Last week, when research firm Meta Group of Stamford, Conn., predicted that Microsoft would begin to support Linux by late 2004 with some of its key server products — Exchange, IIS, SQL server, and the like — reactions ranged from outrage to befuddlement. A source inside Microsoft called the report “wacky.” Analysts of all stripes debated the veracity of the findings. Even Dale Kutnick, Meta’s chief research officer, admitted that Microsoft “is pissed.” Read the article at Business 2.0.
The Microsoft/Linux Connection, Explained
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
But they won’t. The applications division will not be allowed to support linux or any other OS. It is all part of how they aim to keep their stranglehold on the market.
Who knows how long they will even bother to support Mac.
An OS needs to be completely redesigned every 15-20 years. Microsoft is long overdue.
WinNT/XP only has a heritage of 10 years. NT was conceived in 1992 wasn’t it? Sure, there’s still some legacy code in there but this is more of a ‘feature’ addition so that old software will continue to work (i.e. it’s not essential to the OS that it be there).
Not that I give much of a toss what they end up doing…i finally got my RH8 setup running sweet mate
Even if Microsoft did port their server stuff to Linux, who would run it? Considering that the last bit of *NIX experience was around 20years ago, in the form of Xenix, I don’t hold out much hope that their C++ Visual Studio dependent wizz kids on floor 53 can handle needing to learn to code the poper way, aka, sticking to the standard set by, god forbid, a openstandard body made up of competitors and non-profit groups.
Add ontop of that, if they are going to port to Linux, they would need to totally re-write to provide the same, if not better, performance as their Windows counterpart, I don’t ever see Microsoft porting their server software to linux. At the most, they’ll port them to *BSD.
Well, WinNT/XP is largely based on VMS.
http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=449…
http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=2984
http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=3025
Interesting…one would think that there haven’t been any major revelations in OS design in 10 years. I suspect that the next series of operating systems will be “aggregate”. In other words, your operating system will be the aggregate of all of your devices – PDA, Notebook, Desktop, etc. It will be a scalable architecture – a hybrid of P2P and Grid technology.
To a certain extent, that is kind of right, however, considering that Microsoft butchered it by making NT so much like DOS, it is pathetic, I see no resemblence between NT and VMS because of that.
btw, VMS was written in Bliss and Macro, not C++ and assembly, as with the case of Windows NT.
this sounds like a remark/report designed to “piss” people off and create recognition for meta. Remember there is no bad publicity and there are lots of people that will pay for a well-defined dissenting opinion.
Strange that any people around me who use to work with VMS like Windows NT internals because it has the same architecture as VMS …
And saying NT took root in VMS is far from being a bad thing.
In light of the report. One does have to ask Mono’s role in the big picture? Just might be Microsofts way of relieving that “pressure”.
Quote:
> admitted that Microsoft “is pissed.”
and just where did this come from. It’s not in the article.
Did you just make it up?
Is push “innovations” one the desktop (new stuff in Office or other MS business apps to come) that require MS on the back end.
These “innovations” would have to be damn good and original and unavailable elsewhere for this to work.
I don’t think it will work because fundamentally, MS sucks at innovation. It’s not their business model, never has been, and it’s going to be hard to transform the company in this way. They stole the old IBM business model (as applied to PCs) while IBM was asleep. That’s all that happened. If they have to innovate, it’s going to be a massive corporate version of “the emperor has no clothes.”
check out this link: http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/biztech/12/17/microsoft.year.ap/index….
Talks about how pretty much all IT companies are suffering and microsoft is having a banner year. Reporting great sales and profits. Not a chance microsoft will come out with Linux software. Maybe a .Net runtime for linux, but not a chance of porting server software.
Just think…would you rather use Apache, or IIS. That’s a no brainer! Microsoft would lose money in all aspects if this was attempted. Microsoft isnt the richest company in the world for nothing.
Skipping from a younger design to a older design? Well, Be guys said that statment from a idealistic viewpoint, not the business viewpoint. No wonder they died :-). But NT-based Windows is a little over a decade old. Not yet 20 years old.
Actually, it is largely influenced by VMS. It has not VMS code, therefore it is not based on VMS. It is like saying OpenBeOS or B.E.OS being based on BeOS.
Actually, Matthew, its similarities with DOS and DOS-based Windows goes only to the extend of the user interface (even the command prompt, not limited to the GUI) and the application API, Win32/Win16. That’s about it. The rest of the similarities are quite small actually.
Why Microsoft “butchered” NT? Money, Matthew, money. Nobody would run something that doesn’t run their apps, now would they?