Comments on: Microsoft's court testimony: people want PCs, not operating systems
Microsoft sees the writing on the wall. Too bad it's not admitting it to customers.
Most Popular
The browser battles go on and on
roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.
3G wireless still holds promise
The next generation of 4G wireless may get all the headlines, but advanced 3G technology will likely dominate services for the next few years.
About The Open Road
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Add this feed to your online news reader
The Open Road topics
I have worked for companies that were testing the gold version of Vista and it was buggy as hell... did you ever think of why they took back, and re-released the Vista SP1, and why it was so big?
Sorry, Matt Asay is correct, in the IMB Clone world, you are buying the hardware not the OS. Everyone expects an OS to come with their computer, or at least one they know. They buy the computer for the hardware, not the OS, they want a large HD, Blue-Ray DVD drives, etc... I've never heard of anyone buying a computer (except for a Mac) for the OS.
Even on a Mac though, what draw people in is the computer form, and then the OS...
Hardware before software, it stands true, and probably always will.
One more thing, the fact he says things that are true, like making video on a Mac is easier than a PC, and that what you can do on a IBM Clone you can do on a Mac or a Linux box is true too.
I have over 15 years of professional computer experience under my belt, I remember a time when Windows didn't even exist, I have seen computer come from using a tape recorder as a data storage device to sold state drives. I have been nearly anything you can imagine under the sun when it comes to being a computer user, I've worked at some of the most prestigious universities as a trouble shooter, or last resort man before they threw away the computer, network, or infrastructure and start from scratch, so I speak from some level of experience here.
What Matt Asay says isn't lying, or Mac Fandom, it is true, you may not like it, but it doesn't make it any more true.
It's not actually as simple as you think. Most software companies have been focusing on windows for many, many years. These companies would have to go to great lengths to hire new staff with the skills to port or develop new games for mac or linux. It is a large investment to span accross platforms like that. With such a small market share that mac and linux gaming are, can you blame them for sticking with what they can already do?
Compare Dell's Business class, and give it XP ultimate, as well as comparable hard ware if you can, and you'll see your PC is more expensive than a Mac, and that is with the warrantee added in.
Don't blow smoke up someone's butt because they don't agree with you, its not nice or hygienic.
Developing software takes a lot of time. I am a Windows developer and Microsoft treat the developers as if they were gold. Why? Because we are. People by their computers (OS) for what they can run on it. If the software industry doesn't support Microsoft then guess what... they will die.
I have tried to develop in Linux and WOW it is so painful. Unclear documentation, no standards, the user has to rebuild the application to run on their machine, etc... These things make you (software company) not want to waste your time writing application for that platform.
I can't comment on OS-X for I have never used it much less write code.
Thanks,
Bobby Cannon
That being said, perhaps Microsoft should actually pay people to streamline and fix their code, it be so much easier than creating patches over bad code... MS couldn't pay me enough to do it though... I've seen their internal workings before and I felt like running away screaming and hiding in a corner like a little baby...
That stuff scares me, especially the code that they still use from 1986.
Microsoft needs to work on releasing an decent OS. It can't be that hard to size down Vista so that most machines can run it. Linux does it, why can't Vista? Microsoft has got some good ideas, if only they would cut out their bad parts. I would be a full-time Linux user if Adobe products ran on Linux.
This is almost as bad as reading an article on why you shouldn't buy foreign cars from General Motors. Your bias is disgusting. I use all platforms, I own a Macbook and a custom built PC that dual boots with Vista and Ubuntu. While I love my Macbook, I still think Vista runs extremely well and I have not had any problems at all. You only need the proper hardware to run Vista correctly. So no, you can't upgrade your system with Win 2000 and expect it to work. My desktop is constantly running Folding at Home on both cores, and my desktop with Vista is still extremely responsive and fast and is not turned off for well over a month at a time. Never have I had a problem and Vista's been running since it went RTM.
So I ask you, next time I read your blog, would you consider writing something pertaining to the topic of OPEN SOURCE. You aren't influencing anyone to switch from Vista to Open Source by writing negatively about it. You sound like Hillary Clinton constantly attacking Obama. Put some meat in your articles, and does anyone even know what Alfresco is?
- by Whirlium February 28, 2008 7:38 PM PST
- It?s really sad that companies like CNET allow such Bias fanboys to write articles like this, it?s really an embarrassment.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(15 Comments)This article really had nothing to do with Apple's O/S and I?m not sure what type of a point the author was trying to make. It seem to suggest the author was upset because the executives at Microsoft feel it?s pointless to write a manual explaining all the features of it?s operating system. Well I have news for the author I work in tech support and they are right. Farther more my IPod didn?t come with a manual explaining all its features?
While Apple's O/S has great video editing software out of the box, it remains a pretty much closed operating system to developers. Windows on the other hand is very open to developers and this is part of the reason for its mass popularity, and the reason I can find better video editing software than what you have on your MAC and countless other software. Now I?m pretty sure Microsoft would offer better software out of the box then what you see on your Apple OS but they would be looking at another anti-trust suit saying they cornered the market. If anything you should take a look at Apple's monopoly like tactics. Perfect example of Apple's proprietary monopoly like tactics is the IPod with no SDK to develop add-ons or any software that might allow you to download music from other music distribution companies or to even port your paid for music to another player.
While there are times when Microsoft doesn?t get the job done for what I need but, the thing they have done is open up there OS so I can write my own piece of software to feel the gap or I can find some software that does the job. The other thing they have been able to do is unify and create standards which are huge problems for Linux.