Qiranworms
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 1,635
Okay. I'm not going to state my full opinion here, but I would like to make a couple of points.
A few people (who will remain unnamed) have mentioned Microsoft's innovation. I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Now, Microsoft probably has one of the best, or if not the best, at least one of the most successful, business models in existance. Their marketing has clearly worked to an ideal. At this point they are so powerful that they can do virtually anything and get away with it. It is hard to deny Bill Gates' brilliance. However, I do not see anywhere they innovate. Near to none of their "ideas" are original. They are all "borrowed" from somewhere. This pattern has defined a large part of Microsoft's history. Examples of companies that have truly innovated include Apple and IBM. Not Microsoft.
Additionally, it is of my opinion that most people who say that Microsoft products are easier to use then other available OSes have not tried Mac OS X Panther. Those who have often have not spent much time on it...enough to rid themselves of certain Windows habits that would make the OS unfamiliar and leave a harder-to-use impression that wouldn't otherwise exist. If cost weren't an issue (and it is for most people) one could follow the route of Anand Lal Shimpi (of anandtech.com) and spend a month with a mac...a modern high end one at that, trying to do it as impartially and as unbiased as possible.
On the Open Source topic, Linux is beginning to dominate in certain areas. Particularly major servers used by governments and large corporations. They still aren't widely used in the desktop market (though I'm typing this from Linux right now), but Microsoft does clearly see them as a threat. One can see this by the amount of advertising there has been in the last year or so for Server 2003 and why companies should use it instead of Linux. Cost and reliability are two of the biggest reasons for the Linux switching trend in these areas.
A few people (who will remain unnamed) have mentioned Microsoft's innovation. I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Now, Microsoft probably has one of the best, or if not the best, at least one of the most successful, business models in existance. Their marketing has clearly worked to an ideal. At this point they are so powerful that they can do virtually anything and get away with it. It is hard to deny Bill Gates' brilliance. However, I do not see anywhere they innovate. Near to none of their "ideas" are original. They are all "borrowed" from somewhere. This pattern has defined a large part of Microsoft's history. Examples of companies that have truly innovated include Apple and IBM. Not Microsoft.
Additionally, it is of my opinion that most people who say that Microsoft products are easier to use then other available OSes have not tried Mac OS X Panther. Those who have often have not spent much time on it...enough to rid themselves of certain Windows habits that would make the OS unfamiliar and leave a harder-to-use impression that wouldn't otherwise exist. If cost weren't an issue (and it is for most people) one could follow the route of Anand Lal Shimpi (of anandtech.com) and spend a month with a mac...a modern high end one at that, trying to do it as impartially and as unbiased as possible.
On the Open Source topic, Linux is beginning to dominate in certain areas. Particularly major servers used by governments and large corporations. They still aren't widely used in the desktop market (though I'm typing this from Linux right now), but Microsoft does clearly see them as a threat. One can see this by the amount of advertising there has been in the last year or so for Server 2003 and why companies should use it instead of Linux. Cost and reliability are two of the biggest reasons for the Linux switching trend in these areas.