-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ bbgruff on Sunday 06 Dec 2009 23:35 : \____
> Megabyte wrote:
>
>> Thinking that Google's cloud based OS will kick Windows to the curb is
>> overly optimistic IMHO given the security and privacy constraints of cloud
>> based computing. It is really nice, however, to see the activity and
>> competition in the Netbook OS space as in the end, users will benefit from
>> the increased competitiveness. With Linux, Linux based Chromium, Moblin
>> and other alternatives to Windows, MS may have to reconsider their 8 year
>> old Windows XP or Windows 7 Starter edition Netbook strategy. This will
>> drive enhancements and creativity on the FOSS side as well which is so
>> much better than the virtual monopoly that has existed for years on the
>> desktop. I think it will make for a much healthier IT eco system. MS
>> will be forced to look at interoperable standards and will not be able to
>> sit around like they did with IE 6 before Firefox arrived.
>
> That's a very nice post, and one can't help but agree with everything you
> wrote.
> However, from time to time over the past couple of weeks, I've tried to
> stand back from the view expressed by the likes of us in this group, and
> I've tried to look at it from the consumer's point of view.
> In doing so, I came to a very different conclusion. In fact, I managed to
> convince myself that this "minimalist" approach, which in effect takes the
> netbook "back to its roots", might actually be just what I want/need for my
> own travels, holidays, etc!
>
> It seems to me that MS managed to "hi-jack" the original concept, turning
> the netbook into a cheaper, poor-man's laptop. If you think about it as a
> completely new, small, inexpensive, reliable, maintenance-free web-access
> device, and think what you really need for travelling (and for many
> consumers, all the time!), you can come up with a very different, and very
> positive, perception of it.
>
> Your comment on "interoperable standards" I found very telling, and I'm sure
> you are right there.
Standards are intended to make things interoperable though, so what
does "interoperable standards" mean?
Microsoft tried using such terms to justify multiple "standards", where one is
just the proprietary corpus of an ugly (messy) application with legacy baggage.
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Behind every great computer sits a skinny little geek.
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 2075800k total, 1660792k used, 415008k free, 12460k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkscTFMACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5PWQCfVgJB9EHTLjhfrBQNSSTkcKCg
XuwAn3wLapN2pAAo5PtV9ybW5dj+B/B2
=C45s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
