I am always a bit skeptical when I read articles like this. Yes
… it’s all marketing speak. How can anyone know until they
actually experience the migration/upgrade process? I’m not being
“pro-Vista”, nor “anti-Linux” … I’m working to be
“pro-realistic”. I believe that there are multiple points that
Jack is not addressing here.
First, I am curious about the “in-place” migration to Vista, vs. the
“in-place” migration to Linux? Is there even an “in-place”
migration to Linux? I have to admit that I have not looked into
this in detail, however I can almost promise you that we will see an
in-place migration tool, that will allow any user or company to migrate
to Vista with minimal (yes – minimal!) pain. Will there be some
problems? Of course. But lets now compare that to a
migration to Linux from Windows. Could I go to a Windows user,
and perform a clean “in-place” migration, and have them productive when
it completes? I have my doubts here.
Second, I have to admit that hardware evolution is against Jack and
Novell. As people upgrade hardware – which they will – they are
going to get that Windows Vista license, instead of the older Windows
XP license … and they will migrate. And it will be almost
painless. The cost of the “upgrade” of the OS will be hidden in
the cost of the new hardware.
To me, the mentality is still all wrong. To continue to fight
against something only continues to strengthen it. Even Novell
employees heard the old saying “embrace, extend, extinguish”.
Its all about creating more powerful abstractions … there is much
more value in Mono, then Linux … IMHO. There is much more value
in the applications then the OS. There is even more value in the
services hosted in the Internet … enabling the use of the Internet Platform for business.
To fight these fights, and make these claims, is just old school
thinking and behavior. Microsoft knows this, and the real Open
Source community knows this.