From: James (orialv21_at_mindspring.com)
Date: Sat Apr 22 2000 - 12:02:59 EDT
It is really interesting to see so many people bashing Win2k and MS. Two
issues comes to mind - 1) Win2k is "not stable and etc...." and 2) MS is a
1) I personally use Windows and Linux on a daily basis. I work at a US
National lab where nuclear test data are collected and analyzed. Since large
amount of data are being processed on a daily basis by our database
Orcacle2000 ), I can really tell the performance difference between varies
What is interesting is that there are a large number of people believe Win2K
is not stable and performance is terrible. Both from my experience is
untrue. Our database is faster running on Win2K server than on Linux ( with
X-windows ) on the same hardware - IBM, Dell and Compaq servers. Our Win2k
severs have never crashed. On the otherhand, linux didn't crashed completely
but it did crashed our apps a few times.
2) Monopoly. I agree MS has the intention to capture market but that is what
running a business is all about. MS is not a non-profit organization and
should be evaluated based on business objectives. Futhermore, no one has
ever accused Cisco for that even through it acquired over 10 companies last
year and plan to acquire another 18 this year ( Fortune Mag ). In fact John
Cambers is famed for acquiring companies and is praised for that among
corporate CEO and Wall St.
I don't think people are forced to use Word or other MS products. At the
federal facility where I work, we use Lotus Notes, Suites and WordPerfect
softwares and have never run into major problem for not using MS products.
All this means is that one can choose to use non-MS products if one wills to
In conclusion, my positions is netural and don't wish to engage in the
offense nor defensive side of MS. The irony is that it may have some
monopolistic power but it has it only because MS made some softwares that is
relatively easy to use which appeal to the public at large. Adam Smith's
invisiable hand is at work!
----- Original Message -----
From: "sehh of H.I.C. & D.B.S." <sehh_at_altered.com>
To: "thinkpad" <THINKPAD_at_cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2000 8:19 AM
I've got to say one last thing about OSwars and specificly on windoze.
Windoze as an operating system is in many ways good for us, because it
has huge ammounts of hardware requirements, so more people will buy
more powerful systems and so prices will drop and new hardware will be
to support more crappy/demanding software (win2k).
Also windoze is good in one more way, its easy to learn and to teach to
because of all the 'visual' help that new users get to understand windoze,
other operating systems which are quite hard to teach/learn.
So why do we bash on M$ and windoze?
Because M$ is forcing us into a monopoly. Most people don't have a choice,
because M$ forces the standards to be M$ Office, M$ FrontPage, M$ PowerPoint
and whatever other 'invention' they come up with.
And ontop of that, the prices of these products are very high, especially
their software has so many bugs.
I hope i've explained why me and many others may not be very friendly when
talking about M$ and M$ software.
those who have been in the software business know that M$ didn't even
do many inventions, most of their technology came by M$ taking over
some other company or by plain copying others. M$ has a long history
with the law, since the 1991 they've been sued for many things including
the DRDOS scum.
þ H.I.C. & D.B.S. þ OS/2 Warp þ Hellas þ
þ ServerConfig þ ConfigEdit þ OS/2 UK UG þ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:59 EST