Re: Woohooo! Dell + Linux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Joe Hart wrote:
>> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>>> Roberto C. S�nchez wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 10:43:30PM -0400, Jim Hyslop wrote:
>>>>> If I had immediately followed with some outrageous claim that Windows is
>>>>> better and has fewer security holes because <insert some stupid reason>,
>>>>> *THEN* you could accuse me of spreading FUD.
>>>>>
>>>> Windows *is* better, since Microsoft reports much fewer bugs than any
>>>> Linux distribution :-)
>>> Windows *is* better, since it has more users than any other OS, and
>>> those simply can't be wrong. The same applies to M$ office.
>>> Practically none of its users ever think of *why* this or that would be
>>> better or worse than any of the alternatives.
>> Your logic is flawed.
>
> As noted in my other reply: this is not my logic and my way of thinking,
> but that popular among window$ loosers, encouraged by heavy marketing on
> the 'superiority' of the product.
>
>> With Office, it is a compatibility issue. People use Office because
>> their contacts use it, and it is a vicious circle of upgrades just to
>> remain compatible, meanwhile generating a lot of income for MS.
>
> It's about the same way of thinking that encourages persistent use of
> Office and O$ choice. The O$ is also viewed more 'compatible' than
> linux, because most hardware etc. is supported to work with it. It is
> also based on closed standards and employs an update policy to force
> users to upgrade. We still use proprietary hardware on Windows NT, but
> these computers cannot be connected to the internet for security
> reasons, and M$ would like to force us to buy new hardware and upgrade
> to XP/Vista.
>
> It's an interesting and popular misconception that M$ office is
> considered 'compatible' despite the fact that their file formats are the
> *one* example that is arguably least compatible with any other product.
> Their software is also only available for Win32, pseudo-win64 and mac,
> making it incompatible to other hardware or other OSes.
>
> Johannes
>
>
I agree with you. I guess we don't need to debate the issue since your
statements were not based on sound logic, rather they were just echoing
the stupidity of the masses.
Oh how I wished I had seen the light many years ago. Alas, one cannot
change history, but one can endeavor to correct the future. Repentance
while noble, is not effective.
Now we can debate a whole new issue. :) Perhaps we should move it to a
new OT thread though.
Joe
- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGEPPBiXBCVWpc5J4RAiCcAKC+40aqjgD31RzHZGbtrw7Rg/ygTwCeJdBe
BH+KF+2+NhDQxF9SK2qQWKY=
=zm28
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: