In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark Kent
<mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:04:45 +0000
<tp1835-m6i.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ Mark Kent on Thursday 13 December 2007 12:46 : \____
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> Windows Vista: Sold but not deployed
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| Microsoft says it remains happy with enterprise sales of Vista -- however,
>>>>| the software behemoth acknowledges that many businesses which have bought
>>>>| Vista licences are yet to deploy the software.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Windows-Vista-Sold-but-not-deployed/0,130061733,339284495,00.htm
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course they're happy with that. They've "sold" licences and nobody
>>> will even complain about the product, because they're not using it.
>>> Total taxation!
>>
>> Someone ought to pass this to Auntie Neelie, who is still considering the
>> permanent unbundling (open PCs). This is just unacceptable.
>>
>
> The way things are going, I don't know how much it will matter. Of all
> the things I didn't expect, I think that the Asus Eee is going to be the
> final straw...
>
I have my doubts on that, mostly because the "Year of the
Linux" has yet to happen. Somehow, Microsoft comes out
of this sort of crap smelling like the proverbial rose.
Perhaps it's just ignorance of the lay public, or because
Microsoft's under the radar (the subprime mortage/global
starvation/global pollution/US political corruption
crises are arguably far more important), but we'll just
have to keep schlogging through the crap, for awhile.
Fortunately Microsoft is getting very bogged down as the
lay public might not see the lock-in, but they *do* see
the malware...lots of it.
I'm hoping it's not a variant of Stockholm's Syndrome.
And then there's FreeBSD and MacOSX, both of which are
highly capable solutions in their own right, though the
former suffers from lack of salesmanship (though eRacks
does offer it as an option, few other vendors do), and the
latter is apparently corrupted by various Apple decisions,
resulting in a less-than-ideal solution from a security
standpoint, though not nearly as bad as the solution from
Redmond; plus MacOSX is not quite general enough to put
on a garden-variety PCI-based PC yet. Of course the PC is
evolving too; the PCI-based x86 models we have today are a
far cry from the ancient 128k RAM, 5 MB disk space models
(if that!) one had in the early 80's, when the IBM 5150
was in vogue.
(Anyone else remember notchers to create "flippies"? :-) )
Very interesting times we live in. :-)
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
fortune: not found
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
