Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Pushes Windows To Battle Linux In Africa
ThousandStars writes "According to the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft has been making a concerted effort to promote Windows in Africa, pushing Windows over Linux in very poor countries that haven't been locked into a single operating system. From the article: 'To that end, it has established a presence in 13 countries, donated Windows for thousands of school computers, and funded programs for entrepreneurs and the young. It also has used aggressive business tactics, some aimed at its biggest threat in the region: Linux ...'"
The first hit is always free.
It's a new tactic to put those who RTFA on the same playing field as those who don't. Try it on the next political article. I think you'll enjoy the facts you assume more than what's actually written.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
More importantly, it's slashdot.
Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
And so MS is doing just like the gas companies: make the world addict to their product, brignin' the price VERY high, and when everybody is thinking about alternatives, lower the price or, in the case of MS, paying people to use the product.
WSJ get it wrong again:
Wrong. Linux is not a Windows alternative. Windows is a poor imitation of GNU/Linux.
Sell your MS licenses and most of the other tech on ebay. then use that money to buy books and pay for teachers.
It's far more important to teach basics like math, reading, basic science, hygiene, and life skills, than how to move and click a mouse.
What is it with people thinking that what the 3rd world needs are computers? What they need is clean water, learn better agriculture, and to get an education that will allow them to live a better life.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Linux is like the electric car, not a chance and only in a few places..
Well in this case, Africa might be just one of those places. I mean ,what is MS going to do? Give away Windows licenses for free, and throw in Vista-capable PC's as well? (sorry, didn't read the TFA).
Another thing Linux has going here, is that it is -relatively- easy to produce local versions. I mean, does there even exist Windows XP or Vista in Swahili? If not, that may be just what Linux needs to get picked over Windows (or other candidates). And let's not forget the educational aspect: having a system where you can see how it works, how it's put together & how to adapt it to your own requirements, is great when you're in a place where the IT industry is often just starting.
Nobody wants to use Windows. It just comes "free" with the computer, just like MS-DOS before it.
The 90s? You mean back when Windows literally was just an MS-DOS shell?
It's almost the "teens" here. It's time to update your FUD.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Steve Ballmer's got balls because he's got monopoly money to spend and he knows exactly what Ubuntu is and where it came from. He also knows that when that monopoly money runs out, they are in deep Elephant dung because their products have always stood on emaciated legs.
He also knows he's got more money than Mark Shuttleworth.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
most Linux/open source advocates do it for the rebellion not because they have a better product to promote.
No, most OSS advocates do it because the software is THEIRS; by being part of the community that develops it they are personally involved with the software, and are justifiably proud of it. "Look what we built"
What I don't understand is why Microsoft apologists like you bother. You didn't help build Windows, MS has no loyalty to you; evidence shows they do not even LIKE you. They only want you to stay on the treadmill. And yet still you sing their praises. "Look what I paid for". Doesn't make any sense.
So Microsoft aren't religious OS fanatics because they're doing it for a long term profit? Open your eyes.
We had a guest speaker here at my university just last week talk about this. He's setting up wireless mesh networks in rural Zambia. It's essentially the only communication system they have. Cell phones cost 66 cents/min and the locals make $1/day..
Anyway, they have very limited internet access, with a few hundred machines behind a 128 kbps link. They pay $1100/month for it. No way in hell are they gonna keep downloading all the patches needed on Windows. As such, a Windows machine is only useful for about two months (tops) before the worms eat it.
boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse
I tried installing redhat a few times back in the 90s and after banging my head a few times to actually get it working I thought to myself "Oh. Sweet. Free Civ and data management I DONT NEED."
I tried installing Windows a few times back in the 90s, and after banging my head around the TCP/IP stack to actually get it working I thought to myself "Oh. Sweet. Viruses and an annoying paperclip I DONT NEED." It may surprise you to learn that computers have advanced over the last two decades.
And then Linux users go out of their way to do things like make World of Warcraft work on their PC. Look buddy. Ya great you got it working but you are very knowledgeable in Linux, which has a steep learning curve. And most users dont want to spend 2 weeks getting their drivers to work just right to play a game.
The thing is, it only took that one guy 2 weeks to get WoW working, and now hundreds of Linux users get it working with far less effort. Open source beats proprietary not because it's easier to make it work, but because only one person has to put in the effort for everyone else to benefit.
After all if your open source was a decent product, youd be able to SELL IT
People don't sell Linux, not because nobody is willing to pay for it (people pay millions for Unix), but because people don't _have_ to pay for it. Would you pay for a car, even a good one, if you could get it for free from a different dealership?
http://www.mhall119.com