Microsoft Linux
-
If Microsoft felt truly threatened, they'd drop their prices, which they can very much afford to do. However, as Balmer correctly pointed out, that wouldn't translate into much savings for the individual customer. (The MS Office bundle costs OEMs $50, I believe Windows is $40, even if MS dropped both, or either, in half, do you really think OEMs would pass any of the savings onto customers? Especially if they're already losing money or barely making margin as it is?) Besides, if you look where the money is, it's in corporate sales, not home users.
Joe Woodbury wrote: do you really think OEMs would pass any of the savings onto WallMart has obviously chosen to do so by avoiding MS. If you add the OEM prices to their $198 offering, it translates into a nearly 30% price increase, and puts the thing over the commonly accepted "commodity" price mark of $200 or less. Joe Woodbury wrote: Besides, if you look where the money is, it's in corporate sales, not home users. That has been true in the past, but may be becoming less so as Corporate IT groups struggle with cost control, and if the Home PC really becomes a commodity like TVs, etc. that could markedly change the picture... a lot more units, a lot more total dollars at even very skinny margins. The TV manufacturers are in a lot less trouble than most of the "high tech" industries at the moment, even with very slim margins. R
-
Chris Losinger wrote: if people really had to pay the full retail price for that bloated P.O.S., they'd be using something else. Word = crap. Actually, most people who would have to pay for it are using pirated copies... :suss: But for me, it's OpenOffice. Does everything I need so far... :cool: I'd like to find a free or lower cost alternative to Access, though. Got a friend using a questionable copy of Access, but wants to go legit, but can't really afford the whole thing. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
OpenOffice? Talk about a piece of swill! You honestly like that better than MS Office?!? William E. Kempf
-
A more interesting question is: What would happen if WallMart started selling a non-wintel PC with non-MS office package for under $200? How soon (and how) would MSFT retaliate? Would this signal the beginning of the end of MSFT dominance in the desktop?[^] -Politician (n): A person who has nothing to contribute, but a lot to say. Rob
Nope... because as nice as Linux is for the Geek, Mom and Pop would run screaming from it. Linux drives me nuts on a daily basis, and I'm in that Geek category. And from what I see in the LUGs I belong to, that's pretty much a universal situation for most Linux Geek users. Oh, and BTW, I don't have much of an opinion for Lycoris either. They are heading in the right direction, but currently it's not a distro I'd choose to use (and I buy a registered version of this distro). William E. Kempf
-
they lost the suit already. Lindows is available in Walmart for 200 $ . http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2009643&cat=3951&type=19&dept=3944&path=0%3A3944%3A3951[^] My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
That link says Lycoris Desktop/LX (http://www.lycoris.com[^]), which is a different distro from Lindows (http://www.lindows.com[^]). William E. Kempf
-
What would happen if MS did the following. 1. Said "Lets do Linux" 2. Stop supporting all existing Windows software. 3. Created MS Linux 4. Created MS Office for Linux 5. Created Visual Studio for Linux If they did it better than everyone else and put Red Hat, Mandrake, etc out of business would it be unfair, Monoply? I agree that there business practices were/are questonable, but MS Office is the most expensive suite and still has the biggest market share.
I've been watching, and Linuz is moving into goverment desktops around the world, so it is slowly spreading. And although its a very small example, even Walmart is selling a M$ free PC so I think the tide is shitfing, and in a constructive way. Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Joe Woodbury wrote: do you really think OEMs would pass any of the savings onto WallMart has obviously chosen to do so by avoiding MS. If you add the OEM prices to their $198 offering, it translates into a nearly 30% price increase, and puts the thing over the commonly accepted "commodity" price mark of $200 or less. Joe Woodbury wrote: Besides, if you look where the money is, it's in corporate sales, not home users. That has been true in the past, but may be becoming less so as Corporate IT groups struggle with cost control, and if the Home PC really becomes a commodity like TVs, etc. that could markedly change the picture... a lot more units, a lot more total dollars at even very skinny margins. The TV manufacturers are in a lot less trouble than most of the "high tech" industries at the moment, even with very slim margins. R
OldRob wrote: WallMart has obviously chosen to do so by avoiding MS. No matter how you add the numbers up, someone is losing money and it isn't WalMart. OldRob wrote: That has been true in the past, but may be becoming less so as Corporate IT groups struggle with cost control, and if the Home PC really becomes a commodity like TVs, etc. that could markedly change the picture... While PCs are largely a commodity, the Home PC market will not displace corporate sales for the forseeable future. The key difference between PCs and TVs is the relatively expensive after sales support required (in call support as well as warranty replacement. Heck, if my Dad plagued Gateway as much as he bugs his sons, he could drive the company bankrupt, single handed:)) What are the margins on TVs? I suspect they're higher, as a percentage of base cost, than PCs. (Save Macs, which enjoy huge margins, but dismal sales.) I wouldn't be suprised if WalMart quietly drops the low cost PC in the near future. (My local WalMarts don't even carry it.)
-
kjessee wrote: but MS Office ... still has the biggest market share. because it's bundled on every fucking PC that's sold! if people really had to pay the full retail price for that bloated P.O.S., they'd be using something else. Word = crap. -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
Chris Losinger wrote: because [MS Office is] bundled on every f***ing PC that's sold! Where do you live? We get OpenSource crap bundled with the PC, and the first thing to do is get rid of it. It has biggest market share because everyone uses it.
If I could find a souvenir / just to prove the world was here [sighist]
-
Chris Losinger wrote: because [MS Office is] bundled on every f***ing PC that's sold! Where do you live? We get OpenSource crap bundled with the PC, and the first thing to do is get rid of it. It has biggest market share because everyone uses it.
If I could find a souvenir / just to prove the world was here [sighist]
peterchen wrote: Where do you live? North Carolina, USA
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
-
peterchen wrote: Where do you live? North Carolina, USA
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
-
OldRob wrote: WallMart has obviously chosen to do so by avoiding MS. No matter how you add the numbers up, someone is losing money and it isn't WalMart. OldRob wrote: That has been true in the past, but may be becoming less so as Corporate IT groups struggle with cost control, and if the Home PC really becomes a commodity like TVs, etc. that could markedly change the picture... While PCs are largely a commodity, the Home PC market will not displace corporate sales for the forseeable future. The key difference between PCs and TVs is the relatively expensive after sales support required (in call support as well as warranty replacement. Heck, if my Dad plagued Gateway as much as he bugs his sons, he could drive the company bankrupt, single handed:)) What are the margins on TVs? I suspect they're higher, as a percentage of base cost, than PCs. (Save Macs, which enjoy huge margins, but dismal sales.) I wouldn't be suprised if WalMart quietly drops the low cost PC in the near future. (My local WalMarts don't even carry it.)
Actually, I agree with most of your points (although I do thing=k the Corporate market is largely saturated and not likely to gererate the kind of revenues it used to), I am rather amazed at the risk that WalMart is taking. Event if this configuration is as stable as more stable and easy to learn and use than XP, most of the target market (entry level, first time purchasers) are likely to end up asking for their money back... It will be interesting to see how this turns out. On The Corporate side, I work for a LARGE Multi-National and everything is Intel/Microsoft and not likely to change. Open Source is regarded as anathema, mostly due to the "viral" nature of all the GPL based licenses. Rob
-
What would happen if MS did the following. 1. Said "Lets do Linux" 2. Stop supporting all existing Windows software. 3. Created MS Linux 4. Created MS Office for Linux 5. Created Visual Studio for Linux If they did it better than everyone else and put Red Hat, Mandrake, etc out of business would it be unfair, Monoply? I agree that there business practices were/are questonable, but MS Office is the most expensive suite and still has the biggest market share.
The reasons I don't like Microsoft is: 1) They have questionable buisness practices. 2) They charge a who lot for their OSes, and all their software. I would have to say that their software is great though. I'd have to say that their products are of the highest quality -- they are extremely flexible and sometimes those automatic operations are nice (sometimes they are not, but they can usually be turned off). This is why I believe they are so successful -- and they can do it *QUICKLY*. (Take a look at IE -- despite all its' early problems, IE has been able to squash Netscape and become the browser standard. And they did that in a very short period of time.) I believe the most important reason why Microsoft is able to produce high quality software is b/c they have excellent programmers and an excellent software management system -- anyone who has read "Code Complete" or some of MS Press' similar books can see that they have an excellent system for building software. No, I have never worked for MS, but I have been involved in many other professionally build applications and programming interfaces -- and never have I seen a project get written so well so quick. Example: Look the number of people who have contributed world-wide to Linux (and Gnome and KDE) compared to the number of people who have contributed to Windows. Linux is just beginning to catch up with Windows, but still has a way to go. In WinXP, you can drag and drop files onto a CDRW drive and then just press burn -- no more need for programs like Nero (or Linux's XCdBurn (or whatever it is)) for simple burning. And despite what a lot of people think, MS has more projects than just Windows, Office, and Visual Studio -- I don't believe they only make good products because of the massive amounts of programmers. I believe most people would have to say that MS products are what they would ideally like to use. I believe that if anyone made an *honest* survey of companies that have converted to Linux / StarOffice / WordPerfect / .... the reason would be cost, not that they actually think MS products are crap. All that being said, I really would like to see other companies produce products capable of competing with MS products, then everyone could have cheaper software. Let's face reality, the reason MS products are expensive is because they have a *virtual* monopoly (not a real one). Anyway, back to the original question, if MS decided to do MS Linux, MS Office for Linux, and VS for Linux, I think that they would severly cripple R
-
MS had some problems with AT&T with licensing. That is why they decided to create NT from scratch than use Xenix core. Actually, Gates said in an interview that AT&T does not know how to manage their intellectual property and has caused Unix not achieve its potential in the mas market. I think he was referring to a proposal, where MS wanted to build Windows on top of Xenix core like Mac OS X has a BSD core now. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Yes you have brought back a few menories, I rember using Xenix in the 70's. But wasn't NT designed by the "team" that produced VMS, which IMHO has to the the worst O/S I have ever used!
-
The reasons I don't like Microsoft is: 1) They have questionable buisness practices. 2) They charge a who lot for their OSes, and all their software. I would have to say that their software is great though. I'd have to say that their products are of the highest quality -- they are extremely flexible and sometimes those automatic operations are nice (sometimes they are not, but they can usually be turned off). This is why I believe they are so successful -- and they can do it *QUICKLY*. (Take a look at IE -- despite all its' early problems, IE has been able to squash Netscape and become the browser standard. And they did that in a very short period of time.) I believe the most important reason why Microsoft is able to produce high quality software is b/c they have excellent programmers and an excellent software management system -- anyone who has read "Code Complete" or some of MS Press' similar books can see that they have an excellent system for building software. No, I have never worked for MS, but I have been involved in many other professionally build applications and programming interfaces -- and never have I seen a project get written so well so quick. Example: Look the number of people who have contributed world-wide to Linux (and Gnome and KDE) compared to the number of people who have contributed to Windows. Linux is just beginning to catch up with Windows, but still has a way to go. In WinXP, you can drag and drop files onto a CDRW drive and then just press burn -- no more need for programs like Nero (or Linux's XCdBurn (or whatever it is)) for simple burning. And despite what a lot of people think, MS has more projects than just Windows, Office, and Visual Studio -- I don't believe they only make good products because of the massive amounts of programmers. I believe most people would have to say that MS products are what they would ideally like to use. I believe that if anyone made an *honest* survey of companies that have converted to Linux / StarOffice / WordPerfect / .... the reason would be cost, not that they actually think MS products are crap. All that being said, I really would like to see other companies produce products capable of competing with MS products, then everyone could have cheaper software. Let's face reality, the reason MS products are expensive is because they have a *virtual* monopoly (not a real one). Anyway, back to the original question, if MS decided to do MS Linux, MS Office for Linux, and VS for Linux, I think that they would severly cripple R
I also think MS products are top rate and Expensive. Remember when you could by Quattro Pro and Paradox fro $50.00 bucks each? Why didn't they grab market share? My gripe is that when I look at the software on my PC it is mostly all MS products. I tried OpenOffice it's pretty good but I have to use MS Office at work. So I switched back. I guess its like being left handed and always using a right handed mouse. It is easier to move from PC to PC if I don't resist. But I would really like to use a MS balanced computer. I have AutoCAD, Quicken and CodeWright. EVERYTHING else is a MS product X| but what to do? What are the alternatives? Jeff Patterson Programmers speak in Code. http://www.anti-dmca.org[^]
-
Yes you have brought back a few menories, I rember using Xenix in the 70's. But wasn't NT designed by the "team" that produced VMS, which IMHO has to the the worst O/S I have ever used!
Actually, I do not know who designed NT. and have never used VMS either. :-D But, MS wanted to build Windows over Xenix core (if I remember it right). When people talk about Unix being very difficult to use, I tell them that the problem is not with Unix. It is with the people managing the Unix OSs. For them, it seems like user-friendliness is the last requirement. Explains why Windows had an easy time getting market share, and now holding on to it. IMO, they do a better job than others in putting together something that is easy to use. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Yes you have brought back a few menories, I rember using Xenix in the 70's. But wasn't NT designed by the "team" that produced VMS, which IMHO has to the the worst O/S I have ever used!
Ted Ferenc wrote: wasn't NT designed by the "team" that produced VMS, NT actually came more from the Prism project at Digital than VMS itself. Prism was a total new OS designed to supercede VMS. I think about 20 of the top guys were taken from Digital with Cutler to MS when Prism was canned. Originally NT was to supercede OS/2 but some business went wrong with IBM and MS made it supercede Windows by using the Winapi. So because of Prism and the Winapi, NT really inherits the attributes of two OSes. When I used VMS I never thought it was so bad. "beggars can't be choosers" Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Ted Ferenc wrote: wasn't NT designed by the "team" that produced VMS, NT actually came more from the Prism project at Digital than VMS itself. Prism was a total new OS designed to supercede VMS. I think about 20 of the top guys were taken from Digital with Cutler to MS when Prism was canned. Originally NT was to supercede OS/2 but some business went wrong with IBM and MS made it supercede Windows by using the Winapi. So because of Prism and the Winapi, NT really inherits the attributes of two OSes. When I used VMS I never thought it was so bad. "beggars can't be choosers" Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
There's nowt as queer as folk, as we say. But if we all had the same opinions life would be boring! My main gripe with VMS was that if your program went into a loop, it was virtually impossible to kill it on the system console, it also tended to slow down all the other users responces as well, this was on the smallest to the largest computers. But that was a few years back now. Ted
-
Actually, I do not know who designed NT. and have never used VMS either. :-D But, MS wanted to build Windows over Xenix core (if I remember it right). When people talk about Unix being very difficult to use, I tell them that the problem is not with Unix. It is with the people managing the Unix OSs. For them, it seems like user-friendliness is the last requirement. Explains why Windows had an easy time getting market share, and now holding on to it. IMO, they do a better job than others in putting together something that is easy to use. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Well when I was young(ish) before M$, CPM was FAR better than MSDOS, but as with most things we purchase we/upper management are swayed by adverts and what we percieve to be better, i.e. buy M$ get a free works package. As you say they put together something that is "easy" to install, and have the killer applications for it. But M$ have had a, successful, habit of only improving the software when a competitor started to become a threat, e.g. DRDOS and MSDOS 5. I would say XP is what 95 should have been. Now many times are you, as an expert, asked to sort out a simple problem on someones Windows PC? But as you say even a raw novice can easily get up and running.
-
Well when I was young(ish) before M$, CPM was FAR better than MSDOS, but as with most things we purchase we/upper management are swayed by adverts and what we percieve to be better, i.e. buy M$ get a free works package. As you say they put together something that is "easy" to install, and have the killer applications for it. But M$ have had a, successful, habit of only improving the software when a competitor started to become a threat, e.g. DRDOS and MSDOS 5. I would say XP is what 95 should have been. Now many times are you, as an expert, asked to sort out a simple problem on someones Windows PC? But as you say even a raw novice can easily get up and running.
Ted Ferenc wrote: Now many times are you, as an expert, asked to sort out a simple problem on someones Windows PC? But as you say even a raw novice can easily get up and running. Compared to other systems, that they would not even try. That was the only point. The only other system would be Apple, but was/is expensive compared to geting a PC. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
OldRob wrote: WallMart has obviously chosen to do so by avoiding MS. No matter how you add the numbers up, someone is losing money and it isn't WalMart. OldRob wrote: That has been true in the past, but may be becoming less so as Corporate IT groups struggle with cost control, and if the Home PC really becomes a commodity like TVs, etc. that could markedly change the picture... While PCs are largely a commodity, the Home PC market will not displace corporate sales for the forseeable future. The key difference between PCs and TVs is the relatively expensive after sales support required (in call support as well as warranty replacement. Heck, if my Dad plagued Gateway as much as he bugs his sons, he could drive the company bankrupt, single handed:)) What are the margins on TVs? I suspect they're higher, as a percentage of base cost, than PCs. (Save Macs, which enjoy huge margins, but dismal sales.) I wouldn't be suprised if WalMart quietly drops the low cost PC in the near future. (My local WalMarts don't even carry it.)
walmart is ging a Via 800 Mhz processor for the 199$ PC. Now, who wants to use that with an XP machine? No one is losing money on that. VIA makes processor, chip set, motherboard; and everything else in that - a 10 GB 5400 rpm drive, a 14" monitor and Linux. If it cost me 400 $, I would buy atleast a Celeron instead of that. Anyone could sell that config for 199$, but none of the major PC manufacturers are interested. IMO, people in US can afford 20$ a month to get a 700$ PC on credit. I bought a Dell Dimension 4550 - P4 2 GHz, 20 GB HDD, 15" flat panel, 512 MB Ram for 700 dollars. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Nope... because as nice as Linux is for the Geek, Mom and Pop would run screaming from it. Linux drives me nuts on a daily basis, and I'm in that Geek category. And from what I see in the LUGs I belong to, that's pretty much a universal situation for most Linux Geek users. Oh, and BTW, I don't have much of an opinion for Lycoris either. They are heading in the right direction, but currently it's not a distro I'd choose to use (and I buy a registered version of this distro). William E. Kempf
I did not even know that there was a ditribution called Lycoris, until I saw the Walmart ad. :-) I use Debian. Which distribution do you use? I have used Slackware years ago, and have installed RadHat once (but that was only for a test machine). Which distribution that you prefer and why? My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers