Honestly free software will overtake paid proprietary software. The development model alone will result in that becoming a reality. What Microsoft and Windows doesn't have is exactly what FOSS has in abundance--time.
What troubles me is that people think that FOSS can't turn the corner on polish. Polish happens. When you compare what we had when Windows first became popular and you look at what we FOSS offers today, FOSS is massively more capable then those prior offerings. Truly. Remember the first program manager we use to use? Remember the file manager? FAT? Guaranteed FOSS can turn the corner.
Given enough time these programs will gain feature parity and polish. Then it will just be a matter of education--and that also relies on time.
If you look at some of the Microsoft screens you can note that some of them have an excessive number of occurances of the word Microsoft. Visit their home page and count the number of times you read that word.
Now, when you understand why they are doing that you'll understand why it is not a disease to continue to act against the interest of such a company that has so many reason to hate it.
There's nothing wrong with hate. Hate can give you focus, real focus. There is something wrong with fanboyism and that is the real disease; and it extends from both sides.
Linus is probably kicking himself in the butt over saying what he did because so many people have clearly and unequivocally shown that his statement is wrong--all you have to do is really think about it. Someone in an earlier post stated that the hatred is a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. Linus is trying to treat the symptom and not the disease itself by making the comments he is. He's also one-sided in that he doesn't show that the hatred extends both ways.
The key is evil and whether they are avoidable. So many people today don't know that they can avoid the evil. Some feel they will loose out if they don't acquiesce to the evil--"if it doesn't run Windows products its no good" attitude. If they understood that they could run equivalent near feature parity products (or in many cases superior products) that'd be another story. What Microsoft did with the IEEE and OOXML is just a more recent example of their evil. If Apple tried this we could avoid them. But with a monopoly (Microsoft was ruled a monopoly in a court of law--no other software company has been) we can't avoid them.
You are wrong and you are right. You should watch a few of the old time comedy shows where they mock the Bells. I believe there's one done by Lily Tomlin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9e3dTOJi0o
People would hate the phone company because of what they do and how they treat people. Word gets around, so even if they didn't screw you directly you might have heard about a neighbor that got screwed and thus you have a reason to be angry and become hateful.
I had an interesting conversation with a woman who is involved in many non-profit development efforts and has business relations with some others in the same boat. As you know the latest thing is that Microsoft funds non-profits and according to her is stepping in and stealing the ideas created by them. Because they are non-profit means they don't have the money to fight back. Because they received funds as a non-profit from any given company, including Microsoft, doesn't give the company providing the money the right to steal from them.
In the late 80s and early 90s Microsoft was doing this with start ups. One company, in example, was Pen Computing. According to them they agreed to let Microsoft come in and see their product and a few months later Microsoft announced Pen Windows. The industry prior to this announcement was rife with potential over Pen Computing but once Microsoft spoke of Pen Windows that ended it because why would anyone want to invest in Pen when they could get it for free with Windows. I remember back then and I remember thinking that to myself. Why would I? After the announcement of Pen Windows and the subsequent demise of Pen Computing, we still don't have a Pen Windows.
This happened time and again with various other businesses. It was sad to see. Back then we didn't have the internet to disseminate information. It was done through trade journals and weeklys. I use to read 30+ journals a month. It was an amazing time. What's left to day is a shadow. Every day there were new ideas, new products, new focus, new investment, new fortunes being made. Today, this seems to go into the pockets of a few companies. Microsoft was also a company that said, back then that IP was bad and that it hindered start ups. Today they use IP to hinder start ups.
But this foray into non-profit idea stealing is another nail in their coffin for me. There are other choices. Let's let the rest of the world know what they are.
And, people code with impact when they feel they have a purpose. Just like when you want to win that 20k footrace, you really want to win, so you train hard, real hard. It gives you focus. Likewise, when open source programmers feel that they are helping undo the wrong created by Microsoft all those years. Focusing helps them create a better product or spend their own time and money doing so. There's nothing wrong with having that purpose. Linux likely wouldn't exist, IMHO, without programmers having similar reasoning behind their purpose.
Linus sees hate, according to how he used it in his comment, as an absolute. It isn't. You can hate someone without going to the extreme. Hating Nazis wasn't the wrong thing to do. Hating the murder of a family member isn't the wrong thing even if you find that you can forgive the murderer. But hate is not an absolute. Thus he needs to stop talking about hate and fanboyism and focus on making Linux the best product, though I debate tainting the waters with code from a company known to threaten IP lawsuits against the people that use Linux isn't in the best interest of Linux. When some code for Windows was leaked many FOSS programmers were very much against dissemination of it not on legal grounds but on the grounds that Microsoft could claim that reverse engineering used in other projects was tainted due to those engineers potentially having seen that code. It is important to some to not have that held over their heads; including coding techniques.
Repeat after me: "Google is not the encyclopedia of life and wisdom". Yes, Microsoft has, over the years, repeatedly stated that their goal is to wipe Linux off the face of the earth--in so many words, mind you.
Microsoft recently claimed that they were competing nicely against free software. Microsoft is a monopoly. They are not talking about competition in this regard. They are talking about keeping everyone in the dark to hold onto their monopoly position. When we get to the point where the lock in technologies are no longer hindering us and that software parity is gained with free and proprietard software, then we can see if the competition is happening. DOS/Windows has been going for nearly 30 years or more and linux for just over 15. Linux has attained what Microsoft took nearly 30 years to attain.
Essentially I'm saying that Microsoft is riding on momentum due to their monopoly. Time will reduce that momentum and then competition will come into play.
Emotion and hate can give you focus. Don't believe for a minute that people believe that throwing out their hate gives them the edge. What you should avoid isn't hate it is extremism.
I'm a bit older than you and thus I have had the opportunity to watch the industry for a much longer period of time. I began using PCs in the very early 80s as an adult. I watched what happened time and again to the industry because of that abusive monopoly that Microsoft holds. I have the werewithall to keep holding onto my ethics.
And please, don't quote snippets of mine and make comments. I didn't make that up--Microsoft called Linux a cancer on the software industry. I just turned it around and claimed the same about what they have done to the industry. It is my belief, after nearly 30 years in computing, that the industry would be 3-5 times it size had it not been for Microsoft. The types of products and the number of products to compete would be significantly greater.
I don't honestly think he's anything other than someone that created a product and asked others to help him make it better. The visionary-ness comes from all those that agreed to do help him.
If you correlate Ballmer with spinach then you are equating him to Popeye? Does he flex his muscle and smoke a pipe? If I hate Popeye does that mean I hate Ballmer and spinach? Do I have a disease?
What a miracle that would be to see, from your comment, that bill gates could nail his own coffin shut and bury himself. I wish one 10th of you would read up on what kind of person Gates is. Just understanding from Paul Allen's perspective should be enough to understand some of it. Gates is trying to buy his way into heaven. He certainly couldn't come close to dealing the deathblow and burying Stallman.
I don't think we are trying to become a tribe. I think we are trying to undo the decades of abuse Microsoft preyed on us using their monopoly.
What many of you don't understand here is that Linus has been desperately seeking to have Microsoft write programs for Linux to validate his efforts for at least a decade. He even said that if they do then he's won.
I think Linus doesn't understand much outside his purview. He hasn't really focused on what affects our pocketbooks, our future, and our goals. We want to have applications and game developers write their product for Linux. But when you have a company that threatens the industry with 235 alleged patent violations and then shuts down OpenGL support, then stacks the deck with DRM (at the core of the OS), and then says that they will kill Linux by such and such a year. Well, there's reason for the hatred. The community wants untainted product so that in the years when Microsoft is in serious decline they can't keep coming back holding a knife to the community's throat in an effort to stave off their own demise (which is inevitable).
I dislike many things, spinach is one of them, and yet I have a disease because I hate it? Likewise with other foods and other things. I tend to dislike those that rip me off, yet I am suffering a disease due to that dislike?
The guy really needs to know when to open his mouth and when not to. For instance, he should talk less about disease and more about how to make Linux a better product and to speak with influence to those hardware vendors and software vendors to create an environment where we can just do our own things and not be influenced by Microsoft.
I generally respect the man, but he's turning into the extreme right rather than just letting things play out. It really isn't up to him to try to influence things in this regard. He should focus on getting other hardware vendors to cooperate and to get other software vendors to write programs and to get the kernel free of exploits--such as the one recently discovered.
Microsoft has garnered the hatred. Microsoft created the disease. Microsoft is the cancer on software--and I'm sure we all have heard Microsoft claim Linux is a cancer on software.
What Linus doesn't do, I'm certain of it, is follow what happens in the industry nor has he for a long time. Sure he keeps up on some things but not what counts for the rest of us. If he had he would understand the hatred. He would understand it isn't a disease but it is the world's software immune system kicking in to cure the disease that was let to roam free unchecked for far too long. The disease is really Microsoft.
Microsoft put into Vista (and even added more in Vista 7) an incredible amount of DRM. Gates spoke to the press a few years ago stating that computers were no longer used primarily to produce content. He stated they are used primarily to consume it.
Like.doc and.xls formats DRM is used to lock you into a certain company's product. For example, if the courts tell a lawyer that he must submit his pleadings in.doc format then the lawyer has to go back to the office and buy Word for every person providing legal assistance on the case. If he wants to create.doc files he must use word and word runs on Windows. That means the lawyer, his help, and most likely the lawfirm is locked in. This is a very important element to note here.
DRM had Microsoft foaming at the mouth due primarily to the fact that they controlled the mechanism and they had the influence to push even the hardware manufacturers to implement special on-card circuitry to support their DRM. In return it is clear that they would then benefit from some amount from each piece of content sold, not just in the fact that the DRM was not going to be licensed and used on competing platforms, but in the actual sale of the content.
Microsoft saw what Apple had done with iTunes and the iPod with DRM and they were all set to push into that market with a DRM strategy of their own with the Zune until Apple decided to pull the rug out from under them by removing DRM from their store. This in part left people with a platform that had no need for the performance hogging DRM which Microsoft could have claimed was a necessary evil and consumers would have had to accept it, as Microsoft is a monopoly. Microsoft was planning on grabbing monopoly share in DRM content creation by using their monopoly in the OS market.
DRM'd content isn't made to allow you to benefit from it. It is made to ensure that you play that content on only the devices and platforms upon which it is made (DRM on Windows by Microsoft is only usable on Windows). Content creators are not going to license and recreate their content for multiple platforms as it currently is too expensive. Even if the costs did come down they would simply bail on the idea of multiplatforms with the excuse that Windows should be enough because it is the defacto standard. Who cares how Microsoft got there.
Microsoft invested heavily in DRM for the PC and made manufacturers of hardware and content creators all comply. In Vista 7 they put in even more DRM control. It is not likely that Microsoft will give up this position since it knows that formats are lock in technologies which force consumers onto and to stay with their platform.
Sad as that is, it is true. The RIAA guy is either a fool or his superiors haven't clued him in on the future.
It is overpriced. Vista was a horrible dead horse. Essentially a dead horse with lipstick. I have 3 machines with Vista on it. I have 10 machines with Linux and about 8 with XP. The linux boxes run more stably and are more customizable. I can change the look with little effort. Software is easy to install.
Vista is horrible. I spend my days as a small business owner supporting Windows based products. I make my income off it. I spend a good deal of that time (about 90% of it) cleaning computers of malware and bringing them back to a state where they can run acceptably. Though I don't get many infected Vista boxes I do get them. The reason is that I get so few Vista boxes. People in my community learned early on not to trust Microsoft and Vista. Most are just happy as a lark to stay with XP.
To this day I have nothing but problems with all my machines running Vista. I'm attuned to analyzing and fixing problems so I see them in Vista more readily than some Joe that may use it for only a couple purposes. I know this because I work on them regularly. I have to in order to learn it and stay up to date. Just as I will with Windows 7.
But as far as I'm concerned Vista 7 should have been offered for free. No one should be rushing out to pay Microsoft yet again to fix the crap they created in Vista.
First, the beta of Win7 was just Vista with a new taskbar and with the security stripped out. Secondly, PC Mag tests indicate that a Win7 RC runs only 5% faster than Vista (and that the increase is imperceptible to the end-user), thought it has a new taskbar--this means they put back the security. That was a very dirty trick if you ask me.
From what I have read they added even more draconian digital restrictions management into the OS, and hence more privacy violations. You can live with always being treated like a thief. I'll use the software that gives me control, has no draconian DRM, and treats me like a human being. Please, what Linux has done is shown the world that an OS can become popular, incredibly stable, and widely loved by a hundred million or more people world-wide. Let's get over this Microsoft stuff and get moving on competition in this and other markets to return to the consumer their right to have a choice.
As well, you guys are so subject to these crazy marketing ploys. There are no limited supplies of stock when software comes into play. Don't give me the diatribe about CD and production costs. They can distribute it in other ways. There's no limitation of stock unless it is artificially created.
It is free in the US and you can get it free in the UK and other countries if you know how. But I suspect there will be other issues also that interfere with the "service like spotify" in the UK and other countries once their servers are up.
There's nothing to be impressed here with. It's just another category that Microsoft wants to dominate and rule like a monopoly. Hopefully everyone has already wised up to their tactics and can forcefully act against any nefarious ones. Please tell me that citizens of the UK are able to do that.
Nothing matters except competition. With Windows in your view as being the only one that matters, if you get your way, we all get shafted in a big way. Let's not focus on Microsoft, let's focus on competion. Microsoft and Windows do not matter. Give the customer what they want. If a customer only thinks Windows exists then they may think that is what they want. When they understand that there is competition choice is all that matters.
I'd say you should grow up some. You sound either like a M$ shill getting paid for this or you sound like a zealot which the world could do with a lot less of.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly free software will overtake paid proprietary software. The development model alone will result in that becoming a reality. What Microsoft and Windows doesn't have is exactly what FOSS has in abundance--time.
What troubles me is that people think that FOSS can't turn the corner on polish. Polish happens. When you compare what we had when Windows first became popular and you look at what we FOSS offers today, FOSS is massively more capable then those prior offerings. Truly. Remember the first program manager we use to use? Remember the file manager? FAT? Guaranteed FOSS can turn the corner.
Given enough time these programs will gain feature parity and polish. Then it will just be a matter of education--and that also relies on time.
If you look at some of the Microsoft screens you can note that some of them have an excessive number of occurances of the word Microsoft. Visit their home page and count the number of times you read that word.
Now, when you understand why they are doing that you'll understand why it is not a disease to continue to act against the interest of such a company that has so many reason to hate it.
There's nothing wrong with hate. Hate can give you focus, real focus. There is something wrong with fanboyism and that is the real disease; and it extends from both sides.
Linus is probably kicking himself in the butt over saying what he did because so many people have clearly and unequivocally shown that his statement is wrong--all you have to do is really think about it. Someone in an earlier post stated that the hatred is a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. Linus is trying to treat the symptom and not the disease itself by making the comments he is. He's also one-sided in that he doesn't show that the hatred extends both ways.
The key is evil and whether they are avoidable. So many people today don't know that they can avoid the evil. Some feel they will loose out if they don't acquiesce to the evil--"if it doesn't run Windows products its no good" attitude. If they understood that they could run equivalent near feature parity products (or in many cases superior products) that'd be another story. What Microsoft did with the IEEE and OOXML is just a more recent example of their evil. If Apple tried this we could avoid them. But with a monopoly (Microsoft was ruled a monopoly in a court of law--no other software company has been) we can't avoid them.
You are wrong and you are right. You should watch a few of the old time comedy shows where they mock the Bells. I believe there's one done by Lily Tomlin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9e3dTOJi0o
People would hate the phone company because of what they do and how they treat people. Word gets around, so even if they didn't screw you directly you might have heard about a neighbor that got screwed and thus you have a reason to be angry and become hateful.
I had an interesting conversation with a woman who is involved in many non-profit development efforts and has business relations with some others in the same boat. As you know the latest thing is that Microsoft funds non-profits and according to her is stepping in and stealing the ideas created by them. Because they are non-profit means they don't have the money to fight back. Because they received funds as a non-profit from any given company, including Microsoft, doesn't give the company providing the money the right to steal from them.
In the late 80s and early 90s Microsoft was doing this with start ups. One company, in example, was Pen Computing. According to them they agreed to let Microsoft come in and see their product and a few months later Microsoft announced Pen Windows. The industry prior to this announcement was rife with potential over Pen Computing but once Microsoft spoke of Pen Windows that ended it because why would anyone want to invest in Pen when they could get it for free with Windows. I remember back then and I remember thinking that to myself. Why would I? After the announcement of Pen Windows and the subsequent demise of Pen Computing, we still don't have a Pen Windows.
This happened time and again with various other businesses. It was sad to see. Back then we didn't have the internet to disseminate information. It was done through trade journals and weeklys. I use to read 30+ journals a month. It was an amazing time. What's left to day is a shadow. Every day there were new ideas, new products, new focus, new investment, new fortunes being made. Today, this seems to go into the pockets of a few companies. Microsoft was also a company that said, back then that IP was bad and that it hindered start ups. Today they use IP to hinder start ups.
But this foray into non-profit idea stealing is another nail in their coffin for me. There are other choices. Let's let the rest of the world know what they are.
And, people code with impact when they feel they have a purpose. Just like when you want to win that 20k footrace, you really want to win, so you train hard, real hard. It gives you focus. Likewise, when open source programmers feel that they are helping undo the wrong created by Microsoft all those years. Focusing helps them create a better product or spend their own time and money doing so. There's nothing wrong with having that purpose. Linux likely wouldn't exist, IMHO, without programmers having similar reasoning behind their purpose.
Linus sees hate, according to how he used it in his comment, as an absolute. It isn't. You can hate someone without going to the extreme. Hating Nazis wasn't the wrong thing to do. Hating the murder of a family member isn't the wrong thing even if you find that you can forgive the murderer. But hate is not an absolute. Thus he needs to stop talking about hate and fanboyism and focus on making Linux the best product, though I debate tainting the waters with code from a company known to threaten IP lawsuits against the people that use Linux isn't in the best interest of Linux. When some code for Windows was leaked many FOSS programmers were very much against dissemination of it not on legal grounds but on the grounds that Microsoft could claim that reverse engineering used in other projects was tainted due to those engineers potentially having seen that code. It is important to some to not have that held over their heads; including coding techniques.
Repeat after me: "Google is not the encyclopedia of life and wisdom". Yes, Microsoft has, over the years, repeatedly stated that their goal is to wipe Linux off the face of the earth--in so many words, mind you.
Microsoft recently claimed that they were competing nicely against free software. Microsoft is a monopoly. They are not talking about competition in this regard. They are talking about keeping everyone in the dark to hold onto their monopoly position. When we get to the point where the lock in technologies are no longer hindering us and that software parity is gained with free and proprietard software, then we can see if the competition is happening. DOS/Windows has been going for nearly 30 years or more and linux for just over 15. Linux has attained what Microsoft took nearly 30 years to attain.
Essentially I'm saying that Microsoft is riding on momentum due to their monopoly. Time will reduce that momentum and then competition will come into play.
Emotion and hate can give you focus. Don't believe for a minute that people believe that throwing out their hate gives them the edge. What you should avoid isn't hate it is extremism.
I'm a bit older than you and thus I have had the opportunity to watch the industry for a much longer period of time. I began using PCs in the very early 80s as an adult. I watched what happened time and again to the industry because of that abusive monopoly that Microsoft holds. I have the werewithall to keep holding onto my ethics.
And please, don't quote snippets of mine and make comments. I didn't make that up--Microsoft called Linux a cancer on the software industry. I just turned it around and claimed the same about what they have done to the industry. It is my belief, after nearly 30 years in computing, that the industry would be 3-5 times it size had it not been for Microsoft. The types of products and the number of products to compete would be significantly greater.
I don't honestly think he's anything other than someone that created a product and asked others to help him make it better. The visionary-ness comes from all those that agreed to do help him.
This is a good point. Linus should have said that any fanboyism is a disease because they always lead to hate. But he didn't.
If you correlate Ballmer with spinach then you are equating him to Popeye? Does he flex his muscle and smoke a pipe? If I hate Popeye does that mean I hate Ballmer and spinach? Do I have a disease?
What a miracle that would be to see, from your comment, that bill gates could nail his own coffin shut and bury himself. I wish one 10th of you would read up on what kind of person Gates is. Just understanding from Paul Allen's perspective should be enough to understand some of it. Gates is trying to buy his way into heaven. He certainly couldn't come close to dealing the deathblow and burying Stallman.
He quotes wikipedia. Can't even do that in college and get away with it.
I don't think we are trying to become a tribe. I think we are trying to undo the decades of abuse Microsoft preyed on us using their monopoly.
What many of you don't understand here is that Linus has been desperately seeking to have Microsoft write programs for Linux to validate his efforts for at least a decade. He even said that if they do then he's won.
I think Linus doesn't understand much outside his purview. He hasn't really focused on what affects our pocketbooks, our future, and our goals. We want to have applications and game developers write their product for Linux. But when you have a company that threatens the industry with 235 alleged patent violations and then shuts down OpenGL support, then stacks the deck with DRM (at the core of the OS), and then says that they will kill Linux by such and such a year. Well, there's reason for the hatred. The community wants untainted product so that in the years when Microsoft is in serious decline they can't keep coming back holding a knife to the community's throat in an effort to stave off their own demise (which is inevitable).
I dislike many things, spinach is one of them, and yet I have a disease because I hate it? Likewise with other foods and other things. I tend to dislike those that rip me off, yet I am suffering a disease due to that dislike?
The guy really needs to know when to open his mouth and when not to. For instance, he should talk less about disease and more about how to make Linux a better product and to speak with influence to those hardware vendors and software vendors to create an environment where we can just do our own things and not be influenced by Microsoft.
I generally respect the man, but he's turning into the extreme right rather than just letting things play out. It really isn't up to him to try to influence things in this regard. He should focus on getting other hardware vendors to cooperate and to get other software vendors to write programs and to get the kernel free of exploits--such as the one recently discovered.
Microsoft has garnered the hatred. Microsoft created the disease. Microsoft is the cancer on software--and I'm sure we all have heard Microsoft claim Linux is a cancer on software.
What Linus doesn't do, I'm certain of it, is follow what happens in the industry nor has he for a long time. Sure he keeps up on some things but not what counts for the rest of us. If he had he would understand the hatred. He would understand it isn't a disease but it is the world's software immune system kicking in to cure the disease that was let to roam free unchecked for far too long. The disease is really Microsoft.
I looked at it briefly. I saw little info. Pictures weren't sharp. Hopefully they'll increase the detail as time goes by.
Microsoft put into Vista (and even added more in Vista 7) an incredible amount of DRM. Gates spoke to the press a few years ago stating that computers were no longer used primarily to produce content. He stated they are used primarily to consume it.
Like .doc and .xls formats DRM is used to lock you into a certain company's product. For example, if the courts tell a lawyer that he must submit his pleadings in .doc format then the lawyer has to go back to the office and buy Word for every person providing legal assistance on the case. If he wants to create .doc files he must use word and word runs on Windows. That means the lawyer, his help, and most likely the lawfirm is locked in. This is a very important element to note here.
DRM had Microsoft foaming at the mouth due primarily to the fact that they controlled the mechanism and they had the influence to push even the hardware manufacturers to implement special on-card circuitry to support their DRM. In return it is clear that they would then benefit from some amount from each piece of content sold, not just in the fact that the DRM was not going to be licensed and used on competing platforms, but in the actual sale of the content.
Microsoft saw what Apple had done with iTunes and the iPod with DRM and they were all set to push into that market with a DRM strategy of their own with the Zune until Apple decided to pull the rug out from under them by removing DRM from their store. This in part left people with a platform that had no need for the performance hogging DRM which Microsoft could have claimed was a necessary evil and consumers would have had to accept it, as Microsoft is a monopoly. Microsoft was planning on grabbing monopoly share in DRM content creation by using their monopoly in the OS market.
DRM'd content isn't made to allow you to benefit from it. It is made to ensure that you play that content on only the devices and platforms upon which it is made (DRM on Windows by Microsoft is only usable on Windows). Content creators are not going to license and recreate their content for multiple platforms as it currently is too expensive. Even if the costs did come down they would simply bail on the idea of multiplatforms with the excuse that Windows should be enough because it is the defacto standard. Who cares how Microsoft got there.
Microsoft invested heavily in DRM for the PC and made manufacturers of hardware and content creators all comply. In Vista 7 they put in even more DRM control. It is not likely that Microsoft will give up this position since it knows that formats are lock in technologies which force consumers onto and to stay with their platform.
Sad as that is, it is true. The RIAA guy is either a fool or his superiors haven't clued him in on the future.
Actually, you mean a marketing company that just happens to sell software.
It is overpriced. Vista was a horrible dead horse. Essentially a dead horse with lipstick. I have 3 machines with Vista on it. I have 10 machines with Linux and about 8 with XP. The linux boxes run more stably and are more customizable. I can change the look with little effort. Software is easy to install.
Vista is horrible. I spend my days as a small business owner supporting Windows based products. I make my income off it. I spend a good deal of that time (about 90% of it) cleaning computers of malware and bringing them back to a state where they can run acceptably. Though I don't get many infected Vista boxes I do get them. The reason is that I get so few Vista boxes. People in my community learned early on not to trust Microsoft and Vista. Most are just happy as a lark to stay with XP.
To this day I have nothing but problems with all my machines running Vista. I'm attuned to analyzing and fixing problems so I see them in Vista more readily than some Joe that may use it for only a couple purposes. I know this because I work on them regularly. I have to in order to learn it and stay up to date. Just as I will with Windows 7.
But as far as I'm concerned Vista 7 should have been offered for free. No one should be rushing out to pay Microsoft yet again to fix the crap they created in Vista.
First, the beta of Win7 was just Vista with a new taskbar and with the security stripped out. Secondly, PC Mag tests indicate that a Win7 RC runs only 5% faster than Vista (and that the increase is imperceptible to the end-user), thought it has a new taskbar--this means they put back the security. That was a very dirty trick if you ask me.
From what I have read they added even more draconian digital restrictions management into the OS, and hence more privacy violations. You can live with always being treated like a thief. I'll use the software that gives me control, has no draconian DRM, and treats me like a human being. Please, what Linux has done is shown the world that an OS can become popular, incredibly stable, and widely loved by a hundred million or more people world-wide. Let's get over this Microsoft stuff and get moving on competition in this and other markets to return to the consumer their right to have a choice.
As well, you guys are so subject to these crazy marketing ploys. There are no limited supplies of stock when software comes into play. Don't give me the diatribe about CD and production costs. They can distribute it in other ways. There's no limitation of stock unless it is artificially created.
It is free in the US and you can get it free in the UK and other countries if you know how. But I suspect there will be other issues also that interfere with the "service like spotify" in the UK and other countries once their servers are up.
There's nothing to be impressed here with. It's just another category that Microsoft wants to dominate and rule like a monopoly. Hopefully everyone has already wised up to their tactics and can forcefully act against any nefarious ones. Please tell me that citizens of the UK are able to do that.
Don't be a fool. It's always 2 minutes of commercials an hour until....until it is 3, then 5, then 15.
Nothing matters except competition. With Windows in your view as being the only one that matters, if you get your way, we all get shafted in a big way. Let's not focus on Microsoft, let's focus on competion. Microsoft and Windows do not matter. Give the customer what they want. If a customer only thinks Windows exists then they may think that is what they want. When they understand that there is competition choice is all that matters.
I'd say you should grow up some. You sound either like a M$ shill getting paid for this or you sound like a zealot which the world could do with a lot less of.
That's actually pretty funny and totally obvious.