Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Tony 'Say No to Windows' Bove
An anonymous reader writes "XYZ has an interview with Tony Bove, author of the upcoming book, "Just Say No to Microsoft". From the article: 'With this book Bove intends to help readers rid Microsoft from their life- this is easier said that done, but it is certainly possible. The book goes on to list alternatives to the Microsoft programs on which people have become dependent and probably think they cannot give up.'"
From experience, any thing more than 11 steps is not worth it!
..... Should be on the lookout for flying chairs.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
The Army reading list
MS and Windows is not all Bad. Not to mention how much software is avaialable for special industry only on windows not linux or macs.
Most of us can't, and don't really want to "just say no". For example I have clients that are lawyers and doctors that are very happy with their windows software.
Stuff that isn't available in linux. The just say no or linux only group always propose stuff for you to get by without ms, but some of us need to do more then use word and excel, or don't want some custom jerry rigged solution.
...a replacement for Microsoft Exchange. His only mention is how "...Microsoft designs its software products -- especially Outlook and Exchange -- to lock people into using it...". Until a good replacement is found for Exchange you will have a hard time prying it from the cold, dead hands of thousands of businesses worldwide...
(And I work in a shop where most of us do dev work on linux boxes... but we all have windows partitions for Exchange. So damn handy for scheduling meetings, knowing who is in and who is out of town...)
-everphilski-
I personally switched to Mac for my personal platform in '03. I love it, it's great, etc, etc, etc. But I still use Windows at work. And I think it's probably the best solution given the alternatives. It just seems that there are so many services that Microsoft provides that simply don't exist (in an easy to use manner any way) on other platforms. Things like Sharepoint, MS Project come to mind, but we also use countless programs that simply aren't available for other platforms. I understand that other platforms ARE possible for use, but is it really worth it? Anyone out there using another platform that never finds themself asking, "man, if I only had Windows?"
Mark A. McBride -- OmniNerd.com
I dont believe its about riding of Microsoft, I believe its about giving a fair chance for alternatives. Only with competition will the end user benefit. If Microsoft isnt the one that everyone is supposed to hate it would have been another company. I am not a fan of Microsoft either as I do NOT run any windows software at home, but it was because of Microsoft's so called "crappy software" that pushed the open source community to create these great alternatives such as openoffice.org, linux etc ...
GL HF!
1) It assumes there's a good reason for people to abandon MS. Security is close, but as we've seen with recent holes in Firefox/Mozilla, as other tools get popular, their security will come under attack, too. The price, perhaps, but 'free' versions of anything lack meaningful support, which kills it for a significant number of end users. Therefore, if there were a convincing reason for everyone to change (other than personal bias), this would be much more meaningful.
2) It assumes that it's the MS programs holding people back, when many desktops are tied because of third party software. For example, in my every-day job, I support dozens of workstations with Macromedia and Adobe software installed - neither of these run natively under Linux, and they run horribly under emulation. Yes, you can find replacement photo editors, but not really replacement video editors that are on par with After Effects, or replacements for Flash that have 95%+ installation base.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
Which will make being enslaved in the corporate underground salt mines that much more pleasant.
The baby's fine -- please stop sending business cards.
I can understand if you prefer Linux to Windows or don't like Word or something (I **hate** Powerpoint), but the whole not using any Microsoft products for the sake of feeling alternative/rebellious is just really immature and annoying. Microsoft makes a lot of good software.
Okay, I've been using Macs since the 80s (yes, you read correctly) and have been exclusively on Windows from between 1994 - 2004 (I'm a J2EE engineer). Last year, I belatetly hopped onto the OS X bandwagon and the only thing that keeps my Windows boxes at home running are dozens of apps that I have accumulated in the last decade. I know that I could replace most of my apps with Mac apps, but sometimes they don't support my workflow or I cannot interchange. With that said however (and with this not supposed to be turning emotional ;-) I must concede that my Windows days are limited. It has already started with iPods, Cinema displays, etc.. and my next system for sure will be an G5 or G6 (whenever it'll be released) - I happen to know Unix very well, so OS X simply rules for me. Finally, with the video iPod a new era in online video is being spearheaded (see yesterday's /. thread on the topic) and Quicktime is going to be the future. That will allow me to distribute my little shorts to millions of iPods all over the world - something Windows is lightyears away from doing. Finally, on the development front - I'm already 1/2 the time developing on a G4 and hopefully Windows is going to quietly go away in the remainder of this decade.
just use the right codecs:r pmfind.net/linux/RPM/sourceforge/m/mp/mplayer-tru/ mplayer-codecs-essential-20040704-1.i386.html+qtml Client.dll+mplayer&hl=en
http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:3aCwKM2vl0oJ:
I really wish that the Linux community wouldn't sink down to the level that Microsoft has reached. Releasing subjective papers on what works and what doesn't will not do anything for people except cause political arguments. Since most TCO and benchmark data is skewed one way or another, releasing whitepapers and books becomes irrelevant. Most budget managers and IT managers realize this. The people in charge (given that they know what they are doing) researches data from other companies. They ask questions like it worked for Company A so could it work for us? They do not look at opinions and unreliable sources. IMHO, this is one reason why Linux has not made it to the desktop - many companies are scared to move their user base over to a radically different interface. Not many companies have made the move, so everyone else is scared to jump first. They are not scared to move their servers over, since only a small handful of people interface with it - provided the services retain a high level of reliability.
Victory shall be mine!
to make our lives easier? I mean Linux has come around to make it easier for user to work to an extent (I still don't see anything as friendly to computer newbies on the linux systems as windows, but it is getting closer and closer), but to go 100 percent away from Microsoft is almost unrealistic for most people. Remember most people don't even know that you can network iTunes for playback with out buying the songs. Nor do they know what a MKV is, what the different of an OGM and XVID is, or what TCP/IP settings are needed to use a VPN (the last one puzzled me for a couple days.. turned out I was given the wrong IP... from a tech guy)
Microsoft might be a monolpolistic company but for many people it makes their lives easier. I'd love it if they didn't have the same business practices as they currently do but let's not make our lives more inconvient.
This interview sounds like another ranting guy. But yes I don't support Microsoft wholy (I got my Windows heavily discounted from school, I don't use Microsoft Office at home (At work we get it through Compaq, so it's already paid for) but going insanely against them will not help save anyone. Apple would love to step up and set themselves up as the next Microsoft. I'm sure their a little piss with what Microsoft did (with grabbing Apple's own Windows style technology, that they in turn took from Xerox who took it from their programmer who created it), and if they could trade places they would love to be the next giant, and with their love of "Apple approved" hardware, I'm sure could find some ways to close off competition. (remember if Apple was in charge, ATI and NVIDIA wouldn't compete like they do now, each trying to make radical strives, nor would there be any other sound cards except for the one or two companies apple approves of)
Besides all his problems with Microsoft seem to stem from either hatred, or the fact that people who use Windows are stupid. (claiming never to get a virus on a mac isn't a small miracle, I never get virii on PCs... Why? Because I do the same shit he does. I have a anti virus program that has been completely dorment since installation, except when I actually test it, and it performs perfectly then)
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see why this is "news", when a guy writes a book or something about this stuff, let's hear info about book, not his ramblings..
And my one quote from him?
But if there is a monopoly, let's get out the rocket launchers and take our shots, please!
advocating wholesale violence... tsk tsk.
The damn thing got modded +5 Funny. Some people just refuse to believe that Microsoft makes good products I guess.
Eliminating Microsoft is a good way of increasing your computer costs.
It might be hard to see from the end user perspective, but it's crystal clear from a developer perspective. But don't take my word for it, take Joel's:
If someone's going to do a new application, it's much more likely to be a Windows application. If someone's going to offer technical support services, they're much more likely to focus on Windows support. If someone's going to make hardware, they're much more likely to focus on getting Windows supported first.
This all means if you're not using Windows, you're going to pay for it with time or money.
(Read the whole article at http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog00000000 51.html)
They act like drug dealers. They let people copy their software "illegally" for years until it became almost ubiquitous. Then they cracked down after everyone was already "addicted" to make huge profits.
Developers: We can use your help.
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=853
Enjoy
Microsoft Project is the most widely used project management software that corporations use, and it's only available for one platform: Microsoft Windows. Not OSX, Not Linux, Not BSD, Not Sun, Not Palm, Not Amiga, etc. This means that anybody who manages work in a company *has* to use Windows. And yes, I know that Microsoft Project actually sucks for complex project management, and that there are better Project Management packages out there, but most of them only work for Windows also and they don't have the base or support that Microsoft has. Until that lock is broken, its going to be very hard for companies to switch.
Tristan Yates
It is fair game to complain about the costs of Windows, Office and other MS products because that leads to a costs vs benefits analysis of whether it is a better value vs the time and effort spent by the users and the administration costs than other solutions like Linux and OpenOffice. It is fair game to complain about the security issues with Microsoft's products because they have admitted as much that there are issues there and regularly release patches and advisories to address them and are making the ability to run as a non-administrator level user a requirement of software written for Vista to further address it. It is fair game to quantitatively compare the performance of Microsoft's solutions versus other vendor's solutions because, as long as the setup is fair and impartial, numbers don't lie and are a useful tool for comparison of applicability and value of a solution to your needs and hardware. It is fair game to talk of particular bugs and issues you have with Microsoft's products because they have a responsibility to support their products such that they work as advertised. It is even fair game to argue subjective points like ease of use and ease of administration of Microsoft's solutions versus that of their competitors because these are things that people from desktop users to system administrators use every day as an integral part of their jobs and have some responsibility for making things as easy and productive as possible for all involved in the enterprise.
However, what is not fair game is this view of Microsoft as evil and their solutions are never to be considered and you need to "Say No To Windows." Beware those who will tell you that Microsoft is evil, that it's solutions are never better suited to your situation and who will say things about the stability and performance of the OS that fly in the face of the millions who use it without such issues day in and day out to get their work done. There are people believe in Linux and opensource almost as a religion and suffer from the logical fallacy that, if Linux is as better in every way as they believe it to be, Microsoft can only be maintaining it's dominance in marketshare by some sort of evil trickery and vendor lock-in. You are not going to get the answers you need from these sorts of individuals - the corporate solutions will never get any consideration no matter how easy to use, easy to administer, fast, stable and secure that they get. I am still waiting to see a truly fair and objective comparison on Slashdot that takes all these things into account for various situations. That is an article I'd read and the book I'd buy...
Most of us can't, and don't really want to "just say no"
:(
Hmm... that "just say no" got a weird idea in my head, please forgive me if it's too silly.
*Ring!*
-Hello?
- Good morning! *big smile* We've come to share the Word of GNU, and his prophet St. Ignutius.
- Ah, you're the Linux' Witnesses, right? No, thanks.
- But, you don't understand, we've come to save your soul!
- That's nonsense, I've been running Windows and nothing bad has happened to me!
- Ah, but haven't you had to deal with your computer running slow due to viruses? It's the prophecy fulfilled!
- I said NO THANKS!
- But Windows is the Whore of Redmond!
- ARGH!!!! GET OUT OF MY HOUSE!!!
- *gasp* THE DEVIL'S SPAWN! RUN!!!
(Inside the house...)
- Who was it, hon?
- BAH, Some Linux zealots.
(Outside the house, there's a mailbox, and the inscription reads: S. Ballmer and Family)
There isn't a "drop-in" replacement for exchange because the protocols are binary and not documented.
If you will be a little less lazy, there are Outlook plugins for both Kolab and OpenExchange that will let your users use the same client while you replace the server, they should not notice anything different at all.
But there is no way you are ever going to just replace the server and do nothing else. It is impossible - that is why the Outlook/Exchange combo is so horrible, it is not compatible with anything.
I dunno, I seem to be doing pretty well running very popular karaoke shows on weeknights and weekends in a college town using an all-digital system entirely based on free software running on a notebook.
64-bit Ubuntu Linux starts things off, Enlightenment manages (very effectively) the desktop I run during the shows (part of the screen is shown on a big-screen TV so folks know who's singing and who's next; Firefox (!) does that display work), XMMS does a beautiful job (moving to amaroK for this purpose though; it's even nicer) playing both filler and karaoke music, crossfading smoothly between tracks and managing all the audio bits for me, SingIt runs the CDG karaoke lyrics, and my own home-grown Python code manages the singer rotations for me. Sure seems like more than Word and Excel to me.
Sure, I'm a "geek" and I know what I'm doing. No need for Windows on this machine.
Essentially out of the blue, two weeks ago my mother called and asked me if I could bring a Linux Live CD by next time I visit. She's sick of how slow her machine's getting. She's sick of constant root-level vulnerabilities being discovered and needing patching on her workstation. She knows all about not running spyware, about keeping the antivirus software updated, etc., but otherwise she's a polar opposite from me — she doesn't program, she just uses her computer for assorted "computery" tasks.
She's what you'd call a member of "the masses," and even she's ready to switch. It's not a question of "getting by" without Microsoft's software. It's a matter of people saying "holy shit this thing is so much faster / more stable / more useful without that Windows crap on it!" and realizing they've been fooled for years. I don't "get by" without Microsoft; I prosper without them.
And as an aside, plenty of specialized industrial software is still developed for and supported on platforms other than Windows. Show me a heart/vitals monitor in a hospital that runs anything from Microsoft on it. Visit HP's hardware testing labs and witness the Unix-driven measurement and control systems.
Read my stuff.
There's nothing about being a doctor or lawyer that intrinsically requires a MS operating system or software.
You're right to a point. Being a doctor or lawyer does not mean you need MS software.
But if you want to use one of the many of industry-specific, specialized software libraries, you might just have to run Windows.
Before I get flamed on this, I just wanna point out that there is a big difference between being an advocate and being a fanatic against Microsoft. Now you want to tell people not to use MS because the corporation is a pig... ok fine. I can agree that Windows is a poor operating system because of all the patches and the fact that it is based off of DOS, instead of a rock solid, open solution like *nix. That said, do you really expect your average user that "Just uses MS Word to edit lists, or if the list has two colums, use MS Excel" to have any clue about using Linux? Granted that in recent months the Linux world has gotten mush easier to handle, for example Ubuntu 5.10 installs like a dream, with 3D acceleration supported out of the box! But to your average user in general, having config scripts everywhere is just not reasonable. Linux is not ready for the masses. Sorry. Not yet anyway. On the other hand you have Mac OS X, which IMO is a much more viable, and even preferred solution. "It just works" is so true. When you have the prettiest looking user interface of all time, and you build your own hardware (don't have to worry about drivers) and write your own software to work on it, not to mention a rock solid *nix base that's easy to use, then you have the perfect computing solution. Everybody is capable of running a Mac, and it has the perfect mix of *nix to make the geeks happy, and eye candy and functionallity to make anyone happy. OS X is your winner.