| Daniel James 2007-07-29, 7:14 am |
| In article news:<5h158kF3i1djcU1@mid.individual.net>, Arno Wagner wrote:
> What about Linux on routers, NAS, smartphones, v-servers, etc.? Does
> it count or not? And how does it count? Per suer? Per installation?
> Per CPU? You cannot really put Windows onto these things, so is it
> fair if it counts?
MS would have you believe that Windows CE was a viable OS platform for
embedded applications ... so -- as long as CE is included in the figures --
yes, I think it counts.
> Vista is the first time (unless you count ME), that a new OS from
> Redmont tries to replace something that is adequate (XP).
Win2k was adequate. XP brought a few security fixes and built-in driver
support for USB2, firewire, and SATA (in SP2) -- but nothing that couldn't
have been put into a service pack. More significantly XP brought the
inconvenience of activation and a cartload of pointless screen-bling.
> Then there is Dell with its continued XP offers (obviously direcly
> in opposition to MS's wishes) and their Linux offers (which are
> sort of a revolution and certainly also against MS's wishes).
Credit and kudos to Dell ... though they don't exactly push preinstalled
linux outside the US.
> I have not identified any other reason to move to Vista yet ...
In fairness, the security of Vista *is* better than XP. The fact that a
default install does not set all users up as administrators is a definite
improvement, and the fact that UAC popups (annoying though they are) make
it possible to operate the machine as an unprivileged user without having
to log off and log back in as administrator every ten minutes or so is very
welcome. UAC itself is a pain, though ... I hope they manage to fine-tune
some usability into it in SP1 or SP2 ...
> What I actually think could be happening at the moment is the
> commodization (sp?) of the mainstream OS, ...
You mean "commoditization". "commodization" would mean turning it into a
piece of furniture that conceals a chamber-pot ... no, come to think of it,
if that's what you meant you were right the first time <smile>
> if MS wanted to make an actual server OS (no, they do not have
> one now by all sane standards), then they would need to ...
Word is that it will be possible to install Windows NT6 server ("Longhorn",
if it's still called that) without the GUI ... which has to be a step in
the right direction.
Cheers,
Daniel.
|