I don't want to live in a world without Microsoft

[linuxviolin]

I don't want to live in a world without Microsoft and neither do you

Just a quote from the conclusion of the article:

As popular as the notion might be in some circles, I believe a world without Microsoft would make our lives worse, not better. Even if you prefer a different OS, your life and your computing experience would be affected. The competition from Microsoft helps to motivate other companies to come up with new innovations. And Microsoft does much more than just make personal computer operating systems and applications. They sit at the core of a huge ecosystem, the collapse of which would turn that “impossible dream” of a world without Redmond’s influence into a nightmare.

As for me, I want a world w/o Google...

[Moggertron]

I think there is some merrit to wanting to keep Microsoft in the market to drive it's competitors. I'm sure Microsoft is competing really hard to try and maintain it's stance against the free linux alternative. You need to really be ultra competitve to expect a premium price for what linux can deliver for nothing.

In terms of competition I would like to see Australia ban computers coming with windows loaded standard, and give the buyer the option to put whichever OS on it they wish.

[Carl]

In terms of competition I would like to see Australia ban computers coming with windows loaded standard, and give the buyer the option to put whichever OS on it they wish.

You mean something similar to the ruling in Europe requiring Microsoft to not ship Internet Explorer with there OS? that could work but I think it would cause more problems then solve and just cause an awful lot of hassle

[Moggertron]

Yeah that was part of my theory. I would like to be able to buy a pc minus windows. But few offer this option I believe. I am completely windows free and hope to stay that way. Most people at my work haven't heard of linux and those that have think that they would have better chance at performing a heart bypass successfully than run linux smoothly. People should at least be given an option to take the pc minus the os.

[monkeyboy]

If Microsoft went away overnight then some of the points in the article make sense. However such a catastrophic event is unlikely to happen in my opinion. A slow degradation of the company is a much more likely scenario, in which case you are likely to see a whole different set of results.
However such a slow and difficult to predict scenario doesn’t make for flashy eye catching articles in my opinion.

[Kendall]

If Microsoft went away overnight, then the world would have massive economic issues that could potentially take decades to overcome. The core behind quite a bit of the world's enterprises would be cut off. We would be okay in the end, but not without a number of major paradigm shifts. We're at an interesting point in time where a significant number of workers in the world were moved into the information age as opposed to having grown up in it. If Microsoft disappeared 15 years from now, then it wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue, but if they disappeared today then the impact would be more than significant. One of the things that most blog posts like this imply but fail to note is that Microsoft is the status quo, has been the status quo, and will continue to be the status quo in the foreseeable future. Design decisions such as the much maligned and recently introduced Explorer ribbon do more to ensure that the end user is as dumbed down as possible rather than innovate. We shouldn't praise Microsoft for innovation as they've been lacking in that regard for years now. The virtue of Microsoft is that they're role as the status quo has been so unchallenged that it's ingrained itself with such a degree of permanence into the world wide business culture that nobody can fathom a way to exist without it. The companies that are innovating are Google, Apple, and the plethora of startups world wide that, without the resources to build en ecosystem, have to rely on the existing ecosystems provided by (you guessed it) Microsoft, Google, and Apple.

Essentially Microsoft is "anti-innovating". Brave New World or not, they've shown a distinct lack of ability to inspire the hearts and souls of anyone for quite some time now (except for perhaps some webOS developers and that was more of a money issue than anything). Being the status quo, Microsoft has it's platform built upon simply because of the fact that they exist as the status quo. Microsoft taking the anti-innovation approach simply means that they're role as the status quo will remain because they don't push users into having to think beyond the status quo and moves like the Explorer ribbon simply prove that much (and their market share stands for itself, regardless of how substantial/shady their vendor lock-in is). Apple wants people to think about modern computing as a new paradigm. Google want's people to think about modern computing as a new paradigm. Most of desktop Linux doesn't care what happens regarding modern computing as a new paradigm (or gets hated on because of it) and many of the users seem more Microsoft-ish in philosophy than anything else (preserve, don't innovate).

Apple is slowly but significantly gaining market share because they produce desirable products that offer an interface AND and experience that is both intuitive and desirable. But the issue is that Apple no longer has their bet placed on desktop computing. Apple is amongst the most powerful, wealthy, and successful companies in the world and not without many reasons I won't get into at the immediate moment. Apple is already trying to create the new paradigm of computing....... and they're WILDLY succeeding at it. People look at hardware and interface design differently BECAUSE OF APPLE. They're setting the bar high and virtually nobody else is willing to climb the ladder. Apple demands innovation in the sectors of hardware and UI and they get miles of it. The benefit here is remarkably simple: where is the next generation of computer users going to look to for systems that interface well with their lives, not just their day job?

Google is another story. Google offers innovation on a functional level that surpasses everything else in the entire field. Email would not be where it's at today without Gmail. Enterprise collaboration would not be where it's at today without Google Docs. Facebook wouldn't be rolling out a bunch of interface and operative changes without Google+. Modern GPS systems and Geotagging wouldn't be at the level they are without Google Maps. The list goes on and on and on. People depend on Google to redefine the function of any given system just as they depend on Apple to redefine the hardware and UI. Google invents and refines and takes and refines, and it's not so often that they do so for their own immediate direct benefit. Google products are generally rolled out with long beta periods while they figure out how to monetize them. The reasoning here is also simple: who are the reapers of those benefits going to use for search?

Then you have Facebook, Oracle, Twitter, Salesforce, and how many other companies all vying for a piece of an ever expanding pie. Oracle has a patent and software portfolio that people fear to look upon. Facebook commands a user penetration rate that can only compete with Microsoft operating systems and Google search. Twitter is the tech startup metaphor for "The Little Engine That Could" (in a lot of ways, not to mention the realtime search capabilities). Salesforce is effortlessly redefining the way a lot of companies do business..... business that was previously done on software written specifically for Microsoft Windows.I don't want to expand too much on these (for the sake of brevity) but at this point it's getting hard to image the world without a fairly large handful of companies, all of which drive innovation except for Microsoft. Admittedly the UI on the new Windows Mobile phones is pretty slick, but such a thing would never have happened at this point without iOS and Android pushing it along to become better as necessary (and without iOS pretty much defining the genre from the beginning). All we have is Microsoft as the status quo (and fighting to stay there) and other companies that continue to fight said status quo.

I don't want Microsoft to go away tomorrow, but I do see where it's entirely possible that they'll eventually lack the relevance that they presently hold. That comes with innovation... on multiple fronts... with the desktop, the hardware, the UI, the functionality, the intended audience and how they plan to integrate their personal and professional lives, and a bunch of other reasons. Such things will take time. Such things will take enough time for the paradigm to shift in one way or another, and I'm willing to bet that it's not on the side of desktop computing.

Desktop Linux is now little more than a footnote to the tech giants of the world. With the major shift away from desktop computing and the sheer amount of bickering and infighting within the desktop Linux community (GNOME 3, Unity, basically everything Ubuntu has thought of in the past two years, etc), desktop Linux no longer serves as a threat to their worlds (though admittedly desktop Linux would probably better succeed if Google managed to win the war of the tech giants). The paradigm is already shifting and isn't likely to slow down anytime soon, what do you do now?

[xenopeek]

Yeah that was part of my theory. I would like to be able to buy a pc minus windows. But few offer this option I believe. I am completely windows free and hope to stay that way. Most people at my work haven't heard of linux and those that have think that they would have better chance at performing a heart bypass successfully than run linux smoothly. People should at least be given an option to take the pc minus the os.

Most people at my work know of Linux, are using it at home, or even using it at work. Most however give themselves a better chance to perform a heart bypass successfully than to assemble a working PC themselves from components. If you want to be free, build your own PC. No Microsoft tax, as comes with pre-assembled PCs.

[xenopeek]

Thanks Kendall, food for thought... With regards to revenue, Apple has already surpassed Microsoft by a few billion per year, and Google has just surpassed Oracle. These are the current innovators, at least at consumer level. Google is an increasing strong contender and driver of innovation across the board. Apple has been driving the market direction with regards to mobile computing. Strange to see how many people don't consider vendor lock-in an issue for their personal computing. Putting on my tin foil hat, both Apple and Google are more scary in a 1984 way than Microsoft.

[Moggertron]

Most however give themselves a better chance to perform a heart bypass successfully than to assemble a working PC themselves from components. If you want to be free, build your own PC. No Microsoft tax, as comes with pre-assembled PCs.

Fortunately my desktops are home built. So my concerns don't really affect me.

[odo5435]

Fortunately my desktops are home built. So my concerns don't really affect me.

I've always wanted to DYI and, now that I've found Linux, my next box will be. Unfortunately, because I've found Linux, that will now be some further time away because my machine seems to have been dipped in a "fountain of youth".

But, to get back OT, it took several hundred years for the Roman Empire to disintegrate. Lets hope Microsoft doesn't take that long.

[DrHu]

I don't either: their mass market approach means cheaper PCs and notebooks for everyone, whether you leave their OS installed, replace it entirely or add Linux.

Of course cheap sometimes means that:cheap
-bad or low quality parts and marginal functionalities

[Mechanics Fan]

Very difficult to build your own laptop/netbook , but don't worry if you live in the UK. Novatech supply all computers (desktops and laptops) with or without an OS. I have recently bought their N1 netbook and installed Mint 11 Katya on it from USB effortlessly.

My self-built desktop is currently running with Windows 7, but as soon as I have done an overdue reinstall (very cluttered with benchmarking programs/data and other detritus) I will try another variant of Mint on it either in a VM or as a dual boot. The opportunities are truly mind-boggling to a linux newbie like me and I am grateful that support is available from these well populated and equipped forums.

John

[lmintnewb]

As painful as it was, skimmed the article. Full of out of touch speculation and nonsense. Lady seems to think the safety of the free world hinges on M$ maintaining a PC monopoly. Lawdy, lawdy ... help us, help us. Ohhhh whatever would we's do widout M$ ?!?!?! Gimme a break, imo ... She's a tard, but at least potentially she got paid to drum up such gibberish. Though why anyone would care what some woman they've never heard of has to say about such matters ... Not overly sure.

I definitely could care less what predictions or observations she may come up with. She also tactfully avoids any mention of all the possible benefits that could come of M$ getting ousted from it's domination of personal computing. As they've long been in other areas of software. Plenty of options out there that could step in and fill the void. Not to mention monopolies tend to lead to stagnation, not innovation. If M$ instantly crashed overnight ... which o course isn't going to happen. But even if they did, the world would get along fine softwarewise w/o them. Nor would whatever software they have deployed stop functioning overnight regardless. Her whole outlook and attitude reeks of bias and ignorance.

Other than that, shrugs ... lol.

[linuxviolin]

With regards to revenue, Apple has already surpassed Microsoft by a few billion per year, and Google has just surpassed Oracle. These are the current innovators, at least at consumer level. Google is an increasing strong contender and driver of innovation across the board. Apple has been driving the market direction with regards to mobile computing. Strange to see how many people don't consider vendor lock-in an issue for their personal computing. Putting on my tin foil hat, both Apple and Google are more scary in a 1984 way than Microsoft.

I agree that Apple and its "proprietary more proprietary than Microsoft ever imagined" model is the real threat today. Google and its stupid Google + and other is a good candidate too.

admittedly desktop Linux would probably better succeed if Google managed to win the war of the tech giants

You're probably a Google fanboy/lover. Google, my God. Even Android is not really open source. The last time I have looked at the sources of Android 3 were not available.

You can read this: Android Is Not Open Source And Why That's Good:

Google has finally acknowledged that its characterization of Android as open source is false...

[samriggs]

A world without windoze, hmmm
what would all those programmers do with their time.
Make software for linux and mac
games would be made for the linux platform more as well
but how much of the work force will be gone?
Quite a bit, either that or a whole lot of training would be happening pretty quick, poor clem would have to get more servers to handle all the downloads
Probably anyone that knew linux in the least amount would probably become a paid trainer.
Could be a very interesting senario.

[Kendall]

admittedly desktop Linux would probably better succeed if Google managed to win the war of the tech giants

You're probably a Google fanboy/lover. Google, my God. Even Android is not really open source. The last time I have looked at the sources of Android 3 were not available.

What I meant by this is that Google presently doesn't offer a desktop operating system. Sure, they have ChromeOS, but that's not really a desktop operating system. If Microsoft disappeared, I believe you'd see a lot more migration to desktop Linux than to Apple based on cost alone, primarily generated by the fact that Apple isn't willing to licence their operating system to other hardware vendors. Desktop Linux can also be more easily manipulated into behaving more similarly to Windows than OSX can. The proliferation of desktop Linux in this particular hypothetical situation would have everything to do with what Google isn't doing.

Regarding Android, they're not violating the GPL so I don't really see what the issue is. The sucky thing is that they moved from a fairly open platform to an almost entirely closed one. Yes, it would be awesome if it were completely free and open source, but we don't get to choose how they license and release their products regardless of whether or not they're using the Linux kernel.

I'm not a fanboy. I'm also not a blatant hater. I tend to view fanboys and haters as just about the same thing (which is exactly the case in many situations). I try to approach the actions of all the major tech companies with a degree of mild skepticism, but I'm not afraid to read an EULA and use a product if said product is good and the terms are agreeable.

[samriggs]

Personally I hate windoze, have for years, but every company I ever worked for uses it, so in that case, it has paid the bills for me many times over as it has for others.
Can't really complain about that at all even though I think it is a horrible OS, it still pay the bills
Mind you if everyone used linux instead, that would solve the issue, but then again would price wars start, how many would start charging, though the open source community would remain, there would be others like oracle when they got their hand on open office and tried to charge for it, thankfully the community made libre office to bury that idea becaue I am sure a lot would of paid for it over ms office, I know I would of.
It would be interesting to see what would happen, maybe a bit scary at the same time.
Plus M$ gives me ideas for wallpaper against it, where would I be without those ideas
As long as I have a choice I be a happy man.

[DrHu]

Desktop Linux is now little more than a footnote to the tech giants of the world. With the major shift away from desktop computing and the sheer amount of bickering and infighting within the desktop Linux community (GNOME 3, Unity, basically everything Ubuntu has thought of in the past two years, etc), desktop Linux no longer serves as a threat to their worlds (though admittedly desktop Linux would probably better succeed if Google managed to win the war of the tech giants). The paradigm is already shifting and isn't likely to slow down anytime soon, what do you do now?

With the major shift away from desktop computing..
Still not a factor in business, unless we all want corporations to provide social website twit access?

Could be true, but desktop OS isn't dead yet, just like PC gaming isn't dead nor console gaming after the successes of smartphone gaming

I think there is still market space for varieties of user experiences

Not everyone wants an Ipad/touch interface
--I don't, since I am used to a keyboard (fairly efficient) or voice command/which would work faster if it is cleanly done. I want to avoid carpel tunnel syndrome from pointing and pecking small screens, however I don't mind touch-screen smartphones, they have a small enough screen not to cause any serious fatigue issues..

[Kendall]

Still not a factor in business, unless we all want corporations to provide social website twit access?

The most major shift is into smartphones, not tablets at this point (and hopefully not for a long time as I too much prefer a physical keyboard to a touch keyboard). It's a hard argument to say that smartphones aren't a factor in business. One thing that a lot of people aren't aware of is the fact that companies are paying for special purpose smartphone apps, not stuff that'll ever be seen in the Android Market or anything, but something only loaded onto company phones for the purpose of doing company business. Also take note of the number of enterprise targeted mobile CRMs that are popping up (and that companies are paying for) Combine this with a growing number of companies that are replacing desktop apps with web apps in order to cut down on the cost of centralization, and that it's becoming remarkably easy to design scalable and adaptive interfaces for these web apps and you end up with a situation where a number of jobs no longer have to rely on the desktop, though things still favor the desktop at this point.

Could be true, but desktop OS isn't dead yet, just like PC gaming isn't dead nor console gaming after the successes of smartphone gaming

I never said desktop computing was dead, merely that there's a major shift away from it in most segments. Desktop computing will remain, but it's significance is slowly waning.

I think there is still market space for varieties of user experiences

Not everyone wants an Ipad/touch interface
--I don't, since I am used to a keyboard (fairly efficient) or voice command/which would work faster if it is cleanly done. I want to avoid carpel tunnel syndrome from pointing and pecking small screens, however I don't mind touch-screen smartphones, they have a small enough screen not to cause any serious fatigue issues..

I agree wholeheartedly.

[linuxviolin]

If Microsoft disappeared, I believe you'd see a lot more migration to desktop Linux than to Apple based on cost alone

Well, they would have again the choice? If Microsoft disappeared, we like it or not, it would be also a choice which disappeared... Common users *would* use Mac OS or Linux by force. This would be not a good thing, even to promote Linux.

Kendall, you talk about smartphones and tablets? Let me digress for a moment. As a skeptical and pessimistic by nature (and by experience: I believe not in progress, but in human regress, and this has nothing to do with technological progress), I fear that the OS field might eventually reach the status we're now seeing in the smartphones field:

1. everyone curses his or her smartphone, no matter the make and model, for various design flaws, hardware or software (always software too);
2. what happens is that newer smartphones models are issued (updating the firmware for existing/old models is discouraged in this consumerist society), with different design or implementation flaws (including software issues);
3. now curses his or her smartphone, just a different model.

Sticking to maturity and stability is generally a sign of stagnation, not a sign of progress. However, nowadays everything is incredibly complex as compared to, say, 50 years ago. At the same time, no matter what we believe, our capabilities of dealing with complex situations, and the procedures of managing such processes are not satisfactory enough. Through complexity, we've reached a level of fragility unforeseen before. And that includes software. When I'm looking at the hundreds of thousands of bug reports at an upstream project (KDE, GNOME) or distros like *buntu, Fedora, EL, I cannot but jump to the conclusion that the whole process is out of control, and the bug-fixing (or even bug triaging) is nothing else but a lottery.