i wrote this letter to the CEO of Lindows back when the idea was first incepted as a Windows desktop replacement (this letter is circa april of 2002). while i applauded what they were trying to accomplish at the time (completely erradicating MS from the desktop...or perhaps providing some true competition), the developer in me wanted details as i have made my living using tried and somewhat true MS tools. at the time, they were claiming that 90% of native Windows apps would run on Lindows out of the box, which seemed a bit far fetched as one of the things MS is best at is being proprietary. not that my letter had anything to do with Lindows reversing their initial claims of a true Windows replacement (they now claim nothing more than being an uber user-friendly distro of Linux), but shortly thereafter i guess they realized that there is more to a desktop/[platform] than a purdy pricetag and a friendly GUI. besides Office sales, MS indirectly makes the majority of the rest of their money pitching Windows (and now .NET) as a platform for developers (read --> extensible for corps to increase productivity, and thus utlimately revenue). i myself personally could care less about any of the above (the corporate world begs to differ i am sure)...my bottom line is time to market and ROI. bear in mind i wrote this during the ensuing lawsuit that MS brought against Lindows for trademark infringement...thus there is a bit of sarcasm and probably some naivity; here is the email i sent to him (and needless to say, i never heard anything back...they actually thought it was a product support request which is strange as the product wasn't even released yet):
Subject: a little late
i am curious what kind of opportunities you are going to expose for the development crowd out in the world. if you are positioning Lindows as a viable business alternative to Windows (pls note the capital 'W') then understand that most companies are interested in MS products due to the extensive customization that can be done via (albeit proprietary...though remember you are positioning yourself against MS here) VBA, COM and other technologies (OleDB, ActiveX) to tailor these products to the corporations needs. i myself am a developer and as such am not particularly interested so much in the bottom line as i am what i can do with a product. sure aesthetically many Windows (capital 'W') pograms may run on Lindows...but under the hood are they really the same? what kind of gaurantees can you give the millions of Windows (capital 'W') developers out there that the very same MS products will perform and accomplish the very same results as compared to the Windows (capital 'W') version? surface layer integration is easy, for the average office worker this would suffice just fine, however show me a corporation who does now customize MS software for internal needs and i will show you a who's who of companies that simply are not leveraging this software for all that it is worth. i have hundreds of thousands of lines of VBA and VBScript code that would need to be ported to the LindowsOS...what kind of mechanism are you offering to make this as seamless as possible? The simple fact alone that any customizations to MS office (read anything MS) depends on core MS kernel libraries and Windows (capital 'W') API calls is enough to make me beleve that any company with ANY kind of financial investment in MS products simply will not be able to make the switch to Lindows because of the Lindows OS architecture alone! It has nothing to do with the bottom line at this point, appearance is quite important, though it runs a very distant second to functionality and integration. This is the "bottom line" so to speak..what can the software do for the enterprise. MS's proprietary nature alone forbids this on any other OS except for Windows (capital 'W'). And this is the very aspect of GNU based OS's that has prevented them from gaining any kind of ground in mainstream computing thusfar when it comes to trying to run MS software. Which brings me to the WINE project that has been ongoing for years. It would be simply amazing if Lindows has accomplished in the short time since its inception what WINE has been striving to succeed at FOR YEARS, though not be it an unwelcome change. Give us (corporations, enterprises) a new OS that runs MS software aesthetically and functionally as well as the Windows (capital 'W') counterpart at a fraction of the price and you will have succeeded in your goals. Aesthetics will not be enough though. Perhaps to the end user yes, but how many of them TRULY know what is going on behind the scenes? It is the IT departments that drive software sales in the corporations, where the bottom line is not about dollars, but productivity and ease of use. By positioning yourselves against Microsoft and Windows (capital 'W') you may have inadvertantly sealed your own fate. Apple has succeeded by capturing a niche market, as has Linux and other GNU based OS's...but have they really succeeded in the areas you are trapsing upon now? Not in the least...
That being said, I will say I admire what Lindows is trying to accomplish. Who doesn't want a shortcut to greatness. But please give us an indication of what is going on under the hood as well. CFO's may be jumping for joy at this opportunity, but I can guarantee you that CIO's and CTO's alike are sweating about what to do when the order comes to migrate to LindowsOS...what to do with existing codebases for Office apps, VB apps, pretty much any existing MS code that simply will cease to function without Windows (capital 'W') core libraries to support them. The cost of porting alone will prohibit most companies from this migration.
I look forward to your reply about the underpinnings of LindowsOS as to what it will and will not support...from a developers standpoint.
Thank you,
Jayson Knight
Posted
Dec 19 2003, 11:13 PM
by
Jayson Knight