The fact that practically every aspect of the user experience can be controlled through group policy also makes Vista very attractive to businesses. Add in the custom performance metrics for your applications to monitor their crashing centrally and you have something that makes sense for large organizations.
Great, it finally caught up with UNIX-like OSes that have been doing that practically since the advent of modern computing. Good to see that Vista caught up to a more then a decade-old system. Oh and it is sad to see that crashing has became such a central part of our computing world, it seems like the only platforms in need of something like Xkill are those that don't support it.
I know I am fortunate in that my apps are standards based web applications so I can use them on whatever platform I choose. This meant that when we started buying Macs for the graphics department because the art director was more comfortable with them, that they were able to contribute without needing a virtual machine.
And so, if all your apps are standard across all platforms wouldn't Linux be a more logical choice? I mean it is free, easy to support (you can usually figure out what is wrong with it rather easily), virus-resistant, don't need to spend a fortune in specialty software (anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware, etc), secure from user error (so long as you don't let them log in as root 24/7), and runs on more hardware platforms.
I've never seen companies skip Windows releases unless they are in financial trouble and not growing. Otherwise new computers purchased would usually come with the latest version of Windows. I've never experienced a company skipping releases but that does mean admittedly little given that I am just one person. I can certainly understand why companies would do that if they aren't growing.
By now most major companies are starting to look into other OSes other then Windows. Also, it just plain stupid to pay $100 to "upgrade" every system to Vista when if you bought cheap XP computers they are going to run slower then XP. Vista gives you 0 reason to upgrade, even less for a business. Really, what reason is there to "upgrade" from XP, and even the reasons that are there they all evaporate when compared to Mac or Linux. Basically, the smart companies don't throw money at a problem, they look for the best solution. Only companies who are driven by utter fools would blindly upgrade systems to Vista, even foolisher are those who aren't looking to get out of the Windows loop. Basically, there are tons of reasons not to upgrade to Vista if you are a business: A) costs $$$ B) Slower performance C) not tested with all the applications D) DRM E) still full of security problems F) Windows 7 is supposed to come out in a few years G) No advantage.
Basically, you are an idiot if you think Vista is good for businesses. You are an idiot if you think Vista is a decent OS. Basically you offer no proof on how Vista is better then XP, Mac or Linux. And I bet you if you put in a Ubuntu CD, the "acceptable speed" on your laptop would become "great speed".
minwin comes to mind as a possible xp replacement in the long term for such devices, since they have so bluntly stated win7 is going to be an evolved vista... really dashed my hopes for a sleek gaming rig of the future...
Well you only need to look at the delays of Vista to figure out that by the time Windows 7 comes out you can do your gaming on GNU/Hurd emulating Linux using QEMU, running WINE on that to run Cgywin to emulate Linux to use WINE to emulate Windows to play your game. Well, perhaps the part about GNU/Hurd becoming usable was a bit far-fetched, but really by the time that Windows 7 will be out WINE should play most games with no trouble on Linux and even ReactOS may be to the stage that it can support some gaming too.
Wait for the news sites to post their news with DRM protection. A simple html tag is all that is needed. It does not need to be functional with any systems.
So wait... If I just put tags on my site it will make it be uncopyable? And if it isn't readable by at least IE, no one will read the posting so I guess that could mean that it is uncopyable if no one reads it to copy it... But as for it being a simple HTML tag, that is impossible, perhaps with JavaScript, PHP, or Flash it would be possible but there is nothing in HTML that would prevent me from just going to the source and copying and pasting that text either. And either way, if this gets main stream popularity, the developers of Firefox or any other web browser could chose to ignore the (no doubt non standard) HTML tags and just display it in text.
So will this mean in the end we will have 2 competing USB standards? USB-Intel and USB-AMD? I can only hope that one will get picked over the other before it appears in most products because after the whole HD-DVD and Blu-Ray thing it would be an absolute pain to get a computer with USB-Intel in it when all the products will be USB-AMD.
No but here is the thing, it will run 3-D on Linux out of the box. Unlike that ATI card and nVidia, but at least the nVidia binary drivers will actually run and not cause Linux to panic...
I don't get how it would work for 2 people to watch the same video simultaneously without A) depriving Google of hits thereby decreasing profit by ads B) Ignoring cookies C) Invading privacy. For example, how would ads work? When I go to Youtube to watch a video (and have disabled AdBlock and my/etc/hosts file) the ad sees that I am *insert IP address here* and Google can charge the maker of the ads say $.01 per view, so Google gets a penny richer and the company gets a penny poorer. So when I get this from what I can assume to be the ISP's servers, it ignores or displays the ad data without giving Google the stats to get the money. So if I see the ad, Google doesn't get the $.01 and then the company gets a free ad. I just don't think this can work without Google or other ad companies complaining due to lost revenue, and unlike AdBlock this would be widespread.
Also as speaking from experience, my laptop had its motherboard fried not once, but twice. Both from using third party plugs, the first was from a "universal" adapter, the second was what the guy from the maker's tech support told me to buy. Both of the times the real AC adapter's wires became broken because I *gasp* actually used my laptop to travel more then 3 feet and used it for *gasp* more then 3 hours a day. Laptop makers really should adopt a standard because of all the things about laptops I like, I really hate the power issues.
Violent crime in New York City has decreased in the last twelve years and the murder rate in 2005 was at its lowest level since 1963.[1] Crime rates spiked in the 1980s and early 1990s as the crack epidemic hit the city. During the 1990s the New York City Police Department (NYPD) adopted CompStat, broken windows policing and other strategies in a major effort to reduce crime. The city's dramatic drop in crime has been attributed by criminologists to these policing tactics, the end of the crack epidemic and demographic changes.[2][3] From Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_New_York_City
And also
In 2006, as part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun control efforts, the city approved new legislation regulating handgun possession and sales. The new laws established a gun offender registry, required city gun dealers to inspect their inventories and file reports to the police twice a year, and limited individual handgun purchases to once every 90 days. The regulations also banned the use and sale of kits used to paint guns in bright or fluorescent colors, on the grounds that such kits could be used to disguise real guns as toys.
Hmmmm... Odd how Wikipedia's first mention on crime reduction in NYC due to gun control is in 2006 the rest has been due to crack crackdowns, more police officers etc. So, yes crime has dropped, was it due to gun control. No.
Yes, but the main point is a standard plug for Laptops. For example, my Laptop's motherboard has been fried not once, but twice from third-party plugs. One was a cheap "will power every laptop in existence" the other one is what the Laptop maker's tech support told me to get. A standard for laptops would be very nice. And it isn't like you can power a laptop with USB....
Correlation does not imply causation. The gun control laws are caused by the high levels of violent crime, not the other way around - the same with the anti-free speech laws.
But if the gun control laws were working then crime will go down, which it hasn't. Same with free speech. If you are going to kill someone it isn't like you are going to mind breaking a law to get a gun, get a mob of people violent, etc. If guns/free speech become illegal then only criminals will use guns/free speech. Basically, if your going to outlaw something, the people who were the ones in which the laws were created won't give a care if one more thing is illegal it only punishes the law abiding citizen. To put it in geek terms it is like saying that DRM prevents piracy, which if you take any look at a BT tracker you can see that that isn't the case, but it sure makes playing my legally bought tracks a pain to play.
Few people would object to government interference in the distribution of such material through the post, so why should Internet publication be treated any differently?
Because with the post, you usually open up your mailbox to whatever. With the Internet you go to wherever you want to go to read what you want to read. Secondly, the post is regulated by the government and is delivered by the government, with the Internet there is no government that has total control over it (thankfully).
And honestly, what counts as "incitement to violence"? Seriously, I should be able to say that I hate *insert group of people*. Now I can't say I am going to shoot every one of *insert group of people* in the head, but it is bordering on even if you say I don't like *insert minority* because of *insert reason other then they are a minority* you get told you are a racist/sexist. So when does free speech end? It starts with censoring things "harmful to young people" then "things most people don't want to see/hear" then it becomes "harmful to the state" then it becomes full-blown censorship. The censoring of one person's free speech rights for the supposed benefit of more people just silenced a minority opinion. How do we expect as a world to progress if censorship like this continues?
Because we know we never had any censorship under Clinton. We know that every president other then Bush protected the constitution 100%. We know that every president other then bush didn't invade other countries for reasons that didn't involve us. Basically, sure bush is at fault but so are most of the other presidents that have preceded him and I'm willing to bet that if either McCain or Obama manages to get into the White House things aren't going to be much better. And plus, laws are created by congress not the president. So although we can blame Bush and get modded insightful for it, blame every other president too, because the rest of them are at fault too.
Hmmm... The same thing could be said about Windows games, or Mac games, I could even say the same thing about the current generation of home consoles! I could say the same thing about handheld games. Basically, you can pirate any game out there. It isn't a Linux-specific trend.
A lot. Many require WINE or similar to run though. In fact though with a VM you could say you can run every single commercial game in existence on Linux. Just because a game doesn't run natively on Linux doesn't mean that you can't play it using WINE, and many of the more prominent games even have specific steps to play the game perfectly or better then on Windows.
Wouldn't this be easy for ISPs to avoid? Just un-throttle any connections to Google's servers? Just figure out where the test is being done and don't throttle that site. Easy.
Here in America though, the ISPs don't tell you anything. Some tell you that in the contract but it is always "excessive" bandwidth usage, never "100 GB" Or "300 GB" or per year, day, hour, etc. And all this when they are talking about "unlimited" in the same ad for the contract in which they say they have caps and can throttle you.
Well if they do, then they can probably sign me up as a customer. If Google can act on the idea of a 100% neutral Internet and become an ISP, many people will head to them. But I don't think Google will expand into the physical world much just because of how everything they do has to deal with the Internet as more of an OS then it being a physical computer. But if Google becomes an ISP, I might just have to sign up after this.
2. And there's a support issue. If Joe Average has Windows problem there's surely a kid next door who will press a few buttons and have Windows machine run again. There's a bunch of small businesses who make a living by coming to your house and making your Windows computer work as it should again (at least here where i live that is). And you have an option to call MS support line. But all of this fails when it comes to Linux. When someone tells me that one does not need to do a maintainence on Linux computer i just ask them: Would you buy a car that has nearest mechanic 4000 km away?
Well, first there is community support which in Linux they can usually fix the problem rather then the oh-so-helpful response by most Windows forums "Your computer is toast, reinstall and see if that fixes anything". Secondly there is the option of paid support, which, if you really need it, is an option. It is like saying do you want to buy a car that breaks down all the time, costs $5000 more, uses up more gas (CPU, RAM, etc.), requires an oil change (defragging and general clean up) every month, and is prone to breaking down, but has more mechanics or get a car that is nearly free (in the case of Linux it truly is free but I haven't found any real cars that are free), rarely breaks down, needs an oil change only once every few years, uses less gas but has fewer mechanics. Basically, Linux is cheaper in the long run because when you take the OS (about $100) add it in with some support ($150) and add in some extra hardware to make it run as fast as Linux would on the machine ($70) that is a $320 OS, if you take Linux ($0) some support ($200) and no extra hardware, it still is cheaper then going the Windows route. And if you say I don't spend *insert number here* for MS support, then assume you need the same or less for Linux support. Either way, Linux is still cheaper and is better then Windows in some if not all ways.
What this needs is a promise that Office 2007 and this API will be synced to the ISO specification.
No, promises are easily broken by MS, we need it to sync to the ISO specs, not a promise. Think of all the other promises MS has made... We promise that Vista will be innovative, new, fast, out soon, etc. We promise that we will embrace an open Internet (well until we manage to kill Netscape that is...) We promise that OS/2 is the future. And more. MS has been full of promises but has never managed to fulfill any of the ones that help anyone.
No, profit is kind of a universal measure. And MS is profitable.
For today, yes. But how much choice do people get in choosing an OS most of the time? 0, none, no choice whatsoever, if they go into *insert large computer store* they usually get Vista, if they beg and spend some extra money they can get XP put on it. Linux is rarely mentioned, let alone offered. As for Office, most people I know that have Windows actually don't use Office for home use, they either have OOo, Microsoft Works (oh the irony...) or some other word processing program, now Office still leads in business but for how long? People are slowly getting choice back, it is only a matter of time before anyone can walk into a store and they can pick from Windows or Linux. Now of course when people realize they can save $50ish for switching to Linux they will. And from there the MS empire collapses.
Also how about Pirate Amnesty, where people can trade in their pirated copy of Microsoft software in exchange for a discount on genuine Microsoft software?
Because most people simply don't care. Most use the OS that is pre-loaded on the computer when they buy it, pirated or not. If it stops working they call up someone who knows something about computers, gets an outrageously high bill and keeps on using it. If people cared what was on the computers they own, Linux adoption rates would be higher, people would all have firewalls, and would keep up to date with patches. However most people simply don't care what is on the computer they have. Pirated or not, if it boots up to Windows they are happy.
SharePoint alone has seen $1 Billion in sales. The one think the Geek can't forgive about Microsoft is its success.
Success is measured in different ways. MS is always going to be associated with BSoD, cryptic error messages, security holes, frustrating problems in Office, etc. When someone says MS, what do you first think of? Do you think of well debugged software? Solid stability? Cutting-edge features? Or are you like me and most people and think of Windows blue screening, Clippy annoying your brains out, and Vista managing to turn a new PC into a snail in performance. Then think about Apple. Apple will mostly be seen as the company with the nice-looking computers, an easy-to-use yet powerful (UNIX-based) OS, and the iPod. If you gave people a choice between getting Windows or OS X (both on the same computer and cost the same amount) I bet that many would choose OS X. MS is just what you get, Apple is what everyone wants. (Please note that I am a Linux user and don't even own a Mac so don't be calling me an Apple fanboy).
Slashdot Mirror
Great, it finally caught up with UNIX-like OSes that have been doing that practically since the advent of modern computing. Good to see that Vista caught up to a more then a decade-old system. Oh and it is sad to see that crashing has became such a central part of our computing world, it seems like the only platforms in need of something like Xkill are those that don't support it.
I know I am fortunate in that my apps are standards based web applications so I can use them on whatever platform I choose. This meant that when we started buying Macs for the graphics department because the art director was more comfortable with them, that they were able to contribute without needing a virtual machine.
And so, if all your apps are standard across all platforms wouldn't Linux be a more logical choice? I mean it is free, easy to support (you can usually figure out what is wrong with it rather easily), virus-resistant, don't need to spend a fortune in specialty software (anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware, etc), secure from user error (so long as you don't let them log in as root 24/7), and runs on more hardware platforms.
I've never seen companies skip Windows releases unless they are in financial trouble and not growing. Otherwise new computers purchased would usually come with the latest version of Windows. I've never experienced a company skipping releases but that does mean admittedly little given that I am just one person. I can certainly understand why companies would do that if they aren't growing.
By now most major companies are starting to look into other OSes other then Windows. Also, it just plain stupid to pay $100 to "upgrade" every system to Vista when if you bought cheap XP computers they are going to run slower then XP. Vista gives you 0 reason to upgrade, even less for a business. Really, what reason is there to "upgrade" from XP, and even the reasons that are there they all evaporate when compared to Mac or Linux. Basically, the smart companies don't throw money at a problem, they look for the best solution. Only companies who are driven by utter fools would blindly upgrade systems to Vista, even foolisher are those who aren't looking to get out of the Windows loop. Basically, there are tons of reasons not to upgrade to Vista if you are a business: A) costs $$$ B) Slower performance C) not tested with all the applications D) DRM E) still full of security problems F) Windows 7 is supposed to come out in a few years G) No advantage.
Basically, you are an idiot if you think Vista is good for businesses. You are an idiot if you think Vista is a decent OS. Basically you offer no proof on how Vista is better then XP, Mac or Linux. And I bet you if you put in a Ubuntu CD, the "acceptable speed" on your laptop would become "great speed".
Well you only need to look at the delays of Vista to figure out that by the time Windows 7 comes out you can do your gaming on GNU/Hurd emulating Linux using QEMU, running WINE on that to run Cgywin to emulate Linux to use WINE to emulate Windows to play your game. Well, perhaps the part about GNU/Hurd becoming usable was a bit far-fetched, but really by the time that Windows 7 will be out WINE should play most games with no trouble on Linux and even ReactOS may be to the stage that it can support some gaming too.
So wait... If I just put tags on my site it will make it be uncopyable? And if it isn't readable by at least IE, no one will read the posting so I guess that could mean that it is uncopyable if no one reads it to copy it... But as for it being a simple HTML tag, that is impossible, perhaps with JavaScript, PHP, or Flash it would be possible but there is nothing in HTML that would prevent me from just going to the source and copying and pasting that text either. And either way, if this gets main stream popularity, the developers of Firefox or any other web browser could chose to ignore the (no doubt non standard) HTML tags and just display it in text.
But being GPL'd it would be just as easy to go into the source and take out the back doors and recompile it.
So will this mean in the end we will have 2 competing USB standards? USB-Intel and USB-AMD? I can only hope that one will get picked over the other before it appears in most products because after the whole HD-DVD and Blu-Ray thing it would be an absolute pain to get a computer with USB-Intel in it when all the products will be USB-AMD.
No but here is the thing, it will run 3-D on Linux out of the box. Unlike that ATI card and nVidia, but at least the nVidia binary drivers will actually run and not cause Linux to panic...
I don't get how it would work for 2 people to watch the same video simultaneously without A) depriving Google of hits thereby decreasing profit by ads B) Ignoring cookies C) Invading privacy. For example, how would ads work? When I go to Youtube to watch a video (and have disabled AdBlock and my /etc/hosts file) the ad sees that I am *insert IP address here* and Google can charge the maker of the ads say $.01 per view, so Google gets a penny richer and the company gets a penny poorer. So when I get this from what I can assume to be the ISP's servers, it ignores or displays the ad data without giving Google the stats to get the money. So if I see the ad, Google doesn't get the $.01 and then the company gets a free ad. I just don't think this can work without Google or other ad companies complaining due to lost revenue, and unlike AdBlock this would be widespread.
Also as speaking from experience, my laptop had its motherboard fried not once, but twice. Both from using third party plugs, the first was from a "universal" adapter, the second was what the guy from the maker's tech support told me to buy. Both of the times the real AC adapter's wires became broken because I *gasp* actually used my laptop to travel more then 3 feet and used it for *gasp* more then 3 hours a day. Laptop makers really should adopt a standard because of all the things about laptops I like, I really hate the power issues.
And also In 2006, as part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun control efforts, the city approved new legislation regulating handgun possession and sales. The new laws established a gun offender registry, required city gun dealers to inspect their inventories and file reports to the police twice a year, and limited individual handgun purchases to once every 90 days. The regulations also banned the use and sale of kits used to paint guns in bright or fluorescent colors, on the grounds that such kits could be used to disguise real guns as toys.
Hmmmm... Odd how Wikipedia's first mention on crime reduction in NYC due to gun control is in 2006 the rest has been due to crack crackdowns, more police officers etc. So, yes crime has dropped, was it due to gun control. No.
Yes, but the main point is a standard plug for Laptops. For example, my Laptop's motherboard has been fried not once, but twice from third-party plugs. One was a cheap "will power every laptop in existence" the other one is what the Laptop maker's tech support told me to get. A standard for laptops would be very nice. And it isn't like you can power a laptop with USB....
Someone has never seen Homestar Runner... I'll even give you the link http://www.homestarrunner.com/
But if the gun control laws were working then crime will go down, which it hasn't. Same with free speech. If you are going to kill someone it isn't like you are going to mind breaking a law to get a gun, get a mob of people violent, etc. If guns/free speech become illegal then only criminals will use guns/free speech. Basically, if your going to outlaw something, the people who were the ones in which the laws were created won't give a care if one more thing is illegal it only punishes the law abiding citizen. To put it in geek terms it is like saying that DRM prevents piracy, which if you take any look at a BT tracker you can see that that isn't the case, but it sure makes playing my legally bought tracks a pain to play.
Because with the post, you usually open up your mailbox to whatever. With the Internet you go to wherever you want to go to read what you want to read. Secondly, the post is regulated by the government and is delivered by the government, with the Internet there is no government that has total control over it (thankfully).
And honestly, what counts as "incitement to violence"? Seriously, I should be able to say that I hate *insert group of people*. Now I can't say I am going to shoot every one of *insert group of people* in the head, but it is bordering on even if you say I don't like *insert minority* because of *insert reason other then they are a minority* you get told you are a racist/sexist. So when does free speech end? It starts with censoring things "harmful to young people" then "things most people don't want to see/hear" then it becomes "harmful to the state" then it becomes full-blown censorship. The censoring of one person's free speech rights for the supposed benefit of more people just silenced a minority opinion. How do we expect as a world to progress if censorship like this continues?
Because we know we never had any censorship under Clinton. We know that every president other then Bush protected the constitution 100%. We know that every president other then bush didn't invade other countries for reasons that didn't involve us. Basically, sure bush is at fault but so are most of the other presidents that have preceded him and I'm willing to bet that if either McCain or Obama manages to get into the White House things aren't going to be much better. And plus, laws are created by congress not the president. So although we can blame Bush and get modded insightful for it, blame every other president too, because the rest of them are at fault too.
It might be worth looking into getting a cheap EEE ($300) and just SSHing into your PC to control it.
Hmmm... The same thing could be said about Windows games, or Mac games, I could even say the same thing about the current generation of home consoles! I could say the same thing about handheld games. Basically, you can pirate any game out there. It isn't a Linux-specific trend.
A lot. Many require WINE or similar to run though. In fact though with a VM you could say you can run every single commercial game in existence on Linux. Just because a game doesn't run natively on Linux doesn't mean that you can't play it using WINE, and many of the more prominent games even have specific steps to play the game perfectly or better then on Windows.
Wouldn't this be easy for ISPs to avoid? Just un-throttle any connections to Google's servers? Just figure out where the test is being done and don't throttle that site. Easy.
Here in America though, the ISPs don't tell you anything. Some tell you that in the contract but it is always "excessive" bandwidth usage, never "100 GB" Or "300 GB" or per year, day, hour, etc. And all this when they are talking about "unlimited" in the same ad for the contract in which they say they have caps and can throttle you.
Well if they do, then they can probably sign me up as a customer. If Google can act on the idea of a 100% neutral Internet and become an ISP, many people will head to them. But I don't think Google will expand into the physical world much just because of how everything they do has to deal with the Internet as more of an OS then it being a physical computer. But if Google becomes an ISP, I might just have to sign up after this.
Well, first there is community support which in Linux they can usually fix the problem rather then the oh-so-helpful response by most Windows forums "Your computer is toast, reinstall and see if that fixes anything". Secondly there is the option of paid support, which, if you really need it, is an option. It is like saying do you want to buy a car that breaks down all the time, costs $5000 more, uses up more gas (CPU, RAM, etc.), requires an oil change (defragging and general clean up) every month, and is prone to breaking down, but has more mechanics or get a car that is nearly free (in the case of Linux it truly is free but I haven't found any real cars that are free), rarely breaks down, needs an oil change only once every few years, uses less gas but has fewer mechanics. Basically, Linux is cheaper in the long run because when you take the OS (about $100) add it in with some support ($150) and add in some extra hardware to make it run as fast as Linux would on the machine ($70) that is a $320 OS, if you take Linux ($0) some support ($200) and no extra hardware, it still is cheaper then going the Windows route. And if you say I don't spend *insert number here* for MS support, then assume you need the same or less for Linux support. Either way, Linux is still cheaper and is better then Windows in some if not all ways.
No, promises are easily broken by MS, we need it to sync to the ISO specs, not a promise. Think of all the other promises MS has made... We promise that Vista will be innovative, new, fast, out soon, etc. We promise that we will embrace an open Internet (well until we manage to kill Netscape that is...) We promise that OS/2 is the future. And more. MS has been full of promises but has never managed to fulfill any of the ones that help anyone.
For today, yes. But how much choice do people get in choosing an OS most of the time? 0, none, no choice whatsoever, if they go into *insert large computer store* they usually get Vista, if they beg and spend some extra money they can get XP put on it. Linux is rarely mentioned, let alone offered. As for Office, most people I know that have Windows actually don't use Office for home use, they either have OOo, Microsoft Works (oh the irony...) or some other word processing program, now Office still leads in business but for how long? People are slowly getting choice back, it is only a matter of time before anyone can walk into a store and they can pick from Windows or Linux. Now of course when people realize they can save $50ish for switching to Linux they will. And from there the MS empire collapses.
Because most people simply don't care. Most use the OS that is pre-loaded on the computer when they buy it, pirated or not. If it stops working they call up someone who knows something about computers, gets an outrageously high bill and keeps on using it. If people cared what was on the computers they own, Linux adoption rates would be higher, people would all have firewalls, and would keep up to date with patches. However most people simply don't care what is on the computer they have. Pirated or not, if it boots up to Windows they are happy.
Success is measured in different ways. MS is always going to be associated with BSoD, cryptic error messages, security holes, frustrating problems in Office, etc. When someone says MS, what do you first think of? Do you think of well debugged software? Solid stability? Cutting-edge features? Or are you like me and most people and think of Windows blue screening, Clippy annoying your brains out, and Vista managing to turn a new PC into a snail in performance. Then think about Apple. Apple will mostly be seen as the company with the nice-looking computers, an easy-to-use yet powerful (UNIX-based) OS, and the iPod. If you gave people a choice between getting Windows or OS X (both on the same computer and cost the same amount) I bet that many would choose OS X. MS is just what you get, Apple is what everyone wants. (Please note that I am a Linux user and don't even own a Mac so don't be calling me an Apple fanboy).