OSNews

+1 and I totally agree. I've read tons of articles (actually, I don't read them anymore...) predicting that Vista will be free. This simply a joke. As you pointed out people who predict that simply didn't understand where MS gets its money, which is Windows and Office. Nothing else is fundamental to Microsoft and that's why they can give so much software away for free. Now this is not meant to bash anyone here but just to say people should pay more attention.

Plus, let's wipe away a mith: Microsoft doesn't get its money from Windows by direct retails sales. They mostly milk their cow via OEMs and that's the channel they need to care. So a 0€ Linux won't ever affect Windows unless such system will be so easy to sell that OEMs will sell it pre-installed. Though some OEM is start selling Linux pre-installed, that's a little drop in the ocean. No way this can hurt Microsoft (yet)

I don't mean that Microsoft will never be forced to give Windows out for free but that won't happen anytime soon. That would be a very last measure if Microsoft gets into REAL trouble, which won't happen for many years.

Before giving Windows away for free Microsoft can destruct market by lowering (at least two times in a 4 years term) prices (say, if they drop from 90% of PCs to 80%, they might decide to drop a 100USD price to 60USD and less for OEMs, plus if they drop to 75% or 70% in - say - 4 years, they could decide to re-gain market share by dropping price to 35-45USD and on and on). That's a long road before they will ship Windows for free.

But most of all, remember that this will need TIME. If you think MS will drop from 90+% to anything than 85% in a 2-3 years term you're a dreamer.

The bare fact that they didn't need to substantially change XP price for many years shows by itself how worried they are about Linux menace on desktop systems.

Finally, remember that computer ecosystem is supposed to gain MANY users in 2-3 years (the whole Asia plus Latin America zones account for almost 50% of world people). Even if most of such people was able to enter this market and they *all* used Linux/Apple, MS could drop to (say) 50% of the market WITHOUT loosing a penny for their revenues in a 5-6 years term. Plus they have tons of cash and they could afford not to sell a single product for 3-4 years and still being in business...!

So please, let's stop predicting that Microsoft will crumble, collapse, fail, file for bankruptcy. If that will ever happen, we will probably be old enough to have kids or to see children of our own kids. Dreaming costs nothing but if you really want to achieve real goals, it's better to let your feet be firm on the ground.

My .02

If they give Vista away for free, they need to make money on something else. That something else could be support. By giving Vista away they would have more people to sell support to, and the shareholders could be kept happy.

The problem is, that to do that, they need to change the common opinion that support and Microsoft is two separate things that never meet. That would require a lot of money spent on organizational changes, education and PR.

The question then becomes, how much will they be able to charge for support? Most home users will never pay for support (try telling your mum that she needs to pay $$$ monthly to use her computer). It will kill the incentive to upgrade. That is why MS makes loads of money on Windows XP OEM sales.

Corporate users are a different matter, and there I think it might work.

"I think there exists an amazing opportunity"... Yeah, you and this guy: http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2005090902026OPMSSW

For me, it was the flexibility and security.

I get to choose what I want, and adapt it to whatever application I need, and drop the crap I don't need!

Most people do not switch to linux because it is free.

I'd argue that. They *absolutely* switch to Linux because it's free. I think what you mean it say is that they don't move off of Windows because of the cost.

If I just want off of Windows, don't you think the logical choice for the standard consumer is s Mac? I doubt Joe Shmoe is going to up and switch to Linux, which he likely has no experience with, because he's tired of spyware. He'll go to a store and likely find NO BOXES of Linux. He'll have to figure out what to do with an ISO, or worse, how to use BiTorrent. People may not switch because of the cost, but the **average** person that does choose Linux likely does so because its free.

And you base your argument on the biased opinions you have. Ask why people switch to GNU/Linux and the cost is almost never mentionned. Its the reason given by Windows zealot and apologist.

" don't you think the logical choice for the standard consumer is s Mac?"

No , because most people own X86 system. Its easier to switch to GNU/Linux then to go and buy a new Apple computer.

"I doubt Joe Shmoe is going to up and switch to Linux"

I dont know Joe Shmoe but there is nothing stopping him from switching to GNU/Linux if thats what he whants. With Live-CD and the Support group from corporation its easier then to try and install Windows.

"which he likely has no experience with"

Someone who as never used a computer as no experience in anything. When you try something new you dont have any experience. Switchin to Win 98 to win 2k to Win XP its always a new experience.

"He'll go to a store and likely find NO BOXES of Linux."

Thats a supply problem , if you whant a ferrari do you go to the next door wall-mart and look for one ? No you go to the Ferrari specialist.

"He'll have to figure out what to do with an ISO, or worse, how to use BiTorrent."

There are million of service specialist who offer GNU/Linux install and there is boced product and cheaptbytes like store who send you working CD.

The average people switch because GNU/Linux offer more.

- More security
- More software
- More liberty ( legal to install on 5 computer )
- More freedom ( you get to change it the way you like it )
- Etc ...

- Because they can and they whant to ...

BTW most people who use Windows do so illegally , because they cant legally afford it or they dont whant to pay for something tey already paid for. Making it Free whont change the real reason *why* people switch.

I'm sorry, but your responses are just as biased as mine, except you state your opinions as facts. All of my statements come from experience. I've been in this field, and I have seen many people attempt Linux and fail.

You make the mistake of assuming (ASSUMING!) that most people have the knowledge and experience that you do. But the truth is that my experience, as well as every article in all the trade magazines, disagree with you. Linux - of which I am a very big supporter - is certainly not an attractive option for a "normal" computer user in the US today. If it were, you'd see more vendors preinstalling it. But they aren't. Most of them are merely thinking about it or rolling it out onsie twosie. But you won't find large vendors pushing it hard to home consumers. You just won't. Just as its virtually impossible to find Linux boxed in a store. It's not supply, it's lack of demand. Those who want it that way aren't prevalent, those who don't know how to get it - and probably a more recent version - online.

BTW most people who use Windows do so illegally

Yeah, right. Care to back that up with some evidence? You're completely deluded. You're suggesting to me that the hundreds of thousands of computers sold each year are done so with illegal copies of Windows, right? That XP upgrades, sold online in droves via CDW, PC Mall, and Zones, as well as in stores like CompUSA and Best Buy -- they are all pirated, right?

No, sorry -- you're completely misinformed. Perhaps your friends pirate software like that, but most people wouldn't have the foggiest idea where to get a pirated version of Windows if it weren't for the tech savvy.

,,Yeah, right. Care to back that up with some evidence?''

I work and live in Poland. People I know (geeks and non-geeks) who uses Windows.. well.. they all use pirate Windows. Except for my friend who got brand new laptop with OEM Windows. People consider Windows being free as in beer, really.

I'm using Linux not because of a price tag. I use it because of technological merits.

For GNU/Linux to have so many offer there are more that are sucessfull then there are of your failure :

http://distrowatch.com/

There is more trade magazine then WINDOWS MAg :

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/602324/104-9069195-92...

This Year GNU/Linux offer are better then last year but less then next year. Normal computer user in the US are finding out everyday that GNU/Linux is a really atractive option.

The number of OEM brand vendor installing GNU/Linux is increasing at a fast pace. There is more this year then there whas last year at this date and there are less then next year at this date.

The reality is that GNU/Linux distribution can now affor to make there own rolling out ;-) , you will see more often as time goes by ;-)

Wallmart , HP , Dell , Apple are big enough vendor for me.

The GNU/Linux box absence is due to shortage of stocks , most often then not there sold out. Just ask any computer store in your area if they can get GNU/Linux for you.

"Care to back that up with some evidence?"

Yes : Moulinneuf ( thats me ) said there are more Windows in use that are illegal then there are of legal copy.

- China
- Africa
- Middle east
- Europe

BSA Global reports. Microsoft Global reports.

There are more whitebox ( 80% of the market ) then there are of all OEM brand name put togheter.

" That XP upgrades, sold online in droves via CDW, PC Mall, and Zones, as well as in stores like CompUSA and Best Buy -- they are all pirated, right?"

You know that There is more computer OS license that where bought for 95 , 98 and 2000 then there whas for XP. If you dont , now you do. Also a couple of those where sold illegally as OEM license , OEM license are supposed to be sold with new complete assembled computer.

Dont be sorry for me , be sorry for yourself, you live in your own little rich area of teh United states and dont even see whats under your nose.

Most people dont even know they are using Illegal copies of windows , they got it from there local vendors.

Its not because your blind and assume that all your friends and familly are legal and can afford the same as you that they do. I am sure that you dont have to go far from yourself to find a pirated windows or someone with one pirated games or application.

BTW the day ATI , nvidia , Matrox and computer hardware maker started to make GNU/Linux drivers whas long past the point GNU/Linux whas Mainstream , if they keep adding staff and offer for it its because its a market that is growing. ;-)

I don't think so buddy. I work in IT and am often confronted by friends and family about windows, what to do to fix it and if there is something else they can use. I've mentioned linux and 95% of the time the people I'm talking to don't know what it is and they would never take the time to try and really learn how to use it. I can't say that I blame them either. The 'free' part always catches their attention, I've even set some folks up on it. In the end it's just as much trouble as windows because they still call you to fix this, install that or I need to to do this, what can I use?

We had a LUG at the university I attended and an install fest every semester. We tried handing out cd's with free software that existed on linux and windows, put up flyers with "FREE FREE FREE! STABLE! NO MORE VIRUSES" or whatever we thought would catch peoples attention. The crowds at every install fest were very sparse, I mean asside from the few members that would show up to do it, there would be maybe 2 or 3 folks turn up.

In the end most average people don't care about linux or any other free operating system, they care about what they bought and paid for and just want it to work. Most of them are not using windows illegaly because it came preinstalled on their laptop or desktop they purchased from whatever big name computer manufactuer that included a license with it.

Off course you where paid for the service of helping them like on windows right ? Or you made the mistake of saying Everything is free all the time ?

I know the LUG episode , you put it on a day or night everybody else is doing something else and nobody shows up ... There is more to LUG then just installing softwares too.

Not everyone buys there computer at the big name computer manufacturer. Even if I grant you that if they buy it from the store it come with a a legal OS , there is also the applications and games that get pirated too ...

Time is not a problem for GNU/Linux , its probably a good thing they dont try what you have to offer , because from the look of it your not offering the best or not even that much interested in supporting it.

Just for fun what distribution did you use ?

He'll go to a store and likely find NO BOXES of Linux.

Then he's going to the wrong store. I haven't been to Future Shop (Canadian Best Buy equivalent/subsidiary) in a while, but I used to see boxed SuSE CDs all the time in the software aisles. They didn't have a HUGE selection of distros, but they did sell it (and regardless, if I'm going to recommend a boxed version of Linux to anyone, I'm going to recommend SuSE.)

Yeah, they USED to carry SuSE and Red Hat. Not anymore.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp;jsessionid=3KXOBYY3SLFK3KC4...

Red Hat never whas about the consumer Market. There for the corporate market.

I never got tired with worms, spyware, viruses because I've never had one, let me remind you why people move to linux, why people develop linux


http://www.forbes.com/intelligentinfrastructure/2005/06/16/linux-bs...

That said it all

I will understand completely if English is not your first language, but,

Just as stupid is the previous reason, "3: The WHOLE system can be free, not just the OS." So when you use Windows, you can't use open source software just as when you use Linux you can't use propreitary software?

You picked that up wrong. You can indeed use OSS on Windows, but you cannot have a complete FREE system. Microsoft will not allow this. BTW - I mean free as in speech - not free as in free beer.

Honestly, how many started using Linux because it has the "4: Freedom to alter it as I please."?

I don't know. Me for one.

You can indeed use OSS on Windows, but you cannot have a complete FREE system. Microsoft will not allow this. BTW - I mean free as in speech - not free as in free beer.

You know how many people I know in real life that actually care about free-as-in-speech? I can count them on one hand. Anyone who objects to software on moral grounds and is willing to settle on anything less than the right tool to get the job done right isn't someone I want to work with, certainly isn't someone I want on my team, and is exactly the kind of person I would call "fanatic" or a "zealot."

I use open source tools all the time, and prefer most of them, but you can be guaranteed that if a commercial app comes along that is best of breed and accomplishes something I can't do with alternatives (or accomplishes it better, faster, or cheaper), I will use it, and my company expects me to.

Now wait a minute. OSS isn't (just) about morals, it is about very real practical advantages and above all independence. It is about the guarantee that your chosen software will be useful and available for you in the future. The guarantee that there is always a way out in case you get stuck because your software unexpectedly doesn't do exactly what you need it to do.

People who care about this are hardly "fanatics" or "zealots".

Um, last time I looked the #1 and #2 distros out there (Red Hat and Novell/SUSE) were almost 100% open source.

Novell and Red Hat have both added some non open source software here and there but that does not stop you from using the open source parts and having full up and running OS's (Like CentOS and WhiteBox, Open Suse etc)

I like how Novell has done. If you have a small business and you want to be full Open Source you can use Suse Enterprise Linux 9. You get your file sharing from Samba, Directory Services from Open LDAP etc. Or if you want Novell non open source software you can pay more and get e-directory for directory services, IFolder for file sharing etc.

You have choice! No such thing on Windows. You use what they give you, you wait till they upgrade it and you have no control over it. You hope that it works the same etc. For instance, if I want the features of Apache 1.3 but Suse 9 Enterprise comes with Apache 2 (Which it does) I uninstall Apache 2 and install Apache 1.3xxx! Let me see ya do that with IIS? You can't you stuck with what they give you and you hope it works like the last version!

That is the freedom we talk about!

Free as in beer here.

" 1: Malware on Windows
2: Stability (less of a problem with XP, but still
there)
3: The WHOLE system can be free, not just the OS.
4: Freedom to alter it as I please. "

You just put your finger on the problem. Even *IF* Vista were given away, the problem is still one of *perception* : M$ is a GREEDY SELF SERVING company that ONLY cares about the bottom line, and nothing about the user -- the end user is seen is nothing more than a endless source of money. M$ over the years has done nothing but turn out piles of JUNK software that does not even come close to living up to the promises made. Users have been burned over and over by M$. M$ *knows* it has a huge installed base, but the sound of revolution is in the air and it grows by the day: M$'s answer: INTEGRATE EVERYTHING so that ONLY M$ products will work with a M$ OS. The problem is that the world is becoming more and more computer dependent. There are SUN systems, Apples, Linux, BSD, etc. and they must all communicate -- and there is M$ saying -- "We don't want to play and share our sandbox with you". And now along comes LINUX, who *WILL* share his sandbox, but everything else. So who do you go play with, someone who is as STINGY and SELFISH as MICROSOFT?? Or someone who will work with and share their snadbox like LINUX and the Open Source World??

And then there is the issue of VIRUSES and WORMS. I saw the figure that there were litterally THOUSANDS of virses last year alone for Windows based systems.

So even *IF* M$ were to give away Vista for Free, look at what they are giving away: 1) would probably be the cheapest verson available -- just to get the end user hooked on an inferior product, then hope to bleed them dry via the upgrade path -- M$ your friendly drug pusher. 2) Like all drugs it is JUNK: While the world is moving away from 32 bit systems and towards 64 bit systems, Vista is still being designed for 32 bit systems. 3) In order to run Vista at close to its "promised" specs, you need to go out and buy a NEW COMPUTER. You go out and buy a NEW COMPUTER JUST TO RUN an OS?!? And the NEW COMPUTER is still running 32 bit code?? Are you CRAZY. 4) Vista will still be a security nightmare.

So *IF* M$ were to give away their junkware the question is SO WAHAT, and besides, WHO CARES. M$ would have to PAY ME to USE THEIR JUNKWARE. What M$ fails to realize is that no matter how much money they throw at their OS the world has passed them by. The ONLY way *I* weould even consider using a M$ OS is *IF* 1) It were MODULAR so I don't have to use M$ cr@pware 2) It played well with every other platform out there 3) It had a resonable cost. 4) They released all their API etc. so that others could build to those standards without having to be ONLY a M$ product.

As I said, SO WHAT and WHO CARES -- there is NO WAY I will EVER USE VISTA (or whatever M$ decides to release there after) or ANY M$ product. They can keep their BLOATED BUGGY MALWARE to themselves.

Best windows to date
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/windowsrg.html

yeah, and I think I know the reason why.

somoeone learns how to use windows and his mates call him a "guru", he thinks he "knows" computers.

put this person in front of linux and he has not a clue how to do some familiar things. Thus his ego gets dented and he goes back to Windows, saying Linux is crap. and he tells all his mates the same.

The only reason Windows has the amount of users it has, is EGO.

So it has nothing to do with the lack of specialised applications/games or the simple fact that people with a working setup won't bother to seek alternatives, right?

yeah I have a fully working windows system,,,,,, however, as you well know, there is bound to be loads of spyware on there that I dont know about.
but why should I switch to a system where I have to type to get it to do anything ?

Everybody can use Windows, not everybody can use Linux. The number of people using an OS does not make the OS better is just a number. Linux is better in every aspect people don't use it since the average user does not know it exists. I've seen lots of Tech profesors who don't know what is Linux.

I'm fairly sure you were thinking of Lotus 1-2-3 and not Lotus Notes, since Notes isn't anything like Excel in the first place:) (http://www.lotus.com/products/product4.nsf/wdocs/noteshomepage)

I personaly would be very happy indeed for Microsoft made a "Lotus Notes killer" and I never had to use Notes again in my life. While a good idea it has by far THE worst UI of all the applications I use on a regular basis. Had the developers read Microsofts style guides and followed them, it would have been so much easier to use.

(And btw, Wiki nor Usenet has the features that Notes does:))

Unfortunately, quite a few. I'd even be bold enough to say that half of the current OSS fanatics – those running GNU/Linux/*BSD systems daily – would download it, and maybe a bit fewer would run it daily.

I agreed with most of what you had to say, but this part really begged me to reply.

I think that nearly 100% of OSS "fanatics" (I prefer the term "users", but your term does apply to a rather vocal minority) realize that Microsoft Windows can already be downloaded and installed for free. Yet, we still use an alternative.

For some people, an alternative OS is the better OS for them. BSD, Linux, et al, aren't for everyone; but those of us that use it, generally do so because we prefer it.

I think that nearly 100% of OSS "fanatics" realize that Microsoft Windows can already be downloaded and installed for free. Yet, we still use an alternative.

Anybody could download a crack for Opera 8, but as soon as they offered it for free, how many people lept at the chance?

There's a bigger difference between free as in theft and free as in beer than you give credit for.

Last time I looked the Mac OS is based on the Mach kernel and the BSD implementation of UNIX.

It's just as UNIX as Linux is (Even though it's hidden under the pretty GUI)

But you go to the command line and the filesystem layout and commands are almost the same as any Linux/Unix distro.

On another note, MacOS is MacOS, it is not a *NIX, it is not a flavour if BSD, it is MacOS.

Except its kernel and command-line tools are based on Mach 3.0 and FreeBSD 5.

MacOS is MacOS, it is not a *NIX, it is not a flavour if BSD, it is MacOS.

Hmmm... well, you might want to tell that to Apple so that they can update their website.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

Notice the suffix "based". It does not mean it is a *NIX. In the end, every OS derived from UNIX. So, on that note: Windows is Mac OS is UNIX? Chrysler is GMC is Ford is Mercedes? To me, it'd be like telling me that my Chrysler Intrepid is actually a Ford because it was made in a mass production plant based on what Henry Ford and company devised. Glad to see I got replies, however, though negative.

um...

MacOSX has UNIX underpinnings, it's built on UNIX.

The 2006 Dodge Neon is going to be built on the Mitsubishi Lancer platform...it essentially is a Lancer.

The Eagle Talon was a Mitsubishi Eclipse

What's the differences? Presentation...Lexus puts a fine polish on Toyota. Scion puts fun on top of a Toyaota. Accura puts luxury finish on Hondas...

Underneath they are still Toyotas and Hondas.

The end product is what it is built off of...a different label is just a label.

OSX is a UNIX operating system without the ability to say it's UNIX...if they wanted it to be UNIX they would pay for the right to say it is UNIX.

But it's a UNIX operating system...with a Luxury finish on it.