On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:45, Franki wrote:
> oh yeah, I meant to respond to this as well..
>
> MS is full of innovation. Thanks to them millions upon million of users
> can now use a PC. OS2 didn't do that, neither did UNIX or Linux. It was
> Windows 3.1 that started it and Windows 95 that really made PC's sell. I
> may not like MS, but I can not denied their kudos.
>
>
> thats not innovation, its marketing.... MS's marketing companys costs them
> a half a billion a year,
>
> and they earn every cent..
MS, I must admit, did a great job of putting "a computer on every desk in
every home" (Bill Gates). In the more developed nations, this is mostly a
reality, hence the saturated market that has been a (one of many) cause of
the technology market slump. It can be argued that the markets in poorer
nations are mostly saturated as well, since most people cannot afford to pay
the "Microsoft Tax" on top of their hardware (if they can even afford that).
Now is the time for Windows to move over, for it has outlived its usefulness.
A key to the revival of the global ecomomy, IMHO, is cheaper software --
exemplified by GNU/Linux. This in turn creates cheaper hardware, since nobody
will be forced to pay the Microsoft Tax. Cheaper computers mean more people
can afford to buy them (especially in poorer nations), and companies will be
getting better value for money (what better value is there than free?).
People have computers, but nothing truly useful to run on them. WinDOS is a
burden on computer systems, slowing them down. People have grown more
accustomed to computers, and many would like to take the next step to
something better -- GNU/Linux. It may not be there quite yet, but it's
definitely getting there.
--
Sridhar Dhanapalan.
"There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
-- Jeremy S. Anderson
