Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:10:16 -0600 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, <chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Feeding the Troll (Was: freebsd as a desktop ?) Message-ID: <15370.57096.970547.872077@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <015e01c17b99$cf382320$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <15370.33251.168127.204747@guru.mired.org> <010701c17b7f$8fa060c0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <15370.45357.556794.821789@guru.mired.org> <015101c17b85$93b2a5f0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <15370.52421.519402.395812@guru.mired.org> <015e01c17b99$cf382320$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> types: > Mike writes: > > The difference between us is that I lay the > > blame on MS, not the vendors of the junk. > There is nothing unique about Microsoft that would make it more responsible than > any other vendor. The phenomenon of poor software predates MS, and has always > been a problem on the PC platform. If by "PC platform" you mean PC's running MS, then they couldn't predate MS. If by "PC" platform you mean arbitrary desktop machines, then there were OP's available that didn't have the problems that OS gave us. > > That's because MS was providing an OS that > > dealt with misbehaving applications by > > crashing. > All early PC operating systems dealt with misbehaving applications that way. > The machine was essentially given over to the currently running program, and so > it was very easy for an application to crash the system. There was no choice > about this on early Intel processors. I take it you're not familiar with OS/9, OS/1, or MARC? > > If they had instead provided an OS that caught > > such things and terminated them with the prejudice > > they deservied, people wouldn't accept the trash > > they do on their desktop. > Early PC hardware did not permit this. Any code with control of the processor > had control of the system. By the time Windows 3.0 came out, this was no longer true. MS could have fixed it with Windows 3.0. > > MS's monopoly practices basically mean I can't > > buy mass market computers without MS pocketing > > money on the deal. > A lot of people pocket money on every PC purchased, not just Microsoft. The > only difference is that you resent Microsoft more than the others. I resent anyone who pockets money when nothing of theirs went into the product I'm going to use. The only company I know of for which that is true is MS. If you provide other examples, I'll resent them as well. > > I'd rather be able to walk in and say "Give me > > this one, hold the OS". MS's monopoly practices have > > made that impossible. > I've never cared. I can remove the preinstalled OS and install whatever I want. > In fact, that's what I routinely do when purchasing a new PC--I never run the > preinstalled stuff. Are you buying licenses for all of the Windows machines that you're changing the OS on? > > Also, should someone want an MS OS from that > > vendor - which they did sell - the vendor would > > have to charge them more than they would have > > if they weren't willing to sell me a box with > > Unix on it. > That's because Microsoft software is not free (usually). You misunderstand. The fact that the vendor is willing to sell me a box with Unix installed means they have to charge someone who wants a box with NT - just for example - installed than they would charge them if they wouldn't sell me a box with Unix on it. > > You then turn around and say the product wasn't > > good enough to do the job, which means they couldn't > > have been using it to do the job. > Where did I say that? Right here: > > Windows 3 was clearly good enough for most > > people, but they still stood in line at midnight > > to get Windows 95 - which was better. > > The reason you saw long lines is that there were many people for whom Windows 3 > was _not_ good enough. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15370.57096.970547.872077>