Windows vs Linux

[Boriyako]

Do you know why I am anti Microsoft?

I was part of a thread last week about networking capabilities of Windows vs Linux.

I was justly chastised by ACtheTroll for being biased.

However...

The main reason I am anti windows is some of the underhand tactics microsoft uses to groom future users(customers). A particular example :

In Zimbabwe a non-government education project organised low cost (and also second hand free) hardware for schools with no IT facilities (would typically be poorer schools) and open source software in order to provide the kids with IT training. I worked for an education project in South Africa and it was also done there.

Can't remember precise details but, essentially, microsoft approached the Govt education Dept and had the scheme shut down thus depriving a certain % of students of IT education. Also making sure that those who did get IT training grew up to be conditioned to use microsoft products. I don't remember what leverage (threats??) they used to do this but it left a bad taste in MY mouth anyway!

I use XP and office 2003 because I'm used to them and their quirks and, truthfully, I'm too lazy and occupied with other things in my life to learn Linux and OpenOffice. Some would say that this makes me a hypocrite? Maybe, but the fact is that Microsoft uses sinister methods of looking after future markets. YOU judge if that is right or wrong.

(Is it OK to use this forum for discussion rather than a simple question? Apologies if not)

[Ethel]

This question should be elsewhere - it is not a computer question, it is a critique of a company's business methods.

Without citations and authorities your statement is valueless - if you are going to make serious posts intended to provoke debate you should take the time to research and provide links to back up your claims.

However, as you say, you are happy to use Microsoft products yourself because you 'can't be bothered'.

You've lost any argument straight away.

I am learning Linux. I use Firefox as my browser and OpenOffice as my office suite - and have done for years.

[vehelpfulguy]

Microsoft have been very very good at using bullying and underhand tatics ever since they started as a company.

I suppose it could be argued that they have got where they are by using these tactics, but it still leaves a bitter taste in the mouth.

I remember when Windows was starting to get popular and of course many companies wanted to pre-load Windows on their PCs.

Microsoft would only supply them Windows if they agreed to pay Microsoft a certain amount for each PC, EVEN IF THE PC SHIPPED WITHOUT WINDOWS ON IT.

Of course if they refused to pay Microsoft refused to give them Windows, so they had to pay, even if they were shipping some PCs without Windows on them.

more.....

[vehelpfulguy]

Because Microsoft write both Windows AND Office it has long been known that they include code within Windows to make their Office products run faster and other Office products run slower.

Years ago, when Microsoft were battling with Lotus to be "Office" kings there were posters on the wall at Microsoft which said "Windows aint done till Lotus dont run".

When Microsoft were battling with Netscape to be browser king they would write code so that web sites designed for Netscape would display badly in IE.

So people began using IE to "test" their web sites and Netscape fell by the wayside.

There have been many small companies "killed" by Microsoft who often "borrow" their technology and add it to Windows, thus driving the other company out of business.

I could go on, there are many documented examples of Microsoft using their size and influence to gain more of the market.

[vehelpfulguy]

Some of the thing Microsoft have done are detailed on this web site

http://users.aol.com/machcu/amsa.html

[markysngc]

Microsoft are well known for stamping on anybody they think may be a threat to them, which has, sadly, probably led to the demise of many upcoming companies that may have made a useful contribution to the development of computer systems in general.

Even in the early days some of microsofts ways of operation where dubious to say the least, the original DOS was largely based on a CP/M operating system and strangely had many features of a UNIX OS, the entire idea for a GUI never anything to do with microsoft (or apple) but was pioneered by xerox (think they may have even copied the idea from an earlier concept by some guy at an American UNI) and the windows based OS's we all know today was then copied by, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

I agree with AC that some of the worst things MS have done is trying to make their OS be as non-compatible with other peoples software as possible, in doing this they have probably, again, held back useful development by years.

I do use Windows on a couple of my computers, both laptops, though this is largely due to having to have a compatible system for site visits, I am currently on a Linux system (MEPIS) and find it as easy to use on a day to day basis as a windows system, and it is very very rare that I have to drop back to a shell to do anything which is probably what puts most people off linux. I also administer several servers which are all Linux based and for a server environment i would not even consider using windows (unless there was a really good reason, such as a server based package that really needed a MS server)

If anyone is unsure about Linux I would say give it a go, there are several Linux distros that can be run from the CD and will give you the chance to look before you leap

Mark

[markysngc]

sorry agree with vehelpfulguy, damm my memory sometimes :)

[rojash]

And rather ironically, the only operating system they ever developed entirely themselves is Vista.

DOS was bought in as QDOS from Seattle Computers, and XP was based on NT which was based on OS/2 which was developed jointly by MS and IBM.

[markysngc]

security wise Vista actually is a large step in the right direction, at last microsoft have stopped letting everything run with administrator rights or at a system level as default, yeah people may say it's a pain having to click "yes I am sure" everytime you try to run anything but that is the price you have to pay for a more secure system. I've had to type in my root password whenever I run anything that may make any system changes for ages on linux and I know that having to do that is one of the reasons that linux is "almost" virus proof

Now if we can actually train users to read the UAC prompts and think about them when they come up and not just click yes everytime!!

[Boriyako]

Thank you all.

Ethel - what argument did I lose?
You're learning Linux? Well done. You use Firefox and OOffice? Very very well done!
Otherwise...fair comment, you are right, I should take the time to provide evidence.
However... my point was that I believe that Microsoft uses sinister methods. I don't need citations or authorities (?) for that - I saw it.