Microsoft will always beat Open Source

OPEN SOURCE will always be a poor cousin to Microsoft, according to a report by boffins at Harvard Business School.
In a new report, professors Pankaj Ghemawat and Ramon Casadesus-Masanell have sat down with their books of economic formulae and come up with a stinging rebuffing of the Open Source phenomena.

Ghemawat and Casadesus-Masanell decided to look at the Open Source versus Vole in terms of competitive dynamics and ask if OSS ever displace traditional software from market leadership.

In their concisely titled academic paper 'Dynamic Mixed Duopoly: A Model Motivated by Linux vs. Windows', the authors believe neither side is likely to be forced from the battlefield, but Vole will always be the leader.

This was a bit of a surprise to them, because when they started they thought that network effects and demand-side learning would result in Linux forcing Windows out.

It turned out that they had failed to realise that a larger installed base together with its pricing power allow the company to price strategically to control Linux's market share.

Lowering the price of Windows would cause the demand for Linux to shrink to a point where it is not a threat, they said.

There is an interview with the report’s authors [link=http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4834.html]here[/link].

[link=http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34276]source[/link]

 

What there not seeing is that educational institutes are starting to adopt linux (India being a recent example), the one laptop per child program (the laptops run linux) AND, the cherry on the cake, Vista. Vista cant be used on most pc's in existance today and most famailys wont just go out and buy a new pc...

so it up to us geeks, to spread the word of linux to theese older pc's!

for some strange reason, i think that lot might have an effect on the market share;

not that it really effects me, linux basically developed without a market... and so it will continue to develop, with or without a market. You cant beat that sort of development.

 

Thats true! :good: like this website is getting more busier so we can spread linux throught this way as well!.....

 

The thing is, with the reported prices for Vista, they're going up. If their model is correct--and I do believe they are--then we will see Linux in use.

 

I remember Wal-Mart saying they were going to sell computers with Linux installed to help keep prices down.... how did that pan out?

Seeing as so many people find windows hard enough to use I imagine Linux would be a nightmare, especially for people swapping OSs.

If Linux supported more mainstream programs and took on the simplistic installation that Windows boasts im sure it would become more popular.
But the more popular Linux becomes the weaker the security argument will become.

 

Its not the installation that people find difficult, its probably installing custom applications, or getting used to the different software.

Windows is NOT simple to install, definately not as user friendly as Linux installers. What do you mean by the security argument? Linux is the most popular server OS for web sites, it runs most sites on the internet and I'd make a good guess nearly 90% or so of FTP servers. Yet GNU/Linux operating systems are still more secure than Windows.

 

well i may be thick (everyone is with something they don't know) but now i've come away from MS i won't be going back, i'm in linux for the long haul, besides that it's mega's fault ,
but i couldnt be on linux without HWF, thankies guys[ot]i'll get mega back someday, LOL[/ot]

 

That doesn't force a switch towards Linux. People will just keep using XP until they get a new pc shipped with Vista, plain and simple.

It doesn't impress any common user hearing that Linux is more secure, oss and so forth. I think we've established that. Right now, people are happy to pay hundreds of dollars for their copy of Windows, and I don't see why it would change over the next few years. Let alone, let's say, Microsoft dropping the price to $50.

Are you guys telling me you wouldn't think about getting your Vista copy right at launch if it was only $50 ? I think a "yes" would be a lie in most cases.

Although hardware support for Linux is better than it was, it's still extremely poor compared to Windows. Until video cards become fully functional under Linux, we can forget about gamers not getting Windows.

 

My video card works fine in Linux, as does the rest of my hardware. If you compare the general hardware compatibility of Linux to, say, Mac OS, you'd be seeing a pretty big chasm between the two. When you think about it that way, you really do have a very broad choice when it comes to hardware for your Linux system, it just needs to be thought out a bit before implementation.

As for video cards not working right in Linux, that's not true at all. 3D is faster and more reliable with my hardware configuration on Linux than it is in Windows. This is at least partially because I compile my kernels with multimedia and multitasking in mind, and partially because I am using an NVidia video card. ATI doesn't really have superb drivers in Windows, but their Linux drivers are what I would call 3rd rate. So, if you're serious about using Linux, you should also be thinking about what hardware you want to be using. For most people, this means avoiding and/or ditching ATI hardware until they make a more serious effort to support the platform. Also, not buying printers and scanners which do not support Linux well should be a given.

My opinion on the article, if anyone cares for it, is that people will continue running Windows no matter how bad it gets. This is because 90% of the world equates computers with Windows, right along with crashes, malware, insecurity and unpredictability. But that doesn't mean that those of us who realize there are more productive and cost-effective platforms out there should hop on the MS marketing bandwagon, either. Remember that Brittany Spears has sold more records than Ludwig Van Beethoven, but dear white-trash Brittany will only be a brief footnote in history (if she's lucky). Beethoven's contributions have changed the very foundations of music. Personally, I hope the situation between Windows and superior open-source operating systems will one day end up like that. Maybe then, you won't have to make weekend trips to Grandma's house to remove trojans and defragment her HDD.

 

I would not use Vista even if it were given away free. At the same time, I would quite happily pay for Linux.

Hardware support is better in Linux then in Windows in my experience. More hardware is likely to work 'out-of-the-box' then it does it Windows. Take my Hauppauge Nova-T TV card for example. Linux not only installed it automatically, but also set up the infra-red controller too.

I've even found printers easier to set up in Linux. A few months ago I had to install a HP All-in-one printer. I choose to install it in Windows first thinking it would be easier. Nope. Not only did Windows not have the driver, I couldn't even find it on HP's website!
All I had to do in Linux was go to the printer control panel and select the printer from the list. God it was sooo easy and it worked straight away

I've never had a problem setting up my nVidia card in Linux. If you use Linspire / Freespire then it's already done for you.

 

Yes.

My printer was also very easy to set up. In Mandriva 2007 beta, it was detected automatically. After choosing a comaptible driver for it I was away in no more than 2 minutes. The driver also has many options for economy mode etc.

Windows and its hardware detection is not great. I've had many pieces of hardware requiring a driver disk to install the software. It relies on the manufacturer most of the time. Linux makes a better effort, and a lot of the drivers are built into the kernel (as modules anyway). Of course, there are those exotic pieces of hardware which the manufacturer only provide the drivers for windows, ie. Creative with its high end X-Fi cards.

Vista is definately not an option, I might try it as a demo one day to see what its like (if I can run it). Since its not fair to judge it without having tried it for myself, but I will in no way switch from my primary OS back to Windows where Linux does a better job. Might give FreeBSD a try though...

 

I second that sentiment wholeheartedly. The fact that the Linux platform is free only makes it that much more appealing!

 

My point is this: the os has to be invisible to the end-user. And I understand no OS is like that, but I like to think Windows is more like that in many ways (I never said it means it's better).

You guys might want, and actually like, to recompile your kernels, but the common user does not want to have to deal with that.

I already have an ATI card. I shouldn't need to switch to nvidia in order to do what I want. And whether it's ATI's fault is irrelevant for the reason mentioned above.

This has nothing to do with the fact that Linux has more potential. It has everything to do with the fact that with Windows, everyone can install any piece of hardware. I actually know very little about computers, but I can dig information because I'm determined to do so. However, the common user might not be interested in doing that. As far as Apple goes, I really don't see why I'd pay at least double the price for a Mac. Absolutely none of its advantages apply to me.

I buy ATI partly because it is a Canadian company. I don't wanna' encourage an American company when I can avoid it. Oh and the fact AMD bought ATI is irrelevant because the same people are still working at ATI.

I'm just trying to put some perspective here. Flame away.

EDIT: Addis: Stope being a smart ass. I said in MOST cases. The fact you're answering yes does not contradict me AT ALL. thx

 

It's not any Linux distro's fault that ATI's Linux drivers suck. How can it be? ATI drivers are closed-source; nobody but ATI has access to the code. If you choose to use ATI, you also choose their horrible Linux drivers. As for the OS being user transparent, have your mom explain NTFS to me and I'll buy it. OS X is the most user-transparent OS available, and I don't see that holding the market share.

I'll concede that the good Unix distros need a "dumb user" friendly installer, but then again, most typical users don't install their own OS anyway. It's a moot point, don't you think?

 

As AT has said several times before, once set up, Linux distros can be very very easy to use for basic users. For those who want to mess with things a bit, it can be daunting... but wait! For who? If you grow up with windows and know how to mess with it, you are used to the different things that you have to do to get things accomplished. For example: Nobody without looking it up would have known that you could type msconfig in "run" to mess with what programs start up, right? Its the same for linux. If you want to mess with settings in Linux, you have to know the commands. The catch is that the commands are not the same as the windows commands. This is NOT a bad thing. You can do so very much using bash in linux that it is almost unbelievable. If you know how to use linux properly you can do incredibly powerful things and you have to learn them, just like you have to learn how to use windows. The difference is that you can accomplish more using the commands and programs in linux than you would ever accomplish using the windows commands.

And to be honest, I'm not quite sure what to think of Linux's progress with things like media formats. I completely understand the philosophy of not wanting to use things like wmv because they want to be completely open source, but I think it is important for them to let people use closed source drivers and formats out of the box to attract more mainstream users (Although I may not fully understand their reasoning for doing what they do). And although I think it sucks that ATI's drivers completely suck in Linux, because they dont give two :swear: about linux users, they can piss off. I would be willing to pay extra money to nvidia simply because they are willing to try to work on quality drivers for linux users. When I was running Windows, I was way into ATI. I was a dedicated user and buyer of ATI products. Those that have been around a while may remember AT selling first a ATI 9500 pro, and later a ATI 9800 pro, both with custom heatsyncs. Since I started using linux, I haven't purchased a single ATI product. There is nothing that Linux can do about a company that is unwilling to open up the source code for drivers and wont develop any that are worthwhile. That is the same problem with programs. The most common complaint that I get after installing Linux on somebody's system is that Windows programs dont work (Nevermind the fact that I told them very clearly in advance that it is not a Windows OS and it will not run ANY Windows programs). This is in no way a Linux distros fault. Installers for native linux programs actually look fine [just as good as in Windows or Mac]. I think the UT2k4 installer looks fine. It's not some insane command line stuff. I dont rember having problems with Savage, Limewire, or any other closed source, linux native program that I have installed. I just want to remind people that it is the distributors fault that there aren't linux/Mac/Windows programs instead of strictly Windows or Windows/Mac programs. Hell, my roomate just had to drop an online Math class because he had a Mac and the website he submitted his homework on not only required IE, but REQUIRED Windows. Whatever, I think im ranting now.
Fred

 

No, you're right Fred. And if I could relate in summation the tales of stupidity I deal with on a daily basis with "Windows professionals", you might just die outright. There's little wonder that MS' heavily marketed OS is the de-facto standard, because most people in the world are stupid beyond belief.

[ot]Yes, I know I am a moderator of this site and as such I am held to a high standard. But I am not willing to pretend I am not aware of the things I am aware of just to appease the masses who accept the popular OS choice as the best one.[/ot]

 

It varies from distro to distro, but I like the control I have from the get-go. That's Linux blessing and it's curse: the variety and customization with the tons of apps that come with many distros. Linux has come a long way in the hardware support area, with few issues. Pending any hoops, I think with AMD taking over ATi, it could open the door, as AMD's management may be a little more open.

Of course, what Linux doesn't have going for it is the average consumer, or as Stalin said "useful idiots".

I love people who complain about Microsoft's OSes like they're being forced to use it and can't get another OS. Then it's MS fault for pretty much being a business I mean, you can go pickup, or download a distro if you want. It's not like Microsoft is holding a gun to your head to use Windows. Most of the support issues I see is not with Linux so much as 3rd parties in software and hardware.

 

Yes, I agree B, very well put. Besides, even addressing the argument that Windows is easier to set up than Linux (which is largely relative to the distro you're talking about), OS X is undoubtedly easier to configure and use for most users than Windows. Better yet, no extraordanary precautions are required to keep the system afloat. Of course, this also applies to any non-MS operating system I can think of.

As for the ease of installation and setup, I believe that's why Ubuntu has really taken off.

• Not many setup choices, just installs with a basic configuration.
• Installs with Gnome desktop by default, which is not very flexible or customizable by design.
• Hides advanced tools that might confuse new users.
• Dumbs down security to a large extent. This is by making the system behave very much like Windows by making the user run as a root-like (admin) account by default.
  Note: There is no real benefit from this behaviour, just pure user perception of being 'easier'. Unlike Windows, Linux has no usability benefit from running as root full-time. In fact, it's inexcusable to do so!

 

Well, i'm suprised this didn't come up but as a gamer and the real reason why i bought my machine and a lot of other do is to play games. The fact being it keeps the market open, escecially high end crap like $600 vid cards. GAMES!!. If there was a good mostly hassel free was of playing games on linux like on windows i wouldn't even give windows a second thought. Yes its sad that people don't realize what the open source movement or what open source is for that matter, but its true. It probably won't ever overtake windows. As for the pricing being the only matter, i don't think thats true, windows has so much extra crap to deal with its not funny.

 

Okay I don't see why u guys keep bashing ATI, printer makers, 3d party software makers, etc. for their cards or printers or software or whatever else that doesn't work with linux. They're certainly at fault but it's irrelevant to what harrack52 was saying. Regardless of whose fault is it, why should he inconvenience himself by switching to an nvidia card? I, for instance, use AIM just because all my friends use it. I don't like it too much, I bet there are better "messengers" out there, but I'm not gonna dump the ability to talk to my friends online just cuz I don't like the program! So, same with ATI. It doesn't matter if it's ATI's fault. The only thing that matters is that harrack52 seems to want to keep using an ATI card. And Windows lets him do that. End of story. Dunno why u guys keep bashing ATI lol, it doesn't even matter. The fact that it works on one and not the other is all that matters. I think u guys missed his point on that lol.

And, by extension, there are probably plenty of other users who feel the same way as harrack.