Spin, spin, spin. Linux won the respect of everyone in the industry, including Microsoft, so that Linux is now probably running on more devices than Windows -- if not this year, then next year. The nation's business now depends on Linux. All of Microsoft's public web pages are published through Linux. Etc.
Your Windows PC with Outlook can be owned by a simple email attachment. BFD.
"Linux has won." Truer words were never spoken.
I've given much the same advice to the wallybot (now calling itself "father_zosima") more than once, for a milder reason. Its mindless posts have always been an embarrassment to Microsoft. The current crop of shills are hurting Microsoft more directly and more severely. Will they heed the advice? I doubt it. But they can't say they weren't warned.
And what of the future?
Microsoft's trend is toward Linux, not away from it. Years ago, under idiot Ballmer, Microsoft attacked Linux every way it could. Now, under Nadella, Microsoft is taking a much friendlier and more intelligent approach. So we should expect that in the future, Microsoft will use, endorse, imitate and support Linux more widely and more emphatically. Ultimately the company may come to rely on Linux for everything it does. That would be the best outcome for Microsoft, though not necessarily for Linux.
I don't mean to suggest that Linux is the ultimate operating system. Like any system, it will have successors. (One such successor may follow from my own work, but that remains to be seen.)
So here it is, in words of one or two syllables, mostly...
Microsoft USES Linux, as described in an article recently cited (look it up).
Microsoft ENDORSES Linux publicly (see "Microsoft Loves Linux" per Satya Nadella).
Microsoft IMITATES Linux increasingly in newly introduced operating systems, for example by making its systems smaller.
Microsoft SUPPORTS Linux by contributing to the Linux kernel -- for its own private purposes, surely, but the same must be true of most other corporate contributors. And note that most support of Linux comes from corporations anyway.
THEREFORE ANYTHING SAID AGAINST LINUX IS AN ATTACK ON MICROSOFT.
Friendly advice to the shills -- It is usually a bad idea to attack your employer publicly.
LOL as I've said before, Windows is the Elephant Man of operating systems.
But that's an aside. I gather you STILL haven't figured out why you'd best not say any more against Linux. Tsk tsk. I guess I'll give you some more time.
Your attittue toward simplicity of Linux exposes your EXTREME ignorance of everything in all fields of engineering, science, mathematics and especially digital computing. Simplicity is among the highest of desiderata in all such fields. Microsoft top management is only belatedly coming to understand that. Windows is held in extreme contempt by engineers for its gigantic size, estimated to be in the tens of millions of lines of code.
Yadda yadda yadda ... If you don't realize by now that you have nothing to say, you must be too stupid to understand it, or else you're hoping everybody else is too stupid. But they aren't. If you continue to pretend, at some point I suppose I'll have to explain it to you, maybe draw you a picture...
It appears Dell will have a position in services as well as hardware, so can deal in sofware independent of Microsoft. Thus Microsoft should be worried by this move.
Very atypical for television coverage. Journalists vote Democrat 12 to 1, last I heard, so you almost never see anything remotely like this.
I saw an excerpt from the interview at the beginning of the program, but politics bores me like few other topics do, so I changed channels.
The Register? Cue reflex response from the Wallybot...
"MS is using Linux"
Yes, it is. So you no longer have anything to say. Why don't you stop boring everybody with your nonsense.
In the intervening years, softie shills spent a lot of "ink" running down Unix, especially OS/2, because Microsoft's attempt to cooperate with IBM in the development of OS/2 had fallen through. Microsoft did what it coudl to destroy every company developing a version of Unix, while hiring Dave Cutler and others away from DEC to develop what is widely regarded as a knock-off of DEC's VMS, which later came to be known as Windows 2000.
Actually, Microsoft sold that off decades ago, to a company that later came to be known as the Santa Cruz Operation, i.e. SCO. Much later SCO became Microsoft's stalking horse in its war against Linux. SCO made a whole lot of noise over claims to own Unix, which proved in court to be utterly unfounded. It also made a lot of noise about claims that Linux source code had been lifted from Unix, which also proved to be without foundation in fact. That has never prevented softie shllls from lying about it.
I'm waiting to see whether the softie shills are intelligent enough to figure out how this makes their stance a logical absurdity...
Fine, go on lying, as if anyone believed you. Linux gets plenty of credit from everyone except the likes of you, INCLUDING MICROSOFT.
Possibly you are referring to the repeated posts a little earlier. Yahoo was telling me that my attempts to post were failing, so I retried a few times before giving up. But the error messages were themselves erroneous, the posts were succeeding.
I am not "jumping up and down", I am quoting the truth because you will not. I don't do it for your benefit, but for the benefit of any third parties who may be reading this.
It must be emphasized that, as the article points out, the situation in question points up one of Windows' major faults -- that, as I have pointed out before, Windows is the Elephant Man of operating systems. It probably includes nearly everlything needed, but it also includes vastly more, and all the extras make it far less functional. But the new Microsoft is learning its lesson, and learning it FROM LINUX.