Would you consider a PC built of the best parts, running 64 bit OS and apps, and the AMD Hammer as the next 'killer concept' in the market?
Suse Linux on an AMD Hammer based box should blow M$ skirt right off! With some good PR it will be the best shot at de-throwning the self anointed king of all software and thinking.
I say it is the whole package that will do the trick: not just a PC, not just an OS, not just new Officeware.
Lump all the 64-bit good stuff together, at a reasonable price, and M$ can't touch it.
The way I see it is that MS is in an unfair deal. They dont just have IE and Media Player bundeled, but so many other good and useful programs, such as the diskdefragmenter. All these programs are all really now options of the various Windows operating systems. Microsoft hasnt made something like another 3rd party program doesnt install or work on their system. They left the consumers have the choice of what alternative to use. The Device Manger part of the OS is another example, its great, but there are alternatives which in my oppinion arent better than it. Someone make a product better than the ones windows have and everyone is free to chose it. Im sure not everyone here uses every single function given by the OS, right? So you cant say u've bought something you dont need. In Winamp for example, some one may not USE the AVS, so can u say you've been cheated and downloaded something you dont need, The main OS is from MS they have a right to put what they think is right. If you buy a car for example, you can customize it as you want but does everyone know exactly from which company every nut and bolt comes from? No, i think not. So how can someone say they've been cheated? People love to criticise a good, ....anything!! I think IE is really great n thats why the people chose it and it is the most widely use browser today.
Gates and Microsoft do have their prices on their software a bit out of proportion! I do feel like many, that they want to control the software industry. But, who wants to see just two companies (Microsoft & Apple) or maybe one (M.S.)dominate/control the industry! I dont think none of us would.
That's right, if irrelevant. Apple make their own hardware and operating systems, which as far as I can see gives them every right to bundle whatever software they see fit with their systems. Both iTunes and iMovie are optional applications and are not installed as part of the standard operating system installation. And, if you didn't know, a clean installation of Mac OS 9 includes MS Internet Explorer AND Netscape Navigator - both of which are easily removed or reinstalled without bringing the OS to its knees. Microsoft has never given users that sort of choice with their Windows products...
Originally posted by Omega2k1
Apple does the same thing, Look at QuickTime and I-movie and I-tunes. If i'm not mistaken its bundled with a mac.
Your line of reasoning would suggest that Sony "does the same thing" because they bundle a remote control with their audio systems, even though there are plenty of 3rd party remote control manufacturers.
Bundling software with an OS is not the issue. What is important is the fact that Microsoft COULD go modular with their OS, keeping the nine States happy, AND get away with bundling their own extras just so long as they were optional components.
Microsoft only has to worry about rivals who are capable of producing superior software... It's called competition, and as long as they are capable of producing quality products they will stay in business.
Melodramatic, maybe, but at least it was a refreshing contrast from the trend I see that just because that's what "happens in the real world" it is a.ok.
Originally posted by roothog683
Sorry, but those who praise a thief and slayer of competition as a hero
ok, here's the deal
did you ever buy windows 3.x back when it came out? or how about windows 95? or 98? how much did they cost? well I bought them. and you know what? over all those years, they all cost the same amount. they didnt' increase for inflation. how many things can you say that has happened to? no, the truth is that Microsoft hasdn't increased the prices for its software in a long long time. but, ok, let's go with the 'windows bundling issue' for a minute. i propose that Chevrolet is selling too many trucks and the other automakers are having trouble keeping up. so let's lobby the government to force Chevy to use Ford engines, and while we're at it, Dodge bodies. We don't want the other companies to have to innovate and come up with something better, so let's just bring down the top dog to their level instead of forcing them to increase their level of quality. COME ON PEOPLE!!! yeah, sure, microsoft isn't an angel of a company. they're big. they throw their muscle around sometimes. but have you heard of aol-time-warner-netscape-everything else? now you can't tell me they're not trying to get a monopoly on the communication business. but yeah, whenever some other company invents products that my 75-year-old grandparents can sit down and use for the first time with minimal instruction, then i'll buy that company's products. they would never survive on linux. let's get real here.
I hear this reasoning a lot:
Microsoft makes good products. We should not force them to change anything to affect the quality of their software. Other companies have not made software that is as good as microsoft.
But microsoft was found guilty of anti-competative business tactics. In other words, not allowing other companies the opportunity to make (or at least sell) software that is as good. So of course you arn't able to buy a superior product.
As the article points out, Microsoft says that the propsed punishments affects the quality of their software. I get the sense that they are trying to use that excuse to choose their punishment.
I like what Phrost E. posted -- Microsoft could modularize their OS, and then, if they really can make better products on a level playing field, they will have nothing to worry about. That seems fair.
That's what would make it so exciting (be just like the sixties again, the shuttle astronauts got it too easy today.)
When IBM was in a bind with their soon to be released IBM PC, they went to California to buy or liscense C/PM as the OS for the PC.
Unfortunately, the wife of the C/PM owner was rude to the IBM reps while he was out paragliding.
The IBM reps then went to MS BILL who had no OS, but lied and said he did. MS BILL found the developer of DOS (at that time an extremely limited POS) and bought his OS for $50K.
MS started with the lie that it had an OS that IBM could liscense. MS has, since, taken every good OS utility from those who invented them, either by theft of the concept or outright purchase.
MS Bill is a liar, cheat and thief. He kills competition and makes the consumer pay for his actions. If it were not for Linux and the continual improvements made by open source developers, MS Bill would be charging so much for Windowsux, no one but the government could afford it.
As it now stands, MS BILL has lost the liscense wars with several European governments, Korea and China. Open Source is winning, as it should, due to the emphasis on low cost, dependable and highly supported software.
Don't be surprised when one fine day we all wake up to find MS BILL has issued an ultimatum liscense: You have no right to use MS products with an OS that is not Windows. If you do so, you will be banned from buying MS products, forever.
Lindows OS should be out in Qtr.3, then things will get interesting. A Linux based OS that runs MS products and Linux products --- wow, no more dual boot ---- a great idea that MS Bill won't steal and can't duplicate for < $100.
How many football fans out there wan't to see a team that never looses, allways wins the SuperBowl, and breaks the legs of all who come to play the game? Do you think anyone would place a bet against them --- it would be the end of sports betting.
Let me see if I understand this. Because there's a free alternative Microsoft can charge more for their products. I missed that day of Econ class.
Originally posted by roothog683
If it were not for Linux and the continual improvements made by open source developers, MS Bill would be charging so much for Windowsux, no one but the government could afford it.
What playbook are you reading from? Microsoft hasn't filed for bankruptcy and I've not seen a huge number of reports that Linux is dominating the world.
Open Source is winning, as it should, due to the emphasis on low cost, dependable and highly supported software.
Describing Linux as 'highly supported software' is probably one of the funniest things that I've heard in a while. Linux is supported by a community and while that has the benefit of being able to move in mass to support things it is also community supported which means that new drivers aren't out or are buggy when new hardware is released. It means that code compiled for one distribution may or may not work on another.
As much as I like some things about Linux 'highly supported' wouldn't even come close to the picture.
If we want to open a full "Linux vs. Windows" discussion we should probably move it to another thread.
Reread: If Linux DID NOT EXIST Gates would charge whatever he wanted.
Linux support is all over the net....and good stuff.
Where is Windows support? Oh! you have to pay big $$$ for that. No wonder every MS OS is so buggy....they make money selling bugs and they make money fixing bugs that should never have been sold to the public....
The difference in open source Linux and MS is the crux of this thread....Gates admits Win can be separate from apps, but lies when he says it would cripple the OS.
Far from crippling, pulling all the garbage code out of Win would allow it to run as Linux does....with a kernal ......tight and efficient. All apps would be separate (ie Linux); but that would allow competition to make apps that would also work with the kernal.
This is what Gates means; stripping down to just the OS would cripple his ability to limit competition with his buggy sofware. In other words, his ability to make billions while excluding all others who only want to make a few million.
Classic monopolist strategy!
Why should not General Motors simply make all their vehicles so that they would only run on General Motors fuel and not tell anyone until after they bought one that GM fuel costs $20 per gallon.
Simple, they have competition that would crush them if they pulled this kind of ****.
Open Source is the only competitor that has the ability to keep MS BILL from total domination of all software.
Personally, I am still running 98se, but not for long. Even though I finally have my systems stable on 98se, it took a long time and the purchase of 98Lite to get it stable. Why on earth would I listen to PR **** about the latest and greatest WinXP....check the forums....try to count how many non-techies are having hell with XP.
A gigabyte OS is bloat code and it shows in the slowness as compared to 98se or even 95.
Gates could provide an excellent, cheap, stripped OS, but he's greedy (he wants to be the first trillionaire) and he won't do it.
Some new computer users do not have the money or the experience to go out and buy new software from other manufacturers to install on their computers. Offereing a browser, Media Player, and some of the other software that is part of the operating system helps to keep software costs down for the consumer. I would hate to see a "stripped down" version forced onto Microsoft to use in the operating systems, and I feel that instead of thinking strictly about themselves, people, and software manufactures that are competitors need to think of the "little" people, the people who do not have a lot of money or computer knowledge, or are brand new to computers. A lot of this is a result of the software manufacturers, and tech support people who are loosing money by Microsoft adding in a few programs that help the person get started on their new computers.
Can´t find anything wrong with Winamp...
Originally posted by tantone
Come out with a better product and I'll gladly retire my MS apps. How many of you use WinAmp instead of Media Player? There's a good example. [/B]
It´s easy to use, and I find it competent enough.
I think his point was that many people don't use Windows MP to play MP3s because WinAmp is one of the "superior" products out there. Conversely, is it just me, or do most people use MS IE for internet? Are there easier or better defrag options? How about file managers/browsers?
Roothog, the fact that 98lite exists, is competitively priced, useful, and on your system totally wipes out your argument. In a monopoly they couldn't market 98lite. Its wonderful that you read "fire in the valley" or watched "pirates of silicon valley". But you don't miss a business meeting with IBM period. Kildall was a fool. Gates is a tool. Big difference. Anyways, without Mary Gates we wouldn't be *****ing today because AGAIN it WHO not what you know. AOLTW is in the middle of posting a 310BILLION! dollar loss in one qtr. The biggest ever. Why? Because an entity's own size eventually works to its detriment. Whether it's a company or a nation, bureaucracy eventually kills. The US Govt is on the same path. The only other Govt' in history with as many usefull employees was Napoleon's. Linux is great. But much like a porsche or mclaren its HIGH MAINTENANCE (from a schmo's point of view). Whether you or I can "grep" the stupidity of the newbs isnt at issue. What matters is that microsoft is the Wal-Mart of software. Lots of mediocre stuff at a middle of the road price. When will they both suffer? when they rot from within. Now that Sam Walton's kids run Walmart its already starting to lose the customer service it prided itself on. As Gates ages you'll see more Microsoft BOB's in the future. Once the core talent of MS retires/dies things will change. But not anytime soon regardless of the federal remedy. Ma bell was ripped up 20yrs ago and AT&T has been in a slow suicide ever since. Somewhat from their own mistakes and also market forces. The point is that Win98SE was a pretty good OS on 04-23-99 (its build date) it just has real sucky mem management. It's better than WinME. Don't delude yourself into thinking MS didn't wish that turned out better. It cost them BIG. When you're as big as MS you have to compete against yourself too. Don't forget most people who drink diet coke used to drink coke not pepsi. Coke spent BILLIONS of dollars to create a new diet coke product only to find out that they weren't getting new customers. They were just changing what color can some people bought. Of course, that meant more expense and complication for them, but precious little additional market share. The reason linux can't win is that in America to paraphrase an old saying = Money Talks, Good Tech Walks. This won't change until the masses decide that MS makes ****. EVERY big corp does. Does the phone company give you a 15min appt. window? no they say we'll be there between 9am and 2pm. And you get to deal with. Cable? Same deal. Gov't even worse. Tax refund? what a joke. Tax refunds are what happens when a bloated govt returns SOME of the money you loaned them interest free during the year. Of course, they were already overcharging you for the value they provide but that's ok because Gates is the devil? You've got to realize the whole software industry is sick not just MS. Consumers are the problem and the solution. Ask yourself this, how many idiots do you know who think WinMe is better than Win98SE, and that XpHome is just great just because their newer....LOTS. To wit, Sheep + People = SHEEPLE. You live in a fantasy world dude. How are the "sheeple" gonna understand /mnt when they don't even understand what a partition is or that they can have more than one? answer... the boomers just plain won't as a group. Here and there, a couple people over fifty get it. But it will be 50-100 years before computer technology fuses with the culture. That's of course if it isn't dumbed down to the point that nobody knows how to fix or upgrade it anymore. Even at age 29, I'm amazed at how stupid the average register teenager is at the store. They can't make change properly. They can't read. They get all put out if the bar code scanner is wrong or broken. Of course, they don't really know how that little red beam works either, but that's ok. The big corp's want new sheeple to replace the old so all is well. I mean how many times have you been in line at a store where the technology just mystified the employee who stands there using it every **** day. And it's usually someone born after 1980. People that young should have no excuse but alas they still stand there bleating like the sheep they are "price check aisle 5" "manager to checkout 3" blah blah blah.... Maybe you don't realize it yet , but just by posting here you've already separated yourself from the rest of the unwashed humanoids out there. So, in conclusion, its all well and good to bash MS but the problem is much, much deeper. An interesting fact to note is that, the guy who invented TV died broke and bitter. They guy who figured out how to crush him through less than legal/ethical means, is remembered as the father of television. Even our favorite inventor... Edison was a thief and a scoundrel but he makes for a great myth/story. Than