OSNews

Huh? Microsoft didn't prove itself in the early days. Microsoft road the coat tails of IBMs stability by copying code and UI from Apple. It achieved its dominance in OSes with this... then leveraged that to gain dominance in office suites... once they learned they could extend their monopoly... they kept the business rolling with the same business model ever since.

You can genuinely say that Microsoft achieved its status through their own merit.

Had Microsoft not ridden the coat tails and stolen from others, the battle would have been based on who could deliver what the public wanted based on innovation. Back then, Apple was coming up and it was IBM's market to lose.


"the FOSS community cannot wrap its mind around the fact that shit sells, and sells well."

And the Microsoft shills cannot wrap their mind around the fact that the "shit" sells well because of the benefits received from the afformention IBM coat tails and Apple theft.

Without stealing their momentum, Microsoft was not an any track to achieve dominance through their own creativity and ingenuity.

Edited 2005-12-15 00:46

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 4

Huh? Microsoft didn't prove itself in the early days. Microsoft road the coat tails of IBMs stability by copying code and UI from Apple.

Rode IBM's coattails? Ummmm buddy Apple was the biggest PC (as in "personal computers" not servers, work stations, etc) provider before Windows 3.1, if they needed to ride someones "coattials" it would be Apple, the very fact that they chose to go to invest in IBM was purely a business choice (which proved to be extremely profitable). Second, the UI wasn't even Apples's idea it was Xerox's which shows your ignorance to use an argument that's long since been put to rest. In addition to that, the GUI (the concept, which was actually what was accused of being stolen, not the UI (which is a specific design vs a concept, this is ignorant in that Windows has always had a substantially differant UI than Apple's)) was a natural progression of the Computer Industry, atleast to penetrate the Home User market it was. Also your exceptionally ignorant in this area when the entire CORE of Mac OS X isn't even Apple's it's FreeBSD's.

You can genuinely say that Microsoft achieved its status through their own merit.

Yeah they made great business decisions, they invested in a company that had a similiar vision to theirs...to bring computers completely to the Home User market (which, I can aknowledge, Apple proved was a profitable market) and make computers for the Business Market more efficient for practical use (Word Processing, Spreadsheets, etc; not programming, web design (atleast not until the internet boom), servers, etc).

Had Microsoft not ridden the coat tails and stolen from others, the battle would have been based on who could deliver what the public wanted based on innovation. Back then, Apple was coming up and it was IBM's market to lose.

Apple wasn't "coming up", it was the biggest PC provider. The fact that the company took a dive until the iMac G3 was purely Apple's fault a no one else's. (the loss of "The Woz", NeXTStep, etc).

And the Microsoft shills cannot wrap their mind around the fact that the "shit" sells well because of the benefits received from the afformention IBM coat tails and Apple theft.
Is this the only point you can come up with? Gosh, I would have thought that a troll would atleast be alil more knowledgable, but guess I was wrong. So how about I start accusing Apple of all it's thefts so far...the Mac OS X Kernel (which I know was legal under the BSD license, but so was MS's use of the GUI), the multibutton mouse, colored GUI, USB, DVD, CD-Burners (the superdrive came well after Wintel machines had DVD-ROMs and CD-RWs) etc etc. Three of these were natural evolutions in the Computer Industry, yet Windows (and for some of the hardware, IBM-based PC's) had them first therefore with the way Mac users think, you stole them.

Without stealing their momentum, Microsoft was not an any track to achieve dominance through their own creativity and ingenuity.

I could rebuke this, but in general Windows isn't very original, but neither is Apple (atleast post Macintosh). I'm done and out...

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

"They want it cheap, good enough and now. The IBM PC did that. Windows did that. It does it now and would still do it even if it wasn't preloaded on every machine. "

Prove it.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

"They want it cheap, good enough and now. "

Those qualities aren't unique to businesses. Those three qualities apply to Wal-Mart shoppers as well.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Actually IBM proved Microsoft in the early days, by choosing Microsoft's 1:6 price differance over CP/M.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Apparently there's things called viruses, spyware and adware which Microsoft can't seem to keep out. These things are one of the main issues must users have with Windows, the second being inconsistant UI. It appears they've built too much code too fast and are having trouble managing all of it, with it's team of speed coders.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

I like how you use numbers so we can easily reference you when your points are knocked down one by one.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Hahahaha, thanks for a good laugh. Too sad you seem to belive in it yourself.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Interesting that NONE of your points refer to Windows as being a "better product." Almost always, people refer to better programs, and better driver support as to why Windows is superior. The reality is that neither of these have anything to do with the Windows program itself.

But then again, this takes too much thinking. Let's just regurgitate what MS tells us.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Nothing to do with windows? I don't buy it.

Windows is actually a great platform to develop on. Not just because of the userbase, but the things the platform offers as a whole as well.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 3

Interesting that NONE of your points refer to Windows as being a "better product." Almost always, people refer to better programs, and better driver support as to why Windows is superior. The reality is that neither of these have anything to do with the Windows program itself.

Well, if you are going to use this kind of logic, then it would only stand to reason that we would've all ended up with Betamax's back in the day instead of VCR's, right? I mean, sure the VCR had a much better selection of movies, but the Betamax was technically superior, wasn't it?

Well, newsflash - it's the driver support and applications that makes the OS, not the OS itself. As a case in point, my portable mp3 player is a UMS device so it works on just about any computer. But in order to flash the firmware, I need a Windows box. So what the hell good would a non-Windows computer do me in this case?

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

I think that's an excellent point.

Too many folks get tied up in the "stability" or "security" side of an OS and claim it is superior because of these factors alone.

I can tell you my experience is that for the average folk at home will judge a product based on their overall experience with it. People want to buy a printer, camera, memory stick, scanner, etc and they want to plug it in and have it work with little fuss.

That's pretty much impossible on Linux. It doesn't have the technology to do it.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Quote: "That's pretty much impossible on Linux. It doesn't have the technology to do it."

That's complete and utter FUD. It most certainly does have the technology, in fact, Linux is generally very much ahead of Microsoft Windows in supporting new technologies. When you're dealing with closed source drivers/APIs etc, it's very hard to reverse engineer and have 100% compatibility.

I can pretty much buy a camera, printer, memory stick etc, and the Linux kernel will see it (as a device). Whether or not the layers on top of the kernel see it, and allow you to actually install/use it is another matter. You have to be careful how you word your comment, in order to actually be correct :-)

Dave

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 2

"People want to buy a printer, camera, memory stick, scanner, etc and they want to plug it in and have it work with little fuss."
"That's pretty much impossible on Linux. It doesn't have the technology to do it."

Good thing there arent any such problems in Windows....

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 2

Quote: "But in order to flash the firmware, I need a Windows box."

Very true. I had the same thing with a LG DVD burner sometime ago. Again, this isn't Linux's fault, this is the software vendors offering very poor service to their paying customers. If I buy a product, and I use GNU/Linux, should I be discriminated against because the manufacturer doesn't support updates that run on my operating system? I think not. I'm STILL a paying customer and I'm entitled to good service and support. Of course, I can choose not to support such hardware vendors anymore, and I urge other Linux users to do the same. These companies only understand 'money', withhold it from them and they'll start to comprehend things. Until you do so, they'll simply keep ignoring you.

Dave

PS You can use the Ultimate windows boot CD to boot a live version of Windows and then install most firmware :-)

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

A good example of this is Lexmark.
I bought one of their pronters and stuck it into a linux box. CUPS did not detect it, so I called Lexmark.
They asked which OS I was using and I said Mandriva 2006. They said the company policy was that they did not support this OS and I should upgrade to Windows.. UPGRADE ? hahaha

Anyway, I emailed Lexmark and within 2 days I had a reply from them, they gave me drivers to try and they worked. The website is now up to date with linux support and drivers on it.

I also have a UMS mp3 player like the guy in a previous post, and linus sees it as a removable drive, this is fine for copy/delete mp3 etc, but there is no actual access to the flash, I cannot contact the manufacturers, because I do not know who made it, it was a cheap 256mb one, but my point is this...

Yous would not get discriminated against if you were black/yellow/white/gay/straight/bisexual/able-bodied/disabled/protesta nt/catholic/jew/muslim
but you discriminated if you are a Windows/OS X/Linux/BeOS user

There are laws that penalise companies for discrimination against their employees, it is time it was implemented for their customers too.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Again, this isn't Linux's fault, this is the software vendors offering very poor service to their paying customers. If I buy a product, and I use GNU/Linux, should I be discriminated against because the manufacturer doesn't support updates that run on my operating system?

In the case of my mp3 player, it *does* work on Linux insomuch that I can connect it via USB and transfer files to/from it (or I assume I can do so in any distro that supports UMS devices), but if I were using Linux myself, I wouldn't reasonably expect the manufacturer to go through the trouble of writing a progrma to flash the firmware for an OS which is used realistically by at the most, 5% of it customer base. Would I choose another mp3 player? Probably not. Why? Because this particular player sports a couple of features that are extremely useful for audiobook sluts such as myself, that aren't found in very many other players, if any. (For example, the ability to disable track skipping is paramount.)

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Here's a suggestion: Maybe if you started paying people to use this so-called "superior Linux technology", they might use it. Because, clearly, "free" isn't good enough.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

1. MS has Windows/Office for everyday users, and superior VStudio/MSDN for developers.

Linux is superior technically, and just as good in ease of use, as Windows. OpenOffice is just as good as MSOffice, and it's free. VStudio is very good, but so are Kdevelop, NetBeans, Eclipse, QT Designer, Glade, and many others.

2. MS has better product documentation/support

Nope. I've tried getting support from MS, and it's a joke. Linux/FOSS gives incredible support, both from companies and user communities. Documentation for MS producst is only fair at best.

3. Windows are pretty stable now.

It has improved, but doesn't come close to Linux, BSD, MacOSX, or Solaris.

4. Linux/Unices are still harder to use.

Wrong. Completely, utterly wrong. Linspire, Xandros, Mepis, and many others, are about as easy as you can get. Now, other more technical/geek/professional Distros/Unices are harder to use for non tech users, but the newbie friendly distros simply can't be beat in the ease of use department.

5. It is only recently that a barely enough OO is available on *nices

OpenOffice has been available on *nices for a very long time.

6. There is NOT a easy to use and decent development tool. Eclipse is quite difficult to start with.

Eclipse is rather hard, as it's a framework for plugins, rather than a full out-of-the-box IDE. But see above for other great open source IDEs that are just as good or not better than VisualStudio.

7. *nices, OO, and various tools are separate products that can coexist on the same PC, not a system of products that work closely together.

Same holds true of MS products, and it's not a big deal.

8. There are a lot of decent games on Windows verses close to 0 on *nices.

There are some good games for *nices, and most great games are available for windows. Games are very expensive and labor intensive to develop, so most companies can only afford to write to the dominant platform - Windows. This is the only area where Windows has *nices beat.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 5

1. This point is highly debatable. Many of the 'everyday' users can quite happily work with Linux distributions like Xandros or Linspire. As to superior VStudio/MSDN developer applications, of course Microsoft will have superior versions! They own the entire code set to Windows etc, that sort of gives them a huge advantage!!! If we're talking programming though, as a entity, Linux wins hands down. Out of the box I can program in:

a. Ruby
b. Python
c. c
d. c++
e. perl
f. fortran

and the list goes on...and on...and on...trying doing that, out of the box with Microsoft Windows!

2. In some respects this is true, but in many areas it isn't. Windows help and Office help have long been reknowned for being anything but 'help'. Linux has a LOT of documentation, although some of it has undesirable readability issues, I'd agree.

3. Sure they are. But there are many things that I consider broken with Windows, least amongst them the licensing agreement! Stability of Windows is still poor when compared to Unixes, but, in fairness, it is good enough for the majority of users now.

4. To some degree yes, but I cannot totally agree with you here. It really depends on how you define ease of usage, and that is wholly dependant on the user in question. Basic usage, emails, word documents, web browsing, chatting, multimedia etc are no harder on Linux than on either Mac OS X or Windows. Administration of a Linux box is harder, but not overly hard for the average computer literate user who's prepared to learn a little bit. I mean, people still drive manual gearbox cars, despite them being 'harder' to use than automatics!

5. I'd disagree with you here. OpenOffice has been quite usable, for quite some time. I'd say around 2 years now, since the official release of version 1. Compatibility with Microsoft Word etc, is always going to be an issue, since Microsoft seeks to obfuscate the APIs and discourage any competition to their Office suite.

6. All development tools have a learning curve. Sure, there's nothing quite like Visual Studio, but the markets are quite different, and the programmers are quite different as well. I think you'll find (as a generalisation) that most people coding with a Unix/Linux variant are more competent than their Windows counterparts. Of course, I don't have stats to back that statement up, it's a particularly impossible thing to actually measure.

7. And applications that run on Microsoft Windows integrate well and run together? I don't think so...the horrors of shared dll files is still a fresh memory...

8. Yeah, sure. Because games developers port them only for Windows, I suspect because of pressure from Microsoft. That's most certainly not Linux's fault.

9. ?

I'm not sure how you managed to get modded to +5, there was nothing particularly factual, or exciting about your post to warrant modding up imho. Your arguments were mostly weak, and inconclusive.

Dave

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 5

"Because games developers port them only for Windows, I suspect because of pressure from Microsoft. That's most certainly not Linux's fault."
How can MS to force someone to make a game for them? =)
This is all about installed base.
game + consoles == good money
game + windows == money
game + linux != money
Modern games can cost millions. Who will pay?

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Quote: "Modern games can cost millions. Who will pay?"

Of course, if they don't port to Linux, we can't buy the games can we!

Furthermore, there's nothing stopping the games developers from still porting to Linux/BSD, and maybe cutting a loss, but making up for that loss by subsidising it with income from their high profit areas (Windows) and low profit areas (Mac OS X).

If you consider, many games developers are porting to OS X, which has considerably less users worldwide than Linux. And, if you also consider, many Linux users aren't old "unix style" geeks, but the young generation - 15-30 year olds. There's a lot of gamers there. In fact, one of Australia's PC magazines, Atomicmpc, is a magazine devoted for gamers, hardware tinkerers, casemodders etc, and they've been promoting Linux for several years now, with a monthly article on something Linuxy (usually at least 3 or 4 pages in length I might add). Their readerships is mostly that age group that I quoted, and most of them are hardcore gamers. So, there is money to be made. And as Linux saturates more and more of the desktop market over the next 10-15 years, you're going to find more and more people, and more and more gamers, meaning more potential profit.

Dave

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Newsflash, it's not 1998 any more. *nix has grown a lot in just the last year.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

News Flash,

It's the final weeks of 2005, few games are developed with a Linux port, if not for ID there would be next to no native ports.

ATI, one of the dominant graphics cards makers seems to have little interest in supporting Linux for atleast its latest cards.

Can you name a list of companies that release commercial games on both Windows and Linux? And I mean GAMES not Opensourced Game engines that don't include art / levels / sound / etc.

1) ID
2) ?
3) ?
4) ?
5) ?
6) ?
7) ?
8) ?

If not for Wine & Cedega & CodeWeavers Linux would lose 25% or more of its users. Face it, some for many commercial Games and Applications there is no counterpart in Linux and market forces are likely to keep it this way.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Neverwinter Nights, not an ID product. Unreal Tournament, not an ID product.

Also, if people like you shut up, studies shows that the Internet would get rid 99.5% of all meaningless drivel.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

My what a long list.

Should I even bother with the list of windows supported games?


fact is not drivel.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

While I do not like Windows, I do not like Linux either, even after promoting it for years.

However, you guys claiming Linux is better...

Where is the easy instal, you know, GUI instal. Console should have been put to death years ago.

Were is the good help system in linux. Yes, there s tons of help on the net, "RTFM" and "use the search" does not count when 50,000 threads all say the same thing. Besides, there is just as much support for MS and then some.

Where is the easily manipulated desktop environment. Why can I not re-arrange the start menu or desktop with a simple drag and drop system.

Dependencies were a nice idea 10-15 years ago, now it is a bloated mess. Along with the fact that many config files differ in each distro.

Options are good, unless you totally confuse the market or user, which is exactly what Linux does.


If you can get a Linux box working great, they do fine in an office environment, where the user is not playing with it, trying new software, playing games, etc... For home use, Linux is nowhere near ready.



You claim to be ahead, yet mosst everything is still handled through console. The console died years ago on Windows, Beos, Os2, and OSX. It works fine, but so did Dos. Many people look at Linux's console as if they are looking at Windows 3.1, and in all honestly, for the home user, it may as well be. It is foreign to them.

Now,look at the gui desktop and user interface tself. Hate to tell you guys, but it looks about as current as Win 9x does. Xp, Vista and OSX are miles ahead on this, and while the Linux gui may work ust fine, looks are important in selling something.





You guys act as if the average user knows what a command promp is. They cannot even handle a software instalation that requires downloading and double clicking. They have no clue about a directory structure (they lose documents constantly) and now you expect them to edit a config in console mode?

I often ask myself, what are Linux guys smoking.



Yes, Linux makes a great server.
Yes Linux makes a good desktop in a corporate environment where somone else handles the installs.

It does not make a good home desktop. Not by miles.

Those of you who remember the pre Win95 days, should understand this. Putting the home user on Linux is like dripping them into a win3.1 box.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Go troll somwhere else, you are ridicolous.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Instead of calling me a troll, how about actually reading what I wrote and try to refute it.

You wonder why linux people are often called zealots? it is because you refuse to listen to people offering criticism.

In all honestly, my experience is that Linux users are some of the most close minded, and hard headed people in the computer industry. You do not tend to embrace new technology, and you refuse to listen to non-linux users who try to tell you why they have problems with Linux.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

Why would I waste time refuting what is already refuted ten thousand times? You've already proved that you are a troll by regurgitating old long since myths as arguments like these "highlights".

Where is the easy instal, you know, GUI instal. Console should have been put to death years ago.

Old, lame, busted and not true anymore.

Were is the good help system in linux. Yes, there s tons of help on the net, "RTFM" and "use the search" does not count when 50,000 threads all say the same thing. Besides, there is just as much support for MS and then some.

So it's Linux fault that you can't use google or read available documentation effectively? And who claimed there was *more* help available for Linux than for Windwos?

Where is the easily manipulated desktop environment. Why can I not re-arrange the start menu or desktop with a simple drag and drop system.

You can, if you use the right environment. Besides Linux is not Windows, mistake number one among people who think they "know computers". Doh.

Dependencies were a nice idea 10-15 years ago, now it is a bloated mess. Along with the fact that many config files differ in each distro.

Old, lame, dumb and busted myth. Use the repositories provided by your distribution, or learn how the system actually works.

Options are good, unless you totally confuse the market or user, which is exactly what Linux does.

It does? Says who? You must be easily confused.

If you can get a Linux box working great, they do fine in an office environment, where the user is not playing with it, trying new software, playing games, etc... For home use, Linux is nowhere near ready.

Horseshit. You try installing and uninstalling applications like that and you'll have to reinstall quite often, because the registrey will break from that kind of treatment. I've never had to reinstall a Linux system because I installed or uninstalled too many applications. I somehow get the feeling your problem is the comparative shortage of commercial games..


You claim to be ahead, yet mosst everything is still handled through console. The console died years ago on Windows, Beos, Os2, and OSX. It works fine, but so did Dos. Many people look at Linux's console as if they are looking at Windows 3.1, and in all honestly, for the home user, it may as well be. It is foreign to them.

Bullshit. I've converted more or less total noobs to ubuntu, and they have been running it comfortably ever since. Not even ONE call for support. The one time I asked one of them to open a terminal for a quick administrative fix (could have been done graphical, but that would have taken longer time), the biggest problem turned out to be that the user had no idea where the icon for the terminal emulator was, since she'd never used it!

And so you go on, using myths, personal opinions/preferences, halftruths and outright lies as arguments or facts. IMO, that clearly makes you a troll, and I have already wasted enough time on you. Shoo!

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0

You're right... its not because the US protects Microsoft illegal abuses... its because the company was not restricted from acting out its illegal activities so early on.

THAT is what set their dominance in motion.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 4

Just get over it. You guys just fester and stew and that just breeds more bitterness out of frustration. Channel that energy for good not bullshit. We don't need another opinionated column notifying us that MS got greeedy, they broke the law and the did unethical things. For crying out loud We know that. Enough already. The US and the EU both handed down their wrath. But lets be honest about it. It had no affect. Gimme a break, take Windows Media Player out??!?!?! Oh yeah, that's worse than bamboo shoots under Bill's nails. I'm laughing so hard, I need a sip of that Koolaid!

I will not argue the superiority of OS because both clearly have their superior roles. But the article seemed to imply desktop. Linux might be good, even great on the desktop, but the venerable incumbant must be knocked from the throne with a blow that noone sees coming. Not some pissy, we think we are better bullet point list based on a socilistic ideology that feeds the OSS mindset. There, I said it.

I do appreciate the point of view or I wouldn't even respond. I have said before that I too wish there was real competition on the desktop. And I believe that Linux is gaining ground and winning some battles. But there is an old adage. "Fight your battles but win your wars." This is a battle you are wasting energy on because the Desktop war is where its at."

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 3

THAT is what set their dominance in motion.

I'll tell you what put them where they are and I remember it quite well.

The COMPETITION AT THE TIME SUCKED and that did it all.

Lets see who had their shit together going into the early-mid nineties to take on MS ?

* Commodore was bankrupt due to mis-management even though the amiga whipped ass on almost everything out there.

* Apple had an OS with a decent gui riding on a shitbag cooperative multi-tasking foundation backed by a management team that was clueless.

* IBM screwed over hundreds of developers and users (yes I was one of them) when they kept changing their mind about OS/2 and totally gave up once win95 shipped without so much as a yelp.

* Be Inc. had an egomaniac at the helm and I'll just leave it at that.

* Linux distros were just starting to show up but the kernel was mostly still in the closet being developed.

Bottom line is that when the time was right, and it mattered most, no one but MS seemed to be paying attention.

The competition was asleep at the wheel and everyone got their asses handed to them AS THEY DESERVED.

Now the question is what happens as we move forward ?

Cry monopoly all day long but MS is still selling strong and I don't see anyone with much of a real plan to stop them.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 1

Maybe, but that still doesn't address it's present domminance. Especially in the face of "This is the year of Desktop linux". Or all the other competition out there, free or otherwise.

ReplyPermalink Bookmark Score: 0