Discussion:
The people love Windows XP
(too old to reply)
DFS
2005-08-03 01:37:50 UTC
Permalink
32-bit:
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153

and 64-bit:
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034

Enjoy
Rick
2005-08-03 02:46:08 UTC
Permalink
... there is no proof of that ...
--
Rick
TheLetterK
2005-08-03 03:01:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Larry Qualig
2005-08-03 03:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What matters
is where people are willing to put their money and what product they use to
get their work done.
TheLetterK
2005-08-03 03:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What matters
is where people are willing to put their money and what product they use to
get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing. If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format. OS/2 would
have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today. GNU/Linux would
completely dominate the market.

Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Larry Qualig
2005-08-03 03:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple. People
almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually falling prey to
hearsay or marketing. If people bought into technologies based on merit,
Betamax would have been a popular format. OS/2 would have replaced
Windows. DEC would still be alive today. GNU/Linux would completely
dominate the market.
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Good examples. But at the end of the day how much does it matter "why"
somebody bought a product. My wife bought her car because she liked the
interior. (She found it comfortable.) I chose my car based on performance.
Other people select cars/computers/OS's/clothes/beer for whatever reason
happens to be important to them.

Marketing certainly plays a huge part in that decision making process. But
all people won't pick the same product for the same reason. The pure
analytical merit of a product is rarely the driving factor in the decision
process.
rapskat
2005-08-03 08:01:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple. People
almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually falling prey to
hearsay or marketing. If people bought into technologies based on merit,
Betamax would have been a popular format. OS/2 would have replaced
Windows. DEC would still be alive today. GNU/Linux would completely
dominate the market.
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Good examples. But at the end of the day how much does it matter "why"
somebody bought a product. My wife bought her car because she liked the
interior. (She found it comfortable.) I chose my car based on performance.
Other people select cars/computers/OS's/clothes/beer for whatever reason
happens to be important to them.
Marketing certainly plays a huge part in that decision making process. But
all people won't pick the same product for the same reason. The pure
analytical merit of a product is rarely the driving factor in the decision
process.
Name recognition is the key. If you get mindshare, then you get the
market. Most people associate computers with Windows, this is a fact.

The problem is the methods that M$ has used to obtain that mindshare.
It's certainly not merit, and it's not direct marketing. It's the
backroom deals and dirty pool that they employ to get their products put
above any other alternatives all the time.
--
rapskat - 03:56:45 up 6 days, 13:12, 4 users, load average: 2.22, 1.67, 1.36
"I plan to live forever. So far, so good."
billwg
2005-08-03 13:14:46 UTC
Permalink
"rapskat" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@rapskat.com...
:
: The problem is the methods that M$ has used to obtain that mindshare.
: It's certainly not merit, and it's not direct marketing. It's the
: backroom deals and dirty pool that they employ to get their products put
: above any other alternatives all the time.
:
Oh, come on now, Rapskat! In the old days Microsoft offered the OEMs a
sweet deal to package MSDOS and later Windows with their computers.
Everyone made out, MS and the OEMs and the customers. Your man Linus was a
day late and a dollar short with his unix clone and you label the sweet deal
as "dirty pool", but it is just a case of snoozing and loozing on the part
of the competition. The early bird catches the worm, you know! LOL!!!
DFS
2005-08-03 04:55:53 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What
do you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product
that sucks so badly"?
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest about XP
than cola liars are about Linux.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the population's
ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too stupid.
If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never buy
Windows"
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM. DEC was
killed off by tech./business blunders.
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under the
weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your clothes?
Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because Nike told you
to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 05:13:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest about
XP than cola liars are about Linux.
Or there are more problems?
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's
ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too stupid.
If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never buy
Windows"
People seem to be slow to learn. They seem to be slowly learning about
smoking, but it's taking time.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM. DEC was
killed off by tech./business blunders.
Talking Beta, it's one main advantage was the lack of delay to play. People
decided that the delay was no big deal (like waiting for OOo to load, I
suppose) and so they went with VHS. Of course the Beta style of tape load
and opperation was later incorporated into the VHS system, and there went
any advantage anyway.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price. OS/2 was
also better. MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break which they than
made advantage of.
Post by DFS
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under
the weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Linux news servers? They'll be right.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your clothes?
Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because Nike told you
to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
People do buy regardless of merit all the time. Like the Mac's you get fat
on, Doof.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
DFS
2005-08-03 05:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest
about XP than cola liars are about Linux.
Or there are more problems?
Or cola bozos are huge exaggerators and serial liars about Windows.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim
"they're too
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would
never buy Windows"
People seem to be slow to learn. They seem to be slowly learning about
smoking, but it's taking time.
If Linux was as addictive as nicotine, it might get 15% market share.
Maybe.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price.
That right there is a huge lie. It wasn't until recently that Linux could
be considered a decent alternative to Windows. If you've been using Linux
for a long time, then you subjected yourself to extreme hassles re: setup,
configuration, hardware recognition, applications, etc. Maybe you talked
yourself into believing all those hassles were justified, but they weren't.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
OS/2 was also better.
The huge universe of quality Windows apps and games can be considered a
technical advantage. As can the speed of Windows. And the easy install and
setup (not an advantage today, but it was a few years ago).
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break
which they than made advantage of.
Luck doesn't come close to explaining 15-20 years of industry dominance.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over
under the weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Linux news servers? They'll be right.
They'll be crashing left and right.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your
clothes? Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them
because Nike told you to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and
'Dude you got a Dell!' because Dell told you to.
People do buy regardless of merit all the time.
Much more often they buy only because of merit.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the same
stupidity over and over.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 05:56:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest
about XP than cola liars are about Linux.
Or there are more problems?
Or cola bozos are huge exaggerators and serial liars about Windows.
You hardly need to lie about win flaws and malware.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim
"they're too
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would
never buy Windows"
People seem to be slow to learn. They seem to be slowly learning about
smoking, but it's taking time.
If Linux was as addictive as nicotine, it might get 15% market share.
Maybe.
That flows well. Hmm.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price.
That right there is a huge lie. It wasn't until recently that Linux could
be considered a decent alternative to Windows. If you've been using Linux
for a long time, then you subjected yourself to extreme hassles re: setup,
configuration, hardware recognition, applications, etc. Maybe you talked
yourself into believing all those hassles were justified, but they weren't.
I was wondering what you called a lie. I multi-booted OS's for quite a
while. OS/2 for some things and linux and win for others. I adopted linux
early on for internet security. And even in the mazilla days I admit I
prefered pine as a mail app. There were some 'hassles' early on, but this
was mostly just buying compatible hardware. With the right hardware, linux
was never very hard, even with early slack. Of course I grew up before the
'easy' days of DOS, so maybe that's a factor. I used OS/2 for varius
business apps for a while, even used staroffice later on. That migrated to
linux of course and OS/2 was soon no longer needed and was slipping behind.

So you call it a lie. Like I care what a fat racist thinks.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
OS/2 was also better.
The huge universe of quality Windows apps and games can be considered a
technical advantage. As can the speed of Windows. And the easy install
and setup (not an advantage today, but it was a few years ago).
Even RH 4.2 was easy to install. Speed was never a factor. Apps are the only
thing you can really argue and even that is more quantity than quality
these days.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break
which they than made advantage of.
Luck doesn't come close to explaining 15-20 years of industry dominance.
Luck is the start. We all know about the rest of the story.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over
under the weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Linux news servers? They'll be right.
They'll be crashing left and right.
Uh huh.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your
clothes? Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them
because Nike told you to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and
'Dude you got a Dell!' because Dell told you to.
People do buy regardless of merit all the time.
Much more often they buy only because of merit.
Such as? Why does one soap sell better than another? Rarely because of the
product inside.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the same
stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to every
post as a reminder.

Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
DFS
2005-08-03 06:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the same
stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to every
post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 06:59:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the
same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
Hmm. Go killfile^H^H^H^H yourself.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
DFS
2005-08-03 12:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking
the same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
Hmm. Go killfile^H^H^H^H yourself.
That was a forgery by a loser.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 12:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking
the same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
Hmm. Go killfile^H^H^H^H yourself.
That was a forgery by a loser.
Nobody is forging me, dick. Not yet, anyway.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
Rick
2005-08-03 09:41:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the
same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
You are a real dung heap.
--
Rick
DFS
2005-08-03 12:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking
the same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
You are a real dung heap.
Some loser, probably amosf, forged me.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 13:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by Rick
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking
the same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
You are a real dung heap.
Some loser, probably amosf, forged me.
Anonymous troll forged by anonymous troll to troll the same troll.

uh-huh.

Admittedly, this one was weak, even for you. But hardly the first Doof
insult...
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
Kier
2005-08-04 08:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by Rick
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking
the same stupidity over and over.
The fact that you are a fat racist? That's okay, I plan to add it to
every post as a reminder.
Don't have to be jealous of the lifestyle, Doof.
So you do suck your dogs off, racist. LOL.
You are a real dung heap.
Some loser, probably amosf, forged me.
Why should he bother?
--
Kier
Rick
2005-08-03 09:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest
about XP than cola liars are about Linux.
Or there are more problems?
Or cola bozos are huge exaggerators and serial liars about Windows.
Or you are too stupid and dishonest to know the difference, bigot.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim
"they're too
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would
never buy Windows"
People seem to be slow to learn. They seem to be slowly learning about
smoking, but it's taking time.
If Linux was as addictive as nicotine, it might get 15% market share.
Maybe.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price.
That right there is a huge lie. It wasn't until recently that Linux could
be considered a decent alternative to Windows. If you've been using Linux
for a long time, then you subjected yourself to extreme hassles re: setup,
configuration, hardware recognition, applications, etc. Maybe you talked
yourself into believing all those hassles were justified, but they weren't.
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
OS/2 was also better.
The huge universe of quality Windows apps and games can be considered a
technical advantage. As can the speed of Windows. And the easy install
and setup (not an advantage today, but it was a few years ago).
By your reasoning, the extremely huge uncovers of bad windows apps can be
considered an even bigger disadvantage.

What easy windows install? You mean that install that asks for all the
drivers?
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break which they than made
advantage of.
Luck doesn't come close to explaining 15-20 years of industry dominance.
That's true. There was also m$'s illegal activities which resulted in 2
consent decrees, and oversight committee, and fines in in Europe.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over
under the weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Linux news servers? They'll be right.
They'll be crashing left and right.
They don't, idiot.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your
clothes? Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because
Nike told you to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a
Dell!' because Dell told you to.
People do buy regardless of merit all the time.
Much more often they buy only because of merit.
No, idiot, they don't. That's one reason why WalMart is the largest
retailer on the planet.
Post by DFS
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Like the Mac's you get fat on, Doof.
You've been spending too much time with your dogs; you're barking the same
stupidity over and over.
No, you are just too stupid and dishonest to get it.
--
Rick
billwg
2005-08-03 13:35:42 UTC
Permalink
"amosf (Tim Fairchild)" <***@bcs4me.com> wrote in message news:***@news.comindico.com.au...
:
: True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price. OS/2
was
: also better. MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break which they
than
: made advantage of.
:
The "fustest with the mustest", amos! The deal is done, the die is cast,
there is no going back. Look for a better way rather than howl at the moon.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 13:41:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by billwg
: True tho. I've always used linux based on merit rather than price. OS/2
was
: also better. MS got ahead in the start due to a lucky break which they
than
: made advantage of.
The "fustest with the mustest", amos! The deal is done, the die is cast,
there is no going back. Look for a better way rather than howl at the moon.
Howling at the moon is a family tradition.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
Blood Money
2005-08-03 05:33:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What
do you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product
that sucks so badly"?
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest about XP
than cola liars are about Linux.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the population's
ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too stupid.
If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never buy
Windows"
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM. DEC was
killed off by tech./business blunders.
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under the
weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your clothes?
Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because Nike told you
to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
The trolls here used to be so much more creative. You are just sad.

Check this out - same website you cite...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16832106502

My review should be showing up within 24 hours.

Like I said...
sad.
billwg
2005-08-03 13:31:33 UTC
Permalink
"DFS" <***@dfs_.com> wrote in message news:t7YHe.1144$***@fe07.lga...
: TheLetterK wrote:
:
: > Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
: > People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
: > falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
:
: Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's
: ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too stupid.
: If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never buy
: Windows"
:
I find it interesting that the COLA folk fall back on this explanation, i.e.
the consumer is non-discriminating due to lack of brains or information or
both, and yet there is no plan ever asserted to correct the condition. If
it is hopeless to try, then it would be wiser to consider how Windows might
be improved so as to overcome whatever deficiencies that it is said to have.
You can extend Windows almost endlessly with your own system DLLs and
services of course. Why waste a lot of time fooling with something like
linux that no one will ever see?
:
: > If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have
been
: a popular
: > format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive
today.
:
: Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
: technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM. DEC was
: killed off by tech./business blunders.
:
People seem to forget that OS/2 was introduced to the market at a list price
of $1195 and it needed 4Mb of RAM. Regan punished the Japanese for dumping
memory at the same time and managed to run RAM prices up to about $1/K which
made OS/2 a $5K proposition to a company interested in moving up from PCDOS.
Not too many takers at that level and they went with Windows at the $50
intro price and it worked in the original 640K memory that everyone had
then. Of course it flopped.

DEC went off the rails when they started catering to the unix lovers and
quit feeding their VMS customers sweet nothings. If you have to switch to
unix, it was said, why not just get a Sun? Apple may be heading in the same
direction. If their OS is freeBSD and their hardware is Intel, what are
they going to hang their hat on to claim any edge? The Macintoshers are
eager to believe they are superior and willing to pay a little more to prove
it, but they have had their "special" OS and their "special" hardware to
reinforce that decision and that is going away. The emperor's new clothes
all over again.

:
:
: > GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
:
: LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:
: The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under
the
: weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
:
:
:
: > Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
:
: Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your clothes?
: Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because Nike told you
: to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
: Dell told you to.
:
:
:
Rick
2005-08-03 19:37:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by billwg
: > Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
: > People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
: > falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
: Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's
: ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too
: stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never
: buy Windows"
I find it interesting that the COLA folk fall back on this explanation,
i.e. the consumer is non-discriminating due to lack of brains or
information or both, and yet there is no plan ever asserted to correct the
condition.
Those of us that use Linux have formed a plan and are using it.

As for window$ users...
One of my co-workers had her HD wiped and XP installed (from W2k). She was
all upset she couldn't find her email. She could find 'the Internet', and
couldn't find her email app.

Gee ...
Start->Email
Start -> Internet explorer.

And she doesn't understand that there are 2 accounts on her machine. One
that logs into our school domain, and one that just logs into the computer.
Post by billwg
If it is hopeless to try, then it would be wiser to consider
how Windows might be improved so as to overcome whatever deficiencies that
it is said to have.
According to Pearly and Sweaty, m$ has already done that. They say the
same thing after each new version of windows hits the streets.
Post by billwg
You can extend Windows almost endlessly with your own
system DLLs and services of course. Why waste a lot of time fooling with
something like linux that no one will ever see?
: > If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have
: > been a popular
: > format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive
: > today.
: Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
: technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM. DEC was
: killed off by tech./business blunders.
People seem to forget that OS/2 was introduced to the market at a list
price of $1195 and it needed 4Mb of RAM. Regan punished the Japanese for
dumping memory at the same time and managed to run RAM prices up to about
$1/K which made OS/2 a $5K proposition to a company interested in moving
up from PCDOS. Not too many takers at that level and they went with
Windows at the $50 intro price and it worked in the original 640K memory
that everyone had then. Of course it flopped.
I do not remember how much OS/2 cost when it first came out. I do remember
the networking/computer support instructor going on about how great it was.
Post by billwg
DEC went off the rails when they started catering to the unix lovers and
quit feeding their VMS customers sweet nothings. If you have to switch to
unix, it was said, why not just get a Sun? Apple may be heading in the
same direction. If their OS is freeBSD and their hardware is Intel, what
are they going to hang their hat on to claim any edge? The Macintoshers
are eager to believe they are superior and willing to pay a little more to
prove it, but they have had their "special" OS and their "special"
hardware to reinforce that decision and that is going away. The emperor's
new clothes all over again.
: > GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
: LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
: The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under
: the weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
: > Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
: Is that right? Why did you buy your computer? Your shoes? Your
: clothes? Because they had no merit I assume. You bought them because
: Nike told you to, and WalMart had a sale on shirts, and 'Dude you got a
: Dell!' because Dell told you to.
--
Rick
billwg
2005-08-04 01:57:19 UTC
Permalink
"Rick" <***@nomail.com> wrote in message news:***@nomail.com...
:
: Those of us that use Linux have formed a plan and are using it.
:
Oh you talk and talk, Rick, but you are talking to yourselves and that isn't
getting you anywhere.

: As for window$ users...
: One of my co-workers had her HD wiped and XP installed (from W2k). She was
: all upset she couldn't find her email. She could find 'the Internet', and
: couldn't find her email app.
:
: Gee ...
: Start->Email
: Start -> Internet explorer.
:
: And she doesn't understand that there are 2 accounts on her machine. One
: that logs into our school domain, and one that just logs into the
computer.
:
Well, you're the teacher, Rick! LOL!!! Too bad that your students didn't
come already educated! Too bad for the student, anyway.

:
: > If it is hopeless to try, then it would be wiser to consider
: > how Windows might be improved so as to overcome whatever deficiencies
that
: > it is said to have.
:
: According to Pearly and Sweaty, m$ has already done that. They say the
: same thing after each new version of windows hits the streets.
:
I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?

:
: I do not remember how much OS/2 cost when it first came out. I do remember
: the networking/computer support instructor going on about how great it
was.
:
I do. I really liked it, too. I was an IBM Business Partner for their
industrial PC line and we sold the ruggedized AT machines ( called The
Gearbox, IIRC) for use on the factory floor in metal cutting shops to supply
program data to numerical controllers and to get SPC and production data
back directly from the machine tool stations. Used Ethernet connections
with the thick cable and taps. A NIC cost around $1000 then.
Rick
2005-08-04 05:10:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by billwg
: Those of us that use Linux have formed a plan and are using it.
Oh you talk and talk, Rick, but you are talking to yourselves and that
isn't getting you anywhere.
Maybe. Maybe not. I got one kid in our Networking/PC Support classes using
Red Hat 2+ years ago. Last year, there about 5 using it. They'd jokingly
harass me about it, but if they had problems, they'd come to me to walk
them through things, which meant they were still using it.
Post by billwg
: As for window$ users...
: One of my co-workers had her HD wiped and XP installed (from W2k). She
: was all upset she couldn't find her email. She could find 'the
: Internet', and couldn't find her email app.
: Gee ...
: Start->Email
: Start -> Internet explorer.
: And she doesn't understand that there are 2 accounts on her machine. One
: that logs into our school domain, and one that just logs into the
computer.
Well, you're the teacher, Rick!
She's a teacher, too.

LOL!!!

Look.. a brayig ass.
Post by billwg
Too bad that your students didn't
come already educated! Too bad for the student, anyway.
Too bad your parents had sex.
Post by billwg
: > If it is hopeless to try, then it would be wiser to consider how
: > Windows might be improved so as to overcome whatever deficiencies
: > that it is said to have.
: According to Pearly and Sweaty, m$ has already done that. They say the
: same thing after each new version of windows hits the streets.
I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?
No.
Post by billwg
: I do not remember how much OS/2 cost when it first came out. I do
: remember the networking/computer support instructor going on about how
: great it was.
I do. I really liked it, too.
Wow... no kidding?
Post by billwg
I was an IBM Business Partner for their
industrial PC line and we sold the ruggedized AT machines ( called The
Gearbox, IIRC) for use on the factory floor in metal cutting shops to
supply program data to numerical controllers and to get SPC and production
data back directly from the machine tool stations. Used Ethernet
connections with the thick cable and taps. A NIC cost around $1000 then.
Yes? So?
--
Rick
billwg
2005-08-04 13:01:38 UTC
Permalink
"Rick" <***@nomail.com> wrote in message news:***@nomail.com...
: On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 01:57:19 +0000, billwg wrote:
:
: >
: > "Rick" <***@nomail.com> wrote in message
: > news:***@nomail.com...
: > :
: > : Those of us that use Linux have formed a plan and are using it.
: > :
: > Oh you talk and talk, Rick, but you are talking to yourselves and that
: > isn't getting you anywhere.
:
: Maybe. Maybe not. I got one kid in our Networking/PC Support classes using
: Red Hat 2+ years ago. Last year, there about 5 using it. They'd jokingly
: harass me about it, but if they had problems, they'd come to me to walk
: them through things, which meant they were still using it.
:
: >
: > : As for window$ users...
: > : One of my co-workers had her HD wiped and XP installed (from W2k). She
: > : was all upset she couldn't find her email. She could find 'the
: > : Internet', and couldn't find her email app.
: > :
: > : Gee ...
: > : Start->Email
: > : Start -> Internet explorer.
: > :
: > : And she doesn't understand that there are 2 accounts on her machine.
One
: > : that logs into our school domain, and one that just logs into the
: > computer.
: > :
: > Well, you're the teacher, Rick!
:
: She's a teacher, too.
:
: LOL!!!
:
: Look.. a brayig ass.
:
You lose points for sloppy work, Rick! -2

: > Too bad that your students didn't
: > come already educated! Too bad for the student, anyway.
:
: Too bad your parents had sex.
:
Lack of originality -5
: >
: >
: > : > If it is hopeless to try, then it would be wiser to consider how
: > : > Windows might be improved so as to overcome whatever deficiencies
: > : > that it is said to have.
: > :
: > : According to Pearly and Sweaty, m$ has already done that. They say the
: > : same thing after each new version of windows hits the streets.
: > :
: > I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?
:
: No.
:
Lack of perception -20
: >
: >
: > : I do not remember how much OS/2 cost when it first came out. I do
: > : remember the networking/computer support instructor going on about how
: > : great it was.
:
: > I do. I really liked it, too.
:
: Wow... no kidding?
:
: > I was an IBM Business Partner for their
: > industrial PC line and we sold the ruggedized AT machines ( called The
: > Gearbox, IIRC) for use on the factory floor in metal cutting shops to
: > supply program data to numerical controllers and to get SPC and
production
: > data back directly from the machine tool stations. Used Ethernet
: > connections with the thick cable and taps. A NIC cost around $1000
then.
:
: Yes? So?
:
Not a very good effort, Rick. I give it a C-.
Rick
2005-08-05 00:33:43 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 13:01:38 +0000, billwg wrote:

... nothing worth reading.
--
Rick
Beowulf TrollsHammer
2005-08-04 14:16:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by billwg
I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?
Win2K was a considerable improvement over NT4, probably the first truly
usable OS ever released by M$, as the toy DOS-based versions
(3.0/3.1/95/98/ME) were so laughable that nobody in his right mind
would consider them OSes. Unfortunately, with XP they introduced crap
like WPA, massive incompatibilities with older hardware, idiotic
default user interface (complete with searching dog and inane popups
every time a CD is inserted) and spontaneous reboots instead of BSODs.
I don't exactly think this stuff is "getting better".
l***@uku.co.uk
2005-08-04 14:39:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
Post by billwg
I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?
Win2K was a considerable improvement over NT4, probably the first truly
usable OS ever released by M$, as the toy DOS-based versions
(3.0/3.1/95/98/ME) were so laughable that nobody in his right mind
would consider them OSes.
I agree.
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
Unfortunately, with XP they introduced crap like WPA,
Not a fan of WPA but something needs to be done with piracy. *nix boxes
have been doing this for years already.
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
massive incompatibilities with older hardware
Never had a problem. The oldest hardware I run XP on is a 266Mhz laptop
with a broken (cracked) LCD screen.
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
idiotic default user interface (complete with searching dog
and inane popups every time a CD is inserted)
I liked the Win2k user interface better. It took something like 4 or 5
mouse clicks to use that by default. The "searching dog" is something
that is meant to appeal to Joe six-pack. Technical users can
premanently get rid of it with 2 clicks. The inane CD popups can easily
be disabled by selecting "Do Nothing" from the popup.

Again... you have to remember that this OS is targeting roughly 500
million Windows users. It needs to do a lot of hand-holding that the
"average user" needs so experienced users may want to disable some of
these features with a click or two.
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
and spontaneous reboots instead of BSODs. I don't exactly
think this stuff is "getting better".
I've never had a BSOD or spontaneous reboot on XP. Better.... sure it's
better. Until XP the "average consumer desktop" was running Win98 or
WinME. (Very few consumers ran Win2k). Surely XP is way, way, way
better than Win98 or WinME ever was.
Linønut
2005-08-04 18:36:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@uku.co.uk
Again... you have to remember that this OS is targeting roughly 500
million Windows users. It needs to do a lot of hand-holding that the
"average user" needs so experienced users may want to disable some of
these features with a click or two.
Yes. But which clicks?
Post by l***@uku.co.uk
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
and spontaneous reboots instead of BSODs. I don't exactly
think this stuff is "getting better".
I've never had a BSOD or spontaneous reboot on XP. Better.... sure it's
better. Until XP the "average consumer desktop" was running Win98 or
WinME. (Very few consumers ran Win2k). Surely XP is way, way, way
better than Win98 or WinME ever was.
In some ways, yes. In terms of memory footprint and speed, no.

I think in some ways, XP is also better than 2000. But, in other ways,
worse. It's pretty sluggish, and local performance seems to get bogged
down by unnecessary network access (I'm just guessing).

As far as I can tell, Linux is much easier to trouble shoot.
--
Tux rox!
The Ghost In The Machine
2005-08-04 19:00:04 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Beowulf TrollsHammer
<***@lycos.com>
wrote
on 4 Aug 2005 07:16:23 -0700
Post by Beowulf TrollsHammer
Post by billwg
I think that Windows gets better with every release. Don't you?
Win2K was a considerable improvement over NT4, probably the first truly
usable OS ever released by M$, as the toy DOS-based versions
(3.0/3.1/95/98/ME) were so laughable that nobody in his right mind
would consider them OSes. Unfortunately, with XP they introduced crap
like WPA, massive incompatibilities with older hardware, idiotic
default user interface (complete with searching dog and inane popups
every time a CD is inserted) and spontaneous reboots instead of BSODs.
I don't exactly think this stuff is "getting better".
WPA: Probably necessary for commercial software endeavors
(many Unix-based software packages use flexlm, for
example), but a PITA all the same, especially since the
implied message is "We don't trust you, citizen.
Validate your Infrared Security Clearance or we'll cut
off access to your malware. Thank you. Have a nice day."

massive incompatibilities with hardware:

I think the issue here is that they rewrote the central driver protocol
yet again, and you know what that means: older hardware shutout.
I don't know if this is intentional or not, but it's fairly dumb.

idiotic default user interface:

True enough; the doggy and the Teletubby background are fairly
ridiculous, as a default. Then again, they have to show *something*.
Maybe a nice default blue background would work.

spontaneous reboots:

Believe it or not, this *is* an improvement, at least for servers.
Admittedly, it's not clear how much, but tell me which one an IT
professional would prefer if he wants a high-availability website,
assuming a loadbalancing solution on the front of this set of
machines -- I can't call it a cluster, without more info:

[1] System goes down, displays BSOD and locks. IT is notified and
gets out the roller skates, along with a monitor/keyboard/mouse
cart.

[2] System goes down, reboots. IT is notified and looks at
the logs, then gets out the roller skates if necessary.

Of course there's an even better alternative:

[3] System stays up indefinitely. :-)

but even Linux can't quite get there -- though it's probably closer
than many monopolistic operating systems.
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
TheLetterK
2005-08-03 16:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What
do you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product
that sucks so badly"?
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest about XP
than cola liars are about Linux.
All 15 of them? This is wholly unscientific evidence. Your supporting an
argument that people like a product based on reviews from people who
bought a product on a site that typically appeals to tech-heads. The
same people who wouldn't buy XP if they don't like it.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the population's
ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim "they're too stupid.
If they were smart like me and knew about Linux they would never buy
Windows"
Where did I claim this? I said that merit didn't enter into their buying
decisions. Yet another wintroll trying to stuff their verion of reality
down other people's throats.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's a
technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM.
But was technically superior.
Post by DFS
DEC was
killed off by tech./business blunders.
Thanks for proving my point.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Glad you got a laugh out of it--but the joke's going to be on you in the
end.
Post by DFS
The newsgroup servers would sputter and gasp and die and fall over under the
weight of the complaint posts flowing through.
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer?
Well, I assembled the one I'm currently using (I picked the parts I did
mostly because they offered the most performance for the price, while
still being in my price range). If your talking about the iBook... I
wanted a durable laptop in my price range. IBM's offerings were too
expensive.
Post by DFS
Your shoes?
They fit.
Post by DFS
Your clothes?
Same.
Post by DFS
Because they had no merit I assume.
People is plural, and in this context referring to the majority. I am
not a people, I am a *person* (if you want to be pedantic, I can be
too)--and in the minority.
Post by DFS
You bought them because Nike told you
to,
I have no idea who made the shoes I wear--I bought them out of the
bargain bin because they fit, and I saw no point in dropping $80 on a
pair of shoes that didn't fit as well.
Post by DFS
and WalMart had a sale on shirts,
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. Ever.
Post by DFS
and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
I've got a Dell box, only because someone else was getting rid of it.
It's now running Debian, and sitting in the other room acting as a file
server.
DFS
2005-08-03 17:47:52 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What
do you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product
that sucks so badly"?
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest
about XP than cola liars are about Linux.
All 15 of them? This is wholly unscientific evidence.
Of course it is. And there are closer to 100 reviews there.
Post by TheLetterK
Your supporting
an argument that people like a product based on reviews from people
who bought a product on a site that typically appeals to tech-heads.
The same people who wouldn't buy XP if they don't like it.
So. They still wrote in saying how much they liked it. Can you find 100
reviews saying they hated XP?
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim
"they're too stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux
they would never buy Windows"
Where did I claim this?
Just above, when you claimed "people ... [fall] prey to hearsay or
marketing." as if their own knowledge doesn't matter.
Post by TheLetterK
I said that merit didn't enter into their buying decisions.
That's ridiculous. What you mean is "the merit I think Linux has doesn't
enter into their buying decisions."
Post by TheLetterK
Yet another wintroll trying to stuff their verion
of reality down other people's throats.
That's exactly how you think. Many other cola nuts have made identical
claims: people don't know the difference between an app and an OS, people
are stupid, etc.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's
a technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM.
But was technically superior.
There's lots of ways to measure and describe "technically superior."
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
DEC was killed off by tech./business blunders.
Thanks for proving my point.
DEC was a big company. Some products were "technically superior" and some
weren't.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Glad you got a laugh out of it--but the joke's going to be on you in
the end.
When's this magical, mystical, majestical "end" going to come? We've been
hearing the same thing for years from Linux advocates - and we'll be hearing
it forever I expect.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer?
Well, I assembled the one I'm currently using (I picked the parts I
did mostly because they offered the most performance for the price,
while still being in my price range). If your talking about the
iBook... I wanted a durable laptop in my price range. IBM's offerings
were too expensive.
You chose all those parts based on merit, because no matter how low the
price, if they didn't do the job you needed you wouldn't have bought them.

Thanks for contradicting your own argument.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Your shoes?
They fit.
Post by DFS
Your clothes?
Same.
2 more merit badges.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Because they had no merit I assume.
People is plural, and in this context referring to the majority. I am
not a people, I am a *person* (if you want to be pedantic, I can be
too)--and in the minority.
I think some of you cola wackos honestly believe only the 10 regs here can
make informed decisions about computers and OS's. Talk about a version of
reality.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
You bought them because Nike told you to,
I have no idea who made the shoes I wear--I bought them out of the
bargain bin because they fit, and I saw no point in dropping $80 on a
pair of shoes that didn't fit as well.
The fit - they had merit.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
and WalMart had a sale on shirts,
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. Ever.
Why? (I quit Wal-Mart myself right after Christmas last year. I was sick
of the dirty stores, the unstocked merchandise piled up in the aisles, the
employees yelling at each other from 100 feet away, the long lines, the
crappy Chinese junk they sell, etc.)
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
I've got a Dell box, only because someone else was getting rid of it.
It's now running Debian, and sitting in the other room acting as a
file server.
So it has merit as a file server. Otherwise you would have bought something
else.

Do you want to reverse your statement now, or continue to try and support
it?
TheLetterK
2005-08-03 18:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What
do you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product
that sucks so badly"?
If you actually read the reviews you'll see they're far more honest
about XP than cola liars are about Linux.
All 15 of them? This is wholly unscientific evidence.
Of course it is. And there are closer to 100 reviews there.
Post by TheLetterK
Your supporting
an argument that people like a product based on reviews from people
who bought a product on a site that typically appeals to tech-heads.
The same people who wouldn't buy XP if they don't like it.
So. They still wrote in saying how much they liked it. Can you find 100
reviews saying they hated XP?
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product
reviews. It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message
board. What matters is where people are willing to put their money
and what product they use to get their work done.
Unfortunately, this big place known as 'reality' isn't that simple.
People almost never do any kind of cost/benefit analysis, usually
falling prey to hearsay or marketing.
Horseshit. Here we go again, another cola nut lying about the
population's ability to educate themselves. All so you can claim
"they're too stupid. If they were smart like me and knew about Linux
they would never buy Windows"
Where did I claim this?
Just above, when you claimed "people ... [fall] prey to hearsay or
marketing." as if their own knowledge doesn't matter.
Post by TheLetterK
I said that merit didn't enter into their buying decisions.
That's ridiculous. What you mean is "the merit I think Linux has doesn't
enter into their buying decisions."
How do you know what I mean? I mean what I said.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Yet another wintroll trying to stuff their verion
of reality down other people's throats.
That's exactly how you think.
Your right, I do think your a wintroll.
Post by DFS
Many other cola nuts have made identical
claims: people don't know the difference between an app and an OS, people
are stupid, etc.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies based on merit, Betamax would have been
a popular
Post by TheLetterK
format. OS/2 would have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today.
Those are all your opinions. VHS taped longer than Betamax - that's
a technological superiority. OS/2 wasn't supported well by IBM.
But was technically superior.
There's lots of ways to measure and describe "technically superior."
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
DEC was killed off by tech./business blunders.
Thanks for proving my point.
DEC was a big company. Some products were "technically superior" and some
weren't.
Very few weren't. The vast majority were way ahead of the competition.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Glad you got a laugh out of it--but the joke's going to be on you in
the end.
When's this magical, mystical, majestical "end" going to come?
I'm thinking the main transition will start in 2008.
Post by DFS
We've been
hearing the same thing for years from Linux advocates - and we'll be hearing
it forever I expect.
Most of the sane Linux advocates have been saying what I have been--that
Linux will really take off in 2008 or so. This is what they've been
claiming for *years*. Your thinkign of Linuz Zealots, not Linux advocates.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Unfortunately, people *don't* buy products based on merit.
Is that right? Why did you buy your computer?
Well, I assembled the one I'm currently using (I picked the parts I
did mostly because they offered the most performance for the price,
while still being in my price range). If your talking about the
iBook... I wanted a durable laptop in my price range. IBM's offerings
were too expensive.
You chose all those parts based on merit, because no matter how low the
price, if they didn't do the job you needed you wouldn't have bought them.
Yes I did. Most people, however, do not. They buy whatever their friends
are using, or whatever X company tells them is best. I bought these
parts after very careful analysis of what I wanted, what I could afford,
and what my options were.
Post by DFS
Thanks for contradicting your own argument.
Not at all.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Your shoes?
They fit.
Post by DFS
Your clothes?
Same.
2 more merit badges.
Yes they are. See my statement below.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Because they had no merit I assume.
People is plural, and in this context referring to the majority. I am
not a people, I am a *person* (if you want to be pedantic, I can be
too)--and in the minority.
I think some of you cola wackos honestly believe only the 10 regs here can
make informed decisions about computers and OS's.
Hardly. But I'm absolutly certain the vast majority of computer users
(and by this I mean 90% or better) don't do a lick of research, or put
any thought into their buying decsision whatsoever.
Post by DFS
Talk about a version of
reality.
Your th eonly one who seems to think that most people make an educated
decision about computing products.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
You bought them because Nike told you to,
I have no idea who made the shoes I wear--I bought them out of the
bargain bin because they fit, and I saw no point in dropping $80 on a
pair of shoes that didn't fit as well.
The fit - they had merit.
Yes they did--see the above statement.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
and WalMart had a sale on shirts,
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. Ever.
Why?
Customer service sucks, prices aren't that great, grossly overcrowded,
horrible product quality, etc.
Post by DFS
(I quit Wal-Mart myself right after Christmas last year. I was sick
of the dirty stores, the unstocked merchandise piled up in the aisles, the
employees yelling at each other from 100 feet away, the long lines, the
crappy Chinese junk they sell, etc.)
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
and 'Dude you got a Dell!' because
Dell told you to.
I've got a Dell box, only because someone else was getting rid of it.
It's now running Debian, and sitting in the other room acting as a
file server.
So it has merit as a file server.
No, it was free. That was it's only merit. I'd rather use it as a
fileserver than let it put lead in the groundwater.
Post by DFS
Otherwise you would have bought something
else.
I didn't buy it, someone was goign to throw it out, and I offered to
take it.
Post by DFS
Do you want to reverse your statement now, or continue to try and support
it?
I'll stand by my words.
TuxSux
2005-08-03 22:17:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
I think some of you cola wackos honestly believe only the 10 regs
here can make informed decisions about computers and OS's. Talk
about a version of reality.
The most accurate term is "folie à plusieurs".


Here are two fine examples:

http://www.gnu.org/

http://www.penguinista.org/site-info/manifesto.shtml
Linønut
2005-08-04 03:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by TuxSux
The most accurate term is "folie à plusieurs".
http://www.gnu.org/
I get a lot of my software here. Highly recommended. Good, solid
stuff.
Post by TuxSux
http://www.penguinista.org/site-info/manifesto.shtml
Thanks for the heads up on that site! I hadn't seen it before!
Good advocacy, Tux!
--
Tux rox!
Mark Kent
2005-08-05 09:53:41 UTC
Permalink
begin oe_protect.scr
Post by TuxSux
http://www.gnu.org/
http://www.penguinista.org/site-info/manifesto.shtml
Great links - thanks for posting them.
--
end
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a noose.
Chris Barts
2005-08-03 05:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html

The counterpoint is that the technology shifted and Betamax /became/
better than VHS, but by that point it was too late. It obviously is not
too late to shift to Linux, as the increasing adoption rate has proven.
Post by TheLetterK
OS/2 would
have replaced Windows. DEC would still be alive today. GNU/Linux would
completely dominate the market.
These are true, except that DEC died because they didn't make a PC until
it was too late to meaningfully compete in the field.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Rick
2005-08-03 09:33:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Barts
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.
That's right... base 'better' on everything BUT video quality.
Post by Chris Barts
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
The counterpoint is that the technology shifted and Betamax /became/
better than VHS, but by that point it was too late. It obviously is not
too late to shift to Linux, as the increasing adoption rate has proven.
Post by TheLetterK
OS/2 would have replaced Windows.
DEC would still be alive today.
GNU/Linux would completely dominate the market.
These are true, except that DEC died because they didn't make a PC until
it was too late to meaningfully compete in the field.
--
Rick
Chris Barts
2005-08-03 22:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick
Post by Chris Barts
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.
That's right... base 'better' on everything BUT video quality.
Post by Chris Barts
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
Read the article. Video quality wasn't a valid basis of comparison when it
came to home rigs of the era: It was impossible to distinguish VHS from
Beta in a side-by-side test.

Think about this: Is it worth the expense to buy aurally-perfect
mint-condition vinyl if the music on them will only ever be broadcast over
an AM rig?


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Rick
2005-08-04 05:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Barts
Post by Rick
Post by Chris Barts
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.
That's right... base 'better' on everything BUT video quality.
Post by Chris Barts
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
Read the article. Video quality wasn't a valid basis of comparison when it
came to home rigs of the era: It was impossible to distinguish VHS from
Beta in a side-by-side test.
At the time, I could do it.

And, AGAIN, most people will almost always base their purchase on
--price--, not quality. That is how WalMart survives.
Post by Chris Barts
Think about this: Is it worth the expense to buy aurally-perfect
mint-condition vinyl if the music on them will only ever be broadcast over
an AM rig?
Dunno.
--
Rick
DFS
2005-08-04 05:29:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick
And, AGAIN, most people will almost always base their purchase on
--price--, not quality.
They do? How come that doesn't work for Linux? I talked to the sales rep
at MicroCenter the other day. I had to get real specific and ask "Exactly
how many retail boxes of all these low-priced Linux distros do you sell each
month?" He didn't have the exact figure, but he estimated ONE.

And why doesn't your "low-price rules" marketing plan apply to Lexus,
Porsche, and Cadillac? And Cartier? And for a tech. example, Winchester
Digital Raptor drives? And for hundreds of other midscale and up products?
Post by Rick
Dunno.
Much of anything.
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:31:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
They do? How come that doesn't work for Linux? I talked to the sales rep
at MicroCenter the other day. I had to get real specific and ask "Exactly
how many retail boxes of all these low-priced Linux distros do you sell each
month?" He didn't have the exact figure, but he estimated ONE.
And how many retail copies of XP does he sell a month?
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
Rick
2005-08-04 05:37:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by Rick
And, AGAIN, most people will almost always base their purchase on
--price--, not quality.
They do?
They do.
Post by DFS
How come that doesn't work for Linux?
In many cases it does, which is wht Linux is starting to be used in many
places around the world.

In the U.S. there are network effects caused byt the illegaly maintained
monopoly.
Post by DFS
I talked to the sales rep
at MicroCenter the other day. I had to get real specific and ask "Exactly
how many retail boxes of all these low-priced Linux distros do you sell
each month?" He didn't have the exact figure, but he estimated ONE.
... see above.
BTW, maybe you can get WalMart to give you figures. They seem to have a
reputation for not selling products that don't meet their sales
expectations.

You might also want to find out why companies abroad can survive selling
Linux based machines.
Post by DFS
And why doesn't your "low-price rules" marketing plan apply to Lexus,
Porsche, and Cadillac? And Cartier?
They do. Go outside. Look at the traffic. ... then go play in it.
Post by DFS
And for a tech. example, Winchester
Digital Raptor drives? And for hundreds of other midscale and up products?
(snip)
--
Rick
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
And why doesn't your "low-price rules" marketing plan apply to Lexus,
Porsche, and Cadillac? And Cartier? And for a tech. example, Winchester
Digital Raptor drives? And for hundreds of other midscale and up products?
Here's a list of Suse NA resellers.

Someone's making money on this:

http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/resellers/us/index.html
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
Larry Qualig
2005-08-04 12:54:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
And why doesn't your "low-price rules" marketing plan apply to Lexus,
Porsche, and Cadillac? And Cartier? And for a tech. example, Winchester
Digital Raptor drives? And for hundreds of other midscale and up products?
Here's a list of Suse NA resellers.
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/resellers/us/index.html
I'm actually very interested in seeing exactly how much money is being made.
Novell reports earnings at the end of the month. I don't own Novell but I do
plan on examining their 10-Q. They have certainly had ample time to
integrate Suse into their product line so it's now time to show what they've
done with it.
Mark Kent
2005-08-05 09:50:51 UTC
Permalink
begin oe_protect.scr
Post by Chris Barts
Post by Rick
Post by Chris Barts
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.
That's right... base 'better' on everything BUT video quality.
Post by Chris Barts
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
Read the article. Video quality wasn't a valid basis of comparison when it
came to home rigs of the era: It was impossible to distinguish VHS from
Beta in a side-by-side test.
It was easily possible to see the difference, at least on Pal TVs,
anyway. Perhaps in NTSC countries you couldn't tell.
--
end
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a noose.
Mark Kent
2005-08-05 09:50:03 UTC
Permalink
begin oe_protect.scr
Post by Chris Barts
Post by TheLetterK
If people bought into technologies
based on merit, Betamax would have been a popular format.
Uh, no. VHS honestly /was/ better than Beta at the time, given the
playback machines people actually owned and what they needed to do.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,881780,00.html
The counterpoint is that the technology shifted and Betamax /became/
better than VHS, but by that point it was too late. It obviously is not
too late to shift to Linux, as the increasing adoption rate has proven.
Betamax was way superior to VHS in its original design in terms of
audio and video quality. It was really a cut-down Umatic machine.
It supported more lines per frame (better definition in PC-speak),
and superior audio quality.

What killed Beta and left the field open for VHS was that the way the
tape loaded in beta made it virtually impossible to produce a portable
machine, and completely physically impossible to do a cam-corder.
This was a direct artefact of using a cut-down u-matic design, rather
than a 'new' design, which the VHS system was.

It should be borne in mind that both systems were originally taking on the
Philips N1700/N1702 cassette systems, and the newly launched VideoDisc
(the technology for which later became CD). In that respect, both
products were originally successful, as the Philips competing system, the
V2000, was launched almost 18 months late, and was ridiculously complex
due to a *marketing* requirement to have the casette revsersible (ie.,
two-sided), like the audio-cassette. By the time the V2000 appeared, VHS
and Beta were all over the place, and the Philips system was a mechanical
nightmare, using drive-cord for tape threading and all kinds of cr*p.

So the war descended into Beta vs., VHS. Most of the 'techie' folks
preferred Beta, because of the superior picture/audio, however, the
consumers made their choice for the cheapest. Later versions of VHS
improved the definition, with a high-band version, added stereo sound
so that Europeans could record their stereo TV onto cassette (the Nicam
system invented by the BBC - very good), and even were able to record
teletext (another BBC invention). Stereo playback was popular
world-wide, and allowed people outside of PAL countries to enjoy
pre-recorded films with stereo audio.

It was many years before VHS got to the original quality of Beta.
I know - I used to work on them.
--
end
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a noose.
Rick
2005-08-03 03:22:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
The marketplace, when measured properly, will indicate what people use,
but not what they 'love', or even like.
--
Rick
Larry Qualig
2005-08-03 03:47:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
The marketplace, when measured properly, will indicate what people use,
but not what they 'love', or even like.
Yeah... this is true. But generally people won't pay for something they
"hate." (Other than a root canal perhaps.)
rapskat
2005-08-03 07:56:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by Rick
Post by Larry Qualig
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
The marketplace, when measured properly, will indicate what people use,
but not what they 'love', or even like.
Yeah... this is true. But generally people won't pay for something they
"hate." (Other than a root canal perhaps.)
For the most part, people just go with the flow. They
don't really make educated choices about anything, they just pick whatever
is right there in front of them. This often applies to religion,
politics, schools, cars, homes, jobs, even spouses!

The trick of course is to make sure that your product is the one that is
readily available in front of the majority of the people so they don't go
looking around. This is what M$ does, and why they are currently the
majority leader on the desktop.

There is nothing wrong with this per se, it's just the way that they do it
that is despicable. If someone wins a popular vote just because they are
out there in front of as many people as possible winning hearts and minds,
that's one thing. But when they win the vote because they are threatening
people that might vote for the other guy that's something totally
different.
--
rapskat - 03:43:21 up 6 days, 12:58, 4 users, load average: 1.32, 1.25, 1.11
"A computer without a Microsoft operating system is like a dog
without bricks tied to its head."
-- Steve on slashdot
Rick
2005-08-03 09:31:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by Rick
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do
you expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that
sucks so badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews.
It doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
The marketplace, when measured properly, will indicate what people use,
but not what they 'love', or even like.
Yeah... this is true. But generally people won't pay for something they
"hate." (Other than a root canal perhaps.)
Generally. However, I know of VERY few people that love, or even like,
windows. Yet they continue to buy windows based machines. It's the network
effect.
--
Rick
Jim Richardson
2005-08-03 16:27:40 UTC
Permalink
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 23:47:58 -0400,
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by Rick
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews. It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What
matters is where people are willing to put their money and what product
they use to get their work done.
The marketplace, when measured properly, will indicate what people use,
but not what they 'love', or even like.
Yeah... this is true. But generally people won't pay for something they
"hate." (Other than a root canal perhaps.)
That would explain the deep love and affection people have for the IRS,


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFC8PB8d90bcYOAWPYRAg6BAJ9NXs5Yz7JNkAqatm4bnvwB20Q/fQCg4n4G
dBcEhNBuqsQF+w17Udxeb1g=
=cImO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Instruction ends in the schoolroom -- but education
ends only with life. -- Publilius Syrus.
Linønut
2005-08-03 12:17:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Because Newegg is the definitive source for product reviews. What do you
expect? "Wow, I'm an idiot because I bought this product that sucks so
badly"?
Actually the "marketplace" is the ultimate source for product reviews.
Not in a monopoly market.
Post by Larry Qualig
It
doesn't matter what people write or say on some message board. What matters
is where people are willing to put their money and what product they use to
get their work done.
What alternative is being offered to the average shopper?

Certainly no Windows-compatible alternative.

All the storefronts say "Microsoft Windows".

It's a sick system, and the U.S. government allows it.
--
Tux rox!
Blood Money
2005-08-03 05:37:37 UTC
Permalink
As I explained to the troll-in-training, feedback posted re Xandros on
the same site is all kudos.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16832106502
I even set up an account (took less than two minutes) and posted my own
review.

The trolls here suck.
chrisv
2005-08-03 12:51:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Blood Money
The trolls here suck.
People love to feed them, it seems...
b***@yahoo.com
2005-08-04 03:29:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by chrisv
Post by Blood Money
The trolls here suck.
People love to feed them, it seems...
Indeed. Point taken.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 03:53:51 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
So when are you posting some XP bugs on alt.os.windows-xp?
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
Chris Barts
2005-08-03 04:54:18 UTC
Permalink
muted
No, they simply don't know there are any options, or they don't think any
other OS will do what they need to do.

It's a lack of research and a preponderance of marketing, in other words.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
DFS
2005-08-03 05:07:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Barts
muted
No, they simply don't know there are any options,
Why not? And how do you know they don't know there are other options?
Post by Chris Barts
or they don't think any other OS will do what they need to do.
There you go.
Post by Chris Barts
It's a lack of research and a preponderance of marketing, in other words.
And most of all, a huge lack of marketing on Linux' part, of course.

It's kind of funny to flip through a Linux magazine and see Linux vendor
ads, like Novell/Suse, preaching to the choir. But flip through a PC
Magazine or a Maximum PC or Computer Power User and you don't see them, or
any Linux ads, at all.
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 05:18:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by Chris Barts
It's a lack of research and a preponderance of marketing, in other words.
And most of all, a huge lack of marketing on Linux' part, of course.
It's kind of funny to flip through a Linux magazine and see Linux vendor
ads, like Novell/Suse, preaching to the choir. But flip through a PC
Magazine or a Maximum PC or Computer Power User and you don't see them, or
any Linux ads, at all.
PC mags here invariably come with a linux distro. How many get installed
we'll never know, but I do note we have a growing linux users group in the
local township here while the original windows based PC group appears to
have died.

Maybe you can find a linux group in your area since they closed down your
branch of the KKK after the FBI raid. Give you something to do with your
spare time.
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
Mark Kent
2005-08-05 09:41:17 UTC
Permalink
begin oe_protect.scr
Post by amosf (Tim Fairchild)
Post by DFS
Post by Chris Barts
It's a lack of research and a preponderance of marketing, in other words.
And most of all, a huge lack of marketing on Linux' part, of course.
It's kind of funny to flip through a Linux magazine and see Linux vendor
ads, like Novell/Suse, preaching to the choir. But flip through a PC
Magazine or a Maximum PC or Computer Power User and you don't see them, or
any Linux ads, at all.
PC mags here invariably come with a linux distro. How many get installed
we'll never know, but I do note we have a growing linux users group in the
local township here while the original windows based PC group appears to
have died.
Maybe you can find a linux group in your area since they closed down your
branch of the KKK after the FBI raid. Give you something to do with your
spare time.
Burning liveCDs, perhaps?
--
end
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a noose.
Kier
2005-08-03 09:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by Chris Barts
muted
No, they simply don't know there are any options,
Why not? And how do you know they don't know there are other options?
Post by Chris Barts
or they don't think any other OS will do what they need to do.
There you go.
That hardly proves any superiority on Windows' part, nor inferiority of
Linux
Post by DFS
Post by Chris Barts
It's a lack of research and a preponderance of marketing, in other words.
And most of all, a huge lack of marketing on Linux' part, of course.
It's kind of funny to flip through a Linux magazine and see Linux vendor
ads, like Novell/Suse, preaching to the choir. But flip through a PC
Magazine or a Maximum PC or Computer Power User and you don't see them, or
any Linux ads, at all.
Not ads, maybe, but you certainly see articles about Linux in the PC mags
here.

But most people are going to buy what everyone else is buying.
--
Kier
John Bailo
2005-08-03 05:54:25 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Yes, here's one of the /stellar/ recommendations, the first from the top
link:

"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best!"

Translation: "XP doesn't suck as much as all the others".
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
JustMe
2005-08-03 09:10:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Well there you have it then. According to one user (Nova Rift) Windows
XP professional and SP2 are still not as good as Windows 3.1. Don't
think that I'll be rushing to PC world just yet ;-)
mlw
2005-08-03 09:57:47 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Enjoy
Yup, choice quotes to enjoy:

"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still can't beat
Windows 3.1)"

So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP. Wih "love"
like that, Linux just needs time.


"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch problems
seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to fix my driver
and patch problems."

Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
DFS
2005-08-03 13:28:41 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still can't
beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP. Wih
"love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and marketing and
leadership.
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to
fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
mlw
2005-08-03 10:23:30 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still can't
beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP. Wih
"love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and marketing and
leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a basically
wide-open market. Linux has been around for less time in the presense of a
monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be "Linux," but
it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.

As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?

As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE advantage that
Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple leaders and competing
ideas get tried.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to
fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
DFS
2005-08-03 14:15:32 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still
can't beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP.
Wih "love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and
marketing and leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a basically
wide-open market.
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the market
wide open as of 1990. Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then. IBM
marketed PC-DOS. Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen. There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?). Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that they
effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.

So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They didn't
build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else. Windows,
Linux and Mac. That's it.
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't see
Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the high-traffic web
sites.
Post by mlw
As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE
advantage that Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple
leaders and competing ideas get tried.
And the huge disadvantage is that there are multiple leaders and competing
ideas get tried. The public needs one or a very few sources of Linux
information. They don't need to hear competing stories coming from the OSDL
and Novell and RedHat (not that there are competing stories, just that
there shouldn't be). The public needs standards, so they know what to
expect, so they don't have to learn KDE and Gnome, and two or three
different package managers, etc.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to
fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.

Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a nascent
64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again, you're a Linux
devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is exceeded only by your hatred
of Microsoft.
TheLetterK
2005-08-03 16:51:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still
can't beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP.
Wih "love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and
marketing and leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a basically
wide-open market.
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the market
wide open as of 1990. Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then. IBM
marketed PC-DOS. Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen. There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?). Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that they
effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.
So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They didn't
build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else. Windows,
Linux and Mac. That's it.
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't see
Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the high-traffic web
sites.
Because they're using much more effective marketing than the direct
marketing you speak of. They're trying to get *businesses* to adopt
GNU/Linux on the Desktop. You don't do that by wasting money on TV ads,
you do that by offering these companies deals and service breaks.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE
advantage that Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple
leaders and competing ideas get tried.
And the huge disadvantage is that there are multiple leaders and competing
ideas get tried. The public needs one or a very few sources of Linux
information. They don't need to hear competing stories coming from the OSDL
and Novell and RedHat (not that there are competing stories, just that
there shouldn't be). The public needs standards, so they know what to
expect, so they don't have to learn KDE and Gnome, and two or three
different package managers, etc.
The huge advantage here is that *people can pick what they want to use*.
Don't like KDE? Don't use it. It's not a system-wide choice.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to
fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.
Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a nascent
64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again, you're a Linux
devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is exceeded only by your hatred
of Microsoft.
I have lots of problems with Windows. I've still been trying to get it
to bridge a TAP adapter to the wireless card... doesn't seem like XP
allows for it.
mlw
2005-08-03 17:19:18 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still
can't beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP.
Wih "love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and
marketing and leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a basically
wide-open market.
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the market
wide open as of 1990.
Well, good thng you are not writing the history books. Microsoft's monopoly
nonsense is well before the 1990s.
Post by DFS
Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then.
Yup.
Post by DFS
IBM
marketed PC-DOS.
Yup.
Post by DFS
Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen.
Yes, but MS-DOS was the Microsoft monopoly product at the time.
Post by DFS
There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?).
Gem was IMHO, better than Windows at the time.
Post by DFS
Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that they
effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.
Ahh, change the details from "monopoly" to "monopoly on GUI OSs." Microsoft
had enough of a hold on the market in DOS days to keep DRI from succeeding
with CP/M86.
Post by DFS
So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They didn't
build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Puleeze, they practically stole MS-DOS in the first place, and maintained
market by threatening OEMs, yes, even in DOS days.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else. Windows,
Linux and Mac. That's it.
You have so little imagination, no wonder you use Windows.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't see
Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the high-traffic web
sites.
True, but we are seeing site after site, and city after city, switching to
GNU/Linux. One or two may go back to Windows when Microsoft gives them free
software and consulting, but Linux is gaining market segments, one sale at
a time.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE
advantage that Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple
leaders and competing ideas get tried.
And the huge disadvantage is that there are multiple leaders and competing
ideas get tried. The public needs one or a very few sources of Linux
information. They don't need to hear competing stories coming from the OSDL
and Novell and RedHat (not that there are competing stories, just that
there shouldn't be). The public needs standards, so they know what to
expect, so they don't have to learn KDE and Gnome, and two or three
different package managers, etc.
Stalin loved standards and a single leader.

Linux offers competition with compatible source base, now that's
competition. I love capitalism.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able to
fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.
Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a nascent
64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again, you're a Linux
devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is exceeded only by your
hatred of Microsoft.
Typical response. It's my lying and exageration that someone I don't know
had trouble with Windows. Yup, you're a windope.
DFS
2005-08-03 22:27:28 UTC
Permalink
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still
can't beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP.
Wih "love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and
marketing and leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a
basically wide-open market.
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the
market wide open as of 1990.
Well, good thng you are not writing the history books. Microsoft's
monopoly nonsense is well before the 1990s.
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality of
their software products. There was never any guarantee anybody would
purchase IBM PCs. There was never any guarantee Windows 3.0 would be a
huge hit. They teed it up and drove it down the middle. Over and over for
nearly 20 years.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then.
Yup.
Post by DFS
IBM
marketed PC-DOS.
Yup.
Post by DFS
Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen.
Yes, but MS-DOS was the Microsoft monopoly product at the time.
OK.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?).
Gem was IMHO, better than Windows at the time.
I remember using DesqView briefly, but not Gem.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that
they effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.
Ahh, change the details from "monopoly" to "monopoly on GUI OSs."
Microsoft had enough of a hold on the market in DOS days to keep DRI
from succeeding with CP/M86.
Is it your opinion the success of those options would have relegated Windows
3.0/3.1 to an also-ran position?
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They
didn't build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Puleeze, they practically stole MS-DOS in the first place,
The rest of the world knows they paid for it. $25,000 or $50,000 as I
hazily recall
Post by mlw
and maintained market by threatening OEMs, yes, even in DOS days.
How can they threaten an OEM?
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else.
Windows, Linux and Mac. That's it.
You have so little imagination, no wonder you use Windows.
Hmmm. You sling a stupid insult and nothing else?

Very imaginative
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't
see Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the
high-traffic web sites.
True, but we are seeing site after site, and city after city,
switching to GNU/Linux.
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Post by mlw
One or two may go back to Windows when
Microsoft gives them free software and consulting, but Linux is
gaining market segments, one sale at a time.
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE
advantage that Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple
leaders and competing ideas get tried.
And the huge disadvantage is that there are multiple leaders and
competing ideas get tried. The public needs one or a very few
sources of Linux information. They don't need to hear competing
stories coming from the OSDL
and Novell and RedHat (not that there are competing stories, just
that there shouldn't be). The public needs standards, so they know
what to expect, so they don't have to learn KDE and Gnome, and two
or three different package managers, etc.
Stalin loved standards and a single leader.
He would have loved Linux (publicly - privately his system would run XP and
MS Age of Empires).
Post by mlw
Linux offers competition with compatible source base, now that's
competition. I love capitalism.
You just don't like paying for it.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able
to fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.
Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a
nascent 64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again,
you're a Linux devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is
exceeded only by your hatred of Microsoft.
Typical response. It's my lying and exageration that someone I don't
know had trouble with Windows. Yup, you're a windope.
I didn't accuse you of lying, or exaggerating. On the contrary, you accuse
me of lying (line t-8)
amosf (Tim Fairchild)
2005-08-03 22:47:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Well, good thng you are not writing the history books. Microsoft's
monopoly nonsense is well before the 1990s.
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality of
their software products. There was never any guarantee anybody would
purchase IBM PCs. There was never any guarantee Windows 3.0 would be a
huge hit. They teed it up and drove it down the middle. Over and over
for nearly 20 years.
Well, they did kind of have the PC tied up by 1990 a bit... But sure, people
stole win 3.x coz it had pretty coulors I guess. Did anyone actually buy
windows then? I suppose somebody must have.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen.
Yes, but MS-DOS was the Microsoft monopoly product at the time.
OK.
Glad you agree, I'm thinking this isn't the real DFS either...
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?).
Gem was IMHO, better than Windows at the time.
I remember using DesqView briefly, but not Gem.
GEM didn't have some of the features of win at the time (well, centralized
printer support mostly), but was waaaay lighter and waaaay faster. Quite
nice actually, for a gui... Of course nerds at the time weren't really into
a gui except for DTP, which I did then. I did a sci-fi mag with ventura on
GEM. Very nice... But for a bit of luck, it's likely we'd have the DR - GEM
monopoly now I guess...
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They
didn't build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Puleeze, they practically stole MS-DOS in the first place,
The rest of the world knows they paid for it. $25,000 or $50,000 as I
hazily recall
It was a steal, but a legal one :)
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
and maintained market by threatening OEMs, yes, even in DOS days.
How can they threaten an OEM?
OEM's, like people, are sheep. They just went easy like the rest.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else.
Windows, Linux and Mac. That's it.
You have so little imagination, no wonder you use Windows.
Hmmm. You sling a stupid insult and nothing else?
Very imaginative
Doof is good at the insults too, depending on the version. We have to assume
that this is still the racist one.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't
see Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the
high-traffic web sites.
True, but we are seeing site after site, and city after city,
switching to GNU/Linux.
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Don't get our hopes up, Doof. Are you feeling okay?
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
One or two may go back to Windows when
Microsoft gives them free software and consulting, but Linux is
gaining market segments, one sale at a time.
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Long time users don't care much about 'market share'. Minorities are okay.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Linux offers competition with compatible source base, now that's
competition. I love capitalism.
You just don't like paying for it.
I pay for software. Even linux versions in the past - but these days I don't
need the support they supply.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able
to fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.
Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a
nascent 64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again,
you're a Linux devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is
exceeded only by your hatred of Microsoft.
Typical response. It's my lying and exageration that someone I don't
know had trouble with Windows. Yup, you're a windope.
I didn't accuse you of lying, or exaggerating. On the contrary, you
accuse me of lying (line t-8)
Did not, did too...
--
-
I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
-
TheLetterK
2005-08-04 00:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Enjoy
"For a microsoft product this is by far one of the best! (still
can't beat Windows 3.1)"
So, it still isn't better thn Windows 3.1? Yup, people "love" XP.
Wih "love" like that, Linux just needs time.
Linux has had plenty of time already. Linux needs money and
marketing and leadership.
It took Microsoft about 15 years to build its monopoly in a
basically wide-open market.
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the
market wide open as of 1990.
Well, good thng you are not writing the history books. Microsoft's
monopoly nonsense is well before the 1990s.
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality of
their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too good
to refuse. After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to
Microsoft's demands.
Post by DFS
There was never any guarantee anybody would
purchase IBM PCs. There was never any guarantee Windows 3.0 would be a
huge hit. They teed it up and drove it down the middle. Over and over for
nearly 20 years.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then.
Yup.
Post by DFS
IBM
marketed PC-DOS.
Yup.
Post by DFS
Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen.
Yes, but MS-DOS was the Microsoft monopoly product at the time.
OK.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?).
Gem was IMHO, better than Windows at the time.
I remember using DesqView briefly, but not Gem.
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that
they effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.
Ahh, change the details from "monopoly" to "monopoly on GUI OSs."
Microsoft had enough of a hold on the market in DOS days to keep DRI
from succeeding with CP/M86.
Is it your opinion the success of those options would have relegated Windows
3.0/3.1 to an also-ran position?
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
So I think it took the world 6-7 years to give MS a monopoly. They
didn't build it - it was handed to them one sale at a time.
Puleeze, they practically stole MS-DOS in the first place,
The rest of the world knows they paid for it. $25,000 or $50,000 as I
hazily recall
Post by mlw
and maintained market by threatening OEMs, yes, even in DOS days.
How can they threaten an OEM?
Market the product properly so the public is clamoring for it, jack up
the price to unsellable levels, then offer OEMs a huge price break in
exchange for exclusivity contracts.

Same thing they did with Internet Explorer vs. Netscape.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Linux has been around for less time in the presense
of a monopoly. It will take more time for Linux. It may not even be
"Linux," but it will be mostly comprised of GNU infrastructure.
I don't get you, with the Linux in quotes. I can't imagine there would ever
be any wholesale name change to GLOSS or FOSS or anything else.
Windows, Linux and Mac. That's it.
You have so little imagination, no wonder you use Windows.
Hmmm. You sling a stupid insult and nothing else?
Very imaginative
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for money and marketing, are you so blind as to Novell, IBM, and RedHat?
I'm not hearing much of a desktop message from any of them. I don't
see Linux ads in the mainstream press, or on TV, or on the
high-traffic web sites.
True, but we are seeing site after site, and city after city,
switching to GNU/Linux.
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Doubtful. That transition was held back because of the Software Patents
thing, which was recently struck down.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
One or two may go back to Windows when
Microsoft gives them free software and consulting, but Linux is
gaining market segments, one sale at a time.
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Less than 10 years before it'll break Microsoft's market domination
(which doesn't even require 50%). At current rates, of course.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
As for leadership, there is plenty of "leadership." The HUGE
advantage that Linux has over Microsoft is that there is multiple
leaders and competing ideas get tried.
And the huge disadvantage is that there are multiple leaders and
competing ideas get tried. The public needs one or a very few
sources of Linux information. They don't need to hear competing
stories coming from the OSDL
and Novell and RedHat (not that there are competing stories, just
that there shouldn't be). The public needs standards, so they know
what to expect, so they don't have to learn KDE and Gnome, and two
or three different package managers, etc.
Stalin loved standards and a single leader.
He would have loved Linux (publicly - privately his system would run XP and
MS Age of Empires).
Post by mlw
Linux offers competition with compatible source base, now that's
competition. I love capitalism.
You just don't like paying for it.
I have no problem paying for a superior product. What I have a problem
with is buying the crap typically produced by commercial Windows developers.
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
"As for windows XP 64 aside from some slight driver and game patch
problems seems to be work fine. With a little research I was able
to fix my driver and patch problems."
Ahh, yes, Windows just works, huh?
That it does.
LOL, a bit of lie don't you think?
Not at all.
Surely you don't consider a small fraction of user problems in a
nascent 64-bit OS as representative of all of Windows? Then again,
you're a Linux devotee, and most likely your love of Linux is
exceeded only by your hatred of Microsoft.
Typical response. It's my lying and exageration that someone I don't
know had trouble with Windows. Yup, you're a windope.
I didn't accuse you of lying, or exaggerating. On the contrary, you accuse
me of lying (line t-8)
DFS
2005-08-04 05:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the
quality of their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too
good to refuse.
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by OEMs?
Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Post by TheLetterK
After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to Microsoft's demands.
Why? Were they somehow forced by MS.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
How can they threaten an OEM?
Market the product properly so the public is clamoring for it,
Now you're getting nearer the truth: the public did in fact clamor for
Windows 3.0/3.1. Not because it was so great, but because it was plenty
good enough, for users and hardware and software vendors who wrote drivers
and apps for it by the thousands.
Post by TheLetterK
jack up the price to unsellable levels,
What you consider overpriced is very different from what the public
considers overpriced.
Post by TheLetterK
then offer OEMs a huge price break in
exchange for exclusivity contracts.
Good for them. Smart move, MS.
Post by TheLetterK
Same thing they did with Internet Explorer vs. Netscape.
Now you're just revising history, ie acting the cola fool.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Doubtful. That transition was held back because of the Software
Patents thing, which was recently struck down.
So, 2008 maybe? About when Linux busts through worldwide.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Less than 10 years before it'll break Microsoft's market domination
(which doesn't even require 50%). At current rates, of course.
10 years from now? So starting in 2008 and reaching critical mass soon
afterwards and capturing ~ half the market by 2015?
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
You just don't like paying for it.
I have no problem paying for a superior product. What I have a problem
with is buying the crap typically produced by commercial Windows developers.
Which means you really don't like paying for superior products, because it's
widely known the superior apps of their kind exist on the Windows platform -
and often ONLY on the Windows platform.

That would be: MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access, MS Project, MS Visio,
Visual Basic, AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, TOAD for Oracle, Adobe Photoshop (also
on Mac), and who knows how many hundreds of other business and personal
apps, and dozens of utilities like SiSoft Sandra, plus untold numbers of
games.

Face facts: it's a Windows, Windows, Windows, Windows world.
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:17:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by
OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
DFS
2005-08-04 05:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by
OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
People in India are not so worried about looks. They want quality. They
also do not want to be owned by Microsoft.
The Ghost In The Machine
2005-08-04 15:00:03 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, DFS
<***@mindless.com>
wrote
on 3 Aug 2005 22:32:03 -0700
Post by DFS
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by
OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
People in India are not so worried about looks. They want quality.
They also do not want to be owned by Microsoft.
The whole idea of software and ownership is a little odd
to begin with.

Take an ordinary book. Unquestionably, I own the book.
However, I don't own its content (unless I bind my own
writings into a book, which is possible but not likely).
The author, presumably, gets a royalty payment for every
book sold. (The estate does too, for a certain amount
of time.) One might construe this as "a license to read".
Other issues ensue, such as the copying out of chunks
of the book, by manual transcription, photoscanning,
photocopying, OCR, etc., and including it in another work
of my own that I sell. Somebody will scream in that case,
as they should.

Software isn't that much different, though in this case
the reading is far easier (it's done by the machine)
and various output can be generated thereby. In a book,
the only output is some bounced-off photons from the
reading lamp.

As for quality -- what is quality? There's at least 5 metrics
one can apply to quality:

- Performance
- Stability
- Usability
- Flexibility
- Maintainability

or some variants thereof. Of these, usability is probably
of the most interest to the end user, though there's a
case for 4 of the 5 being "top dog" (the fifth is from
the standpoint of the developer, but more maintainability
results in better software as well).
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Nigel Feltham
2005-08-04 19:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Take an ordinary book. Unquestionably, I own the book.
However, I don't own its content (unless I bind my own
writings into a book, which is possible but not likely).
The author, presumably, gets a royalty payment for every
book sold. (The estate does too, for a certain amount
of time.) One might construe this as "a license to read".
Other issues ensue, such as the copying out of chunks
of the book, by manual transcription, photoscanning,
photocopying, OCR, etc., and including it in another work
of my own that I sell. Somebody will scream in that case,
as they should.
And even when you own the book you aren't guaranteed the rights to read
what's contained in the book - witness the recent case in canada over the
release of the latest harry potter book where a bookshop accidentally sold
a few copies of the book a few days early. The publisher of the canadian
edition got a court order to make it illegal for the buyers to even read
the book they'd legitimately bought.

Shame they didn't all read it and publicly admit to reading it - I'd have
liked to see that one go to court, a publisher trying to get someone jailed
for contempt of court for reading a book they'd paid good money for to one
of the publisher's approved book dealers.
The Ghost In The Machine
2005-08-04 21:00:04 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Nigel Feltham
<***@btinternet.com>
wrote
on Thu, 04 Aug 2005 20:18:28 +0100
Post by Nigel Feltham
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Take an ordinary book. Unquestionably, I own the book.
However, I don't own its content (unless I bind my own
writings into a book, which is possible but not likely).
The author, presumably, gets a royalty payment for every
book sold. (The estate does too, for a certain amount
of time.) One might construe this as "a license to read".
Other issues ensue, such as the copying out of chunks
of the book, by manual transcription, photoscanning,
photocopying, OCR, etc., and including it in another work
of my own that I sell. Somebody will scream in that case,
as they should.
And even when you own the book you aren't guaranteed the
rights to read what's contained in the book - witness the
recent case in canada over the release of the latest harry
potter book where a bookshop accidentally sold a few copies
of the book a few days early. The publisher of the canadian
edition got a court order to make it illegal for the buyers
to even read the book they'd legitimately bought.
Shame they didn't all read it and publicly admit to reading
it - I'd have liked to see that one go to court, a publisher
trying to get someone jailed for contempt of court for reading
a book they'd paid good money for to one of the publisher's
approved book dealers.
The way the story came out here is that some boy (I don't remember
who) voluntarily turned the book back in after reading a few
pages thereof; presumably later he went and got it again.

But yeah, "fair use" sure has taken a bit of a beating lately.
Witness, for example, DMCA. Gutenberg couldn't possibly
have dreamed of high-speed electronic machines spewing
data in all directions to anyone making a simple request:

GET /adocument.html HTTP/1.0<cr>
<cr>

:-)

For example:

$ telnet www.ietf.org 80
GET /rfc/rfc2616.txt HTTP/1.0

...
$

works like a champ. Of course a more proper request would be
more along the lines of

$ telnet www.ietf.org 80
GET /rfc/rfc2616.txt HTTP/1.1
Host: www.ietf.org
Connection: close

...
$

(Capturing the actual output is a bit of a problem, admittedly,
using this form.)

And of course Benjamin Franklin didn't have an iPod.
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
DFS
2005-08-04 05:58:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake
by OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
Cost, and cost alone. There wasn't a demand for it.
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:59:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake
by OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
Cost, and cost alone. There wasn't a demand for it.
Huh?

Their requirement was cost.

That was the demand.

Linux met the demand.
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
DFS
2005-08-04 06:13:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake
by OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Why did India choose to base its low cost PC for masses on Linux?
Cost, and cost alone. There wasn't a demand for it.
Huh?
Their requirement was cost.
That was the demand.
Linux met the demand.
That's what I said. They wanted something cheap that worked.
DFS
2005-08-04 05:27:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the
quality of their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too
good to refuse.
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by OEMs?
Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Some loser is forging me again.
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the
quality of their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too
good to refuse.
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by
OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Some loser is forging me again.
One loser forging another...how droll.
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
Rick
2005-08-04 05:31:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality
of their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too good
to refuse.
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by
OEMs? Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
In the U.S.? Network efects from an illegally maintained monopoly.

In the world? OSS is gaining ground every day.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to Microsoft's demands.
Why? Were they somehow forced by MS.
No duh.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
How can they threaten an OEM?
Market the product properly so the public is clamoring for it,
Now you're getting nearer the truth: the public did in fact clamor for
Windows 3.0/3.1. Not because it was so great, but because it was plenty
good enough, for users and hardware and software vendors who wrote drivers
and apps for it by the thousands.
... Or they could put lying error message in windows betas to scare away
beta testers from competitors...
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
jack up the price to unsellable levels,
What you consider overpriced is very different from what the public
considers overpriced.
The general public is grossly uninformed.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
then offer OEMs a huge price break in exchange for exclusivity
contracts.
Good for them. Smart move, MS.
Smart move? It was declared illegal.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Same thing they did with Internet Explorer vs. Netscape.
Now you're just revising history, ie acting the cola fool.
... we'll cut off their air supply.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Doubtful. That transition was held back because of the Software Patents
thing, which was recently struck down.
So, 2008 maybe? About when Linux busts through worldwide.
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Less than 10 years before it'll break Microsoft's market domination
(which doesn't even require 50%). At current rates, of course.
10 years from now? So starting in 2008 and reaching critical mass soon
afterwards and capturing ~ half the market by 2015?
Hopefully. It's just too bad Gates' ill-gotten fortune won't be reuced.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
You just don't like paying for it.
I have no problem paying for a superior product. What I have a problem
with is buying the crap typically produced by commercial Windows developers.
Which means you really don't like paying for superior products, because
it's widely known the superior apps of their kind exist on the Windows
platform - and often ONLY on the Windows platform.
you're a liar.
Post by DFS
That would be: MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access, MS Project, MS
Visio, Visual Basic, AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, TOAD for Oracle, Adobe
Photoshop (also on Mac), and who knows how many hundreds of other business
and personal apps, and dozens of utilities like SiSoft Sandra, plus untold
numbers of games.
Face facts: it's a Windows, Windows, Windows, Windows world.
Not as much anymore. Hope it will be increasingly much less in the very
near future.
--
Rick
TheLetterK
2005-08-05 03:08:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the
quality of their software products.
No they didn't. It was because Microsoft offered vendors deals too
good to refuse.
But free is supposed to be too good to refuse. Why no Linux uptake by OEMs?
Why no new OEMs popping up to satisfy Linux demand?
Public mindshare, combined with Microsoft's exclusivity requirement for
the deals. If you want to be in the business of selling Windows boxes,
you have little choice but to sell *only* windows boxes.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to Microsoft's demands.
Why? Were they somehow forced by MS.
Economically. If they shipped alternatives they would no longe rbe able
to compete price-wize with the competition. Microsoft required them to
ship Windows *exclusively* to get the price break.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
How can they threaten an OEM?
Market the product properly so the public is clamoring for it,
Now you're getting nearer the truth: the public did in fact clamor for
Windows 3.0/3.1.
Yes, Microsoft is good at selling repackaged pig shit to the general
population. It's a talent, I suppose.
Post by DFS
Not because it was so great, but because it was plenty
good enough,
No, it wasn't good enough. That's why people bought Windows 95, because
Microsoft promised them it would be better. It wasn't really, and so
they sold Windows 98 the same way. Then came XP (because the general
population ignored 2000), with the same mantra. They're now old enough
to force the market to upgrade via end-of-lifing a product.
Post by DFS
for users and hardware and software vendors who wrote drivers
and apps for it by the thousands.
Software and hardware vendors had little choice in the matter. They went
kicking and screaming.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
jack up the price to unsellable levels,
What you consider overpriced is very different from what the public
considers overpriced.
Hardly. An OEM can't survive if they have to drop $300 for the operating
system on a $400 computer. They have no choice but to do what is
nessesary for Microsoft to sell them Windows at OEM pricing. They don't
really have an option anyway because the majority of users are locked
into Windows software.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
then offer OEMs a huge price break in
exchange for exclusivity contracts.
Good for them. Smart move, MS.
It's also unethical and choked out superior alternatives. Microsoft has
single-handedly set back the computing industry by 12 years. At least.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Same thing they did with Internet Explorer vs. Netscape.
Now you're just revising history, ie acting the cola fool.
Not at all. Why do you think OEMs didn't ship Netscape with new
computers? Because Microsoft wouldn't sell them Windows at OEM pricing
if they included Netscape.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I'm curious to see what happens in Munich. Hope I don't die before then.
Doubtful. That transition was held back because of the Software
Patents thing, which was recently struck down.
So, 2008 maybe? About when Linux busts through worldwide.
'busts through' is an overstatement. I've said 2008-2009 is when
GNU/Linux will see a veritable explosion in use (as in doubling
marketshare, or so). That doesn't mean Microsoft's grip on the world is
going to crumble overnight.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
I hope you're patient. That could take a while.
Less than 10 years before it'll break Microsoft's market domination
(which doesn't even require 50%). At current rates, of course.
10 years from now? So starting in 2008 and reaching critical mass soon
afterwards and capturing ~ half the market by 2015?
Probably, provided current trends continue.
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
You just don't like paying for it.
I have no problem paying for a superior product. What I have a problem
with is buying the crap typically produced by commercial Windows developers.
Which means you really don't like paying for superior products,
I pay Apple's premium, don't I?
Post by DFS
because it's
widely known the superior apps of their kind exist on the Windows platform -
and often ONLY on the Windows platform.
Not in my opinion. There are *very* few Windows-only apps that are even
worth using. Let alone paying the developers what they think their
product is worth.
Post by DFS
That would be: MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access, MS Project, MS Visio,
Uhh. No. Office is alright on the Mac, only because no decent
alternative runs natively.
Post by DFS
Visual Basic,
Hell no!
Post by DFS
AutoCAD,
I don't do computer aided drafting, so I can't comment.
Post by DFS
3D Studio Max,
Nor 3D modeling.
Post by DFS
TOAD for Oracle,
I'm not an Oracle database administrator.
Post by DFS
Adobe Photoshop (also
on Mac),
Disagree very strongly. IMO, the GIMP is just as good. Though I'm not a
professional in this field so CMYK output isn't important to me. But I
have used Photoshop before.
Post by DFS
and who knows how many hundreds of other business and personal
apps,
How many do you really need?
Post by DFS
and dozens of utilities like SiSoft Sandra,
Dozens of alternatives exist on GNU/Linux.
Post by DFS
plus untold numbers of
games.
There are a few, but most of the games these days are crap.
Post by DFS
Face facts: it's a Windows, Windows, Windows, Windows world.
Not for me. Almost every app I use with any great regularity is fully
cross-platform between all three platforms. I could drop Windows
tomorrow and not suffer a loss of productivity. Though I'd likely get
bored without the games.
Larry Qualig
2005-08-05 13:40:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to Microsoft's demands.
Why? Were they somehow forced by MS.
Economically. If they shipped alternatives they would no longe rbe able to
compete price-wize with the competition. Microsoft required them to ship
Windows *exclusively* to get the price break.
Oddly enough the local Ford dealership isn't allowed to sell Buicks. I was
at Joseph A. Banks a couple of weeks ago and didn't see too many Men's
Warehouse suits in there. Probably wouldn't be able to get a Whopper at
McDonalds either.

Exclusivity isn't new or unique is it?
Linønut
2005-08-05 16:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Oddly enough the local Ford dealership isn't allowed to sell Buicks.
http://www.stokeshondanorth.com/en_US/
8650 Rivers Avenue
North Charleston, SC 29406

http://www.autoseekandsell.com/dsp_dealerinfo.cfm/p/49988/n/Stokes%20Isuzu%20KIA/
Stokes Isuzu KIA
8640 Rivers Avenue
Charleston, South Carolina 29406

http://www.stokesmazdausa.com/en_US/
Stokes Mazda
3570 Ashley Phosphate Road
North Charleston, SC 29418

http://www.stokesvw.com/en_US/
Stokes Volkswagen
3491 Ashley Phosphate Rd
North Charleston, SC 29418

You might want to tell Honda, Isuzu, KIA, Mazda, and Volkswagen about
the nefarious activities of Stokes.
Post by Larry Qualig
Probably wouldn't be able to get a Whopper at McDonalds either.
No, but you can get different flavors of burgers at each place.
Post by Larry Qualig
Exclusivity isn't new or unique is it?
No, but you throw up nice straw man. Thanks!
--
Linux has stones, man!
Larry Qualig
2005-08-05 17:09:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Linønut
Post by Larry Qualig
Oddly enough the local Ford dealership isn't allowed to sell Buicks.
http://www.stokeshondanorth.com/en_US/
8650 Rivers Avenue
North Charleston, SC 29406
http://www.autoseekandsell.com/dsp_dealerinfo.cfm/p/49988/n/Stokes%20Isuzu%20KIA/
Stokes Isuzu KIA
8640 Rivers Avenue
Charleston, South Carolina 29406
http://www.stokesmazdausa.com/en_US/
Stokes Mazda
3570 Ashley Phosphate Road
North Charleston, SC 29418
http://www.stokesvw.com/en_US/
Stokes Volkswagen
3491 Ashley Phosphate Rd
North Charleston, SC 29418
So you do have time to do research after all!

Peter Köhlmann
2005-08-05 16:44:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Qualig
Post by TheLetterK
Post by DFS
Post by TheLetterK
After 3.1, vendors had little choice but concede to Microsoft's demands.
Why? Were they somehow forced by MS.
Economically. If they shipped alternatives they would no longe rbe able
to compete price-wize with the competition. Microsoft required them to
ship Windows *exclusively* to get the price break.
Oddly enough the local Ford dealership isn't allowed to sell Buicks. I was
at Joseph A. Banks a couple of weeks ago and didn't see too many Men's
Warehouse suits in there. Probably wouldn't be able to get a Whopper at
McDonalds either.
Exclusivity isn't new or unique is it?
Oddly enough Ford isn't a monopoly
But keep it on. You do well as MS apologist, since Erik F can't post his
drivel anymore without being shredded
--
Designed for Windows. No user serviceable parts inside. By design
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality of
their software products.
Er...they wrote DOS on contract...as in, their products didn't exist before
they got their monopoly.
Post by DFS
There was never any guarantee anybody would
purchase IBM PCs.
Um, yeah, except for the 90 percent of businesses that were IBM shops, and
all their employees that wanted to be compatible with those businesses,
and...
Post by DFS
There was never any guarantee Windows 3.0 would be a
huge hit.
Huge hit? It was just preventative action to hold off the Mac with the
least amount of GUI needed.
Post by DFS
They teed it up and drove it down the middle. Over and over
for nearly 20 years.
How about, they did the least amount of work necessary and the market
inertia let them coast for years...
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
GreyCloud
2005-08-04 18:20:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
Post by mlw
Post by DFS
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the
market wide open as of 1990.
Well, good thng you are not writing the history books. Microsoft's
monopoly nonsense is well before the 1990s.
What nonsense? The world gave them that monopoly based on the quality of
their software products.
You mean that the world gave them the monopoly due to hyped
up claims of quality by M$.
Biggest scam in history. So, you think DOS, Win3.1, Win95,
and Win98 are quality products??

Guffaw!!!
John Bailo
2005-08-04 05:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the market
wide open as of 1990. Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on PCs then. IBM
marketed PC-DOS. Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen. There was DesqView
and another pretender (Gem?). Then came Windows 3.0 in May of that year.
Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was around 1997 or so that they
effectively owned 95% of the market for GUI OSes.
Well, the world did give it to them initially, but they went to a lot of
length to preserve it. They did that by killing all the major competition
in the applications software.

For example, when Windows 3.0 was about to come out, they delayed delivery
of the API to all major vendors. Lotus was especially hurt by this.
1.2.3. never got their 'Windows' version to market in time, and Excel
decimated them.

Same in each application category. M$ again and again targeted the most
powerful application vendor. Therefore, these vendors could never make
cross platform versions to any other operating system. Also, at that
time, nobody suspected the predatory nature of Microsoft because it was
always "buddying up" with people, just long enough to stab them in the
back. By the time they figured out they'd been had, it was too late, and
there was no room to grow a new competitor.

The success of the Novell suit in LAN systems, and the new suit in the
office products provides proof of this behavior.
--
Texeme Construct
http://www.texeme.com
DFS
2005-08-04 06:13:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Bailo
Post by DFS
That depends on what starting dates you consider. I consider the
market wide open as of 1990. Only MS-DOS was in widespread use on
PCs then. IBM marketed PC-DOS. Windows 2.0 was nowhere to be seen.
There was DesqView and another pretender (Gem?). Then came Windows
3.0 in May of that year. Then Win 3.1, then Win 95. I think it was
around 1997 or so that they effectively owned 95% of the market for
GUI OSes.
Well, the world did give it to them initially, but they went to a lot
of length to preserve it.
Good. Every successful business does this. All of them.
Post by John Bailo
They did that by killing all the major
competition in the applications software.
LOL! Sweet, sweet paranoia.
Post by John Bailo
For example, when Windows 3.0 was about to come out, they delayed
delivery of the API to all major vendors. Lotus was especially hurt
by this.
1.2.3. never got their 'Windows' version to market in time, and Excel
decimated them.
Face facts, Bailo. Excel was just better than 1-2-3.
Post by John Bailo
Same in each application category. M$ again and again targeted the
most powerful application vendor. Therefore, these vendors could
never make cross platform versions to any other operating system.
Also, at that time, nobody suspected the predatory nature of
Microsoft because it was always "buddying up" with people, just long
enough to stab them in the back. By the time they figured out they'd
been had, it was too late, and there was no room to grow a new
competitor.
How do you reconcile this schizoid view with the thousands of successful,
nonMS, Windows apps in the world?
Post by John Bailo
The success of the Novell suit in LAN systems, and the new suit in the
office products provides proof of this behavior.
7
2005-08-03 20:06:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack
CustRatingReview.asp?DEPA=6&Item=N82E16837102153
Post by DFS
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/FeedBack
CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16837102034


Does it run GNU/Linux?

Which version of GPL license is it released under?
Kelsey Bjarnason
2005-08-05 12:09:17 UTC
Permalink
In article <OdVHe.501$***@fe06.lga>, ***@dfs_.com says...

"The people love Windows XP". Allow me to suggest otherwise.

Three different machines, each using XP and the same drivers for a
particular printer. Two of the machines, when spooling to the printer,
default to sending the data as PostScript; the third has defaulted to
PCL5 or some such. Net result, despite all three using the same driver,
installed within minutes of each other, only one of them gets print jobs
done in a reasonable amount of time; the ones which defaulted to
PostScript get the data to the printer quickly enough, but the printer
takes excessively long times to convert that into printed pages.

Leaving aside for a moment the question of why the printer performs so
poorly with PS files, the obvious question is why, given the same OS and
the same driver, it defaulted to two different ways to format the data?

Then, of course, we've got the network. Got a machine we want to join
the domain, so it can access all the goodies. Whoops, no can do; the
machine has XP _home_ on it, which doesn't do domains. Why? No
technical reason whatsoever.

That's Windows for you, though... inconsistency and limitation, for no
reason at all.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...