Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
IT Technology Hardware

What Will Happen in IT in 2007? 318

An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet's Paul Murphy has set out his IT predictions for 2007. Featured among the completely predictable, OpenSolaris overtaking Linux is apparently inevitable within one year. From the article: 'By the end of the year the OpenSolaris community will be widely recognized as larger and more active than the Linux community.' Is 2007 the year of the OpenSolaris desktop? Other 'inevitables' include Microsoft's success with Vista, the continuing phase-out of Itanium, and the Cell processor powering most of the world's super-computers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Will Happen in IT in 2007?

Comments Filter:
  • by strider44 ( 650833 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @10:59PM (#17413508)
    Ex MacOSX guys won't fuel Vista - Dell, HP, et al will. People won't even know that there's any alternative, that's why Microsoft will be making their billions. Bullshit that OpenSolaris will overtake Linux anytime soon, let alone within the next year. The open source zealots will never go for it, and a lot of people have too much invested in Linux. And how will the Cell processor totally dominate the next top computing list when it's not even worth a mention in the current top computing list?

    He then goes on to reiterate much of what's been said every year but never come true, that is the parts that actually made sense. I'm surprised that he didn't say "2007 is the year for the Open Solaris desktop".

    What a waste of time.
  • by rampant mac ( 561036 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:03PM (#17413526)
    "'By the end of the year the OpenSolaris community will be widely recognized as larger and more active than the Linux community.' Is 2007 the year of the OpenSolaris desktop?"

    I could replace the word OpenSolaris with Linux. Or Mac OS X. Or BeOS. Or Amiga.

    Face it, Windows is the defacto standard and will be for many, many years. Until businesses change (from running Windows) every other operating system ever created will be second fiddle to the Microsoft monopoly. You know what? Who cares? Do you think Porsche executives stay up late at night thinking "Jesus Christ, Ford has really got us by the balls. How the fuck are we going to compete againt the new Escort?"

    I don't care about Microsoft and what they're doing. If it wasn't for their stranglehold on the computing industry, they'd be 10 years behind the technological curve. Natch. They ARE 10 years behind the curve. They just (currently) have the money right NOW to stay relevant.

    It'll change. Maybe not now, but soon.
  • What to say? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by symbolset ( 646467 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:13PM (#17413586) Journal

    Somebody find this guy a cluestick and beat him with it.

    1. Microsoft will make billions on vista. duh.
    2. Itanic is still dead. Wow. What a revelation.
    3. Cell takes over HPC. Not gonna happen. See GPGPU for why.
    4. Slowaris wins out over linux. Literally when pigs fly.

    How many trite phrases can you fit in one blog post? "structural convergence" "Web 2" "SOA" "Googlemania" "YouTube"

    OK, Here's my set of predictions.

    1. Lots of folks will make money -- in old realiable and new creative ways. Some of them will go to jail for it eventually. Most will not.
    2. Transcoding video is the killer app for multicore and beyond. The studios aren't coming to market fast enough to deliver the universally playable content that users want, and users are ready to pay thousands for a pc that converts the media they already have.
    3. Linux and OSX will continue to take share from the Borg, slowly. More slowly than they should.
    4. Vista will be revealed to be as buggy and spyware prone as every other MS OS, for the same reason -- it's developed by the same braindamaged marketdroids who brought us all the others. Microsoft is lucky most of us have no other choice.
    5. A great many flackalysts will comment on the invincibility of Vista, Microsoft, IBM, Sun and every other major vendor, and their paid commentary is worth exactly what the company's glossy fliers are -- not even useful as toilet paper.
    6. The winner in the Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD wars will be... Monitor makers. Your powerpoint never looked so lovely as it does in 1080p.

    Don't like my list? You do better.

  • by Bios_Hakr ( 68586 ) <xptical@g3.14mail.com minus pi> on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:16PM (#17413604)
    DRM does not really matter to corporate. You shouldn't be watching movies or listening to music at work anyway. It's probably a selling point.
  • by Oddster ( 628633 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:19PM (#17413626)
    An anonymous reader writes
    ZDNet's Paul Murphy


    Anybody else have the feeling that the submitter is actually Paul Murphy?

    Seems like Zonk has broken into the New Years champagne a bit early, and the standard for front-page stories went from infinitesimal to nil.
  • Re:dream on (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cpuh0g ( 839926 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:23PM (#17413654)
    and Solaris specific technologies including ZFS and Dtrace. Linux already has tracing technologies and it has multiple excellent file systems, as well as a roadmap for ext4. Maybe ZFS and DTrace will have some small influence on their evolution, but for the most part, Linux will go its own way there. My prediction: OpenSolaris is going to be a dud.

    Get real - Linux tracing capabilities are like primitive caveman tools compared to DTrace. Just because something wasn't developed by the "Linux community" (whatever the hell that means) doesn't mean it is worthless. ZFS is a major evolutionary step forward for file systems. Again, just because it wasn't born and raised as a sourceforge project doesn't mean it must be crap. Take off the blinders, zealot. Great technology knows no religion, it can come from anywhere. Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, et al, are not staffed by idiots (well, at least not in the engineering ranks). Just because they work for "the man" doesn't make their contributions to the field of software any less relevant or useful. Judge the tools by their merits, ignore the religion.

    Whether or not OpenSolaris "takes over" in 2007 remains to be seen, but to dismiss the contributions of Sun's engineers (or Microsoft's for that matter) is to ignore history and to ignore some truly innovative contributions to the field.

  • Re:XML (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:37PM (#17413710) Journal
    What? XML gets way too much "respect" by all the wrong people.

    XML was designed for one thing, blind data interchange. That's it. Not config files, not GUI descriptions, not anything to do with databases. Get over it. Everything else is hype created by idiots that make money selling ads in magazines and on web sites.
  • Ummmm yeah.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:39PM (#17413712) Homepage
    As a solaris guy from way back I say.... not!

    Solaris is great, but if you want a FREE unix BSD is your ticket. Hell I even run it on some older Sparc 5 boxes in the basement... Faster and easier than solaris because of it being 100% open.

    As for everything else.... nope... IT in 2007 will look 100% like IT in 2006. XP on the desktop in every competent Corperation, not much changes anywhere else.

    Change = expense.
  • by mOdQuArK! ( 87332 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:41PM (#17413716)
    DRM _will_ start to matter to corporate the first time a software vendor shuts down a mission-critical business application due to some sort of misunderstanding over payment terms.
  • by dhasenan ( 758719 ) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:46PM (#17413736)
    Year of the Linux desktop = 2005

    The desktop tools are fully as useable as Microsoft's. More so, I'd say. Even GNOME is, with their habit of entirely removing everything that's unnecessary for more than 80% of the users.

    The major remaining issues for Linux superiority are hardware support and games. I've got TuxRacer and Globulation 2, though, and set up my wireless card in three easy step (the other fifteen were fiendishly difficult).

    After that, the remaining issues are Internet access and speed (Linux isn't good for slow connections), specific applications (if you have ten years' data for ARCview, you're staying with the platforms they support), and unfamiliarity with Linux.

    Take a similar example: Apple produces a product that's more polished and better in many ways than Linux, better in most ways than Microsoft, and still has less than 10% market share. Why? Nothing technical, just economic and psychological.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 30, 2006 @11:49PM (#17413758)
    Meanwhile, the best Linux has to offer are filesystems borrowed from others (XFS), grossly unreliable (ReiserFS), or based off ten year old filesystem concepts/technology (ext3.) Dude, throw your PC out the window, it's based on 10-year-old technology!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:09AM (#17413884)
    Linux has no good filesystems. You are stuck trying to pick which pig has the nicest lipstick on. And the two nicest made up pigs are both from corporations giving up their unixes and opening their filesystems up. If not for IBM and SGI, linux still would have no usable filesystems at all.

    And linux has nothing that in any way comes anywhere even close to dtrace. I know its pretty standard for gnubies to not know anything besides linux, and speak of linux's greatness out of ignorance, but go read up on dtrace before spewing bullshit.

    Everything about linux is a half dozen not quite good enough "solutions" that are miles behind solaris's offerings. From filesystems to virtualization, from threads to system administration tools, solaris blows linux away on every front.

    You are right about one thing though. Linux will go its own way all right. As always, failing to learn anything from the vastly superior operating systems it pathetically fails to copy.
  • by KZigurs ( 638781 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:42AM (#17414048)
    Crackpot.

    1) Billions off vista? Yeah, right. Public beta is expected to start at the end of January, turnaround to the market isn't THAT fast (remember NT4 SP3? Remember W2000 SP4? Remember Windows XP SP1?)

    2) Itanium?

    3) Except for the fact that SUPERcomputers are not specced, ordered and build overnight, more like 18-24 month timeframe for rollout and then some for full capacity if we are talking about serious ones. Also CELL is not the answer, ask Cray.

    4) Assuming that ___OPEN!!! IT'S OPEN NOW___ Solaris actually manages to get any exposure at all this is absolutely unlikely to happen in an envorement that is supercharged with egos and religious evangelists/fanatics that spend their lives defending their indentation style or plan source control system migration for 18 months ahead.

    Of course we could be had - last three paragraphs hives off a hint that this could be a very ultrasubtle attempt at humor. In a failed way of sense.

    In short - most stupid article seen on /. within last month. I just felt obliged to comment.
  • by supabeast! ( 84658 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:43AM (#17414052)

    What I don't get is that Microsoft made Exchange clients for DOS, Win31, and Mac (There was even a rare Outlook 97 for Windows 3.1!) Why hasn't any of that been successfully reverse engineered and cloned?
    Because open-source programmers are often hobbyists who would rather cobble together one more mail client that will never have a measurable market share. One thing that the anti-Microsoft zealots need to realize is that the open-source crowd aren't in it to win, they're just in it for the code, and so relying on them to conquer the world is wrongheaded, if not downright stupid.
  • by beoba ( 867477 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:44AM (#17414056) Homepage
    If Ford was able to arbitrarily patent the combustion engine, or force gas stations to only provide fuel that worked with Fords, then Porsche would care.
  • Another list... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Viceroy Potatohead ( 954845 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:48AM (#17414082) Homepage
    Ugh. A couple of other predictions for 2007:

    1. Entertainment writers will spend the last week of 2007 wracking their brains for meaningless, top-ten-list, fluff pieces in order to receive their next paychecks.

    2. The apparent MS astroturfing campaign will continue on /. unabated.

    3. Apologists for the upcoming Vista horrorshow will continue to denounce MS critics as zealots.

    4. A new branch of mathematics (VERIZONMATH) will dominate industry calculations, leading to much hijinx, and ultimately, total economic collapse.

    5. Richard Stallman will learn to levitate, leading to much hijinx, and ultimately, total economic collapse.

  • by supabeast! ( 84658 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:53AM (#17414102)

    It's not that MS has the money to stay relevant. They have the market share to stay relevant. That may change in the future. The question is...how far in the future.
    What Microsoft has are products that are relevant to the masses. Mac OS is not relevant to the masses because not everyone wants, can afford, or is willing to pay for, an Apple desktop. Solaris is not relevant to the masses because it's not pretty and a bother for a non-sysadmin to configure and maintain. Linux is not relevant to the masses because F/OSS designers are nerds creating software that's relevant to them.

    Microsoft gets away with being mediocre because they target the hordes of similarly mediocre individuals who make up the human population. If an above-average competitor comes along at this point and targets those same masses, upsetting Microsoft will be easy; but right now I see no evidence that such an event is likely. Google is too nerdy to do it, IBM doesn't care about desktops anymore, it could only happen at Apple with Jobs gone and with Jobs gone Apple would crumble, and Sun is just too much of a mess.
  • by misleb ( 129952 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @12:59AM (#17414142)
    It isn't Outlook that needs to be beat, it is Exchange. The client is the easy part (relatively speaking).

    -matthew
  • Move along (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tacocat ( 527354 ) <tallison1@@@twmi...rr...com> on Sunday December 31, 2006 @01:19AM (#17414216)

    This ZDNet guy is an idiot in search of an audience. Move along, there's nothing to see here other than some pathetic dude trying to keep his ad-clicks up.

    I didn't have to read more than OpenSolaris. Overtaking Linux? Yeah right. Even if it does happen it sure has heck won't be in 12 months time.

  • Re:dream on (Score:3, Insightful)

    by misleb ( 129952 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @01:27AM (#17414252)
    Linux already has tracing technologies and it has multiple excellent file systems, as well as a roadmap for ext4. Maybe ZFS and DTrace will have some small influence on their evolution, but for the most part, Linux will go its own way there.


    What Linux already has is mindshare. It is a "good enough" Microsoft alternative that works now. Sure, DTrace is good. Great, even. But most people wouldn't know how to take advantage of it. Most people putting together a mail server or web server simply don't need it. And as for ZFS... well that just seems like overkill for most situations. I'm sure it is awesome if you really need it, but when ext3/ufs are perfectly adequate for 95% of use cases, who cares?

    Anyone who thinks OpenSolaris is going to be the next Linux because it has a few cool tools needs to realize that brands don't make it on technical merits alone. It is much more complicated than that.

    Personally, I don't know ANYONE who is running OpenSolaris as a production server. To suggest that it will overtake Linux in 2007 is just ridiculous. Maybe it will someday, I can't see that far ahead, but I would bet a lot of money that it won't happen in 2007.

    -matthew
  • Pleeease! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Shadyman ( 939863 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @01:39AM (#17414308) Homepage
    /MOD article +1 Flamebait
  • Re:dream on (Score:3, Insightful)

    by oohshiny ( 998054 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @01:47AM (#17414338)
    Yep. Ever hear of NFS? NIS?

    In what way were Sun NFS and NIS big open source successes? I mean, apart from the fact that NFS and NIS absolutely suck as technologies, Sun released their source long after other people had created their own, independent implementations.

    Complete system probes are something completely new in the world of computing,

    Yes, and that statement in itself makes them suspect. The UNIX philosophy has always been to provide minimal "good enough" solutions for clearly defined needs, not complete, all encompassing solutions to anticipated problems.

    Linux' "multiple excellent file systems" are nothing special--the best of them work acceptably, but that's it.

    Yes, and that is exactly what a UNIX file system should be: "nothing special". If it's any more than that, it's suspect. And that's why everybody is actually running ext3 without ACLs or extended attributes on Linux, even though there are far more advanced file systems already available.

    ZFS will transform small-storage computing in a few years.

    Maybe. If it does, then (and only then) will Linux incorporate a minimal set of features to provide just those aspects of ZFS that have turned out to be useful in practice. And, most likely, the actual Linux implementation of those features will end up being completely differently from the ZFS implementation, and much simpler.
  • by Vancorps ( 746090 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @02:20AM (#17414454)

    Methinks you completely miss the idea of why Exchange is so popular. If all it did was email then it would never have become a dominant player. It is precisely because it offers a unified provider that it has become popular. The server integrates tightly with voice communications as well as forms of instant messaging. In addition to this there is the identity management integration, teleconferencing, remote assistance, the list really goes on and on.

    The desktop OS created Microsoft but all the services provided under one roof are what solidified it in the corporate world. In large organizations they like to exercise strict control and if something goes wrong they want a single person to go to fix the problem.

    Most everyone in the world realizes the shortsightedness of this philosophy but it is indeed the reality. The only way to compete with Microsoft is to first become compatible, then expand your feature-set beyond what Microsoft can provide. It is a steep challenge to say the least despite problems with the software that MS produces it is mostly functional otherwise it would never have been accepted. Convergence is the future, it is why SIP is the dominant protocol and why TCP/IP overtook IPX/SPX. The medium that can do the most will win despite IPX/SPX being superior TCP/IP still won so keep that in mind. Of course Novell can squander pretty much anything so that might not be the best example.

    From what I've seen of Lotus Notes it's a huge pain in the ass and doesn't even come close to offering the same features as Exchange. Much like DB/2 against SQL 2005 or Oracle.

    I think in short a small tools philosophy has proven to work well but it goes against how we think in the real world. We don't setup millions of tiny warehouses for everything we need to store, we setup large facilities where all the resources can be centralized, managed, and monitored. We're like ants that way. It's risky and causes problems; a single bomb and we're screwed.

    With that said maybe this year we can devote to changing the way people think about their tools. My leatherman sure it handy with all the tools it has in it but sometimes you just need a proper screw driver to get the job done. Perhaps there is a place for both, granted I use my leatherman for 90% of the tasks I perform that require a tool.

  • by kripkenstein ( 913150 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @04:07AM (#17414796) Homepage
    "By the end of the year the OpenSolaris community will be widely recognized as larger and more active than the Linux community."

    This statement from TFA completely misses the point, but not only in the way you explain. Thing is, OpenSolaris is a kernel, just like Linux; it isn't an entire OS. The 'Linux community' is only in a small part the 'Linux kernel community'; most projects in the FOSS world are kernel-agnostic. You can run GNOME on a Linux, BSD or OpenSolaris kernel, for example. So even if OpenSolaris does become a more popular kernel than Linux, very little will change in the FOSS world. Microsoft would have a hell of a time replacing their kernel; a 'Linux distro' can fairly easily do so (for example, Nexenta is Ubuntu running on OpenSolaris).

    However, even after focusing only on the kernel, I seriously doubt OpenSolaris will overtake Linux anytime soon. There is quite a lot of (code) investment in Linux, e.g. drivers, which would need to be ported (and licensing issues sorted out, but perhaps Sun will GPL OpenSolaris as rumors claim). Equally importantly, distros are used to using Linux. While OpenSolaris has some advantages, I can't see how any of them is reason enough to switch over. Still, choice is always good, perhaps both kernels have a place.
  • by tftp ( 111690 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @05:05AM (#17414966) Homepage
    I don't remember signing any contract with a utility company. I do remember signing a contract with Sprint, but that was now 8 years ago. Utility, like electricity or water - I seriously doubt. They don't even want an official contract, it's too much hassle. I think I just called them, and if they wanted a deposit I probably just paid with a credit card, right there. This "contract" is also legal and binding.

    In any case, comparison with a utility company is not exactly right here, it would imply renting the software - this rarely happens. A better comparison would be with a paper book that contains a chip that monitors how often you read the book, where, and how, and won't tell you what else it monitors and sends back home. And this chip can incinerate the book if it receives a radio signal from the publisher, or if it itself thinks that you are trying to copy the book. In reality you may be just reading under the sunlight. The book costs $500 (or $5,000, or more) and is essential in your business. Would you buy it? Or maybe you'd prefer a book without the chip, the one that is yours for as long as you want (since that's what was promised when you paid the money for it.) Software is very much like a book - you get use rights only, but those use rights ought to be irrevocable, unless you breach the terms of the contract and the judge (if you so choose) agrees that you are the guilty party. You can't allow a dumb machine to be your judge, jury and the executioner; you can't allow your rights to be terminated on mere suspicion of wrongdoing - and that's what the DRM is about, to deny you your rights automatically, based on arbitrary set of rules that you aren't even allowed to know.

  • by st1d ( 218383 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @06:55AM (#17415250) Homepage
    I'm sorry, but the reality is that Linux pales in comparison to Windows with regards to user friendliness.
    --Okay, I'm a little grumpy this morning (it's early), so sorry folks...

    How is using Wine simpler than just using windows?
    --Because it's a lot easier and cheaper to spend a few minute setting up wine than buying and installing windows onto another partition to run a couple old windows programs that somebody wants me to use.

    Why bother emulating it when it comes standard on most pre-built systems that the majority of computer illiterate will be purchasing?
    --Because my system isn't pre-built, and I'm not computer illiterate.

    Its pointless for those kinds of people. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see ANY OS properly compete with Windows, but I don't see it happening. What will the computer illiterates do with their computer?
    --The same as they're doing today. Not much. The "choice" of OS and GUI have no bearing on someone who doesn't care. They managed (when they were forced to) with DOS, they'll be in the same boat with any future OS.

    I'm willing to bet its gaming, word processing (possibly some other apps that come in Office), surfing and chatting, and playing media.
    --I'm willing to bet it's probably not even that. True computer phobics will go to familiar programs, have other people set up things and show them how to activate them. As long as someone is there to help and show them how to do the handful of things they need, they'll use any OS. I'd hazard a guess that Linux's myriad of configuration options might offer such people a better experience. Instead of trying to force people into MS's view of user interaction, Linux will work as configured, and won't scare them with "your subscription is about to expire!", "your anti-virus is out of date!", etc.

    Yeah its wonderful that Linux is a very secure OS, but its too bad it doesnt play any games.
    --You mean games, as in the popular ones that lots of people buy that are typically ported to Linux? Or do you mean the kind of games MS plays with their users?

    Games for Windows, no matter how much I despise it, will bring make it even more simple for those who want to game on a PC but have trouble setting up in the current PC gaming world. Windows is on top and it is folly to think its up top without a reason.
    --It's folly to base your opinion on one aspect of anything. You're obviously a gamer, and some of your choice games aren't made for Linux. Personally, I'm not into running on the gaming treadmill. I'd like to know a game is good before I spend my cash on it. A key to this decision is to see that gamers like it enough to request a Linux version.

    --As you can see, this is all subjective. MS Windows works for you, Linux works for me. Blanket statements either way are useless. However, my choice is a lot cheaper to implement...leaving me with more money for games. :)
  • by J_Darnley ( 918721 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @08:10AM (#17415450)
    Well if you were to give my Grandmother a Windows disc she would just be as baffled by it. I assume the same would happen if you gave her a Mac. For people who have never used any operating system it would be just as difficult for them to understand any OS you could give them.
  • by arifirefox ( 1031488 ) on Sunday December 31, 2006 @09:41AM (#17415742) Homepage
    The problem isn't just whether linux is a user friendly OS. the apps must also be user friendly and better than the best Windows apps in order to convince people to drop Windows. That is why I think it is more important to work on replacing their apps with Windows apps that are better and also run on linux. It's very unrealistic to get most people to switch OS but apps are easier. Games...ok that is a big problem but you should still be able to get your work done no matter what OS-that's a realistic but challenging goal.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 31, 2006 @09:50AM (#17415766)
    To be fair, why would you have a problem taking someone's money?

    Most of the guys who run businesses are smarter than you, and secretly they hate you, but they don't have a problem selling you stuff and taking your money. I mean, they you're getting all smarmy with the original poster because he pointed out that MS makes mediocre products. Look up Mediocre some time in the dictionary. It doesn't mean "bad", it means "average". Sony is mediocre too. They have a few pockets of passion left, but those are mostly gone. Every one of their new products embodies mediocre.

    Get over it.

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...