The Old Joel on Software Forum: Part 3 (of 5)

Can MS sell the lock-in?

http://news.com.com/2009-1016_3-5103226.html?tag=nefd_lede

Talks about Microsoft's strategy of trying to steer developers into developing browser apps designed to take advantage of longhorn APIs.

I don't see anything that will prevent it from occuring. It seems that it would be too disruptive to become accepted, but everybody seems to be creaming over it. Maybe I read too many weblogs.

On the other hand, Apache has gained even more over IIS in the latest netcraft survey.

Will developers go for this? Will tech managers/decision makers?

Johnny Simmson
Friday, November 7, 2003

It's an interesting crystallisation of the conflict that often appears here - between client oriented developers and server oriented developers.

Server oriented is less demanding with respect to usability and non-administered operations, which is why Java, open source and similar themes predominate in those environments.

So making the focus on the client more explicit is clever and sustainable as a strategic move.

.
Friday, November 7, 2003

One thing i wondered is if you want to develop
for microsoft you can use the current tool set.
Why would anyone move to web type tools
that only work on microsoft? It doesn't make
any sense.

son of parnas
Friday, November 7, 2003

How about a truce. MS leaves the server market and only makes desktops. Seems the best of both worlds to me.

Mike
Friday, November 7, 2003

A lot of people would rather pay for Windows Servers than get Linux for free.

Seems to me the market is disagreeing with you. :-)

Philo

Philo
Friday, November 7, 2003

NT server and NT workstation used to be exactly the same; MS just crippled the workstation.

MS is unlikely to leave the server market because the profits beat the marginal costs of extending the desktop version to a server version.

As to Philo's comment about the market thinking different I rather suspect a large number of the MS servers are bought, not because they are better than Linux servers, but because the companies need other MS software, such as MSSQL or Exchange, that will only run on Windows software.

Stephen Jones
Friday, November 7, 2003

"It seems that it would be too disruptive to become accepted, but everybody seems to be creaming over it."

I've heard tell that once there was a time when people could make their arguments without the use of crude metaphors.

Kyralessa
Friday, November 7, 2003

"A lot of people would rather pay for Windows Servers than get Linux for free."

Netcraft can be manipulated - and has been in the past. The recent surge in Apache servers is actually an unwinding of manipulation in the past. What apparently appears to be an MSFT ploy to have "parked" domain names run IIS has evaporated, and now the domain name percentages are again well over 2:1 in favor of apache.

I think the actual active web server count is a better number, and it has consistently run >2:1 in favor of apache for several years.

So, regardless of what MSFT publishes in terms of IIS sales, the actual user facing http servers out there are acurately accounted for by Netcraft. A number that, yes can be (has been by MSFT to inflate their numbers) manipulated, but is still the best objective indicator out there.

nat ersoz
Friday, November 7, 2003

Uh, that means that 1/3 of those people are paying for Microsoft Servers instead of Linux.

Is something about that not clear?

Philo

Philo
Friday, November 7, 2003

"Netcraft can be manipulated - and has been in the past. The recent surge in Apache servers is actually an unwinding of manipulation in the past....A number that, yes can be (has been by MSFT to inflate their numbers) manipulated"

I think you need to check the oxydization on the tinfoil hat - it's interfering with your judgement.

If you're going to call it manipulation that a couple of large domain parking services switched from IIS to Apache (which makes total sense - they simply serve up "XYZ coming soon" type static pages - Even a no-module Apache setup is far too complex for this task) - then is it fair to say that "Apache is manipulating the results" now that the domain parkers use Apache? Of course it isn't. Note that the same sort of vast swings happened when a large domain hosting company switched from Apache to IIS about a year ago.

Slashdot is a very poor source of factual information.

Dennis Forbes
Friday, November 7, 2003

Netcraft is a joke. One registrar or ISP changing a domain parking server causes massive fluctuations. I bet >50% of their numbers come from just a few dozen domain parking hosts.

Just me (Sir to you)
Friday, November 7, 2003

One other thing, arguable you need fewer linux servers than windows servers so that inflates the number of windows servers sold. Build something inefficient so people need more and then rave about the demand for your products. It works as long as you have an ignorant marketplace.

Mike
Friday, November 7, 2003

OK, I stand corrected - umm, more lke irrelevant.

It would be nice to see an objective metric which crawled the web server "fabric" and reported an objective HTTP server stat. Wishful thinking on my part.

nat ersoz
Friday, November 7, 2003

>> It would be nice to see an objective metric which crawled the web server "fabric" and reported an objective HTTP server stat. <<

Why? How is that information at all useful? Would you really make a decision between systems based on who wins the popularity contest?

SomeBody
Friday, November 7, 2003

"Would you really make a decision between systems based on who wins the popularity contest"

That's actually how a LOT of software decisions get made.

bob
Friday, November 7, 2003

Philo: counterpoint. Netcraft seems to have stopped publishing OS statistics in their web server reports, so I had to use dated stats (June 2001), but at that time Windows was 49% and Linux 29% of the computers serving web pages. The active site statistics were Apache 62%, IIS 21%, and others, 17%. So 55% of people serving web pages on Windows then downloaded and installed something besides IIS...

Chris Hoess
Friday, November 7, 2003

"Seems to me the market is disagreeing with you. :-)"

The Sodomites disagreed with God too, what is your point?

Chen
Saturday, November 8, 2003

"Is something about that not clear?"

Uh, that you can convince 1/3 of the people to pay for something that's less secure, less robust, and probably less efficient than something that's free?

What was it that PT Barnum said?

Jim Rankin
Monday, November 10, 2003

"Netcraft is a joke."

So when can we expect to see your alternative, superior methodology that will give us the true, absolute, unbiased data that Netcraft has been denying us?

Jim Rankin
Monday, November 10, 2003