[MLUG] Microsoft, Linux, UNIX and innovation

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:

> I think that the statements "they innovate" and "they write their own 
> software" are completely different statements.  I do believe that 
> Microsoft do write a lot of their own software.

Right.  They edit code from others, but they write some things from 
scratch based on other people's ideas.  They might have some original 
ideas that are worthwhile, but I am not sure what they are.


> On the subject of Microdoft in general - I happened to watch an 
> advertisment for Dell, an ad that was clearly aimed at the business 
> consumer.  As part of their message on how cutting edge their technology 
> was, they talked about how it could use Linux.  It shocks me how Linux, 
> which is based upon the decades old Unix, could still be the choice of 
> big business when they want reliability.  I guess that Microsoft's abuse 
> of their monopoly power really has harmed consumers, because by now 
> their should be operating systems on the market that clearly outshine 
> any derivative of Unix.  But sadly, that seems not to be the case.

I agree that things would have been better if a single megacorporation 
hadn't been so dominant in the industry.  On the other hand, how much more 
reliable can Linux/UNIX be?  My Solaris box (UNIX) has been running for 
five years with reboots only due to power outages.  So the uptime seems to 
be 100% if we disregard power failures.  I've been running a Linux box for 
more than two years with almost the same results, but it has been rebooted 
(once, I think) for a kernel upgrade.  If reliability is at nearly 100%, 
there isn't much incentive to improve reliability and R&D will focus on 
other problems.

The operating system is a very tricky kind of software to deal with.  I am 
very hesitant to switch to a different operating system if it is 
proprietary, forces me to use certain hardware and has limitations in 
terms of what software I can run.  Proprietary OS's are very unappealing. 
Linux is one of the few free OSs that can do a lot for me.  It's no wonder 
there isn't a lot of competition.  Think of how difficult it would be to 
develop an OS that will be preferable to Linux.  The GNU people have been 
working on Hurd for a long time but I doubt that many people will prefer 
Hurd to Linux today.  Maybe someday.  Maybe.  It will depend on how much 
Hurd developers are willing to work unpaid.

Mike

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members