Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Aug 2009 19:15 UTC, submitted by caffeine deprived
Microsoft Microsoft for the first time has named Linux distributors Red Hat and Canonical as competitors to its Windows client business in its annual filing to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The move is an acknowledgment of the first viable competition from Linux to Microsoft's Windows client business, due mainly to the use of Linux on netbooks, which are rising in prominence as alternatives to full-sized notebooks.
Order by: Score:
I Don't Know Why
by segedunum on Wed 5th Aug 2009 19:46 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

I can only imagine they want to pretend that there's some competition for their own reasons. There's really not much threat to them there.

Reply Score: 1

RE: I Don't Know Why
by Moredhas on Wed 5th Aug 2009 22:49 UTC in reply to "I Don't Know Why"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

It sounds better to the SEC than "GROORAAGHH!! WE HAVE NO COMPETITION!!! WE ARE THE ONLY CONSUMER CHOICE BLOR!"

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: I Don't Know Why
by segedunum on Thu 6th Aug 2009 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE: I Don't Know Why"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

That's it in a nutshell.

Reply Score: 2

Handsets & Netbooks
by robojerk on Wed 5th Aug 2009 20:12 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I think Microsoft should be afraid of handsets and netbooks. Someone made an argument that one reason why Apple is doing so well is because of the iPhone. If Android and PalmPre gain traction then start merging onto desktops, especially as apps go cloud base then people will start to feel more comfortable with tese systems since they know them from their phone.

Reply Score: 6

Comment by motang
by motang on Wed 5th Aug 2009 21:04 UTC
motang
Member since:
2008-03-27

I was more surprised at the fact they mentioned Canonical!

Reply Score: 1

Maybe
by Gone fishing on Wed 5th Aug 2009 22:11 UTC
Gone fishing
Member since:
2006-02-22

Maybe MS recognises the technical merit etc of Linux and therefore sees it as a threat.

It's a pity that too many OEMs and Average Joes refuse to even look at an alternative to Windows.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Maybe
by sukru on Wed 5th Aug 2009 22:26 UTC in reply to "Maybe"
sukru Member since:
2006-11-19

They did look at the alternative (i.e.: Linux). But it did not work well. Especially for ASUS.

For example, even as a "technical" user, and after several years of exclusive Linux desktop, I had to switch to Windows. There are many reasons, but the main issue is still hardware (Fedora 11 totally lost X11 support after installing ATI drivers), and some software (no viable Visual Studio replacement, yet. No please do not talk about Eclipse, or KDevelop, I've used them).

Linux is progressing fine. It still is the primary OS on my laptop, but it's does not seem to be ready for the masses.

Edited 2009-08-05 22:27 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Maybe
by darknexus on Wed 5th Aug 2009 23:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Maybe"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Hah, Asus is not a good example. It's their fault they chose a pathetic cut-down excuse for an os that is Xandros, no one else's. Had they gone with something more mainstream it would've worked, but they failed to pick an os that was worth much and further didn't even test it out. Asus is a bad example if you want to site Linux's deficiencies as that was their fault all the way.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Maybe
by Lennie on Wed 5th Aug 2009 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Maybe"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I think he mentioned it, to show how much how well Linux works in the eyes of mainstream users.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Maybe
by JPisini on Fri 7th Aug 2009 12:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Maybe"
JPisini Member since:
2006-01-24

Hah, Asus is not a good example. It's their fault they chose a pathetic cut-down excuse for an os that is Xandros, no one else's. Had they gone with something more mainstream it would've worked, but they failed to pick an os that was worth much and further didn't even test it out. Asus is a bad example if you want to site Linux's deficiencies as that was their fault all the way.



I can only speak for myself but Xandros is my main OS I use it every day for both work and play. It is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but it works and works well for what I need/want my machine to do. This is why Linux is as popular as it is no one distro/OS is perfect for everybody but there is a choice of what you want to use.

Edited 2009-08-07 12:23 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Maybe
by darknexus on Fri 7th Aug 2009 17:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Maybe"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Yes, but Asus didn't use full Xandros, it was significantly cut down. To add to the difficulty, Asus's Xandros repositories frequently did not work and couple that with bugs in their own GUI updater and their system was doomed to fail.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Maybe
by Lennie on Wed 5th Aug 2009 23:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Maybe"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I know many mainstream users that use Linux just fine.

Reply Score: 3

lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Microsoft Talks Like SCO about Linux

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/05/microsoft_rivals_red_hat_ca...

“[The] Client [division] faces strong competition from well-established companies with differing approaches to the PC market. Competing commercial software products, including variants of Unix, are supplied by competitors such as Apple, Canonical, and Red Hat,” wrote Microsoft in the US Securities Exchange Commission filing.

“Apple takes an integrated approach to the PC experience and has made inroads in share, particularly in the US and in the consumer segment.

“The Linux operating system, which is also derived from Unix and is available without payment under a General Public License, has gained some acceptance, especially in emerging markets, as competitive pressures lead OEMs to reduce costs and new, lower-price PC form-factors gain adoption.”


http://groklaw.net/
PJ: In Microsoft's SEC filing, highlighted by the article in the Register, it says this: "The Linux operating system, which is also derived from Unix and is available without payment under a General Public License, has gained some acceptance, especially in emerging markets, as competitive pressures lead OEMs to reduce costs and new, lower-price PC form-factors gain adoption."

That's not true. It was what SCO claimed, but SCO has to date been unable to prove any such thing. Microsoft also calls Linux a "UNIX variant" like Apple. So why is Microsoft channeling SCO like this in its 10K? You tell me.


PJ has a point. Under copyright law, the term "derived from" has a very specific meaning. In order for a later work to be "derived from" an earlier work, the later work actually must include significant parts of the earlier work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
A derivative work pertaining to copyright law, is an expressive creation that includes major, copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work.


If there is one thing that became abundantly clear from the entire SCO fiasco, it is that Linux does not contain any Unix code.

None at all. Nada. Zilch. Didly squat. Zero lines.

In fact the whole major design aim of GNU, which is reflected right there in the acronym, is that "GNU is Not Unix".

Linux is not "derived from" Unix at all (in the legal, copyright law sense of the term).

Linux is to Unix as Windows NT is to VMS. It is kind-of a work-alike in many ways, but that is about it.

Edited 2009-08-06 04:40 UTC

Reply Score: 5

@sukru
by shotsman on Thu 6th Aug 2009 10:33 UTC
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

If you had done a bit of research you would find that the ATI drivers for the versions of the Kernel & X11 that are used in Fedora 11 are not done properly yet.
Fedora is a bleeding edge distro and should be used with that in mind.
I have several system with Radeon HD43xx GPU's in them and they run X fine (allbeit slowly) with the OOTB driver.
I did look at installing the accelerated one but saw that other people were reporting issues so I have held back until it seems to be more stable.

The issues with the NVidia drivers on Vista in the early days were much worse(IMHO)

Reply Score: 2