Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan
From: Tom (tom_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 03/26/04
- Next message: Alex Nichol: "Re: uninstall XP"
- Previous message: Vance McAlister: "Re: How do I get my defragmenter back?"
- In reply to: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Next in thread: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Reply: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:30:10 -0500
Wah... cry me a river. Those things have been dealt with. Now was that a MS
person or a pushy stupid sales man from MS? And what's to say about the
store? Would you run a store or company and not turn around and go to the
press about MS pressuring you to go with their OS? I would and it doesn't
take a genius. I never bought any of those stories.
In the end there is NOTHING stopping you from installing Linux and there
NEVER WAS OR IS RIGHT NOW.
As I said in my other post. MS should pull completely out of the business of
including their OS on PC's. People should have to single handedly grab a box
off the shelf. Period. It wont change at all the fact most people will
choose Windows. Windows is simply easier and more supported. To deny that
just proves you're a moron.
Tom
"E McCann" <love.nodotshere.myquadra@mad.scientist.com> wrote in message
news:OkTGUmrEEHA.3064@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
> news:u6ZpTDrEEHA.3568@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Perhaps you live in the wrong area if no computers with Linux are
> > available.
> > Here is just one source:
> >
>
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=106562&path=0%3A3944%3A3951%3
A41937%3A106562
> >
> > The stores will sell whatever people will buy.
> > If the stores do not stock something it is because they do not think
> > people will buy it.
> >
> > Since it is the consumers that choose, perhaps it is not all the fault
> > of the "monopoloy".
> > Just maybe the "monopoloy" is the fault of the consumers that choose
> > what they think is best for them in their situation.
>
> JJ,
>
> The monopoly's not a recent event. One of the (historic) complaints.
Several
> years ago OEMs brought up the fact that the way MS licensed the OS to them
> made it economically infeasable to offer *any* other OS. Some OEMs came up
> trying to offer OS/2 and couldn't - there were complaints that MS *did*
> strongarm them into only offering Windows (and IIRC MS DOS at the time.)
> Others (Digital Research) complained MS went "above and beyond" to scare
> people away from other OSes (fake errors in Windows- 3.0, IIRC - if
> installed on DRDos 5, Windows (not for workgroups) 3.11 which had no real
> active changes, just broke the OS/2 2.1 For Windows installer, etc.)
>
> Similar complaints were heard from ISPs and others who were told they
*could
> not* offer Netscape instead of Internet Explorer.
>
> This was not "consumer choice." Actions such as these are what brought
about
> the lawsuits in the first place.
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/19961220124227/caldera.com/news/ (1996, not on
> the current site... since it's partially SCO now. Of course, that makes
the
> OpenLinux bit offered there interesting....)
>
> http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/474.php
>
>
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/cyberspace/jan-june98/microsoft_1-13.html ->
> interview about one of the cases.
>
> http://www.aufait.net/~garnet/muse/lla.html -> reasonably interesting...
> mentioning how even free company-made OSes (such as BeOS) weren't allowed
> and forced away, and why Linux is still around (no one company to go
against
> because of development model.)
>
> Just a few things to look at. The history of antitrust and complaints of
> anticompetitive behavior from MS go *well* back - you could say they went
> from a clever way to compete with the IBM deal to being anticompetitive
> themselves. This was, frankly, allowed because of how *slow* the justice
> system is, and the relative lack of knowledge of "how things work" in the
> computer / software industry by the legal system. So, for the most part -
> consumers weren't *allowed* to choose.
>
> FWIW, this is where I'm coming from - I started running DOS 5 and
Windows.
> Jumped to OS/2 when I could, while watching what was going on on the
Windows
> side (Win95, which seriously annoyed me just with upgrading a modem. Long
> story there.) Got annoyed with IBM's attitude after OS/2 Warp 4 (great OS,
> lousy attitude toward non-corporate users.) Looked into Linux which was
> mostly command-line (still have my old Slackware CD somewhere,) had lousy
> hardware support at the time, etc. so ended up "by default" on Windows
with
> a new PC.
>
> XP is the only Windows OS I've made a conscious decision to *choose* for a
> PC. Over a decade, remember? XP is, IMHO, where Windows should have been
> several years ago. (Yes, I think MS should have switched completely over
to
> NT - based OSes around the time of NT 4.) Had they done so, I'd probably
> have ignored Linux, OS/2 v4, BeOS and others (outside of curiosity.)
>
> Currently running both Windows and a Mac (OS X.2.8)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.620 / Virus Database: 399 - Release Date: 3/11/2004
>
>
- Next message: Alex Nichol: "Re: uninstall XP"
- Previous message: Vance McAlister: "Re: How do I get my defragmenter back?"
- In reply to: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Next in thread: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Reply: E McCann: "Re: Loyal Microsoft Fan"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
