__/ [ Linonut ] on Sunday 10 September 2006 03:32 \__
> After takin' a swig o' grog, fakir005 belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Is Microsoft going to develop a new Operating System every two years.
>
> Microsoft has shown they simply can't develop a new OS every two years.
>
> Even the five or so years they are taking is simply too fast a rate of
> churn for many businesses.
>
> Luckily, Microsoft's OS's are primarily aimed at consumers. They don't
> know from churn, as longs as their main apps run or come bundled with
> the OS.
Compare Microsoft's development model with that of Linux. Since there is
parallel effort by various teams (or vendors), there is greater chance of
success. And the work is not truly fragmented. If GNOME, for example, went
AWOL (temporarily), other desktop environments would be there, as well as
the ability to 'blend' with older version. If Red Hat, for example,
struggles to get Xen integration into a stable state, then you have Novell.
This fashion of production provides a safety net, as well as a greater pool
of skill. And, again, it's not about forking. It's about targetting
different niches and reusing similar components that best suit the job at
hand. Since the best components survive, it's an evolutionary process that
culls out mistakes and leads to an optimal choice. Best components build the
best systems. Apple can't compete with that.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | http://en.opensuse.org
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 1.36 0.91 0.58 5/156 3390
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
|
|
