Re: Micro$oft is at it again...

[awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

>I don't see how the statement quoted below could begin a flame war.

Then you haven't been on this list as long as I have.  Usability 
issues have been very hot button issues in the past,  it could be that 
progress in the last nine months has assauged those issues.

>However I do now feel the need to qualify my phrase "meagerly 
competent
>person to boot and run".
>By 'run' I intended to include basic configuration tasks, such as
>getting online, adding new hardware and software.  While RPMs are

Ok, and I hold my point that those things are difficult under that 
other OS as well, fairly often at least.

>available, most of the really cool things still require ./configure ;
>make ; make install.  That's something I wouldn't wish on Joe User.  
I
>do agree that an already set up and configured Linux system is just 
as
>easy to use as a Win system.
>I'd also like to concede a point:  When referring to the free 
software
>that's out there, I was thinking of all the programs that I've found 
for
>Linux that have no readily comparable free equivalent for Windows.
>After reading Adam's response, I thought a bit more and realized that
>the programs I had in mind are more network security/monitoring and
>server oriented.  Hardly something Joe User is going to be messing
>around with when he's trying to got online to get his email, surf his
>favorite sites and run his IM.  So you got me on that one Adam.

There's more to that than you might think.  That's why I look to my 
wife (a school teacher without a technical background) as test of 
usability issues, as I've learned it's hard for me to discern what the 
"layman" will find difficult.

>Finally, in reference to not being able to picture a lot of GPL
>programmers adopting a MS language...  When has MS ever allowed 
anything
>like the consideration of ethics or ideals get in the way of it's
>arrogance?  I do not believe they have considered that there may be
>enough resistance to them now that they won't be able to steamroller 
it
>over the computer industry.
>For those who are cheesed about my above paragraph, I apologize 
(kinda)
>for venting some of my anti-MS sentiment.  (There, I said it, I 
didn't
>mean it, but I made the effort. *grin*)

<IMHO> I think they're more clever than a lot of people give them credit 
for,  they didn't get 90%+ of American desktops by bieng stupid.  I 
think Open Source still has a very possible chance of bieng shut out of 
the OS wars.  If Linux doesn't take the desktop it WILL loose the 
servers as well.  Active Directory is M$ most powerful weapon.  Making 
applications integrate into AD will rule out everything except WinY2K 
server.  I don't see much of a future for non-M$ applications on M$ 
platforms, and M$-platform developers and small companies must be living 
in a delusion if they think their products have a long term future.  M$ 
can select and assimilate other applications to fill whatever niche they 
choose to enter.  How many Winbloze users use a word processor other 
than M$-Office?  Use a browser other than IE? Less than 15% by the 
number I've seen.  By adding AD dependent features to those applications 
they can regain the mid-range server market, which is Open Source's home 
turf.  They could have done everything AD does with Open LDAP and 
Kerberos standards, but they "extended" those, making their intentions 
crystal clear (at least it appears crystal clear to me).  I give them 
one chance in three of crushing Open Source in the United States within 
the next two to three years.  But I give two out of three to Open 
Source.