Linked by David Adams on Tue 16th Aug 2011 16:48 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y "Who is Microsoft fooling? Other than on the desktop, Linux is eating its lunch, and it's only going to get worse for Microsoft."
Thread beginning with comment 485321
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
But does it need to?
by guilhermefdc on Tue 16th Aug 2011 17:34 UTC
guilhermefdc
Member since:
2011-02-17

Yeah, but does MSFT really need to beat Linux everywhere? For them to succeed, they just need to beat Linux where their core money-printing-machine is: Windows and Office.
As long as they're able to do so, they should be fine. We already live in an era where the web is entrenched in our lives (i.e. we're past the point of saying "the web is where everything is going to") - and the smartphone market, while on meteoric ascension, still is not mature enough for us to declare Google/Android/Linux and Apple winners (although I believe this will happen in 2-3 years). MSFT still has time to catch up with linux on mobile and print huge amounts of money.

Please note that I haven't used a Microsoft product (Xbox included) in the last year or so - I believe that today they are nothing more than patent trolls who stifle innovation. Nevertheless, they're not as dead as I hope they'll be.

Reply Score: 4

RE: But does it need to?
by WorknMan on Tue 16th Aug 2011 18:04 in reply to "But does it need to?"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Yeah, but does MSFT really need to beat Linux everywhere? For them to succeed, they just need to beat Linux where their core money-printing-machine is: Windows and Office.


Yeah, that's what I was thinking they were talking about. Linux has never been a threat on the desktop, and probably never will be. Hell, we don't even have Windows vs Linux on the desktop pissing contests here, as opposed to the old days where it would happen almost daily ;)

We already live in an era where the web is entrenched in our lives (i.e. we're past the point of saying "the web is where everything is going to") - and the smartphone market, while on meteoric ascension, still is not mature enough for us to declare Google/Android/Linux and Apple winners (although I believe this will happen in 2-3 years).


Wishful thinking. Every time a new technology comes around (web, mobile, tablets, etc), pundits are always quick to predict the end of the desktop. It hasn't happened yet, and won't any time soon, so long as the desktop continues to be the best way to get real work done.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: But does it need to?
by vitae on Tue 16th Aug 2011 18:42 in reply to "RE: But does it need to?"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20



Yeah, that's what I was thinking they were talking about. Linux has never been a threat on the desktop, and probably never will be. Hell, we don't even have Windows vs Linux on the desktop pissing contests here, as opposed to the old days where it would happen almost daily ;)




Once upon a time it looked like OEMs might actually give people a choice of OSes on the desktop, then they eventually just caved to Microsoft. Dell, HP, etc. made the choice for us.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: But does it need to?
by JAlexoid on Wed 17th Aug 2011 00:11 in reply to "RE: But does it need to?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

The desktop will diminish when cloud related technologies have proliferated enough to make the average user care less about software and data on his local system. It's starting, but it's a long way to go.

My prediction is that the first thing to go in the desktop computing is the departmental server, as it'll be replaced by a high bandwidth connection to a private or virtual-private cloud system.
Next will be the full blown desktop computer to go. That has partially started in more advanced organisations - Citrix "replacing" local OS or thin server. But it will be more like Android/iOS - locally apps(incl HTML5 stuff) provide GUI and input, while all heavy lifting is done on the server.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: But does it need to?
by toast88 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 17:30 in reply to "RE: But does it need to?"
toast88 Member since:
2009-09-23

"Yeah, but does MSFT really need to beat Linux everywhere? For them to succeed, they just need to beat Linux where their core money-printing-machine is: Windows and Office.


Yeah, that's what I was thinking they were talking about. Linux has never been a threat on the desktop, and probably never will be. Hell, we don't even have Windows vs Linux on the desktop pissing contests here, as opposed to the old days where it would happen almost daily ;)
"
Too bad that the sales for normal desktop PCs are on the fall:

http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/wintel-share-global-pc-industry-fal...

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1744216

You know, pride goes before a fall. Microsoft is losing market shares and if they don't get their a**es up soon and get seriously moving, they'll be doomed for decline.

Remember, there were other companies like Commodore, Atari, Sun and SGI that were acting with similar arrogance and eventually went bankrupt or were bought up.

Microsoft is not invincible.

Adrian

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: But does it need to?
by JAlexoid on Wed 17th Aug 2011 00:02 in reply to "But does it need to?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Yeah, but does MSFT really need to beat Linux everywhere? For them to succeed, they just need to beat Linux where their core money-printing-machine is: Windows and Office.


The issue for them is that they are under threat of any good enough free alternative. You don't need to be the best to oust Windows/Office. A surprising small amount of people use MS Office to it's full potential. OpenOffice/LibreOffice and even Google Docs can handle 99% of what MS Office is used for.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: But does it need to?
by daedalus on Wed 17th Aug 2011 07:40 in reply to "RE: But does it need to?"
daedalus Member since:
2011-01-14

Yes, but as a previous poster pointed out, it's about a package that "just works". I've given people Open Office in the past, and they complain because they save a document, send it to someone who is then unable to read it in Word. All it takes is a Save As and change the filetype, but that's an extra step people don't need when they use MS Office. And so it stays.

Reply Parent Score: 1