Why Windows Lost The Battle for the Desktop

[John Bailo]

The war of the OSes was won a long time ago.

Unix has always been, and will continue to be, the Server OS in the form
of Linux.

Microsoft struggled mightily to win that battle -- creating a poor man's
DBMS, a broken email server and various other /application/ servers to
try and crack the Internet and IS markets.

In the case where they didn't spend their own money to get companies to
install servers, they failed miserably, and the 1 Billion per quarter
Linux market is testament to that.

But, what M$ didn't want you to know, is that the only reason they
wanted to dominate the server, is to protect their desktop and office
applications market.

Seal up the server, and the desktop is safe; cede the server, and the
desktop will fall.

And so it is...falling into the hands of Linux.

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi Rick, To this from me: << The common man/woman
is not about to reprogram Linux just so he/she
can display the family photo album. Open source... ha ! >>

You replied: << You may now tell us how and why anyone would
have to 'reprogram' Linux so he/she can display a family album.
and be specific. >>

You may now compare the the most popular photo album programs
on WinXP and Linuxes and tell me which people prefer.
Also tell how the open-source code is utilized by the common man/woman,
....and be specific.

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi John, Re: Micro-Soft being the original name of Microsoft,

You wrote: << I thought it was Traf-O-Data
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traf-O-Data >>

No, that was just something Bill and Paul did when Bill was 16,
see news:Je******** *************** @Cotse.NET

[Scott M.]

>> Then go take your soapbox and plant it in front of every other

corporation
and then move to a socialist society that doesn't have capitalism and
free
markets.

Don't be surprised. Half the people here who complain about Microsoft
being
evil do so wearing Gap or Old Navy and eat at McDonald's or Burger King.

I know it...Talking out of both sides of their mouths at the same time.

[Peter Köhlmann]

begin Jeff_Relf wrote:

Hi Rick, To this from me: << The common man/woman
is not about to reprogram Linux just so he/she
can display the family photo album. Open source... ha ! >>

You replied: << You may now tell us how and why anyone would
have to 'reprogram' Linux so he/she can display a family album.
and be specific. >>

You may now compare the the most popular photo album programs
on WinXP and Linuxes and tell me which people prefer.
You my now tell how "apps preferred" translates to "reprogramm ing Linux"
Also tell how the open-source code is utilized by the common man/woman,
...and be specific.

Well, they use it in some real special ways: They click on a RPM or a DEB
package, which in turn gets installed, and from then on they select an app
from the Menu system. Quite similar to windows

An app like Digikam (which was written with digital cameras in mind), or
KAlbum (an app which will let you sort pictures according to rules you set)
or Kimdaba (which is probably the closest cousin of all those very similar
windows apps to manage pictures), or Gwenview with also a similar slant.

This is just a *small* selection of the apps available on current linux
systems. Those apps rival in all aspects the windows counterparts.

In short, Jeff Relf proves to be the idiot he always was. He has not the
slightest clue what linux can do and where its current limitations are.

But then, he never saw anything than windows running on computers
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
Let it get in YOUR way. The problem for your problem.

[Scott M.]

>> Not according to their own website. They haven't donated even a billion

dollars.

If you would just open your eyes and your mind and look
(http://gatesfoundation.org/nr/public...s_AR-2003.html)
you would see that as of 12/31/2003 (2 years ago mind you), the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation had 31,489,521,000 in assets. Don't tell me you
missed the notation on the financials that says that all numbers are in
thousands (as all financial statements of organizations doing millions and
billions of dollars do). How do you think
this foundation got 31 billion dollars? It was funded by Bill Gates! The
foundation's money is NOT Bill's money, he GAVE it to the foundation.

[Rick]

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:29:50 +0000, Jeff_Relf wrote:

Hi Rick, To this from me: << The common man/woman
is not about to reprogram Linux just so he/she
can display the family photo album. Open source... ha ! >>

You replied: << You may now tell us how and why anyone would
have to 'reprogram' Linux so he/she can display a family album.
and be specific. >>

You may now compare the the most popular photo album programs
on WinXP and Linuxes and tell me which people prefer.
Thank you for admitting you cannot support your claim that you have to
'reprogram' Linux to display the family photo album.

Also tell how the open-source code is utilized by the common man/woman,
...and be specific.

Thank you for admitting you cannot support your claim that you have to
'reprogram' Linux to display the family photo album.

--
Rick

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi David_Wright and Andrew_DeFaria ( ¿ K-Unit ),

To this from me: << The common man/woman is not about to reprogram Linux
just so he/she can display the family photo album. Open source... ha ! >>

You replied: << I run a consultancy
and manage a mixture of Windows and Linux clients.
I have never had to compile a package under Linux,
you are talking about the early days,
today there is little or no need to recompile packages for yourself
if you are using a mainstream distro... Unless you want to.
The TCO argument is usually down to the fact that
MS funded reports say that it is cheaper to administer
a network of Windows machines than a network of Linux machines
( and many of the comparisons are laughable ). >>

You don't sound like the common man/woman to me
( who, by the way, wouldn't know a TCO from a TKO ).

How much do you pay to support your Linux boxen ?
( Don't forget to count the time you put into it )

How often are you delving into the source code on your distro ?

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi Pete ( and Rick ), To this from me: <<
You may now compare the the most popular photo album programs
on WinXP and Linuxes and tell me which people prefer. >>

You replied: << An app like Digikam
( which was written with digital cameras in mind ),
or KAlbum ( an app which will let you sort pictures
according to rules you set ) or Kimdaba
( which is probably the closest cousin
of all those very similar windows apps to manage pictures ),
or Gwenview with also a similar slant.
This is just a * small * selection of the apps available
on current linux systems.
Those apps rival in all aspects the windows counterparts. >>

Except that the common man/woman ( including myself )
has never even heard of such programs,
much less tweaked the source code.

P.S. Rick, You can't win any arguments by shifting the burden of proof.
In fact, you can't win any arguments... period.

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi Pokeweed ( and John ), You asked me: <<
It costs money to make things ' dumb ' for ' dummies ' ?
Are you the first to admit you're one of them ? >>

I'm as " dumb " as hell when it come to complex programs
( and the accompanying source code ) that I've never seen.
( Especially in a distro/language that I seldom/never use )
Would you admit the same ?

The common man/woman is never going to tweak
the endless source code contained in your typical Linux distro.

[Peter Köhlmann]

begin Jeff_Relf wrote:

< snip >

Except that the common man/woman ( including myself )
has never even heard of such programs,
much less tweaked the source code.

What "tweaking of source code"? Which part in "install those apps and use
them" has to be explained to you?

Idiot

You are a true windows user. Dumber than a cockroach
--
I hear if you play the Windows XP CD backward you'll hear satanic
messages. But even scarier, if you play it forward it installs
Windows XP!!