Microsoft Et Sa Position Dominante

[Fredo]

Tiens, je viens d'apprendre que Microsoft allait faire un don à la recherche médicale de 450 millions de dollars.

Je me demande ce que vont encore dire les alter-mondialeux et autres détracteurs de ce genre

[Chitah]

C'est pas plutôt Bill et sa fondation "Bill and Melinda Gates" qui paie?

[Sous-Commandant Marco]

Tiens, je viens d'apprendre que Microsoft allait faire un don à la recherche médicale de 450 millions de dollars.

Je me demande ce que vont encore dire les alter-mondialeux et autres détracteurs de ce genre 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ils vont encore hurler à la marchandisation de la santé, qui ne doit pas être soumise au bon vouloir d'un milliardaire qui s'est enrichi sur le dos des consommateurs. Je les vois venir gros comme une maison.

[Legion]

Ils vont encore hurler à la marchandisation de la santé, qui ne doit pas être soumise au bon vouloir d'un milliardaire qui s'est enrichi sur le dos des consommateurs. Je les vois venir gros comme une maison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Non généralement ce genre d'actions ils se gardent bien d'en parler. Il faut dire que les agitateurs/propagandistes de service (les journalistes de la Radio Télévision des Milles citoyens en tout état de cause), se garde bien de le leur répéter, pour peu qu'ils en sois eux-même au courant.

[Adam69]

C'est pas plutôt Bill et sa fondation "Bill and Melinda Gates" qui paie?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oui c'est la fondation qui fait ce don énormissime, c'est-à-dire Bill à 90% je suppose…

[Copeau]

D'ailleurs, combien la journée "de solidarité" d'hier est censée rapportée ?

[Xav]

Ils vont encore hurler à la marchandisation de la santé, qui ne doit pas être soumise au bon vouloir d'un milliardaire qui s'est enrichi sur le dos des consommateurs. Je les vois venir gros comme une maison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

En décembre dernier, il offert 43 millions $ à One Health World, une "non-profitable pharmaceutical company".

http://www.oneworldhealth.org/media/details.php?prID=103

[Evildeus]

D'ailleurs, combien la journée "de solidarité" d'hier est censée rapportée ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Autour de 1.2 milliard d'euros il me semble.

[y/o/o/o/k]

Haaaa, je regretterais toute ma vie l'Amiga.

Imaginons… hum un amiga de 4Go de pross..

"soupir"

[Chitah]

Article très intéressant de la MIT Tech Review:

How Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft

By Charles Ferguson June 2005

Page 1 of 6  next 

For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been "Wintel," the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux operating system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is the entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing classic symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself, Microsoft is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and doubt to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The Linux operating system and the open-source model for software development are far from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft.

With some improvements, the open-source model could even become the dominant global production model for software. If it does, it will be an irony. The open-source movement was launched 20 years ago by an antiestablishment technologist and for years was ridiculed by the mainstream computer industry. But it quietly drew more adherents every year, spreading first among iconoclastic hackers because its legal structure and culture offered them freedom from "the suits"--that is, the entire managerial, financial, and legal apparatus of the commercial technology sector. But now IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and Intel have become supporters of Linux and open-source development. Their goal is to reduce Microsoft"s prices and power by commoditizing mass-market software.

commoditizing= rechercher des effets d'échelle,ce qui se traduit souvent par une baisse de coût et une banalisation de la technologie.

Geopolitical paranoia, however, is not the principal reason for the success of open source. The most commonly cited explanation is that evolutionary, decentralized, voluntary efforts can yield better results than those ordered by hierarchical management (see "Can Technology Raise Society"s IQ?" p. 80). But while this may be true, there is something even more fundamental at work.

Furthermore, much of Microsoft"s technical workforce must work on quality assurance and bug fixing, which in open-source efforts often come for free from "the community." Given its lower growth rate, Microsoft thus finds itself a victim of the forces that it once exploited: its average costs are fixed and high, while those of Linux are low and declining. Dion Cornett, who does investment research on open source for Decatur Jones Equity Partners, a Chicago-based investment firm, told me, "We estimate Microsoft"s development costs for server operating systems, from its public filings, at about $300 per unit. Sun"s costs for Solaris are even higher. Red Hat"s costs are about $100 per server now, and they"ll be under $75 within a year."

Finally, one wonders whether the best features of open source could be combined with the advantages of the proprietary model. One possibility would be to add mechanisms for compensating independent open-source developers. There are interesting precedents. For example, in the music industry, members of the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers receive compensation whenever their work is performed in public or played on the radio or television. Similar compensation rights could be built into open-source code without causing the lock-in problems associated with proprietary software. Vendors and users could choose whether or not to accept code that required compensation; they could rewrite expensive code and replace it; compensation rights could be negotiated, including the possibility of automatically terminating them after a period of time.

Whether this happens or not, there seems little doubt that further evolution will occur. Steve Weber, a political scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who has studied the open-source industry extensively and consults with IBM and other companies, says, "The model is still very young. There"s no doubt that the model will evolve along with the technology and the industry." Its achievements are already impressive, both socially and technologically.

Creators, unite; you have nothing to lose but your suits.

[Evildeus]

Je pense qu'il est un peu tot pour dire quel modèle l'emportera. Il est difficile de savoir les conséquences d'une plus grande part de marché de linux sur l'augmentation des couts liées aux attaques de hackers profitant des failles et comment réagira la communauté. Microsoft est bien établi, linux, c'est encore un bébé.

[timburton]

Je pense qu'il est un peu tot pour dire quel modèle l'emportera. Il est difficile de savoir les conséquences d'une plus grande part de marché de linux sur l'augmentation des couts liées aux attaques de hackers profitant des failles et comment réagira la communauté. Microsoft est bien établi, linux, c'est encore un bébé.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Monj ananlyse c'est que les 2 modèles répondant à des besoins souvent différents ,ils peuvent encore coexister un bout de temps.

[Evildeus]

Certes, et meme fort longtemps.