I thought this article was about this story from the BBC about UK government PCs in botnets, is it a coincidence that two Windows based government botnet stories appear at the same time? Or is this just a sign of how fit Windows is for the job.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8010729.stm
"All of the infected machines were Windows-based PCs and the vulnerability was targeting security holes in Internet Explorer and Firefox."
I'm not sure they subsidize as such, but they are forced in some cases like netbooks to offer prices very low and take a lot less profit than they'd like just to avoid losing market share. The further the price drops, the more obvious the price of Windows is. A $150 Windows Tax on a $1000 PC can easily be disguised. A $150 Windows Tax on a $300 PC is half the price. When a free (cost) Linux is available on the same hardware for $150, it's VERY noticeable.
Companies like Norton pay retailers to pre-install trial-ware versions of their applications knowing that a certain amount of customers will think there is no alternative and because it says it's "security" software and they keep hearing about keeping "security" software up to date, they will pay the renewal fee when the trial period ends without wondering if there's an alternative. The more trial ware retailers shove on, the more it subsidizes the price of Windows and keeps any Linux alternative on the same hardware to almost the same price.
It's the other hand you need to look at, the fist shaped one which will deny the retailers the rights to sell Windows at all if they don't play ball and do as Microsoft tell them. They are limited on the range of products they can offer with Linux, limited on the numbers of these products they can sell, limited on how they can promote them and limited to making the customer search for them as all the default options will be Windows.
The retailers can upsell with Windows, with all the stuff Linux either don't need or comes in the repos free of charge.
Like any movie "based on" true events it would be dramatized to some degree with some stuff either inflated, ignored etc but the overall story is very believable. The one line at the end which sums up a lot for me is in Steve Job's office after he found out Bill Gates shafted him.
Jobs "But our OS is better" Gates "It doesn't matter"
I do think it shows the good and bad in all the main players quite fairly. They both had drive to make a lot of cash in computers and chose different ways to do it. They were both ruthless in their ambitions. They both shafted lots of people along the way to get their goals. They both leave a mixed legacy behind them.
I wonder how many votes a party called "The Dastardly Evildoers" would get, specially if their leader was called Dick......no, not Dick Cheney before anyone points out that he'd suit the role rather well.
It's intended to be sold at a price point comparable to a free (cost) Linux. It's intended to be an up-sell to a bigger license. It's intended to be a lighting rod on which to blame piracy for lack of sales.
The number limited to 3 just baffles me, especially after their own developer summits found that most users have an average of between 11 & 15 applications open at any one time. On netbooks with limited hardware I do understand the concept of having only a few applications open at once, but educating customers that a netbook is NOT a little laptop is a better approach that enforcing a limit. It's even more baffling that they want to introduce it to notebooks now too, considering a notebook has no technical reasons to have enforced limits.
Personally I welcome this move by Microsoft, as I do every other dumbass one which will help tip more people over the edge and away from Microsoft. Keep fighting the good fight Mr Ballmer.
I'd hate to have to use Windows like this and be forced to choose between an anti-virus, anti-spyware and firewall application just so I could surf the web and talk on Skype at the same time. On the bright side, not having all those security services filling the gaps Microsoft leave behind would make the PC snappier....for a few minutes until it gets infected.
That's the question. If it's an OS / browser enabled / disabled filter then I'm all for it. If that's the implementation that it will be voluntary for every PC owner / administrator to choose for themselves. If it's at a level beyond the user, then that question does need answered satisfactorily before I'd back it.
I would say this though, even the religious head cases who would rather it didn't exist ain't stupid enough to try and force the blocking of legal porn in the civilized world. They know that any attempt to do that would swing the balance of potential supporters / potential advisories way in the wrong direction. A solution which blocks it for those who don't want to see it while keeping it available for those who do would win a lot of support.
A real "think of the children" issue and solution instead of all the times they use it as a pitch fork battle cry to force an issue totally disconnected from protecting the children.
We really do, we fight on their behalf by signing secret deals with Phorm to spy on their traffic for their own good, we use our lawyers to dodge any legal fallout from those trials to ensure our customers continue to be spied on for an affordable price, as any fine would be passed onto them. We continue to work with Phorm. We now block some content we know our customers would prefer wasn't online at all and urge other ISPs to follow suit. Among our plans for the future are blocking gambling sites in conjunction with hefty donations from brick and mortar gambling establishments.
Yours, The Sarcastic & Totally Bougus BT Management.
From what I read on the IWF site, they are not trying to be anything like a moral crusader, what they are trying to do is have a worldwide voluntary code which webmasters classify their content as "adult only" which allows a more effective filtering system for parents and religious types who don't want to be exposed to it. An open standard to use in a filter is much more effective in regards to false positives etc than we currently have. While we dont have any system in place, countries / ISPs / politicians are free to make their lists manually to favour their own moral agenda. Access to legal porn by adults ain't the issue. As far as TPB being blocked, I'd imagine a midnight visit by the MPAA / RIAA whispering sweet $$$ in their ears may have more to do with the decision to block it.
At first when I read the title in Thunderbird I rolled my eyes rather cynically, but it appears they have genuine functionality to help the troops on the ground. That being the case, why not give em iPhones and iPods? As a Linux user and FOSS advocate I'd rather it wasn't a closed platform but it may well be the best option so again, why not? Anything which can potentially help communicating with the locals is a potential peacemaker, which saves lives on all sides.
The cynical part of me wonders if it's partly a sweetener to quell the anger of the troops not being properly equipped with stuff they need to keep them alive. No body armor for the APCs but here's an iPod. The US funding issue may well be different from the UK, where it's certainly an issue.
Not unlike a magician who wants your attention in one area while he prepares the punchline. Sam wants us not for focus on cost as Microsoft can't compete there, perhaps he;d prefer we focus on security instead? Dammit I want conflicker running on Linux so we can have a fair comparison.
Seriously, we're not focusing too much on price, it's more the patent threats, FUD and corruption emanating from Microsoft via their "partners" both disclosed and undisclosed that we're focusing on. There are plenty of vectors Microsoft can't compete in, price is only one of them. They use all sorts of imaginary stuff to attack us, why shouldn't we use real stuff to fight our corner?
I wasn't aware you could purchase MS Office at all, they sell you a license to use it under certain restrictions and conditions but you never own it, even if you do have a fancy box, manual and DVD. Have Microsoft changed their policies and sold their very first copy of MS Office while I wasn't looking?
Bear arms are fine if the bear in question is still attached to them, and in a fit state to fight and clued in enough to the cause to fight FOR you. If not, then the right to bear arms is pointless, you may as well have the right to shit on the moon.
Then these people have went to dodgy retailers who don't deserve the custom, either that or they have their own ideas on what Linux is / isn't and assume they know better than the retailers. Perhaps this "knowledge" comes from the Microsoft press; you know, all those "independents" who are paid / sponsored by Microsoft. I am curious as to the "constant problems" you refer to though. Do they include:
* I can't run my Windows games * I can't run a bloated Microsoft Office * It's too quick to boot up and shut down * My viruses won't work * This interface is just different enough that a keypad-like interface with big icons for functions is too much from my Microsoft indoctrinated mind to adapt to
Admittedly the last three are sarcastic but the point remains. Some people don't want to even consider change, even if the change is food for them. Bill Gates knew that, which is why he worked so hard to get Windows on every PC by default.
XP was designed with the usual (until Windows 7) Microsoft "build software to take more resources, to force people to buy new hardware to run it, which means another Windows license" revenue stream in mind. In short, XP was designed for desktops, not netbooks. Linux is both modular and flexible. This allows it to be easily compiled and designed for netbooks with all the modules for hardware not on the netbook left out. This makes it perform much better than XP ever will on netbooks.
"Perhaps you'd care to explain the epic fail of Linux on netbooks where they had 100% market penetration from the outset? I mean, come on FFS. Linux started out with 100% market share for what has to be the largest growing sector in computing. Yet here we are 18 months later and Linux netbooks are forming under 10% of sales according to NPD. That's how much of a FAIL Linux is in usability."
Ahh the wonders of the Microsoft press and the gullibility of those who believe and repeat them as if they tell the story as it is. The one part you did get correct there was that at the start Linux DID have 100% of the market in netbooks.
Yet again Microsoft missed a big event and were scrambling around after the fact to get in and ensure that Linux wasn't allowed to flourish in a new market. They know Vista don't have a chance in hell of running on a netbook and they don't have anything suited to it so XP is given a stay of execution and gets hollowed out to fit onto a netbook. Retailers and OEMs are then bullied into only offering netbooks with XP, or making the Linux ones "out of stock" when queries come in.
The very fact that XP (an 8 year old OS) got a stay of execution demonstrates the threat Linux is on the netbook. If the user experience was an "epic fail" as you put it, the netbook would never have taken off and Microsoft wouldn't have to keep XP alive in a hollowed out form to keep market share, let alone offer it for pennies just to keep Linux out.
You forget it's in the retailers interests to get the customer to buy the hobbled XP version as they make more money in upselling all the extras needed to keep Windows running when it connects to the internet. They know with Windows it will need regular malware cleaning, and periodical wiping / reinstalling, which they charge for. Windows is never in the customers interests, it's in the retailers interests. Not to mention Microsoft shafting them if they dare to get too cosey with Linux.
Some Linux netbooks are being returned but mostly due to either a bad choice of Linux distro to put on it, offering little in the way of support and not telling customers they are getting Linux when they buy it. People who go to proper retailers KNOW they are buying Linux, they KNOW they are not getting XP. They KNOW they're gonna have to learn a few new skills to use it. They see a netbook more as an appliance than a PC, like a cell phone where it will have a different OS but it's easy to adapt to, and within a few days of use they will be flying with it.
People who buy from a retailer who convinces them a netbook is just a "cheap laptop" will be disappointed regardless of the OS on it as it's not designed to replace a laptop. Linux is more efficient and designed for lighter hardware so that disappointment will be less but still there.
HAHAHAHAHA Ya gotta love it, personally I hoped for a "flamebait" rather than a "troll" from the astroturfers but either way I draw mod points. Keep 'em coming guys. That's assuming the sense of humor blue screened you ya.
Misconceptions work well for Microsoft, they use them very wisely. They try to tell you that (insert current version of Windows here) is the most popular yet while ignoring the reality. People don't CHOOSE Windows, they choose to buy a new PC, and more often than not the ONLY option they have is Windows. Even when they ask for the PC without Windows they are often told it's not allowed, so they have to pay for something they never intend to use, counting as a Windows sale, even if Linux is running on that hardware by the end of the day. Some people do choose Windows, but everyone else only has a choice of which edition of the current Windows to buy.
Microsoft and their PR partners like to have people talk of "PC viruses" when there are no such things, there are "Windows viruses". No doubt some will eventually appear to target Linux and Apple, which will no doubt be labeled by the same media as "Linux viruses" or "Mac viruses". Making people think "PC" and "Windows" is the same thing makes people think that they'll have all the same Windows specific issues with any other OS, and if any other OS was good enough it'd be in Microsoft's position in stores. Anyone who knows Microsoft knows that to be false but like many have said, he who controls the media controls the message.
Thank you for pointing out the other part of this strategy; Microsoft continue to bully and threaten retailers and OEMs into only offering their customers Windows. It stems the flow of deserters somewhat. Things have changed to some degree in recent years though. Some retailers DO offer Linux options on some models, even if you do have to jump through hoops to find them. Netbooks have given Linux a platform it never had years ago. Vista is seen by many as a turd and people want anything but Vista. Linux's poster child Ubuntu IS starting to make it's way into the mainstream as a credible alternative to the pain and discomfort imposed upon PC use by Microsoft.
What we see is dependent on our circles of living. Many people are trying to avoid having to buy a new PC right now because Microsoft have refused to allow them to buy XP with it. They will hold off if they can until Windows 7, or if they need a new PC before then, they will look at alternatives. To my knowledge the XP downgrade racket was only offered to corporations, not regular home users. Even this is uncertain with cut off dates followed by extensions and exceptions. Even those who are desperate enough to pay extra for an old model to avoid the current one will still be listed as a Vista sale, even if it leaves the store with XP installed.
Yes Microsoft still have a HUGE monopoly on desktops which they will abuse to cut out any competition but they Vista has cost them.
I wonder if "RC" in Microsoft terminology means "Remote Controlled" since almost every critical update description has some wording along the lines of "allows a remote user to execute code on your system and control.....". Every "critical" update apart from the WGA which is critical in helping Microsoft shut down functions of any PC the WGA deems is a pirated version of Windows. Come to think of it, this allows a remote party to control your PC too.
They know people hate Vista. They know many saw it as the last straw with Windows and switched away from Windows. They know that a lot more are clinging onto XP as if it's their only life raft in a storm. They know that each day that Vista is the current Windows is another day XP users will be tempted to switch away. By holding out the new "Windows which will deliver on all your hopes" just a little longer, that they can stay those hands from making the switch.
The same happened with the Sega Saturm / Sony Playstation. Sega got their console onto the shelves about 1 month before Sony, and console fans were split on whether to wait that little bit longer for the Playstation or buy the Saturn now. Even if the Playstation was delayed a little bit, or out of stock, the carrot was always there, dangling just out of reach but within distance.
By dangling the release in "leaks" which may change later, and making it available to a few, it appears to be very exclusive, which sends another PR message that it's "special". By holding the download window open for a short time, it forces people who want it to act within that window, meaning that it's on their minds during that time. It will translate into a flurry of astorturfing blogs which will no doubt be dugg by fellow astroturfers flaming the fires. All of which sends the message to consumers to just hold on, the cavalry is just around the corner and is on it's way to save you from Vista. All of which conveniently forgets to mention that Vista is just a different regiment under the same flag as the cavalry.
The sarcastic response would be "try Red Flag Linux" but the serious response would be to look at a fully open *nix variant such as Debian, or one of the BSDs. I'm not familiar with any of the BSDs but I'm aware that security is a high priority with them. My reluctance with BSD is the lack of "rich entertainment" (for want of a better description) applications easily installable, which won't be an issue (I'd imagine) for the needs of the Dhali Lama.
For the BSD fans, this is NOT meant to flame, just to point out that for users who expect "modern" or "proprietary" stuff like Flash, mp3 support Linux is a better option. If you don't need those type of features then BSD is well worth a look. Any new OS will need new learning, in that regard BSD or Linux makes no difference.
If Microsoft went to the US govt a few years back to offer the DOJ / FBI / CIA etc a blind eye in spyware to help "catch terrorists" in return for an easy ride in any anti-trust investigations. If the govt have a vested interest in most people running Windows so they can infect and spy on it's users, the last thing they want is Microsoft losing it's user base to something they can't infect easily. If the concept of open source takes off, slipping an application like that in will be even harder. It's easier to deal with one person behind the scenes without any paper trail.
The problem when everything is done behind closed doors between nobody you can trust is that you just never know what's been arranged or agreed. All you do know is what their PR departments have said.
The Bush era GOP embraced the religious lunatics so much that the rest of America were eventually turned off by them and kicked them out of office. Like any ousted party, their ONLY role in life is to get back into power, which means fooling enough people who they'd turned off before to vote for them again. For this, they will try what the polls tell them they need to try, regardless of their real plans when they get back into power. Those plans will no doubt fall back to mirror the religious lunatics who can be relied on to "vote God". The same applies with the party in power, their ONLY goal is to stay in power. Beyond that, everything is false promises and rhetoric.
I used to think the GOP were all about the rich, conservative middle / upper classes who seek to be allowed to profit from everything without any limitations, and let the poor carry the tax burden. I used to believe the Democrats were a slightly more socialist version of the GOP. I used to think Obamma would be willing to change a few things in the balance of corporation / government / people, but the more I see his decisions, the more I was right to think that the system IS broken and needs to be changed in favor of the tax paying US people.
Politicians deal in speeches. Speeches talk AT the people, not WITH them. Speeches are pre-planned rhetoric carefully worded to mean many things to many audiences as well as written FOR a specific audience. Speeches are rehearsed and performed; not unlike actors on stage in a play. Actors play roles which are not them, doing stuff they wouldn't do, saying stuff they wouldn't say. It's performance lying....and politicians wonder why they are never believed.
Slashdot Mirror
For answer see parent post, lol.
I thought this article was about this story from the BBC about UK government PCs in botnets, is it a coincidence that two Windows based government botnet stories appear at the same time? Or is this just a sign of how fit Windows is for the job.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8010729.stm
"All of the infected machines were Windows-based PCs and the vulnerability was targeting security holes in Internet Explorer and Firefox."
I'm not sure they subsidize as such, but they are forced in some cases like netbooks to offer prices very low and take a lot less profit than they'd like just to avoid losing market share. The further the price drops, the more obvious the price of Windows is. A $150 Windows Tax on a $1000 PC can easily be disguised. A $150 Windows Tax on a $300 PC is half the price. When a free (cost) Linux is available on the same hardware for $150, it's VERY noticeable.
Companies like Norton pay retailers to pre-install trial-ware versions of their applications knowing that a certain amount of customers will think there is no alternative and because it says it's "security" software and they keep hearing about keeping "security" software up to date, they will pay the renewal fee when the trial period ends without wondering if there's an alternative. The more trial ware retailers shove on, the more it subsidizes the price of Windows and keeps any Linux alternative on the same hardware to almost the same price.
It's the other hand you need to look at, the fist shaped one which will deny the retailers the rights to sell Windows at all if they don't play ball and do as Microsoft tell them. They are limited on the range of products they can offer with Linux, limited on the numbers of these products they can sell, limited on how they can promote them and limited to making the customer search for them as all the default options will be Windows.
The retailers can upsell with Windows, with all the stuff Linux either don't need or comes in the repos free of charge.
Mod +1 Funny.
Like any movie "based on" true events it would be dramatized to some degree with some stuff either inflated, ignored etc but the overall story is very believable. The one line at the end which sums up a lot for me is in Steve Job's office after he found out Bill Gates shafted him.
Jobs "But our OS is better"
Gates "It doesn't matter"
I do think it shows the good and bad in all the main players quite fairly. They both had drive to make a lot of cash in computers and chose different ways to do it. They were both ruthless in their ambitions. They both shafted lots of people along the way to get their goals. They both leave a mixed legacy behind them.
I wonder how many votes a party called "The Dastardly Evildoers" would get, specially if their leader was called Dick......no, not Dick Cheney before anyone points out that he'd suit the role rather well.
It's intended to be sold at a price point comparable to a free (cost) Linux. It's intended to be an up-sell to a bigger license. It's intended to be a lighting rod on which to blame piracy for lack of sales.
The number limited to 3 just baffles me, especially after their own developer summits found that most users have an average of between 11 & 15 applications open at any one time. On netbooks with limited hardware I do understand the concept of having only a few applications open at once, but educating customers that a netbook is NOT a little laptop is a better approach that enforcing a limit. It's even more baffling that they want to introduce it to notebooks now too, considering a notebook has no technical reasons to have enforced limits.
Personally I welcome this move by Microsoft, as I do every other dumbass one which will help tip more people over the edge and away from Microsoft. Keep fighting the good fight Mr Ballmer.
I'd hate to have to use Windows like this and be forced to choose between an anti-virus, anti-spyware and firewall application just so I could surf the web and talk on Skype at the same time. On the bright side, not having all those security services filling the gaps Microsoft leave behind would make the PC snappier....for a few minutes until it gets infected.
That's the question. If it's an OS / browser enabled / disabled filter then I'm all for it. If that's the implementation that it will be voluntary for every PC owner / administrator to choose for themselves. If it's at a level beyond the user, then that question does need answered satisfactorily before I'd back it.
I would say this though, even the religious head cases who would rather it didn't exist ain't stupid enough to try and force the blocking of legal porn in the civilized world. They know that any attempt to do that would swing the balance of potential supporters / potential advisories way in the wrong direction. A solution which blocks it for those who don't want to see it while keeping it available for those who do would win a lot of support.
A real "think of the children" issue and solution instead of all the times they use it as a pitch fork battle cry to force an issue totally disconnected from protecting the children.
We really do, we fight on their behalf by signing secret deals with Phorm to spy on their traffic for their own good, we use our lawyers to dodge any legal fallout from those trials to ensure our customers continue to be spied on for an affordable price, as any fine would be passed onto them. We continue to work with Phorm. We now block some content we know our customers would prefer wasn't online at all and urge other ISPs to follow suit. Among our plans for the future are blocking gambling sites in conjunction with hefty donations from brick and mortar gambling establishments.
Yours,
The Sarcastic & Totally Bougus BT Management.
From what I read on the IWF site, they are not trying to be anything like a moral crusader, what they are trying to do is have a worldwide voluntary code which webmasters classify their content as "adult only" which allows a more effective filtering system for parents and religious types who don't want to be exposed to it. An open standard to use in a filter is much more effective in regards to false positives etc than we currently have. While we dont have any system in place, countries / ISPs / politicians are free to make their lists manually to favour their own moral agenda. Access to legal porn by adults ain't the issue. As far as TPB being blocked, I'd imagine a midnight visit by the MPAA / RIAA whispering sweet $$$ in their ears may have more to do with the decision to block it.
At first when I read the title in Thunderbird I rolled my eyes rather cynically, but it appears they have genuine functionality to help the troops on the ground. That being the case, why not give em iPhones and iPods? As a Linux user and FOSS advocate I'd rather it wasn't a closed platform but it may well be the best option so again, why not? Anything which can potentially help communicating with the locals is a potential peacemaker, which saves lives on all sides.
The cynical part of me wonders if it's partly a sweetener to quell the anger of the troops not being properly equipped with stuff they need to keep them alive. No body armor for the APCs but here's an iPod. The US funding issue may well be different from the UK, where it's certainly an issue.
Why do I suddenly feel a "Save BooBoo & Yogi" campaign coming on? How can a an unarmed bear get picinic baskets?
Not unlike a magician who wants your attention in one area while he prepares the punchline. Sam wants us not for focus on cost as Microsoft can't compete there, perhaps he;d prefer we focus on security instead? Dammit I want conflicker running on Linux so we can have a fair comparison.
Seriously, we're not focusing too much on price, it's more the patent threats, FUD and corruption emanating from Microsoft via their "partners" both disclosed and undisclosed that we're focusing on. There are plenty of vectors Microsoft can't compete in, price is only one of them. They use all sorts of imaginary stuff to attack us, why shouldn't we use real stuff to fight our corner?
I wasn't aware you could purchase MS Office at all, they sell you a license to use it under certain restrictions and conditions but you never own it, even if you do have a fancy box, manual and DVD. Have Microsoft changed their policies and sold their very first copy of MS Office while I wasn't looking?
Bear arms are fine if the bear in question is still attached to them, and in a fit state to fight and clued in enough to the cause to fight FOR you. If not, then the right to bear arms is pointless, you may as well have the right to shit on the moon.
Then these people have went to dodgy retailers who don't deserve the custom, either that or they have their own ideas on what Linux is / isn't and assume they know better than the retailers. Perhaps this "knowledge" comes from the Microsoft press; you know, all those "independents" who are paid / sponsored by Microsoft. I am curious as to the "constant problems" you refer to though. Do they include:
* I can't run my Windows games
* I can't run a bloated Microsoft Office
* It's too quick to boot up and shut down
* My viruses won't work
* This interface is just different enough that a keypad-like interface with big icons for functions is too much from my Microsoft indoctrinated mind to adapt to
Admittedly the last three are sarcastic but the point remains. Some people don't want to even consider change, even if the change is food for them. Bill Gates knew that, which is why he worked so hard to get Windows on every PC by default.
XP was designed with the usual (until Windows 7) Microsoft "build software to take more resources, to force people to buy new hardware to run it, which means another Windows license" revenue stream in mind. In short, XP was designed for desktops, not netbooks. Linux is both modular and flexible. This allows it to be easily compiled and designed for netbooks with all the modules for hardware not on the netbook left out. This makes it perform much better than XP ever will on netbooks.
"Perhaps you'd care to explain the epic fail of Linux on netbooks where they had 100% market penetration from the outset? I mean, come on FFS. Linux started out with 100% market share for what has to be the largest growing sector in computing. Yet here we are 18 months later and Linux netbooks are forming under 10% of sales according to NPD. That's how much of a FAIL Linux is in usability."
Ahh the wonders of the Microsoft press and the gullibility of those who believe and repeat them as if they tell the story as it is. The one part you did get correct there was that at the start Linux DID have 100% of the market in netbooks.
Yet again Microsoft missed a big event and were scrambling around after the fact to get in and ensure that Linux wasn't allowed to flourish in a new market. They know Vista don't have a chance in hell of running on a netbook and they don't have anything suited to it so XP is given a stay of execution and gets hollowed out to fit onto a netbook. Retailers and OEMs are then bullied into only offering netbooks with XP, or making the Linux ones "out of stock" when queries come in.
The very fact that XP (an 8 year old OS) got a stay of execution demonstrates the threat Linux is on the netbook. If the user experience was an "epic fail" as you put it, the netbook would never have taken off and Microsoft wouldn't have to keep XP alive in a hollowed out form to keep market share, let alone offer it for pennies just to keep Linux out.
You forget it's in the retailers interests to get the customer to buy the hobbled XP version as they make more money in upselling all the extras needed to keep Windows running when it connects to the internet. They know with Windows it will need regular malware cleaning, and periodical wiping / reinstalling, which they charge for. Windows is never in the customers interests, it's in the retailers interests. Not to mention Microsoft shafting them if they dare to get too cosey with Linux.
Some Linux netbooks are being returned but mostly due to either a bad choice of Linux distro to put on it, offering little in the way of support and not telling customers they are getting Linux when they buy it. People who go to proper retailers KNOW they are buying Linux, they KNOW they are not getting XP. They KNOW they're gonna have to learn a few new skills to use it. They see a netbook more as an appliance than a PC, like a cell phone where it will have a different OS but it's easy to adapt to, and within a few days of use they will be flying with it.
People who buy from a retailer who convinces them a netbook is just a "cheap laptop" will be disappointed regardless of the OS on it as it's not designed to replace a laptop. Linux is more efficient and designed for lighter hardware so that disappointment will be less but still there.
HAHAHAHAHA Ya gotta love it, personally I hoped for a "flamebait" rather than a "troll" from the astroturfers but either way I draw mod points. Keep 'em coming guys. That's assuming the sense of humor blue screened you ya.
Misconceptions work well for Microsoft, they use them very wisely. They try to tell you that (insert current version of Windows here) is the most popular yet while ignoring the reality. People don't CHOOSE Windows, they choose to buy a new PC, and more often than not the ONLY option they have is Windows. Even when they ask for the PC without Windows they are often told it's not allowed, so they have to pay for something they never intend to use, counting as a Windows sale, even if Linux is running on that hardware by the end of the day. Some people do choose Windows, but everyone else only has a choice of which edition of the current Windows to buy.
Microsoft and their PR partners like to have people talk of "PC viruses" when there are no such things, there are "Windows viruses". No doubt some will eventually appear to target Linux and Apple, which will no doubt be labeled by the same media as "Linux viruses" or "Mac viruses". Making people think "PC" and "Windows" is the same thing makes people think that they'll have all the same Windows specific issues with any other OS, and if any other OS was good enough it'd be in Microsoft's position in stores. Anyone who knows Microsoft knows that to be false but like many have said, he who controls the media controls the message.
Thank you for pointing out the other part of this strategy; Microsoft continue to bully and threaten retailers and OEMs into only offering their customers Windows. It stems the flow of deserters somewhat. Things have changed to some degree in recent years though. Some retailers DO offer Linux options on some models, even if you do have to jump through hoops to find them. Netbooks have given Linux a platform it never had years ago. Vista is seen by many as a turd and people want anything but Vista. Linux's poster child Ubuntu IS starting to make it's way into the mainstream as a credible alternative to the pain and discomfort imposed upon PC use by Microsoft.
What we see is dependent on our circles of living. Many people are trying to avoid having to buy a new PC right now because Microsoft have refused to allow them to buy XP with it. They will hold off if they can until Windows 7, or if they need a new PC before then, they will look at alternatives. To my knowledge the XP downgrade racket was only offered to corporations, not regular home users. Even this is uncertain with cut off dates followed by extensions and exceptions. Even those who are desperate enough to pay extra for an old model to avoid the current one will still be listed as a Vista sale, even if it leaves the store with XP installed.
Yes Microsoft still have a HUGE monopoly on desktops which they will abuse to cut out any competition but they Vista has cost them.
I wonder if "RC" in Microsoft terminology means "Remote Controlled" since almost every critical update description has some wording along the lines of "allows a remote user to execute code on your system and control.....". Every "critical" update apart from the WGA which is critical in helping Microsoft shut down functions of any PC the WGA deems is a pirated version of Windows. Come to think of it, this allows a remote party to control your PC too.
They know people hate Vista. They know many saw it as the last straw with Windows and switched away from Windows. They know that a lot more are clinging onto XP as if it's their only life raft in a storm. They know that each day that Vista is the current Windows is another day XP users will be tempted to switch away. By holding out the new "Windows which will deliver on all your hopes" just a little longer, that they can stay those hands from making the switch.
The same happened with the Sega Saturm / Sony Playstation. Sega got their console onto the shelves about 1 month before Sony, and console fans were split on whether to wait that little bit longer for the Playstation or buy the Saturn now. Even if the Playstation was delayed a little bit, or out of stock, the carrot was always there, dangling just out of reach but within distance.
By dangling the release in "leaks" which may change later, and making it available to a few, it appears to be very exclusive, which sends another PR message that it's "special". By holding the download window open for a short time, it forces people who want it to act within that window, meaning that it's on their minds during that time. It will translate into a flurry of astorturfing blogs which will no doubt be dugg by fellow astroturfers flaming the fires. All of which sends the message to consumers to just hold on, the cavalry is just around the corner and is on it's way to save you from Vista. All of which conveniently forgets to mention that Vista is just a different regiment under the same flag as the cavalry.
The sarcastic response would be "try Red Flag Linux" but the serious response would be to look at a fully open *nix variant such as Debian, or one of the BSDs. I'm not familiar with any of the BSDs but I'm aware that security is a high priority with them. My reluctance with BSD is the lack of "rich entertainment" (for want of a better description) applications easily installable, which won't be an issue (I'd imagine) for the needs of the Dhali Lama.
For the BSD fans, this is NOT meant to flame, just to point out that for users who expect "modern" or "proprietary" stuff like Flash, mp3 support Linux is a better option. If you don't need those type of features then BSD is well worth a look. Any new OS will need new learning, in that regard BSD or Linux makes no difference.
If Microsoft went to the US govt a few years back to offer the DOJ / FBI / CIA etc a blind eye in spyware to help "catch terrorists" in return for an easy ride in any anti-trust investigations. If the govt have a vested interest in most people running Windows so they can infect and spy on it's users, the last thing they want is Microsoft losing it's user base to something they can't infect easily. If the concept of open source takes off, slipping an application like that in will be even harder. It's easier to deal with one person behind the scenes without any paper trail.
The problem when everything is done behind closed doors between nobody you can trust is that you just never know what's been arranged or agreed. All you do know is what their PR departments have said.
The Bush era GOP embraced the religious lunatics so much that the rest of America were eventually turned off by them and kicked them out of office. Like any ousted party, their ONLY role in life is to get back into power, which means fooling enough people who they'd turned off before to vote for them again. For this, they will try what the polls tell them they need to try, regardless of their real plans when they get back into power. Those plans will no doubt fall back to mirror the religious lunatics who can be relied on to "vote God". The same applies with the party in power, their ONLY goal is to stay in power. Beyond that, everything is false promises and rhetoric.
I used to think the GOP were all about the rich, conservative middle / upper classes who seek to be allowed to profit from everything without any limitations, and let the poor carry the tax burden. I used to believe the Democrats were a slightly more socialist version of the GOP. I used to think Obamma would be willing to change a few things in the balance of corporation / government / people, but the more I see his decisions, the more I was right to think that the system IS broken and needs to be changed in favor of the tax paying US people.
Politicians deal in speeches. Speeches talk AT the people, not WITH them. Speeches are pre-planned rhetoric carefully worded to mean many things to many audiences as well as written FOR a specific audience. Speeches are rehearsed and performed; not unlike actors on stage in a play. Actors play roles which are not them, doing stuff they wouldn't do, saying stuff they wouldn't say. It's performance lying....and politicians wonder why they are never believed.