why do some major computer co. support Microsoft

[letre]

I think that computer manufacterers like to see their computers become as absolete as quickly as possible.  I remember once purchasing a Hercules Chrome video card and by the next windows release there was no longer any support.  The same thing happened to my expensive sharp scanner.

[cahult]

quote:Originally posted by letre:
I think that computer manufacterers like to see their computers become as absolete as quickly as possible.  I remember once purchasing a Hercules Chrome video card and by the next windows release there was no longer any support.  The same thing happened to my expensive sharp scanner.

Well, reading this makes me even more happy to have a Mac. Although it

[Calum]

disposable society.

you will see this phenomenon for as long as our society is a capitalist one. If things were built to last, public spending would go down, and the economy would recede.

that's what they tell us anyway    .

[psyjax]

quote:Originally posted by Calum:
disposable society.

you will see this phenomenon for as long as our society is a capitalist one. If things were built to last, public spending would go down, and the economy would recede.

that's what they tell us anyway     .

That is an absolutely true statement.

Back when the 9-11 incident happend one of the first thing the government did was urge people to go buy stuff. I allways found it really funny how some public official would give some teary eyed heartfelt speach and then hed ask people to go spend money at the local mall.

It was such an obvious ploy, but people actually baught in to the BS.

But that's the way the system works, and it's a bit circular in it's reasoning concidering that even the hier ups are in it to make money to spend the money on things made by people that are in it to make money to spend money on things made by people wo are in it to ... .... ..  .etc.

[Brent]

I dont even know why I am bothering to put a response on here.  It seems that the hard core Linux users are sort of like religious fundamentalists when it comes to their OS. Regardless of any proof to the contrary, their way is the only way.
The reason manufacturers put a MS OS on a new computer is very simple and easy to understand. If the AVERAGE computer purchaser took home a new system with any of the more than 1000 versions of Linux on it, can you imagion the total bewilderment when they tried to do even the simplest task? With any MS system since DOS, any old granny can sit down and get started with very little instruction and surf the net, play music, set up folders and files ect.  MS does their thinking for them? of course!!!  Thats what people want for gods sake!  The average user doesnt want to compile a new kernel, fart around for an hour to set up a folder (not having any idea how to do it even after trying to follow the directions in the USUALLY inadaquate manual}  I have nothing at all against Linux.  Hopefully, someday it will evolve into a OS that can be used by anyone on a desktop.  There seems to be a school of thought amoung the present gurus that it should remain as it is.  Why, is beyond me.  The reason why Microsoft is so successfull is because they give the average user what they want! A simple, easy to use, attractive OS that is fun to use and can do anything the average person wants.
I have had windows XP running day after day since installing it 6 months ago and have never had it crash yet.  What are you experts doing that makes it crash all the time?  Wierd!!  I also use Mandrake 8.1 when I want to simply fool around and try to make things work.  I cant help but wonder.... does anyone ever do anything with Linux besides configure, tweak and compile?  At this stage, any linux system is pretty much unusable out of the box for the average person, and without a lot of studying and perserverence will remain so.
What the hell do some of you people hate so much about nice graphics??  Do you prefer your partner in life to be ugly too?  I suspect that it is the lack of eye candy in linux that is the problem and the inability to admit that things could be improved. If yours is not as good as mine, put down mine. Strange phylosophy.....
Bottom line.. Who the hell cares who makes what as long as it suits the purpose?  Windows expensive? Yup! You bet!!  So is a BMW! Nothing in this life is free. The old addage you get what you pay for is true with operating systems as it is with anything else. The response to this is most likely going to be. "If you dont understand and learn linux, you are a moron"  To some of the more radical "fundamentalists" on here, I can only say "get a life"  using an OS is not a religious experience for most.  If playing with linux is your hobby, great!  I really hope some day that it does evolve into "everyones OS" Until then, it is more an operators/operations sytem.
Maybe I dont belong on a thread like this, but I just thought I would express the opinion of an AVERAGE computer user. Linux has its good points. Microsoft has its good points.  And really, the general public doesnt care!! They simply want to use their computers and microsoft, as much as you may hate them, make it possible. OK...OK... im a moron... Proud of it!!!

[iancom]

Hmmmmmmmm.... flame bait......

I'm only going to comment on one part of that.

 

quote:  It seems that the hard core Linux users are sort of like religious fundamentalists when it comes to their OS. Regardless of any proof to the contrary, their way is the only way.

No. What we object to is exactly this kind of attitude from Microsoft. The MS way is the only way.

Open source is about choice. There are many ways to do things, and so there should be. Linux, BSD, Mac, even Microsoft. There should be the choice of what you want to use, what works for you.

Microsoft are limiting this choice for everyone. Why are there very few PC's sold without Windows or with an alternative OS loaded? Because MS make it *very* difficult for OEM's to do this.

We're not saying everyone *must* use Linux. We're not even saying everyone must not use Windows.

We're saying everyone must have the choice of what to use on their PC's.

[psyjax]

Avarege User:

I honestly don't know who you are adressing your post to.

Read the "Dispersing the Linux Lies."

The issues you have mentioned have been discused before, and conclusions have been reached. You may find that thread interesting.

Most people here are not concerned with preaching an OS to you but rather in dispersing the myth that M$ is the only choice. People here hate M$ because the fact is they don't make a better product, and use preditory monoploistic tactics to enjoy the position of power they have.

Forthermore, using an M$ product gives them more money to destroy Linux, something you hope will get better. M$ is on the warpath to destroy Linux the GPL and Open source.

Linux is not the best OS in the world, but nither is M$. People here want everyone to have a choice.

If you wan't an OS your granny can realy use and still maintain power and flexibility try OS X       . (shameless plug).

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]

[Brent]

The topic is "why do major manufacturers support microsoft?" I tried in my layman way to answer that. I am all for Linux evolving into everyones OS. I really believe that when it does, the manufactures would install, regardless of what microsoft attempts to force them to do.  All manufacturers are interested in is the bottom line.  Right now, Microsoft MS's contribute to that bottom line. I would be willing to help in any way that I can to see linux improve and I think that the linux community being able to take constructive critisism would be a start. If this is "flame material" go ahead and flame me. I am only expressing the opinion of the masses and its the masses that are going to make or break MS or linux.  People want the stuff that MS is feeding them.  People dont want to load a cd player compiled by Fred of Fresno!  I certainly appreciate someones ability to develope it, but the masses love Windows media player and Real player!  I AM CERTAINLY NOT ANTI LINUX!!

[Brent]

Just one more comment.  I would suspect the people who purchase name brand computers, on the whole, are not really up on operating systems and other peripherals.  Its the folks who build their own systems and know a bit about computers that tend to play around with different OS's. The OEM's are forced at this time, to supply the public with a system that is usable with a bare minumum of computer knowledge.  End of story

[jtpenrod]

quote: I cant help but wonder.... does anyone ever do anything with Linux besides configure, tweak and compile? At this stage, any linux system is pretty much unusable out of the box for the average person, and without a lot of studying and perserverence will remain so.

This is just so much FUD. Up until last November, I ran Win 95 exclusively for over five years. I didn't really give a rat's ass for Linux. That was, until I considered upgrading the old Dell OptiPlex GSa I'd been using. I thought I'd simply do as everyone else: get a new system with XP on it. Until I learned all about WPA. I found this to be absolutely unacceptable to me. So I looked into Linux, and decided on Mandrake 8.1. Far from finding it "unuseable" I found the KDE desktop to be even easier to navigate than that of Win 95. It took me all of five minutes to figure it out. Can I go to the command line? Of course, and I do for quite a few things. However, I have yet to find anything that I can't do from the desktop. Mandrake, using the default install, first on the old Dell, and later on the new system, worked perfectly right out of the box. I've done far more tweaking to get Win 95 running right.
 

quote: What the hell do some of you people hate so much about nice graphics?? Do you prefer your partner in life to be ugly too? I suspect that it is the lack of eye candy in linux that is the problem and the inability to admit that things could be improved. If yours is not as good as mine, put down mine.

I have nothing against nice graphics. And I find that KDE provides some very nice graphics indeed. Does Win XP provide nice graphics? Last December, while doing some Christmas shopping, I spent quite awhile playing around with an XP demo rig. Fisher-Price-esque is how I would describe it. Not 10 minutes later, I saw a toy computer called "My First PC", for ages five and under; the screen shot on the front of the package bore a stricking resemblance to the XP desktop. I am not five years old, and I quite frankly resent the implicit insult to my intelligence that is the XP desktop. Furthermore, all that "eye candy" carries its price: it's resource intensive. I'd rather use a "plain-Jane" GUI and save the CPU resources for getting real work done.

quote: not having any idea how to do it even after trying to follow the directions in the USUALLY inadaquate manual

Never have I seen such a rediculous bit of FUD. When I was completely new to Linux, I sprung for the Mandrake boxed set, even though I could've gone to Linux Central and saved $30.00. I bought it for the documentation. The documentation is by far vastly superior to anything I ever got from M$. I had to figure out 90% of what I know about using Win 95 by trial and error. The help system was of no help, the documentation absolutely SUCKED. There is hardly a day that I don't see these ads for the Video Professor hawking these CDs for learning Windows. And these ads run on programs that appeal to intelligent viewers. Why does he do it? Because M$ hasn't done it. So far as I'm concerned, everyone who orders the Video Professor's course should send their bills straight to Redmond c/o Bill Gates.

Now let's talk about that new system I wanted. The best system for my needs and budget was the Micron Millenia Extreme. Unlike "store-bought" units, Micron builds these systems when you place your order. When I contacted them, what were my choices: Win XP, Win 98SE, Win ME (WHUDDA DEAL   :eek:  ). Could I order one without software? They wouldn't do that. How about I mail them the Mandrake install CDs and let them load Mandrake? They wouldn't do that either. If I wanted this system, I had to take my choice of M$ software - none of which I wanted. That SUCKS! I, the paying customer, was denied what I wanted, was forced to buy what I never wanted, had no intention of keeping - and this from an OEM that builds systems to order! His Gatesness has Micron and a lot of other OEMs by the balls and you can't get what you want. That's why I am so anti-M$, why I am here.
______________________________

Powered by Mandrake Linux and Freedom
Computers are like air conditioners: they can't do their jobs if you open windows

[Brent]

Perhaps this is off the topic, but I would never purchase a ready made computer.  I build my own and put what I want in it and install whatever OS I want in it. I am currently running an Athlon 1700+ GA7=dxr mobo with raid set up as ATA ide 100 giving me room to install the 5 OS's I currently have installed.  I would never have a brand name computer in the house again after some of the experiences I have had with compaq, HP and Dell. I agree with you on the point that no OEM should ever dictate to me what OS should be installed.  Im rather suprised that they wouldnt sell you one with NO OS installed!!  If Microsoft has that big a hold on them, for gods sake lets get linux so that it appeals to everyone (including granny) and break Microsofts monopoly! Its not going to be done by bitching about them. If it needs pretty pictures and catchy little dittys playing when it starts up, lets do it. If point and click is what is needed, lets get it to be the norm. Command lines are time consuming and to most microsoft users totally foriegn unless they were around in the days of DOS. I would really love nothing better than to get rid of microsofts monopoly but its not going to happen in the near future unless someone (perhaps a linux oriented Bill Gates type?} takes the helm and marches boldly forward. I know zip about programming.  C++  used to be my average mark in spelling (obvious)  By the way, the reason I have so many OS is because I am constantly comparing different versions of linux to see if there is one that does have the potential of being my standard everyday OS

[jtpenrod]

quote:  Perhaps this is off the topic, but I would never purchase a ready made computer. I build my own and put what I want in it and install whatever OS I want in it. I am currently running an Athlon 1700+ GA7=dxr mobo with raid set up as ATA ide 100 giving me room to install the 5 OS's I currently have installed.

You call yourself an average PC user?   :confused:    

quote:  I would never have a brand name computer in the house again after some of the experiences I have had with compaq, HP and Dell.

Nor would I. I've seen lots of pretty store-bought units at places like Circuit City, Comp USA, Best Buy, etc. However, under all the glitz, there were always some flaw: usually undersized power supplies. In this day and age, 250W just doesn't cut it anymore. I've yet to find a good one. One thing that Micron does have going for it is that their systems are at least built with Linux-friendly components. They can't say so, but these are definitely designed and built with multi-booting in mind.
 

quote: Im rather suprised that they wouldnt sell you one with NO OS installed!!  

Not me. If an OEM ships these "naked" systems, Macro$uck, in its arrpgance, figures that the recipient of such a system is going to put a bootleg copy of Winders on it. When they audit the OEM and find that they've shiped more 'puters than they've bought Winders licenses, well, goodbye M$ contract!  

quote: If Microsoft has that big a hold on them, for gods sake lets get linux so that it appeals to everyone (including granny) and break Microsofts monopoly!  

I think you're asking the impossible here. If you build an OS any idiot can use, you probably have an OS that only an idiot would want to use. IMO that is exactly what XP is. YYeeeechhhhhhh!    

The issue here really isn't which OS is better. There are lots of folks out there for whom XP is probably the best solution. They aren't tech-savvy, they have no interest in it, or may not have the time or inclination to learn. They'll never be ready for Linux, nor should Linux be remade in that image. The issue is Macro$uck and its dirty business practices. M$ could become the most ethical software company in the world tomorrow; all it would take is for His Gatesness to issue the order with the threat that, if they didn't straighten out, Gates would repudiate the company and sell all his shares in it. There is nothing keeping M$ from licensing Win XP under the GPL and taking it Open Source except for His Gatesness' hunger for power. There's your real issue.
_______________________________

Powered by Mandrake Linux and Freedom
Computers are like air conditioners: they can't do their jobs if you open windows


[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: jtpenrod ]

[Brent]

Thank you jtpenrod for clarifying to everyone why this forum exists!!  Even though I do use windows xp simply because it does what I need to do most times easier than linux, I am appalled at the business practices of Microsoft.  I would think that the main Purpose of this forum wuld be to express disgust with the company itself rather than windows xp.  As with anything, OS or otherwise, some like it some dont. If you dont like it, dont use it. If you dont like Toyota, dont drive one. etc etc etc. I would love to see Bill and company finally put in their place. Its not going to be done by a bunch of bitching about thier products.
I do think its possible to make a distribution of linux that would appeal to the masses (windows users) and still have the distros that appeal to the hard core users.  Isnt that what open source is all about?  A lot of people may object to "linux for computer illiterates" but to my way of thinking, if a distro like that would help to erode microsofts monopoly, who cares?  Think of all the millions he would have to spend in court fighting to hold on to his empire!!  
Sitting back bitching about his distros and calling anyone that uses them "morons" as a lot of the less enlightened linux users do, is pointless, and childish. Nothing I would like better than to see Microsoft changed into an ethical company, that competes fairly with other companys in the field. Not destroyed, changed. Im certainly not an expert on OS's, but I am simply reflecting the opinions of a lot of my workmates and not suprising, they all say the same thing. "i would love to use linux if it were not so geeky and hard to use"  In my age group, most know diddly about computers and use what is easiest to understand. Simple as that.

[jtpenrod]

quote: I do think its possible to make a distribution of linux that would appeal to the masses (windows users) and still have the distros that appeal to the hard core users.

In that case, have you heard of Lycoris? I've been hearing lots of good things about it lately. It seems to have relatively few problems for a newly released distro. I haven't tried it yet, and I don't think it's something that would appeal to me. I prefer the "hard core" distros (if you can call Mandrake, Red Hat or SuSE that    ) I had no problems making the transition from Win 95 to Mandrake; it took may be a week.

quote:  I am simply reflecting the opinions of a lot of my workmates and not suprising, they all say the same thing. "i would love to use linux if it were not so geeky and hard to use"  

That was true at one time, and not all that long ago. However, I don't think it applies anymore, not with Red Hat, SuSE, or especially Mandrake. Perhaps if these folks could have the chance to see the KDE desktop for themselves they'd be willing to give it a try. Although that probably won't happen any time soon at the places where these folks go to get their systems: Circuit City, Best Buy, Costco, etc. Although Wal-Mart, of all places, is making an effort to defy the Borg by offering systems that come with Linux or even no software at all.

I find that even the "bitching" serves an educational purpose. Besides, it's good, clean fun    Mostly, those who get called "morons" (or even worse    ) usually had it coming by making some rediculous statements.
_________________________________

Powered by Mandrake Linux and Freedom
Computers are like air conditioners: they can't do their jobs if you open windows.

[Calum]

well of course some people want to use windows! they should be allowed to!
i agree with basically all the opinions that you guys say here, about having a choice, and bringing out good software, but i think a lot of this stuff about linux users being fanatical and being a religious cult and so on is really out of place and out of proportion.
The fanaticism of an individual is not down to the products they choose to consume. If a given fanatical linux user had never known about linux, they would be just as fanatical about something else.
Linux users do not have to represent themselves well for other people's benefit. Many people talk to linux users as if they have a duty to behave well, like they are christians representing God, or something, but that is not true.
Everubody is an individual and can do what they like, and should not be judged on the basis of one or two largely invalid considerations.