Just the "usual stuff". Office, antivirus programs, a few games, mp3's from questionable sources, a handful of programs they "just decided to try". It's easy (MS does it all the time) to blame a screwy installation on some third party program, but more often than not, it only becomes a problem because the OS doesn't properly handle exceptions in the code. XP is as guilty as anything, in my experience.
I'm not a big fan of uptime braggerts, just as I'm not interested in overclocking. Long uptimes suggest you aren't applying patches, and overclocking suggests you're careless with the built-in "safety" devices processors include.
As far as my friend's systems, they're like many people. OSS isn't "good enough" for them, so they load their systems down with all sorts of "free" junkware. Like I said, blatent spyware is probably best handled with a clean install, but most of the time, it's the non-spyware, poorly written or outdated stuff that's a problem.
I also think this is part of the reason many people are hesitant to try Linux. They've played around with "free" stuff on Windows, only to get screwed over in one way or another. The very thought of an entire system running "free" software is way beyond any risk level most people are willing to take after being burned a couple times.
Don't kid yourself. I've got a TI994/A that still works. (The Attax game is still addictive!) PC's were more durable back then, but they should have been, because $2500 would buy you a barebones, monitor and CPU. No soundcard, no CD, 5 1/4 drive, a few megs of memory, and a couple gross megs of HD space.
I can still boot these computers, but that's practically all they're good for. At least the Linux ones can usually do something practical.
I still sometimes get a little pissy about articles/reports/surveys like this. Then after I spout my peace, I can't help but laugh. Linux has an advantage that most commercial desktops can't even approach. See, if I sell Windows, Solaris, Mac, or any of the other commercial operating systems, I know exactly how I'm doing.
We all "know" MS has 90-95% of the market. The numbers shipped, the dollar amounts, all point to this "fact". Same with the others.
Linux doesn't come close. From a dollar perspective, most distros pale compared to the others. From a "shipped" point of view, well, who counts little Linux shops in their numbers? This is about Dell and the big folks. And there is the dualboot/wipe issue.
So, why do I laugh? Because, using these statistics, nobody will realize how many people actually use Linux until it's right in their faces. In other words, theoretically, MS could still ship 90-95% of the market, only to turn around one day, and find out that only 10-20% of users actually use Windows (with a few more using it occasionally).
So, realisically, the better way of measuring this would be to measure the "other" sales related to Windows. Antivirus software wouldn't count, neither would Office software, or games. (These are necessities for dual booters, or things that might only be available for one OS.)
My pick would be the "cheapy" software that people tend to buy for their computers. The productivity stuff, or "make your computer easier to use" kind of stuff. Better yet, if you want a long term guage, try the "educational" aisle.
In other words, to guage an OS's success, compare it's market. Find something unusual about that OS, something that no other can share, and use that as a guage. Exact numbers don't matter, but trends can point out a lot.
If money/users seem to be disappearing from these markets, yet the hardware folks are actually doing pretty well, you might want to bump up your Linux/OSS numbers a little.
A good example of a similar situation popped up on my radar a few years ago. Seems you could order a few things from Mexico/Canada, and get DirecTV for free. Of course, by the time you purchased the dish, bought the card writers and cards (at a hefty price), software, and did all that great stuff you had to do to get it to work (I beleive one of the items was to stand on your head and juggle), the monthly payment was cheaper. To add insult to injury, every few months something would change, which meant you needed a new card writer, cards, and software.
One of my coworkers did this for almost a year, risking all the BS and trouble, before finally realizing that he'd spent close to three times what he would have paid for the channels he was actually using.
Go ahead, use your little XP scam. Sooner or later, it won't work anymore, and you'll have a choice. Use Linux, or pay for XP. Why not skip the middleman, and spend some of that relatively wasted time (downloading generators and learning cracks) learning more about Linux?
My guess is part of the appeal of stealing windows is feeling that you're doing something special. In reality, you're just yanking your chain, ignoring the fact that you could truly contribute to your own needs by expending some of that energy helping make Linux better.
Then again, I'm not sure pirating script kiddies are what we need. MS can have those.
Three things: Reinstall, reinstall, and reinstall.
My XP friends do it without even considering there might be an alternative. I can't tell you how many system's I've "saved" simply by spending a minute looking at the actual problem. The worst are the sysadmins, who've been conditioned to do it "because it's easier and quicker than anything else".
There's usually stunned amazement when you fix a glitch without wiping the entire system. How reinstalling can be faster (once you reinstall software, drivers, do a handful of reboots, and configure security) is beyond me. I can understand it for viruses, intrusions and spyware, but 90% of the time, it's just because they are so clueless about Windows/computers that they don't know any better solution. They often joke about being too lazy, but the killer clue is that they do it on their own systems, even when it means losing information.
As a side note, most of these folks now use Linux. Knoppix has become a vital tool in most Linux-aware sysadmin's toolboxes. It might not be their preferred system, or a "real" system, but I don't think that should count for nothing, either.
Well, not to disparage the idea, but I started using Linux exactly because it was free. That, for me, meant nothing to lose if I didn't like it. That was almost 8 years ago, and I've found that I like it enough to financially support as many OSS communities, projects, and good distros as I can.
With Linux, it's not the amount, it's how you feel about the amount. When I donate to a project, community or distro, I know what I'm getting, because I'm already using it. When I used to plunk down for Windows and other peices of software, half of what I spent was a disappointment, at best.
My TCO is technically higher with Linux (supporting MSs marketing in a strangely perverted way), but only because I wouldn't have explored many of the things that Linux/OSS community has allowed me to become a part of.
You're inadvertantly screwing with the numbers. See, W2/3k only counts as a desktop when desktop numbers need to be higher, otherwise it's counted as servers shipped by MS. So, when you're trying to do percentages like this, you need to (psychic?) know which ratio of W2/3K the poller is using.
We know most W2/3K boxes are used as desktops, because they're easier to secure than your typical desktop, and companies gain the "bulk" price, versus buying a couple servers, then the rest as XP desktops.
Think of Gartner as the equivalent of a congressional committee on the subcommitte about committees. In other words, Gartner wastes a whole lot of their client's money on telling them whatever they think they want to hear. If that opinion changes, Gartner is sure to follow that change 6 months to a year later.
Granted, if you spend a few million on Windows computers, the last thing you want to do is read that Linux is not only more powerful, but popular and secure.
MS's earnings report is due out tommorrow. Along with allowing 2000 more people some access to their code, they're also buying back $75 billion in stock over the next four years (the initial buyback is a good portion of the total, IIRC).
I think MS's numbers are worrying the top brass there. MS doesn't need to do that large of a buyback, they could do a billion dollars worth, and wall street would be geeked (because MS never opens it's coffers). My guess is they're preparing for a good chunk of bad news, and trying to work out a way to lighten the disappointment.
Of course, that's just a guess, but they've been acting pretty worried lately, almost hinting at panic.
Sorry folks, but most of what I see around here boils down to excuses for whatever side people happen to be on. My feeling is that the "ject" problem isn't contained in any reasonable way, because there's so much fear about the relevant information. Surely if it was "fixed", somebody would be bragging. As for the international battle about who gets to do what to who and when, you're all screwed in the head when you even have to debate those matters. Your hearts know what's right and wrong (which may depend on the situation, but the "rules" are constant, no matter your culture, religon, or social/economic background).
So much time and effort wasted trying to prove each other wrong, instead of trying to find common ground, and improving yourselves. Pride yourself on what humanity's achieved so far, and completely miss the boat on what we could do if Slashdot's energies were focused on pushing forward in the various arts and sciences.
I don't know. Would you want to hang around in the dark ages, maybe pick up a touch of the plague? Not too much to do back then, and no Internet or video games. Even twenty years ago would be kind of frustrating from a day-to-day perspective (unless you're the betting/stock market type).
No, my guess is that people would be more interested (from a long term perspective) in either seeing the future, or sticking around in their own time with their family and friends. While "vacations" would no doubt be popular, I'm sure the tourists probably don't have any intention of letting us know they're here. It's more fun seeing man in his "natural" habitat, not as much fun being analyzed and pestered as "future human", by every scientist on the planet.
Speaking of which, I really have to get back to eh fouth millenium.;)
>>It should be the other way around: the Public Domain {which belongs to the majority} should be protected from abuse by copyright holders {the minority}.
I think this is a very important point, one that courts/legislatures worldwide should address specifically. It's not without precident, either, as I can't have a cigarette within 100 feet of a school building entrance in Ann Arbor, MI, because it might cause harm to nameless people around me. And that's without valid scientific proof!
Um, nice thought, but they're built that way because the folks at the pentagon set the standard. City roads (Detroir in my case), can be tiny, hazardous little lanes, but interstates have to be able to move certain equipment in times of emergency. Blame it on WWII, the Cold War, or terrorism. Interstate lane sizes (and those state roads that want bases nearby) are determined by the largest equipment the military is willing to move in a hurry. Obviously, having one 30 ft wide lane wouldn't appeal to the citizens, but having 3-4 M1A1*s cruising at highway speeds is a reasonable alternative.
Not that we'll ever need it, but hey, they might end up a legacy like those old roman roads you European folks are so proud of.:)
A lot of people have posted regarding the cost of space missions, either defending or chastising NASA for the amount spent. I think a better plan would be for the government to follow the lead of the Big Three, and do something about overruns.
Every contractor has the excuse "it's impossible to be exact, because we're learning new things", or something similar. Meanwhile, even the smallest programs spiral into the billions of dollars. So, instead of just allowing them to take the money as they see fit, put a cap on.
For example, an absolute limit of 10% overrun costs, and you'd better have a good excuse. If you can't deliver within those guidelines, that's your fault for not giving an adequate proposal. (Somebody should bring these places up on treason charges for lying to get government bids.) You receive nothing for your work, NASA/government keeps what you've built so far (and continuous tabs/records would ensure that a company doesn't destroy everything as that overrun approaches), and another company can bid from where you left off.
BTW, this would include QA checks, so no one can toss together something when the costs get too high. Also, a company has the option to continue, but at their own expense.
Slashdot Mirror
Just the "usual stuff". Office, antivirus programs, a few games, mp3's from questionable sources, a handful of programs they "just decided to try". It's easy (MS does it all the time) to blame a screwy installation on some third party program, but more often than not, it only becomes a problem because the OS doesn't properly handle exceptions in the code. XP is as guilty as anything, in my experience.
I'm not a big fan of uptime braggerts, just as I'm not interested in overclocking. Long uptimes suggest you aren't applying patches, and overclocking suggests you're careless with the built-in "safety" devices processors include.
As far as my friend's systems, they're like many people. OSS isn't "good enough" for them, so they load their systems down with all sorts of "free" junkware. Like I said, blatent spyware is probably best handled with a clean install, but most of the time, it's the non-spyware, poorly written or outdated stuff that's a problem.
I also think this is part of the reason many people are hesitant to try Linux. They've played around with "free" stuff on Windows, only to get screwed over in one way or another. The very thought of an entire system running "free" software is way beyond any risk level most people are willing to take after being burned a couple times.
Don't kid yourself. I've got a TI994/A that still works. (The Attax game is still addictive!) PC's were more durable back then, but they should have been, because $2500 would buy you a barebones, monitor and CPU. No soundcard, no CD, 5 1/4 drive, a few megs of memory, and a couple gross megs of HD space.
I can still boot these computers, but that's practically all they're good for. At least the Linux ones can usually do something practical.
I still sometimes get a little pissy about articles/reports/surveys like this. Then after I spout my peace, I can't help but laugh. Linux has an advantage that most commercial desktops can't even approach. See, if I sell Windows, Solaris, Mac, or any of the other commercial operating systems, I know exactly how I'm doing.
We all "know" MS has 90-95% of the market. The numbers shipped, the dollar amounts, all point to this "fact". Same with the others.
Linux doesn't come close. From a dollar perspective, most distros pale compared to the others. From a "shipped" point of view, well, who counts little Linux shops in their numbers? This is about Dell and the big folks. And there is the dualboot/wipe issue.
So, why do I laugh? Because, using these statistics, nobody will realize how many people actually use Linux until it's right in their faces. In other words, theoretically, MS could still ship 90-95% of the market, only to turn around one day, and find out that only 10-20% of users actually use Windows (with a few more using it occasionally).
So, realisically, the better way of measuring this would be to measure the "other" sales related to Windows. Antivirus software wouldn't count, neither would Office software, or games. (These are necessities for dual booters, or things that might only be available for one OS.)
My pick would be the "cheapy" software that people tend to buy for their computers. The productivity stuff, or "make your computer easier to use" kind of stuff. Better yet, if you want a long term guage, try the "educational" aisle.
In other words, to guage an OS's success, compare it's market. Find something unusual about that OS, something that no other can share, and use that as a guage. Exact numbers don't matter, but trends can point out a lot.
If money/users seem to be disappearing from these markets, yet the hardware folks are actually doing pretty well, you might want to bump up your Linux/OSS numbers a little.
A good example of a similar situation popped up on my radar a few years ago. Seems you could order a few things from Mexico/Canada, and get DirecTV for free. Of course, by the time you purchased the dish, bought the card writers and cards (at a hefty price), software, and did all that great stuff you had to do to get it to work (I beleive one of the items was to stand on your head and juggle), the monthly payment was cheaper. To add insult to injury, every few months something would change, which meant you needed a new card writer, cards, and software.
One of my coworkers did this for almost a year, risking all the BS and trouble, before finally realizing that he'd spent close to three times what he would have paid for the channels he was actually using.
Go ahead, use your little XP scam. Sooner or later, it won't work anymore, and you'll have a choice. Use Linux, or pay for XP. Why not skip the middleman, and spend some of that relatively wasted time (downloading generators and learning cracks) learning more about Linux?
My guess is part of the appeal of stealing windows is feeling that you're doing something special. In reality, you're just yanking your chain, ignoring the fact that you could truly contribute to your own needs by expending some of that energy helping make Linux better.
Then again, I'm not sure pirating script kiddies are what we need. MS can have those.
Three things: Reinstall, reinstall, and reinstall.
My XP friends do it without even considering there might be an alternative. I can't tell you how many system's I've "saved" simply by spending a minute looking at the actual problem. The worst are the sysadmins, who've been conditioned to do it "because it's easier and quicker than anything else".
There's usually stunned amazement when you fix a glitch without wiping the entire system. How reinstalling can be faster (once you reinstall software, drivers, do a handful of reboots, and configure security) is beyond me. I can understand it for viruses, intrusions and spyware, but 90% of the time, it's just because they are so clueless about Windows/computers that they don't know any better solution. They often joke about being too lazy, but the killer clue is that they do it on their own systems, even when it means losing information.
As a side note, most of these folks now use Linux. Knoppix has become a vital tool in most Linux-aware sysadmin's toolboxes. It might not be their preferred system, or a "real" system, but I don't think that should count for nothing, either.
Well, not to disparage the idea, but I started using Linux exactly because it was free. That, for me, meant nothing to lose if I didn't like it. That was almost 8 years ago, and I've found that I like it enough to financially support as many OSS communities, projects, and good distros as I can.
With Linux, it's not the amount, it's how you feel about the amount. When I donate to a project, community or distro, I know what I'm getting, because I'm already using it. When I used to plunk down for Windows and other peices of software, half of what I spent was a disappointment, at best.
My TCO is technically higher with Linux (supporting MSs marketing in a strangely perverted way), but only because I wouldn't have explored many of the things that Linux/OSS community has allowed me to become a part of.
You're inadvertantly screwing with the numbers. See, W2/3k only counts as a desktop when desktop numbers need to be higher, otherwise it's counted as servers shipped by MS. So, when you're trying to do percentages like this, you need to (psychic?) know which ratio of W2/3K the poller is using.
We know most W2/3K boxes are used as desktops, because they're easier to secure than your typical desktop, and companies gain the "bulk" price, versus buying a couple servers, then the rest as XP desktops.
Hmm, probably should let this go, but it actually is included in most distros.
Sorry.
Think of Gartner as the equivalent of a congressional committee on the subcommitte about committees. In other words, Gartner wastes a whole lot of their client's money on telling them whatever they think they want to hear. If that opinion changes, Gartner is sure to follow that change 6 months to a year later.
Granted, if you spend a few million on Windows computers, the last thing you want to do is read that Linux is not only more powerful, but popular and secure.
MS's earnings report is due out tommorrow. Along with allowing 2000 more people some access to their code, they're also buying back $75 billion in stock over the next four years (the initial buyback is a good portion of the total, IIRC).
I think MS's numbers are worrying the top brass there. MS doesn't need to do that large of a buyback, they could do a billion dollars worth, and wall street would be geeked (because MS never opens it's coffers). My guess is they're preparing for a good chunk of bad news, and trying to work out a way to lighten the disappointment.
Of course, that's just a guess, but they've been acting pretty worried lately, almost hinting at panic.
Sorry folks, but most of what I see around here boils down to excuses for whatever side people happen to be on. My feeling is that the "ject" problem isn't contained in any reasonable way, because there's so much fear about the relevant information. Surely if it was "fixed", somebody would be bragging. As for the international battle about who gets to do what to who and when, you're all screwed in the head when you even have to debate those matters. Your hearts know what's right and wrong (which may depend on the situation, but the "rules" are constant, no matter your culture, religon, or social/economic background).
So much time and effort wasted trying to prove each other wrong, instead of trying to find common ground, and improving yourselves. Pride yourself on what humanity's achieved so far, and completely miss the boat on what we could do if Slashdot's energies were focused on pushing forward in the various arts and sciences.
Just something to think about. Flame as needed.
I don't know. Would you want to hang around in the dark ages, maybe pick up a touch of the plague? Not too much to do back then, and no Internet or video games. Even twenty years ago would be kind of frustrating from a day-to-day perspective (unless you're the betting/stock market type).
;)
No, my guess is that people would be more interested (from a long term perspective) in either seeing the future, or sticking around in their own time with their family and friends. While "vacations" would no doubt be popular, I'm sure the tourists probably don't have any intention of letting us know they're here. It's more fun seeing man in his "natural" habitat, not as much fun being analyzed and pestered as "future human", by every scientist on the planet.
Speaking of which, I really have to get back to eh fouth millenium.
>>It should be the other way around: the Public Domain {which belongs to the majority} should be protected from abuse by copyright holders {the minority}.
I think this is a very important point, one that courts/legislatures worldwide should address specifically. It's not without precident, either, as I can't have a cigarette within 100 feet of a school building entrance in Ann Arbor, MI, because it might cause harm to nameless people around me. And that's without valid scientific proof!
Um, nice thought, but they're built that way because the folks at the pentagon set the standard. City roads (Detroir in my case), can be tiny, hazardous little lanes, but interstates have to be able to move certain equipment in times of emergency. Blame it on WWII, the Cold War, or terrorism. Interstate lane sizes (and those state roads that want bases nearby) are determined by the largest equipment the military is willing to move in a hurry. Obviously, having one 30 ft wide lane wouldn't appeal to the citizens, but having 3-4 M1A1*s cruising at highway speeds is a reasonable alternative.
:)
Not that we'll ever need it, but hey, they might end up a legacy like those old roman roads you European folks are so proud of.
A lot of people have posted regarding the cost of space missions, either defending or chastising NASA for the amount spent. I think a better plan would be for the government to follow the lead of the Big Three, and do something about overruns.
Every contractor has the excuse "it's impossible to be exact, because we're learning new things", or something similar. Meanwhile, even the smallest programs spiral into the billions of dollars. So, instead of just allowing them to take the money as they see fit, put a cap on.
For example, an absolute limit of 10% overrun costs, and you'd better have a good excuse. If you can't deliver within those guidelines, that's your fault for not giving an adequate proposal. (Somebody should bring these places up on treason charges for lying to get government bids.) You receive nothing for your work, NASA/government keeps what you've built so far (and continuous tabs/records would ensure that a company doesn't destroy everything as that overrun approaches), and another company can bid from where you left off.
BTW, this would include QA checks, so no one can toss together something when the costs get too high. Also, a company has the option to continue, but at their own expense.
You know, like the real world...