I'd love to see a "I'm a car, I'm an automobile" parody of these adverts. Macs ARE PC's too despite the howls of protest from Mac users. They are just a designer OS running on designer labeled hardware enforced by Apple's corporate policies sold at designer prices from specific authorized outlets.
They could save all the reading and replace the entire page with a "HAHA!! Suckers, what return policy? Gotcha!!" or a "this page is not supported in your browser" message set to show for EVERY browser.
No corporate policy trumps consumer law, it's the other way round. Do any consumer protection laws in the US guarantee something more that these cretins are trying to push? I used to work in a store where we were told to use "company policy is set in stone" as an excuse for getting the customer to accept something less than the law guaranteed them to.
Having said that, companies don't lobby politicians into NOT modifying the law pushing the company / consumer balance further in their favor. Judging by many laws / regulations etc you'd think they were written BY corporations and handed to the government to act on.
I agree, browsers do that, or should do that for the user. As much as people do need to learn the basics of using and maintaining a PC, developers do need to make it easy to do those maintenance tasks. In this case it appears Apple seem to be side-stepping that duty by making the cache hard to find.
As much as I can't stand Apple's business ethics, this story is a storm in a teacup. It's a beta, there's a bug, it'll be fixed. Sure it's good to get it into the public domain to force Apple to act, rather than rely on their good natures to have been informed in private and be working on a fix in private.
Another example of "basic PC skills" would be that people shouldn't be installing beta software as their regular versions, betas should only be installed and used by people who expect to find bugs and can help report / fix them. Every beta software package I've looked at has some disclaimer to that effect before it's installed, and a pointer to which version to use if you want the stable version.
It doesn't help when different developers / vendors have different ways of defining "beta". If you were to stick to the rules, Google apps wouldn't have many regular users, since almost everything they do seems to be in permanent beta, even though they are plenty stable and usable for most people.
I wonder how long it's gonna take before OEMs get pushed over the edge by Microsoft and start to tell them to fuck off. Like many abusive relationships, there's a turning point where the victim says "no more". Of course there are plenty who will die at the hands of their partners because they are too scared to say no. I'm guessing it'd take action by a few of the big players to start the ball rolling which is not likely in the near future at least.
Who do Microsoft think they are, setting hardware limits? They're a fucking SOFTWARE company, they have NO say in the hardware OEMs choose to use. If an OEM puts out a low spec PC with Vista on it and it takes an hour to boot up, customers won't buy it and the OEM loses to their competition. I know the concept of competition is hard for Microsoft to understand in terms other than "it's a bug, we must crush it" but it actually exists on some sectors, are they not happy that THEY win from every purchase, since they won't allow OEMs to sell anything other than fucking Windows? When they make hardware they can set all the hardware limits they want on THEIR stuff.
I'd love to see OEMs start to take a stand against Microsoft, or yet another anti-trust investigation into Microsoft for shit like this. They are totally unrepentant in their actions and intentions. I fail to see how anyone can continue to defend them unless they are paid to.
"it's just an online purchase and a change of product key, and the upgraded features are unlocked with a reboot"
or as many Microsoft users will interpret it:
"it's just a quick visit to a cracks site and a change of product key, and the upgraded features are unlocked with a reboot"
even then, a new product key can't change the fact that it's still Windows after a reboot.
Re:Mac abstraction affects the non-savvy...
on
Safari 4's Messy Trail
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
A basic level of user knowledge must also be to blame too. Browsers cache web sites, there's a limit to how much cache is used, perhaps it's set to a maximum by the application unless you set it otherwise. All browsers do that, it saves bandwidth, time and cycles to download each page every time you visit it.
We know this but this is one of the basics of "using a PC" that ALL users should be taught; every so often you empty your cache. How often varies on what you do with your PC. There's a difference between power users / admins and normal users as we all know. Normal users shouldn't need to learn lots of geeky stuff just to use their PC daily, but there's a basic skill set that they should be expected to know. This is one of them, along with defragging and anti-malware scans (if you're on Windows) updates etc. It's not much, just regular maintenance.
Of course, if that were to start happening PC stores would see a drop in frequency of repairs, the amount they could con out of customers for simple work or new PC sales because their 1 yr old PC is slow as hell and they think it's out-dated. Some companies like to charge for basic training too, so I'd guess there'd be plenty of people who would like to see that idea shot down in flames. Nothing like screwing the people for maintaining your ticket on the gravy train huh?
Seriously though, a PC is a versatile tool, used in most places of work now. This means that most people will have to use PCs as part of their work, so basic PC maintenance should be part of the school curriculum. Note I said "PC" not "Microsoft Windows". We're talking platform agnostic here, giving the kids generic PC knowledge which they can apply to any platform, not indoctrination camps to create the next wave of Microsoft monkeys. In other words EDGI not wanted.
I dunno, there are more options than payment to persuade someone to do your bidding. A promise to increase the per seat cost price of Windows if you refuse, making you more expensive than those who do agree is one. People who are well practiced at avoiding the law have got systems in place to exploit any block placed on them, and lawyers / lobbyists / PR stooges to help them evade justice while it's business as usual.
The thing that people tend to forget is that Microsoft have a system to essentially print money. They develop (or at least invest in) a product to bring it to market. At that point the development costs are over. The product costs peanuts to duplicate and distribute, it's even cheaper for OEMs since they use the same CD over and over, as well as no printing of a manual etc.
The customer is buying a generated number. The more unlocked features, the bigger the version, the more expensive the generated number is. After the costs of development are paid back EVERY penny made by selling numbers is profit. When they deny XP to consumers who want that instead of Vista, the idea of it being "out of stock" is a joke, just generate another number and take the money. This is NOT a physical product which has costs of parts / labor etc in every copy.
Yes, there are ongoing support costs, costs to develop new products, updates etc but your initial investment is paid. Even developing new features may not apply to the current version if there is enough evidence that it could be held back and used as a carrot to persuade people to buy the next version which includes it.
Damn/. needs a 5 minute "edit" button on posts, either that or I need to pause for a few minutes before submitting.
Microsoft are unrepentant in their behavior. They see the only wrong being committed is that some bureaucrats are refusing to roll over and be shafted like all the rest and actually trying to hold them to account. They will do everything in their power to buy / delay / soften decisions while they continue to do what they have always done. Any block put into place will be side stepped by Microsoft.
As far as the EU catching up with them is concerned; if Microsoft really thought that was likely they'd think twice. They know there are a LOT of abuses Microsoft have done and continue to do have gone unpunished. There are only so many hours in a day to investigate one repeat unrepentant offender.
I'm glad they lost this one, I hope the fine is HUGE. I hope the Intel fine opens fire on Microsoft for their part in it and are punished accordingly.
You're right on the anti-virus thing too. The more flaws Windows has when it's released, the more business opportunities for third parties to profit by plugging the holes, which in turn allows Microsoft more leeway in claiming it's someone else's fault when it goes wrong. Great for businesses, shit for the end user who has to suffer the results, or pay out at every turn.
Not unlike the Bush era "scare the public, they will sign away their rights for you to protect them from invisible enemies". With the Windows ecosphere it's "scare them about malware, viruses, trojans etc then glue a pump to their wallets and suck them dry for patches, fixes etc". Just when you think you're patched for all the latest malware, along comes a new one. It's more profitable than making a solid, secure OS to begin with.
You're right, people don't choose a PC by which browser is installed, nor do they choose by which OS is installed; despite Microsoft's insistent claims that Windows is the "preferred choice" of consumers.
So they'll be forced to unbundle IE from Windows in the EU, that only applies to the installation DVD, OEMs will still have to install A browser on the PC before the customer buys a license to use it. What's the betting we'll see an army of Microsoft reps at the OEMs making them "offers they can't refuse" to ensure IE is their "independent choice". Nudge nudge, wink wink;) Just keep the deal under you hat and keep marking "...... recommends Windows" on all your marketing stuff.
Surely the fact that it's common knowledge among IT people to "wait until SP2 before installing Windows" says a LOT about the quality of the product, and a very expensive product at that compared to Linux. It also speaks volumes for Microsoft's priorities, and their concerns for their customers.
If it's released to the public and not suitable, add SP1 and it's still not suitable, only at SP2 stage it's suitable. Is that not like the beta / RC / release states? By this Microsoft are releasing BETA software and charging a fortune for it. They are using their lobbyists to pressure institutions to spend a fortune on beta software, all the while using FUD to convince people it's more stable and secure that "final" quality FOSS alternatives.
This is not the FOSS model where stuff is released often where minor bugs are ironed out in time, it's touted as a major improvement where you pay the big money to have Microsoft's people test it to oblivion and supposedly have it working almost flawlessly from day 1......or that's the illusion they keep trying to sell us on.
Not every Linux is stable, but at least you can be assured with the "final" version of a distro is "fit for general consumption". Not only that but you have a choice to fit your needs; if you want a solid stable LTS Linux for 1,000's of corporate desktops or servers you have Debian, RedHat or CentOS, if you want bleeding edge (where some stuff won't be fully stable) you have options too, like Fedora. Either way it don't cost a fortune and the final release is NOT beta quality.
"This is the part of the issue I have a real problem with. I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity's marketing strategy."
Close but not quite accurate.
The main problem is that Microsoft are so enshrined in government circles that when they choose to end-of-life a product the government feel the heavy pressure from Microsoft lobbyists to conform and buy the new version with tax payers money rather than try a different vendor or FOSS solution. If that pressure was lifted and Microsoft lobbyists banned from government would Microsoft be so keen to end-of-life some products knowing that large government departments would have to switch and potentially NOT to their new product therefor losing their very lucrative contract? Methinks not.
"Bring out your dead" - Business model undertaker "Here's one for you, do you take cronies too?"- Public "Sure, pile it on the cart" - Business model undertaker "I'm not dead" - MediaSentry "He says he's not dead" - Business model undertaker "He soon will be" - Public "I can't take him like this, it's against union rules" - Business model undertaker "Well can you come back Thursday?" - Public "Sorry mate, I've got pay-per-view news on Thursday" - Business model undertaker "If you just hang around he'll be dead in a minute" - Public "I feel better" - MediaSentry "No you don't, you'll be stone dead in a minute" - Public "I feel like going for a walk" - MediaSentry "You're not fooling anyone you know" - Public "But I feel fine" MediaSentry
---MediaSentry is smacked around the head with the common sense stick---
"Told you you'd be dead in a minute" - Public "Dump him on the cart then, next to SCO" - Business model undertaker
As someone who wants to see Microsoft disappear ASAP, I welcome this approach, if it is what Microsoft are thinking. Go on Steve, you can't resist the temptation to shake people down for every last cent; you know you want to.
Sarcasm aside, I know they are looking at ways to make the initial purchase (if you can really call it that given Windows is never priced on a new PC, it's just part of the deal you can't opt out of) then sell addon services to give it features any modern Linux would come with on a live CD. Selling Office on a monthly basis could be appealing for people doing short courses who don't have the money to shell out on the full Microsoft Office suite and who have never heard of OpenOffice.
I know they're also looking at ways to sell them as subscriptions in an effort to cut down on unlicensed versions. Who knows, add "internet enabled via DRM checking" and you could be onto something. Pay us $5 per month and we'll let your Windows play BluRay discs, cancel your subscription and they will stop playing. All of which will require a whole suite of new BRGA (BluRay Genuine Advantage) BTGA (BlueTooth Genuine Advantage) etc.
And they wonder why Linux adoption is becoming more popular?
"The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" - Princess Leia.
Why waste these spy cameras on drug smuggling when we can catch dogs in the act of shitting on the path? Children can't play in some areas without stepping in dogshit it's time we had action on this. Why won't they think of the children.....and the parents who have to clean them afterwards. At least drugs can make you a little more chilled when scraping another round of dogshit from your soles.
Damn, this is what happens when you post tired. "Subsidized" is not correct, it was more the idea that most countries have taxed fuel heavily over the years so the prices are high where the US have resisted that so fuel has been kept low. Only in the last couple of years has the fuel prices risen to comparable levels in the US which is enough to make gas guzzling SUVs suddenly unwanted. The only other countries with low fuel prices are those who are floating in oil fields.....or put another way, the ones with big target signs on them in US government maps.
If you didn't know better, this sounds like a malware patent. Perhaps Microsoft are planning to shut malware writers down with patent infringement lawsuits. It does beg the question of who invented this crippleware concept as many have pointed out with shareware and malware both as prior art. Maybe some patent trolls funded by malware infections should have patented this first and sued Microsoft for infringement.
Microsoft were slapped in the face when consumers refused to hand over wads of cash for Vista like good little consumers. Microsoft spent way longer in their release cycle to get Vista out, and nobody wants it. They lost a LOT of income they would have been able to count in advance (judging by previous patterns). Microsoft need to make that loss up, so the logical option is to make Windows 7 more expensive, with more optional addons charged extra. Taking the previous model off the shelves also helps force the consumers hand when they won't buy your latest offering on merit.
Personally I hope Microsoft REALLY jack the price up, make people aware that Windows costs money. They've gotten away with the illusion that Windows is free for far too long. The higher they jack the price to punish consumers, the more attractive Linux becomes to people who may not have considered it otherwise. We are in the middle of a recession right now, this will have a heavy bearing on how much people spend, and what they spend it on. Keep it up Steve, make sure not to give in on the three-app-only Starter Edition; it's a winner;)
This seems to be the US government forcing US manufacturers to play catch up to most of the rest of the world in aiming for fuel efficiency, somewhere they've been determined not to invest in until they've had their arms twisted.
For decades fuel has been heavily subsidized to the US consumer so driving huge planet destroying gas guzzlers was cheap, so companies like Ford and GM had no need to spend money on R&D to get better mileage, they keep building what they have. When fuel prices rocket up consumers suddenly start to be aware how thirsty they car is and want to trade it in, meanwhile Ford ignore this trend and keep building gas guzzlers which end up glued to forecourts and force Ford to go for a govt hand out due to "unforeseen circumstances".
Manufacturers around the world haven't had the luxury of consumers with subsidized fuel so they've had to become efficient to appeal to consumers. European and especially Asian manufacturers have a market outside their own zones BECAUSE they focus on fuel efficiency. Cars build for the US market don't sell outside the US because they tend to be gas guzzlers which struggle with bends.
This has given the US manufacturers a huge gap to make up just to get to the same level as their competitors. Until their hand has been forced, they've made no efforts to do it themselves. If they complain at how hard it'll be, tell them to look outside the US....yes, believe it or not cars are not just made in the US. There are plenty of examples of how to be fuel efficient, some with better results than others, and all patented by their competitors while they were asleep at the wheel......gotta love that patent system huh? It really helps innovation.
The other way would have been to tax fuel in the US, drive the fuel prices WAAAAAAYYYYY up and see the car manufacturers feel the wrath of their customers. Doing that would likely bankrupt them, driving a lot of people out of work and destroying that sector, not to mention writing off government handouts they already got. The point of any handout to a business is to help tide them over so they can pull out of a bad patch to become stable and profitable again; it's an investment.
I don't believe the UK government has to go with the lowest bidder by law but they would have to have a damn good explanation as to why they're going with a higher bid. Since governments tend to love the idea of blind bids, who knows what the cheapest was if only certain people can access the list of bids? These are minor points but I agree with what you're saying, corners will be cut to put the lowest bid in, then the extras are jacked into the price afterwards.
Flash player it's pre-installed in Linux Mint and CrunchBang as well as some others. The reason it's not pre-installed by default in other distros is not a technical one, it's a legal one. Flash is NOT free software and can't be re-distributed in some areas. I've yet to see any Linux with Flash and the sound not work, perhaps you should look at your mixer settings. There are issues with too many sound drivers, some may work better than others. I've found ALSA is my hardware's sweet spot, where Pulse refuses to work. It's not pre-installed in Windows either.
Educational software? There's at least one distro built specifically for that. http://edubuntu.org/
Stuff to keep the kids away from nasty sites? How about Dansgardian? http://dansguardian.org/
Home automation? http://www.linuxha.com/
I've not tired any of these so I can't vouch for them but they exist if you look for them. In this case Google is your friend.
Specialty software? That is where Linux is more likely to provide than Windows for the simple reason that if only a small number of people need it, it's not worth investing a fortune building it but if people need it it can be created by enthusiastic people who need that niche filled. Not everyone can code, but a developer can be paid a bounty to create that application for you. Of course that applies regardless of platform but chances are that someone somewhere has built something to scratch their itch, and they itch in the same spot as you. Again, Google is your friend; seek and ye shall quite likely find.
By contrast small niche applications developed by companies CAN be expensive as they don't have a huge user base to recoup a profit from. If they go bankrupt and their product is proprietary you're screwed. If you're business is reliant on that software, you're livelihood is suddenly under a REAL and immediate threat, through no fault of yours. I know I'd rather dictate my own destiny, rather than leave it in the hands of others when I possibly can.
It's not the market share which keeps Linux free of viruses although it's a convincing enough argument to convince those with little knowledge. It's a combination of the open source development model and the diversity of Linux distros which make it secure.
The bad dudes can see the code so they must be at an advantage? So can the good guys. If the bad guys find a bug and write an exploit, chances are the good guys will find the bug and fix it before the exploit can be rolled out. Even if it does get rolled out, how many people are running the generic build of that software? Linux users get most of their software from the repos run by their distro. Those repos are filled by people who modify upstream software / patches etc to fit their distro's requirements, so even if the bug is missed by the upstream, chances are it'll be spotted by one of the repo people.
Even accounting for all those missed chances, how many Linux users install the same application? If you hit Gnome or KDE your potential is about maybe 35-40% of Linux users. If you hit Firefox Linux users who prefer other browsers won't be affected. Unlike Windows, Linux can be built with any combination of software packages the user / distro / admin wants. In Windows you have Windows Explorer installed, you have IE installed. Can you remove these if you don't use them and they're known to be insecure, offering holes into your system?
Linux is a fast moving, very small target for malware writers. There are too many variables to try and account for, not to mention there's a firm split between user / root with most distros enforcing the "run as user" by default. I don't doubt that as Linux market share increases, it will draw more people to try and hit Linux. I also don't doubt that fleshware is the best avenue of attack; ie convincing the user to paste a dodgy command into the terminal as root. But most of these will fail. Linux has a much more secure base to build it's market share on.
Cheers, as far as it working in Windows is concerned, don't worry about it, my main platform is Linux Mint, my XP partition is hardly ever used unless there's no Linux alternative to a task I need to achieve. Even then it's a quick in & out and back to Mint. I'd have been gutted if your comment was "nothing for Linux" lol.
Maybe it's just me but I can't see any WebKit forks of Firefox. Maybe it's there and I just never learned the name of the project, or maybe the project was just an idea some people thought about but never took off. I'd love to see a WebKit version of Firefox to see the difference in performance. I am certainly impressed with the speed of both Opera and Chrome (I had to do some Zen syncing the other day in Windows so I took the opportunity to spend some time playing with Chrome).
Slashdot Mirror
I'd love to see a "I'm a car, I'm an automobile" parody of these adverts. Macs ARE PC's too despite the howls of protest from Mac users. They are just a designer OS running on designer labeled hardware enforced by Apple's corporate policies sold at designer prices from specific authorized outlets.
"I'm a Windows PC, I'm a Mac" is accurate.
They could save all the reading and replace the entire page with a "HAHA!! Suckers, what return policy? Gotcha!!" or a "this page is not supported in your browser" message set to show for EVERY browser.
No corporate policy trumps consumer law, it's the other way round. Do any consumer protection laws in the US guarantee something more that these cretins are trying to push? I used to work in a store where we were told to use "company policy is set in stone" as an excuse for getting the customer to accept something less than the law guaranteed them to.
Having said that, companies don't lobby politicians into NOT modifying the law pushing the company / consumer balance further in their favor. Judging by many laws / regulations etc you'd think they were written BY corporations and handed to the government to act on.
I agree, browsers do that, or should do that for the user. As much as people do need to learn the basics of using and maintaining a PC, developers do need to make it easy to do those maintenance tasks. In this case it appears Apple seem to be side-stepping that duty by making the cache hard to find.
As much as I can't stand Apple's business ethics, this story is a storm in a teacup. It's a beta, there's a bug, it'll be fixed. Sure it's good to get it into the public domain to force Apple to act, rather than rely on their good natures to have been informed in private and be working on a fix in private.
Another example of "basic PC skills" would be that people shouldn't be installing beta software as their regular versions, betas should only be installed and used by people who expect to find bugs and can help report / fix them. Every beta software package I've looked at has some disclaimer to that effect before it's installed, and a pointer to which version to use if you want the stable version.
It doesn't help when different developers / vendors have different ways of defining "beta". If you were to stick to the rules, Google apps wouldn't have many regular users, since almost everything they do seems to be in permanent beta, even though they are plenty stable and usable for most people.
I wonder how long it's gonna take before OEMs get pushed over the edge by Microsoft and start to tell them to fuck off. Like many abusive relationships, there's a turning point where the victim says "no more". Of course there are plenty who will die at the hands of their partners because they are too scared to say no. I'm guessing it'd take action by a few of the big players to start the ball rolling which is not likely in the near future at least.
Who do Microsoft think they are, setting hardware limits? They're a fucking SOFTWARE company, they have NO say in the hardware OEMs choose to use. If an OEM puts out a low spec PC with Vista on it and it takes an hour to boot up, customers won't buy it and the OEM loses to their competition. I know the concept of competition is hard for Microsoft to understand in terms other than "it's a bug, we must crush it" but it actually exists on some sectors, are they not happy that THEY win from every purchase, since they won't allow OEMs to sell anything other than fucking Windows? When they make hardware they can set all the hardware limits they want on THEIR stuff.
I'd love to see OEMs start to take a stand against Microsoft, or yet another anti-trust investigation into Microsoft for shit like this. They are totally unrepentant in their actions and intentions. I fail to see how anyone can continue to defend them unless they are paid to.
"it's just an online purchase and a change of product key, and the upgraded features are unlocked with a reboot"
or as many Microsoft users will interpret it:
"it's just a quick visit to a cracks site and a change of product key, and the upgraded features are unlocked with a reboot"
even then, a new product key can't change the fact that it's still Windows after a reboot.
A basic level of user knowledge must also be to blame too. Browsers cache web sites, there's a limit to how much cache is used, perhaps it's set to a maximum by the application unless you set it otherwise. All browsers do that, it saves bandwidth, time and cycles to download each page every time you visit it.
We know this but this is one of the basics of "using a PC" that ALL users should be taught; every so often you empty your cache. How often varies on what you do with your PC. There's a difference between power users / admins and normal users as we all know. Normal users shouldn't need to learn lots of geeky stuff just to use their PC daily, but there's a basic skill set that they should be expected to know. This is one of them, along with defragging and anti-malware scans (if you're on Windows) updates etc. It's not much, just regular maintenance.
Of course, if that were to start happening PC stores would see a drop in frequency of repairs, the amount they could con out of customers for simple work or new PC sales because their 1 yr old PC is slow as hell and they think it's out-dated. Some companies like to charge for basic training too, so I'd guess there'd be plenty of people who would like to see that idea shot down in flames. Nothing like screwing the people for maintaining your ticket on the gravy train huh?
Seriously though, a PC is a versatile tool, used in most places of work now. This means that most people will have to use PCs as part of their work, so basic PC maintenance should be part of the school curriculum. Note I said "PC" not "Microsoft Windows". We're talking platform agnostic here, giving the kids generic PC knowledge which they can apply to any platform, not indoctrination camps to create the next wave of Microsoft monkeys. In other words EDGI not wanted.
I dunno, there are more options than payment to persuade someone to do your bidding. A promise to increase the per seat cost price of Windows if you refuse, making you more expensive than those who do agree is one. People who are well practiced at avoiding the law have got systems in place to exploit any block placed on them, and lawyers / lobbyists / PR stooges to help them evade justice while it's business as usual.
The thing that people tend to forget is that Microsoft have a system to essentially print money. They develop (or at least invest in) a product to bring it to market. At that point the development costs are over. The product costs peanuts to duplicate and distribute, it's even cheaper for OEMs since they use the same CD over and over, as well as no printing of a manual etc.
The customer is buying a generated number. The more unlocked features, the bigger the version, the more expensive the generated number is. After the costs of development are paid back EVERY penny made by selling numbers is profit. When they deny XP to consumers who want that instead of Vista, the idea of it being "out of stock" is a joke, just generate another number and take the money. This is NOT a physical product which has costs of parts / labor etc in every copy.
Yes, there are ongoing support costs, costs to develop new products, updates etc but your initial investment is paid. Even developing new features may not apply to the current version if there is enough evidence that it could be held back and used as a carrot to persuade people to buy the next version which includes it.
Damn /. needs a 5 minute "edit" button on posts, either that or I need to pause for a few minutes before submitting.
Microsoft are unrepentant in their behavior. They see the only wrong being committed is that some bureaucrats are refusing to roll over and be shafted like all the rest and actually trying to hold them to account. They will do everything in their power to buy / delay / soften decisions while they continue to do what they have always done. Any block put into place will be side stepped by Microsoft.
As far as the EU catching up with them is concerned; if Microsoft really thought that was likely they'd think twice. They know there are a LOT of abuses Microsoft have done and continue to do have gone unpunished. There are only so many hours in a day to investigate one repeat unrepentant offender.
I'm glad they lost this one, I hope the fine is HUGE. I hope the Intel fine opens fire on Microsoft for their part in it and are punished accordingly.
You're right on the anti-virus thing too. The more flaws Windows has when it's released, the more business opportunities for third parties to profit by plugging the holes, which in turn allows Microsoft more leeway in claiming it's someone else's fault when it goes wrong. Great for businesses, shit for the end user who has to suffer the results, or pay out at every turn.
Not unlike the Bush era "scare the public, they will sign away their rights for you to protect them from invisible enemies". With the Windows ecosphere it's "scare them about malware, viruses, trojans etc then glue a pump to their wallets and suck them dry for patches, fixes etc". Just when you think you're patched for all the latest malware, along comes a new one. It's more profitable than making a solid, secure OS to begin with.
You're right, people don't choose a PC by which browser is installed, nor do they choose by which OS is installed; despite Microsoft's insistent claims that Windows is the "preferred choice" of consumers.
So they'll be forced to unbundle IE from Windows in the EU, that only applies to the installation DVD, OEMs will still have to install A browser on the PC before the customer buys a license to use it. What's the betting we'll see an army of Microsoft reps at the OEMs making them "offers they can't refuse" to ensure IE is their "independent choice". Nudge nudge, wink wink ;) Just keep the deal under you hat and keep marking "...... recommends Windows" on all your marketing stuff.
Surely the fact that it's common knowledge among IT people to "wait until SP2 before installing Windows" says a LOT about the quality of the product, and a very expensive product at that compared to Linux. It also speaks volumes for Microsoft's priorities, and their concerns for their customers.
If it's released to the public and not suitable, add SP1 and it's still not suitable, only at SP2 stage it's suitable. Is that not like the beta / RC / release states? By this Microsoft are releasing BETA software and charging a fortune for it. They are using their lobbyists to pressure institutions to spend a fortune on beta software, all the while using FUD to convince people it's more stable and secure that "final" quality FOSS alternatives.
This is not the FOSS model where stuff is released often where minor bugs are ironed out in time, it's touted as a major improvement where you pay the big money to have Microsoft's people test it to oblivion and supposedly have it working almost flawlessly from day 1......or that's the illusion they keep trying to sell us on.
Not every Linux is stable, but at least you can be assured with the "final" version of a distro is "fit for general consumption". Not only that but you have a choice to fit your needs; if you want a solid stable LTS Linux for 1,000's of corporate desktops or servers you have Debian, RedHat or CentOS, if you want bleeding edge (where some stuff won't be fully stable) you have options too, like Fedora. Either way it don't cost a fortune and the final release is NOT beta quality.
"This is the part of the issue I have a real problem with. I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity's marketing strategy."
Close but not quite accurate.
The main problem is that Microsoft are so enshrined in government circles that when they choose to end-of-life a product the government feel the heavy pressure from Microsoft lobbyists to conform and buy the new version with tax payers money rather than try a different vendor or FOSS solution. If that pressure was lifted and Microsoft lobbyists banned from government would Microsoft be so keen to end-of-life some products knowing that large government departments would have to switch and potentially NOT to their new product therefor losing their very lucrative contract? Methinks not.
"Bring out your dead" - Business model undertaker
"Here's one for you, do you take cronies too?"- Public
"Sure, pile it on the cart" - Business model undertaker
"I'm not dead" - MediaSentry
"He says he's not dead" - Business model undertaker
"He soon will be" - Public
"I can't take him like this, it's against union rules" - Business model undertaker
"Well can you come back Thursday?" - Public
"Sorry mate, I've got pay-per-view news on Thursday" - Business model undertaker
"If you just hang around he'll be dead in a minute" - Public
"I feel better" - MediaSentry
"No you don't, you'll be stone dead in a minute" - Public
"I feel like going for a walk" - MediaSentry
"You're not fooling anyone you know" - Public
"But I feel fine" MediaSentry
---MediaSentry is smacked around the head with the common sense stick---
"Told you you'd be dead in a minute" - Public
"Dump him on the cart then, next to SCO" - Business model undertaker
As someone who wants to see Microsoft disappear ASAP, I welcome this approach, if it is what Microsoft are thinking. Go on Steve, you can't resist the temptation to shake people down for every last cent; you know you want to.
Sarcasm aside, I know they are looking at ways to make the initial purchase (if you can really call it that given Windows is never priced on a new PC, it's just part of the deal you can't opt out of) then sell addon services to give it features any modern Linux would come with on a live CD. Selling Office on a monthly basis could be appealing for people doing short courses who don't have the money to shell out on the full Microsoft Office suite and who have never heard of OpenOffice.
I know they're also looking at ways to sell them as subscriptions in an effort to cut down on unlicensed versions. Who knows, add "internet enabled via DRM checking" and you could be onto something. Pay us $5 per month and we'll let your Windows play BluRay discs, cancel your subscription and they will stop playing. All of which will require a whole suite of new BRGA (BluRay Genuine Advantage) BTGA (BlueTooth Genuine Advantage) etc.
And they wonder why Linux adoption is becoming more popular?
"The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" - Princess Leia.
Why waste these spy cameras on drug smuggling when we can catch dogs in the act of shitting on the path? Children can't play in some areas without stepping in dogshit it's time we had action on this. Why won't they think of the children.....and the parents who have to clean them afterwards. At least drugs can make you a little more chilled when scraping another round of dogshit from your soles.
Damn, this is what happens when you post tired. "Subsidized" is not correct, it was more the idea that most countries have taxed fuel heavily over the years so the prices are high where the US have resisted that so fuel has been kept low. Only in the last couple of years has the fuel prices risen to comparable levels in the US which is enough to make gas guzzling SUVs suddenly unwanted. The only other countries with low fuel prices are those who are floating in oil fields.....or put another way, the ones with big target signs on them in US government maps.
If you didn't know better, this sounds like a malware patent. Perhaps Microsoft are planning to shut malware writers down with patent infringement lawsuits. It does beg the question of who invented this crippleware concept as many have pointed out with shareware and malware both as prior art. Maybe some patent trolls funded by malware infections should have patented this first and sued Microsoft for infringement.
With or without this, if you run Windows you never owned it. Microsoft have never sold a piece of software, they never will; it's not in their makeup.
Microsoft were slapped in the face when consumers refused to hand over wads of cash for Vista like good little consumers. Microsoft spent way longer in their release cycle to get Vista out, and nobody wants it. They lost a LOT of income they would have been able to count in advance (judging by previous patterns). Microsoft need to make that loss up, so the logical option is to make Windows 7 more expensive, with more optional addons charged extra. Taking the previous model off the shelves also helps force the consumers hand when they won't buy your latest offering on merit.
;)
Personally I hope Microsoft REALLY jack the price up, make people aware that Windows costs money. They've gotten away with the illusion that Windows is free for far too long. The higher they jack the price to punish consumers, the more attractive Linux becomes to people who may not have considered it otherwise. We are in the middle of a recession right now, this will have a heavy bearing on how much people spend, and what they spend it on. Keep it up Steve, make sure not to give in on the three-app-only Starter Edition; it's a winner
This seems to be the US government forcing US manufacturers to play catch up to most of the rest of the world in aiming for fuel efficiency, somewhere they've been determined not to invest in until they've had their arms twisted.
For decades fuel has been heavily subsidized to the US consumer so driving huge planet destroying gas guzzlers was cheap, so companies like Ford and GM had no need to spend money on R&D to get better mileage, they keep building what they have. When fuel prices rocket up consumers suddenly start to be aware how thirsty they car is and want to trade it in, meanwhile Ford ignore this trend and keep building gas guzzlers which end up glued to forecourts and force Ford to go for a govt hand out due to "unforeseen circumstances".
Manufacturers around the world haven't had the luxury of consumers with subsidized fuel so they've had to become efficient to appeal to consumers. European and especially Asian manufacturers have a market outside their own zones BECAUSE they focus on fuel efficiency. Cars build for the US market don't sell outside the US because they tend to be gas guzzlers which struggle with bends.
This has given the US manufacturers a huge gap to make up just to get to the same level as their competitors. Until their hand has been forced, they've made no efforts to do it themselves. If they complain at how hard it'll be, tell them to look outside the US....yes, believe it or not cars are not just made in the US. There are plenty of examples of how to be fuel efficient, some with better results than others, and all patented by their competitors while they were asleep at the wheel......gotta love that patent system huh? It really helps innovation.
The other way would have been to tax fuel in the US, drive the fuel prices WAAAAAAYYYYY up and see the car manufacturers feel the wrath of their customers. Doing that would likely bankrupt them, driving a lot of people out of work and destroying that sector, not to mention writing off government handouts they already got. The point of any handout to a business is to help tide them over so they can pull out of a bad patch to become stable and profitable again; it's an investment.
I don't believe the UK government has to go with the lowest bidder by law but they would have to have a damn good explanation as to why they're going with a higher bid. Since governments tend to love the idea of blind bids, who knows what the cheapest was if only certain people can access the list of bids? These are minor points but I agree with what you're saying, corners will be cut to put the lowest bid in, then the extras are jacked into the price afterwards.
Flash player it's pre-installed in Linux Mint and CrunchBang as well as some others. The reason it's not pre-installed by default in other distros is not a technical one, it's a legal one. Flash is NOT free software and can't be re-distributed in some areas. I've yet to see any Linux with Flash and the sound not work, perhaps you should look at your mixer settings. There are issues with too many sound drivers, some may work better than others. I've found ALSA is my hardware's sweet spot, where Pulse refuses to work. It's not pre-installed in Windows either.
Educational software? There's at least one distro built specifically for that.
http://edubuntu.org/
Stuff to keep the kids away from nasty sites? How about Dansgardian?
http://dansguardian.org/
Home automation? http://www.linuxha.com/
I've not tired any of these so I can't vouch for them but they exist if you look for them. In this case Google is your friend.
Specialty software? That is where Linux is more likely to provide than Windows for the simple reason that if only a small number of people need it, it's not worth investing a fortune building it but if people need it it can be created by enthusiastic people who need that niche filled. Not everyone can code, but a developer can be paid a bounty to create that application for you. Of course that applies regardless of platform but chances are that someone somewhere has built something to scratch their itch, and they itch in the same spot as you. Again, Google is your friend; seek and ye shall quite likely find.
By contrast small niche applications developed by companies CAN be expensive as they don't have a huge user base to recoup a profit from. If they go bankrupt and their product is proprietary you're screwed. If you're business is reliant on that software, you're livelihood is suddenly under a REAL and immediate threat, through no fault of yours. I know I'd rather dictate my own destiny, rather than leave it in the hands of others when I possibly can.
It's not the market share which keeps Linux free of viruses although it's a convincing enough argument to convince those with little knowledge. It's a combination of the open source development model and the diversity of Linux distros which make it secure.
The bad dudes can see the code so they must be at an advantage? So can the good guys. If the bad guys find a bug and write an exploit, chances are the good guys will find the bug and fix it before the exploit can be rolled out. Even if it does get rolled out, how many people are running the generic build of that software? Linux users get most of their software from the repos run by their distro. Those repos are filled by people who modify upstream software / patches etc to fit their distro's requirements, so even if the bug is missed by the upstream, chances are it'll be spotted by one of the repo people.
Even accounting for all those missed chances, how many Linux users install the same application? If you hit Gnome or KDE your potential is about maybe 35-40% of Linux users. If you hit Firefox Linux users who prefer other browsers won't be affected. Unlike Windows, Linux can be built with any combination of software packages the user / distro / admin wants. In Windows you have Windows Explorer installed, you have IE installed. Can you remove these if you don't use them and they're known to be insecure, offering holes into your system?
Linux is a fast moving, very small target for malware writers. There are too many variables to try and account for, not to mention there's a firm split between user / root with most distros enforcing the "run as user" by default. I don't doubt that as Linux market share increases, it will draw more people to try and hit Linux. I also don't doubt that fleshware is the best avenue of attack; ie convincing the user to paste a dodgy command into the terminal as root. But most of these will fail. Linux has a much more secure base to build it's market share on.
Cheers, as far as it working in Windows is concerned, don't worry about it, my main platform is Linux Mint, my XP partition is hardly ever used unless there's no Linux alternative to a task I need to achieve. Even then it's a quick in & out and back to Mint. I'd have been gutted if your comment was "nothing for Linux" lol.
Maybe it's just me but I can't see any WebKit forks of Firefox. Maybe it's there and I just never learned the name of the project, or maybe the project was just an idea some people thought about but never took off. I'd love to see a WebKit version of Firefox to see the difference in performance. I am certainly impressed with the speed of both Opera and Chrome (I had to do some Zen syncing the other day in Windows so I took the opportunity to spend some time playing with Chrome).