How Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft



John Bailo
07-10-2005, 12:24 AM
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp


"For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been "Wintel,"
the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating
systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux operating
system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is the
entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the
Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing classic
symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself, Microsoft
is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and doubt
to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The Linux
operating system and the open-source model for software development are far
from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft."

Winux P
07-10-2005, 12:24 AM
You also have to consider an array of rapid application development tools to
get industry to migrate. As with windows you have VB, J#, C# and third party
RAD tools as well as millions of components like ActiveX controls and .NET
components to boot. Even though the cost of Linux is substantially cheaper
than Windows, still Linux expertise and support is more expensive that
Windows expertise. These may not be an issue for the home user, but for
industry I think it ranks high.

-Winux P.

"John Bailo" <jabailo@texeme.com> wrote in message
news:2IudncKNwaG4wBnfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net...
:
:
: http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp
:
:
: "For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been "Wintel,"
: the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating
: systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux operating
: system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is the
: entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the
: Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing classic
: symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself, Microsoft
: is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and doubt
: to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The Linux
: operating system and the open-source model for software development are
far
: from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft."

Jon
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.

Jon


"Winux P" <winuxp@msnews.grp> wrote in message
news:%23Ppg1d5VFHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
> You also have to consider an array of rapid application development tools
> to
> get industry to migrate. As with windows you have VB, J#, C# and third
> party
> RAD tools as well as millions of components like ActiveX controls and .NET
> components to boot. Even though the cost of Linux is substantially cheaper
> than Windows, still Linux expertise and support is more expensive that
> Windows expertise. These may not be an issue for the home user, but for
> industry I think it ranks high.
>
> -Winux P.
>
> "John Bailo" <jabailo@texeme.com> wrote in message
> news:2IudncKNwaG4wBnfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net...
> :
> :
> : http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp
> :
> :
> : "For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been
> "Wintel,"
> : the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating
> : systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux
> operating
> : system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is
> the
> : entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the
> : Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing
> classic
> : symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself,
> Microsoft
> : is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and
> doubt
> : to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The
> Linux
> : operating system and the open-source model for software development are
> far
> : from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft."
>
>

Rick
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
On Fri, 13 May 2005 09:39:00 +0000, Jon wrote:

> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
> free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
> incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>
> Jon

DL the modem driver. Install the modem driver. $0.

--
Rick

Jack
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for every
possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it to the list
of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not wish to reboot) --
there's probably some distros out there like possibly Novell's SuSE that has
a nice little user-friendly tool to automate the process. The more
benefficial alternative (speedwise) is customizing and compiling a new kernel
by hand. So Winmodems should be no problem and the price to pay is $0. As for
Linux support in the enterprise, one could easily go on IRC and Google for
answers -- there's also plenty of geeks out there who are more than willing
to take a Linux job and not care much about tthe sallary (take me for
instance). Unless employees want to feel important by calling up a
self-proclaimed "Linux experts/gurus" support cost is not going to be a
problem.

"Jon" wrote:

> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
> free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
> incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>
> Jon
>
>
> "Winux P" <winuxp@msnews.grp> wrote in message
> news:%23Ppg1d5VFHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> >
> > You also have to consider an array of rapid application development tools
> > to
> > get industry to migrate. As with windows you have VB, J#, C# and third
> > party
> > RAD tools as well as millions of components like ActiveX controls and .NET
> > components to boot. Even though the cost of Linux is substantially cheaper
> > than Windows, still Linux expertise and support is more expensive that
> > Windows expertise. These may not be an issue for the home user, but for
> > industry I think it ranks high.
> >
> > -Winux P.
> >
> > "John Bailo" <jabailo@texeme.com> wrote in message
> > news:2IudncKNwaG4wBnfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net...
> > :
> > :
> > : http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp
> > :
> > :
> > : "For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been
> > "Wintel,"
> > : the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating
> > : systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux
> > operating
> > : system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is
> > the
> > : entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow the
> > : Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing
> > classic
> > : symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself,
> > Microsoft
> > : is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and
> > doubt
> > : to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The
> > Linux
> > : operating system and the open-source model for software development are
> > far
> > : from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft."
> >
> >
>
>
>

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
Jack wrote:
> I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for
> every possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it
> to the list of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not
> wish to reboot) -- there's probably some distros out there like
> possibly Novell's SuSE that has a nice little user-friendly tool to
> automate the process.

Your confidence is just bullsh*t.

> The more benefficial alternative (speedwise) is
> customizing and compiling a new kernel by hand. <snip>

Not something the average computer user is gonna want to do even if they
were hand-held through the process.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
John Bailo wrote:
> http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp
>
>
> "For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been
> "Wintel," the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows
> operating systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the
> Linux operating system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire,
> and behind it is the entire open-source software movement, which
> threatens to overthrow the Windows industry. Faced with this
> challenge, Microsoft is showing classic symptoms of "incumbents'
> disease." Rather than remaking itself, Microsoft is using legal
> threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and doubt to
> fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The
> Linux operating system and the open-source model for software
> development are far from perfect, but they look increasingly likely
> to depose Microsoft."

I generally agree, but that doesn't make your Linux trolling on-topic in
WinXP.Gen.

Go away Ballo the clown!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Malke
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
kurttrail wrote:

> Jack wrote:
>> I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for
>> every possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it
>> to the list of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not
>> wish to reboot) -- there's probably some distros out there like
>> possibly Novell's SuSE that has a nice little user-friendly tool to
>> automate the process.
>
> Your confidence is just bullsh*t.
>
>> The more benefficial alternative (speedwise) is
>> customizing and compiling a new kernel by hand. <snip>
>
> Not something the average computer user is gonna want to do even if
> they were hand-held through the process.
>
I normally stay out of trollposts, but you may be interested to know
that Mr. Bailo regularly posts questions in the SuSE Linux group and
his posts show that he is stunningly ignorant about Linux. So his
thoughts on *anything* relating to operating systems are worthless.
Don't feed the trolls.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
Malke wrote:
> kurttrail wrote:
>
>> Jack wrote:
>>> I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for
>>> every possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add
>>> it to the list of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does
>>> not wish to reboot) -- there's probably some distros out there like
>>> possibly Novell's SuSE that has a nice little user-friendly tool to
>>> automate the process.
>>
>> Your confidence is just bullsh*t.
>>
>>> The more benefficial alternative (speedwise) is
>>> customizing and compiling a new kernel by hand. <snip>
>>
>> Not something the average computer user is gonna want to do even if
>> they were hand-held through the process.
>>
> I normally stay out of trollposts, but you may be interested to know
> that Mr. Bailo regularly posts questions in the SuSE Linux group and
> his posts show that he is stunningly ignorant about Linux. So his
> thoughts on *anything* relating to operating systems are worthless.
> Don't feed the trolls.


LOL! I'm quite aware that Ballo is a troll.

I believe in toying with trolls.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Kerry Brown
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
"Jack" </dev/null> wrote in message
news:C1918A55-76C0-48E4-A78E-E7046F1350F0@microsoft.com...
>I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for every
> possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it to the
> list
> of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not wish to reboot) --
> there's probably some distros out there like possibly Novell's SuSE that
> has
> a nice little user-friendly tool to automate the process. The more
> benefficial alternative (speedwise) is customizing and compiling a new
> kernel
> by hand. So Winmodems should be no problem and the price to pay is $0. As
> for
> Linux support in the enterprise, one could easily go on IRC and Google for
> answers -- there's also plenty of geeks out there who are more than
> willing
> to take a Linux job and not care much about tthe sallary (take me for
> instance). Unless employees want to feel important by calling up a
> self-proclaimed "Linux experts/gurus" support cost is not going to be a
> problem.
>

Don't you see the inconsistancy of what you are saying? The topic is "How
Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft". The procedures you describe are exactly
the reason it won't happen at the present time. Presently Linux is for
servers in networks large enough to support a full time IT department and
hobbiests/power users who can do the procedures you describe. 90% of
computer users lost you at the first sentence. The linux community needs to
focus on making linux easier to install and maintain. It has to be at least
as easy as windows to download and install a driver or program.

Kerry

> "Jon" wrote:
>
>> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work
>> (for
>> free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
>> incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>> "Winux P" <winuxp@msnews.grp> wrote in message
>> news:%23Ppg1d5VFHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> >
>> > You also have to consider an array of rapid application development
>> > tools
>> > to
>> > get industry to migrate. As with windows you have VB, J#, C# and third
>> > party
>> > RAD tools as well as millions of components like ActiveX controls and
>> > .NET
>> > components to boot. Even though the cost of Linux is substantially
>> > cheaper
>> > than Windows, still Linux expertise and support is more expensive that
>> > Windows expertise. These may not be an issue for the home user, but for
>> > industry I think it ranks high.
>> >
>> > -Winux P.
>> >
>> > "John Bailo" <jabailo@texeme.com> wrote in message
>> > news:2IudncKNwaG4wBnfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net...
>> > :
>> > :
>> > :
>> > http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/issue/feature_linux.asp
>> > :
>> > :
>> > : "For as long as most technologists can remember, there has been
>> > "Wintel,"
>> > : the $250 billion industry dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating
>> > : systems and Intel's microprocessors. But "Lintel," or the Linux
>> > operating
>> > : system and Intel, is now encroaching on this empire, and behind it is
>> > the
>> > : entire open-source software movement, which threatens to overthrow
>> > the
>> > : Windows industry. Faced with this challenge, Microsoft is showing
>> > classic
>> > : symptoms of "incumbents' disease." Rather than remaking itself,
>> > Microsoft
>> > : is using legal threats, short-term deals, and fear, uncertainty, and
>> > doubt
>> > : to fortify its position. But this strategy probably won't work. The
>> > Linux
>> > : operating system and the open-source model for software development
>> > are
>> > far
>> > : from perfect, but they look increasingly likely to depose Microsoft."
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

NoStop
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
Winux P wrote:

>
> You also have to consider an array of rapid application development tools
> to get industry to migrate. As with windows you have VB, J#, C# and third
> party RAD tools as well as millions of components like ActiveX controls
> and .NET components to boot. Even though the cost of Linux is
> substantially cheaper than Windows, still Linux expertise and support is
> more expensive that Windows expertise. These may not be an issue for the
> home user, but for industry I think it ranks high.
>
> -Winux P.

Then again, weigh that against what the insecurity of Windows costs the
business community, and having to pay a little more for a Linux sys
administrator amounts to lose change in the whole scheme of things for the
large enterprise.

--

`,,`,,`,,``,,`
Windows is *NOT* a virus. Viruses are small and efficient.
Legal Notice And Disclaimer:
http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/legal.html

Alex
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
Rick wrote:

>
> DL the modem driver. Install the modem driver. $0.
>

The problem there is getting onlind to download the modem driver when
the modem won't work without the driver....

Same problem as needing the cdrom driver so you can get the driver off
of the cdrom.....

--
Alex / AB2RC

Rick
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
On Fri, 13 May 2005 10:08:11 -0700, Alex wrote:

>
> Rick wrote:
>
>
>> DL the modem driver. Install the modem driver. $0.
>>
>>
> The problem there is getting onlind to download the modem driver when the
> modem won't work without the driver....

That would be true if you needed a driver for window$, too.

>
> Same problem as needing the cdrom driver so you can get the driver off of
> the cdrom.....

what CDROM driver is not included with most Linux distros?

--
Rick

Bob I
07-10-2005, 12:25 AM
Like they say. "Foresight makes the job a LOT easier!"

Alex wrote:

> Rick wrote:
>
>
>>DL the modem driver. Install the modem driver. $0.
>>
>
>
> The problem there is getting onlind to download the modem driver when
> the modem won't work without the driver....
>
> Same problem as needing the cdrom driver so you can get the driver off
> of the cdrom.....
>

Jon
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
0$ gets you 14.4 kbps for a Conexant modem

http://www.linuxant.com/drivers/

Jon


"Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.05.13.10.04.03.435561@nomail.com...
> DL the modem driver. Install the modem driver. $0.
>
> --
> Rick
>

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Jon wrote:
> 0$ gets you 14.4 kbps for a Conexant modem
>
> http://www.linuxant.com/drivers/
>
> Jon

That's a joke right? Why would someone want to connect at 14.4kbps?



--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Jon
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Wish it was a joke

Unfortunately not

$ 14.95 for the "full version"

Jon



"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:%23ECM$C$VFHA.3572@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> That's a joke right? Why would someone want to connect at 14.4kbps?
>
>
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Jon wrote:
> Wish it was a joke
>
> Unfortunately not
>
> $ 14.95 for the "full version"

Now that is funny! OS free, modem driver $14.95!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Rick
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
On Fri, 13 May 2005 19:04:33 +0000, Jon wrote:

> 0$ gets you 14.4 kbps for a Conexant modem
>
> http://www.linuxant.com/drivers/
>
> Jon

Ok.. so don't use Linux. it is obvious you don't want to. Go use something
else.

--
Rick

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Rick wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2005 19:04:33 +0000, Jon wrote:
>
>> 0$ gets you 14.4 kbps for a Conexant modem
>>
>> http://www.linuxant.com/drivers/
>>
>> Jon
>
> Ok.. so don't use Linux. it is obvious you don't want to. Go use
> something else.

LOL! I sure he just needed you input to figure out what he wants or
doesn't want to use.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Jack
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
No need to get all smartass even if there's no such distro (and unless you
checked all distros on distrowatch.com and those that are not listed, how the
f**k would you know?). You can just get a pre-compiled module from elsewhere
then. It surprises me that hardware manufacturers do not bundle (at least for
x86) them on the driver CDs despite the fact that they are tiny.

"kurttrail" wrote:

> Jack wrote:
> > I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for
> > every possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it
> > to the list of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not
> > wish to reboot) -- there's probably some distros out there like
> > possibly Novell's SuSE that has a nice little user-friendly tool to
> > automate the process.
>
> Your confidence is just bullsh*t.
>
> > The more benefficial alternative (speedwise) is
> > customizing and compiling a new kernel by hand. <snip>
>
> Not something the average computer user is gonna want to do even if they
> were hand-held through the process.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>
>
>

Lester Stiefel
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Jack wrote:
> No need to get all smartass even if there's no such distro (and unless you
> checked all distros on distrowatch.com and those that are not listed, how the
> f**k would you know?). You can just get a pre-compiled module from elsewhere
> then. It surprises me that hardware manufacturers do not bundle (at least for
> x86) them on the driver CDs despite the fact that they are tiny.
>
> "kurttrail" wrote:
>
>
>>Jack wrote:
>>
>>>I am confident that some distributions have pre-compiled modules for
>>>every possible device laying around so all a user has to do is add it
>>>to the list of autoloaded modules (and insmod it if he/she does not
>>>wish to reboot) -- there's probably some distros out there like
>>>possibly Novell's SuSE that has a nice little user-friendly tool to
>>>automate the process.
>>
>>Your confidence is just bullsh*t.
>>
>>
>>>The more benefficial alternative (speedwise) is
>>>customizing and compiling a new kernel by hand. <snip>
>>
>>Not something the average computer user is gonna want to do even if they
>>were hand-held through the process.
>>
>>--
>>Peace!
>>Kurt
>>Self-anointed Moderator
>>microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>http://microscum.com/mscommunity
>>"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
>>"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>>
>>
>>
Actually quite amusing. My case is that one needs to be a
software engineer (which I'm not) to install BSD/Linux,
except LinSpire. I might go that route, but maintain a
previous windows for the applications that require this.

--
Lester Stiefel
In Romans 1 there are qualities of Unregenerate man listed
which describe him in the last days.
Is your quality found on this list??

Leythos
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
> free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
> incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.

Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.

--
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Leythos wrote:
> In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
> Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
>> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to
>> work (for free), without requiring the user to purchase another
>> external modem or incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>
> Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.
>

Oh well, travel back in time and change history.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Jack
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
It does not seem to me that you are at all familiar with Linux/BSD or
open-source in general -- your reply demonstrates that. I've managed a SuSE
workstation and YaST provides an easy way to install drivers so please
restrain yourself from feeding FUD and ignorance to the public. It does not
take an IT department and a bunch of guys in suits who act all important and
pretend they know something because they are able to install Linux and
maintain it, to install and maintain Linux. The ease of installation varies
from distro to distro and if you go with a one that is easy to use you'll be
able install it, install software and drivers within a few clicks.

The Ghost In The Machine
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org>
wrote
on Fri, 13 May 2005 19:30:29 -0400
<eSzICPBWFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>:
> Leythos wrote:
>> In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
>> Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
>>> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to
>>> work (for free), without requiring the user to purchase another
>>> external modem or incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>>
>> Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.
>>
>
> Oh well, travel back in time and change history.
>

Not to mention the cost structure (and slightly muddled thinking)
of megacorps. That extra $5 or so per unit adds up.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.

Kerry Brown
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
"Jack" </dev/null> wrote in message
news:E2C1860A-7A25-418A-B8F9-F3AC24040B2C@microsoft.com...
> It does not seem to me that you are at all familiar with Linux/BSD or
> open-source in general -- your reply demonstrates that. I've managed a
> SuSE
> workstation and YaST provides an easy way to install drivers so please
> restrain yourself from feeding FUD and ignorance to the public. It does
> not
> take an IT department and a bunch of guys in suits who act all important
> and
> pretend they know something because they are able to install Linux and
> maintain it, to install and maintain Linux. The ease of installation
> varies
> from distro to distro and if you go with a one that is easy to use you'll
> be
> able install it, install software and drivers within a few clicks.

If you read my post without filtering it through your obvious bias you would
see I was answering a post where someone was explaining how "easy" it was to
install a driver in linux. His explanation would have been far beyond the
knowledge of most computer users. His way was not easy by any stretch of the
imagination.

There are many distros and there are many different methods of
distributing/installing programs. I have used Suse. It is quite easy to
install most drivers and programs. But it is different from a lot of other
distros. I prefer Fedora FC3 currently. I recommend linux to some of my
customers for servers. I recommend it to enthusiast/expert users as well. I
don't recommend it for the vast majority of my small business customers who
don't have the time or desire to learn how to use a computer. They want
something to make running their business easier. They don't care if it's a
computer, fax machine, telephone, whatever. They have no interest in how it
works only what it will do for them and how much it will cost, including how
easy it is to maintain and find someone who can fix it when it breaks. If
you have a server of any kind and more than 5 or 6 workstations you need
someone who is responsible for maintaining the network. A business can't
afford to have people sitting around because the network is down. Doesn't
matter if it is linux/windows/unix/netware a server needs to be maintained
and it takes a bit of knowledge to do it. 99% of computer users can't set up
a firewall, DNS & DHCP servers, set security on shares etc. All this and
more is needed to set up and administer a server with any OS. There are more
people that can install/fix windows than linux. Neither are any easier if
you have the knowledge.

I'll repeat what I said in the post you take exception to. For linux to
overthrow Microsoft the linux community needs to work together to develop a
common core OS that has a standard method of installing programs and
drivers. Even in your post you admit "The ease of installation varies from
distro to distro". This was the whole point of my post.

As for a suit, I don't even own one, haven't worn one in years :-)

Kerry

NoStop
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Kerry Brown wrote:

> "Jack" </dev/null> wrote in message
> news:E2C1860A-7A25-418A-B8F9-F3AC24040B2C@microsoft.com...
>> It does not seem to me that you are at all familiar with Linux/BSD or
>> open-source in general -- your reply demonstrates that. I've managed a
>> SuSE
>> workstation and YaST provides an easy way to install drivers so please
>> restrain yourself from feeding FUD and ignorance to the public. It does
>> not
>> take an IT department and a bunch of guys in suits who act all important
>> and
>> pretend they know something because they are able to install Linux and
>> maintain it, to install and maintain Linux. The ease of installation
>> varies
>> from distro to distro and if you go with a one that is easy to use you'll
>> be
>> able install it, install software and drivers within a few clicks.
>
> If you read my post without filtering it through your obvious bias you
> would see I was answering a post where someone was explaining how "easy"
> it was to install a driver in linux. His explanation would have been far
> beyond the knowledge of most computer users. His way was not easy by any
> stretch of the imagination.
>
(clipped for brevity)
>
> I'll repeat what I said in the post you take exception to. For linux to
> overthrow Microsoft the linux community needs to work together to develop
> a common core OS that has a standard method of installing programs and
> drivers. Even in your post you admit "The ease of installation varies from
> distro to distro". This was the whole point of my post.
>
Then you use a distro that is easy to use (however you define that). What's
the problem? Linux can run on all types of hardware, including things like
MP3 players and routers and firewalls. There are people that want a distro
that will boot and run as a Live CD for example. Or a distro that will boot
up from a floppy disk and only be used to watch movies. I think part of
what makes Linux so special as an OS is that it offers this kind of choice.

If you mean you want a distro that tries to imitate Windoze, I think that
exists. But why anyone would want that is beyond me.

> Kerry

--
-=[ *Usenet FAQ* ]=-
A. Yes it is. It's called "Top Posting" and frowned on by the Usenet
community.
Q. But isn't that backasswards?
A. If their reply comes BEFORE what they are quoting, they probably use
Outlook Express under Windoze.
Q. How can I tell what OS a Usenet poster runs?

Kerry Brown
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
"NoStop" <nostop@stopspam.com> wrote in message
news:ZGehe.1344125$8l.56856@pd7tw1no...
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>
>> "Jack" </dev/null> wrote in message
>> news:E2C1860A-7A25-418A-B8F9-F3AC24040B2C@microsoft.com...
>>> It does not seem to me that you are at all familiar with Linux/BSD or
>>> open-source in general -- your reply demonstrates that. I've managed a
>>> SuSE
>>> workstation and YaST provides an easy way to install drivers so please
>>> restrain yourself from feeding FUD and ignorance to the public. It does
>>> not
>>> take an IT department and a bunch of guys in suits who act all important
>>> and
>>> pretend they know something because they are able to install Linux and
>>> maintain it, to install and maintain Linux. The ease of installation
>>> varies
>>> from distro to distro and if you go with a one that is easy to use
>>> you'll
>>> be
>>> able install it, install software and drivers within a few clicks.
>>
>> If you read my post without filtering it through your obvious bias you
>> would see I was answering a post where someone was explaining how "easy"
>> it was to install a driver in linux. His explanation would have been far
>> beyond the knowledge of most computer users. His way was not easy by any
>> stretch of the imagination.
>>
> (clipped for brevity)
>>
>> I'll repeat what I said in the post you take exception to. For linux to
>> overthrow Microsoft the linux community needs to work together to develop
>> a common core OS that has a standard method of installing programs and
>> drivers. Even in your post you admit "The ease of installation varies
>> from
>> distro to distro". This was the whole point of my post.
>>
> Then you use a distro that is easy to use (however you define that).
> What's
> the problem? Linux can run on all types of hardware, including things like
> MP3 players and routers and firewalls. There are people that want a distro
> that will boot and run as a Live CD for example. Or a distro that will
> boot
> up from a floppy disk and only be used to watch movies. I think part of
> what makes Linux so special as an OS is that it offers this kind of
> choice.
>
> If you mean you want a distro that tries to imitate Windoze, I think that
> exists. But why anyone would want that is beyond me.
>

I also like the diversity of linux. I like the idea of linux. I like linux.
I also like windows, netware, unix etc. I've used almost every operating
system ever released for small computers since CP/M (which I didn't
particulary like).

In order to overthrow Microsoft converting you and I doesn't do any good.
You have to convert Joe Public who just bought a new 42" plasma TV and the
salesman is showing him a media center PC and all it can do. He couldn't
care less at that moment if the OS is secure. All he wants to know is will
he be able to hook it up by himself when he gets home. He probably won't be
able to but his buddy the computer geek will. There a lot more geek buddies
that know windows than know linux. Even if he did get it hooked up can you
imagine him trying to install the drivers for the combo tv/fm tuner whiz
bang video card. First thing his geek buddy will ask is "What distro do you
have?" His response is "Huh?"

With the small business sector all they want to know is cost, how quick will
they get a return on their investment, who will fix it when it breaks, and
does Betty the bookkeeper know how to use it because they don't have time to
learn.

For big business the issue is legacy apps and training. Try and convince
someone who manages 2,000 desktops that he should convert to a new OS and
retrain all the users. Oh yeah, that custom payroll program may not work
either but there's a great open source program that works just as good. Try
explaining to 2,000 employees why their pay cheque is late. There has to be
a very significant advantage for him before it would be considered. He
probably just went through upgrading from win2k to XP in the last couple of
years. Possibly also changing over from NT4 or Netware to Active Directory.
Imagine the headaches he's already been through and his fear that if
something goes wrong he loses his cushy job.

Overthrowing Microsoft has nothing to do with the quality of the OS. It has
very little to do with enthusiasts like us and their wishes. It has
everything to do with marketing.

Kerry

Michael Stevens
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
In news:eSzICPBWFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl,
kurttrail <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> replied with a ;-)
> Leythos wrote:
>> In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
>> Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
>>> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to
>>> work (for free), without requiring the user to purchase another
>>> external modem or incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>>
>> Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.
>>
>
> Oh well, travel back in time and change history.

Actually he was right and your suggestion was a frivolous waste of bandwidth
<LOL>, WinModems were a bad idea that somehow enjoyed a short and dubious
limited lifecycle. Amazingly shortsighted product development with cheap
broadband access looming and limited OS support as an obvious reason not to
developed the winmodem.
You really wonder how some people got to the level they could sign off on
this technology

--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
xpnews@bogusmichaelstevenstech.com
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

kurttrail
07-10-2005, 12:26 AM
Michael Stevens wrote:
> In news:eSzICPBWFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl,
> kurttrail <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> replied with a
> ;-)
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
>>> Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
>>>> For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to
>>>> work (for free), without requiring the user to purchase another
>>>> external modem or incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>>>
>>> Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.
>>>
>>
>> Oh well, travel back in time and change history.
>
> Actually he was right and your suggestion was a frivolous waste of
> bandwidth <LOL>, WinModems were a bad idea that somehow enjoyed a
> short and dubious limited lifecycle. Amazingly shortsighted product
> development with cheap broadband access looming and limited OS
> support as an obvious reason not to developed the winmodem.
> You really wonder how some people got to the level they could sign
> off on this technology

Winmodems suck, but that doesn't change the fact that most average users
that use modems are stuck with winmodems, hence my observation.

And how soon they forget, it is part of my evil plan to waste as much of
MS's bandwidth as possible.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Robert Newson
07-10-2005, 12:29 AM
Leythos wrote:

> In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
> Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
>
>>For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
>>free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
>>incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
>
> Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.

It's just occurred to me that this "Microsoft Innovation" (WinModems) has a
predecessor in the Sinclair QL (ROM (C)1983): the two serial ports of the
Sinclair QL weren't real serial ports (using a UART), but were handled in 2
halves by a ULA (Output side of both ports) and the 8049 second processor
(input side of both ports - hence the reason only 1 baud rate could be set
for both ports at the same time). In the QL, the main OS/the second
processor OS had to handle the processing of the start/data/stop bits as
opposed to the UART supplying a received byte - just like the main OS has to
handle the processing of the Winmodem as opposed to sending a byte to a real
modem device.

Leythos
07-10-2005, 12:29 AM
In article <4287A0CB.2080901@bullet3.fsnet.oc.ku>,
ReapNewsB@bullet3.fsnet.oc.ku says...
> Leythos wrote:
>
> > In article <UA_ge.2076$Pi3.1917@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>,
> > Email_Address@SomewhereOrOther.com says...
> >
> >>For the home user, the issue of getting internal "winmodems" to work (for
> >>free), without requiring the user to purchase another external modem or
> >>incur extra expense, also needs to be resolved.
> >
> > Win modems were always a joke and should never have been invented.
>
> It's just occurred to me that this "Microsoft Innovation" (WinModems) has a
> predecessor in the Sinclair QL (ROM (C)1983): the two serial ports of the
> Sinclair QL weren't real serial ports (using a UART), but were handled in 2
> halves by a ULA (Output side of both ports) and the 8049 second processor
> (input side of both ports - hence the reason only 1 baud rate could be set
> for both ports at the same time). In the QL, the main OS/the second
> processor OS had to handle the processing of the start/data/stop bits as
> opposed to the UART supplying a received byte - just like the main OS has to
> handle the processing of the Winmodem as opposed to sending a byte to a real
> modem device.

Interesting info - I never owned a Sinclair PC in those days, but I had
a lot of others.

--
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me


How Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft