There's nothing keeping me on Windows. I switched to Linux way back in 1997 and never looked back. I don't need to list the apps that make Linux a useful operating system -- you've heard the list a thousand times.
The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is because Microsoft lost the browser war. Yes, you heard me correctly: they lost. Microsoft didn't like the idea of applications shifting from Windows to the web. Remember when you needed special Windows apps for everything? You installed one to send messages to someone's pager, another one to do your banking, another one to track your FedEx shipments, etc. Microsoft wanted to keep it that way, but those pesky Netscape people kept pushing this idea of applications executing on a server while you viewed them in a browser. So they went into War Mode on the browser front. All they managed to accomplish was to destroy Netscape's ability to make money selling browsers. But guess what? Nearly all information-access apps moved to the Web anyway. And those apps are as easily accessed from a Linux or Mac desktop as they are from a Windows desktop. Microsoft failed to stop the migration of apps to the web. Say it with me, folks: Microsoft failed. Doesn't that sound good? It's true. Marc Andreesen's vision of web-enabled applications making the OS irrelevant has become a reality, and that's one of the things that has enabled folks like me to ditch Windows without ever missing it.
That's awesome that you can run Linux full time. I'm really happy for you and one day I'd like to be able to do the same.
However, I disagree with you on a couple points. 1) Microsoft may be loosing the browser war but I'd hardly say they've lost it. Until I can visit every site and have it work perfectly with a browser other than IE, MS hasn't lost the war. My credit card company won't let me access their online payment site without IE, a handful of sites have functionality that's only available through ActiveX compoments etc. MS got to the top by some questionable (to say the least) methods and they're slipping (long live Mozilla & gang!) but they're still top of the heap.
Secondly, you say that "The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is...." Please tell me how to get the games I like (not just any games, but the ones I want to play), Quicken (gnucash isn't there yet), photoshop (gimp is cool but it's not Photoshop), all the latest hardware drivers, application development suites, etc. (I could go on) to work in my browser.
You missed the point. The browser war that MS was fighting was the war to keep the browser from making the OS irrelevant. They lost. Their browser may be the most popular, but it still makes the OS irrelevant. Don't believe it? Try a spoofed header on Mozilla. Today, mine is Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows_98_under_Linux_on_SGI_Octane). Not a word of it is true, of course.
I haven't run into a site that won't function for me on Mozilla. If I do, I'll tell the operator that his site is broken. You mentioned credit card payments; credit card companies are begging for your business. So are banks, and most other businesses. If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me. That's not about browsers or operating systems or computers, that's about the customer (that's me) being right. The customer is always right, as long as the customer pays the businesses' bills. I've never had a problem with a bank which involved computers, but that would be reason enough to take my business elsewhere, just as surely as not being open at convenient times and locations is.
It seems funny that you say GNUcash isn't there yet. I find it's a bit of overkill: I wish there was a slightly less complicated and less capable program. GNUcash does the job, but it does way more than I need.
The parent post was correct: MS lost the browser war. They won the war to have the most popular browser, but they never wanted to win that one. What they wanted was to make sure that NO browser could undermine their OS monopoly.
If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me.
Try telling that to the company that provides your electric power, or to any other regulated municipal monopoly. If they require IE for Windows, then you had better buy a computer that can run IE for Windows, or you can't run any computer because you don't have any power.
Here's a dirty little secret: one doesn't need a computer to do business with the regulated monopolies.
They may WANT you to use a computer, but you can refuse. When they try to sell you on the advantages of using their website for whatever (to save them money, though they rarely emphasize that), politely reply that you will do so when their website works with your computer.
I don't use the web for this sort of thing, regardless of the company's policy on which browsers they'll support. The savings never seem to be passed along to me, and the terms on which you make payments (unless via credit card) seem unfavorable.
Well, I'm a mac person myself, and would love for that to be true, but still now, I can't do internet banking cuz my bank only offers a windoze solution...
When we have true interoperability, I'll be happy, but while.Net continues to grow and flourish, MS still has its way...
> There's nothing keeping me on Windows. I switched to Linux way back in 1997 and never looked back.
<aol>meetoo!</aol> And right about the same time, too.
And it just keeps getting better every year. I can see how someone who actually needed Photoshop or MS Word or some other specific commercial application, or who was addicted to games, wouldn't be able to live on Linux. But for the rest of us, Windows doesn't offer anything we need or particularly need or even want.
I'm still on Red Hat 7.2 / GNOME 1.4, and I don't feel any rush to upgrade. It has gotten to the point that upgrades are luxuries that I do at some convenient time, rather than something that needs to be done to pick up new features as soon as they become available. Back in RH 4.x days I always upgraded immediately, but for the last 2-3 years I've been skipping more and more upgrades.
At any rate, let me emphasize the "never looked back" part.
My wife and I have also been using exclusively Linux for last couple of years (thanks, Mandrake).
I agree 100% on your point about web based services. My company, which sadly is VERY MS based right now, has almost ALL of the its company wide programs for end-users on a central intranet website:
401K Expense Reimbursements POs Accounting Information etc . ..
They only support Explorer, of course, but how hard would it really be to switch to, say, Mozilla if prices really got out of hand. This way of thinking has greatly crippled MS's ability to look in their customers. However, there are other fronts to worry about . . . (.net).
I toy with myself that so many webbased tools will be created that one day all you will need is a dumb i-appliance capable of rendering webpages to work. We'll see . . .
I realise that is the fault of the developers who built the site, but it does go a long way in dispelling what I wish was not the case, MS did win the browser war, how? They are keeping people on Windows first and foremost and secondly a large number of people have to use their browser if they are to go about their daily online activities.
Last time I checked I was running every single one of my applications on my computer, except for, as you noted, information-access applications that need real-time information (like news sources, currency converters, etc). There is not one single application that I run that is not an information-access application that runs over the web.
Photoshop isn't web-enabled. My games aren't web-enabled. Illustrator isn't web-enabled.
I don't know what's worse, that you actually posted this and probably believe it's true, or that you got modded up as being insightful.
Microsoft lost the browser war...... Marc Andreesen's vision of web-enabled applications making the OS irrelevant has become a reality
I somewhat disagree. What is missing from browsers is a true GUI protocol. HTML+DOM+JavaScript is a tangled mess. HTML forms are usually fine for lite B-to-C, but B-to-B really want GUI's so that VB/PowerBuilder/Delphi-type custom biz apps can run GUI's through HTTP.
Contenders include the likes of XWT, XUL, and SCGUI, which use various levels of medium-to-thin client approaches (I hope I got those acronyms right).
When something like these finally gets accepted and perfected, then GUI browsers will be able to kill a lot more OS-specific stuff.
and what does a browser have to do with this anyway?
I didn't see the requirement to bash.
Insigthful only because the current mods hate Ms as much as you and refused to grade you off topic as deserved.
Actually, your point is well taken. Most people are using Windows because the real arrogant assholes are on the other side chiding them for their choice. You aren't going to win converts by simply slamming the other side. You just as might as well concentrate all your hate against Jeb... seems to work as well doesn't it.
I've noticed that the petulant, whiny nonmovers always lecture open/free software users on how to "win converts". Parent is one of many such posts in this story.
As if (a) it were a popularity contest and (b) those people were actually to know something about persuasion. Neither of which is true. I mean, they're doing horribly at persuading me that they're not human wastelands, let alone that I should change my operating system.
On the other hand, the polite nonmovers simply tell us what work they have to do or games they want to play and manage to resist the urge to preach.
I'm also a convert but didn't fully convert until about 2001. Up until then I quite often dual booted ever since I learned about linux in 1996, primarily because internet browsing (IE was just so much easier to use, until I've now gone MOZ) and games. But now my main machine is a Redhat 7.3 and an ibook with OSX 10.2. I'll have to agree with all those OSX users out there that this little ibook is AWESOME! But it is not my main machine (yet?) I am so acustomed to using a big ole box with a 19" 50lb monitor with a IBM model M keyboard dug out of a dumpster. As far as the games arguement; I've finally realized after playing too much diablo2 (wineX version even) that gaming is a total waste of time, but still occasionally that itch comes along to waste the time and I have an addiction to KDE klines. I even learned to code enough to hack the source code of klines so that I could play with a bigger board or more or less balls. Also there are alot of other quite addicting games that come with almost any major linux distro especially kde. What do you get with windows? sol, freecell, pinball and minesweeper? Thats all? How about the game that you put together atomic particles? The only drawback that I have not using windows is now when family and friends ask help and they have winXP, I don't really have a clue how to help them, but yet they still rely on me. I just say something like, well check your settings in your control panel?
I just wanted to post because more than 2000 of you have posted too, so me too!
Watch out for.Net enabled sites. You might have to choose from a castrated Web interface of a real.Net interface in less time than you think. Yes, ASP Controls will be controled by Microsoft and will as incompatible as they see fit.
I wouldn't worry about.Net "smart clients" too much... the API is very well-defined, and the good folks at the Mono project [go-mono.org] are making sure the Free world will be on board.
But are they doing clean room implementations? It doesn't look like that to me. I suspect they will that pass for now, but in the future when everyone has embraced the API, they may (will?) follow another trend.
I don't why this post didn't score at least 1 point. I guess the truth hurts. Developers like developing for Windows and Microsoft knows that in the future that this will be the key to holding on to thier marketshare. The web is not as standardized as most would like it, and with.NET probably even less so. I like using Mozilla, but I can't visit some sites because they are geared specifically towards the Windows user. As much as it sucks, MS Office is still king in the business world. Linux may someday really overtake MS in the desktop world, but only if business and the public care about standards that benefit everyone
I discovered the WWW (not the Internet), Linux and Netscape 3 around 1996. For my spare time the WWW is the ultimate killer app and as a lifelong tinkerer Linux and free software is the ultimate toy (that's "toy as in fun", not "toy as in children's plaything"). I don't care if it used to take me longer to do something in Linux than it would have in Windows - getting there was half the fun! For someone who enjoys getting under the hood and wants total flexibility (etc. etc.) Linux is irresistable. But for someone who just wants to get things done with minimum learning curve Windows (or a pre-configured Linux appliance) is a better choice.
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
-- Dave Olson
Windows? What's that? (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is because Microsoft lost the browser war. Yes, you heard me correctly: they lost. Microsoft didn't like the idea of applications shifting from Windows to the web. Remember when you needed special Windows apps for everything? You installed one to send messages to someone's pager, another one to do your banking, another one to track your FedEx shipments, etc. Microsoft wanted to keep it that way, but those pesky Netscape people kept pushing this idea of applications executing on a server while you viewed them in a browser. So they went into War Mode on the browser front. All they managed to accomplish was to destroy Netscape's ability to make money selling browsers. But guess what? Nearly all information-access apps moved to the Web anyway. And those apps are as easily accessed from a Linux or Mac desktop as they are from a Windows desktop. Microsoft failed to stop the migration of apps to the web. Say it with me, folks: Microsoft failed. Doesn't that sound good? It's true. Marc Andreesen's vision of web-enabled applications making the OS irrelevant has become a reality, and that's one of the things that has enabled folks like me to ditch Windows without ever missing it.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:2, Insightful)
However, I disagree with you on a couple points. 1) Microsoft may be loosing the browser war but I'd hardly say they've lost it. Until I can visit every site and have it work perfectly with a browser other than IE, MS hasn't lost the war. My credit card company won't let me access their online payment site without IE, a handful of sites have functionality that's only available through ActiveX compoments etc. MS got to the top by some questionable (to say the least) methods and they're slipping (long live Mozilla & gang!) but they're still top of the heap.
Secondly, you say that "The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is...." Please tell me how to get the games I like (not just any games, but the ones I want to play), Quicken (gnucash isn't there yet), photoshop (gimp is cool but it's not Photoshop), all the latest hardware drivers, application development suites, etc. (I could go on) to work in my browser.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:2)
I haven't run into a site that won't function for me on Mozilla. If I do, I'll tell the operator that his site is broken. You mentioned credit card payments; credit card companies are begging for your business. So are banks, and most other businesses. If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me. That's not about browsers or operating systems or computers, that's about the customer (that's me) being right. The customer is always right, as long as the customer pays the businesses' bills. I've never had a problem with a bank which involved computers, but that would be reason enough to take my business elsewhere, just as surely as not being open at convenient times and locations is.
It seems funny that you say GNUcash isn't there yet. I find it's a bit of overkill: I wish there was a slightly less complicated and less capable program. GNUcash does the job, but it does way more than I need.
The parent post was correct: MS lost the browser war. They won the war to have the most popular browser, but they never wanted to win that one. What they wanted was to make sure that NO browser could undermine their OS monopoly.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:1)
Hint: Because it's not irrelevant.
Tell that to your power company (Score:2)
If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me.
Try telling that to the company that provides your electric power, or to any other regulated municipal monopoly. If they require IE for Windows, then you had better buy a computer that can run IE for Windows, or you can't run any computer because you don't have any power.
Re:Tell that to your power company (Score:2)
They may WANT you to use a computer, but you can refuse. When they try to sell you on the advantages of using their website for whatever (to save them money, though they rarely emphasize that), politely reply that you will do so when their website works with your computer.
I don't use the web for this sort of thing, regardless of the company's policy on which browsers they'll support. The savings never seem to be passed along to me, and the terms on which you make payments (unless via credit card) seem unfavorable.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:1)
When we have true interoperability, I'll be happy, but while
Re: Windows? What's that? (Score:2)
> There's nothing keeping me on Windows. I switched to Linux way back in 1997 and never looked back.
<aol>meetoo!</aol> And right about the same time, too.
And it just keeps getting better every year. I can see how someone who actually needed Photoshop or MS Word or some other specific commercial application, or who was addicted to games, wouldn't be able to live on Linux. But for the rest of us, Windows doesn't offer anything we need or particularly need or even want.
I'm still on Red Hat 7.2 / GNOME 1.4, and I don't feel any rush to upgrade. It has gotten to the point that upgrades are luxuries that I do at some convenient time, rather than something that needs to be done to pick up new features as soon as they become available. Back in RH 4.x days I always upgraded immediately, but for the last 2-3 years I've been skipping more and more upgrades.
At any rate, let me emphasize the "never looked back" part.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:1)
I agree 100% on your point about web based services. My company, which sadly is VERY MS based right now, has almost ALL of the its company wide programs for end-users on a central intranet website:
401K
Expense Reimbursements
POs
Accounting Information
etc . .
They only support Explorer, of course, but how hard would it really be to switch to, say, Mozilla if prices really got out of hand. This way of thinking has greatly crippled MS's ability to look in their customers. However, there are other fronts to worry about . . . (.net).
I toy with myself that so many webbased tools will be created that one day all you will need is a dumb i-appliance capable of rendering webpages to work. We'll see . . .
I'd agree, except... (Score:1)
I realise that is the fault of the developers who built the site, but it does go a long way in dispelling what I wish was not the case, MS did win the browser war, how? They are keeping people on Windows first and foremost and secondly a large number of people have to use their browser if they are to go about their daily online activities.
No ActiveX in Mac IE (Score:1)
Well, they have IE for MacOS's, no?
IE for Mac OS X does not support ActiveX because ActiveX controls are Win32/x86 binaries. Any web site that requires ActiveX won't work on a Mac.
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:1)
Last time I checked I was running every single one of my applications on my computer, except for, as you noted, information-access applications that need real-time information (like news sources, currency converters, etc). There is not one single application that I run that is not an information-access application that runs over the web.
Photoshop isn't web-enabled. My games aren't web-enabled. Illustrator isn't web-enabled.
I don't know what's worse, that you actually posted this and probably believe it's true, or that you got modded up as being insightful.
Still need HTTP-friendly GUI's (Score:2)
I somewhat disagree. What is missing from browsers is a true GUI protocol. HTML+DOM+JavaScript is a tangled mess. HTML forms are usually fine for lite B-to-C, but B-to-B really want GUI's so that VB/PowerBuilder/Delphi-type custom biz apps can run GUI's through HTTP.
Contenders include the likes of XWT, XUL, and SCGUI, which use various levels of medium-to-thin client approaches (I hope I got those acronyms right).
When something like these finally gets accepted and perfected, then GUI browsers will be able to kill a lot more OS-specific stuff.
So, if all I need is a browser I can use Linux? (Score:2)
I didn't see the requirement to bash.
Insigthful only because the current mods hate Ms as much as you and refused to grade you off topic as deserved.
Actually, your point is well taken. Most people are using Windows because the real arrogant assholes are on the other side chiding them for their choice. You aren't going to win converts by simply slamming the other side. You just as might as well concentrate all your hate against Jeb
Re:So, if all I need is a browser I can use Linux? (Score:2)
As if (a) it were a popularity contest and (b) those people were actually to know something about persuasion. Neither of which is true. I mean, they're doing horribly at persuading me that they're not human wastelands, let alone that I should change my operating system.
On the other hand, the polite nonmovers simply tell us what work they have to do or games they want to play and manage to resist the urge to preach.
Me tooism (Score:1)
The only drawback that I have not using windows is now when family and friends ask help and they have winXP, I don't really have a clue how to help them, but yet they still rely on me. I just say something like, well check your settings in your control panel?
I just wanted to post because more than 2000 of you have posted too, so me too!
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:2)
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:2)
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:2)
I know about Mono, it looks very promising.
Re:Microsoft didn't fail (Score:1)
Re:Windows? What's that? (Score:1)
I discovered the WWW (not the Internet), Linux and Netscape 3 around 1996. For my spare time the WWW is the ultimate killer app and as a lifelong tinkerer Linux and free software is the ultimate toy (that's "toy as in fun", not "toy as in children's plaything"). I don't care if it used to take me longer to do something in Linux than it would have in Windows - getting there was half the fun! For someone who enjoys getting under the hood and wants total flexibility (etc. etc.) Linux is irresistable. But for someone who just wants to get things done with minimum learning curve Windows (or a pre-configured Linux appliance) is a better choice.