Daniel Fowler9 said:Alright, looks like the consensus is that the document is fake—that it was either written by Microsoft or I'm some kind of Microsoft plant. Fine.
But it's funny how neither Larry Castillo66 nor sick-boy chimed in here. Larry, you think the doc is bogus too? Not reflecting reality? And what about you, sick?
Don't forget, that same document confirms the growth of Linux (mostly at the expense of Unix). Why did nobody question that part, but everyone jumped on the .NET and Microsoft stuff???
Daniel Fowler9🙄
I didn't even read it. I haven't had the time, and frankly, I couldn't care less about the market share ratio between .NET and J2EE, or Unix versus Windows. Especially now, since my semester starts tomorrow. I'm actually teaching Data Structures using C and C++ this term, which I'm stoked about because it's exactly the kind of course I wanted to lead. One thing I am absolutely certain of, though: Linux is going to dominate everything from PDAs to supercomputers. I say that based on my own hands-on experience with different OS environments and seeing how fast Linux is catching up in quality. Look, Windows isn't terrible for home or office use (you know, for secretaries typing up stuff in Word). But for heavy-duty business needs, Unix-like systems are a much better bet. Linux has basically grabbed the best of both worlds—stability and usability—and established itself as a universal player. It’s already happening. PDAs run on Linux, and so will that 130,000-processor supercomputer IBM is building. I'm a huge Linux fan. The absolute worst-case scenario is a monopoly. Right now, unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't have any real competition in the desktop space when it comes to profits. Personally, I'll always go with AMD. If AMD manages to outsell Intel, maybe then I'll consider buying Intel. That's my small way of trying to keep competition alive. Without competition, everything goes south. When it comes to operating systems, we're already heading toward a disaster, and Linux is our only ticket back. Linux can, and will, provide a balance similar to how AMD acts as an antithesis to Intel. Still, the current state is frustrating, much like the stupid two-party system we have in the US. We really need more options—maybe ten different operating systems that are all equally successful. You can already see the positive effects of Linux's popularity hitting Windows. Microsoft realized Linux is a threat and started baking features into Windows that have been standard on Unix for ages. So, Windows users should actually cheer for Linux's progress; they'll benefit from it. Competition is good. Without it, we get crappy products at inflated prices. For serious business or scientific computing, Windows just doesn't belong. Mention "Windows clusters" and people will laugh in your face. Some people have actually tried to build them, but I honestly doubt they were done for any real purpose other than a "can we do this?" experiment. But hey, if companies want to try, let them. I'm just saying. Now, is the data in that document accurate? Who knows. I'm not an expert on market stats. I don't mind if .NET takes a big slice of the pie, provided projects can migrate to other platforms easily. If everything stays locked to Windows, it smells like a monopoly again. Even Microsoft knows .NET won't stand a chance if it isn't implemented on other platforms. That's why they're being so accommodating with standards and open implementations. They're chasing what Sun did with Java. Microsoft tried to steal Java from Sun, failed, and then pivoted to .NET. I look at all this from a user perspective. I don't care which corporation wins; I just want healthy, honest competition so I get quality at a fair price. Microsoft makes insane amounts of money. Honestly, they could probably run their entire operation on half that. They need strong competitors to force them to be reasonable with customers. I read that they're even discounting Windows in Germany just to compete with the Linux shift there. It bugs me that big tech companies aren't eager to write commercial software for Linux—the mass-market stuff. That's the one thing missing. They don't write it because they think they won't make money, but the lack of software isn't why they aren't making money. You get the idea. I own a few Microsoft licenses, but I promised myself I'm never buying anything from them again because of how they treat the competition. Imagine a one-party system where the ruling party stays in power through dirty tactics. Sounds awful, right? Even our two-party system irritates me, let alone a one-party one. If Microsoft grabs the majority of the server market too, it'll be a nightmare. Microsoft everywhere. I'd rather go back to the days of the Soviet Union. Again, I haven't read the doc, so I have no clue if it's factual or not. This isn't really my thing. I care about algorithms and graph theory.>>23>>😁 Besides, I’m a Linux guy through and through. So whatever happens, happens.