get ready !


. . .


http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197700816


starting laughing in 5 . . . 4 . . . 3 . . . 2 . . . 1............

hahahahahahahaha!!!

In other news : "pharmaceutical companies urge people to replace candies with medicines"

Dont laugh too hard.  The problem is Linux still needs to be dumbed down a lot for the average consumer who may get fed up with the way things need to be done with it.  It is a feasible alternative for those who can put up with the shortcomings.

The article doesn't really do anything for me either way, but here's some things I thought were remarkable:

The article wrote:

The Free Software Foundation, taking advantage of what it says is the rejection of Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system...

[...]

"We see Microsoft Vista as being a failure," said Peter Brown, FSF executive director, in an interview Friday.

Of course, dear.
 

The article wrote:

"People aren't buying new hardware because of Vista."

Is that a fact?

The article wrote:

As things stand now, it's nearly impossible to purchase a computer without pre-installed Microsoft software, says Brown. "The vendors that do offer such systems usually discourage their purchase by hiding them."

Really? At Dell, maybe. I never understood this problem. I can walk into any PC store here and buy a PC without an OS. Pre-built, custom built, you name it. Any store here that offers pc components also offers a 'let us build it for you' service. Or if you don't want to pick and choose you can just buy some of the standard configurations and choose wether or not you want them to pre-install stuff.

I mean, there's just so much more out there than Dell. Why does the FSF seem to think that you can -only- buy PC's from these OEMs?

foxbar wrote:

He's not saying that, he's saying it should be easy.

 
No he's not. He's saying that it's nearly impossible to buy a PC without Windows. Read the article again.

foxbar wrote:

Remember how easy it was to buy a Commodore, Atari or Apple II computer 20 years ago? It should be that easy again today. You should be able to call any online retailer or walk into any store anywhere and be able to buy a computer with free Linux on it.

True. But it's almost as easy. You can walk into any store here and buy a PC without an OS right now. Free Linux on it is something you'll still have to cater for yourself, but that's a small extra step towards the same result.

foxbar wrote:

People are unhappy, and it has nothing to do with technical superiority or a slick UI.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

foxbar wrote:

The worst sign of all? Team Paradox just cracked Vista's activation, and NO ONE CARES.

What does this have to do with the article?

Okay, I thought this was going to be a discussion on facts, rather than spin and FUD. Until you actually counter my points rather than bring up new stuff every post, I call troll.

foxbar wrote:

People won't use Vista, even for free anymore. It shows that Brown's initiative is sorely needed.

then why does the story about the activation crack on digg has more than 3800+ diggs and still counting ? people aren`t interested to vista , are they ?

even if Vista has been out for a single month its marketshare already climbed to 1% and that's about 2x+ times the actual linux marketshare:  there is nothing more to add here except...

HUMILIATION!
by the way remember to do some reality checks before being brainwashed by the FSF`s FUD campaigns.

foxbar wrote:

Brown is saying there is a large demand, and it should be filled according to supply and demand. If a circle of companies ignores demand, there is probably an invisible factor. Maybe Brown's discussion will finally bring out the reason that Dell and other companies do not supply the demand for free Linux pre-installed. It's probably a pretty ugly/disturbing reason, or else it would have been brought up already.

yeah, companies are all ignoring linux. All of them! there must be an invisible factor somewhere, but I can`t see it.

the only invisible factor here is that for years if somebody wanted linux on his PC he could download a distribution from internet and install it in a few minutes so, if linux was really so requested like the FSF would like people to believe, it wouldn't have a laughable ~0.3% of marketshare.

http://news.com.com/Report+Vistas+business+sales+stronger+than+expected/2100-1016_3-6149468.html

"The sales outpaced the first month's tally for Windows 2000 and only slightly trailed that for Windows XP, the market researcher said Thursday. Commercial revenue from Vista in December was 62.5 percent above that racked up by Windows 2000 in March 2000, its first month after launch. But Vista's total is 3.7 percent below what Microsoft got in the commercial channel for Windows XP in November 2001, its first month on the market."

and all of this months before the official launch when vista was still not released to the public and most hardware still lacked decent drivers.

Aren't business sales enough? Here, read also this: http://www.currentanalysis.com/r/2007/s/vista-2-1.htm

"Overall unit sales for the week ending February 3, 2007, jumped 173% when compared to the previous week and increased 67% year-over-year."

Business and end-users want vista, they just don`t want to upgrade memory/videocards of their PCs but instead they prefer buying new PCs in order to get vista working well and avoid problems with hardware compatibility.

FSF lied on Vista with its badvista campaign, they lied about the votes on the dellideastorm website (that website was not requiring registration (they made registration mandatory a few days ago) and also had no protections to avoid people voting the same stories (except for cookies) and was posted on slashdot and plenty of other linux websites causing linux users to spam the votes of those stories) and now they are also lying on "nobody wanting vista"

if you want you can continue believing the FSF that never spins the facts (/sarcasm) and never attacks the competitors (badvista), but please get your facts straight before repeating their lies like a brainwashed parrot.

foxbar wrote:

http://news.com.com/Report+Vistas+business+sales+stronger+than+expected/2100-1016_3-6149468.html - The story you linked was written BEFORE the release of Vista. Here is one that was written AFTER the release of vista with numbers from the very same firm - http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9011360&intsrc=hm_list

here is another one that was written after the release of vista: http://www.currentanalysis.com/r/2007/s/vista-2-1.htm

so, if nobody wants vista why there was this surge of PC sales?

foxbar wrote:

The point is, OEMs will not put free Linux on their hardware until some one can intercept another Halloween email and air some dirty laundry. That's the unfortunate truth. I think that trying to bring the issue out into the open is a good idea.

The issue is that linux means longer life of the hardware because there is always a distro that can run on older hardware, windows  instead means hardware changed more often.

which ones of the 2 do you think is better for hardware producers?

foxbar wrote:

"The issue is that linux means longer life of the hardware" - Why do you think Chrysler is closing down, and being sold off while people buy Toyota's? Dell = Chrysler. The market takes no excuses. People want free Linux pre-installed. Give it to them or suffer the effects of evolution like Chrysler. http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2006/10/if_50m_wont_get.html - This is what happens when Microsoft promises to bail you out in exchange for market lock. They reneg. They use, abuse, and split when the chips fall. Like a drunken party crasher.

people don`t want linux. only ~0.3% of the market (linux users) wants PCs with linux preinstalled. that`s it. if people wanted linux they could have installed it on their PC but no, the linux market share has always remained the same.

Dell has made available some OS-less PCs made for people that want to run linux on them for a long while, why nobody buys them giving better reasons for Dell to invest more on linux? Because nobody cares of linux. Linux has just become a new buzzword, the FSF makes a lot of noise about it but the truth is that nobody cares.

Also Dell and the other producers have the complete control of the PC market: they can offer hardware at the cheapest prices around so nobody will ever be able to compete with them and become the new Toyota and they surely won't become the new Chrysler.

By the way, if windows fails people will move to the #1 alternative and that means mac, not linux.

foxbar wrote:

http://news.com.com/Report+Vistas+business+sales+stronger+than+expected/2100-1016_3-6149468.html - The story you linked was written BEFORE the release of Vista. Here is one that was written AFTER the release of vista with numbers from the very same firm - http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9011360&intsrc=hm_list

A couple of points.

First, MS doesn't really care for the retail chain. They want to move Vista on new hardware, and so do their OEM partners. The figures are not really that suprising, especially when you take into account that sales of computers rose 67% in the week that Vista is released. Also worth reading another take on the whole retail figures business here

Secondly, those retail figures don't seem to include online retailers if I'm not mistaken.

Again, focussing on these figures is just burying your head in the sand. Vista is here, and has already picked up more desktop users than Linux. Another strategy is needed, because the FUD campaign doesn't appear to be working.

foxbar wrote:

"The issue is that linux means longer life of the hardware" - Why do you think Chrysler is closing down, and being sold off while people buy Toyota's? Dell = Chrysler. The market takes no excuses. People want free Linux pre-installed. Give it to them or suffer the effects of evolution like Chrysler. http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2006/10/if_50m_wont_get.html - This is what happens when Microsoft promises to bail you out in exchange for market lock. They reneg. They use, abuse, and split when the chips fall. Like a drunken party crasher.

You think Dell's problems are being caused by their refusal to install Linux???!! ...

Dell's problems are caused because they have a relatively weak laptop line. Their desktop systems are king, but lots of other companies make better laptops which folk prefer to buy.

YearOfTheLinuxDesktop wrote:



By the way, if windows fails people will move to the #1 alternative and that means mac, not linux.

Very true ...

The fact that there's no iTunes for Linux should keep most people off it.

That's another thing. How come the Linux community never gives Apple a hard time. What has Apple given the Linux community? Which parts of Apple's software portfolio runs on the Linux platform?

foxbar wrote:

Dell = Chrysler

WHERE oh WHERE? Do you see any cooralation between a computer manufacture and a car manufacture?

True, putting Linux on a PC could in fact extend the "life" of the PC due to the requirements of Linux vs Windows, however most large corporations (AOL being one of them) lease the PCs for 2-4 years and then upgrade at a discount, so besides custom applications (Web Servers, etc.) there isn't any need to put Linux on anything around here. So it's a circle argument because it's still going to be cheaper to run to Walmart as a NORMAL (read: not C9 user), and pick up that emachine with Vista Home Basic for $599.00.

The FSF can urge all they want, my doctor urges me to eat healthier, but I still drink Starbucks, my bank urges me to save money, but they're not giving me any money extra to do it.

Urge != Gonna Happen

And when the FSF can validate that switching (or providing the option) of installing Linux on a PC is going to profit them more than it does to install Windows...then I imagine they'll give it a look.

Oh and IdealStorm is a webpage, not a business plan.

Ray6 wrote:



That's another thing. How come the Linux community never gives Apple a hard time.

Because since OSX runs on BSD the Linux community has the outlook that essentially Apple is their beotches.

Now let them move off BSD, I'm willing to bet the lawsuits will commence.

Canard.  People will just stick with XP instead of switching to Linux.  Next post.