9/11 Brings Good News

Of course, in 2001, there was that horror but today IDC had some very good news:
“September 11, 2013 – The worldwide smart connected device market, comprised of PCs, tablets, and smartphones, is forecast to grow 27.8% year over year in 2013, slightly lower than the 30.3% growth in 2012. The growth will be driven by tablet and smartphone shipments, while the PC outlook has been lowered by 10% in 2013. As a result, the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Smart Connected Device Tracker expects tablet shipments to surpass total PC shipments (desktop plus portable PCs) in the fourth quarter of 2013 (4Q13). PCs shipments are still expected to be greater than tablet shipments for the full year, but IDC forecasts tablet shipments will surpass total PC shipments on an annual basis by the end of 2015. Smartphones will continue to ship in high volumes, surpassing 1.4 billion units in 2015 and accounting for 69% of all smart connected device shipments worldwide.”

via Tablet Shipments Forecast to Top Total PC Shipments in the Fourth Quarter of 2013 and Annually by 2015, According to IDC.

This is good news because, while Wintel is slowly collapsing, */Linux on tablets and smartphones is creating an empire that dwarfs what Wintel did. Wintel had a mere ~1billion installed base. According to IDC, */Linux on ARM will ship that much each year. The difference of course is due to FLOSS having ~$0 per copy prices and ARM charging a nominal fee per copy, not half the crop. Wintel was just too greedy and is unsustainable. The world does not need to pay well above market-price for IT. Too bad the OEMs and retailers did not get the picture 15 years ago. They were too happy with their meagre leftovers.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to 9/11 Brings Good News

  1. bw wrote, “Another sign of the huge popularity of chromebooks! Fire sale underway”.

    Nope. Another sign that OEMs can sell PCs for less using Free Software. That’s why M$ insists OEMs not sell */Linux and that other OS on identical hardware, so the buyer cannot subtract and find out how much M$ costs.

  2. oiaohm says:

    bw learn to read “Manufacturer Refurbished” those are not new chromebooks. Those are the chromebooks that had to be returned and repaired.

    That is no discount. That is also no evidence of firesale. Surface RT those were firesale new boxed discounted.

    Chromebooks at best you will get a refurbished cheaper. Scary enough refurbished at list price for new happens with Chromebooks from time to time when supply is tight.

    Sorry bw when you learn to read you links attempt again. You don’t firesale refurbished they should be cheaper than new.

  3. oiaohm says:

    bw size of the internet 0.025 could be valid if all the new units showing up.

    Most of the Windows 8 will be upgrades(no profit to OEM’s). Size of Internet is know.

    Even that Windows 8 is showing as a decent percentage is larger than the value possible from new sales.

  4. Get over it. If the bad guys do something on every day of the year are you going to spend the rest of your life in bed? WWI and WWII involved much more harm and the world moved on.

  5. DrLoser says:

    Ten days later and you still don’t seem to get the concept that “good news” and “9/11” don’t really belong in the same sentence, do you?

    God have mercy on you, Robert, because I certainly don’t.

  6. bw wrote, “as measured by NetMarketShare”.

    Anyone showing nothing for Chrome OS, 91% for that other OS and more for MacOS than Apple claims is suspect and I certainly would not pay $1 to find out what share they claim for ChromeOS. Acer is only one of a bunch of OEMs shipping ChromeOS.

    My own blog shows

    OS Share
    That Other OS 45.67%
    GNU/Linux 37%
    Android/Linux 7.25%
    MacOS 5.54%
    iOS 3.48%
    not set 0.35%
    Chrome OS 0.3%
    M$’s Phoney OS 0.19%
    BB 0.05%
    Symbian 0.05%
  7. bw says:

    No real figures here either, I think. The notion that Amazon is seeing a 15% increase is really a guess by something called “laptoplane” that is a site that links to Amazon pages. Do they get paid for that?

    The BestBuy story is about some third party doing promotions as soon as they hire some help. Their connection to Google and BestBuy is not very clear either, but they haven’t started yet so whatever this is has not affected chromebook sales yet. The Acer claim is an wide range of estimate from an unnamed friend of a friend of a reporter who waves hands about as hard as the owner of this blog.

    If the 15% is still to be believed, the result might be a share value of 0.023% in the use of chromebooks on the internet as measured by NetMarketShare, all things being linear which they are not.

  8. Figures from July and earlier are nearly irrelevant as Google unleashed a big campaign this summer. There was 15% growth at Amazon in August. Google has planted specialists in BestBuy stores. Acer reported that 5-10% of PCs sold in USA by Acer were Chromebooks and that came to several hundred thousand. Sales have ramped up since then. One school district will issue 10K Chromebooks to students and go paperless, meaning they can be in the black within a year or so compared to schools who see nothing but red ink related to Wintel PCs.

  9. oiaohm says:

    bw why is chrome os so hard to count its not a completely new OS. Its a OS created from other distributions.

  10. oiaohm says:

    bw evil is not all builds of Chromeos or chromuim os report as Cros either. Some of the older ones report as Ubuntu Linux and some of the modern ones report as gentoo Linux. How does this happen. Sadly simply you sync your source tree with upstream (yes upstream of chrome os is either Ubuntu or gentoo) and forget to change OS ID back to CrOS from the upstreams. This has happened quite a bit with OEM rushing chrome os out door.
    chrome shell on chrome os use the same method of getting what OS is as chrome browser desktop.

    Linux other at wikipedia does not count cros at all. Yes wikipedia other could be showing the chrome os devices with wrong OS id.

  11. bw says:

    bw, being a troll, warps everything …

    I am only putting emphasis on evidence that seems to deny your rose-colored view of things. Is that “trolling”? Anyway, my source remains as:

    http://thevarguy.com/business-smartphone-and-tablet-technology-solutions/google-chromebooks-sales-grow-how-much

    “Sounds impressive. But nobody is really saying how many Chromebook units are shipping and in use. Perhaps the best data comes from NetMarketShare, which in April 2013 estimated that web traffic from Chromebooks was roughly 2/100 of 1 percent. Or as ZDNet estimated in early 2013, Chromebooks two years after launch had a smaller percentage of usage than Windows RT earned as of January 2013, after only three months of RT on the market.”

    Chromebooks’ User-agent string appears not to mention Linux, just CrOS and X11 so they may not be counted in some web stats as GNU/Linux

    I don’t think anything is ever counted as “GNU/Linux”. NetMarketShare calls it just “Linux” in the table and “other” on its pie chart.

    The VAR Guy paid for the details, I guess, and found it at 0.02% as of April, substantially behind RT even. Maybe it has grown by leaps and bounds in the past 6 months or maybe you are fantasizing. Do you have any numbers other than just saying “huge” with no real count?

  12. oiaohm wrote of his fear of “ending up with something equally bad.”

    That’s the beauty of Free Software. Mistakes can be corrected.

  13. bw, being a troll, warps everything with, “Of course the famous cite that is tubed here is that chromebooks allegedly captured 20 – 30% of the “under $300″ PC market, which is the remnants of the netbook fad which has been a declining business for several years now. You either missed that, due to defective ears, or didn’t comprehend its importance, due to being a somewhat slow-witted oaf.”

    If I look at Wal-mart’s site, I see a bunch of under-$300 personal computers. The netbook is mainstream it seems yet bw claims they are gone. Wal-mart offers 11-14 inch notebooks starting at $199 and 15-16 inchers at $278. Many of them are Chromebooks. The highest-priced Chromebook is $307. The lowest-priced Chromebook is $199.

    In the best-selling list for all computers at Wal-mart, the Chromebooks are not at the top of the list but out of thousands of computer-related items they are on the third page, ahead of a lot of Wintel PCs. On the best-selling list for laptops, a chromebook is 8th out of 149 models offered. Of the people who viewed that Chromebook, 56% ultimately bought it and 10% ultimately bought a different Chromebook.

    So, regardless of bw’s warped view of reality, real people are buying real Chromebooks in huge quantities. Chromebooks’ User-agent string appears not to mention Linux, just CrOS and X11 so they may not be counted in some web stats as GNU/Linux. Wikipedia stats show “Linux other” at 1.6% whereas six months ago is was 0.8%. That could be Chromebooks.

  14. oiaohm says:

    bw I have also in the past pointed out how big 1 percent is really. New sales its very hard to get 1 percent.

    Microsoft has had some parties do upgrades to create the rapid growth of Windows 8. Chrome OS has not had that.

    bw computers don’t run for ever. OEM only make money from new hardware sales not upgrades. It does not matter if Windows 8 has more market share on-line than Chromebooks to OEMs. What is important to OEMs is hardware they are selling today.

    Sorry your use of numbers is bad as normal bw.

    bw also you are a complete idiot from a manufacturing side the cost difference between Windows and Linux is a bit more than 50 dollars. Linux does not suffer from damaged stickers and other expenses like license count tracking.

    Yes there are cost saving not even a redhat server/workstation requires you to stick anything to the case bw. Linux machine 1 less production step to screw up.

    Imaging harddrive/ssd is basically standard. Most people don’t notice how most motherboards with a blank harddrive attempt to network boot.

    Being 50 dollars only bw thinking that Android MS is getting 8 dollars. So 7 android devices sold allows Microsoft to hide one lost sale of Windows 8 on balance sheet.

    Also at 10 dollar s a year with rate people turn over Mobile phones. Microsoft might be better giving up on the OS business completely.

  15. bw says:

    Whose hardware is it?

    Whose software is it? It is like going to Abbey Rents and getting a chainsaw to cut down the dead pine tree in your backyard. You pay to use the chainsaw, but you do not own it. You pay to use Windows, but you do not own it. You sign a contract to use the chainsaw in some restricted way and there are a lot of terms and conditions. The same is true for using Windows. Maybe you would like better terms, but you have to honor the terms you agreed on for now. Linux has better terms, you say, and perhaps they do, but if you are not using Linux, you have to abide by the Windows terms or the OS X terms or whatever you are using.

    Maybe the terms are too harsh, but the decision to accept them is freely arrived at. “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” applies here. It is not slavery, it is, at worst, a bad decision. You have to really work at it to even find anything that is the least limiting as well. 99.999% of users never have need for anything that might violate the terms presented.

    Since the same or better service can be had from Free Software, M$’s stuff is overpriced.

    You say that a lot, but you are always ignoring the fact that the great majority of people have never heard of Linux and fewer have heard of “GNU/Linux”. The reason for that is due to the Linux world not spending any money to educate the world’s users. No advertising, no real outreach, no nothing. Microsoft has spent tens of billions doing that and continue to spend billions each year. It has paid off over the decades with substantial brand and product recognition by the buying public. If the Linux advocates would do the same, then they would have some grounds for complaint. Maybe they would have some recognition, too.

  16. oiaohm says:

    bw funny the netbook market size is not reducing. The sub 300 dollar market was the only section of the PC market to expand in size and value in the last 12 months of numbers bw.

    It looks like the sub 300 is going to become the dominate class bw.

  17. bw wrote, “are you sure that using Windows on your PC rises to the level of slavery? In the old days slaves were a lot worse off, or so the books say.”

    Read M$’s EULA. There’s a lot in there about them being able to do what they want and the user cannot examine, modify or distribute the software. The user cannot even run the software on a different computer or a computer with more cores sometimes. Relatively speaking, that’s software slavery. Whose hardware is it? The user’s or M$’s? I wouldn’t let any manufacturer tell me what I could do in my living room if I installed their product in my kitchen. Why should I do that for a personal computer? Then there is the price and monopoly. None of that is good for the user. Since the same or better service can be had from Free Software, M$’s stuff is overpriced. They can get away with that because of the issue of retail shelf-space and other lock-ins. Slave-masters got away with a lot because of the shackles…

  18. bw says:

    The idea that all of humanity should subject themselves to a single slave-master is totally out of place in the modern world

    At that level of rhetoric even I have to agree with you. But are you sure that using Windows on your PC rises to the level of slavery? In the old days slaves were a lot worse off, or so the books say.

    If we could keep the stakes in the game contained to reality, it might be more productive for any discussions about alternatives. I think that a fair assessment is that Microsoft gets some $50 or so from the OEMs who package Windows as a part of their overall system offering.

    Is it that $50 that is the only issue here? If you consider the amount of time that the average retail buyer keeps and uses their PC, which seems to be increasing these days, the prorated cost of Windows might only be $10 or so per year.

    How much enthusiasm can you generate over such a piddling sum? It can easily be countered with even a hint to the buyer that anything else is an unknown risk of being caught short of productivity apps or incompatible data, i.e. the FUD that you often rail against. Next to no one rich enough to be buying a new PC is going to value that $10 high enough to take any such risk.

    You have to consider the direct cost to the OEMs involved as well. They are not going to sell any more computers if they ship Linux in lieu of Windows, they can only ship different computers. And to do so, they have to invest up front in retraining of support and even manufacturing personnel in the different OS as well as the huge burble in product flow during any change-over period. They are never going to get that money back if they had to offer the buyer a discount due to the “free” OS and if they were to keep their price points, what benefit would accrue to the user? In that scenario the change would be at no gain, not even the $10.

    You have to come up with something real that the buyer would value enough to put in the effort to change. What do you suppose that could be?

  19. bw says:

    Chromebooks sales represented 25% to 30% of PC sales in the first quarter of this year

    It is well-known that you cannot read very well, but now it appears that your hearing is somewhat defective, too. Maybe it is not the sensors that are impaired, it may be the processor!

    Of course the famous cite that is tubed here is that chromebooks allegedly captured 20 – 30% of the “under $300” PC market, which is the remnants of the netbook fad which has been a declining business for several years now. You either missed that, due to defective ears, or didn’t comprehend its importance, due to being a somewhat slow-witted oaf.

    The last person to pay for detailed NetMarketShare info on ChromeOS and blog about it reported that it was well below 1% of the popularity of Windows 8 which had been in the market for far less time. Pogson places a lot of reliance on the accuracy of these statistics, as you can see if you refer a few days back in this thread, so don’t go off about it all being a sham.

    A narrow-minded retiree that plays bridge and golf, supposedly knows what’s what, but has no blog to speak of and does not work in the IT field

    To be fair, I used to work in the IT business and with a Fortune 500 company at that. We are both a competitor and supplier for Microsoft itself as well. We are a major supplier for Unix and Linux users, too. Red Hat ships our trial package even. Dell, too.

    I was playing golf and bridge long before retirement and didn’t just pick it up last year. I used to be better at it, golf at least, but I’m getting a little better as time wears on. I have to admit to being a has-been in the corporate software supplier game, but you, as I can tell, is a never-was, so which is more pertinent?

    BTW, where is your blog site? Can I come visit and comment more directly? I hope you are not alluding to that juvenile web site that you link to your name. Please fix that grossly distorted graphic of the F/A-18F, too. It just screams “Amateur!” to everyone who might see it.
    If you cannot do that, at least change it to an Air Force plane instead.

  20. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson scary part about anything but something is the possibility of ending up with something equally bad.

  21. oiaohm says:

    Its also the fact that Google will not be behind using there mobile phone dominance to push their office suite against Microsoft as well.

    The fun of the up coming battles. GNU/Linux might not win but Microsoft is going to be weakened.

  22. dougman wrote, “toss aside Windows”.

    That’s one way to look at it, but the perfect world would be one in which people just ignore that other OS as some bizarre aberration of IT. The idea that all of humanity should subject themselves to a single slave-master is totally out of place in the modern world.

  23. oiaohm wrote, “The scare part is with Chromebooks taking 30 percent of new sales Apple pulling in about 10 percent of PC sales and the drop in market size. Microsoft market to sell to has in fact cut in half to what it was bw.”

    Not scary. Exhilarating. Even better, stirring up the pot like this helps GNU/Linux be accepted too. We are into an “anything but M$” season.

  24. oiaohm says:

    bw the big thing you are missing is that chromebooks are not like Windows RT cloud let along what Microsoft is talking about with newer versions.

    http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os You have the clear option to rebuild chromeos with your own cloud services at core. Yes you can disconnect chromeos device from Google if that is required.

    All chromebook devices as mandated by google provide a option to replace the primary signing key with your own. So yes you can prevent google made chromeos from being re-installable easily.

    The scare part is with Chromebooks taking 30 percent of new sales Apple pulling in about 10 percent of PC sales and the drop in market size. Microsoft market to sell to has in fact cut in half to what it was bw.

    Fun reality Microsoft can only hide the market loss for so long.

  25. dougman says:

    http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/13-07-29-its_time_for_enterprises_to_consider_chromebooks

    Once, people realize what they can do with a Chromebook, they will just toss aside Windows and the idiotic admins that go with it, all the while saving a butt load of money.

  26. dougman says:

    LOL…… Chromebooks sales represented 25% to 30% of PC sales in the first quarter of this year.

    Were you dropped on your head as a child?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtrQYn8PBNw

    BW reminds me of the Monkey Boy Ballmer, laughs and scoffs at everything, but in reality hasn’t got clue on what constitutes as REAL IT.

    A narrow-minded retiree that plays bridge and golf, supposedly knows what’s what, but has no blog to speak of and does not work in the IT field.

    “According to Google, more than 5,000 schools across the U.S. now use Chromebooks in the classroom.

    The company says using the new Haswell processors will give the devices all-day battery life. The computers come in a variety of sizes, from the small Acer Chromebook to the 14-inch screen HP Chromebook 14. Google said via a post on its blog, “With today’s announcement, now six of the top laptop manufacturers are offering Chromebooks.”

    The devices, which have a full keyboard and get regular software updates from Google, are the fastest-growing part of the PC industry based on price”

  27. bw says:

    No one wants a cloud ONLY OS for their computer where everything is monitored

    Is that why Chromebooks are selling so poorly?

  28. dougman says:

    No one wants Windows 8, it is forced upon them!

    Windows NEIN, will be utter failure, as M$ is at a transition stage with CEOs.

    Windows 10, rumored to exist ONLY in the cloud, will be a catastrophe. No one wants a cloud ONLY OS for their computer where everything is monitored.

  29. oiaohm says:

    bw the expanding markets are not in the USA.

    Windows 8 growth is less than Annual turn over of machines. bw over coming the the party with existing market share is not easy.

    Even in USA numbers Linux has moved from about 1 percent to about 2 percent since the release of Windows 8. Other markets Linux is past 30 percent.

    bw now anything above 10 percent gets shelf space in desktop retail. This is known by Apple market shares. Yes when Apple desktop gets over 10 percent retailers start stocking it when it dropped under that retailers stop stocking it.

    So of course I would not be expecting to see any USA retail bw.

    That Windows 8 has not managed to get over 10 percent is a fairly short time has to worry Microsoft.

    bw due to poor sales of Windows 8 and reasonable well sales of chrome books. Section of the shelf space is gone to chromebooks.

    The reality is Windows 8 had Windows 7 size shelf space. Windows 9 is going to have some of that shelf space in retail carved off for Chromebooks. Now if Window 9 does not do well that should be when the first distributions with wayland start hitting including Sailfish OS.

    Remember the bell curve of adoption bw. It is very slow at first.

    Go back 8 years and attempting to buy a Linux Workstation with Linux installed was fairly much go to custom builder so you had some choice.

    bw like it or not OEM are coming on board with Linux. Talking retail and looking retail is putting the horse before the cart. OEM have to make the devices before retail can sell them.

    Basically pull you moron head out the sand bw and see that the OEM have changed. The question is how long before Retail changes to match what the OEM’s are doing. Important question in fact that is how much time Microsoft has to release a quality OS.

  30. bw says:

    just about dead as far as growth goes

    Are these the same web stats that you pooh-pooh when they show Linux continuing to lag? It seems to me that what you display here shows Win 8 adding to its share each month or two by the same amount that Linux has garnered over its entire existence. If Win 8 is “dead” then what about Linux?

    Anyway, I was not talking about any web stats but rather the inventory at the local Wal-Mart. I think the only thing that will replace Win 8 in that inventory is Win 9.

  31. bw wrote, ” Let me know when Wal-Mart quits stocking Windows 8 computers. It will probably mean that Windows 9 has been released.”

    Not really. Web stats show that “8” is just about dead as far as growth goes:

    Note that growth rate (sales/shipments) gradually declined and then suddenly dropped to very little the last couple of months. QED. Someone is not restocking the shelves because the product is not moving. Meanwhile GNU/Linux has double the share it did when “8” was released. Very soon it will be on a lot more retail shelves.

  32. bw says:

    At the very least GNU/Linux has limited M$’s growth severely

    In your dreams, perhaps, but not in reality. Let me know when Wal-Mart quits stocking Windows 8 computers. It will probably mean that Windows 9 has been released.

  33. bw says:

    They are going onto a lot of retail shelves.

    Maybe so, but not around here (Central Florida). Nor around you from your posting in the relatively recent past. I don’t really care what they stock in Bangkok or even Moscow. I don’t shop either place.

  34. bw wrote, “only about 25% or so of Microsoft’s revenue comes from PC OS, so you can’t imply any sort of meaning to this”.

    M$’s entire empire is built upon the client OS except for a few gadgets. On the server, M$ has many Windows-only features which are also tied in. The prevalence of that other OS on clients is the main reason M$ makes any money with the office suite, databases, servers etc. It’s a house of card that falls with the client. That USA is their island of support should be troubling to a global corporation. The world can easily shift to GNU/Linux more or less rapidly and cut off all growth unless M$ ports stuff to GNU/Linux. That’s beginning to happen with VM stuff in Linux kernel for instance. Gaming ISVs are getting interested in GNU/Linux just to avoid lock-in. At the very least GNU/Linux has limited M$’s growth severely. It will soon cut into the bottom line.

  35. bw wrote, “no one in your bailiwick was carrying Linux computers on their shelves? If OEMs do not make them, how is that ever going to change?”

    IDC reports the top five OEMs of PCs, accounting for 60% of shipments globally were HP, Lenovo, Dell, Acer and ASUS. All of those ship some GNU/Linux PCs. In South America, Positivo Informatica ships 20% GNU/Linux. They are going onto a lot of retail shelves. There is no problem with OEMs making GNU/Linux PCs. Canonical, Novell, RedHat, Linpus, Debian, The Linux Foundation and others give them all the support they need. Consumers want stuff that works and GNU/Linux does that. Business often wants stuff that works with current applications but even then many employees are not locked in to M$ and can do quite well with a GNU/Linux GUI, LibreOffice, FireFox, Chrome and a few others. Many applications run on servers these days so the desktop is much less an issue than it ever was since the mid-late 1990s. e.g. other than a few tools all my work is done with those. Same with the little woman and many of the teachers and students with which I worked.

  36. oiaohm says:

    bw so no chromebooks?? All the major OEM’s do make Linux workstations. So there is a disconnect between retail and OEM on Linux.

    Of course you always want to say a lie that the OEM don’t make Linux machines bw.

    Yes bw there is a disconnect between your reality and world reality.

    You say only 25 percent comes from the OS. Please note without the OS under it MS Office and many other products of Microsoft is also equally doomed.

    bw keystone effect that you are not allowing for.

  37. bw says:

    The biggest issue with “catching on” is that GNU/Linux is still not on some retail shelves. That will change sooner or later

    I have not noticed Linux on ANY retail shelf. Not where I shop anyway. Weren’t you saying a while back that no one in your bailiwick was carrying Linux computers on their shelves? If OEMs do not make them, how is that ever going to change?

  38. bw says:

    Nonsense. No one I know loves M$ or its OS

    Well, I don’t know if that is something that has any meaning or not. You are a little extreme on this topic and it may only be that more moderate folks are simply avoiding you. Quite honestly, I am the only person that I know about locally that even knows what Linux is. There is no one that I know who uses it. Of course I don’t try to get them to try it either.

    I noticed an item yesterday….

    only about 25% or so of Microsoft’s revenue comes from PC OS, so you can’t imply any sort of meaning to this, I think. It is likely that US corporation are the heavy hitters for the server and office software products and that is what is bending the statistics, assuming that they are accurate.

  39. bw wrote, ” All your Linux selling points fall on deaf ears and that is why it never seems to take hold.”

    Nonsense. No one I know loves M$ or its OS. Everyone except a small minority of converts to GNU/Linux finds that GNU/Linux works for them.

    I noticed an item yesterday. Some 44% of M$’s revenue comes from USA/Canada, despite only 18% of legacy PCs sold shipping to USA. Clearly USA is different from the rest of the world in relationship to M$.

    The biggest issue with “catching on” is that GNU/Linux is still not on some retail shelves. That will change sooner or later.

  40. bw says:


    Cost, lock-in, malware, performance, re-re-reboots, monopoly, etc.

    I think that is where you are just blowing hot air. I certainly do not have any issues along those lines myself and I do not hear about any such thing in conversation with those around me daily. All your Linux selling points fall on deaf ears and that is why it never seems to take hold.

    Now whether or not you can find useful selling points about Linux is still a question, but using ones that are known to have no impact on buying decisions is preordained to result in losing the sale. Even if they had some merit in people’s minds and the buyer was concerned about such things, there is rarely anyone present to present them.

    When one goes into a store to buy a computer they are offered a range of models and prices for Windows laptops and desktops and all-in-ones. Discussions are solely about storage capacity, video quality and size, and speed. More recently, styling has been a factor as well as lower price laptops try to mimic the Apple look.

    The OS had become an mere expectation
    decades ago and is no more prominent than the video display or even the keyboard. If Windows were missing, the clerk would have a lot of explaining to do and would likely not bother to do any even if they were trained in what to say.

    From a producer and distributor point of view, Linux-smart buyers are a PITA who are miserly cheapskates to begin with and only want things at bare minimum prices. No money there for those who decide what should be in the pipeline and so the results are predictable.

  41. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –Anyone who might want a Linux computer can have one by simply downloading an install image and applying it to their Wintel computer. Microsoft cannot do a thing about that, but they do not need to because hardly one person in a hundred wants to do that.–

    Sorry bw a lie. 95 when Linux was starting to get a foothold Microsoft changed something.

    In the age of dos to have your hardware used you had to release the specs of it. Age of Windows 95 on closed source drivers no specs required. First was the famous/evil winmodems.

    Now that device driver lock is ending magically secure boot appears with Microsoft in charge of the bootkey.

    bw simple to download a boot image is not true. You might have download a boot image what promise do you have that it will work with the machine you have.

    So yes open specs of hardware allows all OS’s to compete. Without open specs on hardware that all OS makers can use you end up with a bias to 1 particular supplier.

    Bw its the old chicken and egg arguement. No drivers no users, No users no drivers. This was thought to be it. No drivers sees Microsoft completely die in a market.

    Linux some how is able to stay alive in a market without the support bw. So Linux from a resistant to death is stronger. Linux has proven that it can live threw the worst possible things that can be done to stop a OS progress. Microsoft has proven over and over again it cannot.

    Microsoft has been lucky there major OS sales have not been effected by the same things as Linux.

    bw Microsoft is open to destruction some point in the future. They might be large now but they don’t have the durability to stay in place forever.

  42. bw wrote, “Any OS can do that

    Including Windows, so why change? “

    Cost, lock-in, malware, performance, re-re-reboots, monopoly, etc.

  43. bw says:

    Any OS can do that

    Including Windows, so why change?

    M$ is the only problem GNU/Linux has

    Anyone who might want a Linux computer can have one by simply downloading an install image and applying it to their Wintel computer. Microsoft cannot do a thing about that, but they do not need to because hardly one person in a hundred wants to do that. When they do it, they are most likely replacing a copy of Windows that Microsoft has been paid for long ago.

    Linux’s problem is that so very few know about it and fewer care about it.

  44. bw, begging the question, wrote, “Linux would have to be essentially a 100% replacement for Windows overnight in order to overcome all these objections.”

    No, not at all. Many users of PCs do little more than play media and browse the web. Any OS can do that. The reason GNU/Linux has not been on retail shelves has nothing to do with performance or technology, just M$ messing with the market by exclusive dealing, bribes etc. The advent of Android/Linux shows that. M$ had zero leverage over OEMs producing smartphones because those OEMs were not dependent on M$ for other PCs. M$ is the only problem GNU/Linux has.

  45. oiaohm says:

    bw the answer is not what you want to hear.

    Over the same time-frame Windows and Linux guess what one has in fact had more money invested in it. The answer is Linux. Fact to 20 to 1 bw. Now this becomes interesting bw. How can Linux invested 20 times as much and have so little to show in the desktop.

    Exactly why does Windows have almost zero market share in supercomputers and reducing in server and almost no existed in embedded. Answer bw Microsoft has not invested the value of resources to compete effectively. Yes Microsoft failures in those markets is the same reason Linux has failed on Desktop.

    –How much more could Intel have done along these lines if they had not been M$’s slave, free to choose their course of action?–
    In fact is simple. You did not answer why is Intel key to Desktop. The Nothing significant is bogus. bw simple question how useful is a desktop PC without quality video drivers. Bw only in recent cycles are intel video linux drivers starting to match the performance of there Windows and OS X relations. FOSS world got quite desperate in this regard and even attempted to develop their own video cards.

    Bw tell me a Video card that Microsoft has developed. The answer is none.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Graphics_Project Yes FOSS world. Yes bw this desperation took up lots of highly valuable resources. Same with the reversing work of Nvidia drivers. Really bw how far do you think Microsoft would have got if the roles were reversed. Linux with the good drivers and Microsoft Windows with the crap.

    Linux world since early 1994 has wanted to be rid of X11 due to the issues it has had. bw 20 years of waiting with a lead weight around neck.

    –Linux would have to be essentially a 100% replacement for Windows overnight in order to overcome all these objections. It is technically possible to do that, perhaps, but it would take a massive investment for the supply chain to organize itself to do that and there is no payback for those who have to pay that cost. When all was said and done, everyone would be selling the same number of units to the same people and likely at the same price because price pointing is set by what the market will accept rather than by any sort of linear multiple of production costs.–
    Yes the answer is part money. Do you think it was cheep for the Linux World to setup the supply chain of parts it has for super computers or for embedded device construction.

    bw the reality is neither Linux or Microsoft had the money to take all markets at once. So they have had to selectively target. Linux target list has been limited by lack of good video card drivers.

    Yes some people will say Nvidia in fact that is a laugh bw. Only in the last 3 years did LInux get experimental closed source drivers from Nvidia that were multi thread compatible. Windows has had this since 2001.

    Redhat and other major Linux companies also have turned there resources away from targeting the desktop. The desktop has been kept alive as a just for fun project on Linux or decoy. If Microsoft and others where looking at the Linux Desktop they missed the other markets Linux has taken over.

    The reality bw your are a idiot who has not done the research to see where the FOSS money has been consumed.

    The problem now is server and mobile devices are overlapping with the very areas that have stopped Linux progression on the desktop. This will provide force Nvidia and ATI cannot disregard.

  46. bw says:

    How much more could Intel have done along these lines if they had not been M$’s slave, free to choose their course of action?

    My opinion is that they could have done nothing significant. You constantly fail to give due consideration to the practical aspects of world revolution.

    Take for example the situation with Linux. Let us suppose for the sake of argument that Linux is a far superior solution to personal computer OS needs than Windows. You seem to believe that, so there should be no argument on that quarter.

    So why hasn’t it taken over the world of PCs? (Don’t go off about phones and tablets, you know that is a wholly different phenomenon.) Because of the huge inertia in the system is why. OEMs do not need another OS, distributors do not want additional SKUs for items that are more or less fungible, and even customers do not want to have to make any choice over things that seem to be equal but offer the specter of making a long-term mistake.

    Linux would have to be essentially a 100% replacement for Windows overnight in order to overcome all these objections. It is technically possible to do that, perhaps, but it would take a massive investment for the supply chain to organize itself to do that and there is no payback for those who have to pay that cost. When all was said and done, everyone would be selling the same number of units to the same people and likely at the same price because price pointing is set by what the market will accept rather than by any sort of linear multiple of production costs.

    In the case of Intel and McGready, the innovations that his shop could produce were like Linux in that he believed in them, but there was no immediate support by those who would have to integrate them into Intel’s businesses. Further, they had the terrible attribute of irritating Intel’s principle partner in the very lucrative “Wintel” business that was growing at leaps and bounds.

    It was a losing hand and McGready is just another sore loser on a long list of also-rans who failed to launch at the right time and place. It is not a question of malevolence, just the way things work.

  47. bw wrote, “it is not pertinent in today’s IT market either way. “

    Of course it is. We are free to deal with companies that behave ethically. M$ does not.

    bw wrote, “Grove was the arbitrator of what would help Intel and he decided that Microsoft’s proposal made for better business for Intel.”

    Muggees have the freedom to choose whether to be mugged or not…

    bw wrote, ” The stuff of McGready and Microsoft’s tussle are long obsolete and of no consequence today.”

    M$ didn’t want Intel competing with M$ in any way. Well, now Intel is putting a lot into Linux, helping people ship GNU/Linux PCs and is working on Meego/Tizen and a bunch of other things that don’t play well with M$. How much more could Intel have done along these lines if they had not been M$’s slave, free to choose their course of action?

  48. bw says:

    Bill Gates is a bad guy and this anecdote is proof of that

    Very few people think that he is, but it is not pertinent in today’s IT market either way.

    He knew it would harm Intel

    You are just fantasizing here. Gates only knew that it would help Microsoft. Grove was the arbitrator of what would help Intel and he decided that Microsoft’s proposal made for better business for Intel. You side with McGready only because you don’t like Microsoft.

    Intel is now doing some of those things that Gates stopped because they are the right thing for Intel

    What things are those? The stuff of McGready and Microsoft’s tussle are long obsolete and of no consequence today.

  49. bw wrote, of exhibits from US DOJ v M$, “it is just water over the dam and not pertinent to today’s issues.”

    No, it’s not. Bill Gates is a bad guy and this anecdote is proof of that. He had no business messing with Intel’s operations. He only did that because he could. He knew it would harm Intel but he got what he wanted like an ordinary thief. Intel is now doing some of those things that Gates stopped because they are the right thing for Intel. What’s the cost to the world of Intel delaying its work 16 years of so to please Gates?

  50. bw says:

    Nope. IBM blessed M$ …

    You can trivialize and denigrate Microsoft’s achievements in the business world all that you want to, but the facts remain that they are one of the most successful businesses in the history of the planet.

    This is a fine example of M$ interfering with other businesses

    Only in a warped view of the matter. Microsoft wanted one solution, McGready wanted another. they each had to sell Andrew Grove on which course of action was more beneficial to Intel. McGready lost the argument. If you hate Microsoft sufficiently, you can call that evidence of malevolence or a more sensible person would say that Microsoft won their point and business went on.

    In any case it is just water over the dam and not pertinent to today’s issues.

  51. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –If there was a document format, say Word2.0 that defined how a text document could be displayed, that format would necessarily have to change to incorporate display of graphic images as well as how to store the image data along with the text.–
    That is not the problem. I will use document_format_x instead of word so I can go theory with risk of confusing uses with part of a name of a real spec. If I spend time I could make real examples using MS spec.

    So the alter version of document_format_2.0 should become document_format_x 3.0 or 2.1. So when I choose to save document format 2.0 programs that processed 2.0 still should.

    The problem with MS Office is I have MS Office that could save document_format_x 3.0 says it safe document_format_x 2.0 be buggy so release patch for the document_format_x 2.0 programs then never fix the bug in the 3.0 program at saving document 2.0 files incorrectly.

    So anyone who does not update there office program has compatibility problems even from people sending them documents so called in the correct version.

    bw its a complete case that Microsoft internal processes are completely wrong. Microsoft vendor lockin and upgrade tread mill cycles is coming from broken standard conformance internally.

    Microsoft cannot be trusted to do standard conformance internally.

    Standard conformance basically says you don’t go and alter a old standard. You alter you program to conform to it. If you need to alter the standard the standard moves forwards a version.

    bw its all about compatibility and stability. There is a correct way to evolve a format.

    Microsoft is fairly much hopeless at it. End users really need to be stricter on Microsoft over it.

    Governments demanding documented formats is part about stopping Microsoft doing this. So governments can go X version of MS Office does not conform when it saves X version of the file format fix it don’t go and patch the older versions that conform perfectly.

    The fact the older formats have not been staying stable has been making Libreoffice and other Office Suites competitors life hard. Because they cannot seal off sections of their code base.

    Yes the EU is having a effect on this kind of vendor abuse bw.

    bw no matter if you like or not. Microsoft behaviour with the file-formats of Office is not tolerable. Governments around the world are not going to put up with it any more.

    This has a knock on effect for MS Office competitors less requirement to be repeatability remaking sections of their code base.

    bw there is going to be a change in the market. Microsoft has to stop being abusive in there usage of file formats and network standards. Just do things thing.

    Does this mean Microsoft will die maybe. Maybe not. Does this mean competitors will be more common yes it does.

  52. bw wrote, “If there was a document format, say Word2.0 that defined how a text document could be displayed, that format would necessarily have to change to incorporate display of graphic images as well as how to store the image data along with the text. “

    Nope. Remember “objects”? Define everything as an object. Treat text and images as objects. The old format handles the latest and greatest object. If M$ really had no concept of images in W2.0 then that was a flaw not a feature. Why should the world buy more licences from M$ in order to use flawed software? Oh, it’s not about price/performance but lock-in…

  53. bw wrote, ” Whatever the best product might have been, if it were not DOS and then Windows, its promoters were to blame for its lack of success.”

    Nope. IBM blessed M$ so ISVs wrote software for DOS. No other OS need apply. IBM had great influence in those days. When a bunch of software existed for DOS it was rare for a PC to sell without DOS. Same with the GUI.

    On top of IBM’s blessing, M$ never failed to use a dirty trick from buying off “reporters” and stacking forums, to outright lying about compepitors’ products. You do remember “Linux is a cancer” and all that? What was that about? It wasn’t M$ selling a better product.
    “On August 2, 1995, in a meeting of Intel and Microsoft executives, Bill Gates told Intel CEO Andy Grove to shut down the Intel Architecture Labs. Gates didn’t want IAL’s 750 engineers interfering with his plans for domination of the PC industry. Gates made vague threats about support for other platforms, and on the same day he announced a major program to support Digital Equipments’s Alpha microprocessor, an Intel competitor. Gates was livid about IAL’s investments in the Internet and wanted them stopped.”

    see Exhibit 280 in US DOJ v M$. This is a fine example of M$ interfering with other businesses, not competing on price/performance. This was pure bullying.

  54. bw says:

    Nope. We separate format from content all the time

    Meaningless blather, I think. A document file is something that describes the content and presentation of the document. It has evolved over time from nothing more than just text with lots of text formatting via fonts and sizes and page positions to text with graphics to text with graphics with internal calculation capabilities and variable presentation based on output media along with huge increases in what and how you can format documents.

    If there was a document format, say Word2.0 that defined how a text document could be displayed, that format would necessarily have to change to incorporate display of graphic images as well as how to store the image data along with the text.

    I don’t see where tables of ballistic data have any purpose here either. Sure you can write a program, if you really know how, to do things and maybe use some of the same code for other purposes, but that is not pertinent to the discussion either.

  55. bw says:

    Yes. It is really bizarre …

    So how do you view the phone business with Apple and Android being the major players. In this case it looks like the also-rans are Microsoft and RIM. Not much different than PCs with Microsoft and Apple dominating the business and Linux and other odd-ball things being the also-rans.

    I think you just hate Microsoft and that is ruining your sense of balance.

  56. bw says:

    They arranged that if anyone wanted to sell PCs they had to sell M$’s product too

    That is not quite true. Microsoft arranged that anyone who wanted to sell a Windows PC had to sell Windows. The OEMs were willing partners in the scheme and very beholding to Microsoft for making it an all-skate rather than an IBM proprietary fiefdom. You can claim that DOS and Windows were not the best products, but the facts of the matter are that they became the most popular products by a landslide and that is what gave Microsoft the leverage to dictate terms and conditions. Whatever the best product might have been, if it were not DOS and then Windows, its promoters were to blame for its lack of success.

  57. bw wrote, ” An old format would have no way to express use of a feature that did not exist when the old format was designed.”

    Nope. We separate format from content all the time. Mingling them is not a technical necessity and it certainly is not in the best interests of users to have their data tied to any particular application. I can write an application to use a table of numbers to generate ballistics graphs or I can use them as input to develop some theory of internal ballistics. The features of the application are of no import to the file-format. That’s what open standards are about. From time to time one might want to change a standard but generally folks give thought to the future so that doesn’t need to happen very often and with the least disruption. I can still run my first Pascal programme, that I wrote in the 1980s. It has evolved but the file-format is the same, plain ASCII.

  58. bw wrote, “Exclusive dealing is not illegal.”

    It depends on who is making the deal. A buyer should expect that by making a deal they should be more profitable. A seller who expects to exclude competition from a whole market by making exclusive deals is committing an economic crime. By refusing to sell to customers without an exclusive deal, M$ committed a crime. Copyright of a book does not entitle an authour to exclude all other books from the market.

    This is quite apart from gaining monopoly through superiority of the product. M$ certainly did not do that. They arranged that if anyone wanted to sell PCs they had to sell M$’s product too. They leveraged their monopoly of applications/platform on DOS granted by IBM to the GUI.

    see Sherman Antitrust Act: “Section 1. Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty
    Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
    Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.”

  59. oiaohm wrote, “Healthy competing computer world needs more than 2 dominate OS systems.”

    Yes. It is really bizarre that the country that holds itself up as the “free enterprise” country should accept enslavement to M$. No healthy business would accept a single source of supply for nuts and bolts let alone complex computer systems. M$ is the cancer.

  60. oiaohm says:

    Exclusive dealing has to be limited to discounts. Even Apple has got into trouble for this one. Refusing to supply someone selling competitor is against the rules. bw its the same as selling raciest. Everyone can see the problem that its illegal not to serve someone based on the colour of the skin. Microsoft theats were do what we say or we will not sell you MS Windows at all. That is criminal level aggressive. Microsoft went well over the top of what is acceptable and was pulled into line by DOJ and EU. Problem is damage was already done. Lot of the OEM’s had fired there OS development teams by the time DOJ and EU caught up with Microsoft.

    We are seeing the damage done by Microsoft acts starting to be undone now. Vendors supply chrome and android items and the staff to maintain those systems. In the case of Samsung they have got that healthy they are thinking about building their own OS’s.

    Healthy competing computer world needs more than 2 dominate OS systems.

  61. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –Microsoft made new version of Office apps able to read and write the old formats if the user did not want to use a new feature.–
    This is a straight bold face lie.
    Read THIS you MORON BW EVEN IF YOU WILL NOT ANSWER ME.
    http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2010-word/docx-incompatible-between-word-2010-and-word-2007/2764c5ac-4f7c-4a6d-9419-9e37bddf82d8 READ IS OLD FORMATS IS YES. MS OFFICE CANNOT WRITE OLD FORMATS THIS IS WHERE BIG THINGS GO WRONG FOR NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND BUSINESSES.

    This is public documented fact. If a new version of MS Office produces something old version of MS Office cannot read. MS Patches the old version of MS Office. Legacy support is not in MS Office. I was nice an polite when I gave this link. Yes you are still going on spewing the same garbage about MS Office so called being able to write legacy stable. Yes you can argue read legacy stable but that is it.

    LibreOffice and OpenOffice can write legacy properly. This is one of the major differences between Libreoffice/OpenOffice and MS Office is the write legacy support. Libreoffice/OpenOffice don’t have the option of altering old versions of MS Office so have to write how ever the old version supports. Yes Microsoft has a extra power inside there own source bases they are abusing and causing end users harm.

    –This is not lock-in at all, but rather a well designed means of protecting the customers old data files so that information was not lost. —
    The fact that customers can lose data because Legacy export is busted is the reality. Sorry anyone running old versions of MS Office getting updates can loss access to sections of their archives. Due to the incorrect method Microsoft uses for legacy compatibility causing what should be non-required modifications to the legacy program.

    –Consider that Open Office and LibreOffice have no trouble reading these formats and the formats themselves are available from Microsoft under NDA to anyone who needs to reference an MS Office file.–
    Double layers of straight out lies.

    In fact no again MS Office formats are not under NDA. Again being lack of studied moron so saying straight out lies.

    msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc313105(v=office.12).aspx

    You are free to download and read them and see first hand how poor of quality they are in places. There are no better ones by attempting to sign a NDA.

    Anyone can download the MS documentation of the MS Office formats.

    Next is if you go into Libreoffice and OpenOffice testcasing there are many bugs where the MS Documentation says one thing and the Open Source Office suite has todo something different to be compatible with particular versions of MS Office. There is no formal process to submit bugs against MS Office format documentation. So MS Office compatibility is still reversing.

    Microsoft does not run compatibility meet ups for lots of their formats. Only ones they do are the ones they are forced to with Samba due to not legally owning the formats.

    Exclusive dealing does not apply to MacDonald bw bad example. Yes soft-drink might all come from coke but juice comes from a different provider. Where Microsoft came Exclusive dealing in the illegal from was 1 wanting to be paid for product they did not make. 2 saying people could not do deals with different vendors.

    OEM’s making Android phones today would not have been possible if MS contracts with OEM’s were allowed to stand.

    Yes you can do Exclusive dealing to a point in the USA. Bw when you use aggressively and Exclusive dealing you have normally stepped over the line from what is legally above board to what is not.

    Sorry bw everything you said in the last 2 posts I can pull all the links to disprove.

    Robert no point answering a person who is just telling fibs like bw is until they are willing to admit it.

  62. bw says:

    You can see …

    All that I can see is that Microsoft was aggressively trying to win over as many elements of their distribution chain as possible by offering a better deal than their competition. That is the essence of completion in my mind. To show that they overtly stated that they could not do something illegal shows that they were not doing anything illegal and were consulting with experts along the way.

    Exclusive dealing is not illegal. MacDonald’s has an exclusive deal with Coke, etc. There is a trigger level of exclusivity that becomes illegal for a monopoly, but Microsoft never crossed that limit.

  63. bw says:

    Then why did M$ keep changing file-formats? Answer: to lock-in users

    Wrong answer. Storage file formats changed over the years as new features were added to the MS Office applications and document file storage formats necessarily had to change to be able to reference the new features. An old format would have no way to express use of a feature that did not exist when the old format was designed. Microsoft made new version of Office apps able to read and write the old formats if the user did not want to use a new feature.

    This is not lock-in at all, but rather a well designed means of protecting the customers old data files so that information was not lost. Consider that Open Office and Libre Office have no trouble reading these formats and the formats themselves are available from Microsoft under NDA to anyone who needs to reference an MS Office file.

    Where is there any lock in?

  64. bw wrote, ““File-format lock-in” is a silly idea.”

    Then why did M$ keep changing file-formats? Answer: to lock-in users. Anyone who has ever had an attachment from M$’s latest and greatest product that could not be opened by the user’s existing product knows the pressure to upgrade/stay locked-in is strong. I always used PDF even when a job-ad called for M$’s file format.

  65. bw wrote, “I have never heard of the Netscape CD gambit, have you any link to it?”

    That’s just one of a hundred tactics M$ used to suppress Netscape.

    I cannot find specific reference to CDs but M$ did pay money to ISPs to exclude Netscape and they must have had some stock of CDs of Netscape on hand at the time:
    “Microsoft paid significant value other than promotion through Windows to induce ISPs and OLSs to agree to its exclusionary terms “
    see OVERVIEW

    You can see that M$ systematically contacted ISPs to negotiate exclusive contracts: Exhibit 1833

    They definitely considered illegal acts:

    “- Maybe an even more aggressive idea would be to ask ISPS to offer a exclusive discount to all of their Netscape customers who move to IE (and not other browser’s users) in exchange for waiving the fee to get on the referral server. Certainly illegal in several places, for sure France. but why not do where we can ?


    We are doing exactly this and I encourage you to help us be creative in figuring this out. We are trying to figure out how to incent ISPs to move their installed base (as opposed to new customers) ti IE. With Netcom we will refund them $9 from the ISP referral server bounties for every existing customer they move to IE. I have asked Rust and Bradc to please help us think about such a program that we can implement with every ISP we sign.”

  66. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –“File-format lock-in” is a silly idea. How much derision would you heap on Microsoft if their new products were NOT compatible with previous file formats? —
    In fact is file format lock by Microsoft documented reality.
    http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2010-word/docx-incompatible-between-word-2010-and-word-2007/2764c5ac-4f7c-4a6d-9419-9e37bddf82d8

    Yes newer version MS Office can read older formats. Newer version of MS Office write documents that older versions of MS Office can read stable is another matter. Mostly instead of patching the incompatibility in like 2010 Microsoft released a patch that 2007 users have to apply.

    Those patches to older versions of MS Office have been at time recorded breaking older versions of MS Office compatibility with its self. I can dig out those events as well.

    Reality us using Linux and Libreoffice cannot work out why Microsoft users put up with this abuse.

    bw
    –The clone products like Open Office can read and write the Microsoft formats and the specifications for these formats are readily available to anyone who wants to use them.–
    This has taken lots and lots of work. Sections of the standard say as per excel version such and such. Also the documentation and implementation don’t agree either.

    The silly non research person is you again bw. Reality there is major problems in Microsoft quality control of formats they control.

    I really do like the fact that defective bluetooth drivers can magically cause MS Office to lose how for format a document.

    bw yes people complain about Libreoffice but it stuffs up the same way over and over again. MS Office up to 2010 is documented as roll dice and pray. 2013 has not been out long enough but I would not be surprised if it still contained a random bit of hardware able to send it nuts.

  67. dougman says:

    Microsoft spends billions each year on R&D (that never not works), pieces of software that get folded into its disorganized mess and fall away due to disuse, and updates to current products that routinely fail.

    Usually they make acquisitions to embrace, extend and extinguish. Look for Nokia to be the next Microsoft partner to ride off into oblivion. M$ is typical of companies that become too big and hidebound to maneuver quickly and creatively, a character trait even more important to possess in the digital world.

    M$ will now have the difficult task of finding someone who is savvy enough about technology to repair some of the damage Ballmer has done. That includes product strategies and products so off base that it boggles the mind.A turn-around expert CEO will not help.

  68. bw says:

    buying up Netscape CDs to keep them out of the hands of consumers, making illegal exclusive deals, and file-format lock-in.

    I have never heard of the Netscape CD gambit, have you any link to it? As to illegal exclusive deals, there never were any such things. Exclusive deals, yes, but hardly illegal.

    “File-format lock-in” is a silly idea. How much derision would you heap on Microsoft if their new products were NOT compatible with previous file formats? The clone products like Open Office can read and write the Microsoft formats and the specifications for these formats are readily available to anyone who wants to use them.

  69. bw wrote, of “GNU/Linux”, ” You have to agree that such references are few and far between and are usually only found on hard core blog sites like your own.”

    No, I don’t.

    ZYXWare is a company in India that supplies whatever customers need:
    “With GNU/Linux and other Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) you can lower your IT expenditure and achieve higher degrees of customisation. We will help you leverage on such opportunities. Be it setting up and managing a FOSS driven IT Infrastructure or training for your staff in FOSS based applications, we will provide you with the support you need to leverage on the power of FOSS. We will provide you consultancy and implementation support for seamless migration to FOSS applications for home and office. We offer training programmes ranging from general training for your staff on FOSS Operating Systems to technical trainings on system administration. We have provided our services to government and private organizations. We are also a partner for Canonical.”

    They sell PCs with GNU/Linux, servers with GNU/Linux and provide all kinds of service related to GNU/Linux. They don’t hide the GNU. There are businesses like that everywhere. They are strong and growing.

    Apparently, they’ve been at it for a decade: “Domain Name: ZYXWARE.COM
    Registration Date: 21-Mar-2004
    Expiration Date: 21-Mar-2014”

  70. bw wrote, ” the effort to establish exclusivity was probably pretty minor and only involved the lawyers who drew up the OEM contracts.”

    No way. Everyone from the parking lot attendant to the CEO are dedicated to messing with competition. The depth and breadth of their techniques is beyond any lawyer. I don’t think lawyers suggested buying up Netscape CDs to keep them out of the hands of consumers, making illegal exclusive deals, and file-format lock-in. A lawyer could be disbarred for suggesting drawing up a contract in violation of the law.

  71. oiaohm says:

    bw you missed the EU case over SMB protocol. That is a miss deed without question. The correction of that is still having on going effects.

    Yes some of Apple recent growth tracks to its means to more stable join MS Windows Server networks. Linux is also gaining on this side with Samba.

    bw Microsoft early OEM contracts the OEM did sign willing and it was for Microsoft Basic. The MS DOS contract were not so Willing. Microsoft ended life of Basic as a OS. So OEM had fairly much happen to them at the rise of DOS as parties felling the fall of XP. They had to go somewhere. Microsoft did exploit there position that time to get paid for every item the OEM made.

    bw you of course most likely think Microsoft only started with Dos. There OS supply dominance was well and truly entranced before Dos. There was one big difference in the age of Basic OEM’s only paid Microsoft for the machines that contained MS Basic. The time of Dos and early Windows OEM were forced to pay for all machines this was found to be wrong.

  72. bw says:

    I don’t think creating illegal schemes to exclude competition from the market should apply. The software is created for a tiny amount of the money M$ spends. It’s being licensed for far more than market-value.

    For one thing, the effort to establish exclusivity was probably pretty minor and only involved the lawyers who drew up the OEM contracts. OEMs signed them eagerly, wanting to get on the gravy train before there was no more seats left.

    For another, the lawyers did a pretty good job and the courts have more or less all ruled now and what Microsoft did to establish their dominance was not found to be illegal or even actionable. Some subsequent actions by the EU have resulted in collection of fines for gross misdeeds like including a free MP3 player in Windows or shipping their own browser as a default selection. Hardly the stuff that would have affected Linux in any way.

    Microsoft spends billions each year on R&D for updates to current products and creation of new ones. Lately they have been getting into the hardware business with horrible results

  73. bw says:

    Here, let me help you

    OK, I concede that there is one. Can you find another? You have to agree that such references are few and far between and are usually only found on hard core blog sites like your own.

  74. bw wrote, “the boys and girls at Redmond and other sites around the world have been putting in the efforts and working into the night since the company was founded”

    I don’t think creating illegal schemes to exclude competition from the market should apply. The software is created for a tiny amount of the money M$ spends. It’s being licensed for far more than market-value.

  75. bw, having some difficulty reading, wrote, “no reference there at all to “GNU/Linux”.”

    Here, let me help you:“GnuCash is personal and small-business financial-accounting software, freely licensed under the GNU GPL and available for GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris, Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows.Designed to be easy to use, yet powerful and flexible, GnuCash allows you to track bank accounts, stocks, income and expenses. As quick and intuitive to use as a checkbook register, it is based on professional accounting principles to ensure balanced books and accurate reports”

  76. bw says:

    GNU is everywhere and it’s not going away any time soon

    You certainly have a hard enough time finding it and you are a connoisseur of the brand. Acer offers a couple of programs that short of incorporate gnu in their names, name the G in Gimp and the gnu in gnucash, but no reference there at all to “GNU/Linux”.

  77. bw says:

    They will have to become a normal business working for a living.

    It may come as a shock to you, but the boys and girls at Redmond and other sites around the world have been putting in the efforts and working into the night since the company was founded. In the recent past I was associated with several ex-MS developers who had walked away from large salaries and not-yet-vested stock options and grants in order to get away from a stressful and hectic paced position with Microsoft.

    The overall track record of Microsoft has been pretty amazing and none of it really was due to having any sort of “monopoly”. Rather their dominance of their markets, that you term “monopoly” is the results of their efforts, not the means by which they achieved it. If it were easy to do, others would do it as well.

  78. bw wrote, ” the recognition of “GNU”, which, as I pointed out, is totally missing from any offerings of Linux in commerce.”

    Huh? Commerce doesn’t do long-winded names. They shorten “Windows NT 5.1” to Windows XP, for instance. It’s salesmen being lazy. GNU/Linux doesn’t even have many salesmen but many that they do have mention GNU:
    e.g. Acer and others publish the GNU GPL on their sites and offer downloads of GNU software

    So, stop whining. It’s unbecoming an adult. GNU is everywhere and it’s not going away any time soon.

  79. bw wrote, ” Time will tell if Microsoft can organize itself well enough to maintain a successful business in supplying OS and office software to the world.”

    There is no doubt about that but it depends on the definition of “success”. A monopoly for years to come? Nope. $billions of revenue for nothing more than giving permission to have a copy? Nope. A lock on retail shelves? Nope. Long gone. A lock on OEMs? Nope. That’s already gone. They will have to become a normal business working for a living. The fat will have to be cut. The revenue will decline considerably. The only reason the revenue is standing up is because they have diversified and things like Xbox are making money as well as the huge installed base brings in revenue. With shipments down, no one can doubt that the installed base will shrink and with it all kinds of renewal opportunities. PCs don’t last forever. It’s clear a lot won’t be replaced with Wintel units.

    Quantitatively, consider “8”. After nearly a year it’s about 8% of installed base. Are we on a 12-year replacement cycle? Nope. The installed base of Wintel is shrinking. Remember the 100 million licences? That’s about 8%. M$ pumped those into the supply-chain months ago and they have just managed to sell them to consumers a year later. Essentially, shipments of “8” are stalled and migrations from XP to “7” are not that hot either.

  80. bw says:

    All due respect, but you are not a very learned prognosticator of business fortune and those who are generally recognized for their competence are not so gloomy in their predictions. Time will tell if Microsoft can organize itself well enough to maintain a successful business in supplying OS and office software to the world.

  81. bw says:

    What are all those blue dots in the audience area? They sort of look like the backs of empty seats to me. In any case, what I was referencing was not his personal appeal or ability to draw a crowd to witness his flamboyant speech (I might have gone myself if it were nearby), but the recognition of “GNU”, which, as I pointed out, is totally missing from any offerings of Linux in commerce.

  82. bw wrote, ” the lack of publicity that he gets in spite of his audacious behavior.”

    3500 attending one of his talks personally, that’s publicity. There aren’t many empty seats.

  83. bw, blissfully ignoring the reality that M$’s revenue streams are mostly tied to their OS as a platform for the world of IT wrote, ” the real fate of Microsoft lies in their financials.”

    Their financials for client OS are tanking. Who needs M$’s server OS if they use other clients? Who needs M$’s office suite if they use other clients? Sustaining profits means raising prices. M$’s lifeboat is on fire.

  84. bw says:

    As to the main article here, comparing apples to pineapples to pomegranates and clucking over how Dole’s percentage of the fruit business is shrinking, I can only say one more time that the real fate of Microsoft lies in their financials.

    Is their business prospering or not? They operate, as all businesses do, in a constantly changing climate that is affected by the world and local economies and changing trends and even fads. They have been growing fairly constantly over time, changing their internal business mixtures to suit what they see in the overall markets that they participate in. Whether they make a little more or a little less money one year versus another is not as important to them as whether they make enough to keep their hand in the business.

  85. bw says:

    What seems to frost Stallman is not the body count of how many use the kernel vs how many use GNU, but the lack of publicity that he gets in spite of his audacious behavior. The name that stuck, if you call such a measly percentage of users a success, is “Linux”. If you look far and wide to ads by makers or builders of Linux based computers, you will not see any mention whatsoever of “GNU”. Liinux itself is totally overshadowed by Ubuntu and much more so by Android. GNU is a vanishing footnote and that is what Stallman cannot stand.

  86. IGnatius T Foobar wrote, ” Stallman being butthurt over the fact that Linus succeeded where he failed.”

    Get a life! Linus wrote a lot of the FLOSS Linux kernel and organized others to do more. He succeeded very well indeed. RMS wrote a lot of the infrastructure of a FLOSS operating system and organized others to do more. He succeeded very well indeed. That’s why Linus used the GNU stuff. It works for all kinds of people.

    Wikipedia: “Richard Stallman founded the GNU project in September 1983 with an aim to create a free GNU operating system. Initially the components required for kernel and development were written: editors, shell, compiler and all the others. By 1989, GPL came into being and the only major component missing was the kernel.”
    Six years to make a great platform. It was a lot of work and wildly successful. It is used on hundreds of millions of computers. Linus had a working kernel widely used within a few years. Good for him. The world is a better place because of what both men started. Neither one seems hung up on glory. They like what works and hate what doesn’t.

  87. It’s just called Linux. Not “GNU/Linux.” The latter name is nothing more than Stallman being butthurt over the fact that Linus succeeded where he failed.

Leave a Reply