Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software

Interview with Tony 'Say No to Windows' Bove 412

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the this-is-your-brain-on dept.
An anonymous reader writes "XYZ has an interview with Tony Bove, author of the upcoming book, "Just Say No to Microsoft". From the article: 'With this book Bove intends to help readers rid Microsoft from their life- this is easier said that done, but it is certainly possible. The book goes on to list alternatives to the Microsoft programs on which people have become dependent and probably think they cannot give up.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Interview with Tony 'Say No to Windows' Bove More

Interview with Tony 'Say No to Windows' Bove

Comments Filter:

  • Let me be the first to say... (Score:5, Funny)

    by rovingeyes ( 575063 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:51PM (#13810469)
    My goal is to provide a road map for using alternatives, or the equivalent of a "12-step method" for getting off Microsoft software (as if it were an addiction)

    From experience, any thing more than 11 steps is not worth it!

    • Re:Let me be the first to say... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Neil Blender ( 555885 ) <neilblender@gmail.com> on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:53PM (#13810487)
      From experience, any thing more than 11 steps is not worth it!

      And from the average user's perspective, anything more than 0 steps is too many.
      • And from the average user's perspective, anything more than 0 steps is too many.

        Now this is the type of arrogant ignorance I get series headaches from when I come across it. How many steps did you require to learn to use a Windows ? Ok, scrap that. What you mean is that you got so so mentally stuck and so unable to change, to learn and to adapt, or became simply too fragging lazy to even consider using anything else than some good/bad [doesn't really matter] app you got used to ? If that's the case I rea
        • too fragging lazy

          Those are the operative words. And please note, I said 'average user' meaning the general public. By the way, I have been using linux as my main desktop since the days when hanging yourself sometimes seemed like a better option than using linux.
          • I think you may have missed his point accidentally.

            If the general public can take steps to learn how to drive (I know, the amount of actual drivers who obey the commonly accepted rules of the road seems small), then learning how to use Windows/Linux can't be that bad if you learned from absolute scratch.

            Hell, in high school we learn about multiplication and exponents, learn dates in modern history, and how to write. What can be so hard about learning about a few key presses and mouse clicks in either OS?
            • This doesn't even adress the fact that the majority of "average users" woulf be totaly oblivious to what desktop they are using until it was time to send it to the repair shop. Then they call all thier smart friends and tell them thier running windows 2000 because 2000 was the year ME came out. They say the interweb isn't working when they really mean the system won't boot. The claim they toasted the cpu when they mean the powersupply is bad. They claim the moniter won't work when they actualy unpluged the
    • See, it's one more...
    • The first step is to realize that it's not your fault, but it is your problem. You have to take the first step. You must admit you are powerless over your addiction...

      Umm... shouldn't he be emphasizing that you're not powerless? There are alternatives... "Admitting" that you're powerless seems to encourage complacency.

    • I'm going to need all 12 steps to get ride of solitare.

  • Employees in Redmond...... (Score:4, Funny)

    by 8127972 ( 73495 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:51PM (#13810473)
    ..... Should be on the lookout for flying chairs.

  • Props to Tony Bove... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tcopeland ( 32225 ) * <tom@NoSPaM.thomasleecopeland.com> on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:53PM (#13810484) Homepage
    ...if only because he's an old TRS-80 guy - check out his resume [rockument.com], about 10 lines from the bottom:
    TRS-80 Model III User's Guide (John Wiley & Sons)
    Sweet!

  • adbsurd (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CDPatten ( 907182 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:55PM (#13810503) Homepage
    MS and Windows is not all Bad. Not to mention how much software is avaialable for special industry only on windows not linux or macs.

    Most of us can't, and don't really want to "just say no". For example I have clients that are lawyers and doctors that are very happy with their windows software.
      Stuff that isn't available in linux. The just say no or linux only group always propose stuff for you to get by without ms, but some of us need to do more then use word and excel, or don't want some custom jerry rigged solution.

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:3, Informative)

      by i_should_be_working ( 720372 )
      "The just say no or linux only group always propose stuff for you to get by without ms, but some of us need to do more then use word and excel"

      Then they are not talking to you. On the first page of TFA he is asked what his target audience is, and the answer is not 'everyone'.

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Iriel ( 810009 )
      No, they're not all bad. Then again, I think people should start paying more attention to things like Linux, if for nothing more than to catch the eye of a developer that can really help make some Windows alternative shine to desktop and enterprise users alike, and maybe things like this are to help get the attention of users and future contributors.

      Each platform has their pros and cons, and trust me, as much as I absolutely love running openSUSE 10 right now, I still have plenty of gripes about Linux. The

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:2, Interesting)

      by RapidEye ( 322253 )
      Agreed - the best Distributed Control Plantfloor Automation System available for the Pharma/Biotech industry is Delta-V ---> no other vendor on any other platform even comes close to it for the raw number of installs or capabilities in the last 5 yrs. Delta-V only runs on Windows - period!

      The irony is, before Delta-V came out 7 or 8 years ago, all DCS's were on Unix - now if it ain't on M$ - it ain't *&(*&. The other vendors like ABB, Honeywell, etc are all filing down the same path to M$ =-)
      • Yes, we do a lot of integration work, and every hardware manufacturer provides some kind of IDE or DLL or sample code and it's all MS compatible only. There is no way we could, or would even want, to switch away from MS, and our customers would freak out if we gave them something they're not used to. In this industry, nobody ever got fired for spec'ing MS, because EVERY customer we've dealt with uses MS.

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:06PM (#13810603)
      >Most of us can't...

      I think you'll find the point is that most of us CAN. "Most people" use Word to write lists, and if the list needs 2 columns they use Excel. It doesn't have to be that way.

      And it's not just about linux, his favourite OS is Mac OS X.

      If you *need* MS, you probably made a poor decision somewhere along the line. If you have a free choice but choose to stick with MS that's fair enough. There's nothing about being a doctor or lawyer that intrinsically requires a MS operating system or software.

      • Doctors, Lawyers and Windows (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @02:05PM (#13811119)
        There's nothing about being a doctor or lawyer that intrinsically requires a MS operating system or software.

        You're right to a point. Being a doctor or lawyer does not mean you need MS software.

        But if you want to use one of the many of industry-specific, specialized software libraries, you might just have to run Windows.
    • That's fine and well, but there are plenty of people who don't want to feed Microsoft any longer. They just don't see the light at the end of the tunnel and so they adopt an attitude that there's just no way around it. Well, it's those people who we're trying to convince that there is computing beyond Windows and you don't need to have Microsoft's software to get by.

      Anyway, in all honesty, it's Microsoft's desire to thwart competition that is the biggest reason why you can't get that software on those oth

      • "...then more commercial developers might see a reason to port programs to or develop for other platforms."

        Just to play devil's advocate here [apt]... why isn't a single universal OS a good idea? Why should I have to check the back of the box to see if it works, or hunt around for a version that runs on my platform?

        The way I look at it, an OS provides basic services such as memory and file management, device control, scheduling, and so on. Other than for specialized applications (such as embedded), why

        • Re:adbsurd (Score:3, Insightful)

          by bedroll ( 806612 )
          Just to play devil's advocate here [apt]...

          Noted. You can note that I'm not some crazy Linux nut. I have two licenses of XP, one is in use. I also am an avid BSD fan. Lastly, I don't mind Windows (sans IE and Office) myself, but I do mind that I'm not really offered much of a choice but to have it.

          why isn't a single universal OS a good idea? Why should I have to check the back of the box to see if it works, or hunt around for a version that runs on my platform?

          It's not the single OS that should be the

    • I often think about switching away from windows but I keep seeing there is no need, and it's not really possible at this point.

      Take for instance, the major tools you need to make a 3d model. Most people use 3dsMax and/or Maya, and Photoshop. You can't run those on Linux (at least well.) People can jerry-rig something, sure, but many creative industries require things to work. That's why most production houses still use Photoshop 7. It's stable. Don't even get me started with in-house tools that we use that
      • Most people use 3dsMax and/or Maya, and Photoshop

        Now please tell us then, why most og the big studios use Maya on linux and not on windows ? Also, please tell us why most of the professionals use Photoshop on a mac and not on windows ? I don't even want to go into render apps and farms.

        • I think the mac = photoshop thing is a myth. It was that way in the 90's. Most everyone I've come in contact with in the industry is using windows.

          Render farms, however, are an exception.

          Another thing to remember I guess is personal preference. On art teams for example, some houses will let you model on whatever you want as long as you export to a common format. It all depends how the studio is set up and how much support there is for the applications you're using.

      • Maya on Linux (Score:3, Informative)

        by EnglishTim ( 9662 )
        Actually, Maya runs very well under Linux - At my last job almost everybody (we're talking a couple of hundered TDs/Animators here) moved over to Linux from Windows. Photoshop was another matter though - although some people used it via Crossover Office, most people who had to use it a lot had a second machine just to run it on. There's really no serious alternative.

        However I'm talking Post Production here. Now I'm back in the games industry I'm back on Windows again.

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:4, Insightful)

      by nurhussein ( 864532 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:10PM (#13810636) Homepage
      Then the book is not for you.

      It's for those of us who are frustrated with living in MS-land and unhappy with Windows and how Windows forces it's way of operating on you (don't the MS apologists in the audience flame me with "but it's supposed to be easier/better/shinier", I just don't like Windows and I have a right not to), yet because of the dependency chain that applications require you to use on top of Windows, you're stuck with an OS you don't like. I know a list of alternative applications that don't require Windows would come in handy for people who want to switch away from Windows and its inherent problems.

      If you find that the alternatives aren't good enough or aren't up to your standards, fine, stick with Windows. But in a world where Microsoft and the IT industry almost makes it an obligation for every computer user to pay tribute to the mighty monopoly with their wallet and their obedience, it's refreshing to know there's something to help us get out of it.

    • I hate to say it, but if you "Just say no to MS" then all you have left is the RIM and Palm platforms for PDAs. While Palm has an arguably better interface, it's stability leaves much to be desired. You're crippling yourself by switching away from MS alternatives for the PDA market. Palm just isn't reliable enough for the enterprise.
      • Not to mention the total lack of powerful enterprise PIMs for anything other than Windows.

        I still stick with Mac for Home, Windows for Corporate, n*x for Servers. The platforms are more or less fine for each aspect, all we need is all three communities to stop bitching about each other and just write some proper data standards. Yes, open source creates the accessible standards but that doesn't mean you can only use FOSS.
    • If you read his book or my own online book [msversus.org] you'll learn the many reasons to not use their software. It's not just about how bad their software is. They hurt the IT industry and therefore indirectly hurt you as users. They influence the creation of laws and who gets elected. They have a say in international policies.

      I've found that most people say they're happy with MS software... until they try something else. When they learn what they've been missing they realize just how bad they have it.

    • Re:adbsurd (Score:2, Interesting)

      by slackmaster2000 ( 820067 )
      I agree with you for the most part, but more from the corporate side of things. For personal use switching to Linux isn't all that hard, but when you've got some big expensive software packages in your company that are Windows-only, it makes the switch *very* difficult. It's a lot more than just word processing for most organizations. And even for simple tasks like word processing, Open Offices's MS Word import/export filters aren't perfect, making document exchange between companies difficult at times,
    • Most of us can't, and don't really want to "just say no"

      Hmm... that "just say no" got a weird idea in my head, please forgive me if it's too silly.

      *Ring!*
      -Hello?
      - Good morning! *big smile* We've come to share the Word of GNU, and his prophet St. Ignutius.
      - Ah, you're the Linux' Witnesses, right? No, thanks.
      - But, you don't understand, we've come to save your soul! :(
      - That's nonsense, I've been running Windows and nothing bad has happened to me!
      - Ah, but haven't you had to deal with your computer running slow due to viruses? It's the prophecy fulfilled!
      - I said NO THANKS!
      - But Windows is the Whore of Redmond!
      - ARGH!!!! GET OUT OF MY HOUSE!!!
      - *gasp* THE DEVIL'S SPAWN! RUN!!!

      (Inside the house...)
      - Who was it, hon?
      - BAH, Some Linux zealots.

      (Outside the house, there's a mailbox, and the inscription reads: S. Ballmer and Family)
    • special industry only on windows not linux or macs

      Which can also be true for quite a number of apps which have only mac or linux versions.

    • Most of us can't, and don't really want to "just say no".

      Well, Neo, the article was trying to free your mind, but it could only open the door. You have to decide to walk through it.

    • Bleh (Score:4, Interesting)

      by willfe ( 6537 ) <willfe@gmail.com> on Monday October 17, 2005 @02:05PM (#13811118) Homepage

      I dunno, I seem to be doing pretty well running very popular karaoke shows on weeknights and weekends in a college town using an all-digital system entirely based on free software running on a notebook.

      64-bit Ubuntu Linux starts things off, Enlightenment manages (very effectively) the desktop I run during the shows (part of the screen is shown on a big-screen TV so folks know who's singing and who's next; Firefox (!) does that display work), XMMS does a beautiful job (moving to amaroK for this purpose though; it's even nicer) playing both filler and karaoke music, crossfading smoothly between tracks and managing all the audio bits for me, SingIt runs the CDG karaoke lyrics, and my own home-grown Python code manages the singer rotations for me. Sure seems like more than Word and Excel to me.

      Sure, I'm a "geek" and I know what I'm doing. No need for Windows on this machine.

      Essentially out of the blue, two weeks ago my mother called and asked me if I could bring a Linux Live CD by next time I visit. She's sick of how slow her machine's getting. She's sick of constant root-level vulnerabilities being discovered and needing patching on her workstation. She knows all about not running spyware, about keeping the antivirus software updated, etc., but otherwise she's a polar opposite from me — she doesn't program, she just uses her computer for assorted "computery" tasks.

      She's what you'd call a member of "the masses," and even she's ready to switch. It's not a question of "getting by" without Microsoft's software. It's a matter of people saying "holy shit this thing is so much faster / more stable / more useful without that Windows crap on it!" and realizing they've been fooled for years. I don't "get by" without Microsoft; I prosper without them.

      And as an aside, plenty of specialized industrial software is still developed for and supported on platforms other than Windows. Show me a heart/vitals monitor in a hospital that runs anything from Microsoft on it. Visit HP's hardware testing labs and witness the Unix-driven measurement and control systems.

  • the War... (Score:2, Redundant)

    by tktk ( 540564 )
    So Microsoft is now a drug?

    Just Say No! ... to Microsoft

  • the one thing you won't find in his review (Score:5, Insightful)

    by everphilski ( 877346 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:58PM (#13810520) Journal
    ...a replacement for Microsoft Exchange. His only mention is how "...Microsoft designs its software products -- especially Outlook and Exchange -- to lock people into using it...". Until a good replacement is found for Exchange you will have a hard time prying it from the cold, dead hands of thousands of businesses worldwide...

    (And I work in a shop where most of us do dev work on linux boxes... but we all have windows partitions for Exchange. So damn handy for scheduling meetings, knowing who is in and who is out of town...)

    -everphilski-

    • Re:the one thing you won't find in his review (Score:5, Informative)

      by brunes69 ( 86786 ) <slashdot@nOSpam.keirstead.org> on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:05PM (#13810589)
      What's your flavour?

      There's Novell-backed OpenExchange [openexchange.com]

      There's Germany-backed Kolab [kolab.org]

      There's RedHat-backed eGroupWare [egroupware.org]

      There's all-open OpenGroupware [opengroupware.org]

      And that's just the tip of it. There are also commercial products.

      Seriously - if you think there are not alternatives to Exchange out there, then either you have not done your homework or are seriously misinformed, or both.

      • If you're looking at scrapping Exchange, or starting from scratch and you need to offer some of the functionality of Exchange, then these are great.

        None of them are a drop-in replacement for exchange.

        I'm looking at all of these in hopes of moving away from Exchange. Users want to continue to use Outlook the same way they do now. I can't put any of these in place and *guarantee* that they will have a happy time. I can upgrade this crud 5.5 box to 2003, and I *can* offer that guarantee.

        This sucks for the f

        • Of course there isn't (Score:5, Insightful)

          by brunes69 ( 86786 ) <slashdot@nOSpam.keirstead.org> on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:46PM (#13810985)
          There isn't a "drop-in" replacement for exchange because the protocols are binary and not documented.

          If you will be a little less lazy, there are Outlook plugins for both Kolab and OpenExchange that will let your users use the same client while you replace the server, they should not notice anything different at all.

          But there is no way you are ever going to just replace the server and do nothing else. It is impossible - that is why the Outlook/Exchange combo is so horrible, it is not compatible with anything.
          • I've just had to start connecting to an Exchange server using MS Outlook (I'm used to Exim and Thunderbird). It's handy to receive appointments directly into my calendar by email, but is it really "by email" then? It's another use of the same desktop application. And it seems rather strange that I receive an email about an appointment, but when I click "Accept", it stops being an email, and becomes an appointment - so I can't forward the agenda to a colleague who didn't receive the email, being one example
        • Open-Xchange - The Beta Outlook connector is free. The stable version only costs $10.
      • I have setup Suse Linux Open-Exchange 4.1

        It's not an Exchange killer. It is cool but not good enough.

        Until the shared calendar of these products is as easy to use as Exchange then none will prevail.

        I hate Exchange but the shared calendar stuff works.
    • ...while we're on the subject, a good replacement for Microsoft Access would be nice, too. FSM knows it can be a real ornery beast at times, but I have yet to see a better desktop ODBC client than Access for your typical data-savvy end user.

      Seriously--where else do you turn for a nice, straightforward database interface that doesn't assume some degree of SQL ability on the part of the user?

    • I spend 95% of my day on my Mac, and although I have a Windows machine KVMd to my monitor, I just use the Exchange Web client through Safari. Setting up meetings is a little annoying, but since the vast majority of my Exchange transactions involve either accepting or denying meetings, or checking my calendar for the day, its limitations are acceptable.

      That doesn't solve the problem of Exchange being used in the first place, but it does solve the issue of having to use Windows to access it.
    • Have you even looked ???

      Granted, most scheduling apps you will find are going to be web-based, but they work great ! If you want a stand-alone app, then pony up the money and buy Novell's Open Enterprise Server, or any of the other umpteen schedulers available.

      Also, everyone thinks that you cannot switch over a network because they use Exchange. I have switched over 3 networks from MS Win2K to Novell's SLES, the trick is to go to each workstation and ask what they use Outlook for, out of the 300+ people I

  • Is this feasible for corporate entities? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by markmcb ( 855750 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:58PM (#13810523) Homepage
    I personally switched to Mac for my personal platform in '03. I love it, it's great, etc, etc, etc. But I still use Windows at work. And I think it's probably the best solution given the alternatives. It just seems that there are so many services that Microsoft provides that simply don't exist (in an easy to use manner any way) on other platforms. Things like Sharepoint, MS Project come to mind, but we also use countless programs that simply aren't available for other platforms. I understand that other platforms ARE possible for use, but is it really worth it? Anyone out there using another platform that never finds themself asking, "man, if I only had Windows?"
    • My company runs on Mac clients and Linux servers. We never wish for a Windows app and only curse the Windows machine when we need to use it for testing.

      The purpose of the book is to outline the alternatives you're talking about. Personally I've never found a standard corporate app on Windows that didn't have a good alternative on Linux and/or Mac. I spent 10 years on Windows in the financial industry. I pushed hard to get companies to switch, but they don't even want to listen to what alternatives are o
    • Seriously, more thanyou would like to believe, it i simply because you are used to Windows.

      I say this as someone who uses Linux at work every single day, it is the only OS on my laptop. And whenever I need to use windows for any length of time for some external project, I am constantly thinking "if only I had Linux..."

    • Anyone out there using another platform that never finds themself asking, "man, if I only had Windows?"

      My simple guess is that almost every instance of "man, if I only had Windows" actually means "man, if I only had this piece of software that runs on Windows but not on my platform". As people keep using other platforms, it becomes more and more likely that the software *will* run on your platform, as it makes more and more business sense for the creator of the software.

      (Naturally, that does nothing to

      • Personally I find the idea of someone wishing they had Windows laughable. I guess that's just what you're used to.

        I have to use a Wintel PC at work and find it to be the computational equivalent of a straightjacket. Sure, by installing the correct software you can make it almost as capable as a basic Linux install, but why doesn't it just work that way out of the box? I was appalled, for instance, that there's no preinstalled SSH or SFTP client. Similarly, no rsync, no capability for command-line pipes, etc

  • Its not about riding Microsoft (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Daveznet ( 789744 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:59PM (#13810533)
    I dont believe its about riding of Microsoft, I believe its about giving a fair chance for alternatives. Only with competition will the end user benefit. If Microsoft isnt the one that everyone is supposed to hate it would have been another company. I am not a fan of Microsoft either as I do NOT run any windows software at home, but it was because of Microsoft's so called "crappy software" that pushed the open source community to create these great alternatives such as openoffice.org, linux etc ...
    • isn't that like saying that we should thank imperialism because it created gandhi? or that we should thank awful germs because they prompted the creation of medicine?

      you can imagine, that if the "crappy software" you're talking about NEVER EXISTED, the "great [alternatives]" still would have come about, all the same. (though the case seems different for the rhetorical examples i just gave.)

      anyway it usually seems to get lost in the software flames that microsoft doesn't just produce shoddy software. th

  • 2 Problems (Score:5, Insightful)

    by b0r1s ( 170449 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @12:59PM (#13810535) Homepage
    1) It assumes there's a good reason for people to abandon MS. Security is close, but as we've seen with recent holes in Firefox/Mozilla, as other tools get popular, their security will come under attack, too. The price, perhaps, but 'free' versions of anything lack meaningful support, which kills it for a significant number of end users. Therefore, if there were a convincing reason for everyone to change (other than personal bias), this would be much more meaningful.

    2) It assumes that it's the MS programs holding people back, when many desktops are tied because of third party software. For example, in my every-day job, I support dozens of workstations with Macromedia and Adobe software installed - neither of these run natively under Linux, and they run horribly under emulation. Yes, you can find replacement photo editors, but not really replacement video editors that are on par with After Effects, or replacements for Flash that have 95%+ installation base.

    • Re:2 Problems (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stlhawkeye ( 868951 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:11PM (#13810645) Homepage Journal
      2) It assumes that it's the MS programs holding people back, when many desktops are tied because of third party software. For example, in my every-day job, I support dozens of workstations with Macromedia and Adobe software installed - neither of these run natively under Linux, and they run horribly under emulation. Yes, you can find replacement photo editors, but not really replacement video editors that are on par with After Effects, or replacements for Flash that have 95%+ installation base.

      Exactly. Ever try to hire a graphics artist and tell him, "by the way, you'll be using GIMP on our Fedora Core 3 installation"? It's harder than it sounds. Yes, you can all rain down here with THOUSANDS of examples of YOU and YOUR FRIENDS and people YOU KNOW who not only can use GIMP but PREFER it to expensive alternatives. If the sample of Slashdot and its immediate social clique were the norm, we'd live in a pseudosocialist utopia in which all of us are gainfully employed and paid a hundred thousand dollars to work 30 hour weeks developing beautiful open source software that we give away and nobody buys, and all music and entertainment is produced through the honest labor of talented people upon whom we benevolently bestow voluntary payments for their work, and whose labors of love are distributed for free through the software channels that we were paid lots of money to develop. Oh, and Bush isn't president. And global warming stopped. And we all ride bikes to our jobs. And there's no McDonald's or suburbs. And soda is free. So is beer. I could go on, but I moved into the TrollZone about 5 minutes ago.

      • Re:2 Problems (Score:4, Funny)

        by dracvl ( 541254 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @04:14PM (#13812178) Homepage
        a pseudosocialist utopia in which all of us are gainfully employed and paid a hundred thousand dollars to work 30 hour weeks developing beautiful open source software that we give away and nobody buys, and all music and entertainment is produced through the honest labor of talented people upon whom we benevolently bestow voluntary payments for their work, and whose labors of love are distributed for free through the software channels that we were paid lots of money to develop. Oh, and Bush isn't president. And global warming stopped. And we all ride bikes to our jobs.

        Wow, I think you just described Norway [norway.com]. ;)

    • Re:2 Problems (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cbiffle ( 211614 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:23PM (#13810773)
      Security is close, but as we've seen with recent holes in Firefox/Mozilla, as other tools get popular, their security will come under attack, too.


      I'm not particularly anti-Microsoft, though I choose not to use it for myself. However, I had to take issue with this, as I've been hearing this statement more and more lately.

      There is such a thing as designing for security. Postfix is an excellent example of this; whatever your feelings on DJB, djbdns and qmail are also good examples. These three packages are rapidly growing in popularity, without showing the same security problems as the tools they replace (namely, sendmail and BIND). This is because (filesystem hierarchy restrictions aside) they are quite simply designed better.

      Firefox, and Mozilla in general, was not designed with security in mind in the same way as Postfix. So, yes, it will show some correlation between popularity and exploits. However, even if IE and Firefox achieve equal popularity, I doubt Firefox will show the same consistently poor long-term track record as IE, for three main reasons.

      1. IE has at least one designed-in security hole, ActiveX. Signed code is not a security mechanism, it's an authentication mechanism, and a user-driven one at that; sandboxing would be better.

      2. Members (past and present) of the IE team have acknowleged that the IE codebase has grown to the point that it's difficult to maintain and patch. This suggests a poor initial design (compare Postfix's heavily compartmentalized code), but also explains some of the security problems of late.

      3. IE is not written with Least-Privileges in mind. I can drop Firefox on the desktop without admin rights and use it, confident that an exploit in Firefox cannot nuke my machine (assuming the underlying OS is not also exploited). I cannot be so confident about IE, tied into the OS as it is. Too many IE bugs have allowed SYSTEM-level privilege escalation on NT.

      Now, Firefox may well grow into problem #2, but I think #1 and #3 are unlikely.

      End rant.

    • Re:2 Problems (Score:2, Insightful)

      by lotXLIX ( 860709 )
      1 good reason to abandon MS: it is an addiction. This means that people, often against their will, pay money to MS directly or indirectly. MS then uses a portion of that money to lobby in it's favor and stiffle competition, which reinforces the habit. Addictions are bad because they are anti-Democratic, and intrinsically opposed to freedom of capital, among other assets. ~ $85 BILLION is spent on IT between the federal and state government in the United States every year. How much of that money (OUR TA

  • He has a point.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Helpadingoatemybaby ( 629248 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:00PM (#13810538)
    In a thousand years, the current trend towards open software will be regarded just as the Rennaisance is today. Minds opened, components that will form the basis of all communications were begun, no different than painters sharing the idea of perspective.

    Which will make being enslaved in the corporate underground salt mines that much more pleasant.

  • Immature (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:00PM (#13810545)
    I can understand if you prefer Linux to Windows or don't like Word or something (I **hate** Powerpoint), but the whole not using any Microsoft products for the sake of feeling alternative/rebellious is just really immature and annoying. Microsoft makes a lot of good software.

    • Tell me About It (Score:5, Funny)

      by th1ckasabr1ck ( 752151 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:13PM (#13810678)
      There was a /. story a while back requesting comments to answer the question: "Why do you still use Windows?". I posted that I still use Windows because Visual Studio is the best IDE I have ever worked with, and since a huge amount of my time is spent programming, then Windows is the best platform for me.

      The damn thing got modded +5 Funny. Some people just refuse to believe that Microsoft makes good products I guess.

      • Re:Tell me About It (Score:5, Informative)

        by Dan Farina ( 711066 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:40PM (#13810936)
        Perhaps this is because some us find working on Windows the most mind-grating thing ever.

        I really don't understand this fascination with Visual Studio. From what I've seen (which is not a trivial amout) of the 2003 version, it rather sucks in comparison to some of the latter day Free IDEs. I've heard from a friend at Microsoft that 2005 got a major upgrade in many areas (like refactoring) so that IDEs like Eclipse and Netbeans don't eat their mindshare/lunch. MS KNEW that they were weak there.

        In contrast, with *NIX I pretty much get a development environment out of the box. The one sore point is Java, which really is no different than installing it under Windows...it's just that most repositories do not include it. Besides this, it is trivial to obtain a shell, perl, python, gcc, ruby, and countless other libraries. I also haven't seen a half decent (free or otherwise, but less search for the latter type) virtual workspace manager for Windows.

        The one notable exception (which is a large one) is developing Windows applications. For this reason alone (with games, but those aren't productive, so they don't count) I must boot back into Windows now and again.

        df

  • Windows is going down!!! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by teutonic_leech ( 596265 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:01PM (#13810547)
    Okay, I've been using Macs since the 80s (yes, you read correctly) and have been exclusively on Windows from between 1994 - 2004 (I'm a J2EE engineer). Last year, I belatetly hopped onto the OS X bandwagon and the only thing that keeps my Windows boxes at home running are dozens of apps that I have accumulated in the last decade. I know that I could replace most of my apps with Mac apps, but sometimes they don't support my workflow or I cannot interchange. With that said however (and with this not supposed to be turning emotional ;-) I must concede that my Windows days are limited. It has already started with iPods, Cinema displays, etc.. and my next system for sure will be an G5 or G6 (whenever it'll be released) - I happen to know Unix very well, so OS X simply rules for me. Finally, with the video iPod a new era in online video is being spearheaded (see yesterday's /. thread on the topic) and Quicktime is going to be the future. That will allow me to distribute my little shorts to millions of iPods all over the world - something Windows is lightyears away from doing. Finally, on the development front - I'm already 1/2 the time developing on a G4 and hopefully Windows is going to quietly go away in the remainder of this decade.

  • Yeesh (Score:2)

    by Otter ( 3800 )
    This reads like he stuck a bunch of Score: 3 Slashdot posts together and called it a book. Do I get a -1 Troll for pointing out that I've been writing Word documents to PDF, in both Mac and Windows, for a decade? Not sure why Tony Bove still can't manage it.
  • I'd say "no" to Microsoft but Windows is easy to use, fairly intuitive on the surface (fine-tuning it is a big hassle, I admit), and with XP it's finally stable enough for me to use day-in and day-out. I despise it as a development platform, I'm guess I'm a stubborn old UNIX kind of guy. Give me ANSI C and a dumb terminal, and I'll vi up some code for you. But for day-to-day productivity, gaming, websurfing, etc, I'll take it. I'm aware of its myriad shortcomings and MS's sketchville business practices,
  • To be honest I have never heard of this guy, but that's alright, I am a sophomore in college... don't really know everyone who made programs on punch cards.

    Either way, the guy seems to have such a big problem with MS products but never really mentions user error. I don't care what kind of OS you use, the problem is, most of the time, between the keyboard and the chair. He is also obviously some sort of mac fanatic, if you read the third page. He is fine with Apple controlling what people can use with a mac,
    • Haven't read his book, skimmed TFA since it doesn't apply to me, but...

      I am a Mac user and find it vastly superior to XP, but I'm not going to be your typical zealot. XP is FULL of flaws, and this leads to 3 possible solutions, Switch to OS X, switch to Linux or the ilk, or fi Windows. The last one is out of our reach, leaving the previous two, both of which are viable, and both of which ultimatly boil to to personal taste/practicallity. Linux wasn't my thing (not developed enough, to much kludge and duc

  • Not more political motivations! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ficken ( 807392 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:06PM (#13810597) Journal
    I really wish that the Linux community wouldn't sink down to the level that Microsoft has reached. Releasing subjective papers on what works and what doesn't will not do anything for people except cause political arguments. Since most TCO and benchmark data is skewed one way or another, releasing whitepapers and books becomes irrelevant. Most budget managers and IT managers realize this. The people in charge (given that they know what they are doing) researches data from other companies. They ask questions like it worked for Company A so could it work for us? They do not look at opinions and unreliable sources. IMHO, this is one reason why Linux has not made it to the desktop - many companies are scared to move their user base over to a radically different interface. Not many companies have made the move, so everyone else is scared to jump first. They are not scared to move their servers over, since only a small handful of people interface with it - provided the services retain a high level of reliability.
  • The author compares Microsoft to the Pennsylvania Turnpike as follows...

    The road map analogy came to me not long ago, as I fought the traffic on the Pennsylvania Turnpike crossing the state. It looks convenient on paper, if you're coming from New Jersey and want to bypass Philly on your way across the state. Considering the traffic in Philly, it should be convenient. But once you get on the turnpike, you can't get off unless you pay exorbitant tolls. The rest stops are overcrowded, and the service monopol

  • Isn't the purpose of computers... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:09PM (#13810625)
    to make our lives easier? I mean Linux has come around to make it easier for user to work to an extent (I still don't see anything as friendly to computer newbies on the linux systems as windows, but it is getting closer and closer), but to go 100 percent away from Microsoft is almost unrealistic for most people. Remember most people don't even know that you can network iTunes for playback with out buying the songs. Nor do they know what a MKV is, what the different of an OGM and XVID is, or what TCP/IP settings are needed to use a VPN (the last one puzzled me for a couple days.. turned out I was given the wrong IP... from a tech guy)

    Microsoft might be a monolpolistic company but for many people it makes their lives easier. I'd love it if they didn't have the same business practices as they currently do but let's not make our lives more inconvient.

    This interview sounds like another ranting guy. But yes I don't support Microsoft wholy (I got my Windows heavily discounted from school, I don't use Microsoft Office at home (At work we get it through Compaq, so it's already paid for) but going insanely against them will not help save anyone. Apple would love to step up and set themselves up as the next Microsoft. I'm sure their a little piss with what Microsoft did (with grabbing Apple's own Windows style technology, that they in turn took from Xerox who took it from their programmer who created it), and if they could trade places they would love to be the next giant, and with their love of "Apple approved" hardware, I'm sure could find some ways to close off competition. (remember if Apple was in charge, ATI and NVIDIA wouldn't compete like they do now, each trying to make radical strives, nor would there be any other sound cards except for the one or two companies apple approves of)

    Besides all his problems with Microsoft seem to stem from either hatred, or the fact that people who use Windows are stupid. (claiming never to get a virus on a mac isn't a small miracle, I never get virii on PCs... Why? Because I do the same shit he does. I have a anti virus program that has been completely dorment since installation, except when I actually test it, and it performs perfectly then)

    Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see why this is "news", when a guy writes a book or something about this stuff, let's hear info about book, not his ramblings..

    And my one quote from him?

    But if there is a monopoly, let's get out the rocket launchers and take our shots, please!

    advocating wholesale violence... tsk tsk.
    • I still don't see anything as friendly to computer newbies on the linux systems as windows

      That's been a bug under my bonnet for a while now: My whole family uses Linux, including my grade-school-age kids. I've used everything from TRS-80s and Commodore Vic20s to MacIntosh, OS/2 Warp, Windows 9*/XP/NT, to about 10 flavors of Linux and I've found Windows to be the least user-friendly of them all. Because *my* definition of user-friendly is "Let me do whatever I want and give me the easiest tools to do it wi

  • Yeah right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Reality Master 101 ( 179095 ) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .101retsaMytilaeR.> on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:12PM (#13810649) Homepage Journal
    I'm sure there's some subset of the population that does ONLY web and e-mail with light word processing, but I have no one in my life that does. Just as an example, my computer illiterate mother-in-law uses Quicken, and she has a computerized sewing machine software. They use the software that came with their digital camera.

    As usual, it's all about the applications. People want things to "just work", and they don't care about software politics. That's the reason that Apple is only 3% marketshare -- people don't want to have to think about whether their software is compatible or not.

  • Too Early (Score:2, Interesting)

    by brokenarmsgordon ( 903407 )
    Aren't we preaching to the converted with these kinds of books? The people are earnestly capable of switching away from Windows are probably smart enough to do that on their own, and those that choose not to, probably also have good reasons for doing so (re: gaming). I just don't think the software is quite there yet for Grandma to use a Windows alternative without relying on some heavy tech support (often a family member). In a few years, the OSes will be there, but right now I really believe these book
    • Aren't we preaching to the converted with these kinds of books? The people are earnestly capable of switching away from Windows are probably smart enough to do that on their own, and those that choose not to, probably also have good reasons for doing so (re: gaming). I just don't think the software is quite there yet for Grandma to use a Windows alternative without relying on some heavy tech support (often a family member). In a few years, the OSes will be there, but right now I really believe these books a

  • sub-title: how to spend more money (Score:4, Insightful)

    by defile ( 1059 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:16PM (#13810705) Homepage Journal

    Eliminating Microsoft is a good way of increasing your computer costs.

    It might be hard to see from the end user perspective, but it's crystal clear from a developer perspective. But don't take my word for it, take Joel's:

    I'd love to have a Mac version and a Linux version, but they are not good uses of limited resources. Every dollar I invest in CityDesk Windows will earn me 20 times as many sales as a dollar invested in a hypothetical Mac version. Even if you assume that Mac has a higher percentage of creative and home users, I'm still going to sell a heck of a lot more copies on Windows than I could on Mac. And that means that to do a Mac version, the cost had better be under 10% of the cost of a Windows version. Unfortunately, that's nowhere near true for CityDesk. We benefit from using libraries that are freely available on Windows (like the Jet multiuser ACID database engine and the DHTML edit control) for which there are no equivalents on the Macintosh. So if anything, a Mac port would cost more than the original Windows version. Until somebody does something about this fundamental economic truth, it's hard to justify Mac versions from a business perspective. (Incidentally, I have said time and time again, if Apple wants to save the Mac, they have to change this equation.)
    And don't get me started about Linux. I don't know of anyone making money off of Linux desktop software, and without making money, I can't pay programmers and rent and buy computers and T1s. Despite romantic rhetoric, I really do need to pay the rent, so for now, you're going to have to rely on college kids and the occasional charitable big company for your Linux software.

    If someone's going to do a new application, it's much more likely to be a Windows application. If someone's going to offer technical support services, they're much more likely to focus on Windows support. If someone's going to make hardware, they're much more likely to focus on getting Windows supported first.

    This all means if you're not using Windows, you're going to pay for it with time or money.

    (Read the whole article at http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog00000000 51.html [joelonsoftware.com])

    • Joel is pretty clever but the article was dated five years ago. Cross-platform development is a lot easier than it was then. mt
    • you're going to have to rely on college kids and the occasional charitable big company for your Linux software

      Except that I don't rely on college kids, I rely on people like Donald Knuth and Bram Moolenar and so on.

    • Re:sub-title: how to spend more money (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @02:23PM (#13811276) Journal
      If someone's going to do a new application, it's much more likely to be a Windows application.

      I disagree. Look further up the food chain - if somebody's going to do a new application, it's much more likely to be in an environment where the OS is irrelevant.

      Who wants to limit their marketplace to the Windows desktop, when there are so many mobile devices out there now?

      Or, put it like this: What OMFG killer appz have you seen in the last 5-10 years that have been Windows only? Games are moving to gaming consoles, Word Processing is moving with surprising rapidity to OpenDocument, and most all the new cool stuff (Google, Ebay, Yahoo, Amazon, etc) is web-based! (or, at least, is open-protocol)

      If someone's going to offer technical support services, they're much more likely to focus on Windows support.

      Hmmm. Partly because it needs so *much* support just to stay functional? Obviously, that's where the money is...
  • Erase the myth from your mind that you need Microsoft software because everyone else uses it. Actually, only about 95 percent of the computing world uses it. The other 5 percent is comprised of the free thinkers who are willing to try new things; the artists, writers, and musicians who shape our culture; the software geniuses and inventors who brings us new innovations; the scientists and engineers that make everything work; the desktop publishers, multimedia professionals, video editors, and graphic artist

  • What about Microsoft Project? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tyates ( 869064 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:35PM (#13810880) Homepage
    Microsoft Project is the most widely used project management software that corporations use, and it's only available for one platform: Microsoft Windows. Not OSX, Not Linux, Not BSD, Not Sun, Not Palm, Not Amiga, etc. This means that anybody who manages work in a company *has* to use Windows. And yes, I know that Microsoft Project actually sucks for complex project management, and that there are better Project Management packages out there, but most of them only work for Windows also and they don't have the base or support that Microsoft has. Until that lock is broken, its going to be very hard for companies to switch.
    • it's only available for one platform: Microsoft Windows. Not OSX, Not Linux, Not BSD, Not Sun, Not Palm, Not Amiga, etc.

      Ah, but that is where you are wrong, my friend. I have been working night and day and soon I will be releasing a port of MSP to Commodore 64, Vic 20, TRS-80 model I and on the back burner I have a working port for the Atari 2600.

      I figure my Atari port will hit the market no later than March 2006. The others should be out in time for the holiday shopping season.

  • Beware Zealots and Ideologues (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Deviant ( 1501 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @01:36PM (#13810896)
    It is fair game to complain about the costs of Windows, Office and other MS products because that leads to a costs vs benefits analysis of whether it is a better value vs the time and effort spent by the users and the administration costs than other solutions like Linux and OpenOffice. It is fair game to complain about the security issues with Microsoft's products because they have admitted as much that there are issues there and regularly release patches and advisories to address them and are making the ability to run as a non-administrator level user a requirement of software written for Vista to further address it. It is fair game to quantitatively compare the performance of Microsoft's solutions versus other vendor's solutions because, as long as the setup is fair and impartial, numbers don't lie and are a useful tool for comparison of applicability and value of a solution to your needs and hardware. It is fair game to talk of particular bugs and issues you have with Microsoft's products because they have a responsibility to support their products such that they work as advertised. It is even fair game to argue subjective points like ease of use and ease of administration of Microsoft's solutions versus that of their competitors because these are things that people from desktop users to system administrators use every day as an integral part of their jobs and have some responsibility for making things as easy and productive as possible for all involved in the enterprise.

    However, what is not fair game is this view of Microsoft as evil and their solutions are never to be considered and you need to "Say No To Windows." Beware those who will tell you that Microsoft is evil, that it's solutions are never better suited to your situation and who will say things about the stability and performance of the OS that fly in the face of the millions who use it without such issues day in and day out to get their work done. There are people believe in Linux and opensource almost as a religion and suffer from the logical fallacy that, if Linux is as better in every way as they believe it to be, Microsoft can only be maintaining it's dominance in marketshare by some sort of evil trickery and vendor lock-in. You are not going to get the answers you need from these sorts of individuals - the corporate solutions will never get any consideration no matter how easy to use, easy to administer, fast, stable and secure that they get. I am still waiting to see a truly fair and objective comparison on Slashdot that takes all these things into account for various situations. That is an article I'd read and the book I'd buy...

  • Educating people about OS choice (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Randall311 ( 866824 ) on Monday October 17, 2005 @02:11PM (#13811171) Homepage
    Before I get flamed on this, I just wanna point out that there is a big difference between being an advocate and being a fanatic against Microsoft. Now you want to tell people not to use MS because the corporation is a pig... ok fine. I can agree that Windows is a poor operating system because of all the patches and the fact that it is based off of DOS, instead of a rock solid, open solution like *nix. That said, do you really expect your average user that "Just uses MS Word to edit lists, or if the list has two colums, use MS Excel" to have any clue about using Linux? Granted that in recent months the Linux world has gotten mush easier to handle, for example Ubuntu 5.10 installs like a dream, with 3D acceleration supported out of the box! But to your average user in general, having config scripts everywhere is just not reasonable. Linux is not ready for the masses. Sorry. Not yet anyway. On the other hand you have Mac OS X, which IMO is a much more viable, and even preferred solution. "It just works" is so true. When you have the prettiest looking user interface of all time, and you build your own hardware (don't have to worry about drivers) and write your own software to work on it, not to mention a rock solid *nix base that's easy to use, then you have the perfect computing solution. Everybody is capable of running a Mac, and it has the perfect mix of *nix to make the geeks happy, and eye candy and functionallity to make anyone happy. OS X is your winner.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer

Close