"Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message
news:YeA0k.6202$Ri.533@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...

> Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
> popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
> What do you want your computer to do? Microsoft's OS does it. Who uses
> Microsoft's OS? Everyone. Corporations and businesses alike.
> Can't you get that through your head?

You must be a newbie to the business. This is just history repeating
itself.

Times have changed before. Microsoft, unless it changes it's ways will be
the next Novell. BTW, Novell does sell Linux SUSE and would not doubt
NetWare, but is far behind RHT. In the desktop, I wouldn't doubt Ubuntu has
eclipsed SUSE.

Lets list some tech companies that have seen better days, or specifically
major chunck of their business activitied evaporated in market share
ownership, many which were heavy into workstations:

Digital
Compaq
Sperry/UNIVAC
Novell
NorTel
Bell Labs
BaaN
IBM (PC, mainframes and workstations, they evolved to services)
Amdahl
Wyse
Tandy/Radio Shack
Apple (as in II and IIe but recovering)
Commodore (PET, C64)
Data General
Motorola (MC6802 or MC6809 anyone?)
Zilog
Zerox/PARC
SCO (Yep)
(more that I have missed for sure)

Even Linux has road kill. Survival of the fitest.

Now I am not saying Microsoft is going out of business. I am saying it's
price elasticity is shot to hell, innovation has peeked, and market share in
the total market is shrinking. Linux chewing away at the bottom, and Apple
chewing away at the top represents a major problem to future business growth
of Microsoft. Market maturization, commoditization and saturation too.

With Vista, there is a market brand damage and the Microsoft can do no wrong
attitude is under more pressure than ever before. This is likley going to
accelerate.

I will predict Q3 and more so Q4 financial reports this year is not going to
be nice for MSFT as it has to spin a new marketing model to grow. Which is
what the purchase of Yahoo was all about. Bill and Steve know their market
predicament and MSFT futures or they would have made such an offer. MSNBC
is another. MSFT is a 2 trick pony, MS-Windows and MS-Office.

Both which can now be economically replaced with FLOSS.


> "Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
> news:85v0k.179962$rd2.36576@pd7urf3no...
>>
>> "Billy Smith" <chungkingchungking******.com> wrote in message
>> news:y7qdnXLyX-hJmt_VnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>>
>>> "Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4841F669.4020705@biteme.com...
>>>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> How do you explain this?
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Top500_OS.png
>>>
>>> What it says to me is that your corporate and university level people
>>> working with supercomputers are going to Linux versus Unix or in the
>>> case of Microsoft they aren't going to use it. Thats doesn't mean that
>>> Microsoft makes a bad product for the general consumer market. Linux
>>> does have its use and one of its uses is that it tends to be rather fast
>>> for an operating system. However, if you consider speed anything you
>>> should use Linux. Yet when you use a wide variety of PC appplications,
>>> you will find that they aren't usable in Linux format. You can partition
>>> your drive to use both Microsoft based stuff and Linux or you can stick
>>> with what you know.
>>> For most people, they are not going to use Linux because A: There is no
>>> need for using it and B: They don't have the capability to babysit Linux
>>> based systems. The average computer science grad or expert in the
>>> computer field very well might get some usage out of it. For most
>>> people, they are content in using Microsoft Office or whatever works for
>>> plug and play applications.
>>>
>>> Theyr'e not going to waste their time formatting their hard drive to run
>>> a program and system that while being faster doesn't have the applicable
>>> uses that a Microsoft system has. The Microsoft systems have that
>>> advantage because you can put in any XP or Vista or 98 based software of
>>> which I have at least one in each operating system. You can put in any
>>> program that is made for that system and use it. That cannot be said for
>>> converting your system to Linux no matter how much faster it may be. Its
>>> not really worth the time for most people
>>>
>>> If you want to put Linux and make it customizable to your system that
>>> works for those applications then go for it.. For the general computer
>>> user that exists in the general public, then most people go for
>>> Microsoft. They're not going to use Linux and I would venture than
>>> Microsoft is much more recognizable than what Linux has been or probably
>>> will ever be.
>>>
>>> Linux is still at the infancy state of the computer realm. Its not going
>>> to catch on all that much for the hundreds of millions of computer
>>> users.
>>>
>>> Thats why Mac will never be a viable competitor to Microsoft. They're
>>> still stuck in the proprietary and infant stage. Just like the Iphone. I
>>> would have actually been interested in getting an Iphone but when I have
>>> to use ATT for service, they can forget it. I used to have Cingular and
>>> it was a joke for phone service but also their customer service section
>>> was incompetent at best. I can actually pay my bill through Verizon and
>>> know what I actually owe. Nice concept isnt it.
>>>
>>> Macs will never become more than fancy overpriced boxes for graphics
>>> users, game players, etc. You never see that many Macs ever used for
>>> servers, internet commerce, etc. Thats why you can go to the Apple store
>>> here in Louisville and find out that a Mac will cost you 1500 to 2000
>>> dollars when a basic Vista/XP computer will net you half those amounts.
>>> When Apple learns to market their computers and systems correctly and
>>> produce something worth really having, then they will take off. Until
>>> then, they don't have a prayer competition wise.
>>
>> If you mean is Linux finished growing up and fully mature? Heck no, it
>> has only begun. I suspect it will be evolving well past my lifetime.
>>
>> Linux is vastly superior to Vista in most ways, you bet. I place it just
>> on the heals of XP right now but ahead of Vista. I will grant, XP is
>> quite mature, but stagnant. Where as Linux is still, and will always
>> perpetually evolve.
>>
>> The Linux maturity is going to be evolutionary and not the dump
>> everything change now you see with Microsoft products. Where as
>> Microsoft has a grand-batch mentality. The later can't get continuous
>> improvement, can't evolve. Take Vista, is now in maintenance mode. Its
>> active development has ceased! Understand that. They all moved on to
>> Win 7 for the next disruption.
>>
>> Mind you, Vista is a bad batch of soup, the best place is the garborator.
>>
>
>