Linux Cookbook

Keyboards and Another Resource for Linux Wins, and More

I tripped over the Who is switching to Linux? blog the other day, but not for a Linux switch story--it was a story about keyboards.

Now, I may not permit any Microsoft software products in the house, but Microsoft also sells hardware: keyboards and mice. I don't like mice myself, and prefer the Logitech Trackman Wheel device for all my mousing needs.

However, Microsoft sells the only usable widely-available, mass market, ergonomic keyboard (you know, the kind that looks as if it was broken in half and glued together with the halves slightly tilted). The problem is that they also sell a lot of versions of this keyboard: some really cheap and poorly laid-out; some expensive and wireless. And over time, they tinker with the layout, which really messes you up if you've gotten accustomed to one particular layout and they change it.

Which is why the "Who is switching to Linux?" blogger complains about Microsoft - The Anti-Linux Keyboard. It really struck a chord with me, because despite paying top dollar for these keyboards, they keep flaking out on me in some way, and need replacing. At which point I'm forced to try the demo keyboards at Staples and hope that they haven't changed too much since the last time I bought one.

Could Microsoft be plotting against Linux users by moving the Insert key to become inaccessible? I don't know, but at least the latest version of the keyboard I got (just last month) is still "correct" more or less.

We put a man on the moon (well, 40 years or so ago), why can't someone (besides Microsoft) bring a high-quality ergonomic keyboard to market for a reasonable price?

More Vista Misery

Well, I hate to gloat, but it kind of goes with the territory of not using Microsoft brand software. And there's all that FUD to counteract, as well.

So, do you think that if you avoid Linux you can enjoy out-of-the-box support for all your hardware and non-Microsoft software when you upgrade to Vista? Guess again. According to PC World (via Yahoo! News), Vista Is Still Plagued by Incompatibilities NINE MONTHS AFTER IT'S RELEASED!!!

Sorry for shouting there, but come on--that's one of the reasons Microsoft would have you believe Linux is inferior: if you use Linux, you'll never have full support for all your hardware. Never mind the software, because in the *NIX world, backward compatibility is the default (unlike in WindowsWorld).

And then there's the on-going risks of getting pwned by Microsoft's "activation": WARNING: device driver updates causing Vista to deactivate is the story of what happens when Vista decides you've been naughty (whether you have or not). Check the Slashdot coverage, Driver Update Can Cause Vista Deactivation, with plenty of comment goodness. But that guy wasted weeks trying to figure out why, all of a sudden, his Vista desktop stopped working.

Not a problem with Linux, BTW.

Microsoft's "Get the Facts" (tm) Campaign, Deconstructed

It's been some time now since Microsoft launched their Get the Facts campaign to "get" the "facts" out about Microsoft vs Linux. It's certainly been a helpful resource for me, as a great source of research reports and results from third-party research firms.

If you just go and read the white paper/research report summaries that Microsoft publishes, you'd have to think things are not going too well for Linux and other open source projects. Microsoft groups their reports into categories like total cost of ownership, reliability, security, performance, and so on. Scrolling to the bottom of the page, I found this article, Info-Tech Research Group: 2005 Information Technology Priorities listed under "Small and Medium Sized Business". Originally published in March, 2005 (the survey was conducted in January 2005), here are the actual summary bullet items, and I quote:

• Microsoft dominates the mid-sized marketplace. With 75 percent penetration for Windows and 65 percent penetration for Windows Server 2003, Microsoft is the clear winner for mid-sized companies.
• Most mid-sized enterprises are simply not interested in Linux. Forty-eight percent of survey respondents indicated that they are not interested in Linux, and another 15 percent are not sure. Only 10 percent plan to evaluate Linux within the next three years.
• Only 27 percent of mid-sized companies currently have Linux installed.
• For smaller organizations, adding Linux to the mix can create complexity and add headcount and overhead.

What to make of these claims? If you actually think about the numbers, and not the words, it doesn't sound all that bad for Linux. I went to the actual document (link to PDF file here) and read it all in context, where the words make it sound bad, but the numbers are encouraging. Here's my interpretation:

• Microsoft continues to dominate the mid-sized marketplace, but with only 75% running Windows XP and only 65% running Windows Server 2003, one can only wonder what the other 25%/35% are using.
• Most mid-sized enterprises are starting to show an interest in Linux; more than half (52%) indicated some degree of curiosity about Linux, with 10% having firm plans to evaluate Linux in the next three years.
• More than a quarter (27%) of mid-sized companies currently have Linux installed. And while the smaller mid-sized companies are lagging (still close to one quarter, at 23%), over one third (35%) of larger mid-sized have already deployed Linux.
• Smaller organizations may have to make some tough choices about their software, because they can not afford to hire/retrain as many staffers as larger organizations (duh).

The research is about 2.5 years old, so it would be interesting to know whether Microsoft has been able to further ward off Linux depredations on the server market.

Anyway, I just love looking at these reports and finding the nuggest of pure gold Linux propaganda hidden inside the Microsoft-sponsored research. Check back here for more--I plan to keep doing these from time to time, as my time permits.

Microsoft and the GPL

According to this Microsoft Statement About GPLv3, whatever exactly it is that Microsoft and Novell are up to, it doesn't mean that Microsoft is subject to the terms of the GPLv3 license.

Check out the rest of the blogosphere for endless speculation about what it all means. I suspect that it's an indicator of the deployment of yet another tactic in Microsoft's tried and true strategies of "spread FUD" and "embrace and extend" the competition.