Here's a thought. What about those of us who either:
want to use a distro that they don't support? Why should we pay for something we'll never use?
want to migrate a current licenced paid-for OS to new hardware, and reposition the old hardware to use a free OS, or scrap it if it died?
Example: You buy a new computer, and a week later, it gets fried by a voltage spike, That's clearly not under warranty. Why should you have to pay for a second copy of any OS, when you have a fully-paid-for OS, just that the hardware to run it on got vaporized?
Say H^HDell decides to sell Suse, and Future Crap^H^H^H^HShop decides to sell Slackware, and Worst^H^H^H^H^HBest Buy decides to sell Red Hat, and Wallyworld^H^H^H^H^H^Hlmart decides to sell Mandriva. I find it convenient to buy from one of them, because they're closest to me; why should I have to buy the bundled OS when I'm just going to rip it out?
There's one flaw in your analogy - the quality of the software available in the average linux distro is superior to that produced by Microsoft. Microsoft will never again be able to catch up in the quality department.
There's a second flaw in your analogy - Microsoft doesn't manufacture PCs, so why should anyone who wants to compete with them at any level bog themselves down by doing so?
There's a third flaw in your analogy - that those of us who back a gift economy or a pay-it-forward economy are "rationalizing a fear of competing with Microsoft." Its possible to earn a living by giving away your code - businesses such as IBM (who are a lot bigger than Microsoft) have figured that out. Its just too bad that Microsoft can't compete by giving away code and then charging for services. They're not set up that way, and that's their biggest problem.
Now my giving away a few hard drives with linux preinstalled is not "bad for Linux co". They don't "lose promotional hard drives" - first, because there is no such thing as "Linux co", and second, because they were not their hard drives to begin with. To the extent that this creates a larger potential market, it still benefits your hypothetical "Linux co.", so its certainly not a drain on the economy. Or are you going to argue that all the companies who give away free promotional samples are wrong?
Its not against the law to have a monopoly - its against the law to abuse a monopoly.
Also, keep in mind that Microsoft didn't come by their monopoly honestly. Or, to take your comparison with robbers a bit further, do you think criminals should be rewarded, since its a "free market" and stopping people from robbing others is limiting a "free market"?
Have you installed linux lately? Its a lot easier than Windows.
Its also a lot easier to create a master hard drive image that can be installed across various hardware configurations, since there is no WGA, activation, or tying to the installed hardware to generate keys, and you can resize the image once its on the hard drive.
All this means lower, not higher, deployment and support costs.
> Unless people consistently mount/home as noexec, malware will be a problem for Linux or OSX as soon as the get market share (based on Firefox I would say 10-20 percent is the magic number).
Once something gets into a users.rc files or whatnot, it is plenty useful as a mail relay, or a pop-up maker."
I would suggest that most people mount/home on a separate hard drive (or if they can't do that, at least a separate partition).
Of course, the situation isn't comparable with Windows for another reason - the good thing about inux and other open-source products is that we aren't beholden to a single business for fixes.
"Even C++, supposedly lean and mean, seduces us with the bloat of STL."
Don't get me started. The STL sucks, and TR1 sucks almost as much (it sucks slightly less only because it can blame part of the suckage one the original STL)>
Again, the question isn't about competing with Microsoft. Microsofts' model is dying - who wants to compete with that? Then you'll be worried about the next linux-like thing to come along and eat your lunch.
linux, while it makes strong business sense, is more suited to a gift or pay-it-forward model. You like it, you've benefited from it, and you want to, and are free to, share those benefits with others. How can Microsoft compete with that?
Hard drives are relatively cheap nowadays. Help the planet by keeping a pc out of the landfill for a few years, help your friends by giving them more storage space and a more stable OS by giving them a new hard drive + linux, and help yourself, because you'll be helping a better OS reach that "critical mass" that much sooner.
That would require that I actually be interested in competing with Microsoft head to head, when in fact I would rather see us do it in a way they can't compete with. That's why, this Christmas, I'm going to help out some family and friends by giving them second hard drives with linux installed. This way, they keep their data, their old Windows (whch they can now run virtualized in a Window under linux) and they get a LOT more disk space, applications, and stability.
Microsoft can't compete with either the gift or pay-it-forward economies. If everyone who uses linux does this for just 2 people per year, within 5 years, Microsoft will have less than half the market, there will be tons of applications for linux, etc.
Its definitely going to have to happen at some point.
> "There will be a cost for installation for most people. Hopefully in the form of a little business for the neighborhood computer geek, but a cost to the consumer none the less."
For 25 years, we've been "supporting" Microsoft by fixing their crapware on all our friends, relatives, and employers' machines. Ever since I've told people that I don't do Windows, and made it stick, my time wasted supporting Microsofts' products has dropped to zero. I like it like that. I'm ready to help people get their feet wet with linux on the same "freebie" basis, but the hand-holding afterwards will be a lot less, if only because:
so much software comes pre-installed, or easily installed and auto-configured (21 gigs in openSUSE 10.3 if you add all the repositories)
there's no hassle with junk like WGA
no need for an anti-virus, disk defragmenting, etc.
As for retailers, they'll probably just create a master hard drive image, and throw it on boxes as needed (and with linux, you can "grow" that image's partition size without needing 3rd-party tools). Since the master image won't need product activation, and isn't tied to a specific hardware setup for activation purposes, support will be easier, not harder, so retailers will probably find their overall costs lower.
Besides, openSUSE is a one-disk, just-click-on-the-defaults-if-you're-not-sure install; they don't have to hunt down disks for their printer, video, audio, mp3 and dvd players, office suite, graphics programs, etc. Lower price + more value, giving them a competitive advantage.
Apple can always do the same thing Microsoft does - get the hardware manufacturers to make the drivers, and pay a fee for getting the Apple seal of approval. (What, you think Microsoft doesn't charge the hardware manufacturers???)
Of, they can always open-source parts of their stuff.
If they really wanted to hear something insightful, they'd get the "enemy camp" in for a truth-fest.
The simple fact is, they don't want to hear the truth, which starts with the average Windows user HATING Microsoft. If you think linux fans are bad, try someone who is forced to use Windows on a daily basis, when they have a Mac at home.
But forget the MacHeads. The average Microsoft customer doesn't use Windows because they like it - they use Windows because it came with their computer. They bought it, they paid for it, they can't return it for a refund, so they're darned well going to use it!
That's the point about unbundling (to bring this back on-topic).
As for Hilf, he doesn't "get" open source. He's the guy who said open source was dead in 2007, because "even Linus is paid to write code" - when in fact, that shows that open source is quite the opposite of dead - its so useful that people are being paid to write code and give it away.
That last scares the sh*t out of Microsoft - that businesses have found it profitable to give away the very stuff that Microsoft charges for.
Hilf doesn't "get" that, so he's not going to be an effective counterweight.
Where did anyone say that Dell doesn't make money, or that Apple doesn't have support costs?
The implications were that Dell would continue to make money, but that support costs would be transfered to Dell, same as with Windows, if Dell started selling PCs with OSX on them.
I was in Future Shop this weekend with one of my daughters and her boyfriend. From the conversations I heard, a lot of people don't want Vista.
If her laptop can take a second drive, its cheaper to install a second drive and linux than to buy an XP retail license. She can then run Windows in a virtual machine right on the linux desktop. (oh the irony or funning Windows in a window).
Also, check out the "downgrade rights" - everyone's doing it nowadays.
Or suggest she return the laptop because its not fit for the purpose for which it was purchased.
"The craziest part is, you obsess over Dell PCs, and Dell's are the biggest stock part PCs of them all. They don't do anything special - stock motherboards, stock CPUs, stock graphics cards. There's nothing Dell puts into a PC that you could not put into yours when you sell it."
All my PCs are self-built (laptops excepted). Been like that for years and years. I have never owned a Dell or a Gateway.
"There's absolutely no reason a consumer could not benefit from that offering, and its not Microsoft's fault that you Linux people are too big of pussies to actually sell your own offerings."
Actually, now that Christmas is coming, I plan to give away a few hard disk/openSUSE install combos as small presents. I know a few people who are running windows on hardware thats 2-3 years old, and could use both the extra disk space, and the stability of linux. They'll be able to continue running Windows via a VM (no longer a need to dual-boot) until they get used to the new setup.
There's tons of Windows users out there who are only a hard disk away from running linux. They get to keep all their old data, they don't have to shell out big bucks for the latest bloatware, etc.
If every linux user did this for just 2 people this Christmas, Microsofts' stranglehold on the market would be over in a year.
The OEM is free to make the same deals regardless of the operating system. For example, they can install free trials for various ISPs, trialware for multi-user games that work over the net, etc. About the only software they would take a hit on is anti-virus software.
I live in a smoke-free environment, so I expect my drives to last a reasonable length of time; in addition, my cases always have extra ventilation. This particular case not only has extra fans blowing air in, but several open bay slots to let hot air out. The WD drive in there is barely warm to the touch right now, after hours of operation (I just stuck my fingers in to check:-).
As for software RAID, all raid is ultimately done in software - either by your operating system, or the firmware on your raid cards' board. With software raid, I can replicate a broken system on another machine without too many problems, and try to recover the data. With hardware raid, if the card is gone, its gone unless I can find another, identical card. Or I can try to recover it by recovering the raw data off the drives, then trying to combine the stripes (if RAID5) on a sector-by-sector basis, or guessing as to which is the bad stripe (2-disk RAID1). With a 3-disk raid1, its a lot easier - go with the majority vote on each sector - but who runs 3-disk RAID1? RAID0? Lost data is lost data, whether you use a software or hardware solution. Sector-by-sector copy to new drives, and pray.
Unfortunately, nothing is going to protect you from that one-in-a-trillion cosmic ray that flips several bits in just the right sequence (though error-correcting ram will lower the odds).
Actually, I think you're missing the point - competition only works when there is no pre-existing monopoly that got there via illegal means.
We depend on the government to step in to protect us from predators who use illegal means to gain control of a market, same as we depend on them, via police and firemen, for local protection from robbers and fire.
Extreme situations call for extreme measures - unbundling sales of the OS isn't anywhere near extreme. To turn your argument on its head - if Windows is so good, it should have no fear of being able to compete in a truly free marketplace, solely on its merit.
Free competition scares the crap out of Microsoft, because it can't win. Where its forced to compete, it loses market share - just look at the embedded, server, and cluster markets.
As far as image editing goes, the newest version of openSuse lets you choose between the GIMP with the old interface, or reworked to be more photoshop-like.
I didn't get a chance to test it, because my new RAID1 died - no thanks to Seagate (second set of bad drives in 2 weeks).
Ubuntu, openSuse, RedHat/Fedora and everyone else in the party would eat Microsofts' lunch within 5 years if Windows is unbundled.
OSX does run on plain vanilla x86 hardware - Apple was doing that a couple of years ago, but the existence of this was only leaked last year, and didn't get much attention. If and when the numbers are right, they'll release it, but not before.
It came out a while ago that Apple has OSX running on plain vanilla x86 (non-Apple) hardware. Now look at how many people buy iPods, and compare that to the number who buy cheaper competitors, say Zunes. Apple has reached that "sweet spot" where they can have the best of both worlds - high sales of hardware/software bundles, as well as selling just the OS to those who want it on non-apple hardware.
Dell gets the support headaches, apple gets the $$$. And those who want to "step it up a notch" are still free to buy iMacs, same as they buy iPods.
> "I would think that if Linux was that much better than Windows, that consumers would demand Linux powered PCs. If you build it, they will come."
Most people don't even know about the possibility of alternatives. To them, a PC is any computer that runs Windows, same as, for a long time, the Internet was Internet Explorer or AOL.
The cost of an OEM Windows license is a large portion of the cost of a new machine, compared to any time in the past. For the cost of Windows and Office, you can buy 2 or 3 computers with no OS, and install linux. the problem is, the consumer is not given a choice, so we don't know how many would take the opportunity.
Since that choice never happens, software developers develop for the Windows platform, ensuring lock-in.
Of course, now that Novell's openSUSE can run Windows in a window in a VM, there's more reason to buy a new machine with linux, then move your old copy of XP or 2k to a virtual machine on your new box, rather than paying the Microsoft tax a second time (and yes, you can move your license to your new hardware, despite what Microsoft tries to FUD. Just make sure you remove it from your old hardware at the same time).
So many people only use Windows because they think they didn't pay for it. That's why they have such a low expectation of quality - when it crashes they say - Well, I didn't pay for it, so its not like I can ask for my money back."
Unbundle it and let the competition flow. I can see Apple doing a big push for OSX as an aftermarket product. Also, Novell's openSUSE 10.3 is a keeper.
Oh, I agree 100% his job is to just spin the FUD. That Microsoft had to resort to Hilf shows how lacking in insight they are. They could have gotten better spinmeisters here, just by running the anti-microsoft stuff through a script with a few regexes.
They're trying to cover their bases, but its more like a retreat than anything else, because when you have a virtual monopoly, you're your own worst competitor. the person you're trying to steal sales from is yourself - youhave to convince customers that the "wonderful stuff" they bought a few years ago is now "a piece of outdated crap".
That gets predictable, boring, and starts corroding trust. After a while, you ARE your own worst enemy, and people WANT to see you fail. The rest, as they say, is history. We're seeing it now with Vista. Despite Microsofts' claims, Vienna (the next OS after Vista) will be even worse. They either have to break compatibility with the past (in which case, users have little no reason to stick with Microsoft) or just do "more of the same", on an increasingly untenable code base.
This is a rear-guard action, but you can stick a fork in Microsofts' business model. It might not be done yet, but its getting close.
"If you have have a Linux Server and a Heterogeneous or even one Windows client, you have no choice but to run Samba because Windows only talks to Windows.
"
Not quite true. You can always use the modern equivalent of sneakernet - USB keychains or rewriteable dvds - to move data back and forth. A lot better than actually connecting a Windows box to a local network.
Or you can transfer everything through ftp and http.
Heck, there used to be programs out there that would make an ftp connection look like a local file share (don't know if there still are - haven't used windows in a LONG time).
Wouldn't it be more dependable and a lot quicker to just copy the files (not mirroring the disk - that would still leave the files fragmented) to another drive, then swapping drives so you 're now using a drive that's 100% defragmented, but still have the old drive as your most recent backup?
Or even just use two equal-sized partitions, and swap mount points?
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a thought. What about those of us who either:
Example: You buy a new computer, and a week later, it gets fried by a voltage spike, That's clearly not under warranty. Why should you have to pay for a second copy of any OS, when you have a fully-paid-for OS, just that the hardware to run it on got vaporized?
Say H^HDell decides to sell Suse, and Future Crap^H^H^H^HShop decides to sell Slackware, and Worst^H^H^H^H^HBest Buy decides to sell Red Hat, and Wallyworld^H^H^H^H^H^Hlmart decides to sell Mandriva. I find it convenient to buy from one of them, because they're closest to me; why should I have to buy the bundled OS when I'm just going to rip it out?
There's one flaw in your analogy - the quality of the software available in the average linux distro is superior to that produced by Microsoft. Microsoft will never again be able to catch up in the quality department.
There's a second flaw in your analogy - Microsoft doesn't manufacture PCs, so why should anyone who wants to compete with them at any level bog themselves down by doing so?
There's a third flaw in your analogy - that those of us who back a gift economy or a pay-it-forward economy are "rationalizing a fear of competing with Microsoft." Its possible to earn a living by giving away your code - businesses such as IBM (who are a lot bigger than Microsoft) have figured that out. Its just too bad that Microsoft can't compete by giving away code and then charging for services. They're not set up that way, and that's their biggest problem.
Now my giving away a few hard drives with linux preinstalled is not "bad for Linux co". They don't "lose promotional hard drives" - first, because there is no such thing as "Linux co", and second, because they were not their hard drives to begin with. To the extent that this creates a larger potential market, it still benefits your hypothetical "Linux co.", so its certainly not a drain on the economy. Or are you going to argue that all the companies who give away free promotional samples are wrong?
Its not against the law to have a monopoly - its against the law to abuse a monopoly.
Also, keep in mind that Microsoft didn't come by their monopoly honestly. Or, to take your comparison with robbers a bit further, do you think criminals should be rewarded, since its a "free market" and stopping people from robbing others is limiting a "free market"?
Have you installed linux lately? Its a lot easier than Windows.
Its also a lot easier to create a master hard drive image that can be installed across various hardware configurations, since there is no WGA, activation, or tying to the installed hardware to generate keys, and you can resize the image once its on the hard drive.
All this means lower, not higher, deployment and support costs.
> Unless people consistently mount /home as noexec, malware will be a problem for Linux or OSX as soon as the get market share (based on Firefox I would say 10-20 percent is the magic number).
Once something gets into a users .rc files or whatnot, it is plenty useful as a mail relay, or a pop-up maker."
I would suggest that most people mount /home on a separate hard drive (or if they can't do that, at least a separate partition).
Of course, the situation isn't comparable with Windows for another reason - the good thing about inux and other open-source products is that we aren't beholden to a single business for fixes.
"Even C++, supposedly lean and mean, seduces us with the bloat of STL."
Don't get me started. The STL sucks, and TR1 sucks almost as much (it sucks slightly less only because it can blame part of the suckage one the original STL)>
Again, the question isn't about competing with Microsoft. Microsofts' model is dying - who wants to compete with that? Then you'll be worried about the next linux-like thing to come along and eat your lunch.
linux, while it makes strong business sense, is more suited to a gift or pay-it-forward model. You like it, you've benefited from it, and you want to, and are free to, share those benefits with others. How can Microsoft compete with that?
Hard drives are relatively cheap nowadays. Help the planet by keeping a pc out of the landfill for a few years, help your friends by giving them more storage space and a more stable OS by giving them a new hard drive + linux, and help yourself, because you'll be helping a better OS reach that "critical mass" that much sooner.
That would require that I actually be interested in competing with Microsoft head to head, when in fact I would rather see us do it in a way they can't compete with. That's why, this Christmas, I'm going to help out some family and friends by giving them second hard drives with linux installed. This way, they keep their data, their old Windows (whch they can now run virtualized in a Window under linux) and they get a LOT more disk space, applications, and stability.
Microsoft can't compete with either the gift or pay-it-forward economies. If everyone who uses linux does this for just 2 people per year, within 5 years, Microsoft will have less than half the market, there will be tons of applications for linux, etc.
Its definitely going to have to happen at some point.
> "There will be a cost for installation for most people. Hopefully in the form of a little business for the neighborhood computer geek, but a cost to the consumer none the less."
For 25 years, we've been "supporting" Microsoft by fixing their crapware on all our friends, relatives, and employers' machines. Ever since I've told people that I don't do Windows, and made it stick, my time wasted supporting Microsofts' products has dropped to zero. I like it like that. I'm ready to help people get their feet wet with linux on the same "freebie" basis, but the hand-holding afterwards will be a lot less, if only because:
As for retailers, they'll probably just create a master hard drive image, and throw it on boxes as needed (and with linux, you can "grow" that image's partition size without needing 3rd-party tools). Since the master image won't need product activation, and isn't tied to a specific hardware setup for activation purposes, support will be easier, not harder, so retailers will probably find their overall costs lower.
Besides, openSUSE is a one-disk, just-click-on-the-defaults-if-you're-not-sure install; they don't have to hunt down disks for their printer, video, audio, mp3 and dvd players, office suite, graphics programs, etc. Lower price + more value, giving them a competitive advantage.
Apple can always do the same thing Microsoft does - get the hardware manufacturers to make the drivers, and pay a fee for getting the Apple seal of approval. (What, you think Microsoft doesn't charge the hardware manufacturers???)
Of, they can always open-source parts of their stuff.
Right now, the numbers aren't right because Windows is bundled on almost every x86 except those sold by Apple.
Unbundle Windows, and watch the numbers change.
If they really wanted to hear something insightful, they'd get the "enemy camp" in for a truth-fest.
The simple fact is, they don't want to hear the truth, which starts with the average Windows user HATING Microsoft. If you think linux fans are bad, try someone who is forced to use Windows on a daily basis, when they have a Mac at home.
But forget the MacHeads. The average Microsoft customer doesn't use Windows because they like it - they use Windows because it came with their computer. They bought it, they paid for it, they can't return it for a refund, so they're darned well going to use it!
That's the point about unbundling (to bring this back on-topic).
As for Hilf, he doesn't "get" open source. He's the guy who said open source was dead in 2007, because "even Linus is paid to write code" - when in fact, that shows that open source is quite the opposite of dead - its so useful that people are being paid to write code and give it away.
That last scares the sh*t out of Microsoft - that businesses have found it profitable to give away the very stuff that Microsoft charges for.
Hilf doesn't "get" that, so he's not going to be an effective counterweight.
Where did anyone say that Dell doesn't make money, or that Apple doesn't have support costs?
The implications were that Dell would continue to make money, but that support costs would be transfered to Dell, same as with Windows, if Dell started selling PCs with OSX on them.
I was in Future Shop this weekend with one of my daughters and her boyfriend. From the conversations I heard, a lot of people don't want Vista.
If her laptop can take a second drive, its cheaper to install a second drive and linux than to buy an XP retail license. She can then run Windows in a virtual machine right on the linux desktop. (oh the irony or funning Windows in a window).
Also, check out the "downgrade rights" - everyone's doing it nowadays.
Or suggest she return the laptop because its not fit for the purpose for which it was purchased.
"The craziest part is, you obsess over Dell PCs, and Dell's are the biggest stock part PCs of them all. They don't do anything special - stock motherboards, stock CPUs, stock graphics cards. There's nothing Dell puts into a PC that you could not put into yours when you sell it."
All my PCs are self-built (laptops excepted). Been like that for years and years. I have never owned a Dell or a Gateway.
"There's absolutely no reason a consumer could not benefit from that offering, and its not Microsoft's fault that you Linux people are too big of pussies to actually sell your own offerings."
Actually, now that Christmas is coming, I plan to give away a few hard disk/openSUSE install combos as small presents. I know a few people who are running windows on hardware thats 2-3 years old, and could use both the extra disk space, and the stability of linux. They'll be able to continue running Windows via a VM (no longer a need to dual-boot) until they get used to the new setup.
There's tons of Windows users out there who are only a hard disk away from running linux. They get to keep all their old data, they don't have to shell out big bucks for the latest bloatware, etc.
If every linux user did this for just 2 people this Christmas, Microsofts' stranglehold on the market would be over in a year.
The OEM is free to make the same deals regardless of the operating system. For example, they can install free trials for various ISPs, trialware for multi-user games that work over the net, etc. About the only software they would take a hit on is anti-virus software.
I live in a smoke-free environment, so I expect my drives to last a reasonable length of time; in addition, my cases always have extra ventilation. This particular case not only has extra fans blowing air in, but several open bay slots to let hot air out. The WD drive in there is barely warm to the touch right now, after hours of operation (I just stuck my fingers in to check :-).
As for software RAID, all raid is ultimately done in software - either by your operating system, or the firmware on your raid cards' board. With software raid, I can replicate a broken system on another machine without too many problems, and try to recover the data. With hardware raid, if the card is gone, its gone unless I can find another, identical card. Or I can try to recover it by recovering the raw data off the drives, then trying to combine the stripes (if RAID5) on a sector-by-sector basis, or guessing as to which is the bad stripe (2-disk RAID1). With a 3-disk raid1, its a lot easier - go with the majority vote on each sector - but who runs 3-disk RAID1? RAID0? Lost data is lost data, whether you use a software or hardware solution. Sector-by-sector copy to new drives, and pray.
Unfortunately, nothing is going to protect you from that one-in-a-trillion cosmic ray that flips several bits in just the right sequence (though error-correcting ram will lower the odds).
Actually, I think you're missing the point - competition only works when there is no pre-existing monopoly that got there via illegal means.
We depend on the government to step in to protect us from predators who use illegal means to gain control of a market, same as we depend on them, via police and firemen, for local protection from robbers and fire.
Extreme situations call for extreme measures - unbundling sales of the OS isn't anywhere near extreme. To turn your argument on its head - if Windows is so good, it should have no fear of being able to compete in a truly free marketplace, solely on its merit.
Free competition scares the crap out of Microsoft, because it can't win. Where its forced to compete, it loses market share - just look at the embedded, server, and cluster markets.
As far as image editing goes, the newest version of openSuse lets you choose between the GIMP with the old interface, or reworked to be more photoshop-like.
I didn't get a chance to test it, because my new RAID1 died - no thanks to Seagate (second set of bad drives in 2 weeks).
Ubuntu, openSuse, RedHat/Fedora and everyone else in the party would eat Microsofts' lunch within 5 years if Windows is unbundled.
OSX does run on plain vanilla x86 hardware - Apple was doing that a couple of years ago, but the existence of this was only leaked last year, and didn't get much attention. If and when the numbers are right, they'll release it, but not before.
It came out a while ago that Apple has OSX running on plain vanilla x86 (non-Apple) hardware. Now look at how many people buy iPods, and compare that to the number who buy cheaper competitors, say Zunes. Apple has reached that "sweet spot" where they can have the best of both worlds - high sales of hardware/software bundles, as well as selling just the OS to those who want it on non-apple hardware.
Dell gets the support headaches, apple gets the $$$. And those who want to "step it up a notch" are still free to buy iMacs, same as they buy iPods.
> "I would think that if Linux was that much better than Windows, that consumers would demand Linux powered PCs. If you build it, they will come."
Most people don't even know about the possibility of alternatives. To them, a PC is any computer that runs Windows, same as, for a long time, the Internet was Internet Explorer or AOL.
The cost of an OEM Windows license is a large portion of the cost of a new machine, compared to any time in the past. For the cost of Windows and Office, you can buy 2 or 3 computers with no OS, and install linux. the problem is, the consumer is not given a choice, so we don't know how many would take the opportunity.
Since that choice never happens, software developers develop for the Windows platform, ensuring lock-in.
Of course, now that Novell's openSUSE can run Windows in a window in a VM, there's more reason to buy a new machine with linux, then move your old copy of XP or 2k to a virtual machine on your new box, rather than paying the Microsoft tax a second time (and yes, you can move your license to your new hardware, despite what Microsoft tries to FUD. Just make sure you remove it from your old hardware at the same time).
"GASP! Windows won't be FREE!"
So many people only use Windows because they think they didn't pay for it. That's why they have such a low expectation of quality - when it crashes they say - Well, I didn't pay for it, so its not like I can ask for my money back."
Unbundle it and let the competition flow. I can see Apple doing a big push for OSX as an aftermarket product. Also, Novell's openSUSE 10.3 is a keeper.
Oh, I agree 100% his job is to just spin the FUD. That Microsoft had to resort to Hilf shows how lacking in insight they are. They could have gotten better spinmeisters here, just by running the anti-microsoft stuff through a script with a few regexes.
They're trying to cover their bases, but its more like a retreat than anything else, because when you have a virtual monopoly, you're your own worst competitor. the person you're trying to steal sales from is yourself - youhave to convince customers that the "wonderful stuff" they bought a few years ago is now "a piece of outdated crap".
That gets predictable, boring, and starts corroding trust. After a while, you ARE your own worst enemy, and people WANT to see you fail. The rest, as they say, is history. We're seeing it now with Vista. Despite Microsofts' claims, Vienna (the next OS after Vista) will be even worse. They either have to break compatibility with the past (in which case, users have little no reason to stick with Microsoft) or just do "more of the same", on an increasingly untenable code base.
This is a rear-guard action, but you can stick a fork in Microsofts' business model. It might not be done yet, but its getting close.
"If you have have a Linux Server and a Heterogeneous or even one Windows client, you have no choice but to run Samba because Windows only talks to Windows. "
Not quite true. You can always use the modern equivalent of sneakernet - USB keychains or rewriteable dvds - to move data back and forth. A lot better than actually connecting a Windows box to a local network.
Or you can transfer everything through ftp and http.
Heck, there used to be programs out there that would make an ftp connection look like a local file share (don't know if there still are - haven't used windows in a LONG time).
Or even just use two equal-sized partitions, and swap mount points?