Miscellaneous > Applications

I think people don't give M$ a fair enough go...

(1/5) > >>

Jonothan:
Sure M$ make bug loaded programs, charge too much, try to destroy all their competition...

But we shouldn't stoop to their level; not all their programs are completely bad, and for beginners, M$ OS

Kintaro:
Anyway you could see www.mandrake.com
its more troll frienly then Windows.

The problem is that Linux is sold in enough shops

psyjax:

quote:Originally posted by Jonothan:
Sure M$ make bug loaded programs, charge too much, try to destroy all their competition...

But we shouldn't stoop to their level; not all their programs are completely bad, and for beginners, M$ OS

Jonothan:
I have used OSX and I do prefer it to winbloze, however the MAC box is a little too expensive for my liking. And despite what you say, it was windows that made computers main stream, even if their code was "borrowed" from MAC.

Also X11, I have and still do use Linux (Debian/Redhat/Xandros). And you know as well as I do, that there are many people out there who would not even be able to install Mandrake.

Unfortunatly Linux in its current form will never overtake M$, because companies simply don't dump cash into making software they can't make a profit on.

I just think some people on this site bash M$ more than they deserve, as a company they suck, but some of their software isn't all that bad.

P.S. Apple ripped themselves off, the only reason there not leading the market (in sales), is because they don't allow clones to be built.

http://www.satirewire.com/news/0111/microsoft_settlement.shtml
-not really relevant but very funny.

[ April 21, 2002: Message edited by: Jonothan ]

Calum:

quote:Originally posted by Jonothan:
it was windows that made computers main stream, even if their code was "borrowed" from MAC.
--- End quote ---
matter of opinion. what would M$ have done if they hadn't had apple available to rip off ideas from?
 
quote:Unfortunatly Linux in its current form will never overtake M$,
--- End quote ---
a VERY loaded statement. this sentence employs two tenses simultaneously. Linux will not be in its current form in the future. you say "never" as if linux is doomed to stay in its "current form" while M$ goes on to new heights of moneymaking and backstabbing. Remember the open source model is supposed to allow development to be faster than in-house development.
quote: because companies simply don't dump cash into making software they can't make a profit on.
--- End quote ---
Again, we've seen that linux is now the choice for servers, reason 1, it's stable and secure, reason 2, it's cheap/free. Therefore it allows the people who run the server to make money easier. We'll see something of that ilk on the desktop within maybe five years i think, possibly less.
 
quote:
I just think some people on this site bash M$ more than they deserve,
--- End quote ---
seriously, that's not possible
quote: as a company they suck,
--- End quote ---
and that's exactly why it's not possible  
quote:but some of their software isn't all that bad.
--- End quote ---
so a company who can say SOME of their software ISN'T THAT BAD shouldn't be bashed for ruthlessly maneuvring themselves into a position of world monopoly?
Personally i reckon M$' worst transgressions are their politics. Sadly every aspect of their politics is reflected in the programming they do.
examples: proprietary html, proprietary javascript, messenger program that requires the crappy M$ browser to even install, operating system that cannot be bought without being packaged with said crappy browser. Where's the choice that we expect when we pay for such products? Not to mention the fact that they NEVER finish bugfixing a program, so they can always release a new bugfix to make money off of. I agree, for some people none of this is that bad, or even noticable very much, but those people might not care about politics as much as me, and in my opinion, M$ politics mean they deserve all the bashing they will ever get!
 
quote:
P.S. Apple ripped themselves off, the only reason there not leading the market (in sales), is because they don't allow clones to be built.
--- End quote ---
well, yes and no, the clones weren't up to the standard of Apple's actual machines, so we are told, so they were giving MacOS a bad name by being inferior. However, i cannot think of another foolproof plan at that stage in their history so who am i to disagree with you?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page