Re: If you could design a $300 homecomputer today, what would you choose?

[David Ogg <davidogg@nc.rr.com>]

In article <9k61t8$squ$0@216.39.130.4>, otter@oz.net says...
> David Ogg wrote:
> 
> > They chose to buy a PC with Windows on it, they had a choice. If anyone
> > here can find me a PC they want, and they don't want Windows on it, I
> > guarantee I can find it somewhere else, with the same warranty, support,
> > and hardware, at the same price, with another OS on it.
> 
> > 
> > Do you really think that everyone with windows on their computer was
> > forced to use it? I guarantee if you take a poll and ask people buying
> > new machines, and ask them what OS they want on their new PC, it will be
> > Windows.
> 
> I think the biggest reason for this is that most of the people (not the
> technogeeks like most of us here in these newsgroups) simply don't know
> about the alternatives.  Your average computer user will most likely get
> their new overpriced system at one of the big retail chains such as
> Circuit City, or Fred Meyer, or whatever.  When they walk into one of
> those places and look over the selections, they will see the stats on
> the display models, and it will most likely list some form of Windows,
> some form of MS-Office, and probably a trial subscription to MSN or
> AOHell (in addition to listing the hardware of course).  At those
> mass-market chains, you never see systems with stats placards boasting
> Linux and Star-Office.  And the sales rep most likely won't even
> consider mentioning those as a possibility (if he even knows what Linux
> is).
> 
> As an example, only about 2 years ago, I was at the Base Exchange at
> McChord AFB, and was looking over the different computers in their
> electronics department.  I asked the sales rep there if I would be able
> to buy one of their systems without any OS installed, since I was
> scouting out a system to become a Linux box).  He just flat out
> refused.  I don't remember the reason he gave, but if I wanted one of
> their computers for my Linux system, I would have to get it with
> Windows-98 preinstalled, which I wouldn't have been using anyway, so why
> would I want to pay extra for it?), reformat, and then do my Linux
> install.
> 
> So, to cut this post short, since I nearly lost my train of thought
> here...  What good is having choices in operating systems and other
> software packages, if the typical consumer doesn't know about those
> choices and the folks selling the systems won't volunteer that
> information?

Not much good at all, I agree.

This is why Microsoft has been so successful, people don't know any 
better, some people. It has very little to do with availability, or any 
other notion that "you can't get it" (the competitors product.)

That however, would be ridiculous to try to pin on Microsoft. (although 
in our courts, anything's possible ;) I can see the headlines now: 
"Microsoft charged with having customers who don't know any better, 
Microsoft denies charges, plans to appeal."

The truth is, the customer has choice. If he can't make an informed 
choice, then maybe we should make more effort to inform people of the 
choice they do have.