Remember, this is corporations. What the users want is essentially pointless.
The key here is that management doesn't want the way Windows takes them. The older ones currently have flashbacks to the days of IBM's dominance, where big blue could essentially tell them to grin and bear it or close shop, and if you were deep enough in the Blue, they essentially ran your IT department, and they did it the way THEY thought is good. This was actually what made MS big in the first place, because they were maybe not better than IBM in many aspects, but they were at least not IBM. And now MS is just the same, patronizing you in your IT department ("I know when you should patch!") and carpet bombing those that dare to resist with legal bullshit. This is IBM in the 1980s. And you'd be surprised how many current CEOs had to deal with petty IBM bullshit in the 80s when they started their careers.
And of course you have to deal a lot with CEOs' egos and their inability to suffer that someone tells them what to do without coating it as a "suggestion".
That's also wrong. Remember the outcry when Win8 came with the "tiles"? You might argue that that was ahead, but in the end, people hated it.
If you want to convince people that they should move to your flavor, you have to have the flavor they know and like, or at the very least got comfortable with.
I have never said that Android or iOS are better (actually, they're worse). But what is the alternative? Gimme one and I move.
No, Win10 on mobile isn't. For exactly the same damn reason.
The mobile ship has sailed, at least for now. Yes, I do have a mobile phone, simply out of necessity. And I have a quite restrictive company policy concerning what content it may transport. But that's besides the point.
The difference between mobile and desktop devices is that with the latter, you DO actually have a non-invasive, non-spying choice. With the former, you can only hope that one day you will. But for desktops, it is already here.
First, it's not home users that are trying the switch. Nobody gives a shit whether you in your basement go for Linux. Even if you really go through with your plan, you're one lost license. Ok, ok, two because you have that laptop. This is corporations with thousands of licenses. And there's a long, long tail of jobs (and consultant jobs!) hanging on it. You already have a lot of Linux machines in the server market (we actually have more installations of RHEL than MS-Server running), a lot of the backend infrastructure of large corporations is already OS-agnostic (or at the very least not strictly MS-centric). Many of our customers "need" Microsoft only because they use MS-Office and AD, everything else is already easy to migrate or would already run smoother in a Linux desktop environment.
Second, the Linux desktop has always been about 10 years behind Windows. Today, though, this means that it's about on par with what WinXP was. Which is for most people "good enough". It is possible to tweak Linux so that the average user doesn't need to learn much.
And corporations already have Linux admins for the aforementioned Linux servers, so administrating the desktops isn't a big deal anymore either.
Funny enough, the biggest issue for many is the supporters who know too little about Linux to sensibly aid the workers, and training CC-agents is usually not really very popular. In other words, if you have at least a nominal level of knowledge about Linux and need a CC part time job to have some money while studying, this is probably going to be a good time for you.
So no, while the "average user" was supposed to make the "year of the Desktop" come true for Linux it was nothing but a wet dream. But with corporations now seriously considering the switch, this is a whole different level.
Extremists on both sides will. You'll have religious nuts who will go out of their way to ensure anyone and everyone promoting tolerance towards transgender and gay people will get plastered with demonetization requests, and SJWs will do the same with anything and everything dealing with religious content and anything else that's "white privilege promoting" in their eyes.
In the end, the sane people will be the ones losing out. Because when the dust settles after they're done, what's left is cat videos and some teen "youtube stars" promoting the crappy products they created that even your average homeshopping channel wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
Not really, it's a win for those that have enough idiots paying them regardless of views. They can keep spreading their bullshit while everyone debunking it will have to pack and go.
It also means that sane people can't post videos debunking the bullshit some preachers spread anymore if they want to make a living that way. So the religious nuts and those trying to milk idiots believing in that bull should be good, after all, the idiots they're preaching to keep sending them money, no need to monetize the videos themselves.
I'm doing security consulting for a living. Many of our customers are currently evaluating a replacement for their aging Windows 7 systems. And quite a few of them are actually and seriously considering moving away from Windows rather than moving towards Win10, or at the very least putting some money behind evaluating whether such a move is feasible.
Can you imagine just HOW much this spyware has to shake up CEOs that they would rather consider retraining thousands of workers to use a Linux based system than to use Windows 10?
The working market would definitely turn from a buyer's into a seller's market in many areas. Employers will probably have to offer quite a bit different incentives to work for them but "only" money, just as you say. Right now, many can get away with offering shitty pay for a shitty job, especially in areas where jobs are scarce, knowing that you have no option but to bite the bullet. But with UBI, they will quickly have to offer a job worth getting.
With an UBI, that number will increase. Because then even making maybe 200 bucks a month might well be acceptable to some.
I do predict, though, that you'll get a LOT of people trying to do it, and those 200 bucks will soon become 20 bucks for many. In the end, it will most likely even out.
Because UBI doesn't mean that you get as much money as you do now that you're working.
It means that you get what is the bare minimum to survive. Food, shelter, basic clothing. Anything else is most likely beyond your reach. New TV? New Smartphone? Or internet? Go and get a job.
Yes, it means that you will probably have to work for a week as a burger flipper for maybe 100 bucks. But that's 100 bucks spending money. Your food/shelter/clothing needs are covered. If that's all you want, great.
But some people want to live instead of just surviving.
If you didn't try to push your imaginary buddy into laws affecting me and teach the bullshit of your fairy tales in schools like it was science, you wouldn't bother me more than the guy with the tinfoil hat who sits in a crop circle waiting for the aliens to return.
I don't even think that people would. Yes, many would quit lousy jobs, but equally many would notice that they need to replace something in their home or need to buy something, and need a few 100 bucks. They would notice that working 3 weeks as a burger flipper would give them that. And if that's all they're qualified for, they'll do just that.
And given the unemployment situation in the, let's say, less qualified group of the population, you'll always find someone who needs to make a few 100 and who will take the spatula for a week or two.
You'll have an extreme fluctuation, but you will find people to do those jobs.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember, this is corporations. What the users want is essentially pointless.
The key here is that management doesn't want the way Windows takes them. The older ones currently have flashbacks to the days of IBM's dominance, where big blue could essentially tell them to grin and bear it or close shop, and if you were deep enough in the Blue, they essentially ran your IT department, and they did it the way THEY thought is good. This was actually what made MS big in the first place, because they were maybe not better than IBM in many aspects, but they were at least not IBM. And now MS is just the same, patronizing you in your IT department ("I know when you should patch!") and carpet bombing those that dare to resist with legal bullshit. This is IBM in the 1980s. And you'd be surprised how many current CEOs had to deal with petty IBM bullshit in the 80s when they started their careers.
And of course you have to deal a lot with CEOs' egos and their inability to suffer that someone tells them what to do without coating it as a "suggestion".
That's also wrong. Remember the outcry when Win8 came with the "tiles"? You might argue that that was ahead, but in the end, people hated it.
If you want to convince people that they should move to your flavor, you have to have the flavor they know and like, or at the very least got comfortable with.
I have never said that Android or iOS are better (actually, they're worse). But what is the alternative? Gimme one and I move.
No, Win10 on mobile isn't. For exactly the same damn reason.
The mobile ship has sailed, at least for now. Yes, I do have a mobile phone, simply out of necessity. And I have a quite restrictive company policy concerning what content it may transport. But that's besides the point.
The difference between mobile and desktop devices is that with the latter, you DO actually have a non-invasive, non-spying choice. With the former, you can only hope that one day you will. But for desktops, it is already here.
But instead of educating me you just belittle me.
This is different.
First, it's not home users that are trying the switch. Nobody gives a shit whether you in your basement go for Linux. Even if you really go through with your plan, you're one lost license. Ok, ok, two because you have that laptop. This is corporations with thousands of licenses. And there's a long, long tail of jobs (and consultant jobs!) hanging on it. You already have a lot of Linux machines in the server market (we actually have more installations of RHEL than MS-Server running), a lot of the backend infrastructure of large corporations is already OS-agnostic (or at the very least not strictly MS-centric). Many of our customers "need" Microsoft only because they use MS-Office and AD, everything else is already easy to migrate or would already run smoother in a Linux desktop environment.
Second, the Linux desktop has always been about 10 years behind Windows. Today, though, this means that it's about on par with what WinXP was. Which is for most people "good enough". It is possible to tweak Linux so that the average user doesn't need to learn much.
And corporations already have Linux admins for the aforementioned Linux servers, so administrating the desktops isn't a big deal anymore either.
Funny enough, the biggest issue for many is the supporters who know too little about Linux to sensibly aid the workers, and training CC-agents is usually not really very popular. In other words, if you have at least a nominal level of knowledge about Linux and need a CC part time job to have some money while studying, this is probably going to be a good time for you.
So no, while the "average user" was supposed to make the "year of the Desktop" come true for Linux it was nothing but a wet dream. But with corporations now seriously considering the switch, this is a whole different level.
Extremists on both sides will. You'll have religious nuts who will go out of their way to ensure anyone and everyone promoting tolerance towards transgender and gay people will get plastered with demonetization requests, and SJWs will do the same with anything and everything dealing with religious content and anything else that's "white privilege promoting" in their eyes.
In the end, the sane people will be the ones losing out. Because when the dust settles after they're done, what's left is cat videos and some teen "youtube stars" promoting the crappy products they created that even your average homeshopping channel wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
So long YouTube, you were fun while you lasted.
NEXT!
No. All it means is that Trump can't collect the 100 bucks he would make from his videos.
I'd buy your crap.
Just for the sake of it.
Why only white people, all people can listen, it's not a white privilege, dammit!
Not really, it's a win for those that have enough idiots paying them regardless of views. They can keep spreading their bullshit while everyone debunking it will have to pack and go.
It also means that sane people can't post videos debunking the bullshit some preachers spread anymore if they want to make a living that way. So the religious nuts and those trying to milk idiots believing in that bull should be good, after all, the idiots they're preaching to keep sending them money, no need to monetize the videos themselves.
I can't say anymore that religious nuts are well defined in the ICD-10 F22.0 without being demonetized?
Hey, it's only the truth!
I'm doing security consulting for a living. Many of our customers are currently evaluating a replacement for their aging Windows 7 systems. And quite a few of them are actually and seriously considering moving away from Windows rather than moving towards Win10, or at the very least putting some money behind evaluating whether such a move is feasible.
Can you imagine just HOW much this spyware has to shake up CEOs that they would rather consider retraining thousands of workers to use a Linux based system than to use Windows 10?
Gee, if you didn't tell us it wasn't intentional, we probably wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from any other update.
English soccer is a game on the field and a war on the stands.
Not UBI, but close to it, is what's going on in Austria. It probably has the best social security system in existence right now.
Germany's is actually way worse.
The working market would definitely turn from a buyer's into a seller's market in many areas. Employers will probably have to offer quite a bit different incentives to work for them but "only" money, just as you say. Right now, many can get away with offering shitty pay for a shitty job, especially in areas where jobs are scarce, knowing that you have no option but to bite the bullet. But with UBI, they will quickly have to offer a job worth getting.
With an UBI, that number will increase. Because then even making maybe 200 bucks a month might well be acceptable to some.
I do predict, though, that you'll get a LOT of people trying to do it, and those 200 bucks will soon become 20 bucks for many. In the end, it will most likely even out.
That sums it up nicely.
Then I guess the market will find a way to solve it. Maybe you have to pay more? But maybe you'll also find people who will do it.
Because UBI doesn't mean that you get as much money as you do now that you're working.
It means that you get what is the bare minimum to survive. Food, shelter, basic clothing. Anything else is most likely beyond your reach. New TV? New Smartphone? Or internet? Go and get a job.
Yes, it means that you will probably have to work for a week as a burger flipper for maybe 100 bucks. But that's 100 bucks spending money. Your food/shelter/clothing needs are covered. If that's all you want, great.
But some people want to live instead of just surviving.
If you didn't try to push your imaginary buddy into laws affecting me and teach the bullshit of your fairy tales in schools like it was science, you wouldn't bother me more than the guy with the tinfoil hat who sits in a crop circle waiting for the aliens to return.
Hey! That's my text! :)
Seriously, though, are we related? This is scarily close to my job+hobby.
What's yours?
I don't even think that people would. Yes, many would quit lousy jobs, but equally many would notice that they need to replace something in their home or need to buy something, and need a few 100 bucks. They would notice that working 3 weeks as a burger flipper would give them that. And if that's all they're qualified for, they'll do just that.
And given the unemployment situation in the, let's say, less qualified group of the population, you'll always find someone who needs to make a few 100 and who will take the spatula for a week or two.
You'll have an extreme fluctuation, but you will find people to do those jobs.