On Sep 15, 1:00 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Microsoft's plans for XP
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | In yet another conspiracist theory, I explain how Microsoft plans to phase
> | out XP and force upgrades to Vista.
> `----
>
> http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/92724/index.html
The main thing to remember is that Microsoft has moved their "best and
brightest" into supporting Vista and Vista WGA updates.
The XP updates and supports, as well as "security updates" are now
being handled by those who "couldn't quite make the cut" for the
Vista team. Furthermore, they get a much smaller budget, which means
that they are putting out patches that haven't been as thoroughly
tested.
It's a very subtle form of sabotage designed to gradually nudge people
into taking the "forced upgrades" to Vista.
It's a delicate balancing act. Too many really horrid bugs and you
might drive people to Linux instead of Vista. Too few bugs and they
might not convert in a timely manner.
Remember, Microsoft estimates that there are almost 1 billion Windows
users and 90% of them are Windows XP users. The PC industry typically
sells about 100 million computers per year (10% of the base).
Microsoft recently put out a few patches that cause Windows XP to
become vulnerable to a virus that rendered the PC drive unbootable.
They had to scramble to get PC install image CDs out to people via
magazines, because so few people had the capability to re-install a
corrupted XP image.
Remember, about 80% of those 1 billion PCs aren't even capable of
running core Vista functions. They can't support enough RAM, they
don't have the right graphics cards, and the CPU is too slow for
Vista. Of those that remain, only about 20% (about 5% of the base)
have video graphics cards capable of running AeroGlass, which means
that Vista will just run slower, not better.
Most of these customers who have XP already have firewall and anti-
virus software, which means that it isn't critical to upgrade.
Since Microsoft has already tried the "forced upgrade" card, most
corporate customers have already developed contingincy plans to assure
a smooth transition from Windows to Linux if Microsoft attempts to
"force" an upgrade to Vista too quickly.
Many corporations have already begun to mirror applications like
Firefox and Open Office to assure a smooth transition to Linux over
time - if necessary.
IBM's Lotus Notes 8.0 client includes ODF viewer/editors, which will
make composing and exchanging ODF documents much easier. Since most
large insurance and financial corporations use Notes (to assure
regulatory compliance), it is likely that ODF documents will become a
requirement for most of their customers.
The U.S. courts probably won't continue much more intervention in the
form of antitrust actions, which means that if customers and
competitors really want to break the monopoly, they will have to do it
in the marketplace.
If Microsoft continues it's lock-out practices, the ISVs might start
going after the OEMs, pushing them to test against Microsoft or be
named as co-defendents in Collusion cases. Attorney's General in the
"California Group" as well as NY, NJ, and others might even file
Clayton Act lawsuits. After all, if they didn't come forward during
the Antitrust trial and implementation review hearings, they must be
willing conspirators to exclude competitors from the marketplace.
The marketplace itself is consolidating, and becoming more hostile to
Microsoft. HP bought Compaq, and has become an aggressive Linux
supporter. Acer is about to purchase Gateway, and Acer is an
aggressive Linux supporter. IBM sold Lennovo, and the Lennovo
organization, including the former IBM-ers, have been aggressive Linux
supporters. Dell has also been an aggressive Linux supporter. Each
of these vendors makes most of their machines "Linux Ready", and in
some cases, can even make recommendations as to which options will be
Linux compatible.
Sony still appears to be supporting Windows on it's PCs, but even they
are bitter rivals in the game machine industry, where Sony has begun
to offer Linux for the PS/3.
The "Pure Vista Plays" - OEMs who did not subsidize their PC revenue
with secondary revenue streams such as printers, servers, consulting,
or HDTV screens, have been bleeding red ink for years. About the only
time they appeared to be making any profits at all was when they were
producing "Linux Ready" high-end machines.
The fact that there is so much demand for "Linux Ready" machines is
sending a signal to the OEMs as well. In some cases, Linux
compatibility is even listed as one of the requirements, even when the
PC is purchased with XP. When a large corporation is about to
purchase several thousand PCs, one of the things they will often do is
run a "Linux Compatibility Test" using a LiveCD and/or USB drive, just
to see if the machine is actually capable of booting and running
Linux. Machines that can't pass this test don't make the short list.
Intel has found that Core 2 Duo Centrino chips are very popular.
Centrino chips are frequently the choice of Linux users, because Linux
generally doesn't use the features that are not included in Centrino.
This means that Intel can produce more reliable 64 bit and quad-core
centrino chips.
AMD fell behind with the quad-core, which came out late, but they have
made up for the delay by offering chips that are suitable for desktop
and laptop machines, and support 64 bit Linux distributions.
When Microsoft attempted "Forced Upgrades" from Windows NT 4.0 servers
to Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 servers, many of their NT 4.0 servers
were simply converted to Linux. Eventually Microsoft has softened
it's stance, lowered it's license fees, improved server support,
smoothed out performance, and improved their support for running as a
virtualized client, which has increased the count and market share of
Windows servers (virtual) in the marketplace.
In the server market, Linux has turned out to be a boon to Microsoft.
Solutions such as VMWare ESX and Xen provide the ability to run a very
lightly configured Linux system (usually command line and web
interface) which can then be used to load virtualized Windows 2003
servers. These are easier to back-up, easier to recover, easier to
deploy full configurations, and less sensitive to hardware upgrades.
The virtualized solution also makes it easier to get more
functionality from fewer hardware boxes. For a while it was getting
to the point where Windows servers were less than 5% utilized but
functions couldn't be combined into a single machine because of DLL
conflicts and licensing terms. Linux hosting of virtualized Windows
machines has improved the ability to get more performance out of the
available hardware. Linux can also use SAN and NAS storage and hide
all of the complexities from Windows, making the Windows
administration much simpler.
Given that many of these large virtualized server customers are also
large PC customers. New desktop virtualization tools such as VMWare
player and GSX make it simpler to deploy "standard image" virtualized
Windows images that can be backed up and recovered using Linux tools.
Windows XP or 2000 doesn't go away, it just becomes more managable as
a virtualized client.
Microsoft may even need to come up with either a "Vista Light", or an
enhanced version of Windows 2000 or XP that is better optimized for
use as a virtualized client. They can strip away most of the driver
support, most of the DirectX graphics optimizations (Linux has DirectX
to OpenGL conversions, or Microsoft could provide one).
Windows isn't going away, but Linux will be moving into the desktop
with it.
Remember, Linux already protects most PCs by providing firewalls, WiFi
hubs, SAN and NAS storage. Linux is used on many DVRs, it's also used
to control many HDTV systems as well as GPS navigators. It's only a
matter of time before having Linux provide that final layer of
integration on the PC itself becomes inevitable.
Most users won't even know they are using Linux. They will see some
applications that are new, but they will still have a desktop with the
familiar Windows logo, familiar applications, and familiar tools.
There will just be a launch bar on one side or above or below, that
will have the Linux applications and configuration tools. If the user
enables the desktop switcher, they can switch to another desktop that
provides Linux functionality. If not, they will just see Windows with
some new applications and a Linux distributor logo hidden off in the
secondary tool bar.
It's not even a matter of whether, but when, and how many. Mac is
very popular and commanding healthy profit margins. Vista is getting
a lot of market resistance and "Vista Only" machines have been marked
down to prices below cost. The profitable machines are the ones that
are "Linux Ready", and many of those machines (most according to Dell
back in march), are being sold with Windows XP Professional (even
though it is technically a downgraded Vista Business Edition license).
Microsoft will have to make a few changes to gain acceptance of
Vista. They will need to soften the language on the license. They
will need to reduce the "spread" (difference in prices) between Vista
Home Basic and Vista Business (since Virtualized Vista would need to
run "light" like Home Basic, but would need to permit use as VM
Client. They will need to provide a very low cost "upgrade" to permit
upgrades to Vista Business (or at least the VM license) to permit use
as a VM Client. This needs to be something that can easily be
provided to retail customers as well.
Ironically, Retailers may be the biggest force pushing Linux. Many
smaller retailers and computer stores are now beginning to configure
systems with Linux and a Windows XP VM. They pay the OEM price for
the configuration, but use the VM to simplify installation, support,
and management.
If Microsoft can "play nice" with Linux, they have a bright future
ahead of them, and will probably get credit for most of the Linux
capabilities, much the way they get credit for the Internet
capabilities provided by IE access to Unix and Linux servers.
If Microsoft tries to stick with the "All or Nothing" tactics of the
past, they can expect more pressure and more resistance from everyone
from the courts and prosecutors, to the vendors, OEMs, and Retailers,
to the corporate customers.
Microsoft's "Hard Line Tactics" have already created demand for
Firefox, Open Office, Java, and OSS API support that has penitrated as
much as 50% of the market. A good push from Microsoft could trigger
open revolt, with major Fortune 500 corporations refusing to accept
anything but ODF documents, refusing to do business with web sites
that don't support Firefox, and refusing to accept applications
written to "Windows-only" API sets (.NET, VB, VC#).
Microsoft has had a monopoly on the PC market for almost 20 years. A
new generation is taking over, and many of them started using Linux in
Jr High or High School when Windows 95 wouldn't run on their 80486 PCs
with 8 megabytes of RAM. In some cases, their first computers were
left in the back alleys or county recycling centers, with the hard
drives completely cleaned of all software (if they even had a hard
drive). They installed Linux on these systems, and turned them into
web browsers and even web servers, or test beds for web servers. Many
of these kids passed Linux CDs around like they were the latest new
drug. Even if they didn't disable Windows, they could boot the live-
CDs, and run Linux as a secondary system.
With Bill Gates about to retire, it's hard to see anyone with the
technical prowess that he displayed. It's hard to see anyone with the
ability to bluff the way he did, the ability to lie to customers, the
public, even congress, and get away with it long enough to earn the
money to pay the penalties. It's even questionable whether Microsoft
would be willing to "Bail Out" any other officer in the company who
committed similar acts. Would Microsoft pay $1 billion to keep Steve
Ballmer out of jail?
The good thing is that Bill Gates is giving it away as efficiently as
he made it. The Gates Foundation gets huge "bang for the buck" by
leveraging donations with other sources and organizations to produce
much more result for the amount of money donated. Sure, there were
some of those charities reccomended by Jack Abrams and Tom DeLay that
didn't pan out so well, but then again, Bill seems to have gotten a
lot of value for his donation (The DOJ hasn't supported ANY of the
complaints against Microsoft).
|
|
