M$ did help SCO sue IBM about Linux

[Vampiel]

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...8915_tc119.htm

those dirty rotten little money hungry thieves, they did jump start the lawsuit

[bob05]

Wow, that doesn't sound good. But I guarantee that it will take more than 10+ years for Windows to lose any dominance. It is heavily embedded in the computers of people all around the world, and why would the average Joe want anything to do with Linux, if all he's used is Windows? Plus, Linux right now only has OpenGL as a descent API, and not even all OpenGL games are ported to Linux anyway.

[_Mystical_Night]

it would take a super OS to topple microsoft

what i mean by super is that it would have to do the following


1 = Make itself compatible with all windows software and if possible make itself compatible with linux and apple to eliminate any competition

2 = make itself faster then windows

3 = improve security better then windows already has

4 = offer an easy interface like windows without violateing any copyrights for makeing it look too similar to windows

etc etc ... you get the feeling ...

[Billforce]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by _Mystical_Night
[B]it would take a super OS to topple microsoft

what i mean by super is that it would have to do the following


1 = Make itself compatible with all windows software and if possible make itself compatible with linux and apple to eliminate any competition

2 = make itself faster then windows

3 = improve security better then windows already has

4 = offer an easy interface like windows without violateing any copyrights for makeing it look too similar to windows

What a HOOT! MS actually STOLE the whole Windows concept and operation from Jobs and Apple and didn't even try to hide it.
I have no repect for thieves.

[_Mystical_Night]

yeah but they basicly have a monopoly running in the pc software world ... most of the software is for windows only or in rare cases windows/mac only

[Vampiel]

They seem invurnable now.

The reason why they are so dominent is b/c of compadibilty and price. The Mac's are compadible with pretty much any software you would ever need (games are still a bit iffy, but they are coming along), but their price is much higher. Linux is not compadible with enough programs and it is not as easy to use as windows. Seeing as to how alot of large corp. are looking more and more at Linux that makes M$ nervous.

If you could make Linux easier to install and use (if you have used a Linux GUI, you know the hard part is getting it to work, buts its fairly easy to use once you know the basic's just like windows), plus make it compadible with everything (not to mention China sponsering it) then it would pose a real threat to M$.

[DocEvi1]

You don't need to offer a OS which is similar to Windows, you just need to offer a OS which decent. I use Red Hat9 at Uni and although I'm slowly getting used to it, I hate having to fiddle with it to make it to my liking.

I like Windows, I like the layout, I like the look, I like the inbuilt programs, I like the support, I like the availability of programs... I like the fact that most of the software is relatively stable...

Linux, seems to be a technical mess. Until they make a frontend that is both powerful enough for users like me and you, and a interface that is easy and accesible for users like me and you, MS will stand head and shoulders above the competition.

There is nothing wrong with protecting your interests, and while as monopoly's appear a bad thing, imagine the problems you will have if many more OS's take to the market, we already have 3 which are completely incompatible (Linux, Windows, Mac OS), I don't want any more!

[rusty4x4]

"Linux, seems to be a technical mess. Until they make a frontend that is both powerful enough for users like me and you, and a interface that is easy and accesible for users like me and you, ..."

I disagree. The installations for Linux are far superior (read: easier) to those available 3 years ago, and X-Windows is a very capable GUI.

Linux's level of functionality is quite high. But the simple truth is this: Linux is not for everyone. Mastery of the command line is essential, and this takes time, determination, and curiosity.

I think if you give your RH experience some time, you'll discover that Windows aims to mold the perfect User, while Linux is the school for Administrators.

"...MS will stand head and shoulders above the competition."

To me, this latest revelation amplifies what the Department of Justice has proven: predatory business practices will drive the competition out. it worked against Netscape, and those innumerable unnamed third-party software providers whose livelihood got obliterated because MS incorporated a "feature" into Windows. If this is the way to be "head and shoulders" about the competition, then MS should be confronted at every turn.

"[B]it would take a super OS to topple microsoft "

Why deliberately try to topple anyone? This is where MS is making a huge mistake. They see Linux as some kind of centralized force, when it is quite the opposite. Hard to fight an enemy that is everywhere, and is very capable of providing a free alternative to their wares. So long as there is one rebel kernel hacker out there, the MS/SCO axis of evil can not and will not win.

Full Disclosure: I'm writing this from my Mandrake 9.2 box, and browsing with Mozilla on my trusty P3-733, which happily hums away as a BF1942 server on the weekends.

[cbh]

Originally posted by Vampiel
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...8915_tc119.htm

those dirty rotten little money hungry thieves, they did jump start the lawsuit

Oh man! Linux is in deep ****!

[stix_kua]

There is no need to offer simiarity but ease of use is a must. That is what matters most. As long as people do not have to relearn computers too much it'd be fine. The switch would be easier. For example, even though the Mac has one button on the mouse I found it easier to leave my Mac, way back when, and join the PC/Windows crew however, to even go from PC/Windows to PC/Linux, it took a lot of time and effort so I said screw it and am back to PC/Windows and Mac. they are easier.

Linux does appear to be a technical mess and it is. It is too "weird" for the aerage user. And no it is not faster then other Oses....I do not know why people ever believed that. Startup on a high quality system takes forever to start up and as for hardware support...the only hardware that can almost always be garanteed to workk is the power supply...

But I must disagree with the statement that they are not compatible becuase they are more compatible now then ever before but still I know what you mean...it isn;t a direct tranlsation yet...

i just hope that Apple wisens up and creates Mac OS X for the x86/x86-64 architectures...It'd help them alot and i'd be willing to use it....

Originally posted by DocEvi1
You don't need to offer a OS which is similar to Windows, you just need to offer a OS which decent. I use Red Hat9 at Uni and although I'm slowly getting used to it, I hate having to fiddle with it to make it to my liking.

I like Windows, I like the layout, I like the look, I like the inbuilt programs, I like the support, I like the availability of programs... I like the fact that most of the software is relatively stable...

Linux, seems to be a technical mess. Until they make a frontend that is both powerful enough for users like me and you, and a interface that is easy and accesible for users like me and you, MS will stand head and shoulders above the competition.

There is nothing wrong with protecting your interests, and while as monopoly's appear a bad thing, imagine the problems you will have if many more OS's take to the market, we already have 3 which are completely incompatible (Linux, Windows, Mac OS), I don't want any more!

[DocEvi1]

Originally posted by rusty4x4
[B]"Linux, seems to be a technical mess. Until they make a frontend that is both powerful enough for users like me and you, and a interface that is easy and accesible for users like me and you, ..."

I disagree. The installations for Linux are far superior (read: easier) to those available 3 years ago, and X-Windows is a very capable GUI.

Linux's level of functionality is quite high. But the simple truth is this: Linux is not for everyone. Mastery of the command line is essential, and this takes time, determination, and curiosity.

I think if you give your RH experience some time, you'll discover that Windows aims to mold the perfect User, while Linux is the school for Administrators.

I think is the difference between you and I, I can use command line and find some things are easier to do so, but personally why should I? I want a GUI which is for numpties but also allows me to feel at home. I find XP perfect for this.

As long as Linux et al aim themselves at adminstrator's and the like they are missing out on the home market where they really want a share from recent versions.

"...MS will stand head and shoulders above the competition."

To me, this latest revelation amplifies what the Department of Justice has proven: predatory business practices will drive the competition out. it worked against Netscape, and those innumerable unnamed third-party software providers whose livelihood got obliterated because MS incorporated a "feature" into Windows. If this is the way to be "head and shoulders" about the competition, then MS should be confronted at every turn.

depends on your outlook, if that company was offering something MS wasn't, and would charge you extra for it why can't MS incorporate it into Windows and give it to the user for "free"? I agree some of the practices are bad, and things they have done are incorrect and imoral, but on the flip side we now have a good, complete system from MS.

"[B]it would take a super OS to topple microsoft "

Why deliberately try to topple anyone? This is where MS is making a huge mistake. They see Linux as some kind of centralized force, when it is quite the opposite. Hard to fight an enemy that is everywhere, and is very capable of providing a free alternative to their wares. So long as there is one rebel kernel hacker out there, the MS/SCO axis of evil can not and will not win.

true.