You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
14

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Not undercut. Microsoft didn't get to where they were today by being more efficient than everyone else, they did it through cronyism and intimidation. Case in point: Every time you purchase a USB key or SD card you pay a microsoft tax because they "own" some basic concepts related to file systems. Take away the US patent office and microsoft would dissolve.

0
4

[–] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Only if it's formatted FAT

0
2

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

FAT 32 specifically, which all of them are, it's actually part of the SD card standard. Although you can get "multimedia cards" (MMC) which is essentially the same thing without the formatting, then you format it yourself.

[–] [deleted] ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] Broc_Lia ago 

The way they did it is by guaranteeing corporate support. If you're a giant corporation and you depend on your computer systems then there's literally no options. You pay Microsoft whatever they want. Because the only alternative is to use open source software which if it breaks for any reason, you are fully responsible. You can put as many layers of management between you and that decision as you want every time the system stops working there will be one fewer person between yourself and that mistake.

This isn't really accurate either. There's an overwhelming preference for linux in the server market, even though MS offers more support options.

If there was ever a smaller alternative company doing the same thing it wouldn't matter, the investors would always say "why didn't you go for Microsoft, obviously".

There is: Red Hat. They're pretty successful.

That's how Microsoft got ahead. If open source solutions ever scaled to suit corporations without breaking down because "blib-xyzlgbt.10076.xcc" suddenly needs "x11z7.bto" to be on the latest version then Microsoft would have a problem. But that has never happened.

Like I said, most important servers run linux, not windows. It's not even the cost: Compared to all the other overheads a windows licence isn't that much extra. Sysadmins prefer linux because it's typically more stable and more secure (or at least securable).

Where microsoft reigns supreme is the desktop market, especially government institutions. They spend good hard cash making sure that governments worldwide use their OS/office suite. That dominance is becoming irrelevant with the increasing importance of mobile and cloud apps though. Email transitioned to online interfaces a long time ago, and office software is getting there. Even high end computationally intensive software companies like autodesk are flirting with online-only software.

It's only a matter of time before it doesn't really matter what OS you run, you'll mostly have access to the same software. When that happens microsoft is doomed. Azure is their last hope.