“The “best” product doesn’t always win since, given advantages of predatory pricing and clever marketing strategy, “good enough” is almost always good enough to carry the day. I’m talking, of course, about Microsoft, its software and its business practices, and if you’re a fan of BeOS, OS/2 or another innovative software product that ended up mangled on the side of The Road Ahead, you’ve seen these sentiments expressed before and you’ve probably expressed them yourself.” Editorial at eWeek.
When ‘Good Enough’ is Better
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
… IBM doomed OS/2 themselves.
What makes you believe that? I mean, do you believe IBM did that on purpose or was OS/2 put down due to incompetent marketing people? If it was put down on purpose, what were IBM’s strategies behind the scene then? Surely they didn’t say “We are pulling the plug of OS/2 publicly” If they did it on purpose why did they do that?
1. They realised they can’t compete with Microsoft?
2. They were losing a lot of money because of OS/2?
3. A secret aliance between IBM and Microsoft?
“The Road Ahead” … wasn’t that Bill Gates’ book? I almost bought it.
A bit of both? Poor marketing on IBM’s part and less support by Microsoft?
Yes, IBM botched OS/2. IBM botched OS/2 when it still paid programmers by the number of lines of code they produced, instead of doing it Microsoft’s way of the most efficient solution (this is when they were still working together on the project). IBM botched OS/2 when they had the Warp rollout, and all the CD’s distributed to the assembled computing press had broken config.sys files. IBM botched OS/2 by focusing on making “a better DOS than DOS,” and not urging developers to make native OS/2 GUI apps until there was already an entrenched Win16 user base.
I could go on and on. Don’t get me wrong, I loved OS/2, but IBM screwed things up in only the way a behemoth organization can.
As for what’s in the article, the author misses the point a bit. MS used to get picked because it provided the most bang for the buck. Sure, OS/2 was better. But it was expensive when compared to DOS/WFW3.11. Sure NetWare was better for servers, but it was expensive compared to NT (although NT’s quality quickly exceeded Novell’s).
What should have MS very scared is that the Free Software crowd is now producing software that’s better *and* it’s free. For a simple file/print server, there is absolutely no reason to buy a copy of Win2k server anymore. Linux/FreeBSD with Samba is just as fast, more stable, and requires less maintainance.
As far as the browsers go, MS could easily write a better browser than Mozilla. It wouldn’t require much of an expenditure on their part. But (and they argued this in the antitrust trial) IE has become much more than a browser to the company.
It would be nice if they’d make it easy to disable popups, though.
“when it still paid programmers by the number of lines of code they produced, instead of doing it Microsoft’s way of the most efficient solution (this is when they were still working together on the project)”
Oh god, please stop with the Ballmer drivel of lies…. IBM most definitivelly doesn’t (and didn’t) pay by the number of lines. Ballmer is a marketing guy, he has no concept or actual programming knowledge, that is why he uttered that lie. Technical people are still laughing, but it seems that some poor bastards actually believed that guy….. *sigh*
I am pretty sure that Intel pays its engineers by the number of transistors in their designs too, right?
Oh, well… nice troll though…
All this discussion make me remind “the point”. People don’t use OS because “OS” but because applications. And that is way Microsoft made their way in almost all computers in the globe. They have MS Office, MS IE and MS Outlook Express. Only by now we are getting open source equivalent software well designed enough to satisfy the needs of regular users. And also, we can’t forget about file formats standards what is also being addressed now.
You can argue: and WordPerfect, Lotus123, Netscape and the like? All they ran in the same platform and Microsoft had more time and resources to push the limits. That’s it.
Despite of everything many people say, they have good software (almost) and can compete on applications area but know they are squeezed in the corner, they can’t beat free good software and that’s why they are so scared.
An OS, like any other technology product has to have three attributes:
– good
– right
– successfull
I am coming from an engineering history, so my focus was always on the “good” of the things.
But in the real world “right” (fit to the context) and “successuful” (fit to the political environment) are very important attributes.
See for example Linux: only in the last year Linus is getting “right” and “successfull”. Linux is trying to fit the desktop environment (simple to use, common UI, etc) and it has found good political players (IBM, Sony, Panasonic, etc).
Good and right and successfull
Antonio
Easy: They are a open source project. They have no competent company redistributing their software. No company to market it. Plus, it doesn’t have a end-user focus. But what about Netscape? Any chance AOL got with it was blown away over the years. Through mismanagement and poor decission making, I’m beginning to wonder if Netscape were to be better off without AOL.
AOL had already also 100 billion bucks, their merger should have been great, but how many big mergers actually succeed? What happen is that AOL overlooked Netscape’s potential to replace AOL as the browser/email/reader/whatever front-end and put Netscape there.
Remember, at that time, there were far more users that once in their lifes used Netscape than AOL. Netscape had a good web portal – but thanks to AOL, it failed to keep up with competition until recently. I remember when I stop using Netscape – it was slow, unrealiable. That’s why I moved to Yahoo. What AOL should have done is to make Netscape something like MSN Explorer – a browser integrated with a portal. I’m quite sure people would buy into something like that – Microsoft today is betting on it.
But then again, AOL themselves is a textbook example of how NOT to become. How many companies you know can loose $100 billion? They have so many unprofitable subsidies, and so many subsidies with untapped potential. If you read The Fourth Estate by Jeff Archer, AOL Time Warner sounds so similar to Townsend’s failing empire. Hope there would be a Elizabeth though (and that Bill Gates commits suicide like in the end of the story :-).
Trust me, OS/2 (at least Warp 4.0) was very well marketed. It was their company direction in this case. What happen is that OEMs prefered Windows over OS/2 for pricing reasons – if they go with IBM, there is no way they would be able to compete with IBM on price with their PCs. IBM should have instead drop the hardware and sold the OS, or at least give a competitive OEM price to OS/2.
As for a secret alliance between Microsoft and IBM… that would be like a secret alliance between Intel and Sun. Or IBM and BEA. Or Be Inc. and Apple.
And this is where my dislike of popular Linux advocacy enters the picture. They always seem to be striving for the lowest common denominator. The point of comparison is always Microsoft, not what might actually be good. The most common rebuttal fo criticism against Linux GUI solutions seems to begin with “But Windows…”. Just look at the fresh KDE 3.1 comments on this site.
True, Windows never gained market share by being good in any regard, but idealistic people like open source programmers shouldn’t be paying so much attention to the practices of what is often referred to as the “enemy”, IMHO.
IBM botched OS/2 when it still paid programmers by the number of lines of code they produced
Is there any slightest remote proof of this? Because of that’s the case, my respect for IBM as a company just went down the gutters.
IBM botched OS/2 by focusing on making “a better DOS than DOS,” and not urging developers to make native OS/2 GUI apps until there was already an entrenched Win16 user base.
This was entirely true. But it wouldn’t have pushed them to drop OS/2. Certainly wouldn’t make it a resounding failure. When WIndows 95 came out, OS/2 was still in a mighty favourable position in the market – they could have easily created Win32-like extensions specific to OS/2. In other words, it would be easy for developers to port to Windows and OS/2.
In fact, if they have taken this route, plus better OEM pricing, there may not be a monopoly in the desktop market right now…
But it was expensive when compared to DOS/WFW3.11.
As for bang for the buck, I would say OS/2 gave more. But the reason why they shrivel up and went on to OS Heaven is because of their OEM pricing. No sane OEM would use OS/2 if it means being unable to compete with IBM on price anymore.
Sure NetWare was better for servers, but it was expensive compared to NT (although NT’s quality quickly exceeded Novell’s).
On the later part, I disagree. “Quality” doesn’t mean more features, I personally think NetWare was better built. But NT won pretty much because they marketed their new features and making it look like NetWare was useless. Novell at that time was too slow to react – at that time they were pretty much in autopilot.
It wouldn’t require much of an expenditure on their part
Personally, I think IE hit the same wall Netscape did with Netscape Communicator 4 – the Mosaic wall. May not be true, but I personally think a rewrite would be needed in the works. For features like pop-up blocker and tabs, it should be easy, but most of IE’s problems aren’t just limited to the front end.
But then having a rewrite on the most used rendering engine would be a little too hard – many applications depend on IE. If IE is changed too much in a way that a lot of binary compatiblity is broken, it is pretty much Hell for Microsoft.
It would be nice if they’d make it easy to disable popups, though.
I doubt this would happen anytime in the near future… at least until MSN stops using pop-ups.
More reasons why I either need to proof read, or OSNews need a edit feature:
Wrong: AOL had already also 100 billion bucks,
Right: AOL had already lost 100 billion bucks,
Did u know that Win 3.1 tun on top of DOS
Did u know that OS/2 Could run Win 3.1
Did u know that Os/2 And Win 3.1 had a compitability [excuse my english] layer to run Apps from each other?
Did u know that Os/2’s GUI was created by Micro$oft?
That they made all of the front-ends?
With win 3.1 u needed to connect the printer, install the drivers and PRINT.
With Os/2 U needed to connect the printer, specify the port, install the driver, set a lot of other things etc. etc. etc. and print. Micro$oft did all that with os/2 , Micro$oft just pushed its Windows, and it was destoing OS/2 gui.
Did u know that when ther partnership has broken, Microsoft renamed Os/2[their piece of code] to Windows [3.51 as i remember] NT.
Hey when i boot my Windows 2000 i c build on NT technology, that is Windows 2000 built on IBM OS/2 technology.
http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2Warp.html
http://pages.cthome.net/iact/IQN/7-2000jan/iqn7-Blue-Redmond_Connex…
… but I do not know know a company that goes by the name of Micro$oft, care to elaborate ?
You should try reading some history yourself…
. Windows 3.x can _not_ run OS/2 applications. Windows NT have a OS/2 personality layer (16bit, textmode only).
. While the base “GUI” code was written by Microsoft(<- spelled with an ‘S’ not ‘$’) most/all visible things where written by IBM.
. Microsoft thought that OS/2 was the future but continued working on Windows as it sold better…
. Windows 2000 have nothing in common with OS/2 (well they are both operating systems)…
I have never actually SEEN a box running OS/2
//I have never actually SEEN a box running OS/2//
Likely you won’t, either.
But, scores of banking and financial institutions *still* use OS/2, in some capacity.
It’s out there, but not for regular folks.
>I have never actually SEEN a box running OS/2
You probably have. You just don’t know you have.
I’ve seen ATM’s running OS/2 and terminals at
airports and such.
The question when people say that open source software should simply be ‘good enough’ if .. are you willing to use often-times inferior software for political reasons? That is the bottom line. For some people, the answer is yes. For me, the answer is no.
‘Inferior’ is also in the eye of the beholder. Some would consider a piece of software that includes the source code to be superior simply for that reason, no matter how bad it sucks.
I belive pretty much all ATM’s run OS/2 at least any of the ones that have pictures of happy people walking dogs and holding babies while you wait for it to give you your money at a fee of $1.50. The text only ones i don’t know. I think there probably some sort of DOS. But yeah if your ever at one when a tech person is there messing with it you can see the full OS/2 GUI. Also when they crash and have their error screens they tell you it’s os/2, Though only seen that on one of them.
One more byproduct of having an industry driven by two giant monopolies (Microsoft, Intel). BeOS, OS/2, and many other promising platforms could have grown up to be excellent products if not for being crushed by monopoly power.
‘Good enough’ is the enemy of the big corporate monster. The PC slowdown is already happening because Microsoft fucked up and didn’t provide any reasonably interesting new MIPS-burner to market to the masses. They made Windows XP about 20% slower than Windows 2000, but there wasn’t enough in Windows XP to drive PC upgrades.
As the review all the processors from 100Mhz to 3066Mhz on Tom’s Hardware showed, application performance reached something of a plateau at about 1 Ghz. Subjectively there is no real difference when you buy that new multi-gigahertz PC.
All this speaks to an industry where the big players are going to have troubles if they don’t come up with some MIPS-killer application that everyone wants.
P2P was promising… but the RIAA has done a good job of killing this technology.
We’re in for some interesting times.
–ms
Just a quick note — Bank of Ireland ATMs use Windows, and they crash quite frequently.
Political reasons is not the only reason to use “good enough” software. Heck, millions of people use “good enough” software from MS every day simply because that is what they know how to use and it interoperates pretty well with everyone else’s software (at least, everyone else who is using MS software that is).
However, “good enough” software that is cheaper, interoperates well, and easy to use can gain acceptance. It doesn’t have to happen in one big move. First, people can start using WordPerfect (notice what comes “free” with Dells, Gateways, and I believe others now) or Open Office on Windows XP. Once they get used to that (and maybe some other free software) maybe the switch to Linux (or Mac OS X) won’t be so hard to deal with.
Ok, we have a couple of boxes running OS/2 performing a very selective application related server task.
I have OS/2 boxes at a chain of movie houses that use them for ticketing.
I have seen OS/2 boxes running a dial-up connectivity tool called Xcellenet though I believe they have moved everything over to NT now.
OS/2 still performs a number of specialized tasks and will continue to do so up to the point the companies finally decide to port the applications over to NT or another platform.
I don’t know how many ATM’s still use this but I know the older text ATM’s were generally IMS screens (or possibly CICS). You know, mainframe terminal stuff.
Heck, millions of people use “good enough” software from MS every day simply because that is what they know how to use and it interoperates pretty well with everyone else’s software (at least, everyone else who is using MS software that is).
Ok, so .. you can either choose to interoperate with everyone using MS software (which basically means everybody and their grandmother) or interoperate with everyone else left over – the answer is quite obvious for most people.
As far as cheaper is concerned, all software can be found for cheap (read: free) if you know where to look
Ok, so besides that, what else is there? Political reasons?
Ok, so .. you can either choose to interoperate with everyone using MS software (which basically means everybody and their grandmother) or interoperate with everyone else left over – the answer is quite obvious for most people.
First most software packages including MS Office have this crazy revolutionary thing called filters that can translate the common MSOffice formats.
Second, Apple which is the second largest desktop platform has a version of MSOffice.
Third, some people don’t like Windows. It is not political. They just do not like XP or Win2k. I don’t like Windows for example. I prefer linux and other people prefer Macs and some people like BSD and that is all good. Choice and competition is a good thing.
As far as cheaper is concerned, all software can be found for cheap (read: free) if you know where to look
So, you are saying it alright to steal and use warez. That is not political. That is just lame.
In the past, it seems that you Darius have made some very decent pro-MS remarks. However, this is not one of those times.
We should use Microsoft products because everyone else does and if we cannot afford some of the products we should steal them?
That is incredibly wrong.
There are a number of very good reasons to use Microsoft products.
You have always used MSOffice, you are used to MSOffice for Windows and you like MSOffice for Windows. Then stick with MS.
You want to play a large number of PC games. Then stick with MS.
You want inexpensive PC hardware. You want the OS to work right out of the box (from the hardware company) and connect to AOL and do other things without installing a new OS to do it. Stick with MS.
You are a gadget whore with cheap PC hardware and you want every new gadget you get to come bundled with drivers that usually work even if sometimes you have to download new drivers from the companies website to make them work right. Stick with MS.
Ok, so .. you can either choose to interoperate with everyone using MS software (which basically means everybody and their grandmother) or interoperate with everyone else left over – the answer is quite obvious for most people.
Of course compatibility is the key to competition here. That’s why the EU is pushing for MS to open up their office formats. There are some decent libraries for handling office formats but AFAIK they are not free and not 100% correct. That needs to be corrected before a serious challenge will be mounted.
As far as cheaper is concerned, all software can be found for cheap (read: free) if you know where to look
Believe it or not but most people aren’t into warez. They tend to think of it as stealing.
Ok, so besides that, what else is there? Political reasons?
Right now the answer is still mostly for political reasons. But that only has to do with the maturity of the competition. Once the competition matures the non-political reasons do come into play.
First most software packages including MS Office have this crazy revolutionary thing called filters that can translate the common MSOffice formats.
So, what exactly are the ‘common’ MS Office file formats? I assume those formats don’t include .mdb files?
Second, Apple which is the second largest desktop platform has a version of MSOffice.
Yes, and MSOffice is (gasp) .. and MS product, so what’s your point?
Third, some people don’t like Windows. It is not political.
When I speak of ‘good enough’, I mean software, as in applications (not operating systems). Personally, I love everything about Linux as an OS, but I can’t find a single (desktop) app on Linux that isn’t either available in Windows or doesn’t have a better Windows counterpart.
So, you are saying it alright to steal and use warez.
Yes, at least from criminal corporations. Should people really feel bad about stealing from criminals?
We should use Microsoft products because everyone else does
Yes, if you want to be compatabile, and you want access to all of the ‘perks’ that come with using MS software (spyware not withstanding).
Otherwise, use whatever works best for you.
and if we cannot afford some of the products we should steal them?
No, I’m saying that when it comes to any software company who’s a member of the BSA, you should steal from them irregardless. And if you happen to have a conscience and want to keep it ‘honest’, you should pirate their app, and then go out and buy their competitor’s app and give it to somebody who needs/wants it.
Oh, did I mention that I hate MS just as much as the next guy? It just so happens that all the best desktop software is available on their platform, so that’s what I use.
That is incredibly wrong.
I beg to differ.
Of course compatibility is the key to competition here. That’s why the EU is pushing for MS to open up their office formats.
Yes, and I certainly hope that happens.
Right now the answer is still mostly for political reasons.
And guess what? The majority of soccer mom’s and regular Joe Users don’t give two shits about politics.
But that only has to do with the maturity of the competition. Once the competition matures the non-political reasons do come into play.
Well, when that happens, I’ll be first in line. Until then, please tell your zealot bretheran to quit insulting me because I don’t use the same OS they do.
Thank you for injecting a dose of reality into the system. So many people take years of criminal activity on the part of Microsoft and trivialize it. Or worse than trivializing it, they give it tacit approval.
Microsoft is behind many of the draconian IP laws we have in this country. And because Microsoft gets these laws passed, they are able to use tax payer dollars to inflict their schemes on the public.
UCITA has already been passed in two states and Microsoft is making a giant multi-million dollar push to get it adopted in more states. In each state that the UCITA becomes law, that’s more taxes to pay all the additional law enforcement people.
It’s a great scam Microsoft has going… using the public’s money to make them even more powerful.
All these pundits wonder why the evolution of the Windows PC is dead, refusing to discuss the elephant in the room. It’s pathetic.
–ms
So, what exactly are the ‘common’ MS Office file formats? I assume those formats don’t include .mdb files?
People don’t generally pass around .mdb files. I have worked in many offices and only one used Access for anything serious. And that was steadily being replaced by web apps designed in products like Cold Fusion. Access just doesn’t have much of a place anymore.
Well, when that happens, I’ll be first in line. Until then, please tell your zealot bretheran to quit insulting me because I don’t use the same OS they do.
First, if free software doesn’t interoperate and have the right features then it isn’t “good enough”. Sure, people use software that isn’t “good enough” for political reasons but we are talking about software that IS “good enough” which clearly means it is software that meets people’s needs.
Second, I think you are exhibiting a behavior known as transference. And just because I disagree with you does not make me a zealot. Nor does it make others my brethren.
And that was steadily being replaced by web apps designed in products like Cold Fusion. Access just doesn’t have much of a place anymore
I agree with your first point, but disagree on the second. The three things I like about Access is a) It works without the presence of an Internet connection b) Does not require that you have access to MySQL, Oracle, etc and 3) I can write custom frontends for Access mdb databases, packages them up, and run them on other computers without Access installed. I am desperately trying to find a cross-platform solution for this though
I probably wouldn’t use Access for anything more than very small databases, but for this purpose, it works great.
First, if free software doesn’t interoperate and have the right features then it isn’t “good enough”. Sure, people use software that isn’t “good enough” for political reasons but we are talking about software that IS “good enough” which clearly means it is software that meets people’s needs.
Good enough … could you not write an entire website with notepad.exe or edit.com? Are those two apps not GOOD ENOUGH for the task at hand? When you say that something is ‘good enough’, it generally tends to indicate that there’s something else BETTER out there. Yeah, a piece of software may meet particular requirement, but that still doesn’t change the fact that there could be other programs out there with twice the functionality and half the learning curve.
And just because I disagree with you does not make me a zealot
Of course not, I didn’t mean to inquire that you are one.
Nor does it make others my brethren.
What I meant by my statement is that it would be nice if the Linux community as a whole would do more to get rid of the ‘bad apples’, if you know what I mean.
“Microsoft is behind many of the draconian IP laws in this country…”
Care to back that up? I don’t particularly like Microsoft, but I try to pay attention to corporate influence on laws and I haven’t ever heard anyone studying the field make this claim before. Entertainment companies and industry associations, frequently–but very rarely software companies. In fact, I’m not sure I’ve heard of any major cases with Microsoft even taking advantage of these draconian laws to stomp on or extort people in Unisys and Rambus fashion. (In fact, they’ve rarely even bought competitors from what I’ve seen–they just undercut them and otherwise find perhaps unethical but technically legal ways to screw them.)
Again, I’m not suggesting Microsoft hasn’t done a lot of reprehensible things in their business practices–but I think its important not to exaggerate for effect.
First I said common file formats and I do NOT consider Access database files as a common file format next to Excel and Word. The vast majority of people do not deal in these formats.
I completely agree that Access database compatibility as well as Visio compatible apps are two places where there is no good-enough app with proper filters.
Yes, MSOffice is available for the Mac and the point is that you do not have to live in a Windows world to access it. You can have interoperability with a Mac without using Windows. That is all.
Second, I can name a couple of apps that I personally prefer over Windows versions that are available on linux. Many of them were inspired directly from MS. Gnumeric is a prime example. I prefer it to Excel for most spreadsheet functions especially in terms of look and feel of the program. No I agree that I cannot think of a single type of desktop app available for an alternative OS that is not available for Windows in some form or another. However, I disagree with you that the MS app is always better. Of course, I will say personal preference will always play a part in that opinion.
I agree that the actions of Microsoft are criminal but to steal the software is just wrong. You are using one corporations actions to justify your own theft. Two wrongs still do not make a right.
If that is the way you rationalize being a thief and a minor criminal then so be it.
Calling a man who steals a thief does not make me or anyone else an insulting zealot. It is called honesty.
You say you steal — you are a thief. You say you steal from criminals but it does not change the fact you are a thief.
Second, I can name a couple of apps that I personally prefer over Windows versions that are available on linux.
Wow, a whopping two apps? Now THAT’S impressive
Gnumeric is a prime example.
Ok, that’s one … what is the other one?
I prefer it to Excel for most spreadsheet functions especially in terms of look and feel of the program.
I don’t personally use any spreadsheet (no need for one), so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one.
No I agree that I cannot think of a single type of desktop app available for an alternative OS that is not available for Windows in some form or another. However, I disagree with you that the MS app is always better.
I never said MS apps specifically are always better (I prefer Opera 7 over IE personally). I said that for every (desktop) app on the Linux platform, there is either a native version running on Windows or else there’s something else better on Windows, though maybe not specifically MS apps. (Ok, this may not be true in EVERY case, but I’d guess 95-98% of the time, this statement is accurate. You can say that alternate apps are ‘good enough’, but only a hardcore zealot will deny that almost all of these apps are not up to snuff with those in the Windows world.)
I agree that the actions of Microsoft are criminal but to steal the software is just wrong. You are using one corporations actions to justify your own theft. Two wrongs still do not make a right.
Calling a man who steals a thief does not make me or anyone else an insulting zealot.
No, but insulting someone based on the OS they use DOES make someone an insulting zealot. And no, I’m not accusing you of doing any such thing, but the actions taken by others in ‘the community’ is the sole reason I’m here having these debates in the first place. It’s a shame that these people don’t think others are capable of making an intelligent decision about what OS they use and still end up on Windows, but such is life, I guess.
You say you steal — you are a thief. You say you steal from criminals but it does not change the fact you are a thief.
Of course, you’re right. But when it comes down to a choice between stealing from criminals or giving them money, I’ll choose the former everytime, and I still manage to sleep at night, so be it.
I agree with your first point, but disagree on the second. The three things I like about Access is a) It works without the presence of an Internet connection b) Does not require that you have access to MySQL, Oracle, etc and 3) I can write custom frontends for Access mdb databases, packages them up, and run them on other computers without Access installed. I am desperately trying to find a cross-platform solution for this though
I probably wouldn’t use Access for anything more than very small databases, but for this purpose, it works great.
Sounds like Filemaker Pro might work for you there. Have you checked?
http://www.filemaker.com/
Maybe, but I don’t see a native version for Linux available? I know there’s a version for Mac, but neither OS9 nor OSX runs on my hardware
I’ve seen OS/2 running. I actually installed it my self on my own computer. I was making an experiment. I had 4 operating systems running on one hard drive (separate partitions). I had WinMe, WinXP, RedHat Linux and OS/2.
My experience of OS/2 was this. Overall was ok but I did not find it very friendly. There was no taskbar so switching between running programs was a pain while I am used to a taskbar. Then also, the “mouse follows menu” or whatever you call it, was not present. Basicly to highlight a menu item, you had to click on it, unlike the MS one where the item is highlighted when you move the mouse over it.
The rest of the stuff was very easu except these two VERY important things. Well they are important for me, I don’t know about you.
I did not know you were demanding a full list but I will give you a few examples.
It has been awhile since I used NT or any other Windows based machine as my full-time desktop for awhile. So here goes and correct me where I mess up the MS side of things.
I like both Opera (you mentioned this yourself) and the newest Galeon2 builds (much more stable than I expected from beta) as compared to IE basically in terms of both the look and feel and the speed factor. I like tabbed browsing and being able to easily block without popups etc..etc..
I like Evolution. Outlook has feels slow next to latest releases of Evolution. The layout while being a copy job feels even more natural. Plus it does not take as much resources. When I used Outlook exclusively the thing was a serious resource hog next to Evolution.
I fully admit that Mr. Project does not have some of the more advanced features of MSProject but that is one of the things I like about it. I find Project to be a confusing mess of options and some the leveling tools for scheduling and graphing functions seem absolutely possessed. I swear that program is hacked out by some evil folks. If the program was a person their head would spin and they float two feet above their own bed. Every manager in my office will tell you basically the same thing. It just acts very flaky. I can give you examples off-line if you need them.
Gnucash may not be up to Quicken standards but I prefer the formatting, the accounts concept and quick-fill functions much better than the Money counterparts. Most of my reasons for preferring Quicken are in general UI related and very much a matter of personal choice.
I give you four examples but do I really have to justify something I said right off the bat is a matter of general taste more than function in many cases.
If I have to use a word processor I still prefer the old WordPerfect8 on linux or windows to Word. I still feel that WordPerfect had the best Word Processor out there in terms of not only look and feel but function. I know many law firms that did the insane (for the PC world) and did not go to MSOffice but stuck out through the bleak times with WordPerfect Office because they preferred WordPerect to Word. Still even there it is a matter of what you want out of a word processor. All solutions do not fit all people.
Some people will consider these apps up to snuff as you say and others will not. People who want to be able to import their existing Project files will not want to move to Mr Project to give an example. But I live at work and home on linux and I enjoy these apps.
You like Windows and I have already listed a half dozen legitimate reasons why a person would want to stick with Windows in an earlier post.
BTW, if you post on slashdot or here you better expect a few trolling zealots. They do not represent the community. IRC does not represent the community. I am a member of the redhat list and I post to gnomesupport and I do not consider the people there to be insulting or zealots. The SuSE_en list is also very good for help and advice. It is like saying that mac fan guy who comes out swinging and proclaiming Jobs as God represents all Mac fans. It is fun to point and laugh but it does not make the few idiots a true representation of the entire community.
I think we have have to agree to disagree on our taste in apps … I hate both Outlook and Evolution
heh
Just a few thoughts ..
Opera = Available on Windows as well (as I’m sure you knew)
Galeon/tabbed browsing/etc = Many browsers that use the IE rendering engine (Avant Browser, Crazy Browser, etc) use the IE rendering engine and have many/all of the same features as Galeon.
Mr. Project = I guess it all depends on if you need the extra features of the MS offering or you need to import your files. If not, then I guess you’re in pretty good shape.
Quicken = There’s always AceMoney on the Win32 platform. Though I have personally never used it (I use a custom-written Access frontend to handle finances:), I’ve heard it’s good.
I personally think that if you’re going to debate the merits of one OS to another, the apps should be the center of attention, not the OS itself. Of course, you quickly run into a problem when the kinds of apps one person uses is not the kinds of apps that another person uses – it’s kind of hard to talk about the merits of an app you’ve never used before
OS/2 is still available and being developed as eComStation http://www.ecomstation.com
I still use is on my primary development workstation. I have eCS on my most powerful machine at home (dual Athlon etc). In fact the only Windows machine that I ever even touch is this web browsing and Solitaire/Minesweeper Win2k beast that my boss thinks I need. (I don’t even have an editor, debugger or compiler installed on it. . .perhaps that is why it doesn’t crash as often as my bosses machine).
Anyway, Windows 3.1 sucked. Windows for Warfrats sucked. Windows 95 sucked. Windows 98 sucked. Windows ME sucked. Windows 2000 doesn’t suck quite so hard but it is still sorta lame. With Windows XP we are back to sucking hard.
Call this evaluation subjective if you wish but Microsoft has to date always sold their latest OS by convincing the consumers that it doesn’t suck as bad as their previous offerings. . .that the next version will have all of those cool things that they promised would be in the last version that you bought (or even the first version!).
The truth is that a product’s quality does not actually have to be ‘good enough’ in order to carry the day in the marketplace. A product can be embarassingly shody but as long as the consumer perceives it to be ‘good enough’ then it will be treated as such by the market.
This perception part is where marketing comes in: Churn out the glossy brochures promising the moon. Crank up the FUD on the competition. Get your impartial looking mouthpieces (C/Net, Ziff-Davis etc) to cook up some reviews and comparisons and make certain that they are never seriously critical of your product.
Remember the words of P.T. Barnum, “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public” and “There is a sucker born every minute”. This is the nature of the market.
>I said that for every (desktop) app on the Linux platform, >there is either a native version running on Windows or else >there’s something else better on Windows, though maybe not >specifically MS apps.
Oh… I wouldn’t be so sure here. I’d wager that Mozilla on Linux is the same as Mozilla on windows. Same as Opera on Linux/Windows. And OpenOffice is the same on both platforms, and OOo is probably *the* alternative office suite du jour. Is XMMS as good as WinAmp 2.x? You betcha. Is it as good as Winamp 3.x? Thank god, it’s not.
So if you cover web browsing, the office suite, and mp3s, you’ve got a good chunk of the ‘average user’ market covered.
Oh… I wouldn’t be so sure here. I’d wager that Mozilla on Linux is the same as Mozilla on windows.
What is your point? I didn’t say native Windows apps were better than their native Linux brethren. I said either there’s a native version on Windows OR there’s something else in Windows that’s better.
Same as Opera on Linux/Windows.
But you’re wrong on this one. Opera is up to version 7 on Windows. A beta of version 7 was just released on FreeBSD. There’s not even a release of v7 on Linux, AFAIK.
So if you cover web browsing, the office suite, and mp3s, you’ve got a good chunk of the ‘average user’ market covered.
I disagree with you strongly on this point, but you’re certainly entitled to your opinion. I don’t know why so many people want to put Joe User in this little box – he’s far from computer literate, but certainly more diverse than you give him credit for.
didn’t MS use to give visual studio away for free during the early windows days? or atleast it was for under a hundred. The point is, when windows was young, and MS wanted it to be adopted, they made it cheap and/or free to start writing win16/32 apps for it.
What redhat needs to start making room?
1. Take gcc or some compiler, bundle it up nice and sell it as a redhat studio.
1a. Make it really easy to write and port software on/to (redhat)linux.
2. Make it easy for a user(via rpm) to install and manage software… that means, ZERO commandline, gui compilers, and some fix for dependency problems
p.s. to those who think rpms are horrible and have problems… linux was once horrible, and had problems, but has been improved over time… windows has had (and has) problems(read stability) but like it or not, they have mostly gone away. The point: stick with a standard(rpm) and improve it, don’t rewrite from scratch. This is a lesson JoelonSoftware has a great article on.
We use different types of apps and it is hard to explore the applications based discussion in this manner.
I know that Opera is available in Windows and I still prefer the Linux version. It feels more responsive to me and YMMV. :->
I admit I have never tried the browsers you mentioned.
On the Mr. Project thing there is a point where an application has too many options and the whole thing becomes confusing. MSProject reached that point eons ago. The MS product is flaky in my opinion and the people in my group do NOT use those advanced features you talk about.
I don’t like AceMoney it feels like an app tacked onto of the top of Access. A programmer in my office uses that app. I hate apps tacked on top of Access. I have never seen one done well enough to stack up against a stand-alone app.
Still, the funny thing is that you are quick to make quips like going off on the fact I said “couple” and only mentioned one example of apps I liked better in Linux. Also, you are quick to say in another reply thread to a story that linux apps suck.
Guess what? It depends on what apps you use. There are good apps available for Linux. The open source FSF movement and all the gnome and kde software is far from anywhere near perfect. That is not what I am saying.
I am saying that making blanket judgements on alternative OSes because people have been rude to you and the OS did not work for you is unfair. That is as bad as people judging all software in Windows as if born straight from the heart of the Bill Gates beast.
>What is your point? I didn’t say native Windows apps were >better than their native Linux brethren. I said either there’s >a native version on Windows OR there’s something else in >Windows that’s better.
What’s better here? You *could* argue that IE is better than mozilla, but there are more people who’d argue against that, IMO.
>>A beta of version 7 was just released on FreeBSD. >>There’s not even a release of v7 on Linux, AFAIK.
Yes there is.
>>A beta of version 7 was just released on FreeBSD. >>There’s not even a release of v7 on Linux, AFAIK.
Yes there is.
Really? Where can I find? The Opera page still lists 6.11 for download. Or is it still in beta? Reason why I’m asking is because I want a copy of its gold code
Don’t forget Microsoft originally wrote OS/2. I’ve still got the mug (with bright blue “Microsoft OS/2” text). I could be pursuaded to part with it for appropriate renumeration (given it’s Microsoft, a gold bar and a couple of virgins). I wish, oh wish, I still had a copy of the press release which announced they were abandoning Windows in favour of OS/2.