There's a lot more that differentiates FreeBSD than its licensing. For some people/situations, that might be a priority, but it wasn't for me and I still went with FreeBSD. Same with countless other people/companies.
Agreed. RealPlayer works just great on my FreeBSD desktop. I don't mind it at all.
I'm happy they've cleaned up their player and are giving attention to people beyond Windows and Mac. I'd miss RealPlayer if it were to vanish, because goodness knows there'll never be a "Windows Media Player" for FreeBSD or Linux. Heh.
That said... RealPlayer is hardly my sole or even primary media player.;)
I'm sure for $5-$10 they could find some geek willing to burn the software to CD-R and print off the documentation and staple it together. Hell, I'd do it for free for someone I knew, just to help them get off some of the horrible commercial software out there.
The cool thing is, though, that it's not necessary. One can download for free and use the online documentation for free, if they so choose.
"Linux is great but I can't walk into a BestBuy and buy anything software wise for it."
No, but in less time than it takes to just drive to Best Buy (let alone check out and get back), you could have downloaded several pieces of software for it. For free.
You suffer from the limited brainwashed mindset that software is something on a disc in a shrinkwrapped box that is 99% packing material, which you then have to pay this thing called "money" for. To quote an oft-use phrase: you need to think outside the box. What's the advantage? Hell, you don't even get manuals most the time anymore, with the slip of paper in the box referring you to the company's website for documentation and help. Sounds a lot like the open-source support model... hmmm....
And the irony is that most people have already grasped the concept. They're already accustomed to downloading AIM or MSN off some website and installing it in minutes without spending a dime to get this fancy new piece of software. Why not do the same for an upgraded web browser? Or a full-blown office suite? They can already handle that.
Given the laziness of the average population, the desire to get things as cheap as possible (or free), and the desire for instant-gratification, I'd think they'd prefer the Ubuntu way over the Best Buy way.
Disclaimer: I'm a FreeBSD user, but I've checked out Ubuntu to see what all the fuss is about.
"I had to replace my home laptop a few months back and Vista was the only OS offered by Dell."
Not true. If you order a Latitude (which you always should, for many other reasons too, over the Inspirons), you can still specify Windows XP as the OS. You don't even have to do anything special, it's right there available online.
At first, I was going to say it was Planetfall on a Tandy TRS-80 Model 2000, but then I realized I was thinking in terms of the first game on a computer we owned. Prior to the Tandy, my elementary school got a Commodore PET back when I was in 3rd grade... our school's first computer. I remember the principal was so proud... he carted the thing around from classroom to classroom, showing it off. He'd make up some math problem, then have us race against the computer to solve it (I think we might have gotten calculators, not sure). Anyhow, it took programs you loaded off cassette tape. One was a game called Miner I believe... there was a sign-up sheet where you could reserve time to play it during recess. I'm not sure if we got LOGO for it too or if that came later with the Commodore 64s... my memory is a bit hazy.
"The point is some kind of add on program be it a plug-in or a standalone player is required to play all video."
Not sure why you're wasting your time getting confused.... that's a given for any video/picture/music/etc filetype. Like JPEG. They don't open themselves. They need a program to open them. No shit that browsers can open JPEG files. So can a stand-alone image viewer. That's my point.
The user doesn't like Flash, for legitimate reasons. It's not a standard way to play video. Standard video file formats (DivX, MPEG, etc) can be played with standard players. Web browsers aren't inherently video-file playing applications... hence they need special plug-ins. Using a web browser plus a plug-in to play a simple video is like using a can-opener attachment for your Kitchen-Aid mixer just to open cans, when it'd be far-simpler and more-practical to just use a stand-alone can opener.
Flash sucks, and videos are better if made available for download. Flash is not standard and not anywhere near as widely-available as DivX/MPEG/etc video players.
Well no kidding. Some sort of "add-on program" is necessary to view a JPEG too. The person you responded to was specifically requesting a stand-alone standard video file format, versus an embedded Flash video. Since, as has been stated by many people, Flash sucks.
Why do you assume the person you're replying to has a mobile device which is the source of his/her problem?
While you are correct that many mobile devices don't support Flash, that's not the main reason that Flash sucks. Flash sucks because it's a proprietary data type which puts content at the mercy of whatever OSes and devices that Adobe feels bothered to bless with a Flash player. Perhaps the user was on a non-mobile OS that doesn't have a Flash player (FreeBSD?). Maybe s/he just hates Flash for many other perfectly-valid reasons. The Wii, for example, is stuck with an old version of Flash. You think Adobe cares? You can "push" Adobe all you like but the fact remains that unless you're running a Windows or Mac desktop/laptop, you're not important to them.
Adobe shouldn't have a stranglehold on internet content with Flash for the same reason Microsoft shouldn't with proprietary HTML in IE.
And no, video does NOT require a plug-in to play. Video can play just fine with a standalone video player. Or were you not aware that these existed and assumed a web browser was the only way to play videos, MP3s, and use email?
The 2nd edition of Michael Lucas' "Absolute FreeBSD" just came out. I haven't had a chance to go through the 2nd edition though, but the 1st ed was very good. This would make it the most-up-to-date FreeBSD book currently available. Other older ones I can recommend are FreeBSD Unleashed, The Complete FreeBSD, and FreeBSD: The Complete Reference.
Well, I use FreeBSD (thought it'd be apparent from my URL for those truly curious).
I specifically didn't mention it because my point was to critique Adobe and the issues with Flash, not to come off as a FreeBSD fanboy. The issues here are the same regardless if you use FreeBSD or any OS that is not Windows/Mac/Linux. The web shouldn't be limited solely to those OSes that Adobe feels like producing a plugin for.
I didn't say DHTML could do everything Flash did. I said "Little of what Flash is used for even requires Flash...". Read my comment again.
Most sites using Flash are using it for such mundane purposes as doing mouseover/expanding menus and other simple interface mechanics that not only can be done with DHTML, but can be done simpler with broader browser compatibility and faster page-load times (less bytes on the wire). In fact, a site's basic interface and navigation should never require a plugin. Plugins should only offer added content.
"how long will it take for most people to upgrade flash versions?"
I'll update Flash once Adobe gives me a version that works. For now, I'm stuck with version 7 for a different OS, thunked in with some hacked-up compatibility layer. Every day, more and more websites are inaccessible to me.
Flash is bane on the internet, giving a proprietary stranglehold to a single commercial company. It turns Adobe into another Microsoft and Flash becomes its "IE"... the more people they can get to use Flash, the more control they have over the keys to the internet, granting them only to whatever OS and browsers they feel like producing Flash plugins for.
Little of what Flash is used for even requires Flash and could be done with modern OS-agnostic DHTML. Sadly, too many web designers are sucking Adobe's dipstick.
Actually, they are quite delicate. I know, because I've got a piece of the material. And no, I'm no one special... they sell it (or used to) in the KSC gift shop. A tap won't "snap" it but it will crush that spot... these things are like a silica sponge, mostly air. Great insulators, at the expense of being extremely fragile. It can't take much of a bump without damage.
I managed to easily put some marks into my sample before I smartened up and kept it in its case.
"No US phone company will sell you a phone that hasn't been locked to them, and usually also crippled."
Untrue. Unicel (my carrier) does this. You don't even need a contract (although they'll knock some bucks off the phone if you do). They sell them set up and ready to go with their network, with a few value-adds, but the phones are unlocked and can easily be returned to a virgin-state for use with other GSM carriers.
Although smaller than Verizon, they aren't "small". They have a native presence all over the country, and through no-fee-to-the-customer roaming agreements with other GSM providers, can provide extensive nationwide coverage.
I use an unlocked Motorola V635 with them that I got elsewhere. I've sold unlocked phones from them on eBay to other people.
Not sure if you are aware (maybe you are), but to clarify for other readers... there actually was a Netscape 5.0. I had a copy. It was basically the (failed) update for 4.x following along the same lines as 3 -> 4. Looked pretty much the same as 4.x and so on. But it was a nightmare mess of code, and before making any sort of final release they abandoned it entirely, and birthed the Gecko/Mozilla open-source rewrite project. 5.0 was then skipped as far as official releases go to separate 6.0 from the started-then-abandoned 5.0 project.
"That aside, why is it that everyone makes such a big freakin' deal about what browser Joe Customer uses?"
It's really not that complicated:
1) When the dominate browser is the least standards-compliant, and actually pushes proprietary features instead of their standards-compliant equivalents, it encourages a proprietary web and is detrimental to everyone else not on the proprietary platform. It is also detrimental to those ON the proprietary platform, because their costs are kept in-check by competition. Without competition, you have a monopoly and prices spiral upwards (just take a look at the prices for Vista).
2) Security. The internet is inter-connected. A bad apple is a burden on others on the network. John's infected Windows PC affects plenty of others, with attempted infections, DDOS attacks at machines or websites, junk email, and just added traffic that slows down the internet. Even though I don't use IE or Windows, those that do and get their machines infected have a direct negative effect on me and my online experience. All that spam sure as hell isn't coming from my FreeBSD, Mac or Linux friends running Firefox/Safari/Konqueror/Epiphany/Galleon/Opera/et c.
3) Support. Those with the most grievances with Windows tend to be IE users. I am empathetic to my friends and family... it is not pleasant for me to hear about their computers being rendered useless by infections, and their pains and struggles getting them fixed. I often fix the computers of close friends/family for free out of pity but I'd much rather they didn't have to endure that and learn about stuff like Firefox the hard way. I really don't care that they use Firefox, just that they DON'T use IE (or anything based on IE). "Anything but IE" = "much fewer computer problems", plain and simple. Unfortunately their monopoly OS likes to push their monopoly browser and most users just don't know any better, and suffer horrendously for it.
I have Flash installed, and I still get crap like that. Because apparently Flash 8 is all the rage, some sites even requiring Flash 9 for their content... and all that Adobe can be bothered to produce for Linux is Flash 7, and a buggy version at that (I actually use FreeBSD, not Linux... but since Adobe can't be bothered to support FreeBSD with their proprietary technology that they are trying to use to take over web standards, us FreeBSD users are forced to hack the Linux version of the plug-in to make it sort-of work).
"...if somebody is content with IE and wants to go on using it, good for them. It's a free country."
I'd agree, if them using IE didn't affect me even though I don't use IE.
Other people using IE encourages sites to be non-compliant, interfering with MY web experience since sites look messed-up or don't work at all.
Other people using IE causes their systems to get infected by spambots which turn their PCs into zombies and clog up MY email inbox.
Other people using IE causes their systems to get infected by DDOS bots which turn their PCs into zombies and take down MY websites (or websites I'm trying to visit).
All this unnecessary nonsense resulting from IE use also clogs up the internet as a whole and slows down MY online experience.
Other people using IE means I waste way too much of my time as an IT tech cleaning spyware/malware/etc when I could be better put to use improving the server or helping people make better use of their software applications.
Once IE is a safe, standards-compliant browser, then I won't give a fuck who uses it. Until then, it's a plague on the entire internet and anyone who uses the internet, whether they themselves use IE or not.
"So your saying in the age of the modern broadband; in the age of rich deliverable content; you are saying we should send text only?"
Yes, in this age of interconnected devices beyond just computers. How do YOU know what the capabilities of the device is I'm using to read my email? Who are you to dictate that just because you for some reason can't express yourself without fonts, text-size adjustments, colors, and wallpaper, that I shouldn't be allowed to check my email using my PDA, or my cell phone? What if I'm blind, and check my email via a text-to-speech device? (I'm not, but I know someone who is).
I worked at just such a place for many years. We were king in our day (early 90s) but as more people discovered Gateway, and saw low-end HP and Compaq junk in retail stores, it became harder to compete. It's hard to sell someone on something they don't realize they need yet (service) or explain to them why YOUR hard drive (faster RPMs, lower ms access time, bigger cache, better rep for longevity) is better than Gateway's when both are the same # of MBs but Gateway's is cheaper.
When they walk in, they look at MHz, GBs, and maybe screen size... and price. That's it. If even that (we had plenty who wouldn't know the difference and just wanted "a good computer"). Most people don't even notice warranty details... you know, little things, like LENGTH. Try and explain the nuances that distinguish quality from crap, and their eyes glaze over.... THEY DON'T CARE. Until later, when the crap they bought from Gateway shits the bed and they come crying to you for help.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a lot more that differentiates FreeBSD than its licensing. For some people/situations, that might be a priority, but it wasn't for me and I still went with FreeBSD. Same with countless other people/companies.
Agreed. RealPlayer works just great on my FreeBSD desktop. I don't mind it at all.
;)
I'm happy they've cleaned up their player and are giving attention to people beyond Windows and Mac. I'd miss RealPlayer if it were to vanish, because goodness knows there'll never be a "Windows Media Player" for FreeBSD or Linux. Heh.
That said... RealPlayer is hardly my sole or even primary media player.
I'm sure for $5-$10 they could find some geek willing to burn the software to CD-R and print off the documentation and staple it together. Hell, I'd do it for free for someone I knew, just to help them get off some of the horrible commercial software out there.
The cool thing is, though, that it's not necessary. One can download for free and use the online documentation for free, if they so choose.
"Linux is great but I can't walk into a BestBuy and buy anything software wise for it."
No, but in less time than it takes to just drive to Best Buy (let alone check out and get back), you could have downloaded several pieces of software for it. For free.
You suffer from the limited brainwashed mindset that software is something on a disc in a shrinkwrapped box that is 99% packing material, which you then have to pay this thing called "money" for. To quote an oft-use phrase: you need to think outside the box. What's the advantage? Hell, you don't even get manuals most the time anymore, with the slip of paper in the box referring you to the company's website for documentation and help. Sounds a lot like the open-source support model... hmmm....
And the irony is that most people have already grasped the concept. They're already accustomed to downloading AIM or MSN off some website and installing it in minutes without spending a dime to get this fancy new piece of software. Why not do the same for an upgraded web browser? Or a full-blown office suite? They can already handle that.
Given the laziness of the average population, the desire to get things as cheap as possible (or free), and the desire for instant-gratification, I'd think they'd prefer the Ubuntu way over the Best Buy way.
Disclaimer: I'm a FreeBSD user, but I've checked out Ubuntu to see what all the fuss is about.
"I had to replace my home laptop a few months back and Vista was the only OS offered by Dell."
Not true. If you order a Latitude (which you always should, for many other reasons too, over the Inspirons), you can still specify Windows XP as the OS. You don't even have to do anything special, it's right there available online.
At first, I was going to say it was Planetfall on a Tandy TRS-80 Model 2000, but then I realized I was thinking in terms of the first game on a computer we owned. Prior to the Tandy, my elementary school got a Commodore PET back when I was in 3rd grade... our school's first computer. I remember the principal was so proud... he carted the thing around from classroom to classroom, showing it off. He'd make up some math problem, then have us race against the computer to solve it (I think we might have gotten calculators, not sure). Anyhow, it took programs you loaded off cassette tape. One was a game called Miner I believe... there was a sign-up sheet where you could reserve time to play it during recess. I'm not sure if we got LOGO for it too or if that came later with the Commodore 64s... my memory is a bit hazy.
Just searched on Google, and apparently I was at least correct that it was called "Miner". Here's a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-7hguyq8mY
Ah, the memories!
Wow, you're totally missing my point.
You said:
"The point is some kind of add on program be it a plug-in or a standalone player is required to play all video."
Not sure why you're wasting your time getting confused.... that's a given for any video/picture/music/etc filetype. Like JPEG. They don't open themselves. They need a program to open them. No shit that browsers can open JPEG files. So can a stand-alone image viewer. That's my point.
The user doesn't like Flash, for legitimate reasons. It's not a standard way to play video. Standard video file formats (DivX, MPEG, etc) can be played with standard players. Web browsers aren't inherently video-file playing applications... hence they need special plug-ins. Using a web browser plus a plug-in to play a simple video is like using a can-opener attachment for your Kitchen-Aid mixer just to open cans, when it'd be far-simpler and more-practical to just use a stand-alone can opener.
Flash sucks, and videos are better if made available for download. Flash is not standard and not anywhere near as widely-available as DivX/MPEG/etc video players.
Well no kidding. Some sort of "add-on program" is necessary to view a JPEG too. The person you responded to was specifically requesting a stand-alone standard video file format, versus an embedded Flash video. Since, as has been stated by many people, Flash sucks.
Why do you assume the person you're replying to has a mobile device which is the source of his/her problem?
While you are correct that many mobile devices don't support Flash, that's not the main reason that Flash sucks. Flash sucks because it's a proprietary data type which puts content at the mercy of whatever OSes and devices that Adobe feels bothered to bless with a Flash player. Perhaps the user was on a non-mobile OS that doesn't have a Flash player (FreeBSD?). Maybe s/he just hates Flash for many other perfectly-valid reasons. The Wii, for example, is stuck with an old version of Flash. You think Adobe cares? You can "push" Adobe all you like but the fact remains that unless you're running a Windows or Mac desktop/laptop, you're not important to them.
Adobe shouldn't have a stranglehold on internet content with Flash for the same reason Microsoft shouldn't with proprietary HTML in IE.
And no, video does NOT require a plug-in to play. Video can play just fine with a standalone video player. Or were you not aware that these existed and assumed a web browser was the only way to play videos, MP3s, and use email?
The 2nd edition of Michael Lucas' "Absolute FreeBSD" just came out. I haven't had a chance to go through the 2nd edition though, but the 1st ed was very good. This would make it the most-up-to-date FreeBSD book currently available. Other older ones I can recommend are FreeBSD Unleashed, The Complete FreeBSD, and FreeBSD: The Complete Reference.
Well, I use FreeBSD (thought it'd be apparent from my URL for those truly curious).
I specifically didn't mention it because my point was to critique Adobe and the issues with Flash, not to come off as a FreeBSD fanboy. The issues here are the same regardless if you use FreeBSD or any OS that is not Windows/Mac/Linux. The web shouldn't be limited solely to those OSes that Adobe feels like producing a plugin for.
I didn't say DHTML could do everything Flash did. I said "Little of what Flash is used for even requires Flash...". Read my comment again.
Most sites using Flash are using it for such mundane purposes as doing mouseover/expanding menus and other simple interface mechanics that not only can be done with DHTML, but can be done simpler with broader browser compatibility and faster page-load times (less bytes on the wire). In fact, a site's basic interface and navigation should never require a plugin. Plugins should only offer added content.
"how long will it take for most people to upgrade flash versions?"
I'll update Flash once Adobe gives me a version that works. For now, I'm stuck with version 7 for a different OS, thunked in with some hacked-up compatibility layer. Every day, more and more websites are inaccessible to me.
Flash is bane on the internet, giving a proprietary stranglehold to a single commercial company. It turns Adobe into another Microsoft and Flash becomes its "IE"... the more people they can get to use Flash, the more control they have over the keys to the internet, granting them only to whatever OS and browsers they feel like producing Flash plugins for.
Little of what Flash is used for even requires Flash and could be done with modern OS-agnostic DHTML. Sadly, too many web designers are sucking Adobe's dipstick.
Actually, they are quite delicate. I know, because I've got a piece of the material. And no, I'm no one special... they sell it (or used to) in the KSC gift shop. A tap won't "snap" it but it will crush that spot... these things are like a silica sponge, mostly air. Great insulators, at the expense of being extremely fragile. It can't take much of a bump without damage.
I managed to easily put some marks into my sample before I smartened up and kept it in its case.
"No US phone company will sell you a phone that hasn't been locked to them, and usually also crippled."
Untrue. Unicel (my carrier) does this. You don't even need a contract (although they'll knock some bucks off the phone if you do). They sell them set up and ready to go with their network, with a few value-adds, but the phones are unlocked and can easily be returned to a virgin-state for use with other GSM carriers.
Although smaller than Verizon, they aren't "small". They have a native presence all over the country, and through no-fee-to-the-customer roaming agreements with other GSM providers, can provide extensive nationwide coverage.
I use an unlocked Motorola V635 with them that I got elsewhere. I've sold unlocked phones from them on eBay to other people.
"Country-level TLDs are significant."
.tv domain is based out of Tuvalu.
Yep, because everyone with a
"they skipped version 5 as a marketing ploy"
Not sure if you are aware (maybe you are), but to clarify for other readers... there actually was a Netscape 5.0. I had a copy. It was basically the (failed) update for 4.x following along the same lines as 3 -> 4. Looked pretty much the same as 4.x and so on. But it was a nightmare mess of code, and before making any sort of final release they abandoned it entirely, and birthed the Gecko/Mozilla open-source rewrite project. 5.0 was then skipped as far as official releases go to separate 6.0 from the started-then-abandoned 5.0 project.
"That aside, why is it that everyone makes such a big freakin' deal about what browser Joe Customer uses?"
t c.
It's really not that complicated:
1) When the dominate browser is the least standards-compliant, and actually pushes proprietary features instead of their standards-compliant equivalents, it encourages a proprietary web and is detrimental to everyone else not on the proprietary platform. It is also detrimental to those ON the proprietary platform, because their costs are kept in-check by competition. Without competition, you have a monopoly and prices spiral upwards (just take a look at the prices for Vista).
2) Security. The internet is inter-connected. A bad apple is a burden on others on the network. John's infected Windows PC affects plenty of others, with attempted infections, DDOS attacks at machines or websites, junk email, and just added traffic that slows down the internet. Even though I don't use IE or Windows, those that do and get their machines infected have a direct negative effect on me and my online experience. All that spam sure as hell isn't coming from my FreeBSD, Mac or Linux friends running Firefox/Safari/Konqueror/Epiphany/Galleon/Opera/e
3) Support. Those with the most grievances with Windows tend to be IE users. I am empathetic to my friends and family... it is not pleasant for me to hear about their computers being rendered useless by infections, and their pains and struggles getting them fixed. I often fix the computers of close friends/family for free out of pity but I'd much rather they didn't have to endure that and learn about stuff like Firefox the hard way. I really don't care that they use Firefox, just that they DON'T use IE (or anything based on IE). "Anything but IE" = "much fewer computer problems", plain and simple. Unfortunately their monopoly OS likes to push their monopoly browser and most users just don't know any better, and suffer horrendously for it.
Sounds like you didn't make a wise laptop purchase. My Dell Latitude 610 (with the 2nd media-bay battery) gets like 6+ hours on battery power.
If battery power matters, perhaps a 17" screen and the latest high-GHz power-hungry CPU aren't the best choices.
I have Flash installed, and I still get crap like that. Because apparently Flash 8 is all the rage, some sites even requiring Flash 9 for their content... and all that Adobe can be bothered to produce for Linux is Flash 7, and a buggy version at that (I actually use FreeBSD, not Linux... but since Adobe can't be bothered to support FreeBSD with their proprietary technology that they are trying to use to take over web standards, us FreeBSD users are forced to hack the Linux version of the plug-in to make it sort-of work).
"...if somebody is content with IE and wants to go on using it, good for them. It's a free country."
I'd agree, if them using IE didn't affect me even though I don't use IE.
Other people using IE encourages sites to be non-compliant, interfering with MY web experience since sites look messed-up or don't work at all.
Other people using IE causes their systems to get infected by spambots which turn their PCs into zombies and clog up MY email inbox.
Other people using IE causes their systems to get infected by DDOS bots which turn their PCs into zombies and take down MY websites (or websites I'm trying to visit).
All this unnecessary nonsense resulting from IE use also clogs up the internet as a whole and slows down MY online experience.
Other people using IE means I waste way too much of my time as an IT tech cleaning spyware/malware/etc when I could be better put to use improving the server or helping people make better use of their software applications.
Once IE is a safe, standards-compliant browser, then I won't give a fuck who uses it. Until then, it's a plague on the entire internet and anyone who uses the internet, whether they themselves use IE or not.
"The best laugh I had in ages was one (Admittedly a very good parody) of "rmeo n jlet", with the memorable line "wer4 rt tho rmeo?""
Dude, I want this. Please tell me where I can find it.
"So your saying in the age of the modern broadband; in the age of rich deliverable content; you are saying we should send text only?"
Yes, in this age of interconnected devices beyond just computers. How do YOU know what the capabilities of the device is I'm using to read my email? Who are you to dictate that just because you for some reason can't express yourself without fonts, text-size adjustments, colors, and wallpaper, that I shouldn't be allowed to check my email using my PDA, or my cell phone? What if I'm blind, and check my email via a text-to-speech device? (I'm not, but I know someone who is).
Yes, email should be text-only, as intended.
*looks under mouse*
"Made in China"
*looks under PDA*
"Made in China"
*looks under keyboard*
"Made in China"
*looks in cell phone*
"Made in China"
I worked at just such a place for many years. We were king in our day (early 90s) but as more people discovered Gateway, and saw low-end HP and Compaq junk in retail stores, it became harder to compete. It's hard to sell someone on something they don't realize they need yet (service) or explain to them why YOUR hard drive (faster RPMs, lower ms access time, bigger cache, better rep for longevity) is better than Gateway's when both are the same # of MBs but Gateway's is cheaper.
When they walk in, they look at MHz, GBs, and maybe screen size... and price. That's it. If even that (we had plenty who wouldn't know the difference and just wanted "a good computer"). Most people don't even notice warranty details... you know, little things, like LENGTH. Try and explain the nuances that distinguish quality from crap, and their eyes glaze over.... THEY DON'T CARE. Until later, when the crap they bought from Gateway shits the bed and they come crying to you for help.