On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, James Caska wrote:

> I really don't understand why people are so upset paying a few hundred
> ok maybe even thousand dollars for a product that has probably
> required hundreds of thousands of man years to create and forms the
> basis quite often of their own incomes yet fork out happily tens of
> thousands for an automobile which takes them to and from work. Most of
> you have probably spent more on petrol in a year than the software you
> use to make a living.
>
> To temper it a little I agree XP is going to stuggle for a while
> mostly because Windows 2000 is really a very good product and people
> will need a genuine reason to move on however I also agree with this
> AOL comparison, it can work. AOL customers happily use the internet as
> a service and pay for it as a service, why not software?

Because AOL has ongoing monthly costs associated with providing you with
Internet access and content; Microsoft does not.  If I use no Microsoft
product or service other than the OS, why should I be subsidizing their
ISP operation?  Or their other ventures?  And don't trot out that argument
about all the poor coders slaving over the next version.  If the next
version is worth buying, I'll buy it, THEN they make money on that
version.  Why should my fees for this version pay to develop the next --
which I must then also buy?  And if it's a subscription type of model, who
says I want to be a perpetual beta tester for whatever bug-of-the-month
they come up with?

> As for Linux, well I think it was born well of the seed of talented
> individuals formed on the basis of the 80/20 rule. That is for 20% of
> the effort you get an 80% product which is exactly what linux is but
> it takes CASH to invest that extra 80% of effort required to get a
> 100% product so don't be fooled because linux is a LONG way from being
> that 100% product equivalent to that put out by microsoft or sun.

The sort of CASH which companies like IBM, RedHat, SGI and many, many
others are and have been expending.

> You should always use the best tools for the job and stop getting
> carried away with distracting ideology.

This is not just blind anti-Microsoft ideology.  In my case at least, it's
a specific set of disagreements with specific features, policies and
methods that Microsoft seems bent on deploying, customers be damned.
Personally I like Windows for daily desktop use.  Some of the things I
disagree with are Microsoft's increasing demands to incorporate behavior
control and cash extraction techniques as supposed "features" of the OS.
The XP licensing crap, for example -- if I decide to shuffle hardware on a
weekly business, it's my business.  I know it's not here yet, but write
this down -- eventually Microsoft will want you to pay a monthly or annual
fee to keep your OS functioning, whether you upgrade or not.  Microsoft
wants you to view your computer in the same light as your TV set or your
phone - merely an appliance you use to view or receive content and
services, for which privilege you pay (only) Microsoft a monthly fee
based on how much you use it.

Needless to say, I strongly disagree with this model.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body