OEM vs Retail XP Pro

[charles]

Just because something is complicated doesn't mean that it requires
support. That is a longstanding fallacy of the IT industry.


I'd rather have something that works out of the box.

Every built item requires support. Anything made by one entity and used
by any other needs some kind of mechanism to ensure it keeps working
and/or the user can continue to process. Read any of the fancy words you
like: feed loops, infrastructures, etc.

The availability of support for Linux in just about any category doesn't
come anywhere near the support available for my coffee machine.

One of Microsoft's key wins was the ability to make support for their
products the responsibility of someone else who usually made a
reasonably good business out of doing it.

 

[Ruel Smith]

Notice all the palava is about user friendly GUI's the real power and
flexibility is in the command line (for those who chose to use it). The
thing that I like about Linux is the "Do what YOU want" attitude and the
community is just that, a community. I really detest this locking you
into using software and closed standards that go hand in hand with
windows. Don't get me wrong I'm not a windows hater by any means I like
to think I'm very open minded on the computer front I actively use
Windows, Linux and UNIX on a daily basis.

At first, I was a GUI junkie, but now I'm liking the commandline. With
Linux, you can have it any way you choose.

People that detract from Linux just don't understand it. It gives you
freedom and choice. You choose what flavor you want, how you want to
interact with it, and the degree of technical difficulty involved. It can
be molded and shaped to any way YOU want it. It's highly configurable and
customizable. Windows doesn't even come close.

I still love KDE. KDE's usability surpassed Windows a long time ago.
Microsoft was even caught checking out the KDE booth and a big Linux
convention, recently... )

 

[Ruel Smith]

That sounds about right.


Besides hardware hype which they don't understand, for most
personal computer users, software is the motivation for choosing a
Windows-based desktop computer.

Have you ever been to a store that sells software? All you have to
do is open your eyes.

By spreading misinformation, you damage your own cause.

I'm not spreading misinformation. There was a recent article that talked
about Konqueror's ability to be seen as IE on Windows XP, and the fact that
prior Linux marketshare information was gather by determining hits on a
certain website. They estimated that as much as 13% of home desktop
computers are either running Linux full time, dual booting it, or slipping
in a Knoppix disk occasionally. Given all the buzz about Linux far
exceeding the buzz about the Mac, it's very believable. Other statistics
have pointed to Linux having 3-5% marketshare, and still outpacing the Mac.

Statistics are something that you have to take with a grain of salt. It
depends on who's conducting the survey, who's sponsoring it, and how the
data is collected.

Here's a link to show you how Konqueror changes its browser identity for
sebsites:

http://home.fuse.net/ruelsmith/SnapshotBrowserIdent.png

You can see how website hits cannot possibly be accurate.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Every built item requires support.

My television, microwave, washing machine, refrigerator, air
conditioner, radio, tape recorder, and endless other "built items" prove
this not to be the case. They never require support; they just work.
Vast technical-support organizations are a pox limited almost entirely
to the computer industry, mainly because computers are hastily and
incompetently designed.

There is a _very gradual_ trend towards computer products that truly
require no support, but at the glacial pace of that trend today, one
wonders how many centuries may be required to reach the ultimate goal.

The availability of support for Linux in just about any category doesn't
come anywhere near the support available for my coffee machine.

I'll believe that. Worse yet, your coffee machine doesn't require
anywhere near the support that Linux requires. So you get the worst of
both worlds with Linux.

Other computers products represent only a slight improvement, though.

One of Microsoft's key wins was the ability to make support for their
products the responsibility of someone else who usually made a
reasonably good business out of doing it.

A still more important achievement is developing products that--for the
great majority of users in the great majority of cases--never require
any support.

About 95% of the support load is generated by about 5% of the user base.

 

[JD]

charles writes:




My television, microwave, washing machine, refrigerator, air
conditioner, radio, tape recorder, and endless other "built items" prove
this not to be the case. They never require support; they just work.
Vast technical-support organizations are a pox limited almost entirely
to the computer industry, mainly because computers are hastily and
incompetently designed.

There is a _very gradual_ trend towards computer products that truly
require no support, but at the glacial pace of that trend today, one
wonders how many centuries may be required to reach the ultimate goal.




I'll believe that. Worse yet, your coffee machine doesn't require
anywhere near the support that Linux requires. So you get the worst of
both worlds with Linux.

Other computers products represent only a slight improvement, though.




A still more important achievement is developing products that--for the
great majority of users in the great majority of cases--never require
any support.

About 95% of the support load is generated by about 5% of the user base.

75% of all statistics are made up

 

[John Doe]

Mxsmanic wrote:

The difference between your home appliances and a personal computer
is complexity and interactivity. A computer is immeasurably more
complex. Many users constantly configure and change things in a
computer.

I'm not saying there should be many bugs, but it does follow a rule.
The more users, the more likely you will find defects. That is true
for ordinary products as well as mainstream software.

 

[charles]

My television, microwave, washing machine, refrigerator, air
conditioner, radio, tape recorder, and endless other "built items" prove
this not to be the case. They never require support; they just work.

I guess the Maytag repairman is really lonely in your area.

All of these "built items" have a host of support infrastructure that
you are taking so much for granted that they seem invisible to you.

And I won't even classify the huge investment in alternatives and
competitors and their sales forces everywhere as part of that support
infrastructure although I should.

 

[charles]

A still more important achievement is developing products that--for the
great majority of users in the great majority of cases--never require
any support.

Your statement above is absolute nonsense.

 

[JD]

Mxsmanic wrote:




You're lying. Everyone who sits down to a computer for the very first time
is clueless where to begin.




Yes, but they are very different. To view files on a Mac, you have to open
the finder. To view files on Windows, you open IE. To view files in KDE on
Linux, you open Konqueror. They may be the same on the surface, but they're
not.




You didn't read they rest, did you?

You want SuSE for free? ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse
Mandrake (Mandriva)?




KDE, Gnome... All from the Linux movement.




KDE was the first GUI that was full-featured for *nix. Gnome came later. KDE
was released in 1997 for the first time.

http://events.kde.org/info/kastle/presentations/kastle-history/html/slide_2.html

Most of the software you'll use in FreeBSD or Linux in a GUI environment
will either be derived from Gnome or KDE. Those environments, including all
the applications like KDevelop, KOffice, etc. are all originally developed
for Linux.

Notice all the palava is about user friendly GUI's the real power and
flexibility is in the command line (for those who chose to use it). The
thing that I like about Linux is the "Do what YOU want" attitude and the
community is just that, a community. I really detest this locking you
into using software and closed standards that go hand in hand with
windows. Don't get me wrong I'm not a windows hater by any means I like
to think I'm very open minded on the computer front I actively use
Windows, Linux and UNIX on a daily basis.

 

[JD]

Well, I'm glad it 'works' (pun) for you but Linux doesn't offer me
anything, as a work machine, to make up for the risks involved. For
example, I regularly need to exchange word documents and there's no
assurance of compatibility like using the real thing.

That's what happens when you use closed standards .. there are plenty of
converters for doc files .. then again how hard is it to export as plain
text, HTML or even PDF .. better yet use a cross platform office suit,
star office (commercial), OpenOffice etc. You can even run MS office
under Wine well not at the moment because Microsoft realise that it is a
threat and have actively Designed there "Microsoft Genuine Advantage"
program to search for it, and who said they were anti-competitive. I
know what someone's going to say "But they are just looking after there
software" well I have to disagree, MS Office is a separate Program its
not part of Windows (altho it is designed to work with it) why shouldn't
someone be able to buy it and run it under Linux if they chose ? after
all they just spent $300 odd quid on it !

 

[John Doe]

Mxsmanic wrote:

That sounds about right.

Your statistics are waaay off. You must be quoting the
statistics given some time ago based on web page hits. If you
had any clue at all, you'd know that Konqueror has the ability
to identify itself as another browser, which is typically done
to bypass browser identification checks by websites. Those
statistics are very, very skewed...

Besides hardware hype which they don't understand, for most
personal computer users, software is the motivation for choosing a
Windows-based desktop computer.

Have you ever been to a store that sells software? All you have to
do is open your eyes.

By spreading misinformation, you damage your own cause.

 

[Mxsmanic]

That's what happens when you use closed standards ...

Sometimes those are the only suitable standards available.

... there are plenty of converters for doc files .. then again how
hard is it to export as plain text, HTML or even PDF ...

It's not difficult, but it's not necessarily useful. If both
correspondents use Word, and use the various features specific to Word
that are incorporated into Word files, then the document must stay in
Word format, not HTML or PDF.

... better yet use a cross platform office suit,
star office (commercial), OpenOffice etc.

That's not better at all if your correspondents are using Word.

You can even run MS office under Wine ...

Why bother, when you can run it so much more easily and reliably under
Windows?

... well not at the moment because Microsoft realise that it is a
threat and have actively Designed there "Microsoft Genuine Advantage"
program to search for it, and who said they were anti-competitive.

See above. Why run a different operating system to run Windows
applications when you can just run Windows?

Linux fans don't seem to realize that ordinary users are not trying to
find ways to run Linux at all costs; they just want to get the job done.
And if their correspondents use mostly Word on Windows, these users will
use Word on Windows as well. They have no deep emotional need to use
any non-Microsoft operating system. They're about as passionate about
their operating systems as they are about their washing machines.

I know what someone's going to say "But they are just looking after there
software" well I have to disagree, MS Office is a separate Program its
not part of Windows (altho it is designed to work with it) why shouldn't
someone be able to buy it and run it under Linux if they chose ?

Why would anyone so choose? Why not make it run under AS/400? Why
won't X clients run on Windows NT?

 

[Mxsmanic]

Your statistics are waaay off. You must be quoting the statistics given some
time ago based on web page hits.

I'm quoting daily unique visitor totals on Web sites.

If you had any clue at all, you'd know that Konqueror has the ability
to identify itself as another browser, which is typically done to bypass
browser identification checks by websites.

And some other browsers can pretend to be Linux, too.

Those statistics are very, very skewed...

See above.

 

[Mxsmanic]

I'm not spreading misinformation. There was a recent article that talked
about Konqueror's ability to be seen as IE on Windows XP, and the fact that
prior Linux marketshare information was gather by determining hits on a
certain website. They estimated that as much as 13% of home desktop
computers are either running Linux full time, dual booting it, or slipping
in a Knoppix disk occasionally.

That recent article is fantasy. I look at the actual numbers first,
before I read a random author of a random article. There is absolutely
no way that 13% of the user base out there is running Linux, even
occasionally. A figure of 0.3% (one in 300 users) sounds much more
plausible.

Given all the buzz about Linux far exceeding the buzz about the Mac ...

Buzz is not the same as user base. The Mac user base eclipses the Linux
user base, with or without "buzz." For every Linux user out there,
there are about 16 Mac users.

... it's very believable.

To whom? Linux isn't even a blip on the radar, except in the
imaginations of Linux fans.

Other statistics have pointed to Linux having 3-5% marketshare, and
still outpacing the Mac.

Why believe those statistics if you're unwilling to believe numbers
taken directly from the Net?

Statistics are something that you have to take with a grain of salt.

Then why aren't you doing so? You're willing to believe "other
statistics" and an unspecified "recent article" that supports what you
wish to believe, but you won't believe the actual numbers coming through
the logs.

It depends on who's conducting the survey, who's sponsoring it, and how the
data is collected.
Yes.

Here's a link to show you how Konqueror changes its browser identity for
sebsites:

Browser identity and OS identity are separate.

You can see how website hits cannot possibly be accurate.

They can be inaccurate in many ways, not just in ways that disfavor
Linux.

 

[Mxsmanic]

You're lying.

No, I'm not.

Everyone who sits down to a computer for the very first time
is clueless where to begin.

I wasn't. I had learned about computers long before actually sitting in
front of one to use it.

Yes, but they are very different. To view files on a Mac, you have to open
the finder. To view files on Windows, you open IE. To view files in KDE on
Linux, you open Konqueror. They may be the same on the surface, but they're
not.

The similarities are more than skin deep. Mac OS X has UNIX underneath,
and file operations are very similar across all of these operating
systems.

You didn't read they rest, did you?

Once I saw the price tags, I knew they weren't free.

You want SuSE for free? ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse
Mandrake (Mandriva)?

I don't want any of them now.

KDE, Gnome... All from the Linux movement.

Most UNIX systems are not running these.

Interesting that you refer to it as a "movement."

KDE was the first GUI that was full-featured for *nix. Gnome came later. KDE
was released in 1997 for the first time.

There's a lot more to the UNIX world than KDE or Gnome. Most UNIX
systems are not running either of these, since they are just servers.
And UNIX had distinctive X environments of its own long before Linux
fans tried to ape Windows in their GUIs.

Most of the software you'll use in FreeBSD or Linux in a GUI environment
will either be derived from Gnome or KDE.

Nothing of what I'm running on my FreeBSD systems has anything to do
with Linux, and I don't run GUIs on my FreeBSD machines.

Those environments, including all
the applications like KDevelop, KOffice, etc. are all originally developed
for Linux.

I don't use any of those, and neither do most other UNIX installations.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Notice all the palava is about user friendly GUI's the real power and
flexibility is in the command line (for those who chose to use it).

Yes. I run my FreeBSD machines through SSH sessions, mostly.

The thing that I like about Linux is the "Do what YOU want" attitude
and the community is just that, a community.

I'm not really into social clubs. I consider computers to be tools, not
toys (most of the time).

I really detest this locking you
into using software and closed standards that go hand in hand with
windows.

They you must detest Linux as well, since no other "movement" tries so
hard to look like Windows. Dyed-in-the-wool UNIX users don't try to
make their GUIs walk and talk like Windows; in fact, they often don't
use GUIs at all. The same is obviously true for Mac users, and for uses
of many other operating systems. Only Linux is a wannabe Windows.

Don't get me wrong I'm not a windows hater by any means I like
to think I'm very open minded on the computer front I actively use
Windows, Linux and UNIX on a daily basis.

I use UNIX and Windows daily. I haven't found a use for Linux, but I
have nothing against it.

 

[Mxsmanic]

At first, I was a GUI junkie, but now I'm liking the commandline. With
Linux, you can have it any way you choose.

And with UNIX as well.

People that detract from Linux just don't understand it.

Linux is in many ways a solution looking for a problem. Its main reason
for existence is a community of people who hate Microsoft and yet don't
know any other environment. So they spend their time spitting at
Microsoft even as they work hard to make their own adopted OS (Linux)
look as much like Windows as possible.

It gives you freedom and choice.

Unfortunately it doesn't give you reliability, compatibility, or ease of
use.

You choose what flavor you want ...

I long ago discovered that just choosing a base OS was time-consuming
and complicated enough; having 100 flavors of the _same_ OS is a
disadvantage to anyone except those who spend their lives twiddling with
the OS (as opposed to doing real work).

... how you want to
interact with it, and the degree of technical difficulty involved. It can
be molded and shaped to any way YOU want it.

I guess my point still isn't getting across. The vast majority of
computer users in thise world do not care. They don't want to choose
interactions, difficulty levels, or flavors. They just want to flip a
switch, do what they need to do, then flip the switch again and go on
with the rest of their lives.

It's highly configurable and customizable. Windows doesn't even come close.

People don't want configurable and customizable, they want something
that just works.

I still love KDE. KDE's usability surpassed Windows a long time ago.
Hardly.

Microsoft was even caught checking out the KDE booth and a big Linux
convention, recently... )

Is "Microsoft" some sort of giant alien, or is it a company with tens of
thousands of employees?

 

[Mxsmanic]

While this is still true to some extent, it's mostly old outdated info. You
can setup the majority of your system with SuSE or Mandrake Linux without
ever editing a single configuration file or using the commandline. I say
the majority because I'm sure there are obscurities that still need to be
addressed that way. However, an average Linux user will never have to do it
with those distros. They use control panels that are very similar to a
Windows/Macintosh environment to set it all up, now.

So why not just run Windows or a Mac?

Again, you don't need to use the commandline anymore.

Need to? The command line is the _preferred_ way to do many things on
computer systems, if possible. GUIs are extremely awkward to use for
many functions.

 

[Mxsmanic]

The difference between your home appliances and a personal computer
is complexity and interactivity.

And design decisions, most of which favor engineers in the case of
computers, and end users in the case of appliances.

A computer is immeasurably more
complex. Many users constantly configure and change things in a
computer.

No, most users never configure or change anything. They run it
essentially as it came out of the box.

I'm not saying there should be many bugs, but it does follow a rule.
The more users, the more likely you will find defects. That is true
for ordinary products as well as mainstream software.

It's not true for the appliances I mentioned.

 

[Mxsmanic]

I guess the Maytag repairman is really lonely in your area.

What Maytag repairman?

All of these "built items" have a host of support infrastructure that
you are taking so much for granted that they seem invisible to you.

No, they don't. They are designed to work without support, and they do.

And I won't even classify the huge investment in alternatives and
competitors and their sales forces everywhere as part of that support
infrastructure although I should.

There isn't any support structure.