The long road to Yukon

TalkBack 40 of 156:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

It may not have been meant as a slam...

...but it was one nonetheless.

I'd like to point out a few problems with your logic here, Bit.

"And given their 90% - 95% grasp of the market I would say the majority feels the same way. As a developer, when I put something together for Windows clients I count on all the required parts being installed and in place for my use."

Microsoft had monopoly market share long before they integrated everything under the sun into Windows. With Windows 95, if you tried to install something that required another component of Windows that you didn't have installed, it would prompt you for the Windows 95 disk and install that component. This functionality *still exists* in Windows, and could easily be applied to IE, Windows Media Player, etc. 90% - 95% of the market is locked in by a monopoly and has no real choice as to whether or not they use Windows. I'll bet if you pulled a random person off the street and asked them if they'd like to be able to clear up hard drive space by removing stuff from their computer they never use, they'd say "yes." Or possibly even "duh."

"If I wanted to re-invent pieces parts everytime I'd do open source work."

This statement shows a severe misunderstanding of how open source software works. With Linux, for instance, you can have shared components, libraries that multiple applications use. Re-invention isn't necessary or desirable in the OSS world.

"That is not meant as a slam, it's simply two very different paradigms on how to go about it."

But since your assessment is incorrect, I'm afraid it is a slam. Just not an effective one.

"Fortunately for everyone there is room for both. If you want a stripped down OS that you piece together you have Linux (open source) if you want the entire thing ready to rock and roll from the time you plug it in, there is Windows."

And just for the record, no distributions of Linux give you a stripped down installation by default. They include the most commonly used, easy applications and add-ons by default. If you are an advanced user, you can choose a more complex installation method. Fancy that... Choice. While in Windows, as an advanced user you can... Ummm... Still install all the same crap that you're never going to use.

Here's a funny thing, by the way. Your statement implies that Linux provides choice to users, in that you can get a stripped down OS with it. Does that mean, prior to the advent of Linux, users had no choices? Gosh, that sounds like a pretty anti-Microsoft statement, now that I think about it...

Posted by: Damon K   Posted on: 12/23/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• SOA for Dummies 2nd IBM Limited Edition Mini eBook IBM In this ebook, you'll learn how to work smarter and optimize cost using ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Infrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Security Explorer for File Servers Version 7.0.23 ScriptLogic Security Explorer is a powerful, graphical solution for real-time ... Download Now