Re: Thousands wait in line for new Apple store - New linux store also opens (with photos)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
M

Moshe Goldfarb

On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:46:15 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2008-05-16, Ezekiel <a@b.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/05/15/line-for-boston-apple-store-stretches-four-city-blocks/
>>
>><quote>
>> Oh, hello there. I'm patiently waiting for the new Boylston Street Apple
>> Store to open here in Boston. Did I need to show up four hours early?
>> Probably not, but I just can't resist sitting in an outdoor food court while
>> pigeons buzz within inches of my fragile body. Seems nobody told them about
>> the food chain and how humans are atop said food chain. Anyhoo, you might be
>> interested to know that the line for the grand opening of the Apple Store
>> stretches a country mile! Four city blocks to be precise.
>></quote>
>
> ...while you are too busy taking a swipe a Linux over this you are
> interestingly enough ignoring the fact that this sort of thing doesn't
> happen over Microsoft products anymore. The sort of excitement that
> a new Microsoft product launch used to generate is now being generated
> by Apple instead.

Pretty much true as Vista is turning out to be less than exciting.

> ...not such a bad thing overall.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Linux loses nothing if Apple does well.

Sure it does.
Why aren't all those people jumping ship to Apple going to Linux instead?
Linux is free.
Apple is not.

THAT is the question which needs to be answered.

When you have a free product, Linux, and a potential pool of unhappy
customers (Vista users), why are these customers ready, willing and able to
pay big money for Apple vs migrating to Linux for free?

IOW what is it about Linux that keeps average Joe from using it?



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
"Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1aim6cnnfxba7$.xbad57tltpnb$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:46:15 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2008-05-16, Ezekiel <a@b.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/05/15/line-for-boston-apple-store-stretches-four-city-blocks/
>>>
>>><quote>
>>> Oh, hello there. I'm patiently waiting for the new Boylston Street Apple
>>> Store to open here in Boston. Did I need to show up four hours early?
>>> Probably not, but I just can't resist sitting in an outdoor food court
>>> while
>>> pigeons buzz within inches of my fragile body. Seems nobody told them
>>> about
>>> the food chain and how humans are atop said food chain. Anyhoo, you
>>> might be
>>> interested to know that the line for the grand opening of the Apple
>>> Store
>>> stretches a country mile! Four city blocks to be precise.
>>></quote>
>>
>> ...while you are too busy taking a swipe a Linux over this you are
>> interestingly enough ignoring the fact that this sort of thing doesn't
>> happen over Microsoft products anymore. The sort of excitement that
>> a new Microsoft product launch used to generate is now being generated
>> by Apple instead.
>
> Pretty much true as Vista is turning out to be less than exciting.
>
>> ...not such a bad thing overall.
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> Linux loses nothing if Apple does well.
>
> Sure it does.
> Why aren't all those people jumping ship to Apple going to Linux instead?
> Linux is free.
> Apple is not.
>
> THAT is the question which needs to be answered.
>
> When you have a free product, Linux, and a potential pool of unhappy
> customers (Vista users), why are these customers ready, willing and able
> to
> pay big money for Apple vs migrating to Linux for free?
>
> IOW what is it about Linux that keeps average Joe from using it?

If Linux isn't anything to worry about, how come Microsoft spends so much in
anti-Linux FUD? The internet abounds with stories like:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/05/15/ms_slush_fund_provides_big/

And you can't count in sales the downloads of Linux. I give out FREE DVDs
to anyone that asks. Those will not even be on the download counters.

And HP goes the distance producing printer drivers for an OS no one uses.
Right.

You are right, Linux looses nothing if Apple wins. In fact, Apple is BSD
UNIX inside and fully 100% interoperable with Linux. Unlike Vista
crippleware.
 
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:47:28 GMT, Canuck57 wrote:

> "Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1aim6cnnfxba7$.xbad57tltpnb$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:46:15 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2008-05-16, Ezekiel <a@b.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/05/15/line-for-boston-apple-store-stretches-four-city-blocks/
>>>>
>>>><quote>
>>>> Oh, hello there. I'm patiently waiting for the new Boylston Street Apple
>>>> Store to open here in Boston. Did I need to show up four hours early?
>>>> Probably not, but I just can't resist sitting in an outdoor food court
>>>> while
>>>> pigeons buzz within inches of my fragile body. Seems nobody told them
>>>> about
>>>> the food chain and how humans are atop said food chain. Anyhoo, you
>>>> might be
>>>> interested to know that the line for the grand opening of the Apple
>>>> Store
>>>> stretches a country mile! Four city blocks to be precise.
>>>></quote>
>>>
>>> ...while you are too busy taking a swipe a Linux over this you are
>>> interestingly enough ignoring the fact that this sort of thing doesn't
>>> happen over Microsoft products anymore. The sort of excitement that
>>> a new Microsoft product launch used to generate is now being generated
>>> by Apple instead.
>>
>> Pretty much true as Vista is turning out to be less than exciting.
>>
>>> ...not such a bad thing overall.
>>>
>>> [deletia]
>>>
>>> Linux loses nothing if Apple does well.
>>
>> Sure it does.
>> Why aren't all those people jumping ship to Apple going to Linux instead?
>> Linux is free.
>> Apple is not.
>>
>> THAT is the question which needs to be answered.
>>
>> When you have a free product, Linux, and a potential pool of unhappy
>> customers (Vista users), why are these customers ready, willing and able
>> to
>> pay big money for Apple vs migrating to Linux for free?
>>
>> IOW what is it about Linux that keeps average Joe from using it?
>
> If Linux isn't anything to worry about, how come Microsoft spends so much in
> anti-Linux FUD? The internet abounds with stories like:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/05/15/ms_slush_fund_provides_big/

Microsoft is afraid of Linux on servers, portable devices, embedded etc.
And they should be.
They have nothing to fear about desktop Linux.


> And you can't count in sales the downloads of Linux. I give out FREE DVDs
> to anyone that asks. Those will not even be on the download counters.

How many are still using it after a few days, or more realistically, hours?
People try Linux and they dump it just as fast.
Few stick with Linux.

> And HP goes the distance producing printer drivers for an OS no one uses.
> Right.

Why not?
HP is a huge company that makes very large machines too so they already
have the infrastructure in place to do so.
More icing on the cake.

The BBC decided the Linux market at 0.8 percent wasn't enough to build in
support for their multimedia player.

> You are right, Linux looses nothing if Apple wins. In fact, Apple is BSD
> UNIX inside and fully 100% interoperable with Linux. Unlike Vista
> crippleware.

I didn't say that.
I said something like:

Linux loses if Apple wins because those Apple converts could be Linux
converts.
But they are not.
And it's doubtful if they ever will be.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:00:18 -0700, George Graves wrote:

> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced with
> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or practically
> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to interest
> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going to
> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to the
> "enthusiast" segment.

If things were starting from scratch right now I would agree with you
however let's suppose that the user could go to Circuit City and buy bare
machines with no OS.

The first question would be " can I run all my Windows programs like
Quicken, iTunes (including the iStore) with the Linux machine?"

Can I use the programs my children bring home from school on it?

And so forth.

IOW the same questions people ask today.

That coupled with the consumer looking around the store at all the Windows
shrink wrap would knock Linux out of the box.

Then there is the profit motive of the store.
Why sell a Linux machine when a Windows machine will bring in more money
via all the extra programs that have to be purchased?

I don't think it will work.




--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Re: Thousands wait in line for new Apple store - New linux storealso opens (with photos)

On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:59:11 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

>> If you hate Vista, drop in Linux, a
>> no charge trial and no charge if you want to keep it. Sure beats going
>> out and buying Ultimate at $500+ for a full retail version to find out
>> it solves nothing.
>
> Sounds good in theory but it's just not happening that way. People are
> blowing $2000.00 on a Mac in stead. Why?
> I'm not really sure, but I suspect it's the multimedia interfacing with
> iPhones etc and the fact that they are pissed at Microsoft.
>
> One thing is certain, they are not flocking to free Linux.
>
>

Well the issue is essentially this.

If someone wants Windows, what do they do? They buy a PC.

If they want MacOS, what do they do? They buy a Mac.

If they want Linux (assuming they even know it exists in the first
place)? Buying a pre-installed Linux system is generally only possible if
you *know* about it ahead of time and even then selection is limited.

The only realistic way to get Linux on any PC is to install it manually
and therein lies the problem. People in general can barely handling
installing an application...you expect them to install an OS? Any OS?
There is a *very* good reason why PC manufacturers include Recovery CD/
DVDs with their computers and not Windows install CDs.

So ultimately the issue has little to do with Linux being better or worse
or being free or not free. It has everything to do with availability in
such a way that the average person can actually obtain it.

If Linux was placed on even ground in terms of pre-installed availability
with Windows then things would be very different.

--
Stephan
1986 Pontiac Fiero GT
1992 Suzuki Kan-o-tuna ('till I can get my R1)

å›ã®äº‹æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®äº‹å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Re: Thousands wait in line for new Apple store - New linux storealso opens (with photos)

George Graves wrote:

> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced with
> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or practically
> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to interest
> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going to
> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to the
> "enthusiast" segment.

If people choose "Linux" on their new system I believe it's mostly
because it is free and they intend to replace it with a pirated copy
of Windows.

Steve
 
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:28:28 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:59:11 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>
>>> If you hate Vista, drop in Linux, a
>>> no charge trial and no charge if you want to keep it. Sure beats going
>>> out and buying Ultimate at $500+ for a full retail version to find out
>>> it solves nothing.
>>
>> Sounds good in theory but it's just not happening that way. People are
>> blowing $2000.00 on a Mac in stead. Why?
>> I'm not really sure, but I suspect it's the multimedia interfacing with
>> iPhones etc and the fact that they are pissed at Microsoft.
>>
>> One thing is certain, they are not flocking to free Linux.
>>
>>
>
> Well the issue is essentially this.
>
> If someone wants Windows, what do they do? They buy a PC.
>
> If they want MacOS, what do they do? They buy a Mac.
>
> If they want Linux (assuming they even know it exists in the first
> place)? Buying a pre-installed Linux system is generally only possible if
> you *know* about it ahead of time and even then selection is limited.
>
> The only realistic way to get Linux on any PC is to install it manually
> and therein lies the problem. People in general can barely handling
> installing an application...you expect them to install an OS? Any OS?
> There is a *very* good reason why PC manufacturers include Recovery CD/
> DVDs with their computers and not Windows install CDs.
>
> So ultimately the issue has little to do with Linux being better or worse
> or being free or not free. It has everything to do with availability in
> such a way that the average person can actually obtain it.
>
> If Linux was placed on even ground in terms of pre-installed availability
> with Windows then things would be very different.

I disagree.
See my other reply to George on this.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message
news:uMrvXE7tIHA.552@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> It will take time. Took Microsoft 10 years to remove mainframe terminals
>> and Novell. But also remember, what goes around, comes around. Just
>> takes time.
>>
>> For example, say Apple increases market share just 20% a year. Say they
>> have 5% now. Say Linux is similar. In less than 13 years Microsofts
>> share will dimish to zero. While Linux and Apple are not that big, they
>> are growing and eating slowly now, and will feed in bigger chunks of
>> Microsoft as time goes by.
>>
>> Apple knows this story, Apple II and Apple IIe were previously at the top
>> of the heap before Microsoft.
>>
>> Say Win7 flops. A Microsoft worst case scenario. It will accelerate.
>> Or if Microsoft gets greedy, ups the prices whuch often happens in a
>> failing business model.
>>
>>> If Linux can't capitalize on Vista then there is no hope for Linux.
>>
>> It is. Lets say you like Vista, you go out and buy it. Why not load
>> Linux on the 3 year old PC and check it out? If you hate Vista, drop in
>> Linux, a no charge trial and no charge if you want to keep it. Sure
>> beats going out and buying Ultimate at $500+ for a full retail version to
>> find out it solves nothing.
>>
>> BTW, another achilles heal. Microsoft Windows products, especially the
>> likes of Vista do not integrate well in a mixed server environment
>> outside of HTTP.
>>
>> Linux integrates nicely. A business driver. Also useful if your older
>> systems are all UNIX based. NFS mounts so much easier to other xNIXs it
>> is nice. Vista isn't compatible or as stable with much.
>>
>>
>
>
> Re Apple, you are missing the point. Apple is an exclusive product, be it
> a MacBook Pro, iPhone, iPod. To beat Microsoft, Apple would have to reduce
> prices, but then a Mac wouldn't be an exclusive product anymore, and would
> just become an also-ran. Steve Jobs doesn't want that to happen. He has
> filled a niche which Microsoft will never get into, and he has expanded
> Apple beyond a computer + OS.

In time, Apple will compete favorably. They have 2 advantages. They
control the whole system, no bickering with Dell, HP, Lenovo and others.

Second, a superior OS. Mac blows away Vista.

> Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are not enemies. They both accept that Apple is
> classy and Microsoft is tacky, but they have both done very well in their
> niches, and accept that one couldn't have made it without the other.

Huh? Ask them that. But agree, Apple is classy, Vista is a pig.

> Linux as a desktop OS lacks centralized development. Too many are doing
> their own thing with it. It will never have the class of MacOS, and will
> never be as developed or as versatile as a Microsoft OS.

This is true. But Linux borrows from Darwin. Good ideas float, bad ideas
sink. Microsoft is WeSaySo so you jump. WeSaySo is doomed. Eventually,
Darwin will in time produce a superior product than any WeSaySo corp can
produce, it is inevitable.

The real power is going to go to a corporation that can work with it, not
against it.

> Like MacOS, it has a small niche but at the other end of the ballpark.

That niche is growing. Much like MS-DOS did.

> As a server OS, it should be all conquering, but it isn't. MS Server 2003
> cut into it quite decisively, and MS Server 2008 will cut deeper still.

MS server crap has been losing market share for years. Up until say 4 years
ago, M$ was on a role, but in places I work, Linux has been eating Solaris
and MS-windows alive.

> You seem to have a fascination with $500 Vista Ultimate, but Vista is more
> than just the one edition. Most people buy a computer onto which Vista has
> been pre-installed. They don't pay $500 for the OS. However, they do have
> the option of paying for it and, with all due respect, is their right and
> personal business.

Grossly over priced. Far past market elastisity and too fat. PCs have gone
from 8088 @$8,000 in 1981 to machines a 1000 times more capactity in 27
years. OS has gone from $25 to $500.

This is backwards. OS is over priced, as is MS-Office. That is why there
is predatory pricing in EeePC, Taiwan, India etc. No fool in Asia is going
to pay $500 for Ultimate.

> One thing you can be sure. If you placed two identical expensive looking
> computers side by side, loaded one with Vista and one with Linux, and then
> put a' free to good home' sticker on each one, the Vista machine would be
> picked up first..

If price be the same, Apple, then Linux. Vista can pay me after my last PC.

Are you not embaraced at Vista performance and quality? 5+ years in the
making, the billions that MS makes off of it and the gross margine?

MS aught to spend less on BS and get back to work or they will be creamed.
People will not continue to pay current rates for a sucky OS like Vista.
Dream on. Produce quality or become fly dust in the rad.

I will not buy a M$ OS unless I have at least a 5 times ROI in 3 months.
 
"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:mP6dnaT9Ea0BhbPVnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com...

> Well the issue is essentially this.
>
> If someone wants Windows, what do they do? They buy a PC.
>
> If they want MacOS, what do they do? They buy a Mac.
>
> If they want Linux (assuming they even know it exists in the first
> place)? Buying a pre-installed Linux system is generally only possible if
> you *know* about it ahead of time and even then selection is limited.
>
> The only realistic way to get Linux on any PC is to install it manually
> and therein lies the problem. People in general can barely handling
> installing an application...you expect them to install an OS? Any OS?
> There is a *very* good reason why PC manufacturers include Recovery CD/
> DVDs with their computers and not Windows install CDs.
>
> So ultimately the issue has little to do with Linux being better or worse
> or being free or not free. It has everything to do with availability in
> such a way that the average person can actually obtain it.
>
> If Linux was placed on even ground in terms of pre-installed availability
> with Windows then things would be very different.

They indeed would be different. If a Best Buy PC booted up, said Linux or
Vista, Vista $50 -- Microsoft would be in a whole world of hurt. Right now,
Microsoft is running their business on predatory and extortionist pricing.
Due to "bundling" practices. Cracking at the seams too.
 
"George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C4536012001713BCF01846D8@news.comcast.net...

> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced
> with
> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or
> practically
> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to
> interest
> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going
> to
> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to the
> "enthusiast" segment.

Not likely. Microsoft knows it's market penetration and market share
depends on bundling. As long as your commodity home PC is strapped with a
Vista product, the numbers rise. The whole idea is to not give the
commodity home PC buyer a choice. A PC from Dell, HP, Lenovo, Aspire with
bundled Vista or an Apple. It is about numbers and perception.

I do agree on one point though. Linux vendors like RedHat and Novell have
their heads up their butts right now. They could flog their Linux desktops
to Compaq/HP, Dell and others and make a real dent into the monopolistic
hold that MS has. In fact, as more people learn Linux isn't so scary and
can do the tasks, the more that will flock to it. It would help their
server sales to get more people into Linux. If I was RetHat or Novell, I
would be selling it for $35 or less with Open Office and the 9 yards. No
inferior Premium branding and snob appeal, deliver the real thing.

Even a vendor, say HP, say they adopted Linux and developed it. And do like
Apple, the OS and hardware removing the HW issues... M$ would be in big
hurt. This is why MS gets $50 OEM from HP and not $500 for Ultimate. There
is a quiet, but deadly battle going on and MS in their shorts on this.

The porting to Linux is already occurring. I am not sure of this, but HP
seems to offer working Linux drivers for everything. Makes HP printer #1 in
my books. I have no problems for getting drivers but for a few hold outs
like Broadcom (54g) and real odd ball stuff that companies like ATI/AMD want
to forget about like TV Wonder USB 2. But they are dying fast.

Buy Linux friendly, and when the Vista becomes tiresome or a hand me down,
Linux will work right on it. And not hard to do either. I was going to do
that with my XP system in favour of the new system running Vista. But after
trying Vista, I realised my XP system is going to have to last 2-3 years to
see if Linux is better than Win7 or is Win7 going to be what Vista should
have been.
 
"Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1odiq5vmlc4zz$.1dsfbhtwgpkb6.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:00:18 -0700, George Graves wrote:
>
>> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
>> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced
>> with
>> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or
>> practically
>> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
>> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to
>> interest
>> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going
>> to
>> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to
>> the
>> "enthusiast" segment.
>
> If things were starting from scratch right now I would agree with you
> however let's suppose that the user could go to Circuit City and buy bare
> machines with no OS.
>
> The first question would be " can I run all my Windows programs like
> Quicken, iTunes (including the iStore) with the Linux machine?"
>
> Can I use the programs my children bring home from school on it?
>
> And so forth.
>
> IOW the same questions people ask today.
>
> That coupled with the consumer looking around the store at all the Windows
> shrink wrap would knock Linux out of the box.
>
> Then there is the profit motive of the store.
> Why sell a Linux machine when a Windows machine will bring in more money
> via all the extra programs that have to be purchased?
>
> I don't think it will work.

You are right. Go to the store and ask for where the return sales are.
Usually can get a few hundred off of a Vista crapware on a quad core AMD or
Intel for cheap as the base install is screwed up. "It didn't work with my
Video capture, camera or printer..." returns are what you look for. Vista
x64 Premium are usually good catches.

Bonus for Linux users.
 
On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:46:06 GMT, Canuck57 wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
> news:mP6dnaT9Ea0BhbPVnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
>> Well the issue is essentially this.
>>
>> If someone wants Windows, what do they do? They buy a PC.
>>
>> If they want MacOS, what do they do? They buy a Mac.
>>
>> If they want Linux (assuming they even know it exists in the first
>> place)? Buying a pre-installed Linux system is generally only possible if
>> you *know* about it ahead of time and even then selection is limited.
>>
>> The only realistic way to get Linux on any PC is to install it manually
>> and therein lies the problem. People in general can barely handling
>> installing an application...you expect them to install an OS? Any OS?
>> There is a *very* good reason why PC manufacturers include Recovery CD/
>> DVDs with their computers and not Windows install CDs.
>>
>> So ultimately the issue has little to do with Linux being better or worse
>> or being free or not free. It has everything to do with availability in
>> such a way that the average person can actually obtain it.
>>
>> If Linux was placed on even ground in terms of pre-installed availability
>> with Windows then things would be very different.
>
> They indeed would be different. If a Best Buy PC booted up, said Linux or
> Vista, Vista $50 -- Microsoft would be in a whole world of hurt. Right now,
> Microsoft is running their business on predatory and extortionist pricing.
> Due to "bundling" practices. Cracking at the seams too.

Are you kidding?

See my other post but in a nutshell, people will still demand Windows.
Just like they do now.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
"Steve de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote in message
news:H6KdnXxKiLiVhLPVnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
> George Graves wrote:
>
>> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
>> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced
>> with a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or
>> practically free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would
>> go for it. If that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the
>> critical mass to interest major developers in porting their apps to the
>> platform. That's not going to happen, however and I think that Linux will
>> always remain regulated to the "enthusiast" segment.
>
> If people choose "Linux" on their new system I believe it's mostly because
> it is free and they intend to replace it with a pirated copy of Windows.

Hm, you are kidding, why bother. I would not waste the bandwidth for a free
copy of Vista. Maybe Xp x64... got a key and a link?

Ever seen Compiz at work? Makes Vista look so last century. Does not
require a $500 video card to work right either, mine is $50.
 
On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:50:20 GMT, Canuck57 wrote:

> "Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1odiq5vmlc4zz$.1dsfbhtwgpkb6.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:00:18 -0700, George Graves wrote:
>>
>>> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
>>> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced
>>> with
>>> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or
>>> practically
>>> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
>>> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to
>>> interest
>>> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going
>>> to
>>> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to
>>> the
>>> "enthusiast" segment.
>>
>> If things were starting from scratch right now I would agree with you
>> however let's suppose that the user could go to Circuit City and buy bare
>> machines with no OS.
>>
>> The first question would be " can I run all my Windows programs like
>> Quicken, iTunes (including the iStore) with the Linux machine?"
>>
>> Can I use the programs my children bring home from school on it?
>>
>> And so forth.
>>
>> IOW the same questions people ask today.
>>
>> That coupled with the consumer looking around the store at all the Windows
>> shrink wrap would knock Linux out of the box.
>>
>> Then there is the profit motive of the store.
>> Why sell a Linux machine when a Windows machine will bring in more money
>> via all the extra programs that have to be purchased?
>>
>> I don't think it will work.
>
> You are right. Go to the store and ask for where the return sales are.
> Usually can get a few hundred off of a Vista crapware on a quad core AMD or
> Intel for cheap as the base install is screwed up. "It didn't work with my
> Video capture, camera or printer..." returns are what you look for. Vista
> x64 Premium are usually good catches.
>
> Bonus for Linux users.

Linux users typically are searching in dumpsters for hardware.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:20:37 -0700, Moshe Goldfarb wrote
(in article <1odiq5vmlc4zz$.1dsfbhtwgpkb6.dlg@40tude.net>):

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:00:18 -0700, George Graves wrote:
>
>> I believe that Linux would have a larger "market share" IF computer
>> manufacturers stopped pre-installing Windows on their machines. If faced
>> with
>> a choice of buying Windows retail, and getting Linux for free (or
>> practically
>> free - that $10 CD price, you know) a lot more people would go for it. If
>> that occurred, Linux user-ship would soon reach the critical mass to
>> interest
>> major developers in porting their apps to the platform. That's not going to
>> happen, however and I think that Linux will always remain regulated to the
>> "enthusiast" segment.
>
> If things were starting from scratch right now I would agree with you
> however let's suppose that the user could go to Circuit City and buy bare
> machines with no OS.
>
> The first question would be " can I run all my Windows programs like
> Quicken, iTunes (including the iStore) with the Linux machine?"
>
> Can I use the programs my children bring home from school on it?
>
> And so forth.
>
> IOW the same questions people ask today.
>
> That coupled with the consumer looking around the store at all the Windows
> shrink wrap would knock Linux out of the box.
>
> Then there is the profit motive of the store.
> Why sell a Linux machine when a Windows machine will bring in more money
> via all the extra programs that have to be purchased?
>
> I don't think it will work.


No, it won't. But I didn't mean to suggest that Linux would suddeny become
"THE" replacement for Windows, But more people would contemplate it. It
doesn't really matter though, my scenario will never occur. It's just a bit
of "what if" -ism on my part.
 
While I love Linux, and use it daily - it doesn't come accross as a hobbiest
project sometimes. Yes it may never crash, but having to restart the Window
Server because the Gnome control applet can't corectly detect your sound
card it just as bad as a reboot for most people. I had to restart it when I
entered an invalid WEP key too, pretty shoddy IMO.

So I avoid Linux as a entertainment/mobile OS, saving it for my development
machine. Netbeans and Eclipse are it's saving grace, along with
Apache/Tomcat and the other severs.

It's no competition to Mac, as it's a long long way from "just working" -
and as far as competition for Windows goes, it's a tough challange to
compete with Microsoft's ecosystem - .NET, ASP.NET, Acive Directory, SQL
Server, Windows Server - they may not be cheap, but to most companies the
licience fees are a small percentage of their profits, and cheaper than the
extra training and staff required to run a Mac/*Nix network. Being "free"
just isn't enough, why do people still buy Photoshop and Office when there's
free alternitives?

Don't get me wrong, I've been using Linux since Red Hat 5 (that box had 32Mb
RAM!) and absolutely love it for what it is. What it's not however, it a
mass market OS, and I can't see it ever being that while it's so fractured.
Too many distributions, disagreements (see Fedora's refusal to bundle
Firefox 2 because they didn't like it. That's not their choice!!) mean
Windows will have the edge.

Marc
 
"Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1fsflu6lifet3$.18z3cci7bck98.dlg@40tude.net...

>> They indeed would be different. If a Best Buy PC booted up, said Linux
>> or
>> Vista, Vista $50 -- Microsoft would be in a whole world of hurt. Right
>> now,
>> Microsoft is running their business on predatory and extortionist
>> pricing.
>> Due to "bundling" practices. Cracking at the seams too.
>
> Are you kidding?
>
> See my other post but in a nutshell, people will still demand Windows.
> Just like they do now.

Not kidding.

Right now many buy a PC with Vista, decide it is trash, then buy XP. Double
dip.

Many will opt for Vista. Many will not. Some might even by one copy of XP.

Me, XP or Linux.
 
Re: Thousands wait in line for new Apple store - New linux storealso opens (with photos)

Canuck57 wrote:
> "Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1fsflu6lifet3$.18z3cci7bck98.dlg@40tude.net...
>
>>> They indeed would be different. If a Best Buy PC booted up, said Linux
>>> or
>>> Vista, Vista $50 -- Microsoft would be in a whole world of hurt. Right
>>> now,
>>> Microsoft is running their business on predatory and extortionist
>>> pricing.
>>> Due to "bundling" practices. Cracking at the seams too.
>> Are you kidding?
>>
>> See my other post but in a nutshell, people will still demand Windows.
>> Just like they do now.
>
> Not kidding.
>
> Right now many buy a PC with Vista, decide it is trash, then buy XP. Double
> dip.
>
> Many will opt for Vista. Many will not. Some might even by one copy of XP.
>
> Me, XP or Linux.
>
>

A national computer store chain here in Spain will sell you a computer
with Vista, XP or Ubuntu. If you opt for Ubuntu, the computer costs 50
euros less.

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@nukethisgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g0mrto$pbh$2@aioe.org...


> A national computer store chain here in Spain will sell you a computer
> with Vista, XP or Ubuntu. If you opt for Ubuntu, the computer costs 50
> euros less.
>
> Alias

Didn't you say vista was hundreds of Euros there?
 
Re: Thousands wait in line for new Apple store - New linux storealso opens (with photos)

dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@nukethisgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g0mrto$pbh$2@aioe.org...
>
>
>> A national computer store chain here in Spain will sell you a computer
>> with Vista, XP or Ubuntu. If you opt for Ubuntu, the computer costs 50
>> euros less.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Didn't you say vista was hundreds of Euros there?

Yes, but if your memory had served you well, you would recall that I was
talking about Retail, not a computer with Vista preinstalled.

To give you an idea of retail prices here, see:

http://www.elcorteingles.es/informatica/producto/producto.asp?referencia=28610744055

And retail Office 2007 Ultimate:

http://www.elcorteingles.es/informatica/producto/producto.asp?referencia=28610737760

They've even put the price in US dollars for you.

Alias
 
Back
Top