I don't think this demographic should be forced to run out and buy a new system.
What, exactly, about the release of a new OS, and its inclusion on new OEM machines, leads you to believe people are being forced to do anything?
The only Windows users who didn't choose an MS operating system are those that use them at work. Otherwise, of course they choose them. No one forced Windows into anybody's hands.
I get tired of all the complaints against the OEM manufacturers and Microsoft's strong-arm tactics with them. How do you think Microsoft has amassed so much wealth? They are a business, as people are so oft to forget. They exist at heart for one true purpose: to make money.
The majority of people don't care what their operating system is. They are the regular joe schmoes who walk into a Best Buy and tell the Geek Squad teenager that they want a computer to surf the net, print their vacation photos, and send emails. So the kid in the blue shirt hands them over a nice Gateway or HP that comes preloaded with more than they'll ever need, the customer goes away perfectly content...and then everyone comes in here and waxes eloquent on the plight of the Everyman who has been forced into accepting an ubiqitous operating system they did not want to begin with.
As for competition--the OEM manufactures are businesses as well. Which means they're going to go with what makes the most fiscal sense. So you can't just focus on Microsoft when you're discussing an entire market. If any serious competitor offered a comparable deal, perhaps we'd see more variety in the OSs that come preloaded on these machines. Or maybe you're busy writing that very OS as we speak. Until then, Microsoft is doing what any busines would do--enjoying and taking advantage of their position right now.
Back to people's freedom and choice...the people that really care about their operating system are you and I. And we will either do one of three things when presented with the challenge of buying a new system: 1) We'll go with an alternative, such as a Mac. 2) We'll build our own machines with the added benefit of not feeling like we were robbed of our choice of a motherboard as well. 3) We'll buy the Dell or Gateway because we're lazy, and then turn right around and reformat the hard drive with anything our heart desires (if you're feeling especially masochistic or just relish the opportunity to call people "noobs", this means Linux).
See, we all have choices. What you're really arguing against is the proliferation of Windows. And that proliferation exists--is allowed to exist--for one simple reason: the majority of computer users are lazy and don't want to dig for a great OS, so they'll take what's handed to them. And no other company has figured out a way of challenging this.
Slashdot Mirror
It's only brought down by the UI if you have Aero turned on. Don't care about it? Turn it off. And what is this other "folderol" you speak of?
I don't think this demographic should be forced to run out and buy a new system. What, exactly, about the release of a new OS, and its inclusion on new OEM machines, leads you to believe people are being forced to do anything?
Proving that, given no fodder, ./'ers will still find something to bitch about when it comes to Windows.
The only Windows users who didn't choose an MS operating system are those that use them at work. Otherwise, of course they choose them. No one forced Windows into anybody's hands.
I get tired of all the complaints against the OEM manufacturers and Microsoft's strong-arm tactics with them. How do you think Microsoft has amassed so much wealth? They are a business, as people are so oft to forget. They exist at heart for one true purpose: to make money.
The majority of people don't care what their operating system is. They are the regular joe schmoes who walk into a Best Buy and tell the Geek Squad teenager that they want a computer to surf the net, print their vacation photos, and send emails. So the kid in the blue shirt hands them over a nice Gateway or HP that comes preloaded with more than they'll ever need, the customer goes away perfectly content...and then everyone comes in here and waxes eloquent on the plight of the Everyman who has been forced into accepting an ubiqitous operating system they did not want to begin with.
As for competition--the OEM manufactures are businesses as well. Which means they're going to go with what makes the most fiscal sense. So you can't just focus on Microsoft when you're discussing an entire market. If any serious competitor offered a comparable deal, perhaps we'd see more variety in the OSs that come preloaded on these machines. Or maybe you're busy writing that very OS as we speak. Until then, Microsoft is doing what any busines would do--enjoying and taking advantage of their position right now.
Back to people's freedom and choice...the people that really care about their operating system are you and I. And we will either do one of three things when presented with the challenge of buying a new system: 1) We'll go with an alternative, such as a Mac. 2) We'll build our own machines with the added benefit of not feeling like we were robbed of our choice of a motherboard as well. 3) We'll buy the Dell or Gateway because we're lazy, and then turn right around and reformat the hard drive with anything our heart desires (if you're feeling especially masochistic or just relish the opportunity to call people "noobs", this means Linux).
See, we all have choices. What you're really arguing against is the proliferation of Windows. And that proliferation exists--is allowed to exist--for one simple reason: the majority of computer users are lazy and don't want to dig for a great OS, so they'll take what's handed to them. And no other company has figured out a way of challenging this.