Windows bigots....seems the kettle is calling the pot black

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by thing, Feb 6, 2005.

  1. thing

    thing Guest

    thing, Feb 6, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 6, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. thing

    thing Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > thing wrote:
    >
    >> (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >> http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >> Interesting....

    >
    >
    > heh, I for one never claimed that the windows side didn't have it's fair
    > shore of fucktards.


    heh.....such morons do neither "side" any good.

    regards

    Thing
    thing, Feb 7, 2005
    #3
  4. thing

    Steve Guest

    thing wrote:
    > Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >
    >> thing wrote:
    >>
    >>> (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >>> http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >>> Interesting....

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> heh, I for one never claimed that the windows side didn't have it's
    >> fair shore of fucktards.

    >
    >
    > heh.....such morons do neither "side" any good.
    >
    > regards
    >
    > Thing
    >

    Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    technical competence at any level.

    Steve
    Steve, Feb 7, 2005
    #4
  5. thing

    thing Guest

    Steve wrote:
    > thing wrote:
    >
    >> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >>
    >>> thing wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >>>> http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >>>> Interesting....
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> heh, I for one never claimed that the windows side didn't have it's
    >>> fair shore of fucktards.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> heh.....such morons do neither "side" any good.
    >>
    >> regards
    >>
    >> Thing
    >>

    > Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    > technical competence at any level.
    >
    > Steve


    Both sides...who is more to blame, the dumb customer or the sharp vendor?

    NT4 outsold Novell 5.x yet Novel's NDS was head and shoulders above NT's
    domain system... We know have AD....a rough approximation of a polished
    Novel 6.x....

    me no understand......

    I think some companies (vendors) should do some analysis of why Novel
    lost so much and MS won so easily.

    The same thing is happening with Unix v MS/Linux, I cannot fathom why
    some really good companies with good technology could fail to foresee
    the future expansion of the desktop and applications. Now its too late,
    they have left it open to a company with at best second rate technology
    but a good eye for the future brilliant marketing and execution....

    While I think the upsurge of Linux is due many factors I wonder if we
    will see a repeat of the Novel/MS battle (The market leader being beaten
    by the new comer). I mean while MS was screwing up its pricing and
    dismissed Linux as a non-event (lets not mention poor reliabilty,
    security), I am sure Novel did the same, and didnt live to regret it.

    We could add in of course that there are a LOT of companies out there
    with sharpened daggers just waiting for MS to stumble. MS has made a lot
    of enemies and few if any friends.....et tu brutus.

    regards

    Thing
    thing, Feb 7, 2005
    #5
  6. thing

    Peter Guest

    Peter, Feb 7, 2005
    #6
  7. Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 7, 2005
    #7
  8. In article <>, Peter <> wrote:
    >thing wrote:

    *SNIP*
    >And the text of the page doesn't word wrap - I tried it in Firefox and in
    >Mozilla.
    >

    It doesn't wrap in IE, either. I tried, just to see if they were doing
    something nasty for other clients.
    It seems that, no, they're just incompetent.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
    Matthew Poole, Feb 7, 2005
    #8
  9. In <cu7apc$qc8$> Matthew Poole wrote:
    > In article <>, Peter <.
    > nz> wrote:
    >>thing wrote:

    > *SNIP*
    >>And the text of the page doesn't word wrap - I tried it in Firefox and
    >>in Mozilla.

    > It doesn't wrap in IE, either. I tried, just to see if they were
    > doing something nasty for other clients. It seems that, no, they're
    > just incompetent.


    Oh god! The article was written by Paul Thurrott. He describes himself
    as a journalist, but others describe him as a "self-congratulatory
    windbag Microsoft-apologist".

    --
    Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand
    http://vintageware.orcon.net.nz/
    ________________________________________________________________________
    No Silicon Heaven? Preposterous! Where would all the calculators go?

    Kryten, from the Red Dwarf episode "The Last Day"
    Roger Johnstone, Feb 7, 2005
    #9
  10. thing

    Guest

    On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:52:41 +1300, thing wrote:

    > (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >
    > http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >
    > Interesting....


    Do you know what "NAFF" originally meant?


    Divine

    --
    "Linux and MySQL are going to keep chipping away at Micro$ofts' install base
    and it is terrified. Why else would they keep spouting on about how awful
    Linux is? If it was no threat they would just ignore and move on. I think the
    same goes for a huge number of windows admins, they see a steep learning curve
    for a whole new skill set on the horizon and are struggling to avoid it. Linux
    and open source are the future, get used to it."
    , Feb 7, 2005
    #10
  11. thing

    AD. Guest

    On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:34:39 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:

    >>Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>technical competence at any level.

    >
    > VHS. Beta. :)


    Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    technical one?

    After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Feb 7, 2005
    #11
  12. thing

    froggy Guest

    On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 19:27:04 +1300, Steve wrote:

    > thing wrote:
    >> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >>
    >>> thing wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >>>> http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >>>> Interesting....
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> heh, I for one never claimed that the windows side didn't have it's
    >>> fair shore of fucktards.

    >>
    >>
    >> heh.....such morons do neither "side" any good.
    >>
    >> regards
    >>
    >> Thing
    >>

    > Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    > technical competence at any level.
    >
    > Steve


    oddly enough this was also mentioned a couple of days ago on
    alt.solaris.x86
    <Quote>
    The history of computing teaches us that all the superior technology dies
    out in favor of inferior solutions; it is software, even badly designed
    software, that decides the success or failure of a certain platform.

    There has not yet been a company that has overturned this trend, but
    perhaps, I hope, that will change yet.

    Some examples of superior technology that didn't make it:

    Amiga
    SGI
    IRIX
    OS X (numbers are insignificant, as opposed to what they should be, given
    the quality)
    *BSD
    Betamax
    MiniDisc
    Alpha...

    ...the list could go on and on.



    Not to mention the list could have
    started with Univac, Control Data,
    Burroughs and Cray.

    </Quote>



    --

    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    froggy, Feb 7, 2005
    #12
  13. Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>>>Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>>>technical competence at any level.


    >>>VHS. Beta. :)


    >>Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    >>technical one?
    >>After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.


    > IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    > market quicker. Not sure if there was a price differenc or not.


    the ermm, amature adult film industry also had a lot to do with the
    rise(pun intended) of VHS, recording equipment and media were
    significantly cheaper.
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 7, 2005
    #13
  14. In article <cu71no$kga$>, Steve <> wrote:
    >thing wrote:
    >> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >>> thing wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> (not the article, which is naff, but the first comment)
    >>>> http://www.winnetmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45325/Windows_45325.html
    >>>> Interesting....
    >>>
    >>> heh, I for one never claimed that the windows side didn't have it's
    >>> fair shore of fucktards.

    >>
    >> heh.....such morons do neither "side" any good.
    >>

    >Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >technical competence at any level.


    VHS. Beta. :)


    Bruce


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
    think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
    If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
    I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
    of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
    the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 7, 2005
    #14
  15. thing

    Axel Guest

    Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    > In article <>, "AD." <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:34:39 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>>>technical competence at any level.
    >>>
    >>>VHS. Beta. :)

    >>
    >>Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    >>technical one?
    >>
    >>After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.

    >
    >
    > IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    > market quicker. Not sure if there was a price differenc or not.
    > Effective result was the same - lots of VHS sold, pretty much killing off
    > the beta market.
    > Again IIRC, "professional" still used beta for quite a while. They may still
    > do (along with umax or some such other system ?).
    >
    >


    There was more VHS in the rental stores, which is what people were
    buying vcrs for.
    VHS had enough recording time for a feature film and Beta didn't.
    Next Sony cockup was that VHS machines were more readily available to
    the rental market, by the time Sony made them easier to rent VHS had 70%
    of the market.
    Sony decided they were selling a superior product for a high price,
    which was a strategy that worked in hifi. They thought people would
    prefer a high quality recorder, but in reality the people wanted a
    diversity of pre recorded content.
    It didn't work for an exploding market in rentals and porn.
    Sony Betacam was a different pro recording format using the same
    mechanism and cassette housing.
    Axel, Feb 7, 2005
    #15
  16. thing

    AD. Guest

    On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:07:00 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:

    > IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    > market quicker.


    Yep because manufacturers could make VHS stuff cheaper than Beta because
    they didn't have to license it from Sony and pay royalties. And once they
    started making more of one than the other economies of scale kick in and
    Beta doesn't really stand a chance.

    You can see shades of it today with Sony Memory Sticks vs generic flash
    ram.

    I'm sure that if VHS was proprietary and Beta open, then the result
    would've been reversed and the technically superior one would've won out
    after all.

    OEMs generally don't like being beholden to another companys whims and
    prefer dealing in open technologies.

    I think these debates around technical vs marketing superiority miss the
    fact that it's usually economics or other business factors that decide.
    After all there have been plenty of well marketed failures too.

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Feb 7, 2005
    #16
  17. thing

    Axel Guest

    AD. wrote:
    > On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:34:39 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>>technical competence at any level.

    >>
    >>VHS. Beta. :)

    >
    >
    > Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    > technical one?
    >
    > After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.
    >


    The gillette principle in action.
    The rental cassettes were the product, the player was just the handle.
    JVC got more cassettes out there.
    Axel, Feb 7, 2005
    #17
  18. thing

    Axel Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >
    >>>>> Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>>>> technical competence at any level.

    >
    >
    >>>> VHS. Beta. :)

    >
    >
    >>> Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    >>> technical one?
    >>> After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.

    >
    >
    >> IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    >> market quicker. Not sure if there was a price differenc or not.

    >
    >
    > the ermm, amature adult film industry also had a lot to do with the
    > rise(pun intended) of VHS, recording equipment and media were
    > significantly cheaper.


    Most porn was recorded and edited on Sony Professional Betacam or 3/4"
    U-matic cassettes then duped and distributed on VHS.
    You could rent enough VHS machines from Radio Rentals to run a
    duplicating system.
    Most VHS machines never recorded anything except from the tuner.
    Axel, Feb 7, 2005
    #18
  19. In article <>, "AD." <> wrote:
    >On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:34:39 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >
    >>>Proof positive that it's marketing that sells, nothing to do with
    >>>technical competence at any level.

    >>
    >> VHS. Beta. :)

    >
    >Wasn't that a open over proprietary success rather than marketing over
    >technical one?
    >
    >After all, Sony is usually fairly good at marketing.


    IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    market quicker. Not sure if there was a price differenc or not.
    Effective result was the same - lots of VHS sold, pretty much killing off
    the beta market.
    Again IIRC, "professional" still used beta for quite a while. They may still
    do (along with umax or some such other system ?).



    Bruce


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
    think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
    If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
    I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
    of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
    the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
    Bruce Sinclair, Feb 7, 2005
    #19
  20. thing

    Axel Guest

    AD. wrote:
    > On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:07:00 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >
    >
    >>IIRC, Beta was technically better, but there was a lot more VHS on the
    >>market quicker.

    >
    >
    > Yep because manufacturers could make VHS stuff cheaper than Beta because
    > they didn't have to license it from Sony and pay royalties. And once they
    > started making more of one than the other economies of scale kick in and
    > Beta doesn't really stand a chance.
    >
    > You can see shades of it today with Sony Memory Sticks vs generic flash
    > ram.
    >
    > I'm sure that if VHS was proprietary and Beta open, then the result
    > would've been reversed and the technically superior one would've won out
    > after all.
    >
    > OEMs generally don't like being beholden to another companys whims and
    > prefer dealing in open technologies.
    >
    > I think these debates around technical vs marketing superiority miss the
    > fact that it's usually economics or other business factors that decide.
    > After all there have been plenty of well marketed failures too.
    >

    Given two competing formats, the one which distributes the most pr0n is
    the most likely to succeed.
    VHS vs Beta
    Apache vs IIS
    Sex sells :)
    Axel, Feb 7, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim Hollis

    Ma and Pa Kettle

    Jim Hollis, Feb 16, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    395
    Jim Hollis
    Feb 16, 2004
  2. Dyuob Poltice

    Ma and Pa Kettle question

    Dyuob Poltice, Oct 5, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    420
    jayembee
    Oct 6, 2004
  3. Markus

    Laptop Screen seems black

    Markus, Apr 12, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    747
    Toolman Tim
    Apr 14, 2006
  4. Jim Scott

    IE7 vs Firefox (bigots please ignore)

    Jim Scott, Jun 29, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    478
    Jim Scott
    Jun 29, 2006
  5. Dudley Hanks

    Kettle Valley Tressel

    Dudley Hanks, Jul 25, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    1,045
    Dudley Hanks
    Aug 1, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page