Chad >>If Novell gets their NetWare integration with Linux smoothed out
properly, they may well reclaim much of the business networking market from
NT.
Chad >>As long as they don't get too greedy and start trying to leverage
high licensing rates out of SuSE and NetWare both, they should be okay.
I agree. When NT Server 3.51 came out, the license was for unlimited users.
Today, the Client Access Licenses (CAL) are getting pretty expensive. I was
an NT guy until MS started turning the screws. When they had to beat Novell,
they kept it cheap. I can get a SuSE server for $499 (1 yr support) or $169
(no support). So they are much cheaper than NT, but not near as easy or as
well integrated as Windows 2003 Small Business Server. Still, I see the
writing on the wall and I'm starting down that long road to converting to
Linux.
At some point, I hope someone comes out with a Linux disrto that is designed
like WinSBS - a server installation that is build around supporting Windows
clients, and provide email for Outlook, proxy server, SQL, and a shared fax.
I'm betting that's Novell's plan. If a never-used-Linux small business user
could drop it in go (no samba issues, etc) they'd really have something.
Chad >> I'm not so sure how I feel about .net extensions. I mean, really --
who cares? Aren't there better ways to produce interoperating software on
the x86 platform (and compatible architectures yet to come)?
Yes, I'm sure there are. I'd like to see .NET for one reason - MS is using
.NET to make their apps portable across all system, regardless of OS. Long
ago, there was a system called the P-Code system (UCSD). You compiled your
code to "pseudo-code", and any system (UNIX, DOS, Apple, CP/M) with a P-Code
interpreter could run the app. Great idea, but it ran too slow, so it
didn't catch on. MS .NET is the same basic idea - it compiles to a generic
machine language (CLR - Common Language Runtime), and will run on any OS
with a interpreter and .NET libraries. This is a brilliant move, in my
opinion. History has shown that every dominating OS has lost when
technology made a big enough leap. The Mac almost did that, except Apple
blew the intro. Gates learned from that. He realizes they could lose the
OS war any day. Imagine if Sony suddenly comes out with a 128 bit chip with
8GB of on-die RAM running Linux for $400. It would take Intel/AMD at least
a year or two to match it, at least as long for MS to port their apps. But
Linux guys would move much faster, and that's the danger MS has with Linux.
But with .NET, all MS has to do is port the interpreter and libraries to the
new system an all off-the-shelf .NET apps would run unchanged.
So, when Linux has .NET aboard, we will have access to all the MS apps.
That will let Linux move to the corporate desktop. It's a double-edge sword
for MS, but owning the development environment is more important for them
then owning the OS in the long run. They are willing to lose the $50 OEM OS
license to keep the $400-$800 application income. What we gain is the
option to use either MS or non-MS development tools.
Wouldn't you like to run a Sun Linux, a Sony 128, AMD 64 and any exotic
machine with Linux AND run all your Linux apps and MS apps? I'm tired of
keeping both a Linux PC and a W2K PC for PhotoShop/Adobe
Illustrator/Dreamweaver/AutoCAD/SolidWorks/MS
Office/VisualStudio/Rhino/Cakewalk/Pinnacle Studio. I'd like to be
hardware-independent and OS-independent, and that's where I think/hope this
is heading.
Sorry to be so wordy on all this.
Ken Elliott
=====================
-----Original Message-----
From: slug@nks.net [mailto:slug@nks.net] On Behalf Of Chad Perrin
Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 2:35 AM
To: slug@nks.net
Subject: Re: [SLUG] Re: Linspire aka Lindows now trying to make Apple Mad?
Ken Elliott wrote:
>
>I wish Apple would port their OS to AMD 64 and add .net extensions.
>That would really change the game. Would any of you guys buy an AMD64
>OS/X for $500?
>
>Ken Elliott
>
If I had it to spare . . . ? Hell, yes. I'm not so sure how I feel about
.net extensions. I mean, really -- who cares? Aren't there better ways to
produce interoperating software on the x86 platform (and compatible
architectures yet to come)?
RedHat seems to be going in two directions, and I have to applaud them for
that. On the one hand, they're going upscale with enterprise server
development -- something that hasn't really been seriously developed with
Linux before this -- as their main focus, and on the other they're providing
sort of a "safe zone" with moral support and all-open-source code
availability for their unofficial desktop distribution, Fedora.
The fact that I have not much liked the way they implement installation and
configuration in my past experience with RH desktop distributions doesn't
change the fact that they seem to be doing good work. As long as they keep
their commitment to supporting the concept of free (open
source) software, I wish them the best of luck, especially since their
investment in enterprise server solutions and official opposition to bandit
monopoly attempts like SCO Group is currency to buy a whole lot of
increasing attention and credibility for open source software.
If Novell gets their NetWare integration with Linux smoothed out properly,
they may well reclaim much of the business networking market from NT. Total
cost of ownership, in a properly run network, could hardly be as expensive
for a SuSE+NetWare solution as it is for a total NT (these days, probably
Server 2003 and XP Pro) solution. As long as they don't get too greedy and
start trying to leverage high licensing rates out of SuSE and NetWare both,
they should be okay. I'd hate to see SuSE get turned into some kind of
financial thumbscrew with pretty colors on it like XP, since it really does
have a lot to offer as an alternative to other distributions of Linux. If
nothing else, the YaST2 system and installer can be quite a boon for some
users, and they really seem to have a handle on automatic hardware
detection.
-- Chad Perrin----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.651 / Virus Database: 417 - Release Date: 4/5/2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:58:55 EDT