Blaming Microsoft for Your Own Shortcomings!

Today, I read an article that was about enterprises having a difficult time migrating to Windows 7.  The cause?  IE6, of course!

In the article, someone is quoted as saying that Microsoft should do more to help its customers because the problem was caused by Microsoft!

I don't normally defend Microsoft, but I think every enterprise that wrote applications that could only run on IE6 deserve what they get!  After all, it was never a big secret that Microsoft was trying to make sure that they locked you into Windows, by locking you into proprietary browser technology.  No one should be surprised, and Microsoft is not to blame.

When I worked in IT, during the very time when IE 5, 5.5 and 6 were the predominant IE releases, we tested all our web applications on Firefox, as well as IE, just to make sure that we weren't using proprietary IE features.

As Enterprise architects, you have to think beyond what the developer cares about, and think about the entire enterprise.  With that in mind, decisions about proprietary technology have to be weighed very heavily.  As anyone that has read this blog knows, I'm no fan of proprietary technology, and this article is just another data point, in a long line of data points, that shows you eventually pay a price for using ANY proprietary technology.  This example is especially egregious, just because the enterprises in question aren't even switching to a competitive operating system solution, but cannot even upgrade to the latest version from the same vendor.

In this day and age, everyone should know better!

Something Everyone Interested in Open Source Should Read

I just ran across Michael Tiemann's recent blog post, on his OSI (Open Source Initiative) blog.  After reading it, I really felt like everyone should read this.

So, here is the link:

The OSI Categorically Rejects IIPA's special pleadings against Open Source

We all need to be on guard against organizations like the IIPA, and what they attempt to do to disrupt open source software's adoption.

What Would Life Be Like Without Windows?

Today I read a blog titled the same as what I titled my blog post, from PC World, and giving full credit, were credit is due, by Randall C. Kennedy of InfoWorld.  Now, I don't know Randall, but I have to say, it was the most lopsided view of the world I have ever read.

Basically, it was an article claiming that the monopoly of Microsoft on the desktop is a good thing.  I used to work in telecommunications, and I used to hear the same argument about AT&T.

The fact of the matter is, monopolies are never good, but competition is very good for everyone.  It brings prices down, improves quality, and expands the market.

Besides, I know what life is like without Windows.  I haven't run any version of Windows since Windows 3.1!  I can tell you from my experience, that it wasn't always peaches and creme, but today I couldn't be happier.

I'm currently running Fedora 12 on the laptop that I'm am using to write this blog post.  I have all the software I need for everything I do, and it works great.  I can interoperate with anyone out there, even people using Microsoft products.  Besides that, I have the most stable environment I can imagine.

I don't spend countless hours fixing my system, but spend countless hours getting work done.  No viruses, crashes, hangs, or interoperability issues here.  I even have Mac's in my home, and my Linux system and the Mac's interoperate just fine.  We share drives across the network, e-mail and IM (including video) between the systems, share documents, you name it, and it all works.

Randall's vision of a future without Windows is simply not based on reality.