Longhorn: The inside story
Published: 21 May 2004 15:00 BST
Bob Muglia may have one of the hottest seats in all of Microsoft.
The desktop version of Longhorn, Microsoft's next release of Windows, may receive most of the ink. But it is the server version that is more vital to the software giant's long-run ambitions. That's because some of the most heavily touted features of Longhorn -- such as mainframe-calibre computing, better security and management and networkwide search -- rely on Longhorn Server.
Muglia, a 16-year veteran of Microsoft, has the task of building Longhorn Server, likely the most complex operating system ever designed. What's more, Muglia must keep a long train of updates and service packs for older versions of Windows rolling off the production line.
Even though Longhorn Server likely won't make a debut until 2007, it's already generated controversy. Microsoft had barely acknowledged the product's existence when the company admitted that one of the software's most anticipated features, wide-scale search of corporate networks, won't make it into the first release.
Microsoft will also need to convince big companies that Longhorn's more advanced features are worth the trouble. And while Microsoft will spend the next three years building Longhorn, Linux continues to gain in popularity. Muglia sat down with CNET News.com to talk about Longhorn, the evolving Linux threat and how Microsoft builds Windows.
Q: What's Microsoft's latest thinking on Linux? The market has changed a bit in the past few years, with some consolidation. But companies continue to install Linux on servers. How does Microsoft approach that problem?
The world has changed a bit. If you went back 18 to 24 months ago, it was unclear what Linux would look like and how it would evolve. It was thought of as free. And there was a whole series of attributes that were attributed to Linux that in retrospect were inaccurate. As time has gone on, it's apparent that Linux is becoming a set of offerings from commercial vendors. When I think of Linux, I don't think about it as our competitor. I think about Linux as a technology that is used by our competitors to build competitive offerings.
Sometimes, those products are solutions or pieces of solutions that need to be integrated together. One of the differentiations that Microsoft has with Linux is that we are a software company first and foremost, and we think about software-based solutions to information technology problems and how our software can drive down cost. That's pretty distinct from, say, an IBM that is first and foremost a consulting company. Our focus is how to provide more out-of-the-box solutions that don't require those consulting services.
It's interesting how you characterise Linux. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have told us that they focus on Linux, the operating system. They frame the debate in different terms than you.
I do think that I am bringing this thinking into the organisation, because it provides clarity to me. The problem with saying that Linux is my competitor is: What does that mean? What distribution of Linux [are you referring to]? If I look at a given Red Hat or SuSE Linux distribution or an IBM solution, I can look at how that's a clear competitor and how that compares and contrasts with Windows.
Previous
Did you find this article useful?
106 out of 191 people found this useful
Digg
Slashdot
Del.ici.ous
Stumble
Reddit
