«

On Jan 24, 4:03*pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> Micoshaft Appil asstroturfing fraudster with a big girlie butt
> pounding the sock One Shot, One Kill wrote on behalf of Half Wits from
> Micoshaft Appil Department of Marketing:

> > the oems make money selling computers people want to buy.

And Linux users buy machines that have Windows preinstalled.

> > there is no market for desktop linux machines.

More accurately - Linux users would rather install their favorite
distribution than be bound to a stripped-down version provided by the
OEM.

> One blank and one pre-mature ejactitation from a micoshaftee
> fanboi paid to asstroturf on its behalf.

> You been claiming that since when fanboi?

WinTrolls in this group have been predicting the death of Linux since
about 1995, and Microsoft has been predicting the death of *nix since
about 1983. Every version MS-DOS was supposed to be the "Unix Killer"
and every version of Windows since Windows 3.11 was supposed to be the
"Linux Killer". Microsoft announced NT 3.0 vaporware as "a better
Unix than Unix". At the time he was referring to Sun's newly
announced Solaris based IPC Lunchbox and SLC Pizza Box. Adding 1 X11
terminal brought the cost of the Sun to less than $3000 per seat, and
Windows 3.1 cost about $3500 per seat. The Sun could actually support
up to 4 X-terminals, quite easily.

By the time Microsoft announced NT, Linux had already been posted on
the FSF site, and the GNU project had ported most UNIX apps and X11 to
Linux. By January of 1993, you could get an "ammo box" of 100 3.5
inch floppy disks to load Linux. About 2 months later, you could get
a CD-ROM to eliminate the manual disk flipping. SLS Linux had a
default screen saver that said "Avoid the 'Gates' of Hell - Use
Linux".

Microsoft was concerned enough that when Walt Mossberg of the Wall
Street Journal wrote a mildly positive review of Linux, Microsoft
pulled a full page ad, telling the management that if Dow Jones liked
Linux so much, Linux could pay for the ad.

Microsoft wasn't that worried about competing with a $7,000 UNIX
workstation, but when Linux started popping up on discarded 80386 and
80486 SX/50 machines, AND was offering better performance, stability,
reliability, and security, that was a problem for Microsoft.

> Dell still got more PCs on offer than ever before you started
> ranting and make bucket loads of money selling Linux.

Dell, HP, Acer, and Lenovo are all acutely aware that a substantial
number of their PC customers are running Linux on the machine. Each
company has limited support for Linux, and there are some tell-tale
signs that the customer intends to run Linux, like purchasing extra
memory, extra hard drive, and installation media for Windows XP.

Many Linux users have been buying Windows NetBooks, not because they
want windows so badly, but because they can install their favorite
version(s) of Linux on the real hard drive, and the 1 Gig of RAM.

And of course, Dell, HP, Acer, and Lenovo are eyeballing Apple's
profit margin, compared to the losses they have been experiencing,
especially on "Windows only" devices, and are itching to find a way to
tap into the Linux market in a way that gives them the ability to make
40-60% profit margins like Apple does.

HP and Dell announce that some of their products will be offered with
Linux about 4 times a year. It's not that they actually plan to sell
these machines without Windows. It's their way of telling buyers that
they can buy these machines and install Linux themselves and
everything including the 3D graphics, WiFi, cellular, and storage will
work perfectly.

> So do most mainstream hardware suppliers
> switching over to Linux phones, Linux Android tablets, and
> they of course shipping 33% of all netbooks.

And then of course, there are the millions of Linux CDs shipped with
books, magazines, mother boards, and PCs.

> A lot of CN manufacturers have now entered the desktop PC market
> as a commodity with commodity pricing.

Actually the United States is one of the few markets where you can't
go into the popular retail stores and buy a "NO-OS" machine. These
machines are specifically designed to run Linux. The US courts are
have let Microsoft sue OEMs and demand full retail price for promoting
piracy - this based on the Napster case as a precedent.

> 75% of Linux is now written and supported by corporate paid developers.

And the other 25% are professionals supporting corporate developers
who don't want OSS contributions credited to them out of fear of
liability or retailiation from Microsoft.

> And your post is a purile attempt to compete with Linux
> without a working desktop micoshaft product.

Windows 7 works. It's better than Vista (but then so was XP).
Still to be resolved though:
Is Windows 7 better than Windows XP?
Is Windows 7 better than a Mac?
Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux AND Windows XP?
Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux AND Windows 7?
Is Windows 7 alone better than a PC running Linux alone?

To answer that, we have to look at those things that ONLY Windows 7
can do.

MS-Office 2007 and 2010 - Will corporate and professionals be willing
to spend all of the time and money to upgrade to Windows 7, MS-Office
2007 knowing that MS-Office 2010 will render MS-Office 2007 obsolete?
Keep in mind that the cost of these upgrades isn't just the hardware
and software - it's the cost of professional installers, license
administration, registration of users, backup of personal and
corporate information, installation itself or replacement of a working
PC with another only marginally better PC, restoration of information
to the new system, configuration of 3rd party software and personal
preferences, and re-entering forms, shortcuts, and other "Lost"
information embedded in the guts of Windows registries and other
proprietary files.

Then comes the question of RETURN on this investment.

Will Windows 7 run faster?
Probably not. It needs more memory and hard drive, and still uses the
NTFS file system which limits overall performance of the system. Most
users are already running Windows XP on 2 gig or 3 gig dual-core
processors with accelerated 3G graphics. Windows 7 will use more of
that memory for "dead code" and will have even more registry values
and file I/O and network I/O due to the larger libraries and
application code.

Will Windows 7 be more secure?
Probably not. Most experts are still recommending that Windows 7
users get a good 3rd party Anti-Virus package such as Norton-360 or
McCaffee. These provide Anti-Virus, firewall, and malware detection
and removal. The filters are updated at least once a week, and can
generally clean up machines even after they've been infected.

Will Windows 7 be more stable?
Probably not - Windows XP has become pretty stable these days. If it
suddenly became unstable, it's highly likely that customers would
suspect that Microsoft was sabatoging their own product in an attempt
to force Windows XP users to upgrade to Windows 7. While the tactic
might work for some customers, many large corporate customers got so
burned during the release of Windows XP that they have formulated
plans to migrate to Linux if Microsoft attempts a forced upgrade such
as this again.

Will Windows 7 be more functional?
There are no real "Killer Apps" for Windows 7. At the same time,
Linux has several "killer apps" such as SecondLife viewers, the
OpenOffice suite, and a variety of collaboration tools based on those
used by the teams that developed the Linux kernel, libraries, and
thousands of Linux applications.

Will Windows 7 lower software costs?
Actually, the opposite - 3rd party software will have to be upgraded
or repurchased, even Microsoft applications, license packs, and
support programs will have to be upgraded - with an increase in
recurring costs.


> The joke is still on micoshaft crocporation to produce
> desktop PCs cheaper than Linux.

Actually, Windows makes PCs cheaper than those capable of running
Linux. Since there is almost no significant difference in the
performance between most PCs running Windows 7 (due to the intense
disk I/O), the machines that ONLY run Windows generally costs more to
produce - and are generally harder to sell. Machines that are ready
to run Linux with fully supported hardware so that everything works
automatically or with minimal GUI configuration - tend to sell for
much higher prices, even though they are cheaper to produce. In
addition, since Linux users often want to run XP as a virtual client,
they are more likely to purchase extra RAM. Often they will want to
purchase a second hard drive and a carrier that will allow them to
boot from the alternate drive (which boots into Linux) or they will
want to save the Windows 7 drive in case they need warranty support on
the hardware. These extra devices are usually sold at a higher
profit. Linux users will also be inclined to go for faster drives,
such as 7200 RPM SATA-II drives - since Linux can actually exploit the
3 gigabit/second transfer speeds.

What Linux users DON'T order is Microsoft Office, Visio, Project, and
Quicken. These applications could be run under virtualized XP and
wouldn't need to be upgraded. The virtual images are easier to back-up
than native mode Windows, and the backups are very reliable.

What Linux users ARE likely to purchase is support services,
especially extended hardware replacement plans, since they get
software support from the Linux distributor and problems that can't be
resolved are nearly ALWAYS hardware related problems. Insurance
against a broken fan, broken LCD, or keyboard that has had soda-pop
spilled on it is a good investment in "peace of mind". You know there
is a 99% chance that you'll never need it, but if the graphics chip
overheads because the fan got loaded with dust after two year on your
favorite woolly pants and sweater, next to your crackers, cookies, and
soda - it's nice to know that you can swap out for a reconditioned
machine that has a new graphics chip.

> It is worthwhile for everyone to learn Linux.
> Searchwww.youtube.comfor compiz and linux and you begin
> to see how the other half live a world apart
> and more advanced than micoshaftees.

Linux is easy enough for very non-technical people to use. At the
same time, those who really want to know how a computer works can get
as much information as they like. Even if they can't get the source
to DB/2, they can learn how databases really work by looking at open
source code like MySQL and PostGreSQL. Even if they want to see how
graphics editors like Power Point work, they can look at the source to
Open Office Presents.

Bill Gates has already retired. Several other of the "greats" at
Microsoft have already cashed in and moved on. Paul Allen is almost
completely gone. Nathan Myrvold is also gone. Others have moved out
of the technical and into more business and legal related executive
duties.

At some point, Microsoft will be completely at the mercy of a handful
of elite Vunderkids who think they are indespensible - much like the
guys who supported MVS back in 1992 - and were suddenly terminated -
leaving a vacuum of expertise for a while. Many of these guys had to
be hired back for Y2K - at 4 times the hourly rate.

> Here is some guidance to go practice your Linux
> to achieve similar results with 3D translucent Linux Desktop.

If your really want to look at the trends in software that are likely
in 2010, take a look at the Emerald Viewer for Linux. Compare it to
the SecondLife viewer for Windows. The Windows version is slow,
jerky, and in most cases looks more like a sequence of stills at about
4 frames per second. The Linux version of Emerald looks more like a
movie running 30 frames per second (or faster) with the ability to get
remarkably good detail as you pan around the room, looking at objects
as you walk by them, and as you dance looking at other people dancing
using mouse-look.

Imagine a company like QVC setting up "stores" where you could look at
real designs of real clothes using an avitar that has your real
measurements, including waist, hips, thighs, calves, and feet. You
could also get real color approximating the color of your real hair
and face by comparing them to a photograph. Then you could actually
model the items you like best, buying virtual clothes with Lindens,
then picking REAL versions of your favorites, paying for them with
real dollars.

Fashion designers are already taking inspirations from Second Life,
and are even test-marketing designs there, offering virtual clothing
that almost exactly matches designs they can actually mass-produce.

There are even concept cars that are being shown in SL that may be
available for actual sale in real life within 2-3 years. You can even
design buildings, including all the interior decorating - using items
that can be purchased in real life now, or in the future.

And that's just ONE application that Linux makes possible and Windows
can't.

> Converting an ISO file to a bootable USB stick or a bootable
> SD Card for EEE is easy.

The most important thing about that bootable USB stick is that you can
test a PC or laptop to know, for certain, whether a computer you are
purchasing will work with your favorite Linux distributions. Lately,
most retailers have been locking down the DVD drive to prevent
shoppers from running the "Knoppix test". The "Thumb Drive" test can
be done without making ANY ugly modifications to the hard drive. And
most retailers are not going to want to block off the USB ports on all
4 sides of the machine. And then there's that SDHD slot...

> Without being able to convert a distro into a bootable USB flash /SD Card,
> that distro can't be easily loaded into netbook like EEE
> and stand to miss out on users installing it into netbooks.

Flash/SD distributions are also perfect for people who have to move
between different machines at different locations. Rather than try to
sort out some user's crazy windows settings, you plug in the thumb
drive, bring up Linux, get connected, and you have all your favorite
apps, personal files, and private information ready to go. Add an
external USB drive and you can pretty much do anything you want.

This is also handy when you want to review documents or make notes on
your netbook while you are travelling, then want to have access to the
full power of a full sized notebook when you are working in an office,
hotel, or from your couch at home.

> So I would recommend all distro mainters look at their netbook
> boot strategy and offer something to boot their distros
> from USB flash and SD cards or miss out on users installing it into
> netbooks.

Most top distributions now have a solid "floor to ceiling" strategy.
They can boot from the DVD, install to a thumb drive or USB drive, and
can support dual 1080p monitors, remote X11 servers, remote access
Windows systems, and then plug into a netbook where they can run a
1024x768 display on a 10 inch screen with a keyboard and screen that
fit nicely in the "coach" seat of an airplane.

There are also teleconferencing services such as Unyte, which allow
Windows and Linux users to take turns presenting with minimal effort.

> Having done a few conversions, a pattern emerges that works well for
> most syslinux / isolinux / extlinux based distros.

One of the big challenges for the OEMs is trying to figure out how to
package Linux and Windows together. Should they pre-install Ubuntu?
Red Hat? Fedora? SUSE? something else? Should they install "the
works" or just "the basics"? How can they make sure that a computer
sitting on the shelves for 2 months doesn't become obsolete because a
new version of Linux came out? Or a new distribution?

And the Final barrier is Microsoft - who still refuses to permit OEMs
to install Windows and Linux on the same PC in a configuration that
will allow both to run at the same time.

On the other hand, the Linux community has already figured out how to
install Linux on a machine that has been preconfigured with Windows 7,
shrinking the Windows partition, adding Linux partitions, and
configuring a boot manager such as grub, so that the user can boot
into Windows when absolutely necessary. In additon, using Xen,
Virtual Box, or other virtualization software, it's possible to run
Windows as a Linux application.

The irony is that Windows running as a Linux application actually runs
faster than Windows running in native mode. This is because the Linux
file system is easier to buffer, easier to cache, and has better
memory management.