On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Though Windows is by no stretch POSIX compliant, most would argue that is not necessary attribute anyway, given the huge breadth of server applications chugging away happily on Windows boxes.
At the moment I am running a company network that includes Windows desktops, and one core application is a Windows client/server application. It is the only reason to keep Windows running, besides the "general feeling" of the management that you cannot install anything else than Windows and MS Office: Otherwise staff will be completely cofused because that's what they know. The later point may become mute in the future: More and more people get more exposed to other platforms, particularly tablets which running "the same stuff" than their mobiles. More and more development go into apps for Android and iOS too. More and more applications being "Windows only" in the past are accessible via tablets. Windows 8 are adding to the confusion in the corporate world too. We have desktops which are running Windows 7 - what about a new system that is not desktop friendly? What about apps, how to maintain security if you have an additional way of software "creeping in"? The costs of maintaining the foundation by yourself is huge. For a company losing significant market share it is a monumental task. Microsoft was able to do that because people did not think there is an alternative and you have to pay the price, and could put part of the premium into their development (sometimes just deliberately reinventing the wheel to be incompatible with others). Being a market leader and able to lock in people is good for your business. If you are "just one of them" it hurts to have an odd system. So far my crystal ball;-) Regards Peter