Linux-Advocacy Digest #869, Volume #25 Wed, 29 Mar 00 07:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 06:26:49 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting doc rogers from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:08:34 -0500
>
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >I think this is due to a difference in the sort of people we work with, hang
>> >out with, etc. (And just in case this would imply this to you, I'm not
>> >trying to imply that the people I know are any better because of it).
>
>> On the contrary, I think you imply that they have more mainstream, simplistic
>> requirements and expectations. People who think that getting MP3 to work is a
>> technical achievement. They're not *wrong*, they're just not aware that the
>> only reason it is difficult at all is due, whether directly or indirectly, at
>> least in part to the Windows monopoly.
>
>LOL--"I'm not trying to imply that the people I know are any better because
>of it."
>
>T-Max: "You may not be, but I am."
?????
>I think that deducing that those who like of a wide variety of OS's are more
>"mainstream" and "simplistic" due to that fact may be what's in danger of
>being simplistic here.
?????
>
>But how is your Gateway 2600 chugging along, anyway?
Right now its running RedHat.
But I can't get the external monitor to work with X, not that I've spent much
time on it. My idea was to run it as a headless server, since the internal
display is inop, and it would cost more to get fixed than the system is worth
at this point. I am more than happy to admit that none of that has anything
to do with Microsoft.
>> >I can't say that the folks I know _hate_ any OS. Rather, as far as I know,
>> >I would say that most of us look at them as tools with different flavors, so
>> >to speak. No OS is "the next best thing to sliced bread" to anyone I know
>> >personally and no one has been heard expressing anything, or behaving in a
>> >way overly negative to any OS.
>
>> Oh, please.
>
>Now you know the people I know better than I do?
No, I know common attitudes about computers (and common responses to "MS
issues") better than you do, as this is part of my profession and I have dealt
with it rather extensively. If I had a dollar for every time I heard someone
use this "we just don't get obsessed..." strawman, well, Bill Gates would
still be the richest man in the world, but I'd be gaining on him fast.
>> Not the "we're just even-headed normal folk who don't get so
>> upset out computers" stance.
>
>Well, we're just adults for whom an operating system doesn't affect our
>emotional lives very much.
Who said anything about "emotional lives"? How about your pocket book? It
sounds more and more like, despite your attempt to paint yourself as "level
headed", I think the term "apathetic, ignorant, or in denial" is more
appropriate.
>There are aspects that everyone I know likes
>about certain OSs and aspects they might not like as much. None of that
>amounts to an emotional feeling of love or hate.
None of that has anything to do with the discussion, either. Though it may
appear we've gotten off on a technical tangent with the Gateway install thing,
we are not talking about whether one OS is better than another (at least I'm
not). We're talking about whether one OS is SO MUCH BETTER THAN ALL OTHERS
that it has a monopoly on the consumer PC pre-load market.
>What do you want me to do, lie about my experiences so they cohere with
>yours and you don't have to consider other possibilities?
No, I want you to consider the possibility that your experience is not
universal, or that you are not interpreting correctly.
>I'm not denying that you hate some OSs. I just don't know anyone personally
>who _cares_ that much about any OS to love it or hate it.
Everybody I know cares about unavoidably paying extra money for shoddy goods
and accepting onerous licensing to use mainstream products, once the reality
of the situation is explained to them. Are you getting this yet? Your
argument appears to be "I'm apathetic and ignorant (or in denial), everyone I
know is apathetic and ignorant, so why are you getting so upset that apathy
and ignorance [concerning the legal and financial issue of Microsoft, with no
reference whatsoever to technical ignorance, BTW] is causing persistent harm
to the PC industry?" Is this correct?
>Everyone I know who uses computers uses Windows to some extent, sure.
Fess up. Everyone you know who uses computers uses Windows. Period. They
have to, unless they're hard-core hobbyists, in which case I doubt we'd be
having this discussion. I'm not saying they don't use other OSes. I'm saying
that MS has a commercial OS preload monopoly, and it is detrimental to you,
me, your friends, my customers, and everyone else who uses computers, whether
your or they "care" or not.
>A big chunk of the people I know who use computers use various versions of
>Unix, too. So, I wouldn't say that they never say that, really.
It's the "too" that is the issue, Doc. Saying "OSes are just tools" and "I
don't care about the Windows pre-load monopoly" requires cognitive dissonance.
(Also recognizable as apathy, ignorance, or denial. Pick you poison.)
>> It is the people who learned everything they know about software from
>> marketing that think there is no reason to hate Windows.
>
>The people I'm thinking of never worked in marketing.
I will assume that amidst the discussion you simply didn't realize how
completely you would be misinterpreting my statement to think that it referred
to *working* in marketing.
>I'm not sure what
>else you mean by "learned everything they know about software from
>marketing." Maybe something like, "only know software from reading magazine
>ads" or something? That wouldn't fit here either, because I'm thinking of
>mostly people who work in the computer industry.
"Working in the computer industry" does not, unfortunately, indicate an
understanding of computers. By the "marketing" thing, I meant that they have
a casual grasp of software issues, relying on a basic premise of "software is
magic" to explain how things really work. 95% of the populace, inside or
outside the computer industry, have tremendous trouble recognizing how
information is instrumented or processed and comprehending what is and is not
possible for software to effectively accomplish. That is my opinion, at
least. I base it on the profound number of occasions when someone wants
software to do something, and after it is explained why it would be
ineffective or impossible to do that, they reply "oh, wow, you're right; that
won't work."
Face it, people want the computer to "know what they want". There is a small
minority who simply want the computer to do what they tell it, and are willing
to face the onerous task of learning what it is they want themselves, and
learning how to tell a computer to do that. When the PC revolution occurred,
it seemed the goal was that this group would not be limited to programmers.
This is not, however, what is driving the industry, and it doesn't look like
non-programmers will be provided anything more than "buy more software" in the
way of tools to accomplish this in the near future. (In the far future, of
course, I expect that either everyone will be programmers, if we can save the
industry/society from their love of ignorance, or else they will simply be a
massive captive revenue stream for those who control the technology [as in
Bill Gate's plans for the Internet].)
If you think you can persuade me that main-stream end-users *don't* want the
computer to "know what they want" [and that seems quite contrary to all the
marketing and development and regression of functionality I've seen in the
last six years, at the very least], then I invite the discussion. I will
leave it for you to decide whether or not you belong to the group "main-stream
end-users", but if you're going to use your personal experience as a gage,
then your going to have to be consistent about that.
>A "desire for variety in the pre-load market" has little to do with _hating_
>Windows. Heck, I even have that desire, and I _like_ Windows.
You're being silly. Why are you obsessed with making this discussion about
hating Windows? I'm not posting from "alt.hate.windows", you know (or even
alt.microsoft.sucks, though I will admit that is my personal opinion). I'm
posting from alt.destroy.microsoft. A "hatred of windows" has little to do
with desiring variety in the pre-load market.
It is normal for main-stream end-users to *hate* whatever piece of software
they are having problems with. Now if only main-stream end-users could
correctly identify which piece of software they are having problems with (a
"video/CardBus/PCMCIA driver" or "Windows"), they could stop hating Microsoft.
This is problematic, of course, because the issue itself is a strawman. We
may *want* there to be some differentiation, the marketing may support the
*premise* there is some differentiation, but there is only one "piece" of
software of concern: all the code running on one computer at one time. So
long as Microsoft insists on control, but not responsibility, for how other's
use their software, there is every reason to loathe Windows as a product and
as a technology.
(It's very late, and I'm very frustrated, so please, if you disagree with the
last statement, kindly take it for granted that you simply misunderstood it.)
>> >I'll have to start asking my colleagues and friends if any of them hate
>> >Windows (or anything else, for my own curiosity).
>
>> Better yet, ask them if they like anything
>
>Sure, we all have likes and dislikes. That's not the same thing as saying
>you hate something or not. But you knew that, I'm sure.
I dislike having to shell out for a license for Windows every time I buy a PC.
I hate the fact that there are some apathetic/ignorant/denying people who say
they don't dislike having to shell out for a license for Windows every time
they buy a PC.
>> or have ever though that something
>> really useful was "the best thing since sliced bread". I mean, you want to
>> differentiate between being reasonable and simply being complacent.
>
>I thought we were talking about hating things or not. At least that was
>what I was commenting on. No one claimed that "no one has likes or
>dislikes."
No, we weren't talking about hating things or not. I used the phrase "hate
Windows" once in a 74 line message, and that is the only occurrence of that
phrase I can find in my current message base. You're not "commenting" on it;
you're using it as a straw man. If you want to point out that people should
not get emotionally upset when they are frustrated by their PCs, then say so,
wait for the response appropriate to these groups pointing out that people
often get emotional when they're being ripped off and are powerless to stop
it, and then go away.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
