I doubt that Linux users really want any of the big-name OEM's to provide Linux installations, unless they're truly that blind to the fact that many of the instability issues that people blame on Windows aren't actually caused by Windows at all. If you want your beloved Linux to come pre-installed on Dell's computers, be prepared for plenty of unnecessary bloat.
I use Windows, but I'd never use a pre-installed OEM version of Windows. That's just asking for trouble. And don't think that package managers will save Linux in the OEM world. Expect much of the garbage that accompanies Windows on OEM PC's to make the transition to Linux PC's, as well.
The classic theme in Vista looks horrible, though. Furthermore, using Aero will generally result in better performance, as the rendering is hardware-based, rather than software-based as in the past.
So, by your logic, somebody who is shot and killed is immediately at fault because he/she isn't immortal? Oh, and the killer gets to insult the victim, too!
I've never used Xbox Live, so I have a question concerning it: Are less popular or older games ever removed from the service, rendering them unplayable online thereafter? EA likes to remove online support for the PlayStation versions of older (as in two years old) sports titles in order to force players to purchase a newer version. Does this occur with the titles that are playable on Xbox Live, by chance? If not, then it makes perfect sense that EA would be a bit hesitant to support Xbox Live in the beginning.
Have you actually used this "evil, evil" Vista? I consider myself to be in-the-know, and I have no problems with using Windows, whatsoever. I hope that you're warning people of the impending compatibility issues that they'll likely have upon switching to Ubuntu. And I sincerely hope that you're not suggesting Ubuntu to non-in-the-know laptop users who enjoy having wireless capabilities...
Unless you're planning to assist each and every person whom you recommended Ubuntu to in configuring such things...
So, fixing Windows would automatically prevent the further spreading of viruses? I think not. Fixing Windows has nothing to do with this. There are plenty of Windows users out there who are still using Windows 98. You know, users of Linux or Mac OS should have the good sense to use antivirus software simply to prevent viruses from spreading further. When something as seemingly innocent as a JPEG (or an EXE disguised as a JPEG, thanks to Windows' hiding of filename extensions by default) can cause problems (especially on older versions of Windows), people should really consider that they're becoming a part of the problem by not using antivirus, regardless of what operating system they're using.
From what I understand, their improvements in CSS rendering are rather limited. I don't think that it even comes close to passing the Acid Test, but it's definitely a step in the right direction.
If this is the version of IE that's in Build 5536, then I must say that I'm surprised that they haven't made any performance improvements to it. It's still a step up from IE6 in terms of security and whatnot, but it's absolute torture trying to use this browser when you're used to the speed and response time that Opera offers.
I agree. Honestly, when I used to play PSO, I generally preferred using female characters, as their character models are generally more interesting to look at. The guys look like complete douchebags.
WOW, since when did the avarge luser learn what a OS was?
Hahahaha...when did I even mention that? I simply said that Vista will be a great release for the average user. I never said that they had any idea as to what an OS is.
I guess m$ isent doing their jobs at dis-education as well as it used to.
Oh, nice of you to show me how mature you are. Nice dollar sign for the "s" there. Wow, I didn't see that coming. And were you trying to spell "isn't" there?
And thats face it, installing windows is hard work, and that its known to have installation problems at random, most people dont know that, so they will assume windows is uninstallable if they dont try to reinstall it untill it works (well, as best at windows ever can work).
Umm...despite what you may believe, Linux has installation problems at random, as well. Nothing is perfect. What's your point? Say what you will about Windows, but it installed quite nicely on my cousin's old hard drive, despite four different Linux distros failing to install. (DSL was the only distro that would install properly.)
Maybe if people buy new computers, but thats face it, most people dont have that kind of money for a new computer with a $$$ expensive OS that requires more hardware power then they need, and power that costs even more $$ money.
If you'd bother to leave your parents' basement (or even assuming that you're old enough to drive) and visit a computer store sometime, you'd realize that there are some very affordable Windows Vista Capable computers. And I mean computers that're even as little as $500 and are pretty decked out as far as power goes. Yes, open your eyes; they do exist.
Furthermore, Windows Vista Beta 2 isn't nearly as taxing on older hardware as you'd think. My computer, being five years old, gets a whopping 1 out of 5 on Windows Vista Beta 2's included performance rating feature. However, the Aero interface performs very well, with the only slight lagger being the window contents itself. If the beta is as bad in relation to the newer builds as I've heard, then I have no worries whatsoever about the final build.
Vista might catch on in a few years, but only if people have it in their mindset that its nessesary (which isent to hard, but still, with the specs it requires, it might make people more open to alternatives (assuming they know about there existence)).
I've already stated that I've mentioned and explained the alternatives to many people. Do realize, however, that most employees at computer stores know absolutely nothing about Linux. I don't claim to be an expert on it, but I gave it an honest effort for two months straight quite some time ago. I messed around with plenty of distros, from Ubuntu to Gentoo. What did I find? Well, Linux distros are usually more complete out of the box, but I found myself uninstalling a lot of software, anyway. Why not just start with a bare-bones OS, such as Windows, and save myself the effort?
And yes, I realize that there are distros that allow you to start from scratch, but those are far too difficult for Linux newbies to screw around with. And distros like Ubuntu see fit to hide features to a point that it's insulting. I mean, I'd much rather risk running an.exe file that is downloaded from the manufacturer's Web site by double-clicking it than having to enable "restricted" packages in Ubuntu in order to install decent video card drivers.
m$ wants to fix the "bare-bones" problem? Thats a good laugh. People make a good amount of money patching m$'s shooty work in every area of programs, even m$. They have nothing any user would want to use for more then basic things (REALLY basic, to the point where if they really want to do something, they cant).
You're basing this on XP; try Vista Beta 2. Still, I probably won't even use the additional
The current version of Windows XP is, as you described, nothing more than a five-year-old OS with a few [hundred] patches. As such, no, it isn't a valid comparison. Despite what you may think, however, comparing Server 2003 is a rather valid argument, as it is used quite extensively as a desktop OS (usually pirated, of course). In fact, it's even more sensible to use Server 2003 in this comparison, because Vista is based on Server 2003. Longhorn was based on XP, and it was pretty much falling apart; XP's kernel simply wasn't robust enough. Server 2003, on the other hand, is quite robust.
A common gripe about Windows (other than the obvious blue screen BS and security issues) is the fact that its out-of-the-box driver support is far inferior to that of Linux. Again, seeing as how the current version of XP doesn't have much (if any) added driver support out of the box, how is that even fair? It offers security patches, nothing more. Any driver support is included by the respective hardware vendors.
So, if you don't happen to have a copy of Server 2003 handy, why not just wait until a better build of Vista is released to the general public? I have a feeling that, despite what the majority of Slashdotters believe, Windows Vista is gonna be a great release for the average user right off the bat. Note that I said "average" user, however, as I don't really see all that much that appeals to me with the additional features. Why? Because I use other applications already. Why should I change?
Say what you want about Windows. The fact of the matter is that it's obviously not bad enough for most people to even bother searching for an alternative. I work at CompUSA, and the Apple hardware is very well represented there. As such, I highly doubt that people have no clue that other options exist, and I've even told many of them about the alternatives. I've even helped out with peoples' Linux-related inquiries, and I've even done my good deed by recommending that they download them for free to allow them to try several distros.
I realize that my needs aren't identical to everyone else's needs. As such, I'm understanding of what other people look for in an OS. I remember talking with a customer who had just purchased a Windows PC, as her Mac had recently died, and a friend had recommended that she get a Dell. (Ouch.) She was shocked at how bare-bones Windows XP was when compared to Mac OS. I honestly had never thought about that, and I suppose that I took my knowledge of Windows for granted. I now recognize Windows' bare-bones nature as a legitimate flaw, but Microsoft seeks to change that with Vista. They're improving their product, but they'll never escape the criticism of those Linux users who can't seem to fathom the fact that the "s" in Microsoft isn't actually a dollar sign. It's quite tragic, really.
And let's not forget the fact that they tend to have a lawsuit thrown their way for every single feature that they attempt to add to Windows. Despite what you may think of Windows, do realize that Microsoft isn't free to do whatever it likes with its OS; a lot of businesses have been built on Microsoft's past mistakes, and it would seem that Microsoft isn't able to simply correct those flaws without facing legal retribution.
You should respect the fact that Microsoft is opening up its beta software to the general public. They're seeking feedback, and I feel that they're handling it quite well. Of course, no matter how good the "final" version is, I'm sure that many Slashdotters will continue to spread lies about experiencing a blue screen every ten minutes upon trying it out. Honestly, I haven't experienced a blue screen on my own computer in well over four years. Granted, I'm running a clean install of Windows that isn't littered with all of the "free" crap that comes pre-installed on many store-bought computers.
In either case, it's no big secret that the public beta for Windows Vista isn't all that great. If you happen to wander over to a site that actually posts Microsoft news on a regular basis and actually has a category specifically set aside for such news (You know, like...not Slashdot. And no, Slashdot's tagging beta, with its "duh" and "obvious" tags for anti-Microsoft posts honestly don't count. Grow up, subscribers.), you might actually realize that the newer builds of Vista are shaping up to be quite nice.
I didn't have any driver-related issues with the beta, honestly. Yes, the performance was lacking a bit, but I was expecting far worse. Linux users need to stop comparing their OS' state to that of a five-year-old version of Windows. Where was your beloved Linux at that point? Quite far from where it is now, that's where.
Microsoft sycophant? You obviously haven't read some of his reviews. Despite what you may think, not all of his outlooks on various Microsoft products are positive.
Considering some of the outlandish pricing for cell phone games (which are choppy and short in comparison to console games), this really doesn't sound all that bad.
Honestly, there's a certain point at which it simply isn't possible to "fix" an infested installation of any operating system. Just back up the important files and reformat/reinstall. This isn't even news.
Becauses there's no dedicated Microsoft section, which is hilarious, considering the fact that Slashdot takes any opportunity to dump on it. In either case, I find it hilariou that I recently tried installing Linux on my cousin's computer to get him by until I get around to picking up replacement hardware that he needs (seeing as how he only uses his computer for Internet access), only to find that at least five different distros (even Ubuntu) completely failed to install. Windows would install fine, but I didn't feel like taking the time to install the various things that he'd need in addition to the OS itself. I ended up installing DSL, as that was the only distro that would install. The others returned errors regarding the hard drive. I realize that the hard drive is on the verge of death, but it's obvious that it's able to accept a Windows installation. What in God's name does Linux find so hard about installing on some hardware? Ridiculous.
Have they released a new client update in the last few months? I used to use NOD32, but I began having serious issues with it at one point. I'd download a file (any file), and NOD32's CPU usage would jump to 99% until I deleted the file. I could never get around this issue. It was a shame, too, as I used to recommend NOD32 to everyone. Now, I'm using AVG until I'm positive that NOD32 is fixed.
The "beauty" of open-source? No, I'd say that it's the problem. If making the Linux environment more user-friendly is such an important goal for so many in the Linux community (and it is - don't deny it), then these people need to swallow their pride and do what it takes to truly make the Linux environment more user-friendly.
I'm a Windows user. I don't fear the registry. I do, however, hate the command prompt. As such, I absolutely had using the terminal in Linux. It's a serious pain-in-the-ass, especially when I can install fully-capable video card drivers in Windows simply by double-clicking an executable that I found so conveniently lying around on the manufacturer's Web site!
There is a such a thing as Linux. It's a magical place where über-geeks can tweak the living shit out of their systems, while some have a somewhat clouded vision of a "user-friendly" Linux that locks out all administrative access in an attempt to make things "better" than what they are in Windows. Sorry, but that's never gonna happen. When a Linux distro such as Ubuntu tries to be "Linux for Human Beings" and disables the root account by default in an attempt to "protect" me, I can't help but feel a bit insulted.
You know, considering the fact that Slashdot doesn't appear to have a dedicated Microsoft section, I find it rather amusing that any potentially negative Microsoft news gets posted.
It's likely someone's way of trying to point out how much more difficult Windows is to set up when compared to Linux or Mac OS. I wouldn't be surprised. Although that's probably the point to this being on Slashdot, especially, I submitted a list, anyway. Why? Because once my computer is populated with the apps that I suggested, it's good to go. I reformat my computer at least once every two months, so it isn't that bad.
Honestly, if every anti-Sony person in the world had enough money, I'd say that the ideal way of getting rid of Sony would be to purchase the PlayStation 3 console with absolutely no accessories or games whatsoever. Sure, there will be plenty of people who purchase 3-4 games with their console, but I don't think that would be enough to recoup the costs of selling so many other consoles at a loss.
Slashdot Mirror
Storing a lot of data within a phone is reckless. Plenty of phones offer removable storage options, which I feel is a far more intelligent approach.
I doubt that Linux users really want any of the big-name OEM's to provide Linux installations, unless they're truly that blind to the fact that many of the instability issues that people blame on Windows aren't actually caused by Windows at all. If you want your beloved Linux to come pre-installed on Dell's computers, be prepared for plenty of unnecessary bloat.
I use Windows, but I'd never use a pre-installed OEM version of Windows. That's just asking for trouble. And don't think that package managers will save Linux in the OEM world. Expect much of the garbage that accompanies Windows on OEM PC's to make the transition to Linux PC's, as well.
The classic theme in Vista looks horrible, though. Furthermore, using Aero will generally result in better performance, as the rendering is hardware-based, rather than software-based as in the past.
So, by your logic, somebody who is shot and killed is immediately at fault because he/she isn't immortal? Oh, and the killer gets to insult the victim, too!
I've never used Xbox Live, so I have a question concerning it: Are less popular or older games ever removed from the service, rendering them unplayable online thereafter? EA likes to remove online support for the PlayStation versions of older (as in two years old) sports titles in order to force players to purchase a newer version. Does this occur with the titles that are playable on Xbox Live, by chance? If not, then it makes perfect sense that EA would be a bit hesitant to support Xbox Live in the beginning.
Whoa...Slashdot uninformed about something Windows-related? Hold your tongue, sir.
Have you actually used this "evil, evil" Vista? I consider myself to be in-the-know, and I have no problems with using Windows, whatsoever. I hope that you're warning people of the impending compatibility issues that they'll likely have upon switching to Ubuntu. And I sincerely hope that you're not suggesting Ubuntu to non-in-the-know laptop users who enjoy having wireless capabilities...
Unless you're planning to assist each and every person whom you recommended Ubuntu to in configuring such things...
So, fixing Windows would automatically prevent the further spreading of viruses? I think not. Fixing Windows has nothing to do with this. There are plenty of Windows users out there who are still using Windows 98. You know, users of Linux or Mac OS should have the good sense to use antivirus software simply to prevent viruses from spreading further. When something as seemingly innocent as a JPEG (or an EXE disguised as a JPEG, thanks to Windows' hiding of filename extensions by default) can cause problems (especially on older versions of Windows), people should really consider that they're becoming a part of the problem by not using antivirus, regardless of what operating system they're using.
From what I understand, their improvements in CSS rendering are rather limited. I don't think that it even comes close to passing the Acid Test, but it's definitely a step in the right direction.
If this is the version of IE that's in Build 5536, then I must say that I'm surprised that they haven't made any performance improvements to it. It's still a step up from IE6 in terms of security and whatnot, but it's absolute torture trying to use this browser when you're used to the speed and response time that Opera offers.
I agree. Honestly, when I used to play PSO, I generally preferred using female characters, as their character models are generally more interesting to look at. The guys look like complete douchebags.
WOW, since when did the avarge luser learn what a OS was?
Hahahaha...when did I even mention that? I simply said that Vista will be a great release for the average user. I never said that they had any idea as to what an OS is.
I guess m$ isent doing their jobs at dis-education as well as it used to.
Oh, nice of you to show me how mature you are. Nice dollar sign for the "s" there. Wow, I didn't see that coming. And were you trying to spell "isn't" there?
And thats face it, installing windows is hard work, and that its known to have installation problems at random, most people dont know that, so they will assume windows is uninstallable if they dont try to reinstall it untill it works (well, as best at windows ever can work).
Umm...despite what you may believe, Linux has installation problems at random, as well. Nothing is perfect. What's your point? Say what you will about Windows, but it installed quite nicely on my cousin's old hard drive, despite four different Linux distros failing to install. (DSL was the only distro that would install properly.)
Maybe if people buy new computers, but thats face it, most people dont have that kind of money for a new computer with a $$$ expensive OS that requires more hardware power then they need, and power that costs even more $$ money.
If you'd bother to leave your parents' basement (or even assuming that you're old enough to drive) and visit a computer store sometime, you'd realize that there are some very affordable Windows Vista Capable computers. And I mean computers that're even as little as $500 and are pretty decked out as far as power goes. Yes, open your eyes; they do exist.
Furthermore, Windows Vista Beta 2 isn't nearly as taxing on older hardware as you'd think. My computer, being five years old, gets a whopping 1 out of 5 on Windows Vista Beta 2's included performance rating feature. However, the Aero interface performs very well, with the only slight lagger being the window contents itself. If the beta is as bad in relation to the newer builds as I've heard, then I have no worries whatsoever about the final build.
Vista might catch on in a few years, but only if people have it in their mindset that its nessesary (which isent to hard, but still, with the specs it requires, it might make people more open to alternatives (assuming they know about there existence)).
I've already stated that I've mentioned and explained the alternatives to many people. Do realize, however, that most employees at computer stores know absolutely nothing about Linux. I don't claim to be an expert on it, but I gave it an honest effort for two months straight quite some time ago. I messed around with plenty of distros, from Ubuntu to Gentoo. What did I find? Well, Linux distros are usually more complete out of the box, but I found myself uninstalling a lot of software, anyway. Why not just start with a bare-bones OS, such as Windows, and save myself the effort?
And yes, I realize that there are distros that allow you to start from scratch, but those are far too difficult for Linux newbies to screw around with. And distros like Ubuntu see fit to hide features to a point that it's insulting. I mean, I'd much rather risk running an .exe file that is downloaded from the manufacturer's Web site by double-clicking it than having to enable "restricted" packages in Ubuntu in order to install decent video card drivers.
m$ wants to fix the "bare-bones" problem? Thats a good laugh. People make a good amount of money patching m$'s shooty work in every area of programs, even m$. They have nothing any user would want to use for more then basic things (REALLY basic, to the point where if they really want to do something, they cant).
You're basing this on XP; try Vista Beta 2. Still, I probably won't even use the additional
The current version of Windows XP is, as you described, nothing more than a five-year-old OS with a few [hundred] patches. As such, no, it isn't a valid comparison. Despite what you may think, however, comparing Server 2003 is a rather valid argument, as it is used quite extensively as a desktop OS (usually pirated, of course). In fact, it's even more sensible to use Server 2003 in this comparison, because Vista is based on Server 2003. Longhorn was based on XP, and it was pretty much falling apart; XP's kernel simply wasn't robust enough. Server 2003, on the other hand, is quite robust.
A common gripe about Windows (other than the obvious blue screen BS and security issues) is the fact that its out-of-the-box driver support is far inferior to that of Linux. Again, seeing as how the current version of XP doesn't have much (if any) added driver support out of the box, how is that even fair? It offers security patches, nothing more. Any driver support is included by the respective hardware vendors.
So, if you don't happen to have a copy of Server 2003 handy, why not just wait until a better build of Vista is released to the general public? I have a feeling that, despite what the majority of Slashdotters believe, Windows Vista is gonna be a great release for the average user right off the bat. Note that I said "average" user, however, as I don't really see all that much that appeals to me with the additional features. Why? Because I use other applications already. Why should I change?
Say what you want about Windows. The fact of the matter is that it's obviously not bad enough for most people to even bother searching for an alternative. I work at CompUSA, and the Apple hardware is very well represented there. As such, I highly doubt that people have no clue that other options exist, and I've even told many of them about the alternatives. I've even helped out with peoples' Linux-related inquiries, and I've even done my good deed by recommending that they download them for free to allow them to try several distros.
I realize that my needs aren't identical to everyone else's needs. As such, I'm understanding of what other people look for in an OS. I remember talking with a customer who had just purchased a Windows PC, as her Mac had recently died, and a friend had recommended that she get a Dell. (Ouch.) She was shocked at how bare-bones Windows XP was when compared to Mac OS. I honestly had never thought about that, and I suppose that I took my knowledge of Windows for granted. I now recognize Windows' bare-bones nature as a legitimate flaw, but Microsoft seeks to change that with Vista. They're improving their product, but they'll never escape the criticism of those Linux users who can't seem to fathom the fact that the "s" in Microsoft isn't actually a dollar sign. It's quite tragic, really.
And let's not forget the fact that they tend to have a lawsuit thrown their way for every single feature that they attempt to add to Windows. Despite what you may think of Windows, do realize that Microsoft isn't free to do whatever it likes with its OS; a lot of businesses have been built on Microsoft's past mistakes, and it would seem that Microsoft isn't able to simply correct those flaws without facing legal retribution.
You should respect the fact that Microsoft is opening up its beta software to the general public. They're seeking feedback, and I feel that they're handling it quite well. Of course, no matter how good the "final" version is, I'm sure that many Slashdotters will continue to spread lies about experiencing a blue screen every ten minutes upon trying it out. Honestly, I haven't experienced a blue screen on my own computer in well over four years. Granted, I'm running a clean install of Windows that isn't littered with all of the "free" crap that comes pre-installed on many store-bought computers.
In either case, it's no big secret that the public beta for Windows Vista isn't all that great. If you happen to wander over to a site that actually posts Microsoft news on a regular basis and actually has a category specifically set aside for such news (You know, like...not Slashdot. And no, Slashdot's tagging beta, with its "duh" and "obvious" tags for anti-Microsoft posts honestly don't count. Grow up, subscribers.), you might actually realize that the newer builds of Vista are shaping up to be quite nice.
I didn't have any driver-related issues with the beta, honestly. Yes, the performance was lacking a bit, but I was expecting far worse. Linux users need to stop comparing their OS' state to that of a five-year-old version of Windows. Where was your beloved Linux at that point? Quite far from where it is now, that's where.
Microsoft sycophant? You obviously haven't read some of his reviews. Despite what you may think, not all of his outlooks on various Microsoft products are positive.
Considering some of the outlandish pricing for cell phone games (which are choppy and short in comparison to console games), this really doesn't sound all that bad.
Honestly, there's a certain point at which it simply isn't possible to "fix" an infested installation of any operating system. Just back up the important files and reformat/reinstall. This isn't even news.
Becauses there's no dedicated Microsoft section, which is hilarious, considering the fact that Slashdot takes any opportunity to dump on it. In either case, I find it hilariou that I recently tried installing Linux on my cousin's computer to get him by until I get around to picking up replacement hardware that he needs (seeing as how he only uses his computer for Internet access), only to find that at least five different distros (even Ubuntu) completely failed to install. Windows would install fine, but I didn't feel like taking the time to install the various things that he'd need in addition to the OS itself. I ended up installing DSL, as that was the only distro that would install. The others returned errors regarding the hard drive. I realize that the hard drive is on the verge of death, but it's obvious that it's able to accept a Windows installation. What in God's name does Linux find so hard about installing on some hardware? Ridiculous.
Have they released a new client update in the last few months? I used to use NOD32, but I began having serious issues with it at one point. I'd download a file (any file), and NOD32's CPU usage would jump to 99% until I deleted the file. I could never get around this issue. It was a shame, too, as I used to recommend NOD32 to everyone. Now, I'm using AVG until I'm positive that NOD32 is fixed.
The "beauty" of open-source? No, I'd say that it's the problem. If making the Linux environment more user-friendly is such an important goal for so many in the Linux community (and it is - don't deny it), then these people need to swallow their pride and do what it takes to truly make the Linux environment more user-friendly.
I'm a Windows user. I don't fear the registry. I do, however, hate the command prompt. As such, I absolutely had using the terminal in Linux. It's a serious pain-in-the-ass, especially when I can install fully-capable video card drivers in Windows simply by double-clicking an executable that I found so conveniently lying around on the manufacturer's Web site!
There is a such a thing as Linux. It's a magical place where über-geeks can tweak the living shit out of their systems, while some have a somewhat clouded vision of a "user-friendly" Linux that locks out all administrative access in an attempt to make things "better" than what they are in Windows. Sorry, but that's never gonna happen. When a Linux distro such as Ubuntu tries to be "Linux for Human Beings" and disables the root account by default in an attempt to "protect" me, I can't help but feel a bit insulted.
I could care less about OGG support. Honestly, must Linux users make it a point to constantly do things against the grain?
Hahahaha...that is rather amusing...
You know, considering the fact that Slashdot doesn't appear to have a dedicated Microsoft section, I find it rather amusing that any potentially negative Microsoft news gets posted.
It's likely someone's way of trying to point out how much more difficult Windows is to set up when compared to Linux or Mac OS. I wouldn't be surprised. Although that's probably the point to this being on Slashdot, especially, I submitted a list, anyway. Why? Because once my computer is populated with the apps that I suggested, it's good to go. I reformat my computer at least once every two months, so it isn't that bad.
Honestly, if every anti-Sony person in the world had enough money, I'd say that the ideal way of getting rid of Sony would be to purchase the PlayStation 3 console with absolutely no accessories or games whatsoever. Sure, there will be plenty of people who purchase 3-4 games with their console, but I don't think that would be enough to recoup the costs of selling so many other consoles at a loss.