> I am so not interested in fielding "mummy, if I click here it segfaults!" on usenet it's incredible.
Exactly why you and all Linux fanatics can't understand why corporate America and home users don't care for your OS jihad. Let's put it in non Windows-vs-Linux terms you closed-minded OSS fanatics (contradictory, hmm? but realistic) may be open to listening to. Mac OS X is based on a Unix variant. Look at how EASY it is to use! The level of automation and lack of segfaults and coredumps have been built into people's general expectation of their computers for years. When they double click on a file with an association, they want the program to run and load the file. The last time I checked, Linux purported to have this capability, but it worked like total crap! Hell, OS/2 had better file association than the Linux win managers have. I don't think OSS works because even with all the jihad propaganda that Linux and OSS puts out, Apple took only 2 years to create a window manager that is 100x better than both Gnome and KDE. Why? Accountability. When you're paying someone, it assures you the vendor will be accountable. Capitalism vs. Communism. Ever seen a labor union member get overenthusiastic about delivering quality work? 'Nuff said! OSS sucks!!!
BTW, I am a Windows developer and owner with a love for the new OS X. True, Win3.1 had gen prot faults, but then I've been using NT for the last 5 years and have had no problems.
First off, he believes price of PC hardware and software should synchronize. PC hardware is commoditizing. Although new tech is developing in this area, much of the IP are done. Software is a completely different beast. It cost a lot of money to develop. How can MS deliver for less than it cost to develop? Their margins is in the 40%. If they cut this much off, it still would not meet this bozo's criteria for a price low enough to justify.
Second of all, he completely dismisses the fact that after 25 yrs or more, people now expect certain level of capabilities from their PC. Business and home users will choose a cheaper PC only if it can do what they want. What good is a $350 PC going to do for me if it can't do the things I want? It's one hell of an expensive brick, if you ask me.
The third issue I have is my inability to reconcile this whole notion of free open source software with the need to earn an income by the millions of developers out there. On a large scale, other than Linux, I have not seen one example of this working in a capitalist society where people are motivated by profits from hard work. I do not understand this whole belief that software, music, and movies ought to be free. In capitalism, how does one become motivated to produce without possibility of gain? I believe many of the open source developers do what they do because they enjoy it. However, the vast majority of software developers write software to make an income. I believe most of the free software advocates aren't actually contributing to the cause. They're just tying to push the idea to get something for free. Then they go use Gnutella to steal music and movies. Sorry guys, modern society have already proven Communism just does not work.
It's good for a chuckle. Like watching the democrats and republicans fighting it out or watching Muslims, Jews, Christians duke it out. Notice the people who are actually writing softare like the Carmack, Torvalds, and MS programmers seldom get into these fights.
Actually, no. I write software, C++, Java, VB, SQL. Now looking at dotnet. Own an XP box, have RedHat Linux running in VMWare to play with Mono. Looking for a reason to buy a MAC because it's so elegant, but can't see any reason to because my development, word processing, and web browsing is pretty adequate on XP.
I like to design and implement software/systems. Don't care what tech or platforms. Don't want to be bother with worrying about escape sequence in emacs, parameters in environment scripts, etc. When I program, I focus on the code, not the environment. When I word process, I focus on what I am writing, not the environment. That's why I laugh at your OS religion. If I have to do dev on VAX VMS tomorrow or Mac, or Linux, so be it. If those are what are best for the job, so be it.
In my 10+ years experience, the most tech religious people were the least technically savvy and most ignorant of tech options and capability. They're the ones that say "it's from MS, it must suck. Linux or Unix is the best because..." They weren't around when the VMS guys were saying the same thing about Unix. They're usually enthusiasts who don't do programming or engineering for a living. They remind me of those silly dotcom marketers or web scripting kiddies of recent past. I have worked with many engineers who don't even have computers at homes. Yet these "technicians" and "hackers" live, eat, dring, sleep tech religion. Not sure why. It's pretty sad. So are you a script kiddie? Sounds like it.
So religious, so Mac-like. Pssst, allow me to let you in on a secret. The rest of the world and most business do not revolve around computers like your world. They just want to get things done. Windows and Mac are great because they let you get your work done without delving into the geeky technical how-tos that Linux geeks love so much. If I can't right click and change my screen resolution with the mouse, forget it. If I have to find the gui or bring up a console to mount a drive, forget it. These are BASIC (yes, BASIC) features that are a given on Windows and Macs!
Go ahead and reinvent the desktop if you want. Seems like the techno geek world is forever in this revolving reinvent everything because it feels cool to do mentality. The sane world will greet an alternative if it's ever ready. In the mean time, we have businesses (that only cares if the computer does its assigned job) to run, books to write, email to send. You guys are so funny. You find the same thing in institutionalized religion, in politics, and yes, in techno geekdom.
Slashdot Mirror
> I am so not interested in fielding "mummy, if I click here it segfaults!" on usenet it's incredible.
Exactly why you and all Linux fanatics can't understand why corporate America and home users don't care for your OS jihad. Let's put it in non Windows-vs-Linux terms you closed-minded OSS fanatics (contradictory, hmm? but realistic) may be open to listening to. Mac OS X is based on a Unix variant. Look at how EASY it is to use! The level of automation and lack of segfaults and coredumps have been built into people's general expectation of their computers for years. When they double click on a file with an association, they want the program to run and load the file. The last time I checked, Linux purported to have this capability, but it worked like total crap! Hell, OS/2 had better file association than the Linux win managers have. I don't think OSS works because even with all the jihad propaganda that Linux and OSS puts out, Apple took only 2 years to create a window manager that is 100x better than both Gnome and KDE. Why? Accountability. When you're paying someone, it assures you the vendor will be accountable. Capitalism vs. Communism. Ever seen a labor union member get overenthusiastic about delivering quality work? 'Nuff said! OSS sucks!!!
BTW, I am a Windows developer and owner with a love for the new OS X. True, Win3.1 had gen prot faults, but then I've been using NT for the last 5 years and have had no problems.
First off, he believes price of PC hardware and software should synchronize. PC hardware is commoditizing. Although new tech is developing in this area, much of the IP are done. Software is a completely different beast. It cost a lot of money to develop. How can MS deliver for less than it cost to develop? Their margins is in the 40%. If they cut this much off, it still would not meet this bozo's criteria for a price low enough to justify.
Second of all, he completely dismisses the fact that after 25 yrs or more, people now expect certain level of capabilities from their PC. Business and home users will choose a cheaper PC only if it can do what they want. What good is a $350 PC going to do for me if it can't do the things I want? It's one hell of an expensive brick, if you ask me.
The third issue I have is my inability to reconcile this whole notion of free open source software with the need to earn an income by the millions of developers out there. On a large scale, other than Linux, I have not seen one example of this working in a capitalist society where people are motivated by profits from hard work. I do not understand this whole belief that software, music, and movies ought to be free. In capitalism, how does one become motivated to produce without possibility of gain? I believe many of the open source developers do what they do because they enjoy it. However, the vast majority of software developers write software to make an income. I believe most of the free software advocates aren't actually contributing to the cause. They're just tying to push the idea to get something for free. Then they go use Gnutella to steal music and movies. Sorry guys, modern society have already proven Communism just does not work.
It's good for a chuckle. Like watching the democrats and republicans fighting it out or watching Muslims, Jews, Christians duke it out. Notice the people who are actually writing softare like the Carmack, Torvalds, and MS programmers seldom get into these fights.
Actually, no. I write software, C++, Java, VB, SQL. Now looking at dotnet. Own an XP box, have RedHat Linux running in VMWare to play with Mono. Looking for a reason to buy a MAC because it's so elegant, but can't see any reason to because my development, word processing, and web browsing is pretty adequate on XP. I like to design and implement software/systems. Don't care what tech or platforms. Don't want to be bother with worrying about escape sequence in emacs, parameters in environment scripts, etc. When I program, I focus on the code, not the environment. When I word process, I focus on what I am writing, not the environment. That's why I laugh at your OS religion. If I have to do dev on VAX VMS tomorrow or Mac, or Linux, so be it. If those are what are best for the job, so be it. In my 10+ years experience, the most tech religious people were the least technically savvy and most ignorant of tech options and capability. They're the ones that say "it's from MS, it must suck. Linux or Unix is the best because..." They weren't around when the VMS guys were saying the same thing about Unix. They're usually enthusiasts who don't do programming or engineering for a living. They remind me of those silly dotcom marketers or web scripting kiddies of recent past. I have worked with many engineers who don't even have computers at homes. Yet these "technicians" and "hackers" live, eat, dring, sleep tech religion. Not sure why. It's pretty sad. So are you a script kiddie? Sounds like it.
So religious, so Mac-like. Pssst, allow me to let you in on a secret. The rest of the world and most business do not revolve around computers like your world. They just want to get things done. Windows and Mac are great because they let you get your work done without delving into the geeky technical how-tos that Linux geeks love so much. If I can't right click and change my screen resolution with the mouse, forget it. If I have to find the gui or bring up a console to mount a drive, forget it. These are BASIC (yes, BASIC) features that are a given on Windows and Macs! Go ahead and reinvent the desktop if you want. Seems like the techno geek world is forever in this revolving reinvent everything because it feels cool to do mentality. The sane world will greet an alternative if it's ever ready. In the mean time, we have businesses (that only cares if the computer does its assigned job) to run, books to write, email to send. You guys are so funny. You find the same thing in institutionalized religion, in politics, and yes, in techno geekdom.