Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Feared Mac Vs. Vista In '05
CWmike writes "Gregg Keizer sifted through many threads of e-mails released under the 'Vista Capable' lawsuit to dig up this jewel...More than a year before Windows Vista's release — and long before Apple started poking fun at the OS — Microsoft officials were already worried about comparisons between Mac OS X and Vista. An e-mail thread from October 2005 showed that an article in the Wall Street Journal by Walt Mossberg grabbed the attention of managers at Microsoft. In a column headlined What PC to Buy If You Are Planning On a Vista Upgrade, Mossberg alarmed one Windows manager who forwarded a bit from the column.... 'You won't have to worry about Vista if you buy one of Apple Computer's Macintosh computers, which don't run Windows,' Mossberg had written. 'Every mainstream consumer doing typical tasks should consider the Mac. Its operating system, called Tiger, is better and more secure than Windows XP, and already contains most of the key features promised for Vista.' Warrier added a comment of his own: 'A premium experience as defined by Walt = Apple. This is why we need to address [the column].'"
What Microsoft should really have considered was why, even before they released it, customers were ready to say NO to Vista.
It's been a huge albatross around their neck. It's Windows ME 2.0, has gotten the same response (and even MS eventually had to list Windows ME as "Do Not Use") and yet the consumer is getting fucked by MS's trying to kill off XP and force them to install the Vista Virus instead.
The "Aero" interface is a standing joke; the supposed "security" of Vista is laughable compared to simply keeping XP properly updated and behind a NAT at home; and the performance hit it takes to run is incredible. Vista is half as fast as XP on the same hardware, that's reason enough not to use it even before all the other crap and nonsense.
Uh... this is news? Any good businessman always watches the competition and tries to estimate how many customers might switchover. That's not "fear". That's just good old commonsense.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
Which is just plain wrong. Consumers don't upgrade operating systems. They use the one that came with the box until they need a new box. Techno-nerds and enterprises upgrade operating syatems. In the case of Vista, enterprises have stayed away in droves.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I'm sure many will remember the comparisons of the screen shots and betas for Vista vs. OS X. It was remarkable how much Vista looked like OS X. In both feature (bloat) and GUI. Microsoft is as much, if not more, to blame for the feature comparison. Redmond continued to flaunt using Cupertino as their proxy R&D. When Microsoft finally shipped the goods, the comparisons it seems, were only skin deep.
With a BSD backend, a controlled hardware architecture and the ability to run tools from all platforms via MacPorts or VMWare or Wine, Mac has shown it is not only a better user experience in th long run but a far lower maintenance computer. There are fewer problems due to the maintained hardware architecture by Apple and no viruses to speak of due to sandboxing and BSD's UNIX background.
It does hav bugs like any OS which luckily they are fairly quick to address, and they have a much faster turn around for new versions of the OS (one every year versus every 3-5 years for Windows).
Would I prefer it to be more open like Linux? Oh hell yes especially now that they are adopting HDCP and other DRM related technologies. I suspect however that the Vista fiasco and Netbooks have caused enough people to consider a switch to Linux and with Apple embracing OpenGL for game development on iPhone and iTouch, it will only be a matter of time before it is on equal footing as a game platform and openGL is equally considered thus giving Linux a footup as well; afterall, Blizzard already has admitted to having a Linux Warcraft client internally that they haven't released.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Microsoft has a lot to worry about. When it has come to the big technology shifts, DOS and later Windows have always been trailing-edge technology.
I'm getting really annoyed at the Mac commercials that constantly slam PC's.
I'm the kind of person who hates it when politicians run smear campaigns and TV ads slandering the opposition, and for Apple to be doing this for their TV ads seems unprofessional and childish.
If you want to highlight your product, great! Do so, and let the product speak for itself. People who are so fed up with Microsoft will see a commercial highlighting the Mac's features, and they will generally go research it. I have been put off by the commercials, and any interest I genuinely had in getting a Mac was completely destroyed.
This is old news and obvious FUD. Mac OS X has its place for graphic design people among others. Nothing wrong with that. Vista's failure is not the operating system itself but more with the system requirements and issues that should have been corrected before release. To compare Vista of then to Vista now is completely different. Vista 64 bit is very stable and with 4 gigs of ram runs very well. The old saying still applies as it does in the Mac world. If your system is more than 1 or 2 years old consider purchasing a new system or build a new one yourself and do the research. I did research before building my system and I have nothing but praise for the operating system. It took some time to get used to the new features but given a real use trial I wouldn't go back to XP. And for the flames that will inevitably follow this post. I also use and recommend Ubuntu Linux as well. Ubuntu has been by far the best experience using a computer outside of the M$ realm that I have had thus far and I have tried many Linux flavors. I just felt the need to set the record straight that not everyone who reads comments and stories on /. are M$ haters or someone who had a bad experience with Vista and now tells anyone who uses it they are stupid (idiots).
So working at a University, I'd like to say that we have a lot of people throwing a lot of money at Mac hardware, only to turn around and install Bootcamp or Parallels so they can run the science software needed to do their work and research. And they use federal grants to do this. I'm thinking there should be an oversight committee to determine if a Mac is a necessary item (it almost never is) or if Linux or Windows will do the job more efficiently (they usually do).
$12,000 dual quad core Mac that we had to spend two months rewriting code to compile that worked fine on an old Linux cluster. The professor could have gotten a lot more parallel processing power if he'd gone with a newer cluster rather than a single, decked out Mac.
I would have gotten hooked Linux if it wasn't for OS X. Terminal.app sitting in the Utilities folder is like a drug pusher. First it starts out with a little 'ls' and 'mv'. Then you learn to SSH and X11 forward. Then come the shell scripts and built in gcc.
Oh god, and then you discover screen and it's all over. You're hooked.
I'm now a CLI junkie. I get my fix from my debian rtorrent machine that gives me my movies and now I'm building a home automation center from NSLU2 and 1-Wire. My MacBook Pro starts Terminal.app on start.
Parents keep your kids away from Apple, they could be come CLI Junkies. Vista is the one true path to salvation.
Sure MS may have been worried about OS X in 2005, but the problem runs much deeper now. Let's take a look back:
In 2005, Mac OS X was available and rating "better" as a desktop environment in many places, but in order to "upgrade" to OS X, it required purchase of all new hardware.
by 2008, Mac had adopted Intel x86-based processors and expanded support into the realm formerly controlled only by PC. While technically you still need to upgrade to Mac hardware according to the Mac OS X EULA, the validity of that claim is currently being questioned. Additionally Ubuntu and other Linux distros that make setup easy and are very user-friendly have started spawning and are also beginning to take a significant chunk out of MS's market share.
There may have been signs of things to come in 2005, but thinks look even more bleak for MS now unless they can get things together with Vista or at least Windows 7.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
"Better ingredients. Better OS. Papa Steve's."
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
Russell went on to defend Vista, specifically its ability to "run on a very wide-ranging set of systems from the minimally capable to the incredibly capable," he said. "Apple doesn't do that."
Riiiiight. Apple was able to slim down OS X to run on an ARM smartphone, can MS do the same with Vista ? Oh yeah that's right, they had to extend the life of XP just for the netbook market, cause there's no way Vista could run on that hardware, and they were afraid of Linux taking over.
I can't see how this guy could think that, did he not ever use Vista ?
"A premium experience as defined by Walt = Apple. This is why we need to address [the column]."
That suggests that when Microsoft received reports of a competitor offering a superior product that executives regarded the reports themselves as the problem and not Microsoft's deficient offerings; Warrier writes of addressing Mossberg's column, not of addressing the problems with Microsoft's planning and development processes which led them to an inferior market position.
Blaming someone outside the organization is smart corporate politics because it does not make enemies inside your own organization who might retaliate against you. But then maybe that is the problem with Microsoft management, that it is full of shrewd corporate ladder-climbing types instead of inspired artists and engineers.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
I think that's true of the Mac hardware, but I'll take Ubuntu over any recent Mac OS. I'd say the same thing of the iPhone - my T-Mobile G1 hardware sucks in comparison, but the Android OS is a fine competitor.
I think Dell loves to compare their products to Macs. Same features, at half the price.
Beer is proof that God loves us, and wants us to be happy.
CLITerminal.app Junkies.
So, Monsieur Trollaxor, you're saying they could become clit junkies?
=Smidge=
Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
Microsoft didn't sell the reason people needed Vista. They polished a dashboard up with some glassy looking graphics and slapped a pricetag on it. That's not relevant to 99% of users. Most people use their computers for the internet, or for writing letters. Could Vista do anything like that better than XP? No. And there's your answer.
If Microsoft wanted to sell Vista, they should have examined what the main concerns are of people and acted on them. Most people don't care about what is happening behind the scenes... that's what nerds are for. Most people care about what the computers can do for them.
Now if they wanted to sell Vista, they should have got Jerry Seinfeld to do the Vista commercials from the beginning, and keep Bill Gates out of them. Seinfeld would simply sell the reason people need to upgrade to Vista which is for security and for expanded multi-media capability.
Jerry could have also addressed most of the user objections to Vista openly and with a dash of dry comedy that people tend to admire in the comedian.
But they chose to do a faceless monolithic kind of ad campaign, to combat Apple's ads but that actually made people think about how good Apple is compared to windows which was the kicker-backfire!!!! OMG yes.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Microsoft might be looking for a bailout right after Congress gets through with Detroit? Makes sense if you think about it. Both Microsoft and Detroit have (or should have known) for many, many years what was wrong with their products. Detroit ignored the fuel crises of the 70's and Microsoft ignored the instability and increasing difficulty users had keeping their systems stable. Other similarities exist between Detroit and Redmond, in that both seem unable to properly address the known issues in their product offerings. Vista puts a flashier face (lipstick on a pig - too soon?) on a flawed O/S and GM gives us a freakin' hybrid Tahoe? Yeah, and the people who made those craptastic decisions receive HUGE financial compensation and really don't give a rat's behind what you and I think. Don't worry though. I'm being a tad bit melodramatic. Microsoft, (like GM at one time...) has more money than God and is, in the current venacular...too large to fail. Enjoy.
This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway This is the road to hell
Why does Microsoft, and apparently Apple, believe what we've been waiting for is more features? I don't know a single consumer who is dissatisfied with their box because it lacks this or that feature. The consumers I know who are unhappy are unhappy with the user experience: box does something unexpected, unexplained, mysterious, unintended, or just plain wrong. So I don't understand the features war. I would think the vast majority of us aren't looking for the box to do something new and wonderful, but to stop doing things that are weird and obstructive.
Apple's hardware restriction helps them code for a positive user experience. It would get really bloated if it had to "just work" with every piece of hardware out there. I know *nix flavors work with many pieces of crap, but you have to be savvy to get it going. I totally agree with the Android prediction. Also, i have a Dell running OS X... albeit poorly.
The ninties called and they want their thinking back.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
I will kill this Mossberg for you for ten million of your American dollars and a lifetime license for Windows XP.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
In the case of Vista, enterprises have stayed away in droves.
Which is a point I've been making for months to pro Vista people who don't understand why this is such a disaster and keep claiming "Vista isn't that bad." What they don't understand is that for the business market, Vista is extraordinarily bad!! That's extraordinarily bad for Microsoft, and which is their main source of income. Business are still buying XP licenses for new machines, but they aren't upgrading current machines to Vista because it's an admin nightmare and companies have lost complete trust in Vista.
Microsoft has then been trying to fix the problem by putting out odd consumer ads? The problem isn't primarily with consumers, which is why their ad campaign is broken, too.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
It isn't already bloated? Have you seen the size of the printer driver install set that's installed by default? Yeesh.
Look, I know this is Slashdot and all, but honestly I'm starting to get microsoft-vista-embarassing-email-story fatigue. Ever since the Vista class-action exposed all of these internal Microsoft emails, people have been cherry-picking emails and making them into full-blown stories for months it seems.
I'm no Microsoft apologist, it's just that it's starting to get old. Yes, we know Vista sucks. We know Microsoft felt the same way. We get it!! Please stop beating us over the head with it already.
If Apple would simply allow their OS to run on generic PCs, Microsoft would have a true competitor.
If Apple would allow their OS to run on generic PCs, they would fall into a support hell.
That's true and I wish it installed zero by default. There presence actually confuses my users and I usually have other drivers that I prefer them to use anyway.
I agree, though Apple naturally dropped the opportunity to really take on Microsoft. If Apple would simply allow their OS to run on generic PCs, Microsoft would have a true competitor.
This old canard again?
Nobody makes Big Money on desktop operating systems. Microsoft uses theirs to leverage sales of MS-Office and their enterprise solutions.
Apple uses theirs to sell hardware.
The only people who get worked up about the "OS wars" are fanboys. Everybody at Apple and Microsoft is too busy making money to care.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Apple makes their money as a hardware vendor. People would just pirate the OS, and everyone else would rather just run Windows on their PCs and have all their apps. Apple would fade away if you were running the company.
Oh, and the iPhone isn't going anywhere. THAT'S how Apple is taking on Microsoft--invading the mobile market where PCs are inevitably headed. Their laptop sales go up every year, and they have portable media and cell phones.
You haven't seen some viruses. I seem to remember, back in the dark ages of floppies, long before the internet, when 1.44 MB was all the space on a floppy and viruses were supposed to go unnoticed on one so they could spread, someone had written a 100K virus in Clipper. Or one of the similar DBase2-like databases. In an age of 512 _byte_ viruses, or where even complex and sophisticated ones were measured in single digit kilobytes, that was fucking huge. It's akin to having a 100 MB virus nowadays. In fact, it's akin to nowadays writing a virus in Java and distributing it together with a JDK.
So in all fairness, you can't generalize like that. Just because Vista is the most extreme case of a bloated and inefficient virus, doesn't mean there weren't other viruses that were only slightly less bloated and inefficient before ;)
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
s/there/their/ i am an idiot
mplayer -ontop -cache 102400 $drag and drop video here from NFS share$
Only way to watch videos in bed/couch. Never have to worry about Firefox or what ever being in front of the video. Caches enough to watch the movie without hiccups.
Although aalib gives new meaning to ASCII Porn.
I couldn't have said it better myself. We just want the 30-second lockups, hard disk thrashing and other unexplained delays to go away and let us do our work. Unfortunately, Vista exacerbates all those problems instead of fixing them.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
If Apple would simply allow their OS to run on generic PCs, Microsoft would have a true competitor.
People say this, but Apple would have to take on a lot of expense to support generic hardware. They'd have to massively upgrade their test procedures, spend huge amounts of development time on drivers, hire reams of new tech support... unless their market share spiked, there is no way that they could justify the expense. Either that or the "generic" OS would cost a lot more than it does today.
Apple is perfectly happy with their niche of selling only high-margin products. Dell has margins of under 5%, Apple is over 14%. MS is 29%, for comparison. Of course, Apple could never get to that high of a number since MS is only able to price gouge due to their monopoly. It would be kind of fun to see how cheap Windows got if Apple entered the marketplace. We're already seeing it in sub-notebooks where the monopoly was destroyed.
As a bonus, Apple doesn't get called "unstable" every time the crappy $300 Dell hardware flakes out.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
You might as well sell your sole to Richard Stall..erm Satan!!/p>
Why would Satan, or Stallman for that matter, do with one of his shoes??
It's not so stupid when you consider both Apple and Google's cash on-hand. Apple has $25bn in the bank, Google: $14.5bn.
Zing!
Mac: Hi, I'm a Mac
Bill Gates: And I'm a PC
Mac: WHOA, Bill Gates! What are you doing on a Mac commercial?
Bill: To remind people that Microsoft is more than Windows. We've been writing software for the Mac since before there was a Mac. The same Office suite that PC's use is available to Mac Users
Mac: Actually, Bill, it's better.
Bill: [blushes] Thanks. And with Boot Camp and virtualization, you can run Windows if you have to.
Mac: Or want to. I think Vista ROCKS on a Mac.
Bill: That's all. Microsoft makes software and operating systems... for PCs AND Macs.
Mac: So, we can work together.
Bill: Yes. Yes, we can. [shakes hands] Nice shoes...[Exit, Stage right]
[Mac stands stunned]
[Enter PC, eating a churro]
PC: You're not going to believe this. I just met Jerry Seinfeld in the hallway.
[Mac stands stunned]
PC: What? What'd I miss?
[Fade to iMac running Office 2008 and Parallels with Vista] and new 'Yes, WE can' logo
Microsoft doesn't have much to fear from Apple and won't for still some time even if Apple keeps slowly increasing their market share.
What you see here is an interest in the competition, a dialog to consider improving your own product in response to a competitor.
Sounds like the market actually working, but it's not fear.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Or you could try this little tidbit if you are truly a CLI Junkie...
Did I just say that??
MAC = Media Access Control
Mac = Short for Apple Macintosh.
My friend, I fear that the computer you chose to use will have no bearing on what people already think of your intelligence.
From someone who has never used Vista. I've had it installed for years, it's every bit as stable as XP, and while it's clearly somewhat more "expensive" (CPU+Memory), on any kind of modern hardware it is irrelevant.
It's also clearly more secure than XP. In all cases where I've installed it for friends and family, it has noticeably reduced the amount of cruft that gets installed.
I waited awhile to even try Vista because of all the talk, but I got a copy of Home Premium and dual booted it just to check it out, and I haven't had any problems... Its running well, even Aero (2x G280 SLI) and I use it to game all the time. I would agree that XP can run faster but a little, but honestly only like 5-10% with the video cards my desktop runs without using up CPU cycles, and when I jump into a direct X game it turns itself off until I return to the desktop. I have had no crashes, no blue screens, and no issues running all my software. So I just don't get it? Do you people not configure your windows for performance on your systems? Do you just install it and leave it? Maybe I'm just some kind of fluke, but I guess we'll see as I just put it on the rest of the gaming PC's in this house (one more SLI system and one ATI pos) but the kids seem to like it so far... as far as replacing it with a Mac, uh a Mac can't do what I need it to do.
Apple's hardware restriction means every piece of hardware you buy is way overpriced. Maybe some are ok with paying more... but when they find out the EXACT same hardware is much more expensive, they may feel cheated... especially with the economy in the toliet.
Where MS has succeeded is that it does work with many pieces of crap, and you don't have to be savvy to get it going.
Gahh!!! If you follow the downward spiral even more you might end up watching those movies you downloaded with rtorrent with mplayer via aalib!!!
Why not use the framebuffer output of mplayer for a real CLI experience? ;-)
The printer bundle and the localisations if you include them are huge.
First things to go in an install on any boxes I mange.
Has been an obsession for Microsoft for decades.
I think Bill Gates has 20 years of Walt Mossburg's columns memorized and can recite any of them verbatim on demand.
Certainly he is a capable tech writer but I don't understand the obsession.
Apple ditched all of the legacy crap. It was somewhat painful, but it's not like peoples old OS's simply stopped working. When they were ready, they upgraded and left the legacy world behind. MS has far more baggage that they need to lose. I think a lot of the 'bloat' associated with MS OS's would go away if they just started with a clean slate. With the popularity of VM's these days, they could easily integrate old app OS support into a shiny new OS using VM's without trying to maintain compatibility. They have simply become old school, and now they will never graduate on their current path...
The clit is fun to play with.
Well, Satan _is_ a bit of a heel. So he deserves it.
There's certainly a lot of interest in that. There was so much talk out there about the possibility that Windows 7 was going to be this kind of "New Windows" with legacy software running in a thin emulation environment that it became conventional wisdom at one point. They could do this... a lot more easily than Apple did... because the Windows application model is not tightly coupled to the API exposed through it... for example, the Pocket PC test environment in the Pocket PC SDK is just a Windows application with a different set of DLLs available to it. Whether they will or not is a different matter, but it's something they certainly could do.
Part of the reason I don't see them going that way is that currently the complexity of the Windows API is where their application barrier to entry lives. Given a simpler and cleaner API it would be SO much easier for projects like Wine to emulate it on top of UNIX-based systems.
It's fear of a Mac planet.
Why does Microsoft, and apparently Apple, believe what we've been waiting for is more features?
The next OS release for Apple is Snow Leopard which instead of offering user facing features is working on improved programming API's, better stability and performance.
I'm not saying they never chase the shiny ring of featureitis, but at least in this instance Apple is taking the wise path of refining what they have, even if not everyone upgrades due to the lack of new features it's still a great boon for new computer buyers.
In reality I think Windows 7 is party taking the same approach by refining Vista, but they cannot seem to help add new shiny features to try and lure users.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The old saying still applies as it does in the Mac world. If your system is more than 1 or 2 years old consider purchasing a new system or build a new one yourself and do the research.
Sorry, but that does NOT apply in the Mac world in the same way. Leopard runs just fine on systems several years old, not just two, and in fact improves performance on the older systems as well - just like every release of OS X before it...
You seem to have confused an OS that makes you FEEL like you have new hardware for one that REQUIRES new hardware.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's a sign of healthy instincts. A company that stops fearing competition is doomed!
how IT is changing the world - http://max.zamorsky.name
Only way to watch videos in bed/couch.
Judging by that comment and your nick, I'll wager you don't have a girlfriend.
Trolling is a art,
How do you know that the hardware is more expensive?
It is unknown how much Apple charges for the pre-bundled copy of OS X because it comes part of the whole package. But it would be ridiculous to think that they only charge $129 for it.
With that given, let's assume they charge $599 for OS X + iLife. Vista Ultimate goes for around $300-400 according to a quick search on Google. Therefore, OS X and iLife for $599 doesn't seem completely unreasonable.
That means that you can get a Macbook hardware for $500 and Mac Mini hardware for free! Show me the PC hardware that is cheaper than that.
I bought a Mac with Tiger last year. I upgraded to Leopard and found it ran faster. Snow Leopard is due out next year and it appears that my current hardware will probably run even faster on it. Why should I buy new hardware with the OS helping my current hardware last longer? This has been the case for a while, although the PPC-Intel switch will probably leave some people with PPC Macs needing to upgrade their hardware after a few years to be able to run the latest Mac OS.
Contrast with Windows, where OS upgrades always put more strain on the hardware, which brings in your 1-2 year rule.
I love that flambait moderation, one of you fanboys must have really been hurt by the truth.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
What's particularly telling here is not that they were "scared" - they weren't. They thought that this was a simple failure of marketing. It never occurred to them that Apple might have introduced something that might actually have some advantages over their next generation system. It was inconceivable to them. That is not a failure of marketing - it's a failure to understand the market and your competition. It is a failure of management - and a failure at the highest levels of the most profitable software company in the world.
I work in Microsoft support hell, you insensitive clod!
You might as well sell your sole to Richard Stall..erm Satan!!
Or for that matter, What would Satan or Stallman do with his flatfish?
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
OS X has a simple metaphor that exposes the underlying principles of computers in a way that average people can understand -- apps are files you drag from an archive to an HD to install for instance. That's the exact opposite of dumbing things down; it's making things clear. Windows, by contrast, hides the issues -- having programs you download actually be installers that download more files and install them to a non-obvious place, for instance. THIS is dumbing-down -- it leads to users that don't understand what they've just done, never mind how to solve problems. And don't get me started on how illogical having a "file" menu with an exit option is in a PC browser, or an anti-virus program. Macs make that app vs. file distinction much more sensible too.
MAC = Macintosh, Mandatory Access Control, Mandatory Access Control, Message Authentication Code, ad infinitum (almost)
Most things only have meaning in their context. "MAC" is one of the worst cases.
But then maybe that is the problem with Microsoft management, that it is full of shrewd corporate ladder-climbing types instead of inspired artists and engineers.
It's a problem when people are more concerned about getting the higher-up job than about doing their own job, 100% agreed.
But management positions should be held by managers, not artists or engineers. They should be familiar with the process they're managing (so ex-artists and -engineers are a good idea), but they should also have a good set of management skills. Learning only from your experiences is probably not the best way to go.
Having someone teach you insights of the past, what to think about and how to think usefully about it (i.e. a formal education) is probably a good start, and in my book, if you get a management position, that makes you a manager and an ex-whatever.
[maybe that's what you meant...]
"-Smart text parsing. The OS should know that xxxx@yyyy.zzz is an email. Mail does something like this, but I don't use it for other reasons."
Please, let us not have this added to anything. That is the format used for Jabber screennames, ssh/sftp logins, finger, and a variety of other network services new and old.
"-Real transparent server file systems. No, XP/Vista/OS X/Linux do not have this."
Wait, let me check...yes, Dolphin from KDE4, and Konqueror in KDE3, and the file dialog in KDE, and so forth all supported ftp/sftp/webdav browsing, saving, editing, and so on. I fail to see how we can get more transparent than that, short of the computer learning to read minds.
Palm trees and 8
'You won't have to worry about Vista if you buy one of Apple Computer's Macintosh computers, which don't run Windows,' Mossberg had written.
When my wife was asked to do half her work from home (and be much more productive that commuting to the office, it turns out), she had to look into replacing her ancient (4 years old ;-) Windows box. It was running XP, and her office hasn't upgraded to Vista, so she was looking for a PC to run XP. She couldn't buy one, until she asked at an Apple store. They explained to her that she could indeed run XP on a Mac. She got an iMac, installed XP via Fusion, and it works fine. Now a number of other people at work want her to teach them how to do it.
This has gotta be one of the things that terrifies MS's management. They lost a customer to Apple because the customer couldn't use Vista (for work-related reasons), and a competitor's system can run a virtualized XP subsystem. You could probably do the same with Linux.
Back in the 1970s, when the VM OS was taking over the IBM mainframe world, IBM responded by adopting VM and supporting it. This radically improved the usefulness of IBM's mainframes to their customers, and helped them consolidate their stranglehold on the mainframe market. So far, MS has viewed virtualization as a threat to their business, and has tried to block it. Maybe we shouldn't tell them that they're making a huge mistake. If they keep fighting it, they'll never be able to duplicate the total takeover that IBM managed in the mainframe arena. Virtualization is just too useful to a large percent of the users. And if we can avoid that sort of monoculture in the desktop, laptop, etc parts of the industry, we'll have a much healthier industry that will continue to innovate.
So let's all encourage MS to continue to try to block this development. It's for the benefit of everyone (except for MS's main stockholders).
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
This is why I think Microsoft has been pushing .Net so hard for the last few years. Get a decent new API ready for the eventual replacement of the existing system. It'd also make it possible to switch architectures if needed.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
Except that Apple *never* uses "MAC" to refer to their machines or software in its literature anywhere. It is always "Mac" or "Apple Mac" or "Apple Macintosh" or sometimes just "Macintosh" but never "MAC".
The only exception would be if it appeared in an all-caps paragraph or something, which the original post clearly is not.
Actually, I think Microsoft probably does make pretty big money on Windows alone (even with a flop like Vista), but I agree with you that Mac OS X on generic hardware wouldn't have the effect people hope for in the undermining of Microsoft's stranglehold.
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
Language is defined by users of the language, not those who don't wish themselves or their products to gain a certain name.
Not to mention that the "basic" version, while still an overpriced POS, lacks even those pretty-graphics capabilities of the more-expensive crap, and lacks what were commonplace capabilities in XP pro/home such as the ability to connect to a password-protected SMB share.
Only if an organization doesn't actively protect its trademarks from dilution. That's why restaurant servers are required to ask "is Pepsi okay?" if you ask for a Coke in a Pepsi joint. As far as I know, Apple does actively protect its trademarks.
Of course, that doesn't prevent tech support callers from insisting that their computer doesn't have a MAC address because it's a PC.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
It's news because people forget. Remember when it was found out that the mailed anthrax came from the US's own gov labs? People have already forgotten that too. People need to be reminded of the monopolistic software prison they live in. They don't have to use Windows, and there is better software out there.
It never ceases to amaze me the complete obliviousness you mac fanboys show when it comes to your favorite monopolistic company.
I can buy any hardware I want, put largely any software I want, any accessories, upgrades, add-ons, etc. There are literally thousands of companies making products for PCs. I can install Linux, I can install Windows, I can install anything I want on a PC. I guess you can use Boot Camp or parallels, but native install?
You're the one who's locked down, there, Sparky.
But you can't just get the hardware. Compare the same hardware specs between some Intel based Apple and another vendor which installs Windows, and the Windows machine will be cheaper overall.
Required? Maybe by their boss who doesn't want to deal with the occasional "I asked for Coke, not Pepsi!", but I can assure you it has nothing to do with trademark law.
What M$ should fear are the new netbooks, and the fact that they have to use different OS because Vista is too slow.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
It's got everything to do with trademark law, but indirectly. Coke still tries to protect its trademark from dilution (even though "coke" is pretty much a synonym for "cola" in popular terms). So they won't let Pepsi use the term "coke" in their marketing, obviously. Nor does Pepsi want to. But if Pepsi allowed the people who sell their products to use the term "coke" when selling them, Coke could take legal action to protect their trademark. So Pepsi vendors have to clarify that they're selling Pepsi, not Coke.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
"Sit the fuck down and listen to the reason why the hell we, FLOSS users, hate proprietary software."
No.
You're losers who identify with a movement because your life is otherwise meaningless.
You're no different than football or nascar fans.
And you deserve as much respect.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
That's why restaurant servers are required to ask "is Pepsi okay?" if you ask for a Coke in a Pepsi joint.
I thought it was to avoid complaints from people who ordered a Coke and got a Pepsi instead.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I wonder if I'm the only one who's sick of seeing the "I'm a PC" ads on the BART stations here in SF?
It wouldn't be so bad if there were just a few posters or ads here and there, but at some of the stations (e.g., Montgomery) it seems Microsoft took a scorched earth approach with their advertising budget and went totally nuts plastering them at about every conceivable square inch eyeballs could possibly scan on the concourse level.
I am tempted to invest in a handful of Linux/TUX stickers and plaster them over the ads but I don't want to be arrested for vandalism either ;-)
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
So you know what Apple is trying to avoid :)
"Thank you for already going fast-forward to the part where I, and the 99,99% of /., can only laugh at you because there are no arguments left on your side of this conversation"
I'm glad you think I'm right, and that I don't need to make any more arguments.
Now go watch nascar, er... I mean code some open source project.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
Vista Ultimate goes for around $300-400 according to a quick search on Google. Therefore, OS X and iLife for $599 doesn't seem completely unreasonable.
Actually, it's stupidly unreasonable to compare retail Windows prices with whatever dollar value Apple might put on the copies of OS X that are bundled with their Macs.
But, I'm sure you already knew that.
I'm glad you think I'm right, and that I don't need to make any more arguments.
What part of your brain is too stupid to understand that if you run out of arguments then you are, you know, wrong?!
Now go watch nascar, er... I mean code some open source project.
Good idea, after I figured out exactly what I'm going to do with the ideas that I have, I am going to code it. You see, I might even make some money with it, but it so happens that I am not an antisocial, greedy person.
Here be signatures
I liked the quotes blaming the fact that "we haven't communicated the value of Vista."
But the biggest one to me was the quote from the dude who fired back about how Vista runs on much more hardware and blah blah blah. That's only a good thing to the few remaining geeks who build/upgrade their own systems yet still use Windows.
They're not viewing the issue from a consumer perspective. The consumer doesn't care how many thousands of video cards and usb-to-serial adapters the OS supports. They want to buy a computer, and use it. It wouldn't matter if Apple sold two computers, one called "Desktop" and one called "Laptop". As long as the OS does what it's supposed to do, and you can run your everyday apps, who cares?
"What part of your brain is too stupid to understand that if you run out of arguments then you are, you know, wrong?!"
Um, not if the arguments are correct.
And you call ME stupid...
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
NOT IF YOU TYPE LIKE THIS!
How do we, as consumers fucked into taking vista, start (or join?) a class action lawsuit to be granted a permanent, authentic copy of XP, as a bridge to wait and see what becomes of the next windows version?
I am SICK of seeing windows vista take 1.5 GB of my VirtualBox resources and run slower than dog-guana at times. Mandriva Linux 2008 on the machine (hosting VBox) runs faster, and that is in ~ 350 MB. I want to NOT have to go to ms site at all. I am NOT going to connect my laptop to them to get an update to vista. I rarely directly put it (the laptop) on a live network.
Why do consumers have to fight tooth and nail to get XP on a machine that is not fully up to the task but was marketed as being up to the task? KDE without Compiz/et al is far ahead of windows' Aero.
I'm venting, yes, and yes, *vista does work*, but i'd like that much RAM taken from windows and used by my CAD app (ViaCAD). As much as i can't stand ms, i'm almost ready to willingly pay $170 for XP if i can ever get the cash together. Vista should be rebuked, excoriated, repudiated, and FAST.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Um, not if the arguments are correct.
It is if one counters them and you can't counter ones counter argument(s).
And you call ME stupid...
Not only is some part of 'YOUR' brain unable to properly read (I clearly asked what part of your brain was too stupid and I haven't said that you were stupid) but you also continuing making people hate you (flaimebait, -1). What a great life do you have there man!
Here be signatures
From TFA:
"My takeaway from Walt's article is that we have failed to communicate Vista's value," Russell said in an e-mail reply sent just 20 minutes after Warrier fired off his.
Where Russell is Richard Russell, a Microsoft development manager.
Not, gee whiz, the guy is telling us something, let's improve the product, here's our chance. Not, great - negative feedback is better than positive because it gives us a chance to know how to improve.
Nope. It's just let's communicate the value better - from a development manager.
This is what's wrong in every corporation that puts out a fucked up product, from my experience. I hate it.
Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
CLI junkies (defined by doing more than execution of single use apps such as Lame) are typically those who are too lazy or too stupid to learn how to program. You would have enjoyed the Amiga. CLI shortcut on the top level.
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
And the vast majority of those users are happy to spell "Mac" correctly. That the occasional idiot gets it wrong doesn't mean we all need to start updating our dictionaries.
Come on now. Look at the Apple's developers conferences, they spend 90% of the time talking about:
1) new hardware
2) new os features
3) new APIs to use the new os features
And these talks get watched by millions.
As for Microsoft their core business model is the OS providing services for their office / network apps to create a fully integrated suite. Arguably office, sharepoint.... are essentially part of the OS at this point.
Yes, that's it, keep ranting and insulting me just like a football or nascar fan, in your effort to prove you're not just like a football or nascar fan.
"unable to read..."
No, I'm just smarter than you. Smart enough to realize that MY BRAIN IS PART OF ME.
"continuing making people hate you"
Confederacy of Dunces.
Seriously, WTF do I care that some loser ass fanbois mod me down for telling the truth about them?
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
This claim has been made again and again. Spec out a system exactly the same as a mac from a major vendor (HP, Dell, Toshiba) and you'll find it is within 20% almost always and sometimes the mac is cheaper.
You shouldn't apologize, you proved me irrefutably correct.
I said you were like football and nascar fans and you proceeded to behave exactly like they do, thus proving me correct.
So don't apologize.
"you don't know what you post would trigger"
I know that in well adjusted individuals, it wouldn't trigger anything, and even if it did, they wouldn't act like a four year old then blame me for their behavior.
Like you did for instance.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
Unless your wife installed a cracked version of XP she got off of Pirate Bay, Microsoft didn't lose a customer. I'm betting the license for the copy of XP she's running was paid for and did, in fact, generate a sale for MS. She probably also installed a paid for copy of Office as well.
Some PC manufacturer lost a sale but MS didn't. In fact, they probably made more money than they would have if they'd sold the OEM license.
Check it out
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
You're kidding right? "Within 20%?" So you think people won't care about the difference between a $2000 mac and a $1600 Windows machine? At that point, I may as well throw my extra $400 at upgrading the hardware on the Windows machine. As for "sometimes the mac is cheaper," please, be my guest and show me.
Somewhere out there, there's a girl for him, and she's converting his screen name to decimal right now...
Microsoft's strategy for the last 20 years worked really well for them over the last 20 years. Now it's today, and unlike 20 years ago, there's already a Microsoft in the market--not to mention Linux.
There's absolutely no reason to believe that a 20 year old strategy would work just as well today as it did for Microsoft then. This is a sort of hindsight fallacy, where past success is mistaken for future guarantees. It's instructive that the one remaining competitor to Microsoft in the stand-alone OS market gives its product away for free (Linux).
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
You know,now that you mention it,I bet it drivers the servers nuts in those places that only serve Pepsi here in the South. For those that don't know "A coke" is the slang term everyone here uses for a cola,be it Coke,Pepsi,Dew etc. So everybody that walks through the door is going to say "and a coke" and I have even heard the old folks say "give me a Pepsi Coke" when they actually want a Pepsi. I know I always say "and a large coke" when frankly I don't give a damn WHAT kind of cola it is as long as it isn't that diet garbage.
Now for the article at hand: Is there anyone who is actually SURPRISED that MSFT was scared of OSX? Between all the confusion they created with Vista capable,ready,premium and then having to figure out if you actually bought it whether you need Basic,Home Premium,Business,Ultimate,etc(I know there is a couple more that fit in there somewhere) it is a total PITA when compared to OSX. No matter what Apple you buy,from the lowest mini to the most expensive Macbook Pro,it is all the same OS. Why MSFT couldn't have just went with the Home/Pro that worked for XP I'll never know. Although I'll have to admit that except for the ultra cheapo Walmart specials nearly every machine that crosses my desk runs XP Pro. XP Home always seemed to be that "also ran" that those that bought shitty machines from Best Buy ended up with.
But between the bugs,crazy system requirements,lack of real backwards compatibility(WTF was MSFT thinking? BC is their bread and butter!) lack of decent drivers,etc frankly the only call I have had for Vista is "Please remove this crap from my PC and put on XP" so it really doesn't surprise me that the guys in MSFT were worried before it even came out.
OT,but I'm at a dead end and I'm hoping one of my fellow slashdot IT guys can give me a hand: Does anyone know how to reset the BIOS password on a HP Pavilion ze5600 without having to rip the whole damned thing apart and yank the CMOS? I had a lady drop one off this morning,and apparently her daughter and her boyfriend were having a bad one,and in anger the girl locks the BIOS to keep him from spying on her,and then the dumbass forgot what she put in for a password. I figure I can rip the CMOS battery out and reset it that way,but this thing is a royal PITA to take apart and I'm hoping somebody here knows a better way. So has anyone here had exp with these HP Pavilion laptops?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I did the CLI-only thing for a while in college. I felt very l337 browsing the web and watching movies via framebuffer. Then I got a job and got busy, so I started using Macs. :D
~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fail%5B2%5D
Main Entry:
2fail
Function:
noun
Date:
13th century
1 : failure --usually used in the phrase without fail
2 : a failure (as by a security dealer) to deliver or receive securities within a prescribed period after purchase or sale
Right. Which of those two uses was this again?
Bow-ties are cool.
Hahah, yeah, I'm a seasoned Windows, Linux, and Mac admin that recently purchased a Macbook to use for consulting work, since it could run all the OSes I have to support on one machine. I run lots of command line apps such as nmap and the like from an OS X terminal, I hack together C# programs in VS 08 running in a VirtualBox VM'd copy of XP. I build HA systems using my Mac to manage ESX servers. I'm really dumbing society down hardcore.
The stereotypes of a clueless user on a Mac might be generally true, but a few folks buy them because they know what they want and know Apple makes solid hardware.
Folks like me that buy a Mac don't dumb down society; myopic dumbasses like you dumb down society.
People say this, but Apple would have to take on a lot of expense to support generic hardware. They'd have to massively upgrade their test procedures, spend huge amounts of development time on drivers, hire reams of new tech support...
This is correct and, even more so, Apple users generally acknowledge that they are running a "different" hardware/OS and so either buy from an Apple store or research a product before buying it. If you install Ubuntu for someone on a stock machine that was previously running Windows, they don't quite understand that they have fundamentally changed the way their machine works and will inevitably go out and buy incompatible hardware and then blame Ubuntu when it doesn't work. That is exactly the position Apple doesn't want to be in. Both for loss of proprietary hardware sales and for the support nightmare that will ensue.
Marketing managers in general tend to panic whenever they run into a negative article in a mainstream publication. It doesn't mean anything.
The big concern about Vista before launch, and it's critical to the "Vista Capable" lawsuit, was that the OEMs didn't have their shit together. Despite years of extra time, many hardware manufacturers didn't have drivers ready and some (notably Creative) told Microsoft that using the new toolkit was too difficult and they would just release broken drivers for Vista. MS broke down and reluctantly wrote their own drivers for these devices. And lots and lots of others.
Worse, entry-level systems didn't have DirectX 9 cards (due to OEMs dragging their feet) and couldn't run Aero at launch. Vista Basic wasn't supposed to exist at all. Vista Basic and Vista Capable were something the OEMs insisted on because their $500 boxes couldn't really run Vista in January 2007.
Blame MS all you want but they gave the driver kit to the OEMs almost 8 years ago (Vista drivers are basically Windows Server 2003 drivers, they both use WDF). Betas were available to the OEMs nearly 2 years before launch. And in 8 years they couldn't get anything done. In many cases (80%?) all they had to do was change ONE LINE of code. I personally modified XP drivers for use in Vista, and yeah, I really just had to change one line of code.
There's a plaice for everything.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
PI = Principal Investigator...generally a faculty member at a research university in charge of a research group consisting of graduate students and possibly academic or staff researchers (postdocs, researchers, etc).
that doesn't stop them from trying
Wouldn't they be foolish not to get as much as they can for their product? Profit maximization is evil now?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Cheap computers parts generally last just as long as high end parts.
That simply has not been my experience. I can't say the hard drive or CPU are going to flake out - but the power supply sure will.
And longevity aside, those low-end Dells flake out more often and always feel far slower than their spec sheet seems to indicate that they should.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Hey, I was making a joke in reply to a troll. I think you need to direct your hostility elsewhere!
Although, given that you're posting anonymously, I don't think there's much credence to your argument.
I think the regular, normal people have names.
I ADDRESSED THAT RESPONSE IN MY REPLY TO THIS THREAD ALREADY.
Wow, caps lock really is cruise control for cool. heh.
Lameness filter won;t take so many caps.
Jackdaws love my big sphinx of quartz, but only if it isn't in caps it seems.
You can look at the mac threads from around 2003,4. Usually when a new system came out these comparisons were made and generally the mac came in 10-15% below the comparable Dells.
As for 20% being a big deal, no I don't think that matters too much. At 8 hrs usage 200 days a year for 3 years that comes out to $.07 / hr.
The "upgrade" copies of OS X and Windows are similarly priced. The price of Windows also gives an indication of what the market is willing to pay for an operating system. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to assume that OS X is similar in price to Windows.
The cheap capacitors instead of the better quality ones? The cheaper voltage regulator circuits? There's a lot of discrete components on a motherboard, and varying levels of quality and tolerance options in the power circuits can make a huge difference in the quality and stability of a machine. They can also make an opposite difference in a low margin commodity business.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
So when someone orders Dr. Pepper and is offered Mr. Pibb...naw, it's "this will taste like shit, don't say I didn't warn you"
Writers imply. Readers infer.
Some people have mentioned the last version, 10.5, as being slower, and that it had initial bugs. I havnt noticed it myself.
---
I dont like attack ads either, here in NZ we just had our elections, the party in power ran all these attack ads about the new Leader of the opposition, who became the Prime Minister (NZs version of a president), things about "you cant trust him" and "he was a money trader over in america you know, look what happened there, the rich guys ripped off the little guy, and X has $50 million bucks").
Mac fanatics like myself would say that Apple "invented" the mouse, the GUI, USB, stunning design etc etc. You know the drill by now :)
And yet Apple is still basically invisible worldwide when it comes to marketshare. I live in NZ, New Zealand, and we dont get lovely Fifth Avenue Apple Stores here, overall we get a couple "Big Box" stores per city that MAY have an iMac and a Macbook tucked away somewhere.
So Apple is thought of as something like Lamborghini, you see it on tv, people in womens magazines use Macbook Pros, not normal everyday people. I understand that the "mac vs pc" ads run all the time in america right? I think theres been maybe 3 that have been on NZ TV, and only ever on one channel. We got some iPhone ad, and one for the Macbook Air, but theres never stuff on normal tv etc for Apple.
Surely the best way for Apple to sell more Macs is for them to point out whats different, whats obviously worth spending a few thousand dollars on over the current PC a potential switcher has? BTW, Macs are more expensive here in NZ, and probably in many places like the UK than they are in USA. A normal iMac can end up costing 3000 NZD with a 3 year warranty and Microsoft Office for Mac thrown in. People deserve to know that its worth that, and that they can feel special about being an Apple user after paying that much :)
Sorry if you are annoyed by the American ads. I hope you decide to look at a Mac by yourself sometime, look at the hardware/software somewhere quiet, so you can make your own mind up and hopefully take the plunge. Have a super day.
---
I use my iPhone for everything, i even switch on its wifi (its through a couple of menus) and use a TV guide application that cost me a couple of dollars, just to see whats on tv next :)
And yet, here we actually do have the iPod Touch ad about gaming on it, and god it makes me itch for a touch! I would get one in a second if they had a 64GB version. I could fit my music by itself on the 32, but its too close to a thousand dollars for me in my mind here. You can buy a Dell with a 20 inch screen for the price of the 32GB Touch here.
Try and get an unlocked iPhone, I mean sure you actually pay the cost of the phone, gasp, but its worth it not having to pay 200 dollars a month like one of the initial NZ plans! ha, 199 for the iPhone 3G and then 200 a month for 2 years! Vodafone NZ changed it pretty quickly, it was all over the media here :) My $790 original iPhone looked cheap :)
---
its not fair! its not fair!
---
The price of Windows also gives an indication of what the market is willing to pay for an operating system. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to assume that OS X is similar in price to Windows.
The price of Windows to a large OEM (like, say, HP) isn't anything close to the retail price. To say nothing of the stuff you are licensed to do with a retail version of Windows that you aren't with any version of OS X.
... apps like SAS, SPSS, ...
For what it's worth, you have SAS for Linux already. They don't make the product easy to find, and there are a lot of deadlinks, but it works well -- if you can get it. Also, SPSS for Linux has been available for a while, too.
So you can let the researchers work on whichever platform makes the most productive, be it OS X or Linux. But the real boost is for the system maintenance team. Getting rid of the last of the Windows cruft from the LAN means that all those hours spent coddling and repairing M$ junk can be instead directed towards improving the computing environment. Providing better service is a better goal than just trying to keep things running long enough to get work done.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
For a sec there my eyes drifted down to the equal sign before I read the author name of the article. I thought they were comparing Walt Disney and Apple, and Microsoft with crappy animators.
Need more coffee. Funny tho. :)
You can look at the mac threads from around 2003,4. Usually when a new system came out these comparisons were made and generally the mac came in 10-15% below the comparable Dells.
What complete nonsense. No one cares what the prices were in 2003 or 2004, as no one has a time machine they could use to buy a machine with those prices.
As for 20% being a big deal, no I don't think that matters too much. At 8 hrs usage 200 days a year for 3 years that comes out to $.07 / hr.
Well, you're an idiot. Consumers don't price computers that way. They don't plan on replacing them in a set amount of time, nor are they writing off depreciation. They want the most they can get now, and likely don't even worry about whether or not the computer will last them in the near future. 20% is a big deal for consumers. I would even argue it's a big deal for business; $400 per laptop when you're buying 300 laptops is $12,000. That's not something to sneeze at.
It's obvious that Apple does not charge OEM-like prices. Otherwise the argument that Apple products are overpriced would not exist.
I liked the quotes blaming the fact that "we haven't communicated the value of Vista."
Yes, I wish I had included that in my original post. It buttresses the point that there is a persistent misbelief at Microsoft in a problem with marketing Vista and not with the quality of the product itself.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
It's obvious that Apple does not charge OEM-like prices. Otherwise the argument that Apple products are overpriced would not exist.
Uh, what ? Your reasoning seems arse-about face.
Actually most applications on a OS X system are bundles. Bundles are directories which are displayed by the GUI as on file.
Of course your argument still holds true: You install the application by copying its bundle into to application folder and you de-install by moving the bundle into the trash can. It does not get more simpler than that.
The user does not need to know and never notice that the bundle consists of lots and lots of files.
And even I as a power user who does know the underlying mechanism find it incredible simple and amazing. Because I - as a power user - know that moving the application icon into the trash can will actually and fully remove the application from my system.
Something I am never quite sure about with Windows de-installers.
First off I think you might want to learn to express yourself without the insults. Secondly 400x300 = $120,000 not $12,000.
As for the rest do you have any evidence for your speculation that consumers set a fix cost based on some external factor and then buy the most they can for that fixed cost? Also any evidence for the theory that they don't depreciate but rather (essentially) apply a very high rate of interest and consider the computer only for the short term?
That's odd. I've always heard Mossberg referred to as the Wall Street Journal's resident Macintosh Fanboy. He normally praises all things Apple and disses all things Redmond. Paul Thurrott of Windows IT Pro Magazine routinely rips him apart for his columns where he clearly doesn't understand what he's talking about. If you listen to his Windows Weekly podcast, you'll hear him fuming about something Mossberg has written that demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of Windows architecture, technology and history. In the very first paragraph of a recent Mossberg column, Thurrott pointed out no fewer than eight completely false statements about Windows Vista that suggested Mossberg had never even done the most rudimentary level of research to back up his assertions.
Yes, Mossberg is a tool, but one that commands a great deal of undeserved respect from millions of clueless WSJ readers (and business decision-makers).
First off I think you might want to learn to express yourself without the insults.
Sure, as soon as you step out of your alternate universe.
Secondly 400x300 = $120,000 not $12,000.
Sorry, I missed a 0 when typing. Not that catching this mistake helps your case.
As for the rest do you have any evidence for your speculation that consumers set a fix cost based on some external factor and then buy the most they can for that fixed cost?
Yes, most consumers are limited in the amount of money they can spend on such things. As for evidence, simply look at the rise of Walmart. They make money hand over fist, because they will save you $0.10 on an item. Also, given our current economic situation, people are MUCH more likely to choose the lower priced computer now. Again, look at Walmart. Their sales have been skyrocketing, while many other places are worrying about bankruptcy. If consumers can enough to go to Walmart to save $0.10, you don't think they'll notice a 20% difference in price?
Also any evidence for the theory that they don't depreciate but rather (essentially) apply a very high rate of interest and consider the computer only for the short term?
Look at the various "services" to "help" consumers buy computers. They might not know what a Mhz is, but when they see Apple offers the same for more, they'll likely choose the latter. Some invariably will be duped by the "it just works" nonsense... but given the number of people using Apple, that bubble will soon burst.
The thing is MS now has to care about what they put out as opposed to us just accepting what they put out. They are F'ed!
"And you do realize that MS Windows has nothing to do with nerds, right?"
No.
"And that FLOSS and Linux is kinda important here on "/.", right?"
To you. I couldn't care less, and there's plenty of stuff to catch my interest. Maybe you should come to grips with the fact that no mater how your sorry loser ass tries to show it, this IS NOT A WEBSITE DEVOTED TO OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE.
Cry to your mom about it, but that won't change it, and it sure as fuck won't make your retarded objections to my visiting any less retarded.
"You meant; "I am too stupid to comprehent (sic) smart people"
At least you finally admit it, but you really shouldn't be so hard on yourself.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
"Ah, so you don't realise it. Hey I can do this kinda crap too!"
No, because it's not true. I can't "realise" something that isn't true, so no, you fail.
Again.
"This is a website devoted to FLOSS, but not solely devoted to FLOSS!"
No it isn't. It's just a website that has some OSS content. Claiming it is "devoted" without any evidence apart from your opinion, which you're proven to be worthless because you're a liar, doesn't make it so.
"You are such a girl"
Wow, not only are you a liar, but you're a bigot and a misogynist. How fucking pathetic.
And I thought you couldn't make yourself look any worse.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...