Of course, the other story that runs is that M$ is long convinced about this already and plans to dump all its OS business in favor for linux. They would stick to their office soft in order to survive. BTW, this might be the reason for M$ going sloooow on hasta la vista. They are simply playing for time. They also must have read that Forbes article: http://www.computing.co.uk/forbes/news/2142257/microsofts-midlife-crisis
Hate to be a party poop, but I don't feel that I suffer at all with Windows XP. I rarely have any kind of problem.... can't imagine how any other OS could serve my needs significantly better. And as such I view Microsoft-bashing, Linux-loving zealots as "protesting too much".
Look at Jim Allchins comments: I have worked for $soft ... you are overstimating them... They have put off - at the expense of their customers - performing the re-organization of the the last convoluted dependency pieces of the OS for several years simply due to inertia. They finally got the point where it all broke down and everyone knew they would get to this point .. they just kept procrastinating.
I'm bashing NOBODY. I'm simply sharing my personal experience. I can assure you that when XYZ$ can serve me better than unix/linux, I'll start switching yesterday.
No not really ... if it meets your needs then its fine .. its just a piece of software - dialtone basically for your application stack. My only interest in Linux versus $soft is cost plain and simple. Our analysis shows that productivitiy is basically the same on the two platforms for end users. Thus it all boils down - for us - to the total cost (ROI) and for our case $soft is more expensive.
I didn't specifically say "you", but there are those on on ET who constantly claim, in so many words, "Microsoft is crap", "change to Linux ASAP", "only dumb-asses are still using Windows", etc. Or, whenever someone asks a question about Windows, some Linuxite pipes in "well, if you used Linux you wouldn't have to ask such a question". Personally, I don't see it. And unless Equis comes up with a Linux version of MetaStock, I'll likely never change until I stop trading.... oh, I guess that's a moot point, as I'd also have stopped breathing or become totally demented. Of course if I were starting a business or had an application where I had a choice of OS and its costs were a significant consideration, I'd be foolish not to give Linux a look.
Putting cost aside, could someone elaborate why Linux is superior to M$, in terms of technology, business model, ...? You need to come up with solid arguments, simply bashing M$ isn't going to convince me.
As a sideline to the "working out the bugs" issue, Microsoft does piss me off with their hurry to bring out a a new OS. Of course, that gets us consumers ponying up our cash for new software and hardware sooner than our needs really require... like a forced obsolescence. And to rub salt into that wound, MS really brings their OSs to market before they're actually ready... that way, we all get to pay to be beta testers.
CoolTrader, That's a good question. Why don't you start elaborating why M$ is superior to Linux, in terms of technology, business model, ... ? You need to come up with solid arguments, etc. In fact I'm pulling your leg of course but my pun is legitimate. As traders, many people come together in this thread. Some run a standard package, some do rather sophisticated software development. For my part , I believe that I know what is best for me. In general, talking about business models, we all know about the perverse nature of a de facto monopoly. Look a bit around in the US & EU, even courts decided it to be true. The naive happy user, worried about having to perhaps switch and relearn a bit of OS in the future is in fact sorrowfully duped by any form of MONOPOLY, often totally unaware of it. That's why a long time ago laws were passed to curb it. These days they don't seem to work anymore. I could get into far more detail on this how vendors, suppliers are constantly coerced and threatened to keep 'unfriendly' products out of their boxies, off their shelves and left without support in order to extend the reign of some kind of technologically inferior product forced on the crowds at whatever price the market will bear. If you never have seen textbook monopoly in action, don't miss your chance. As an introduction, Madison gave you an excellent introductory reference.