Are Microsoft users abuse victims?
Oct. 14th, 2003 11:34 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsOmaha asked me this, in relationship to her Mac, but I have to wonder about it in general. I mean, it really does start to sound like it sometimes: "Oh, it's not Windows' fault, it's mine. Really. If I worked harder at our relationship, I wouldn't have the crashes and the viruses and the spam. I just have to do what Bill tells me, and it will all be okay, right? I mean, that's really the issue. I stay because I know it'll get better. It will. I've put too much time and effort into it to give up now."
Just musing.
Just musing.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 07:14 pm (UTC)The only problem is, who the hell other than us Linux converts would buy it? Particularly not some judge who is herself (Ms. Kotelly) an addict...
I've said for years that it is unfair that the government officials who try Microsoft for anti-trust are themselves Microsoft (ab)users... and no one will take me seriously.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 07:24 pm (UTC)"What this country needs is a good twelve-step program" - Sparrow to Mo, Dykes To Watch Out For, about Gulf War I.
Only problem is...
Date: 2003-10-14 07:36 pm (UTC)I think abuse is really in the eye of the beholder.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 07:41 pm (UTC)About the closest I could find was a mention that I managed to crash it using the 2.5.x software suspend facility. Well, duh; if I install alpha software on it, especially alpha kernel software, I ask for, get, and deserve the problems that come with it.
And, unlike an MS user, I have the option to fix it myself.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 07:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 08:13 pm (UTC)And, unlike an MS user, I have the option to fix it myself.
And how many users actually have the skills to fix the code?
I'm not anti-open-source on principle, mind you. I think that with a committed group of skilled people, open-source can create great software. For that matter, I tend to prefer file systems I can do data recovery on because it makes me feel more secure. ;) Heck, switching to a closed system like a Mac would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. But they don't. Why not?
(I peg a combination of laziness and cheapness, meself.)
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 08:20 pm (UTC)I used to be a Mac-head, and ran a machine with Linux for a couple of years, and have used FreeBSD most recently as my 'alternative' OS. Windows 95 and 98 I never cared for much, but XP has proven to be as stable as anything else I've used (Moreso than Macintosh pre-OS X)
Maybe I'm unusual in the fact I know how to use a computer rather well, and have been able to operate all the OSes I've tried quite well. The real question is, are the people who can't work their Windows machines going to do any better on any other platform? From what I know of end users, the answer is no.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 08:39 pm (UTC)From my experience in Windows support and testing, a lot of problems could be reduced by switching to a closed system (say, Mac - using only Apple hw, only Apple's OS, only Apple peripherals), putting it behind a firewall, and installing only a few apps. This would reduce the untested code paths dramatically. Of course many folks wouldn't be happy with such a system....
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 09:53 pm (UTC)However, learning that new stuff right at the moment isn't high on my list of priorities, since the only thing I require from my computer is that it connect me to the internet, do word processing and a few other office apps, and let me play a game now and then. Those of us who are not certified geeks wouldn't dream of actually trying to FIX operating system errors. And I'd venture to guess that the *vast* majority of people using computers these days would no more try to program/install hardware on their systems than they would construct their own plumbing and electrical system.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 10:36 pm (UTC)I think this one of those pieces of FUD that Linux will be spending awhile overcoming. The commercial Linuxen, like SuSE or Redhat, are as stable and reliable as any other commercial OS released around the same time. I'm not particularly anti-Windows. I've even written code for it; it put food on my family's table for two years once upon a time. But MS and Apple keep acting as if their commodity products are precious and rare-- they're not.
As for the price-- I guess I don't understand that. An install of XP with Office approaches six hundred dollars, while a similar install of Fedora (the free component of RedHat) costs about a dollar-- and it comes with things you don't get with XP/Office, like a desktop publishing program, a working spam filter, image editing software comparable to Photoshop, 3d rendering software, and the like. Not that you need any of those, but there they are.
It's simple: a hammer is a commodity item. Everyone knows how to make a hammer, so hammer manufacturers have to get you somewhere else, and they sell on volume because margins are slim. The only ways to "win" in the hammer market (or the cola market, or the automobile market) is to generate volume through marketing, and to reduce costs through material supply manangement.
It seems counterintutive because so few people can program, but operating systems, windowing systems, office suites, and the like-- are the same way. "How to make one" is commodity knowledge. Anyone with the time and energy can go to the library and look it up. There's no secret, no intellectual property, no patentable process, to be had there. And once a talented amateur has reproduced what the propietary marketers have invested in so heavily, the market is doomed.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 10:42 pm (UTC)but on my comp im running currently 2 operating systems
XP pro and 2k pro
as soon as i find a good way to fast switch hard drives im gonna put my BSD drive a lil 5 gig drive that i use to practice my alt os's maybe one of you could recomend a method to keep my primary disk xp but my tertiary drive bsd or linux
Re: Only problem is...
Date: 2003-10-14 11:23 pm (UTC)Weird. I'm using OS X on an iBook, and it's infinitely better than using my Windows desktop. The interface is nicer (except for the help section, which sucks big time), and the programs that I have found that aren't the same brand as what I use on my Windows box are just as good, and in some cases cheaper. Programs take longer to start up, but then I have an AMD 1.0 GHz in my Windows box, and a little G3 600 MHz in my iBook (same RAM). And, oh joy, the thing doesn't crash every other day. Matter of fact, when I went downstairs to check the RAM on my Windows box, the damn thing crashed right in front of me! How's that for "ease of use". ;)
I'm so geared up for working in an office, that I really resent having my word processing and other programs work badly.
The one problem I've had is that I am used to using WordPerfect, for which there is no Mac version (and hasn't been since OS 8). Most choices for the Mac don't even open up WordPerfect documents. There's Appleworks, one of the worst wordprocessors I've ever seen. I've also evaluating Word for the Mac OS X...actually very nicely done word processor (the Excel for the Mac as well.) There are also some others.
Of course, you can also get OpenOffice for OS X, but you have to install X11. It runs very, very slowly on my iBook, and I don't know whether it's the RAM I have (128), the CPU speed, or both. I suppose I can just go and get more RAM (I need to anyway...all of the AAA games coming out that I review recommend 256) and check it out, but I haven't done it yet. But OpenOffice is sweeeeeeeet. And free. :)
no subject
Date: 2003-10-14 11:31 pm (UTC)Read it yourself...it's more snarky than anything else. But it does make some good points.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-15 12:28 am (UTC)I think the biggest thing that is 'against' the alternative OS systems is simply that a lot of people really don't know that much about the machines they use. And let's face it, MS markets the heck out of their stuff. Anyone who is only literate, as opposed to well informed, barely knows the other systems are out there. A lot of them barely know how to use the systems they have, for that matter. There are still a whole lot of 'old fogeys' out there to whom computers are still a mystery, and a lot of them are in 'positions of power' when it comes to business and the workforce.
There's also the conversion problem. While not insurmountable, it often *seems* that way to those not familar with anything other than Windows. And even then, the old principle of 'If it's not broke, don't fix it' still has a lot of force in business and with private individuals.
Of course they're commodities. Back in the old days, I could just as easily program a lot of apps as go out and buy them...the logic isn't all that difficult for most of them. Given enough incentive, I could probably still learn what I needed to know. But where's my incentive, as an average user? There are programs out there I can *buy* that are a simple install...and I don't have to do all the work. That's the attitude most folk have about a lot of things. (Why should I make my own bookshelves, when I can go to Lowe's and buy 'em cheap?)
This is changing, of course, as the current generations grow up. The 'new' technology isn't a mystery to you guys...and it won't be a mystery to a lot of the people in high school and college now. I suspect that, given that, MS is gonna have a whole lot harder time in the future holding on to it's market share when it comes to OS systems.
Agree, and disagree
Date: 2003-10-15 03:21 am (UTC)As for Linux, I haven't had the pleasure, but am definately interested. Unfortunately, it seems every Linux user I hear from is always submerged in an endless process of getting it to work just they way they want to. I understand your issues have been mainly hardware related, but your LJ is hardly an advert for Linux's state of usability. That said, I do look forward to paying less for an OS distribution that I do for the games I run on it, and Linux is my official best bet for the future.
Alas, I've never gelled with Macs, which I'm forced to use 8 hours a day at work. It's an endless catalog of frustration, most of it related to the relative slowness of it all. I know there's no technical basis for this, but macs have less bang for the buck and business machines angle toward buck concerns. Everytime I hear talk of redundancies I look at the useless, expense-incurring stylings of our luxolamp imacs and shudder at the gullibility of management. I guess we need LCD monitors more than the workers who use them...
I've seen G5 and look forward to giving it a go, but pre-X is like Win98, except it doesn't actually tell you why it's slow and crashtastic. And OS X is a nasty triumph of formism, forcing a host of unintuitive, different-for-the-sake-of-being-different uselessnesses on the hapless user. It's almost like a crusade against OS "invisibility," right down to the loathesome dock, in which some icon must always bounce for attention like some kind of OCD frog from a 1970s arcade game.
Of course, that's only my mileage. If I'm an abuse victim, I hadn't noticed it.
Re: Agree, and disagree
Date: 2003-10-16 03:58 pm (UTC)"It's almost like a crusade against OS "invisibility," right down to the loathesome dock, in which some icon must always bounce for attention like some kind of OCD frog from a 1970s arcade game."
In Dock Preferences, uncheck "Animate Opening Applications." End of bouncing icons.
I'm forced to use Windows at work. Pity we can't trade...
no subject
Date: 2003-10-16 04:56 pm (UTC)Y'know, though, people want to be able to do things like that. They like those conveniences, and the Mac/Linux people for years have been wondering why there are so many inherent flaws in Windows that Windows people can't get those conveniences and pleasures without opening themselves up to serious risk.
I suppose XP s a step in the right direction, with its proper memory and process segmentation. But it's a step that Unix took in 1984!