EVE Search - Will we ever break free from Microsoft operating systems?

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Will we ever break free from Microsoft operating systems?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sales Merchant	Posted - 2007.06.27 11:06:00 - [1] I have no particular hate against Microsoft but I personally feel they have the world by the balls in terms of their o/s sitting on the majority of ordinary personal computers. I would like to see a serious competitor. Millions of little voices scream "linux!" from thier dark damp hiding places but in all honesty it still regarded as an enthusiast o/s instead of a direct commercial rival to windows on the world scale. Thousands of little voices wimper "macs!" but they are not very good for your average games player. So who will save us from Microsoft? __ "You are not entirely safeà but I can safely say that EVE is going to hurt you until you leave or learn. The world will persist without you." -Tovarishch
Thomas 666 Gallente University of Caille	Posted - 2007.06.27 11:19:00 - [2] Microsoft or Apple? THE HORROR!
MrTriggerHappy Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.27 11:23:00 - [3] In my opinion your views on linux are somewhat out dated. Recently Dell has started selling some PC's with Ubuntu pre-installed (this is happening in the states, nothing on the UK and europe at the mo). A lot of people have been campaigning for this, and if Dell obviously are doing it, there's an obvious demand for it! More and more governments and companies are starting to use Opensource software, I believe Munich's council recently made the switch to using Linux. Peugot is also converting all their PC's to use Linux. The question isnt "Who will save us" its "When will you save yourself?". I use ubuntu as well as windows, and to be fair.. I much prefer ubuntu. At the end of the day.. its what you can do for yourself, not what others can do for you. Now go try Ubuntu! -------------------------------- My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance
Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.27 12:00:00 - [4] Linux lacks the appeal of commercial companies, simple because any company that works with target audiences will tell them that Linux isn't a money market. The majority of the Linux users want everything for free. The problem with this is for people like me who really want to see those commercial companies invest in Linux, and make software such as Adobe Premiere, or the CS3-suite available for Linux. But it just won't happen because the market advisors tell them it's a bad call. If you want to work professionally with graphics and multimedia, it's Windows or more likely OSX they focus on. If you want to develop commercial games it's Windows and softwares for this. Even for a lot of consoles. Linux has since it's conception been a very niched system (for lack of a better word). On one hand you have the security and control-freaks who love it for it's adaptability, and depth. On the other hand you have the wannabe's who got ubuntu and now think they're awesome hackers when they spin their desktop around and make it sparkle. The thing that matters for the majority of the consumers is product availability, and Linux users of any of the two above categories can scream their necks blue about how awesome alternatives there are for each application. This will not change this. I will still want to use Adobe Photoshop in my daily creative job, because that's what the people I work with use. Same goes for Premiere, or where I study, Final Cut. Students on our university all use Microsoft Word, and it's not because they prefer it. Some of them even use it in WINE on their linux box, just because it's a standard tool. Maybe some time in the future, possibly. With how poor VISTA looks right now, it actually may happen. But until the software giants of Adobe, etc. bother about it, I won't either. I use one desktop OS. For my servers, that's a whole different thing though. - Recruitment open again-
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.27 12:05:00 - [5] I know I want to... Ubuntu does fine for home computing. With Wine, it plays most of my games just fine. And the home office, web browsing, image editing (etc.) programs are all dandy. The days of it being degree-in-computer-sciences-people only are long past- Ubuntu was easier to install and get running than XP --------
MrTriggerHappy Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.27 12:21:00 - [6] Originally by: Patch86 I know I want to... Ubuntu does fine for home computing. With Wine, it plays most of my games just fine. And the home office, web browsing, image editing (etc.) programs are all dandy. The days of it being degree-in-computer-sciences-people only are long past- Ubuntu was easier to install and get running than XP And 7.04 boots up faster too -------------------------------- My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance
Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.27 13:20:00 - [7] Originally by: Patch86 [...] With Wine, it plays most of my games just fine. And the home office, web browsing, image editing (etc.) programs are all dandy.[...] It's a pity there still is no workaround to get WINE to run the CS3-renditions. - Recruitment open again-
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.27 13:49:00 - [8] At this point, I don't think there will ever be serious competition to Microsoft for desktop operating systems. The reason is that there's no conceivable reason to entice people to switch. If Linux was as easy to install as inserting a CD and turning the system on, and it had 100% application compatibility with Windows, you still couldn't get the majority of the people to use it. To them, it's a hassle that would give them the same practical results that they can get right now with Windows. The only way you could get people to switch over is to give them an application that's so awesome and with such widespread appeal that people are willing to switch. But what sort of killer application could Linux have that couldn't be easily ported to Windows? So I don't think you'll be able to significantly chip away at Microsoft's market share beyond what's already done. Rather, the market will move to something else. IBM was king of the mainframes, and they used to be hated the same way Microsoft is hated now. But when PCs became popular, IBM failed to understand the new market. IBM remains a huge and profitable company (much larger than Microsoft), but we never talk about them anymore as the Big Evil Company. In a similar way, I expect the market to move to a web services model. Microsoft's attempts at that so far have been laughable.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.27 14:01:00 - [9] Originally by: Frezik At this point, I don't think there will ever be serious competition to Microsoft for desktop operating systems. The reason is that there's no conceivable reason to entice people to switch. If Linux was as easy to install as inserting a CD and turning the system on, and it had 100% application compatibility with Windows, you still couldn't get the majority of the people to use it. To them, it's a hassle that would give them the same practical results that they can get right now with Windows. Most people don't care. Most people just want to browse the Internet and use their email. And that is why Ubuntu is becoming so popular; it does that extremely well with zero hassle and with no need for any real computer knowledge. It doesn't get viruses, and it doesn't get spyware, and so people are happy. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Sc0rpion Archer Daniels Midland	Posted - 2007.06.27 14:37:00 - [10] You are a slave. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage. Born into a prison you cannot see or taste or touch. A prison, for your PC. The true secret to enjoying life is to live it dangerously. -Friedrich Nietzsche Killmails are for pooftas.
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.27 14:44:00 - [11] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Frezik At this point, I don't think there will ever be serious competition to Microsoft for desktop operating systems. The reason is that there's no conceivable reason to entice people to switch. If Linux was as easy to install as inserting a CD and turning the system on, and it had 100% application compatibility with Windows, you still couldn't get the majority of the people to use it. To them, it's a hassle that would give them the same practical results that they can get right now with Windows. Most people don't care. Most people just want to browse the Internet and use their email. And that is why Ubuntu is becoming so popular; it does that extremely well with zero hassle and with no need for any real computer knowledge. It doesn't get viruses, and it doesn't get spyware, and so people are happy. I would say it was becoming so popular perhaps "more popular" would have been better, 90% of people i assure you, still don't even know what Linux is. Windows was easier for me, came installed on my computer, no set up, no configuration.. just started up all i had to do was change the name from Admin to Matthias. Oh and ive not had one virus or any malicious software yet (i bet i get one now) I do think people are fed up with a lot of aspects of windows, Linux isn't a ready competitor yet, but isnt far off. -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dearwin coracao ardente	Posted - 2007.06.27 14:59:00 - [12] As much as I love linux (and I do) it certainly wont come near to a truly competitive market share OS any time soon. I think people forget how little of the full computing market share is for home users. Theres hundreds of millions of dollars and even more man hours invested in incredibly niche business applications. Billing Software, Financial database apps, inventory software. All based exclusively on Windows, many DEPENDENT on MS code. Its companies buying thousands of desktops on a wim that decides the trends of market share, not grandmas using Ubuntu at home cause their son told them so. Those companies for the vastly large majority will continue to buy MS based desktops, servers and architectures, because the software they depend on to function is based on those same MS systems. It sucks, but its a unavoidable fact. Beagle Corp Fun
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.27 15:00:00 - [13] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 27/06/2007 15:00:44 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Frezik At this point, I don't think there will ever be serious competition to Microsoft for desktop operating systems. The reason is that there's no conceivable reason to entice people to switch. If Linux was as easy to install as inserting a CD and turning the system on, and it had 100% application compatibility with Windows, you still couldn't get the majority of the people to use it. To them, it's a hassle that would give them the same practical results that they can get right now with Windows. Most people don't care. Most people just want to browse the Internet and use their email. And that is why Ubuntu is becoming so popular; it does that extremely well with zero hassle and with no need for any real computer knowledge. It doesn't get viruses, and it doesn't get spyware, and so people are happy. I would say it was becoming so popular perhaps "more popular" would have been better, 90% of people i assure you, still don't even know what Linux is. Windows was easier for me, came installed on my computer, no set up, no configuration.. just started up all i had to do was change the name from Admin to Matthias. Oh and ive not had one virus or any malicious software yet (i bet i get one now) I do think people are fed up with a lot of aspects of windows, Linux isn't a ready competitor yet, but isnt far off. I think Vista is going to be the main turning point. It is annoying consumers enough that they're calling the computer companies and asking for something different, even if its just Windows XP. Originally by: Dearwin As much as I love linux (and I do) it certainly wont come near to a truly competitive market share OS any time soon. I think people forget how little of the full computing market share is for home users. Theres hundreds of millions of dollars and even more man hours invested in incredibly niche business applications. Billing Software, Financial database apps, inventory software. All based exclusively on Windows, many DEPENDENT on MS code. Its companies buying thousands of desktops on a wim that decides the trends of market share, not grandmas using Ubuntu at home cause their son told them so. Those companies for the vastly large majority will continue to buy MS based desktops, servers and architectures, because the software they depend on to function is based on those same MS systems. It sucks, but its a unavoidable fact. Actually, that's probably where the change will occur first. Its already happening in governments; many state and national governments are moving over to open source software, starting with OpenOffice and such, because they don't want to be bound to Microsoft any longer. It'll take a while for the OS move to take place, but my guess is that it'll happen when Microsoft stops supporting Windows XP and 2000. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Dearwin coracao ardente	Posted - 2007.06.27 15:43:00 - [14] Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 27/06/2007 15:00:44 Actually, that's probably where the change will occur first. Its already happening in governments; many state and national governments... To be honest its happening in City Councils, County Offices, organizations who might only buy handfuls of desktops and supporting software at a time, and once again to be honest, dont matter. Then there are the huge international banks, the massive tech/industry companies who as I said, will literally buy hundreds or thousands of desktops and accompanying software on a whim. I would say the only real chance that other OSs and software packages will have is when the true "Web 2" technologies come out. Platform independent server based computing etc buzzword etc is probably the only chance to get away from the current deadlock. (Hell, you can almost do everything you would in MS Office now in GMail). But that will still be many many years away I think. Beagle Corp Fun
Vari Carbide Industries	Posted - 2007.06.27 15:46:00 - [15] Edited by: Vari on 27/06/2007 15:47:44 Originally by: MrTriggerHappy And 7.04 boots up faster too 7.04 does not boot quickly. Making up facts from your altered perception of the OS just shows you're a fanboy. But that's a moot point cuz 7.10 does boot quickly, and more importantly runs much cooler (laptop).
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.27 18:20:00 - [16] Originally by: Vari Edited by: Vari on 27/06/2007 15:47:44 Originally by: MrTriggerHappy And 7.04 boots up faster too 7.04 does not boot quickly. Making up facts from your altered perception of the OS just shows you're a fanboy. But that's a moot point cuz 7.10 does boot quickly, and more importantly runs much cooler (laptop). My Ubuntu Feisty box boots faster than my XP box. I know thats no indicator (them being different machines, theres a hundred reasons why) but still. Certainly isn't a long boot up. --------
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.27 19:24:00 - [17] I feel i was too mature.... MICROSFT RULES SHUT UP HATERS!!! USE VISTA IT BE GOOD! RA RA RA LINUX SUX HahahahahaHAHAHAHahahHAHHAhaahHAHAhAAHAhAhAhHAahaHAHAhahAAHAHahAHAHA DS is a smelly poo. -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.27 20:44:00 - [18] Originally by: Dearwin I think people forget how little of the full computing market share is for home users. Very true so far, but . . . Quote: Theres hundreds of millions of dollars and even more man hours invested in incredibly niche business applications. Billing Software, Financial database apps, inventory software. All based exclusively on Windows, many DEPENDENT on MS code. Many systems are dependent on MS code, but many others are not. Not only that, but many systems are dependent on very old MS code. I flew out to New York a few months ago, and on the way back they left my luggage in O'Hare (my layover stop). The lady who helped me track it down was using a Win3.1 system. The software I write for a living right now will never see any legitimate home use, but it doesn't run on Microsoft stuff, either. It's all web application code built for a specific business. We're on an old-style Unix system now, but will probably be on Linux soon. I doubt any of it will ever touch a Microsoft OS.
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.27 20:46:00 - [19] Originally by: Mtthias Clemi I feel i was too mature.... MICROSFT RULES SHUT UP HATERS!!! USE VISTA IT BE GOOD! RA RA RA LINUX SUX HahahahahaHAHAHAHahahHAHHAhaahHAHAhAAHAhAhAhHAahaHAHAhahAAHAHahAHAHA DS is a smelly poo. Yeah? Well, your mom.
RedFall Irreligion	Posted - 2007.06.27 20:48:00 - [20] Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Mtthias Clemi I feel i was too mature.... MICROSFT RULES SHUT UP HATERS!!! USE VISTA IT BE GOOD! RA RA RA LINUX SUX HahahahahaHAHAHAHahahHAHHAhaahHAHAhAAHAhAhAhHAahaHAHAhahAAHAHahAHAHA DS is a smelly poo. Yeah? Well, your mom. Let's get off of moms, because I just got off of yours.
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:06:00 - [21] Originally by: RedFall Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Mtthias Clemi I feel i was too mature.... MICROSFT RULES SHUT UP HATERS!!! USE VISTA IT BE GOOD! RA RA RA LINUX SUX HahahahahaHAHAHAHahahHAHHAhaahHAHAhAAHAhAhAhHAahaHAHAhahAAHAHahAHAHA DS is a smelly poo. Yeah? Well, your mom. Let's get off of moms, because I just got off of yours. oooooo burrrnnnn -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Barbarellas Daughter Lonely Barbarella	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:14:00 - [22] Originally by: Dark Shikari I think Vista is going to be the main turning point. didnt they say that when xp has been released too? imo windows is like eve: it gets laggier day by day, but (even more) people still use it. ____________________________________________ Originally by: Marduk Felzhen You have an amazing cleavage, except you have no arms :(
Hydraxian Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:15:00 - [23] I think i can offically say that Matthias is bored lol And to answer the OP... yes, there will be a "real" opponent or choice to windows within the next 5 years i think. The falling prices of "good" PCs has driven to higher and higher sales in both destops and Laptops, meaning more and more people will be asking to get away from Micro$oft bull****. However athough i agree ubuntu is pretty damn good (personal bootloader problems aside) the thing that will really hit Windows on the head is a OS that can use all the software Windows can (and i mean off the shelf) without messing about with WINE ect.
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:28:00 - [24] Originally by: Hydraxian I think i can offically say that Matthias is bored lol And to answer the OP... yes, there will be a "real" opponent or choice to windows within the next 5 years i think. The falling prices of "good" PCs has driven to higher and higher sales in both destops and Laptops, meaning more and more people will be asking to get away from Micro$oft bull****. However athough i agree ubuntu is pretty damn good (personal bootloader problems aside) the thing that will really hit Windows on the head is a OS that can use all the software Windows can (and i mean off the shelf) without messing about with WINE ect. roll your eyes at me again and the next time i see you im gunna hit you over the head with a chair... -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:47:00 - [25] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 27/06/2007 22:46:06 Originally by: Barbarellas Daughter Originally by: Dark Shikari I think Vista is going to be the main turning point. didnt they say that when xp has been released too? No they didn't; that's a stupid argument. Vista is just like ME; it will be a complete marketing failure and Microsoft will likely completely throw out the code in favor of something better. If they come out with a new OS fast enough, they'll succeed in the marketplace. If they don't, they'll be replaced. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Brolly Caldari Templars of Space Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.27 22:50:00 - [26] I kinda like unbuntu, but it does'nt like me. Trying to install nvidia drivers, flash was a nighty. Would'nt be so bad but I borked up my EVERYTHING. /me sucks
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.06.28 00:35:00 - [27] I want someone to make a GameOS. This is how I imagine it: Needs about 32megs of RAM to run the basic OS. It's graphical, but doesn't have all the crap the Vista does (but you can add it if you want with stuff like WindowBlinds). It's OldSchool for gamers who want performance over ease of use. It only installs the drivers for things that are in your comp, so just your vid card, sound card, NIC, etc. None of this "We have everything that was ever used" crap. The only standard software is a web browser and text editor. You can install stuff for network monitoring and the like. Printers, Scanners, all that is optional in the basic installation. If you install the basic stuff, you have input devices, a monitor, and graphics and sound. That's it. This should keep it in the dozens, maybe hundreds of MB of HD space for the installation. Imagine if you could actually use your system's RAM for playing games, not running useless services that may be used at some point. Obviously, this wouldn't be the system you use for business. This is purely for entertainment, sort of like a Console in a PC, but with far more functionality and upgradability. I know it's a pipe dream, but it's my pipe dream. And I long for this day. PS - it also wouldn't cost an arm and a leg. I used to get It. Then It changed. Now I don't even know what It is.
Miss Anthropy School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.06.28 00:41:00 - [28] Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 27/06/2007 22:46:06 Originally by: Barbarellas Daughter Originally by: Dark Shikari I think Vista is going to be the main turning point. didnt they say that when xp has been released too? No they didn't; that's a stupid argument. Vista is just like ME; it will be a complete marketing failure and Microsoft will likely completely throw out the code in favor of something better. If they come out with a new OS fast enough, they'll succeed in the marketplace. If they don't, they'll be replaced. I agree. ME was FUBAR and Microsoft where quick to titillate consumers by marketing XP once they'd seen how bad ME was. They were desperate to restore public trust and released XP around 18 months after ME. Personally I think XP is Microsoft's best creation so far. Vista is just a messy collection of bad ideas. They couldn't even be bothered to put in the stuff they really wanted to (like the new file system WinFS) because they spent all their time concentrating on DRM and Aero. Vista is just a bloated shell for DRM that is failing in it's sales. Sure, it's got a few nice widgets and handy features, but it's ultimate aim is to control YOU.
Daedalus DuGalle Gallente University of Caille	Posted - 2007.06.28 00:43:00 - [29] I'm trying....but linux just isn't idiot-proof like XP is. Plus, the first time a newbie sees a Terminal command for installing stuff he/she is likely to panic. Like me. Originally by: Janu Hull Nothing says gritty cynicism like a 1 ISK note wedged between a pair of silicone enhanced knockers.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 01:07:00 - [30] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 01:05:39 Originally by: Daedalus DuGalle I'm trying....but linux just isn't idiot-proof like XP is. Plus, the first time a newbie sees a Terminal command for installing stuff he/she is likely to panic. Like me. XP is idiot-proof? It doesn't even have proper privilege separation; one idiot move and the entire OS won't work. Linux, on the other hand, you have to specifically give admin privileges if you want to screw with anything critical. If you don't tell it specifically to do something stupid, it'll just work without you messing with it. (and every single common operation in Ubuntu can be done without touching a terminal) 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Derovius Vaden	Posted - 2007.06.28 01:15:00 - [31] Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 01:05:39 Originally by: Daedalus DuGalle I'm trying....but linux just isn't idiot-proof like XP is. Plus, the first time a newbie sees a Terminal command for installing stuff he/she is likely to panic. Like me. XP is idiot-proof? It doesn't even have proper privilege separation; one idiot move and the entire OS won't work. Linux, on the other hand, you have to specifically give admin privileges if you want to screw with anything critical. If you don't tell it specifically to do something stupid, it'll just work without you messing with it. (and every single common operation in Ubuntu can be done without touching a terminal) Linux is not a good example of idiot proof operating systems, our Engineering network admin accidentally deleted his super admin account and no one had any permissions to make new accounts/reassigning access rights. Windows may not be the best of the best, but atleast its easier than trying to work with orphaned Unix kernals like they have in many Linux builts and O/S X.
Vari Carbide Industries	Posted - 2007.06.28 01:19:00 - [32] Originally by: Dark Shikari (and every single common operation in Ubuntu can be done without touching a terminal) The problem with Ubuntu is that common operations won't get that printer working. Or turn that Bluetooth card off. Or let me configure my boot preferences. Or anything that goes beyond basic web surfing and office work. I'm not saying command line is terrible, just that it's not user friendly to someone like my mom when something goes wrong. Ubuntu is the unfriendliest of the 3 major desktop OSs for now, but it is making giant strides. If you want to prove me wrong tell me how to turn off my Bluetooth card, bonus points if you can do it without me having to use terminal along the way.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 02:13:00 - [33] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 02:19:08 Originally by: Vari Originally by: Dark Shikari (and every single common operation in Ubuntu can be done without touching a terminal) The problem with Ubuntu is that common operations won't get that printer working. Or turn that Bluetooth card off. Or let me configure my boot preferences. Or anything that goes beyond basic web surfing and office work. I'm not saying command line is terrible, just that it's not user friendly to someone like my mom when something goes wrong. Ubuntu is the unfriendliest of the 3 major desktop OSs for now, but it is making giant strides. If you want to prove me wrong tell me how to turn off my Bluetooth card, bonus points if you can do it without me having to use terminal along the way. I don't know how to use a Bluetooth card in Windows and I've used Windows-based OSs since 3.1. The only way I can imagine disabling one is to open the device manager and just shut it off, which no ordinary user will have any idea how to do whatsoever. Oh, and in Ubuntu, there is a nice "printers" button in the system menu that lets you install printers. It doesn't support everything, but neither does Windows; in fact, Windows supports almost no printers out of the box. In fact, I've never ever found a Windows computer in my entire life that didn't need 3rd-party printer drivers. The advantage of Ubuntu is that it contains a bunch of good, common printer drivers out of the box. The advantage of Windows is that if it doesn't have them, one can hope the disk with the printer has good, working drivers. Obviously it is somewhat less likely to have Linux drivers, so that is an advantage of windows. Your comparisons about problems are really invalid; in Linux, if something goes wrong you can fix it, albeit with difficulty. In Windows, if something goes wrong you are screwed and you probably have to reinstall the entire operating system. You can do the same with Ubuntu too if you really want to, and if anything its quite a bit easier than it is on Windows. Honestly, the longer you spend working with and trying to fix Windows, the more you realize how bad it is. When people rate other operating systems, they rate them by standards which Windows fails miserably in every department. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Ecnav Gallente Military Intel Tactitions	Posted - 2007.06.28 05:17:00 - [34] Edited by: Ecnav on 28/06/2007 05:22:31 I have a feeling Mac is going to rise to the top, not any time soon, but eventually they will. The only basis of my theory is T.V. commercials. Every single T.V. commercial that I have seen that involves computers has a Mac in the picture. This is what it is like in the U.S., I dont know aobut Europe. Macs are secretly advertising their products, and they don't even know it. __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __
Miss Anthropy School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.06.28 07:15:00 - [35] Originally by: Ecnav Edited by: Ecnav on 28/06/2007 05:22:31 I have a feeling Mac is going to rise to the top, not any time soon, but eventually they will. The only basis of my theory is T.V. commercials. Every single T.V. commercial that I have seen that involves computers has a Mac in the picture. This is what it is like in the U.S., I dont know aobut Europe. Macs are secretly advertising their products, and they don't even know it. Macs won't be doing this advertising secretly trust me. There are laws in place to prevent someone who isn't the owner of a product advertising it. For example, if you're making a movie and need to shoot a scene with someone having a drink of Coke, you need permission from the Coke people to display that scene in your movie.
Ryan Scouse'UK	Posted - 2007.06.28 12:27:00 - [36] Long live MS !!! Bill Gates <3 .. takes second place after DS ;) hehe but on a real note.. MS works.. It plays eve/MSN/internet/****/Music/P2P It does everything I want .. there for I need nothing else no second bit system or some half arsed OS .. Keep on making ur billions MS
MrTriggerHappy Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.28 12:42:00 - [37] Originally by: Ryan Scouse'UK Long live MS !!! Bill Gates <3 .. takes second place after DS ;) hehe but on a real note.. MS works.. It plays eve/MSN/internet/**/Music/P2P It does everything I want .. there for I need nothing else no second bit system or some half arsed OS .. Keep on making ur billions MS Linux can: Play eve/MSN (lookup GAIM)/Internet//Music/P2P It can do all the things the windows box can.. and more! I'll admit, one windows OS that actually showed the slightest bit of promise was "Longhorn" and no this wasn't the code name for Vista. But they didnt release it, they scrapped the project and went for Vista, so all in all MS's best OS is XP -------------------------------- My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance**
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 14:47:00 - [38] How many people here who keep saying how terrible vista is, actually use it? I much Prefer my Vista PC to my old XP one.. and it works perfectly Plus i didn't have to spend ages installing drivers for my mp3 players and cameras or whatever like i did on XP, they all just work, the only major quarrel i have is that Xp-Vista networking doesn't work as it should. I want to know why DS is so determined to prove to everyone that Linux is better than windows... Honestly it was like when everyone kept going on about the security warnings with vista "lol warning dnt let u do nytink! it stupd!! HAHAHAHAHA" i thought it was weird then, because i get no such warnings, i cannot understand this underlying hatred of Microsoft. Honestly sometimes i think it comes down to the fact that people see them as the capitalist pigs who do anything for money and that is wrong and must be destroyed rararara. Ive never used linux, seen photos, videos, so i cant tell you whether or not its better, alls i know is that windows is nowhere near as bad as some people on here make it out to be, especially vista. But anyway... seriously.. whats the jip? -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:03:00 - [39] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 15:04:29 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi How many people here who keep saying how terrible vista is, actually use it? I've used it and absolutely hated it. Of course, the facts I learned after made it a lot worse, but simply having to click "YES" to 57 "ARE YOU SURE" dialogues just to update Firefox struck me as patently absurd. Nevermind the fact that the interface lagged on an X1950, or that the entire interface was completely counterintuitive. The worst part is the hard disk bug that causes copying files to randomly go at about 10kbps. Microsoft claims to have fixed this but considering that I've seen it still happen constantly, I highly doubt it. I have not encountered one person in real life (out of hundreds) who actually prefers Vista over XP; everyone I know that uses it does so because they got a new computer with it and can't be bothered to wipe it and install XP. Now that is a failure of an OS; an operating system that only exists because people don't know or don't care to get rid of it. Perhaps I get a new perspective because I run a computer repair business; I'm forced to actually deal with and use Windows, especially Vista. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:05:00 - [40] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Mtthias Clemi How many people here who keep saying how terrible vista is, actually use it? I've used it for just an hour and absolutely hated it. Of course, the facts I learned after made it a lot worse, but simply having to click "YES" to 57 "ARE YOU SURE" dialogues just to update Firefox struck me as patently absurd. Nevermind the fact that the interface lagged on an X1950, or that the entire interface was completely counterintuitive. Ive updated firefox plenty and never got one message, the lag i cant explain, i use an 8800gts... and in what way was it counter intuitive? Oh and ive figured out who you really are True identity -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:07:00 - [41] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 15:10:43 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Mtthias Clemi How many people here who keep saying how terrible vista is, actually use it? I've used it for just an hour and absolutely hated it. Of course, the facts I learned after made it a lot worse, but simply having to click "YES" to 57 "ARE YOU SURE" dialogues just to update Firefox struck me as patently absurd. Nevermind the fact that the interface lagged on an X1950, or that the entire interface was completely counterintuitive. Ive updated firefox plenty and never got one message, the lag i cant explain, i use an 8800gts... and in what way was it counter intuitive? The counter-intuitive was that it took me over a minute to figure out how to shut down the computer because they MOVED THE BUTTON from where it had been from over a decade. The entire interface has been taken and thrown all over the place to make it that much more annoying for any Windows veteran to use, without actually improving it at all. By "updating Firefox" I mean "extracting my new optimized build over the Firefox folder". It asked me "are you sure" for EVERY SINGLE EXE/DLL FILE IN THE FOLDER THREE TIMES EACH. The only way to turn it off was to disable security altogether, in which case I might as well reinstall Windows 95. The GUI was also abominably ugly, and I didn't see any obvious option to switch it to something less sinful like I could with Windows XP. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:14:00 - [42] Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 15:07:11 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Mtthias Clemi How many people here who keep saying how terrible vista is, actually use it? I've used it for just an hour and absolutely hated it. Of course, the facts I learned after made it a lot worse, but simply having to click "YES" to 57 "ARE YOU SURE" dialogues just to update Firefox struck me as patently absurd. Nevermind the fact that the interface lagged on an X1950, or that the entire interface was completely counterintuitive. Ive updated firefox plenty and never got one message, the lag i cant explain, i use an 8800gts... and in what way was it counter intuitive? The counter-intuitive was that it took me over a minute to figure out how to shut down the computer because they MOVED THE BUTTON from where it had been from over a decade. The entire interface has been taken and thrown all over the place to make it that much more annoying for any Windows veteran to use, without actually improving it at all. By "updating Firefox" I mean "extracting my new optimized build over the Firefox folder". It asked me "are you sure" for EVERY SINGLE EXE/DLL FILE IN THE FOLDER THREE TIMES EACH. The only way to turn it off was to disable security altogether, in which case I might as well reinstall Windows 95. it took me five seconds, although i dont see why they moved that, it was my first thought. But what implications does your idea that vista is terrible have for the actual common user, i mean is the average user going to be doing that? It has no effect on them, so you cant use that as a basis for the idea that the entire operating system will fail... and the fact they moved a button.. which, strangely enough is more likely to annoy them. Im not an average user, and i still find that it does everything that i want, vista never questions me, as far as i can tell all that is required is for you to be set as administrator. On the matter of the interface, what do you mean? as far as i can see the basic interface is very very similar. -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:16:00 - [43] I've never felt trapped by Windows, and I've never felt that the computing habits of the masses matter that much, as long as they keep all the various commercial software and hardware companies they are serving their purpose. - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:18:00 - [44] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 15:19:35 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi But what implications does your idea that vista is terrible have for the actual common user, i mean is the average user going to be doing that? It has no effect on them, so you cant use that as a basis for the idea that the entire operating system will fail... and the fact they moved a button.. which, strangely enough is more likely to annoy them. Im not an average user, and i still find that it does everything that i want, vista never questions me, as far as i can tell all that is required is for you to be set as administrator. On the matter of the interface, what do you mean? as far as i can see the basic interface is very very similar. For the average user, two things are going to bother them: a) The interface has changed. This will confuse normal users, who don't actually have any idea how to use Windows; they just memorize series of buttons to click to perform tasks. This is very important to understand; the vast majority of people have no idea how to use Windows, OS X, or Linux. What they do know are series of buttons that you press in order to do certain things. That is why interface changes cause people so many problems; they don't know how to use the operating system, and since their "series of clicks" have been interrupted, they don't know what to do. Having worked with hundreds and hundreds of "average users," I am quite confident in this. b) Vista asks you "are you sure" multiple times before doing anything under default settings. This has been so successful that Apple has made a major advertising campaign based on it. It matters less for power users who can disable the security, but that doesn't matter for the general public. People don't like operating systems that annoy them. They don't care about pretty transparent windows or internal improvements; they care that it works the way their last one did, and that it works without bothering them. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 15:33:00 - [45] Well My sister and father both use it, ones a teenage girl and the other is a International bank executive.. they both like it.. i like it, im not saying it will be extremely successful, but i don't believe it will fail as badly as you say it will, i could be proved wrong however. The interface changes are not that massive, it took me about a day to get used to them, and ive heard no complains about that from any other users. Either way, back on topic, im fine with windows, but it needs a mainstream competitor and unfortunately what that OS must be able to do will be dictated by windows, so even then you aren't out of control. I envy bill gates so -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 17:12:00 - [46] Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Im not an average user, and i still find that it does everything that i want, vista never questions me, as far as i can tell all that is required is for you to be set as administrator. Exactly. All you have to do to make it work right is turn off all the security. Security is a tradeoff, and Microsoft has always screwed that tradeoff up. Sudo on Linux gets that tradeoff much, much better.
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 17:41:00 - [47] Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Im not an average user, and i still find that it does everything that i want, vista never questions me, as far as i can tell all that is required is for you to be set as administrator. Exactly. All you have to do to make it work right is turn off all the security. Security is a tradeoff, and Microsoft has always screwed that tradeoff up. Sudo on Linux gets that tradeoff much, much better. In what way is being administrator the same as turning off security? -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 17:45:00 - [48] Originally by: Mtthias Clemi In what way is being administrator the same as turning off security? Lack of privilege separation.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 17:46:00 - [49] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 17:45:17 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Im not an average user, and i still find that it does everything that i want, vista never questions me, as far as i can tell all that is required is for you to be set as administrator. Exactly. All you have to do to make it work right is turn off all the security. Security is a tradeoff, and Microsoft has always screwed that tradeoff up. Sudo on Linux gets that tradeoff much, much better. In what way is being administrator the same as turning off security? Because any program that you run has the exact same rights as the user it runs on, and therefore if the installer you just downloaded has a malicious program bound to it, it will run under those same restrictions (or lack thereof). Privilege separation is a critical concept in security and is the first layer of defense against any malicious code. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 18:00:00 - [50] If its as bad as you say it is i surely would have been adversely effected so far, and yet i have not, strange no? There must be something to it other than the fact i am extremely lucky? What things there have been, either windows itself or avg has detected.. -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 18:03:00 - [51] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 18:05:17 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi If its as bad as you say it is i surely would have been adversely effected so far, and yet i have not, strange no? There must be something to it other than the fact i am extremely lucky? What things there have been, either windows itself or avg has detected.. Privelege separation isn't something unique to Windows, its an operating system philosophy going back decades. The reason why Windows is historically insecure is that, in the past, Windows hasn't had very effective privilege separation. Windows 95/98/ME had little to none, and 2000 and XP had pretty effective separation if you ran as a regular user rather than an admin. It wasn't close to perfect though, and not nearly as effect as nix/BSD. Vista strove to actually implement it well, but fell flat on its face unfortunately. The reason why Windows has so many viruses is because of its lack of privilege separation; if you run a virus, it will infect your computer, guaranteed, unless something stops it from running (like an anti-virus). On any other operating system, that would be basically impossible without a complicated privilege-escalation exploit. This is partially why Microsoft really wanted to implement this effectively; it would vastly improve their operating systems' security and bring their security model out of the 1970s. That's also why Firefox is so much more secure than Internet Explorer. IE has to* have far more system privileges than Firefox due to its ActiveX controls and the like, which means if one manages to run arbitrary code in Internet Explorer, that code can potentially affect any file on the computer, including system files. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 18:09:00 - [52] Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 18:02:58 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi If its as bad as you say it is i surely would have been adversely effected so far, and yet i have not, strange no? There must be something to it other than the fact i am extremely lucky? What things there have been, either windows itself or avg has detected.. Privelege separation isn't something unique to Windows, its an operating system philosophy going back decades. The reason why Windows is historically insecure is that, in the past, Windows hasn't had very effective privilege separation. Windows 95/98/ME had little to none, and 2000 and XP had pretty effective separation if you ran as a regular user rather than an admin. It wasn't close to perfect though, and not nearly as effect as nix/BSD. Vista strove to actually implement it well, but fell flat on its face unfortunately. The reason why Windows has so many viruses is because of its lack of privilege separation; if you run a virus, it will infect your computer, guaranteed. On any other operating system, that would be basically impossible without a complicated privilege-escalation exploit. That's also why Firefox is so much more secure than Internet Explorer. IE has to* have far more system privileges than Firefox due to its ActiveX controls and the like, which means if one manages to run arbitrary code in Internet Explorer, that code can potentially affect any file on the computer, including system files. Well explained, makes sense! i use firefox, i recognize that IE sucks balls... however, i still would need heavy convincing that vista is as bad as you say, it hasnt failed me yet, and it works perfectly! -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 18:25:00 - [53] Originally by: Mtthias Clemi Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 18:02:58 Originally by: Mtthias Clemi If its as bad as you say it is i surely would have been adversely effected so far, and yet i have not, strange no? There must be something to it other than the fact i am extremely lucky? What things there have been, either windows itself or avg has detected.. Privelege separation isn't something unique to Windows, its an operating system philosophy going back decades. The reason why Windows is historically insecure is that, in the past, Windows hasn't had very effective privilege separation. Windows 95/98/ME had little to none, and 2000 and XP had pretty effective separation if you ran as a regular user rather than an admin. It wasn't close to perfect though, and not nearly as effect as nix/BSD. Vista strove to actually implement it well, but fell flat on its face unfortunately. The reason why Windows has so many viruses is because of its lack of privilege separation; if you run a virus, it will infect your computer, guaranteed. On any other operating system, that would be basically impossible without a complicated privilege-escalation exploit. That's also why Firefox is so much more secure than Internet Explorer. IE has to* have far more system privileges than Firefox due to its ActiveX controls and the like, which means if one manages to run arbitrary code in Internet Explorer, that code can potentially affect any file on the computer, including system files. Well explained, makes sense! i use firefox, i recognize that IE sucks balls... however, i still would need heavy convincing that vista is as bad as you say, it hasnt failed me yet, and it works perfectly! Vista isn't absolutely horrible; it does the job, and works. And if you enable the User Access Control and don't run as an administrator, its definitely more secure than XP, though at a cost (the annoyance) If you can put up with it and you don't use the various features that cause problems, it isn't unbearable; its just in my opinion worse than XP and 2000. That doesn't mean its horrible; there's always OS/2 for that 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 19:04:00 - [54] Originally by: Dark Shikari Vista isn't absolutely horrible; it does the job, and works. And if you enable the User Access Control and don't run as an administrator, its definitely more secure than XP, though at a cost (the annoyance) This is what I meant when I said Microsoft gets security tradeoffs all wrong. It's easy to make a computer perfectly secure--just unplug it. Making it secure and useful is hard. UAC is bad because it makes it harder to use the system. All but the most pedantic users will eventually shut it off in frustration.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.28 19:09:00 - [55] If everyone goes opensource and free software, your parents or you would be out of jobs and would be sleeping on the streets. Jumping into the opensource and free software, or closesource and commercial software bandwagon is like you are communist or capitalist. I rather be capitalist and earn big $$$. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 19:28:00 - [56] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If everyone goes opensource and free software, your parents or you would be out of jobs and would be sleeping on the streets. I write software for a living, and I would not lose my job if the world went 100% open source. I'm a contractor, and my income is guaranteed by contract law, not copyright law. If they don't pay me, I don't write code for them anymore (and I'd probably sue, too). They can try to hire someone else, but they're probably not going to write code for free, either. I'm not alone in this. The majority of software out there never hits retail shelves. It's written by either contractors or direct employees to solve the specific problems of a specific business (or sometimes a class of businesses). Moving along, another big security problem is that Microsoft tends to make the same mistakes over and over again. As an example, search around for "Microsoft RC4 vulnerability". RC4 is one of the few remaining stream ciphers that's still considered secure (more or less). The problem is that all stream ciphers are very fragile. Small implementation details can destroy the security of the whole system. This is true of encryption systems in general, but particularly true of stream ciphers. It's considered best practices to avoid RC4 and other stream ciphers whenever possible. But Microsoft doesn't heed that advice: Word and Excel problem in 2005: http://eprint.iacr.org/2005/007.pdf Interview with Phil Zimmermann (creater of PGP) about the above: http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?NewsID=3027 Win NT SysKey, from 1999: http://www.bindview.com/Services/razor/Advisories/1999/adv_WinNT_syskey.cfm Orginal XBox hack: http://www.xbox-linux.org/wiki/17_Mistakes_Microsoft_Made_in_the_Xbox_Security_System#Extracting_the_Secret_ROM Remote desktop flaw, 2005: http://www.securiteam.com/windowsntfocus/5EP010KG0G.html (I thought I remembered an RC4 flaw from NT3.51, but I can't find a link to confirm.)
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.28 19:51:00 - [57] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If everyone goes opensource and free software, your parents or you would be out of jobs and would be sleeping on the streets. Jumping into the opensource and free software, or closesource and commercial software bandwagon is like you are communist or capitalist. I rather be capitalist and earn big $$$. My dad works for an insurance company, and my mum is a secretary. I'm not sure how switching to Linux would lose them their jobs. Unless theres such a thing as "open source insurance"... Maybe Bill Gates might suffer a bit but...you know. I'm sure he'll muddle through. --------
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:00:00 - [58] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 28/06/2007 20:04:31 You both up there are funny. How can you compare commercialized software and service? You write the software for free but get paid for your service in writing the software. Let me guess, you are writing software for internal use in banks, health services, etc. Wait, you can also write software for free that plays MP3s and put it into the hardware and sell the hardware. Nothing is free in this world. Period. Edit: I made a general reply to the concept of free. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:21:00 - [59] Edited by: Patch86 on 28/06/2007 20:19:59 You don't half talk some crap, Jenny. I want the old Jenny back I can assure you, the foundations of the earth will not crumble if you use open source software. Some companies will probably suffer, but so what? I have no interest in them. 99% of the population and 99% of the business world has no interest in them. And capitalism is most certainly not about charity. Saying "don't use open source 'cus Microsoft will go out of business" really isn't a great argument. Wouldn't effect me a jot if they go out of business- and isn't that what capitalism is all about? Capitalism is like a great big competition, where everyone is trying to extract the maximum amount of money out of everyone else. Microsoft are "winning" by extracting massive amounts of money out of everyone else. Finding a solution that doesn't cost you as massive an amount of money is a pretty capitalist thing to do, and it's been what capitalist companies have been doing for centuries. And, as yet, the sky has not fallen because of it. --------
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:25:00 - [60] Originally by: Patch86 I can assure you, the foundations of the earth will not crumble if you use open source software. Some companies will probably suffer, but so what? I have no interest in them. 99% of the population and 99% of the business world has no interest in them. And capitalism is most certainly not about charity. Domino effect. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:36:00 - [61] So I assume you still use coal to heat your house, to support the miners? Even though other forms of power are cheaper and cleaner? If you don't, all those coal mining corporations will go bust. And if they do, the foundations of western civilisation will crumble to dust... Oh wait. Companies die, and new companies crop up to replace them all the time. Novell, Red Hat and Canonical are 3 companies that do extremely well for themselves with open source software as their flag ship products. In the unlikely event that in the near future 100% of the computing industry converts to open source, we'll see companies like MS and Apple go under sure, and we'll see companies like the above rise in their place. Red Hat is the oil company to Microsoft's coal --------
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:48:00 - [62] The fossil fuel thing doesn't really apply, it would be fairly easy for Microsoft to survive as a business in the event that open source takes over.. given that they design software, its not like they rely on actual materials.. -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.28 20:53:00 - [63] Originally by: Mtthias Clemi The fossil fuel thing doesn't really apply, it would be fairly easy for Microsoft to survive as a business in the event that open source takes over.. given that they design software, its not like they rely on actual materials.. True that, I was just using it as an analogy of major industries going bust, and it not being the end of the world. And that there is little reason to support and industry just for the sake- it's always best (from a capitalist view point) to do whatever is best for you. The system generally sorts itself out. That's IF you're a capitalist. Lets not discriminate --------
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 21:04:00 - [64] Originally by: Patch86 Capitalism is like a great big competition, where everyone is trying to extract the maximum amount of money out of everyone else. Microsoft are "winning" by extracting massive amounts of money out of everyone else. Finding a solution that doesn't cost you as massive an amount of money is a pretty capitalist thing to do, and it's been what capitalist companies have been doing for centuries. And, as yet, the sky has not fallen because of it. That's closer to mercentilisim than capitalism. The big advancement in capitalism was that you can have deals that make everybody rich, instead of having to screw everyone in order to make yourself rich. Admittedly, most companies work more along mercentilist lines. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Let me guess, you are writing software for internal use in banks, health services, etc. Something along those lines, yes. And as I said, most software is written for just those sorts of internal uses. The software on the shelf at Best Buy represents a very small amount of the code out there. If all of the retail software were replaced by Open Source, my job isn't going away. In fact, my job is a great deal easier because of many Open Source software.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.28 21:21:00 - [65] Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Patch86 Capitalism is like a great big competition, where everyone is trying to extract the maximum amount of money out of everyone else. Microsoft are "winning" by extracting massive amounts of money out of everyone else. Finding a solution that doesn't cost you as massive an amount of money is a pretty capitalist thing to do, and it's been what capitalist companies have been doing for centuries. And, as yet, the sky has not fallen because of it. That's closer to mercentilisim than capitalism. The big advancement in capitalism was that you can have deals that make everybody rich, instead of having to screw everyone in order to make yourself rich. Admittedly, most companies work more along mercentilist lines. Oh, I don't know. Capitalism is driven pretty solely by profit. Companies (and individuals too, really) have two ways of effecting their profit- increase income (by charging their customers more, for example) and decrease costs (by spending less on their day to day business). Microsoft are busy maximising their profit by upping their product prices, collecting licence fees, and employing methods of keeping their market share. The legitimate capitalist response of any of MS's corporate customers is to try and maximise their profit by finding a lower cost alternative. This is true of individual customers too. This alternative isn't necessarily open source software, but it might well be. --------
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 22:10:00 - [66] Originally by: Patch86 Oh, I don't know. Capitalism is driven pretty solely by profit. Companies (and individuals too, really) have two ways of effecting their profit- increase income (by charging their customers more, for example) and decrease costs (by spending less on their day to day business). Yes, it's driven by profit. The distinction comes when you consider comparative advantage and other economic developments that show that it's often unprofitable to try to screw everyone over. Quote: Microsoft are busy maximising their profit by upping their product prices, Microsoft charges for Vista Ultimate about the same as it charged for Win2k (the equivalent OS for its time). Even as a monopoly, they're still bound by rules of supply and demand. Increasing their prices would mean a lot of people either stick with XP, find an alternative, or use an illegal copy. Outside the US, Microsoft does charge comparatively more, but this is due to the weakness of the US dollar against other currencies rather than anything Microsoft does. Quote: collecting licence fees, and employing methods of keeping their market share. All companies try to increase their market share. Now, Microsoft has used far more aggressive tactics, many of which are unethical or illegal, to get that share, but trying to increase market share in itself is nothing bad. Quote: The legitimate capitalist response of any of MS's corporate customers is to try and maximise their profit by finding a lower cost alternative. This is true of individual customers too. This alternative isn't necessarily open source software, but it might well be. The problem I see is that this market may not be able to handle competition. It's easier in terms of customer support and software development to have just one OS. In such a case, government limits on the monopoly may be the correct option.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.28 22:55:00 - [67] The way I see it, supporting paid software is supporting capitalism. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 23:00:00 - [68] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire The way I see it, supporting paid software is supporting capitalism. So is buying milk.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.28 23:01:00 - [69] Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Jenny Spitfire The way I see it, supporting paid software is supporting capitalism. So is buying milk. And supporting freeware is supporting communism. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.06.28 23:02:00 - [70] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 28/06/2007 23:01:47 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire The way I see it, supporting paid software is supporting capitalism. Actually, buying software produced by a monopoly is the opposite, as the direct opposite of capitalism (free competition) is a monopoly (no competition). Open-source software (unlike, say, Windows XP) isn't the opposite of capitalism, because it does not eschew competition, the essence of capitalism. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.28 23:25:00 - [71] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire And supporting freeware is supporting communism. So is buying oil products. See, I can make silly comparisons, too
thesulei Applied Eugenics	Posted - 2007.06.28 23:48:00 - [72] Edited by: thesulei on 28/06/2007 23:48:23 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 28/06/2007 20:04:31 You both up there are funny. How can you compare commercialized software and service? You write the software for free but get paid for your service in writing the software. Let me guess, you are writing software for internal use in banks, health services, etc. Wait, you can also write software for free that plays MP3s and put it into the hardware and sell the hardware. Nothing is free in this world. Period. Edit: I made a general reply to the concept of free. Open Source Software is sometimes also being called FLOSS for Free/Libre Open Source Software. From the Free Software Foundation website: Quote: Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer. Read about it here before posting any more. Edit: I wrote my Master thesis in Sociology about OSS as a social movement, so I should know what I am talking about.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.29 07:48:00 - [73] Originally by: thesulei Edited by: thesulei on 28/06/2007 23:48:23 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 28/06/2007 20:04:31 You both up there are funny. How can you compare commercialized software and service? You write the software for free but get paid for your service in writing the software. Let me guess, you are writing software for internal use in banks, health services, etc. Wait, you can also write software for free that plays MP3s and put it into the hardware and sell the hardware. Nothing is free in this world. Period. Edit: I made a general reply to the concept of free. Open Source Software is sometimes also being called FLOSS for Free/Libre Open Source Software. From the Free Software Foundation website: Quote: Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer. Read about it here before posting any more. Edit: I wrote my Master thesis in Sociology about OSS as a social movement, so I should know what I am talking about. Are you suggesting OSS is about fame seeking in the geek community? --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.29 11:36:00 - [74] Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Patch86 Oh, I don't know. Capitalism is driven pretty solely by profit. Companies (and individuals too, really) have two ways of effecting their profit- increase income (by charging their customers more, for example) and decrease costs (by spending less on their day to day business). Yes, it's driven by profit. The distinction comes when you consider comparative advantage and other economic developments that show that it's often unprofitable to try to screw everyone over. Quote: Microsoft are busy maximising their profit by upping their product prices, Microsoft charges for Vista Ultimate about the same as it charged for Win2k (the equivalent OS for its time). Even as a monopoly, they're still bound by rules of supply and demand. Increasing their prices would mean a lot of people either stick with XP, find an alternative, or use an illegal copy. Outside the US, Microsoft does charge comparatively more, but this is due to the weakness of the US dollar against other currencies rather than anything Microsoft does. Quote: collecting licence fees, and employing methods of keeping their market share. All companies try to increase their market share. Now, Microsoft has used far more aggressive tactics, many of which are unethical or illegal, to get that share, but trying to increase market share in itself is nothing bad. Quote: The legitimate capitalist response of any of MS's corporate customers is to try and maximise their profit by finding a lower cost alternative. This is true of individual customers too. This alternative isn't necessarily open source software, but it might well be. The problem I see is that this market may not be able to handle competition. It's easier in terms of customer support and software development to have just one OS. In such a case, government limits on the monopoly may be the correct option. I don't disagree that capitalism is more than just "WANTZ MOAR MONAY!", but no other factors are really relevant in as simple analogy as this. All I mean to be saying is that it is not immoral or evil for MS to be trying to maximise their profit, but it's certainly the "capitalist" thing to do to try and maximise one's own profit, by choosing the most competitively priced product. And if MS's proprietary software is inherently unable to compete, it shouldn't be artificially kept afloat. The "capitalist" thing to do is to let the products compete on an even playing field, and let the most competitively viable product succeed. Jenny's talk of "don't use open source, capitalism will fall around us and we'll enter a new dark age" simply doesn't make sense within a capitalist system. And if anything, the computing industry is the one industry where market competition is not just possible, it's vital. It's an industry with no logistics, with infinite ease of distribution, and where a simple shared API can mean total compatibility between diametrically opposed products. Observing MS's performance as a monopoly, they've flatly failed to innovate in years. The only advancements in their recent OS's are almost direct reactions to the innovation of smaller companies such as Apple and Linux distributors. It won't be until there is full and even competition between comparable companies that we'll see true innovation reenter the industry. And so you know, MS doesn't just charge "comparatively more" outside the US- it costs fully double to buy Vista in the UK what it costs to buy it in the US. There is no economic reason for this- the weakness of the dollar simply isn't THAT disruptive. --------
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.29 11:59:00 - [75] Why mock monopoly? Microsoft's monopoly did good to all of us. If it wasn't for that monopoly, your latest custom build 8474873467 horse power PC would not connect to your favorite Microsoft Mouse or the internet and you would be playing eVe from sharded clusters. HP only clusters, Dell only clusters, Sun only clusters, you get the picture. There is no such thing as 100% anti-monopoly or 100% anti-paid software is good. If free is so good, would you like to work for me for free? You will not be paid but you can have your name displayed in font size 70 for your work. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:14:00 - [76] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Why mock monopoly? Microsoft's monopoly did good to all of us. If it wasn't for that monopoly, your latest custom build 8474873467 horse power PC would not connect to your favorite Microsoft Mouse or the internet and you would be playing eVe from sharded clusters. HP only clusters, Dell only clusters, Sun only clusters, you get the picture. There is no such thing as 100% anti-monopoly or 100% anti-paid software is good. If free is so good, would you like to work for me for free? You will not be paid but you can have your name displayed in font size 70 for your work. Look up API. Different companies does not mean incompatibility. The only reason most Windows software is incompatible with non-Windows is because they refuse to share their API (Direct X and it's ilk). How is that a good thing? Free software does not mean "free". It is free as in speech, not free as in beer. Again, look up companies such as Red Hat. They make a vast amount of money, and employ a great many people, with open source as their flag ship product. People get paid for working at open source software. Of course you can ignore it and carry on trolling if you like... --------
ry ry StateCorp	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:27:00 - [77] monopoly is the best board game ever.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:30:00 - [78] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/06/2007 12:29:39 Red Hat sells services. You get the software for free and you pay for support. Microsoft sells products. You pay for the software and you get free support. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
ry ry StateCorp	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:35:00 - [79] Edited by: ry ry on 29/06/2007 12:34:19 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/06/2007 12:29:39 Red Hat sells services. You get the software for free and you pay for support. Microsoft sells products. You pay for the software and you get free support. the fundamental difference there being that you aren't required to get your support from redhat.
MrTriggerHappy Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:38:00 - [80] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/06/2007 12:29:39 Red Hat sells services. You get the software for free and you pay for support. Microsoft sells products. You pay for the software and you get free support. Actually Microsoft sell support, it costs from ú40 to ú240 to log a call with Microsoft for support with its products. -------------------------------- My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:41:00 - [81] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/06/2007 12:29:39 Red Hat sells services. You get the software for free and you pay for support. Microsoft sells products. You pay for the software and you get free support. Whats the difference? Either way, a product increases employment opportunities. If all we're talking about is "free software creates unemployment", it's clearly not true- they just make money in other ways. Take Canonical Inc. They're the chief sponsor of the Ubuntu distro. They make money out of professional support contracts (and Microsoft also charge for professional support contracts, where they provide them at all- mostly they leave it to 3rd party services), and selling documentation for the distro (such as the "official" Ubuntu book). They then pay developers to work on the Ubuntu code project, as well as pay money in to advertising and supporting the project, because it's in their interest to increase the success of the product they sell support for. They employ people, they make money, and so forth. Using their open source product will not lead to the next depression- it'll lead to them making more money and hiring new people, just like any company. And if their product genuinely is better than Microsoft's, in terms of value for money (which is debatable, but lets not go in to that right now), they deserve to be getting the custom. Thats the way capitalism works. --------
Araxmas The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:48:00 - [82] Maybe windows is a monopoly because its good? I mean I use windows and it works pretty damn well for me so I don't wish to be "set free". -------- Robbie Rotten left me
MrTriggerHappy Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:56:00 - [83] Originally by: Araxmas Maybe windows is a monopoly because its good? I mean I use windows and it works pretty damn well for me so I don't wish to be "set free". Your argument is null and void, Windows isnt a monopoly because it works for you. Linux would work for you too, but it wouldnt make it a monopoly The difference is that Windows controls the OS market, infact they in the UK alone I believe they make up 98% of the OS market, this however is actually illegal in the UK because they are creating unfair competition, but Ofcom wont recognise it. -------------------------------- My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance
ry ry StateCorp	Posted - 2007.06.29 12:58:00 - [84] Originally by: MrTriggerHappy Actually Microsoft sell support, it costs from ú40 to ú240 to log a call with Microsoft for support with its products. depends on the license you purchase for your software, and the nature of the support you require, but yeah, they do sell support. MS business support without a support pack is so expensive it's probably cheaper to just buy a new server off ebay if anything goes wrong.
Miss Anthropy School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.06.29 13:56:00 - [85] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Frezik Originally by: Patch86 Capitalism is like a great big competition, where everyone is trying to extract the maximum amount of money out of everyone else. Microsoft are "winning" by extracting massive amounts of money out of everyone else. Finding a solution that doesn't cost you as massive an amount of money is a pretty capitalist thing to do, and it's been what capitalist companies have been doing for centuries. And, as yet, the sky has not fallen because of it. That's closer to mercentilisim than capitalism. The big advancement in capitalism was that you can have deals that make everybody rich, instead of having to screw everyone in order to make yourself rich. Admittedly, most companies work more along mercentilist lines. Oh, I don't know. Capitalism is driven pretty solely by profit. Companies (and individuals too, really) have two ways of effecting their profit- increase income (by charging their customers more, for example) and decrease costs (by spending less on their day to day business). Microsoft are busy maximising their profit by upping their product prices, collecting licence fees, and employing methods of keeping their market share. The legitimate capitalist response of any of MS's corporate customers is to try and maximise their profit by finding a lower cost alternative. This is true of individual customers too. This alternative isn't necessarily open source software, but it might well be. Mercantilism tries to encourage more exports while discouraging imports. It's a highly protective economic practice and was used heavily from between the 16th to 18th centuries. A free market (Capitalism) is one in which the government does not intervene and allows businesses to engage in private economic activity. Microsoft are not mercantile because they are not a government or company restricting imports. Microsoft are attempting a monopoly, which, according to Wikipedia is best defined as a situation where there is only one provider of a product or service. Microsoft aim to have the only Operating System customers (whether private or business) will use. NERF AMARR!
Frezik Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.29 14:14:00 - [86] Originally by: Miss Anthropy Mercantilism tries to encourage more exports while discouraging imports. It's a highly protective economic practice and was used heavily from between the 16th to 18th centuries. A free market (Capitalism) is one in which the government does not intervene and allows businesses to engage in private economic activity. That's one aspect of mercantilism. The underlieing factor is that they considered the economy to be a zero-sum game--for someone to gain, someone else has to lose. The other underlieing factor in mercantilism was considering that a nation's wealth is measured in its gold reserves, even though gold has little intrinsic value beyond the fact that it's rare. Quote: Microsoft are not mercantile because they are not a government or company restricting imports. I consider many companies to have a "mercantile" outlook in seeing the system as a zero-sum game, rather than the capitalist idea that competition is healthy and deals can be made where all players win.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.