Linux is ok, since its free, but how about a OS that saves you money?

[isitcomputing]

True, and his move to keep the rights to his product and on sell it to
any other buyer was brilliant

 

[Rick]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:01:18 +0200, kenny wrote:

Top posting fix. And the top posting say a lot about you...

Oh yeah....how about access?

.... I don't need it. Most people don't need it. The onse that do need a
real relational database have plenty to chosse from, and OO.o has Base, as
well as access to other DBMs.

Why then are so many buying office and love it,

Because some people actually do love it. Others are ignorant. Others use
what they are told to use...

when OO is out there for free?

The overwhelming majority of computer users have never heard of Open
Office.

OO has many problems.... perhaps one day it will make it there. I think
its a good effort. But its not the best.

It is very much more than 'good enough' for the majority of 'office' users.

If linux shapes up and becomes more user friendly, and programs start
being compiled for that platform, I will be the first to use it.

You really do enjoy looking ignorant (stupid?), don't you.

I dont
care what an OS is called. I just want to create... and I need the tools
that will get me the results I want as fast as possible.

Then go use the OS that suits your needs.

 

[Al Klein]

***Disclamer*** I am not bashing linux, I am not a troll.

Kenny, you're right, you're not a troll, you're just a kid who has a
very limited view of the world. The way you yhink you see history
isn't the way it really happened.

When you grow up, and have a broader perspective, you'll realize how
embarrassed you should have been this year.

And your teachers should be ashamed of the fraud they commit each time
they cash their pay checks.

 

[Rosco]

Al Klein cried out

Ok, maybee I am speaking out my @$$ but oh well this is my opinion.
After messing with linux for a few days then SHREDDING the cd I will
gladly stand behind Windows anyday. To me windows is by far the
easiest OS to use and run for the AVERAGE, EVERYDAY user. Not some
super geek trying to run five videos, fade effects, and burn two
cd's while watching tv, on a second monitor. COME ON! Put down the
hotpockets and get out of your moms basement. Corporations choose
Windows XP because it is what most people know and its simple. The
hardest task for a windows user to preform is so shut the computer
down because it includes clicking start instead of stop. Windows is
great you can take a blank HD pop in a windows cd and 20 mins later
you have a working copy up to snuff with no tweaking required with
little to no user interevention. I was a die hard mac fan before win
95 then I made the switch. Give linux to a five year old they are
likely to cry, give windows to them and they can blow you away,
enough said. Now stop with your BWAHAHA sh*t and get a f**king life!

On a side note, the gaming system shirts, yeah they were NEVER
fashionable.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

if you can see clearly like I do you can see the truth plain and
simple.

I just wanted to see that again.

 

[Mitch]

Of course.. you could even do that with a lesser computer... or one called a
word processor was a devoted machine.

Yet you ignore global compatibility.

Everyone knows windows compatible formats, everyone knows SOME the tech
jargon, and you are most possible sure that if you post a file someone will
be able to open it and run it.

Sure, but ONLY because of the apps you are using. It's never about OS,
it's always about the apps.
Look at networks and the Internet; people don't have to post a text
file in various formats by platform -- they need to post it in a format
that people can easily open. If you buy the very newest MS Office and
use a format that is proprietary to that new version (which is a very
likely event in the near future), you wouldn't post a file you wanted
everyone to open in that format. You'd use a standard or open format
like TXT or PDF or JPG or GIF.

Imagine now that without windows you would
have 15 (say) different platforms, each having its own variations of file
types. It would not be a global language anymore.

Never has been. There are many different platforms, and those platforms
all really do open all standard file types. You are confusing yourself
about COMMON files and file types. There is no global language. There
is no global coding or programming.

Linux needed to have
openoffice for example that made sure it COULD open DOC files because MS
made doc a standard.

DOC is not a standard in any way. It is a COMMON TYPE, in the same way
that it is merely common to use Windows or the MS Office package.
Standards are open to use by anyone and are always the same kind of
file. Like JPEG or plain text.

Its not just good enough for the masses.

Maybe so, maybe so.

 

[Mitch]

It takes *way* more than "luck and clever marketing" not only to
see an opening, but more importantly to understand what that
opening can actually *mean* if you think big. What Gates did was
to realise that, and then to throw everything -- fair and foul --
to corner the market.

If Steve Jobs had had anywhere near the same foresight, he'd have
realised that he should have licenced his OS and cornered half of
the full market, rather than remaining a control-freak on his
hardware and winding up with (5%? 10%?) of the potential market.

Perhaps. But Gates was in a totally different position, too.

Gates was positioned (because of the IBM deal) to take advantage of his
position when the architecture opened up to clones. It gave him a
unique opportunity to lead the hardware industry by deciding what
technologies would be adopted and which ones would be allowed to work
under the DOS system everybody was expecting to have to use. That's a
social example of a positive feedback loop. Wanting to use clone
hardware, DOS is common on that, which requires buying more DOS
hardware, which further pushes people into the common OS.

And that's why you can't say he was better than everyone else at doing
this -- only he had this opportunity!

That's also hinting at why "kenny's" comments don't hold water. MS-DOS,
and Windows after it, do not keep power in the industry by encouraging
development of technologies. They force those developers to work within
limits that Microsoft sets and decides upon.
Remember Microsoft deciding whether USB would be supported? It was a
fully-developed technology with clear advantages to both users and
manufacturers, but Microsoft considered keeping it off the field.
TrueType, PostScript, even the mouse, for goodness' sake. Microsoft
reduces the industry, it doesn't make it improve or grow. Everything
else does.

 

[Mitch]

True, and his move to keep the rights to his product and on sell it to
any other buyer was brilliant

Who?

Which product?

"on sell it to any other buyer?"

 

[Mitch]

But the result of all this is something you cannot wave.

What? Like a flag?
Or did you mean WAIVE, like something you cannot ignore?

It's certainly true that the computer industry cannot ignore Windows or
Microsoft.

 

[Mitch]

To me windows is by far the
easiest OS to use and run for the AVERAGE, EVERYDAY user.

You mean one that has already learned or used Windows? Naturally!
For anybody else, I'd strongly suggest Mac OS. It's MUCH easier, much
simpler, much more suited to regular people.

Corporations choose
Windows XP because it is what most people know and its simple.

It is common, that doesn't make it a good choice.
You think corporations choose an OS because of employees they don't
already have? Nonsense. They continue using Windows once they have
invested in employees, software, and hardware that have been using it,
but that's the opposite of what you said.
I strongly disagree that it is simple. It's anything but simple. Try
explaining the various steps to someone who doesn't know anything about
computers, and you'll quickly learn that there are enormous issues to
learn and be aware of that have nothing to do with simplicity.

The
hardest task for a windows user to preform is so shut the computer
down because it includes clicking start instead of stop. Windows is
great you can take a blank HD pop in a windows cd and 20 mins later
you have a working copy up to snuff with no tweaking required with
little to no user interevention.

Working copy of what? no tweaking or user intervention?
If you just mean formatting the drive, every OS makes that very fast
and quite simple.
You can't be talking about building a startup volume in Windows -- you
have enormous driver issues, and you'd be limited to using it with only
the same hardware, and you certainly have 'user intervention' when he
has to pull it out and move it to another machine!

I was a die hard mac fan before win
95 then I made the switch. Give linux to a five year old they are
likely to cry, give windows to them and they can blow you away,
enough said.

Bull. No way you are talking about an uninformed computer user. Windows
isn't nearly clean and simple enough for a five-year-old to do anything
meaningful. Mac far far outstrips Windows in being simple enough for an
uninformed user, and I see no reason two or three of the Linux distros
wouldn't be just as easy as Windows for a real newcomer.

 

[Mitch]

Not with XP you don't - M$ finally caught up.

You're kidding -- other Windows machines can use a remote printer even
if they have no driver for it?
I'm not asking if Windows usually loads a driver automatically -- I'm
asking if it totally doesn't need any driver at all to use it.
Here's a way to know that -- if you removed all (non-Microsoft written)
printer drivers, would it really still know how to use a printer
connected to the same network?


I think it was funny you mentioned consistent application appearance as
an issue that is better under Windows. It's taken years to convince
Microsoft and many other publishers that consistency was even a virtue,
and I wouldn't call it consistent today at all.

 

[Craig]

I just wanted to see that again.

I just wanted to relish this, once more.

-Craig

 

[Mitch]

Oh yeah....how about access?

I think you mean Microsoft Access, and I'll think you'll find that
Access no longer has as strong a following.

Why then are so many buying office and love it, when OO is out there for
free?

I can tell you that simple superiority of the product doesn't determine
which one sells better or which one becomes more common.

OO has many problems.... perhaps one day it will make it there. I think its
a good effort. But its not the best.

Neither is MS Office. Except perhaps Excel -- certainly a great
program, even if most people don't need it at all.

If linux shapes up and becomes more user friendly, and programs start being
compiled for that platform, I will be the first to
use it. I dont care what an OS is called. I just want to create...
and I need the tools that will get me the results I want as fast as
possible.

Then you need an OS that you rarely have to think about at all, which
gets out of the way of apps ALL of the time, and which doesn't require
maintenance or monitoring or repair or even consideration for any
reason at any time. Now that would be a good OS in both design and
function.
That's most definitely not in Windows' future. Their best hope is to
minimize the problems to getting there.

 

[Zitty]

You're kidding -- other Windows machines can use a remote printer even
if they have no driver for it?

Using XP on the server and the remote PC's yes - install drivers on server,
printer appears on remote PC's network - print to it and away it goes. No
messing.

I'm not asking if Windows usually loads a driver automatically -- I'm
asking if it totally doesn't need any driver at all to use it.
Here's a way to know that -- if you removed all (non-Microsoft written)
printer drivers, would it really still know how to use a printer
connected to the same network?

Honestly, I've no idea if XP automatically loads the driver over the network
to the remote PC or what, all I know is it works - even with non MS written
drivers.

I think it was funny you mentioned consistent application appearance as
an issue that is better under Windows. It's taken years to convince
Microsoft and many other publishers that consistency was even a virtue,
and I wouldn't call it consistent today at all.

Appearance is only one part, although having 12pt Times Roman show at 14pt
in one application and 6pt in another and 24pt in another doesn't exactly
help. Not having to spend ages trolling through dozens of menus and option
panels trying to find how to set something simple like the fontsize is
another. Having consistant shortcut keys for things like copy and paste is
another... I could go on; but if you've ever used Linux you'll know exactly
what its like.

Windows *has* been fairly consistant, although just recently though what
with more skinned apps. and the NET framework its started to go off the
rails again.. but even then most of the time you have a reasonably good idea
when to look for option "a", which is more than can be said for Linux apps.

 

[Mark Warner]

***Disclamer*** I am not bashing linux, I am not a troll.

A misspelling, and two fibs. I don't expect the Microsoft software to
catch the fibs, but you'd think the spell checker would work...

I don't see why there's all this either/or shit. Me, I'm typing this in
Thunderbird, running MEPIS, on a quad-boot (W2K, MEPIS, Ubuntu, Xandros)
machine. I like 'em all. Windows is my main/default OS, simply because
that's what I know. But if I were starting from scratch today, the
Xandros or MEPIS installs would probably be what I'd concentrate on,
simply from an out-of-the-box usability standpoint. My biggest problem
with Linux is that I still *think* in Windows. But I'm workin' on it...

 

[kenny]

Keep working on it... in the meanwhile other people have no interest in
learning
much about computers.. they just want their work done.

The best computer OS will be one, that you are not aware that it is a
computer OS.

 

[kenny]

Microsoft can try to limit all it wants...

However they have opened the pandora box to the world, and nothing
can be stopped now.

 

[7]

Yes that's true, insofar as you need something like a 1GHz PC with 512MB
of ram for it to be usable (although still slower than Windows). Its a
shame that drag-and-drop isn't working properly though (especially with
non-kde apps), and that if I use something like BEEP media player then
whenever I double click on a mp3 file the little 'loading' bouncing cursor
and hourglass-taskbar appears for 30 seconds EVEN THOUGH the file is
loaded and playing.. I could go on, but I won't as I'm sure your fully
aware of how all the stupid little features of the different window
managers don't cooperate...

Sounds like you are describing a windope expeeh machine
infected with viri and spyware bots.

Have you ever tried that?? That of *all* things shows just how *BAD* linux
apps can be - its a complete and utter pain to setup, get working and make
something approaching stable, and even if you do (I gave up trying), it
still 'runs' like its on a 386.

Well now anyone can burst your astroturfing windope lie bubble.
Try and downloading some 300+ livecds from
http://www.livecdlist.com
I mean, you could load DSL for example on to 128Mb RAM and run it so
fast, things come up before you finish your second click!!

Same applies to the rest of your repetitive astroturfing lies.
Everyone is free to test, install and modify source code
without having to pay or having to listen to micoshaft funded
astroturfers posting lies on the internet.
Free and fully functional LiveCDs are something that micoshaft
cannot offer unfortunately because they haven't got as far ahead
as Linux has in the technology envelope. Windopes is legacy
crap that doesn't cut it any more.

Since when?
Those things are lightening quick compared to windopes.

Really? perhaps you have the time to tweak the living daylights out of
your Linux setup - but in my and everyone else's experience the desktop
part of Linux is pathetically slow compared to Windows.

I can play 6 videos overlaid on top of each other
in translucent mode at different distances in 3D windows
the flicks and rotates in real time with mouse movement
using Big Linux.
Windopes can at best play one video.

Yours may be only able to only play one, I can play as many as I like. I
remember seeing a 1.5GHz system being sold on a TV shoping channel a few
years ago and they where playing 10 video's concurrently to show how
'powerful' the system was. I could do the same on my 800MHz system I had
at the time and had to demonstrate it to a friend to show that it was
nothing special.

BWAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!
Are you claiming you know how to use a computer?

I'm not claiming anything. You are the one bragging about what you use
your PC for....

Are you claiming you know how to use a computer?
It sounds like you shouldn't be allowed near a computer.

or perhaps I should.. seeing as if *I* have problems with setting up Linux
to work with my hardware, how the hell are other people who would hardly
know how to do more than point-and-click supposed to get it working?

[repetitive crap snipped]

 

[7]

Oh yeah....how about access?

Open Office is free to download and has package called Base
which is access equivalent.
http://www.openoffice.org
And when you run it, you can open documents that micoshaft can't
open like its own legacy formats!
Of course you are free to try it out, there is nothing to pay EVER!
So you know, companies could wait for the BSA to come knocking
and fine every admin personally as well the company huge amounts of
money for license violations, or the company can just abandon
windope crap altogether and switch to Open Office and avoid the
threat of a BSA audit.

Why then are so many buying office and love it, when OO is out there for
free?

In other words, you are an astroturfer astroturfing on behalf of
micoshaft asking asking micoshafty sales questions on open
internet channels.

Well, listen up asstroturfer,
People are free to choose whatever they want.
You trying to be persuasive in forcing people to buy
windope crap may have worked a long time ago when
there were no alternatives. But today there is choice, and millions
upon millions of users have made the choice for open source
and free software. There are huge developer communities
that are funded by its users to make alternatives where
your precious micoshaft can't cut it no more.

OO has many problems.... perhaps one day it will make it there. I think
its a good effort. But its not the best.

It is the best.
It works on so many more platforms than windopes can ever hope
to catch up on now.

If linux shapes up and becomes more user friendly, and programs start
being compiled for that platform, I will be the first to
use it. I dont care what an OS is called. I just want to create...
and I need the tools that will get me the results I want as fast as
possible.

Taken straight out of the micoshaft astroturfing campaign book.
Try Mepis for example and see how much of a lie these things are!
http://www.livecdlist.com
What I dislike most about asstroturfers is they are funded
by money stolen from charities. The usa seems to have made
charities working for donors acceptable allowing them to steal
money from cradles and kids mouths. Big business has made sure
that charities don't work for charitable causes, they only work
for money, and for donors, to hide the money and hide the donors.

 

[Harvey Van Sickle]

It takes *way* more than "luck and clever marketing" not only
to see an opening, but more importantly to understand what
that opening can actually *mean* if you think big. What
Gates did was to realise that, and then to throw everything
-- fair and foul -- to corner the market.

If Steve Jobs had had anywhere near the same foresight, he'd
have realised that he should have licenced his OS and
cornered half of the full market, rather than remaining a
control-freak on his hardware and winding up with (5%? 10%?)
of the potential market.

Perhaps. But Gates was in a totally different position, too.

Gates was positioned (because of the IBM deal) to take
advantage of his position when the architecture opened up to
clones.[/QUOTE]

That's my point: Gates wasn't just "positioned (because of the IBM
deal)" -- he *positioned himself* with the IBM deal. That took
foresight.

It gave him a unique opportunity to lead the hardware
industry by deciding what technologies would be adopted and
which ones would be allowed to work under the DOS system
everybody was expecting to have to use.

Precisely: that's the foresight bit that I was talking about -- he
didn't just stumble into that "unique opportunity"; he *created*
that unique opportunity.

-snip-

And that's why you can't say he was better than everyone else
at doing this -- only he had this opportunity!

Not "better", just "smarter" -- because he saw the opportunity, and
proceeded to corner it.