Slashdot Mirror


Windows XP: Prices, And One Reaction

Jim42688 writes: "Looks like the prices Amazon was reporting for Windows XP a while back were right. On the back of today's ad for CompUSA, it lists the prices to preorder. Home Full, 199.99, Home Upgrade, 99.99. Professional full, 299.99, Professional upgrade, 199.99." Perfect timing -- Fwis writes: "Use your power as a consumer to Boycott XP. The site is now functioning smoothly, and we invite you to log in and participate in discussions, polls, and news stories related to Microsoft's release of the XP line of products." There are some interesting links on this page if you (or someone with purchasing power at your company) is considering XP.

28 of 598 comments (clear)

  1. WindowsRG by jeffehobbs · · Score: 3, Funny
  2. price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Home Full, 199.99, Home Upgrade, 99.99. Professional full, 299.99, Professional upgrade, 199.99."


    Linux... Priceless

  3. Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok by Dimensio · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since it puts NT and 9x together I'm kind of glad that a lot of home users will now have an actual stable OS.

    When I, as a home user, wanted an actual stable Windows OS, I went to Windows 2000, as did quite a few people I know. We did lose some legacy and DOS-based support but AFAIK Windows XP loses most if it as well (I understand that there is some kind of DOS compatability mode, but I don't know all of the details) and after getting used to Windows 2K, I don't see a need to switch just to get the little extra that XP offers. Also, XP Home Edition doesn't even have all of the features supported in Windoes 2000 (off the top of my head: advanced security features and SMP support) -- to get a 'true' replacement we would need to upgrade to Windows XP Professional. Again, why go to the expense and performance hit of an XP upgrade when we already have most, if not all, of what we want anyway.
    .
    One thing I do think about sometimes. A lot of linux distibutions come with various programs already on them that do things like cd burning and such. Now Windows comes along with new things built in.

    Well...yes, but my understanding is that a number of third-party apps that people used to use for these purposes are crippled or non-functional. Apparently it's a 'bug' with the upgrades that XP has (and not an attempt for MS to force you to use their apps exclusively). Most of my friends with CD-R drives already have the software they need and they know how to use it -- it's pretty standard to get software with the drive. Maybe it's convenient for MS to offer seamless CD burning options integrated in the OS, but I could do without the overhead (and the crippling of my other choices).

  4. Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok by mindstrm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One problem with things being built-in... is that MS destroys any competition, and eventually controls the feature-set.

    If people no longer need to get third-party software to burn cds, for example.... there is no longer a market for cd-software. Eventually, MS dictates the hardware interface to the manufacturers, seeing as how they are the only ones producing software, and pretty soon... you get the picture.

  5. Why should an MS user Upgrade ? by redelm · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I just don't see any compelling reason. I have plenty of MS Win95 licences, and really see no need to upgrade those boxen. Just like my Linux & FreeBSD boxen who almost always are a few versions behind.


    MS-Win95b is acceptably stable given enough RAM, HD and maintenance. The only thing that has caused me to upgrade a few to Win98 is USB cameras not installing on 95.


    MS-WinNT may be more stable, but some hardware and software still refuses to run under it. I believe XP is an NT descendant, so I'd worry about this.


    Upgrading is fine for journalists who have stories to write, and for other software reviewers. I just don't know why the rest of us should upgrade. To get a bunch of bugfixes & security patches? Feh! If I need'em, I'll get them separately.

  6. a boycott makes us no better than M$ by roxytheman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If this software is good, then buy it, use it and enjoy it! Then again, if it is just a piece of crap, don't buy it, use it -or enjoy it! It is up to you! Boycotting a great piece of software just because it is made by M$ is wrong I think. I have never tried XP, and propably never going to buy it, but if it is good, people should have the right to use it, and maybe we can learn from it and improve out favourite penguin or devil-OSes ...

    --

    Find nice cocktail recipes @ www.spitzy.net
    1. Re:a boycott makes us no better than M$ by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd agree, except I guess the only problem is the people who aren't really aware of what they're getting into until after they buy a copy of XP and install it.

      Despite all the marketing information and even a few screen shots I looked at online, I had no idea what the XP overall "feel" would be until I installed a release-candidate 30-day trial for myself. The average user doesn't wipe their hard drive and install 30-day trials of operating systems, just to decide if they should buy it or not.

      (For the record, I wiped XP off my drive after giving it about 5 days. My wife refused to use it, saying it looked too "cartoon-like" and was noticeably slower launching several programs she commonly uses. I could deal with the new appearance of things, but I really disliked all the attempts to coerce me into using MS products for everything. It installed MSN messenger by default, and each "mouse-over" to the shortcut in the system tray reminded me to click to sign up and activate it. Then, they kept bugging me to go to their web site and sign up for a Passport account, to use their .net functionality. Uh, no thanks.)

  7. For that price... by john@iastate.edu · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ...they ought to bundle a free computer!

    Seriously, are we approaching the day that windows will cost more than the computer it runs on for most people?

    --
    Shut up, be happy. The conveniences you demanded are now mandatory. -- Jello Biafra
  8. Re:bah, for windows users... by Chmarr · · Score: 3, Informative
    It wasn't release candidate 2 that was being tested, it was BETA 2. This makes a big difference, release candidates usually have all the debug information stripped out. The idea of a release candidate is to have a version of the code that could very well ship if nothing appears wrong with it.

    Beta versions, on the other hand, often have a lot of debugging information built in that could cause bloat and lag.

    Personally, I hate windows, and I'll be keeping XP at a very long distance. However, if we're going to rag a product, let's do it for the right reasons :)

  9. Back up now by Publicus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey, I'm an editor at boycottxp.com, we got hit hard there but we're back up now and we should stay that way. It might be a little slow at first but keep checking back as the traffic levels off. We're excited to hear what you have to say.

    --

    My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

  10. I'd love to see by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A version of Windows XP (because the only reason I still use Windows is for my ATI-TV card, and to review computer games) that only has these features:

    1. Basic OS/Gui.
    2. Directx 8

    That's it. I don't want a media player, a browser, or all of the other stuff. If they had this out, I'd pay $30 for it, and be perfectly happy. If I wanted the other pieces (browser, chat module, blah, blah, blah), I could choose whether to buy them from MS, or go and use something else (so an extra $15 for MS Explorer, or I could put Mozilla on the box).

    Now everybody wins. MS is happy because it gets $30 from me (and the potential of more money if I choose to pay $99/$199 if I want all the bells an whistles), the DOJ is happy (because it makes a truly level playing frield, since other companies can compete with the other add-ons (at least in theory)), and I'm happy because I can review my games.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    1. Re:I'd love to see by evilquaker · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Now everybody wins. MS is happy because it gets $30 from me

      No, Microsoft is not happy, which is why you haven't and you never will see such a version of Windows. They aren't happy for (at least) two reasons:

      1. You're going to buy Windows anyway... why should they sell you what you want for $30 when they can sell you that + a bunch of crap you don't want for $200?
      2. Why should they give away a chance to get their software on your PC? Every PC that ships with media player is another PC they can claim is part of their "installed base". This they can then use to get companies to stream in their format, as opposed to Real Audio/Video.
      So keep dreaming... such a thing will never happen.

      --
      To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
  11. Re:boycott XP? by error0x100 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Perhaps you missed it in the news, but Microsoft was recently tried in court for illegally abusing their monopoly position to retain dominance and unfairly squash competition. It was generally called the "Microsoft antitrust trial", and not only was Microsoft found guilty, but the appeals court upheld the guilty verdict. So Microsoft's success was ill-gained - this is not just arbitrary opinions of some people, its a fact that has been not only found in court but upheld by the appeals court (or do you think all the judges are also just jealous of Microsoft's success?).

    The reason for the boycott is basically that all the illegal tactics that Microsoft used to gain dominance are still being used, they continue to break the law, and the lack of competition that results from this is harming customers.

    Did you really not notice this trial that was going on? It was very well publicised. Or did you just neglect to listen when the facts of the case were discussed in the media?

  12. Re:Transparent Encryption? by Meorah · · Score: 3, Informative

    128-bit hashed local file and directory encryption. "transparent" because its based on the user's access token that they receive when logging onto their PC. In other words, if you log on as a certain user, and encrypt a file, then you will be able to access that file at any time as long as you are logged on as that user. Log on as a different user, and try to access the encrypted file, and you'll be denied access.

    The mechanism for encrypting files is simply a checkbox in an "advanced" menu. Only 2 button clicks deep, but far enough out of the way that most people won't accidentally enable encryption. Also, you can't encrypt files that have been compressed natively... Of course, the work around is that you use winzip or pkzip or winrar to compress your files, then encrypt them with the built-in encryption.

    This is only local encryption! If you want encryption over a network, you've still got to use IPSec, Kerberos, VPN, etc.

    All of these features are available in Windows 2000 and XP. In fact, just about every worth-while feature in XP is also found in 2000. Oh yah, you get to use WPA in XP! Another reason to upgrade to 2000 instead of XP if you're going to use Windows.

    --
    Protector of Capitalist views,
    Meorah
  13. What's the alternative? by themaddone · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The problem, as it always has been, is that people can't use Linux.

    Hell, ask anyone... Using Linux probably has never been easier. I, for the first time, installed Red Hat 7.1 a few weeks ago... Until then, I had been a diehard Windows user... Not because I wanted to be, mind you, but because I didn't think I could use Linux, or that it could replace my desktop.

    So I yanked out my Windows HD, put in a clean one, and installed Red Hat. Hell, it astonishingly simple. The biggest problem I had was KDE or Gnome? But then I started using it...

    I'm not a completely naive Windows user... I mean, I read Slashdot, right? But when you have to spend 75% of your time reading websites and manuals and going back and forth to websites and trying to figure out the terminal, and... Well, it's frustrating. Too frustrating.WindowsXP makes things easier for the average, not so bright computer user. People won't have to upgrade, they'll buy new PCs with XP already on it. And they won't even bother to ask "Can I get Red Hat, or Mandrake, or Slackware on that?" And the reason is simple. Despite the fact the MS is a monopolistic megolith, along with groupls like the MPAA and the RIAA and others who eat away at people's freedoms (to choose, to speak, whatever), they (WE!) will tolerate it because there isn't a better choice. And until someone designs a new operating system, one that can run Windows programs, and offers the ease of use that Windows does, you'll never have a real alternative to Windows.

    I'm an economist(-in-training). I know that competition drives prices down, and forces product quality up. But if someone doesn't come along and design an alternative, all we'll ever get to do is sit here, bitch about it on Slashdot, and feel sorry for people that don't know the difference.

    I'm going to keep using Red Hat. Not full time, not even half time. But I'm going to try to learn to be proficient on something that isn't Windows, so I don't have to use Windows. But in the end, it's just a hobby, and I'll keep coming back to /dev/hda1, where I keep Windows.

    -Josh

    1. Re:What's the alternative? by pjrc · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The problem ... is that people can't use Linux.

      I see this same statement all the time, and while I generally agree with it, just yesterday it finally occured to me why I find it so bothersome. That reason is simply:

      They can't really use Microsoft Windows either.

      These masses of "average joe" users who will never be able to use linux really don't know how to use windows either. Almost everything about the computer is "too hard" for them... except playing a couple simple games, reading email and surfing the web, and sometimes struggling through a word processor.

      In all of these cases where the "can" use windows, they are blissfully unaware of 95% of the features that the software offers them. They save their files whereever the "save as" dialog defaults, and later if someone asks them to copy the file onto a floppy, they have no idea how to do it or even where they put the file on their drive. These are the masses that constantly need someone to "fix the computer". I could go on and on (but not today).

      The point is that saying "linux is too hard" is usually meant to imply that "but windows is easy". The sad truth is that the vast majority of the population can't really use ANY operating system, linux, windows, macos, Be, whatever. Of course, the vast majority of the driving population can't change their car's oil or probably even a tire, and they can't program their on-screen controls VCR, etc, etc.

      Sure, windows is probably overall a bit easier, largely because of automated install programs and more commercial software (that has a lot of work put into reducing costly tech support queried).

      For these mainstream novice users, the system they've invested hundreds of hours not really using in any signifcant way, but stumbling and strugging through to get the minimal "productivity" they manage is going to be easier than anything that is a change, not matter how much a change for the better it may happen to be.

      Well, that's enough ranting for now. There's already hundreds of messages, so it's highly unlikely many people will read this... but I feel a bit better finally coming to terms why "people can't use linux" bothers me, when I generally agree with the statement.

    2. Re:What's the alternative? by mj6798 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But when you have to spend 75% of your time reading websites and manuals and going back and forth to websites and trying to figure out the terminal, and... Well, it's frustrating. Too frustrating.WindowsXP makes things easier for the average, not so bright computer user.

      You spent years getting familiar with Windows. You can't expect to pick up Linux in a day. This says nothing about the relative quality or utility of the different OSes.

      In fact, learning Linux probably is initially harder than learning Windows. On the other hand, learning Linux is probably a more valuable skill: you learn to use software that doesn't change every year. And once you understand the command line tools and scripting, you can do really amazing things very quickly.

      The biggest problem I had was KDE or Gnome? But then I started using it...

      I think the answer is: it doesn't matter. Learn to use LaTeX, Emacs, xterm, and the standard POSIX tools. Learn Python or Perl. And if you are an "economist in training", learn R (for data analysis).

  14. Re:bah, for windows users... by Lally+Singh · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nope, because you end up with code that looks like:
    (normal asm code)
    jmp 245
    (line number info, symbolics, etc)
    245: (normal asm code)

    Which really thrashes the cache and disrupts the pipeline pretty harshly.

    --
    Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
  15. Re:Transparent Encryption? - E4M by dasunt · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Not totally transparent, since you have to "mount" the drives (actual partitions or just a virtual drive saved in a file), but E4M is a wonderful (free, OS) encryption scheme that works across all windows versions (although win98 has a shutdown bug).


    Price is right, and it works fine for me. Although NTFS has a built-in encryption on its filesystem that is truly transparent, but since I can't see the code behind it, I don't trust it.

  16. Re:Already! by Flavius+Stilicho · · Score: 5, Informative

    "How many slashdotters would buy Windows XP if not this boycott?"

    I would. I decide what our corporate technology standards are, what products are purchased and what OS is installed on our 150+ PCs. Currently, that standard is Windows 2000 Professional and Server so I am in a prime position to upgrade to XP. However....

    About a month or so ago, a rep from Microsoft called me to give me the pitch for XP and how it would make 'everything so much better.' I actually had a great deal of fun with that call. Essentially, I told him that I had absolutely no intention of going to any XP product anytime soon. He courteously informed me that if I didn't it would cost us way more when we finally upgraded. I responded by saying that 'anytime soon' was just my nice way of saying that I'd never goto XP. He balked at that one and asked why. I told him that, frankly, I didn't care one bit for MS's licensing practices, the quality (or lack thereof) of their products, the inherent insecurity of their products and a few others that I can't remember. When he asked what our intentions were, I told him that we would stay with the 2000 line for a couple years. After that we would begin evaluating alternative operating systems and applications -- primarily Linux. I then told him that our core application was a client server model that already had a web based front end and could easily be ported to Apache & Oracle or MySQL. As for Office and messaging applications, I told him that there were many solid alternatives to Exchange already on the market and StarOffice would work just fine for our Office Suite needs. At that point he said "Oh. Thank you for your time." and hung up.

    I decided to start boycotting Microsoft products a while ago -- when the details about the new licensing scheme were released. I know that 150 PC and 20 servers isn't much to MS, but it's aleast a half million dollars when it's all said and done. Had it not been for the licensing changes, I probably would have upgraded.

  17. XP support for copyright 'protection' BAD by canadian_right · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Windows XP has built in support for many new 'copyright protection' features. Why buy an OS that ASSUMES you are a software pirate?

    SAP - Secure Audio Path, adds static to music if not 'authenticated.
    WPA - Windows Product Activation - can deativate software if it thinks its running on the 'wrong' computer.
    No Java, MS takes its toys home
    Built in support for Passport - let the spam begin.
    Before the Hard-drive manufactures came to their senses it was rumoured that XP would fully support the 'copyright' protection scheme IBM thought up for HDs. Anyone have info?

    For more info see these fun loving fanatics:
    XP and Privacy/Copyright

    --
    Anarchists never rule
  18. Windows XP FAQ by Strangely+Unbiased · · Score: 3, Informative

    From someone who's running XP RC2:

    - If you have a legal copy, WPA is no problem. You just click 'Next' , then 'Finish'.Done. And Microsoft can't use your PC spec info; it's a one-way hash code.(BTW, it's been cracked.)

    - It's not bloated: It runs perfectly fine on my p250 128MB, with visual styles enabled. All the patronising features (simple file sharing and that puppy on the search bar) can be easily disabled.)

    - It's stable.Mostly.

    - It's got a pretty nice stealth firewall (grc.com's ShieldsUP says so, anyway.). And the built-in cd-writing's convenient too.

    - It DOES run every one as administrator by default, for Win9x legacy reasons. Not hard to change that, but the default 'Limited User' profile has problems with older apps and games. The trick is to put the users in the predefined 'Power Users' group.

    - It's still Windows. If you hate Windows, it probably won't change your mind, but nevertheless it's the best Windows to work with.

    It's got lots of other features too, so if you have a question before you consider upgrading, I'm here for you(so nice of me isn't it)

    --


    There is no such thing as 'world peace'.
  19. And so it begins.... by mikethegeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    XP will be the doom of Microsoft. One day in the future, XP will be studied along with the Apple III, IBM Micro Channel Architecture, and Intel/Rambus as an example of corporate arrogance trumping common sense with DISATEROUS results.

    As one /. poster has put it (brilliantly, I might add), that with XP, Microsoft has done to itself what the DOJ never could have done: Release a product that will ENABLE competition, and possibly ruin the company.

    XP is the product of the two biggest sins a corporation can commit: arrogance and contempt. It's arrogant in that it's overpriced, offers NOTHING new over WIndows 2000, and in fact, takes away from it.

    The "Home" version strips you of network capability, unlike 98/95/ME/2000, it CANNOT be used as a client on anything but a peer-to-peer network. It won't allow you to log into a NT domain. I haven't tested it to see if Novell Client 32 will allow logins to a Netware server, but I'd suspect that it's broken as well. It has no support for SMP at all (though 9X didn't either), to get SMP requires the $200 "Professional" version upgrade. None of this is because XP can't do SMP or serve as a network client, it's because MS chose to deliberately CRIPPLE it, and yet sell it for a radically increased price over ME/98.

    The Home version upgrade is 100% more expensive than ME! (ME could be had for $50 to upgrade from 98). For what benefit? None that I can tell. Sure, you are likely to gain some of 2000's stability, but you will surely lose game compatibility (which is why the deplorable Win `9X is still the gamers OS). Is that worth $100? Not to me. And I'd bet not to many joe blows.

    MS comits the sin of contempt with Product Activation, and it's spyware nature. XP "decides" how far to let you upgrade your hardware before requiring reactication. Which can lose you your data if there is but the SLIGHTEST glitch in this process. MS is better known for creating "unintended consequences" in it's "features" than it is in writing bug-free code. XP constantly monitors your hardware configuration,assigning it a "checksum" number via some formula, and if it gets too far from the "checksum" number originally generated when you installed it, it will CEASE to function.

    I hope they have those support lines well staffed.

    That's right, now on a XP system, the system owner does NOT have root access to the machine! This is something no MS OS has attempted to do before.

    Even if XP didn't have the fatal flaws of arrogance and contempt, the fact that it's a 100%-200% increase in price over 9X alone would be enough to doom it. In this time of economic crisis, particularly in the tech sector, a 100+% increase in the "MS Tax" will do nothing but slow sales, ESPECIALLY when you expect MS to make licenses of ME, 98, and 2000 scarce quickly.

    The "window" of opportunity for Linux is open.

    --
    === The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
    1. Re:And so it begins.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The licensing on XP is tied to the system's BIOS. Upgrade your CD-ROM...no reactivation required. For most home users, who don't even know what a BIOS is, they will likely never need to re-register XP.

      Most of the new hardware requirements are due to the new GUI, don't like it? It can easily be switched back to "classic" mode from the start panel. Thus XP will require similar hardware requirements as Win2k.

      And as for the Home edition connectivity issues, Client for Netware is not included on the home edtion, but Client services for MS networks is. Beta versions of XP Home DO allow you to access resouces on a domain, just as 9.x clients. But they can't "join" the domain like win2k or XP pro clients...meaning no Group Policy, etc.

      They had to give big business a reason to spend $ for the Pro version.

  20. Bullshit by sheldon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Today what is the situation?

    Roxio has a monopoly in CD recording software by way of CD Creator. Roxio dictates to manufacturers how to do the hardware interface. Roxio charges an extremely HIGH price to consumers to obtain this software.

    I had to upgrade from CD Creator v3 to v4 for Win2k compatibility. Roxio wanted like $90 for this upgrade.

    I was able to buy a brand new CD-RW drive with bundled CD Creator for $99. A new 10X drive which was faster than my old 4X Yamaha.

    I would hardly say that Roxio by itself has been benefiting consumers.

    Besides, all Microsoft has done is license the software from Roxio and include it in WinXP by default.

    If anything this is an example of how bundling can benefit consumers.

    Chances are, the Roxio software in WinXP is limited in some fashion. Obviously Roxio did this in order to leverage sales of their Deluxe product.

    But since WinXP contains some rudimentary support for CD-R drives in some fashion we now have a standard! Hardware makers can write drivers that plug into the existing WinXP OS. Software makers of all sorts can leverage the existing CD-R handling and create more full featured writing programs.

    I see this as increasing consumer well being, similar to the way Microsoft increased our ability to network when they integrated TCP/IP into Win95 and eliminated the need to buy third party products like LANtastic.

  21. prices from June 1990 by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just for shits and giggles, here are some prices from a June 1990 Byte magazine (the one with a rave review of Windows 3.0):

    Windows 3.0 retail: $150

    Price of a Dell 386 with color monitor and 40mb hard drive, 512K, 16MHz, a midrange system for running Windows: $2,399

    Price of a 25MHz 486, a high-end system: $5,295

    No conclusions but I thought maybe somebody would find this interesting!

  22. Windows is easier to use than Linux...or something by foqn1bo · · Score: 3, Interesting


    To be sure, whenever Slashdot has a story that involves M$ products, everyone gets hot and rustled with the age old "Why the hell do people still use Windows" thread. Primarily I see two arguments that surface:

    Windows has better/more software for my needs.

    (I would argue with 'better', but point taken).

    Windows is and will always be easier to use than Linux.

    I am sick and tired of hearing that excuse. And before you mod me down for being a snobbish troll, consider my reasoning first.

    Barring great paradigms such as Graphical vs. CL interfaces, I don't believe that there is such thing as a 'More intuitive than another' OS. Obviously Linux has got GUI covered. Face it people, you are good at what you know. The reason that windows users don't think that Linux is easy to learn is because it isn't Windows . When you have spent maybe 10 to 15 years using M$ operating systems, you have grown very used to the way things work there. eg., I want to know the filesize of this document, I rightclick, and select properties. Does anyone really think that a person who has never used a computer before (after learning what a mouse is and does) is going to think "Oh, I think I'll right click on that icon and select 'Properties!" ? Like C++, swimming and Italian cookery, using a particular operating system is a learned skill.

    Case in point? I hear that the Macintosh is supposed to be the end-all be-all of OS simplicity and intuitive design. *Yeah Right.* Just ask any windows/other user that is inexperienced with MacOS, and they'll tell you that it is a bloody nightmare. I work in IT at a University and I see this all the time--we have a small enclave of Mac users who are unbelievably frightened of PCs and our PC users are afraid to touch the Macs in fear that they'll cause the dreaded 'OsError' Bomb to come destroy the machine in spite. Not to mention the 'Boop of Death'. (True script involving my friend Renee at the library)

    Renee: Ok, I'll just click the...
    Mac: 'Boop'
    Renee: Ahh! Ok, how about...
    Mac: 'Boop'
    Renee: Aiee!! I'm trying to close you! Stop Booping!
    Mac: 'Boop Boop Boop'


    What I'm getting at (and there is a point I suppose), is that making any platform shift is shaky at first. Linux comes naturally for me now, but I spent a good long amount of time in confusion. If we want people to understand computers better and have the ability to make these kinds of migrations painlessly, then they need to be educated about the abstracts of how computers interact with humans, and not through a computer literacy course that deals strictly with an OS. Maybe then ./configure ./make ./make install won't be quite as terrifying.

  23. Congratulations! by mj6798 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You just spent $130 for the privilege of learning a proprietary system. Because you will now invest months and years in learning that system, you'll then basically be forced to spend thousands of dollars on the full version once you graduate, since you will already have sunk the cost of learning something.

    Are there open source alternatives? You bet. No, not quite the same bundle of functionality, but overall better: Maxima (symbolic math+functional programming), OCAML and Haskell (functional programming), R (graphics, interactive numerical programming), Python (graphics, 3D visualization, interactive numerical programming), and many others.