About Microsoft
Countless applications "Linux more profitable than Windows" forced to write a globally useless note.
I like Linux. In Xs, there is a pleasant inertia of the mouse cursor, and in Gnome there is an opportunity to feel like a little Mac-user. Anyway, it's like getting into another dimension - Linux users smear butter on sandwiches from the other side!
But at the same time, Microsoft has MSDN, which will give odds to all man and others. There is also Visual Studio 2005, which is many times better than any IDE for Linux. And then there is .NET, which no one else has - IBM WebSphere, QT and who else is there; the scale of .NET is simply amazing. Separately, for each MS product there is an answer from free software or simply from other developers, but the strength of MS is in integrating everything. Something is exactly, something is not very, but no one has such integration.
PDAs, desktops, servers - all this is under all common pieces of iron, and in the appendage to this is also the integration of everything with each other. No other software vendor can boast that much.
')
There is only one MS product that I cannot tolerate, this is MS SQL Server. Maybe there would be something else, but I have never come across such a plan. Visual Studio, starting with the seventh version, was a logical product that fits perfectly on my understanding of the right. But SQL Server simply stands in front of its seemingly insignificant indents from the standards - they implement the triggers in their own way, then the DDL, then something else on the little things. Oracle is an expensive (more expensive than MS SQL) cesspool. From the rest I choose PostgreSQL.
In general, I will use Linux only if it appears.
a) normal development tools;
b) normal frameworks;
c) beautiful and correct office-tools;
d) someone who is responsible.
But this means that someone like Microsoft will appear and, in general, they will not differ from each other. By the way, the license for SuSE Linux costs more than $ 100, which is approximately equal to the cost of WindowsXP Pro OEM, only the life cycle of MS OSes is more than 3 years of the license of SuSE Linux.
These are the cakes - corporate users and developers choose Windows, because it is more profitable. Marketing is an important thing, but not on such a scale.
I like Linux. In Xs, there is a pleasant inertia of the mouse cursor, and in Gnome there is an opportunity to feel like a little Mac-user. Anyway, it's like getting into another dimension - Linux users smear butter on sandwiches from the other side!
But at the same time, Microsoft has MSDN, which will give odds to all man and others. There is also Visual Studio 2005, which is many times better than any IDE for Linux. And then there is .NET, which no one else has - IBM WebSphere, QT and who else is there; the scale of .NET is simply amazing. Separately, for each MS product there is an answer from free software or simply from other developers, but the strength of MS is in integrating everything. Something is exactly, something is not very, but no one has such integration.
PDAs, desktops, servers - all this is under all common pieces of iron, and in the appendage to this is also the integration of everything with each other. No other software vendor can boast that much.
')
There is only one MS product that I cannot tolerate, this is MS SQL Server. Maybe there would be something else, but I have never come across such a plan. Visual Studio, starting with the seventh version, was a logical product that fits perfectly on my understanding of the right. But SQL Server simply stands in front of its seemingly insignificant indents from the standards - they implement the triggers in their own way, then the DDL, then something else on the little things. Oracle is an expensive (more expensive than MS SQL) cesspool. From the rest I choose PostgreSQL.
In general, I will use Linux only if it appears.
a) normal development tools;
b) normal frameworks;
c) beautiful and correct office-tools;
d) someone who is responsible.
But this means that someone like Microsoft will appear and, in general, they will not differ from each other. By the way, the license for SuSE Linux costs more than $ 100, which is approximately equal to the cost of WindowsXP Pro OEM, only the life cycle of MS OSes is more than 3 years of the license of SuSE Linux.
These are the cakes - corporate users and developers choose Windows, because it is more profitable. Marketing is an important thing, but not on such a scale.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/3564/
All Articles