Submitted by “The amazing thing isn’t that Windows beat the pants off Unix; it’s that so many of the Unix companies survived until today. Linux came into the field though with two big advantages over the Unixes. The first was that it was open-source. The second advantage was it had Linus Torvalds.” In other news, here you can read what various people have to say about the restructuring operation at Microsoft.
But what about *BSD? I call this mis-information. I’m getting too old for these Linux-vs.-Windows articles. More pragmatism, please.
/Anders
bsd and linux are supposed to be versions of unix or clones of… and both care a lot of code that is in unix… hmm…
oh wait.. i guess linus torvalds IS god of all OS’s
or a buncha kids who thought that linux was the only way to beat microsoft successfully started the bandwagon affect..
“bsd and linux are supposed to be versions of unix or clones of… and both care a lot of code that is in unix… hmm…”
Linux was originally written as a clone of Minix, BSD386 was written as a port of BSD to i386. There was never any any actual UNIX code in Linux, and following the BSDI lawsuit all the BSD code was rewritten to form FreeBSD. Since then both have grown to provide much greater hardware support and much more powerful interfaces than their proprietary ancestors.
“oh wait.. i guess linus torvalds IS god of all OS’s”
Linus is a nice guy and a fine programmer. His contribution to software engineering–which would have guaranteed him more than a passing mention in the history of computing even if the Linux kernel was not as successful as it has been–is an empirical proof what has been known as Linus’ Law:
Given a large enough beta-tester and co-developer base, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the fix obvious to someone.
And an empirical counterexample to Brooks’ Law:
The programming work performed increases with direct proportion to the number of programmers (N), but the complexity of a project increases by the square of the number of programmers (N2).
Linus showed that distributed development is not only possible, but remarkably effective, as long as the structure of the project is maintained as a hierarchical tree of subsystems. Perhaps more importantly, he showed that distributed debugging is perhaps the greatest advance in software engineering since portable programming languages.
So even if Linux is not the end-all of *nix kernels (and it definitely is not), It still stands as a profound contribution to the field of software engineering. Not only did Linus Torvalds revive the hacker culture when it was near death in the early 90’s, but he has shown us that individuals, academia, and competiting corporations can collaborate on a single software project.
Is Linus God? No. Does he belong in the top echelon of the world’s greatest programmers? No. Is he the greatest hacker of all time? Quite possibly.
“or a buncha kids who thought that linux was the only way to beat microsoft successfully started the bandwagon affect..”
A bunch of kids who wanted to hack but had nothing to hack on were suddenly given something promising to work with. It wasn’t about beating Microsoft. It was about showing that proprietary software was not the sole destiny of the personal computer. That as long as we can think, imagine, and create, there will always be a public domain.
Why don’t we wake up and realize that we can write our own music, produce our own movies, paint our own paintings, write our own literature, and program our own software? We don’t need to depend on content providers to stimulate our interests.
Especially now that we have the Internet. History has taught us that great advancements in communication and education have been followed by periods of intellectual rebirth, creativity, empowerment of the individual, as well and political and social reform. It happened in the Rennaissance, and it happened in the histories of our great world empires. Perhaps history only recounts the larger trends and not the minor fluctuations. Because it seems like the political and societal response to the Internet has included a strong component striving to control and effectively stifle this progress.
In conclusion, it’s not about religion, it’s not about beating microsoft, and it’s not about youthful idealism, it’s not even really about software. It’s about our freedom to absorb, influence, and communicate culture. If culture can propagate across a global network as remarkable speeds, then our ability to affect culture should be equally remarkable. Freedom of speech is is a categorical imperative. Free trade is an economic theory. If free trade stops working in a digital age of free speech, then it is the economy that needs to be regulated, not speech.
Thanks for listening to my rant.
I think what affected the Unixes so much was the fact that many of them refused to change and adapt to emerging technology and new companies.
The second advantage was it had Linus Torvalds.”
Bell Labs had Dennis Ritchie. What’s the point?
fact was unix was controlled by novell, sco or bell and their licensing policies were bullshit and no one would share their crap and nothing was interoptable and it was all platform specific. once open group came a long it was too late.
THAT is why unix did not win. I rest my case.
Funny how the author talks about the merit of having a single way of operating for an OS, when with Linux, you have a couple of different vendors which do not share a single method of distribution or administration.
He also points out the differnet UNIX vendors only on the PC platform. Why single out x86 UNIX when it was not surely the dominant UNIX and sent no presidence?
Companies were still happy to buy 15-30k pizza box sparc and MIPS processor workstations for high end even when Windows went networking.
If that article were true then the BSDs should be more popular than they are today. They’re all about open standards and open source. But Linux has Linus Torvalds, Superman, or just the reincarnation of Jesus, you decide.
Something seems to be missing from this article about Linux. Hrmm. What do you think it might be?
Let’s see they mentioned Linux and Microsoft and BSD and Torvalds. What did they leave out…
Bring it on, Microsoft. Linux is ready for you.
Not without that license it ain’t.
@Anders. This article was about GNU/Linux systems. *BSD’s are mentioned however, as a sort of evidence that *BSD still suffers from earlier factions.
@libray. Did you read the article properly? He’s talking about LSB 3.0 and yet you cannot see? GNU/Linux is getting together (without sacrificing the choice of freedom). Besides that… have you been looking at autopackage?
/dylansmrjones
kristian AT herkild DOT dk
Companies are starting to realize this
and offer preinstalled Linux.
http://www.addonshop.com/
http://www.emperorlinux.com/
http://www.ibexpc.com/
http://www.linare.com/
http://www.linspire.com/
http://www.linuxcertified.com/
http://www.microtelpc.com/
http://www.outpost.com/
http://shoprcubed.com/
http://www.sub300.com/
http://www.systemax.com/divisions.htm
http://www.walmart.com/
http://www.xandros.com/
http://tuxmobil.org/reseller.html
http://www.us.debian.org/distrib/pre-installed
http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/index.html
http://tuxmobil.org/ (general information)
No OS
(Sabio made by Quanta, like Dell-latitudes)
http://www.avadirect.com/
http://www.asimobile.com/
http://www.powernotebooks.com/
I was a little disappointed by that powernotebooks page. I was hoping it was selling something like no-name PPC notebooks. That would have been neat, even though they would probably only have about 5 customers.
http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/
http://h10018.www1.hp.com/wwsolutions/linux/index.html
http://www.dell.com/
http://www.gamepc.com/index.asp
I don’t think that Windows beat the pants off Unix. I think that Windows beat the pants of Novell. Every place that I know that were using big Unix servers 5 to 10 years ago still are. They have added NT servers for mail and file sharing, but the Unix server are still runing databases, communications, and back end processing.
Linux is big right now, and Linux is making its way into the data center, but I don’t see it moving as fast as people seem to think it is. Many banks, government organizations, and financial instutions are still running large UNIX data centers, and are still buying machines from UNIX vendors run UNIX.
Maybe this guy is talking from more of a desktop, web hosting point of view, in which case I agree with him.
He goes on to say that Windows beat UNIX because ISV’s had to write like 6 different versions for all the versions of UNIX.
He then concludes that because of Open Source, a single leader (Linus), and the LSB that Linux will drive on and win against Windows.
[/short version]
[opinion]
While this is true to some extent, software still needs to be recompiled/repackaged for all the individual distros.
Say I have one application that I don’t change for 4 years that I want to offer to Linux users. If I package it myself for the 6-7 versions of the most popular 150 distros you can see where I would have allot of man hours.
It is only because of open source that I am instead able to release the source and have other people build the packages for me.
So I move that open source is not just a development model, it is currently only single method of software distribution that scales on the Linux we have today.
Commercial packages always seem to work fine on Windows and Solaris but not so with Linux. OSS is free like freedom but at the same time free like mandated.
While this is true to some extent, software still needs to be recompiled/repackaged for all the individual distros.
No it doesn’t. You can distribute your package statically-linked and it will install on any distro. Loki did this for their games, Codeweavers does this for Crossover Office.
Just install it in /opt and add that to the global path and you’re in business…
A workaround, but not a definitive solution. Some folks are already complaining of the high memory consumption of the big DEs… Static linking might not help “the cause”.
An unified package deployment system with a set of pristine, uncustomised libraries would be ideal, but that is probably utopic. That said, we never know.
I agree it’s not ideal, however for commercial applications it’s a pragmatic approach.
I do think that waiting for a unified package manager is utopian…
A standerd package tool I think I am going Ubuntu (sp?) soon, I am tired of .rpm & source files.
Windows is going down by its own overweight. Linux seems lighter. Linux has muscles while Windows has fat and insecurity. Linux is the worker and Windows is the intellectual. I can’t stand Windows when it breaks. I can stand Linux when it breaks. 🙂
Microsoft’s aim is to put OS on every desktop.
Mac’s aim is to put the most beautiful GUI on every desktop.
No offence but………..
What is Linux OS’s aim??? Can anyone define it in single sentence with less than 60 characters!
It can’t be “providing free working OS”? to whom? to a poor desktop prople or free to a rich server making companies??
In year 2000 linux OS was trying to mimic WIN95 desktop (redhat, debian earlier versions)
In year 2003 it was trying to be close to win98
In year 2005 LinuxOS is trying to achieve win2k performance and GUI (mepis, linspire, knoppix etc)
In year 2007 it will be close to XP
In year 2012 it will be definitely beat MS Vista
Wake up linux fellow users, this is fast moving internet age….you can’t just try to catch up with something already existing…….
In 1980, Microsoft was trying to mimick CP/M (DOS).
In 1995, Microsoft was trying to be close to Mac OS.
In 1996, Microsoft was trying to be close to Netscape.
In 2000, Microsoft was trying to get UNIX stability (Win2k).
In 2001, Microsoft was trying to be KDE (theme the operating system?)
In 2005, Microsoft was trying to mimick Firefox (tabbed browsing, pop-up blocker).
In 2006, Microsoft MIGHT catch up to OS X.4
Wake up Microsoft users, this is fast moving internet age….you can’t just try to catch up with something already existing…….
“In year 2000 [blaaaat] beat MS Vista”
“In 1980 [blaaaat] to OS X.4”
In 1980, everyone was copying from everyone.
In 1985, everyone was copying from everyone.
In 1990, everyone was copying from everyone.
In 1995, everyone was copying from everyone.
In 2000, everyone was copying from everyone.
In 2005, everyone is copying from everyone.
In 2010, everyone will be copying from everyone.
In 2015, everyone will be copying from everyone.
There, the software/operating systems world in a nutshell.
>In 1980, Microsoft was trying to mimick CP/M (DOS).
It did and beat it.
>In 1995, Microsoft was trying to be close to Mac OS.
It did and beat it.
>In 1996, Microsoft was trying to be close to Netscape.
It did and crushed it.
In 2000, Microsoft was trying to get UNIX stability (Win2k).
It did and beat it.
In 2001, Microsoft was trying to be KDE (theme the operating system?)
It did and beat it.
In 2005, Microsoft was trying to mimick Firefox (tabbed browsing, pop-up blocker).
It did and beat it – IE7.
In 2006, Microsoft MIGHT catch up to OS X.4
It did and beat it – Windows Vista.
>In 1980, Microsoft was trying to mimick CP/M (DOS).
It did and beat it.
>In 1995, Microsoft was trying to be close to Mac OS.
It did and beat it.
>In 1996, Microsoft was trying to be close to Netscape.
It did and crushed it.
In 2000, Microsoft was trying to get UNIX stability (Win2k).
It did and beat it.
In 2001, Microsoft was trying to be KDE (theme the operating system?)
It did and beat it.
In 2005, Microsoft was trying to mimick Firefox (tabbed browsing, pop-up blocker).
It did and beat it – IE7.
In 2006, Microsoft MIGHT catch up to OS X.4
It did and beat it – Windows Vista.
Microsoft not only beat em all, but they were ahead all the time. It’s funny that some retards said XP tried to mimic KDE. ROFL. KDE 4.0 might be able to mimic Win98 this time eh? Right now, I think Win95 is better than KDE.
Alot of people are plain ignorant here. The most copied company has been Microsoft. Linux (desktop) always and still and will forever try to mimic Windows. I just hope for them that one day they will at least do it good. And IE never tried to mimic Firefox but Opera.
The only OS right now that deserve some attention is OSX but I think it deserve already awy too much attention. There’s nothing impressive in OSX really.
I think alot of people here dont know **** anyway. Windows is far more than what some of you might think. Windows is a complete platform with a well done and stable (not always moving) api. It also comes with some wonderful layers like MFC and .NET that make programmer’s life way easier. Windows is also COM, DirectX, ect. Just to name a few.
Windows is a BIG bundle. And like it or not, most people still use Windows. Do you really think professionals would switch to Mono/GTK when .NET is 10 billions times better? Do you think games developers would start making games only in OpenGL for the Linux platform when they can do it better on Windows using latest DirectX having all the new bleeding edge features already buildin? Do you think your mom would stop using MSOffice for OO? Do you think I would trade VS2005 for vi, emacs? or even worst kDevelop? ARE YOU CRAZY PEOPLE.
Anyway, I think that all the attention that the last week PDC got showed to the world that Microsoft is still alive and well.
VS2005 is for wankers.
VS2005 is for wankers.
So you’re using it right?
Wow – That’s mature. I bet so many developers that use Visual Studio 2005 are just shaking their head and saying “Well, that’s it, I don’t want to be a wanker, so I’m going to use Emacs*.”
Of course, just maybe VS2005 is actually useful for writing applications that companies use.
Now I distrust Microsoft and detest Windows as much as the next Linux Zealot, but name calling and acting like people on Windows are idiots doesn’t help anyone.
On behalf of mature Linux Zealots and F/OSS developers everywhere…
Shut up.
* Insert preferred editor here.
If they’re mature, they’re not zealots.
You must be trolling. KDE4 will be about the same level as Win98? You realize that Win98 has no hardware rendering, or the other hundreds of extra usability and eyecandy features? Have you used KDE, or any other Linux DE or WM?
I think alot of people here dont know **** anyway
So this pot and this kettle met on a dark night…
Given that you must be trolling, there’s surely no point in responding to the rest of your balmy post.
you sir, are a fucking retard.
how can Linux copt a microsoft desktop, when Linux desktops have transparancy, shaders, copositing NOW when WIndows will not have it until Vista gets released in the FUTURE ???
how ?
come on dickhead, explain it.
or was this what happened in that dream you had ? you know the one, the one where you woke up touching yourself after you dreamt of sucking bill gates off
Microsoft ALWAYS are behind and ALWAYS copy the competition
In 2005, Microsoft released a 64-bit OS, without any competent apps. Linux was 64-bit in 1993, and has THOUSANDS of 64-bit Apps! Microsoft MIGHT catch up in ten to fifteen years, to where Linux was in 2000!
In 2005, Microsoft acknowledged its 305th loss in civil court, for theft of Intellectual porperty, just like the many CRIMINAL FELONY convictions. More the reason NOT to deal with a person, or corporation, with no ethics…
In 2004, and again, in 2005, Microsoft released a Server OS, that upon release, cannot serve their own office suite, and other, products!
Look at what it tells your customers and clients, when they see some intern on your floor, entering their private financial/medical data into an unsecured terminal database, wide open to the world!
Sheesh! The smart 40% of FOSS users run Debian Linux.
Linux is YOUR Operating System; and it works very well for a donation.
What is Linux OS’s aim??? Can anyone define it in single sentence with less than 60 characters!
How about: “As you wish.”?
Looking at your list, though, I don’t think you quite get it. Linux isn’t attempting to be a clone of Windows. ReactOS is.
Linux has been superior to Windows for over 1/2 of the last 14 years…but not superior to Windows for every configuration or use.
If you want to know the aims of Linux, look at the people who distribute it. You will find many different motivations and many different goals.
Like an active biosphere, the poorly adapted distributions and applications die out while the well adapted tend to get picked up. Not 100% of the time, but very frequently.
“Microsoft’s aim is to put OS on every desktop.
Mac’s aim is to put the most beautiful GUI on every desktop.
No offence but………..
What is Linux OS’s aim???”
No, Mac’s aim is not to put anything on every desktop. It is to put its desktop on hardware it, and it alone supplies, which implies putting it on around 5% of desktops.
Linux and MS have the same objective: to put as many copies as people will buy/download on the hardware of the user’s choice.
No competition, really.
Linux aim is to offer complete freedom to do what you want with the OS, and choice. Which is good, and it works great for a lot of people.
The thing is, most users dont care about that. They want a nicely packaged and pretty OS that just works for them out of the box, no tinkering.
Some Linux distros are trying to offer this, but aren’t quite there yet I think.
Microsoft’s aim is to put OS on every desktop.
Mac’s aim is to put the most beautiful GUI on every desktop.
No offence but………..
What is Linux OS’s aim???
* Microsoft’s aim is to dominate and profit by ANY means. (It doesn’t matter if its OS, application, console, etc).
* Apple’s aim is to provide hardware and software solutions. Whether its PCs or other devices like iPod.
* Linux’s aim is to provide a kernel that is flexible and free for anyone. (as in the right to view the code, etc)
* Open-source’s aim?
Technically, its split into to 2 main sub-groups…
One is OSI which accepts that open-source people need to make money, etc), while the Freedom Software Foundation believes that ALL software should be free.
In both cases, they promote the idea of any user having the choice to do whatever they want with the code.
Wake up linux fellow users, this is fast moving internet age….you can’t just try to catch up with something already existing…….
rakamaka, you have no clue on Linux or open-source.
Just run back to your Windows haven and STFU. Bill and Steve need to be fed, you money will do quite nicely.
Tests and statistics don’t mean a damn thing. Data can be skewed, variables are ever changing and infinitely different, and facts are subjective.
The real point to be made is “What do you need your system to do” If you need an MS-centric app then go with MS. If you don’t then try to use *nix.
IMHO a Windows fileserver is a waste of money because a Linux box can do the Job.
I stopped reading when I read this :
“Today, most of those companies are dead. Only two of them—Sun and SCO—are still in the Unix business.”
I know he probably meant to say the INTEL unix business, but I’m tired of this kind of poorly written drivel.
What unix companies found out pretty early on is that certainly at the time it wasn’t worth it trying to build stable intel based servers. You could do it better on power, sparc or any of the handful of other architectures available at the time. MS had nothing to do with that.
Yeah, this is the point.
If you are going to run mission critical databases with hundreds of gigabytes in size, then forget about the wintel stuff. Sun and IBM does a very good job in this area.
IBM have one of the best server hardwares, and Sun has (one of) the most advanced server operating system.
All the hype around x86 architecture is about 64 bit computing, and 3-4GHz CPUs. RISC and Sparc is not about gigahertz. Its about architecture, that can handle serveral dozens of processors, with almost a linear scalability.
And who the hell cares about 64bit on x86, if you can only put 8-12Gigs of RAM in to an Intel based server, and it is likely that you wont use more than 2-3 Terabytes of storage? 64bit is about capacity, and has nothing to do with performance.
Its true, that most of the companies don’t need this technology, but there are also a lot, who does.
Yes, I’m a unix tech person working for one of the companies mentioned above. I hate server operating systems equipped with fancy looking graphical desktop, without the option to uninstall the the desktop. Graphic is just a waste of resources for a server, if I really want to click on icons, then I use an X terminal.
Oh, I have nothing against Windows in general. I use it as a desktop OS. It is really good in that. Also very good games they have for Windows.
But if I want to do serious computing, I use serious hardware and Unix.
I dont see how. Part of besting someone or something at an activity is to not fail while doing it.
Solaris admins the world over know that rebooting and downtime are choices, not forced.
I’ve had uptime in the 1300 day range. Why did I shutdown? To move.
The real reason that Linux and Windows are doing better than unix is because they run on cheap hardware.
With networking equipment and PC’s becoming cheaper and more powerful it makes since to move from the expensive mainframes and mini computers to PC’s. Since Linux and Windows are good enough for many server tasks and cheaper they are the way to go.
But BSD beats them all!!!
iqwqwui qowujasj sadjajiijadwj adsjsakd w jdwqjdqdjjla asjajlsdasjjdqjl qjwjldjdlqdide0e0045kgrkok
asdkopkosa 93r0230909fdfkpodk sfl sdfisdfjipoklbmn
I’m planning a full series of these articles, they are about as informative and correct as this one
This is the second time recently, that they’ve put an idiotic headline. We used to get the dead tree version of work, I’m going to cancel it if we still do.
Linux is not going to “beat” Microsoft and Microsoft isn’t going to “beat” Linux.
Linux, BSD, Solaris will be there on the Unix side and Microsoft will be there for people that don’t want windows.
The microsoft restructuring is essential
They have thousands and thousands of developers who are achieving nothing much more than inventing endless new toy computer languages to play with.
Oh and some nice transparent window effects.
They need a lot less programmers with some focus on actually producing a new more secure and more efficient operating system. As for office 12, can someone answer the question why?
Like a big, fat, spoiled and grumpy octopus hiding in a dark, dirty whale dung infested corner of the ocean, the //$ beast lobs out psyop/propoganda by the day in various forms – only most people (especially pro-M$ people) don’t notice it until it’s investigated and proven.
One day you hear FUD about Mozilla, the next about Linux, then about the Linux community, then FOSS app X, Y, Z, it happens on a daily basis. Where does it all come from? You know where. Instead of innovating, the fat spoiled pig of an octopus ripples the water to fake activity and action when it’s all inaction.
//$ has a few years left with its OS until the majority of people switch to free/open solutions.
The end
This post is all my opinion
To say that Linux will beat Windows is absolutely hilarious. Which Linux-based operating system in existence do you suppose will do this? People say that users will run to Linux for refuge from big, bad Microsoft. Run to whom? The computerization of the world came in the Microsoft era. Unix was never a consumer or desktop operating system – windows started out as such and continued to make strides to support business and various server tasks.
When users migrated from Unix to Windows…uh, wait…how many people migrated from Unix?…For most people a windows machine was their first computing experience. Well, that perspective certainly does change things does it not? There is no denying that OSS is developed very well, but which company is going to take on the task of consumer computing the way that Microsoft has exceled in doing?
So wait everyone agrees that Windows won over Unix?
LOL >_<” !!
The point and discussion of this article just seems weird. It is another Linux and Windows argument.
I didn’t learn anything new from this article, plz osnews stop this stuff.
like rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic before she slips below the waves…
“Microsoft’s aim is to put OS on every desktop.
Mac’s aim is to put the most beautiful GUI on every desktop.
No offence but………..
What is Linux OS’s aim???”
Linux doesn’t aim to claim users, if Linux is useful then use it, if it’s not dont. People tell me they heard Linux is stable, virus free and secure by default, thats why people use Linux and it’s aim is to be used.
I always find that osnews after the onslaught of Vista articals, likes to find something good to say about Linux.
unix’s command line (implemented through linux, nevertheless) is far better and a lot more flexible than any windows os will ever be.
thanks.
And by that I safely assume that you’ve looked at Monad? Up til this point Windows have required either a mish mash of either JScript/String-of-command.cmd or (better yet) cygwin to do more advanced stuff on the command line but Monad is at least as good as *sh from where I look.
That coming from someone who loves cron/*sh
What ? You mean monad is portable ?
No ? So what are you talking about. You may love cron/*sh, but sure enough you have not the slightest idea why it is so powerful, which implies you don’t even know how to use it (so I wonder how come you love it). Monad does the same mistakes as csh (notice we don’t hear a lot about this shell lately, guess why), and given the track record of MS regarding security, I don’t hold my breath for Monad. But sure enough, it has nothing near the power of *sh, at least as long as it’s not portable.
Ookaze
A troll can smell another troll from a mile away…
So being the troll I am then I just have to say I smell that this is another trolling from Vaughan-Nichols. However I like reading FOSS trolls better than M$ trolls so, read on…
Linus Torvalds may be the sole owner and master of the Linux kernel (well, he owns the trademark, wrote the first versions, and is still active in development today), but I don’t see how that really helped since there are now myriad Linux distributions. I guess you could say that programs compiled for one will run on the other, but there are all those package managers, different library versions…
Not that I know exactly how fragmented UNIX derivatives were back in the day. This COULD be better, but I don’t think it’s as good as he makes out.
That, and the recent article from the Red Hat developer claiming that the LSB3 tests were flawed and badly done… I get the impression everyone’s not on the same page about how much that means.
unix is open sourced now. so ha linux. solaris IS certified unix and yes its open source. id like linux to be unix certified to proves its more interoptable and follow through on the origional goals of linux–to create a clone of unix.
oh yeah, linus torvalds only owns the trademark he does very little linux work these days so hes basicly out of the picture. he seems to be wanting to cash in on linux though by charging outrageous fees for trademark usage.
Windows won because it gaves users what they wanted and not what they needed.
eg. File permission are really importantbut can be confusing for users who refuse to learn.
MSDOS through to Windows ME, didn’t have any ‘confusing’ file permissions and had a cool GUI so users used it.
– Jesse McNelis
“”In year 2000 [blaaaat] beat MS Vista”
“In 1980 [blaaaat] to OS X.4″
In 1980, everyone was copying from everyone.”
While this is somewhat true those copied ideas ORIGINATED from SOMEWHERE….. and as usual Microsoft was there to copy.
Is is all about echonomy, not technology or user interface, or marketing (per say).
before the mid 90’s UNIX and other Mainframe systems (VAX,Prime,…) was expensive. The OS Cost Thousands of Dollars, The Hardware cost Tens of Thousands of dollars. Upgrading IT was a major expense for companies of any size. Before Windows Desktops were still religated to home games, and small buisnesses, but no real infrastructure. Then Windows NT and Windows 95 Came along. They supported multi-tasking well enough to be effective servers and they costs Hundreds of dollars vs thousand of dollars for the OS. And it ran on hardware that costs thosands of dollars vs. tens of thousands of dollars. Plus it had a wider range of hardware it could run on. So Company a can upgrade the hardware for faster speed and not get a new OS if they didn’t feel like it or even if they did the OS will still be compatible, But the company would be able to agressivly show for hardware, If you were not happy with HP you could go with Gateway or vice versa, or you could buy from an other white box maker, you were no longer stuck with hardware, so you can compare prices and make bargins with you sellers. So that is why Windows kicked the pants of UNIX early on, windows may not have been better but it has been “good enough”. Now Linux came along and started to become a serious OS in the late 90 (On a side note BSD users were thrown back when ATT sued the BSD Systems for copywrite and lead to a remake of many parts of BSD to avoid the ATT lawsuits, thus delaying FreeBSD from getting into the market, and cause people to worry about the legality of BSD). and it offered an OS that was free yes, but it wasn’t owned by any one company and it worked on even more hardware. So it allows companies to save on Hardware and Software costs. The only real downfall many still have the migration to windows fresh in their minds and all the trouble it intailed, (Many companies are still in the migration) so they are reluctant to go threw the expense again to go with Linux for a long time.
I find DOWNLOAD Windows Vista pre-Beta 2 page here: http://windows.czweb.org/show_article.php?id_article=99