[WinTard]

I would think so.

[rasmasyean]

Just to dispel a myth that Windows is inherently more unreliable than other OS's (read Linux) in and of itself...

Here's a snippet on "industrial PC's". These are the computers that control anything from automation that can toss engine blocks across the room to reactors that can explode and make square kilometers uninhabitable.

"Some suppliers said that Windows 2000 and XP are the easiest to work with in terms of installing and developing applications, as these are stable despite their poor environmental adaptability. Meanwhile, Linux is not stable enough, but has better in environmental adaptability. Windows XP Embedded is hard to install, but it has better environmental adaptability."
www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Industrial-panel-PC/a/9000000101154.htm
And take a look that this job listing for making autonomous vehicles for war. If Linux is that much more reliable, why would they risk Windows computers going berserk and shooting missile in random directions or whatever? That would be funny to watch though! haha
[http://g-nius.co.il/info-pages/careers.html]

[yankeeDDL]

TechieXP, I also rarely experience the BSOD.

What bothers me using Wndows is that after it's been on for one day of heavy use, it gets sluggish.Maybe it takes 2 days, maybe 3. Doesn't really matter: the point is that my experience with a PC changes as time goes by. Is like if you buy a Mercedes and you drive it and find yourself driving a small GM instead ... till you stop and restart again.

And you're absolutely right: we got used to this and we think it's part of the "experience" of using a PC. Well, I tell you again, it doesn't have to be this way. You have a choice. You can choose a Mercedes that always run as a Mercedes, no matter how many software you have on at the same times or how long the engine has been running.

An delieve me, you do not need a college degree to run Linux. Distros like Ubuntu are aimed to the public and require very basic computer knowledge, I'd say definitely comparable to what you need to run Windows. Linux can be totally customizable: go to "gnome-look.org" and find tons of (free) customization that will make your Linux PC look and feel just like Vista, or XP, or Mac OX ... or anywhere in between or beyond. You can have docking bars, "Aero-style" applets, transparencies ... or no effect at all if you prefer all the resources to be dedicated to performance. And you can switch between these environments ... in a moment. Without reboot.

I don;t know what applications you use: you talk about $100K of SW in one partition ... I suppose you have very specific tools. So maybe Linux is not for you. But for everybody, you have Firefox, just like in Windows, for your broowsing. You have OpenOffice for your documents (compatible with the latest Office 2007 proprietary format ... and also with all the open standard formats). You can use OpenOffice on Windows too. I do. It's faster than MS Office and free and does much more than I need it to do for me. And Thunderbird, Skype, Pidgin, Google desktop, VLC mediaplayer, VPN software, VNC software, Zip/Rar, Gimp image viewer, video editing that's really all I use the PC for and the same software is available in Linux and window. There's no learning curve. And with a little bit ofbrowsing in the hundreds of pre-supported apps you can find many little smart applications that will make your PC experience much more pleasant. For example: I follow the stock market and on Windows I need to go on Yahoo's webpage or start one of the broker's Java applets. They work, but they're resourceand bandwidth hogs. Linux has a free tool that allows you to set a list of stocks you want to monitor andyou can decidethe refresh rate. It's onobtrusive, extremely lightweigth and gives me exactly what I need. I find educational software for my kids, some videogames for me, some powerful tools to customize the special keys on my keyboard ... Every time I find myself thinking "would be cool if I could get this done this way" I always find out that somebody else had thought of that already and the application, or the method, is there for me to use. Anyway. I have been using Linux for 6 months now, after a life of Windows and I do wish I had looked at it sooner. Much sooner. I can only suggest you do the same. It costs 0 - zero - niet - nothing. You can only gain from trying it out.

[rasmasyean]

From what you describe, one of the potential common causes of your "sluggishness" is what is known as "memory leak". It means that available memory is "leaking away"...but what actually happens is that a program is taking up more and more memory without letting it go even when it's exited, thus "filling up" your used memory.
It's relatively common especially among freeware/shareware I imagine as they are often made by amateurs or people who don't get enough money from it to find it worth it to optimize. Not to say that it can't happen in Adobe or something as even pros are still human, but at least they have million dollar staffs looking out for it. In "older" languages like C / C sometimes it's not so hard for a programmer to make these accidents. In the .NET environment (Microsoft's programming languages), they try to solve the problem by this thing they call "garbage collection". Anyway, the point of that technical offshoot is that perhaps this is one thing that helps with the Win Server / .NET adoption as it makes it more "forgiving" and hence stable enough for critical applications. So it can depend on the quality of the software you run. And Windows isn't always a "straightforward" environment to work in because it has a lot of parts to it (in contrast to Linux, which relatively didn't really change much since it's incepttion). So programmers can overlook a lot of things.

[asiafish]

yankeeDDL said:

TechieXP, I also rarely experience the BSOD.


What bothers me using Wndows is that after it's been on for one day of heavy use, it gets sluggish.Maybe it takes 2 days, maybe 3. Doesn't really matter: the point is that my experience with a PC changes as time goes by. Is like if you buy a Mercedes and you drive it and find yourself driving a small GM instead ... till you stop and restart again.


And you're absolutely right: we got used to this and we think it's part of the "experience" of using a PC. Well, I tell you again, it doesn't have to be this way. You have a choice. You can choose a Mercedes that always run as a Mercedes, no matter how many software you have on at the same times or how long the engine has been running.


An delieve me, you do not need a college degree to run Linux. Distros like Ubuntu are aimed to the public and require very basic computer knowledge, I'd say definitely comparable to what you need to run Windows. Linux can be totally customizable: go to "gnome-look.org" and find tons of (free) customization that will make your Linux PC look and feel just like Vista, or XP, or Mac OX ... or anywhere in between or beyond. You can have docking bars, "Aero-style" applets, transparencies ... or no effect at all if you prefer all the resources to be dedicated to performance. And you can switch between these environments ... in a moment. Without reboot.


I don;t know what applications you use: you talk about $100K of SW in one partition ... I suppose you have very specific tools. So maybe Linux is not for you. But for everybody, you have Firefox, just like in Windows, for your broowsing. You have OpenOffice for your documents (compatible with the latest Office 2007 proprietary format ... and also with all the open standard formats). You can use OpenOffice on Windows too. I do. It's faster than MS Office and free and does much more than I need it to do for me. And Thunderbird, Skype, Pidgin, Google desktop, VLC mediaplayer, VPN software, VNC software, Zip/Rar, Gimp image viewer, video editing that's really all I use the PC for and the same software is available in Linux and window. There's no learning curve. And with a little bit ofbrowsing in the hundreds of pre-supported apps you can find many little smart applications that will make your PC experience much more pleasant. For example: I follow the stock market and on Windows I need to go on Yahoo's webpage or start one of the broker's Java applets. They work, but they're resourceand bandwidth hogs. Linux has a free tool that allows you to set a list of stocks you want to monitor andyou can decidethe refresh rate. It's onobtrusive, extremely lightweigth and gives me exactly what I need. I find educational software for my kids, some videogames for me, some powerful tools to customize the special keys on my keyboard ... Every time I find myself thinking "would be cool if I could get this done this way" I always find out that somebody else had thought of that already and the application, or the method, is there for me to use. Anyway. I have been using Linux for 6 months now, after a life of Windows and I do wish I had looked at it sooner. Much sooner. I can only suggest you do the same. It costs 0 - zero - niet - nothing. You can only gain from trying it out.

Like most Linux fans, you claim compatibility. OpenOffice and the like are compatible with basic documents, but complex formatting will break. I work with specialized documents called legal pleadings. Every lawyer, court clerk, judge and paralegal deals with these on a regular basis, and the fact is, you cannot open one in anything other than the application that created without losing formatting, and thus time. OpenOffice is no more an option for opening Word pleadings that Word is for opening WordPerfect pleadings.

There are dozens of other instances where Linux just doesn't cut it for regular use. Photoshop? Nope, won't run, and no, the GIMP is not a replacement. How about watching a commercial DVD movie you rent before your flight? It won't play unless you hunt down CSS decryption and codecs. Want to play games? Sorry, unless it is one of the few that runs in WINE, you are out of luck again.

Linux is still a geek toy.

[rasmasyean]

One thing about using Linux is that you have to go out an search a lot of freeware, hence find out that there are "so many Linux freeware" out there. But little would you know, there are those exact ones or equivalent for Windows and then some...that are free. As for compatibility, would you think the Linux freeware is more compatible with Windows formats than Windows freeware? That's some logic, eh?
Just a note too. Software is not always "free" just because you can make it and give it out. The reason why you can't play that DVD is because of licensing blocking that from being officially included. If you download something to make it work, that could actually be a copyright violation. Not that I give a crap myself as I would have done it too...but just a pointer that developers pay fees to include these things in their products...so you don't have to hunt it down and illegally install it. There may even be things in GIMP like font's, etc. that you can "download for free" that violates Adobe's rights as well.

[asiafish]

My point is that Linux is not a replacement for Mac or Windows, both of which allow you to run genuine MS Office, genuine Adobe, etc., etc. There are other programs that are Windows only and if you need one of those then even a Mac won't do.

I'm just tired of all of the Linux geeks who shout "Linux, Linux, Linux" as the answer to everyone when clearly it is not. Simply put, if you need to work with complex documents and share them with others, you need to use the same application they were created in. Period. That means Windows or Macintosh.

[yankeeDDL]

Asiafish,

sorry but you only confirm what I say. You have "complex" documents that can be opene donly with the software that created them. And that's a good thing? Openoffice supports standard formats. If you created the documents in Openoffice you wouldn't have any problem opening them.

And yes, fact remains, complex documents created with Word cannot be opened in Openoffice without losing formatting. That's fine: this means one of th efollowing: if you mostly use documents that absolutely require MS Word to be used, then you do need Window - this only confirms to me that Microsoft uses its monopoly to lock people in.

Or, if you only seldom handle these types of documents, then you could still use Openoffice and then install MS Office through Wine or in a Virtual machine.

Photoshop: yes, you're correct. Same goes to AutoCAD. But how many people do need Photoshop? Anybody, other than imaging professional can use Gimp instead of Photoshop. There's nothing in Photoshop that anyone other than graphic designers need to use, which you won't find in GIMP. Nothing.

Then you talk Games ... can't say you're wrong here, but Cedega for Linux supports practically all latest WINDOWS games with a minor performance hit (do that in Windows ...). Considering the market share of Windows vs Linux, it's no surprise that games are designed for Windows only. But if people start taking their head out of the box and see how powerfuil and pleasant the Linux experience is, things will surely change. What I really cannot understand is how is it possible that so many people, even experienced computer users, are "free" advocate of Windows (meaning, they "advertise" and "defend" Windows for free) while they need to pay dearly to use i, when there's a free and at least equally powerful OS out there. It's really beyond me. TechieXP says that he runs Windows without antivirus by being "careful. This means restricting internet browsing (I did catch a virus by clicking ona google link that took me to a site for music lyrics ... and I did have an antivirus .. which crashed when the website came up),this means not installing freeware, shareware and many non-mainstream applications. How can you possibly consider a good OS, one that poses so many restrictions and limitations in order to run smoothly?It's a PC: shouldn't I be free to install what I thing may be useful to me? Or what I'm curious to try out? All without worrying of making my PC experience a nightmare? Isn't this abare minimum requirement for a modern OS?

[yankeeDDL]

I've used Windows for 20+ years. Linux for 6 months. I certainly don;t consider myself a LInux geek. Nor a Linux expert. I know an awful lot more about Windows than Linux. I used practically every single Windows version, including the infamous Windows ME.

And I did so using a large variety of hardware, from an old 386 running MS Dos 5.0, till a core 2 Duo with windows XP. Then I tried Linux. I'm still learning how to use it properly, but it's fascinating what you can do with it. It is "THE" exception to "You get what you pay for" rule.

Now, to you I'm Mr nobody. Have a look at this article: http://www.computerw...ticleId=9131558

Here there is an acclaimed windows' guru trying out a Mac. It's a long article, but I suggest you read it. I just extract 2 lines in the "final verdict": <<Overall, though, Mac OS X beats Windows. There, I've said it. And lightning hasn't struck me yet.>>

[rasmasyean]

There are numerous articles on how Windows is sloppy...Windows is bloated...Windows is like a Rube Goldberg cartoon of a computer...whatever. Heck, there are numerous special cases where people have used other OS's because these Windows flaws can be done without. But to deny that amidst all these flaws, there exists a system that...for an overwhelming number of situations, works better than any other OS in the environment we live in (a.k.a. Earth), you are just being delusional.
The reason why it's viewed as "flawed" in these aspects is that it is prolly true that MS programmers cobble up some things together and then try to fix it later. But in doing so...they meet the market demand first...without having to wait for the "Open Source Community" to have some grand conference on how X method is better for the world because of some stupid elegant computer science principle. Or that we have to unite to world and anything future home appliance manufacturers make must be capable of operation from every single browser that will ever be created.
Most people say "who gives a crap about bogus like this". People with competence can afford to pay extra for something that fits the situation. They also recognize that if you have to jump through a dozen hoops and change your methods and delay this and that...in the end, you will lose. But heck...if you got it for "free" instead you didn't actually lose anything right? Yeah, sure...

[TechieXP]

Proprietory formats are not a monopoly. How come its on such if Microsoft uses it? What about PDF. Microsoft has been trying to get Adobe to allow it to license PDF so that WIndows can open those docs natively. Still hasn't happen. Its know different then any other invention. Its yours you do what it takes to protect it. Documents created by Word can be opened by OpenOffice...The different is teh special tool and formatting MSFT has crated themselves. If you just allow any one to have it, how do you make money? DUH! How about you make teh most awesome fuel for teh whole world and just give it away. See how much money you make.

As was said about Linux...There is no way Linux can compete with Windows no matter how free it is. Free software CAN'T do what commercial software does. EVER! Sure you can find plenty that will cover basic needs...but what about Enterprise users who need the full deal. That means Linux is not an option only Windows and OSX is. There is a reason why it is free. There is no way possible free can provide better in all instances. The only reason Firefox and all the other browsers are free because IE is. If MSFT was selling IE so would they. This is one of those cases where free can get you some thing that can be a bit more benefiticial. In order for software to perform specific tasks that measn someone got paid big money to do so. How you expect a company to stay in business giving stuff away.

Look where Xerox is now, and where they probably could have been if the higher ups knew what they had when their own scientist created the graphical user interface. If they knew then what they know now, niether Microsoft or Apple would have it.

Microsoft doesn't make you use thier software. if you can find something better go use it. However on a buisness level, whether you want to or not...in order to stay compatible with everyone else...you have to have it. Microsoft didn't push any of its software on anyone...what they did do was create standards with what they had that was better than anyone else. It could ahve been anyone....it just happen to be them.

Monopoly means total ownership. Microsoft is not teh only company that makes an OS, or an Office suite...or any other programs they ake...and they certainly don't make all the best software. The ones they do make have been accepted as a standard. Just like ISO9660 is a standard...just like UL sets standards...Standards ensure that everyone can be on an equal playing field. Imagine is developers just simply make what they want...example Linux. No control, no guidance, no thought...they just do. Its a community of kaos.

[TechieXP]

As far as Internet browsing and your commit about what I said. I use the internet most to blog here, search for software or hardware, do y banking and to keep up on readings about several companies including the ones we talk about here. I don't visit porn sites and if I visit a torrent site I a very careful of what I may grab. I don't like community web sites like Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and similar because teh content to me is just garbage. But I am not against it for anyone else who is consumed by it.

If you keep garbage out, garbage won't get in. I make it a rule to download software from trusted sites. If I decide to break that rule...i make sure I eother do it from another location or I boot into a safe drive where I do have anti-virus running and I disconnect my other drives. I try to avoid pirated software...but I am not going to lie and say I've never had any.

I'm not into downloading music very often...I usually created my own collection by swapping with friends. If I want to see a movie, I either get it from NetFlix or I borrow it from a friend or wait for cable. Bootleg is BS..and I just heard on teh news a couple got busted recording the Miley Cyrus movie and the feds went to their house and found over 40,000 bootleg movies. At 5 bucks a piece that is a nice income. But now they are going to jail.

Using a computer and Internet is just common since. Its just like being outside. Sure no matter how careful you are you can still be a victim of circumstance...but teh idea is too prevent as much as you can. Like a Mac user I don't worry about viruses either. I recently bought new drives and set my system up on a RAID configuration and install Vista Ultimate x64 and at present I haven't install any antivirus. And I don't plan too.

If a person knows they like to visit questionable locations and they know they can't identify what is a span email from Ebay or PayPal then they need all the protection they can get.

On my system I locked down every single port using Windows Firewall and so far so good.

[techie4fun]

And how is any of what you just said compared to Mac vs Windows Laptops?



;)

[asiafish]

yankeeDDL said:

Asiafish,


sorry but you only confirm what I say. You have "complex" documents that can be opene donly with the software that created them. And that's a good thing? Openoffice supports standard formats. If you created the documents in Openoffice you wouldn't have any problem opening them.

Its not that simple and simply not possible. If I created the documents in OpenOffice then I could not exchange them. Most Federal courts require electronic filing, at least in my circuit, and that electronic filing must be in Word or PDF. Furthermore, when lawyers collaborate we send the pleading back and forth, and since everyong with a very few exceptions uses Word, those pleadings must be in Word. Those "very few exceptions" are the old timers who still use WordPerfect, and to work with them you must also have WordPerfect Finally, when you file something with the court occasionally the clerk will help you edit it, and the clerk's office will use Word (about 98% of courts) or WordPerfect (again the few old timers).

Using OpenOffice means that you can only work within your own firm, cannot open and edit the work of others and nobody else can open or edit your work.

Quote

And yes, fact remains, complex documents created with Word cannot be opened in Openoffice without losing formatting. That's fine: this means one of th efollowing: if you mostly use documents that absolutely require MS Word to be used, then you do need Window - this only confirms to me that Microsoft uses its monopoly to lock people in.

You don't need Windows, you need genuine MS Word. I use a Mac and have no issues.

Quote

Or, if you only seldom handle these types of documents, then you could still use Openoffice and then install MS Office through Wine or in a Virtual machine.

>
Again WINE is a no go as it only supports older versions, while Word 2007 (Windows) and Word 2008 (Mac) will open legal pleadings all the way back to Word 97 without issue. Office 97 or 2000, however, cannot open a legal pleading created in Word 2007 without again breaking the formatting.

Using a virtual machine is my solution for WordPerfect, which need at most once or twice per quarter. For Word, however, which I need every single day, a virtual machine is clumsy. Why run Word for Windows on a virtual machine on Linux when I can just run Windows or OS X and be done with it?

Linux is a geek toy. Getting even that older version of Word for Windows to work in WINE is definitely not straightforward.

Quote

Photoshop: yes, you're correct. Same goes to AutoCAD. But how many people do need Photoshop? Anybody, other than imaging professional can use Gimp instead of Photoshop. There's nothing in Photoshop that anyone other than graphic designers need to use, which you won't find in GIMP. Nothing.

No, anybody cannot use GIMP instead. GIMP is much more difficult to use than PhotoShop and even harder still compared to PhotoShop Elements.

Quote

Then you talk Games ... can't say you're wrong here, but Cedega for Linux supports practically all latest WINDOWS games with a minor performance hit (do that in Windows ...). Considering the market share of Windows vs Linux, it's no surprise that games are designed for Windows only. But if people start taking their head out of the box and see how powerfuil and pleasant the Linux experience is, things will surely change. What I really cannot understand is how is it possible that so many people, even experienced computer users, are "free" advocate of Windows (meaning, they "advertise" and "defend" Windows for free) while they need to pay dearly to use i, when there's a free and at least equally powerful OS out there. It's really beyond me. TechieXP says that he runs Windows without antivirus by being "careful. This means restricting internet browsing (I did catch a virus by clicking ona google link that took me to a site for music lyrics ... and I did have an antivirus .. which crashed when the website came up),this means not installing freeware, shareware and many non-mainstream applications. How can you possibly consider a good OS, one that poses so many restrictions and limitations in order to run smoothly?It's a PC: shouldn't I be free to install what I thing may be useful to me? Or what I'm curious to try out? All without worrying of making my PC experience a nightmare? Isn't this abare minimum requirement for a modern OS?

Really? I am playing three games right now, Mass Effect, Fallout3 and The Witcher. None of them are supported by Cedega.

The only malware in the wild for OS X are trojans bundled into "warez" that nobody should be running on any platform due to it being illegal.

I stand by my statement. Linux is great for geeks, but lousy when you deal in complex documents that must be shared outside of your office. I used the legal profession as an example, but I am sure that there are many other fields with the same collaboration issues. Like it or not, monopoly or not, Word is the standard for EDITABLE electronic documents and PDF is the standard for electronic forms or submission of final version electronic documents. OpenOffice is not the standard in any industry, and won't become the standard anytime soon.

In the mean time, if I were to use OpenOffice as a lawyer, it would means spending an extra 10 or 15 minutes reformatting every document that I import from word, every time I import it. I typically open legal pleadings from outside my office at least 10 or 20 times per week, which translates to between 2 1/3 hours to 4 2/3 hours of my time ever week. My time is billed at $300 hours, and I doubt many clients are willing to pay that (and I'm not willing to absorb that) just so that I can open pleadings in OpenOffice. That doesn't even consider the time of those others who open my pleadings. If those pleadings were created in OpenOfice, others would need to spend the same 10 to 15 minutes each and every time reformatting my pleadings. Thats EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE for supposedly free software.

[TechieXP]

]:) LOL...
I was answering the comment.;)

[asiafish]

yankeeDDL said:

I've used Windows for 20+ years. Linux for 6 months. I certainly don;t consider myself a LInux geek. Nor a Linux expert. I know an awful lot more about Windows than Linux. I used practically every single Windows version, including the infamous Windows ME.


And I did so using a large variety of hardware, from an old 386 running MS Dos 5.0, till a core 2 Duo with windows XP. Then I tried Linux. I'm still learning how to use it properly, but it's fascinating what you can do with it. It is "THE" exception to "You get what you pay for" rule.


Now, to you I'm Mr nobody. Have a look at this article: http://www.computerw...ticleId=9131558


Here there is an acclaimed windows' guru trying out a Mac. It's a long article, but I suggest you read it. I just extract 2 lines in the "final verdict": <<Overall, though, Mac OS X beats Windows. There, I've said it. And lightning hasn't struck me yet.>>

OS X is not Linux. OS X doesn't have most of the compatibility issues that Linux does, at least not in terms of document formats. I use PhotoShop and Word, and it makes no difference whether I do so on OS X or Windows, but Linux cannot run a recent-enough version of either application natively.

[asiafish]

rasmasyean said:

There are numerous articles on how Windows is sloppy...Windows is bloated...Windows is like a Rube Goldberg cartoon of a computer...whatever. Heck, there are numerous special cases where people have used other OS's because these Windows flaws can be done without. But to deny that amidst all these flaws, there exists a system that...for an overwhelming number of situations, works better than any other OS in the environment we live in (a.k.a. Earth), you are just being delusional.

The reason why it's viewed as "flawed" in these aspects is that it is prolly true that MS programmers cobble up some things together and then try to fix it later. But in doing so...they meet the market demand first...without having to wait for the "Open Source Community" to have some grand conference on how X method is better for the world because of some stupid elegant computer science principle. Or that we have to unite to world and anything future home appliance manufacturers make must be capable of operation from every single browser that will ever be created.

Most people say "who gives a crap about bogus like this". People with competence can afford to pay extra for something that fits the situation. They also recognize that if you have to jump through a dozen hoops and change your methods and delay this and that...in the end, you will lose. But heck...if you got it for "free" instead you didn't actually lose anything right? Yeah, sure...

I use OS X. No hoops required.

[asiafish]

TechieXP said:

Proprietory formats are not a monopoly. How come its on such if Microsoft uses it? What about PDF. Microsoft has been trying to get Adobe to allow it to license PDF so that WIndows can open those docs natively. Still hasn't happen. Its know different then any other invention. Its yours you do what it takes to protect it. Documents created by Word can be opened by OpenOffice...The different is teh special tool and formatting MSFT has crated themselves. If you just allow any one to have it, how do you make money? DUH! How about you make teh most awesome fuel for teh whole world and just give it away. See how much money you make.

Word most definitely is a proprietary format and Microsoft does have a monopoly on it. Nothing I can do about it. If I want to work with others who use Word, I need to use Word. If I added in the overheard of using OpenOffice or the like I would quickly be out of business as that is not an expense that clients would be willing to pay.

Quote

As was said about Linux...There is no way Linux can compete with Windows no matter how free it is. Free software CAN'T do what commercial software does. EVER! Sure you can find plenty that will cover basic needs...but what about Enterprise users who need the full deal. That means Linux is not an option only Windows and OSX is. There is a reason why it is free. There is no way possible free can provide better in all instances. The only reason Firefox and all the other browsers are free because IE is. If MSFT was selling IE so would they. This is one of those cases where free can get you some thing that can be a bit more benefiticial. In order for software to perform specific tasks that measn someone got paid big money to do so. How you expect a company to stay in business giving stuff away.

Look where Xerox is now, and where they probably could have been if the higher ups knew what they had when their own scientist created the graphical user interface. If they knew then what they know now, niether Microsoft or Apple would have it.

Microsoft doesn't make you use thier software. if you can find something better go use it. However on a buisness level, whether you want to or not...in order to stay compatible with everyone else...you have to have it. Microsoft didn't push any of its software on anyone...what they did do was create standards with what they had that was better than anyone else. It could ahve been anyone....it just happen to be them.

I did, its called OS X.

Quote

Monopoly means total ownership. Microsoft is not teh only company that makes an OS, or an Office suite...or any other programs they ake...and they certainly don't make all the best software. The ones they do make have been accepted as a standard. Just like ISO9660 is a standard...just like UL sets standards...Standards ensure that everyone can be on an equal playing field. Imagine is developers just simply make what they want...example Linux. No control, no guidance, no thought...they just do. Its a community of kaos.

.doc and .docx are standards, but they definitely are proprietary. If they were open then OpenOffice and the like would have no problems with complex formatting and there would be no obstacle in using OpenOffice instead of MS Office other than user preference. OpenOffice is also available for Windows and OS X, but for the exact same reasons as on Linux, it is unusable in my profession.

[techie4fun]

OFF TOPIC:

True! Applaus for planet earth.

[yankeeDDL]

TechieXP,

prorietary is not monopoly. Never said otherwise.

Microsoft is monopoly with ~95% market share on OS.

There's nothing wrong with Microsoft trying to use it's position to write software in a way that forces you to keep using it. Yes, it's a way to make money and if I was Microsoft I would do the same.

What I find odd is that people like you are willing to put up with it. Are willing to be locked into using expensive software provided only by one company when free alternatives do exist. Microsoft decided to change MS Office interface in 2007. You don't get to choose. It's what MS decides. The file format was changed (yet again) in 2007. You don;t get to choose. Microsoft has a clause in theyr EULA that forbids you from complaining about it. Again, you don't get to choose.

If you're fine with it, the use it. I'm just telling you, that if you want to blog, or write normal documents, spreadsheets, then you can do it using free software, yet I really don't see any support to this statement. In my experience, the vast majority of home users can do absolutely everything they need with Linux. yes, there arre exceptions, but that's what they are. Exceptions.

You don;t need to look for porn to get a virus. I got one looking for the lyrics of a song. And again, "average Joe" won;t be so savvy to stay out of trouble. You cannot conceive widespread Windows use without buying antiviruses. Again, in my view, buying an OS that requires you to buy other software in order to safely operate it, is nonsense. At the very least, it should be criticized.

Personally, I pity miself for spending so much money on Windows and Office in the past 20 years now that I know that we had a free choice. I did not know about that. I did not think that Linux could be just as easy as Windows and that free office suits like Openoffice would be just as practical as MS Office. Not to mention that I can do all this on my 8 years old laptop which struggles to start up on Windows XP.

Linux gives you a choice. You're free not to make it if so pleases you. You should be glad that you have a choice, while for some reason you seem to try really hard to prove that you don't have a choice and that only Microsoft Window can give you what you need. Well, if that's the case, I'd be concerned if I were you: "single source" is never a good thing, no matter what you look at.