All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software

How Apple+Mac is better than Windows+Intel

<< < (4/21) > >>

voidmain:

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:
But at least MS doesn't force you to buy computers built by MS to run the Windows OS.
--- End quote ---


No, they just strongarm all the major hardware vendors who don't have their own OS to sell said hardware with a copy of Windows. Ever tried to buy a desktop/laptop machine in a store or from a major computer manufacturer without a copy of Windows? It's no easy task I can assure you.

Like it or not (I don't), Windows is the most popular OS out there at 97% of the market so all hardware manufactures surely want to be able to sell their equipment preloaded with Windows. Problem is, if they don't sell *every* desktop/laptop computer with a copy of Windows Microsoft will punish them by not giving them as good of a deal.

That makes it pretty unlikely that any competing OS will ever get a piece of that market with all the proprietary formats and protocols Microsoft can dish out by having that 97% of the desktop market. Users are stuck, unless they are willing to make a number of sacrifices initially (like I am willing to do).

Zombie9920:
Nope. I never have and never will buy a OEM computer. Know why? Because I prefer building my own systems. =0P I

BTW, the Windows being pre-installed wouldn't be a big issue for me even if I did buy an OEM computer because I feel Windows is just the best system to be running right now(I install Windows on systems I build for a living as well as systems I build for myself). All PC games are made to run in Windows, almost every *popular* graphical, office, video editing, etc. app runs in Windows(Photoshop, Maya, AutoCAD, Microsoft Office, etc.). With Linux you have to rely on Open Source knock offs of the popular apps that try thier best to support the formats of the popular apps but always fall short. With Linux you have to rely on stuff like Wine to play alot of the popular games(Wine does not run most Win32 stuff flawlessly though).

Another reason why alot of OEMs do not choose to use Linux as an OS to pre-install on consumer computers is because Linux is too difficult for most consumers. In one corner you have an OS that is all point and click, it runs pretty much everything useful and it has a decent GUI to boot(I don't care what you say, Gnome, KDE, IceWM, etc. are not nearly as good as the Windows GUI for looks and ease of use) in the other corner you have an OS that has a GUI added on to a command line OS(and to do stuff effectivley in Linux you need to use the Konsole instead of the GUI WM), it doesn't have support for most of the popular apps and games, it is a bitch to install some stuff on it because you have to be root to install certain things(alot of users wouldn't know about gaining root access) and it is not easy to use(the command line stuff is used alot in the GUI). Tell me, how many people would know that they need to manually mount and unmount something like a floppy drive wheras in Windows it mounts/unmounts all drives automatically.

Linux is not ready to be on the desktops of most users therefore it will not be pre-installed as an OS for consumers.

Linux has a long way to go.

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

Doctor V:

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:
Nope. I never have and never will buy a OEM computer. Know why? Because I prefer building my own systems. =0P I

BTW, the Windows being pre-installed wouldn't be a big issue for me even if I did buy an OEM computer because I feel Windows is just the best system to be running right now(I install Windows on systems I build for a living as well as systems I build for myself). All PC games are made to run in Windows, almost every *popular* graphical, office, video editing, etc. app runs in Windows(Photoshop, Maya, AutoCAD, Microsoft Office, etc.). With Linux you have to rely on Open Source knock offs of the popular apps that try thier best to support the formats of the popular apps but always fall short. With Linux you have to rely on stuff like Wine to play alot of the popular games(Wine does not run most Win32 stuff flawlessly though).

Another reason why alot of OEMs do not choose to use Linux as an OS to pre-install on consumer computers is because Linux is too difficult for most consumers. In one corner you have an OS that is all point and click, it runs pretty much everything useful and it has a decent GUI to boot(I don't care what you say, Gnome, KDE, IceWM, etc. are not nearly as good as the Windows GUI for looks and ease of use) in the other corner you have an OS that has a GUI added on to a command line OS(and to do stuff effectivley in Linux you need to use the Konsole instead of the GUI WM), it doesn't have support for most of the popular apps and games, it is a bitch to install some stuff on it because you have to be root to install certain things(alot of users wouldn't know about gaining root access) and it is not easy to use(the command line stuff is used alot in the GUI). Tell me, how many people would know that they need to manually mount and unmount something like a floppy drive wheras in Windows it mounts/unmounts all drives automatically.

Linux is not ready to be on the desktops of most users therefore it will not be pre-installed as an OS for consumers.

Linux has a long way to go.

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]
--- End quote ---


I really liked the RIAA kitten picture, what happened to it?  I think the RIAA really would kill kittens.  

Calling all open-source software knock-offs to popular apps is complete BS.  Open source software often beats out the propriatary crud.  Take Apache for example.  It wipes the floor with ISS.  How about Mozilla vs. IE.  Alot of proprietary software is based on open source.  Unlike Windows you get a choice of GUIs, and you can make it look however you want, so don't say windoze's GUI looks better.  You say Lin is hard to install, and that simply is not true anymore.  Wine works, I don't think you've ever tried it.  You say you have to use the command line to do things effectively in Linux, but that is also not true.  Tell me then, what do you need a command line for.  You do need to be root to do some things yes.  Windows catches viruses and is hacked more easily than Linux.  There is a connection between the two.  And its not exactly hard to get into root.  Takes about 2 seconds if your a very slow typer.

More and more computer manufacturers are offering Linux preinstalls.  The only thing ONLY thing that was holding them back so long were the penalties M$ would throw at them with their monopoly power.  Linux is growing, and will gain more ground.

I don't think you have ever really used Linux, and if you have, it was a very long time ago because what you are saying is simply not accurate.

I hate the RIAA.  Do you like the RIAA?  DRMOS is on its way.  I won't use it, will you?

V

psyjax:
Man, Zombie4848979784

you sure do have a way of degenerating a perfectly decent thread. I belive Jimmie James was being a bit sarcastic and takeing liberties with his story. Note the fact that he says he threw the PC off the roof with an X box!

Don't know about you, sounds like humor to me.

Whatever...

Yes, Windows PC's (damn these political corect computer terms  :D )

Zombie9920:

quote:Originally posted by Doctor V:


I really liked the RIAA kitten picture, what happened to it?  I think the RIAA really would kill kittens.  

Calling all open-source software knock-offs to popular apps is complete BS.  Open source software often beats out the propriatary crud.  Take Apache for example.  It wipes the floor with ISS.  How about Mozilla vs. IE.  Alot of proprietary software is based on open source.  Unlike Windows you get a choice of GUIs, and you can make it look however you want, so don't say windoze's GUI looks better.  You say Lin is hard to install, and that simply is not true anymore.  Wine works, I don't think you've ever tried it.  You say you have to use the command line to do things effectively in Linux, but that is also not true.  Tell me then, what do you need a command line for.  You do need to be root to do some things yes.  Windows catches viruses and is hacked more easily than Linux.  There is a connection between the two.  And its not exactly hard to get into root.  Takes about 2 seconds if your a very slow typer.

More and more computer manufacturers are offering Linux preinstalls.  The only thing ONLY thing that was holding them back so long were the penalties M$ would throw at them with their monopoly power.  Linux is growing, and will gain more ground.

I don't think you have ever really used Linux, and if you have, it was a very long time ago because what you are saying is simply not accurate.

I hate the RIAA.  Do you like the RIAA?  DRMOS is on its way.  I won't use it, will you?

V
--- End quote ---


Q. What happened to my other sig? A. I got sick of seeing it so I took it down. =0P

The last distro of Linux I used was Mandrake 9.0. I never said that Linux was hard to install so I don't know where that came from. LoL

Open Source software couterparts to popular propriarity software are knock offs. I have yet to see any open source software that actually beats out propriarity software. I'll give some credit, Apache is an excellent solution for a server(I'll even go as far as to say it is better than IIS in alot of ways)..but guess what, Linux and Unix were designed to be used on servers and not as a desktop OS, so knock on wood, *nix has excellent server solutions available.

Now lets get to the rest of the stuff Open Office in no way beats MS Office. Honestly, OpenOffice has some problems with MS Office file formats(MS Office is the DEFACTO standard office format used these days so Open Office does not offer anything better than MS Office...Open Office formats are not the DEFACTO standard you know ;P). Mozilla does not beat out IE. I garantee I can view more pages correctly in IE than I can in Mozilla. IE doesn't have sites that are incompatible with the IE browser(which is the case with Mozilla). Just for an example, go to Homestead and try logging into the site builder/file manager with Mozilla and you will get a nice lil message saying that Site Builder does not support your browser. There are other sites just like that out there. ;P

The Gecko engine has always had problems with properly rendering CSS(Cascading Style Sheets). That was a big turn off for users trying Netscape in the past and the same problem still exists in Mozilla(which so happens to be almost like NS 4.x), luckily for some of you CSS isn't used nearly as much in pages as it used to be though.

Now for the command line in Linux. You can do things much more effectivley in the command line(like compile drivers, install drivers properly, configure your newly installed drivers, compile software packages, etc.). Void Main is a Linux guru so I'm sure he knows that the command line is much more effective than the GUI. For the root acess...you may know that you have to gain root access and you know how to gain root access as well as I know...but how many average consumers know that they have to be root sometimes and know how to?

For the you can make Linux look how you want it to statement. Wow, you can change your GUI's color. I'm so impressed. Most Linux desktops use KDE or Gnome as a GUI. No matter what color it is, it still looks like KDE or Gnome. I'm impressed that you can change the color of an ugly GUI.       :rolleyes:      

Example of having to use command line stuff in the Linux GUI. When I used Mandrake I had to manually type /file/mnt/hdc to access my Master drive file/mnt/cdrom to access my CD-ROM, etc. in Konquerer whereas in Windows I would just double click My Computer and double click the drive/partation I want to access.

I bet that MS isn't holding OEM's back from using Linux as much as you try to claim. I bet if MacOS was ever ported to x86 you would see it being pre-installed on OEM computers just like you see Windows pre-installed. You know why? Because MacOS *is* easy to use and is consumer ready. The only thing MacOS really lacks is good gaming support. It already has support for all of the popular apps available today for work. To make a long story short, the only thing holding OEM's back from pre-installing Linux on most of thier consumer systems is the fact that they know Linux is not ready to be the OS for most desktop conumers. If MS really held OEMs back then why do OEMs offer Server computers with Unix installed? Oems don't have to worry about admins having a Unix system that they don't know how to use because chances are if a person spends the kind of cash that they do on a server then they figure the admin knows how to use Unix. There is a Windows XP 64bit available, Win2K Datacenter server, etc. but OEM's still don't use only MS OSes on thier server line of computers. That is enough to show that MS isn't holding OEM's back.

Mac OSX is a great OS, it is just a crying shame that Apple demands that it has to be run on thier inferior computers.

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version