"Look, we innovate. We innovate the hell out of stuff. Just yesterday I innovated a donut by taking one off some old guy when I pushed him down a flight of stairs. And Yahoo!, well, we're innovating them right now, and we're going to keep innovating them until they stop moving. Then we'll use their bloated corpse to innovate any Google employee that gets in our way."
-- Bill Gates
(Ok, what he actually said was "640K ought to be enough for anybody" but I am paraphrasing a bit.)
Microsoft opens Windows
Software giant announces sweeping changes to improve interoperability position
The EU says, "Yeah, we've heard *that* before. We'll believe it when we see it."
And, well... I kind of see it from their point of view.
Microsoft releases list of programs that won't work with Vista SP1
Nothing too urgent, just a bunch of antivirus and firewall
Redmond Developer News:http://reddevnews.com/news/print.aspx?editorialsid=9566
*roflamo* these codeproject guys shure have funy headlines.
Windows, 2.0, or so.
I'm sure that "Microsoft Visual Ruby .NET" will be horrifyingly
I thought it was Microsoft Active Ruby .NET.
What do you all make of this?
They're following. :-)
What I mean is that they've already got position, if they have to give away the piggy bank to stay in that position, it doesn't matter, they can still sell windows and office upgrades to people.
However, for a company like Microsoft there is more to ascent/decline than just revenue. Microsoft's business model depends on being able to extend their monopoly and leverage their products and services against each other in order to lead people into the belief that they have to use them.
In case you haven't noticed, they've been botching that game for several years now. Gone are the days when Microsoft can roll out a new technology and no one would dare continue to use the competition. They've utterly failed to take over the Internet, for example, and they've proven time and time again that they just don't get it. Despite high ambitions they don't even have control of the server market. Linux and Unix are kicking their asses, especially in high end enterprise environments. .NET was supposed to extinguish Java but it ended up being nothing more than the next generation of tools for people who were already planning to build on Windows.
Take a look at Silverlight. No one wants it and they're being forced to pay out big bucks for anything that even might end up looking like it could be a highly visible deployment.
Take away their control of the industry and the monopoly eventually crumbles.
But they'll still bring in hundreds of billions from their cash cows in the interim.
It's like tires.
Goodrich and firestone just have to keep making tires. Every 20 years something thinks up something new, steel belts, run-flats, whatever, and they just have to adopt it.
And they just have to keep making tires, for there will be cars to put them on for a long long time to come.
The MS/windows platform, is just that, it's an existing platform that in some small and some large areas has become one of the options. You can go mac, you can go unix, or you can go MS.
Nobody (or few people) run mac servers, because that's not it's thing. There are probably as many people woho run linux desktop as there are people who run windows servers, it's an option, it's going to be there for a long time, and all they have to do is not stop and it will stay there.
Unix has just as much foothold in this world as windowsy stuff does.
Just like oracle. Oracle can sit on it's ass for 10 years and still be pretty sure of having large chunk of the db market. You just have to not lose.
I saw a good article about Microsoft. It said that they should buy SAP
that woul;d be funny.
That would just play into oracle's hands that much more and billy boy probably doesn't want that.
i think this is another indicator that MS focused on the 2k8 server. And this one aims at Linux in the cupboard and comercial linux solution providers. Aero didn't make it into that... but after reading one fanboy article and reading the linux mag comparison between it and 5 linux distribution, I think the chance of taking over a microsoft "owned" serverroom was never less likely.
That comparison article names "know your enimy, as sooner or later you (the reader) will have to face people wanting to push through a 2k8 box, and you should be prepared for that argument"
2k8 has a minimalistic version, in which it just needs 1G of disk, and half a gig of ram. But, it doesn't even bring powershell and remote gui in that mode. Its intended for hosting an MS-VMware box. Bare bones Linux distros bring more features with even less space. (who needs a gui after all?)
2k8 has a verry sophisticated server management facility program, where you can click through a tree view and configure server components, which is remote usable like zenworks. But, you should at least have 1280x1024 screen else it will become real small. And, hitting it with Zero knowledge and finding out how to change a specific setting isn't that fast either.
2k8 knows about 'server roles' and 'features', which you can install separately. For example IIS is a role (for which installing you need to reboot after *cough*) but... whats a feature and whats a role? and were to search first? one never knows.
And, yes, you are able to configure everything from the shell (you have to in bare bones mode) It brings the see-carpet coded shell (but not in base mode where you also don't have that admin gui, as it requires the dotnet framework to be installed)
That vmware replacement isn't ready yet, its going to be delivered in the next 18 months
The pricing is real low in the starting arena but it comes with a max-cpu bondage, 2 cores and for more you have to pay. and, you have to pay per seat of users which will bring you to around 3k$ with 50 licenses.
So, close competition, unless you know how to bash-kill their features, right?
ah... i forgot, 2k8 doesn't allow installing from remote sources, so you always need a disk inside the drive.
and, 2k8 comes with a GUI installer!