home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.os.beos      Underrated early 90's OS, sad it died...      1,512 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 1,175 of 1,512   
   =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lin=F8nut?= to Andrew J. Brehm poked his little he   
   Re: Is Linux the Next BEOS or OS/2?   
   08 Sep 05 15:40:07   
   
   XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.os2.advocacy   
   From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?lin=F8nut?=@bone.com   
      
   Andrew J. Brehm poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:   
      
   > Ok. What exactly are Microsoft doing to prevent, say, me from buying a   
   > Linux computer in a computer store in Germany or a Walmart in the US?   
      
   To prevent?  Nothing.   
      
   To make it difficult?  A lot.   
      
   >> Okay, then.  Go into Office Depot and buy a non-Windows computer.   
   >   
   > I don't know Office Depot. Go to an Apple store and buy a Windows   
   > computer. Perhaps some stores do not have the products you want?   
      
   Office Depot is a general office store; Apple is a manufacturer's   
   outlet.   
      
   I know of no major store (Walmart included) where one can walk in and   
   buy a PC preloaded with Linux.  Or Mac OSX, for that matter.   
      
   > And you don't think that the question whether one computer is compatible   
   > with another has something to do with that?   
      
   No.  A computer is a general purpose processor, and it is possible to   
   program it to perform many types of operations, if those operations can   
   be specified.   
      
   >> Yes, it did.   
   >   
   > I am sure it will be more clear to you soon.   
      
   (I hate these patronizing answers.)   
      
   >> Bzzzzzt.  Wrong.   Transmissions are just as subject to a network   
   >> effect.   
   >   
   > Like operating systems? Cars with different transmissions might not be   
   > able to interoperate or use the same roads?   
      
   Ah, I see your point.   
      
   >> Yet there are still significant numbers of manual   
   >> transmissions out there.   
   >   
   > Yes, that's because the value of the transmission does not depend on   
   > using the same transmission system as everybody else.   
   >   
   > You can still use the same roads.   
      
   True.  Yet there is still a (smaller) effect, in that the rest of your   
   family may force you to buy automatic transmission.   
      
   Or automatic is so common that that is all they teach, and you have to   
   go out on your own to learn manual.   
      
   (I was lucky.  In order to sell me a car, a salesman took the time to   
   teach me to drive manual.)   
      
   > So perhaps you disagree that compatibility with Windows programs is a   
   > standard?   
      
   Compatibility with Windows programs is not what I'd call a standard.   
      
   Being able to exchange and use data on both platforms is what would make   
   a standard.   
      
   >> People want a PC that does standard things, like support email and word   
   >> processing.   
   >   
   > People can have that. Any Windows PC or Mac or Sun box or Linux box will   
   > do that.   
      
   Indeed.   
      
   Except... try filing for relief (using the Web) with FEMA on a Linux,   
   Sun, or Mac box.  You can't.   
      
   >> You want to define standards as "adhering to Windows".   
   >   
   > I don't. I don't care about Windows compatibility, not much anyway. But   
   > most people do. Try and sell them a Mac and they will ask whether it   
   > runs Windows programs. Try it.   
      
   I can well believe that.   
      
   The strength of the Microsoft standard is that Microsoft, through   
   secrecy and churn, prevents others from writing programs that can deal   
   100% with the omnipresent Microsoft formats.   
      
   Even the problem of running Windows programs could be solved, with more   
   openness from MS.  Wine gets reasonably close, but one cannot (yet)   
   claim that Linux can run Windows programs.   
      
   >> You are too trusting.   
   >   
   > But you trust government to get it right with solving the problem of   
   > Microsoft's market share?   
      
   No.  The government has proven feckless in this matter.   
      
   >> You're pretty staid for a Marx Brothers fan.   
   >   
   > It takes an adventurous man to oppose current gospel on anti-trust laws.   
      
   You're doing no such thing.   
      
   > I am actually pretty laid-back, that's why I don't worry much about   
   > Microsoft. I am more concerned with government interference, because I   
   > cannot avoid its influence by simply buying elsewhere.   
      
   So you access all documents, web sites, and internet services without   
   using Windows?   
      
   Or do you, like Richard Stallman, simply do without those services that   
   won't operate on your system of choice?   
      
   > Because nothing can make me use one at home. I don't like Windows, find   
   > it thoroughly annoying. I use Windows at work though.   
      
   Same here.   
      
   > I began to like Windows as an office platform.   
      
   Not me.  MS office products are a bit unstable and problematic.   
      
   > Active Directory is handy.   
      
   As long as someone competent (after a sizable learning curve) sets it   
   up.   
      
   > But the GUI is annoying.   
      
   Yeah.   
      
   > I haven't bought a Windows computer since 1994. Switched to OS/2 shortly   
   > after I saw Windows 3.1. Bought computers with Warp Connect and without   
   > operating systems in the 90s, then switched to BeOS, then GNU/Linux,   
   > then Mac OS X.   
   >   
   > It was then that I learned that Microsoft forced me not to buy anything   
   > but Windows computers. I was surprised.   
      
   You needn't be.  You cannot (as far as I know) buy OS/2 now, or BeOS.   
      
   You can get Linux preloaded from a few vendors.  But you have to be   
   prepared to deal with some interoperability problems with documents,   
   services, and sites that employ only Microsoft protocols and formats.   
      
   You can, of course, opt for a Mac.  But, again, you have to be prepared   
   to deal with interoperability problems, and a notably higher cost for   
   hardware.   
      
   Microsoft doesn't force you to buy Windows computers, but it makes it   
   pretty difficult to buy non-Windows computers, and certainly difficult   
   to "enjoy" Windows-only sites, services, and documents.   
      
   Whether you wish to believe it or not, Microsoft has made   
   well-documented moves to ensure that the only kind of computer you can   
   get by walking into a major retail outlet is a Windows computer.   
      
   --   
   Code is community.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca