Microsoft has won in the past due to many factors, and none of them related
to "Let them define the game," a couple from a list of many: They leveraged
their monopoly to break into new markets. The most discussed one is when they
used brute force and anti-competitive strategies to get their products into
new markets, but in some other cases they got fairly good adoption of their
products with little or no effort: just bundle it with Windows: MSN
messenger, Media Player.
Competitors were outmaneuvered or were incompetent (See High Stakes No
Prisoners).
People were sleeping at the wheel.
In 1993-1994, Linux had the promise of becoming the best desktop system. We
had real multi-tasking, real 32-bit OS. Client and Server in the same system:
Linux could be used as a server ... (more)
This lively discussion will take on the controversial questions that everyone
is asking. What are the limits of Linux? How will Open Source change the
industry? What opportunities and risks are associated with the rise of Open
Source? Come join in the discussion, and pose the OS questions that are on
your own high-priority list.
Panelists: Miguel de Icaza (Chief Technology Officer, Novell ... (more)
In July 2001 we announced the launch of the Mono Project an effort to
build an open-source implementation of the Microsoft .NET Framework using the
technical documents that Microsoft submitted to ECMA (the European Computer
Manufacturers Association) for standarization.
Eighteen months later, we have achieved quite a bit: we have an
implementation of the Common Language Infrastructure (... (more)
At first glance, it may sound like an impossible prospect for .NET developers
to engage in cross-platform, open source development in the enterprise. Such
a reality would be unfortunate, because many development teams enjoy the
productivity inherent in using Visual Studio .NET and its wealth of tools for
rapidly producing high-quality code. However, they would also like the
ability to de... (more)