LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Alex Garner <mlist@lynx.net.au>
  To  : linuxsa@linuxsa.org.au
  Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 17:40:16 +1030

RE: NT bashing

"Uh-oh, lookout, Alex is on the thread..."

Seriously folks, before we get right into this, remember that this list is
not limited to technical issues, and "MrJ"s original post has brought up a
very important and relevant point with regard to the future of Linux and
the future of Microsoft. The day's of Linux being a UNI student's project
are over. Linux us moving into a marketplace worth hundreds of billions of
dollars.

That being said, let's not make this a "Bash NT" session, cause we've all
heard it before, and you don't need to convince 90% of the users of this
list that NT "has its problems"

Here we go...

At 12:14 18/11/98 , O'CONNOR, Steve wrote:
>	Maybe closer than you think. Not long ago mobile phones were as much
>as computers are now. You can now get a 'free' mobile by subscribing to a
>service. The day is not far away when you will be able to get 'free' and
>easy to use computers by subscribing to a service. When that day comes, you
>can bet that Linux has a much better chance than NT / W2K of runinng those
>free computers.

Wow. You have come dangerously close to the crux of the issue here, and I
love your analogy. As the Halloween memo to Gates outlines (everyone should
read it), the future of computing is heading in a direction that MS cannot
compete in. They have spent the last ten years moving away from shipping
manuals with their software to shipping a URL. They have dissolved their
telephone support, and pushed the support of their products onto other
companies. They have no reason to care, cause they make their money when
you purchase the binaries off them. But the future lies elsewhere...

How about buying PCs and hardware with a free OS and obtaining the
programmes and source for a small free or nothing at all and then going out
on site and configuring and designing a solutions for a company. You set it
up well, the company is happy, they don't need to spend more on you
maintaining the system, but best of all, it's the programmes and system
administrators who have been inside computers all their life who get paid
$120 an hour for creating real life solutions for companies and businesses.

The $120 no longer goes to some wannabe who has a few MS approved courses
up his sleeve and can use a mouse and NT and ensure that the company
network survives till Friday. It's not good enough anymore. People with
skill get paid. People without can answer the phones.

Think about Steve's mobile phone example again. It's good

At 13:15 18/11/98 , James I Forbes wrote:
>Apologies if I'm cluttering this mailing list with an irrelevant message.
>It's just that this comment from Steve is quite pertinent to Stephen Fry's
>book "Making History" which I've just about finished reading at the moment.

Seriously folks. Every one loves a good discussion, and Tuesday nights at
San Georgio's prove this. Don't apologize for your comments, it's a good
point, and I now realize that there is a Steven Fry book I haven't read!

At 14:14 18/11/98 , Michael Pearson wrote:
>I disagree. MS did one good thing, that thing that it orignally set out to
>do (before it discovered money), was to bring PC's to the home user. Yes,
>MS now really bites, but what they did 10 years ago was rather good.

Just some food for thought on that note, and I'll quote Eric S. Raymond
here cause it's been summed up before.
(http://www.opensource.org/halloween-rant.html)

        >Bill Gates pretends to defend ``innovation'', and if he did I'd
        >love him for it. But there's very little evidence that Microsoft
        >even knows what the word means. Buying or outright stealing key
        >technologies rather than innovating has been a Microsoft trait
        >from the beginning. Consider this list...
        >
        >MS-DOS: bought (from Tim Paterson). PC1 BIOS code: stolen (almost
        >bit-for-bit from Gary Kildall's CP/M BIOS). The Windows interface:
        >copied (incompetently, from Apple). On-the-fly disk compression:
        >stolen (from Stac Electronics). Internet Explorer: bought or
        >stolen, depending on who you believe (from Spyglass). And the list
        >only starts with these.

Seriously, don't kid yourself into thinking that MS is about technology. It
never has been and it never will. It's about MARKETING. Bill Gates and MS
are one of the best Marketing combinations I've ever come across.

At 14:14 18/11/98 , Michael Pearson wrote:
>To finalise, I think MS has done its job getting the PC to the home
>market, and it's time to ditch annoying trade secrets in protocols.

Well you can actually thank IBM for that. They just didn't have the
marketing or blind luck that MS did. But it's time to dump those secrets,
and like you say, I reckon we could get some better co-operation from video
card manufacturers too.

At 14:14 18/11/98 , Stock, Nick wrote:
>Most users (in my experience >90%) have never managed to solve
>even the simplest problem ("problem" definition: a computer or any
>other piece of equipment that has a power on button, acting in a
>manner different to the way the user believes it should act) because
>their first reaction is not to think but to EXPECT someone else to
>fix it.

Since I've experienced the level of customer support that Nick gave with
his PCs when he sold them, I can vouch for this comment.

Nick is using his knowledge of PCs and software to give free support, for
an OS that he hates, that the user paid for, that is crap. For him, it
requires no less configuration and hassle that Linux would, is no harder
for the user to break than Linux is, and is something that he has to return
to fix when there is a problem no less often than if Linux was installed.
you have to admit. Once Linux is configured, it just won't die.

How about this? Instead of getting the customer to pay for the OS, they get
it free. They then use the support that the company selling the computer
offers as little or as often as they like. If they want to be "driven
around", they pay the chauffeur. If they want to drive themselves, change
their own oil, and perform their own services, they can. And they save
money. Computer knowledge and skill is a tradable commodity. Going around
and fixing Auntie Sue's computer when she looses her word files is fine,
but Price Waterhouse can damn well pay for that support, cause for them,
the computer system equals money.

This expectation that the OS, once it's paid for should work, and that it
should be supported by the hardware supplier, is total rubbish. Support
equals experience/time which equals money. Nick is not there to justify and
hold up a MS purchase, he is there to supply a service, for which he, and
every other bugger should be paid.

Have fun... and may this thread never die until Intel ships without MS and
software is free.

Open Source, my friends - be scared. Be very very scared...

Cheers

Alex!

       from  Alex Garner - Lynx Internet Connections 
                   http://www.lynx.net.au
                           -----
With WindowsNT, I always felt limited by the software available.
         With UNIX, I am limited only by my knowledge.  


-- 
Check out the LinuxSA web pages at http://www.linuxsa.org.au/
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject