[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Kai Hendry wrote: > On 2007-04-13T15:43+0100 Paul Sutton wrote: > >> Just wondered if the Linux / OSS can take advantage of this >> http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5164450.stm >> > > I though this one more interesting: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6551429.stm > > One word scuppers both plans. Business. Microsoft have to realise (as in have no option) that thousands, if not millions of businesses world wide use bespoke software written for them for their original OS. Many of them still use Windows 98 for the simple reason that it does what they want, and they see no reason to change all their hardware and software and go through all the aggravation of a system upgrade just because some company in America says so. The same is true of Windows XP. All that will happen is that anyone with a support contract with Microsoft (and let's be honest who in their right mind would?) will simply obtain the support elsewhere, and Microsoft will lose that revenue. Business will *not* put an untested bugridden OS on their systems. 'They already HAVE!' I hear you cry .. 'Windows of any flavour'.. true, but at least what they have currently works. Linux I feel *can* grab this market but two things have to happen. a) Businesses have to be convinced of the support structure available for their hardware *and* software. b) Anything bespoke needs to be tried and tested with WINE, or ported across to Linux. b) involves expense and it is up to the Linux community to prove to businesses that the expense will be recouped within a reasonable time. Personally I have to say I am an old-school tech - If it works, use it, and only change it if/when it stops working. The addendum to that in this case is of course that if you prove it works better/faster/more reliably in Linux you're likely to get more converts. For example a couple of years ago I converted a piece of video from AVI - MPEG in Windows. On the same machine I then performed the same conversion, on the same file, using the same program, via WINE. Under Linux, even using WINE the conversion took a third less time. Time is money - show businesses how to save that much time and they will flock to the cause. The same argument can be used to dissuade them from Windows upgrades. Why 'upgrade' to an OS that will run slower and cost their company time and therefore money? Answer - don't! Kind regards, Julian -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html