Stop Microsoft

All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: auser on 3 September 2004, 18:34

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: auser on 3 September 2004, 18:34
Hellow every one
Lets talk a bit about learning this system
Lets say that there is a new compter user who no nothing about the computers

if this user need to learn a computer system he will select Windows...
But why does not this user select MAC or Linux
He may not select Mac couse it too expensive as a new user
Now We have windows and Linux
Lets now together but both of these OS near and see the different
as a new user he need the easyest to be learned and deal with
Windows can really be for the new user couse Its MUCH easyer than linux
simply need to install anew APP just open the control pnel and use ADD/Remove programs
Need to install a new hardware .. The same thing
Need to use the programs
its easyer + Windows have a huge database of help
and first of all most of the programs are for windows Even if there is WINE in Linux

as an advance user and a good C programmer he may select linux harder and better security and open source
But the problem still in linux is using it how to
install a new program or hardware
even installing the OS it self
for me this is normal but I am talking about the new user

Lets talk about this
think about it
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Xeen on 3 September 2004, 19:51
I agree with you 100%.

Windows is shit, but it's very user friendly. Although my opinion is that since XP and with the upcoming Longhorn it's TOO friendly and just childish.

Linux is good, stable, and very customizable, but it's not as user friendly. Sure, it's getting there. But slowly and painfully. People want an OS that's not just good and stable, but also one where they don't have to care about compiling sources and kernels, etc...

I think the answer is something like Mac OSX. It's pure Unix but it has a very friendly shell that lets you do every single thing you need to do. All we need is for something similar to come out for PCs.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: hm_murdock on 3 September 2004, 20:49
You mean something like GenSTEP and Komodo
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Talium on 3 September 2004, 22:11
Someone who doesn't know anything about computers will chose Win cose it is not only user friendly but also the most popular OS. In my country most people(those that have no idea about computers) doesn't even know that other OS's exist and they all have windows. And the majoraty of those who know aboud other OS's don't use it eighter.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: WMD on 3 September 2004, 22:33
Windows seems very easy and intuitive, only because everyone has been made familiar with it.  There's plenty of people who don't know how to do much in Windows except run their programs - they can't do anything to the system.  I'll let a Mac user take it from here....  ;)
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 3 September 2004, 23:25
I've been thinking of starting some website to help people switch to the Mac for a minimal cost, how to build your own Mac, how to find an alternative to software for Windows and stuff. I think it's not worth waiting for an alternative for PC, and that focus should be on switching people to OS X. I have to start working on that project one of these days.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 4 September 2004, 14:25
Why is windows so easy to use?  Because of the over-exposure to windows.  Why is windows over-exposed?  Because it's so easy to use.  Why is windows so easy to use?

infinite loop, terminating.  That's ridiculous logic, and it needs to be flushed.

Although some *nixes claim to be desktop ready, they are only good for tech-savvy users.  I am glad to offer any assistance I can to new users, but some people will never get the concept.  However, these same people will never grasp the concept of NTFS permissions or registry editing or dll maintenance either, so I don't feel sorry for them.

OSX is light years beyond anything Microsoft has ever come up with.  If Apple shipped ten times as many units as they do now, they would cost probably 20% less, that's economics for you.  So if Macs are too expensive, you only have yourself to blame.  ;)
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Xeen on 4 September 2004, 18:25
This semester I'll actually be learning and using the Mac OSX a lot for the first time.

But here's my 2 problems with Macs:
1. You buy them "as is". I dont like that. I like being able to build my own computer the way I want and be able to do anything with it. I don't like the Mac's designs. I dont like those semi-spheres with the monitors sticking out and I dont like the ones with everything built into the monitor either. The only thing I seem to like about Macs is the OS.

2. With Macs, you have to pay for everything which I simply cannot do. I like being able to get free software or pirated software cause I just cant afford stuff. With Macs, there ain't no free software like there is millions of it for Windows, and hardly anyone pirates mac stuff as far as I know.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 4 September 2004, 19:50
quote:
1. You buy them "as is". I dont like that. I like being able to build my own computer the way I want and be able to do anything with it.


Not all Macs are iMacs. Powermacs are like PC's and can be expanded at will. It is even possible to build a Mac from scratch.

http://www.macopz.com/buildamac/ (http://www.macopz.com/buildamac/)

In fact, it's actually easier to upgrade a Mac than to upgrade a PC. All you have to do is add a PCI or ZIF card. If you don't wish to buy a G4 from Apple or build your own, you can buy some old G3 tower (or even a 9500) and buy an upgrade from Sonnet (http://www.sonnettech.com/).

   
quote:
2. With Macs, you have to pay for everything which I simply cannot do.


Not true. There is plenty of freeware and shareware for Mac, and Mac software can be found just as easily with any P2P program. In fact, all you have to do is type the word 'mac' in the search engine to get all the Mac-specific software. Plus, many CD's are hybrids, so you are likely to already possess software that will work on the Mac.

[ September 04, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: bedouin on 4 September 2004, 21:49
quote:
Originally posted by xeen:
But here's my 2 problems with Macs:
1. You buy them "as is". I dont like that. I like being able to build my own computer the way I want and be able to do anything with it. I don't like the Mac's designs. I dont like those semi-spheres with the monitors sticking out and I dont like the ones with everything built into the monitor either. The only thing I seem to like about Macs is the OS.


Well, my 2+ year old PowerMac has had the following internal changes made to it (I won't bother including external peripherals -- aside from he displays):

1) Stock Radeon 7000 32mb replaced with GeForce4 Ti 4600 128mb
2) Switched from CRT to LCD; CRT became secondary display
3) Purchased AlchemyTV DVR PCI card
4) Stock CD-RW replaced with Superdrive (DVD+-RW)
5) Added second internal hard drive
6) Added 1gb of RAM (still not maxxed out though)

And I'll probably upgrade the CPU soon as well.  I suppose I may need to add FW800 or USB 2.0 in the future sometime as well.  In that case I have plenty of empty PCI slots.

Even the iMacs are opening up.  Nearly every part (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86812) in the new iMac G5 is user replaceable.  This may lead way for some interesting third-party upgrades.

Personally, I think the main reason I liked building my own machines from scratch as a PC user was because I knew every detail of the system; it gave me a sense of pride, kind of like putting together my own hot rod.  There was perhaps a false reassurance that because you chose each part, and assembled it yourself, that the machine was somehow superior, even to machines with better specifications that were pre-assembled.

Well, all I can say is I've learned to trust Apple.  The parts they select for their machines are generally quality, and not particularly different from what I would have chose if buying equivalent parts to build my own PC.  The only difference is I know with relative certainty that this product will function in OS X, without quests for drivers or other troubleshooting during reinstalls or when experiencing difficulties.  It's been said over and over: part of what makes OS X good is that Apple manufactures the machine and the OS.  

Also keep in mind many Mac designs are engineered not only to look 'pretty,' but for a specific function.  I always find it amusing that some PC people think Macs look ugly, then buy the most horrific looking PC case, complete with neon lights and other assorted nonsense.  

 
quote:
]2. With Macs, you have to pay for everything which I simply cannot do. I like being able to get free software or pirated software cause I just cant afford stuff. With Macs, there ain't no free software like there is millions of it for Windows, and hardly anyone pirates mac stuff as far as I know.


The Mac warez scene has a pretty rich history.  Some might even consider Hotline an early precursor to modern P2P networks.  I'm not going to give you direct information, but there are plenty of Mac torrents, IRC channels, etc.

However if you're really interested in 'free' software OS X lets you compile nearly any Linux app and run it under X11.  Sometimes when I'm looking for a specific app the first thing I do is head over to Freshmeat (http://freshmeat.net) and see what projects are available.

Then again, when you actually find an operating system that meets your needs exceptionally well, and hasn't been forced upon you, you might just find yourself purchasing software to support your community.  Imagine that.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: mobrien_12 on 6 September 2004, 06:28
quote:
Originally posted by worker201:
Why is windows so easy to use?  Because of the over-exposure to windows.  Why is windows over-exposed?  Because it's so easy to use.  Why is windows so easy to use?

infinite loop, terminating.  That's ridiculous logic, and it needs to be flushed.
 


I remember the first time I tried to  work with MS Word 6.0, never havning used a Word or Wordperfect program before, but being fluent in LaTeX.  It was a frigging nightmare.  It took a hellof a long time to learn how to use it ("how do I do this in Word when it's so easy in LaTeX?").

So NO, MS stuff is not easier.  It's just what people learn first in most cases.  And now I know more about Word than most people, and I can tell you that from what I see, 90% of the people don't know how to use it correctly.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Orethrius on 6 September 2004, 06:48
quote:
Originally posted by M. O'Brien:


And now I know more about Word than most people, and I can tell you that from what I see, 90% of the people don't know how to use it correctly.


I know, Word isn't a word processor, it's a tool for accessing otherwise restricted drives.   ;)
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 6 September 2004, 16:21
quote:
Then again, when you actually find an operating system that meets your needs exceptionally well, and hasn't been forced upon you, you might just find yourself purchasing software to support your community. Imagine that.


If you're talking about purchasing proprietary software, then that's an easy way to undermine your community, not support it.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: bedouin on 7 September 2004, 00:29
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
If you're talking about purchasing proprietary software, then that's an easy way to undermine your community, not support it.

That all depends on who my community is, and if I believe I solely belong to just one.  In that case support means a number of different things.  If you're going to have a kind of polarized "with us or against us" mentality then you're just as backward as the one's you're against.  The line becomes even less clear when you have a company like Apple that regularly contributes back to the open source community.

Seeing as I'm not much of a developer, the best I can contribute back to the OSS community is the occasional donation and bug reports.  Well, that and actually using said program -- which is a kind of support by itself, that commercial vendors fail to understand (yes, warez does help in some cases).  

However, I don't feel compelled to use a program just because it's open source when there's a superior alternative available.  Furthermore, I don't have a problem supporting a company that makes quality products, assuming they continue to do so, and act in a morally acceptable fashion (Microsoft fails not one, but both of these criteria).  In short, I'm with whoever has the superior solution, and acts in an acceptable manner.  In some cases that may be a small shareware developer living in New Zealand; in others it may be the makers of a Linux distribution, or open source app.  In the past it was BeOS and various Linux distributions; nowadays it's largely Apple.

Yet when a viable open source app comes that meets my needs I'm the first to adopt it, and then spread the word about it.  I have absolutely no qualms suggesting a Windows or Linux user check out OpenOffice instead of MS Office; I'm the first to install Firebird on someone's machine after repairing it, giving them a brief rundown of why it's a superior product, and why they should consider other non-MS alternatives.  I'll quickly ask a struggling Windows user who owns x86 hardware if he's ever considered Linux.  However if someone comes to me for advice about making their next computer purchase, I'd quickly suggest nothing other than a Mac running OS X, for their sanity and my own.

The battle for me isn't so much about commercial vs. open source; it's about destroying a very dangerous hegemony, that could destroy computers as we know them.  In my eyes the promotion of any alternative is a good thing.  The presence of many alternatives doesn't hurt open source, it only reenforces to the consumer that there are multiple choices.  What I hope for is computing to return back to what it was in the 80s, where a number of platforms were available all with their strengths and weaknesses.  What I don't want from the 80s is the lack of cross-platform compatibility.  This means eliminating file formats not supported across platforms, closed protocols, and coding with portability in mind.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 7 September 2004, 00:59
quote:
Originally posted by flap:


If you're talking about purchasing proprietary software, then that's an easy way to undermine your community, not support it.


Like Bedouin says, it depends on what your community is.  As a Linux user, support means bug reports, donations, art submissions, etc.  But in the Mac community, this may just mean sending $10 to a shareware developer.  A lot of Mac software is free, but not open source.  If I build autoconf or gnutls from source on my Mac, it's really more of a support to GNU than it is to Apple.  Supporting Apple means something else entirely.  Apple makes good software and good hardware, and I am willing to put my money where my mouth is.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: beamrider2600 on 7 September 2004, 19:32
I don't think windows is easy to use at all. The biggest challanges to a new user are when things go wrong - when the unexpected happens. Windows is a very unstable operating system - things are far more likely to go wrong and therefore it couldn't be a worse platform to learn on. Even if you start out on Linux at least you can learn how to use it and know it'll work as expected.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: insomnia on 7 September 2004, 19:53
quote:
Originally posted by worker201:


Like Bedouin says, it depends on what your community is.  As a Linux user, support means bug reports, donations, art submissions, etc.  But in the Mac community, this may just mean sending $10 to a shareware developer.  A lot of Mac software is free, but not open source.  If I build autoconf or gnutls from source on my Mac, it's really more of a support to GNU than it is to Apple.  Supporting Apple means something else entirely.  Apple makes good software and good hardware, and I am willing to put my money where my mouth is.



What a nice community.
Give us your money and you're part of it.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 7 September 2004, 20:11
quote:
Originally posted by insomnia:


What a nice community.
Give us your money and you're part of it.



The best part of it is that you can contribute both by giving money in exchange for innovative and top quality software AND by giving code to the Darwin community.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 8 September 2004, 01:16
quote:
Originally posted by insomnia:



What a nice community.
Give us your money and you're part of it.


Thats not exactly what I meant.  Once the hardware and basic software are purchased, things are voluntary.  Donating $20 to the Mozilla project and paying $20 for a piece of shareware that I think is really cool are pretty much the same thing.  There's no requirement, and you give of your own free will, to support the producers of quality software.  They don't make money off it, but I want to encourage them to keep at it, because they are on the right track.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: insomnia on 8 September 2004, 02:38
quote:
Originally posted by worker201:


Thats not exactly what I meant.  Once the hardware and basic software are purchased, things are voluntary.  Donating $20 to the Mozilla project and paying $20 for a piece of shareware that I think is really cool are pretty much the same thing.



You seem to have a different opinion on 'community' software.

When developers share their code, or even better, make it entirely free, they make it a community project.

As for closed source payware, it doesnt belong to any community, every individual has to pay for it  and they will never fully own it.(This doesn't mean it's bad software.)
 
(Unless the Shareware you mean is all OSS)

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 8 September 2004, 03:14
Mostly I was referring to the kind of shareware where it works just fine (not crippled in any way), and you are encouraged to pay a purchase fee, which is little more than a donation to the developers.  When I pay that fee, I am just saying thanks.

Let's look at the other side.  I know tons of people who go to a gnu ftp site and just download away, greedy for free software.  These people never write articles or help newbs or even say "thank you ever so much for your time" when posting to a support mailing list.  So free/open software doesn't automatically make a good community.  I help out where I can because I appreciate all the people out there who helped me out.  I would be lost if it wasn't for kind people at gcc, libpng, and mozilla.  I want to return the favor.  But not everyone is righteous or just when it comes to the computer.

Anyway, you do what you can to help out.  I don't see anything wrong with paying for software, if it is good and reasonably priced.  $130 for OSX, $100 for Illustrator CS (educational!), these are investments I am willing to make.

Ah, capitalism.  Well, as long as we are stuck with it, we might as well do the best we can with it.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 8 September 2004, 05:43
quote:
Donating $20 to the Mozilla project and paying $20 for a piece of shareware that I think is really cool are pretty much the same thing.


The important distinction to make between paying for proprietary software and paying for free software (whether the payment in this case is for a boxed set of software etc. or a donation) is that what you're paying for in each case is very different. Traditional, proprietary software licencing is based on the principle of charging for the use of the software, not the acquisition of it or the work done in producing it. When you buy a boxed Mandrake set, pay a free software developer for some work or you donate $20 to Mozilla, you're either paying for a tangible product or you're acknowledging the work that's been done to produce some software. In any case your payment (or lack of) has absolutely no bearing on your use of the software. Free software is free because you're not restricted in your use or empowering of others to make use of it. When you pay for a shareware licence you're buying a restricted right to simply use the software.

I don't know what your definition of Shareware is, but as I understand it it's software that's released free of charge on a temporary basis but that you're expected to pay for if you wish to use it after a certain period. If you're thinking that paying for shareware software is voluntary then you're probably referring to freeware whose authors ask for, but don't require, a donation; or "donorware".

 
quote:
The battle for me isn't so much about commercial vs. open source


Agreed; it isn't about either of those for me. It's about proprietary vs. free software.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 8 September 2004, 06:01
quote:
When you pay for a shareware licence you're buying a restricted right to simply use the software.


That claim doesn't make much sense. Your right to use a software can't be 'restricted' since you didn't have it before acquiring it.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: skyman8081 on 8 September 2004, 06:29
And I don't care if it is free/open/OSS/GPL/BSD/WTF/BBQ
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 8 September 2004, 06:36
quote:
Originally posted by Agent Sauron:
And I don't care if it is free/open/OSS/GPL/BSD/WTF/BBQ


Me neither. That rhetoric is getting old.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: insomnia on 8 September 2004, 06:55
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7 / BOB:


Me neither. That rhetoric is getting old.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]


I find it very sad you both think like that.
  :confused:
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 8 September 2004, 07:08
Alright, I'll explain.

What I find sad is not as much the existence of open source or free software than the insistence of its proponents on eliminating any alternative business models. Many people such as myself greatly appreciate the contributions and efforts of genuinely innovative companies such as Apple, MadWolf and many others (the former I mention because I admit, it is a company that I have in high esteem, but I am sure that they are not the only ones).

I and many others would rightly be deeply saddened to see such companies and their software disappear as a result of such hasty generalisations. I can do without Microsoft, as they have breached every rule in the book, but for the rest I would like to see a coexistence. Both business models have their strengths and weaknesses and can contribute in their ways to technological innovation.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: insomnia on 8 September 2004, 07:24
So...?
Does the fact that you pay for OSX(without even really owning it) make it better.
Would you shoot yourself if all that stuff was free?
How can you not prefer free software?
Wouldn't you like your Apple system to be free as well?

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 8 September 2004, 07:42
If they can find a way to make their software free whilst being able to keep one of their biggest selling points for their hardware, and if they choose to do so, then that's their prerogative. However, forcing companies out of the market because they prefer a different approach is another thing, and it is one of the major reasons why I dislike Microsoft, and disagree with OSS extremists.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: insomnia on 8 September 2004, 07:55
Oh well...
IMO, their are no extremists on the left wing side.
We're simply right.  ;)
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Laukev7 on 8 September 2004, 08:12
I don't see things as being either 'left' or 'right' wing, I just see them as different approaches. Neither do I actually see them as 'extremes', despite my ill-chosen expression. Some approaches simply work better for some people than for others (I'm not talking about social issues like abortion or gay rights).

I find the left and right concept flawed, anyway.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 8 September 2004, 21:04
This thread is headed for the lounge and/or bin anyways, might as well give it a little push.  ;)

Yes, licensing is a silly concept, and the realities of paying for a license are dumb.  But is it required to even slip to that level of abstraction?  No.  My $20 goes to the company.  Whether that is a donation or a license fee doesn't really mean shit to my wallet, it's just $20.

Stupidest analogy ever:
If someone offered you the following deal: you get a red Ferrari for free, or a black Ferrari for $100, which would you choose?  Would you automatically choose the free one?  Or would the benefit of owning a black car vs a red car be worth the $100?  I mean, if you like Cocoa better than GTK, it's worth it, right?

I don't know.
I fully support FSF and GNU, with whatever resources I have to spare.  But I also love my Mac.  If I eve wrote a program, it would be GPL, no question.  But I am not going to let any sort of blindness prevent me from owning the software I need.  Christ, Linux does NOT have a hi-end vector drawing program.  Adobe Illustrator is the only software that even comes close (F freehand and coreldraw).  For awhile, I was seriously trying to decide whether I should get a Mac or a Linux-ready x86.  I decided not to choose.  Instead, I chose Illustrator and Flash.

(but in my spare time, I am trying to figure out how to make a vector program for linux)

So fuck, I don't know anything, really, except what works for me.  That's all I have to say on the topic.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Werre on 8 September 2004, 11:30
Re: Windows being "easier" for a new user.
This is total and utter bullshit.

Winblows is in no way easier than any modern Linux distro with KDE or gnome properly set up. It's lunacy to even suggest that, unless your definition of "new user" really means that he has had prior contact with Winshit.

As for installing software, which is easier:
-To use ONE frontend and one mechanism to install, keep track of, search, and uninstall packages OR
1. Use god knows what methods (googling, magazines) to find the software, then
2. use vendor-supplied installer that differs from every other installer, then pray it does not fuck up
3. then decide you didn't want this shareware crap anyway, use the vendor-supplied uninstaller that more often than not does NOT remove everything, often causing problems.

Which ones easier?

On Linux you'd use some graphical frontend to locate the software and click "install", and if you decide later to uninstall you can rest assured EVERYTHING except your modified configurations are removed - even those if you so prefer.

Installing shit on Wincrap servers requires RTFMing too, and is more often that not quite painful if it has anything to do with legacy apps or databases.

The thread's parent message was a collection of age-old myths with no basis on reality.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 8 September 2004, 18:14
quote:
That claim doesn't make much sense. Your right to use a software can't be 'restricted' since you didn't have it before acquiring it.


I didn't say that. I said the right you're buying is restricted i.e. limited. You're buying a limited right.

 
quote:
Me neither. That rhetoric is getting old.


By "rhetoric" I assume you mean "opinion". And by "getting old" you mean it's one you don't agree with.

 
quote:
If someone offered you the following deal: you get a red Ferrari for free, or a black Ferrari for $100, which would you choose? Would you automatically choose the free one? Or would the benefit of owning a black car vs a red car be worth the $100? I mean, if you like Cocoa better than GTK, it's worth it, right?


It has nothing to do with price. I'd happily pay more money for some Free Software than I would for proprietary. There are deeper social issues and principles at stake than how well a particular piece of software works.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: bedouin on 9 September 2004, 06:28
Here's a few of my thoughts.  Take them as a grain of salt.


So, I guess in summary your ideals are fine, flap.  And I honestly don't think you have much to worry about.  The biggest dilemma is ensuring that the MS beast doesn't grow any further, because they truly are techno-imperialists.

[ September 08, 2004: Message edited by: bedouin ]

Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: worker201 on 9 September 2004, 08:23
Couple points:

1. Take a good long look at your software licenses.  They are unlike any other contract ever produced.  When you pay your money to Microsoft or Adobe or Macromedia or Apple, you are not purchasing software.  You are not even paying money for a binary distribution.  You are paying money to use the software.  The license does not give you "ownership" over anything.  License do not reflect the cost of material goods.  They are more like rent, and your license agreement has hundreds of ways to take their software back if they don't like how you treat it.  This is, unfortunately, the favored business model.

2. I have a close friend who is an officer in the Ecuadorian Navy.  He is in charge of all oceanic mapping, and he has been around the world chasing down sonar and making measurements.  He has told me that in the rest of the world, especially South America and Africa, Windows is considered rare.  Only in the US do people use Windows.  I kinda got the impression that most people used late model minicomputers, or early PC clones running god-knows-what - Solaris or OS/2 or HP/UX or something.  In the US, windows has been marketed as part of the so-called "paperless office" that never actually appeared, and is mostly used by secretaries and junior executives.  Other countries can't afford a computer for every single member of a company's staff.  Therefore Windows is not a dominating force in their markets.  I think that someone (we) should encourage them to stay away from Windows forever.

Anyway, my Mac is still my Mac.  I will probably buy Tiger, and my next primary computer (2-3 yrs from now) will probably be a Mac.  But at the office and at the bars, I tell everyone FSF.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 9 September 2004, 15:05
quote:
Whether or not I have the source code for a program, I am still its owner. I'm the owner of its binary distribution. Your argument is slightly weak (though I understand, and even agree to a certain extent). As a developer owning the source code may be complete ownership to you, but to the average consumer they could care less.


I doubt that. Anyone who has ever had to turn down the opportunity to help other people out by giving them copies of their proprietary software, because the law (and technological anti-copying measures) prohibits them from copying it, will have noticed that they only have limited rights over the software they're using.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Claris on 14 September 2004, 05:35
quote:
Originally posted by insomnia:



What a nice community.
Give us your money and you're part of it.

[ September 07, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]


By God, you're right! How dare we buy things!   :rolleyes:
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 14 September 2004, 14:45
You're not "buying" anything. You're renting a limited right to use something you don't own.
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 14 September 2004, 15:10
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
You're not "buying" anything. You're renting a limited right to use something you don't own.


So what's so bad about renting something?
Title: I have a diferent point of view
Post by: flap on 14 September 2004, 16:34
I didn't say there was anything wrong with renting per se. I said there's a problem with buying very limited rights that should be automatic and inalienable.