On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Jeremy Visser wrote:

> Though Windows is by no stretch POSIX compliant, most would argue that
> is not necessary attribute anyway, given the huge breadth of server
> applications chugging away happily on Windows boxes.

At the moment I am running a company network that includes Windows 
desktops, and one core application is a Windows client/server 
application.

It is the only reason to keep Windows running, besides the "general 
feeling" of the management that you cannot install anything else than 
Windows and MS Office: Otherwise staff will be completely cofused because 
that's what they know.

The later point may become mute in the future: More and more people get 
more exposed to other platforms, particularly tablets which running "the 
same stuff" than their mobiles.

More and more development go into apps for Android and iOS too. More and 
more applications being "Windows only" in the past are accessible via 
tablets.

Windows 8 are adding to the confusion in the corporate world too. We have 
desktops which are running Windows 7 - what about a new system that is not 
desktop friendly? What about apps, how to maintain security if you have an 
additional way of software "creeping in"?

The costs of maintaining the foundation by yourself is huge. For a company 
losing significant market share it is a monumental task.

Microsoft was able to do that because people did not think there is an 
alternative and you have to pay the price, and could put part of the 
premium into their development (sometimes just deliberately reinventing 
the wheel to be incompatible with others).

Being a market leader and able to lock in people is good for your 
business.

If you are "just one of them" it hurts to have an odd system.

So far my crystal ball;-)

Regards
Peter
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to