Kind of a moot point really. Microsoft has the game market because they have the highest market share. It's not a chicken and egg thing, Microsoft came first and then the games. So clearly they built their market share without games.
Printable View
Kind of a moot point really. Microsoft has the game market because they have the highest market share. It's not a chicken and egg thing, Microsoft came first and then the games. So clearly they built their market share without games.
Quote:
Originally posted here by Vorlin
xmadness, he has a very valid point...MS is in the workplace because businesses want to buy an 'all in one' package and that includes IIS, NT site licenses, Exchange, support contracts, etc etc...all byCompaq or HP (before the merger, now they're gonna be HPQs) who made deals with MS. I have yet to walk into a Best Buy and see a Compaq or HP with linux on it. Why? Because that makes no money and nobody knows how to use it to boot. Games, on the other hand, are 95% win32 applications made for Windows because that's what sells. If I knew right now though, this very minute, that without fail, I could switch over to Lindows or linux running vmware or wine without ANY problems with my games (and I'm talking games like Global Operations, GTA3, upcoming Warcraft 3 and Neverwinter Nights), I'd be SO GONE from the windows scene, never to turn back ever.
If I remember correctly, large vendors, can't sell their computers with an OS other than some flavor of Windows. Because of the license that they hold with MS forbids it. That might just be for dual-boot computers though.
That would be correct to a point. Game companies want money. So they would naturally make a game to be played on Windows. Why would they make a game for some OS that doesn't have as big of a market. i.e. Linux/BeOS/Mac. Sure there are Linux/BeOS/Mac user's who love to play games. But they are a minority.Quote:
Kind of a moot point really. Microsoft has the game market because they have the highest market share.
The way this can change is if, the game companies, want to expand their games to other OS's. Such as id. They release their games for Linux. And after awhile, they open up the source to their Engine.
I don't think so. There where games on computers, before there was even a company called Microsoft, let alone an OS called Windows. :)Quote:
Microsoft came first and then the games. So clearly they built their market share without games.
I don't think MS would die, because of gaming alone. Alot of borderline people would leave. But not the 'newbies', and the corporate users, who are entrenched in MS products.
The reason why Windows prevails, is because it is easy. Show a new person how to install something on a Windows machine, and they can do it at a later time, with little to no help from a more knowledgable person.
Show a person how to install a program on Linux; and they might come back the next time asking you what "dependancies" mean. Of course rpm, deb and the like are making it a bit easier. But it still isn't "there" yet.
Maybe without the games, Windows users who like the simple interface could be gravitated towards MacOS..........but a lot of people like the Win2k server, and many people would find it 50% more difficult to do their work w/out M$ Office Apps........
My boss's boss wont let us buy anything that's not microsoft here... if it's effective and cheap he wants no part :oT and screw M$ for the games, go buy a ps2, i got so many gaming sys's at home who needs winblows
What is this ****? I mean, what would happen if this company didn't have this? They have it, so deal with it...Quote:
Originally posted here by pysk0tik
Maybe without the games, Windows users who like the simple interface could be gravitated towards MacOS..........but a lot of people like the Win2k server, and many people would find it 50% more difficult to do their work w/out M$ Office Apps........
They've got Office, and its the best Office suite around... sure it has its problems, for instance, its security... but its still one of the easiest office suites to use, is quite powerful for the average user, and even more powerful for an experienced user...
Whether you like MS or not, saying what if they didn't have this, and what if they didn't have that is completely pointless.... they've got it, and people will use it... you could whinge all day about they only have it because its they used unfair business tactics *I don't deny that they did.. but I can't say that I wouldn't have done the same*, or you could admit that its easy to use and that's why people like it....
Fact is they are where they are, they have the placement they've got, and this thread is pointless...
Every OS has its advantages / disadvantages... When a solution presents itself, companies will 'generally' go with the best solutions... they decide this by examining the feasibility of each solution (say its outright cost, versus its maintenance costs as one example).. While *nix's may be cheap initial solutions, maintenance and support costs over time can put it into the same price bracket as Windows..
Am I rambling again?