that is what I think they want to do in the future. Have the total control of the computer world.
that is what I think they want to do in the future. Have the total control of the computer world.
They "own" about 86% now....Hmmm wonder why? Every PC sold has Windoz on it! Why not sell boxes with no OS preloaded?!?!?!? Never understood why it ws not that way!
Better OS's out there, including Linux, OSX, etc.
/\ it's true bundled things are usually cheaper. however, many (if not most??) linux operating systems are free. And i'm not sure they are any hard to install these days that any other software.
Oh, I am with you mike, there are many advantages and I agree an operating system in itself isn't that difficult but when they then have to install drivers, media players, configure settings etc many will have a problem.
But are they vulnerable to Google? Will MS be dust in 7 years? Or can they re-invent themselves?
no, what I was saying is when you buy your box at Best Buy or Circuit City etc., the store loads whatever OS you want!!!
Man, for a supposedly technologically advanced society that we are suppose to be, most know very little of how their machines work!
In selling computers for 7 years on a retail level, I saw every conceivable "reason" why they were returned...all operator created!
Microsoft dominates the world now. However, after seeing and using Vista and MS Office 2007 I really think they have done themselves in. I don't know if you have seen Microsoft Office 2007 but it will be a real huge learning curve for most people. Its not like all other office versions like from Office 95, to Office 97, to Office Xp, to Office 2003. Its a huge change. Everything a person has learned back to the original office is null and void if you learned the menus rather then the icons as now everything is done via icons. Open Office has a real good chance as the learning curve from Office 2003 to Office 2007 is much greater then from Office 2003 to Open Office 2.1. Plus all documents from 2003 are supported in Open Office and Open office has a supported Open Document Format…a format in which MS has tried to change.
Vista is such a huge change, almost linux like. So why not use linux such the learning curve will also be large.
So I predict in 5 to 7 years MS will be a minority rather then a majority.
Could microsoft release a proprietary linux? or would they have to make a look-alike?
I don't think they'll dominate. I would strongly consider a move to linux or OS X, EXCEPT....the software that I need to use is Windows only, and is extremely graphics intensive (ie, the drivers need to be perfect). So I'm stuck with Windows. Many companies are really only looking for the ability to run Office, so it doesn't make that big a deal between OS X and Windows as far as that's concerned. But the biggest thing that MS has going for it is that Windows is so pervasive. Everyone knows how to use, at the very least, the basic features.
The companies that could be in hot water in the future are the PC manufacturers. Since Windows can now run on Macs (Microsoft is OK here...have to buy a Windows license), there may not be as much of areason to buy a PC as there has been in the past.
It is a toss up for me, I don't like the monopoly mentality of MS - our way or the highway. I am a little worried about vista and what it will do for things like me being able to make legal backups of my dvd's etc.
On the other hand though, while I can't say I have tried everything I find office to be the most full featured product. Certainly the other programs have a disadvantage as I started in office. I have been using vista and office 07 prereleases for awhile now and much like in XP I haven't had any problems. I do take precautions though that maybe I shouldn't have to. I restore my drive to a clean image every month.
I am savvy enough for many application type things but not savvy enough to do things like mess with the registry etc. I didn't have much of problem switching over to office 07. I think it is the best office yet.
Real competition may come in the form of Google. With a move to more and more web based computing. As more and more people get high speed available in their area I can see that happening. I use google doc and spreadsheets all the time for collaborative based things, being a park ranger our offices are spread out and it is really handy even though most of us are on dial up. Coupled with its limited features is a smaller learning curve and it works better than some other things we have tried such as combinations of outlook, acrobat, project and some other ms app I can't remember maybe it was called one note or something.
In any case not being up to date on the industry it is just my guess but something like that would seam to have the advantage of replacing microsoft over some non web based suite. It is currently free but some subscription based fuller featured product might make it.
I expect Microsoft's dominance to increase in the next few years. Microsoft hopes eventually to move to a utility-style model of software use, in which your use of Windows will be paid for on a monthly or annual basis, like you pay your utility bills.......and like your utility bills, failure to pay the bill will result in the cessation of services (that is, Windows will shut down and refuse to operate untill the bill is paid). Microsoft has actually been experimenting with this model for some time. The technology for implementing this model of use has actually been built into every version of Windows since XP. "Windows Genuine Advantage" (the feature in XP which causes Windows to shut down and refuse to operate if it thinks it has been installed on a different machine) is a part of this technology.
Microsoft hopes to move the licensing of Windows to a time-limited basis. In other words, you will purchase Windows along with a license to use it for, say, one year. During that year, MS will offer updates and support as part of the license agreement. At the end of the year, you may either renew the license or stop using the computer. Windows will refuse to operate beyond the specified license period. Microsoft will also refuse to authorize renewals of the license agreement on outdated versions of Windows, to keep everyone around the world up to date with the latest software. Microsoft sees the current situation of multiple different versions of Windows simultaneously in use to be a management problem. It's too difficult to manage security concerns, interoperability of the different OSs, and support for such a diverse field. They can much better control the situation (and reduce their costs of operation) if everyone is on the same page with the same OS. [I am aware of organizations today in which various members of the organization are using either Win 95, Win 98, Win 2K, Win NT, Win Server 2003, and Windows XP. MS can reduce their operating costs and simplify management by forcing the update of all of this "ancient" software. Of course, forcing companies to buy all those new upgrade copies of Windows won't be bad for MS, either!]
The utility model of software use will raise the cost of using Windows substantially to the end user. But it will raise MS's financial fortunes considerably (can you imagine every person on Earth who uses Windows sending money to MS every month!).
The immediate future of Microsoft looks very, very good. Whether or not their software is well-written, safe, stable, or easy to use means nothing. Apple is not a threat to MS. Should Apple get out of line, or begin selling too many computers, MS will eliminate them. Microsoft is in the unique position of being guaranteed success as a company, regardless of how they chart the course of their future enterprise.
There are many distributions of Linux which are sold retain (Suse, Mandriva, etc.) but what you are actually purchasing when you buy the package are the instruction manuals, the convenience of the package, and software support from the distribution. You can obtain the same software free, if you're willing to work hard enough to find it and put the various pieces back together. Microsoft could release their own distribution of Linux, but then they would have to release the source code of their new MS-Linux to the public. Then, anyone who so desired could take that source code from MS and reassemble it into MS-Linux. They could offer the reassembled version on the internet for anyone to download free, and it would be identical to MS's product. That would all be perfectly legal, so long as all Microsoft trademarks were stripped out of the free version. Microsoft could probably not make a lot of money from MS-Linux, because it would instantly (and legally) become available free everywhere.
Microsoft could, of course, rewrite the Linux kernel in a proprietary fashion and make it functionally equivalent. They would have to be careful not to copy any of the open source code in Linux, but it could be done. That would be a very, very, very un-Microsoft sort of thing for them to do, however (sort of like GWB proposing a Constitutional amendment to guarantee the right of marriage to homosexuals). And MS has no motivation right now to even attempt such a thing, since they have no real competition from anyone.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I dont think thats the complete story. You only need to realease the code if you ship the software, otherwise you dont need to ship anything. Hence why google doesnt put out the version of linux they use with all the changes they have made, especially to the filesystem.The use of Linux or any part thereof is open to any one who wants to adopt it and modify it for any reason, but the person who adopts it is legally obligated to release the source code of the new product he's created in turn to the general public without charge.
Is Microsoft going to dominate? Well if they can get their act together, yes they have the power and the resources. They fumbled with vista too much, and Microsoft is cleaning house with all their top executives. They are beginning to realize what they are up against and are going to fight tooth and nail.
I dont really think they would ever switch to a subscription model for windows. Perhaps in poorer countries where you get the hardware for free and then you rent the software, but otherwise no. People want to own their computer.
Bill Gates is a god. He can rule the world. Probably do a good job of it.
One thing for sure...
Microsoft will never dominare the videogamemarket