[taustin1382]

TechieXP wrote: I work at Citibank and at the besktop we were running Citrix which crashed often

sounds like citrix needs work...



TechieXP wrote:I don;t think it matters about viruses for Linux because it isn't desktop friendly enough for everyday usage.



and here I have been using linux since 2002 as a desktopOS dual booted with windows until 2006 when I went solely to linux with no microsoft products installed on any of the 3 computers at my house.... and lets get off on a little tnagent here. My parents use a computersoley for email and browsing the web. they hadxp for about 6 months on thier new pc. I was over there or on the phone with htem weekly fixing something. update failure, viruses, etc. I switched them to ubuntu and have not been there for issuesother than to upgrade them to a new version or help them with installing an application (they dont have the root password. on top of that I have 150 users in a manufacturing/office environment that are using ubuntu 8.10 every day!!! they even picked the gnome environment with is the least windows like of the 2. so yeah that a load of crap! if you can read and click you can operate linux just fine. for a business environment I can attest and show you the savings and usability.





TechieXP wrote: And as you said...i watch Windows users just say yes to everything. Which means they would do teh same on any other system, that is why they are being written at this level. The biggest vulverable espect to a computer will be the user as it is the most open door.

if the users do not have the root password they cannot change anything but what they see. for home use as i said there is no way around this but in a business environment with an IT staff there is no reason they could install anything with out the password.





TechieXP wrote: I don't even run virus software in Vista and I have yet to be infected.

and you know this how????





TechieXP wrote: People hate Vista's UAC because it pops up for everything. This happen in linux will only piss off the user and they will simply say yes so as not to be disturbed. This would be the same on the MAC level.

for home use yes again I stated this before but in a business they cannot go past it with out a password not just ask are you sure???





TechieXP wrote:What ypu said was true and expect in certain enviroments. But be practical as linux isn't big in desktop area. And someone did hack Visa server and got Bill Gates Credit Card number remember that? and it was a kid. It can happen if someone is willing to take out teh time.

I never said it could not be done I just simply pointedout that it was much more difficult and not nearly as likely.... ps who knows what went in to that hack.... i havehad people call me and pose as a vendor for our webserver support telling us there is a major update and they need the admin password.... im not that stupid but im sure someone is. it does not have to be avunerability of the os to do this stuff... not saying thats what happened but we dont know the details. either way i never said any os in infalable. in fact I have started the oposite many times.


TechieXP wrote: All I have a home network and I did get an infection when running XP, but the virus did populate on every pc I had setup. It got in through an open port on 1 system and I had it locked on the others.
good job on patching the hole... however i can assure you that everyone here can tell you 100's of times that has not been the case....




TechieXP wrote:If MS wasnt who they were they would be having this problem that is a fact. and it isn't so easily dismissed by your explaination.
i have to disagree.... if you get control of one windows pc on the network with user level authenticationand that user account has access to all other computers on the domain or even a few and you go to networkcomputernamec$ you can make any changes you want to the other computers c drive unless you are on a guest account. in linux you would have to have an account setup on the other pc and would only have access to /home/yourusername/ directory (equivilent of documents and settings in windows) with out the admin password.


TechieXP wrote:MS needs to work on security and geez how many times do we need to be reminded of it. They took great steps in working out many flaws in XP with Vista and fix XP with SP2/3.
unless it gets fixed we will keep hearing about it.... get used to it....


{quote:title=TechieXP wrote: }{quote}If Linux was where MS was now and MS was where Lunix was the conversation would be the same, providing they went about being in that spot with the same measures MS used to get there.
if it was crap software that was thrown on to the market unfinshed yes we would be having this conversations.... fact is in its current state we would be having this converasation about home users but businesses would be fine assuming they did not give the users the root account... lets add that rules can be added in linux to blacklist applications. so we would probably be having this conversation for a few minutes until the app got blacklisted.....

{quote:title=TechieXP wrote: }{quote}The problem with MS isn't there marketshare, but how they attained. We all know the stories I don't need to rehash them. If they simply bec number one just by doing good business they wouldn't have the problems or least not at this level. So they brought alot of it on themselves. Which is why since they know they are a target they need to protect themselves better so that we would be protected too.

doing good business..... are you serious.....lets take a look.

Microsoft initially embraces a competing standard or product, then
extends it to produce their own version which is then incompatible with
the standard, which in time extinguishes competition that does not or
cannot use Microsoft's new version. These and other tactics have resulted in lawsuits brought by companies
and governments, and billions of dollars in rulings against Microsof..... is that good business? no thats not good business thats tyrany!

lets say ford is the dominent car in the US lets say oh 90% of the cars in the us. chevey starts making cars that work just like ford.... ford then has all the cars updated to use a new fuel..... now lets say ford now owns the rights this fuel so they control who can use it.... because ford now uses only this fuel and is the dominent car all the stations start selling this fuel.... ford says nope we are not releaseing the rights t use this fuel so deal with it .... no more chevy.... .net comes to mind....

lets look at some other practices..... how about the hey this company has a great product that rivals ours.... BUY company... obsolve company..... no more problem... the netscape meeting i the 90's is a good example of this..... look it up.


{quote:title=TechieXP wrote: }{quote}
Which is why since they know they are a target they need to protect themselves better so that we would be protected too.
you are absolutely right..... so why arn't they?? they have the ability to do better than this.... its very simple question. if known viruses are infecting your os why are you relying on third party software to keep you safe..... oh wait your not..... you are running no antivirus..... yeah best of luck with that. might want to have one on there so you can at least check whether you have a virus or not..... ever hear of botnet..... what about drive by download..... it does not matter what you click or where you go.... if you catch a popup from an infected site you could be infected. heck there was a story about infected ads doing this.....

[TechieXP]

yes I don't run anti-virus native on my system, but I do scan it often. I have Windows Live CD that I mount from a flash drive and I scan the system. Just as another commenter said, Linus is free and can be download by anyone and if the have a lil knowledge can load it into a virtual pc or even install it to another drive and try it. I am aware lots of ppl can use linux, but in my opinion it isn't ready for the market. Can you find a program for linux similar to Windows? Of course just as you can for MAC. but are they all as good or better, may be a matter of opinion. I've use StarOffice and it is a nice suite, but it certainly isn't a good Office replacement.

As far as your other comments, point taken. I don't totally agree but I do understand. I personally don't have enough problem with Windows to think of switching at this point. I have tried Linux and I have tried MAC OS. Windows provides enough good that I can deal with the downsides. I have to deal with it in the real world so I am ok with it.Problems aside fact is teh other OS's don't offer what Windows does and that is enough to tough it out. Until I am force to jump ship there really is no need to. To each its own. But look where Linux has gotten in 25 years and look where Windows was in 25 years. Even free it doesn't offer anything better. Sure on some levels it does, and so does MAC OS...

And I have a copy of the DOJ report and I am aware of MS history...i just don't care. Netscape sucked that is my opinioned and it costed way to much money. Sure go ahead say it...well Windows sucks and we pay for it...right? Not quite the same. I am aware of MS issue in court...they arent teh only ones who have been or will be going. I dont care about their legal problem. If they created them they will sort them out. MS isn't teh only compnay who will buy out a competitor to stay ahead. They wasn't firt now will they be last.

I still have every Windows release and I have a DVD that has all teh drivers i need and software. If MS went out of business today I'd still use Windows even if I never get another Windows app as long as what I have works.

[taustin1382]

you are absolutely correct on most point and the whole point is exactly what you said. to each his own. it is all about choice and freedom of choice. I have my opinion and you have yours and that's what makes this situation great. Im not trying to convert anyone I am simply defending my case as you yours and making sure everyone is on the same page.


couple of notes here....



"...And I have a copy of the DOJ report and I am aware of MS history...i
just don't care. Netscape sucked that is my opinioned and it costed way
to much money...."

netscape browser is/was free... when it was released long before IE came in to existance it was the first browser to get out of text only mode..... MS was not happy ..... look it up .... its a good read ... we are talking way back when here not recently.... ps netscape is now known as firefox....







"....But look where Linux has gotten in 25 years and look where Windows was in
25 years. Even free it doesn't offer anything better. Sure on some
levels it does, and so does MAC OS..."



do a little research dude.... linux just turned 17 years old....microsoft just turned 33... msdos27.... windows25

september 1991 - "Version 0.01 of Torvald's project is made available via ftp.funet.fi. Ari Lemmke, the systems administrator gives the directory the name Linux"

the first version of linux would be comparable to dos

if you want to look at the first windows version comparable to gnome or kde in linux you are looking at linux in its current state being only 12 years old or the microsoft equivalent of windows 3.x on the cusp on windows 95

if you start at the first release of MSDOS then microsoft equivalent time line puts MS at the first release of windows 98.....

if you want to just do microsoft in general you have to include thier first attempt Xenix which brings you back down the timeline a few years.... around 76 or 78 I believe .... oh and btw xenix is unix based.... if I remeber correctly they purchased it from AT&T and billed it as thier own OS.



I think linux has done a fine job considering where MS was 17 years in to thier existance compared to linux at the moment...

either way its not important. we both have our opinions and thats whats important... we are not all forced to use the same os... and we all have our favorite.

[taustin1382]

I have one more nail in the coffin about linux not being user friendly....

http://forums.pcworl...e/167096#167096

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" the Aspire One comes with the Linpus Linux Lite OS, which is very
user friendly. I've used Windows for most of my life but switching to
Linux on the Aspire One was smooth and easy.

Most of the netbooks
I tested with Linux booted up far faster than Windows XP or Windows
Vista. Which reminds me, don't buy a netbook with Vista -- it's just
too slow."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

apparently its easy enough.

[TechieXP]

You're reaching aren't you? You are digging so deep that you want to compare the boot time of a Lite OS versus Windows XP and Vista? On a Netbook? First off I have seen versions of linux that have been compiled to run on hardware that isn't even as close as being as fast as a PC. How fast a boot time is depend on what type of hardware you are running. If you run sophiticated hardware like some of these video and sound cards the .sys files are huge and do take time to load extending you boot time. If you run anti-virus then adds as well as system files are being scan during the bott which is the most vulnerable and critcal point of teh process. System specs also play a key role. I use Vista Ultimate and my boot time takes 70 second on a Quadcore w/4GB ram and my XP boot takes about 61 seconds. I have a Windows Live CD that I created an fixed so I can boot my system without even installing Windows. It runs from The CD and I have it fixed to run from a Flash Drive. Both boot me up in less then 30 seconds. As it is strppied of everything accept what I need to get to teh desktop. Its not designed to run full applications but I can use basic Windows features including burning a CD/DVD. An as far as the age of an OS...does it really matter? I see it as...Linux is free, that is a golden opportunity for developers to make something that is totally better then Windows. I started off trying Red Hat but at teh beginning it was to complicated for me. A friend turned me on to Mandrake which I did like and I also like Suse as well. We use Centros here in our office for a PBX we designed to run our phone system using Asterisk. I am very familiar with what Linux can do on a basic level and I am still learning. Maybe with some of the ways the licnsing is wriiten maybe developers don't want to have to sharewhat they ahve worked hard to develop. Who knows.

I have nothing against Linux or Mac OS and they are good software as long as they do what YOU need. They don't for me. I have to take into account other users in my house, one of which worked for a designer using Mac OS and still prefers Windows. I even showed her Linux and it was very frustrating for her to use. Even Ubuntu which I have been playing with to because I like soe of the physical features you can add is still frustrating.

Windows enviroment unlike Linux is easy to learn without knowing a bunch of acronyms. Sure I watch our IT master whip through Linux commands as we don't use the GUI at all right out of his head. He too would prefer we didn't use Windows. But for teh types of softwares we use exclusively like Lotus Notes, we use what works best for us.

Yes I agreed with you that all OS can have a library of software that will help you accomplish practically any task. And being compatible with everything sometimes can be a drawback as well as a blessing. However of the 3 it your choice as you stated. if it works for you be happy with it.

As far as Netscape I never remember it being free. I remember paying $80 for a version of Communicator once. Was it faster than IE? Sure. But buy the time I wasted and hour to download plugins to make it work properly with was was available then...it was just as slow. and on a system that has a CPU that is 150 Mhz with 256MB of ram I didn't need 2 appz that did the same thing.

I was being sarcastic with my original comment on the explaination to a kid who had no idea. If you take a kid who had a basic education and good motor skills and placed hi in from of 3 computers 1 with each of an OS...in my opinion I am will to better after trying all 3...he'll stop using Linux, and end up using Mac OSX and Windows more. I have even seen commenters in these forums say, that they switched and went out and bout Macs...and for teh most part they are just stiing around doing nothing. Why do you think that is? Even those who dula boot Windows with MAC oS have stated they use Windows 70% of the time...which means there truly was no benefit to switch. Sure dual booting is ok...i do it too...but bewteen Windows XP and Vista I use Vista probably 70% of teh time bec I use XP for games.

On a netbook where you are just seeking to have an OS that works so that you can browse teh Internet and check email...Linux is perfect. If you have enough knowledge and you want to learn something new Linux is a viable option. However most computer users want a syatem they can just walk up to and get going and out of habit they are going to use what they are familar with. If I use Mac at work then it makes since to have ac at home. if I use Windows at work it makes since to have Windows at home. Same for Linux...But how many ppl at work use Linux at there desktop other then mostly IT people? Yes there are some, but you can count them. In teh office I am in right now the company has 20 computer users. Only 2 are using Linux in a Virtual PC because they need it to configure teh phone syste they build. That's it. There is a Linux server that runs teh phone system...that's it. If you look at the main use for linux, unix and solaris it is mostly on a sever level. with people who are degreed and have to know that stuff. Linux has very good potential and for anyone who is will to learn it, can easily get by. But comparing boot times and software and desktop usage...sorry u can't win no matter how you spin it...

Sure Windows dominates the desktop bec of how MS did business. I don't deny that as I said I have a DOJ finding of facts on Microsoft. What ever legals they pay people to be on top of that stuff. I am not one of them. It ust not be all that bad as theu are still in business. Iff MS software was as bad as some ppl sound...then MS couldn't push the issue to use it. I still say the fact that Windows runs 200,000 pices of software and works with 1000's of hardware and yet it still works 90% of teh time without hiccups I can live with that. I don't have time or money to research making sure every lil hardware I have will work in another OS...I installed Linux Ubuntu on my system because I saw some cool things on YouTube about it. It didn't even work with one of my NICS. I couldnt use all teh features of my Video or Soundcard...StarOffice is very nice...however I don't like it over Office for the MAC or for Windows. Configuring Knome I think it was to run Windows was a pain for e and I am pretty tech savvy. I have had no college and I was able to teach myself how to use Windows even on the Server side...

Having never worked with Windows Server on a Enterprise level...I still was able to convert an office I worked in from Windows NT Server over to Windows 2000 Sever and setup Exchange using nothing more then the help files. Can't do that with Linux. Even to do commandlines you need a cheat sheet. Sure not everyone...but it helps. I dont need any off that in Windows. Mac users have said in fact...it is easier to go from Mac to Windows then vice versa. Sure that was for earlier version as 10 is teh easiet Mac version I have ever seen and I like it as well. But not enough to switch...but if I ever did leave Windows I would go back to where I stared...with Apple as my first system was teh Apple II/IIE/IIGS. The Mac sucked then and I watched it disappear until Steve came back and release teh really cool iMACS and that laptop that looked like a pillow.

In my office we allow users to install whatever they want...some here have iphone and they have iTunes...they have Blackberry's and Plam devices and they have teh software for them. All running with no issue. Yes Linux work with Palm devices natively on teh basic level. Cool. They all do a good job at something...But Mac OS combined with linux still doesn't compare to what Windows offers. Why do you think it bacame what it was? His Apple releases teh first user friendly PC offering a GUI...that they basically stole fro Xerox and don't say they didn't because Xerox did file a lawsuit. Microsoft steals the same GUI after buying DOS from a guy and changed it called it their own as MS-DOS. Once you buy it outright it becomes yours. Apple didn't buy what they found at Xerox. MS didn't either..but they made they're own version in Windows. It took off bec, you could get a cheaper user friendly computer that offer more software and more hardware for less then 1/2 teh cost of a MAC. A thing that hasn't changed very much. It would cost a compnay way more money to try to run a sophisticated business using Mac over Windows. I have been toying with MAC OS10 server for a month now. Can it do what Windows Server and Exchange does...yes it can and it does it very well. But work it with PC users is no easy action...it would be better to get MACS. which wouldn't work in our office.

The fact so many rely on Windows eans Microsoft needs to do better. Windows 95 vs Windows 3.1 and DOS made some very good milestones. Windows 2000 bring desktop like features to teh enterprise was a milestone for IT people. The features of Windows 2003 Server and its client Windows XP work very well together. Windows Vista tho has issues does work very well for many. If ppl just followed a few simple things they to would have had a good upgrade experience.

I too was disappointed that many features that MS hyped didn't appear in the final release. But so, I was still using what was working fine. I didn't jump over until almost 8 month after. It dodn't provide a benfit to me, but I like teh look and smoothness of it over XP. And I still haven;t had a system or application meltdown. For those who did, so sorry for you...it happens. But proof that jumping ship may or may not be the answer.

I'm not a fanboy as ppl just pawn me off to be, I just happen to like their stuff. I defend them only in the respect that most act like MS does nothing right. If they didn't they wouldn't be in business. Many decisions they pushed helped out...it just depends on how u look at it. I don't like bashing companies simply bec it does no good. It's there money they will spend as they please. We can show how much we hate what they are doing by simply not buying their product. And since so many feel Linux and Mac OS is a great alternative...use it. It obviously isn't. One they I hope one of them or someone will be. Until that day at least 10 years from now I am sticking with what work for me.

[taustin1382]

wow... good post.... Im not going to take the time to pick that apart very well thought out.


yeah the boot issue was more of point about MS forcing vista than boot time. you see where people here complain that if you have an old pc and install vista its going to disappoint you.... I was just showing that MS/pc manufacs are selling it on extreme lowend systems...





as for the rest I think we are actually on the same page.... there was nothing in there I could not see your point on... not everyone like the same thing.... who cares.... .... I have to comment on the netscape issue.





the netscape browser was and always has been free.... before MS realized that graphical browsing was a good idea 2 kids wrote this application and made it available for download. it became one of the most downloaded applications (we are talking early internet text only times....) in a meeting with MS they apparently were given 2 options.... sell out and go out of business and walk away with a pay off or be forced out of business and be crushed.... they told MS to buzz off MS purchased modified version of mosaic and started shipping it with the os preinstalled.



"Underlying these disputes were questions over whether Microsoft altered or manipulated its application programming interfaces
(APIs) to favor Internet Explorer over third party web browsers,
Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing agreements with original equipment manufacturer (OEMs), and Microsoft's intent in its course of conduct."



"The business demise of Netscape was a central premise of Microsoft's antitrust trial, wherein, the Court ruled that Microsoft corporation's bundling of Internet Explorer with the Windows operating system was monopolistic, an illegal business practice."





even though this ruling stuck MS has not changed its bully ways....





edit: this seems a little on the dramatic side but it gets the basics right.... www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKaKEoSePnE

edit: 3 of 4 .... lawyer has it nail on the head ...
Message was edited by: taustin1382
Message was edited by: taustin1382

[TechieXP]

Here is what I understand from teh DOJ report I have you can get here.

The issue with Netscape was it was being developed to run applications without the need of an OS. Microsoft wan'ted to force teh issue of using Windows API's so that Netscape would still need Windows in order to work. Netscape did not want to do that. From what I remember I paid for Netscape, however it was available free when you signed up for AOL. It was a good browser. As now the cpmplaint is MS takes other ppl's software reverse engineer it and provide it free in Windows. Cutting into the market, because why buy a cheesy app, when you can a cheezy app for free.

But I don't see it that way. Windows is an OS. It is designed to take advantage of teh capabilites of you hardware. I do see how integrating a browser would in fact cause ppl to not go an download another if they have one already. In my opinion may appz MS provide for what you call free in many cases are better. And they are not free they are bundled. If the take teh capabilities of Windows XP and went and bout a single application to do teh exact same thing, it would cost you more then a single copy of Windows. Windows Media Player though a resource hog is better than QT and RMP to me for media playback. The only player I found that is free that was better was WinAMP and teh best paid player I ever bought was MusicMatch. Real's player to me was horrible and Apple just forget it.

Integarting features like CD/Burning, audio/video playback is good. The bundle stuff in Windows only provides basic functions. Which means if you want extended features you still have teh option to go eleswhere. All I need a browser for is to view web content. All that hype about plugins is just user preference. IE not having all that KISS (keep it simple stupid) the more simple the less problems. Sure I would love a car with everything, but it increases teh cances of me not having long bec it more enticing for someone to want to steal.

No matter what MS bundles if you have a favorite you can still get it. Its like cable...you pay a bundle price. If Comcast allowed you to only have teh channels you wanted..it would cost you more to have much less. Which when it comes to teh price tag of Vista. 399.99 for teh retail was steep...however if you took all of Vista features and made them separate it would cost you nearly double. Same for Office. Even if you never use more then Word Excel and Outlook...it is still better as a suite vs buying a single product unless u don't have a need for the othrs at all. But even if you don't use it someone in your company or home probably does. It is there in case you simply need it because someone sends you an email with a PPT file attached.

I took got sick when I read most of what I did in teh DOJ report. But I don't know how much of it is really true and how much was beefed up to make the lawsuit viable and believeable. I see it as no more then MS doing what it took to protect their interest. Yes they went way overboard...many many times a fact I can't deny.

Just like teh search deal. Ppl blew up bec they didnt let Google and Yahoo unite. Well if they had since both are used 90% of teh time...both togther would totally eliminate other options. MSN search sucks and Excite and others suck too. MS buying Google would have give MS a chance to compete in this market especially since applications will be moving to teh web vesus on pc. MS sucks in this area. When you can't do something, you teamup with someone who can. That's business...that's not greed. But obviously greed is the idea.

Someone commented that MS is even trying to bully teh VG market with XBOX. That was just to much. Obviously XBOX 360 is better than PS3 in many ways. Price not being one of them. Then I guess there is an issue with RROD? So...didn't sony have heating issues with teh original PS. Didn't they have hardware issue with PS2?

What I hate is ppl pawn MS as if they can't do anything right. Well they much be doing something right. They didn't get where they are sitting doing nothing. I think they get slandered just because of who they are. For what they provide they ahve a good reason to protect their oney...and yes they need to do so legally and fairly.

But is it fair that the companies that put us in this recession the gov bailed them out? and we have to pay for it? MS is the least of their focus...if anything they could keep the market moving somewhat. It is obvious the market will effect them to as ppl wont have money to get new pc's this year. But they wont be borrowing anything to manage.

We all know MS is teh copycat compay. but doesn't everyone copy to a point? There is always 1 original and the rest are copies. I see nothing really bad in what they do, what is bad is why they do it. But you think Wal-Mart selling stuff so low even at a cost to themselves wasn't ment to push out competition? Bec just as MS does, if you make sure you're teh only provider for a certain product you increase your chances of survival.

MS has 3 products they really sell. Windows, Office and XBOX. The other stuff they have is mostly o an enterprise level. They get so mucg attack...bec i see it as they are better in may ways then competitors. Even teh companies who benefit fro MS complain. Sure I don't want to get bullied to..but the game is u play along or you cease to exist. IBM hates MS and we all know why, but you think they past up a chance to invest? One of teh guys from IBM is a major stockholder, i forgot his name. when you even say their name in his presence he practically has a heartattck and after reading DOJ i see why.

If teh GOV would have broke up MS like AT$T it wouldn't have help. Now you have 3 microsoft's making dominating products. They aren't going to stop util the GOV fines them into oblivion.

The best way to may a point with a product you don't like is to simply not buy it. When they see sales drop they will get on the ball. But Windows keeps selling even though it has issues. Why? bec we have learned to accept teh fact that in some cases it is worth teh headache. Imagine if MS had a company in every market possible...they only lead in one...the PC World...
here.

[taustin1382]

ok this is how far i got before typing this reply....



""The issue with Netscape
was it was being developed to run applications without the need of an
OS. Microsoft wan'ted to force teh issue of using Windows API's so that
Netscape would still need Windows in order to work. Netscape did not
want to do that. From what I remember I paid for Netscape, however it
was available free when you signed up for AOL.""

you are a good 5 years past the issue we are discussing at this point.... this is well before that....

I will continue reading....

[taustin1382]

you just summed up my entire argument in one statement

"The best way to may a point with a product you don't like is to simply
not buy it" .... "But
Windows keeps selling even though it has issues. Why? bec we have
learned to accept teh fact that in some cases it is worth teh headache. "

how can you not buy it.... go buy a laptop that does not have windows on it at a fair price for the hardware.....

MS keeps selling because it is forced though the manufacurers not because we choose it....

[taustin1382]

"But you think Wal-Mart selling stuff so low even at a cost to themselves wasn't ment to push out competition?"



yes but wal-mart does not go and buy all the kmarts, krogers, food cities and then close the stores....

[taustin1382]

"What I hate is ppl pawn
MS as if they can't do anything right. Well they much be doing
something right. They didn't get where they are sitting doing nothing.
I think they get slandered just because of who they are. For what they
provide they ahve a good reason to protect their oney...and yes they
need to do so legally and fairly."
I completely agree but here is the thing... they are not doing so legally and fairly....
they want legal and fair then let me buy a PC from any manufac and not have to buy the OS.... the manufac can provide the same support they do not excluding software support which the software manufac should be providing anyway not the manufac. then lets see how vista sales look and how microsofts profits are effected. after the initial reviews of vista do you honestly think that people would have taken it over Xp if they had a choice? same goes for XP at the time it was released... it was crap compared to the stability of 2K.... point is in that type of situation, a fair situation they would have to release a FINISHED PRODUCT TO SELL IT.... not a half cocked flaming piece they are so well known for doing. in that market people would have a choice and MS would have to earn thier share not buy it!


and dont take this as a MS vs mac or linux thing... im talking xp to vista vista to win7 even 2k to xp. apples to apples....



how would you like it if every truck sold in america came with a 4cyl and if you wanted a v6 or anything else you had to buy the 4cyl then also pay for the v6 or v8 or whatever on top of the cost for the 4cyl but you could not sell the 4cyl nope you just paid for it because you did not have a choice and now it belongs to you even though you are not using it .... does that sound fair?

[JaywalkerExtraordinaire]

{quote}Windows keeps selling even though it has issues. Why?{quote}

Because most people don't realize that they have a choice. Go to most electronics stores and look at computers, and they all nearly all come bundled with Windows. The only real exception is Apple, who produces their own OS as another way to differentiate their hardware from competitors', such as HP and Dell's. Apple, however, does not make any attempt to compete in the budget PC market, something that incidentally contributes to their reputation of being overpriced, despite the competitive prices of Apple Hardware compared to equivalent hardware offerings from other manufacturers. (See here for more info)

Linux would be a viable option for many people if the awareness of Linux was higher among typical users. However, Linux's many strengths are also Linux's weaknesses. First, there is Linux's enviable customization options. If someone wants their operating system to work in a certain way, Linux can be made to work that way. Unfortunately, this also means that there are dozens, if not hundreds of Linux distributions out there. With all the different distributions, a particular task may require different steps to accomplish, depending on the distribution the user has installed. It also can make finding information online more difficult, since the user may not have a particular package installed that may be necessary in order to follow the online instructions.

Professional Linux support is expensive, often costing as much, if not much more than a Windows license. Usually, such support is marketed primarily for enterprise rather than consumers (e.g. Red Hat). Enterprise IT typically understands better than consumers the value of professional support compared to lost revenue from downtime. Ironically, consumers in need of support often find MS's support nearly useless if they have to use it, so the advantage over Linux in this respect is largely imaginary.

So, essentially, people put up with Windows' problems and issues because they don't have any viable alternatives. In other words, Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market.

[TechieXP]

What you said I agree with until teh last paragraph. I think releasing an OS in so many flavors is confusing even for tech savvy people. As you mentioned with Linux, there are so many distros and each if configured so different even when using same kernal. They can however simplify one and make it desktop friendly. Since RedHat is sold at Best Buy and can be downloaded free online you can create your ow option to try it.

I can't however by into people don't know about it. Even navigating online for stuff that isn't tech related you will bump into information on Linux. The choice of teh user being misinform or not informed is they simply aren't interested in finding out. I mean maybe this is sarcastic, but unless you ere born yesterday i can't see it possible to not have even the slightess idea what linux is. Maybe because it is on teh retail market like teh other 2 has something to do with it. But i think many simply don't care.

You analogy would say that since Ford is one of teh big 3 automakers and driving down a local street where auto dealers are lined up, that just because they are always in my face that I won't find out about a smaller company like maybe Smart.

Right here in Chicago if you driver down Cicero or Western Avenues you will pass 100's of car dealers...most will be the big 3 abd here and there you see teh others. Some you don't even see at all like Lexus and Jaquar simply because these car are higher priced and in a big city where 80% are low income they produce no sales. So you find them in teh burbs where incomes are higher. And here you actually see less of teh big 3 and more of anyone else. Its all in teh marketing. If Linux doesn't mrket how you expect to get known? When was teh last time you seen a Linux commercial? Dell and HP both have systems configured with Linux...but i a aware because of pressure from MS they aren't avail on retail. But it doesn't mean you can't get one if you requested it. I think because Linux is really ready for teh retail market yet is a good reason. Once Linux has a stable library of applications like teh others OS's you can bring it out. If you look at linux appz on a few stand out like StarOffice and a few others. One guy who commented on Linux appz listed several...i've used Linux before and I have never heard of them.

If you ask any Windows users a list of appz they just know by heart...they could list at least 25...with Mac it could be close to same. Ask them teh same for linux...you will be lucky to get 2 or so. Linux has been marketed mostly on an IT level and of course these guys will hav supreme knowledge of it. We tried 4 distros here to work with our phone system.

Look how much confusion Vista caused with so many versions. With Windows 9x it was simple. It was a consumer version only. Windows 2000 wasn't confusing bec it was advertised as a Professional software. Ppl ran an bought it bec Windows 9x crashed all the time and ppl at work said their pc virtually never crashed and they wanted teh same thing for at home. they all went out buying it and ran into problems mostly with hardware support. MS rushed to fix teh issue with Windows XP providing Windows 98 support and better hardware support. One of few times we can say as a fact MS listened to its users.

And as you mention price of ownership of Linux makes it a non-viable alternative. However that isn't Microsoft's fault totally. I mean come on. Linux is free. The license allows you to make mods however you like as long as you share them. For so many who don't like Windows and have programming knowledge this is a golden opportunity to make something better. If you make something better and market it well even if it is teh same as another product, it will sell. Look at iPhone. Several phones already do what iphone does...but it sells beca of how it was marketed and how they made a cool elegant product. Other than that feature by feature plenty of phone have same and better features...but some don't look as cool.

Cost is an issue. Macs are to pricey and even with soe that are low cost you trade off not getting something. The Mac Air is beautiful and I can afford $2700. But for that same amount I can get a PC laptop with way more...and i can match it almost for a bit less. And I have teh option to configure teh system the way I want and that is what matters. Apple does not or limits that option. Aren't you tired of living in a world where someone tells you what you can and can't have. Yes MS does it to...but they are way more open.

Drivers were a big issue in my case. One guy said...Linux has several drivers these days. Yes they do. But I am willing to bet I can go to a store right now...and I have a better chance of getting a device that works with Windows 100% and with Linux I have a 50% chance or less. That makes it desktop unfriendly. And some of teh drivers they do have don't support all the features of the hardware. Proof. My motherboard has builtin wireless. I can use it to create my own hotspot so that I can use another computer and get online...without enabling ICS. Linux does not offer me this...and it was only recently I found a driver to make teh card even work.

I also learned how to get Mac OS to run on my PC...same thing but I expected it since it was a HackIntosh...however it did manage to work with one of my NICS...

I never buy into the monopoly argument bec that means total control with no option. AT&T owned all the lines in this country...so there was NO other option. When GOV broke them into smaller Bell's that created options.Even though you may have most of teh control, as long as there is an option its your choice to chance. Fact is will it be a change for better or worse. I don't feel mac offers better...but maybe eqal on a level. Linux would be worse for more then teh few who could use it.

The netbook is an option for ppl to open themselves to try linux. You think ppl aren't failiar with it? They are. Its advertised online fro every outlet that sells them. And it shows it runs Linux. This is why I can't buy the monopoly idea and how ppl don't know about another OS. That may have been try in teh 70's 80's and early 90's. But with teh internet as we have it now...there isn't nothing you can't know about even if you're not looking for it.

I am hoping i am alive to see who dethrones Windows. I am willing to bet y life it won't be Linux and it won't be Apple. But fact is how much better can teh desktop environmrnt be? As far as I am concern all 3 OS's virtually look teh same. They all use a similar GUI on soe level. The appz all do the same thing. Its repeitive...just like with cars. Yes it promotes choice...but where does it end. Like with cars everyone has the sae groups on some level. soe have a better or worse options. Same with OS's...Windows does offer the best option..Xerox could have owned it all. Apple blew it too. MS simply didn't. Oh well...if Apple had done it teh conversion would be teh same except MS would have been where Apple is now. Or however you want to spin it.

Opening an Apple Store was a great idea..now that Macs are sold at large electronic stores that was also good. Imagine if there was a Linux store. MS obviously doesn't need one. Again it marketing. Not like Apple isn't known. Its just ppl needed a reminder that hey we are still here.

Maybe you can be teh first to help Linux market their product so that it gets reconition. Look at the browser wars. Firefox was a nobdy, yet they came out of nowhere and pitted itself against IE. In order to jump that gun you need a serious rival product. Linux isn't it. You ahve to eat away at teh competition first. To attack Windows you need a plan of action that you can't afford to miss no details. The best plan is to eat away at MS smaller appz first and work your way up. And as Apple learned to get ahead the least concern should be Microsoft. They aren't unbeatable, it just nobody has teh business stratgy to do so. One day someone will.

[TechieXP]

in addition...the GOV has learned in dealing with Microsoft what in fact is good and bad business. MS isn't going to contiune to get over. Change is coing and in fact is here. Buying out your competition isn't new and others do it all the time. Sure Microsoft is notorious. But that bullying to get there is a thing of teh pass. Any company will continue to pull string to stay ahead...but they better not get caught. Look at Martha Stewart. You think inside trading has never happened before? You think this is teh first time Govenors bought or sold a seat?

Look at companies that have products in multiple markets like Sony...remember teh days when no matter where you shopped all you saw was expensive Sony stuff? Look now...

Companies have gotten smarter and many know how to battle MS. The only ones that can't are teh ones MS has already placed under their feets. IBM is a company that refused to bend. Look at them now. They refuse to plat MS game and to insure it they totally left the market on that level bec there consumers were more important and they have enough money to replace that product. A smaller company won't be so lucky. But it doesn't mean larger companies can't do it. Yes MS pays them to play..as you see not all can be bought. And that list will get longer and MS hold on the market will get smaller. Its going to take time especially when a single company has 90%. Look at Wal-Mart. Sears last 50+ yrs. Change happens...

Whatever happen i a glad i lived during a time when it was all happen and when i get old and dont care I can look back an remember. Its a story you'll never forget.

[JaywalkerExtraordinaire]

{quote}They can however simplify one and make it desktop friendly.{quote}

Ubuntu is great in that respect. It's not perfect, by any means, but it's no less user friendly than Windows.

{quote}Since RedHat is sold at Best Buy and can be downloaded free online you can create your ow option to try it.{quote}

RedHat's binaries are not freely available. One has to either download the source code, which must be made freely available from RedHat due to the GNU license. The other option is to download CentOS binaries (or source), since it is essentially RedHat without the logos.

{quote}I can't however by into people don't know about it.{quote}

The average user has no clue about Linux's existence. They don't shop online, and often don't even know how to send a file as an email attachment. I've met more than a few people who even have trouble understanding that Firefox and Internet Explorer connect to the same internet. The average user doesn't know what an operating system is, and is unaware that users actually have a choice regarding what operating system to run.

{quote}You analogy would say that since Ford is one of teh big 3 automakers and driving down a local street where auto dealers are lined up, that just because they are always in my face that I won't find out about a smaller company like maybe Smart.{quote}

Okay, let's find out how accurate the analogy is. What is the single most secure operating system available to the public? There is a single correct answer to the question. (Hint: it's not Windows, OS X or GNU/Linux) I wonder how many people actually know the answer to that question, since that particular OS gets very little, if any mention in the mainstream tech press.

{quote}Once Linux has a stable library of applications like teh others OS's you can bring it out. If you look at linux appz on a few stand out like StarOffice and a few others. One guy who commented on Linux appz listed several...i've used Linux before and I have never heard of them. {quote}

Linux has many, many apps available. It is a business standard. It has much better cross platform compatibility than Windows has. If you're not familiar with the vast number of applications available for Linux, perhaps that's because you view computers from a Windows-centric perspective.

{quote}If you ask any Windows users a list of appz they just know by heart...they could list at least 25...with Mac it could be close to same. Ask them teh same for linux...you will be lucky to get 2 or so.{quote}

If you are claiming that the average Windows user and the average Mac user could not name more than two Linux apps, that's probably not far from correct. If you're claiming the average Linux user couldn't name more than two Linux apps, that would be 180 degrees from the truth. They are likely to be able to name more Linux apps than the number of Windows apps the average WIndows user could name or the number of Mac apps that the average Mac user could name.

{quote}And as you mention price of ownership of Linux makes it a non-viable alternative.{quote}

No, I didn't mention that. Nor do I agree with that assertion. Linux is a viable alternative to Windows. It's just not an alternative that average computer users are aware of.

{quote}Look at iPhone. Several phones already do what iphone does...but it sells beca of how it was marketed and how they made a cool elegant product. Other than that feature by feature plenty of phone have same and better features...but some don't look as cool. {quote}

Beyond the cool factor, the iPhone has something else going for it. I agree completely that there are other phones on the market with more features and greater capabilities. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter how many features a gadget has. What matters is how much a user can do with the gadget. Features are meaningless if the user doesn't know how to use them. The iPhone's UI enables users to actually take advantage of most of its features.

{quote}Macs are to pricey{quote}

You get what you pay for. If you configure a Dell or HP or Lenovo, etc. to similar specs, they will cost about the same as a Mac, sometimes more. I bought a MacBook last year that was cheaper than any comparably configured laptop from any major manufacturer. I've never seen a laptop comparable to my MBP for a significantly lower price. It has been my experience that most people who believe that they can buy an equivalent machine for less than Apple charges are unaware of many of the features of the Mac, believing that processor speed, amount of RAM, hard drive capacity and screen size are the only important specs of a computer. Those are just the tip of the iceberg.

{quote}The Mac Air is beautiful and I can afford $2700. But for that same amount I can get a PC laptop with way more...and i can match it almost for a bit less.{quote}

Well, first, a top of the line MacBook Air is only $2499, not $2700. Second, the MBA is not intended to be a full featured machine. It is designed for business travelers who need a lightweight machine with more power than an iPhone, but not so much power as a MacBook or MacBook Pro. Comparable machines tend to be priced very similarly. Obviously, if the weight and form factor are not important, much cheaper, better featured solutions are available from Apple and other manufacturers.

{quote}Aren't you tired of living in a world where someone tells you what you can and can't have. {quote}

I don't live in such a world. I can upgrade the RAM and hard drives in my laptops, just like users of laptops from other manufacturers. If I owned a Mac Pro, I would be able to upgrade the components as I see fit, just like the owners of towers from other manufacturers. People often upgrade Mac minis with faster CPU's, more RAM, larger hard drives, faster wireless cards, etc. Similarly, the all in one iMac can be upgraded in many ways. Granted, the iMac can't be upgraded as extensively as a tower, but neither can other manufacturers' all in one systems.

Macs are incredibly customizable in terms of software, arguably not to the extent of Linux, but no less than Windows. Of course, some of that customization requires use of the command line, and isn't available via the GUI, but that's just a way of keeping things simple for average users, while retaining the power of UNIX? for power geeks.

{quote}I never buy into the monopoly argument bec that means total control with no option. {quote}

Please, tell us, what commercial OS besides Windows is readily and legally available to consumers (for non-Apple hardware)?

{quote}Windows does offer the best option.{quote}

Except for all the other options. There's a reason that real geeks don't use Windows unless they're gaming or getting paid for it.

{quote}Oh well...if Apple had done it teh conversion would be teh same except MS would have been where Apple is now.{quote}

The two companies don't compete, except in the MP3 player market. Apple is primarily a hardware company, while Microsoft is primarily a hardware company. Incidentally, in the MP3 player market, where they do compete, Apple is eating Microsoft's lunch.

{quote}They aren't unbeatable, it just nobody has teh business stratgy to do so.{quote}

Not surprising, since Microsoft doesn't face any commercial competitors in the OS market.

[TechieXP]

I know you saw this post by another commenter.:

cannot believe that I am even going to get into this... but: damn you mac users!

To debunk your bit about the hardware affecting cost or rather " Unless you're another
wannabe geek who thinks CPU speed, RAM, and HDD capacity are the most
important specs necessary to compare hardware" Very simple; if I compare a Dell VS a Dell or even Dell VS HP, there are 4 things that controll the price: these things are 1. CPU 2. RAM 3. HDD Space 4. Video card (to some very small extent the display size - though anymore, that is usually a result of 3 and 4 in the event the system is either raid, or has a nice little 9800m in there). So, YES the above 4 mentioned items are first on my list.... I would never by a machine (mac or otherwise) that had an Intel Pentium Dual Core, or Intel Celeron for example. And there are definate pricing differences as you reach higher end Intel C2D chips.

Also - look into this thing jokinly reffered to as the Apple Tax gizmodo.com/5065133/the-truth-about-the-apple-tax

AS to Mac OSX Vs Windows: I really don't care if you CAN do the things you say you can, can you do it as cheaply, and can you find it locally? I can go to wal-mart and get a copy of office, I can go to wal-mart for the latest games, I can go to Best Buy or even Office Max for the latest copy of Adobe CS all for the PC and never for the Mac. If I want Mac software, I need to prep myself for an all day affair so that I can go to Microcenter for it. Oh yeah, and I don't know about you guys, but I DO like to play games on my machine, even my laptop. and there are MANY games that don't work with a Mac. Don't even try to deny it. Its just like linux, I have to keep Windows floating around, for those games I cannot seem to Wine.

anyhow, I think I am done for now



My take is...mac dont offer teh amount of software, or hardware or options to customize better than a PC. Fact...I can build a PC and buy my own parts and pay less then having them predone on a MAC. Don't believe me..here are my spec's and I want you to build a Mac with all my capabilities or as close as you can without buying any outside hardware:

Intel Pentium Core 2 Quad - Q6600 (4 x 2.4GHz)

ASUS P5K Deluxe/Wifi - The wifi allows me to make my own hotspot with a router or enabling ICS

4GB RAM (677)

Radeon x1650 w/512MB Ram - I have 2 but have right now 1 installed

Dual HDD 320GB setup on RAID 0

CD/DVD Dual Layer Burner

Intergrated Sound supports 7.1 and it has a digital connector.

My screen is a Dell 22" with builtin Camera...that lets me view the house remotely from any pc and it has motion detection allowing it to see left and right without moving..and teh screen was only $325 extra...so with keyboard and joysticks I spent less than $1200...NO MAC WILL COME CLOSE and offer AND OF THE CAPABILITIES...PERIOD. And Macs use teh same hardware yet they cost more? Why...because you're paying for teh fancy case? Well I just bought a fancy case for $250...just because...but I can swap and rebuild at anytime and upgrading to faster will be cheaper then buy a whole new mac. Even now I can buy a MB for the new I7 cpu's and new ram for about...less than $800...still less then buying a new mac. meaning 1.oo per 1.00 i come out better with a PC.

Thats teh cool thing about pc's. If I don't like what OEM's give me I can do it myself. And anyone who can read and match colors can build a pc if they wanted to...even building your own will save you a couple hundred vs an OEM...

With macs you alewats have to sacrifice something...screen size, ram amount...hdd space...lower resolutions...less usb ports...may no PCIe slot and maybe not even haveing a builtin CD rom. So when OSx crashes and I need to reinstall how do I with a CD? Oh i have to carry one. Damn...isn't carrying teh laptop enough? And The Air is suppose to be a business mans latop? So how can he watch a movie on a plane if he has a dvd? Damn....

I love macs they are elegant...but they are a porsche. not practical, cost to much to own...and simply offers nothing worth switching for. It overs an alternative if you're just tired of Windows. But unless you are a mac exclusive users...even dual booters use Windows 70% of teh time...which means switching offered no benefit other than saying...look what I can do with my mac. PC's have been dual booting since about Windows 98...welcome aboard. As said...if you can't beat them JOIN THEM>. Welcome to out Intel world where everything is better.

You can look up teh board an see how many eSATA I have...how many more SATA drives I can have...how many processor upgrades I can do before this board becomes obsolete...My board supports even teh latest 775 sockets cpu's. Which means I can up for at least 5 or more speed ranges...and there are at least 3 speed ranges with my present cpu type...I have dual PCIe and it supports 2.0 natively with no BIOS update...need I go on. Price to get it all...less than $1000...in fact i paid just over $900 and I have a system that will allow me to run Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 and the next Windows before I need to upgrade seeing as my board supports 8GB of ram and 64bit processing...and I can overclock any chipset. Try that on any mac.I can overclock right now to close to 4Ghz right now...jetting past any Mac including the Quadcore Zeons 2.8 and I see some macs have. And why would a home user need Zeon's anyway?

[TechieXP]

Awww come on can't you do better? Why should Wal-Mart spend money to buy them, when they can simply force them in to bankrupcy or make them close...meaning they will get teh customers anyway. However in teh typical retail market you do have lots of choices...but look Circuit City is totally closing where do you think they will go now? Best Buy and Wl-Mart becasue there are no better options.

Just like even with these OS's...no matter how much you use them you still go back to Windows...i don't care if it is for gaming. Windows isn't going to just disappear even after Bill dies. However is Ballmer doesn't grow a brain and make good decisions that will be the death of MS. But I have enough drivers and software that I'll never have to switch...EVER!

[JaywalkerExtraordinaire]

{quote}1. CPU 2. RAM 3. HDD Space 4. Video card{quote}

I agree that information about the CPU is important. However, CPU clock speed is but one of many important statistics about a CPU, and not even the most important one. What is the FSB speed? How much cache? What is the architecture type? What is the die size? What is the energy usage at full load?

RAM is also important, but again, just knowing the amount of RAM doesn't offer enough information.

HDD space is not terribly important, since hard drive upgrades are pretty cheap and easy user upgrades.

Video card importance depends on the platform and intended use. For gamers, it is a major consideration. It was also a consideration for me with my last laptop purchase, since OS X 10.6 is supposed to implement OpenCL, which will essentially allow Macs to utilize the GPU as an additional processor when not busy with graphics related tasks. Otherwise, my only real concern would be whether or not it can handle HD video without dropping frames.

Another major consideration is networking capability. Lack of gigabit ethernet is a deal breaker for me on any computer. Why would I want a computer that I can't use to communicate with the network at a reasonable speed? Likewise, 802.11n and IEEE 1394 are critical features.

I often laugh when people try to compare laptop screen sizes. Screen size isn't important. Resolution is important. Given identical resolution, smaller screens are better than larger ones.

{quote}AS to Mac OSX Vs Windows: I really don't care if you CAN do the things you say you can, can you do it as cheaply, and can you find it locally?{quote}

As inexpensively? Usually I can find software for the same or lower price on Mac than on Windows. For example, iWork versus Office. (Excel is superior to Numbers, Word is more powerful, but far less user friendly than Pages, and Keynote is superior to Powerpoint) I paid $39 for my license. I could have had a five seat license for $99. I paid $69 for my last upgrade, from Tiger to Leopard (compare to Vista Ultimate). I can buy VMware Fusion for $39. There is a huge amount of quality freeware available on the Mac, as well as some excellent shareware that has no Windows equivalent (Scrivener comes to mind as an example).

As far as locally available, the only time I leave home to buy software is when I buy from the campus store.

{quote}in fact i paid just over $900 and I have a system that will allow me to run Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 and the next Windows before I need to upgrade seeing as my board supports 8GB of ram and 64bit processing...and I can overclock any chipset.{quote}

Why should you need to upgrade anything more than (maybe) RAM in order to run three consecutive major releases of an operating system (starting with the latest one at time of purchase)? I think most Mac owners I know would be pretty mad if they had to upgrade their hardware just because Apple released a new OS.

{quote}So when OSx crashes and I need to reinstall how do I with a CD?{quote}

I've honestly never known anyone to which that has happened, except in the case of a hard drive failure, making a reinstall pointless without a new HDD. Why should I ever need to reinstall an operating system without a hard drive failure? It's pretty easy to get right the first time.

{quote}I love macs they are elegant...but they are a porsche. not practical, cost to much to own...and simply offers nothing worth switching for.{quote}

Hmmm ? my last Mac cost me $10 per month, for 15 months, in total. The only other computer I've owned with similarly low total cost of ownership was also a Mac. And my productivity on my computer has gone up significantly since switching from XP, after using Windows since v.3.1. There was a 2-3 month period during which I had some occasional problems with the transition, but nearly invariably, the problem was caused by me trying to make a task much harder than it was; I was trying to turn two step tasks into ten step tasks, because they were complicated in Windows.

If there's nothing worth switching for, how come I've never encountered a real geek (i.e. someone intimately familiar with multiple versions of at least two operating system platforms at a bare minimum) that uses Windows on their primary personal machines. Not once. They use Linux and OS X in about equal proportions. Everyone Windows evangelist I know only knows Windows. Every single one. If the only tool someone has is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.

{quote}I DO like to play games on my machine, even my laptop. and there are MANY games that don't work with a Mac.{quote}

For gaming, Windows is currently the very best platform, at least without considering consoles. Macs are improving in that regard, albeit slowly. I could play any games I wanted with my MacBook pro under Windows, but there's nothing I've seen that really justifies a Windows installation. As OpenGL and OpenCL gain industry wide popularity, and as Apple continues to offer decent gaming cards in Macs, that will change. Microsoft betting so large on DX10 and Vista has actually helped that some.

{quote}PC's have been dual booting since about Windows 98...welcome aboard.{quote}

Macs have been dual booting for many years, not just with the Intel Macs. The Intel Macs aren't even the first Macs capable of booting Windows.

{quote}And why would a home user need Zeon's anyway?{quote}

Some people use their computers to do real, processor intensive work. Personally, I don't need eight Xeon cores (two serve me well), nor do I need 32 GB of RAM, but for those that need that power, Apple has them covered. Of course many people don't understand the need for a 4+ Gbit/s home network backbone, while I wonder how they get by on their home networks with anything less. Different people have different needs and different expectations from their equipment.

[Integr8d]

I know! And to think that Microsoft will have the nerve to charge for Windows 7, when it should be sent out for free with an included apology letter for Windows MeII Service Pack 4... I mean Vista.

[brucewduvelow]

Are you kidding??
This is a professor that is talking like he is from Romper Room.Hey buddy,I suggest you not give up your day job.Better yet maybe you should because you had nothing important to say about these differences."Pail" "a beautiful Burmuda island?? I can see that maybe you can explain it that way to a preschooler,but not even to a middle schooler.I have had Vista for a year and a half.Maybe for those of you whom are having a problem Vista...lies in you.Meaning alot of you people think just because you have a computer makes you a "professor" Try to actually have some heavy duty Ram.Maybe a video card at least 1 gig!! And one of those wonderful duo core processors.
It's no wonder why it took until Monday for some one to comment at this MUMBO-JUMBO...Blah,Blah,Blah from MR."Professor" Shapiro.