Originally posted by: earthman
I'd like to know where all this "free" software is that works so great. Most of the "free" programs I've seen are pretty lame. Believe me, when I see free stuff that equals GoLive or Dreamweaver, I'll jump on it. Its the lack of serious software that has kept me from using Linux as more than an excercise in curiosity.
Once you create your great websites in GoLive and Dreamweaver, you upload them all to IIS servers running windows?
Thats assuming you can even get it to install, which has been hit or miss for me.
I could never get windows to be stable on via motherboards, so what?
Microsoft doesn't dominate through strength of numbers, it's because they sell products that are easy to use, polished, and work well, not to mention that the OS has a high percieved value due to the fact it runs millions of applications.
They dominate for many reasons, the perceived quality of their products only being one. Also realize that these are only your opinions and are disagreed with by MANY people.
Most of the people who claim otherwise don't actually seem to own or use many of their products (unless its warez), as far as I've seen personally.
How many of their products do you need to use before you're worthy of assessing their quality? How does warezing the product make you less qualified to judge its quality? Does a warezed piece of software act fundamentally different from a legit copy in any way that impacts the user's overall experience?
Microsoft owns 92% of the desktop because their product works best in that environment, not for any other reason at this point in time.
Are you really confident about that?
No other reason?
Another thing thats amazing is how much time people are willing to spend trying to set up some oddball distro that has poor usability, when if they even had to spend an extra 10 minutes setting up Windows, they would be soooooooo quick to dump on it for being a bad product.
It's quite obvious, to me at least, that a person with that attitude already has reasons to dislike windows, and either is interested in messing around with "some oddball distro" because they find it fun, and/or they think it's worth their investement of time in the long run. I don't think they would call windows a bad product because they had to spend 10 minutes doing whatever with it, but for other reasons that they had accumulated over time. This really seems like a bad example to try to make some point out of. What is your point, anyways?
I have work to get done on my systems, I can't spend days screwing around trying to get DiNgleBallZ L33T LiNUX v0.02 or some other BS to work.
Yeah, that darn dingleballz linux. You know, I have work to get done too, and when I sit down at a windows machine, I become visibly frustrated because it works in a way that overall I find extremely ... frustrating. I could say that I can get work done faster in X11 on a unix machine, but I won't, because honestly I think the rate at which a person gets things done is more dependent on the person than the tools they use. However, I still find windows a royal pain in the ass to use. But hey, that's just me. Imagine that, a subjective opinion! What a concept.
(don't think I haven't spent any time with it, I have, way too much time) I wish there was a real alternative to Microsoft, but at this point, there isn't.
Um,
for you. It should be quite obvious that for many people, there are very real alternatives. Not even alternatives. Just natural choices. Linux and BSD and OSX aren't "alternatives" to windows for me, they're just operating systems. Windows is the one that needs to do a hell of a lot of work before I'd consider it an alternative.
And don't say Mac, they're even more arrogant than Microsoft. (although I do have one)
I thought you needed to get work done? Where does arrogance enter the picture? How does your computer impose a personality on you that prevents you from getting things done? And the last comment is just hilarious. What kind of argument are you even trying to make?
The Linux distros need to get alot better and alot more standardized, before they will have enough users to interest the big software developers whose apps drive the desktop market as much or more than Microsoft's marketing power.
But to a lot of people, none of that really even matters.