WTF are you talking about?
Every single home user that bought a PC with Windows made a choice to not buy a Mac with OSX and the same the other direction.
To answer your articulate question, we're discussing the two operating systems OS X and Windows. Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that buying a PC involves choice, heck anything does. My point is more to do with Windows. The vast majority of new computers sold in the market today come pre-installed with a version of Windows. It doesn't matter if you already own a windows licence, or intend to run Linux, you have to buy a new one, like it or not.
The keyword being 'vast majority', there's no doubt that building your own PC or some specialist shops could sell you a computer without an OS. But we're talking 95%, which means average Joe. Joe is unaware or doesn't care about a viable alternative OS on the PC. To him, a Dell running on Windows is a computer. Mac's are for creatives and Linux is for geeks. A person who went ahead and bought a mac for personal use, now that is exercising choice because you can't possibly argue that that person has no clue about Windows.
Choice without knowledge is useless. Arguing that there IS choice is absolutely pointless in this discussion because thats true in any instance. If there was a single candidate in an election, you still have a choice... vote for him or don't... but does it mean anything?
A real choice requires understanding of at least some alternatives and being able to make a rational decision based on that knowledge. If you want an example to prove the above, just look at Linux on the desktop. The barrier of entry is insanely low. The cost is free, there are live CD's to try it, the installers are unbelievably easy which automate the dual booting process. but no... I install Suse on my girlfriend's computer and she starts crying saying that it doesn't feel like her computer anymore!
.... but they ARE competing for mindshare... and right now Apple is winning hands down. They seem to have the midas touch where everything they come out with turns to gold. Currently, Microsoft is the exact opposite.
An important point to note in the article is how the author discusses how much of Microsoft's monopoly is attributed to customers choosing an MS product over a competitors. They may have 95% market share but its also true that 95% of the time Windows is sold, there's no choice involved. You get it pre-installed on your new computer.
Whereas Apple's minute market share is completely derived from people exercising choice. You have to actually choose to buy a mac. This might not be such a big deal right now but Microsoft is definitely worried about it. Mac OS X may not directly compete with Windows per say... but its rising popularity should and does worry the big giant.
It's extremely ironic to note how the most popular justification of the use of nuclear weapons by the US needs no justification. Is anyone thinking double standards here? What makes the US think that it's on such a high pedestal or moral highground to label other states as Pariah's and demand that they backdown from any nuclear ambitions?
Mohamed ElBaradei (head of IAEA) has an excellent quote that went something like this....
"You can't tell a smoker to quit while holding a lit cigarette in your hand"
The US is by definition far worse than Iran if we're going to start looking at history.
-It's very inception resulted in the near total wipeout of an entire indigeneous people.
-It has been part of more wars than any other modern sovereign state.
-It uses Nuclear weapons in Japan, Chemical and Bio logical weapons with truly horrible results in Vietnam ALL resulting in tens of thousands of people.
-It won't take you long to realise that the US is probably responsible for millions of deaths through its war machine.
-The entire war on Iraq was based on a false premise, weapons of mass destruction. It eventually boiled down to Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds.
Consider the millions that have died of cancer caused by nuclear testing and radioactive/chemical dumping- according to many government and private studies- , even after the studies made the effects of them clear, amounts to the US "regime(s)" using chemical and nuclear weapons against its own people, in a premeditated fashion.
-This very same war on Iraq reduced a stable developing country to one torn by civil war and strife.
I could go on but I think the basic point is clear, the US of all countries has absolutely no business spreading its 'moralistic' bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
To answer your articulate question, we're discussing the two operating systems OS X and Windows. Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that buying a PC involves choice, heck anything does. My point is more to do with Windows. The vast majority of new computers sold in the market today come pre-installed with a version of Windows. It doesn't matter if you already own a windows licence, or intend to run Linux, you have to buy a new one, like it or not.
The keyword being 'vast majority', there's no doubt that building your own PC or some specialist shops could sell you a computer without an OS. But we're talking 95%, which means average Joe. Joe is unaware or doesn't care about a viable alternative OS on the PC. To him, a Dell running on Windows is a computer. Mac's are for creatives and Linux is for geeks. A person who went ahead and bought a mac for personal use, now that is exercising choice because you can't possibly argue that that person has no clue about Windows.
Choice without knowledge is useless. Arguing that there IS choice is absolutely pointless in this discussion because thats true in any instance. If there was a single candidate in an election, you still have a choice... vote for him or don't... but does it mean anything?
A real choice requires understanding of at least some alternatives and being able to make a rational decision based on that knowledge. If you want an example to prove the above, just look at Linux on the desktop. The barrier of entry is insanely low. The cost is free, there are live CD's to try it, the installers are unbelievably easy which automate the dual booting process. but no... I install Suse on my girlfriend's computer and she starts crying saying that it doesn't feel like her computer anymore!
.... but they ARE competing for mindshare... and right now Apple is winning hands down. They seem to have the midas touch where everything they come out with turns to gold. Currently, Microsoft is the exact opposite. An important point to note in the article is how the author discusses how much of Microsoft's monopoly is attributed to customers choosing an MS product over a competitors. They may have 95% market share but its also true that 95% of the time Windows is sold, there's no choice involved. You get it pre-installed on your new computer. Whereas Apple's minute market share is completely derived from people exercising choice. You have to actually choose to buy a mac. This might not be such a big deal right now but Microsoft is definitely worried about it. Mac OS X may not directly compete with Windows per say... but its rising popularity should and does worry the big giant.
It's extremely ironic to note how the most popular justification of the use of nuclear weapons by the US needs no justification. Is anyone thinking double standards here? What makes the US think that it's on such a high pedestal or moral highground to label other states as Pariah's and demand that they backdown from any nuclear ambitions? Mohamed ElBaradei (head of IAEA) has an excellent quote that went something like this.... "You can't tell a smoker to quit while holding a lit cigarette in your hand" The US is by definition far worse than Iran if we're going to start looking at history. -It's very inception resulted in the near total wipeout of an entire indigeneous people. -It has been part of more wars than any other modern sovereign state. -It uses Nuclear weapons in Japan, Chemical and Bio logical weapons with truly horrible results in Vietnam ALL resulting in tens of thousands of people. -It won't take you long to realise that the US is probably responsible for millions of deaths through its war machine. -The entire war on Iraq was based on a false premise, weapons of mass destruction. It eventually boiled down to Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds. Consider the millions that have died of cancer caused by nuclear testing and radioactive/chemical dumping- according to many government and private studies- , even after the studies made the effects of them clear, amounts to the US "regime(s)" using chemical and nuclear weapons against its own people, in a premeditated fashion. -This very same war on Iraq reduced a stable developing country to one torn by civil war and strife. I could go on but I think the basic point is clear, the US of all countries has absolutely no business spreading its 'moralistic' bullshit.