MAILBAG - Letter to the Editor

ENT, August 16, 2000

Decision May Help Microsoft

Congratulations on your June 14 article, "Gates Outlines Strategy for Developers," by Thomas Sullivan.

Bill Gates' decision to concentrate on software development and hand over the CEO position at Microsoft to Steve Ballmer just may prove to be the best and biggest decision he has ever made. Anyone who believes this is a sign that Bill Gates is slowing down or beginning to fade into the background is sadly mistaken. Steve Ballmer is as brilliant and savvy as Bill Gates.

More important, however, is the fact that despite all the success Microsoft has had, it has lost something by not allowing Bill Gates to concentrate on software development.

As CEO, Bill Gates was forced to spend too much time dealing with issues that at the end of the day did not result in driving software development, the company's core product.

That all changes under the new structure. That one change means the industry should expect Microsoft to introduce better products in the future.

Jimmy Castro

jimmycastro@hotmail.com

Times They Are a Changin'

I just wanted to drop a line to let you know I enjoyed reading Greg Scott's June 28 column in ENT. Although my association with DEC is not as extensive as Greg's, I did serve as systems administrator for a university VMS cluster for two years.

I have also been a user of Windows NT since 1993, and am now running W2K. Microsoft seems to be improving Windows, and may someday get up to the capabilities that VMS had way back when.

Peter Shkabara, PE

Computer Science Instructor

Columbia College

Sonora, CA

peter@gtemail.net

I read Greg Scott's June 28 column with great interest.

I also have long wondered why Compaq is not (publicly) porting VMS to IA64. It would seem to be a perfect match. I am a long time VMS systems programmer who believes VMS still has a lot to offer with respect to Windows NT and all the Unix variants.

What's especially interesting is that VMS has from the very beginning been quasi-open source in that 95 percent of the code is available via the fiche sets and 100 percent available via the VMSKITBLD magnetic tape. But the fiche and magnetic tape kits cost money.

Given the long-time spirit of DECUS, I would believe that the user community would port VMS if Compaq provided a Web site/clearinghouse and some kernel VMS expertise to start the port and review code.

In other words, VMS -- and layered products -- could be ported by the user community in the same manner Linux was created.

I would help with the port and I'll bet a lot of other disenfranchised VMS systems persons would, too. Could IA64/OpenSourceVMS become the preferred Windows NT alternative over Linux? I'll bet my VMS debugger it could.

Jim Palmer

Unigraphics Solutions

Palmerj@ugsoludons.com

MicrosDft's Future

In News & Views in the July 19 ENT, David Chappell is one of "Four Experts Speculate on a Future with Two Microsofts."

He predicts that a new desktop monopoly will arise because enterprise customers want a monopoly and also because, "A desktop monopoly exists because a large share of users want one."

I do not believe that any organization truly wants a monopoly. I believe they accept a monopoly because they perceive that as being the only reasonable way to guarantee data interchangeability between systems. That was certainly the dominant factor in our decision, with reduced training costs a very distant second in importance.

If Office Productivity Suite A under Operating System X bad complete bi-directional data compatibility with Office Suite B under Operating System Y, the entire business case for a desktop monopoly would evaporate.

Paul R. Dittrich

Paul.dittrich@wiremold.com

I enjoyed reading both of Greg Scott's July 19 columns, "A Future with Two Microsofts" and "Big Heads, Big Trouble."

I agree with his points in both articles. I believe it's important for VARs to diversify their knowledge and product base. Linux, open source, Web development, and security are high growth areas not dependent upon Microsoft. I get a sense that the IT community is tired of Microsoft's arrogance and are looking at alternatives. I don't believe anything in the short term will replace MS on the desktop and no one really wants to give up Office. Change will come from the Internet and Web development efforts. Microsoft does not make the best Internet tools or applications. Developers are using or evaluating Linux, Sun, and Oracle solutions. VARs need to capitalize on this shift and focus on solutions rather than products.

Neil Kutchera

Data Integrity Inc.

Coral Springs, Fla.

neil@dataintegrity.com

Web Server Survey

The June 14 survey of Web servers used on Fortune 500 brochure sites isn't very helpful for someone trying to decide on technology for critical applications. Almost anything will work if all you're doing is cranking out static pages, or if your Web site isn't important for customer relations.

A better test of technology is a survey of the Fortune e-50. These are companies for whom e-commerce is central, rather than being a sideline.

I hope to see you do a more complete survey along the same lines.