--Paul Maritz, Microsoft
“Is Microsoft unable to find and purchase any successful companies that use its own stack?”It's interesting to find that a much larger acquisition -- the purchase of FAST to be specific -- involves UNIX and Linux yet again, not to mention Yahoo possibilities (it's the same story as far as underlying technologies are concerned). Many of these acquisitions are of services that compete directly with Google (or the likes of Google). Is Microsoft unable to find and purchase any successful companies that use its own stack? If so, what does that tell us about Microsoft's products? Does that inspire much confidence?
Watch the following couple of news articles and pay particular attention to snippets which talk about FAST becoming a "Microsoft subsidiary". This is interesting because it's precisely the same term which is sometimes used to talk about Novell (even Bruce Perens said this). Maybe it's an unnecessary exaggeration to pay attention to semantics, so judge for yourself and see what it all means.
Microsoft Completes FAST Purchase
"There's a significant part of the [FAST customer base] that have chosen to run their systems on Unix and Linux," said Jared Spataro, director, Microsoft Office SharePoint. "Many people thought we would err on the side of cutting those programs."
According to the press release issued by Microsoft today, Fast will now become a Microsoft subsidiary, presided over by John Markus Lervik, who will move from his current role as Fast's CEO to new the job of corporate VP of enterprise search at Microsoft. Working at a new "dedicated enterprise research and development center" in Fast's home base of Oslo, Norway, the new Microsoft arm will also develop "further innovation" across "Windows as well [as] Linux and Unix."
The new subsidiary will work on development of a "comprehensive portfolio of enterprise search offerings," to include a new product called Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express, Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007, and Fast's existing ESP product, which already runs on Linux and Unix.
The most interesting part on Wired magazine's revelation was during iPhone’s software development. On a very tight deadline to finish the iPhone right on time, Apple software engineers looked carefully at Linux, since it had already been rewritten for use on mobile phones. But, Linux on iPhone was denied by Steve Jobs for the reason that he do not want to utilize someone else’s software. Just imagine the endless possibilities had Steve agreed.
Comments
DOUGman
2008-04-26 12:10:18
Wow....Linux is not "owned" by anyone, that the beauty of it. I an can imagine the possibilities, I can guarantee you that iPhone sales would have gone up even more had he chose Linux instead. I would have bought one then, and just imagine Ubuntu on the iPhone then.
D.
LinuxIsFun
2008-04-26 14:01:50
LinuxIsFun
2008-04-26 14:04:59
freebsd opengl
Roy Schestowitz
2008-04-26 14:20:24
As for Apple, Linux is a threat to it too, but especially at the low-end segment. Apple is in a situation similar to that of Microsoft, but whereas Microsoft is at the "fight" stage, Apple is still at "ignore" (not even "ridicule").
Here is a very recent good post:
Where are the Mac to Linux ports?
"I'm not talking about Apple's own apps. Apple would surely like to pretend Linux doesn't exist. No, wait, scratch that. Apple DOES pretend Linux doesn't exist. And they have good reason to. Just like Microsoft, they don't want to offer aid and comfort to the enemy; and what with OS X being based on BSD, they probably think it would open the door to someone figuring out how to run Leopard's GUI on the Linux kernel. And they might be right."
Apple isn't worth worrying about at this stage because it helps in diversifying the market and ridiculing Microsoft (e.g. with Mac ads). It demotes and gradually dethrones the monoculture in some areas. In a way, Linux has a similar healthy impact on Apple in the embedded and HPC sector where it reigns. This prevents further Windows growth.
CoolGuy
2008-04-26 16:15:53
No one wants them...
CoolGuy
2008-04-26 16:49:27
Ballmar would going nuts today hearing all the doom and gloom surrounding M$ today. All their years of exploitation has come to an end finally.
Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds are our Messiah !!!
stevetheFLY
2008-04-26 17:29:48
But anyway, my point: You are a clueless ignorant; just the one I WOULDN'T trust with lobbying for Linux - because you simply have no idea what you're talking about. Ignorance makes good believers but bad advocates of the right cause.
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a possible incarnation of known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
stevetheFLY: 80.132.128.196
eet: 80.132.139.19
stevetheFLY
2008-04-26 17:32:10
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a possible incarnation of known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
stevetheFLY: 80.132.128.196
eet: 80.132.139.19
Robert Millan
2008-04-26 22:19:21
and I guess you are a blatant troll ;-)
Roy Schestowitz
2008-04-26 23:10:36
on snap
2008-04-28 11:37:06
He would quickly lose all the control of vendor lock in, firmware updates, etc. Steve Jobs is far from an electronics messiah and actually quite the opposite, but in a world dominated by Microsoft people are willing to ignore his insane control schemes.
Don't ever expect Apple to be an open source advocate in any way other then to promote itself, for itself, by itself.
Steve Jobs = Apple; Will be interesting to see where the company goes when he is gone.
Victor Soliz
2008-04-28 11:58:05
CoolGuy
2008-04-28 16:32:52
I choose my freedom and values of sharing over anything else.
Bill Gates and Ballmer are cursed to hell. They are the incarnate of the satan and his team of evil doers.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-04-28 17:31:00
It has products? That's news to me. ;-)
"Asked about these problems, Arno Edelmann, Microsoft's European business security product manager, told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the code itself has pieces missing. "Usually Microsoft doesn't develop products, we buy products. It's not a bad product, but bits and pieces are missing," said Edelmann.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39286351,00.htm
To be fair, Google is no better,
masteroblaster
2008-04-29 11:57:37
Gawwwd; HOW old are you?
Anyway, not cool at all, coolguy! ;)