Microsoft and Google Need to Kiss and Make Up

khess 0 254 Views

OK, you two, stop fighting. These little spats of yours are getting old. A , heard yesterday, that Google is not going to use Windows internally in their company might be just that: rumor. And, a bad one at that. It's interesting to note that, while such a rumor stirs up thoughts of Google's own Chrome OS on a thousand desktops/laptops/netbooks; I don't know that it's entirely possible to toss out all the Windows operating systems from their midst. Or desirable.

FOSS Chorus: How can he say such a thing? He's the Linux Guy, after all.

I'm realistic. Not all of Google's customers will want or need to use Linux. Or Mac. Or even Windows. It just isn't wise for anyone to say that they will or will not use product X because of <insert lame excuse here>.

FOSS Chorus: OMG. Is he for real? How is it lame to say that Linux is more secure than Windows? And, Google should feel free to move to their operating system of choice--as long as that choice doesn't mean Windows.

Google has customers that use Windows. They have customers that use Mac. And, they have customers that use Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and Linux. To think that the world could be a world of one operating system is ridiculous. Besides, if we all used Linux, what would the zealots do with 99.99% of their time?

Oh yeah, I forgot. Video games.

FOSS Chorus: OK, that's it. Who is he talking to? Oh, excuse me, Mr. Perfect, let us rephrase that: To whom is he speaking?

Seriously. It's time for Google and other companies (and journalists and pseudo-journalists and bloggers) to stop making wild accusations and using crazy headlines like, "Google to Stop Using Windows." Puleeze.

FOSS Chorus: Oh, no he di'n't. What's crazy about not using Windows? It's not secure, you have to reboot it all the time (Ken Hess, himself, has said that), it's expensive and it just isn't cool to use non-free software.

All I'm saying is this, "We all need to get along on some level. Microsoft isn't going away. Linux isn't going away. And, Mac isn't going away. Microsoft and Google just need to kiss and make up."
Even if the rumor is fact, and I'm hoping that it isn't fact, it's silly to come out and say such a thing publicly. You can use any operating system that you want but you don't have to broadcast which one(s) you aren't using.

FOSS Chorus: Where is he? Where is Ken Hess? We're going to find him, hunt him down and make him reboot Windows servers until his three-finger saluting hands are raw and he begs us to let him just peek at a Linux command line.

Yeah, yeah. Get in line.

Dani AI

Generated

A short, practical addendum that pulls the thread together and fills technical gaps in the discussion started by (and echoed by and ): big companies rarely make OS decisions as an ideological broadcast. They make them to keep critical services running, to reduce risk, and to control cost and support effort.

There are concrete reasons a mixed-OS environment is normal: many organisations still depend on long‑running line‑of‑business applications that aren’t easy to replatform; identity and policy control is often centralized around Active Directory–style services; and when teams want to reduce Windows on endpoints they still deliver Windows apps via virtualization or app‑delivery platforms. (crn.com)

If an organisation is serious about reducing Windows footprint, treat it like any major migration—measure first, then change. A compact, repeatable workflow that works in practice:

  • Inventory every application and endpoint; tag apps as replace / rehost / retain (Windows‑only).
  • For rehosted Windows apps, plan virtual delivery (VDI / app virtualization) or containerized hosting.
  • For replacements, proof the cross‑platform alternatives and validate file/format compatibility.
  • Plan identity: if AD is in use, include SSO/LDAP strategy and test account/group mappings.
  • Pilot with a small group, capture metrics (support tickets, performance, user friction), then expand.

These steps reflect standard migration guidance and tooling vendors’ recommendations—plan, pilot, convert, measure. (docs.redhat.com)

Practical caution: a public pronouncement that “we’ll stop using X” is rarely helpful—it raises support, procurement, and morale questions and can lock an organisation into a risky single‑vendor posture. A pragmatic, phased approach that preserves user productivity while retiring legacy dependencies is the real win; for many orgs that means coexistence, not a religious switch. Chrome‑style, cloud‑first endpoints exist and are useful, but they’re not a one‑size‑fits‑all replacement for every enterprise workload. (en.wikipedia.org)

Member Avatar for Alex_
Alex_ 0 Junior Poster

I don't get it. What is the problem after all?
Google ditches windows... hooray!
Google needs to make up... ok.

Member Avatar for kashcool5
kashcool5 0 Newbie Poster

Really Interesting topic and very well explained. Thanks.

You can also visit to this new classified site which i found really easy to use, visit: http://www.funkyfreaks.com

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview