[Leaplist] so true

[Jim Hartley]

It may not be so much a matter of hating Windoze as hating Micro$haft. I 
have been down on M$ ever since they reneged on their deal with IBM and 
sabotaged OS/2. (The deal was to have Windoze on low-end machines and 
OS/2 on the higher end computers ... then M$ DELIBERATELY introduced 
incompatibilities so Windoze programs would no longer work on OS/2).

Then there were the deals they arm-twisted OEMs into, where it cost the 
OEM's MORE to buy Windoze licenses for some machines and put a different 
OS on the rest, than to buy Windoze licenses for ALL their machines. Not 
to mention various anti-trust convictions.

If we ignore the studies paid for by M$, I don't think there is any 
doubt that Linux is a better OS than Windoze. M$ has chosen to sacrifice 
security and solid operations for user convenience - not, IMHO, a good 
choice.

The root of the usability problem is INSTALLS - installing Windoze is 
certainly no easier than installing Linux (yes, I've done both), but 
because of M$'s stranglehold on the market, the Joe Sixpack user never 
has to do it. If the customer could walk into (insert your choice of 
big-box store) and see two computers, identical hardware, but one had 
Linux and was $50-100 cheaper than the Windoze one, what do you think 
would happen? It's NOT a level playing field, and I think a lot of us 
hate M$ because they are continuously using dirty tricks to keep it 
non-level. If they'd expend some of the effort they use on sabotaging 
everyone else on improving Windoze things might be different, but they 
are focused on market share and don't give a damn that they are selling 
crapware instead of a quality product.

That said, if you want to run Windoze, that's your choice. I'll stick 
with Linux, thank you.

Jim Hartley

Matthew Cupples wrote:
> can someone tell me why i'm supposed to hate windows/microsoft again?
> 
> as far as i knew, linux isn't easy.  that's why we have groups for it.
>  heck, it took me a little while to get the hang of it and I like
> computers.  imagine someone who doesn't like computers trying to get
> with it.
> 
> windows is a perfectly fine os.  i've run it for years on my desktop
> and i've never seen a virus.  granted, many people do see them and you
> state that as facts as to why you don't use windows.  of course, the
> same people who get viruses on windows are likely the same people who
> have trouble with linux.  if you're as knowledgeable as i am (or more
> than i am in most of your cases) , you can do just fine in windows
> without viruses or malware.  it blows my mind as to why you hate it so
> much.
> 
> please someone tell me why we hate it so i can jump on the bandwagon.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 3:28 AM, Phil Barnett <philb at philb.us> wrote:
>> On Saturday 09 August 2008 09:45:38 am William Warren wrote:
>>
>>> I'm curious as to why so many distros are wasting so much time trying to
>>> look like windows.
>> Because people are resistant to change. The less they have to change, the
>> easier they adapt. It's a fact.
>>
>> --
>> Waiting for sunspots.
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leaplist mailing list
>> Leaplist at leap-cf.org
>> http://lists.leap-cf.org/mailman/listinfo/leaplist
>>
> 

-- 
Teen Angel - a ghost story - http://teenangel.netfirms.com

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.