[ncolug] Re: Minix3
- From: "Larry D" <larry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 09:27:23 -0500 (EST)
> One of
> Microsoft's great feats has been its ability to adapt, to go with the
> trends
Nothing could be further from the truth. Microsoft has only ever caved in
to "trends" whenever it had no other choices. Examples: proprietary
formats for Office documents (that persist today,) their own format even
for email - where there is a clear standard that they just choose to
ignore, and there isn't even any advantage to it, it's just plain stupid.
They ignored the existence of the Internet until it was almost too late!
> and consequently Microsoft's *desires* for Longhorn are more to
> being an Oracle than a Linux.
There is no longhorn, it's called "Vista" now, and it is mainly modeled
after MacOS, as most of their operating systems have been in the past. It
is not a database.
> The great strength of Linux is, of course, its diversity but that also
> means that all those hackers are likely to continue pulling that Linux
> cart off the course that companies like Google are going.
That's OK. Linux isn't a company.
> Then there is the issue of chips.
No, there isn't. The processor that an OS runs on has almost nothing to do
with the success or failure of an OS company's product. For that matter,
hardware itself is incidental to the success of a solution.
Let's say I am an IT guy, who needs to put up a database server. Here are
my priorities, in order of importance:
1.) the finished application
2.) the database engine
3.) the operating system
4.) the hardware
If my database, doesn't run on xxx OS, I will use the one that it does run
on. If my OS doesn't run on xxx hardware platform, I will find one that it
does run on.
Costs control everything. The cost of hardware is trivial compared to the
cost of everything else.
> Here again Microsoft has already
> diverted from the X86/64 course with the XBox. If anyone believes that
> Microsoft is making a multi-billion investment in the billions just to
> win the game box market, do some research.
As above: Microsoft will use whatever hardware is cheapest at the time.
> The fundamental concept of IT is changing very rapidly from information
> stored on a HDD in a box on or next to your desk to info being pulled
> from the web as needed.
Which consists of a HDD in a box, somewhere else.
> Optimizing that process requires fundamental
> changes that, because of their huge investment in the legacy PC
> concept, neither Intel nor Linux seem willing to make but Minix3 *and*
> .Microsoft as well as Google seem prepared to change course.
Optimizing that process requires NO CHANGE in hardware or OS for the user,
and no change in hardware or OS for the provider. What it requires is
changes in network infrastructure equipment, pipes, and security, which
usually falls into Cisco's neighborhood.
--
"Life is too short, to spend it waiting for slow hardware to do something..."
- Dev
All functions of our list can be controlled through the web by logging in
at //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
You can also unsubscribe by sending email to
ncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
Other related posts:
