Isn't it feasible that some site might be having a slow day? I never have any trouble accessing sites that are so-called "Slashdotted"... maybe your ISP is just really pathetic.
The thought that Slashdot is some unstoppable force that brings down websites is humorous.
OK, now I'm not an AC any more, so you'll have to find another ad hominem attack.:)
My point wasn't that people can actually *get* support in any meaningful sense. Although in most cases they can usually get it. Perhaps not from MS but from other software vendors.
My point was that people want to *think* that they can, or at very best have someone to blame if they can't. Not to throw around cliches, but let's call it "mindshare..." People need to *think* that they're getting something supportable by someone other than a 15 year-old hacker in mom's basement on a cable modem.
I know I do.
To respond to other comments, I don't think that the widespread use of DNS/bind, sendmail, etc is any "proof" of the superiority of open source, in the PUBLIC EYE. People don't choose to use the free source sendmail protocol. They choose to use Microsoft Outlook Express. They implicitly use sendmail because it's there, and because no one has found a compelling reason to replace it. It is free, and if it breaks, it will get fixed for free. Why should Microsoft or anyone else try to change this? It wouldn't be cost effective. At the same time, that doesn't mean that people looked at all the alternatives and chose the higher quality free source implementation. Nine out of ten internet users these days likely don't even know what sendmail is.
If we're talking about OSS as the "future of modern software", that's probably a lost cause. Yes, there are examples of successful open source items. Apache is used by many. How much of that is just because it was here first, the world may never know. But when it comes to Actual Users, in my "much bally-hooed real world," they choose things that they can trust, and that they can feel they get support on.
Those were my points? Any clearer? Do my words now have more meaning and value because I attached a name, email address and web URL to them? Or are you just angry because I disparagingly used the term "hacker"?
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it feasible that some site might be having a slow day? I never have any trouble accessing sites that are so-called "Slashdotted"... maybe your ISP is just really pathetic.
The thought that Slashdot is some unstoppable force that brings down websites is humorous.
ryan
OK, now I'm not an AC any more, so you'll have to find another ad hominem attack. :)
My point wasn't that people can actually *get* support in any meaningful sense. Although in most cases they can usually get it. Perhaps not from MS but from other software vendors.
My point was that people want to *think* that they can, or at very best have someone to blame if they can't. Not to throw around cliches, but let's call it "mindshare..." People need to *think* that they're getting something supportable by someone other than a 15 year-old hacker in mom's basement on a cable modem.
I know I do.
To respond to other comments, I don't think that the widespread use of DNS/bind, sendmail, etc is any "proof" of the superiority of open source, in the PUBLIC EYE. People don't choose to use the free source sendmail protocol. They choose to use Microsoft Outlook Express. They implicitly use sendmail because it's there, and because no one has found a compelling reason to replace it. It is free, and if it breaks, it will get fixed for free. Why should Microsoft or anyone else try to change this? It wouldn't be cost effective. At the same time, that doesn't mean that people looked at all the alternatives and chose the higher quality free source implementation. Nine out of ten internet users these days likely don't even know what sendmail is.
If we're talking about OSS as the "future of modern software", that's probably a lost cause. Yes, there are examples of successful open source items. Apache is used by many. How much of that is just because it was here first, the world may never know. But when it comes to Actual Users, in my "much bally-hooed real world," they choose things that they can trust, and that they can feel they get support on.
Those were my points? Any clearer? Do my words now have more meaning and value because I attached a name, email address and web URL to them? Or are you just angry because I disparagingly used the term "hacker"?
Sheesh.
ryan