Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 19:19 UTC
Windows The rumours about Windows possibly being ported to ARM has left a lot of people bewildered; why would you port Windows NT when Windows CE 6.0 is a perfectly capable operating system? Putting all the pieces together, it's actually quite clear why you would want Windows NT on ARM: servers.
Thread beginning with comment 454671
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
oiaohm
Member since:
2009-05-30

And the only vendor who's been able to capitalize on Linux in this market and make a decent profit has been Cisco with their Linksys line of products. Granted, there are a ton of other smaller solutions out there, and quite a few Linux distributions, but they're never going to get the penetration that Cisco will.

Canonical or Red Hat can pull this off with the right subscription model and OEM/partner support (Dell or another enterprise vendor, since HP is too committed to MS). Amazon, Citrix, Cisco, VMWare, Apple, or Google could also pull this off. At this point only Cisco owns the stack and enough of the technologies to bring this to market.

For what people think of Microsoft and Sharepoint, they have a ton of applications and technologies that integrate into them very well that they own. Sharepoint has very robust integration services that plug in everywhere, and provide services that the other Intranet services don't have. This is their best-selling new product in years, and they are converting many proprietary apps to use it as a back-end (Project Server, Exchange Public Folders, etc.). Open Source will not replace 100% of that integration. It works fine for many smaller projects, but not for Excel Services or Project Server.

You really have zero understanding how close Linux guys are. Exchange Public Folders don't make me laugh. sogo using openchange does that as a drop in replacement.

Alfresso has Project Server features built in. Also Alfresso pretends to be sharepoint quite well.

Samba 4 gives drop in replacement to ADS.

All these don't have to use CAL's.

The delay is Samba 4 its a keystone. MS has to move before the Keystone becomes functional or they are going to be hit by a boardside of matching techs on a platform that they don't have a OS for that is lower cost than the platform MS runs on.

Sorry claim that opensource will not replace 100 percent it basically ready to replace at least 90 percent. What for most businesses will be good enough. Since it will replace the missing 10 percent with other ways of getting the same results.

Arm and open source on servers threatens to bring the 500 dollar server todo most business needs into existence with unlimited cals.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You really have zero understanding how close Linux guys are.


The Linux guys are always infinitely close - but never quite there.

Reply Parent Score: 1

somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

"You really have zero understanding how close Linux guys are.


The Linux guys are always infinitely close - but never quite there.
"

while in other aspects, windows guys are infinitely far and will never be even close. instead of wasting money on generic solutions one can order tailored ones for that money and get way more bang for same amount

all depends on what one needs. if i'd be moving me or any of my customers on windows i'd be crippling them with added additional costs. all software they need and services are already tailored to linux primarily and there simply is no simple and cost effective way to introduce windows and generic solutions you name. (i just introduced this aspect from my point of view to produce contra to your personal aspect. I'm not even nearly bashing ms products. if anything... i say "use the hammer that works for your nails")

Reply Parent Score: 4

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

"You really have zero understanding how close Linux guys are.


The Linux guys are always infinitely close - but never quite there.
"
Not true. It takes a long time to get all the interlinked parts work work. Did not help that a Legal case had to be won and MS made obey to get the information to get this close.

Illegal actions is market kept MS possition. Linux was doing quite well even gaining before 2000 and MS illegal action. Basically the same thing that shot Novell shot Linux. Not been something simple to recovery from.

Reply Parent Score: 2

mbpark Member since:
2005-11-17

No, I do have full understanding of how both work. Sharepoint is about the only thing Microsoft got right in the past 10 years besides Windows 7.

Linux has been close for years. I remember when people were selling Samba 2 solutions for this years ago (remember Cobalt, who Sun bought? I was running them in 1999).

Alfresco pretends to be SP quite well, which in itself was Microsoft's reaction to Oracle's Content Management Server (which started as Internet File System in 1998-1999). However, there are features of Sharepoint that Microsoft pushes that many of the large vendors such as SAP, Kronos, and a very large amount of software vendors use. Your average C-level with purchase-level authority doesn't want to hear "like sharepoint". Project Server in itself is a pretty complex project that sits on top of it as a front end. For every Microsoft product that uses it, there's another 10 industry-specific solutions that do as well.

I've spoken with Microsoft many times, especially about their latest push to build applications on top of Sharepoint by hitting the verticals. They are aiming dead at Adobe, EMC, and Oracle with this, who have solutions so expensive for these that they will make you wish for CALs. Those who complain about CALs have never had to license Oracle or Adobe LiveCycle.

Exchange still has a large amount of the marketplace. I gave that as an example as how Microsoft is transitioning older functionality to newer products.

BTW, I wouldn't run OpenExchange when Google is right there with better functionality and the ability to plug into your LDAP/AD system.

You have no idea of what I was aiming at. Microsoft is trying to replace the idea of CALs, which are the devil, with a subscription-based revenue stream. They actually have all of the technology to put something together that customers can use and is very simple to use. They actually can package it together and sell it. Cisco, via their acquisition of Linksys, also has this knowledge in-house, and has sold products that have this functionality. Oracle, Symantec, Apple, and Google also have the technology, and have implemented it in various forms.

Microsoft is losing money to IBM, Google, Apple, Symantec, Open Source, Cisco, and Intel/McAfee. They have the ability and technology to integrate everything and present a solution to the customers that is a one-box solution.

Canonical (especially since they do a lot of ARM development) or Red Hat, if they had the inclination, could do exactly the same thing with the right hardware and software partners. Novell got bought and neutered by Attachmate/Microsoft and is no longer a threat (and they have the knowledge in-house). They were the Commodore of Linux.

This isn't about having a solution, it's about having an integrated one.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

^

This.

This is exactly where our business is moving. We have SAP and other systems that Sharepoint can integrate with ... it is a no brainer for our business since we already run these systems and sharepoint can integrate with these systems quite easily.

Also because we are using Sharepoint elsewhere in the business we are rolling it out to our website, mainly because we will have a lot of in house skills with sharepoint at the time.

Edited 2010-12-24 20:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

No, I do have full understanding of how both work. Sharepoint is about the only thing Microsoft got right in the past 10 years besides Windows 7.

Linux has been close for years. I remember when people were selling Samba 2 solutions for this years ago (remember Cobalt, who Sun bought? I was running them in 1999).

Yes 1999 Linux was doing quite well. 2000 MS did a illegal action and that was the end of Novell netware and Samba from domination and MS took over.

Court cast had to be fort that was won in 2006 and its taken quite a few years to make up for 6 years of lacking information. The not quite there state being as bad as it is results of an illegal action.

Alfresco pretends to be SP quite well, which in itself was Microsoft's reaction to Oracle's Content Management Server (which started as Internet File System in 1998-1999). However, there are features of Sharepoint that Microsoft pushes that many of the large vendors such as SAP, Kronos, and a very large amount of software vendors use. Your average C-level with purchase-level authority doesn't want to hear "like sharepoint". Project Server in itself is a pretty complex project that sits on top of it as a front end. For every Microsoft product that uses it, there's another 10 industry-specific solutions that do as well.

Alfresso I said pretends to be sharepoint. This is API level. So to SAP it thinks it is talking to Sharepoint but its really talking to Alfresso. Anyone who looks at the user interface knows Alfresso looks different ans has other features that Sharepoint lacks. Ie pretends not like. I have not tried with Kronos but I would not be surprised if it worked as well with Alfresso.

I've spoken with Microsoft many times, especially about their latest push to build applications on top of Sharepoint by hitting the verticals. They are aiming dead at Adobe, EMC, and Oracle with this, who have solutions so expensive for these that they will make you wish for CALs. Those who complain about CALs have never had to license Oracle or Adobe LiveCycle.

Of course they are trying to build vertical on top of Sharepoint to lock you back in.

They are about to lose the vertical of Exchange and active directory that allowed them to destroy Linux and Novel netware from 2000 on with illegally closed protocols. So they have to create something new.


Exchange still has a large amount of the marketplace. I gave that as an example as how Microsoft is transitioning older functionality to newer products.

BTW, I wouldn't run OpenExchange when Google is right there with better functionality and the ability to plug into your LDAP/AD system.

Openchange is not openexchange. openchange can also be used to back end onto google. So you don't need to install google sync on client machines. Basically openchange is a wrapper allowing outlook to see an exchange server but many different groupware servers be hidding behind it. Since it is being a exchange server not a installed add on it cannot be damaged by MS doing updates to outlook unless MS wants to break compatibility with there own servers.

You have no idea of what I was aiming at. Microsoft is trying to replace the idea of CALs, which are the devil, with a subscription-based revenue stream. They actually have all of the technology to put something together that customers can use and is very simple to use. They actually can package it together and sell it. Cisco, via their acquisition of Linksys, also has this knowledge in-house, and has sold products that have this functionality. Oracle, Symantec, Apple, and Google also have the technology, and have implemented it in various forms.

Microsoft is losing money to IBM, Google, Apple, Symantec, Open Source, Cisco, and Intel/McAfee. They have the ability and technology to integrate everything and present a solution to the customers that is a one-box solution.

Canonical (especially since they do a lot of ARM development) or Red Hat, if they had the inclination, could do exactly the same thing with the right hardware and software partners. Novell got bought and neutered by Attachmate/Microsoft and is no longer a threat (and they have the knowledge in-house). They were the Commodore of Linux.

This isn't about having a solution, it's about having an integrated one.

And there are many Linux distributions that are very close to having integrated really to go. Not the players you are listing either.

http://www.zentyal.org/ http://www.clearfoundation.com just to name two.

The keystone landing I am talking about will release new players into the market on equal footing to MS in lots of ways. Past MS in another.

Reply Parent Score: 3