Windows User Experiments With Linux for 10 Days

An anonymous reader writes "Clarence Ladson over at Flexbeta decided to kick Windows to the curb for 10 days in an experiment to find out just how hard it would be to 'quit cold turkey' and move entirely to Linux. It's amazing how many day-to-day operations require the inadvertent use of Windows in our daily lives."

Comments

Necessary Evil

[kkirk007]

As much as we all hate it, we have to keep Windows around for some necessary things.

If nothing else, then at least to play a lot of our games.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG!

You do not need windows to play games. You may need windows to play games designed to run on Windows though. But if you're dumping windows, you no longer have a need for those games.

Linux, as it exists today, is a philosophical choice. I'm not supporting Redmond or any of the companies that butter their bread using that damnable product.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

> As much as we all hate it, we have to keep
> Windows around for some necessary things.

Who is "we"? Speak for yourself if you want, but I have *never* owned a Windows computer; I've been using Unix-like systems exclusively since 1988, and before then it was CP/M.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Tim C]

If you wanna play games, go get a console.

I was round a friend's house the other weekend, and she fired up Halo 2 on her XBox, and I was struck with how primitive the graphics look. Sure, an XBox is a damn sight cheaper than my PC, but I can see why.

Computers are for serious work.

You elitist snob - my computer is for whatever I choose to use it for, and I'll not have anyone tell me different.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Paralizer]

As much as we all hate it, we have to keep Windows around for some necessary things.

Just because I don't use Windows that often doesn't mean I hate it. In fact, I don't even dislike it, I really have no problem with most of Microsoft's software. I don't entirely agree with their business tactics, but I give them credit for making software that is easy to use to even casual users.

Most people I run in to that claim they hate Windows are those who are really just frustrated with the OS because they don't spend the time to learn what exactly it is that they are doing. I'm sure many of the /. readers here would agree, Windows is a great OS for those people who don't have a significant amount of time to learn about open source alternatives such as Linux. You don't really think your grandmother wants to spend weeks learning how to read her email on Linux do you? If they just want normal day-to-day tasks, like reading email or the latest news, go with Windows -- there's nothing wrong with that.

However, I think this idea of dedicating a reasonable amount of time to attempting to learn how to use Linux is a great idea (if of course you have the time and you are genuinely interested). Not to say all the people who participate will stick with it after their ten day trial, but some of them may enjoy the system and either continue to use it on their spare time, to take what they've learned to the Windows community. I'd like to see more programs like this, and less about "schools completely switching to Linux". If you force someone to switch to a more advanced environment when they may not have been comfortable with using a more user friendly one, that's really not going to give you the results you are aiming for. People will become frustrated and lose interest, probably destroying any consideration of looking into the alternative in the future.

Re:Necessary Evil

[auctoris]

Windows is most definitely not necessary. I have owned personal computers since 1984 (yes, started with the C64), and I have *never* owned a Windows machine. Currently I use OS X at home and we use OS X exclusively at my workplace. The only reason I have ever heard to justify the absolute *necessity* of Windows is that other people are using it. So if you want to make Windows unnecessary, just stop using it. :-)

Re:Necessary Evil

[aussie_a]

if you're dumping windows, you no longer have a need for those games.

No-one ever has a need for games (or at least, only under very specific circumstances that applies to a very tiny minority).

Linux, as it exists today, is a philosophical choice. I'm not supporting Redmond or any of the companies that butter their bread using that damnable product.

I bet you're still supporting illegal (if it were run in America) working conditions and child slave labour by having a computer (if you own a computer solely made in America, sorry for the incorrect assumption). Compared with Chinese working conditions, Microsoft is a very small evil. But most people here refuse to consider that.

I'm not saying you have to refuse to support all the evils in the business world. I'm just pointing out your inconsistency when it comes to which evil you'll support with computers.

Re:Necessary Evil

[NickFortune]

The only problem with windows, is that it is designed for the Average User.

And that it has this pesky forced upgrade cycle thing. Oh, software bloat to drive hardware upgrades. And serious secuity issues stemming from an unwise level of integration. Which is an instance of a larger problem: fundamental technical decisions being made by marketing staff rather than techies. And then there are the licencing terms which mean that you don't own your OS, and which reserve for MS the right to monkey around with your system at any future time. And there's proprietory file formats, and vendor lock in. And some of us have concerns about how spyware-friendly windows appears to be, especially in the light of the Claria/Gator aquisition.

But apart from that, you're dead right. The only problem with windows is that it's designed for the Average User. Oh, and a few of us dislike windows because it supports an illegal monopoly which has a well documented history of unethical and anti-competitive business strategies,

But apart from all that...

Re:Necessary Evil

[Mr2001]

I was round a friend's house the other weekend, and she fired up Halo 2 on her XBox, and I was struck with how primitive the graphics look. Sure, an XBox is a damn sight cheaper than my PC, but I can see why.

It's not just the graphics that are disappointing. You have to control it with a gamepad too, unless you buy a keyboard/mouse adapter, and even then it doesn't quite feel like a real PC FPS.

Re:Necessary Evil

[abdulla]

Windows is a great OS for those people who don't have a significant amount of time to learn about open source alternatives such as Linux. You don't really think your grandmother wants to spend weeks learning how to read her email on Linux do you?

I would think my grandmother would have the most amount of time to learn such things. People are more open to alternatives than you think, and people like my grandmother who haven't been exposed to Windows all their life would be more flexible to change.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft's business practices are no different than any other corporation and in many respects they're less aggressive, like compared to precious Apple who locks down everything they produce from competition. So you're really not bashing Microsoft at all, you're bashing capitalism and we all know the alternatives don't work so get with the program.

You're right, Microsoft won't be on top forever but will be for a very long time because it's such a well-run and adaptive company. Microsoft is the winner right now because they're outsmarted the competition but nothing lasts forever. That's how the system works.

Re:Necessary Evil

[jrockway]

Yes. I've never used Windows extensively myself. I was forced to at work, but I won't count that :)

Anyway, many years ago I migrated from MacOS 8 to Linux. It was hard at first... there weren't any GUI word processors for Linux back then. Instead of whining about it and dumping Linux, I learned LaTeX and haven't looked back since. Converting to Linux means you're going to have to re-learn some common tasks. That's too hard for some people, and for them, I recommend that they stick to having a virus-infected Windows machine.

All in all, learning emacs and LaTeX let me write better looking documents (and code) with less effort. It just takes a bit of initial learning and the willingness to change your mindset.

As for games, I guess I got lucky -- the only game I ever really liked was Unreal Tournament, and there are excellent Linux versions available (original, 2003, 2004). Personally, I think the hardcore gamers should just use consoles; they're cheaper than computers, Just Work, use less power, and turn on instantly. Use your computer for work and your game system for gaming. That's what I would do.

Re:Necessary Evil

[digidave]

Actually, configuration aside, learning Linux tends to be easier than learning Windows. Email, Internet and office are virtually identical. Users don't have to learn the hard way about email viruses. They don't have to learn the hard way that the Control Panel can be dangerous. All they need to learn is to click on the three or four icons at the bottom of the screen.

I put my mom on Linux and she has never used a computer in her life. Yes, she had a learning curve, but that was mostly with how to use the mouse. Now she's burning CDs (easier with Gnome than Windows) and emailing digital pictures (again, easier with Gnome than Windows' shoddy digital camera support).

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a "moral right" to anyone else's source code, even if you paid for the software. Software developers have the freedom to sell you a service and profit from it by keeping you from having complete access to the design.

You'd be silly to claim you have a moral right to schematics, blueprints, and design documents for your car if there's something wrong with it, or to demand schematics and code for an ASIC you want to "improve." The same goes for source code.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Ithika]

Using (or not using) software for philosophical reaons is stupid. [...] I use UNIX-based solutions because [...] UNIX simply Does Things Right.

Doing Things Right is about as succinct a way of saying "for philosophical reasons" as you could possibly get. The contradiction inherent in your argument is almost painful. Philosophical does not imply moral.

Re:Necessary Evil

[NickFortune]

You don't own Linux either.

Arguably, everyone owns Linux. There are a few rights reserved, mainly restricting my rights to restrict those of others in respect to Linux, and specifically in respect to source code if I choose to distribute a modified version of the software. But it seems clear that the intent is that Linux/Gnu should be a Commonewealth. The point is, I suppose, debatable.

Beyond question however, is that I have vastly more rights regarding my Linux software than I have over any windows system I've ever used or that I ever expect to use.

That's close enough for me.

Re:Necessary Evil

[MBGMorden]

Hurray for you, but you do realize that your viewpoint isn't the only one don't you? There are people out there who play games on their computers. As a matter of fact there are people who build their entire system around playing games. To these people, switching to Linux would make now sense.

There are plenty of people out there who don't give a damn about games, video editing, office apps, development tools, scientific programs, or databases. That doesn't somehow invalidate the needs of those who DO use those types of applications. Use whatever works best for you. Too often Linux users are trying to push the view point of how few sacrifices you'll need to make when switching to Linux. In reality, for people to truly switch from one platform to another, they need benefits, not a shorter list of things they're loosing.

Re:Necessary Evil

[PsychoBrat]

Personally, I think the hardcore gamers should just use consoles; they're cheaper than computers, Just Work, use less power, and turn on instantly. Use your computer for work and your game system for gaming. That's what I would do. Unfortunately it's not that simple; if consoles really were the solution to all our gaming needs, then there simply wouldn't be any computer games. See any console vs PC gaming debate for a plethora of obvious reasons why both will always have their place, regardless of what those marketing monkeys have to say, and remember, that opinion of what 'hardcore gamers' should do most likely comes from the fact that - as you said - you are not a hardcore gamer, and therefore wouldn't really understand their need in a platform, right?

Re:Necessary Evil

[aevan]

But standing up against the lesser while being complacent about the greater is hypocrasy. A lot seem to hate M$ because it's fashionable to do so.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

What? Are you a idiot. MS$ is a MONOPOLY. It practices monopolist tactics. That means there is little to no competition. That means no capitalism. What a screwed up sense of reality. I bet Slavery is freedom and War is piece to you.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

A couple of points:

1) If Microsoft code is buggy and people know it, then it certainly does benefit Microsoft to fix said code. They don't release security updates out of the kindness of their hearts.

2) Not being able to modify this code is not at all akin to being unable to change a lightbulb in your own house. When you buy a house, you OWN the house. When you buy a piece of software, you do not OWN the code. The only thing you own is the media it comes on and the manuals associated with it. Whether you happen to see this as morally or legally wrong is beside the point - as far as they are concerned, what you're paying for is a right to USE the software that belongs to THEM.

Just like when you buy a book, you can do what you please with the tangible item itself, but you can't do what you like with the content because there are things like copyrights and licenses preventing you from doing that. If it were possible for books to be released under the GPL then perhaps you could change the ending or the characters and even re-print it and sell it for profit! Doesn't seem such a bad idea...

I'm a pretty staunch advocate of open source, I think it fits proper software development lifecycles far more snugly and keeps the rights to code written in the public domain where it belongs - in the public domain. It seems private enterprise has a completely different idea about rights and freedom.

Re:Necessary Evil

[sumdumass]

Actualy They are at different times of thier operation and to differing extents different for other corperations.

Vendor lockin, and so called underhanded tactic aside, microsoft has in more then one occasion stole property form others and used them in windows or componants inside windows. They then either tied any complaints up in court long enough to break the plaintif or force a buyout (at a resonably fair price).

Microsoft has also included different things that were on a paid business model into thier operating systems and claimed they were giving it away free. Interestingly enough, the price of free required an upgraded operating system in some cases wich isn't free. To the layperson it does appear to be free but in reality it isn't because the prerequisit purchase to run the supporting product. This is rearing its head again with IE7 wich won't be availible for many former microsoft operating systems. It isn't that the previous operating systems would need some major code reworking either, it is about supporting upgrade paths.

The whole netscape versus internet explorer thign would have had a different light on it if IE was offered as a download or optional instalation package seperate from the windows installer. Instead, they included it into the windows install which took away any choice the majority of users would have. At the time netscape was a better product then IE and all ISPs had a shell logon were you textualy browse the internet and check email without having a browser at all so it isn't the case were you need a browser to download a browser either. Even today you can conect to the internet and download stuff without having a browser installed, it is just a little harder but not out of the expectations of a user back when the battle started.

In all, microsoft has done some thigns that other companies wouldn't think of doing (or at least acknowledge they thought about it). People who think microsoft has done no evil tend to be the ones that were not around back when some of this stuff was being done. The world as we know it now isn't the same as it was back in the day. what we see as good today was basicaly started back durring the browser wars. Think of what could be if some of the competition wasn't shut out. Think about how much better the operating system as a who would have been if if competition continued to force constant improvments. If this was still the case, i would be looking forward to a new microsoft operating system.

Windows 95 was a reaction to competition, windows 98 was a fix to 95 and 98SE was largley the same to get another upgrade path because 95 and 98 didn't offer too much differences. Windows ME was basicaly a profit release and we seen how that turned out. Windows XP was a consolidation of resources with improvments from the ME experience while thier next operating system is a mix of new DRM tech and competition wich should prove something halfway good. The competition has made microsoft delay the release because they know a new windows 98SE type relese shouldn't generate much upgrades and basicaly only replace thier current OEM stuss. Competition has force them to make improvment in the UI as well as feature. Competition is a good thing and we will soon see it.

Re:Necessary Evil

[typical]

All in all, learning emacs and LaTeX let me write better looking documents (and code) with less effort. It just takes a bit of initial learning and the willingness to change your mindset.

Oh, don't lie. Learning emacs and LaTeX may well let you produce better looking documents. However, "a bit of initial learning" is extremely misleading . Both of these software packages are wildly powerful and versatile, but in the time it takes to become an emacs guru alone, you could have become a Photoshop guru five times over.

I'd say that knowing LaTeX will let you produce documents that look better than your Word-knowing colleagues, yes. But it will still take work (I *often* spend a great deal of time poking through documentation to try to figure out how to do something complex in LaTeX), and the initial learning cost is not even remotely "a bit". I am perhaps an intermediate emacs user. I can't really code useful elisp code from scratch without a reference, but I can modify existing stuff, know many of the default keybindings, and so forth. I have been using emacs/xemacs heavily for coding, text-writing, LaTeX processing, and just about everything else (even had a stint with emacs as my mail client) for years, am rabid about learning things that I'm not familiar with that I run into, and I haven't even looked at huge chunks of the program.

Re:Necessary Evil

[tarunthegreat2]

instead, they included it into the windows install which took away any choice the majority of users would have

Umm excuse me? They offered something additonal for free and this limited consumers' choice? No. They were guilty of leveraging their monopoly in one market to exploit another, but they did not limit consumers' choice in this one instance. You were and still are absolute free to run any other browser on Windows - including Netscape. It's just that IE will be sitting there pre-installed. That's only a limitation of choice if you're down to your last 4 MB of space on your hard drive, and the un-bundling of IE would have saved that space for you to use otherwise. But you never have to click on it (unless you run into an ugly asp IE-only site - but again THAT is not MS's fault. The site should support multiple - and standards compliant - browsers).

Re:Necessary Evil

[dvaldenaire]

>>you're bashing capitalism and we all know the alternatives don't work so get with the program.

we all know ?

If by "don't work", you mean "can't resist to a massive US Army attack", so you probably right...

Re:Necessary Evil

[drsquare]

Windows is a monopoly? Funny then, this Linux thing I'm using now must just be an illusion. There is more competition for Microsoft on PCs than there is for Apple on Macs, but no-one complains when Apple clamps down on people trying to run OSX on x86. Maybe that's a monopolistic tactic.

An alternative operating system to Windows is as simple as buying a Mac or installing Linux.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Znork]

"you're bashing capitalism and we all know the alternatives don't work so get with the program."

Anti-competetive practices are what dont work, and there is no difference between Soviet style state-owned monopolies and privately owned monopolies.

Competition leading to ever increased efficiency is what generates growth of wealth. Wether the competing entities are owned privately or collectively is irrelevant.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Sparr0]

Yes, you can. Wine/Cedega doesnt actually emulate much (a few un-implemented calls have "emulated" dummy replacements). Most of its function is simply providing a layer to convert DirectX graphics and Windows system calls to the appropriate calls for OpenGL/Linux. If the Linux calls run appreciably faster, which they do in many cases for graphics, memory management, and file system access, it often outweighs the light overhead involved in the conversion.

For example, the graphical part of EverQuest runs a bit slower in Linux, but new zones loaded about twice as fast as in Windows.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Markus_UW]

I must point out that the entire point of capitalism is to avoid a monopoly, and that, in fact a monopoly is the worst possible state for capitalist growth. With a (full) monopoly, there's no reason to improve ones product/service, which leads to fewer jobs in the industry, finally resulting in no progress being made and a shitload of unemployed workers.

Capitalism demands competition for stability. Competition keeps prices low (or it would if companies didn't corroborate to raise prices *cough* Oil companies the world around *end cough*) and promotes progress. Think how much crappier windows would be today without the influences of Unix and Linux (and even OS/2).

Re:Necessary Evil

[man_of_mr_e]

Personally, I don't believe that Microsoft has a real monopoly. I think they have a "Monopoly by default". If and when Linux (or MacOS now that it will be on x86) can provide what consumers are looking for, I think Linux will gain enough market share that this will not be the case any longer.

Lots of people find Linux "good enough" to replace (or even better than) Windows, but not yet enough to make a major dent. You might argue that this is because consumers don't know about Linux, but I would disagree. For Linux to be a complete solution, it has to include commercial applications, and so far that's been rare.

Wine doesn't really cut it either, since that's still an imperfect solution that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. Besides, that's just like keeping Windows around anyways. Linux should be able to stand on its own.

Re:Necessary Evil

[Danga]

I prefer to do most of my software development and getting paid (in money) for it. I do not mind paying money for a product that I know will be compatible with everyone I interact with (such as MS Word). I also do not mind paying money for software that I just enjoy using and do not have the time or skills to produce such as games (WoW). The open source movement is great, and I submit bug fixes occasionally but I do not like the mindset that a lot of its followers have that "all software should be free". If I put a lot of my time and effort into a project (not a side project) then I want to and believe I deserve to get paid for it... and I do get paid for my work. Why does almost EVERY open source project ask for donations? Because it's pretty damn hard to live without some kind of income.

I am not a Microsoft fan in the least, but the reason that MS Office is so popular is b/c it is the standard. Open Office is pretty good, but the quality of MS Office is greater both speed wise and compatibility wise. So I will spend the few hundred dollars and get a product that I know will work with anything I throw at it (which is not too much) instead of trying to re-invent the wheel and make an alternative. I would rather spend my spare time going fishing, hanging out with my friends/family, or enjoying some other hobbies of mine... like posting on Slashdot.

He Brings Up Good Points

[Aeron65432]

I know myself, I haven't been able to quit Windows cold turkey. In general I use linux, but there are many Windows-specific things, several of which he mentions.

I'll list a few big ones.

Games, of course.
Certain programs.
Family.

Re:He Brings Up Good Points

[mc_barron]

Wow. Could you post a comment that is more useless? "Certain Programs"? "Games"? I don't think you could get more generic, dull, and uninformative.

Look, we all know there are programs (both applications and games) that run only on Windows. That's not any news. What would be MUCH more interesting is to hear exactly which applications you must use in a windows environment.

Re:already /.ed

[vcv]

Funny you say that.. because it is a linux server.

Re:10 days?

[Seumas]

I'm not sure what things the blurb poster was talking about, but I use OSX, Solaris and Ubuntu for my desktops at home and work EXCLUSIVELY and Debian on my production server on the west coast. The only thing Windows does for me is play my games - which I barely even do anymore anyway.

So seriously, what's so great about windows that linux or OSX can't do for you (obviously solaris isn't as geared to a few of these things, but still...)? Calendaring? Email? Managing your website? Writing letters and documents and spreadsheets? Personal wikis? Photo albums? Dinky little flash games? Instant messaging? Watching movies? Listening to music? Making music? Coding? P2P/Bit Torrent?

Exactly what is there that you can't do on a non windows box?

10 days is not enough

[andy753421]

"It's amazing how many day-to-day operations require the inadvertent use of Windows in our daily lives."

Maybe this is true at first, however after several months of using Linux I began to see the FOSS alternatives to using windows and now I haven't had windows installed for about 9 months.

It seems like switching to Linux should be more gradual. Linux has a steep learning curve. If you try to jump in all at once your more likely to get a bad impression when you can't figure out how to play a dvd, or even 'mount' the cdrom drive.

Re:10 days is not enough

[Anonymous Coward]

If there's one thing Microsoft has, it's R&D. Their engineers know how to create a functional UI.

Are you kidding?

Re:10 days is not enough

[Sparr0]

I went through the exact same cycle. I guess I just started a few cycles earlier. My latest stint in Linux is up to a year, over numerous kernel recompiles, with no sign of stopping. Most of the programs I use every day now dont even have counterparts in Windows. I do not know what I would do without access to the simple shell scripting tools in Linux (how the hell do I copy every file created on any day after 12PM in windows?).

Re:10 days is not enough

[MoogMan]

This is the wrong way of thinking, IMO. Linux shouldn't have a steep learning curve (and many distributions are starting to effectively tackle this... Ubuntu, Fedora).

Why would I want to mount my CD? I expect to just put it in and it to be available. Same with my DVD. I expect to put the DVD in and click "Play DVD" or "Open [Totem] Movie Player".

Ok, I personally don't think that Linux installation is going to come anywhere close to be installable by the average computer user - it's *not going to happen*. But for the large majority of things people use it should "just work".

Take music for example. I want to play my mp3s.

Hurdle 1: I can't find them because they're on my WinXP/NTFS partition.
(Solution: An init script (or preferably, an install module) to scan for non-ext3 partitions and automatically add them to fstab.)

Hurdle 2: I find my music player. Why won't it play my mp3's? Licence? What licence? I don't have to get a licence on my xyzfoobar player in Windows.

This is just one of *many* situations that need to be resolved before users start sticking to Linux.

Having said that, the last year or two have made leaps and bounds in terms of user-friendlyness, but there's still much room for improvement.

At present, Linux for the end user lacks the polish it needs to be usable by the majority of PC users. I use (and love) it, but I seem to be able to see from the viewpoint of the average user - something many geeks cannot do.

Re:10 days is not enough

[mpiktas]

Hurdle 1: I can't find them because they're on my WinXP/NTFS partition. (Solution: An init script (or preferably, an install module) to scan for non-ext3 partitions and automatically add them to fstab.)

Ironically, I could not test how my WinXP (came preinstalled with the notebook) plays videos, since the only one I had was in my ext3 partition.

The post below is right, all these problems are solved in modern distributions.

Re:10 days is not enough

[Jussi K. Kojootti]

Hurdle 2: I find my music player. Why won't it play my mp3's? Licence? What licence? I don't have to get a licence on my xyzfoobar player in Windows.

Do some research on this -- you might be surprised. Either the distributor of xyzfoobar has bought a license and gives it to you (it's one of those free lunches) or someone is using the codec without a license...

This is just one of *many* situations that need to be resolved before users start sticking to Linux.

This is a situation resolved best by either not using mp3 or buying an mp3 codec (stand alone or bundled with Windows or a commercial Linux distribution). This is not a technical problem as you suggest, but a legal/economical one.

all depends

[bigwavejas]

Windows is business worlds industry standard, with companies using programs such as, Powerpoint, MS Project, Outlook (to name a few). It seems to even try to function as a business professional without Windows you're asking for HUGE headaches.

Linux strikes me as more the OS of choise for tech types (engineers, IT pros, etc), as its much more robust at those type of applications than Windows.

I think it all depends on the environment.

My Wife, my mother and Linux...

[MosesJones]

I put my aged PII 400MHz home computer over to Linux a few years ago (well 2002 actually) and since then my Wife has suffered not a single case of having to reboot using the plug-socket, not a single crash and not a single failed application.

Until she got her iPod... so now we are buying a new PC, just so she doesn't have to use my work machine for iTunes.

My mother had an horrific attack of the virii which has meant I had to do a complete re-install of windows, and I've lobbed SUSE onto the other partition to help the recovery next time. My mother has elected to use SUSE to access the internet, and just go into Windows when she has to use the software from work.

My wife does email, internet, work processing and accounts, pretty much the same as my mother. BOTH have faired perfectly well with Linux (SUSE), with less hassle to me than on Windows.

And here is the kicker... installing Windows on a SATA drive was a pain in the arse, my mothers machine having no floppy drive and Windows not being able to detect the SATA (even in an SP2 install) SUSE 9.3.... had no issues and went straight on.

I couldn't WORK on Linux yet... but for the majority of INTERNET users who just want EMAIL, a browser and OpenOffice.... it really doesn't matter.

10 days?

[mistermark]

I tried windows for 10 days and boy, did I discover how much day-to-day operations on windows made me love *nix even more...

But a little more serious, 10 days? I mean like, what do you expect? Give it 10 months and you don't want anything else, but 10 days? What are these windows-users, shallow?

(They spent years and years trying to control this fuzzy-logic called windows and give something else 10 days... tsssss...)

For most people...

[suitepotato]

...not using Windows is not an option. The reasons are numerous and well-documented and only the idiot zealots try to deny them.

The more stable and sane try to at least address the shortcomings and work on it and to them goes out my thanks and my encouragement to "get it" no matter what it takes as to why Windows continues to and probably will indefinitely kick Linux' ass on the desktop.

Okay, so maybe the various app writers are at the mercy of those who write the frameworks, those who press ahead with kernel designs, etc. But they really need to band together and say to those maintaining the core guts of Linux that enough is enough, we need a stable solid framework on par with what Microsoft has with Windows.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if Gnucash was a bit more friendly with exported MS Money files, if there were more friendly install scripts for webcam drivers (again, SPCA5xx farking rocks for those who don't blanche at typing "make"), if nVidia made their drivers a little friendlier, if Real bothered tightening up their player, and for that matter if Yahoo would finish porting all the nice doo-dads of their Windows messenger client to their Linux one.

Of course I could use some more and better graphics apps and format compatibility, and a lot of other things...

But I'm a techie sort so I can deal with whatever. The average user can't and since techies estranged from the average end-user's needs tend to be the ones building distros with the attitude that "we know what is best for you" rather than listening, I don't expect that to change.

What I'd really like to see out of the Linux world is a collection of several of the top apps per area together on a live DVD using Debian, one using FC, another with SuSE, etc. so that the users can get a better feel and then pick and choose their mix to get the best fit for them. Call it Distros On Demand if you will, but we need something like that if we're going to put more choice in the hands of the end-users to make them more comfortable with Linux.

Never mind hiding Vi and Emacs from them so their heads don't explode when they try to adapt from Notepad.

Re:For most people...

[MBCook]

Crap.

Pure crap.

That is absoultly not true. I've done it. ANYONE can do it. My brother did it too. Linux may not be there, but OS X is. It's just as stable and secure as Linux. But it has commercial applications. It many not have Money, but you can run GNUCash, or Quicken as I do. You can run Open Office, or just use MS Office as I do (I actually think the OS X version is better than the Windows version). You want a nice IM client? You could use any open source one, or there is iChat. It already has all those nice little do-dads. Graphics apps and format compatibility? Have you ever heard of Photoshop? I've got that on my Mac and it opens just about ANYTHING. I've got a DVD player (called... DVD Player). I can run Vi, EMACS, Nano, TextEdit, BBEdit, and many others. Want to run Visio? Omnigraffle is MUCH nicer.

I'm a techie also. I like messing around in Linux. But OS X provides the Unix environment that I love so much, with the commercial applications of Windows, stability, and much more. I am always finding little things on Windows boxes that just annoy me. Little things I DON'T have to do under OS X. Little things I never thought about untill I tried something better.

There are only two applications that I haven't found replacments for (not that I looked very hard). MS Project, and SQL Plus. Both run just fine in Virtual PC.

Not using Windows IS an option. It's an EASY option. Most large computer stores have an entire section devoted to it. It's called a MACINTOSH. This isn't a two horse race. There is a third and most people don't see it because it's far out in front.

No we don't

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

If you just decide not to use windows again, like i did back in 2000, and just not look behind, you can do it. I don't require windows for anything, I try not to use proprietary software, and when extremly needed, there is wine ...

Re:I kicked Windows to the Curb, too!

[MustardMan]

Disclaimer: I use OS X, and openoffice.

There is NO WAY IN HELL NeoOffice/J or OpenOffice replace the MS office suite. No matter what people claim, they still break plenty of office docs that get emailed to me, and forget about replacing powerpoint. Apple's Keynote does a pretty good job but isn't anywhere near as feature-filled as powerpoint. I try to use alternate software as much as possible, but I keep a copy of MS office installed too.

And there's still the occasional app I run on my windows box at home that just doesn't have a replacement on OS X. I love my mac, but we're a long way from a M$-free world.

Re:10 days?

[Reaperducer]

Play "Blue Screen of Death" and "Guess Which Driver Is Causing A Problem Today."

Today the Microsoft database index at work ate itself and I'm waiting seven hours for it to re-index a couple of million documents. I said to one of the guys trying to fix things, "How come every time you guys tell me something bad it begins with the word 'Microsoft?'"

Re:I kicked Windows to the Curb, too!

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I'm not touching MS Office in part because I can't pay for it and I'm not going to do this copyright infringement thing.

I think it would be hypocritical of myself (and others) if I / they complain about GPL infringement when the complainers themselves don't care that they themselves are committing acts of infringement themselves.

Re:already /.ed

[aussie_a]

Or we can just use stuff like coral cache and not destroy the person's server. Yeah, it's slower. But it's cheaper for the person whose server it was, and everyone gets the article.

Re:COM

[Quantam]

Weird hack? Can you explain to me... 1) How COM and DLLs are a hack? 2) How the Unix way is so decisively superior to COM and DLLs?

There are alternatives

[Infonaut]

It seems to even try to function as a business professional without Windows you're asking for HUGE headaches.

I functioned as a business professional for several years using a Mac, without any serious problems. I found that Office was the determining factor. Because there was a Mac version of Office, the OS was of secondary importance.

As more and more office functions are filled by web apps, the determining factor will become the development tools used in the creation of said web apps. IT departments that go with Windows-centric web apps will box out users of MacOS, Linux, BSD, et. al., and IT departments that refuse to tie themselves to Microsoft will make it easier for users of alternative OSes.

Unfortunate

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, nobody really seems to care one whit about which operating system they use.

Most people have a fuzzy idea or no idea as to what an OS is and does.

Zealotry, like usual, is pointless.

mif
http://www.residentcynic.net/

Re:10 days?

[stealth.c]

I agree. Moving back to XP this summer showed me what a hassle it is to set up and run Windows. A zillion things I took for granted in *nix (SSH, graphic FTP client, office suite, the ability to write ISO images) are totally absent from a Windows installation unless you hunt through Google or Download.com or go buy something at the store. Getting a LAMP server running under Fedora was a piece of cake.

My DVD-ROM drive came with my PC when I originally got it from Gateway. I've moved from the Gateway-installed Windows98 and therefore don't have the stock DVD player software Gateway included. To replace this functionality in Windows I'd have to buy it all over again. This problem is far easier to solve with Linux.

After nearly a year in Linux, Windows only has half the built-in functionality I've come to expect, game compatibility be damned.

Re:Just re-installed Linux...not happy

[cdn-programmer]

A "computer Science" Student? Having such few resources and so little problem solving ability?

I would never hire you.

Re:COM

[nxtw]

Do you know what COM does? (It's a lot more than interprocess communication or shared libraries)

DLLs are essentially shared libraries. Just because they are different does not make them a "weird hack". Guess what: Windows is DIFFERENT than Unix, and the Unix way is not the only way. What makes shared objects on Unix somehow better?

Furthermore, how does some Unixes having shared libraries and IPC for twenty years relate to Windows? Windows has been around for 20 years, and the NT line is less than 15 years old.

Featureful does not mean works better

[putaro]

Sometimes FEWER features makes for a better program. Until you get something from some PHB who just had to use some obscure feature that you can't import.

A slight ammendment to your idea...

[carlmenezes]

Use any platform to teach the concepts of computing - like what drag and drop is for, what the clipboard is used for, the concept of a file system structure, u know...stuff like that. Once they have the concepts down, give them an operating system as an excercise to show them the different computing environments available. Then ask them their opinions. I think that could be a very constructive session - both for the kids and the school.

Re:An idea for teaching Linux in schools

[patio11]

That requiers having teachers who can trouble-shoot all three architectures. I love public school teachers with a passion -- half of my family does it and I've taught myself. But do you realize what the average level of computer expertise is? I can introduce you to that lady all the tech support sites make fun of for using scissors to "reformat" a 5.25" disk into a 3.5" one. Most of my colleagues had post-it notes on their monitors for the button sequence to run MS Word ("Start (bottom left) -> Programs -> MS Office -> MS Word"). Schools are one of the worst places for a mixed operating environment (they're also one of the worst places to learn anything about computers). Stick to reading, writing, and arithmatic, learn the computers somewhere else.

The problem is

[Sycraft-fu]

How do you do it gradually? I've actually been running Linux on my desktop at work some, because I need to learn more about it. We are going to start offically supporting it and unlike Windows and Solairs, we don't really have any gurus, so we all need to learn more about it. The problem is, that I find I have to force myself to boot in to Linux. Why? Well it, at best, does things as well as Windows does and in many cases does them much worse, or just not at all.

So of course I do the natural thing, I take the path of least resistance and just leave my machine in Windows, espically whenever I get busy.

Now I'm willing to do this, I'm a tech worker, it's my job to understand how to support our systems. However how is this supposed to apply to an average user? They are going to be very unimpressed if you tell them "Ya well you can do some of what you want easily in Linux, the rest you'll just have to figure out or do without." They are likely to just go back to Windows perminantly.

I think it's fairly difficult for most people to switch if there isn't an ideological reason behind it. You just don't find any advantages as an end user. For some it might seem like it initally, those that are spyware'd all to hell will probably find Linux a relief initally since it'll be faster and work stable, but soon, very soon, other annoyances and problems will creep in and they'll be frustrated all over again.

This is really the area that Linux needs to improve in, if the objective is to penetrate the mass market and really compete with Windows. It needs to be easy for completely non-technical people to switch over. This is getting more true as MS is slowly erroding advantages Linux once had.

Time was, Windows just wouldn't stay up. It wasn't a question of if it went down, just when. Not the case anymore, a good XP system will basically never crash, and it'll handle patching while you sleep so from a user perspective, it's never down. Likewise spyware and exploits were/are major problems, but they are clamping down on that too. The included firewall stops nearly all automatic worms, and their spyware tool is really quite slick and I imagine will make a major dent when it is in a release state.

So really what Linux needs to concentrate on is an easier end-user experience. Now leaps and bounds have been made in that area. I remember the first time I tried Linux in 1996 and had to get a friend who was an expert to help me even get it installed, now for most research systems in the department I drop an FC3 CD in, install, patch, setup LDAP, run our automount script and call it good. However there's still a long way to go.

One thing, for example, is the install process. For almost all Windows software, including most OSS, the install process invloves clicking on an executable which launched a nice graphical installer. This walks you through any options, and then does all the install needed. Any libraries that need updating are updated, all settings are taken care of, etc. In Linux, things are usually at best a make script. Now when it works, it's pretty easy. Config, make, make install, what's so hard about that?

Well it's intimidating. Normal users, and even us tech peopel that can't program, get intimidated by the compiler. It's something that's way outside the experience of normal users. And then what if something goes wrong? I've had make scripts fail and generally I'm sunk, I don't understand the errors because I don't know C or compilers. Imagine how an artist feels.

So things like that really need to be improved, if Linux in teh mainstream is a goal. Most users won't give a new OS months, many won't even give it a week. It'd better do what they want for word go, or they'll dump it.

Re:The problem is

[GigsVT]

A distro agnostic packaging format like autopackage might help. It doesn't replace your distro's package system, it's in addition to it. Lets third party software writers not have to worry about distro specific crap, and gives the end users a consistant way to install packages that don't come with their distro.

Re:10 days?

[Com2Kid]

• and "Guess Which Driver Is Causing A Problem Today."

Instead, under Linux, you get to play:

"Guess which driver is not supported today."

For instance, when I did a kernel upgrade, I lost video driver support, my vid driver was too old, OK, go get another one, hey look, my video card was NO LONGER SUPPORTED by the newest video card driver.

Gee thanks Nvidia! Because we all know that Linux is primarily about gaming and that no one would dare use an OLDER video card on a Linux box? Right? ...

Granted this particular problem is Nvidia's fault, but then there are the sound drivers. . . .

Oh and why does something as simple as getting a frame buffered console require me to recieve conflicting advice on exactly which packages to emerge, and then editing of a script file? ...

Installing Java on Linux, hey, just as much fun! Only 3 or so files to edit in order to get the paths setup right. Don't count on advice from any ONE site since every distro is different! Fuuuun....

Fine ... but why

[sanx]

It just occurred to me: why is quitting Microsoft and moving over to Linux and trying to find replacements for all the old programs and games you used to use make you a better person?

Are you going to give up cars and exclusively use public transport? Are you going to stop usng electricity and move back to heat and light from whale oil? Why add extra complication and hassle to your life than you need (and re-learning how to do common tasks in Linux is a hassle when you're used to the way Windows works).

Going open source is not going to cure cancer, bring about world peace and prevent N Sync from releasing a best-of album. It just means you've saved yourself a few bucks and reduced Microsoft's profits by 0.0000001%.

Re:An idea for teaching Linux in schools

[MikeBabcock]

Assuming the teacher dealing with computers is as educated in computers as an English teacher ought to be in English, this shouldn't be a reality.

I know it is, but that just requires that we explain our requirements to the public school boards that computer-educated teachers work with the computers for grade school students.

10 days is not enough time to learn a new system

[hattig]

Disclaimer: I'm a Mac OS X convert as of two months ago. Before that I was a FreeBSD / Linux person that used Windows for various things (Office, games, etc) but without much enjoyment.

Windows: Tries to get in your way, force you to do things its way, doesn't provide a decent option to de-dumb globally. Office is a nightmare of over-featured bloat that most users will never use. When something goes wrong, it takes ages to fix because whilst you know what is wrong, Windows tries to stop you fixing it.

Linux / FreeBSD: Works well. If you know your stuff, it is easy to fix stuff and set up. I've had issues with upgrades however, after some time it will eventually mess up. Desktop applications are a mishmash of good and bad, or poorly thought out in a single crucial aspect whilst being very powerful.

Mac OS X: Doesn't get in your way. Allows you to actually get work done. Many applications are much more specific in their task (alternatively known as not having as many features, but the features that it does have actually work as you expect them to). Dashboard sucks. I don't think it can be beaten as an end-user operating system, however I can see that it lacks certain things that corporations would like in a desktop computer.

Computers come down to personal preference and what you are used to. If you only know how to do something in Windows and you aren't of a mind to sit down and learn how it is done in Linux or Mac OS X, then you are simply going to state that you need Windows for that task. Despite the frustration that you might have with it in Windows (e.g., tables in Word).

One thing that I like about Mac OS X is that it generally eschews the dozens of small icons in a toolbar that you can't really make out that well and thus never really use. Applications like Pages, Keynote, Mail and so on have a few buttons that bring up or hide inspectors or sidebars. A good design guide means that you'll always know how to do the common tasks (save, open, print) and you don't need a small icon that is hard to hit (Fitt's Law) present.

However it will take you a while to get used to this alternative way of working. Once you are there though, you will know you are more productive and find computing much less of a drag. What is unfortunate is that this goes for migrating from Linux or FreeBSD as well as migrating from Windows.

Also there are issues such as Logitech's APPALLING lack of support for Mac OS X for their webcam range. Canon's DIRE support for their scanners (hurrah for ScanVue). Samsung's AWFUL support for their printers (can't use my 1 year old ML-2250 under Mac OS X, but you can under Windows and Linux, sheesh). Now that the Mac seems to be having a small revival, maybe some companies will spend a little time on supporting it. When you run into something like this, it can be very demoralising, and appear as a negative against the OS.

But is there anything I *must* use Windows for? I can't think of anything in my line of work that couldn't be done in Mac OS X. However I think that there are big gaps in the software range for Linux, such as good finance/accounting/tax applications. Specialist software is another area where Windows can have a stranglehold, and if you use some of that, then you'll have issues.

Big fat stinking lie

[Hosiah]

The site is apparently Slashdotted into oblivion, but this sounds a lot like a similar article I saw a few months ago. OK, maybe there are people who can't get by without Windows. Some people can't surf the web without the AOL blue box, either. Some people cannot walk without crutches. Do they speak for all of us who can walk?

I get by without using Windows at all. So does my entire household. Thousands of other people all over the world get by just fine without using Windows at all. Before there was a Windows, (1985, just twenty short years ago, people, not that long to remember if you try!), EVERYBODY who used a computer AT ALL got along fine without any Windows. Tell me, folks, if Windows is so necessary to the function of a computer, how do you think computers were ever invented before Bill Gates was born? (They were too! Google Charles Babbage!)

Speaking as one who has used Macintosh, Windows, and Linux, we have three machines in this household running Linux 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Collectively together, we program, design graphics, chat in Yahoo, surf the web, play Flash animations, watch Real Player movies, play games, manage office documents and business records, and use modern devices such as laser printers, USB keychain drives, and CD/DVD burners. All on Linux. All the time. And I must say, even I (geekiest of the lot) find little reason to resort to a command line anymore.

I'm just dying to know what arcane task needs *just Windows* to be executed anymore. Unless it's specifically coded to stop dead and balk if it doesn't find Windows running and it won't co-operate with WINE and a feasible alternative program doesn't exist... ever seen the ad for the company that will *custom-make* a special Linux version of any Windows program you come to them with? I've seen it running in the Google ads on this very site!

Games...yes, we had a box of Windows-only games I bought back when I was dumb enough to settle for that. True, they will not run in Linux. Instead, thousands of games are now being made for Linux, which you can DOWNLOAD FOR FREE instead of shelling out $40-60 dollars for them. At that rate, we can play a new game every week, now, instead of playing one game all month until we're sick of it because we feel like fools if we don't get our money's worth out of it. The box of Windows games ended up going 50-cents apiece at a yard sale. The people getting them shrugged and made noises about how they were keeping Windows 95/98 running at home because they weren't about to shell out for the upgrade. So I offer them a home-burned Knoppix CD and just say "Try this when you get sick of the games."

But hey, I'm standing by for the usual howls and screams and flames of indignation I usually get when I say this kind of thing in this kind of thread. How dare I speak the truth! Especially where a paid-M$-shill has an account.

Re:Microsoft in schools

[inphorm]

Actually this is a perfectly normal practice within business. Do you see Coke and Pepsi together in any chain fast food store?? No. McDonalds and Burger King (Hungry Jacks here in Australia) both sell Coke, KFC sells Pepsi.

Not that I'm defending Microsofts Business practices, although I'd have to say that we could all learn something from Bill Gates, the guy is obviously successful in what he does.

- paul

Re:Microsoft in schools

[Anonymous Coward]

Apples and oranges. Coke and Pepsi sell their product to these companies, and in many instances, actually own them as part of their diversified portfolio. At one time Pepsi-cola owned KFC. Don't know if they still do or not.

Microsoft gives schools the software, takes a tax break for it, and then locks the schools down to using only their software, which benefits them financially in the long run.

And after the school has removed all Linux and gotten rid of the techs that used it, MS may NOT give them more software the next time they need it. In fact, they may force them to buy it.

This has happened. MS made a school remove GIMP, then refused grant to cover purchasing Photoshop.

Of course, I'm not saying this isn't brilliant. MS gives the school a disc which costs 27 cents and "bills" the US Gov for list price (through IRS), and creates a whole new generation of MS button monkeys.

I just think it's laughable to call it "charity."

Re:You're stupid

[quanticle]

The average consumer does have a choice. At the very least, they can go with Apple.

In addition, Red Hat and SuSE are both sold at Best Buy, and Linux has gotten enough free press that its no longer a complete unknown. If the consumer wants to, he/she can install an alternative OS on their existing hardware.

Just because you view MS as the bane of the software universe doesn't guarantaee that everyone cares, or that anyone will switch operating systems based upon your opinion. The question isn't "Should everyone use Linux?", but instead is, "Should I use Linux?" And the answer to that question is a variable depending on many other factors, not all of which are controllable by the consumer.

Re:code quality

[wojie]

Ah, the ME example yet again. I have to say, since I run both Fedora and W2k3 clusters at my lab, that both OSes are solid. Never had a w2k3 crash, while Linux nodes pop off like popcorn; bad config I guess.

Let's face it, neiter software licensing concept is perfect, but one provides Gates with a LOT of cash, and the AIDS community with $700 million and India with $300 million in development aid. When was the last time the Linux community got together and made a charitable donation? I can't bash Gates, he's vowed to spend his ENTIRE fortune on charity before he and his wife die; can't get more good natured than that.

If Windows and protectionist practises is what it takes to raise $40 billion for good and useful causes then I say: "SO BE IT. Let's all buy Windows."

Troll

[the_womble]

Either you are trolling, or you have tried soemthing like Red Hat 6 and nothing since. Every single problem and "hurdle" you come up with are things that have been dealt dealt with long ago.

Re:You're stupid

[tarunthegreat2]

Just because the average consumer doesn't want to go through the trouble of informing him/herself about which operating system is better doesn't mean s/he doesn't have a choice. The choice at least of August 2005 is large. You can pic Windows, Mac, Linux or Unix and many others, that I as a lazy consumer am not aware of - whose fault is that? Microsoft's? In a non-internet world, you'd be partly correct, because Microsoft's marketing dollars would yell the loudest. But we have the Net see, the "Great Equalizer". You want a good operating system. Look it up. If people are too lazy to research, they deserve the monopoly they end up with. The same applies to political candidates.

Re:And the other big myth:

[Anonymous Coward]

I read both your posts, and I must say I agree with you.

For the last three years my laptop has been running GNU/Linux, despite most colleagues using Microsoft Windows XP. I don't tell them I run GNU/Linux. They send me documents created using Microsoft Office XP, I read or edit them using OpenOffice, and send them Microsoft Office formatet documents in return. Sometimes reading fails, but surprisingly seldom. I remember getting into problems like that much more often when I was using Microsoft Office 95 and somebody sent me an MS Office 97 or 2000 or XP document.

Another thing that is or was very difficult to find out on Windows was the size of a directory. If you are short on hard drive space, this is very annoying. You had to mark a folder in the standard Windows Explorer file manager, hit ALT+Return, and then it would find out how large that single folder was. Now multiply that with the number of games, "handy utilities" and what not. Sigh...

I'm sure some people will have trouble understanding how something as simple as ALT+Return can be considered "hard", but if I break it down into steps, you may be able to understand:

a. you must want more hard drive space
b. you must consider what to remove that will give the maximum benefit, yet keep as much useful stuff as possible.
c. you must learn that there is something called a file manager and how to start it.
d. you must learn to expand a filetree by hitting a pluss-sign next to a folder.
e. you will discover that folder size is not given.
f. you must find out how to get the folder size. There are two ways.
g. you must hit delete, and be told that removing this program may affect your system state.

Actually point g. is interesting. Windows will warn you, GNU/Linux will not warn you, yet none of them does the obvious - start a deinstallation program.

If you really want a laugh, just head over to http://www.annoyances.org/. Yes, there are stupid problems for GNU/Linux users, but this site shows that this is true for Microsoft Windows users.

Re:You're stupid

[Fred_A]

Because of course, the 70 or 80% of users who don't even have the faintest idea of what an operating system is are going to compare the respective merits of Unix and Windows ("hmmm, I wonder which has the best scheduler...")

That's not the way it works, sorry. People will maybe shop around when they buy a car (and not just get what their brother in law tells them to or whatever) but when it gets to computers, unless they have someone knowledgeable around, they'll go with whatever the store tells them.

Re:I did it too...

[pe1chl]

When I started with Linux, Windows did not even exist as an operating system (there was a GUI running on top of DOS that was called Windows as well).
Before Linux, I used Unix. I was very pleased that I finally could run a decent OS on my home system. Before that, the alternative was MS-DOS.

When Windows appeared as an OS (first Windows 95, later NT) I found myself in the same situation as you are now. With Linux, I could do anything, to use Windows beyond "install it and click on some things" I needed to read a lot. And there was not even sourcecode to read, only "user manuals" that often spent more than 60% of content on basic principles like how to insert a floppy disk.

So indeed, it is not really a difference between Linux and Windows, just a difference between what you know and what is new.

Eh?

[goldcd]

They are offering the school a choice - not forcing it upon them. Just because MS offer something perceived as more valuable than what the Open Source can isn't a reason to cry foul.
If you care so much about it, then do something.
The school's job is to prepare children for work (oh and all that social guff as well). The harsh reality is that for the vast number of pupils who will never work in IT, experience with MS products will provide them a better skillset - you try explaining on your CV how you can't use windows, have no idea what office looks like - but can compile your own kernel.
Linux is out there, it's free and if anybody has an interest in it, they can pick it up and play with it themselves.

Re:Microsoft in schools

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that I'm defending Microsofts Business practices, although I'd have to say that we could all learn something from Bill Gates, the guy is obviously successful in what he does.

No, clown, we can not all learn something from Bill Gates. That is precisely the point.

There is this myth that you should emulate success, but if even a few of us emulated this cancer, it would be like a shark feeding frenzy. It is not safe for the weak to have this guy OR ANY LIKE HIM around.

The Gates formula for success, like that of J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, and others, is to find a new, poorly understood, not yet regulated niche, and do stuff that will later be deemed illegal to secure a tax on a basic service, one that he has not innovated in, one that he has not contributed anything substantial to.

Monopolies are inherently destructive and must be regulated for the good of society or there will be consequences. Gates is actually responsible for the decline of the US software industry, because he has shown that the best way to make money is NOT to innovate. This has hurt the most creative software developers. The Gates strategy doesn't play as well in countries like China, and now we don't have any companies capable of competing there on merit, because they've been starved by monopoly power in the US.

I once read that Warren Buffet praised Bill Gates for securing a "tax" on "turning on your computer." He said that he thought Gates's next idea, securing a tax for "hooking your computer to the Internet" was a great idea, similar to Coke and Pepsi securing a tax for the consumption of water. He went on to say that the really compelling ideas involve securing a tax on things like power and communications and entertainment, things people just have to have.

When I hear clowns say that they admire Gates or would like to be like him, I try to remember that they really just mean that they would like to have a monstrous pile of money to call their own. Hopefully, not many are twisted enough to really want to tax "turn on your computer" or "turning on your tv."