MS heads for H.C. [x-adr][x-bayes]

[Brian Densmore]

> That's fair. Take NT. NT was leaps and bounds better than 95. Excepting install 
> media, it finally left DOS behind. I do think that NT 3.51 was more stable than
> 4.0, but then 4.0 was were they started adding the new cruft. Which reminds me...
You're confused. NT 3.51 was more stable because it only ran on a very limited amount
of hardware and a lot of Windows 3.x/9x code wouldn't run on it. I remember 3.51. It wasn't
that good. I remember 1.01 as a matter of fact. Now that was a stable version of
Windows.

>> > No one has ever accused Microsoft of failing to test the 
>> > legal limits of competitive practices. 
>> 
>> That's not the problem. The problem is the fact they seem to 
>> have a get out of jail free card. Any small business or individual 
>> that used the same tactics would be in jail now doing 10-20! 
>That's a strawman argument. Small businesses aren't in a position to use the same tactics. 
Why? Criminal behavior is criminal. This kind of attitude about corruption is part of
the problem. If more people demanded real justice be carried out, then perhaps things
would change.

> Maybe I'm reading this wrong but, many in the open source world 
> listen to the customer. 
I agree. Open source is usually better at delivering what people want. Because it usually the 
people wanting it, that are building what they want.

>> Hunh? one word /. 
>Hunh? Even with my filter set to 5, reading Slashdot still has a low signal to noise ratio...
I was referring to reading the articles, not the dribble after it. lol.

> But point me toward the equivalent of Apache for centralized network management? 
> Where is the coherent framework that ties it all together?
webmin? I understand what you are saying, but there are tools out there that handle this.
You just have to be willing to give up your dependency on vi and/or emacs. ;')

>Linux now has kernel developers with financial backers to push Linux further 
>into the high end. It also give Linux prestige and acceptability to be used 
>by scientific laboratories and movie rendering farms... I think that is why
> Microsoft is moving in on this new turf. To undermine areas where Linux is
> gaining credibility.
Yes, Microsoft wants to have control of the movie studios and film industry!

>> > The reality is that 
>> > Microsoft dominates the harder problem: the desktop. Check out 
>> > google.com/zeitgeist.html. 92% of all google queries come from 
>> > Windows machines. And seeing as how Microsoft has been mopping the 
>> > floor with desktop competitors for years... 
>> 
>> Ummm ... yeah? And the point is? Linux desktops now outnumber Apple 
>> and that number is likely to double in the next year? 
>Check out google.com/zeitgeist. Linux stands at 1%. Apple at 4%. 
>Show me a study that says Linux has displaced Apple. I'm interested. 
>I've got a running $100 bet that by 12/31/05 Linux will 
>displace Apple. I'd love to collect on it.
I could show you studies that give different numbers than that, but that is the
problem with studies, they are plagued by the mindset of the person who designed
the study. The most common numbers I see for Apple are from 3% to 4% and for Linux
from 2% to 3%. But I was referring to "shipments" of Linux versus Apple. According
to one study (http://www.linuxinsider.com/stroy/32706.html) Linux desktops could
be as high as 128 million. I find that number probably very optimistic, but I do 
think that Linux counter number at 68 million is quite possible. That may be a
very small percentage of the market, but I consider that to be a rather huge physical
market. The most recent numbers I've seen for Apple and Linux desktops puts
the numbers at a little over 3% and 2.8% so I'd say you stand a good chance of
winning your bet.
  
Brian