Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Why Windows Being Bad is Good for Microsoft (or a Case for Unbundling)

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 05:02:13 +0000, Homer wrote:

> Verily I say unto thee, that High Plains Thumper spake thusly:
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> Most people dont want to have to do that. Installing the OS is a
>>> job for jobsworth tape monkeys. Most people want the PC ready out
>>> of the box for them to install and configure their application SW
> Right, so people (FSVO: "people") don't want to install an OS, but they
> are joyful at the prospect of researching for apps they need, locating a
> retailer to purchase those apps from, paying vast amounts of money for
> them, waiting for them to arrive through the mail (or trawling for hours
> through shops filled with clueless clerks), receiving them, reading the
> installation requirements; license and instructions, reluctantly
> agreeing to a prohibitive license, installing the software (along with
> whatever other steps may be required, such as the inevitable "disable
> your antivirus and/or firewall"), dealing with the equally inevitable
> installation issues (everything from installation failure to BSODs),
> typing in the serial number, going through the laborious; insulting and
> often dysfunctional "activation" process, then finally discovering that
> this "killer app" doesn't actually work very well on their version of
> Windows (Vista), as they wait months for an update that's "coming soon"?
> Idiot.
>>>> Should houses also be built with furniture bolted in? Or 
>>>> restaurant serve just one meal because choice is bad and cooking
>>>> is too complicated?
>>> Is that supposed to be an analogy? If so it was incredibly bad.
>> Yet does not explain why.
>>> New houses DO come with electrictiy and water however ....
>> ???
> Talk about bad analogies!
> I don't know about Hardon's neck of the woods, but round these parts
> people have a /choice/ of energy supplier. As for water, that isn't
> "owned" by private companies (in the UK, anyway). One pays the
> /government/ (local council) water charges as part of the council tax.
> Roy's analogy was a good one, however.
> Imagine if a property company only allowed you to purchase a house under
> the strict conditions that you only buy your carpets from General
> George, and you only buy your furnishings from Homebase, etc., etc. That
> is exactly what it is like buying the vast majority of PCs today. If you
> buy the PC then you /must/ "furnish" it with Microsoft's Windows.
> That, ladies and gentlemen, is racketeering, pure and simple.
> Hardon obviously doesn't like choice, because he supports this racket.

Naturally, because Hardon Quack is a M$ fanboi, "long term XP user &
programmer" (his words - Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Message-ID: <87y7hxdaei.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>).

Most people are sheep.  
Microsoft is very effective 
at fleecing the flockers.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index