____/ BearItAll on Thursday 06 September 2007 16:07 : \____
> Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Why I?m staying with Debian
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| And Debian, for all its endless squabbles and the posturing of some of
>>>| its developers, has overall proven itself a community I can trust. So,
>>>| at least for the time being, I?ll be sticking with Debian.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://brucebyfield.wordpress.com/2007/09/05/why-im-staying-with-debian/
>>>
>>> On the other hand, by contract, this is astonishing:
>>>
>>> XenSource dishes embedded hypervisor to OEMs
>>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/05/xensource_oem_edition_announced/
>>>
>>> Hypervisor vendor adds "embedded" version
>>>
>>> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6921141970.html
>>>
>>> XenSource Offers Embedded Hypervisor for Server OEM's
>>>
>>>
>
http://www.linuxelectrons.com/news/hardware/11703/xensource-offers-embedded-hypervisor-server-oems
>>>
>>> XenSource unveils OEM edition
>>>
>>> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=172508174&rid=-50
>>>
>>>
>>> No menion of Linux. This is official: Microsoft hijacked XenSource, so
>>> Xen needs to be forked or altogether abandoned.
>>>
>>
>> It's inevitable; Microsoft cannot have people running Windows on Linux -
>> it would stop them from doing all kinds of little tricks to keep the
>> customers updating/patching and generally paying again.
>>
>
> I think that MS will find they have no choice, they already know this really
> because they did the work on XP to make it VMable (I think I just invented
> a new word). Because as virtual remote machines build momentum, then MS
> have to be prepared to be served from the bulk of the Internet servers
> which are UNIX and Linux.
>
> But also internal to companies, the more powerfull of the servers and
> therefore most likely to make good VM servers are going to be
> UNIX/Linux/Solaris machines, you can't have fluff on a machine that is
> serving VMs, you need all the raw power you can get your hands on.
>
> MS are going to have to be ready with a VM version, which they have with XP,
> MS did the work so that XP could be VMified (bugger me another new word). I
> really can't see that they could get away with not virtualising Vista (I
> mean if it ever comes good).
They have already placed restrictions on VMs for Vista (price). They still try
to change their business plan and models. Whilst moving online, they strive to
use OOXML to keep people's data hostage. This is truly and utterly repulsive.
Microsoft as we know it is struggling and I don't think the buybacks can keep
up appearance for long. For the time being, they just try to sabotage the
rivals' work (SCO, XenSource, anti-Linux studies, "patent terrorism", etc).
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | No SCO code was used to generate this sig
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
02:05:01 up 31 days, 4:58, 5 users, load average: 0.69, 1.06, 1.34
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
