There’s an article by Tony McCune in the November 17 ZDNet entitled Five myths about ‘Wronghorn’ which takes aim at Micro$oft’s much-vaunted Longhorn, the next Windows O/S slated for release sometime in 2006.

McCune was at Micro$oft’s annual developer conference in Los Angeles and says the company, "served up another dose of rhetoric that inevitably encourages locking developers and customers into Microsoft products" but, "As far as I can tell, Longhorn is yet another Windows wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing."

Then he launches into a five-point summary of what’s wrong with Longhorn.

But as you read this, bear in mind that although McCune - director of business development at CrossLogic - obviously doesn’t like Longhorn or Micro$oft, he’s hot - very - on IBM and Java.

Now read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Myth #1: The Longhorn suite will be a worthwhile investment.
Microsoft typically pushes big software bundles that force customers to pay for much more functionality than they actually need, and Longhorn will continue that tradition. Microsoft?s own research shows that 30 percent of PC desktop users don’t use the entire Office suite. They only use the word processor. This means that a huge percentage of businesses are made to pay for functionality that they don’t use. It’s like going for a fully loaded SUV when only one person will be driving the vehicle to the train station. A Ford Focus would do, but you’re force to buy a Lincoln Navigator.

Myth #2: Longhorn will not drive customer dependence on Microsoft products.
Customers who chose to migrate to Longhorn will be faced with three alternatives: First, run an all-Windows shop and be saddled with Microsoft devices and licensing fees as your only option. Second, run a mixed-vendor environment standardized on Longhorn and accept the fact that you?ll have to rewrite all non-Windows applications. Third, go with Java and don?t worry about rewriting tons of code since you?ll have the freedom to use your choice of middleware and hardware, including Windows. It?s obvious which scenario Longhorn will perpetuate: locking customers into Microsoft software riddled with second-class interoperability and integration and, of course, security flaws and vulnerabilities.

Myth #3: Longhorn will provide a better alternative to Java.
With Longhorn, Microsoft claims that its new software is so easy to use that developers won’t need or want the ?complex, specialized? Java platform anymore. They fail to note that Java has made great strides in usability and–unlike Longhorn–is not tied to a specific operating system. Building applications on the proprietary Longhorn framework will continue to force developers to work within the narrow confines of Microsoft devices.

Myth #4: Longhorn will not require a multitude of customer upgrades to implement.
Microsoft has built its business on a model that forces customers to spend money on software upgrades every few years. Every successive upgrade restricts Microsoft’s client base to fewer options and increased dependence on its platform. Even developers are not immune to this upgrade stranglehold. In the next two years, Microsoft is planning three new versions of Visual Studio .NET: Whidbey in 2004, Orcas in 2005 and the Longhorn version of Visual Studio in 2006. Each version has a new framework that cannot be used with previous versions. Developers must continually update their skills, which costs customers time and money.

Myth #5: Longhorn will support open standards.
Microsoft has never fully support open standards, and Longhorn will be no exception. Steve Ballmer says that Microsoft delivers the benefits of open standards through XML connectivity. However, the company creates new barriers to true interoperability by promoting Microsoft vendor lock-in. This defeats the purpose of open standards because Microsoft products are open only as long as you develop applications on the Windows platform ? and the same hold true for Longhorn. This is not the same as truly open platforms, such as IBM’s, which are agnostic and run on virtually every operating system and device, from hand-held computers to mainframes.

Microsoft promises the world with Longhorn, but customers may call it "Wronghorn" by the time it sees the light of day, several years from now. Even then, can Microsoft credibly claim that issues that have plagued its products in the past won’t reappear in the Longhorn–security flaws, poor integration, limited scalability and lack of interoperability? History and logic tell us not to count on it.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 18th, 2003 at 3:55 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 3582 times