On 5/16/2013 7:29 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 5/16/2013 5:16 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:50:10 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:23:58 -0400, wrote:

Most of his life was devoted to crushing any competition and
maintaining his monopoly.

====

And he was very good at that. Very very good. Greedy? Absolutely,
but that was the driving force that made WINDOWS the most popular
operating system of all time, and made PC technology and the internet
accessible by virtually everyone regardlesss of technical expertise.

No small accomplishment. It required brilliant vision, dedicated
leadership and focus, not to mention a huge amount of work.

Unfortunately it was like the phone company. Not much real innovation
came out of Redmond Washington. If there was a good idea from a
competitor that Gates liked, he simply bought that company. If he
didn't like it, he crushed the company. We ended up with the bloated
OS we have today that tries to be all things to all people and does
not really address anyone's actual needs. Like all monopolies, they
dominate because they are virtually the only game in town.


Between Windoze and Androis, who's "needs" are not being met?

The typists and photoshoppers like apple for it's simplicity.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:39:05 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

The profit motive (call it greed if you must) is the driving force
behind all innovation, all customer service, all product excellence
and all efficient manufacturing. Without the potential for profit
(sometimes *large* profits) there are no incentives for the risks and
hard work of starting or running a business. Anything else is
socialism and we all know how that worked out in the former USSR.

Harry is bitter because success (profit) seems to have escaped him.



There are differences between "profit" and "greed," but apparently these
escape w'hine. And to say profit is the driving force behind "all
innovation" is just plain bull****.

What is that difference and where is the threshold between profit and
greed?

===

It turns out that there is a very easy answer to that question.

Companies (and people) that Harry likes are profitable.

Companies (and people) that Harry dislikes are greedy.

Got it, thanks for the clarification!

On 5/16/2013 10:00 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:29:08 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 5/16/2013 5:16 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:50:10 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:23:58 -0400, wrote:

Most of his life was devoted to crushing any competition and
maintaining his monopoly.

====

And he was very good at that. Very very good. Greedy? Absolutely,
but that was the driving force that made WINDOWS the most popular
operating system of all time, and made PC technology and the internet
accessible by virtually everyone regardlesss of technical expertise.

No small accomplishment. It required brilliant vision, dedicated
leadership and focus, not to mention a huge amount of work.

Unfortunately it was like the phone company. Not much real innovation
came out of Redmond Washington. If there was a good idea from a
competitor that Gates liked, he simply bought that company. If he
didn't like it, he crushed the company. We ended up with the bloated
OS we have today that tries to be all things to all people and does
not really address anyone's actual needs. Like all monopolies, they
dominate because they are virtually the only game in town.


Between Windoze and Androis, who's "needs" are not being met?

I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence


But still, inconvenient sure.. I mean, a watch chip can run a rocket
ship after all... But "who's needs are not being met"?

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:29:08 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 5/16/2013 5:16 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:50:10 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:23:58 -0400, wrote:

Most of his life was devoted to crushing any competition and
maintaining his monopoly.

====

And he was very good at that. Very very good. Greedy? Absolutely,
but that was the driving force that made WINDOWS the most popular
operating system of all time, and made PC technology and the internet
accessible by virtually everyone regardlesss of technical expertise.

No small accomplishment. It required brilliant vision, dedicated
leadership and focus, not to mention a huge amount of work.

Unfortunately it was like the phone company. Not much real innovation
came out of Redmond Washington. If there was a good idea from a
competitor that Gates liked, he simply bought that company. If he
didn't like it, he crushed the company. We ended up with the bloated
OS we have today that tries to be all things to all people and does
not really address anyone's actual needs. Like all monopolies, they
dominate because they are virtually the only game in town.


Between Windoze and Androis, who's "needs" are not being met?

I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

Because of the complexity of the operating systems of today, I doubt
that's possible.

On 5/16/13 10:09 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 5/16/2013 10:00 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:29:08 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 5/16/2013 5:16 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:50:10 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:23:58 -0400, wrote:

Most of his life was devoted to crushing any competition and
maintaining his monopoly.

====

And he was very good at that. Very very good. Greedy? Absolutely,
but that was the driving force that made WINDOWS the most popular
operating system of all time, and made PC technology and the internet
accessible by virtually everyone regardlesss of technical expertise.

No small accomplishment. It required brilliant vision, dedicated
leadership and focus, not to mention a huge amount of work.

Unfortunately it was like the phone company. Not much real innovation
came out of Redmond Washington. If there was a good idea from a
competitor that Gates liked, he simply bought that company. If he
didn't like it, he crushed the company. We ended up with the bloated
OS we have today that tries to be all things to all people and does
not really address anyone's actual needs. Like all monopolies, they
dominate because they are virtually the only game in town.


Between Windoze and Androis, who's "needs" are not being met?

I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence


But still, inconvenient sure.. I mean, a watch chip can run a rocket
ship after all... But "who's needs are not being met"?


Users who don't like glutware, or dealing with a non-English speaking
clerk who has been taught that all tech support consists of reading off
a script. The few times I have called Apple for tech support, I've
gotten competent people who speak English as well as I do and know how
to work their way through a support tree, and who are customer oriented.

wrote in message ...


I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

-------------------------------------------

I've never understood the many anti-Windows sentiments. Maybe I just
don't use a computer for demanding tasks.

I currently have two laptops, one with the infamous "Vista" OS and
the other with Windows 7. Both have the same 4Gb of memory and both
have the same clock speed. Windows 7 is faster, for sure
(especially on a cold start) but both are stable and I've never
encountered any serious problems nor have I experienced a "crash" of
the OS. I normally just put them in "sleep" mode when not in use, so
they fire up and are ready to use in seconds. I also have an older,
smaller laptop that I used to use on the boat. It has Windows XP
Professional on it and works just fine.

I have the Windows updates set so I can determine when to download and
install them. Usually do that once a month or so. I also use
Windows Mail (Vista) and Windows Live Mail (Win7) both for email
and as a newsgroup reader. Both work fine, have filter capabilities
and several options in terms of how emails or newsgroup posts are
displayed. I tried Thunderbird and Agent a while back just for grins
but never noticed any advantage they had.

Yesterday I was using a friend's new HP laptop. I didn't realize it
had Windows 8 on it at first and was temporarily at a loss looking for
the "Start" button.
But it only took a few seconds to figure out what was going on and it
seemed to work just fine.

On 5/16/13 10:25 AM, Eisboch wrote:


wrote in message ...


I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

-------------------------------------------

I've never understood the many anti-Windows sentiments. Maybe I just
don't use a computer for demanding tasks.

I currently have two laptops, one with the infamous "Vista" OS and the
other with Windows 7. Both have the same 4Gb of memory and both have
the same clock speed. Windows 7 is faster, for sure (especially on a
cold start) but both are stable and I've never encountered any serious
problems nor have I experienced a "crash" of the OS. I normally just
put them in "sleep" mode when not in use, so they fire up and are ready
to use in seconds. I also have an older, smaller laptop that I used to
use on the boat. It has Windows XP Professional on it and works just fine.

I have the Windows updates set so I can determine when to download and
install them. Usually do that once a month or so. I also use Windows
Mail (Vista) and Windows Live Mail (Win7) both for email and as a
newsgroup reader. Both work fine, have filter capabilities and several
options in terms of how emails or newsgroup posts are displayed. I
tried Thunderbird and Agent a while back just for grins but never
noticed any advantage they had.

Yesterday I was using a friend's new HP laptop. I didn't realize it had
Windows 8 on it at first and was temporarily at a loss looking for the
"Start" button.
But it only took a few seconds to figure out what was going on and it
seemed to work just fine.





I had only occasional problems with Vista. My wife runs Windows 7 on her
home desktop and I would know if she were having problems, because I'm
the "tech support" guy here, and I speak English.

In article ,
says...

wrote in message ...


I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

-------------------------------------------

I've never understood the many anti-Windows sentiments. Maybe I just
don't use a computer for demanding tasks.

I currently have two laptops, one with the infamous "Vista" OS and
the other with Windows 7. Both have the same 4Gb of memory and both
have the same clock speed. Windows 7 is faster, for sure
(especially on a cold start) but both are stable and I've never
encountered any serious problems nor have I experienced a "crash" of
the OS. I normally just put them in "sleep" mode when not in use, so
they fire up and are ready to use in seconds. I also have an older,
smaller laptop that I used to use on the boat. It has Windows XP
Professional on it and works just fine.

I have the Windows updates set so I can determine when to download and
install them. Usually do that once a month or so. I also use
Windows Mail (Vista) and Windows Live Mail (Win7) both for email
and as a newsgroup reader. Both work fine, have filter capabilities
and several options in terms of how emails or newsgroup posts are
displayed. I tried Thunderbird and Agent a while back just for grins
but never noticed any advantage they had.

Yesterday I was using a friend's new HP laptop. I didn't realize it
had Windows 8 on it at first and was temporarily at a loss looking for
the "Start" button.
But it only took a few seconds to figure out what was going on and it
seemed to work just fine.

I really like Windows 8.

On 5/16/2013 10:50 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 May 2013 10:10:53 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

Because of the complexity of the operating systems of today, I doubt
that's possible.

The problem is that the OS is all encompassing with things that should
be optional, being coded right into the OS. It is unnecessary
complexity but part of the Microsoft monopoly thinking.
I need the same OS to take a few hundred bytes a minute from my
weather station and post it on the web as I would use to run a small
publishing company


But what is it that the system "doesn't" do for you? What part of the
system is keeping you from doing what you could do without it??

On 5/16/2013 7:00 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:29:08 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

Between Windoze and Androis, who's "needs" are not being met?

I don't know much about android but PC users might want an OS that
will run a week or two without a reboot, either from a crash or an
update. They would also like one with a stable API so you don't need
to update your OS for the next big thing, usually requiring a new
machine.. Windoze is the last vestige of planned obsolescence

Our IC design CAD tools from Cadence, Synopsys, Ansys, Mentor Graphics,
etc. all run on redhat Linux for those reasons.