Slashdot Log In
Ask Microsoft's Martin Taylor About Linux vs. Windows
Posted by
Roblimo
on Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:00 PM
from the TCO-studies-prove-whatever-you-want-them-to dept.
from the TCO-studies-prove-whatever-you-want-them-to dept.
Martin Taylor is Microsoft's global general manager of platform strategy, but he's best-known as the man the company trots out to refute claims of Linux superiority. Here are links to several interviews he's done in the past two years: vnunet.com; CMP; Computerworld; and one on Microsoft's own site. As usual, please submit one question per post. We'll present 10 - 12 of the highest-moderated questions to Mr. Taylor about 24 hours after this post appears, and we expect to publish his answers within the next week.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The one true question... (Score:5, Funny)
Notepad or Wordpad? ;-)
Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
On second thought, I do have some questions, which I can wrap into a single bundle:
"Is Microsoft going to pursue a Palladium philosophy in the next 5 years? And, if this the strategy, what guarantees will Microsoft make that protect Free Speech?"
Ratboy.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
What do you view as Microsoft's responsibilities to their customers? In what ways do you believe Microsoft has/does/will fulfill these responsibilities better than other software developers?
Parent
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do you believe that it is easier to standardise and interoperate across a range of hardware and software platforms with closed, patented document formats such as those used by MS Office rather than open, free (as in speech), soon to be ISO standardised, XML formats such as those used by OpenOffice?
Parent
Have you ever used Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
Questions (Score:5, Interesting)
Does Microsoft feel that Linux has any place at all in the IT industry? If so, where?
Interoperability... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Interoperability... (Score:5, Interesting)
Does Microsoft consider open standards, intended to facilitate interoperability, to be beneficial or detrimental to overall system security?
e.g. Closed vs open product development models.
Parent
Protection against malware (Score:5, Interesting)
Code Review (Score:5, Interesting)
Plain speech (Score:5, Funny)
I have read a couple of your interviews and I would like to ask you to answer to this one in plain English. Please! Could you avoid silly metaphors (try not to mention ballpark for instance) or sentences such as "So someone asks 'Hey can you guys
It's painful to read and hardly understandable. Thanks in advance.
Do you read Slashdot? (Score:5, Interesting)
Q. Do you frequent Slashdot and the other Linux boards to say what your competition's saying about you?
How can you take seriously the "Lower TCO" claim? (Score:5, Interesting)
- How Linux admins can easily administrate more machines per person-hour, due to the nature of Unix/Linux's remote administration (and don't even get me started on VNC or Terminal Services; they aren't scriptable, they aren't as bandwidth-effective, etc. etc. etc...), than Windows admins?
- The "hidden" costs of lost time due to (A) protecting against adware/spyware/malware/viruses/pop-ups, or (B) actually disinfecting machines that got infected anyhow.
- The "hidden" costs of downtime due to buggy MS software. Sure, F/OSS stuff has bugs too, but when it does, at least the admin can try to fix them. When MS software is buggy, the admin is 100% at MS's mercy to fix the bug (since, being closed source, MS software is often 100% unfixable to anyone outside MS...)
- The "hidden" costs of dealing with "hacked" IIS servers (vs. Apache).
And a further question: Do Linux geeks really pull in that much more money salary-wise than Windows geeks!? find this claim hard to swallow, especially in today's economy. I call BS. Show some proof.3 areas (Score:5, Interesting)
3 areas (re-phrase) (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Open Source Applications Helping Windows Compete? (Score:5, Interesting)
.NET Platform Portability (Score:5, Interesting)
My question is does Microsoft have any intentions of implementing a CLR and BCL for any other non Microsoft platforms where applications built under one would be (relatively) easily used under another (provided the application does not rely on P/Invokes of course)? If not... why?
Future... (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows TCO vs. Linux TCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Especially when the costs of upgrading is recurring.
"Platform" (Score:5, Interesting)
Free version (Score:5, Interesting)
What is Linux doing right? (Score:5, Interesting)
How about allowing multiple home installs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft - breaking it's own software (Score:5, Insightful)
Aren't you worried that this continual (and increasingly intrusive) process of deliberately breaking and/or crippling your own software is going to alienate some your customers and make them feel like criminals, particularly since the makers of the 'free software' operating systems that you're now competing against have no need of any of it and can concentrate all of their resources on trying to make their software work?
When will MS products be "fit for any purpose"? (Score:5, Insightful)
So what's up with that?
Open source licenses usually have the same thing, but those are generally free products. You guys have taken in a couple hundred billion. Plus, we can use the code as we like. So you can't claim any kind of equivalence.
Licensing for Technicians (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm an independant contractor with an MCSE that supports a small customer base of companies that mostly run Windows software. I have four development and testing computers at my house, all of which run Linux and free software solutions, this is because I cannot afford to buy Windows 2003 server, Office 2003, dev studio and a lot of other recent releases.
With my cost free Open Source testing platform I have designed and implemented quite a few solutions with software such as Open Office, Open Exchange, Samba etc.
With online activation and licensing restrictions I am not able to run any Microsoft software in a test environment to ensure it is adequately tested and ensure I am able to support it.
This is driving my skill set and support abilities away from Microsoft and squarely into the arms of the Open Source camp. What (if anything) is Microsoft doing to combat this and ensure that the professionals in the field that sell and support your software have access to the resources they require?
Thanks
John the Kiwi
Open standards (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 64 Bit? (Score:5, Interesting)
What do you want that Linux has? (Score:5, Interesting)
What I don't see is the other side - specifically, what does Microsoft see in Linux? What does Linux offer that Windows does not, and what does Linux offer that Windows doesn't do as well, from a Microsoft point of view? Just as important, where is Microsoft headed to close those gaps?
Unavailability of dual boot Windows/Linux computer (Score:5, Interesting)
Yet, while there are a couple of PC manufacturers that sell a version of their computer with either Linux or Windows, there is none who does sell a single computer with both operating systems? Is there any financial or legal stimulus by Microsoft that prevents PC manufacturers from offering these attractive dual boot computers?
Bert
product or service ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Is there any particular type of software ( op sysems/enterprise apps/utilities/research software/etc ) that should be open source ? why ?
Release timing (Score:5, Interesting)
I understand that Enterprise customers prefer large updates on a long timetable, but consumers tend to want new features now - I don't want to wait three years for a feature that Gnome, KDE or Apple has to show up in Windows. How do you plan on preventing the Windows brand from becoming "stale" when viewed in relation to a community with a much more rapid and dynamic release schedule?
"Get the facts" campaign (Score:5, Insightful)
I recall reading the details of one from the downloadable report on the Microsoft web site [microsoft.com] recently that compared the throughput of Windows + IIS to Linux + Apache for serving static web pages. The figures showed Windows in a clear lead, yet on closer examination it appears that the Windows installation had been thoroughly optimised (by, e.g., turning off the collection of last access information on the file system and increasing the default filesystem block size, see pages 30 & 33 of the document linked) whereas similar optimisations had not been applied to the Linux system for the test (with default configurations suggested by the distribution installer accepted for filesystem parameters, see pages 30 - 32 of the document).
How would you answer those who are concerned that by presenting these "independent" tests where the testers have followed precise instructions from Microsoft on how to optimise their products but have not (apparently) consulted Linux experts on how to optimise Linux systems as authoritative that you are unfairly distorting the truth and painting a poor picture of Linux? Is it just that you're doing your job the only way you can, because on a level playing field Linux would win? Or is the picture of these reports as unfair to Linux in some way wrong?
OSS Contributions (Score:5, Interesting)
Many major companies such as IBM and Apple have learned that they can benefit from OSS software by taking an existing OSS product, refining it to fit their needs, and then redistributing the finished product and giving some source back to the community. In this manner, for instance, Apple was able to produce Safari, which is IMO a high-quality and stable web browser, that was produced much faster than it would have taken Apple to write an equivilent product from scratch.
Why has Microsoft not taken similar approaches to software development? I guess that in the past, OSS code has been used in Windows (TCP stack, for starters), but why does Microsoft insist on resisting innovation rather than contributing to it?
Are google morons? (Score:5, Interesting)
They use a LOT of computers, and TCO has got to be important in that enviroment.
[1] See MS advertising and "Get the Facts" literature.
What's wrong with Linux OTD? (Score:5, Interesting)
This guy is nothing more than a paid spin doctor (Score:5, Interesting)
Given that, here is my question:
How does your background make you an authoritative source on IT matters? Give me a few reasons why I would want to ask you a question and value your answer?
(Sorry that's harsh, but I honestly want to know!)
Martin, (Score:5, Interesting)
Breaking standards to prevent interoperability (Score:5, Interesting)
Why does Microsoft persist in breaking standards just to lock the competition out? Is it that you are too scared to compete on the merits of your products, the fact that this behaviour has become institutionalised, or some other reason?
Re:TCO of Windows vs. Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
One way to look at this is to say that Windows is more compatible with Windows than Linux, and therefore a better choice. Another way of looking at it is that Microsoft is exceedingly successful at locking in its customers, and that (as a customer) it is best to get out as soon as possible because it will only get worse.
Do you worry that people will take this second point of view rather than the first, and that the campaign might backfire?
Parent
Re:TCO of Windows vs. Linux (Score:5, Informative)
I see Microsoft ads in magazines claiming that the TCO a business using Windows is significantly less than using Linux. How can this be?
These studies typically assume that the status quo is Windows, the workforce is already skilled with Windows but not Linux, Windows is currently installed on the machines, etc. and what is being compared is the cost of sticking with Windows vs. switching operating systems, retraining the workforce, and similar expenses. These transition costs make Linux appear more expensive than Windows, even when the Linux solution itself is cheaper to run.
So, to make this into a question for Mr. Taylor, is this an accurate summary of the studies, and can you point to any that are conducted from a more neutral perspective, without making assumptions of one OS or the other enjoying a comfortable incumbent position?
Parent
Re:Reviews (Score:5, Insightful)
questions should be genuine. it shouldn't be used to prove a point, or lack of a point, or to push an agenda or to reinforce what we already know. nor should questions be used to try to push the answerer into a corner to "admit" something. we know it won't happen, it's self-serving and frankly, useless.
Parent
Re:following (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:following (Score:5, Interesting)
I honestly wish I had a dime for all the times I have seen Microsoft people start a holy war when you mention replacing one of their products with a non "Windows" option. I generally ask them the question above "What other products have you looked at or worked with?" I personally don't care who makes a product as long as it makes my life easier and lets me focus on the business, however I will say that I try and avoid companies that lock me in to their technology, so I find myself trying to avoid Microsoft in some ways...
and as I have always said, Once free software is "Good Enough" then the proprietary software vendor is going to be dead. It is almost impossible to compete with free when free is "Good Enough". You can do it but you won't have 50Billion in the bank and have one of the highest profit margins in the world.
Lastly, my question.
At what point in marketshare would Linux need on the client before Microsoft would start porting their applications over to it?
I ask this because it won't be long before the Linux client marketshare will be greater than the Macintosh...
Parent
Re:Regardless of the superiority or not (Score:5, Insightful)
The argument shouldn't be: Linux is better because it is free. It should be: Microsoft's higher price is not enough to justify the additional features one gets from it. If someone paid you a hundred dollars to use an operating system and it was really bad, most people probably wouldn't use it. The price, whether it be $-100, $0, $100, or $1000 is meaningless. However weighing that price to the given feature set is what is important.
Microsoft is completly capable of competing against Linux in the long term and writing them off as some ageing dinosaur is not accurate.
No I dont work for MS, Yes I'm running Linux on my laptop, m6811 fedora core 3... hot
Parent
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Honest question about FUD (Score:5, Interesting)
I would put this akin to Chevrolet SUV commercials touting a much lower flip-over rate than Ford SUVs equiped with Firestone tires. If you believe this an unfair comparisson, please explain why. (Keep in mind that buggy/compromised software could present a risk to human life.)
Parent
Re:Paint me cynical (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the question is misleading. The .doc
file format is documented on MSDN[1], and is just
as open as PDF. The two also serve different needs.
PDF is effectively a page description language,
albeit one with some nice interactivity features
like forms and even animations (although few
people use them). The .doc format is intented
for editable documents, and stores various metadata along with the content. PDF is not and
doesn't.
But it does lead nicely to another file format related question. Last week, Bill Gates claimed [microsoft.com]:
Common file formats are the contract by which office applications can exchange data with each other. Given Bill's commitment to interoperability, when can we expect the Visio file format to be documented so that other diagram editors such as Dia of Kivio can interoperate with Visio, as Bill desires?
Similarly, the Exchange wire protocol is the contract by which mail clients communicate and exchange data with the MS Exchange mail server. I take it that we can look forward to documentation for that, too, so that the myriad email clients in use today can talk to an Exchange server?
Another example would be the W3C standards, the contract by which a web developer sends markup information to an end user for viewing in a browser. The rest of the world is happily using CSS to provide rich presentation of information to end users. Yet as developers, we are forced to break that contract because Microsoft's IE browser doesn't honour the contract, and our web sites don't display in the intended manner. Will MS commit to bringing IE up to scratch so that it interoperates with the rest of the world?
Will MS start making versions of Word that use standard UTF-8 character encoding, rather than a Microsoft specific one that produces output that doesn't interoperate [fourmilab.ch] with non-Microsoft platforms (and even, as we found out this week, with newer versions of IE, which correctly ignore the MS character set!)
Or was he merely referring to making Microsoft applications interoperable with each other, a move which reduces customer choice, and prevents them from picking the best solution available for the task because it may not interoperate correctly with existing Microsoft products?
[1] At least, it was. I don't know if that documentation has been kept up to date with the latest versions of .doc
Parent
Re:Interoperability (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Seriously... (Score:5, Interesting)
My question:
due to the long and on-going development of Longhorn, do you believe that the new OS will have the features and enhancements to keep up with the rapid growth shown in Linux and Mac OSX during the last few years? In other words, do you think that the new features in Longhorn will be enough to keep people upgrading to the latest and newest windows even as the alternatives are constantly improving.
Parent