This really pisses me off....

I paid for my xp home and the wife got xp pro. She installed hers a month or two ago, I put mine in last February as a test. If it worked, she would follow. I haven't had a freeze or a crash, but have noticed that, after 9 months, it's much slower to boot in the morning and very slow to shut down lately. I figure that's typical Windoze. Hers loads and closes three times faster, but it won't last. Our computers have roughly two years left, and we're going with Macs.

In the meantime, the old 486 that we network through, running Slackware just purrs on and on. A year now and never a hiccup. It stays on 24/7 while we shut ours down at the end of the day. I paid less than $30 for the Slack Linux, and total of almost $400 for the 2 Windoze. Something is very wrong with that picture but, I'm the fool who doled out the money, so I guess I'm what's wrong.

Luckily for me I am going to school where I have been able to get all versions of losedoze for $5. I haven't paid more for losedoze since I got lose95 with a pc I bought way back when.

I just hope I have found replacements for all the apps I really love on losedoze on linux so I can make the ultimate switchover and roundfile m$ for good!!

well,
Hopefully it won't be to long before the linux community makes their already fantastic OS a viable product for the basic user, and compatible with the extensively used M$ Office file formats.
when that day comes the evil empire will come crashing down...

If the day comes that linux works a way to make ms software compatible, and it becomes user friendly for those folks who just want to turn on a computer and use it, like Windoze, and if the price of linux stays cheap, watch ms cut the price of their stuff in half or more.

Actually Apple has already done it, if they weren't so expensive. The OSX is bsd with the Apple GUI. Price or not, we're making the move when our PC's go to the big computer in the sky.

Allenb1963 is right and El Diablo is also correct. I have to say that M$ is making too much money from us and Bill Gates, is always attempting a monoply. The last major monopoly that he attempted, the U.S Supreme Court stopped him right on his tracks. He tries to make some products that will not work without another real important product, which you have to buy seperately. So this is my point, M$ can make all the money now by making and pulling smalling time monopoly, but one day they will fall to their feet because of the presents of another major emerging company.

This company is speak off may be mine or a friend of mine that is known as Spyder32:D.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by ebo
Allenb1963 is right and El Diablo is also correct. I have to say that M$ is making too much money from us and Bill Gates, is always attempting a monoply. The last major monopoly that he attempted, the U.S Supreme Court stopped him right on his tracks. He tries to make some products that will not work without another real important product, which you have to buy seperately. So this is my point, M$ can make all the money now by making and pulling smalling time monopoly, but one day they will fall to their feet because of the presents of another major emerging company.

This company is speak off may be mine or a friend of mine that is known as Spyder32:D.

---

ebo> What teh hell?

.. Anyways, as much as I don't like Microsoft, I don't think he is TRYING to make software that sucks. All software/programs have bug's, his just tend to have the bigger ones and more of them. Yes, I do believe that it is a crime for Microsoft to charge people to use their services, but they try to make their software secure and bug-free. Emphasis on the try there.

If M$ ever decide to spend as much time developing as they do thinking of ways to srew their customers out of more money, they might have a half decent product!

meh... I don't know alot about buisness and stuff, but I say, "whatever makes the money."
Microsoft was fortunate to make this much dough in this one product and where everything else failed. I think it balances everything out.

I'm afraid I have to go against the grain here somewhat. If MS is making 85% profit on their software, does that mean they're an evil company, or are they just very good salespeople? Bill Gates is running a business, not a soup kitchen. The main criticism against MS is that their products have many bugs, and if they spent more time developing rather than pushing the product out the door, they wouldn't have such a low opinion in some circles. OK, that's fair enough, but put yourself in MS's position. You have the number one OS on the planet in terms of users. The vast majority of these users have trouble setting the time on a VCR. They want something easy and friendly. These people are going to get themselves into situations that MS probably never even imagined. If you sell cheese to 500 people in your town, chances are a few won't care much for it. Sell your cheese to 500,000,000 people, and see how many complaints you get.

You can't compare Linux to MS. That's like comparing Rolls Royce to General Motors. If Rolls Royce has 100,000 customers, General Motors has 100,000,000. Do you ever hear of Rolls Royce on the evening news with a recall? Didn't think so. Linux developers can sit back and think what will be popular or useful 3-4 years from now. MS has to double that figure just due to the size of their customer base.

Linux is said to be a very stable OS, with very few known bugs. Distribute Linux to 25% of the planet, and see how quickly that previous statement erodes.

Quote:

---

If MS is making 85% profit on their software, does that mean they're an evil company, or are they just very good salespeople?

---

It isn't too hard to sell something when you use strongarmed tactics to impress upon ANYONE who has the ability to foster competition that you have the ability to put them out of business. When you have vendors who are afraid to offer an alternative because they know that their licensing terms will be renegociated in an unfavorable manner if they do. Thats not good salemanship, thats mob tactics.