Microsoft Taking Official Petitions to Keep XP Alive

"Adam Albright" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:50:16 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
wrote:

"Alias" wrote in message

No, Mike, you don't understand the whole picture. Ubuntu and other
versions of Linux are taking off. If you can joggle your poor memory a
bit, when XP came out, you didn't see *any* posts about Linux in the XP
General newsgroup. No media was covering it and practically no major OEM
was offering it preinstalled. All that's changed and the reason is that
distros like Ubuntu are so user friendly, easy to install and easy to
configure and tweak.

Alias


For now Linux is seeing better times, but Vista has hoisted the hardware
requirements, and in a couple of years from now, many will have upgraded
their computers. Vista will have improved enough that it is the force to
be
reckoned with, and then Windows 7 will release, easily able to run on the
same hardware as Vista.

Vista will have improved enough?

Funny to watch fanboys change their tune as they constantly move the
goal posts. I though Vista was already the greatest version of Windows
ever. If so, why does it need to improve?

After all that was the song you guys were humming over a year ago.
However now that Vista has been out awhile and proved to be just
another bloated, poorly implemented, bug riddled, sluggish pile of
coding mistakes like every prior version of Windows before it was, you
now say wait to the next version. I'll say one thing good about you
Mike, you sure know how to repeat the party line issued from Redmond.

Microsoft has been saying the same thing for over two decades... just
wait for the next version of Windows, it will knock your socks off.
Sure, right. Only problem is I like tens of millions of others are
tired of waiting and being disappointed over and over again. People
are more seriously starting to look at alternatives to Windows.

In the meantime, Linux will make inroads in third world countries where
cheap equipment is all that can be afforded.

You really are clueless and dense on world events aren't you. Would
you consider China third world? Are you sitting down? Right now China
has over 300,000,000 MIDDLE CLASS citizens and that number is growing
at explosive rates. That's as many middle class as the entire
population of the United States. Are you aware Russia soon might have
more millionaires then there are in the United States? Their middle
class is exploding too. While Windows "sales" in China is a drop in
the bucket they already have more Internet users than in the United
States. Hint: Those people are running all those computers on
something, and it isn't paid for copies of Windows.

The reality is Microsoft's time in the sun is fading. That is why
Ballmer tried, but failed to take over Yahoo, to start building a new
cash stream since people are fed-up giving Microsoft piles of money
for one broken OS version after another.

Microsoft's other cash cow Office, has been equaled or surpassed by
FREE Office alternatives. That's not good news for Microsoft either.
Their two biggest product lines, Windows and Office are showing signs
of cracking.

You know what the biggest sign of Microsoft's pending doom really is?

Simple. That would be Bill Gates founder getting ready to throw in the
towel. His belly no longer burns for Microsoft. He's more than willing
to give Microsoft over to flimflam artists like Ballmer while he
starts to give away his billions. That surely can't be good for
Microsoft's future. No, not when the founder only 53 year old decides
he's had enough. Maybe he sees the writing on the wall clearer than
anybody.

Bill Gates might be setting himself up for doing a Dell or Jobs type
comeback.

But in Bill's case, he maybe too rich to care. Or with Microsoft they
simply are not competitive any longer.

BTW, well put.

Aren't YOU keeping up with technology. Did you buy a plasma or LCD TV set.
Are you going digital?
Crippled shareware indeed. I don't use virus programs either. I don't shell
out hundreds of bucks every 3 or 4 years. Your words not mine. If you do
that's your business. Media playthings?? Are you a child?
"Dave" wrote in message
...
Unknown wrote:
Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
What do you want your computer to do? Microsoft's OS does it. Who uses
Microsoft's OS? Everyone. Corporations and businesses alike.
Can't you get that through your head?

Corporations AND businesses? What's Google use? Are they neither?

Until you break free from the uptight and paranoid world of crippled
shareware and continuous virus scans; from having to shell out a hundred
bucks every 3 or 4 years for a new OS (then hundreds more for the
horsepower to run them); from having to pay hundreds of dollars extra for
compatible word processors and media playthings; you'll never understand.

You mean?

#define VISTA worstOf(CE, ME, NT)
#define WIN7 regurgitate(VISTA)

I have programmed more code than you know. But stocks is something I am
into. Right now my logic for the last 4 months has been:

if (MSFT) {
sellStock(MSFT);
buyStock(RHT);
cout profit;
exit(0);

Hahaha.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...
You apparently have no business savvy. And I might add , absolutely zero
programming experience.
"Canuck57" wrote in message
news:n%z0k.54$ze2.0@pd7urf1no...

"Mike Hall - MVP" wrote in message
...

Mind you, Vista is a bad batch of soup, the best place is the
garborator.

You people don't give up easily, do you. This argument has been raging
for years, but only at user level mainly because users don't understand
the whole picture.

Most people who spend $1000 for a nice system for home don't know how to
replace or dual boot and install another OS. They just assume the OS is
a native part of the computer. WinMe, I gave it about the same amount of
time. I gave OS2 about the same too. Loved OS2, but the driver support
was just too bad for it to be useful. And I get calls from non-tech
friends and relatives, unanimous, Vista is not the best.

Users (technical or not) understand the _full_ picture absolutely. For
without users, there would be absolutely no need for Microsoft.
Microsoft is in a false sense of security because of the monopoly
position with PC vendors, but with Eee PC (Linux) and a hoard of new
systems like it the base is crumbling.

Problem is Redmond wants to lead myopically and push customers, not
service their needs. They want to pump profits in a commodity market by
fast regurgitation of old tech making it unstable. And are now failing.
It will be slow to start, like the mainframe. But Microsoft zenith has
passed if they don't change course fast.

People are tired of the crash learn of big changes. If they have to, it
had better be cheap.

Businesses are balking at the fast expensive refresh cycle. They expect
a 2-3 year old device to work with a PC today. This is NOT unreasonable.
Would you buy a car you couldn't get tires or spare parts for in as
little as 3 years? Or a car that needed a major over haul every 3 years?
This is why many businesses still run W2000.

Software, including the OS needs to be a series of smaller, more planned
and evolutionary steps. Vista is a complete failure in this regard.
Thus, continuous improvement of unfinished Vista is improbable. Just
minimal patchwork. It is in "maintenance" mode while everyone runs off
to Win 7.

A few suggestions to Microsoft:

We know you know your software market has hits it's elasticity of growth
in dollars and cents. Software, including the OS is now going to follow
hardware as a commodity item. Microsoft aught to gear for this now, and
not wait for 4 quarters of declining revenue to hear the wake up call.

Evolve the OS with compatibility in mind, perhaps on a subscription
basis. But don't expect $300/3 years for Vista. It needs to be like
$20/year tops. When you buy a PC it is prepaid for 3 years, like a car
warranty. Ditto MS-Office. Only rich fools go out and buy the full
MS-Office ultimate.

Let the user chose, loose the WeSaySo corporation attitude. Users know
what they want. This means XP will not die until the users don't want it
any more. Even Ford still makes a Taurus. And due to it's popularity
and longevity, I can still get parts for it 12 years later.

Simplify licensing. Your own people don't understand it very well. Quit
packaging a product like Vista 17 different ways confusing everyone. An
OS isn't a Lamborghini. And it will never sell like it either.

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:27:39 -0500, Charlie Tame
wrote:

Microsoft does need to recognize that Linux IS getting much more user
friendly, and is therefore a viable alternative for many of these older
machines that MS and the OEMs want us to replace with Vista machines.
They will not all get thrown away, and many that get "Salvaged" won't
have the OEM XP disks with them so when the OS breaks, there's a
perfectly usable free option. In some ways having the Vista specs too
high to run on them may be a bad thing for MS.

What I don't get is why Microsoft seems so dead set on killing off XP.
There's nothing wrong from a business standpoint of offering both...
as a choice. People that just got to have the "latest and greatest"
could go with Vista then buy some expensive hardware it needs to go
with it, others wanting a new machine, but a basic no frills model
could opt for XP. Sounds like a win, win to me.

From where I sit one of the biggest problems Microsoft faces is
Ballmer. He's not that well liked on the street (Wall street), he's
lost tons of respect from institutional investors for screwing up the
Yahoo deal and most smaller investors think he's a Bozo, and who can
blame them?

When you own stock in a Fortune 500 company and the CEO dances around
on stage like he's having a bad LSD trip, why would you trust him to
lead the company in the right direction? The guy doesn't even know how
to close a deal for a much smaller company (Yahoo) which by now, if
Microsoft really thinks they need it for the future could have started
a hostile takeover bid and be well on the way to closing the deal. But
no, instead Microsoft's stock continues to slowly slide South.

If Microsoft wants to get some respect back, get rid of the Ballmer
clown.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...

Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
What do you want your computer to do? Microsoft's OS does it. Who uses
Microsoft's OS? Everyone. Corporations and businesses alike.
Can't you get that through your head?

You must be a newbie to the business. This is just history repeating
itself.

Times have changed before. Microsoft, unless it changes it's ways will be
the next Novell. BTW, Novell does sell Linux SUSE and would not doubt
NetWare, but is far behind RHT. In the desktop, I wouldn't doubt Ubuntu has
eclipsed SUSE.

Lets list some tech companies that have seen better days, or specifically
major chunck of their business activitied evaporated in market share
ownership, many which were heavy into workstations:

Digital
Compaq
Sperry/UNIVAC
Novell
NorTel
Bell Labs
BaaN
IBM (PC, mainframes and workstations, they evolved to services)
Amdahl
Wyse
Tandy/Radio Shack
Apple (as in II and IIe but recovering)
Commodore (PET, C64)
Data General
Motorola (MC6802 or MC6809 anyone?)
Zilog
Zerox/PARC
SCO (Yep)
(more that I have missed for sure)

Even Linux has road kill. Survival of the fitest.

Now I am not saying Microsoft is going out of business. I am saying it's
price elasticity is shot to hell, innovation has peeked, and market share in
the total market is shrinking. Linux chewing away at the bottom, and Apple
chewing away at the top represents a major problem to future business growth
of Microsoft. Market maturization, commoditization and saturation too.

With Vista, there is a market brand damage and the Microsoft can do no wrong
attitude is under more pressure than ever before. This is likley going to
accelerate.

I will predict Q3 and more so Q4 financial reports this year is not going to
be nice for MSFT as it has to spin a new marketing model to grow. Which is
what the purchase of Yahoo was all about. Bill and Steve know their market
predicament and MSFT futures or they would have made such an offer. MSNBC
is another. MSFT is a 2 trick pony, MS-Windows and MS-Office.

Both which can now be economically replaced with FLOSS.


"Canuck57" wrote in message
news:85v0k.179962$rd2.36576@pd7urf3no...

"Billy Smith" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Billy Smith wrote:

How do you explain this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Top500_OS.png

What it says to me is that your corporate and university level people
working with supercomputers are going to Linux versus Unix or in the
case of Microsoft they aren't going to use it. Thats doesn't mean that
Microsoft makes a bad product for the general consumer market. Linux
does have its use and one of its uses is that it tends to be rather fast
for an operating system. However, if you consider speed anything you
should use Linux. Yet when you use a wide variety of PC appplications,
you will find that they aren't usable in Linux format. You can partition
your drive to use both Microsoft based stuff and Linux or you can stick
with what you know.
For most people, they are not going to use Linux because A: There is no
need for using it and B: They don't have the capability to babysit Linux
based systems. The average computer science grad or expert in the
computer field very well might get some usage out of it. For most
people, they are content in using Microsoft Office or whatever works for
plug and play applications.

Theyr'e not going to waste their time formatting their hard drive to run
a program and system that while being faster doesn't have the applicable
uses that a Microsoft system has. The Microsoft systems have that
advantage because you can put in any XP or Vista or 98 based software of
which I have at least one in each operating system. You can put in any
program that is made for that system and use it. That cannot be said for
converting your system to Linux no matter how much faster it may be. Its
not really worth the time for most people

If you want to put Linux and make it customizable to your system that
works for those applications then go for it.. For the general computer
user that exists in the general public, then most people go for
Microsoft. They're not going to use Linux and I would venture than
Microsoft is much more recognizable than what Linux has been or probably
will ever be.

Linux is still at the infancy state of the computer realm. Its not going
to catch on all that much for the hundreds of millions of computer
users.

Thats why Mac will never be a viable competitor to Microsoft. They're
still stuck in the proprietary and infant stage. Just like the Iphone. I
would have actually been interested in getting an Iphone but when I have
to use ATT for service, they can forget it. I used to have Cingular and
it was a joke for phone service but also their customer service section
was incompetent at best. I can actually pay my bill through Verizon and
know what I actually owe. Nice concept isnt it.

Macs will never become more than fancy overpriced boxes for graphics
users, game players, etc. You never see that many Macs ever used for
servers, internet commerce, etc. Thats why you can go to the Apple store
here in Louisville and find out that a Mac will cost you 1500 to 2000
dollars when a basic Vista/XP computer will net you half those amounts.
When Apple learns to market their computers and systems correctly and
produce something worth really having, then they will take off. Until
then, they don't have a prayer competition wise.

If you mean is Linux finished growing up and fully mature? Heck no, it
has only begun. I suspect it will be evolving well past my lifetime.

Linux is vastly superior to Vista in most ways, you bet. I place it just
on the heals of XP right now but ahead of Vista. I will grant, XP is
quite mature, but stagnant. Where as Linux is still, and will always
perpetually evolve.

The Linux maturity is going to be evolutionary and not the dump
everything change now you see with Microsoft products. Where as
Microsoft has a grand-batch mentality. The later can't get continuous
improvement, can't evolve. Take Vista, is now in maintenance mode. Its
active development has ceased! Understand that. They all moved on to
Win 7 for the next disruption.

Mind you, Vista is a bad batch of soup, the best place is the garborator.

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:38:01 -0500, "Unknown"
wrote:

Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
What do you want your computer to do? Microsoft's OS does it.

I had no idea people wanted their systems to crash so often.

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:40:54 -0500, "Unknown"
wrote:

What a bunch of misguided trash.

Oh I see, so misguided you couldn't counter a single point.

You did manage to top post though. Figures.

"Adam Albright" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:27:39 -0500, Charlie Tame
wrote:

Microsoft does need to recognize that Linux IS getting much more user
friendly, and is therefore a viable alternative for many of these older
machines that MS and the OEMs want us to replace with Vista machines.
They will not all get thrown away, and many that get "Salvaged" won't
have the OEM XP disks with them so when the OS breaks, there's a
perfectly usable free option. In some ways having the Vista specs too
high to run on them may be a bad thing for MS.

What I don't get is why Microsoft seems so dead set on killing off XP.
There's nothing wrong from a business standpoint of offering both...
as a choice. People that just got to have the "latest and greatest"
could go with Vista then buy some expensive hardware it needs to go
with it, others wanting a new machine, but a basic no frills model
could opt for XP. Sounds like a win, win to me.

From where I sit one of the biggest problems Microsoft faces is
Ballmer. He's not that well liked on the street (Wall street), he's
lost tons of respect from institutional investors for screwing up the
Yahoo deal and most smaller investors think he's a Bozo, and who can
blame them?

When you own stock in a Fortune 500 company and the CEO dances around
on stage like he's having a bad LSD trip, why would you trust him to
lead the company in the right direction? The guy doesn't even know how
to close a deal for a much smaller company (Yahoo) which by now, if
Microsoft really thinks they need it for the future could have started
a hostile takeover bid and be well on the way to closing the deal. But
no, instead Microsoft's stock continues to slowly slide South.

If Microsoft wants to get some respect back, get rid of the Ballmer
clown.

That would be a good start. But more will be needed. While you and I can
load Linux, most of the users out there would have problems loading XP from
Microsoft in that they would have to do their own XP integration to
downgrade. Which, makes them stuck in Vista. And if stuck in Vista and not
happy about it, waiting 2-3 years for Win 7 isn't going to do Microsoft any
good.

Microsoft should revitalise the driver sets for XP, and offer down grades
for $10 S&H.

"Adam Albright" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:50:16 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
wrote:

"Alias" wrote in message

No, Mike, you don't understand the whole picture. Ubuntu and other
versions of Linux are taking off. If you can joggle your poor memory a
bit, when XP came out, you didn't see *any* posts about Linux in the XP
General newsgroup. No media was covering it and practically no major OEM
was offering it preinstalled. All that's changed and the reason is that
distros like Ubuntu are so user friendly, easy to install and easy to
configure and tweak.

Alias


For now Linux is seeing better times, but Vista has hoisted the hardware
requirements, and in a couple of years from now, many will have upgraded
their computers. Vista will have improved enough that it is the force to
be
reckoned with, and then Windows 7 will release, easily able to run on the
same hardware as Vista.

Vista will have improved enough?

Funny to watch fanboys change their tune as they constantly move the
goal posts. I though Vista was already the greatest version of Windows
ever. If so, why does it need to improve?

After all that was the song you guys were humming over a year ago.
However now that Vista has been out awhile and proved to be just
another bloated, poorly implemented, bug riddled, sluggish pile of
coding mistakes like every prior version of Windows before it was, you
now say wait to the next version. I'll say one thing good about you
Mike, you sure know how to repeat the party line issued from Redmond.

Microsoft has been saying the same thing for over two decades... just
wait for the next version of Windows, it will knock your socks off.
Sure, right. Only problem is I like tens of millions of others are
tired of waiting and being disappointed over and over again. People
are more seriously starting to look at alternatives to Windows.

In the meantime, Linux will make inroads in third world countries where
cheap equipment is all that can be afforded.

You really are clueless and dense on world events aren't you. Would
you consider China third world? Are you sitting down? Right now China
has over 300,000,000 MIDDLE CLASS citizens and that number is growing
at explosive rates. That's as many middle class as the entire
population of the United States. Are you aware Russia soon might have
more millionaires then there are in the United States? Their middle
class is exploding too. While Windows "sales" in China is a drop in
the bucket they already have more Internet users than in the United
States. Hint: Those people are running all those computers on
something, and it isn't paid for copies of Windows.

The reality is Microsoft's time in the sun is fading. That is why
Ballmer tried, but failed to take over Yahoo, to start building a new
cash stream since people are fed-up giving Microsoft piles of money
for one broken OS version after another.

Microsoft's other cash cow Office, has been equaled or surpassed by
FREE Office alternatives. That's not good news for Microsoft either.
Their two biggest product lines, Windows and Office are showing signs
of cracking.

You know what the biggest sign of Microsoft's pending doom really is?

Simple. That would be Bill Gates founder getting ready to throw in the
towel. His belly no longer burns for Microsoft. He's more than willing
to give Microsoft over to flimflam artists like Ballmer while he
starts to give away his billions. That surely can't be good for
Microsoft's future. No, not when the founder only 53 year old decides
he's had enough. Maybe he sees the writing on the wall clearer than
anybody.



In China, they pirate Vista. I doubt that many use Linux.

Re. Vista being the best, like all new releases of anything, it needed work
and, in any event, suggesting that something is the best yet does not mean
that it is without issues. Many Vista issues were down to a lack of driver
support, but yes, it was bogged down with some of its own. Needless to say
that Vista has moved on but the FUD remains..

I assume that Steve B has filed your resume away where the sun doesn't
shine, otherwise we would no doubt be seeing quantum improvements coming out
of Redmond.. :-)


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

"+Bob+" wrote in message
...

Microsoft doesn't care about stability or the fact that each new OS
requires more and more HP to run effectively. Otherwise there would be
an SP4 and/or there would be official upgrade releases that added new
features. Instead, we get a bug ridden, driver lacking, software
incompatible, new OS every few years. Face it: they care only about
selling you a new OS.

Don't disagree with that at all. However that is the problem, neither home
consumers nor businesses want to rework their computer infrastructure every
3 years.

But, the problem for them is that there are really not that many new
features to add to an OS. Look at a comparison of 2000, to XP, to
Vista. What have they really added in terms of user features? VPN? I'm
at a loss to find anything else that's more than a refinement on the
user side. On the system side, they've simply gobbled more HP to
deliver the same set of user features (that's not a feature, it's a
major flaw).

Agree there. So between extra resources and additional DRM...we have Vista,
offers noting else.


I long for a return to the old days, when OS vendors built an
operating system then continually refined it in each release to make
it better. Wholesale replacement was not an option because customers
demanded stability and reduced life cycle costs. Over time, we ended
up with some incredibly stable, bug free, solid, dependable OS's. You
can't do that if you keep replacing your code wholesale.

Linux, the BSDs and Solaris do this. I have run Solaris 7 programs on
Solaris 10. Big departures can occur, like SunOS to Solaris but are decades
apart. Linux, is a series of incremental improvements. Continious
improvent taken seriously.

XP can compete with Linux and do well, but Vista....nada. Vista is like
the
Titanic after the water was leaking in. Vista drives people to Apple and
Linux. It will be slow at first, but will pick up as word spreads. See
Eee
PC sales....suppliers can't keep the Linux varieties in stock.

Not to worry. Windows 7 will fix everything! (Note sarcasm, see above,
note repeat cycle).

Been around too long to believe that Win7 will fix much. For everything it
solves, it will create new issues.

In fact, it is going to create a situation where you have 3 major OSes in
place for Microsoft alone. XP, Vista and Win 7. Not to mention variations
there in and of others like W2008. I anticipate MS-Windows 100 OS pickup.

(since XP was made)
(Assuming Win7/W2008 follows Vista/2003 fragmentation)

(5) Windows Server 2008 Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter, Itanium, Web
(3) Windows Server 2008 (No Hyper-V) Standard, Enterprise, Enterprise
(4) Windows Server 2008 x64 Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter, Web
(3) Windows Server 2008 x64 (No Hyper-V) Standard, Enterprise, Enterprise
(5) Windows Win7 OEM: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Basic, Enterprise
(5) Windows Win7 Full: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Basic, Enterprise
(4) Windows Win7 x64 OEM: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Enterprise
(4) Windows Win7 x64 Full: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Enterprise
(5) Windows Vista OEM: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Basic, Enterprise
(5) Windows Vista Full: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Basic, Enterprise
(4) Windows Vista x64 OEM: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Enterprise
(4) Windows Vista x64 Full: Ultimate, Business, Premium, Enterprise
(4) Windows Server 2003 Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter, Web
(4) Windows Server 2003 x64: Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter, Web
(2) Windows Server 2003 Itanium: Enterprise, Datacenter
(3) XP Home, Pro, MCE (2003 & 2005)
(6) XP OEM Home, Pro, Pro x64, MCE, Tablet, Mini (EeePC)
(10) CE (List is long, includes pocket PC, phone etc, this is conservative)

Did I miss any? Any not quite right?

70 not including CE, which makes at least 80+ different ways to buy
MS-Windows sold since XP was introduced.

I pity the poor MSCE that has to carry all those DVDs to a consulting gig.

No wonder the M$ salesperson can't remember pricing....as the above comes in
diffent different, business licensing and retail. And even then the support
variations.... Whew.

No wonder they can't fix Vista, engineering is buried in configuration
management issues.

"Adam Albright" wrote in message
...

Fast forward to 1981. IBM noticed Apple's growing success but also
realized their major blunder using a closed architecture, just stupid
and based on greed. Literally overnight IBM put together a team of 12
engineers who with off the shelf parts gave birth to the PC using Open
Architecture. Shortly before IBM for reasons only God knows approached
Bill Gates, a total nobody at the time to write a OS for this PC. You
know the rest of that story.

I know some history on this. IBM designed the PC, 8088 @ 4.7 MHz. Trouble
was IBM started building them and warehousing them before their internal OS
development was finished with Digital Research. Boca Ratan comes to mind,
anyway IBM had big problems and was desperate for a working OS. Someone
found Microsoft as an alternative to the failing relationship with Digital
Research. For Microsoft, MS-DOS was originally known as QDOS (Quick and
Dirty OS) which borrowed from CP/M. Essentially, MS-DOS was stripped down
CP/M. Also added was Basic to the BIOS, borrowed from earlier works on the
PET and Altair ports and then IBM had a PC with OS/programming. Initially,
IBM actually helped people market and paid people to write programs for this
PC. I believe Microsoft got $25 per MS-DOS sold via IBM.

Competators at the time included: Apple, Tandy/Radio Shack and Commodore
Pet and a few others. There were plenty of micro based systems, 6800, 6502,
8080, Z80 and others before the 8088 IBM PC. IBMs ants in the pants to get
to market as they could forsee the micro based personal market going big
time and they wanted in fast.

While Bill is credited with the founding of Microsoft, this is folk lore. A
real known picture of the Microsoft 11:

http://kennethg.blogspot.com/2006/06...-founders.html

11 or 12 people started Microsoft, most of which were moved asside before or
when Ballmer came into Microsoft in 1980. There is a lot of hidden stories
in this period to tell as American media likes the single shining knight
story. That is, Bill Gates is not the single founder of Microsoft, not even
apartner, but one of many. But Ballmer was with Microsoft just before they
hit it big time with the IBM contract.

On Jun 1, 11:33*am, "Canuck57" wrote:
"Unknown" wrote in message

...

Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
What do you want your computer to do? *Microsoft's OS does it. Who uses
Microsoft's OS? *Everyone. Corporations and businesses alike.
Can't you get that through your head?

You must be a newbie to the business. *This is just history repeating
itself.

Times have changed before. *Microsoft, unless it changes it's ways will be
the next Novell. *BTW, Novell does sell Linux SUSE and would not doubt
NetWare, but is far behind RHT. *In the desktop, I wouldn't doubt Ubuntu has
eclipsed SUSE.

Lets list some tech companies that have seen better days, or specifically
major chunck of their business activitied evaporated in market share
ownership, many which were heavy into workstations:

Digital
Compaq
Sperry/UNIVAC
Novell
NorTel
Bell Labs
BaaN
IBM (PC, mainframes and workstations, they evolved to services)
Amdahl
Wyse
Tandy/Radio Shack
Apple (as in II and IIe but recovering)
Commodore (PET, C64)
Data General
Motorola (MC6802 or MC6809 anyone?)
Zilog
Zerox/PARC
SCO (Yep)
(more that I have missed for sure)

Even Linux has road kill. *Survival of the fitest.

Now I am not saying Microsoft is going out of business. *I am saying it's
price elasticity is shot to hell, innovation has peeked, and market share in
the total market is shrinking. *Linux chewing away at the bottom, and Apple
chewing away at the top represents a major problem to future business growth
of Microsoft. *Market maturization, commoditization and saturation too.

With Vista, there is a market brand damage and the Microsoft can do no wrong
attitude is under more pressure than ever before. *This is likley going to
accelerate.

I will predict Q3 and more so Q4 financial reports this year is not going to
be nice for MSFT as it has to spin a new marketing model to grow. *Which is
what the purchase of Yahoo was all about. *Bill and Steve know their market
predicament and MSFT futures or they would have made such an offer. *MSNBC
is another. *MSFT is a 2 trick pony, MS-Windows and MS-Office.

- Both which can now be economically replaced with FLOSS.

Free/Libre/Open Source Software [FLOSS]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOSS



"Canuck57" wrote in message
news:85v0k.179962$rd2.36576@pd7urf3no...

"Billy Smith" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Billy Smith wrote:

How do you explain this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Top500_OS.png

What it says to me is that your corporate and university level people
working with supercomputers *are going to Linux versus Unix or in the
case of Microsoft they aren't going to use it. Thats doesn't mean that
Microsoft makes a bad product for the general consumer market. Linux
does have its use and one of its uses is that it tends to be rather fast
for an operating system. However, if you consider speed anything you
should use Linux. Yet when you use a wide variety of PC appplications,
you will find that they aren't usable in Linux format. You can partition
your drive to use both Microsoft based stuff and Linux or you can stick
with what you know.
For most people, they are not going to use Linux because A: There is no
need for using it and B: They don't have the capability to babysit Linux
based systems. The average computer science grad or expert in the
computer field very well might get some usage out of it. For most
people, they are content in using Microsoft Office or whatever works for
plug and play applications.

Theyr'e not going to waste their time formatting their hard drive to run
a program and system that while being faster doesn't have the applicable
uses that a Microsoft system has. The Microsoft systems have that
advantage because you can put in any XP or Vista or 98 based software of
which I have at least one in each operating system. You can put in any
program that is made for that system and use it. That cannot be said for
converting your system to Linux no matter how much faster it may be. Its
not really worth the time for most people

If you want to put Linux and make it customizable to your system that
works for *those applications then go for it.. For the general computer
user that exists in the general public, then most people go for
Microsoft. They're not going to use Linux and I would venture than
Microsoft is much more recognizable than what Linux has been or probably
will ever be.

Linux is still at the infancy state of the computer realm. Its not going
to catch on all that much for the hundreds of millions of computer
users.

Thats why Mac will never be a viable competitor to Microsoft. They're
still stuck in the proprietary and infant stage. Just like the Iphone. I
would have actually been interested in getting an Iphone but when I have
to use ATT for service, they can forget it. I used to have Cingular and
it was a joke for phone service but also their customer service section
was incompetent at best. I can actually pay my bill through Verizon and
know what I actually owe. Nice concept isnt it.

Macs will never become more than fancy overpriced boxes for graphics
users, game players, etc. You never see that many Macs ever used for
servers, internet commerce, etc. Thats why you can go to the Apple store
here in Louisville and find out that a Mac will cost you 1500 to 2000
dollars when a basic Vista/XP computer will net you half those amounts..
When Apple learns to market their computers and systems correctly and
produce something worth really having, then they will take off. Until
then, they don't have a prayer competition wise.

If you mean is Linux finished growing up and fully mature? *Heck no, it
has only begun. *I suspect it will be evolving well past my lifetime.

Linux is vastly superior to Vista in most ways, you bet. *I place it just
on the heals of XP right now but ahead of Vista. *I will grant, XP is
quite mature, but stagnant. *Where as Linux is still, and will always
perpetually evolve.

The Linux maturity is going to be evolutionary and not the dump
everything change now you see with Microsoft products. *Where as
Microsoft has a grand-batch mentality. *The later can't get continuous
improvement, can't evolve. *Take Vista, is now in maintenance mode. *Its
active development has ceased! *Understand that. *They all moved on to
Win 7 for the next disruption.

Mind you, Vista is a bad batch of soup, the best place is the garborator.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"+Bob+" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 13:30:48 -0500, Adam Albright wrote:

What I don't get is why Microsoft seems so dead set on killing off XP.

Because lots of large corporations buy into the "upgrade and stay
current" scenario. Then there's all the training they sell, new
exams, etc. They also get to obsolete older versions of other programs
which forces new purchases of dated, but working, software.

It's billions of $'s.

And do you think these companies pay these billions for nothing?
If they got nothing they wouldn't pay.

Very stupid comment. Ever stop to think what causes the crashes?
"Adam Albright" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:38:01 -0500, "Unknown"
wrote:

Your argument is totally ridiculous. The primary reason for Microsoft's
popularity is simply because it is so flexible.
What do you want your computer to do? Microsoft's OS does it.

I had no idea people wanted their systems to crash so often.

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:44:33 GMT, "Canuck57"
wrote:


"Adam Albright" wrote in message
.. .

Fast forward to 1981. IBM noticed Apple's growing success but also
realized their major blunder using a closed architecture, just stupid
and based on greed. Literally overnight IBM put together a team of 12
engineers who with off the shelf parts gave birth to the PC using Open
Architecture. Shortly before IBM for reasons only God knows approached
Bill Gates, a total nobody at the time to write a OS for this PC. You
know the rest of that story.

I know some history on this. IBM designed the PC, 8088 @ 4.7 MHz. Trouble
was IBM started building them and warehousing them before their internal OS
development was finished with Digital Research. Boca Ratan comes to mind,
anyway IBM had big problems and was desperate for a working OS. Someone
found Microsoft as an alternative to the failing relationship with Digital
Research. For Microsoft, MS-DOS was originally known as QDOS (Quick and
Dirty OS) which borrowed from CP/M. Essentially, MS-DOS was stripped down
CP/M. Also added was Basic to the BIOS, borrowed from earlier works on the
PET and Altair ports and then IBM had a PC with OS/programming. Initially,
IBM actually helped people market and paid people to write programs for this
PC. I believe Microsoft got $25 per MS-DOS sold via IBM.

Competators at the time included: Apple, Tandy/Radio Shack and Commodore
Pet and a few others. There were plenty of micro based systems, 6800, 6502,
8080, Z80 and others before the 8088 IBM PC. IBMs ants in the pants to get
to market as they could forsee the micro based personal market going big
time and they wanted in fast.

While Bill is credited with the founding of Microsoft, this is folk lore. A
real known picture of the Microsoft 11:

http://kennethg.blogspot.com/2006/06...-founders.html

11 or 12 people started Microsoft, most of which were moved asside before or
when Ballmer came into Microsoft in 1980. There is a lot of hidden stories
in this period to tell as American media likes the single shining knight
story. That is, Bill Gates is not the single founder of Microsoft, not even
apartner, but one of many. But Ballmer was with Microsoft just before they
hit it big time with the IBM contract.

One thing I've always wondered about is why IBM the powerhouse it was
and still is didn't write it's own OS for their PC totally in house.

I've seen that famous picture many times. I think history never gave
Paul Allen, extreme right bottom row much credit.