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.

[Victor Vatamanescu]

What you don't have a clue about is always at least ten times more costly
compared to what you use day by day. I have no idea why M$ tries so much
these days to demonstrate this rather obvious thing and manipulates other
people to repeat this (otherwise true) thesis over and over.
Linux is free. Linux skills are not. Of course neither Windows skills are
free, but who cares?! If you are really to compare you realize that Linux
skills are realistically speaking only 5-10% more expensive than Windows
skills but who cares about reality?! Who cares anymore about computer
science, about an engineering perspective or such things?! Or even about
pursuing the TRUTH! We dont care, we have Microsoft and great courses and
certification programs that replace our need to think for ourselves as
rational human beings!
Who says Linux is hard never touched a Linux. I was a Visual C programmer
once upon a time, swearing Linux at all time and saying everyone who cared to
listen me how hard and unproductive is to develop on Linux until one day when
I had to do some Linux programming. WOW! The ease of use, the logic and
simplicity of Linux design really amazed me. Ever since I am a member of The
OSS community and I must say that I learned a lot and I had the honor to work
with great developers in great projects. I use Windows very rarely, not
because I would hate it (in the end both Windows and Linux are tools, what is
really important is to gain perspective from my point of view, this is what
defines you as a developer), but because I dont need it. Linux has everything
I need, of course with the notable exception of a browser that implements IE
stupidities.

"Jeff_Relf" wrote:

Hi Andrew_DeFaria ( ¿ ¿ K-Unit ),

You informed me: << My Linux was soggy. MySQL was extra krispy.
Perl was al-dente. Apache was charbroiled. My jock itch was free.
Hell the treadmill I am running Linux on was given to me. Need I go on ?
Effectively, I'm addicted to free software and it hurts a lot.
Mathematically. .. >>

Oh good... here comes the math: <<
the only way Linux ( L ) could be ten times the price of MS
( IOW: L = 10 * MS ) and L = $ 0 then MS must be $ 0 too !
We all know that MS <> 0 rather MS = M$.
Ergo your statement is mathematically false ! >>

Ergo you missed my point entirely ( and intentionally ).

Every breath you takes costs you,
even when no one is paying you to do it.

The common man/woman is not about to reprogram Linux
just so he/she can display the family photo album.
Open source... ha !

Re: How the common man can only affort Micro-Soft's products,

You observed: <<
IMHO, computer professionals are not the same as common men. >>

Right, they're people who either code for themselves,
their friends... or to pay the rent.

[Peter Weaver]

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Hi John, To this from me: <<
Sam Walton didn't create a bunch of spoiled brats ( billionaires )
by overpaying his employees... neither did Bill Gates. >>

You commented: << People forget.
The reason these companies are successful
are that they deliver low costs to the consumer.
For every pissed off programmer, there are 1000 happy customers,
making $30,000 a year, who can afford cheap goods.
Now Linux/WalMart are taking on that role.
Linux does what Microsoft does
-- but it doesn't have to pay a Bill Gates.
That's why its better. >>

Linux is ten times the price of Micro-Soft.

Just in terms of difficulty to use alone.

Why do you have to pay for MS products ?
Because the code is Designed/Tested for the common man,
and that costs money.

Only idiots find linux hard to use.
I've built linux computers for computer illiterate friends, and they
cope without difficulties, and most of all they are happy their computer
cannot be affected by the hundreds of M$ compatable viri around.

[Peter Weaver]

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Hi John, Re: The typical techno-phobe housewife badly in need
of the ease of use and economies of scale provided only by Micro-Soft,
not by open source,

You wrote: << Microsoft is the staid husband,
no longer vital, that goes off to work everyday.
Linux is the young penguin,
who sneaks in the the backdoor and Satisfies the customer. >>

I hate to pop your bubble John,
but she's not using open source, much less Linux.

Which brings up an interesting question...
Does your ex use Linux ?

Yes.

Also Most websites are hosted on linux, e-mail services are generally
linux based, plus i would be amazed if this nntp server was operating on
a linux platform when linux based nntp services are cheaper more
resiliant and generally regarded as bullet proof.

Many women use linux, I find your comments are even more sexist and
ignorant and silly, than "Holiday On The Busses".

Don't knock linux untill you have properly used it.

[chrisv]

Peter Weaver <no*@all-wanting-spam.ok> wrote:

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Don't feed the troll.

[Nick Malik [Microsoft]]

"Peter Weaver" <no*@all-wanting-spam.ok> wrote in message
news:cq******** **@sparta.btint ernet.com...

Which brings up an interesting question...
Does your ex use Linux ?
Yes.

Also Most websites are hosted on linux,

I'd venture that Solaris and Windows both account for more sites, especially
if you include Intranet sites. While Lunix is popular, you'd be hard
pressed to show that "most" web sites are hosted on one operating system.
Some of the largest ISPs in the world run inside the corporate firewall.
e-mail services are generally linux based,
Sure, SENDMAIL runs on a lot of machines, but most non-spam e-mail is
handled behind company and corporate firewalls by Lotus and Exchange, and
never sees the open Internet. Linux-based SMTP servers are a relatively
small portion of the overall e-mail server count, even counting Google and
AOL, who both apparently have embraced Lunix. (can't speak for Hotmail... I
really don't know. I suppose I should ;-} In summary, your statement was a
simple exaggeration that can only be justified from a narrow point of view.
plus i would be amazed if this nntp server was operating on
a linux platform when linux based nntp services are cheaper more
resiliant and generally regarded as bullet proof.
Except for the logical error in your statement, which I will attribute to
fast typing, this is probably a true statement. NNTP services largely run
on cheap devices because (1) the protocol is open source and has been since
the beginning, (2) most of the internet code to handle Usenet was written on
Unix and therefore translates well to a Linux platform, and (3) Usenet is
valuable to the users of these newsgroups, but it is not mission critical.
No one will die if a message is lost. (4) Administration on NNTP is largely
automated, so there's very little need for nice U/I features. (all of this
applies to SMTP as well, but not necessarily to "endpoint" mail servers).

Therefore, there is no need to spend a bunch of money to get a managable
general-purpose server when a cheaper appliance will do the trick. That
said, these statements apply to Unix in general, not necessarily Linux, and
primarily to the open internet, not corporate or governmental networks. My
point: The NNTP appliance could just as well be running BSD or one of the
other unix-based operating systems.

Many women use linux, I find your comments are even more sexist and
ignorant and silly, than "Holiday On The Busses".
I didn't read the other post, so I can't comment. I do think that it would
be fair to say that the percentage of women using Linux is probably
proportional to the percentage of women using any computing equipment. I
see no reason to believe that _being female_ makes you any more or less
likely to use a particular operating system, especially as an end-user,
which appears to be the thrust of your argument. I don't think that the
previous poster meant "as an end-user" though. "Users of the Linux command
line" make up a smaller fraction of the total population of "users of
computing equipment," frequently as server administrators, CS students, and
computing hobbyists. Those groups have, in my unscientific observation,
exhibited a tendency to be more than 60% male. Perhaps the previous poster
was trying to get there, albeit in an odd and perhaps indefensible way.
Don't knock linux untill you have properly used it.

Not sure what qualifications I would need to have to say I've properly used
it. Does this apply only to people who've typed at a Linux command line?
Your message thread seems to imply that most of us use Linux already (quite
possibly true, in some way or another) when performing Internet-based tasks
like surfing the web, searching, sending e-mail, using a TiVo, and reading
our newsgroups. Does this count as properly using it? If so, I have the
right to knock it... :-).

Before the days of Linux, I spent a few years writing C code on Unix (AT&T
System V). This was probably the most intensely geeky period of my career.
I'm no enemy to the OS. That said, until someone can get a much wider
distribution of Linux to the desktop (perhaps by selling PCs with Linux
preinstalled at Walmart, or something like that), then you will end up
having arguments about "housewives " and what it means to "use Unix."

Competition makes everyone stronger. Keep it coming.
--
--- Nick Malik [Microsoft]
MCSD, CFPS, Certified Scrummaster
http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and not
representative of my employer.
I do not answer questions on behalf of my employer. I'm just a
programmer helping programmers.
--

[Conor]

In article Peter Weaver says...

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Hi John, Re: The typical techno-phobe housewife badly in need
of the ease of use and economies of scale provided only by Micro-Soft,
not by open source,

You wrote: << Microsoft is the staid husband,
no longer vital, that goes off to work everyday.
Linux is the young penguin,
who sneaks in the the backdoor and Satisfies the customer. >>

I hate to pop your bubble John,
but she's not using open source, much less Linux.

Which brings up an interesting question...
Does your ex use Linux ?

Yes.

Also Most websites are hosted on linux, e-mail services are generally
linux based,

Really?

http://www.internetnews.com/stats/article.php/3448561

While Microsoft Windows currently commands a 90 percent share of the
total market, the report suggests that Linux will chip away at Redmond's
(Quote, Chart) grasp in the relative short term, running in about 25.7
percent of all servers shipped vs. 63 percent for Windows-based systems
by 2008.

And...

"Just about every major hardware vendor concedes that Linux is the No. 2
operating system based on new server shipments,"

Final footnote of the article..

The Linux evangelist said the reverse is true in places like China where
some consumers purchase Linux systems and wipe out the OS in favor of
some pirated Windows software.

--
Conor

An imperfect plan executed violently is far superior to a perfect plan.
-- George Patton

[Jeff_Relf]

Hi Pete, You told me: << Only idiots find linux hard to use.
I've built linux computers for computer illiterate friends,
and they cope without difficulties,
and most of all they are happy their computer cannot be affected by
the hundreds of M$ compatable viri around. >>

Linux is also unaffected by
all the people/vendors who target WinXP exclusively.

I use WinXP exclusively and I get no spam or malware.
I use no firewall or antivirus software either.
All one has to do it this:
1. Use on-the-fly e-mail aliases
( e.g. Cotse.NET, which also has SMTP-AUTH which works from any LAN ).
2. Browse with FireFox 1.0 ( IE automation like GuruNet is no problem ).
3. Use 40tude Dialog instead of Outlook,
or, better yet, write your own client, as I did ( X.CPP ).

[Octopussy]

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Linux is also unaffected by
all the people/vendors who target WinXP exclusively.

Not true.

Linux people are plagued by WinXP machines infected by spam trojans that
spew email to their accounts.

By law, every Linux user should be able to sue WinXP users for putting
hazardous material on the Internet.

[General Protection Fault]

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.a dvocacy.]
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:12:00 GMT, Octopussy wrote:

Jeff_Relf wrote:

Linux is also unaffected by
all the people/vendors who target WinXP exclusively.

Not true.

Linux people are plagued by WinXP machines infected by spam trojans that
spew email to their accounts.

By law, every Linux user should be able to sue WinXP users for putting
hazardous material on the Internet.

Not true. You're only liable if you *know* you're doing it.
--
FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE i386
8:50AM up 37 days, 14:12, 1 user, load averages: 0.04, 0.02, 0.00

[nev]

many people today are spending $5000 on wide screen tv's and $30-60,000 on
vans, SUVs etc.

in case you haven't noticed, the average buying power of americans has been
steadily climbing.

what it shows is that the general public, is willing to pay for personal
support for technology.

Arnt we talking about low cost of ownership and running a (computer) system
here... anyways having to spend nothing on an OS.. but 300 bucks to fix
anything negates the whole point of getting a free OS ...atleast for the
folks paying for such a service.