My Network World blogging colleague Ron Barrett has whooped up a firestorm with his blog post "Why Windows 7 will crush Linux". I have to say he's one brave soul for taking on the open source and Linux crowd. They're a passionate and vocal bunch, and the only thing higher on their "most-wanted list" than George Bush is Microsoft. Ron seems to weathering it well, though, so more power to him for saying what he believes.
In the interest of being fair and balanced, I'm respectfully taking the other viewpoint -- that Linux won't get crushed by Windows 7. We could do a feature-by-feature comparison of the two operating systems, but I believe there are more fundamental, systemic reasons Linux isn't going away anytime soon. Matter of fact, many of them are the exact reasons open source and Linux have become such a dominant force in software. That's not to say I think Windows 7 will be a failure, either. I believe Windows 7 is going to be a very big success -- on the desktop.
Now, for my arguments why Windows 7 won't kill off Linux:
Free beer is, well, free. No matter how hard anyone argues that "open source has a higher TCO," free software will always feel like it's free. If your staff has the inclination, they can download and run any variety of Linux distros on desktops or servers. There's no program to sign up for, and no sales person will call.
Free has given Linux the keys to the backdoor of untold numbers of data centers and computer rooms. So, there's no doubt Linux has solidified itself in the data center, including on the desktops of many IT and network technical staff. Will Linux continue its march onto users' desktops? Maybe Windows 7 will slow the progress, but Linux certainly isn't going away any time soon.
Upgrades, it's up to you. Let's face it, not everyone wants to cozy up to one dominant vendor, Microsoft. We've all been through or heard about situations where Microsoft is forcing us to upgrade because they aren't supporting a version of Windows (or other products) anymore. It's the proverbial gun-to-the-head scenario -- at least that's how many customers see it. And we are all waiting for the same to happen with Windows XP to get us to move to Windows 7.
This doesn't happen with Linux. Want to hang on and run your apps on some obscure version of slackware or Fedora? Go right ahead, there's no one to stop you, and you'll very likely find the software's still supported somewhere in the community. There's no one dominant vendor to force an upgrade from you. Some will never put their IT systems completely onto the Microsoft treadmill.
The Linux and Mac crowds have banded together. With Mac OS X being built on BSD, a sibling of Linux, many Linux fans I know and work with quickly moved to Mac OS X on Apple hardware for their everyday desktop or laptop. Not only is BSD familiar to Linux users, it also brings a proven Apple desktop experience with a big dose of chic. To me this is an odd-bedfellows sort of match though, given Apple's expensive hardware and history of locking in customers. That's something I would think open source advocates would rail against. But many Linux users have now banded together with Apple, strengthening their lines on both the Linux and Apple battlefronts. I guess this proves the old adage, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
(Author's note: Okay, if those lofty ideas didn't convince you Linux isn't gonna get killed off by Windows 7, these last two are my closers. Simple and straight to the point.)
If XP's so good, why didn't it already kill off Linux? That says it all. Nuff said.
And if Windows 7 doesn't wow XP users into converting, why would Linux users convert? We don't know the answer to this one yet, but still -- nuff said.
Like this? Here are some of Mitchell's recent posts.
- Windows 7 - The Dilemma XP Users Will Face
- Windows 7: It's Still All About The XP Users
- Windows 7 Has Its First Blunder
- Premature to Call Pre the savior of Palm
- Top 8 Microsoft Research Projects To Improve Our Lives
- Cisco Nips Xobni From Microsoft's Bud
- Muglia Promotion Secures Windows Azure Future
Mitchell's Book Recommendations:
Also visit Mitchell's other blogs and podcasts:
Visit Microsoft Subnet for more news, blogs, opinion from around the Web. Sign up for the bi-weekly Microsoft newsletter. (Click on News/Microsoft News Alert.)
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Wow
Anyone who switches to Linux will surely NEVER go back, that much I know for sure!
www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
really?
I "switched" to various versions of linux in the last 12 years (yes 12) and always came back to either Windows or Mac OS depending on the time... Linux (even newer desktop distros like Ubuntu) is just not it for everyone, just face it.
However I migrated my sister to Ubuntu last year and she never complained! (I'm not sure she knows yet)
Really switching
That's not really switching then - you put "switch" in quotation marks. If you keep "switching" to Linux and then going back after awhile, that's really just trying it out and deciding you don't like it.
Sure Linux is not it for everyone. But I think the parent post's point is that if someone really did switch to Linux because they believed it was better than Windows, they'll likely not decide to switch back.
What on earth is your point?
What you've just said is 'only people who switch for real are switchers'.
What he said is 'I've tried to switch repeatedly and it doesn't stick.'
His point is that to him (and to be honest, to a lot of people) when the put the effort in to try and switch, the effort simply isn't worth it, and so they go back to Windows. That's IMPORTANT because if the Linux fans figured out why that happens, they might be able to fix the problem and turn 'tasters' into 'switchers'.
Getting bogged down in semantics is completely missing the point.
Most people don't decide Linux is better than switch. Most people hear about Linux, give it a try, then decide to switch or not.
I switched
I switched in 2003 and never did go back. It is obvious if someone has been trying to switch for 12 years he isn't completely happy with Windows. Maybe that is how this particular individual deals with everything in life but there are certainly thousands of people that switched and are quite happy they did.
Wayne
I switched and went back
I switched to Linux for a few months, and went back to Windows after that.
Euhm, Linux is a sibling of
Euhm, Linux is a sibling of UNIX, BSD is also a sibling of UNIX but a more direct one, so actually Mac OSX is the uncle of Linux.
Hey Cuz
I think that would make them cousins.
Mitchell Ashley
Converging Network, LLC
Personal blog: http://www.theconvergingnetwork.com
Personal podcast: http://ashimmy.podomatic.com
A sibling of a asibling is another sibling
A sibling is a brother or sister. So according to rv, your brother's brother is your uncle, and according to Mitchell Ashley, your brother's brother is your cousin. Alabamans, I presume. ;) "Euhm, Linux is a sibling of UNIX, BSD is also a sibling of UNIX but a more direct one, so actually Mac OSX is the uncle of Linux." rv, how can there be a "more direct" brother or sister?
Siblings?
BSD is a _descendant_ of the original UNIX, as is the current SysV Unix. Linux (and GNU Hurd) are siblings of UNIX, because they are inspired by UNIX without using any UNIX code.
If anything, Linux is Mac OSX's uncle.
Post new comment