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

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

In article <Pine.HPX.4.33.0107302242410.8552-100000@ux1>, 
mhughes@students.depaul.edu says...
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, David Ogg wrote:
> 
> > In article <6EG+ci0efUZ7Ew70@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>,
> > james@zephyr.org.uk says...
> > > In message <MPG.15cede648df0ba4c9896a6@news-server.nc.rr.com>, David Ogg
> > > <davidogg@nc.rr.com> writes
> > > >> Monopoly does *not* mean that *everyone* uses your product. AT&T was a monopoly, even
> > > >> though there were several other competitors (GT&T, IT&T, here in eastern Nebraska
> > > >> there was LT&T, and so on), AT&T was a monopoly because they had a super majority of
> > > >> the business, and there was no way that any of the competitors could take the monopoly
> > > >> away from them.
> > > >
> > > >A monopoly means the consumer has no choice.
> > >
> > > Not in the real world.
> > >
> > > A choice can still be available when a company is monopolistic - like
> > > Microsoft, for instance.
> >
> > :) We're talking about Microsoft, and you can use Microsoft as your
> > example of precidence? "Microsoft can be a monopololy even though there
> > are choices, take Microsoft for instance?"
> >
> > > And most users *didn't* get a choice, because
> > > of the licensing agreements with major PC manufacturers which is how a
> > > lot of people buy hardware.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> That is a pretty strong guarantee. could you make the other OS 'geos'? And
> no that is _not_ a typo. or hey let's call dell and see if they will
> preload QNX?

"I guarantee I can find it somewhere else" Just like I said.
 
> > Even during the time when Microsoft had exclusive licensing clauses
> > (ended around 1993) there were options. I mean, heck, look at this
> > newsgroup.
> >
> And that is another point. every so often a newbie comes in and asks about
> this newsgroup(writting from alt.amiga.*), should they get interested in
> Amiga and the answer is invarible, not unless your in it for nostalgia.
> The stopped making them because they could not sell enough units. although
> my personal feeling is that M$ did not kill the Amiga but only handed them
> the knife.

Actually, I don't think Microsoft had anything to do with it, Commodore 
couldn't market pardons in prison. They had a bad habit of marketing to 
customers they already had, or "preaching to the choir."
 
>  > 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. The people who want something else will buy a machine without
> > Windows. (Personally I've never purchased Windows, but I get developer
> > versions via MSDN, and beta versions like the XP I'm using now)
> >
> I think if you take a poll on new PC owners they would not know what an OS
> was you would be more likely to get the answer Word.

;) 

Most of our customers ask for Windows 2000, thinking it's 98's next 
version. Then they ask about the Millenium version, so we tell them that
it's WinME they're thinking of. The ones who don't ask about the OS just 
assume that Windows "comes with" their computer, they also assume 
MSOffice comes with it also.
 Then we hit them with the price. Win98/ME $99 installed, Linux, your 
choice of distro, $50 installed.
 Some ask, "what do you mean installed?", We respond, "that means we 
install it" (as if the HDD was manufactured with an OS on it, sheesh).
 "But Gateway doesn't charge for that!", "Yes they do, it's built into 
the price they're charging you for the OS, we're not charging you extra, 
we're giving you the option of not paying for something you may not 
want"

> As far as experienced PC owners, what non-commercial OS are they going to
> ask for? I mean Really, Red-hat is not yet buying ad space in Time,
> newsweek, or insert-your-favorite-non-Linux-publication-here.

Red Hat /is/ a commercial OS, and an "expierenced PC owner" has I'm sure 
been flooded with information and hype et al about linux, including from 
such sources as... Time, Newsweek, insert just about any major PC 
magazine here. In fact, didn't Time do a huge article about Linus and 
name him one of the "people to watch" right under (or was it above) Bill 
Gates?
 
> >  Here's the real world situation. Microsoft can't touch Apache with IIS
> > in any of it's incarnations, and it doesn't look like that will change,
> > despite the fact they'll give it to you FREE with Server, and Mindcraft
> > say's it's faster and scales better.

> They seem to be doing a pretty good job, and 'Code Red' virus seems to be
> proving it. But with several companies buying into the 'technology
> partner' status, and '.net' strategy, it seems to be Microsoft || die.

;) I don't know if we can look at virus proliferation as a sign of 
Microsoft dominance, but it's a funny thought. ;)
I remember several people talking about the P3-unique ID the way some 
talk about .net. We'll see how many die from lack of .net.
 
> >  On top of that, after stating "opensource is a virus" Microsoft has egg
> > on their face because they just cant for the life of them get hotmail to
> > work without good old BSD holding the fort, and this is at a time when
> > they're pimping their platform for .Net.

> Last time I checked(recently), hotmail was running windows 2000 on IIS.
> Yeah shocked me too. I was doublechecking it for accuracy and according to
> the website I used(I think it was netcraft) they were no longer FreeBSD.
> Which the NT-vs-Linux.org site needs to be updated cause that is the link
> I _was_ referencing in conversations.

If you used Netcraft to check their servers, you were seeing a straw 
man. You'll notice a few weeks ago netcraft identifies them sometimes as 
"BSD" sometimes as "2000" and I even saw a "???" listed, MS is playing 
games putting an "airgap firewall" up. (which by the way, is actually 
good security practice, my firewall is linux, but it reports itself as 
NT4 :) It's harder to hack if you don't know what you're hacking)
 But Microsoft has recently stated that they were using BSD, and that 
the transition would be gradual so as not to effect the user. This has 
been going on for a while now.
 
> >  There are Free alternatives to all of Microsoft's products, and ones in
> > developement for products Microsoft hasn't even released yet! Miguel's
> > already pimpin' Mono to work with .Net.
> >  Microsoft's days are numbered, they see the writing on the wall, they
> > know they can't compete with a competitor that they can't buy,
> > undersell, influence, or lock out of the market. The government stepping
> > in right now, would just stop the inertia at a time when they're not
> > needed anyway, they'd take the credit for the inevitable.
> >
> Microsoft is not dead, possibly dying but I don't think so. They have very
> low overhead for the units they sell. Nobody is going to unseat them, I
> offer the following quote from an advert in the paper..."Please send your
> resume in word doc format." When your the standard the other guy has to be
> twice as good to unseat you.

 You don't have to unseat Microsoft, and they don't have to die, they 
will simply become less relevant over time, Like the term "Word Doc" is 
less relevant now, since like Kleenex, many Word Processors can save to 
Word Document format. Sometimes common usage is a bad thing for the 
trademark holder, it can be a sign of evaporating relevance.
 
> >  Monopoly or not aside, the governments role is to protect the consumer
> > and ensure the consumer has choice. The government's role is NOT to
> > leverage consumer choice for the benefit of Microsoft's competitors. If
> > competitors are cutting each others throats giving away free software,
> > and as the dust settles, the consumer has free software, and netscape's
> > dead, the consumer has benefitted. What then, would the consumer benefit
> > from the government flexing its arms at Microsoft on behalf of these
> > businesses who lost the war to the benefit of the consumer? That's
> > supposed to be how the Monopoly law works, to benefit, for, and ONLY,
> > the consumer.
> >
> See comment about Geos above. When I was consulting, 10 years ago, Geos
> was considered by some to be "better" than windows. For 3.10 that was not
> a huge challenge. But it's dead now and the company's only claim to fame is
> a (silly)patent on WAP. Is the consumer protected by geos' inexistance?

Geos still exists. They simply renamed themselves "New Deal Office" and 
are marketed at Doorstop-technology machines, like old 486's. They 
wern't squeezed out of the market, they chose a niche, that they are 
currently filling.

> Was Microsoft the first company to produce a software product called
> internet explorer? what happened to that company?

They sold their rights.

> Was the lesson of geos, and the company who originally owned the
> copyright to the name to "internet explorer" as a program a benefit to the
> consumer?

Considering the consumer gets it free? How is that not a benefit? The 
consumer also gets the competitors product free also. I can't think of a 
way that the consumer has lost, can you? And guess what? there's more! 
If you have a hankering for something different, there's Arachne for DOS 
(free) and Opera for Windows, get this, selling their browser, in spite 
of Netscape and IE being free. You know why, they built a browser that 
suits the needs of some people who are willing to buy it where as the 
free ones didn't. (actually tried Opera, didn't like the MDI-windowed 
interface, but it was fast!)

I hate to break it to the Netscape people, but netscape was a pain in 
the ass quite often, up untill V6 anyway, 6 looks good. (Why couldn't 
Mozilla use 6's interface instead of that legacy 4.7 crap?)

> >  So where has the consumer lost? The consumer has both Netscape, AND IE,
> > both free, and without the government stepping in where it would have
> > hurt the consumer to do so.
> >
> Without AOL would netscape 6 even exist?

Probably not, or at least it wouldn't be as good as it is now. The same, 
however, can be said for IE. Would IE exist, as it does now, if not for 
Microsoft?
 
> >  The fact remains, Netscape is just as available as it's always been, if
> > not more so. From the consumers point of view, the consumer has won.
> > From Netscapes point of view, they are legally entitled to financial
> > damages, but they are NOT entitled to having the customers choice
> > overruled by the government on Netscapes behalf.
> >
> It wasn't that MSIE was free, it was that you couldn't get windows without
> it. It would be like firestone striking a deal with Ford that you couldn't
> get a shiny new (ford)SUV without firestone tires on it.

But if they decided to give you the tires for free, to keep, and you had 
the choice to take that money and buy your own tires, in addition to 
keeping the firestones, well,hey!

> >  This isn't really anything more than a political issue I believe, I
> > think this discussion is between the chairs on the left and the chairs
> > on the right. :)
> >
> I guess you must be sitting on the right, because I know I am on the left.

;)

> oddly enough I am a Microsoft user, but only the OS. You see I bought the
> OS because it came preinstalled on my machine before I knew about your
> gaurantee.

<snicker> :) (that was clever!) :)

> I don't have the office suite because I don't have the $450 to
> buy the non-upgrade copy. (oddly enough though the Corel office competing
> product is only $100, why is that?) 

Demand.

You should have bought the PC from someone who could have sold you an 
OEM MSOffice. (well, assuming you bought them at the same time anyway)

Here's a tidbit, we make more selling Correl Office Suite than we do MS 
Office. Last time I ordered Corel (OEM version mind you, but the whole 
Office Suite) it was $14 my cost, we sell it for $95 installed, with 
correl Office ServicePack3 patched and all. Should be a National Average 
price, since I had to get it from Ingram Micro.

> I am writing this from a Linux box on
> a telnet session because the emulation is better.<rant />   Matt

Writing this from Microplanet Gravity on WinXP RC12505 (gettin RC2 
tommorrow!) Microsoft's newsreaders suck. It's worth the price for 
Gravity. (I just didn't care for Agent, it felt like a 16bit app, just 
me?)

--David Ogg
Fear the government that fears your computer.