OSNews

MOST alternatives have worse hardware support than Windows. Gee, I wonder whose fault that is.

The fault lies with the Linux programmers and the Linux distribution companies who refuse or simply too lazy to talk to hardware companies to get hardware support improved.

Eh, what?

Dearth - shortage, commonly used in the context of food.

There is a shortage, apart from some 'compatibility' and 'emulation' applications, by enlarge, there is no proprietary third party network; why haven't Novell and Red Hat done anything to encourage third parties to release desktop software for Linux? why don't these organisations invest money into the respective companies as to pay for the porting of those applications?

I agree, Microsoft's monopoly is completely explicable, but for completely different reasons than you would like to pretend. For example, even if NO other operating system had ANY hardware support at all, I am still PERFECTLY within my rights to have computers I buy supplied without an operating system so that I can install any I wish - but just try telling that to PC vendors.

You can do it right now; go down to your local computer assembly place and purchase one; white box manufacturers make up over 50% of the computers sold globally, they're hardly a weird thing.

Despite your contention to the contrary, there are now more areas than ever where users of other platforms can opt for similar and compatible applications, and that trend will most likely only continue. Whatever you think of Scribus, for example, it's one area I did not expect to see addressed by FOSS programs for quite a while yet. (And there are other, proprietary, alternatives). However, in the interim it might be a good idea for more Linux distributors to start shipping CrossOver Office.

Ok, we'll rely on Crossover - why don't I see the big distributors work with Crossover and third parties to add to wine as to allow greater compatibility between Windows applications and wine? there seems to be alot of things which the linux distributors fail to do - simply sitting on the side lines *hoping* for a company to port to Linux isn't a viable long term stratergy.

As for Scribus; great tool, and what I think they should do is start offering a 'add on pack' which includes an array of templates and clipart for a nominal fee - the money acquired from those sales could fund the project itself.

Microsoft have shown themselves perfectly capable of shipping bucketloads of an excrescence with impunity - I refer not only to WindowsME, which I know only by reputation, but to Windows98 also. It's not quality of the product that matters when people buy operating systems, it's quality of marketing.

Hence the reason I threw out the whole 'branding' junk which Microsoft threw around; the net is a whole new ball game and Microsoft doesn't quite no how to approach it; they'll eventually get there with a viable product, but I don't seem them being a major player.

Microsoft isn't going go away but I do think that their future growth will be stagnating if they don't do something about the fundamental problem with their business model - sure, people will point to the $50billion as proof that 'all is good' - a more recently example would be sun who had $9billion at one stage; time can creap up on those companies who are unprepared.