• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

[NEWS] Dvorak on How Microsoft Can Kill Linux

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Mr.Guvernment

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
i dont think this would kill linux, if so it would of happened by now. But i must say Linux really needs to work on their process for installing drives. just click and go!

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Dvorak on How Microsoft Can Kill Linux |
| from the i-miss-silicon-spin dept. |
| posted by Zonk on Friday February 25, @11:54 (Microsoft) |
| http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/25/162243 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

gewg_ writes "John C. Dvorak thinks he knows the way [0]Redmond can kill Linux. Basing his premise on the relative dearth of device drivers available for Linux (compared to what is available for Windows), he sees an opportunity for the Borg to embrace and extinguish." From the article:
"The immediate usefulness of Linux running under Windows is obvious. You can use all the Windows drivers for all the peripherals that don't run under Linux. Drivers have always been an issue with Linux as PC users have gotten spoiled with Windows driver support. Today's user wants to grab just about anything and not worry about installing it and making it work."

Discuss this story at:
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=05/02/25/162243

Links:
0. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1768170,00.asp
 
The drive problem only exists because people upgrade more than in the Microsoft world.

If a vendor made a mainstream distro that had the same base kernel versions, other vendors could produce drivers that would invariably be compatible with it and hence could be simple 1-click installs. Choosing not to change the kernel often only holds you back to Microsoft's rate of change.
 
True but that might also be why MS is so much bigger. PC scare a lot of people plan and simple. The last thing they need is having hardware that dosnt work. I am not saying its good to make a crap product. But it is also not good to make a awsome product whihc on one can use.
 
Didn't like the Article, Mr Dvorak, seems to think that people would stop making software for Linux, but people currently make free software for windows, so why would that stop making free software for linux?


Linux is not only about being an alternative to Windows, Linux is a free tool for doing nitty gritty things, for a home user who plays games, Linux is not the answer, people would not all jump to linux if it had the hardware support that Windows does, Linux does not do well with games, because no one makes game for linux, thats strike one against linux, 2 installing software, Linux, you need command line knowledge, or something like apt-get Windows click and go, Linux needs something like the MSI, which makes installing software easy.

Hardware support is becoming less and less an issue with Linux, and yet popularity is barely gaining, I know few people who do not run at least one Windows box in there home, I know I will continue to use Windows so long as it has market dominance because you can't help someone if you don't know there "language".


For MS to truly kick Linux hard, it needs to offer a cleaner more detailed installation, allowing the removal of more items during the install, but also offer more items as well if Windows installed like Linux Mandrake 10 and you were given the Option to buy Windows/Office Combos which would fully integrate as then Windows would kick the Linux people were it hurts, custom installs, with more options, and better security is what MS needs, not its own Linux version.
 
it needs to offer a cleaner more detailed installation, allowing the removal of more items during the install,

But to the joe blow - this simple, few option installs is god send, they dont have to wory about having to choose 50 million things, like 10 different options for an mp3 player, or what GUI to use, it is click and go, and once youe in windows ideally you can uninstall anything - with of course the exception of IE / MSN / outlook express - those thing u can not choose during the install and u can remove them - excetp IE after windows is installed with a ini edit.

For me yes, i love tha option in some ditro's of linux, but others there are just toooo many options of things to install it is overkill.
 
If windows had better security, less resource usage, and like deRusett said, the OPTION to have more choices for installing it (there are many programs with an Advanced options button durring install, why not have one of those that delves almost as deep as an average linux install for that GREAT customization?), then it very well could put a huge stop to linux gaining anything. Linix, with a simple distro, isn't at all hard to use IMO for the average PC-savvy guy, but that's what it is marketed for, the computer savvy...M$ is there for the super average joe blow who knows all too little about PCs and needs a number for tech support to install a new NIC card or update some drivers. Linux's "market" will remain steady unless M$ makes some drastic changes...and since it has lasted since the 60's (UNIX)...I believe it will stay.
 
Mr.Guvernment said:
But to the joe blow - this simple, few option installs is god send, they dont have to wory about having to choose 50 million things, like 10 different options for an mp3 player, or what GUI to use, it is click and go, and once youe in windows ideally you can uninstall anything - with of course the exception of IE / MSN / outlook express - those thing u can not choose during the install and u can remove them - excetp IE after windows is installed with a ini edit.

For me yes, i love tha option in some ditro's of linux, but others there are just toooo many options of things to install it is overkill.


Joe Blow is not doing the installing, BUT the people who do the set up for them like to have options, they could do the install much like MS office, Typical, Complete, Custom. it would work for Joe sixpack and Joe Overclock,


Mr Dvorak seems to think everything revolves around hardware support and sticking it to the man.
 
Interesting concept but I don't see it as being successful at killing linux or likely to happen.

Here's why:
linux started becoming successful when it had virtually NO driver support and native applications did not exist at all. The kernel was developed and then GNU apps and utilities were ported to it becoming an operating system.
Now that it DOES have a user base that enjoys the advantages Linux already has over any version of Windows, merely selling a windows driver layer would certainly not get rid of the more important linux distributions. Geez! Look at the ADVANTAGES many linux drivers have over Windows drivers:
usb/device support
NIC drivers
IDE/Chipset drivers.

The above three categories are just some of the components where I do not NEED any separate drivers for these devices to work- they are built into the kernel if configured for it.
I have used a large number of usb storage devices that needed drivers installed in Windows; in linux I just plugged them in and they worked, period. :)
NIC, IDE and chipset drivers all have the same options very often, and here is a funny thing:
I have succesfully moved linux installations from Intel to AMD systems and vice-versa with NO ill effects. Try that with Windows. ;)
Linux is just more robust and configurable, and for those who want that, the simplicity of Windows installs are nowhere near adequate compensation.

Another failure I see is that the resulting operating system would be able to support devices that don't support standards (or have standards yet) but would still rely on *nix-compatible software.
Well, in my experience the biggest single issues for people considering linux are two things: if their game will work and if MS Office will work.
The answer in both cases would the same as it is for any other distro of linux. Hardware drivers would not matter, but software compatibility would. ANd that is not the topic of discussion.

MS makes money by selling many things, operating systems and office suites being two of the biggest. Windows hardware drivers for linux would not impact that, but it would also have litte impact on some of the main factors holding linux back.
Hardware that strictly follows published industry standards actually tends to work BETTER in linux than in Windows- it is the "latest, greatest" hardware that suffers here, and much of that gets drivers released in short order, as long as it is- again- compliant to the applicable standards.

Microsoft will not succeed at killing linux easily, though they do try.....
They need to make a better, more robust, more configurable operating system than linux at a low price to do that and these things are just NOT on the list of Microsoft core competencies. ;)

They can keep linux' growth slow by making Windows easier to use and more full-featured as well as adding stability and security. The first two of those are definitely strengths of Gates and crew, the last two just aren't. They get better all the time but they are still lacking in that department.

The funny thing is that I actually like some windows versions and some things about windows; there are also things about linux that really annoy me!
But the strengths of linux are more than enough to keep Windows off of any computer I use on a regular basis.

The article is well written (spelling, punctuation, organization, etc.) but based on fallacy in my arrogant opinion.
 
Just as mac I dont think linux will ever disapear but it will stay on the back burner. Atleast for a long time. The main problam with linux as said before is just ease of use and compatibilty. A lot of programers wont put out there apps for linux because why do all that work if it will be barly used. Because of this less consumers go to linux because well not as many programmers program for Linux. Linux is gaining some ground but I dont think it will ever catch up and I dont think it will ever go away.
 
The thing to make Linux successful for normal desktop users is apps.

Hardware support is already good enough, imho. In alot of cases its better than Windows, in other cases you might have a bit of hardware that doesn't work, but a different model or brand would work fine.
 
Back