Cringely's 2004 Predictions 436
somethinghollow writes "Cringely's 2004 Predictions are out, and he makes a very interesting claim concerning Linux: 'The SCO debacle has created a crisis within the Linux community. They pretend that it hasn't, but it has. This will come to a head in 2004 with either the development of a new organizational structure for Linux or the start of its demise. Linux has to grow or die, and the direction it takes will be determined in 2004.' With a claimed 70% successful prediction rate, you at least have to listen..."
As a member of the Linux community... (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, nothing will change because nothing CAN change. As long as people want to work on Linux, they will. The Internet and the minds of its members are not property of SCO. So too bad for them.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:4, Insightful)
If SCO was to launch world wide lawsuits in the unlikely case that it wins, it would be decimated by the time it finishes.
Oh my.. what did they do to our precious Caldera?
Right (Score:4, Interesting)
Ever noticed that those who have to say it, aren't?
Pros: "I know a little about computers."
Also-rans: "I'm a computer expert."
Pros: "We'll do our best."
Also-rans: "We deliver quality."
Pros: "I'm OS neutral." (though would probably recommend specific OS for specific job)
Also-rans: "Linux is like a god."
Pros: "Life always picks up and goes on..."
Also-rans: "Linux could be threatened! Everybody should worry about it!"
I'll bet that:
90% or more of what we worry about, in life, doesn't happen.
90% or more of what we hope or dream about, and really work at, happens.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that making Linux "illegal" would not stop people from using it. It would put an end to: comercial software, many supported and semi-supported porting efforts, corporate desktops, embedded devices, hosting companies offering Linux, etc.
I'd say a lot can change.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
Patent and copyright recognition are the big demands the US and WTO make of countries that want to join the globalization oligarchy. I think it fairly likely that a change in the legal status of Linux in the US would have effects throughout the world.
Don't panic! (Score:5, Informative)
Hitchkiker's Guide to /. Linux Users: Don't Panic!
There's no reason to panic(9), should the current Linux implementation be declared illegal in a US court:
But this is only theoretical. It is most likely that a judge will require that some code be purged from the Linux kernel; code that can be really easily hacked up in a few hours or days.
DONT'T PANIC! (The Hitchhiker's Guide to /. Linux-Users)
Re:Don't panic! (Score:3, Funny)
SCO:
Mostly Harmless
Re:Don't panic! (Score:3, Interesting)
This would not just require replacing the Linux kernel. It would make any software based on the Bazaar methodology potentially illegal and kill both commercial creation and commercial/professional use of such software.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Informative)
Point taken, but we are speaking of a hypothetical case in which Linux is declared "illegal". SCO's complaint against IBM and press releases contain all sorts of allegations about their IP being included in Linux without their consent. If a judge were to find in SCO's favor in the IBM case it could lend weight to SCO's claims that they own the "intellectual property" behind every modern OS.
Just because an american judge might declare something illegal in the US, does not in any way make it illegal in other countries, EVEN if they recognize patent and copyright.
The Berne Convention does require other countries to recognize copyright of other nations that have signed the covenant. The Patent Law Treaty will sow up the same sort of thing for patents.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:3, Informative)
That was a bit different. There were two seperate problems with crypto in the US - patents on fundamental techniques given to RSA and export controls that were never updated to reflect the advances in the state of the art.
The export controls did exactly what you stated: drove crypto jobs out of the US. The problem of patents on fundamental techniques will soon be addressed by The Patent
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with US IP law is that it is driven by short sited lobbying from middle men who do no actually create anything. It would be a shame if the "rights" of profe
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, this is Slashdot and many people run Linux here, but the vast majority of people in the real world do not run Linux, and there is still a fair ways to go before people do, and if the OS becomes illegal in the mean time, the game is pretty much over.
-B
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
The "movement" will slow down, become more "underground", and some of the people will aim their work at other OSes rather than have to deal with a potentially nightmare(ish) legal process.
The ones already making a lot of money out of the use of linux (routers, basestations, pvrs etc) will pay for a license, and then it's business as usual.
A few people will start working on something that is open, free and capable of replacing Linux; the process will be slow, and initially there will be a lot of politics stoping any real work from getting done.
At a time when M$ has started losing ground simply based on "momentum" a serious problem with Linux will be a HUGE problem for the free/open source-community; and the only company that will truly benefit from it is M$.
Open source as an option for businesses/governments could be set back anywhere from 3-10 years.
Things CAN change, things CAN get a lot worse than it is today...
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
A few people will start working on something that is open, free and capable of replacing Linux"?
Start? Excuse me - *BSD anyone?
"""
There's a more obvious answer - just rewrite the bits that are IP violating. Believe it or not there are loads of linux hackers who could probably rewrite the contentious bits in a matter of days.
When that happens, Linux suddenly becomes legal again. You can't taint new linux with the (alleged) faults of old linux. Then again, I beleive the SCO suit has no teeth anyway.
I think Cringely is just going for the attention, and we've given it too him. Look at the prediction "it will either get bigger or smaller". What kind of prediction is that?
Here's one:
Akozakie - this coming year you will either drink more or less caffeinated drinks than this past year.
What are the chances that prediction is correct?
Here's another one:
This coming year at least one bear will shit in the woods.
Cringely, attention seeking media whore, who'd a thunk it.
YAW
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't going to happen of course. Linux is nothing without it's community, and who would contribute anything to SCO?
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:4, Insightful)
Get real. SCO did not write almost all the code in Linux, it does not own almost all the code in Linux, it cannot control almost all the code in Linux. Whatever files are found that are SCO's, if any, will be replaced virtually instantly and it will be business as usual.
To say Linux will "become illegal" is childish and silly. Just as likely, illegal software will be found in M$Windows and M$ will have to stop shipping. Fat chance.
---
It's wrong that an intellectual property creator should not be rewarded for their work.
It's equally wrong that an IP creator should be rewarded too many times for the one piece of work, for exactly the same reasons.
Reform IP law and stop the M$/RIAA abuse.
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you go with the SCO claim, they claim ownership of a whole hoard of header files and other key source files.
Software is soft. Nothing is so key that it cannot be replaced. Linux is the unix standard now (there are now more linux users than all other unix users put together) and at worst some standards may need to change. That might not even be a bad thing.
Besides, SCO is saying that they own all derivatives of UNIX.
Code ownership is viral? That's a new one on me!
Linux is a clone, not a deriva
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:3, Informative)
The worst case scenaerio is that SCO manange to score retrospective compensation against any commercial organisation that has made use of linux during the last decade.
That problem applies to any software, not just Linux. Broken IP law and submarine patents means that any software may have this problem. And have you seen M$'s guarantee recently? Like most software they don't guarantee jack.
Whats at stake is the reputation of OSS, GNU, GPL, etc.
Again, reputation applies to any software, not just the
Re:As a member of the Linux community... (Score:3, Insightful)
In the very unlikely event that Linux became illegal it would also become another Amiga OS, niche software that some people played with, but which had no future outside of a hobbist market.
What utter nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)
Erm, why? Linux isn't a company. If Linux stopped growing, there'd still be thousands of developers and testers working on it. Cringely evidently doesn't understand the whole ethos behind the free software world; his comment is ridiculous.
Cringley's predictions are self-determining... (Score:5, Informative)
SO the corporate numbers are OK then, their stock is up over the year (reference [yahoo.com]) so I'd say so corporate numbers sure are decent, then what basis is there for saying they are performing badly? Perhaps if I refer to an unspecified quantity I can make up a story about it too. Like, er, Dell will start slide into oblivion, which if you look below the corporate numbers (that is below profits, penetration, users, sales, turnover, employment, etc) you will see I am correct. What was I correct about? Well, ask me in a year and I'll tell you.
2. I predicted that Dell would continue to grow at the expense of its competitors
The home/business PC market is getting mature, so if any company grows it is largely at the expense of its competitors. Dell were growing market share, one doesn't have to be a genius to see that a lagged deterministic trend will continue, it is more insightful to look at the rate of change that growth is having, but he didn't do that.
3. I wrote that Linux would continue to give Microsoft fits (that's true) and that Microsoft would be forced to compete on quality. Pick a low quality (costly) product. It comes under pressure from a free high quality product. The low quality (costly) product comes under pressure. A 3rd grade kid could draw that line of reasoning.
4. I said that Sun would decline further, generally because of the success of Linux.
(Fastidious comment, which of these [yahoo.com] Suns did you mean?) I can give a little credit to this since unlike the other 'predictions' it was not already written mud, though perhaps it was written in mud ready to be fossilised. Though looking back to financial numbers, Sun Microsystems [yahoo.com] doesn't seem to have done too bad.
5. Here is one I got wrong. I predicted that China would standardize on Linux running on MIPS hardware.
OK, so he stopped predicting the sun would rise tomorrow and got on with some original thinking. And failed, though it was a nice idea.
6. I was wrong, too, in my prediction that Microsoft would force Intel to adopt AMD's 64-bit Opteron instructions.
Hard to see this happening at the time, but again an interesting idea.
7. I correctly predicted the Mac G5 computer line
This had been announced by Apple already.
8. correctly predicted that V.92 modem development would stall, but that nobody would care Or perhaps saw nobody cared about V.92 (DSL+ is where the action has been for the past 3 years), so predicted it would stall. Nice insight.
9. I predicted that Microsoft's Palladium security plan, now called Trustworthy Computing, would be distrusted and stall.
It was already distructed. Well done on the stalling part, it was just wishful thinking for me
10. I wrote that Hollywood would come up with new digital rights management schemes that would be promptly broken
An encrypted system where many have the same key is a system that has a key for anyone. Always been like that, always will
OK, so I could go on, but his 'predictions' are a combination of the obvious (with a little critical thought) and the failures (when he gets beyond stating the obvious he usually gets it wrong). I do not trust this person's predictions.
Re:Cringley's predictions are self-determining... (Score:4, Insightful)
Now what might be impressive would be if he predicted the direction of growth and got that right - but he's not even predicting that.
I like his regular columns much more than his "predictions"
Re:Cringley's predictions are self-determining... (Score:3, Interesting)
Pick a low quality (costly) product. It comes under pressure from a free high quality product. The low quality (costly) product comes under pressure. A 3rd grade kid could draw that line of reasoning.
You would think that, though my managers still think OSS isn't ready for prime time. Most don't realize that Apache, Tomcat, and a variety of other pieces used on our 'flagship
Re:Cringley's predictions are self-determining... (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, so he stopped predicting the sun would rise tomorrow and got on with some original thinking. And failed, though it was a nice idea.
Actually, the process has stalled and was nowhere as fast as people thought, but China is still pretty much moving in that direction. So it is too early to say. So the wrong part here is that he sais that his predicttion failed. Also it is not MIPS(tm). Some parts of t
Re:Cringley's predictions are self-determining... (Score:3, Interesting)
Profit and loss accounts refer to the past, not the future. If a company did restructuring and trimmed poor divisions it may make a short term loss but would benefit in the long term.
The price of a stock refers purely and simply to its supply and demand, i.e. where people are happy to buy the stock and where people are happy to sell.
So the price if a function of many agents' opinions of the future price and earnings of the said
Re:What utter nonsense (Score:3, Interesting)
So what's next? Is fine tuning the VM and implementing yet another filesystem "it"? Or should there be another goal that takes it somewhere else, like a Desktop Linux initiative or something? I'm guessing that's the growth he meant, not in the "get bigger" sense, although I'd
Re:What utter nonsense (Score:5, Interesting)
This is just an old trick, popularized by horoscope and fortune cookie writers, applied to the computer industry. There's almost no conceivable course of events during the next year (especially given the certainty of more SCO-related headlines, at least on Slashdot) that couldn't be described as at least provisionally consistent with this prediction. If Cringely provided some analysis or insight, I guess there could have been an interesting point here. But it's really just a throw-away.
As an exercise, review the years to date for Linux. Each year has seen some significant movement towards both growth and death. Lately there have been interesting maintainer changes, which would probably qualify as changes in organizational structure. It's hard to remember a significant period of time during which Linux hasn't confronted something that could be loosely described as a do-or-die challenge. The same could probably be said for most if not all organizations in the tech industry. If Cringely really wanted to make a non-obvious prediction, and this was the best he could come up with, he probably just didn't give it much thought.
Re:What utter nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
Note: Free software can die. (Well, go into prolonged hibernation with no appearant awakening time.) All that's needed is for the maintainers to loose interest and not be replaced, while the environment it was used in evolves. Check the Debian site for oprhaned packages to see some software that's just started the long descent.
I like this prediction... (Score:4, Funny)
Predicting that a microsoft security product isn't reliable? Predicting that a microsoft product is late?
Cringley is THE ORACLE!!
Give Me A Break... (Score:5, Funny)
"They like to pretend that it hasn't, but it has."
Yeah, just like I pretend that Cringley doesn't matter, but he does.
Re:Give Me A Break... (Score:3, Interesting)
btw, what fucking new drm schemes did hollywood come up in 2003 that were promptly broken? what?? anybody??
Re:Give Me A Break... (Score:3, Insightful)
The analysis seems to suggest a traditional business model. Linux isn't a business OR a product. It's a bunch of enthusiast building a shared, free toolset. The enthusiast could care less about a profit. They just want a more stable operating system.
People seem to suggest that the ants will stop building just because you knock over the anthill. This isn't so. Despite ANYTHING that SCO does, the ants will keep building. No legal menueverings or laws will stop the ants because they are just plain smar
Um, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
As fluffy as that prediction is, we can have Andrew Morton take over maintainership of 2.6 from Linus Torvalds this year and Cringeley can claim another success at the end of 2004.
Re:Um, what? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Um, what? (Score:2)
Many /. readers have a good idea how the kernel is managed and thus know that it's unlikely that illegal code on the scale SCO is claiming could make it in there - either through personal experience or through reading the various SCO-oriented stories.
Most columnists, managers and commentators don't. To them, it's just some system which appears to have magically come into existence from nowhere with no visible structure. Expect
Re:Um, what? (Score:5, Interesting)
For example, currently driver support in linux is horribly broken. Worse yet, it is horribly broken *by design*. The kernel developers refuse to freeze a driver api for the kernel (like MS did with win95/98/me and win2k/xp) or make a DDK (to my knowledge) instead changing the api every major release and sometimes on point releases. They have a point -- doing so encourages the development of open source drivers instead of binary only drivers. Unfortunatley this is one area in which corporate interests might superceede the interests of the individual kernel developers. Possible.
Another area we might see is with regards to linux on the desktop. Progressing, yes, but not as fast as it might if - say - sun or ibm decided to make a serious commitment to linux and either extend kde/gnome/x or replace them entirely. If they come up with a desktop replacement that is far better than the current offerings they will win by default, thus placing the future of linux on the desktop in corporate hands, at least for a short while.
I think this is what cringley was getting at -- changing linux to reflect the fact that alot of the development is funded by major corporations now instead of hackers working on their free time.
Re:Um, what? (Score:2)
What you think he means? Why does that sound familiar? What God - uh, I mean Cringely - meant to say...
Re:Um, what? (Score:2)
Re:Um, what? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think open-source drivers are good for
Re:Um, what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, that suggestion is complete nonsense, since the only way the community could verify that no code was breaking
Re:Um, what? (Score:3, Insightful)
IMHO, the Linux development community already has much more stringent IP validation techniques than any proprietary shop. I mean, Linux can't just go around stealing people's IP because all the Linux code is out there in the open; if something's not theirs, it's obvious and hard to hide. A place like Microsoft on the other hand, all the code is secret and jealously guarded, so
Re:I don't think Linux driver support is broken (Score:3, Insightful)
NVidia and ATI for example.
There is not much sense in putting any IP on the programing info for an 8 year old SCSI chipset, and this is where most of those 1000s of C files are.
Linux does not have to grow. (Score:5, Insightful)
If linux becomes oh so unpopular what is it to say that no one just takes the codebase and make something new and better? I think the cat is out of the bag now and thanks to OSS the applications barrier to entry is officially dead or atleast very small compared to how things looked a couple of years ago.
Without the applications barrier MS has no real advantage over anything else.
Re:Linux does not have to grow. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Linux does not have to grow. (Score:5, Insightful)
What I hope to see happen is that with backing from Big Blue, Linux continues to gain mainstream acceptance and eventually becomes one of the default choices for corporate use everywhere from the desktop to the mainframe. But that won't happen unless it makes a few more major steps in the propaganda war.
At least for IBM customers, which constitute a huge segment of the IT industry, Linux is going to be a significant part of their world. IBM has put too much money into their Linux strategy to back off, and there's no technical reason to look for another approach in any case. Linux is already running on lots of mainframes, RS/6000s and Netfinity boxes, and as it becomes capable of seriously replacing AIX, it will do that as well. Linux on the desktop is less certain, but IBM doesn't really play on the desktop (sure, they sell PCs, but it's not a big part of their business and they aren't a big part of the PC business).
About the only thing that could seriously slow IBM's move toward Linux is for SCO's lawsuit to succeed, and anyone who's been following the case closely knows that there's next to no chance of that.
Disclaimer: I work for IBM, but I'm not an IBM spokesman. And my part of IBM still thinks Linux is a funny fringe OS.
The Rising Sun (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Rising Sun (Score:3, Interesting)
It must be growing (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Non-prediction (Score:5, Funny)
I. At the end of the year,
Two choose new and one
Will try to abuse, but
Cause in them no fear.
II.No man will be killed
By means of net, but
Many with their money
Will be parted.
III. The mail of lightning
Will useless be, so Big
Red something new proposes.
But beware of traps!
IV. Old things abandoned will be,
And this many in danger
Will certainly leave.
A rusty knife can still kill.
Need I go on?
easy. (Score:3, Insightful)
By being completely stupid? How does free software "grow"? How does it "die"? These are comercial software concepts that have no meaning in the free software world.
Today, as it was before there was commercial software, free software grows when someone scratches an itch. Someone takes code and makes it do what they want. The result is more free code. Comercial code, on the other hand, grows when a marketing department convinces a user that thier part
Vague vague vague - and probably still wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides which, linux has coped fine with SCO. Even if there were any infringing code (which, after all the contradictory, facile BS SCO has been spouting, I somehow doubt) it would be a very easy matter within the current kernel development framework to either rewrite the code or dike it out -- if SCO would say what, exactly, the code was. The problem isn't one of the linux development model, it's a problem with SCO and their blatant disregard for honesty, the truth or any kind of propriety. If there was some (unspecified) "other" development model used, we would still rely on SCO telling us what the infringing code was so that it could be fixed or removed.
Believe me, if there was a problem with the linux kernel development system that meant the whole thing could be brought down using lawyers, Microsoft would have torn us apart years ago. In terms of unpleasantness (and certainly in terms of competence) SCO has nothing on MS Legal.
Amiga Prediction (Score:2)
Off to a bad start (Score:5, Funny)
As 2004 is a leap year with 366 days, I'm guessing Cringely will get this prediction wrong...
Crack head. (Score:2, Interesting)
"The U.S. IT industry will see some real growth except for Hewlett- Packard and Sun, which will continue their declines."
This guy must be on crack. Sun shipped the most copies of UNIX last year, have lower prices than Dell on the x86 side, supports Linux, created OpenOffice and supported it commercially, and is doing some of the most innovating development of any company (including t
Re:Crack head. (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree with the prediction regarding Sun Microsystems for a few reasons. First of all, I don't think the CEO of Sun is that great. In fact, I think he isn't very good. He reminds of the CEO of a company I used to work for, Motorola. Both CEOs seriously fall behind the competition and lack any insight. Second, Sun will have a tough time because it is caught between two things: hardware and software. Traditionally, its revenues have been from hardware, with software acting as a cash cow. Right now, it will have a hard time. Does it start selling Intel hardware (in which case it won't be making money off that)? Or does it go with software (which it isn't familiar with)? It looks like it is leaning towards software (with its Java Desktop System (which has little to do wiht java)). It remains to be seen if it can compete with Red Hat and Novell, among others.
What's the fun in killing people? Costing billions of dollars in damage multiple times a year, even a month, seems like a much better option if I was a terrorist. But I'm not a terrorist, I fear caves.
Terrorists don't live in caves--at least not most of them. In any case, I haven't read the article but terrorists don't (and won't) use cyber-terrorism because that is not their goal now. Groups like Al-Qaida don't target economic targets right now. All of their targets have been symbolic (warship, embassies, WTC, Pentagon). They may switch to economic targets in the future but we don't know. If they really wanted to cause massive economic hard, they domn't need the internet. They just need to blow the US stock markets. That will cause TRILLIONS of damage! Since financial institutions (like the stock market) are the heart of capitalism, any damage will have massive impact.
As far as the online music sales thingie is concerned, I don't really have a strong opinion yet. A lot of people are buying songs but I'm not sure if that is a long term thing or a short term fad.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Prediction 1 - he doesn't know games programmers (Score:2, Interesting)
The rest of (1) is hardly a prediction, unless 'Microsoft will carry on as normal' is an earth shattering revelation.
I like Cringely, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
3) Despite new anti-spam laws, we'll still be plagued with unsolicited commercial messages, especially using Internet Messaging protocols.
Sorry, anyone with an Inbox and a clue could tell you this. Vast amounts of spam come from outside the US boarders, where spam laws in the US mean squat. I think he's right on the money with this one though:
The more vague the predictions, the more likely they are to not be wrong, you know.
Those are not predictions, but observations (Score:2, Funny)
cyber-extortion (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this could have been predicted for 2003.We've already seen examples of cyber-extortion here (the medical transcriptionist in Pakistan), and I've seen lots of other reports of cyber-extortion attempts here and there, especially in the last 6 or so months. And this is the stuff that is actually reported in the news! I wonder how much of it goes unreported...
Some predictions misplaced (Score:5, Interesting)
1. The PS2's VU was pretty hard to write software for, but who is winning the market right now?
2. Nintendo have not announced what proecssor they are using, so how can it be the Cell processor? Who said that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft were releasing now consoles this year? At this time, they are all gunning for 2005.
3. Apple are not going to release flash iPod's, instead they are going to release HD based iPod's with 2 or 4gb capacity. This is a solid rumor.
4. Apple have made no announcement of how many G5's they want to sell, so anything is not what they are hoping.
5. Chances are the G6 will be released next year as the Power5 is being released next year.
6. Linux die? How? It's not a company, its a conglomerate of programmers. It's marketshare is rising, not falling. Case in point, OSS such as Apache is only growing in popularity.
7. How is Microsoft continuing on their normal ways a prediction? It's a fact.
8. Walmart are going to have some serious issues with their online music store simply because its not easy to use. I agree that Apple at this rate will not be in the lead though.
9. The Burst case is interesting, but I can't see Apple and Real being punished if Microsoft loses/or buys Burst.
All up a rather silly set of predictions that is all too vague or missing facts. I can see why he gets 70-80% success.
How many of his predictions? (Score:2)
Touchscreen voting (Score:2)
Resolved? Probably not. But we've *already* seen improvements made, namely that various state pols have already expressed their dissatisfaction and complete distrust of electronic voting systems. I think this will continue, and will become an issue in Congress soon - and possibly even a presidential election issue.
rubbish (Score:3, Insightful)
just giving the numbers here and my comment:
1) Ofcourse MS will. That's what they already wanted to do with the Xbox and failed (IMO) and they still are doing this... Geeez what a prediction...
2) Do I really need to say anything about this... It's pure bullshit...
3) Geez don't we already know this...
4) Geez, all these companies already told this to everybody who wanted to hear this... My my what a prediction...
5) Rubbish...
6) I predicted this at the start of the SCO case and everybody knew this from the start...
7) Nonsense...
8) Can't comment on this because I don't live in the USA.
9) I expect HP to grow, Sun will stabilize and Dell will indeed start to compete in new markets as they have done every year the last 2 or 3 years...
10) Can't comment on this one as I don't know the situation.
11) Geez, ofcourse WiFi will grow... and ofcourse progress and service will be spotty... and ofcourse a new business model won't work...
12) Can't comment on Wall-Mart as I can't buy there etc and I'm not living in the USA...
13) Can't comment on this as I don't know anything about Apple.
14) Geez... how surprising. But the strange thing is: all the candidates will be against outsourcing because it's bad for the number of jobs in the USA... So don't expect to be able to pick the winner on this point...
15) That's something they already do for the last 4 years... Nothing new here And ofcource Bill Gates won't get the Nobel Peace Prize... Which idiot would expect that...
Come back in 363 more days and see how I did
He's just like the gypsy at the local fair... obvious things and then claiming he thought it up...
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
My 2004 Prediction (Score:3, Funny)
Why another organizational structure for Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
The Linux kernel development already has a tried and true tested organization. Linus Torvalls and crew operating as benevolent dictators, totally open to public scrutiny, with no abolute power to dictate what additional patches the distributions and developers end up using. It has worked and continues to work very well [ibm.com].
All the contributions and development are traceable though both the Bit-tracker/CVS logs and the mailing lists, which makes eve
Ooh, prescient (Score:4, Insightful)
What else does he predict? The stock market will either rise or fall? The Republican candidate or the Democrat candidate will win the Presidential election? We'll be damned if we do, and damned if we don't?
Wal-Mart vs. ITMS (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree with this, for a few reasons. One, they're under tremendous pressure from their conservative customer base (lower-income white America) to adhere to a "moral standard". Have you ever bought a CD from Wal-Mart? They only sell "clean" versions of much of the type of music that would be bought online by the younger Internet demographic. If I was going to buy an electronic version of "Straight Outta Comptom", I sure as hell wouldn't buy it from Wal-Mart's online music store.
Second, online music is not an area that plays to Wal-Mart's competitive strength. Not many people think of Wal-Mart as a successful "clicks and mortar" e-commerce company. Wal-Mart makes its money by selling cheap consumer goods at rock-bottom prices. So rock-bottom, that their smaller competitiors can't compete, and are forced out of the market. But digital music is a much more level playing field. Apple can work with its label partners to lower its prices to match Wal-Mart's. But honestly, I don't think they have to. The integration with iTunes, the iTunes product on both Windows and OS X, and the huge mindshare that Apple enjoys make for an ability to sell their music at an 11 cent premium over Wal-Mart if they want to.
Third (and last, I'm getting tired of typing) - can Wal-Mart sustain their price advantage? Or is it like buymusic.com, where the few tracks that were actually available for their advertised 79 cent price were obscure tracks that you wouldn't want, and as some artists complained, weren't legal anyway? Unfortunately for the consumer, I think 99 cents a track is where the industry wants the price for most songs to be.
I guess that my main point is that I just don't believe Wal-Mart is going to steamroll over the music industry with a business plan of "We do what they do, just a bit cheaper." Too many other companies have already established beachheads, and they're actually innovating. My predicition is that Wal-Mart abandons digital music within 18 months.
Other reason why Wal-Mart is a non-starter... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, lots and lots of people of all bands visit the stores. But that's not going to help online music sales much. I think there are very few people actually shopping around online for music stores, and almost no-one going to the Wal-Mart web site the same way people go to the stores. So Wal-Mart's service in reality has a pretty low visibility.
Now add in the 900 pound gorilla - the Pepsi promotion. All sorts of Wal-Mart customer
You've never seen... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yea, they drove some people out of business for sure. But at the same time, they are a VERY capable company. They very well could succeed at this.
Re:Wal-Mart vs. ITMS (Score:3, Interesting)
As this is the entertainment business, I'll just point ou
What's wrong with POP3? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why replace POP3 (and IMAP)? These work fine and are completely separate of the SMTP delivery engine. The smart thing to do would be to replace SMTP MTAs with something that does server-to-server authentication, and leave POP3 and IMAP for the MUAs.
I don't see why. (Score:3, Redundant)
I wish the SCO would just die as it deserves, a quiet death without rousing the entire roost with it's antics. It's like believing the boy who cried 'Wolf!' after the fiftieth time..........
Technogensia and the Fate of Free Software (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux development may indeed change, regardless of SCO. Or, to put it more accurately, "free" software development must change from a pure technocracy if it is to wrest control of the consumer space from Microsoft. Now, I realize (and respect) Linus's lack of concern about market share and other trappings of competition; I use Linux precisely because I like the technology associated with it. I am also a technoscenti, which means that my needs are quite different from those of most people.
Technical excellence can be attained in conjunction with meeting the needs of mundane users. "Free" software has created its own hierarchy of haves and have nots, based on technical prowess; the lords of free software turn up their noses and snort when confronted with needs of the commoners. Able to exist on a purely philosophical level, the technogensia fail to see that free software has reached the edge of its current potential. Apple, Sun, and Red Hat will take "free" software to the next level, where it accomplishes solid, practical tasks for real people.
So in a sense, Cringley is correct: free software (which he erroneously lumps under "Linux") will change, or it will be replaced in the greater world by something more attuned to the needs of the commons.
Re:Technogensia and the Fate of Free Software (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't accept that; your three examples are more different than you make out.
Apple are a good example of a company that has built almost all of the important user interface stuff themselves, and tacked it onto a Free Software underbelly
how's the weather up there? (Score:3, Insightful)
What planet do you live on? On my plannet there's a guy named Knopper who made a CD that runs and self configures on just about any computer without taking any hard drive space. Knoppix has two sets of repla
Re:how's the weather up there? (Score:3, Interesting)
We're talking apples and oranges here. I'm quite fond of Knoppix (and have hopes for Gnoppix as well); I just used it to convert my wife's Windows laptop to GNU/Linux/KDE. Price is not the issue in this debate -- attendance to user needs is.
For example, I miss the graphing abilities of Excel; OpenCalc and Gnumeric simply don't compare. The usual "free" response is to use gnuplot or some other outside package, or to modify Gnumeric myself. I'm certainly capable of doing both, but I haven't the time; I'd
Re:what? (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose that I should ignore you, given your obvious need for non sequitors. But then I'm in a cranky mood, so... ;)
The lack of reliability in Microsoft's products is no excuse for the lack of quality in many free softwares. Like Linus, I don't really give a hoot what Microsoft does -- I want the best possible free-as-in-liberty software, period.
How many examples would you like me to cite? Should I have mentioned the silly bug (which frustrated me this morning) in Abiword 2.0.1 that consistently s
Re:Technogensia and the Fate of Free Software (Score:4, Insightful)
"Free" software has created its own hierarchy of haves and have nots, based on technical prowess; the lords of free software turn up their noses and snort when confronted with needs of the commoners.
Poppycock, rubbish, balderdash and all those other silly-sounding patronizing pejoratives.
Give me an example of free software developers "turning up their noses" at the needs of the commoners. Free software developers work on what they're interested in. Some of them are interested in making things easy and usable for common users (the KDE and GNOME teams, OpenOffice developers, Mozilla developers, hotplug developers, Knopper, etc.) and some of them are interesting in making the underpinnings fast, reliable and secure (kernel developers, tools developers, apache developers, and some subset of all of the people in the first list).
Okay, so Linus and company aren't focusing their efforts on newbie-friendly GUIs, but why should they? It's not their area of expertise, or interest. Others are doing that. You may be unhappy about the rate of progress but unless you provide someone a reason to care about your opinion, you have no rational reason to think your ill-defined expectations will be met.
Apple, Sun, and Red Hat will take "free" software to the next level, where it accomplishes solid, practical tasks for real people.
More crap. Apple's software is far from Free -- at least the part of it that is for "real people". If you want commercial, by all means buy commercial! Sun and Red Hat (and SuSe/Novell, and Mandrake, and...) are just packaging up the same free software that everyone else has. They're not really building user-friendly solutions on top of the Free software so much as riding the same usability wave everyone else is (though they do contribute a lot to the development of Free software -- excepting Sun, of course).
No, the main thing that Sun, Red Hat, etc. are providing isn't software, it's services. Those services do in fact help make the software "accomplish solid, practical tasks for real people", but it's hardly reasonable to criticize the developers because they want to write software rather than provide services.
What's next, are you going to criticize your garbage man because he doesn't come in your house and empty all the trash cans? Or clean your house?
Linux illegal? (Score:3, Insightful)
so it depends on the strength of US law and jurisdiction what SCO and its CEO fill face.
Everybody knows that they are nuts, except the capital market and mainstream journalists. I don't see any reason to worry.
-- Now Saddam could tell where his WMD are hidden
Poor stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO impacting Linux? Has Cringely even looked at the market? SCO's attacks on Linux have simply turned up the volume on the debate, they have not actually changed the fundamentals.
As far as I can see, the fundamentals of IT are:
1. Ever cheaper technology, including and especially software technology. Software drops in price just like hardware does, but it's starting to be a significant driver.
2. Ever worse infestation by parasitical software - trojans, spyware, worms, viruses - and the use of this by spammers. This is no longer a sideshow, it is one of the main drivers.
3. Global competition to lower costs, especially IT costs. Few firms can avoid competition, one way or another, by companies halfway around the globe.
It all adds up to a big problem for Microsoft and a significant advantage for free/open software, especially Linux.
Microsoft has tried to sabotage Linux through a variety of strategies, and each time they have failed. 2004 will see the start of serious competition, or serious defeat.
I predict that Microsoft will produce a "Windows Classic" package in 2004 that combines a cheap Windows OS and Office, for $49.95, or less. This is about the only way it can compete with offerings like Xandros Desktop, which provide a very smooth and complete package for around this price.
Price, security, simplicity. C'mon, it's so obvious that it hurts to have to say this.
Re:Poor stuff (Score:5, Interesting)
When they do that, they would lose probably more than half of their revenue and Bill Gates' and Ballmer's stock would become a lot less worth than it is now.
I predict Microsoft will continue to do selective discounts, or to put it in another way: To offer great rebates to possible defectors while ripping off their loyal userbase.
How can I believe predictions ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, there are a few predictions there that are simply ludicrous, and others are nothing more than simple set up for saying nothing. The linux prediction that everyone here is most interested in is a hollow, say nothing prediction.
It is best summed up by the last sentence "Linux has to grow or die, and the direction it takes will be determined in 2004." Talk about hollow predications. Linux is an active project, so it must do something. At any moment in time, and with every decision, Linux will take a positive or negative direction simply because it is active. Since Cringely's prediction contains both outcomes, he can come back next year and claim success. That is, of course, unless Linux stagnates, which isn't about to happen.
Shoddy journalism. No more or less. Ignore the article and save time, unless you believe in that sort of thing. If you do, send me all your money and I'll sell you this great bridge connecting Brooklyn and Manhattan
Doesn't matter (Score:3, Insightful)
My only prediction is that he will claim 70% again (Score:3, Insightful)
My only prediction is that at the start of next year he will again claim to be at least 70% correct. But there are some useful trends suggested that are worth considering. I now see why the start of the new year is always such a low moment in readership.
He got one more right (Score:4, Insightful)
"I was wrong in my mysterious prediction of a new electronic way to foment social change. I just never got around to doing it myself (that was the plan), so I'll have to accept that I was wrong."
I don't see his email, or I'd email him directly...but he *did* get that one right: consider Howard Dean and Meetup.
mark "did I mention ?"
Misconception about cyberterrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Terrorism is NOT just about body counts, it is about the ability to get a group to accede to your wishes by force or threat of force. Killing people is an effective way to do this but it is not the only way. In a highly wired country like the USA, a single cyberterrorist act that cripples the nation's infrastructure and/or economy is just as effective in producing terror as threatening to crash a plane into a building.
2. Cyberterrorism need not be separate from other acts of terrorism. A cyber attack could well be a component of a large, complex attack. So even if a large cyberterror attack were improbable, it doesn't rule out small ones that are done as one piece of a much larger attack. (For example, using electronic means to extort or steal money, as Cringley admits is likely, could finance another 9/11 attack.)
A Long-Winded Response (Score:5, Insightful)
1) It will happen late in the year, but Microsoft will make a bold run for video game leadership...
Didn't Microsoft already do this, with the XBox? And let's just say MS decides to -announce- the next console - can we have some predicted specs? No? Then all this prediction says is "Microsoft will announce their next console." Fine, this one actually has a bit of substance, actually puts Cringley in the position of being distinctly right or wrong. Of course, the XBox is now almost 2 years old (launched in Nov of 2001), so it's not unreasonable to assume the announcement of a new console, particularly given how early the XBox itself was announced.
2) We still won't see a big example of cyber-terrorism simply because nobody has figured out how to actually kill people that way...
This seems like fluff to me. Did anyone ever predict "cyber-terrorism"? I know it's not something I'm worried about. If al qaeda (or whoever) stop my email for a week, hey, that's less work for me. It doesn't inspire terror. In fact, little that could be done online has the potential to cause terror, save for the goatse.cx man, and possibly this [geekh.com].
To paraphrase, "I was right last year, so let me try again this year." Watch, I can do it too, with a high probability of success - "We again won't see the launch of nuclear weapons". And hey, if I'm wrong, you probably won't be able to hold me to it anyway.
3) Despite new anti-spam laws, we'll still be plagued with unsolicited commercial messages, especially using Internet Messaging protocols.
Oh my god, what a bold prediction! Surely this Cringley is possessed of a preternatural ability for soothsaying. Spam will still be a problem! Perhaps I can pay this man for tomorrow's lottery numbers, or for a Super Bowl pick. Then it's off to the bookie...
Sorry, my sarcasm got the best of me. To be fair, he does predict possible new email protocols, but he doesn't address whether they will be accepted, or even considered.
4) Continuing the security theme, look for lots of software companies to abandon support for old products and platforms.
Microsoft JUST announced [newsfactor.com] they were dropping Windows 98 support. And companies do this all the time. Is he predicting a rise in this type of decision?
"Companies will abandon old products to get you to upgrade." Once again I am shocked!
5) The SCO debacle has created a crisis within the Linux community. They pretend that it hasn't, but it has.
This one has everyone here talking, but what does it really say? Linux will either continue to grow or start to die in 2004. Well, I mean, yeah. Obviously. Linux has BEEN growing for years now, so if it continues to grow, well look, he was right. Oh, and if in 5, 10 years, it's dead? Well, look, he was probably right, it probably started in 2004, or at least it may have. This is a non-prediction. Something will happen, or it won't. All this rules out is Linux stagnating, and who can judge that? What are the odds that every flavor of Linux will stop making major updates, but continue to make minor updates (and thus, not grow, but not die?).
6) As for SCO, they'll continue to make noise until the middle of the year, at which point the legal case will implode and the company will give up...
SCO will finally crumble under the weight of their legal lies, you say? I'm sure I speak for much of the Slashdot community, and Cringely's largely geek audience in general, when I say "Yes, we know".
7) 2004 will be a crucial year for streaming media... At first, this doesn't sound like much of a prediction. Then, he says MS will settle, which
SCO vs. Linux - There is no danger! (Score:3, Interesting)
I know I'm just stating the obvious here, but it seems worth mentioning, in case people really believe Cringely's "the sky is falling" claim regarding SCO and Linux.
First, there is Linux the kernel, and there is Linux the full featured operating system. The only thing in any danger is Linux the kernel, which is just a part of Linux the operating system. So, right off the bat, the potential danger is localized.
Second, once SCO is compelled by the courts to reveal the allegedly infringing code - if there is any - the Linux community will quickly replace it, and Linux will be back on track.
If, for some reason, replacing the allegedly infringing code is not possible, there are other kernels to turn to, including but not limited to the excellent BSD kernel (Free, Net, Open).
This SCO nonsense is just good entertainment for us, and a foolish money sink for companies like IBM that have to put up with SCO's obnoxiousness.
There's nothing to see here. Move on.
-Teckla
That's a little like saying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux has an organizational structure? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's none of the above, of course. It's a free software kernal, rolled into many operating systems like Red Hat and Debian, but still just a kernel. Pretty much useless by itself, unlike Free, Net and OpenBSD, which are top-to-bottom OS projects, with a central organizational structure that takes care of everything a user could want or need in their Unix system.
Free Software/Open Source has not one, but two religious movment/trade associations, complete with Famous and Glamorous grand high pooh-bah charismatic heads. Richard Stallman on the one side, and Bruce Perens on the other. Both men and their organizations are pretty much ignored by everyone involved with Linux, save to incorporate their software into the Linux-based OS projects or to toss obscene amounts of cash at them to help them kick Microsoft out of the datacenter. Overall, they're mostly just good for really entertaining flame wars.
Linux will continue to grow unchecked because there is no organizational structure. People are free to take and use the kernel however they see fit, so long as they share the source code to any modifications, so it will wind up in spacecraft microcontrollers and kilo-processor supercomputers, wrapped in the software needed to get the job done.
Linux-based desktop operating systems will put in more effort to be interoperable with each other, though it's unlikely they'll all get together and decide to have someone be their collective boss. That's not neccesarily a bad thing, and coprorate customers will be more comfortable knowing that the organizational structure in charge of their Linux-based OS is "IBM" or "Red Hat" rather than a nebulous organization of hippies and geeks... gives 'em someone to sue if it all goes wrong.
SoupIsGood Food
mostly the usual cringely nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
No elaboration, explanation, discussion of what 'grow or die' means. How trivial.
As for SCO, they'll continue to make noise until the middle of the year, at which point the legal case will implode and the company will give up...This was never more than a stock scam,
This much at least seems true.
We'll see more of this ploy in the future.
This seems unlikely. Once SCO self-destructs and all non-insiders are left hoding shares at 100% loss, this pattern will become evident even to financial analysts (who, with few exceptions, have been amazingly dense sofar). Even Didio and Enderle will be able to see it then, though they'll never have the decency to say so.
Linux IS organized (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is BETTER organized than closed source shops.
The whole notion that Linux is somehow disorganized is a subtle knock that says: "oh, it has to be centralized to be organized", in other words, only big companies are capable of organization. Yet, big companies are often just as disorganized as the internet blob that is Linux.
We often note how corporate will can accomplish great things, but, we also live in a world where we disregard all of the dishonesty and infighting that plagues many IT departments and companies. Even MS is not immune to this - with the rumored infighting between the Office team and the
By contrast, Linux projects are out in the open. You can check the status of any via the web, you can see the differing philosophies of the different camps of different systems easily, you can choose to decide which technology to invest in by a transparent and open decision making process. Of course, you could always look at the source yourself, and you may, but for the most part, the process of fundraising in the open source environment is a lot more transparent and accountable than the same process in a closed source company.
Its not the first time . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux *does* have to grow! (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux is technically solid. This is no surprise, as it essentially borrowed its technical solidity from UNIX, which had been around for 20 years when Linux first appeared. This is good.
But beyond the kernel and server-type applications and developer utilities, Linux has less focus. Some people like using bare window managers. Some people want X Windows replaced with something saner. Then there are the KDE/Gnome desktop environment battles. Lets not even get into the various GUI creation libraries.
One side will say "Choice is good!", and I agree. But all the arguing and general muddling has made Linux much less appealing as an alternative to more focused operating systems. Apple forces a GUI down your throat, but at the same time they've succeeded in making desktop UNIX appealing and a target for well-known applications. So Linux needs to grow in the sense that there should be more focus to what the desktop Linux experience *is* exactly, and with that is going to come wider curiosity and adoption. UserLinux may pull this off...or not.
But please just don't blow off the comment, okay? Personally, I see OS X as a much brighter alternative to Linux, simply because decisions have been made and there's strong leadership.
Re:More like it... (Score:2)
Here... I'm spelling MS with a dollar sign: M$
Sivaram Velauthapillai