On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:31:10 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
> A commercial user
> might be persuaded to change for a couple of reasons, the best reason
> being that the new environment provides some valuable function that the
> old does not provide and will not add in an acceptable timeframe.
Yes. This is an important point that bears on the dynamics of Windows
vs. Linux. The Vista release has met with a skeptical response in the
business community. CIOs have largely concluded that Vista is a costly
upgrade that provides few benefits. Most will simply stick with XP and
postpone big decisions for the time being. But others are asking
themselves "Might it not be better to consider a new platform, in which
we will have to invest heavily up front, so we can avoid the cost of
future licensing fees that don't bring better productivity or otherwise
add value to our organization?" Some are looking at Linux thin clients
and Google's webtop applications. Others are considering a partial
deployment of Linux, reserving Windows licenses for the relatively small
number of people who need the full feature set of Excel or other MS
Office applications.
The composition of the desktop OS market is unlikely to change radically
over a short time frame. But the complacency of those who argue that
Microsoft has a permanent lock on the desktop, that the problems with
Vista are no different from what has gone on with previous OS releases,
is wearing thin. A revolution is slowly brewing.
Charlie
|
|
