What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth;Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales - Linux

This is a discussion on What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth;Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales - Linux ; >Quack trolled: >> >> 2007 really could have been the year of Linux - but I am afraid the >> zealots and the total confusion regarding the GPL is ham stringing >> progress. I'm afraid that no one should give ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86

Thread: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth;Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

  1. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    >Quack trolled:
    >>
    >> 2007 really could have been the year of Linux - but I am afraid the
    >> zealots and the total confusion regarding the GPL is ham stringing
    >> progress.


    I'm afraid that no one should give a **** what a troll like you
    thinks, asshole. Your lying and attacking those who are better than
    you are a matter of record.

    >>Now Vista is cleaning up its act


    In what ways, "true Linux advocate" Hadron Quack?

    >> and its pretty much game over
    >> for Linux. Not necessarily of OSS, but Linux as a desktop OS is pretty
    >> much doomed it would appear. Too little too late.


    Nice "true Linux advocacy", Quack.

    You are a fsckwit, Quack.

    >> This pains me.


    An incredible claim, coming from a defender of the Microsoft
    Corporation. One can only conclude that you are lying again.


  2. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    >>Quack snotted:
    >>
    >> So you agree that a traditional retail channel is a good thing? Good
    >> because some of your more nutty fellow advocates disagreed....


    Let's see you prove this claim, you lying asshole.


  3. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    Linonut wrote:

    >However, these days you won't find those Linux boxed sets for sale in
    >retail outlets (at least where I live). I think basically they stopped
    >being necessary.


    They are not necessary. Of course, fsckwits like Quack read "not
    necessary" and infer "not beneficial". The added visibility certainly
    would not hurt...


  4. raylopez99 amazes us all with his analysis of economic theory ..

    On 25 Jan, 19:48, raylopez99 wrote:

    > unless somebody owns a technology, it will be misused if given away for free. This is known in economics as the "tragedy of the commons".


    What a twisted representation of "tragedy of the commons" but we'll
    get to that later ..

    You mean like TCP/IP, the GUI and Ethernet, where would Microsoft be
    if these had been patented? And FM stereo radio stagnated for years
    because of the high cost of a 'license' ..

    "the tragedy of the commons" refers to a conflict between special
    interests and the common good. The tragedy being that the common good
    loses out.

    A particular modern example being the big Pharma companys driving up
    the price of aids drugs through the use of excessively expensive
    testing protocols and the suppression of the production of generic
    drugs through the use of inter-government agreements like TRIPS.

    In fact the 'commercial' software companies have only recently
    borrowed such techniques. eg. Indemnification against getting sued
    for Intellectual Property violations and Memorandum of Understandings
    with governments. It also helps if you get your own former lawyers to
    form submarine patent companies like Intellectual Vultures, sorry
    Ventures. They'll even help the politicians write the legislation. The
    effects of such strategies as described above being to drive up the
    cost of generic software.

  5. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    [snips]

    On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:31:26 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:

    > Indeed. If a company decides to offer a Linux box, there is widespread
    > initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.


    Let's see how this stacks up if we substitute Windows for Linux.

    > The company picked the wrong distribution.


    I'd bitch if the only thing I could get was some half-baked "home basic"
    edition which doesn't have the goodies.

    >The company isn't offering
    > enough distributions.


    If the only thing they offer is that "home basic" edition, I'd bitch, too.

    > The company said "Ubuntu" on a web page when they
    > should have said "Linux".


    It said "Vista Preinstalled". Didn't say "Vista Home Basic".

    > The company said "Linux" when they should
    > have said "GNU/Linux".


    It said "Vista Preinstalled". Didn't say "Vista Home Basic".

    > The Linux product page is too hard to find.


    The Vista product page is too hard to find.

    > The
    > price difference between the Linux box and their similar Windows boxes
    > is too low.


    The price difference between this box and the box they announced (but
    aren't shipping yet) with Vista Business Ultimate is only six bucks, I'm
    getting overcharged.

    > The company should be offering a no-OS version for people
    > who want to install a different distribution.


    I've already _got_ four XP licenses and I don't want Vista; where's the
    no-OS version so I can install XP?

    > The company didn't follow the GPL correctly.


    The license that comes with the box violates MS's own license.

    > The company didn't offer the right video card.


    They said they used the nVidia 8800 utra; turns out they're using an
    onboard S3-based card.

    > The
    > company is not *really* behind Linux-


    They're not *really* behind Windows. Ask 'em to support it, they'll just
    tell you to go talk to Microsoft.

    > Some random member of the public thinking about that box who does a
    > little web research will find all that crap, and that will make it seem
    > a lot safer to buy another Windows box, or maybe give Apple try.


    Safer to buy another Windows box? Scroll up.


  6. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    [snips]

    On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:08:44 -0500, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > The Linux community has a huge stigma associated with it and much of it
    > stems from what Tim is talking about.
    >
    > When the suit making the $$$$ decision is approaced about Linux what do
    > you think he does?


    How cute.

    One day, we hear that nobody knows about Linux, it's 0.3% of the market,
    it's nowhere.

    The next day we're told it has such a huge and well-known stigma that
    this is having an apparently global effect on the ability of vendors to
    push products with Linux.

    You boneheads are just so cute.


  7. Re: raylopez99 amazes us all with his analysis of economic theory ..

    On Jan 29, 1:25*pm, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    > On 25 Jan, 19:48, raylopez99 wrote:
    >
    > > unless somebody owns a technology, it will be misused if given away for free. *This is known in economics as the "tragedy of the commons".

    >
    > What a twisted representation of "tragedy of the commons" but we'll
    > get to that later ..


    You never did get to it.

    >
    > You mean like TCP/IP, the GUI and Ethernet, where would Microsoft be
    > if these had been patented? And FM stereo radio stagnated for years
    > because of the high cost of a 'license' ..
    >


    All of these were in fact patented. Everything done by the government
    is effectively patented, since it has military implications. Only by
    the grace of government do you, as a civilian, get to use it. That
    goes for GPS too.


    > "the tragedy of the commons" refers to a conflict between special
    > interests and the common good. The tragedy being that the common good
    > loses out.
    >


    That's not the definition of ToC idiot. Wikipedia it fool.

    [Misleading junk and pseudo-intellectual law deleted]

    RL

  8. Re: raylopez99 amazes us all with his analysis of economic theory ..

    On Jan 30, 1:22 pm, raylopez99 wrote:
    > On Jan 29, 1:25 pm, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    > > On 25 Jan, 19:48, raylopez99 wrote:


    > > > unless somebody owns a technology, it will be misused if given away for free.
    > > > This is known in economics as the "tragedy of the commons".



    > > You mean like TCP/IP, the GUI and Ethernet, where would Microsoft be
    > > if these had been patented? And FM stereo radio stagnated for years
    > > because of the high cost of a 'license' ..


    > All of these were in fact patented.

    Incorrect

    > Everything done by the government is effectively patented, since it has military implications.


    Incorrect. Federally funded inventions are NOT patented, they are
    public domain.

    If the contribution is a function of a top secret project, disclosure
    carries a 10 year prison term (or worse), but once the project, or
    that portion of the project is declassified, the code funded by the
    government becomes public domain.

    In 1976, a great deal of code, especially orphan code, was
    declassified because it no longer constituted a military secret.

    Had NASA been allowed to patent their inventions, and collect
    royalties on all of their inventions, they would not only be self
    supporting, they would have at least double their current budget
    available for projects ranging from much larger space stations, the
    reusable shuttle, and even manned flights to mars.

    There is a provision which protects intellectual property that was
    developed by corporations and is used in a government project, which
    protects existing patent rights and copyrights. You will often see
    notices in software copyright notices that use is permitted under this
    provision.

    Many were very upset that the NCSA sold intellectual property
    contributed under a GPL like copyright, and were quite upset to
    discover that the federal government was allowed to unilaterally alter
    the copyright and sell the technology to Microsoft without getting
    their permission. The result was that many individuals and
    organizations stopped contributing code to the NCSA under their
    licenses, and instead developed their on nonprofit organizatitons and
    published works under their own copyrights, which the government could
    use under the same provision used by corporations to protect their
    intellectual property.

    > Only by the grace of government do you, as a civilian, get to use it. That
    > goes for GPS too.


    Perhaps you are from the UK. In the United States, the government is
    only allowed to seize property, including intellectual property,
    through due process of law. The Bill of Rights stipulates the rules
    required for that due process. Pretty much, unless there is criminal
    activity against the government, it's not possible for the government
    to seize intellectual property.

    > > "the tragedy of the commons" refers to a conflict between special
    > > interests and the common good. The tragedy being that the common good
    > > loses out.


    Even the rule of eminant domain requires that the government properly
    and fairly compensate people and corporations for any property seized
    under eminant domain for public use. The Supreme Court only recently
    extended this to seizure of property for private enterprise projects
    percieved by the government to be for the common good, such as seizing
    sea-side shacks to let other companies build Casinos.

    > That's not the definition of ToC idiot. Wikipedia it fool.
    > [Misleading junk and pseudo-intellectual law deleted]
    > RL


    Laws may vary in different countries. Many countries have different
    laws related to seizure of property. However, TCP/IP was funded and
    developed by the United States Department of Defense Advanced Research
    Project Agency (ARPA) for the intent of building a communications
    network capable of surviving a nuclear halocaust. The work never was
    classified, and has always been public domain. There was an issue
    with the predecessor, which was corporate intellectual property that
    had been contributed, and could not be put into public domain.

    The RFCs were also public domain, and a matter of public record.

    Other public domain works include court proceedings (unless submitted
    under seal), the congressional record, and declassified official
    communications between members of the cabinet.

    But that's the United States. I'm not sure of the rules in other
    countries.

    Rex B


  9. Re: raylopez99 amazes us all with his analysis of economic theory ..

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:22:10 -0800 (PST),
    raylopez99 wrote:
    > On Jan 29, 1:25*pm, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    >> On 25 Jan, 19:48, raylopez99 wrote:
    >>
    >> > unless somebody owns a technology, it will be misused if given away for free. *This is known in economics as the "tragedy of the commons".

    >>
    >> What a twisted representation of "tragedy of the commons" but we'll
    >> get to that later ..

    >
    > You never did get to it.
    >
    >>
    >> You mean like TCP/IP, the GUI and Ethernet, where would Microsoft be
    >> if these had been patented? And FM stereo radio stagnated for years
    >> because of the high cost of a 'license' ..
    >>

    >
    > All of these were in fact patented.


    False.

    > Everything done by the government is effectively patented, since it
    > has military implications.


    again, false.


    > Only by
    > the grace of government do you, as a civilian, get to use it. That
    > goes for GPS too.
    >


    GPS is a service. Please pay attention. GPS is also not patented.
    Although there are undoubtedly many patents in the hw/sw used in the
    system.





    >> "the tragedy of the commons" refers to a conflict between special
    >> interests and the common good. The tragedy being that the common good
    >> loses out.
    >>

    >
    > That's not the definition of ToC idiot. Wikipedia it fool.
    >



    would serve you well to take your own advice. (yeah, I know, fat
    chance.)

    > [Misleading junk and pseudo-intellectual law deleted]
    >
    > RL


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHoRIId90bcYOAWPYRAgEAAKDoQdQx1w1A3EzCD7AvGf QNiLmK/gCdEdpC
    vX/hx4U51+2Br7QBUgADCnM=
    =U5kR
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems,
    but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.

  10. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    Rex Ballard writes:

    > On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:
    >
    >> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a Linux box, there is widespread
    >> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >
    > Let's just say we've heard the song so many times, yet we haven't seen
    > the dance.
    > It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.


    The only logical conclusion from what you just said is that it's hard to
    make a decent Linux PC and any jeering is of their own making.

  11. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:36:53 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Rex Ballard writes:
    >
    >> On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:
    >>
    >>> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a Linux box, there is widespread
    >>> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >>
    >> Let's just say we've heard the song so many times, yet we haven't seen
    >> the dance.
    >> It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >
    > The only logical conclusion from what you just said is that it's hard to
    > make a decent Linux PC and any jeering is of their own making.


    Mostly because the majority of people don't have any interest in a Linux PC
    so the noise has got to be emanating from the fickle Linux community
    itself.

  12. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    On Jan 31, 7:36 am, Hadron wrote:
    > Rex Ballard writes:
    > > On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:


    [ lots of snipped content]

    > >> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a
    > >> Linux box, there is widespread
    > >> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.


    > > Let's just say we've heard the song so many times,
    > > yet we haven't seen the dance.
    > > It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.


    > The only logical conclusion from what you just said
    > is that it's hard to make a decent Linux PC and
    > any jeering is of their own making.


    Incorrect. it's very easy to MAKE a decent Linux PC. Most OEMs offer
    several models of PC which can be configured with Linux in less than
    30 minutes. A VAR can do partition copies using live-cds even faster,
    as little as 10 minutes.

    The lack of interaction beyond the initial options settings means that
    a single installer could configure 10-20 desktops or laptops in an
    hour.

    It's harder to MARKET a Linux PC when you have Microsoft
    OEM license restrictions on what you can say, how you can say it, and
    where you can say it. When violating these restrictions could result
    in nullification of all of the licences you've already paid for.

    Rex Ballard
    http://www.open4success.org



  13. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    "Rex Ballard" stated in post
    bb3ed691-136c-447e-b207-82978e76adf4...oglegroups.com on 1/31/08
    11:11 AM:

    > On Jan 31, 7:36 am, Hadron wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>> On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:

    >
    > [ lots of snipped content]
    >
    >>>> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a
    >>>> Linux box, there is widespread
    >>>> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >
    >>> Let's just say we've heard the song so many times,
    >>> yet we haven't seen the dance.
    >>> It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >
    >> The only logical conclusion from what you just said
    >> is that it's hard to make a decent Linux PC and
    >> any jeering is of their own making.

    >
    > Incorrect. it's very easy to MAKE a decent Linux PC. Most OEMs offer
    > several models of PC which can be configured with Linux in less than
    > 30 minutes. A VAR can do partition copies using live-cds even faster,
    > as little as 10 minutes.
    >
    > The lack of interaction beyond the initial options settings means that
    > a single installer could configure 10-20 desktops or laptops in an
    > hour.
    >
    > It's harder to MARKET a Linux PC when you have Microsoft
    > OEM license restrictions on what you can say, how you can say it, and
    > where you can say it. When violating these restrictions could result
    > in nullification of all of the licences you've already paid for.


    Can you give some specific and current (or relatively so) examples of these
    restrictions?

    --
    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
    --Aldous Huxley


  14. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales


    "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    news:bb3ed691-136c-447e-b207-82978e76adf4@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
    > On Jan 31, 7:36 am, Hadron wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >> > On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:

    >
    > [ lots of snipped content]
    >
    >> >> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a
    >> >> Linux box, there is widespread
    >> >> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >
    >> > Let's just say we've heard the song so many times,
    >> > yet we haven't seen the dance.
    >> > It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >
    >> The only logical conclusion from what you just said
    >> is that it's hard to make a decent Linux PC and
    >> any jeering is of their own making.

    >
    > Incorrect. it's very easy to MAKE a decent Linux PC. Most OEMs offer
    > several models of PC which can be configured with Linux in less than
    > 30 minutes. A VAR can do partition copies using live-cds even faster,
    > as little as 10 minutes.
    >
    > The lack of interaction beyond the initial options settings means that
    > a single installer could configure 10-20 desktops or laptops in an
    > hour.
    >
    > It's harder to MARKET a Linux PC when you have Microsoft
    > OEM license restrictions on what you can say, how you can say it, and
    > where you can say it.


    Funny. These OEM restrictions don't seem to be stopping Lenovo, Dell, Acer,
    Asus, etc from marketing and selling a linux PC. It's more likely harder to
    MARKET a Linux PC because just about every consumer in the world knows what
    MS-Windows is and next to nobody has any idea what a Linux is.


    > When violating these restrictions could result
    > in nullification of all of the licences you've already paid for.


    More nonsense. Could... possibly... might... Yet Dell, Acer, Lenovo, Asus
    and whoever else out there seems to market and sell Linux PCs just fine and
    not one single copy of their Windows licenses has been nullified. Despite
    the lies and nonsense you post to the contrary.




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  15. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    On Jan 31, 11:39 am, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:36:53 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    > > Rex Ballard writes:
    > >> On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:
    > >>> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a Linux box, there is widespread
    > >>> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.


    > >> Let's just say we've heard the song so many times, yet we haven't seen
    > >> the dance. It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >
    > > The only logical conclusion from what you just said is that it's hard to
    > > make a decent Linux PC and any jeering is of their own making.


    Nope. Linux PCs are easy to make. Most models offered by OEM can be
    configured with Linux in less that 30 minutes.

    The challenge is in MARKETING Linux PCs.

    > Mostly because the majority of people don't have any interest in a Linux PC
    > so the noise has got to be emanating from the fickle Linux community
    > itself.


    You might be right about that. It's really hard to tell, since 99% of
    the Linux users also have Windows installed on the same or an older
    computer.

    We've seen that a lot of people prefer Mac to Windows, to the point
    where Apple can't keep up with demand and is getting premium prices
    for their superior product.

    We know that Linux is technically superior, but without effective
    marketing, advertizing, and a retail presence, all the good press in
    the world can only yield a limited result.

    Nobody has any idea how the general public would respond to seeing
    Linux on the retail shelves of a major retailer like Best Buy or
    Staples or WalMart. Linux advocates speculate that demand would be
    very high, and that users would choose Linux over Windows. WinTrolls
    speculate that demand would be very low, and buyers would opt for the
    old and familiar Windows environment. The only way to know for sure
    is to put a few thousand PCs on retailer shelves and see who pulls out
    the credit cards.

    It seems that Microsoft does not share the confidence of their
    advocates in COLA. They don't want Linux introduced to the general
    retailer market, and seem willing to go to extraordinary lengths to
    prevent it's introduction. Many of these tactics have already been
    made public, showing how Microsoft used similar tactics against DR-
    DOS, OS/2, and UNIX Workstations.

    Microsoft has a monopoly on the Retail PC market, and they are willing
    to do whatever it takes to make sure that this monopoly is not
    broken. It's fine for end users to put Linux on a PC that was
    purchased with Windows, as long as Microsoft gets the revenue for the
    Windows license.

    Microsoft is fully aware that Linux on retail shelves could have an
    adverse impact on Microsoft revenues. They are entering new markets
    to offset the revenue they have already started to lose in the
    corporate arena, but they need to maintain top-line growth and profits
    to prevent their stock prices from taking a nose dive.

    However, many corporations are already adopting Linux oriented
    standards and technologies, and have already formulated plans to:
    Move VB applications to Java
    Move ASP pages to JSP pages
    Move Access Applications to Java
    Move from Exchange to Domino.
    Move documents from Microsoft Office format to ODF format.
    Switch from .NET to AJAX and SOA.

    Several software vendors have taken strong pro-linux positions,
    including:
    Lotus
    Adobe
    Sun
    RealMedia
    Borland
    Corel
    Symantic

    More software vendors are offering free Linux applications in
    combination with services which provide revenue through commissions
    and subscription fees.

    Linux desktops have been spreading from POS "terminals" to call
    centers to secretarial workstations to developer workstations and are
    now moving to power user workstations and executitve workstations.

    If all of the former partners of Microsoft who have been driven out by
    Microsoft shovelware decide to start supporting Linux, it could have a
    noticable impact on the overall market.

  16. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    "Rex Ballard" stated in post
    d18a0fde-8120-4fb5-b0c3-0abf8fdc43c4...oglegroups.com on 1/31/08
    11:39 AM:

    > On Jan 31, 11:39 am, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:36:53 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>>> On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:
    >>>>> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a Linux box, there is widespread
    >>>>> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >
    >>>> Let's just say we've heard the song so many times, yet we haven't seen
    >>>> the dance. It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >>
    >>> The only logical conclusion from what you just said is that it's hard to
    >>> make a decent Linux PC and any jeering is of their own making.

    >
    > Nope. Linux PCs are easy to make. Most models offered by OEM can be
    > configured with Linux in less that 30 minutes.
    >
    > The challenge is in MARKETING Linux PCs.


    What is the challenge? The OS is free - thus the computers should be less
    expensive. Sure, there is the momentum of MS, but at least some decent
    number of people should be willing to buy less expensive computers that do,
    in theory, as much or more for them.

    >> Mostly because the majority of people don't have any interest in a Linux PC
    >> so the noise has got to be emanating from the fickle Linux community
    >> itself.

    >
    > You might be right about that. It's really hard to tell, since 99% of
    > the Linux users also have Windows installed on the same or an older
    > computer.
    >
    > We've seen that a lot of people prefer Mac to Windows, to the point
    > where Apple can't keep up with demand and is getting premium prices
    > for their superior product.


    Well, Macs actually cost about the same as comparable Windows machines, but
    other than that, sure.

    > We know that Linux is technically superior, but without effective
    > marketing, advertizing, and a retail presence, all the good press in
    > the world can only yield a limited result.


    What is "technically" superior might not be better for the user.

    > Nobody has any idea how the general public would respond to seeing
    > Linux on the retail shelves of a major retailer like Best Buy or
    > Staples or WalMart. Linux advocates speculate that demand would be
    > very high, and that users would choose Linux over Windows. WinTrolls
    > speculate that demand would be very low, and buyers would opt for the
    > old and familiar Windows environment. The only way to know for sure
    > is to put a few thousand PCs on retailer shelves and see who pulls out
    > the credit cards.


    WalMart does - or did - sell Linux PCs.





    --
    Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
    conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.


  17. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:50:20 -0700, Snit wrote:


    > WalMart does - or did - sell Linux PCs.


    Wall Of China.
    Perfect place for them.

  18. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    Rex Ballard writes:

    > On Jan 31, 7:36 am, Hadron wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >> > On Jan 25, 3:31 pm, Tim Smith wrote:

    >
    > [ lots of snipped content]
    >
    >> >> Indeed. If a company decides to offer a
    >> >> Linux box, there is widespread
    >> >> initial cheering, then the zealots start finding fault.

    >
    >> > Let's just say we've heard the song so many times,
    >> > yet we haven't seen the dance.
    >> > It's easy to talk the talk, but not so easy to walk the walk.

    >
    >> The only logical conclusion from what you just said
    >> is that it's hard to make a decent Linux PC and
    >> any jeering is of their own making.

    >
    > Incorrect. it's very easy to MAKE a decent Linux PC. Most OEMs offer
    > several models of PC which can be configured with Linux in less than
    > 30 minutes. A VAR can do partition copies using live-cds even faster,
    > as little as 10 minutes.
    >


    I know. But that's not what the conclusion would be by anyone that read
    your words above. That was my point.

  19. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers StrongGrowth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales

    On Jan 31, 1:50 pm, Snit wrote:
    > "Rex Ballard" stated in post


    Why don't OEMs mass market OEM PCs.

    > > Nope. Linux PCs are easy to make. Most models offered by OEM can be
    > > configured with Linux in less that 30 minutes.


    > > The challenge is in MARKETING Linux PCs.


    > What is the challenge? The OS is free - thus the computers should be less
    > expensive. Sure, there is the momentum of MS, but at least some decent
    > number of people should be willing to buy less expensive computers that do,
    > in theory, as much or more for them.


    Remember, that there are provisions in the Microsoft OEM license which
    can severly limit the OEM ability to market a Linux PC. The OEM not
    only has to purchase the licenses, he also has to install them. When
    Windows is installed, nothing can be changed in the base install,
    without Microsoft's permission.

    If a machine is Linux Capable, the OEM may not be allowed to install
    Linux. They may have to sell it to a VAR, who purchases the PC and
    the hard drives separately, and then preloads the drive with Linux and
    installs it into the PC.

    Even if an OEM is allowed to install Linux, they may not be able to
    take orders for Linux machines via telephone lines used to sell
    Windows machines. They may not be able to take orders for Linux
    machines from the same web site or web page that allows them to
    purchase Windows machines.

    All of these terms are negotiable, and so the contracts can vary
    broadly from OEM to OEM, but any violation of the contract voids the
    entire contract, and Microsoft can nullify all of the licenses already
    purchased.

    > >> Mostly because the majority of people don't have any interest in a Linux PC
    > >> so the noise has got to be emanating from the fickle Linux community
    > >> itself.

    >
    > > You might be right about that. It's really hard to tell, since 99% of
    > > the Linux users also have Windows installed on the same or an older
    > > computer.

    >
    > > We've seen that a lot of people prefer Mac to Windows, to the point
    > > where Apple can't keep up with demand and is getting premium prices
    > > for their superior product.

    >
    > Well, Macs actually cost about the same as comparable Windows machines, but
    > other than that, sure.


    Generally, the Macs have less memory, hard drive space, and CPU speed
    than a comparably priced Windows machine. Since the BSD kernel is
    faster than Windows, the reduced memory and cpu speed isn't as much of
    an issue. Since the UNIX system uses the storage more efficiently,
    you don't miss the space as much. Typically, for Windows and Mac
    machines of the same hardware configuration, you will pay 20-40% more
    for the Mac.

    > > We know that Linux is technically superior, but without effective
    > > marketing, advertizing, and a retail presence, all the good press in
    > > the world can only yield a limited result.


    > What is "technically" superior might not be better for the user.


    That's the argument, that Microsoft makes.
    Still, they prefer not to put it to the test.
    This is why they do everything they can to keep Linux PCs off
    the retail shelves. Retailers can lose their right to use the
    Microsoft
    trademark and logo if they violate Microsoft Authorised Reseller
    licenses.

    > WalMart does - or did - sell Linux PCs.


    But never on the retail floor. They have offered web-order Linux PCs
    for years, and their biggest problem is that their suppliers can't
    keep up with demand. We have yet to see Linux PCs on the retail
    floors of all WalMart stores.

    > --
    > Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
    > conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.


    Unless you are Microsoft, who depends on maintaining sincere ignorance
    among it's retailers and customers.

    Rex

  20. Re: What else is new? (same old story): Microsoft Delivers Strong Growth; Quarterly Profit Up 79% on Vista Sales


    "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    news:d88ae075-0979-4b65-adb6-168191f56cd7@b2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
    > On Jan 31, 1:50 pm, Snit wrote:
    >> "Rex Ballard" stated in post

    >



    > Retailers can lose their right to use the
    > Microsoft trademark and logo if they
    > violate Microsoft Authorised Reseller
    > licenses.


    Bull**** and you know it. Do show a copy of the "Microsoft Authorised
    Reseller License" and prove your bull****. Name a single reseller taht got
    their license yanked for selling Linux.

    Better yet... slink away like the liar that you are.





    >> WalMart does - or did - sell Linux PCs.

    >
    > But never on the retail floor. They have offered web-order Linux PCs
    > for years, and their biggest problem is that their suppliers can't
    > keep up with demand. We have yet to see Linux PCs on the retail
    > floors of all WalMart stores.
    >



    More nonsense and bull****. - "their biggest problem is that their suppliers
    couldn't keep up with the demand" for linux PCs???? And that's why Walmart
    stopped selling them.

    Go ahead and prove this too. I'm sure that you can't, I'm sure that you
    won't, and I'm sure that you'll slink away like a weasel.




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast