Beware of software auditors in a recession
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: fedora 12 install woes
Next: Mouse prob
From: Conor on 9 Jan 2010 16:33 In article <No32n.24084$Ym4.11961(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says... > All the excuses don't compare with rock steady > cost saving Linux. <snigger> Linux - free if your time is worthless. If Linux is so good, how come Windows 7 got 5 times the market share in 1/40th the time it took Linux to get to 1%? -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: bcoombes on 9 Jan 2010 16:37 Conor wrote: > In article <No32n.24084$Ym4.11961(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says... > >> All the excuses don't compare with rock steady >> cost saving Linux. > > <snigger> > Linux - free if your time is worthless. > > If Linux is so good, how come Windows 7 got 5 times the market share in > 1/40th the time it took Linux to get to 1%? > It's a conspiracy, the aliens are in league with M$ to overrun the world.
From: Jenn on 9 Jan 2010 16:42 Conor wrote: > In article <No32n.24084$Ym4.11961(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 > says... > >> All the excuses don't compare with rock steady >> cost saving Linux. > > <snigger> > Linux - free if your time is worthless. > > If Linux is so good, how come Windows 7 got 5 times the market share > in 1/40th the time it took Linux to get to 1%? .... because Windows is geared toward the general pc user, which is a bigger market than Linux users. Market share has no bearing on whether a system is better than another. They are totally different markets altogether. -- Jenn (from Oklahoma)
From: Terry Porter on 9 Jan 2010 18:30 On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 21:33:28 +0000, Conor wrote: > In article <No32n.24084$Ym4.11961(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says... > >> All the excuses don't compare with rock steady cost saving Linux. > > <snigger> Idiot. > Linux - free if your time is worthless. Windows - closed and buggy, like your mind. > > If Linux is so good, how come Windows 7 got 5 times the market share in > 1/40th the time it took Linux to get to 1%? Studies show that 99% of all statistics are just fabrications. -- This machine running Gnu/Linux Mint 8 and posting via Pan. Get your Free copy NOW! http://linuxmint.com/
From: High Plains Thumper on 9 Jan 2010 21:48
Jenn wrote: > Conor wrote: >> 7 says... >> >>> All the excuses don't compare with rock steady cost saving >>> Linux. >> >> <snigger> Linux - free if your time is worthless. If Linux is so >> good, how come Windows 7 got 5 times the market share in 1/40th the >> time it took Linux to get to 1%? > > ... because Windows is geared toward the general pc user, which is a > bigger market than Linux users. Market share has no bearing on > whether a system is better than another. They are totally different > markets altogether. Linux can also be for the general PC user, except for Microsoft monopoly maintenance: [quote] In contrast to the RPFJ, a meaningful remedy must account for the fact that Microsoft manipulates interface information in a variety of ways to preclude competition. Although too numerous to recount, Microsoft's tactics include: * "Secret Interfaces" - Microsoft does not publish all the interfaces it uses and does not publish all the interface information that others need to develop products that interoperate with Microsoft software. * "Crippled Interfaces" - For some functions, Microsoft publishes information about an interface that is inferior to the interface that Microsoft itself uses to accomplish a function, or publishes incomplete information about an interface. * "Kick Me Interfaces" - Sometimes, Microsoft publishes information about an interface that Microsoft uses to perform a function, but it "marks" non-Microsoft software in a way that assures the interface will operate in an inferior way. Microsoft can "mark" competitors software through tagging, signing, encrypted passwords, or by noting the absence of such features. * "Moving Interfaces" - If, by some means, a third party has been able to obtain adequate interface information that Microsoft doesn't want it to have, Microsoft will simply move the interface. For example, Novell successfully figured out how to enable its directory services software to interoperate with Windows NT. To counter Novell's success, in Windows 2000 Microsoft broke up and moved the computer files containing the interface information used by Novell and marked, or signed, information required for the interfaces so that Novell could neither use Microsoft's interface information nor replace it. The typical result of such tactics is that Microsoft makes competing products appear inferior to Microsoft's products. Microsoft's actions may make a competing product appear slower, require more memory, or perform with limited functionality. These tactics also enable Microsoft to persuade customers to buy Microsoft's inferior and/or more expensive products simply to avoid Microsoft's roadblocks. [15] [/quote] Footnote 15: [quote] 15. Perhaps most remarkable, is the arrogance with which Microsoft exploits its anticompetitive efforts to impede interoperability. Microsoft, for example, repeatedly issues marketing materials that criticize products offered by Novell and other competitors for technical problems cause by Microsoft's refusal to allow effective interoperability with Windows. Thus, in 1998, Microsoft's Website criticized Novell's directory services product, NDS for NT, because "[i]t is not integrated with the operating system." Further, Microsoft proclaimed that Windows NT is "successful," because " customers have found that Windows NT Server suits most of their needs now and they are confident that Microsoft will deliver on other functionality that they need in the near future. Such is the case with directory services." In other words, in 1998, Microsoft admitted that it did not yet offer a competitive directory services middleware product, but it aggressively discouraged customers from using Novell's product based on interoperability limitations created by Microsoft and its "promise" of improving its software sometime in the future. See NDS for NT: Increases Complexity and Cost Without Adding Value, available at http://www.strom.com/awards/98a.html (visited Jan. 13, 2002) (republication of paper appearing on Microsoft's website until Jan. 22, 1998). Four years later, Microsoft's Active Directory is still generally regarded as inferior to Novell's eDirectory, yet continues to increase market share at Novell's expense as a result of Microsoft's anticompetitive acts. See, e.g., Products of the Year, Network Magazine (May 7, 2000), available at http://www.networkmagazine.com/article/NMG20010413S0005 (visited Jan. 15, 2002). [/quote] http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_tuncom/major/mtc-00029523.htm |