Microsoft’s long-awaited launch of its Windows 2003-based Small Business Server next week is designed to cut Linux off at the knees in its SMB territory, according to company executives. On Oct. 9, the Redmond, Wash.-based company is scheduled to release two editions of Windows SBS 2003–a low-cost entry-level version and a premium edition that includes, for the first time, BizTalk Partner Edition, executives told CRN Wednesday, roughly a week before its annual partner show, Microsoft Momentum, kicks off. News.com also has a related article.
Windows Small Business Server Priced To Beat Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I’m going to buy it as soon as it’s available.
Microsoft Wednesday made available its price list to OEM and solution providers. The entry-level version is priced at $599
Hmmm, $600 vs. Free. Let me think about this for a minute …
“…designed to cut Linux off at the knees in its SMB territory…”
Is that a euphamism for “once again making it hard to interoperate with Windows”?
I can download gentoo, debian, mandrake, openbsd, freebsd, SUSE and Redhat for free. If I want support it is still cheaper than Microsoft. With Microsoft All I get is Technet (which if you ask anyone who has used it, SUCKS!!!) or someone who hardly speaks english! M$ Cheaper! My Foot!
The difference is that, for the target of SBS (50 or fewer users) $600 + familiar technology < free + new,unfamiliar software.
The people in <50 user companies often aren’t computer geeks. They are bakers, financiers, realtors, plumbers, etc. They’ve been using Windows for years and the SBS wizards get them up and running quickly.
As a consultant (and fan of OpenBSD, Linux and OS X), it will be cheaper for many of my customers to go to SBS. It may mean less money for me, but their needs are supposed to be more important.
It won’t stop me from pushing OSS solutions, but OSS isn’t a shoo-in when you look at it from the customer’s perspective.
Finally, once a monster company gets some real competition they start to slash prices down to be able to mantain its position in the market. It was about time this hapened. Hopefully microsoft will apply this philosofy to their crappy line of software and come out with better quality. MS fans should be happy about the existence of Linux and their continuing growth bacause they are going to see better prices to their aplications as a result. Hopefully the Linux people will keep improving and making their appz and desktops easier to use (from a regular user point of view, power users have bennefitted from Linux for years) as competition will make way for better and faster technology improvements.
Figa
I have to admit that SBS is a good thing, I’ve seen too many small (10-20) user offices that needed a server but balked at the cost of Win2K Server.
Anyone have a link with a comparison to the “full” Win2k3 server?
Absolutly. The ironic thing is that as linux improves and makes inroads, one of the natural consequences will be that MS will have to boost quality and cut cost and actually COMPETE. And they will do it.
They are some clever and driven people, over there in Redmond, and I don’t see them getting pushed off the top of the heap any time soon.
Steve
The difference is that, for the target of SBS (50 or fewer users) $600 + familiar technology < free + new,unfamiliar software.
In your case, perhaps. While most of my clients’ desktops run Win2k, every single server I’ve ever installed in the past two years, save one, has been running E-Smith:
http://www.e-smith.org
So, in my case, it’s $600 + unproven technology versus free + proven software
[1]
GG
——————–
[1] You should check it out! Mitel bought them a year or so ago, so the website is a bit of an adventure in “Buy this now! Or get the free, UNSUPPORTED, MIGHT-BLOW-UP-YOUR-COMPUTER-AND-STEAL-YOUR-GIRLFRIEND VERSION”. But the DLs can be found here:
http://e-smith.org/content/downloads/
I suggest you give it a try — it works like a charm even in a MicroSoft house. Just don’t tell them it’s Linux
“The difference is that, for the target of SBS (50 or fewer users) $600 + familiar technology < free + new,unfamiliar software”
For now, maybe, but hopefully not for too much longer. Familiarity and inertia will count for less and less as exposure to Linux (et al) becomes more widespread in the general population. I wonder if the horse is already out of the barn, and eventual mass transition from Microsoft to free software is already inevitable.
You know, when people say to me “Look MS is lowering it’s prices…”, I can calmly reply, “Yes, thank Linux.”
The power of competition, the power of open source.
Thats alot of server for $600 hmmm i might have to pick this up
The people in <50 user companies often aren’t computer geeks. They are bakers, financiers, realtors, plumbers, etc. They’ve been using Windows for years and the SBS wizards get them up and running quickly.
The problem is that companies of that size are likely to acquire less and less software and hardware. Instead, they lease it. Small companies get powerful broadband connections and the servers need not be in their own facilities. Servers are in huge hosted clusters running free operating systems, like FreeBSD and Linux. That is by far the easiest and cleanest solution for small business.
bringing the cost of software down and the devleopment jobs that go with it. No offense to open source people, but who gets paid for open source.. no one!. People work their butts of to develop software and hope to make money off their effort. Then along comes an open source competitor. The competition lowers the cost of the product that has a price tag—developers lose jobs or take a hit in the wallet. YEP! Thanks open source! : for making people who want to work hard and make money for their hard effort have to look for new jobs or train their H1B replacements.
Its not the up front costs that are important. Yes, Linux is $600.00 cheaper than Windows to install. However, as anyone knows its the ongoing costs that make the real difference. Like you you need one computer admin for each 10 to 12 windows computers and for every 25 to 40 Linux work stations. Oops I guess Linux is cheaper to use there too. Fact is companies that are mostly or all Linux seem to be spending much less on computing than those that go whole hog Windows.
The place were I work is going with a Unix/Linux (and a bit of Windows) solution to our computing needs. Why, – We are getting more work stations for less money and because many of those are single or limited use we are expecting that long term training costs to reduced as well. When this was added to the lower maintenance costs and I am afraid that the Two companies offering a Windows only solutions had lost to the Unix/Linux firm without even much of a battle.
In reality, I am now working in a shop that is in its last days as a Windows only shop, we are moving away from Windows because of the high cost of system maintenance. Many of the so called great Windows solutions work poorly at best. We have used several out of the box “low cost” products and have problems like – data files from one to another are barley if at all interchangeable or do not work in a server/client network. Yes, you can still find Windows support people that think all networking is pear to pear. We have 4 versions of MS Office (Office 2000, Office 2000 Premium, Office XP Small Business, Office XP standard) – and the time lost in mismatching file formats and differences of deployments have cost us thousands of dollars. Now one company wide install of OpenOffice and everyone one is working on the same exact version full version. We can update all at once. Once a small upfront retraining cost is covered, the cost will be much lower that use of MS Office.
Here is Windows real problem in trying to compete with Linux. Windows costs more to get, Costs more to use, Costs more to Maintain, and is far less flexible in the solutions it offers to business. Hay, outside of that Windows is a great product.
Didn’t you learn anything from economics 101. Yeah maybe developers will loose jobs, but new areas will be born where inhouse developers will be needed for the newer Linux systems or BSDs. Also many other people will be looking for more and more people with experience with Linux and or Unix and many new jobs will be available. New companies based on Linux will most probably arise giving way to innovations. Didn’t you know that the #1 source of jobs in the US are small companies and not big corporaitons like MS. Also, more innovations come from smaller companies too. Think outside of the mold.
Figa
Not buying it Bill.
Nuff said.
http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/mcse2.htm
Another analysis showing that Windows is better/cheaper on the desktop and on a network server.
Regardless of your opinion of M$ as a corporate entity or of their actions, this offering is (imho) a really good deal.
(btw – by day i’m a *nix admin, and i love it – on the side i do minor consulting and soho setups)
I just finished setting up win2k3/Exchange2k3 for a small business. Previously he had ms small bus for NT (can’t remember the exact rev). This was solid for over 5 years, with regular updates of course.
For whatever reason i was told to set up the above and although they work great together the overall cost for software/setup/migration etc was about $4500(cdn)
The business owner has 14 staff, all are recent pc’s running xp pro. He has all the remote admin software on his own xp desktop so that he can do whatever he needs, the integration of AD is truly excellent. I haven’t been impressed with Microsoft in years, actually i can’t remember a time when i was ever impressed – that changed last week.
My point is that this business is independant of an IT contract or staff member, he is in that grey area where his network just has to work, this does and he’s bloody happy about it.
Admin is a breeze, exchange mailbox, shared resources, click, click, drag drop. For an employer who is tech savy but does not want to learn the complexity of a cli, this is ideal. He doesn’t want to learn new OS’s or a new interface
Yes i could have gone linux but you know what – this was easier, and it’s better for the customer.
This is a truly competative product
gnu/linux/freebsd
-cheap (0$)
-no hardware upgrade required, while getting a simultaneous speed boost.. so it’s much faster then nt4/2k servers.
-i set up the print servers/queues.
-30 minute tutorial in webmin, and they have no problems creating user accounts, changing passwords etc.
it’s too freaken easy.
and i make $300 off of a couple hours work.
none of my clients servers have been hacked, been infected by mblast, lovsan or other ugly ms nastiness. stable as a rock and besides the patches, you can “set it and forget it”.
no more rebooting.
ssh in to take care of little stuff.
it’s perfect.
This is exactly what I had hoped would come of Linux – that giving customers a choice would drive down the price down below gouging levels. Once M$ is no longer a true monopoly – they would be forced to actually listen to customers, provide better support, ect. You know – the things the rest of us are forced to do every day
Choice is a good thing
Then you need the licenses for people connecting to the server.
Then you need the licenses for Exchange.
Then you need the licenses for every other thing you get for free with Linux.
And even after you get all the licenses, you still have to deal with the Microsoft imposed limit on the number of users that can connect to the server. So, once you start getting people mysteriously disappearing from the network, you have to either a) figure out how to get around the stupid limitation, or b) throw more stupid-money at the problem and buy an un-crippled version of the software.
Microsoft still doesn’t get it. People aren’t so gullible anymore, and for those who still believe the microsoft horse manure, well, you’ll never learn.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
About the article
“I’m running XP on the monster rig I use at home–a brand new Compaq mid-tower–and the OS blazes like a Corvette. I especially like the four games it comes with – Hearts, FreeCell (so addictive!), Minesweeper, and Solitaire.”
Jaja – any self respecting computer expert (even mcse) wouldn’t buy a compaq … you would build your own pc. That’s part of the fun. I had to fix more Compaq computers than anything else in my days as a pc tech. Talking about games, only 4!! every Linux distro comes with more than 20 games, and I am not talking about console games. Even
Slackware, one of the most geeky distro has more games than that with the standard installation. Who says geeks don’t like to play games. This article makes me wonder if the author knows more than just names of Linux distros. Looks like he has never touch one.
Didn’t you learn anything from economics 101. Yeah maybe developers will loose jobs
there is no maybe about it. They WILL lose their jobs. If everything is so cheap that it makes it a moot point to develop software for anything but a hobby, then software development will go the way of cheap labor and sweat shops.
but new areas will be born where inhouse developers will be needed for the newer Linux systems or BSDs.
Erm.. what if there is free software? sucks to be them.. no job worth it, sorry…. move along now.
Also many other people will be looking for more and more people with experience with Linux and or Unix and many new jobs will be available.
Ok,I’ll agree with you that you’ll have a surge of people wanting to be admins .. then flooding the already overpopulated market of admins.
New companies based on Linux will most probably arise giving way to innovations.
How are they going to make any money if they develop software that, perhaps, has a free equivalent. Again, that would make development a moot effort. Perhaps they developed a technology based on Linux or BSD. Then in comes open source and takes that away too.
Didn’t you know that the #1 source of jobs in the US are small companies and not big corporaitons like MS. Also, more innovations come from smaller companies too. Think outside of the mold.
And how many of the small software development companies are going to be left if there is an open source equivalent for what they do? It would be an uphill battle to constantly develop something that NO ONE has thought of. Once more… when the open source moves in on it then good bye profit (if it’s good enough that is).
The job of the average developer IS to think out of the mold; but if there’s no benefit in it (and most think monitarily for returns in their efforts) then what’s the point?
if no one is making money on the software and the service field is just too volatile a market to make consistant gains then what is left to do? Money makes the world turn. eventually people will want to start receiving a return for the efforts.. One wonders if open source will take a back seat in the next 5 to 10 years.
wasn’t this explained once before? something about cache hits .. I don’t recall exactly what the deal was but there was a report and explaination on it.
That price (600) is only for 5 users. The price starts growing as you add users.
“”Didn’t you learn anything from economics 101. Yeah maybe developers will loose jobs, but new areas will be born where inhouse developers will be needed for the newer Linux systems or BSDs.””
You’re likely to see more and more inhouse development consisting of gluing together various opensource libraries to produce the required solution (This comes right back to the Unix philosophy of reusable code). Since it takes less effort to reuse code than to write from scratch there is less need for inhouse developers. Ergo there will be less development jobs, not more (Might be time for me to write an article on OSS threatening depth of talent in the next generation of programmers).
“” Also many other people will be looking for more and more people with experience with Linux and or Unix and many new jobs will be available.””
Not everyone dreams of being a system admin. Besides, the same flaw exists in this comment as in the first one. Companies will switch FROM one OS TO another OS. If a company has 50 MSCE admins before the switch and replaces them with 50 Unix admins after it then NO new jobs have been created. The more likely case is that jobs will be LOST, since largescale Unix systems require less admin work (Or simply have better admins, take your pick).
“”New companies based on Linux will most probably arise giving way to innovations.””
I’d imagine small companies based on Linux will probably sprout up at around the same rate as small companies based on Windows go under. I doubt there will be any net increase in the long term.
“” Didn’t you know that the #1 source of jobs in the US are small companies and not big corporaitons like MS. Also, more innovations come from smaller companies too.””
I’ll address this by example. Consider a plant that makes cars. Now the plant itself probably doesn’t employ that many people to actually assemble the cars. However it needs mouldings, hinges, glass, designers etc that all come from smaller companies. The smaller companies are almost utterly dependant on the car company producing cars (Ain’t much use for a steering wheel on a motorcycle). In precisely the same way smaller companies producing software for Windows are almost totally dependant on the continued use of Windows on the desktop. If MS goes to the wall then a lot of small companies will go to the wall with them. Simply recoding for Linux is pointless in the majority of cases because free OSS alternatives are already being made. The exceptions to this are companies that produce highly specialised software (Eg Matlab).
“” Think outside of the mold[sic]. “”
You first :>.
***
Now that’s pretty off-topic, but it’s high time people realised that although OSS brings with it a lot of benefits there is also a downside to take into consideration. The question is not IF programmers will lose their jobs because of OSS software, it is simply a question of how many. Personally I think it’s a worthwhile tradeoff, but that’s an easy decision to make because I don’t rely on programming to earn a living. If I did I expect I’d have a different view on the subject.
I am getting so sick of this “you can’t make any money off of open source” crap. Open source does NOT equal free beer, but free speech. You can charge for open source software. I repeat: **you can charge for open source software**. Red Hat does it, Lindows does it, Apple does it, SuSE does it, etc. People *pay* for open source software. Yes, it’s often available for free download, but you know what? That’s (a) provided as a courtesy, it’s NOT mandatory, and (b) many businesses *do* pay for their open source software.
Here’s another news flash for you — a lot of software development goes into in-house products that are never “released” to the public. Why do you think Visual Basic got so popular? Because it made it easy to develop software quickly for in-house use. At this point, the comparison between proprietary and free software becomes moot, because this software *is never released to the public*!
So, Mr. “The Shoe”, I don’t know if you’re simply misguided or just trolling, but please don’t bother us anymore with your “open source is killing developer jobs” nonsense. It’s silly, misleading, and pointless.
Regards,
Jared
P. S. If open source software is ruining developers’ lives, then just exactly WHO is developing all this open source software anyway? Obviously some people enjoy programming for open source projects. Food for thought, eh?
hey guess what, 90% of programmers write software that will never be commercial avaliable, it’s mostly internal software that will only improve with open source
I highly value his opinion, he did graduate from Devry after all.
“”I am getting so sick of this “you can’t make any money off of open source” crap. Open source does NOT equal free beer, but free speech. You can charge for open source software. I repeat: **you can charge for open source software**. Red Hat does it, Lindows does it, Apple does it, SuSE does it, etc. People *pay* for open source software. Yes, it’s often available for free download, but you know what? That’s (a) provided as a courtesy, it’s NOT mandatory, and (b) many businesses *do* pay for their open source software. “”
Well the rest of us are getting sick of the “You can charge” for open source software speech.
Imagine Photoshop being GPLed. Can you honestly say that people are still going to hand over $649 for the software when they can just get the source and compile it themselves?
It’ll be interesting to see how many companies can survive only selling 1 copy of any product they create.
i’d like to meet the person who pays for every program that is on their windows pc, land of the pirates. That will put a nice big dent in your wallet.
is designed to cut Linux off at the knees in its
<p>
well… I think Linux is designed to cut M$ off at the knees …
If you’re a small business owner, you’re in a much different position than the average home-user. Small business owners were, and probably still are getting extortion letters from the BSA, which means that you either fall into line, find licenses for everything you have, or you hope that Microsoft et al don’t decide to make an example of you.
“”i’d like to meet the person who pays for every program that is on their windows pc, land of the pirates. That will put a nice big dent in your wallet. “”
Yes, and this is in an arena where users are actually expecting to pay for their software and don’t have access to the source. In what insane universe do you think their would be less piracy with freely available source code for commercial software on systems where a “What? You mean it’s not free?” attitude is prevalent?
I’ve already had the Windows piracy argument here so I’m not going through it again. Needless to say IMO, given the same access to pirated commercial software, Linux/BSD/Whatever users are just as susceptible to piracy as Windows users. It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them appear to be more respectful of IP.
“It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them appear to be more respectful of IP.”
Couldn’t agree with you more.
the software is basically all free like is mentioned earlier, its all under gpl and distributed freely in courtesy, but people still buy it to help support the programmers. windows is home of piracy because the software isn’t handed out for free, why do you think every program has a keygen/crack and there are hundreds of warez chatrooms and ftps.
1) People here seem to be under the impression that all software is the shrink-wrapped stuff you buy at CompUSA. Most software is not sold to the mass-market, but is instead done for custom solutions.
2) You can easily charge for OSS software. Imagine if Photoshop was open source. If you are a professional graphics artist, do you think you would use Photoshop without an active support contract? If you’re just a hobbyist tooling around with it, you probably would just download from the internet anyway. When you are making real money with a piece of software, you’ll pay for the added insurance of having support there when you need it.
1. MS is doing this because of competition by Linux.
2. More competition for MS means that MS will provide greater value (higher quality and/or lower prices) or lose business.
3. Linux distributors and other interested parties can continue to work to be more competitive.
4. OSS might or might not cost programming jobs in the U.S. or elsewhere — this has yet to be determined.
5. Regardless of whether OSS costs programming jobs, it’s here to stay.
6. MS having a monopoly does not increase the overall number of programming jobs in the U.S. or elsewhere.
Regards,
Mark Wilson
ya people seem to forget that linux was put together with a bunch of GNU software which was written freely so you aren’t stuck with proprietary licenses and closed source software. and then you distribute this software and charge for support.
If I develop an email program that just works better than, oh lets say, Outlook, and I decide that i’de like to have it freely available for the world to use, am I robbing someone out of a job? Should I feel guilty? Did I do something wrong? Should I go to jail?
In my opinion, the rapid development of OSS and Linux is a by-product of a monopolistic software company. It was bound to happen.
And yes you can make money from free software. Just look at what the software company 321 studios has done. they sell a software package to copy your favorite DVD’s. But if you buy the program and see what apps they’re using, THEY’RE ALL FREEWARE APPS THAT YOU CAN DOWNLOAD AND USE FOR FREE!! The only thing they’ve provided was a tutorial to guide you through the complex tasks to copy DVD’s using those free apps. Why the heck didn’t I think of that! Sigh.
Switch to SBS today! We at Microsoft garuntee you a fair deal on pricing and per-seat growth licensing. Oh and while you are at it, please ignore the cost of the 10 seat license for Symantec for NAV, the cost of the firwall solution and hardware from Symantec, and just please ignore the licenses for Office and your POS (that’s Point of Sale, not the other) system interface. Oh, ignore the price tag on Peachtree, and ADP payroll.. and and…
“Wait! That’s … over $7500 upfront! Oh, and you didn’t mention that $300 support subscription for ADP monthly updates and $400 for Peachtree and…”
Been there, paid the invoices. Microsoft would have you blind to the full cost of ownership of computing solutions on thier platform. OSS isn’t “free” always in the monetary sense, but the TCO is almost always lower if you have the capability (read here: available software) to do so. Not all businesses can benefit from OSS solutions simply because the needed software is not available. But for those that do there is often a considerable TCO savings over proprietary solutions. This assumes a level of competence for computer software and security issues. MOST small business people should really just keep paper ledgers because they DON’T have the computer knowledge to keep their confidential financial and customer information secret and safe, which takes extra effort and expense on Microsoft platforms.
I think that lowering costs is always good. First, if you’re not in the developers guild, you certainly benefit. You have more money left –your wellbeing (or company profitability) increases. Social saving is a good thing for the economy overall. Think of the railroad revolution; teamsters lost jobs but the economy significantly improved.
Of course, this kind of ‘macro’ improvements implies a redistribution of wealth –while most win, some lose. What defines how much you lose is how much you can fit back into an equally (or more) productive activity.
The IT case, with its high skills and specialization, seems to be the case where some may lose. However, I don’t think it’s the case, given the flexibility of the industry. Moreover, let’s envision a world were an open source operative system is dominant… The advantages of productivity gains of having a common, open source code will release a lot of developer power to more productive alternatives. You will be less devoted to fix security holes and improve stability of the system, and will be more devoted to coding the next-generation word processor that we people in the social sciences and humanities are craving for… (and we’ll be very happy to pay for!)
Finally, the open source infrastructure will allow smaller developer companies to flourish; proprietary code and formats impose barriers of entry to new players in the game.
“It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them appear to be more respectful of IP.”
Actually, that is erroneous. It should be “It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them more respectful of IP.”
When you don’t actually commit the crime, you are not guilty of it, whether or not you would do it if the occasion presented itself.
Any way you cut it, there is tons more piracy in the Windows world than in the Linux world, both in absolute and proportionate terms. What it would be like if things were different is irrelevant. In the real world, the “here and now”, piracy is rampant among Windows users, while Linux users are comparatively much more respectful of IP.
“i’d like to meet the person who pays for every program that is on their windows pc, land of the pirates. That will put a nice big dent in your wallet.”
Nice to meet you then. I have bought Office, the OS, etc. Unlike a lot of folks I know I even paid for Winzip and registered it, as well as mIRC. I have done the same with Linux by actually paying for my copies of RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE.
Do you buy your linux distro to support OSS or do you just grab it off the web and then complain when something just doesn’t work right for your needs?
As far back as I can remember, I never paid for software while I was using Windows. Now a year or more ago, I started to use OSS software, Linux, OpenBSD, etc. Since then I started to pay for it. Not because I had too, but because I like it so much, it gave me much more freedom. And it felt right to support them. So every time OpenBSD comes out with a new version, I order a CD set. Same with Gentoo Linux, I donated 5 times money to them.
So people thinking there’s no way to make money off OSS, you are living in a world full of lies.
“”You will be less devoted to fix security holes and improve stability of the system, and will be more devoted to coding the next-generation word processor that we people in the social sciences and humanities are craving for… (and we’ll be very happy to pay for!) “”
It just doesn’t work that way. Creativity is just as rare a commodity in computing as it is in any other field of design. There are VERY few developers out there who can come up with a new or innovative application, and they’re already doing it (And most are being paid quite handsomely to do it as well). Reducing the dogwork of day to day programming isn’t going to increase their number at all.
If houses came pre-painted and you handed every decorator some oils, canvas and brushes with instructions to start painting art then there isn’t going to be a sudden upturn in the quantity of good art produced. Perhaps some small number would discover skills they didn’t know they had, but the majority would be producing mediocre art instead of being perfectly good decorators.
That’s where the axe is going to fall here. Not on creative geniuses like Shigeru Miyamoto and not on limited programmers whose skills barely extend beyond bolting together libraries, but on the wider range of programmers who might not be too inventive, but possess the skills and experience to solve most problems presented to them. With a vast library of OSS solutions around their skills and experience start to become largely irrelevant.
Someone mentioned Visual Basic earlier as being used for inhouse software, thanks helping my argument :>. Do those companies need a C programmer, or (*shock horror*) an assembly language programmer? Nope, they’re happy with “good enough” software instead of “good” software and programming (As an art) gets dumbed down just one step further.
Given the amount of dependence VB has on MS supplied libraries it’s a valid comparison. Would the companies need to hire more or less developers if those libraries didn’t exist? Would they need developers of a higher calibre than those they have hired (Yes, I despise VB)?
The answer of course is yes in both cases (If there’s a time limit on the project). Flooding the programming world with OSS libraries that do everything from 1+1 to making breakfast will lead to precisely the same situation.
Once again I must state that I’m not a paid programmer, so a reduction in jobs in this sector is of no consequence to me. However anyone who thinks availability of OSS code is not going to lead to a reduction in the number of jobs avaiable for programmers needs to think again.
ya i infact just paid for slackware 9.1 and ive contributed to mozilla and mandrake. id contribute more if i had the money.
Wildly off-topic, but I’ll play.
“”Actually, that is erroneous. It should be “It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them more respectful of IP.”
When you don’t actually commit the crime, you are not guilty of it, whether or not you would do it if the occasion presented itself. “”
Respect is either shown or not shown. Without opportunity to show respect there exists no possibility of displaying more respect than someone who has opportunity to show disrespect. Therefore someone can only “appear” to show respect until such times as the opportunity arises to actually show respect at which point they can be said to be showing more respect than someone who is showing disrespect.
What if the PCs consumers bought came with a software bundle that included an operating system, anti-virus software, a firewall, office applications, some games, and multimedia software?
What if the majority of the bundled software came from the same company?
Consumers would defintitly think most of the software was free because it was included with the PC.
Why would a consumer buy other software when most of the software they already have was free?
How many jobs is that one company costing the world by bundling most of its software with new PCs?
Is there not a shareware market? Is there not companies selling software that is very similar to what is included with PCs? Are all those third party software companies going out of business?
What is the difference between an open source market and a market dominated by one company?
How is people losing their jobs because something better and more efficient comes up. In economics, this just means there was overpricing in the market. Or that trends are changing. E few years ago, lets say about 15 years ago, typists were very much in demand. You needed a course to be able to type well and do document preparation. Now, I know companies who basically retrenched all their typing pools, because everyone who works is given a computer and they can use their word processor. Speed is not so muc an issue anyway. Typists did bring an extra, unnecesary layer into it anyway.
I am sur a century ago, horse carriage makers began to see a drop in business as well. So if coders start being laid off, it just means the trends aare changing again.
What do they mean by “That price includes a license for up to five PCs”? Will a maximun of five people be able to access it at one time, or will you only have only a maximun of five user accounts on it?
There is no SQL either.
Why is this any better than an old copy of Windows 2000 pro and apache?
I’m not up to date on the improvements made in Windows 2003, but surely small businesses would be perfectly happy with Win2k?
I’m not trying to argue against technological advancement. My arguments are directed against those who seem to believe OSS is some all embracing panacea and nobody is going to lose out. The point here is that jobs WILL be lost, and lost as a direct result of OSS code being freely available. No matter which way people try to spin it the OSS community is going to be directly responsible for these people being unemployed.
Maybe it’s just the way things are, as humanity goes forward some people fall off the train, but I’d imagine that most people would be marginally unhappy if they got sacked from their job simply because one day someone showed up and offered to do the same job for free. I suspect the typists in your example felt the same way.
I found it hard to work with. I feel like I have more control with Linux. The MS way is to have these “wizards” or something, to take over and do everything – even stuff you may not want. And you can’t always put things back the way they were.
On the other hand, I found 2003 server to be faster than 2000.
Also, I think the idea that open source operating systems are the cause for USA tech jobs being exported is completely idiotic.
All JMHO.
This is blessing in disguise. B’Cos of linux. This Giant is actually cutting product price to match linux compitition into server place. I hope they do the same for desktop users in the near future when they feel that their desktop place is threatened.
I can download linux from redhat for fee and use in it in my business for 50 people.
For windoze I have to pay $600 to M$ with a lot of down time of reboots and bugs and security issue.
Linux just rules for me.
Linux, Apache, MySQL and Tom Cat just rules.
“”i’d like to meet the person who pays for every program that is on their windows pc, land of the pirates. That will put a nice big dent in your wallet. “”
Yes, and this is in an arena where users are actually expecting to pay for their software and don’t have access to the source. In what insane universe do you think their would be less piracy with freely available source code for commercial software on systems where a “What? You mean it’s not free?” attitude is prevalent?
The largest purchases of software is the corporate market. Always has and always will. The whole point of activation was for Microsoft to finally make some money out of the consumer, and unfortunately, they have failed.
Joe and Jane doe are you typical end users, they want everything for free and yet want a quality product and support. Sorry, these things come at a price.
If you took the corporate purchases away (including small business), the whole software business would go bankrupt overnight. The fact remains that Joe and Jave Doe don’t see it as stealing, they see it as, “borrowing software from a friend”, kinda like the neighbourhood Office 2000 CD that floats from door to door for people to install.
I’ve already had the Windows piracy argument here so I’m not going through it again. Needless to say IMO, given the same access to pirated commercial software, Linux/BSD/Whatever users are just as susceptible to piracy as Windows users. It is lack of opportunity that currently makes them appear to be more respectful of IP.
The average *BSD and Linux user, by in large, are computer literate, can programme to a certain degree and thus, realise the time and effort put into a product. Even Stallman, who is a as pro-opensource as you can get, realise that you can’t simply just steal code and pirate software. As he said, he if wants something and it isn’t opensource, he’ll make a tool that does the same thing.
Same thing goes for software piracy, just because a person can’t afford a piece of software doesn’t entitle them steal it. For example, I can’t afford Adobes CS Boxed set, so I decided I would purchase Corel Graphics Suite 11. It was cheaper and lacked some features but it did the job. Now sure, I could jump onto some P2P sharing gizmo and try to download, BUT the fact remains, I am not entitled to do that.
Err wrote:
“I’m not trying to argue against technological advancement. My arguments are directed against those who seem to believe OSS is some all embracing panacea and nobody is going to lose out. The point here is that jobs WILL be lost, and lost as a direct result of OSS code being freely available. No matter which way people try to spin it the OSS community is going to be directly responsible for these people being unemployed.”
I don’t think there is any evidence that OSS results in a net loss of programming jobs. Many OSS programmers are paid to write OSS programs or are in academia and paid to be computer programmers.
The loss of programming jobs in the U.S. has many causes. One of those causes is U.S.-based proprietary software companies hiring programmers outside the U.S.
Companies that can save money on software purchases will have more money to spend on other productive investments, including hiring more people for a variety of jobs, including in-house programming jobs.
To say that OSS causes people to be unemployed, either in programming jobs or other jobs is simply not supported by any facts.
Regards,
Mark Wilson
They don’t charge for the software. they charge for the SUPPORT ..READ S U P P O R T. that is not the same as charging for the software unless bizzaro world merged with the reality that I currently reside in.
I think the best interview so far was Scott McNealy being asked about outsourcing. If people want someone to blame, blame the over regulation in the area of employment. Some of the protection is valid and most companies are willing to accept that they have a social obligation to do good by the employee BUT when you have over the top regulation as in the case of California, then you have problems.
For exmple, this eMac, in the user manual says, “This product *MAY* contain lead”. Well duh, of course it has lead, it is friggin computer. I wonder how much money is wasted by the Californian state government spent enforcing this “warning”? This is what is causing problems.
Add the over regulation with the over valued US dollar and voila, you end up with employment costs that go through the roof. Lets weight it up, you have on one hand Joe Bloggs from the US as a programmer being paid $55,000 a year, and in Russia (for example) you have Ivan Programmerovski who can be paid $30,000 a year. Both are equally qualified. As a business, why wouldn’t you want to move your software development operations overseas? haven’t people realised yet that businesses have no patriotic obligation to be a chariety case and provide employment for the poor souls who can’t get a job?
Most IT work will end up in low wage countries eventually – just accept it and retrain for a new career.
Your TV is probably made in China and your shirt in a third world sweatshop. Your software will be made overseas soon.
India,China + Russia have education systems that produce vast numbers of scientifically literate graduates and ultra low wages (1/20th of the USA).
The reality is that quality non-specialised software will eventually be ultra cheap ($10 for a DVD full at chain stores).
As many people asked before, how much will an exta license cost, if you want more then 5 cals? I expect that these prices are compensating the low price of the 600 dollar. They did the same with 2000
With all the BSD’s out there being so powerful servermachines I can see that MS is trying to make some wise moves.
If it wasn’t for BSD’s where would we be today?
As long as BSD’s continue to be superior to many other systems and free we’ll see MS forced to make better offers…
So when someone give you their happy face about this news item, just say “Don’t thank MS, thank BSD for being the heavy competitor”
What do they mean by “That price includes a license for up to five PCs”? Will a maximun of five people be able to access it at one time, or will you only have only a maximun of five user accounts on it?
I suppose it’s the latter because it includes Exchange…
> If I develop an email program that just works better than,
> oh lets say, Outlook, and I decide that i’de like to have
> it freely available for the world to use, am I robbing
> someone out of a job? Should I feel guilty? Did I do
> something wrong? Should I go to jail?
You have every right to do what you want with your program, but when someone starts pushing others open their source, it gets very tiresome.
I know of lots of freeware programs that are not open source. The problem is that they are bombarded by people demanding that they open their source. Some have even gotten so tired of it that they just said “f**k it” and stopped developing their program (without opening source).
OSS is a choice, but don’t press other people to make the same choices
I wouldnt buy this. I wouldnt want it even for free. No thanks.
i know a lot of freeware thats really spyware. i’m not aware of any oss that’s spyware
“If I develop an email program that just works better than, oh lets say, Outlook, and I decide that I’d like to have it freely available for the world to use, am I robbing someone out of a job? Should I feel guilty? Did I do something wrong? Should I go to jail?”
I think many people in Microsoft and elsewhere do believe that giving away software is morally wrong and ought to be illegal. The reasoning is indeed that you are doing somebody out of a job.
This is the same as the belief that books should be in perpetual copyright. Everything should be owned by somebody and paid for by everyone else. Nothing should be free (health care for example should never be free).
I think these ideas come partly from Ayn Rand. From outside the US, they appear very extreme.