[Troll] Windows -- not even second best
Linonut
Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
--
In terms of doing things I take a fairly scientific approach to why things
happen and how they happen. I don't know if there's a god or not, but I
think religious principles are quite valid.
-- Bill Gates, PBS interview with David Frost (November 1995)
amicus_curious
"Linonut" <lin...@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
news:OVXTj.29916$DY1....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>...If that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
>
A self-admitted troglodyte from Sun speaks ill of Microsoft! How novel.
One is, of course, reminded of the equally trite: "If ifs and ands were pots
and pans..."
Keep your hopes up!
Erik Funkenbusch
> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
>
> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.
This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
things always win out over "technical superiority".
It's cliche, but the classic example is vhs versus beta. There were a lot
of reasons VHS won out, but technical superiority was not one of them.
People that flock to technical superiority tend to believe in their cause
religiously, and that causes a lot of problems on its own. They tend to
believe there is no reason for them not to win, but they dismiss all the
things that really matter to end users.
Beta people dismissed the 5 hour limitation on beta tapes versus VHS's 8
hours. Beta people dismissed the licensing fees that make Beta
significantly more expensive than VHS (not just a one time cost of player,
but also added to the cost of tapes, a recurring cost). Beta people
dismissed the fact that there was more content available for VHS. I mean,
after all, how could anyone go for the less technically superior solution?
As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
account first.
Moshe Goldfarb
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>
>> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
>>
>> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
>> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
>> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
>> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
>> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
>> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
>> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
>> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
>> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
>
> People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.
If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
science.
Slowly dwindling are the concepts of digging into an operating system to
play with configuration files, file systems, sound systems, desktop
enviornments (for most people different themes are more than enough) and so
forth.
We are moving toward an "ease of use and I don't care how it works" society
in a much bigger way than in the past.
I think the newest generation of young adults is the driving force behind
this.
> This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
> superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
> of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
> base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
> things always win out over "technical superiority".
Every single time.
The iPhone is a classic example of this.
It doesn't really do anything that other cellphone/pda/multimedia all in
one devices don't already do except maybe the rolling display trick, yet it
is by far the most popular of these devices.
Why?
The interface...
My Blackberry does all the same crap.
So does my cell phone and in fact my cellphone streams TV video as well.
Now try and actually USE these features.
Confused menus, horrible shortcuts etc make the experience painful.
> It's cliche, but the classic example is vhs versus beta. There were a lot
> of reasons VHS won out, but technical superiority was not one of them.
The main reason Beta was the format of choice for professional broadcasting
for years after VHS won was technical superiority.
> People that flock to technical superiority tend to believe in their cause
> religiously, and that causes a lot of problems on its own. They tend to
> believe there is no reason for them not to win, but they dismiss all the
> things that really matter to end users.
Sounds like COLA.
They can't see the forest for the trees.
I know of people who go out and set up a project recording studio, spend a
ton of money on complicated gear, buy it all at once and then shake their
head in disbelief when their work sucks. In short they get overwhelmed.
They would have been better off with a simple sound card and a free DAW
program and later on as they learned how to use those programs they could
graduate to bigger and better things.
> Beta people dismissed the 5 hour limitation on beta tapes versus VHS's 8
> hours. Beta people dismissed the licensing fees that make Beta
> significantly more expensive than VHS (not just a one time cost of player,
> but also added to the cost of tapes, a recurring cost). Beta people
> dismissed the fact that there was more content available for VHS. I mean,
> after all, how could anyone go for the less technically superior solution?
Interestingly enough we can *thank* the porn industry for VHS.
I saw a show on History Channel about this and in a nutshell it boils down
to the porn industry adopting VHS instead of Beta and the fact that being
able to view porn in the privacy of one's own home was a totally unique
concept at the time and a huge one as video rental stores sprang up all
over the place.
> As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
> account first.
People don't want to have to think anymore about the underpinnings and
operation of common items like a PC, a car etc.
Sure there is always a fringe group of enthusiasts who buy the Factory
Service Manual for their cars, but this is a small group compared to the
masses most of whom just want to turn the key and go someplace in the car.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
The Ghost In The Machine
<er...@despam-funkenbusch.com>
wrote
on Tue, 6 May 2008 11:14:47 -0400
<18tjkz06...@funkenbusch.com>:
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>
>> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
>>
>> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
>> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
>> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
>> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
>> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
>> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
>> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
>> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
>> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
>
> People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.
It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
*first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
Think about it. The best car [*] one can have would
be either a tank (durability), a shuttle crawler (load
capacity), a race car (speed), an ATV (maneuverability),
or a bicycle (efficiency). Instead, we all compromise,
usually ending up with something that has four wheels,
a steering column, a gas and brake pedal, and a fuel
storage facility that might explode (under exactly the
right conditions; gasoline, fortunately, is very difficult
to ignite unless the air-fuel mixture is exactly right).
In Microsoft's case, they have a good set of compromises,
bolstered further by marketing. The Microsoft Windows
system is also very open (maybe too much so!), but the
documentation (.H files et al) is somewhat lacking unless
one purchases the requisite SDKs, and that only gets one
the externally visible interfaces.
>
> This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
> superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
> of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
> base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
> things always win out over "technical superiority".
Correct.
>
> It's cliche, but the classic example is vhs versus beta. There were a lot
> of reasons VHS won out, but technical superiority was not one of them.
VHS indeed won, because of media cost.
>
> People that flock to technical superiority tend to believe in their cause
> religiously, and that causes a lot of problems on its own. They tend to
> believe there is no reason for them not to win, but they dismiss all the
> things that really matter to end users.
>
> Beta people dismissed the 5 hour limitation on beta tapes versus VHS's 8
> hours.
I think you mean 1 hour versus 2 hours -- or maybe 6.
The 8 hours came later. But you're otherwise generally
correct.
> Beta people dismissed the licensing fees that make Beta
> significantly more expensive than VHS (not just a one time cost of player,
> but also added to the cost of tapes, a recurring cost). Beta people
> dismissed the fact that there was more content available for VHS. I mean,
> after all, how could anyone go for the less technically superior solution?
>
> As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
> account first.
And Windows is indeed good enough. That's the trouble. Either
it is functionally sufficient, or marketing will gloss over
the inefficiencies.
[*] for purposes of this diatribe "car" = "ground
transport". One can include such things as airplanes and
spacecraft if one wants to get sufficiently weird here.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
People think that libraries are safe. They're wrong. They have ideas.
(Also occasionally ectoplasmic slime and cute librarians.)
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Tim Smith
Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
> science.
Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
crappy software that was bundled with it.
This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
computer, by switching to Mac.
The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
> > This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
> > superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
> > of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
> > base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
> > things always win out over "technical superiority".
>
> Every single time.
> The iPhone is a classic example of this.
> It doesn't really do anything that other cellphone/pda/multimedia all in
> one devices don't already do except maybe the rolling display trick, yet it
> is by far the most popular of these devices.
>
> Why?
>
> The interface...
> My Blackberry does all the same crap.
> So does my cell phone and in fact my cellphone streams TV video as well.
> Now try and actually USE these features.
> Confused menus, horrible shortcuts etc make the experience painful.
Yup. I once watched three people try to set up a three-way call on
their cell phones. Two were long-time Linux programmers, and one was a
project manager who had extensive experience in the phone industry.
None of them had ever set up a three-way call on their current phones,
and none were able to figure it out after about 10 minutes of fiddling
with the phone. Finally, one of them had to go dig up the manual for
his phone, and find the arcane sequence to set up the second call
without hanging up the first.
On an iPhone, setting up a three-way call is trivial, as is adding
people, dropping people (with or without hanging up on them), and so on.
If the iPhone can do something, almost any average iPhone user will have
no trouble figuring it out the first time they try to do it, right away.
The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
has. I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
them when I did want to use them.
Some of my other phones have had features the iPhone lacks (and the
iPhone has things they have lacked), but the iPhone has more features I
do use, and more I will use.
* It has more features I use frequently, because of better interface and
integration. For example, I use the calendar much more on my iPhone,
because it integrates in much better with my computer. The software
from Palm for my Treo for managing the calendar was horrible, so I
didn't make much use of it.
* I will use more of the less common features, because when I do want to
use them, I'll be able to figure them out without consulting the manual.
Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.
--
--Tim Smith
chrisv
> Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.
I think that most people would agree that, in the area of UI design, Apple
is currently the best. If one places a high value on that, and doesn't
mind paying the price premium, they are a reasonable choice.
Snit
pan.2008.05.06....@nospam.invalid on 5/6/08 12:16 PM:
And the price "premium" is a bit of a myth: for similar systems Macs are
about the same price. There are, of course, more options if you buy a
Windows machine - so to fit a specific need the Mac might cost more.
--
Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
--Albert Einstein
Linonut
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>
>> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
>>
>> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
>> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
>> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
>> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
>> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
>> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
>> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
>> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
>> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
>
> People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.
It's slowly happening /now/. You, while UNIX has /always/ beat the
ever-loving /snot/ out of Windows, it is only in the last few years
that we've had UNIX that ran on hardware within the cost-reach of small
businesses and consumers.
> This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
> superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
> of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
> base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
> things always win out over "technical superiority".
True. He did say "if" the logjam breaks.
> As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
> account first.
I agree with your Beta/VHS analogy (snipped for brevity).
However, cost is now going away as a reason to choose Windows over UNIX
or even Mac.
--
We are not even close to finishing the basic dream of what the PC can be.
-- Bill Gates
Linonut
> It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
> *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
You are a very clever troll, Ghost.
It's like those "jokes" my wife's sister makes about my wife. They're
"ha-ha-funny", except they're really not.
Now you have to figure out how serious I am here. <straight face>
--
Television is not real life. In real life people actually have to leave the
coffee shop and go to jobs.
-- Bill Gates
Linonut
> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
I actually kind of agree with you here.
I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
while the phone is in your pocket.
> The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
> phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
> has.
Hmmmm. Now if I can sell that idea to my wife.....
> I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
> didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
> iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
> I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
> them when I did want to use them.
I agree. Plus, trying to read the menu entries while driving? Ay yi yi.
> Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.
Tim, are now an iPhone troll!? <grin>
--
Life is not fair; get used to it.
-- Bill Gates
Moshe Goldfarb
> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.x...@40tude.net>,
> Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
>> science.
>
> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
> crappy software that was bundled with it.
That is so true.
My kids have iPods, several different types, and I have a Creative Zen
Vision M.
My unit was cheaper, more storage, does more stuff, bigger and brighter
screen etc.
IOW on "paper" it blows the iPods away.
Well, I should have known anything from Creative is crap and this was no
exception.
Constant freezes due to firmaware bugs.
Convoluted, slow, confusing, buggy software.
And so forth.
A real POS.
In real USE the iPod blows it away with the exception of the earliest
iTunes for Windows software which had some problems with bloat.
The new versions are almost as good as the Mac versions.
Not quite, but real close.
> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
> computer, by switching to Mac.
And that is exactly what is happening.
Throw in all the bad press Vista is getting and now you have quite a lot of
people with older PC machines looking seriously at switching to Macs.
> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
That's exactly what they do and the result is a person who looks at them
like they are crazy...
Why cares if the mp3 player/phne/pda/etc runs Linux?
Nobody but a Linux zealot and generally only because that is the only
positive thing he can offer up.
> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
They are awful and Verizon is the worst of the worst.
Verizon takes a good Motorola interface, customizes it and turns it to
shit.
>>> This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
>>> superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
>>> of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
>>> base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
>>> things always win out over "technical superiority".
>>
>> Every single time.
>> The iPhone is a classic example of this.
>> It doesn't really do anything that other cellphone/pda/multimedia all in
>> one devices don't already do except maybe the rolling display trick, yet it
>> is by far the most popular of these devices.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> The interface...
>> My Blackberry does all the same crap.
>> So does my cell phone and in fact my cellphone streams TV video as well.
>> Now try and actually USE these features.
>> Confused menus, horrible shortcuts etc make the experience painful.
>
> Yup. I once watched three people try to set up a three-way call on
> their cell phones. Two were long-time Linux programmers, and one was a
> project manager who had extensive experience in the phone industry.
> None of them had ever set up a three-way call on their current phones,
> and none were able to figure it out after about 10 minutes of fiddling
> with the phone. Finally, one of them had to go dig up the manual for
> his phone, and find the arcane sequence to set up the second call
> without hanging up the first.
I've had to read the manual for my last 3 phones because despite the
*standard all phones alike* Verizon interface, I couldn't figure out how to
do simple things.
> On an iPhone, setting up a three-way call is trivial, as is adding
> people, dropping people (with or without hanging up on them), and so on.
> If the iPhone can do something, almost any average iPhone user will have
> no trouble figuring it out the first time they try to do it, right away.
And the Mac is the same and so is the iPod.
They all have an uncanny ability to allow even a total noob use most of the
features without ever cracking a manual.
> The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
> phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
> has. I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
> didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
> iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
> I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
> them when I did want to use them.
My phone does everything.
I use literally nothing of it besides the phone and the camera.
Why?
The interface sucks.
> Some of my other phones have had features the iPhone lacks (and the
> iPhone has things they have lacked), but the iPhone has more features I
> do use, and more I will use.
Yep.
> * It has more features I use frequently, because of better interface and
> integration. For example, I use the calendar much more on my iPhone,
> because it integrates in much better with my computer. The software
> from Palm for my Treo for managing the calendar was horrible, so I
> didn't make much use of it.
The Blackberry software is a joke.
Adding and removing applications while easy is convoluted.
> * I will use more of the less common features, because when I do want to
> use them, I'll be able to figure them out without consulting the manual.
>
> Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.
Apple knows how to make devices and software that people like to use.
Linux does not.
Snit
pf3Uj.71677$vr3....@bignews2.bellsouth.net on 5/6/08 1:33 PM:
> * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
>> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
>> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
>
> I actually kind of agree with you here.
>
> I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
> The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
>
> And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
> while the phone is in your pocket.
Of course the buttons are on the outside! If the buttons were on the inside
few people would spend the time to open up their phone to just dial!
:)
--
"Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/gates/>
The Ghost In The Machine
<lin...@bollsouth.nut>
wrote
on Tue, 6 May 2008 16:29:27 -0400
<Cb3Uj.71675$vr3....@bignews2.bellsouth.net>:
> * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
>> *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
>
> You are a very clever troll, Ghost.
Oops....*reel reel reel* *fwwiiiissssh*....*kerplunk* [*]
:-)
>
> It's like those "jokes" my wife's sister makes about my wife. They're
> "ha-ha-funny", except they're really not.
>
> Now you have to figure out how serious I am here. <straight face>
>
Yeah, well, that's part of the problem. Windows can
*afford* Superbowl commercials and plastering ads all
over the place, putting Windows Vista/Windows Server/SQL
Server in front of the noses of the casual commuter and
lying their collective [censored]s off.
The only real Linux ads I've seen are the rather enigmatic
IBM one (the black background with a peace symbol, a
stylized heart, and a penguin -- if one isn't clued in
to Tux one probably went "WTF?" upon first seeing that),
and an IBM commercial where a team marked "Linux" is playing
basketball against a bunch of malwares, thus implying Linux
can shoot baskets (it can't; that's a hardware upgrade :-) ).
This contrasted to various Windows campaigns:
- "server white room party"
- "colored butterfly around the world"
- "MothMan" (I've seen him on the Web, not on TV)
- "The Five Nines"
- "Start Me Up"
- "SQL Server dry cells" (Web campaign)
- "MS Office"
- "Only dinos use non-Microsoft"
- "Dell uses MS System Center, which scales really really big"
And that's just off the top of my head! Say what one will,
the Microsoft worm/meme has burrowed into a lot of brains.
How to get it out? What exactly to replace it with?
(Mostly because Microsoft does offer a plethora of
products, from Vista Starter to the aforementioned System
Center, with a lot of things in between.)
[*] It has been claimed that the worst day fishing is
better than the best day working, but I've yet to verify
that.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Now in nine exciting editions. Try them all!
Gregory Shearman
> * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
>> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
>> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
>
> I actually kind of agree with you here.
>
> I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
> The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
>
> And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
> while the phone is in your pocket.
I've got one of the cheapest mobile phones (I refuse to call a mobile a
"cell phone". We don't say that around here.) and it has buttons on the
outside that have to be big because I have BIG hands. All I do is keep
the phone with the keypad lock on. It doesn't interfere in any way with
receiving calls and the thing is safe bouncing around.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
JEDIDIAH
Ah... no.
Microsoft took advantage of the fact that every different
make of car needs it's own brand of gasoline to go with it.
Imagine a gas station with pumps for every brand of car.
Most gas station owners would go insane. So they would instead
tend to only support the most common cars. Then eventually they
would only support only one brand of car.
This is what happened with PC's, nevermind non-PCs.
[deletia]
Microsoft got in bed with the right partner and got themselves
enough "street cred" to nullify pretty much any other interesting
criteria.
--
OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
/ | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
JEDIDIAH
> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.x...@40tude.net>,
> Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
>> science.
...as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.
>
> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
> crappy software that was bundled with it.
...that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.
Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.
>
> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
> computer, by switching to Mac.
>
> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.
For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
completely defecting.
>
> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.
[deletia]
Moshe Goldfarb
> On 2008-05-06, Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.x...@40tude.net>,
>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
>>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
>>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
>>> science.
>
> ...as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.
Huh?
>>
>> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
>> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
>> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
>> crappy software that was bundled with it.
>
> ...that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.
>
> Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.
You don't have a clue.
People want to USE their players not play with mount commands, permissions,
umount or the clusterfsck called automount.
They want to plug them in, sync the data and use them.
Linux need not apply.
>>
>> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
>> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
>> computer, by switching to Mac.
>>
>> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
>> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
>> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
>
> Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.
And listen as they beg for iTunes back.
> For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
> have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
> try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
> available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
> completely defecting.
Sure, and 0.6 percent of desktop users do in fact end up sticking with
Linux.
The rest go running back to whatever they were using before they had a
lapse of sanity and decided to try out Linux.
You really need to get a clue how today's consumer operates and what she
expects.
Most of the people writing Linux distributions, with few exceptions,
haven't a clue which is why Linux's desktop market share is a dismal 0.6
percent despite Linux being free.
Sinister Midget
As long as they're tied to ATT, they're out of my price range even if
they're free. Unlocked ones aren't the answer because App-Hole keeps
updating the firmware and frying the buggers.
--
Microsoft may not be the root of all evil, but it's not for lack of
trying.
Linonut
> This contrasted to various Windows campaigns:
>
> - "server white room party"
> - "colored butterfly around the world"
> - "MothMan" (I've seen him on the Web, not on TV)
> - "The Five Nines"
> - "Start Me Up"
> - "SQL Server dry cells" (Web campaign)
> - "MS Office"
> - "Only dinos use non-Microsoft"
> - "Dell uses MS System Center, which scales really really big"
>
> And that's just off the top of my head! Say what one will,
> the Microsoft worm/meme has burrowed into a lot of brains.
I remember a couple of those ads.
Especially that creepy Microsoft moth-man.
Hey, Apple! A word with ya! Ya know how you got that pudgy geeky "Bill
Gates" guy in your ads.
Howz about including a bellow Blammer look-alike? Y'knowk, to capture
the current spirit of Microsoft?
> [*] It has been claimed that the worst day fishing is
> better than the best day working, but I've yet to verify
> that.
It would be cool to be able to turn one's brain off enough (without a
lot of alcohol) to thoroughly enjoy doing /nothing/, wouldn't it?
We're sick men, Ghost! Sick!
--
I actually thought that it would be a little confusing during the same
period of your life to be in one meeting when you're trying to make money,
and then go to another meeting where you're giving it away.
-- Bill Gates
Linonut
I wonder if my phone (actually, was my daughter's phone) has such a
lock.
She was wandering around one day asking "Where is my cell phone?" and I
said "In your cell." Her friend laughed, she didn't.
--
Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.
-- Bill Gates
Linonut
> Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)
>
> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/01/moshe-goldfarb-troll.html
> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/flatfish-troll.html
Y'know what's freaky? I actually remember all of these flatfish nyms.
--
"Microsoft has had competitors in the past. It's a good thing we have
museums to document this stuff."
-- Bill Gates, in a talk at the Computer History Museum
in Mountain View, Calif.
Sinister Midget
> I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
> The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
>
> And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
> while the phone is in your pocket.
I got a Treo and I like it, except that it keeps calling my wife, when
using only Keyguard, or 9-1-1, when using only Security (because it has
the means to allow emergency calling without a password) if I keep it
on my side. My old Motorola used to call my wife constantly (actually,
it called the last number accessed, and I always made sure it was my
wife to avoid trouble), and it was a flip-phone. Using one or the other
mechanism to stop all of that isn't sufficient.
I ended up adding another program to make unlocking Keyguard a two-
stage process, and had to also use Security so I have to use a password
to unlock it.
So far it hasn't made any unwanted calls in the last few days (that I
know about). So maybe it's going to work.
Just to be safe I have a vehciluar bluetooth gizmo, and I try to always
remember to remove the phone from the case on my side before putting on
the seat belt.
On the up side, it's easy to use while driving, even without the
bluetooth, as long as I don't have to unlock it. I don't call anybody
when I'm behind the wheel, so that's never a problem. I can answer it
without keystrokes or passwords from the bluetooth. Plus I have all of
the PDA functions I need, and then some.
--
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates.
The Ghost In The Machine
<je...@nomad.mishnet>
wrote
on Tue, 6 May 2008 17:01:44 -0500
<slrng21la...@nomad.mishnet>:
At the time, yes. Microsoft commoditized the market, yes.
They then leveraged it -- DOS to Win3.1, Win3.1 to Win95,
Win95 to Win98 to WinMe (ha!) to WinXP, and finally the
latest and (FSVO) greatest, Windows Vista.
And IBM was left somewhere between the bedroom and the altar... :-/
>
> Most gas station owners would go insane. So they would instead
> tend to only support the most common cars.
Further exacerbated by the requirement that Microsoft
gets paid for every fillup, regardless of whether they
use regular Microsoft, or premium Something Else(tm).
But of course Microsoft was very nice to the filling stations;
they gave them a slight discount. Wasn't that lovely? :-)
> Then eventually they
> would only support only one brand of car.
Or one brand type. The PCs got a little weird, since IBM
did a foolish thing in publishing the entire BIOS listing.
(Wish I still had that.)
>
> This is what happened with PC's, nevermind non-PCs.
Non-PCs dropped out of the equation because PCs underpriced them,
methinks.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Microsoft got in bed with the right partner and got themselves
> enough "street cred" to nullify pretty much any other interesting
> criteria.
>
Ah, it could have been so different. The 68000 was
a better processor. The Amiga was a better machine.
But oh well.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
/dev/signature: No such file or directory
The Ghost In The Machine
<brick....@gmail.com>
wrote
on Tue, 6 May 2008 18:26:24 -0400
<121l2f3fdf9ob$.519tyf5n6m7p$.d...@40tude.net>:
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:17:26 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2008-05-06, Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.x...@40tude.net>,
>>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
>>>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
>>>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
>>>> science.
>>
>> ...as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.
>
> Huh?
Color me puzzled here as well.
>
>>>
>>> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
>>> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
>>> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
>>> crappy software that was bundled with it.
>>
>> ...that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.
>>
>> Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.
>
> You don't have a clue.
> People want to USE their players not play with mount commands, permissions,
> umount or the clusterfsck called automount.
>
> They want to plug them in, sync the data and use them.
Absolutely correct.
>
> Linux need not apply.
Not quite. Of course, one has to set it up via something
a la supermount (or hope that the distro has set up things
for them), but workarounds do exist.
>
>>>
>>> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
>>> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
>>> computer, by switching to Mac.
>>>
>>> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
>>> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
>>> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
>>
>> Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.
>
> And listen as they beg for iTunes back.
ITYM "Zune".
>
>
>
>> For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
>> have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
>> try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
>> available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
>> completely defecting.
>
> Sure, and 0.6 percent of desktop users do in fact end up sticking with
> Linux.
And how do we know this?
> The rest go running back to whatever they were using before they had a
ITYM "Windows".
> lapse of sanity and decided to try out Linux.
>
> You really need to get a clue how today's consumer operates and what she
> expects.
S/he expects things to work. Windows works straight out of the box.
(At least until the infections set in later.) Linux almost works,
but requires installation and tweaking.
Three guesses which one a user generally ignorant of computers
and/or computer software prefers.
>
> Most of the people writing Linux distributions, with few exceptions,
> haven't a clue which is why Linux's desktop market share is a dismal 0.6
> percent despite Linux being free.
>
Perhaps you'd care to try your hand at writing one?
Homer
> * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
>> *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
>
> You are a very clever troll, Ghost.
He's very tongue-in-cheek too, with a subtle mix of sarcasm delivered
through euphemisms, although I'm not sure if the euphemisms are quite
intentional. E.g. "marketing", a.k.a "bribery and corruption", at least
in Microsoft's case.
It always amuses me when the Trolls rebuff anti-Microsoft sentiment by
extolling the very thing that people hate most about them, and then try
to paint it as "envy". Ray Dopez is the chief culprit in that regard,
although most Trolls will fall back on that argument once the rest of
their shallow diatribe has been exhausted. For the record, I am no more
envious of Microsoft's ill-gotten "success" than I am of Al Capone's
"success" ... something any normal person could easily grasp, but the
money-obsessed goons who worship gangsters like Microsoft find quite
incomprehensible. If there is such a thing as pure evil, surely it is
defined as those who do wrong but lack any comprehension of their own
immorality, or at least don't care about the consequences. That pretty
much sums up Microsoft's attitude, and that of those who worship them.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
00:49:21 up 137 days, 21:25, 5 users, load average: 0.27, 0.15, 0.13
Homer
>> Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)
>>
>> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/01/moshe-goldfarb-troll.html
>> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/flatfish-troll.html
>
> Y'know what's freaky? I actually remember all of these flatfish
> nyms.
So does my leafnode filter (currently 347 Flatty nyms, and that's the
*pruned* version). PK's list probably runs into the thousands.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
00:57:54 up 137 days, 21:33, 6 users, load average: 0.04, 0.14, 0.13
The Ghost In The Machine
<use...@slated.org>
wrote
on Wed, 07 May 2008 00:49:52 +0100
<1e77f5-...@sky.matrix>:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
>> * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
>>> *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
>>
>> You are a very clever troll, Ghost.
>
> He's very tongue-in-cheek too, with a subtle mix of sarcasm delivered
> through euphemisms, although I'm not sure if the euphemisms are quite
> intentional. E.g. "marketing", a.k.a "bribery and corruption", at least
> in Microsoft's case.
*Ding*
I'll give you that one; hadn't thought about it. :-)
Of course, that's part of what marketing *is*, to spin
the positive, banish the negative from the minds of
prospective suckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcustomers. Ideally,
of course, the marketers would also honor the customers'
intelligence by not insulting them. ;-)
I'll admit to some curiosity as to exactly whom Microsoft
bribed, though. Best I can come up with is that "per
box" licensing issue, which was a discount and therefore
a sort of bribe (since it reduced the OEM's price for
each Windows license). The corruption is more obvious;
the OOXML process thus far has been rather disgusting to
watch, at least from afar and distorted through the COLA
filter -- but then, COLA is also reporting what they see
in the layman news filter, so we're not alone.
There's also the <OBJECT> versus <APPLET> issue, which is
still immortalized in HTML 4.01. (At least that's somewhat
justifiable; <OBJECT> is a more general construct. It does
look a little odd, though.) Not sure if that's a corruption
or not.
Gods, the muck that HTML and HTTP have turned into.
(Admittedly, it could be worse; replace HTML by MS Doc
format and we'd really be in a fine pickle. Of course
it turns out MS Doc got on the Web anyway, and are
readable by plugins [in my case, OpenOffice]).
>
> It always amuses me when the Trolls rebuff anti-Microsoft sentiment by
> extolling the very thing that people hate most about them, and then try
> to paint it as "envy". Ray Dopez is the chief culprit in that regard,
> although most Trolls will fall back on that argument once the rest of
> their shallow diatribe has been exhausted. For the record, I am no more
> envious of Microsoft's ill-gotten "success" than I am of Al Capone's
> "success" ... something any normal person could easily grasp, but the
> money-obsessed goons who worship gangsters like Microsoft find quite
> incomprehensible. If there is such a thing as pure evil, surely it is
> defined as those who do wrong but lack any comprehension of their own
> immorality, or at least don't care about the consequences. That pretty
> much sums up Microsoft's attitude, and that of those who worship them.
>
*shrug*
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
/dev/signature/pedantry: Resource temporarily unavailable
Tattoo Vampire
> "MothMan" (I've seen him on the Web, not on TV)
Ummmmm, that wasn't Mothman, I don't think. The real mothman hails from the
upper end of the state I call home for the time being:
http://www.essortment.com/all/mothmancreature_rlcw.htm
--
Regards,
[tv]
...Be reasonable......do it my way.
Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
Good to the last supper
Homer
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Homer <use...@slated.org> wrote on Wed, 07
> May 2008 00:49:52 +0100 <1e77f5-...@sky.matrix>:
> I'll admit to some curiosity as to exactly whom Microsoft bribed,
> though.
Here's one:
[quote]
Mba-Uzoukwu wrote that Microsoft is still negotiating an agreement that
would give TSC US$400,000 (£190,323) for marketing activities around the
Classmate PCs when those computers are converted to Windows.
[/quote]
And another:
[quote]
Microsoft Sweden was later found to have offered extra "marketing
contributions" to its business partners to encourage them to vote for
OOXML, according to e-mails seen by Computer Sweden.
[/quote]
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/08/31/Sweden-OOXML-vote-invalid_1.html
And yet another:
[quote]
According to at least six bloggers, Microsoft has been sending out free
top-of-the-line laptops pre-loaded with Vista as a 'no strings attached
gifts'. This 'reward' for their hard work on covering tech in general is
coincidentally right before the launch of Vista to consumers. To be
clear, these weren't loans, they were gifts, and they were
top-of-the-line Acer Ferrari laptops. Microsoft blogger Long Zheng broke
the silence over the source of the freebies.
[/quote]
http://slashdot.org/articles/06/12/27/1423234.shtml
How about another?:
[quote]
A ROW IS BREWING between a bunch of bloggers who took cash from
Microsoft marketing outfit and stodgy old media types who take their
bribes in less obvious ways.
The row started on Friday when the ValleyWag revealed how some "star
boggers" had taken some cash from Federated Media to repeat some
Microsoft sloganeering in copy on their websites.
Michael Arrington tells all how his Techcrunch site became
"people-ready". Gigaom's Om Malik talks about when a business becomes
"people ready". Others named and shamed include Paul Kedrosky and Matt
Marshall of Venture Beat, as well as Fred Wilson, the blogger-investor.
Ads with the Volish motto appear on the blogger's site.
[/quote]
http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2007/06/25/boggers-embroiled-in-volish-bribery-kerfuffle
Oh go on, have another one:
[quote]
Mercury News writers Mike Antonucci and Dean Takahashi demo and review
the new Halo 3, Microsoft’s much anticipated new gaming title. Nooch
calls it “one of the biggest days in videogame history.” And the duo
discuss the approximately $800 press kit that showed up in the mail for
Dean - a giant, personalized duffel bag filled with Halo 3 schwag.
[/quote]
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2007/09/24/video_dean_and_nooch_demo_halo_3/
Last one ... promise, although I think this one counts more as
extortion, than bribery. Well it's the opposite side of the same coin:
[quote]
Microsoft sharpshooter Joachim Kempin, who was convicted of illegally
shooting antelope in Montana in 1998, has been turning his guns on a
more familiar target: Microsoft's own OEM customers.
The States' remedy hearing opened in DC yesterday, and States attorney
Steven Kuney produced a devastating memo from Kempin, then in charge of
Microsoft's OEM business, written after Judge Jackson had ordered his
break-up of the company. Kempin raises the possibility of threatening
Dell and other PC builders which promote Linux.
"I'm thinking of hitting the OEMs harder than in the past with
anti-Linux. ... they should do a delicate dance," Kempin wrote to
Ballmer, in what is sure to be a memorable addition to the phrases
("knife the baby", "cut off the air supply") with which Microsoft
enriched the English language in the first trial. Unlike those two, this
is not contested.
[/quote]
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/03/19/microsoft_killed_dell_linux_states/
This is not an exhaustive list.
Bizniz® as usual for the Redmond gangsters.
>> If there is such a thing as pure evil, surely it is defined as
>> those who do wrong but lack any comprehension of their own
>> immorality, or at least don't care about the consequences. That
>> pretty much sums up Microsoft's attitude, and that of those who
>> worship them.
>
> *shrug*
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
04:33:31 up 138 days, 1:09, 6 users, load average: 0.16, 0.29, 0.55
The Ghost In The Machine
<sit...@this.computer>
wrote
on Tue, 6 May 2008 23:05:59 -0400
<ch50o8b5...@ziggynet1.ziggynet>:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> "MothMan" (I've seen him on the Web, not on TV)
>
> Ummmmm, that wasn't Mothman, I don't think. The real mothman hails from the
> upper end of the state I call home for the time being:
>
> http://www.essortment.com/all/mothmancreature_rlcw.htm
And here I thought he might be this guy's sidekick:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tick
:-)
But the above one is arguably more interesting.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }
DFS
>> I'll admit to some curiosity as to exactly whom Microsoft bribed,
>> though.
Let's see: bloggers accept free MS gifts and that's "bribery" and it means
the bloggers are corrupt and are then unable to write an independent review,
but Linux lusers accept free OSS software practically all the time but
remain pure as snow.
Suuurrrree...
Fact is, you shameless Linux/OSS hypocrites - not just on cola but all over
the 'Net - deliver loads and loads of corrupt, positive, welfare reviews of
Linux, despite its proven crappiness. The slightest glitch in Windows and
you're screeching to holy hell, but Linux morons delude themselves about the
quality of Linux and post ridiculous stuff like this:
"PCLinux is brilliant and definitly one of if not the top Linux distro, but
only when its actually working."
http://www.pclinuxos.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=58&topic=39498.0
"I have loaded and reloaded and reloaded. Mepis works GREAT! However, it
freezes every morning when I get back on it."
http://mepislovers.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10675&highlight=freezes
"Never give up on openSUSE!!!!!!!!! It is frustrating, but gets better when
the system actually works."
http://www.suseforums.net/index.php?showtopic=41708&hl=
chrisv
>Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
>> * Patricia peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>>> Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)
>>>
>>> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/01/moshe-goldfarb-troll.html
>>> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/flatfish-troll.html
>>
>> Y'know what's freaky? I actually remember all of these flatfish
>> nyms.
>
>So does my leafnode filter (currently 347 Flatty nyms, and that's the
>*pruned* version). PK's list probably runs into the thousands.
I had quite a list going, until I blew-it out about a year ago.
Google "my bozo bin", where I posted the list, if you're interested.
Moshe Goldfarb
The word about these Linux cultists is getting around to the various
respectable journals so expect to see some press about it in the near
future.
What is happening is that the Linux loons typical "works for me" couple
with their "Windows ate my first born" tactics are backfiring on them.
People are trying Linux, having massive problems and then taking to the
net, assuming they can even get Linux to connect to the net that is because
network cards seem to give Linux fits, where they will start reading the
lies and arrogance and will realize that "hey Windows works for me" and
"wow, a lot of people have problems with Linux".
IOW they figure out that they have been lied to and they become even more
anti Linux.
Notice the tone of the people in of some of the links you are posting.
These people are upset at wasting weeks trying to get Linux to half work.
So the more idiots like kelsey and Roy and Kent and [homer] the paranoid
mental case keep posting their lies, the more people see them and the more
people get pissed at Linux.
Word spreads very fast.
The Ghost In The Machine
<fik7f5-...@sky.matrix>:
> Verily I say unto thee, that The Ghost In The Machine spake thusly:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Homer <use...@slated.org> wrote on Wed, 07
>> May 2008 00:49:52 +0100 <1e77f5-...@sky.matrix>:
>
>> I'll admit to some curiosity as to exactly whom Microsoft bribed,
>> though.
>
> Here's one:
[non-exhaustive list snipped]
Ick. That's worse than I expected.
>
> Bizniz® as usual for the Redmond gangsters.
Worrisome, when bribery, corruption, and deals one can't
refuse can be shuffled under the rug as "business as usual"
to the ignorant majority.
>
>>> If there is such a thing as pure evil, surely it is defined as
>>> those who do wrong but lack any comprehension of their own
>>> immorality, or at least don't care about the consequences. That
>>> pretty much sums up Microsoft's attitude, and that of those who
>>> worship them.
>>
>> *shrug*
>
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
Windows. The choice of a bunch of people who like very weird behavior on
a regular basis, random crashes, and "extend, embrace, and extinguish".
JEDIDIAH
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
><brick....@gmail.com>
> wrote
> on Tue, 6 May 2008 18:26:24 -0400
><121l2f3fdf9ob$.519tyf5n6m7p$.d...@40tude.net>:
>> On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:17:26 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2008-05-06, Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.x...@40tude.net>,
>>>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
>>>>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
>>>>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
>>>>> science.
>>>
>>> ...as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.
>>
>> Huh?
>
> Color me puzzled here as well.
What video formats and codecs does an ipod support?
This is already a point of contention for the AppleTV.
It takes a LONG time to convert stuff just so that a PMP
won't choke on it. It's FAR more convenient to able to just
drag stuff to it.
It is simplest to do nothing.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
>>>> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
>>>> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
>>>> crappy software that was bundled with it.
>>>
>>> ...that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.
>>>
>>> Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.
>>
>> You don't have a clue.
>> People want to USE their players not play with mount commands, permissions,
>> umount or the clusterfsck called automount.
Compared to the way that XP handles USB devices (PMP or otherwise),
Linux is an absolute dream.
>>
>> They want to plug them in, sync the data and use them.
Odd then that this is not how the other vendors treat media players.
>
> Absolutely correct.
>
>>
>> Linux need not apply.
>
> Not quite. Of course, one has to set it up via something
> a la supermount (or hope that the distro has set up things
> for them), but workarounds do exist.
Nope.
More recent distros will do all of this automagically.
Knowing too much in this case can be a problem because
you find yourself not looking for the newer easier
solutions and thus find yourself unaware of them.
Linux can be sneaky that way.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
>>>> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
>>>> computer, by switching to Mac.
>>>>
>>>> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
>>>> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
>>>> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?
>>>
>>> Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.
>>
>> And listen as they beg for iTunes back.
iTunes is nothing special.
If you aren't fixated on buying DRM laden stuff from Apple
it is completely interchangable with a number of other applications.
>
> ITYM "Zune".
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
>>> have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
>>> try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
>>> available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
>>> completely defecting.
>>
>> Sure, and 0.6 percent of desktop users do in fact end up sticking with
>> Linux.
>
> And how do we know this?
>
>> The rest go running back to whatever they were using before they had a
>
> ITYM "Windows".
>
>> lapse of sanity and decided to try out Linux.
>>
>> You really need to get a clue how today's consumer operates and what she
>> expects.
>
> S/he expects things to work. Windows works straight out of the box.
> (At least until the infections set in later.) Linux almost works,
> but requires installation and tweaking.
...sounds like a Windows install.
"Don't plug in this device before installing the driver"
[deletia]
--
Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.
JEDIDIAH
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, JEDIDIAH
><je...@nomad.mishnet>
> wrote
> on Tue, 6 May 2008 17:01:44 -0500
><slrng21la...@nomad.mishnet>:
>> On 2008-05-06, The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
>>><er...@despam-funkenbusch.com>
>>> wrote
>>> on Tue, 6 May 2008 11:14:47 -0400
>>><18tjkz06...@funkenbusch.com>:
>>>> On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>> Ah... no.
>>
>> Microsoft took advantage of the fact that every different
>> make of car needs it's own brand of gasoline to go with it.
>>
>> Imagine a gas station with pumps for every brand of car.
>
> At the time, yes. Microsoft commoditized the market, yes.
They didn't "commodotize" anything.
They were just affiliated with the previous monopoly: IBM.
> They then leveraged it -- DOS to Win3.1, Win3.1 to Win95,
> Win95 to Win98 to WinMe (ha!) to WinXP, and finally the
> latest and (FSVO) greatest, Windows Vista.
>
> And IBM was left somewhere between the bedroom and the altar... :-/
>
Ah... no.
What created the PC as a commodity were the cloners Phoenix and Compaq.
Microsoft was just lucky it got to go along for the ride.
>>
>> Most gas station owners would go insane. So they would instead
>> tend to only support the most common cars.
>
> Further exacerbated by the requirement that Microsoft
> gets paid for every fillup, regardless of whether they
> use regular Microsoft, or premium Something Else(tm).
>
> But of course Microsoft was very nice to the filling stations;
> they gave them a slight discount. Wasn't that lovely? :-)
>
>> Then eventually they
>> would only support only one brand of car.
>
> Or one brand type. The PCs got a little weird, since IBM
> did a foolish thing in publishing the entire BIOS listing.
>
> (Wish I still had that.)
>
>>
>> This is what happened with PC's, nevermind non-PCs.
>
> Non-PCs dropped out of the equation because PCs underpriced them,
> methinks.
Not really.
Amigas were simultaneously better and cheaper.
Macs had the perception of being expensive but they weren't
much more expensive than non-trash PCs. The fact that people could
get a recycled PC that should have gone in the local landfill helped
create this perception that PCs were "cheaper".
Although cut-rate brands of clones weren't cheaper than Amigas or ST's.
>
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> Microsoft got in bed with the right partner and got themselves
>> enough "street cred" to nullify pretty much any other interesting
>> criteria.
>>
>
> Ah, it could have been so different. The 68000 was
> a better processor. The Amiga was a better machine.
> But oh well.
>
--
Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Homer
> iTunes is nothing special.
It's worse than that, it's slow; bloated; buggy; and totally unnecessary.
I have an iPod, and two machines running XP (dual boot) that I could run
iTuna on if I really wanted to. In fact I used to, but it reached the
stage where it became very frustrating waiting for iTuna's bloated
interface. At times it takes up to one minute just to respond to certain
tasks - specifically when adding new media or rescanning the database.
Then there's the fact that it /really/ doesn't play well with others.
Media uploaded to the device through other media managers gets
arbitrarily wiped by iTuna, rather than imported into the database,
which /should/ be the correct behaviour (at least it's the polite thing
to do). In fact every aspect of iTuna feels restrictive (as if the bloat
and general slowness wasn't enough)
I thought Microsoft's Draconian control of the user's desktop experience
was bad, until I started using Apple software, which is about a hundred
times worse.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
00:28:43 up 138 days, 21:04, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
The Ghost In The Machine
<piq9f5-...@sky.matrix>:
> Verily I say unto thee, that JEDIDIAH spake thusly:
>
>> iTunes is nothing special.
>
> It's worse than that, it's slow; bloated; buggy; and totally unnecessary.
>
> I have an iPod, and two machines running XP (dual boot) that I could run
> iTuna on if I really wanted to. In fact I used to, but it reached the
> stage where it became very frustrating waiting for iTuna's bloated
> interface. At times it takes up to one minute just to respond to certain
> tasks - specifically when adding new media or rescanning the database.
>
> Then there's the fact that it /really/ doesn't play well with others.
> Media uploaded to the device through other media managers gets
> arbitrarily wiped by iTuna, rather than imported into the database,
> which /should/ be the correct behaviour (at least it's the polite thing
> to do). In fact every aspect of iTuna feels restrictive (as if the bloat
> and general slowness wasn't enough)
>
> I thought Microsoft's Draconian control of the user's desktop experience
> was bad, until I started using Apple software, which is about a hundred
> times worse.
>
Not sure I'd want either an iPod *or* a Zune, but this
is slightly distressing. But do I have money to sue or
develop one of my own? No. (I suspect there's a few other
DRM-less MP3 players flitting about, but I'd have to look.)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
fortune: not found
Erik Funkenbusch
> Verily I say unto thee, that JEDIDIAH spake thusly:
>
>> iTunes is nothing special.
>
> It's worse than that, it's slow; bloated; buggy; and totally unnecessary.
Unless you want to buy music from the iTunes Store, then it's mandatory.
Tim Smith
> is slightly distressing. But do I have money to sue or
> develop one of my own? No. (I suspect there's a few other
> DRM-less MP3 players flitting about, but I'd have to look.)
Why would you need a DRM-less MP3 player?
--
--Tim Smith
Hadron
And is easy to use, has a consistent UI and a good built in normalizer.
Lets face it - Homercrite just despises success of any kind. He's a
washed up old procrastinator who puts nothing back in himself.
--
< doogie> asuffield: how do you think dpkg was originally written? :|
< asuffield> by letting iwj get dangerously near a computer
-- in #debian-devel
The Ghost In The Machine
<reply_i...@mouse-potato.com>
wrote
on Wed, 07 May 2008 21:45:40 -0700
<reply_in_group-6FE...@news.supernews.com>:
Well, considering my usual setup, I might not; I already
have my laptop at my elbow and a pair of cheap earphones.
But it's a tad heavy to carry around in, say, a crowded
shopping mall. Not that I frequently listen to music
or frequent shopping malls, crowded or otherwise.
Why would anyone need an iPod or a Zune? Yet people buy them.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
New Technology? Not There. No Thanks.
Moshe Goldfarb
> Erik Funkenbusch <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 00:28:56 +0100, Homer wrote:
>>
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that JEDIDIAH spake thusly:
>>>
>>>> iTunes is nothing special.
>>>
>>> It's worse than that, it's slow; bloated; buggy; and totally unnecessary.
>>
>> Unless you want to buy music from the iTunes Store, then it's
>> mandatory.
>
> And is easy to use, has a consistent UI and a good built in normalizer.
>
> Lets face it - Homercrite just despises success of any kind. He's a
> washed up old procrastinator who puts nothing back in himself.
The initial Windows version was a little bloated and buggy, that part is
true.
It was fixed quickly and now the Windows version is just as good as the OSX
version IMHO.
There is a solid reason that people like the iPod, the iPhone and now in
increasing numbers, the Mac and that is because it *just works*, is
intuitive and allows the user to do *stuff* without having to think about
how to use a computer or in the case of Linux fuss with an operating
system.