Today, we cannot know if people would still buy Microsoft products because the government protects the monopoly. What percentage of the market would Microsoft have in a fair market? The only way we can answer that last question is to stop manufacturers from preloading Windows. Until then, we do not have a free market. Microsoft has no way to prove itself otherwise, says LXer.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:
Member since: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.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-11-13
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?
Member since:
Member since:2005-07-12
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.
Member since:2005-07-08
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
Member since:2005-08-09
"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?
Member since:
Member since: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.
Member since: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.
Member since:
Member since:
1. MS has Windows/Office for everyday users, and superior VStudio/MSDN for developers.
2. MS has better product documentation/support
3. Windows are pretty stable now.
4. Linux/Unices are still harder to use.
5. It is only recently that a barely enough OO is available on *nices
6. There is NOT a easy to use and decent development tool. Eclipse is quite difficult to start with.
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.
8. There are a lot of decent games on Windows verses close to 0 on *nices.
9......................