes.
The ie4Linux project can be handy for some of these situations but the worst possible scenario is when a website uses ActiveX or some other functionality the ties directly to the Win-OS. These types of sites will not even work with IE in Wine(although if you’re like me, you probably don’t want them “working” on your system anyway).
What I’ve found to be the best fixes for such problems is to let the webmaster of the offending website know about the problem, or raise awareness of the problem publicly - should the former solution not work.
One such success story that I have to share is the photo-processing website at rite-aid.com - ever since I sent them a detailed email on how their website was not working with GNU/Linux, the problem(perhaps coincidentally) has been fixed. I can submit photos to the Rite-Aid.com website and have them printed at the store for me.
Perhaps another good way to get websites to comply with the standards is to use the “Help>Report Broken Website” feature of Mozilla Firefox. The tool actually says, “This tool allows you to tell the Evangelism Team about web site that do not work properly in Firefox, or shut Firefox out.” To use the tool, simply navigate to the page that’s not working, then click “Help>Report Broken Website”.
Also, if you need another person (or few) to email the website that you’re having a problem with, let me know - I’d be glad to give them a piece of my mind(and rally for more) in the name of Free and Open Standards.
Enable Humans with Technology - that’s what I say.
Shannon VanWagner
http://humans-enabled.com
Comment by Shannon VanWagner — 24. January 2009 @ 13:09
@Shannon re: SplashTop / InstantOn
I think the OEMs are actually getting there. These are relatively new products and the shot boot time (and it’s actually not as instant as you might want) has not been there for very long. That said, major motherboard manufacturers are putting these on large numbers of boards. I would not be surprised if they became a default feature at which point commonplace desktop Linux starts to look like an decidedly realistic proposition.
A personal anecdote: I recently upgraded the Linux system on a co-workers dual-boot ThinkPad laptop from Fedora 8 to 10. Fedora was originally installed for running certain science applications which we use for work. For some reason Vista booted outrageously slowly on that system, possibly partly because of the anti-virus software mandated by our employer and partly because of simply being Vista. As I was doing the upgrade, I learned that my coworker had grown into the habit of booting into Linux if she needed to just check email or do online banking etc. quickly. Fedora boots in something like 40 seconds on that system, and it certainly seemed instantaneous in comparison to Vista. So Linux seems to be having the effect of these instant boot thingies already, in the conventional hard-drive installed form.
Comment by Mike — 24. January 2009 @ 17:58