Are you a Mac person OR a Pc person?

[Neil]

So it wasn't Apple's slick advertising that convinced me to buy a Mac -- it was Microsoft's s**t operating system.

Well we all have opinions.

Do you know how much business is done with Microsoft OSs?

Businesses aren't fooled by preference or product loyalty.

 

[JohnH]

Well we all have opinions.

Neil, surely 12 years' experience of "Fatal Exception Errors", "General Protection Faults", blue screens of death, irretrievable computer freezes, spontaneous application shut-downs, steadily decreasing computer performance and malware vulnerability counts as more than just an "opinion"???

Do you know how much business is done with Microsoft OSs?

Businesses aren't fooled by preference or product loyalty.

Businesses are rarely informed that they have a choice, because Microsoft are masters of denying choice.

When I go into a computer store to buy a notebook or desktop PC, does the salesman offer me a choice of operating systems? No. There is no choice, because the computer comes pre-loaded with the operating system that Microsoft wants me to use. And even if the salesman offers to wipe Windows and install Ubuntu Linux for me, MS will still benefit because the price that I pay for the PC includes the cost of a Windows licence. (Until the US Department of Justice's investigation into Microsoft, MS were being given a cut of the money paid for every Pentium CPU that was sold by Intel!).

For businesses, being "locked in" to the Microsoft product line is much deeper than a choice of operating system:

• the time and money invested in training staff to use MS applications
• the proprietary file formats (e.g. '.doc' & '.xls') that can't always be properly imported by non-MS applications
• the peripheral devices that are only supplied with drivers for various versions of Windows
• the need for compatibility with the computer systems of customers & suppliers (who are also "locked-in" to using Microsoft's programs)

-- all of these things compel businesses to stay on the Microsoft treadmill, because the short-term costs of getting off that treadmill are scary, even if the long-term effects would be beneficial.

This is no accident. Microsoft's lawyers had to warn Bill Gates in the 1980s to stop telling everyone that he wanted to have a monopoly over the computer industry. Nothing's changed since then, except that Microsoft now keeps quiet about its desire for total domination.

Prime example:
Here is the UK government's educational technology agency, BECTA, who signed a "great deal" with Microsoft in 2003, to provide software for the UK's school computers at reduced cost... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3291279.stm

And here was BECTA's position four years later, after civil servants had learned the hard way what happens when you sign a deal with Microsoft... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7063716.stm

 

[stew-b]

ubuntu 10.10 for me on my laptop
vista 64 on an SSD for my proper pc and crappy old XP on my netbook,very impresssed with ubuntu though

 

[Radoslaw]

Aye, had Ubuntu, really nice system. Now I have Fedora which isn't that user friendly at all but easier to secure in a way what I like.

 

[Neil]

Well we all have opinions.

Neil, surely 12 years' experience of "Fatal Exception Errors", "General Protection Faults", blue screens of death, irretrievable computer freezes, spontaneous application shut-downs, steadily decreasing computer performance and malware vulnerability counts as more than just an "opinion"???

Nope - it's merely anecdotal - as is my take that over that time I've not had continual problems - in fact quite the opposite

Do you know how much business is done with Microsoft OSs?
Businesses aren't fooled by preference or product loyalty.

Businesses are rarely informed that they have a choice, because Microsoft are masters of denying choice.

Business has lots of driving factors - neither vendor loyalty, or pure preference seem high on that list.

Best comprehensive choice, least risk, that meets all the requirements, at the best cost (including all factors) available.

When I go into a computer store to buy a notebook or desktop PC, does the salesman offer me a choice of operating systems? No. There is no choice, because the computer comes pre-loaded with the operating system that Microsoft wants me to use.

1. For most users, it's probably the optimal choice.
2. Nobody is forcing you to keep that OS, if you have other preferences.

You make the mistake of thinking I'm a Microsoft advocate, and defending them, their position, and their software.

I'm not, I'm agnostic / ambivalent.

There's just a lot of guff spouted, at times, to reinforce peoples' preferences and investment - which is everybody's choice, but all the same, is often misleading or from a very individual standpoint.

Sure - your preferences are what they are - as for me, as I said, I'm happy with many choices. I just reject the notion that the anecdotal opinions of people trumps the wide-ranging use by industry.

For businesses, being "locked in" to the Microsoft product line is much deeper than a choice of operating system:

• the time and money invested in training staff to use MS applications
• the proprietary file formats (e.g. '.doc' & '.xls') that can't always be properly imported by non-MS applications
• the peripheral devices that are only supplied with drivers for various versions of Windows
• the need for compatibility with the computer systems of customers & suppliers (who are also "locked-in" to using Microsoft's programs)

-- all of these things compel businesses to stay on the Microsoft treadmill, because the short-term costs of getting off that treadmill are scary, even if the long-term effects would be beneficial.

1. I'm not seeing any proof or quantifying evidence behind these claimed "long-term effects". Perhaps if there was something comprehensively more compelling than mere assertion, many businesses would opt for alternatives.
2. Large-ish businesses rarely just use one OS or OS supplier - if there were benefits of either strategic or tactical deviation from a particular OS, they'd go with it - I know, I've been involved, countless times.
3. There are plenty of Office productivity packages (some freeware - eg openoffice) that don't tie people to one vendors app suite - and can deal with the same format and type of files. There are options. Mostly they're not taken, though - why?

This is no accident. Microsoft's lawyers had to warn Bill Gates in the 1980s to stop telling everyone that he wanted to have a monopoly over the computer industry. Nothing's changed since then, except that Microsoft now keeps quiet about its desire for total domination.

Prime example:
Here is the UK government's educational technology agency, BECTA, who signed a "great deal" with Microsoft in 2003, to provide software for the UK's school computers at reduced cost... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3291279.stm

And here was BECTA's position four years later, after civil servants had learned the hard way what happens when you sign a deal with Microsoft... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7063716.stm

And again, you fall into the trap of apparently contending my argument as advocacy of Microsoft software - it's not.

Frankly, it wouldn't bother me one jot, if all the work I did from tomorrow never involved Microsoft software. The fact remains that that's not going to happen - but it's not because Microsoft effectively bully industry into using it - it's because business and industry will use - and remain using - whatever type of software and OS that makes most business sense to them.

 

[eg2]

Microsoft all day long. I love windows 7.

Apple add ridiculous "fanboi tax" onto everything and all though from an intuitive use point of view their O/S is very well laid out, they can't deliver the functionality.

Linux I do like, Ubuntu is something I've played about with but again it lacks the functionality.

Most people's misconceptions about microsoft are actually down to not understanding the security. John H's example of him falling victim to a phishing attack, sorry chap, but what caused all of those windows to open and the dialling a connection on a premium rate number will have been an auto-executable that should have been blocked by your AV, let alone the fact your web filter should never have displayed, much less allowed you to click on a malicious URL...

I'm not saying Microsoft dont have their issues, if they did we wouldnt have Patch Tuesdays, but in terms of the number of vulnerabilities across their entire portfolio vs the number apple have across theirs, Microsoft have a lower ratio. There is a Gartner report that proves it too...

 

[rosstheboss]

I think the main point about less viruses on Macs, is that Pc users watch more bongo... me included!

 

[MikeD]

I'm with Neil -- it's all just computers, you might as well argue about what sort of pen to use or whether cornflakes are better than Weetabix.

 

[tintin40]

What gets me about such things is this debate seems more divided than other product fans.

I like Mac because they are easy to use. Plus when at work i use Vista. So if i used PC at home i could feel i've never left work

Also it's never good to have a market with one system. A choice is good. Look at the number of cars or mtb's you can buy

 

[Neil]

Also it's never good to have a market with one system.

We don't, across the piece.

Sure, corporates, desktops, small systems, file-sharing, printing, email - Microsoft are pretty damned prevalent there.

Even the middle layer, they have a large, strong presence - although not to the same degree of ubiquity that they do at the desktop (so web-y, mild database). Directories and repositories. PKI. Network services.

But at that level and above, not so - they are merely one train of thought, so to speak.

Enterprise computing on big iron, has lots of technology chunks, that whilst Microsoft would like to dominate - perhaps even think they're on competing terms, yet are still making up the numbers.

J2EE environments and components, BIG Unix systems running lots of true business processing, or large databases, can be - in many scenarios - largely untouched by Microsoft OSs and software - except at the periphery.

There's certain - yet rather large and dominating - areas of IT where Microsoft struggle for credibility (and have done for some time). My money would be on them eventually forging into those areas, but they're not comprehensively there yet.