[Sussex] Steve Ballmer using Linux in public

[Paul Tansom]

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 19:43 +0100, Geoffrey Teale wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 15:45 +0100, Paul Tansom wrote:
> > Is it? Where would you stand on the motives/benefits of a Microsoft
> > produced Linux distribution?
> 
> ----- %< ------
> 
> An interesting post.  If Microsoft did produce a part proprietary distro
> they would just be one of many - step up Novell / SuSE and Sun for
> example.  Ignoring their past and the marketing weight of the products
> they could bring to the platform the problems are still the same.
> 
> I posted a couple of weeks ago about there only being one "free" distro
> within the definition of "free" defined by the Free Software Foundation.
> It's an important point that many parties are too willing to ignore.
> Sure practicality means that many of us spend a lot of time working in a
> compromised environment, but we should be pushing towards freedom (and I
> mean actively campaigning for it) if we value any of the things that
> GNU/Linux brings us that we can't get from Microsoft.  Indeed it is that
> freedom that has made GNU/Linux a success so far where so many others
> have failed.  If we were just tearing down one closed monopoly with
> another we would have achieved nothing.
> 
> To quote the Who:
> 
> "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
> 
> Those who discount the importance of "Free Software" as opposed to
> "Open" or "Shared" source would do well to meditate in those words.

Good points, although Novell / SuSE are opening up a bit - no idea about
Sun, I did pick up their demo CD at a Linux show some time back, but
that's as far as it got - it's in a pile of CDs somewhere!.

I think my visualisation of a MS Linux was pretty much based on a
totally proprietary MS coded DE on top of X (so a competitor to KDE and
Gnome), which should be feasible. This could quite easily be a rewrite
of a Windows compatible GUI in terms of look and API which basically
leaves Linux as the kernel, compatibility with X to run any Linux based
apps, but to all intents and purposes Windows still. I guess this is
sort of what has happened to MacOS if you think about it!

I don't think any of the current distros with proprietary elements have
quite the strength of market presence that MS have, but then nor did MS
originally, so it is something to watch. Migrating between any of the
existing distros is still fairly straightforward - configuration is
different in some respects, but on the whole (bar things like Red Hat
and the commercial applications support) you can run any app you were
using (even most commercial apps would have a decent chance if you're
willing to forgo official support).

I guess with the current situation you are looking at cross (Linux)
platform compatibility, with an aim at cross platform compatibility of
applications (so more apps that could run on either - well any as you
should add BSD, MacOS, etc.). With my hypothetical scenario you would
still have the MS vs the rest of the world issue.

I think I'm a little more flexible on my idea of a "free" distro, and
will accept a certain amount of proprietary stuff (at least temporarily)
because of my grounding firmly in the practicalities of current business
requirements. I still see and aim for the ideal option though, and
computing was certainly much more fun in many ways back in the days of
sharing code and the listings pages in the back of magazines like Your
Computer, etc..

Ook, I'm getting nostalgic, I'll be reaching into my retro cupboard in a
minute if I'm not careful!

-- 
Paul Tansom | Aptanet Ltd. | http://www.aptanet.com/