unspoken point 2.5
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| number6x Jul 20, 2007 8:46 AM EDT |
The article makes this statement:
Quoting:"For Linux to make the mainstream enterprise desktop leap, the projects and providers that back the open-source operating system must do more to address the outstanding interoperability issues that stem from working in an environment in which Microsoft has made most of the rules—and has kept the rules close to its vest." There are three points there. 1.0) The outstanding interoperability issues 2.0) Microsoft has made most of the rules—and has kept the rules close to its vest 3.0) The open-source operating system must do more There is an interoperability problem. Microsoft has created the problem, and Linux must fix it. Why can't Microsoft fix it? Why does Linux have to fix it. This is both good and bad. The bad? Linux is somehow portrayed as inadequate because it must change to solve the problem of interoperability. It seems to imply that if Linux must solve this it must be because Linux is not yet ready. The good? At least people see Linux as an OS that can solve this problem! I think there is a missing point between 2 and 3. There are a few options for the missing point:: 1.0) The outstanding interoperability issues 2.0) Microsoft has made most of the rules—and has kept the rules close to its vest 2.5) Microsoft is unwilling to fix the problem it created or 2.5) Microsoft is unable to fix the problem it created 3.0) The open-source operating system must do more For a long time I used to get mad that a lot of these pundits expected Linux to carry the weight for Microsoft created problems, but lately I've started thinking differently about it. They unconsciously believe Microsoft is unwilling or even incapable of solving many of these issues, while at the same time they have seen the open source community solve issue after issue. But the way it comes out, it still seems like FOSS is somehow inadequate, when it is MS that created the problem and is the barrier to its solution. |
| mvermeer Jul 20, 2007 9:12 AM EDT |
Yes, it's an asymmetric situation. And yes, it's not fair. Welcome to life in the big city ;-/ It reminds me of another, traditional asymmetry: "one fool can ask more than a hundred sages can answer". |
| NoDough Jul 20, 2007 9:14 AM EDT |
number6x: I'm sure that you concluded the following without explicitly stating it. The answer is "2.5) Microsoft is unwilling to fix the problem it created"... sort of. The complete answer is Microsoft spent millions in engineering to create multiple integration problems and they are not merely unwilling to fix them, but willing to spend millions more complicating existing and creating new problems. Don't believe me? Just ask the Samba engineers how many times MS' protocol has changed causing problems for Samba, while adding no value for MS. Of course, we all know that Microsoft's actions are attempts to maintain a monopoly built on products that are now commodities. The FOSS community must not only fix the current interoperability problems, but the future problems MS will create. Unless some governments get serious about punishing anti-competitive behavior, interoperability will remain a moving target. Edit: Disclaimer - My closing statement sounds like I approve of government intervention in business practices. I condone this only in the most extreme situations. 99% of the time I prefer to see the free markets correct themselves through competition and consumer education. |
| mvermeer Jul 20, 2007 9:14 AM EDT |
BTW wasn't Google Earth for Linux a native app? Certainly runs at native speed on a glx-enabled card. |
| jdixon Jul 20, 2007 10:19 AM EDT |
> BTW wasn't Google Earth for Linux a native app? Certainly runs at native speed on a glx-enabled card. My memory matches yours on the matter. In any case, I don't have Wine installed on my new system yet and Google Earth ran fine the last time I tried it. |
| Abe Jul 20, 2007 10:57 AM EDT |
Quoting:number6x 3.0) The open-source operating system must do more Let's face it, MS existed for a long time before FOSS presented itself as a good alternative. This situation created the impression that the burden falls on FOSS to be interpretable with MS. That was the main reason FOSS community tried their best to make sure it can live along side with MS. The developers resorted to multiple approaches to accomplish interoperability; reverse engineering, open interfaces and open standards were among them. So FOSS did all they can and the rest falls on MS to extend its hand out to FOSS. MS was never willing or had any intention of doing that. But, MS users now are demanding and forcing MS to do its part although MS keeps trying to wiggle out of it. FOSS can't do any more than what has already been done in the area of interoperability; Now FOSS is extending its effort into creating standards that are attractive to the users. ODF is one and Web services is another. That doesn't mean MS will join in happily, and we can see that in their fight against ODF, but consumer demand will play a major role in forcing MS into interoperability and Open Standards compliance. It is going to take some time, but as FOSS flourishes and become more widely adopted, MS will have no choice other than buckle down and comply with users' demand. |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 20, 2007 12:46 PM EDT |
Quoting:My memory matches yours on the matter. In any case, I don't have Wine installed on my new system yet and Google Earth ran fine the last time I tried it. You wouldn't need Wine installed even if it did use Wine (it doesn't BTW. I looked it up). Google statically compiled Wine into Picassa, so you don't need the Wine libraries to use Picassa on Linux. |
| tracyanne Jul 20, 2007 3:39 PM EDT |
Quoting:Edit: Disclaimer - My closing statement sounds like I approve of government intervention in business practices. I condone this only in the most extreme situations. 99% of the time I prefer to see the free markets correct themselves through competition and consumer education. The government always intervenes in business practices. Currently, in the US, and more and more often in other countries that intervention is to the advantage of large monopolies. |
| NoDough Jul 23, 2007 4:38 AM EDT |
Quoting:The government always intervenes in business practices. Currently, in the US, and more and more often in other countries that intervention is to the advantage of large monopolies.Agreed. |
| jdixon Jul 23, 2007 6:04 AM EDT |
> Currently, in the US, and more and more often in other countries that intervention is to the advantage of large monopolies. The business version of the golden rule: Those with the gold make the rules. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!