Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft

http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft


* Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted by shaneco
IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on Windows,
Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before leaving the
Redmond giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in to the devil's
temptations, but he's now a complete open source and Linux advocate, and
in his new book, "After the Software Wars", he explains why open source
will prevail against Microsoft's proprietary model.

Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left Microsoft.
Over the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now claims that
thanks to the proprietary software model, we are living in "the dark
ages of computing." This is what is scientifically known as doing a
complete 180 (no, not a 360).

In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model will
ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that the open
source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox and the Linux
kernel as examples of open source delivering greater quality than the
proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that open source undermines
Microsoft's profit margins.

He further argues that while open source may not have made tremendous
gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very well in other
segments of the computing market. "Google has hundreds of thousands of
machines running Linux," he explains, "Free software is well on its way
to conquering the small and the large, and the remaining challenge is
the desktop in the middle."

It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model. Sure,
Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care? For
instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one would
care because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft, 20 years
ago, built Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist, and millions of
programmers would be improving it rather than competing with it," he
says, "However, I think it is too late for that now."

So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to compete
with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is little Microsoft
can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it, not only would it hurt
their profit margins, they'd be forced to explain to customers why they
should continue to pay for Office if the company believes the free
OpenOffice is good enough."

It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming from
someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I don't think
of open source destroying proprietary - I see open source and
proprietary competing with one another, so that we, consumers, end up
with better products. Open source made Microsoft improve both its server
and desktop offerings on the operating system front, and even when it
comes to Office, Microsoft has made tremendous steps forward that
wouldn't have been made without open source breathing down their necks.

At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between
proprietary products and their open source counterparts also serve as a
carrot for open source developers to work even harder to improve their
code and products.

It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want to
wash my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".

 

So you can copy and paste. Good Boy

Did Mama teach you to copy and paste?


"TheBiG" <kah@com.com> wrote in message
news:4a1f0053$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft
>
>
> * Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
> posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted by
> shaneco
> IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on Windows,
> Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before leaving the Redmond
> giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in to the devil's temptations,
> but he's now a complete open source and Linux advocate, and in his new
> book, "After the Software Wars", he explains why open source will prevail
> against Microsoft's proprietary model.
>
> Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left Microsoft. Over
> the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now claims that thanks to
> the proprietary software model, we are living in "the dark ages of
> computing." This is what is scientifically known as doing a complete 180
> (no, not a 360).
>
> In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model will
> ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that the open
> source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox and the Linux
> kernel as examples of open source delivering greater quality than the
> proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that open source undermines
> Microsoft's profit margins.
>
> He further argues that while open source may not have made tremendous
> gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very well in other
> segments of the computing market. "Google has hundreds of thousands of
> machines running Linux," he explains, "Free software is well on its way to
> conquering the small and the large, and the remaining challenge is the
> desktop in the middle."
>
> It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model. Sure,
> Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care? For
> instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one would care
> because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft, 20 years ago, built
> Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist, and millions of programmers
> would be improving it rather than competing with it," he says, "However, I
> think it is too late for that now."
>
> So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to compete
> with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is little Microsoft
> can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it, not only would it hurt
> their profit margins, they'd be forced to explain to customers why they
> should continue to pay for Office if the company believes the free
> OpenOffice is good enough."
>
> It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming from
> someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I don't think of
> open source destroying proprietary - I see open source and proprietary
> competing with one another, so that we, consumers, end up with better
> products. Open source made Microsoft improve both its server and desktop
> offerings on the operating system front, and even when it comes to Office,
> Microsoft has made tremendous steps forward that wouldn't have been made
> without open source breathing down their necks.
>
> At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between proprietary
> products and their open source counterparts also serve as a carrot for
> open source developers to work even harder to improve their code and
> products.
>
> It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want to wash
> my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".

 

TheBiG wrote:
> http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft
>
>
>
> * Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
> posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted by
> shaneco
> IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on Windows,
> Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before leaving the
> Redmond giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in to the devil's
> temptations, but he's now a complete open source and Linux advocate, and
> in his new book, "After the Software Wars", he explains why open source
> will prevail against Microsoft's proprietary model.
>
> Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left Microsoft.
> Over the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now claims that
> thanks to the proprietary software model, we are living in "the dark
> ages of computing." This is what is scientifically known as doing a
> complete 180 (no, not a 360).
>
> In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model will
> ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that the open
> source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox and the Linux
> kernel as examples of open source delivering greater quality than the
> proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that open source undermines
> Microsoft's profit margins.
>
> He further argues that while open source may not have made tremendous
> gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very well in other
> segments of the computing market. "Google has hundreds of thousands of
> machines running Linux," he explains, "Free software is well on its way
> to conquering the small and the large, and the remaining challenge is
> the desktop in the middle."
>
> It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model. Sure,
> Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care? For
> instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one would
> care because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft, 20 years
> ago, built Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist, and millions of
> programmers would be improving it rather than competing with it," he
> says, "However, I think it is too late for that now."
>
> So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to compete
> with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is little Microsoft
> can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it, not only would it hurt
> their profit margins, they'd be forced to explain to customers why they
> should continue to pay for Office if the company believes the free
> OpenOffice is good enough."
>
> It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming from
> someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I don't think
> of open source destroying proprietary - I see open source and
> proprietary competing with one another, so that we, consumers, end up
> with better products. Open source made Microsoft improve both its server
> and desktop offerings on the operating system front, and even when it
> comes to Office, Microsoft has made tremendous steps forward that
> wouldn't have been made without open source breathing down their necks.
>
> At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between
> proprietary products and their open source counterparts also serve as a
> carrot for open source developers to work even harder to improve their
> code and products.
>
> It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want to
> wash my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".

Excellent post. Too bad the Windbots here like Frank and the Nymshifter
won't understand it and will do their usual low life song and dance of
lies, insults, animals sex, profanity and drivel.

Alias

 

measekite Da Monkey wrote:
> "Alias" <iamaliasNUK3@THISgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:gvn6g1$h5f$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> TheBiG wrote:
>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft *
>>> Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
>>> posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted by
>>> shaneco
>>> IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on Windows,
>>> Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before leaving the
>>> Redmond giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in to the devil's
>>> temptations, but he's now a complete open source and Linux advocate, and
>>> in his new book, "After the Software Wars", he explains why open source
>>> will prevail against Microsoft's proprietary model.
>>>
>>> Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left Microsoft. Over
>>> the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now claims that thanks to
>>> the proprietary software model, we are living in "the dark ages of
>>> computing." This is what is scientifically known as doing a complete 180
>>> (no, not a 360).
>>>
>>> In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model will
>>> ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that the open
>>> source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox and the Linux
>>> kernel as examples of open source delivering greater quality than the
>>> proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that open source undermines
>>> Microsoft's profit margins.
>>>
>>> He further argues that while open source may not have made tremendous
>>> gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very well in other
>>> segments of the computing market. "Google has hundreds of thousands of
>>> machines running Linux," he explains, "Free software is well on its way
>>> to conquering the small and the large, and the remaining challenge is the
>>> desktop in the middle."
>>>
>>> It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model. Sure,
>>> Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care? For
>>> instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one would
>>> care because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft, 20 years ago,
>>> built Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist, and millions of
>>> programmers would be improving it rather than competing with it," he
>>> says, "However, I think it is too late for that now."
>>>
>>> So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to compete
>>> with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is little Microsoft
>>> can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it, not only would it hurt
>>> their profit margins, they'd be forced to explain to customers why they
>>> should continue to pay for Office if the company believes the free
>>> OpenOffice is good enough."
>>>
>>> It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming from
>>> someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I don't think of
>>> open source destroying proprietary - I see open source and proprietary
>>> competing with one another, so that we, consumers, end up with better
>>> products. Open source made Microsoft improve both its server and desktop
>>> offerings on the operating system front, and even when it comes to
>>> Office, Microsoft has made tremendous steps forward that wouldn't have
>>> been made without open source breathing down their necks.
>>>
>>> At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between proprietary
>>> products and their open source counterparts also serve as a carrot for
>>> open source developers to work even harder to improve their code and
>>> products.
>>>
>>> It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want to wash
>>> my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".
>> Excellent post. Too bad the Windbots here like Frank and the Nymshifter
>> won't understand it and will do their usual low life song and dance of
>> lies, insults, animals sex, profanity and drivel.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Of course you would think the above lies constitute an excellent post. You
> can jump up and down all day long about your Open Sores software, but
> Microsoft will be here many years to come.

That's what AOL said.

Alias

 

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> measekite Da Monkey wrote:
>>> "Alias" <iamaliasNUK3@THISgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:gvn6g1$h5f$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> TheBiG wrote:
>>>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft
>>>>> * Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
>>>>> posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted
>>>>> by shaneco
>>>>> IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on
>>>>> Windows, Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before
>>>>> leaving the Redmond giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in
>>>>> to the devil's temptations, but he's now a complete open source and
>>>>> Linux advocate, and in his new book, "After the Software Wars", he
>>>>> explains why open source will prevail against Microsoft's
>>>>> proprietary model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left
>>>>> Microsoft. Over the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now
>>>>> claims that thanks to the proprietary software model, we are living
>>>>> in "the dark ages of computing." This is what is scientifically
>>>>> known as doing a complete 180 (no, not a 360).
>>>>>
>>>>> In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model
>>>>> will ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that
>>>>> the open source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox
>>>>> and the Linux kernel as examples of open source delivering greater
>>>>> quality than the proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that
>>>>> open source undermines Microsoft's profit margins.
>>>>>
>>>>> He further argues that while open source may not have made
>>>>> tremendous gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very
>>>>> well in other segments of the computing market. "Google has
>>>>> hundreds of thousands of machines running Linux," he explains,
>>>>> "Free software is well on its way to conquering the small and the
>>>>> large, and the remaining challenge is the desktop in the middle."
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model.
>>>>> Sure, Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care?
>>>>> For instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one
>>>>> would care because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft,
>>>>> 20 years ago, built Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist,
>>>>> and millions of programmers would be improving it rather than
>>>>> competing with it," he says, "However, I think it is too late for
>>>>> that now."
>>>>>
>>>>> So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to
>>>>> compete with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is
>>>>> little Microsoft can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it,
>>>>> not only would it hurt their profit margins, they'd be forced to
>>>>> explain to customers why they should continue to pay for Office if
>>>>> the company believes the free OpenOffice is good enough."
>>>>>
>>>>> It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming
>>>>> from someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I
>>>>> don't think of open source destroying proprietary - I see open
>>>>> source and proprietary competing with one another, so that we,
>>>>> consumers, end up with better products. Open source made Microsoft
>>>>> improve both its server and desktop offerings on the operating
>>>>> system front, and even when it comes to Office, Microsoft has made
>>>>> tremendous steps forward that wouldn't have been made without open
>>>>> source breathing down their necks.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between
>>>>> proprietary products and their open source counterparts also serve
>>>>> as a carrot for open source developers to work even harder to
>>>>> improve their code and products.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want
>>>>> to wash my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".
>>>> Excellent post. Too bad the Windbots here like Frank and the
>>>> Nymshifter won't understand it and will do their usual low life song
>>>> and dance of lies, insults, animals sex, profanity and drivel.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> Of course you would think the above lies constitute an excellent
>>> post. You can jump up and down all day long about your Open Sores
>>> software, but Microsoft will be here many years to come.
>>
>> That's what AOL said.
>>
>> Alias
>
> hehehe...no wonder you're one broke POS loser...LOL!


so is that wny microsoft is secretly still using linux for many of their
web based services? because they are poor? or because they tried using
windows server and it was a nightmare..???

 

Alias wrote:

>
> That's what AOL said.
>
> Alias

---------------------------
Last time I checked AOL was still around <chuckle>!

 

alias the idiot predicts the future...hahaha!

Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That's what AOL said.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> ---------------------------
>> Last time I checked AOL was still around <chuckle>!
>
> Where? It's heading the same direction as Netscape. They tried to push
> their crap in Spain through the banks and it went nowhere. Course, you
> probably still have friends who use it judging from your lack of any
> class, education, humor or tact. Birds of a feather and all that jazz.
>
> MS has had its day and it may take awhile for everyone to wake up but
> with anything new, it always takes awhile, especially something as
> complex as a computer.
>
> Alias

hehehe....yeah...please hold your breath while you are waiting for MS to
fail...hahahah!
Loser!

 

Re: alias the idiot predicts the future...hahaha!

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> Frank wrote:
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's what AOL said.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> ---------------------------
>>> Last time I checked AOL was still around <chuckle>!
>>
>> Where? It's heading the same direction as Netscape. They tried to push
>> their crap in Spain through the banks and it went nowhere. Course, you
>> probably still have friends who use it judging from your lack of any
>> class, education, humor or tact. Birds of a feather and all that jazz.
>>
>> MS has had its day and it may take awhile for everyone to wake up but
>> with anything new, it always takes awhile, especially something as
>> complex as a computer.
>>
>> Alias
>
> hehehe....yeah...please hold your breath while you are waiting for MS to
> fail...hahahah!
> Loser!


Well lets stick with the current facts. You are Fail and you are Stupid.

you say that vista is the best OS in the world. How dumb could any one
be to say that?

Only an ignorant computer illiterate moron would say that...and you are
just that.

 

"TheBiG" <kah@com.com> wrote in message
news:4a1fb175$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> Frank wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>> measekite Da Monkey wrote:
>>>> "Alias" <iamaliasNUK3@THISgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:gvn6g1$h5f$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> TheBiG wrote:
>>>>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/21543/Ex-Microsoft_Employee_Free_Software_Will_Kill_Microsoft *
>>>>>> Ex-Microsoft Employee: Free Software Will Kill Microsoft
>>>>>> posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:58 UTC, submitted by
>>>>>> shaneco
>>>>>> IconKeith Curtis worked at Microsoft for 11 years, coding on Windows,
>>>>>> Office, and at Microsoft's research department, before leaving the
>>>>>> Redmond giant. Call it a revelation, call it giving in to the devil's
>>>>>> temptations, but he's now a complete open source and Linux advocate,
>>>>>> and in his new book, "After the Software Wars", he explains why open
>>>>>> source will prevail against Microsoft's proprietary model.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Curtis never actually used Linux until 2004, when he left Microsoft.
>>>>>> Over the years, he turned into a Linux advocate, and now claims that
>>>>>> thanks to the proprietary software model, we are living in "the dark
>>>>>> ages of computing." This is what is scientifically known as doing a
>>>>>> complete 180 (no, not a 360).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In an interview with CIO, he explains why the open source model will
>>>>>> ultimately lead to Microsoft's demise. First, he argues that the open
>>>>>> source model leads to better code. He points to Firefox and the Linux
>>>>>> kernel as examples of open source delivering greater quality than the
>>>>>> proprietary model. Secondly, he also states that open source
>>>>>> undermines Microsoft's profit margins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He further argues that while open source may not have made tremendous
>>>>>> gains just yet in the desktop market, it is doing very well in other
>>>>>> segments of the computing market. "Google has hundreds of thousands
>>>>>> of machines running Linux," he explains, "Free software is well on
>>>>>> its way to conquering the small and the large, and the remaining
>>>>>> challenge is the desktop in the middle."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be hard for Microsoft to adapt to the open source model.
>>>>>> Sure, Microsoft could open source its products, but who would care?
>>>>>> For instance, if they were to open source Internet Explorer, no one
>>>>>> would care because Webkit and Gecko already exist. "If Microsoft, 20
>>>>>> years ago, built Windows in an open way, Linux wouldn't exist, and
>>>>>> millions of programmers would be improving it rather than competing
>>>>>> with it," he says, "However, I think it is too late for that now."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, does he believe that there are other ways for Microsoft to
>>>>>> compete with open source? "Other than adopting Linux, there is little
>>>>>> Microsoft can do," he starts, "Even if they did embrace it, not only
>>>>>> would it hurt their profit margins, they'd be forced to explain to
>>>>>> customers why they should continue to pay for Office if the company
>>>>>> believes the free OpenOffice is good enough."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It sure is an interesting view on the debate, especially coming from
>>>>>> someone who worked at Microsoft for so long. Personally, I don't
>>>>>> think of open source destroying proprietary - I see open source and
>>>>>> proprietary competing with one another, so that we, consumers, end up
>>>>>> with better products. Open source made Microsoft improve both its
>>>>>> server and desktop offerings on the operating system front, and even
>>>>>> when it comes to Office, Microsoft has made tremendous steps forward
>>>>>> that wouldn't have been made without open source breathing down their
>>>>>> necks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the same time, the continuous comparisons drawn up between
>>>>>> proprietary products and their open source counterparts also serve as
>>>>>> a carrot for open source developers to work even harder to improve
>>>>>> their code and products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a win-win situation for us consumers, people. And now I want to
>>>>>> wash my mouth with soap for saying "win-win situation".
>>>>> Excellent post. Too bad the Windbots here like Frank and the
>>>>> Nymshifter won't understand it and will do their usual low life song
>>>>> and dance of lies, insults, animals sex, profanity and drivel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>> Of course you would think the above lies constitute an excellent post.
>>>> You can jump up and down all day long about your Open Sores software,
>>>> but Microsoft will be here many years to come.
>>>
>>> That's what AOL said.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> hehehe...no wonder you're one broke POS loser...LOL!
>
>
> so is that wny microsoft is secretly still using linux for many of their
> web based services? because they are poor? or because they tried using
> windows server and it was a nightmare..???

You are quite correct. They even use network appliances with Linux and UNIX
inside. LOL.

Next time you bump into a Microsoft facist statement from a Microsoft drone,
take not of their cell phone and wireless stuff. Then look it up to see
what OS it runs. Then get them to make the statement they are Microsoft
only.

Did this once with a Microsoft saleman. He had a LinkSys router and Linux
in his cell phone. I challenged he is not pure Microsoft. Was he mad.

Much to Microsoft's dismay, the Internet is open source and open systems.
They will never change that. And if anything, their market is shrinking
with specialized handhelds, appliances and none run Microsoft crap. Even
Cisco, of which Microsoft is a customer, has Linux insde. LOL.