Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ballmer on Windows Server 2003, Linux

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the sominex dept.

Microsoft 1282

no_demons writes "Microsoft's CEO, Steve Ballmer, has given an interview to CNet about Windows Server 2003 and Linux. He claims that 'our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community'. Discuss." Also in the news: two critical security vulnerabilities (MS03-014, MS03-015), and this piece about Windows 2003 mentioning that Microsoft is trying to develop a command-line only server.

cancel ×

1282 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No wonder (2, Flamebait)

unterderbrucke (628741) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809081)

The customers can't tell the difference between the multiple applications being worked on by Linux developers. They can tell that Windows 2003 has all they need, with an easy point and click interface, without semi-redundant applications. The Comp-Sci department at my college desperately wanted to run our server off Linux, but after we installed it there was just too many choices.23 web servers: OK, I can handle that. Apache. 4 media servers, none of which support Quicktime, 3 of which support low-res Real only: unusable. Very little XML support, which is important because our document retrival system is based upon it. Very buggy when uploading to Windows clients, which is very important because all of our computers run Windows, since Linux is so easy to screw up and there's no applications for imaging or like Norton's GoBack.

What open source needs to do:
1. stop focusing on programming the new hot stuff, focus on the stuff you missed in between text-editing and a 3D GUI.
2. look up the keywords of a SourceForge project you want to start on SourceForge before you start it. If there's another similar project, just missing features from your idea, work on that instead.
3. make things easy to use. have your uncle come over and try to work your program. observe what gives him trouble, fix it.

One last final point: Open source was doomed from the beginning. Yes, it's a blanket statement that sounds ridiculous. Keep reading. Open source is based on the very principles of communism: everyone works on it, everyone owns it. The very thing that led to the collapse of Communism leads to the inability of open source to become popular: workers then tend to migrate quickly, and not work hard, since they can't gain anything from working on one thing hard. So, projects die as they become less "hot" to work on. People ignore the basic fundamentals required (a decent media server), and instead work on a 3D GUI for X. God knows how you'll fix this problem. Call me if you do, that way I can start my own perfect county based on Communism.

Linus Doesn't Shoot... (4, Funny)

neurostar (578917) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809123)

Open source is based on the very principles of communism...

But the biggest difference is that Linus isn't going to send you to N. Finland and have Alan Cox shoot you if you whine on /. about your latest/greatest kernel patch...

;)

Re:Linus Doesn't Shoot... (1)

np_geek (313391) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809276)

Not to be picky, but Alan Cox lives in Wales these days, I believe and I don't think the Europeans are very fond of guns anyway...

Re:No wonder (0, Troll)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809136)

> Keep reading. Open source is based on the very
> principles of communism:

What the hell is this? The Microsoft first post cut & paste FUD brigade?

Thanks but no thanks McCarthy!

Re:No wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809192)

Do you deny that OSS operates on the same principals as Communism?

Re:No wonder (1)

b0r1s (170449) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809203)

Oh come on. The GPL is about as close to communism as you can get in the software world.

"I've written this software. It's free to use, it's free to modify, but you have to give back any changes to the community".

If it was really about freedom, you'd be writing code under the BSD license (free to use, free to modify, do whatever the hell you want, just don't blame the original authors if it doesn't work).

Re:No wonder (5, Insightful)

Blaine Hilton (626259) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809145)

I hate to say it, but you have a point with communism, there is no incentive. However I believe that the core group of open source developers have incentive, and that beating Microsoft. It's like a small idealistic group standing up against a huge goliath of a company.

What I think, is the open source community needs to work more on marketing, documentation, and support. I believe that's the area that is lacking the most. Probably one of the best ways to education people on linux and open source is to get it in the schools. Kids usually tech their parents how to use computers.

Go calculate [webcalc.net] something

Re:No wonder (1)

arose (644256) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809242)

"Open Source" may have bad documentation, I sugest you look at the GNU project.

Re:No wonder (2, Interesting)

Guipo (591513) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809272)

so incentive as in being pure hate? So what happens if microsoft disappears?

Re:No wonder (-1, Offtopic)

addaon (41825) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809157)

How do you continually, successfully troll otherwise (benefit of the doubt) intelligent people with a username like that?

Re:No wonder (0)

Spunk (83964) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809168)

Was? Denken Sie dass jemand spricht Deutsch? :)

Re:No wonder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809207)

You mean to say he's not a Red Hot Chili Peppers fan?

Re:No wonder (1)

MsGeek (162936) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809266)

Not everyone understands German. If they did, they would see that he's named after the favored dwelling spot of TROLLS. :P

Re:No wonder (5, Insightful)

bucketoftruth (583696) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809177)

Open source is based on the very principles of communism: everyone works on it, everyone owns it. Your annalogy is so wrong it makes my head spin. One of the biggest drawbacks of soviet communism was that the state controlled everything, more of an annalogy to Microsoft's business model than the open source. Open source development, on the other hand, is more like pure capitalism which, in it's own right, doesn't work so well either.

TROLL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809178)

enough said.

Re:No wonder (2, Insightful)

Circuit_Burnout (660480) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809189)

Umm I don't know where to start? You do realize that the golden child of open source right now is not Linux, but Apache. Do a check yourself or go get the info from one of the companies that do check these things. Apache has almost complete market share of webservers. "Not work hard" Have you lost your mind? New security and bug errata is released almost daily opposed to M$'s fixes come maybe once every few months(if that as they don't want people to know their software is crap). Next time you decide to bash the community do a little research first. As for the other crap I'm sure som e other /.er will berate you.

Quick! Mod him down! He has a point! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809199)

Fucking moderators. Congratulations on your impressive censorship because he isn't painting a rosy picture of the current state of Open Source.

If you gave a shit about addressing the problems of free software, you wouldn't be doing this, but you figure if you mod him down, the problems he describes might go away. Idiots.

Re:No wonder (1)

bmj (230572) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809200)

You know, it figures that people here would think this is FUD. While I don't agree with this point:

One last final point: Open source was doomed from the beginning.

I agree with TODO section. One big problem with open source (and especially linux-related) development is that the developers are only working for a particular breed of customer--themselves. It's the "if you can't figure out, don't use it" attitude that will kill open source, at least as an alternative to windows. Sure, developers, sys admins and perhaps even research programmers will use open source resources, but it will never trickle into the mainstream. It's not so much that linux development should try to mirror what Windows or Mac OS X does, but they have a set a standard, at least as far as usability goes, that the average computer user has come to expect.

Another informed reader (2, Insightful)

Epeeist (2682) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809206)

It always amuses me when posters claim "this is communist" when they obviously haven't read any of Marx's books. In Britain these people tend to be get their opinions from the "Daily Mail" or "The Sun". Not sure what the equivalent in the States is.

Re:Another informed reader (1, Troll)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809281)

That would be Fox News [foxnews.com] . :)

Re:No wonder (5, Interesting)

brotherscrim (617899) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809218)

your post would be valid if the last 19 years of Windows had managed to accomplish what Linux has in 8.

In other words: If Linux couldn't beat the snot out of Windows on everything but ease of use, then Windows would indeed be the best choice. The facts, however, clearly show that in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, Linux can and will outperform Windows on an older machine. It's more stable, it's more secure, it adheres to standards, it's faster, and it's more likely to advance faster than MS could possibly keep pace. All of this for free.

Especially in the server realm, Linux will continue to grow while MS still operates under the delusion that if they say something enough (e.g. "Linux sucks"), people will believe them.

Re:No wonder (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809222)

Apparently you don't know much about Communism. Of course, since you are undoubtably an american, this is not suprising. Open-source and Communism have common facets, but one is certainly not the other. Often two things can use the same basic facts as a rational without being identical.

Fact remains, as social animals, we do not exist in an individual isolation. I know it's hard for friendless computer geeks to comprehend this, but it's true. Throughout history humans have worked communally to achieve their goals, and by this method became the most powerful animal on the planet. If we'd not cooperated, our ancestors would've been picked off one by one by sabre-toothed tigers and their ilk.

Sure, there were selfish individualists then too, but if they did not bend to the will of the tribe, they were cast out and consequently died due to predation or lack of food. This is all very basic, even a small child can see this. Communal sharing is a basic premise of humanity. Those who violate it are unhuman monsters, as we can see by the rampant degeneration in the united states of fat pigs (USA).

What we have done, through our hard work, is stopped killing snotty individualists, so now they think they have free reign over themselves and their environment, and think that it is natural, and good. You can always tell a moron from not by using this test. It's the furthest thing from natural, it only exists because the community has created an environment where their shenanigans can be tolerated without much damaged. I think we should go back to culling them, they are slowing the progress of our species.

Re:No wonder (5, Insightful)

dvdeug (5033) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809256)

23 web servers:

Much easier to let Microsoft take care of you and feed you, isn't it. Ignore those other web servers for Windows because Mommy Gates doesn't make them.

Open source was doomed from the beginning. [...] Open source is based on the very principles of communism:

The American revolution was doomed from the beginning. It was based on the very principles of democracy, and look what happened to the Roman republic. It's easy to make a simplistic analysis, but the simple fact of the matter is that open source works.

People ignore the basic fundamentals required (a decent media server),

The basic fundamentals required include a media server? Since when?

Steve shares nose surgeon with Michael Jackson? (4, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809088)

a new version of the company's server operating system that Microsoft's CEO described as "the right product" to help companies stretch their IT budgets.

In typical parlance this means make money go further, however in this context it means 'spend money, spend more money, keep spending money', until the budget snaps like an rubberband when its elasticity has been exceded.

Well, our budget has already snapped, like the rubberband. Funny how budgets these days aren't elastic and don't stretch. Perhaps setting up a demo MySQL or Postgres Linux server might be in order to convince the powers that be that we can get along just fine without.

BTW, I love how Steve blathers on about having a corporation behind their product. Like support from that has not pricetag. We're doing without MSDN because we can't afford that. Google is my friend. Lastly, a customer can go to Microsoft and request a feature? Really? Even one as small as us? Yeah, right. Time for a little off the end?

Re:Steve shares nose surgeon with Michael Jackson? (2, Insightful)

rasafras (637995) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809204)

Lastly, a customer can go to Microsoft and request a feature? Really? Even one as small as us? Yeah, right.

There is a project called the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, which uses primarily Microsoft architecture. It has been very successful, and as bugs come up along the way due to situations in databases which have never been tested, they can call up the company and have a patch for the bug by the next day. I guess their budget is higher than most companies', however, because they have gained a substantial amount of funding from grants. But Microsoft does work permitting that you have money and you know how to use it.

News flash: MS takes care of 1 well-funded company (-1, Troll)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809252)

for publicity angle. Spits in soup of eveyone else while laughing, steals their wallet, and defecates in their living room. Film at 11:00.

Wow! I got first (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809093)

and yet I don't give one flying FUCK about this article!

I don't trust MS software anymore. (0, Redundant)

tcd004 (134130) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809096)

I've had it with microsoft. These days I only buy my software/hardware from Jesus. [lostbrain.com]

tcd004

ya baby! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809103)

Remnants of Taliban fighters just killed one imperialist invader and wounded 5 other before escaping across the afghan border to pakistan!

Ya baby let the quagmires begin!

Re:ya baby! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809113)

Go fuck yourself, you stupid buffoon.

Re:ya baby! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809220)

Fuck you imperialist stooge.

Why do you like having your tax money wasted and your young people die so that the oil barrons in the American ruling class can gain more wealth?

President Hamid "The Pipeline" Karzai's government in Afghanistan won't last.

Unlikely (4, Interesting)

inertia@yahoo.com (156602) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809108)

I'd be very impressed if Microsoft actually came out with a command-line only version. The fact that "it's a very tangled subsystem" makes me wonder how possible that would be.

I could see a version of Windows shipping without the GUI enabled, allowing administration only by remote desktop. But for the entire OS to ship with no GUI libraries would be very unlikely.

On the other hand, they've already done it (sort of), look at the .NET CLI. But if they shipped an OS based on just the CLI, it couldn't very well be called "Windows," now could it?

Mirrors:

com.com link [martin-studio.com]
zdnet.co.uk link [martin-studio.com]

Re:Unlikely (4, Interesting)

WatertonMan (550706) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809141)

Even if the entire OS shipped with no GUI, how much of the software you want would work with it?

Re:Unlikely (1)

lseltzer (311306) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809253)

Mod-U-Up

Exactly on-point. Almost nothing would work with it. And what's the point anyway? THere's no value proposition.

Re:Unlikely (4, Insightful)

EasyTarget (43516) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809265)

Even if the entire OS shipped with no GUI, how much of the software you want would work with it?

It's a server platform.. Work it out.

innovation. (4, Funny)

Unknown Poltroon (31628) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809109)

So, this command line server, let me guess, the name will be MicroSoft Disk On Server V1.2?

Re:innovation. (3, Funny)

Blaine Hilton (626259) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809194)

With the current numbering system probably more like MSDOS 2004...

Re:innovation. (5, Funny)

ebacon (16101) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809236)

No, its going to be called Universal Networking, and be available in 2009. To distinguish it from their other software offerings, the last 2 digits of the release year will be represented in roman numerals ...

Re:innovation. (3, Insightful)

Kevin Stevens (227724) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809241)

Also remember, that the command line died two years ago. Microsoft had a big party for it and everything. I guess its buried next to the floppy disk, printers ( paperless office), serial port, parallel port, tape backup systems, and mainframes.

He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (5, Insightful)

Elpacoloco (69306) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809110)

I quote Mr. Balmer:
" Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system. I'm not saying that it doesn't have some place for some customers, but that is not an innovative proposition."

So just because the basic design is old, it's not "innovative?" I think this guy needs to spend more time with his programmers!

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809120)

"basic design"...linux is a "direct rip" of unix. it shares a HELL of a lot more than basic design principles. duh.

So does the Iraqi Information Minister (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809137)

"There is no innovation! Innovation is a trick of the west! Linux is 20 years old, and has never been updated. It still runs on floppy disks! Customers need Windows 2003! Saddam blesses Windows 2003! Allah blesses Windows 2003!"

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (5, Insightful)

Elderly Isaac (667024) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809143)

You mean kinda like how Windows is a clone of the 20 year-old Mac? Sure, a lot has changed since then, but a lot has changed in Linux too.

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (4, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809208)

Actually, other than the GUI, it is based heavily on the VMS architechure with huge influence (and growing) from Unix.

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (1)

Elderly Isaac (667024) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809274)

100% true. But it just goes to show you that the same useless platitudes Ballmer spews forth can be easily used against his own product.

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (0, Troll)

sigep_ohio (115364) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809271)

yes and Steve blo-Jobs got his inspiration from Xerox. Most /. readers should all know this story already. Mac is not as innovative with respect to the GUI as they claim. And saying Winblows is a cheap knock-off is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (1)

L7_ (645377) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809148)

x86 architecture is brand new!

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (2, Insightful)

mattbee (17533) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809217)

If we're going to use a OS derived from the 1970s, let's at least pick our favourite and be grateful Linus wasn't a VMS fan :-) [winntmag.com]

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (5, Insightful)

b0r1s (170449) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809243)

Let's be completely fair here.

Name an application, or a feature of the operating system, that is truly innovative?

The only I can think of is Mosix. The other large areas of development (KDE, GNOME, Mozilla, the kernel) are simply trying to catch up to existing commercial software (Windows, IE, Solaris/BSD).

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (4, Interesting)

oldmildog (533046) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809244)

Right. Aren't we still using the same basic design of the airplane and the automobile and the cheese steak sandwich? There are improvements layered on, but the underlying design is still there.

It's not a bad thing to go back to the drawing board every so often and ask if there's a better way to do it. But be willing to accept No as an answer, instead of starting over for the sake of starting over.

Re:He has a funny idea of "Innovation." (5, Interesting)

Surak (18578) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809250)

I quote Mr. Balmer:

" Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system. I'm not saying that it doesn't have some place for some customers, but that is not an innovative proposition."

So just because the basic design is old, it's not "innovative?" I think this guy needs to spend more time with his programmers!


Hmmm...Windows 2003 is based on Windows XP, which is based on Windows 2000, which is based on Windows NT, which came out in 1993 (?) That's 10 years old, except, wait! The internals of Windows NT are based on VMS! Which makes Windows 2003 a clone of at least a 20 year old OS!

BTW--Linux is not a clone of the original 20 year-old OS. It's a MODERN Unix clone. It's based on POSIX standards which is actually quite a bit newer.

Yup, Michael posted this one. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809114)

Had to get a jab at MS with some security announcements. Nice going, Mike. Way to present yet another example of your anti-MS lust.

Innovation (5, Funny)

KillerHamster (645942) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809119)

'our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community'

Probably true - I'd imagine many Microsoft customers are so busy installing service packs and counting their licenses that they haven't had the time to look at Open Source Software.

Here's why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809162)

1. Microsoft steals every innovation from open source.
2. Microsoft adds one or two innovations of their own (think... talking paperclip).

Tada, Microsoft now has more innovation.

Re:Innovation (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809221)

Come on. I run Linux exclusively, but at a high level, GNU/Linux doesn't really innovate. They didn't invent any of the technologies in use today, they just made them better and faster (and more stable). But in terms of pure originality, really what has open source offered? (If you have another take on this, please let me know. I do consider myself a free software advocate, but it has always bothered me that free software never invents anything 'radically new')

Re:Innovation (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809229)

I'm a college student and on vacation, where I've got nothing to do but scratch my ass, I don't have time to look at open source software. There's too frigging much, 99% doesn't work, and evenyone wants to create a magic bullet application that saves the world.

I've tried half a dozen different distributions and flavors from OpenBSD to Red Hat with little real success. Don't even start me on Debian. I'm a computer science major with experience using Solaris, so it's not like I'm a n00b. But the configuration is a nightmare, the instructions poor if non-existant hidden deep in message board posts from god knows where. If I could find the applications that worked and got them all installed so they worked, maybe I'd be using linux. But I don't have that kind of time so fuck it. I'm not a professional linux enthusaist.

Its True! (4, Funny)

PopeAlien (164869) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809121)

Talk about inovation! Nobody but nobody can dance like that guy!

I'd like to see Linus, RMS or any of those other hippies try to outdance Mr. Balmer.. Er.. No, on second thought I wouldn't like to see that.

Michael, thanks for the addendum you hypocrite! (-1)

Real World Stuff (561780) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809128)

Shall we start posting the security holes and vulnerabilities of _EVERY_ mention of a particular spftware product. Damn I am thankful that performance reviews are coming up. Best of luck from a disgruntled customer.

Still camping that website?

Uh-Oh (0, Redundant)

Snork Asaurus (595692) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809130)

our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community

Be forewarned. It could get ugly below.

More innovation from Microsoft? (5, Insightful)

xYoni69x (652510) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809132)

He claims that 'our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community'.

Microsoft is trying to develop a command-line only server.

Isn't this a little backwards?

Innovation in EULA's and user restrictions (3, Interesting)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809134)

Yep, Microsoft has definitely made advances in way to snatch away the rights of those who use their products. Well done guys! Can't wait for palladium....

I wonder why... (3, Insightful)

slyckshoes (174544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809138)

They're Microsoft's customers, of course they've seen more innovation from Microsoft. That's because they haven't tried something else. Anytime something starts with "our customers" what follows is not a valid comparison. You need a better sample.

20 years... old or experienced? (3, Insightful)

DarkBlackFox (643814) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809151)

Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system. I'm not saying that it doesn't have some place for some customers, but that is not an innovative proposition.

Gee, so 5 years down the road when M$ is integrating open source software to maintain value in the consumer market, I wonder where this guy will be...

That aside, generally don't things get better with age? With more time on the open market, would that not imlpy 20 years of innovation and development? If not, why is it still alive and more popular than ever? Would that explain the relatively small number of security holes and bugs of the 20 year old system, compared to the "modern" Window$ core?

Re:20 years... old or experienced? (1)

mb12036 (516109) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809270)

I follow you from a security perspective (performance, reliability, etc. also). As a layman though, from the perspective of how we interface with a machine, the rules have not changed much in twenty years. Maybe this is just a GUI gripe...I dunno. But if I'm still doing things at a command line in 20 more years, that will just plain suck. That's why I can't understand why M$ would pick that route to go. If you're going to throw cash at how humans interact with computers, look towards the horizon don't look back towards the way things were.

I agree Linux (and others) have come far in 20 years in many many many many many ways, but much can be said about how far things _haven't_ come in terms of how we interact with the machine.

Ballmer's right (3, Insightful)

Pentalon (466561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809152)

Ballmer's right -- stability isn't an innovation. Good design isn't an innovation. These are all concepts that existed years ago.

Re:Ballmer's right (2, Insightful)

b0r1s (170449) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809282)

And to be fair, they have existed in windows since late 1999.

2000 is quite stable; anyone who says otherwise either never tried it, or doesn't know what they're doing.

They're trying command line only? (2, Insightful)

bigberk (547360) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809154)

I guess even Microsoft is realizing that for administration purposes, it's not beneficial to hide all settings deep within pretty GUI tabs and dialogs.

Good luck with that experiment, Microsoft. But there's much more to a solid OS than a simply a lack of GUI :)

innovation or marketing (2, Interesting)

satsuke (263225) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809155)

'our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community'

Perhaps he is commiting the cardinal sin of confusing market share and marketing speak with innovation and creativity.

As has worked for the majority of M$ innovations, they put a pretty gui on things created by others, and leave the real details to registry entries and third party plug ins.

the .net "innovations" seems to have a lot in common with the stuff Novell was doing several years ago with single sign on and single vendor application development etc etc (NDS / Btreave / groupwise / wordperfect suite / ZENworks etc )

They aren't necessarily wrong... (2, Interesting)

rasafras (637995) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809156)

In terms of innovations, Microsoft truly leads (agaist open-source). Microsoft tries to hire people with ideas, for the sole purpose of designing better interfaces and new concepts. I really, honestly, haven't seen much innovation from Linux.

I think this might have to do with the premise of open-source. OSS does not really have profit. It is easy to recreate an existing idea, because you know what you have to do and how. It is far harder to create a new idea and implement it, and your chances of success are far lower. For this reason, paid employees are more likely to try and innovate. I'm not saying Linux doesn't have anything new - just that I haven't really seen anything.

Hooray! (5, Funny)

dswensen (252552) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809161)

and this piece about Windows 2003 mentioning that Microsoft is trying to develop a command-line only server.

And the best part is, it's so simple to use! It has only one command: "reboot."

Interesting.. (1)

EdMcMan (70171) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809164)

Ballmer seems to use Linux and Unix interchangeably. (Unix doesn't have a command line?)

Linux has that too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809169)

Command line only server is an option on most linux distributions installation program. It's called the NO X option, lol

It's like they are trying to make a dos server lol!

Oh look, an outright lie too. (4, Insightful)

Elpacoloco (69306) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809170)

" The way things are structured today, from a licensing perspective, in the Linux world nobody will ever commercialize Linux the way the Sun commercialized FreeBSD."

Forgetting RedHat [redhat.com] , Mr. Balmer?


Re:Oh look, an outright lie too. (1, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809225)

Nevermind Bughat, Balmer is conveniently ignoring IBM.

Ingore the FUD, keep coding (1)

InodoroPereyra (514794) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809176)

GNU/Linux went this far (up to a point of being a threaten to the evil empire) by damn good coding. Where do you want to spend the next half our of your spare time, discussing this FUD in /. or coding (bug reporting, writing documentation, etc) for your favorite project ? It's your choice :-)

moron bashing Godless softwar gangsters (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809186)

server? what a fauxking MiSnomer that is.

trustworthycomputing.com?

that's even funnier than va lairIE's patentdead PostBlock(tm) device.

lookout bullow. nothing but gnu skies, ..., or, as soon as we (US) awaken from this phonIE payper liesense stock markup fraud/georgewellian ?pr? scam?

Imagine... (1)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809190)

A beowulf cluster of MS Excercise Bikes running 2003 server.

News flash: Customers notice bloat, marketers coin "innovative".

Clone (2, Interesting)

mojowantshappy (605815) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809196)

Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system.

Yeah... NT was created about 10 years ago which was a clone of Windows which was created in 1981 and was derived from DOS which was stolen from QDOS.

I hate Balmer.

our customers have seen a lot more innovation ... (1)

dougmc (70836) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809205)

He claims that 'our customers have seen a lot more innovation from us than they have seen from that [open-source] community'.
Taken out of context like this, this statement is probably correct.

After all, Microsoft customers see what innovation Microsoft releases ... because they're Microsoft customers!

These aren't `Linux users' ... they're Microsoft customers. So of course they're going to see a lot more Microsoft than Linux.

(Yes, there's going to be some overlap where Microsoft customers are also Linux users, but assuming that 25% of Microsoft customers are Linux users (which is probably *extremely* overestimated) this would require that Linux innovate 4x as much as Microsoft for Microsoft customers to see as much Linux innovation as they see Microsoft innovation (assuming that everybody sees every innovation, of course.)) (Not that you can even really measure innovation anyways ...)

It's all a play on words. But these words were probably carefully chosen to be accurate and yet sound good -- even though they don't mean much if you really think about it.

Web Services Development (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809209)

Dear Webmaster,

My name is Steve Warren, and I am the president of an internet development and marketing company. Due to the state of the economy, several of our long term contracts have defaulted and I need to rapidly generate some funds to pay my developers or lose them. If you have any web design, Flash development, PHP, CGI or database development, C, C++, JAVA, ASP work you need done; please give us the opportunity to quote you. We can program for any windows or linux environment. I will bill you just $25 per hour to offset my employee payroll.

We have the following scripts already developed and ready to install:

*Access Counters
*Banner Ad Rotation System
*Auction Scripts
*bulletin board system
*realtime chat
*live helper support system
*support ticket system
*multi-level affiliate marketing system
*Shopping cart system
*guestbook
*classified ads
*personals/dating system
*survey and voting
*form/order processing
*topsite
*weblinks
*adult websites (turnkey)
*membership rebilling for websites
*realtime credit card processing ... Plus too much more to list

Thank You for your consideration

Steve Warren
CEO NetWizards
1601 NW 97th Ave, SJO3016
Miami, FL 33102
1-305-468-6390
(Leave a message with a brief description of your needs so I can have the correct person return your call)

"Are you looking at search?" (4, Insightful)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809211)

But for traffic, Yahoo is doing quite well and we are doing quite well.

Gosh, could that be because any not found address put into an IE browser redirects to an MS search page? Could that drive up traffic? Is that innovation? Like Arthur Anderson innovation?

So that's what happened to Lindows! (0, Flamebait)

herko_cl (533936) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809214)

<tinfoil hat>
Command-line Windows?
I knew there had to be a reason for the Lindows controversy. Let's see...*Pictures B. Gates thinking hard*
1. Windows-without-Windows? Lame...
2. Non-Windows? Lamer...
3. Disk Operating System? Nah, used that one already.
4. Command-Line Windows? Mmmm... has potential...
5. command Line-Windows?
6. Lindows!
So it's in use? *Picks up phone...*
</tinfoil hat>

What's wrong with using a 20 year old system? (2, Insightful)

Dthoma (593797) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809219)

"Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system."

If it ain't broke...

Coming soon! MS NotSoFreeBSD! (1)

GeorgieBoy (6120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809224)

Annoucing the new Microsoft server OS with a command-line interface! (How hard could it be?)

This is great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809230)

...everyone was talking about the Linux commandline. But I've never seen it. Everytime I boot Linux KDE or Gnome appear right in front of me. But NO commandline. So now it takes a real big player in this business to invent this great commandline.. I'm so exited about this great news.. I could crap my pants!

Truth be told (1)

Alomex (148003) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809233)

he is right about the innovation thing... for now. In fact he's simply paraphrasing Rob Pike (of Unix fame):

Linux's success may indeed be the single strongest argument for my thesis: The excitement generated by a clone of a decades-old operating system demonstrates the void that the systems software research community has failed to fill.

Besides, Linux's cleverness is not in the software, but in the development model, hardly a triumph of academic CS (especially software engineering) by any measure.

Indeed, up until very recently the Linux community was busy simply trying to catchup with other Unices.

However, over the last five years or so, Linux has slowly but surely started surpasing other Unices here and there. For example, KDE and GNOME are miles better than any of the commercial vendor unix-GUIs.

So if Ballmer is counting on the lack of Linux innovation thus far to keep Windows ahead, he is in for a surprise.

However at the same time it is important that Linux advocacy groups (such as /.) encourage and foster the environment for the development of an improved Linux. For that we need laundry lists a-la "let's make unix not suck" which Miguel de Icaza put out a long time ago. That is, identify its weakest points (X11, security model, cryptic commands, lack of decent word processing suite) and work on improving them as much as we can.

Hmmm... (0)

Azureash (571772) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809239)

The timing on this release isn't a coincidence...
It seems Balmer just got back from a stint as the Iraqi Information Minister.

Corporations are not running Open Source software! The Open Source programmers, those bastards, are committing suicide, and we are encouraging them! Their stomachs are roasting in Windows hell!

It's partly true (4, Interesting)

aiken_d (127097) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809240)

If you compare the 20+ year history of Microsoft to the much younger open source movement, I think it may be fair to say that there's been more technical innovation from Microsoft. Of course, the whole open source model is quite an innovation in and of itself.

The first 5 years or so of Linux were mainly focused on replicating funcationality that already existed in non-free Unix OSes. Likewise with the apps. It's only in the past year or two that we're starting to see a good deal of innovation in the form of apps that aren't just clones of non-open-source apps.

Open source is starting to really move, and we're starting to see some truly novel apps and innovations, but I think it's completely understandable that the first decade or so of open source was devoted to bootstrapping our tech to be equal to or better than closed source stuff.

I'm no Microsoft fan, but they *have* introduced some real innovations. Cheap, shared-SCSI-bus clustering comes to mind, as does Active Directory (although AD is certainly inspired by NDS). While Microsoft certainly followed Apple into the era of the GUI, they've made notable improvements to the GUI. There are others, of course; only the most rabid anti-MS zealot could claim that they've *never* done *anything* innovative.

Of course, it says something about Microsoft's insecurity that Ballmer is playing the "Historically, we've done more than open source." Open source is still snowballing -- if Microsoft had a new closed-source competitor that was starting to gain market share, everyone would laugh at marketing material that said "Historically, we've done more than this new competitor."

Cheers
-b

Command Line Server?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5809248)

and this piece about Windows 2003 mentioning that Microsoft is trying to develop a command-line only server.

Didn't Microsoft develop that in like 1981? A thing called MS-DOS??

A Few Easy Steps... (1)

rasafras (637995) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809249)

1. Create command-line only server
2. Claim command-line is innovation
3. Re-sell MS-DOS 1.0
4. ???
5. Profit!

Microsoft, first to implement CLI on top of GUI? (4, Funny)

product byproduct (628318) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809251)

Because direct implementation would require a complete rewrite of the codebase, anyone suspecting that the command lines you type will actually move a cursor and click on GUI elements internally, just without video output?

Balmer's ability to do math (5, Funny)

pashdown (124942) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809257)

Linux itself is a clone of an operating system that is 20-plus years old. That's what it is. That is what you can get today, a clone of a 20-year-old system. I'm not saying that it doesn't have some place for some customers, but that is not an innovative proposition.

Then in response to the XBox,

Remember, we brought Windows 1 out in 1983...

I love interviews with Balmer.

MS coders learning from UNIX & Linux (4, Insightful)

mactari (220786) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809262)

I've always been impressed with descriptions of Window's technologies while they're being developed. Like it or not, Microsoft has -- and can afford to pay and retain -- some of the smartest minds in the field. I'd love to work with these guys, who seem to be open to using standards and who don't have so much FUD in their eyes or are so egotistical they can't learn from the *nixes.

The problem is that all these bright ideas go through Microsoft's "profit maximization machine" at some point and we get "embrace and extend" and other fun phonomena. I'll stop before I get back into that tired rant.

At any rate, here are two lessons learned -- by MS -- from *nixes, quoted from the article [zdnet.co.uk] on the command line server. "Windows core technology guru Rob Short" says...
We'll be able to patch probably two thirds of the components without shutting the system down. That's an area where the Unix guys are ahead of us, because of the way they do redirection -- they can patch a file and then change the symbolic link. That's an area where we've got a problem, and we'll fix it in the near future when possible.

Later a quote on Linux:
[Question] Why is there no command line only version?

[Short's answer] We're looking longer term to see what can be done, looking at the layers and what's available at each layer and how do we make it much closer to the thing the Linux guys have -- having only the pieces you want running. That's something Linux has that's ahead of us, but we're looking at it. We will have a command line-only version, but whether it'll have all the features in is another matter.

yegods! (2, Interesting)

Telastyn (206146) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809263)

anyone notice in the bottom link that in 2003 that the listener portion of IIS was moved into the kernel?

Am I the only one that that strikes as a poor idea?

Software cost - right. (1)

jpellino (202698) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809264)

"I don't think the price of software and the price of hardware have some inextricable link." Are you really that naive? Is your focus group made up of vested MS employees and department heads?

Yes they are linked, Steve. Perception is tantamount to reality. It might as well be a physical link, because everyone who goes thru it gets steamed. That link is quite obviously in the mind of everyone who buys a computer (e.g., iBook) for $999 thinking that it will do all their computing. Then they find out that you have to spend half of that ($499) to equip it with industry-standard software. *Then* they go find out that AppleWorks or something else can do 95% of the job for free-with-the-machine. I cover web, email, chat, PIM, WP, SS, DB, paint, draw, music, movies and photos with what shipped on the drive, and pay reasonable ($50-100) for other such things as PS(LE), HomePage, Keynote and eFax.

But $500 for a productivity suite? Not my first choice.

What about the positives aspects of the interview? (5, Insightful)

jagripino (314506) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809267)

Example:

We created the SMB file server specs, and we didn't have the fastest one around, which was embarrassing. So we took our performance team and said "your mission is to make ours twice as fast as this other one on the market."

I understand this to be the admission that Samba was faster than any SMB server MS had in the past, right? See, this is competition at work. Granted, Microsoft tried to discourage people from competing (in the SMB case, by making small changes to the protocols with each release, I believe. Correct me if I my wrong, please) but the Samba team still came out with a better product.

I expect that by this time next year the Samba team will be saying "yeah, we got a faster SMB server than the one in Windows 2003, but hey, they ASKED for it! Do you remember that S Ballmer interview?"...

Security tools (5, Funny)

peaworth (578846) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809268)

We created tools that run across the code and understand almost all the attacks. Microsoft Research built a tool that can find almost all the buffer overflow problems

Yeah, that tool is called "a non-firewalled internet connection."

Microsoft's Strength (4, Insightful)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809275)

Yes. We're a clear No. 2 in the market. We are coming on strong. It is probably going to take us another turn of the crank, from a product cycle perspective, before we make money. But most of the things we do as a company successfully today we worked at for years before they made money. Remember, we brought Windows 1 out in 1983 and we didn't have any real volume until 1991. It took us eight years to get volume. I don't know when we got profit, but it took us eight years to get volume.


Take Windows server. We started on it in 1988, but it was probably 1998 before we had real volume, and I don't know when we would have said we had profitability on that product. But most of the good businesses require long-term patience, commitment, tenacity...and you can't be impatient. I feel very good that we have great teams to take MSN and Xbox in exactly those same directions.

They're willing to take ten YEARS to let something come to fruition; they have no problem 'waiting for fullness.'

This is a HUGE advantage that a lot of OSS people simply don't have; whoever's coding NiftyApp gets bored around version 0.64 and drops it, and meanwhile, some other guys is making GniftyApp 0.4 because he doesn't feel like working with the first guy.

On the other side of the pond, Microsoft will let something fail, and fail, and fail, tweak, twist, fix, and then they have something worth having.

i'll take heat for this... (1)

edrugtrader (442064) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809279)

it seriously looks like they are moving in the right direction.

HTTP handling in kernel mode... well... maybe they got drunk that day... but the rest sounds like they are making progress and fixing the legacy design issues that have been around since NT and 98.

Issues with Windows 2xxx servers (1)

losttoy (558557) | more than 11 years ago | (#5809280)

What does Windows 2003 offer over Windows 2000? Does it offer more stability? Does it decouple the kernel/core from the applications like the GUI?

I have been concerned about using Windows 2xxx servers because of the tight integration. A change to the Java settings of the browser requires a restart. A change in DNS server or IP address of an interface, randomly, demands a reboot.

IMHO, Microsoft should work on making the OS easier to understand and administer for administrators. Point and click is only one way of making it easier. Unix/Linux scores over Windows because Administrators can see the insides and hence administer the systems more confidently. As an administrator, if I can't trust my OS, I wouldn't run critical apps on it.

All I want from a server OS is a stable filesystem, good I/O and mem-mgmt, clean ways to adminsiter apps, and good security. Not tonnes of attached paraphenila and parasitic apps bundled with the OS.

May the source be your saviour.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>