[Troll] Windows -- not even second best - Linux

This is a discussion on [Troll] Windows -- not even second best - Linux ; http://www.linux.com/feature/133149 Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You can argue about the relative merits of modern ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 42

Thread: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

  1. [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    http://www.linux.com/feature/133149

    Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
    operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
    desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
    can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
    the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
    robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
    the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
    fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
    that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`

    --
    In terms of doing things I take a fairly scientific approach to why things
    happen and how they happen. I don't know if there's a god or not, but I
    think religious principles are quite valid.
    -- Bill Gates, PBS interview with David Frost (November 1995)

  2. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best


    "Linonut" wrote in message
    news:OVXTj.29916$DY1.21767@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..

    >...If that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`
    >

    A self-admitted troglodyte from Sun speaks ill of Microsoft! How novel.

    One is, of course, reminded of the equally trite: "If ifs and ands were pots
    and pans..."

    Keep your hopes up!


  3. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:

    > http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
    >
    > Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
    > operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
    > desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
    > can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
    > the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
    > robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
    > the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
    > fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
    > that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`


    People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.

    This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
    superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
    of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
    base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
    things always win out over "technical superiority".

    It's cliche, but the classic example is vhs versus beta. There were a lot
    of reasons VHS won out, but technical superiority was not one of them.

    People that flock to technical superiority tend to believe in their cause
    religiously, and that causes a lot of problems on its own. They tend to
    believe there is no reason for them not to win, but they dismiss all the
    things that really matter to end users.

    Beta people dismissed the 5 hour limitation on beta tapes versus VHS's 8
    hours. Beta people dismissed the licensing fees that make Beta
    significantly more expensive than VHS (not just a one time cost of player,
    but also added to the cost of tapes, a recurring cost). Beta people
    dismissed the fact that there was more content available for VHS. I mean,
    after all, how could anyone go for the less technically superior solution?

    As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
    account first.

  4. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  5. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch

    wrote
    on Tue, 6 May 2008 11:14:47 -0400
    <18tjkz06fpj6w.dlg@funkenbusch.com>:
    > On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
    >>
    >> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
    >> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
    >> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
    >> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
    >> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
    >> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
    >> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
    >> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
    >> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`

    >
    > People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.


    It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
    *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.

    Think about it. The best car[*] one can have would
    be either a tank (durability), a shuttle crawler (load
    capacity), a race car (speed), an ATV (maneuverability),
    or a bicycle (efficiency). Instead, we all compromise,
    usually ending up with something that has four wheels,
    a steering column, a gas and brake pedal, and a fuel
    storage facility that might explode (under exactly the
    right conditions; gasoline, fortunately, is very difficult
    to ignite unless the air-fuel mixture is exactly right).

    In Microsoft's case, they have a good set of compromises,
    bolstered further by marketing. The Microsoft Windows
    system is also very open (maybe too much so!), but the
    documentation (.H files et al) is somewhat lacking unless
    one purchases the requisite SDKs, and that only gets one
    the externally visible interfaces.

    >
    > This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
    > superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
    > of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
    > base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
    > things always win out over "technical superiority".


    Correct.

    >
    > It's cliche, but the classic example is vhs versus beta. There were a lot
    > of reasons VHS won out, but technical superiority was not one of them.


    VHS indeed won, because of media cost.

    >
    > People that flock to technical superiority tend to believe in their cause
    > religiously, and that causes a lot of problems on its own. They tend to
    > believe there is no reason for them not to win, but they dismiss all the
    > things that really matter to end users.
    >
    > Beta people dismissed the 5 hour limitation on beta tapes versus VHS's 8
    > hours.


    I think you mean 1 hour versus 2 hours -- or maybe 6.
    The 8 hours came later. But you're otherwise generally
    correct.

    > Beta people dismissed the licensing fees that make Beta
    > significantly more expensive than VHS (not just a one time cost of player,
    > but also added to the cost of tapes, a recurring cost). Beta people
    > dismissed the fact that there was more content available for VHS. I mean,
    > after all, how could anyone go for the less technically superior solution?
    >
    > As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
    > account first.


    And Windows is indeed good enough. That's the trouble. Either
    it is functionally sufficient, or marketing will gloss over
    the inefficiencies.
    [*] for purposes of this diatribe "car" = "ground
    transport". One can include such things as airplanes and
    spacecraft if one wants to get sufficiently weird here.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    People think that libraries are safe. They're wrong. They have ideas.
    (Also occasionally ectoplasmic slime and cute librarians.)
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  6. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.xl3ond9yf3n5.dlg@40tude.net>,
    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    > If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
    > experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
    > Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
    > science.


    Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
    iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
    is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
    crappy software that was bundled with it.

    This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
    that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
    computer, by switching to Mac.

    The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
    to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
    switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?

    The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.

    > > This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
    > > superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
    > > of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
    > > base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
    > > things always win out over "technical superiority".

    >
    > Every single time.
    > The iPhone is a classic example of this.
    > It doesn't really do anything that other cellphone/pda/multimedia all in
    > one devices don't already do except maybe the rolling display trick, yet it
    > is by far the most popular of these devices.
    >
    > Why?
    >
    > The interface...
    > My Blackberry does all the same crap.
    > So does my cell phone and in fact my cellphone streams TV video as well.
    > Now try and actually USE these features.
    > Confused menus, horrible shortcuts etc make the experience painful.


    Yup. I once watched three people try to set up a three-way call on
    their cell phones. Two were long-time Linux programmers, and one was a
    project manager who had extensive experience in the phone industry.
    None of them had ever set up a three-way call on their current phones,
    and none were able to figure it out after about 10 minutes of fiddling
    with the phone. Finally, one of them had to go dig up the manual for
    his phone, and find the arcane sequence to set up the second call
    without hanging up the first.

    On an iPhone, setting up a three-way call is trivial, as is adding
    people, dropping people (with or without hanging up on them), and so on.
    If the iPhone can do something, almost any average iPhone user will have
    no trouble figuring it out the first time they try to do it, right away.

    The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
    phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
    has. I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
    didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
    iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
    I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
    them when I did want to use them.

    Some of my other phones have had features the iPhone lacks (and the
    iPhone has things they have lacked), but the iPhone has more features I
    do use, and more I will use.

    * It has more features I use frequently, because of better interface and
    integration. For example, I use the calendar much more on my iPhone,
    because it integrates in much better with my computer. The software
    from Palm for my Treo for managing the calendar was horrible, so I
    didn't make much use of it.

    * I will use more of the less common features, because when I do want to
    use them, I'll be able to figure them out without consulting the manual.

    Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.


    --
    --Tim Smith

  7. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    Tim Smith wrote:

    > Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.


    I think that most people would agree that, in the area of UI design, Apple
    is currently the best. If one places a high value on that, and doesn't
    mind paying the price premium, they are a reasonable choice.


  8. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    "chrisv" stated in post
    pan.2008.05.06.19.16.08.111124@nospam.invalid on 5/6/08 12:16 PM:

    > Tim Smith wrote:
    >
    >> Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.

    >
    > I think that most people would agree that, in the area of UI design, Apple
    > is currently the best. If one places a high value on that, and doesn't
    > mind paying the price premium, they are a reasonable choice.
    >

    And the price "premium" is a bit of a myth: for similar systems Macs are
    about the same price. There are, of course, more options if you buy a
    Windows machine - so to fit a specific need the Mac might cost more.


    --
    Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
    --Albert Einstein


  9. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
    >>
    >> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
    >> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
    >> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
    >> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
    >> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
    >> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
    >> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
    >> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
    >> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`

    >
    > People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.


    It's slowly happening /now/. You, while UNIX has /always/ beat the
    ever-loving /snot/ out of Windows, it is only in the last few years
    that we've had UNIX that ran on hardware within the cost-reach of small
    businesses and consumers.

    > This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
    > superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
    > of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
    > base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
    > things always win out over "technical superiority".


    True. He did say "if" the logjam breaks.

    > As long as something is "good enough", they'll take other factors into
    > account first.


    I agree with your Beta/VHS analogy (snipped for brevity).

    However, cost is now going away as a reason to choose Windows over UNIX
    or even Mac.

    --
    We are not even close to finishing the basic dream of what the PC can be.
    -- Bill Gates

  10. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
    > *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.


    You are a very clever troll, Ghost.

    It's like those "jokes" my wife's sister makes about my wife. They're
    "ha-ha-funny", except they're really not.

    Now you have to figure out how serious I am here.

    --
    Television is not real life. In real life people actually have to leave the
    coffee shop and go to jobs.
    -- Bill Gates

  11. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    > interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    > to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.


    I actually kind of agree with you here.

    I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
    The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).

    And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
    while the phone is in your pocket.

    > The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
    > phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
    > has.


    Hmmmm. Now if I can sell that idea to my wife.....

    > I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
    > didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
    > iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
    > I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
    > them when I did want to use them.


    I agree. Plus, trying to read the menu entries while driving? Ay yi yi.

    > Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.


    Tim, are now an iPhone troll!?

    --
    Life is not fair; get used to it.
    -- Bill Gates

  12. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On Tue, 06 May 2008 12:01:35 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.xl3ond9yf3n5.dlg@40tude.net>,
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
    >> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
    >> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
    >> science.

    >
    > Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
    > iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
    > is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
    > crappy software that was bundled with it.


    That is so true.
    My kids have iPods, several different types, and I have a Creative Zen
    Vision M.
    My unit was cheaper, more storage, does more stuff, bigger and brighter
    screen etc.
    IOW on "paper" it blows the iPods away.

    Well, I should have known anything from Creative is crap and this was no
    exception.
    Constant freezes due to firmaware bugs.
    Convoluted, slow, confusing, buggy software.
    And so forth.

    A real POS.

    In real USE the iPod blows it away with the exception of the earliest
    iTunes for Windows software which had some problems with bloat.
    The new versions are almost as good as the Mac versions.
    Not quite, but real close.

    > This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
    > that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
    > computer, by switching to Mac.


    And that is exactly what is happening.
    Throw in all the bad press Vista is getting and now you have quite a lot of
    people with older PC machines looking seriously at switching to Macs.

    > The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
    > to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
    > switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?


    That's exactly what they do and the result is a person who looks at them
    like they are crazy...
    Why cares if the mp3 player/phne/pda/etc runs Linux?
    Nobody but a Linux zealot and generally only because that is the only
    positive thing he can offer up.


    > The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    > interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    > to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.


    They are awful and Verizon is the worst of the worst.
    Verizon takes a good Motorola interface, customizes it and turns it to
    ****.

    >>> This has always boiled down to "technical superiority" and "useful
    >>> superiority". Windows is more usable for the average person, for a variety
    >>> of reasons (few of which are technical). Those reasons include installed
    >>> base, existing application pools, economic interests, etc.. And those
    >>> things always win out over "technical superiority".

    >>
    >> Every single time.
    >> The iPhone is a classic example of this.
    >> It doesn't really do anything that other cellphone/pda/multimedia all in
    >> one devices don't already do except maybe the rolling display trick, yet it
    >> is by far the most popular of these devices.
    >>
    >> Why?
    >>
    >> The interface...
    >> My Blackberry does all the same crap.
    >> So does my cell phone and in fact my cellphone streams TV video as well.
    >> Now try and actually USE these features.
    >> Confused menus, horrible shortcuts etc make the experience painful.

    >
    > Yup. I once watched three people try to set up a three-way call on
    > their cell phones. Two were long-time Linux programmers, and one was a
    > project manager who had extensive experience in the phone industry.
    > None of them had ever set up a three-way call on their current phones,
    > and none were able to figure it out after about 10 minutes of fiddling
    > with the phone. Finally, one of them had to go dig up the manual for
    > his phone, and find the arcane sequence to set up the second call
    > without hanging up the first.


    I've had to read the manual for my last 3 phones because despite the
    *standard all phones alike* Verizon interface, I couldn't figure out how to
    do simple things.


    > On an iPhone, setting up a three-way call is trivial, as is adding
    > people, dropping people (with or without hanging up on them), and so on.
    > If the iPhone can do something, almost any average iPhone user will have
    > no trouble figuring it out the first time they try to do it, right away.


    And the Mac is the same and so is the iPod.
    They all have an uncanny ability to allow even a total noob use most of the
    features without ever cracking a manual.


    > The iPhone is the first phone I've had since my original primitive cell
    > phone 15 years ago where I think I can actually use every feature it
    > has. I could do that on my original phone, but that was because it
    > didn't have many features. :-) All my other phones between that and the
    > iPhone have had features whose interfaces were so badly designed that if
    > I didn't use them frequently, I would not be able to remember how to use
    > them when I did want to use them.


    My phone does everything.
    I use literally nothing of it besides the phone and the camera.
    Why?
    The interface sucks.


    > Some of my other phones have had features the iPhone lacks (and the
    > iPhone has things they have lacked), but the iPhone has more features I
    > do use, and more I will use.


    Yep.

    > * It has more features I use frequently, because of better interface and
    > integration. For example, I use the calendar much more on my iPhone,
    > because it integrates in much better with my computer. The software
    > from Palm for my Treo for managing the calendar was horrible, so I
    > didn't make much use of it.


    The Blackberry software is a joke.
    Adding and removing applications while easy is convoluted.

    > * I will use more of the less common features, because when I do want to
    > use them, I'll be able to figure them out without consulting the manual.
    >
    > Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.


    Apple knows how to make devices and software that people like to use.

    Linux does not.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  13. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    "Linonut" stated in post
    pf3Uj.71677$vr3.1339@bignews2.bellsouth.net on 5/6/08 1:33 PM:

    > * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    >> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    >> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.

    >
    > I actually kind of agree with you here.
    >
    > I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
    > The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
    >
    > And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
    > while the phone is in your pocket.


    Of course the buttons are on the outside! If the buttons were on the inside
    few people would spend the time to open up their phone to just dial!



    --
    "Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
    be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates



  14. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  15. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut

    wrote
    on Tue, 6 May 2008 16:29:27 -0400
    :
    > * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
    >> *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.

    >
    > You are a very clever troll, Ghost.


    Oops....*reel reel reel* *fwwiiiissssh*....*kerplunk*[*]
    :-)

    >
    > It's like those "jokes" my wife's sister makes about my wife. They're
    > "ha-ha-funny", except they're really not.
    >
    > Now you have to figure out how serious I am here.
    >


    Yeah, well, that's part of the problem. Windows can
    *afford* Superbowl commercials and plastering ads all
    over the place, putting Windows Vista/Windows Server/SQL
    Server in front of the noses of the casual commuter and
    lying their collective [censored]s off.

    The only real Linux ads I've seen are the rather enigmatic
    IBM one (the black background with a peace symbol, a
    stylized heart, and a penguin -- if one isn't clued in
    to Tux one probably went "WTF?" upon first seeing that),
    and an IBM commercial where a team marked "Linux" is playing
    basketball against a bunch of malwares, thus implying Linux
    can shoot baskets (it can't; that's a hardware upgrade :-) ).

    This contrasted to various Windows campaigns:

    - "server white room party"
    - "colored butterfly around the world"
    - "MothMan" (I've seen him on the Web, not on TV)
    - "The Five Nines"
    - "Start Me Up"
    - "SQL Server dry cells" (Web campaign)
    - "MS Office"
    - "Only dinos use non-Microsoft"
    - "Dell uses MS System Center, which scales really really big"

    And that's just off the top of my head! Say what one will,
    the Microsoft worm/meme has burrowed into a lot of brains.

    How to get it out? What exactly to replace it with?
    (Mostly because Microsoft does offer a plethora of
    products, from Vista Starter to the aforementioned System
    Center, with a lot of things in between.)
    [*] It has been claimed that the worst day fishing is
    better than the best day working, but I've yet to verify
    that.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows Vista. Now in nine exciting editions. Try them all!
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  16. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On 2008-05-06, Linonut wrote:
    > * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    >> interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    >> to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.

    >
    > I actually kind of agree with you here.
    >
    > I strongly dislike cell phones. Almost everything about 'em.
    > The clumsiest, most dangerous interfaces (while driving).
    >
    > And they put buttons on the outside of them, so the buttons get pushed
    > while the phone is in your pocket.


    I've got one of the cheapest mobile phones (I refuse to call a mobile a
    "cell phone". We don't say that around here.) and it has buttons on the
    outside that have to be big because I have BIG hands. All I do is keep
    the phone with the keypad lock on. It doesn't interfere in any way with
    receiving calls and the thing is safe bouncing around.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  17. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On 2008-05-06, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
    >
    > wrote
    > on Tue, 6 May 2008 11:14:47 -0400
    ><18tjkz06fpj6w.dlg@funkenbusch.com>:
    >> On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:12:23 -0400, Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.linux.com/feature/133149
    >>>
    >>> Looking further ahead, Bray predicts a move away from Microsoft
    >>> operating systems. "The fact is that the vast majority of office
    >>> desktops are using Windows, the third-best platform," he says. "You
    >>> can argue about the relative merits of modern Linuxes like Ubuntu and
    >>> the Mac, but they are clearly better than Windows in terms of
    >>> robustness, cost, performance, and a whole bunch of other things. For
    >>> the long term, can the mainstream of business continue to ignore the
    >>> fact that there's a better alternative than what they're running? If
    >>> that logjam breaks, that's going to be a real change."`

    >>
    >> People have been saying that for 20 years. It hasn't happened yet.

    >
    > It never will; Microsoft is not the third-best, but the
    > *first*-best, because of one thing: marketing.
    >
    > Think about it. The best car[*] one can have would
    > be either a tank (durability), a shuttle crawler (load
    > capacity), a race car (speed), an ATV (maneuverability),
    > or a bicycle (efficiency). Instead, we all compromise,
    > usually ending up with something that has four wheels,
    > a steering column, a gas and brake pedal, and a fuel
    > storage facility that might explode (under exactly the
    > right conditions; gasoline, fortunately, is very difficult
    > to ignite unless the air-fuel mixture is exactly right).
    >
    > In Microsoft's case, they have a good set of compromises,
    > bolstered further by marketing. The Microsoft Windows


    Ah... no.

    Microsoft took advantage of the fact that every different
    make of car needs it's own brand of gasoline to go with it.

    Imagine a gas station with pumps for every brand of car.

    Most gas station owners would go insane. So they would instead
    tend to only support the most common cars. Then eventually they
    would only support only one brand of car.

    This is what happened with PC's, nevermind non-PCs.

    [deletia]

    Microsoft got in bed with the right partner and got themselves
    enough "street cred" to nullify pretty much any other interesting
    criteria.

    --
    OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  18. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On 2008-05-06, Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.xl3ond9yf3n5.dlg@40tude.net>,
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
    >> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
    >> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
    >> science.


    ....as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.

    >
    > Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
    > iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
    > is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
    > crappy software that was bundled with it.


    ....that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.

    Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.

    >
    > This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
    > that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
    > computer, by switching to Mac.
    >
    > The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
    > to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
    > switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?


    Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.

    For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
    have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
    try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
    available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
    completely defecting.

    >
    > The problem with that is that most people don't like their cell phone
    > interfaces. Associating Linux with cell phone interfaces is more likely
    > to discourage desktop migration than encourage it.


    [deletia]

    --
    OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  19. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On 2008-05-06, chrisv claimed:
    > Tim Smith wrote:
    >
    >> Net result: the iPhone is the most *useful* phone I've ever had.

    >
    > I think that most people would agree that, in the area of UI design, Apple
    > is currently the best. If one places a high value on that, and doesn't
    > mind paying the price premium, they are a reasonable choice.


    As long as they're tied to ATT, they're out of my price range even if
    they're free. Unlocked ones aren't the answer because App-Hole keeps
    updating the firmware and frying the buggers.

    --
    Microsoft may not be the root of all evil, but it's not for lack of
    trying.

  20. Re: [Troll] Windows -- not even second best

    On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:17:26 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > On 2008-05-06, Tim Smith wrote:
    >> In article <1gb105wu2bwiq.xl3ond9yf3n5.dlg@40tude.net>,
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> If anything, people are moving toward the Mac because of the total seemless
    >>> experience between the computer and their multimedia devices.
    >>> Multimedia is the future, and in a big way and the Mac has this down to a
    >>> science.

    >
    > ...as long as you don't have any of your own data to begin with.


    Huh?

    >>
    >> Related to this is iTunes on Windows. Windows users buy iPods, and use
    >> iTunes to manage those iPods, and notice that the iTunes/iPod experience
    >> is a lot better than the experience they had with a non-iPod and the
    >> crappy software that was bundled with it.

    >
    > ...that's a problem with a part of the Windows/MacOS mentality.
    >
    > Something like a media player shouldn't need any bundled software.


    You don't have a clue.
    People want to USE their players not play with mount commands, permissions,
    umount or the clusterfsck called automount.

    They want to plug them in, sync the data and use them.

    Linux need not apply.

    >>
    >> This gives Mac advocates a great opening. Just tell the Windows user
    >> that they can have that experience with most of their apps and the whole
    >> computer, by switching to Mac.
    >>
    >> The Linux advocate has a much harder time. What's he gonna do? Point
    >> to a person's cell phone, and tell them it runs Linux, and suggest they
    >> switch from Windows, to get that Linux experience on the desktop?

    >
    > Give them a win32 copy of Firefox or OpenOffice.


    And listen as they beg for iTunes back.



    > For a person to even get their toe in the water with Apple they
    > have to buy something. That's not a problem with Linux. The user can
    > try out everything with zero cost. They can also use a subset of the
    > available bits to make their Windows experience less miserable without
    > completely defecting.


    Sure, and 0.6 percent of desktop users do in fact end up sticking with
    Linux.
    The rest go running back to whatever they were using before they had a
    lapse of sanity and decided to try out Linux.

    You really need to get a clue how today's consumer operates and what she
    expects.

    Most of the people writing Linux distributions, with few exceptions,
    haven't a clue which is why Linux's desktop market share is a dismal 0.6
    percent despite Linux being free.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast