Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (
More info?)
SjT wrote:
>
>
> I don't like MS and their business practises either, but at the end of
> the day i dont see why they should play fair
Because it's the LAW.
> <snip> besides i beleive that if linux was really any competitor to
> windows and was half as good as its users claim then it would win out,
It IS as good, and it IS winning out. Many large companies and even whole city
governments are run on it. When the US Navy bought a bung of new Macs the requirement
was that they run Linux. Use a cell phone? It's not Microsoft software running the
racks of line cards in the central office, it's VX Works and Linux. Mention Microsoft
in a telco environment and the least that'll happen is hysterical laughter. Watch many
Hollywood movies? Lots of FX is done with Linux. Whole Disney studios are running
Linux. Sinbad was done on Linux.
>
> unfortunatly its seen as a tight-fisted geek's operating system
By some maybe.
Except that people get excited about getting new versions of SuSE the minute it goes on
sale. Of course, the license entitles you to install it on an unlimited number of
machines, but that's besides the point (or is it?).
Talk to game companies that make Linux demos available and they'll tell you that the
conversion rate (those who actually buy the game) is higher for Linux users. There've
been articles about this. Search on Slashdot, I think it was covered about 6 months ago
or so. I'm to the point where I only buy games that will run on Linux, in part because
I get a better gaming experience in Linux than Windows (higher frame rates, more
responsive controls), and in part because installing a game on Linux can be done at the
"user" security level, and not hose any system files like codecs etc. I've had major
headaches on Windows after a game messed with my codecs.
> and
> that's why alot of developers dont produce for it,
Actually it's more to do with support. Support is complicated on Linux for a variety of
reasons, more so than Windows. As more distributions adopt standards-based
configurations, this is changing. SuSE is a leader in that area.
> no ones really
> prepared to pay serious money for linux apps,
That's not true.
Macromedia did some serious market research and found that there is enough of a paying
market to port their tools over to Linux.
People want relief from the virus-of-the-week attacks that Microsoft's unsecure
architecture invites. They want to be free from having to reboot every time they
install a patch or minor upgrade or new application. People want fast, reliable, stable
systems. And they want to be free from paying huge sums of money to get a license for
every machine they own just to upgrade the OS.
> and so it is left to
> bedroom programmers<snip>
Some people do open source as a hobby, but many do it as a business.
And some people do "closed source" for Linux.
At the end of the day, I just want apps that work. If I can find open source ones for
free that will do what I want, I'll use them. But if not, and there's a closed source
"Ulead" or "Macromedia" tool that I need to do the job, then so be it.
>
>
> I wish it was better than windows
It IS better than Windows. You've obviously never used SuSE.
> , but for the majority of people who
> want to turn on and talk to a paper clip and play a few games on their
> machines it isnt,
Wrong again.
Most people want everything to come with the OS and not have to buy anything extra.
People use Media Player because it's installed. They use IE because it's installed
(never mind that Opera and Mozilla are better in several ways). They use MS Office
because they pirate a copy from work because their employer forces them to use it.
Do you have ANY idea how much quality software comes on the 5 SuSE CD's and 2 double
sided DVDs? A TON (and it installs in about the same time as Windows). There's Open
Office, which by Microsoft's own admission is every bit as some versions of MS Office.
The latest version opened every Microsoft Word document or Excel spreadsheet I could
throw at it and looked and printed identically to Windows versions.
Look, there are 4 year olds using Linux daily. Anyone who can use a mouse can do what
they need pretty easily. Even advanced system administration is pretty easy using the
SuSE "Yast" setup wizard (think Windows Device Manager, Windows Update, "msconfig" all
on steroids and rolled into one utility). I was amazed sine I'd been used to doing
things the hard way.
Hell, even networking with Windows machines didn't take any thought. At Christmas, my
mother-in-law was here and wanted to download some pictures from her digital camera.
Even though it was USB, it required special drivers (Kodak) that you can't download
without a butt load of forms to fill out. Well that ticked me off so I plugged in in to
my SuSE machine just to see what would happen - and before I could look for the manual,
an icon popped up on the desktop, I clicked on it (once), and there were all her
pictures. Then I clicked the "Local Network" icon on the desktop (I had never bothered
to try to configure networking, I just have the system plugged into my Linksys
firewall/DSL router), and saw the hard drive of my wife's machine. So I clicked &
dragged the pictures from the camera to my wife's machine without even thinking about
it, it was so simple.
Not as good as Windows? Think again. It's BETTER than Windows and that's just one
example.
> and thats why MS have the monopoly, not because of
> their tricks, dont fool yourself.
>
>
Don't fool YOURself.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram