where is it going 8

[georgebitar]

Microsoft's technical guru Nathan Myhrvold has predicted that its Windows operating system will almost be consigned to history within five years.



Nathan Myhrvold talking on Radio 4's In Business
Windows is installed on more than 90% of the world's personal computers. Its dominant position has led to the US Justice Department's anti-monopoly case, accusing Microsoft of using the operating system to gain a similar stranglehold on the Internet.

But the company's chief technology officer told BBC Radio 4's In Business programme that every five years there is a major revolution in the computer business.

"It's virtually certain Windows will be superseded by something else within the next five years," he said.

"In fact, something may already exist, so today the seeds of the next contender to Windows - maybe its Linux, maybe it's Netscape Navigator, they've had a plan to turn that into an operating system, maybe it's the Java operating system. The seeds of the next revolution may be there now.

"Historically we know that many more seeds are planted than sprout into a successor but sometime in the next five years the successor to Windows will come about. We, of course, at Microsoft, hope that we're behind that. But if we don't work very hard, someone else will be."



Thanks,
George Bitar

 

[Grenage]

Imagine a shop.

Hello Sir, would you like Windows Vista or Linux on your new pc?

What's the difference?

Not much, but you're probably used to Windows. Vista will require 10 times the power to do what Linux and Windows XP does, but you won't have to waste time re-learning an interface.

I'm confused. I'll take a Mac, they look pretty.


----
In Linux's defence, drivers are pretty good these days. Especially since most manufacturers now give out Linux drivers as well as Windows. It's also not surprising that you can't run windows applications on it, it's not windows....

You can, however, pretty much guarantee that there will be alternative, similar software available.

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[philhege]

You can, however, pretty much guarantee that there will be alternative, similar software available

OK. Give me the Linux version of Biztalk. While you're at it, can I have the Linux version of Sharepoint, you know, the one that performs seamlessly with, well, OpenOffice?

I could really, really use the penguin version of Reporting Services, too.

;^)

Phil Hegedusich
Senior Programmer/Analyst
IIMAK

http://www.iimak.com

-----------
Not NULL-terminated yet.

 

[Grenage]

What, not that pap! I never saw those MS servers as being essential in any way. Let us talk of 'real' programs! /grin

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[Sympology]

I'm confused. I'll take a Mac, they look pretty

And they come with come with a free mocha and a years supply of air kisses. Ideal for those Blue Sky days when you need to think out of the box darling.


Hee hee.

Lets face it, use want you want to use. If you get get wound up over wich OS is best, leave the darkened bedroom, there's a world out there.

Windows is here to stay, Linux is here to stay, as is Mac OS (what ever they decide to call it), UNIX in all its various forms and the new Fantastic OS called "Pirate" (TM).
I've just decided to "write" an OS, it will nick all the best bit's of other os's, be full of hype, will be free, not easy to use and will be written by every one else. Watch this Space.
Here's is the first bit:

10 Print "I'm A Pirate"
20 Goto 10.

Ok if eveyone else can do the rest, I'll take the credit.

Cheers.

Sorry waffling on but i see the beginnings of another my OS is better than your OS coming along and they are sooo 2006.

Stu..

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[Grenage]

Etcha Sketch is the future, Stu.

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[philhege]

OK, Grenage. In deference to your bias, I'll rephrase:

What's the Linux version of a messaging and document interchange system that handles EDI and business workflows?

What Linux package provides enterprise portal functions and document collaboration in concert with the Open Office suite?

What Linux application allows for the design, deployment, and management of publication-quality data reports?

BTW my "pap" manages eight figures of revenue per annum, TYVM.

We're not anti-Linux; far from it. What else would you use to run VMWare Enterprise? ;^) I'm just curious to know what other heavy-hitting business solutions are built on the kernel. I might load up a VM or two and try 'em out!

 

[Grenage]

Apologies if you didn't read the sarcasm in my earlier reply to your post. I should probably have thrown a wink in.

I am aware that there are no real direct replacements for such services mentioned. I personally believe it's all logistics, and that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[pmonett]

As far as DRM is concerned, can we all get over that "it's Hollywood" thing ?

Do you really think Microsoft "bent over" and "accepted" Hollywood's will ? Microsoft has proven capable of basically ignoring the DoJ and the European Commission, I don't see Hollywood as being more important.

And if you think it's for the money, well gaming is a market that is becoming more important than cinema, and Microsoft has a balance sheet that is quite heavier than any cinema company. Proof is in the numbers, right ? As of today, Microsoft is worth $240 billion. Warner (only one I could find) is worth less than $110 billion.

I think MS included DRM because it suited Ballmer, not because Hollywood wanted it. And for that, I will hold off of Vista until the water is over my head.

Maybe by that time gaming will finally be on Linux. I hope so.




I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[infinitelo]

This post is looking familliar, very similar to the ones i read when win xp came out. New hardware at the time could barely handle the new os, linux was revolutionary. Many predictions were floating around that windows was done. Microsoft had the only offerings for "out of the box" business apps. A couple of differances: The gamers now have another option the console with a harddrive, as soon as they put in a keyboard and a web browser (for cheats, chats, and hacks) gamers may move to consoles. Console technology is much more directed to what the gamers need. lower cost, fast i/o, ruggedness. As far as business apps, linux has a strong foothold on the server side, it will only make since for it to start moving into packaged business apps over the next five years. I wouldnt run out and sell my microsoft shares quite yet, they have a console, and moore's law is still in effect (although running just a little behind)

The only way to create fair competition in the OS market it to make laws against selling software bundeled with hardware. That was true when dos came out, it is true today.

(p.s. same with cars, if you had to buy the engine seperatly you would have a more diverse choice than you do today)

if it is to be it's up to me

 

[Sympology]

(p.s. same with cars, if you had to buy the engine seperatly you would have a more diverse choice than you do today)

They are called kit cars. But most people like over priced, mass produce tub o'lards....Now is that windows or cars...lol

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[pmonett]

Consoles are restricted to certain forms of gaming. They do racing best, MMORPGS fine, FPS not always so good, and RTS horribly.

Now I'm not saying that console games look bad, I'm just saying that certain styles of gaming are not well-suited to the absence of keyboard+mouse.

Of course, stick KBD+mouse on a console and these issues should disappear - except that console games are necessarily developed for the basic console interface (a joypad of some kind).

A typical example in my mind is Unreal 2. It was touted as the summit of graphical excellence, and indeed my top-of-line (at the time) PC was hard put to keep up with its visual treats (a few patches later things went a lot better though). It did look nice, but the thing that destroyed the interest for me was when I discovered that enemy monsters "spawned" from thin air in predetermined places and at times that were set to the player character crossing a certain line.
In other words, you could fight your way up a staircase, get to a corridor, watch the staircase fall away due to damage, clear the corridor of enemies and then, when you step up to the only door at the end of the corridor, suddenly you are attacked from behind.
Compare and contrast with the king of FPS storymakers : Half Life (the original, mind you, the one from November 1998). In that game (only ever came out on PC), you would proceed area by area. Each time you came up to a new area, all the entities of that area would load at the same time, then go about their business until you showed up. You could wait for hours before moving (sometimes ;-)), they had their own stuff to do.

What is the difference ? In Half-Life, you could try different methods and see how they worked. You could charge in, guns blazing, and find out how far you got. Or you could check out the area, try and take down the enemy one by one. Sometimes you could even avoid fighting entirely, with a bit of observation. Whereas, in Unreal 2, it doesn't matter whether you go carefully or fast. All you need to do is cross that invisible, undetectable tripwire, to trigger the next wave of enemies from predetermined positions. No planning, no strategy, no thought required, only reflexes.
Unreal 2 is a game from 2003, for PC and Xbox (in 2004). Half-Life, although five years older, is to me a far superior game - but only came out on PC (yeah, XBox wasn't there at the time).

I do not believe that Unreal 2 was designed to be inferior. Five years later, with much more powerful hardware on the market, that seems unlikely. However, Unreal 2 was, from the start, designed to be ported to the XBox, and that is, in my eye, what sealed its fate.

Today the situation is different. Consoles are more powerful and somewhat more flexible (with hard discs, Internet connections and USB connectors), so I expect future console titles to be more like PC games in the coming years.

But for the moment, I don't think there's any chance to see Supreme Commander on the 360. Hardcore FPS and RTS titles are for PCs and will remain so for a good while yet.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[Sympology]

Another way at looking at the situation is "Windows" may not be around in 5 - 10 years,but it's successor will be.

I think that, shock horror, Windows may actually get less bloated. Why? The push is more and more online content. There is already talk of Office online, Photoshop is going online and many many apps are moving this way, so the OS may just become a Driver, processor, memory and storage controller with all the hosting performed offline. Apps loaded down and then run. Media player, for example may be lightweight and only download what it needs for that particlular file.

Welcome to the digital divide.
Those with good broadband connections and those without.

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[Opieo]

@Stu's latest.
Kind of sad about the whole internet dependency.

@pmoney (hehehe)

Supreme Commander looks like its going to be sweet.
So large and full dual screen support, brilliant!

~
Give a man some fire, he will be warm for a day, Set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life.

 

[AlexCuse]

I'll be happy to contribute to this bold new OS

10 Print "I'm A Pirate"
20 Print "That's why I can't use windows"
30 Print "Now I'm off to listen to my mp3's"
40 Goto 10.

Ignorance of certain subjects is a great part of wisdom

 

[Sympology]

Well, I have downloaded Linux Umbongo (or something) and will try it. My last hands on Linux experience was about 2 years ago and was horrendous, ended up reformatting drives etc. Hated every second of it. So no here I go.
However that said, I found my first issue, bearing in mind I've worked with pc's for about 10 years.
First up I typed in "Best Linux to use" in Google and ofund a site that helped me decide, it recommended Ubuntu? and kunbutu and a coupl of others. So I looked at the products.

Here's linux downfall no 1.
I'm expected to know the difference between KDE,Gnome and god knows what else. No very helpful to start with, although unbuntu's website was very good and a bit of trawling helped. I looked at another package knopix? And was put of in seconds. On the install page was things such as
Q: It won't install.
A: make sure it is set to /etc/whatthe/areyou/onabout.

Not very friendly. The people going on about if xyz driver doesn't work, try compiling you own. Yeah right, bedroom door, life outside of.

Now I'm not deliberatly being Anti Linux, but if it want's mass appeal, you need it to appeal to the masses. Ubuntu website was very good, but I can't say the same for many others, they were poorly laid out, very techie and overbearing.
Also the choice is bewildering, choice can be great, but not if you don't have a clue, it will turn people of (a risk MS have with Vista)
I haven't tried the software yet as it took all night to download, but first impressions count, hence I chose Ubuntu, as it seemed far more polished than the others I looked at.
MS have a slick marketing package, user friendly interfaces and a (fairly) simple to understand guide to product. Linux site could learn a lot from this as you seem to need to know what you want before looking.
I do hope my Linux experience is much better than last time (trying Live Cd's) as I can't be bothered to shell out for a new pc, just to run an OS.


Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[Opieo]

I have usually seen Knopix as a live cd form.
We (my peers and I) mainly used it in diagnosing computers and virus scanning and such.
Kind of like a Windows boot CD but had many more features.
Do not recall which version it was that was so shiny.
But my friend probably still has a copy of the CD.

My roommate dual boots windows with Ubuntu.
He loves it and I have never had a problem using his computer.
It is very similar with ease of use to Windows.
Then again, I have never messed with his computer's drivers, nor installed the OS. I have only played around with it some when I needed a file he had or something (with his permission =P)

~
Give a man some fire, he will be warm for a day, Set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life.

 

[Sympology]

OK fired up Unbunto last night all seemed well, nice clean startup, but... No info, it just sat there a while with a progress bar moving. Was it loading, stalled or just taking a while? Little bit of info would of been nice (remember I'm trying to see this as a newish person top pcs') I had the sense to look at the drive lights and spot activities. That said I know it would be much quicker once installed so, I'm not that concerend.
The I was in and presented with a colourful dsktop, nice clean, although the icons REALLY reminded me of my Atari Falcon from 10 yrs ago. That said it was clean and looked fairly simple, I actually liked it.
1 snag, I went into network setting and I seemed to have 2 wireless devices and no LAN devices. Somethigs not right.
The language used in the Wireless setting were not that firendly either. It asked for either an ASCI or hexidecimal password. Sorry, but average Joe is not going to know what the heck that is.
However one positive, my MultiCard reader is fantastic in Linux, it recognised each slot, e.g SD card, MMC card, CF etc, windows just says Drive F,G,H etc, so full marks there.

Maybe I should leave this thread and start a blog or something, but from what I've seen so far, Linux has improved, but it still needs to lose some "techie" elements. I'll keep at it and try other versions and hopefully find one I like.
Oh and on shut down i ejected the CD. Ooops....
Stu..

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[Opieo]

Stu, I believe that would be great.
I also believe pointing out a said blog to the Ubuntu development team (not sure whether it is any company or just a group of users) would be cool too.
I need to check out if they have a suggestions for next version place already on their website.
However, I am at work and do not wish to spend a few hours surfing a Linux OS flavor website. I know I would spend too long there.
Back to programming I go.

~
Give a man some fire, he will be warm for a day, Set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life.

 

[kHz]

I am a Unix admin and the reasons cited by many who believe Linux is going to save the world are superfluous.

Why am I moving to Linux

1. Great cost model
2. I can do anything I want with it from modifying the kernel to pushing out terminal services without worrying about licensing costs.
3. Performance. Yes, I have managed to do something very stupid and crash my Linux boxes. With windows I don't have to do anything. Windows has gotten better but still are not as solid as Linux.
5. Applications. I can get almost anything I want or need at little or no cost.
8. Samba. Play nice and share.

1. The cost model of RHEL isn't cheap. Since Sun changed their pricing model, Solaris is probably less expensive than RHEL.
Linux isn't free and businesses need to have a vendor to call.
2. I have never needed to modify the Kernel on AIX or Solaris for business purposes. So why is it touted as a plus for Linux in a business environment?
3. It depends on what you are doing. Most people install an OS call it good. They are unaware of the intricacies of each OS. If you tweak AIX or Solaris on their vendor hardware, Linux isn't going to give you much more, if any performance increase.
5. In a business setting, most applications are vendor provided and they offer them on HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, Linux.
8. Samba runs on any Unix.

 

[dilettante]

In a way it's sort of a sad situation. The "world" seems to break down pretty simply now for desktop and server OSs:
[ul][li]Windows[/li]
[li]*nix
[ul][li]"Real" Unix[/li]
[li]Linux[/li][/ul][/li]
[li]Legacy mini/mainframe OSs[/li][/ul]
I don't mean to ignore other things out there like academic or other "fringe" OSs. They really don't have general applicability though, at least right now.

And yes, there are several embedded OSs and such. But again, generally:

Where is all of the innovation? Sometimes I think we'll have to wait for interstellar visitors before we move out of this rut.