I've used Outlook Express for years and years. So shock, horror,
when I upgraded to Window 7, I still am really pissed off that
MS has not included it, so it won't work with Windows 7.

So I dug out my old copy of Outlook 2000, but that won't work
either, only from Outlook 2003 onwards!

I simply liked the ease and layout of Outlook Express and it was
hugely popular, so I was not the only one.

What other email programmes are around that anyone knows of, that
are similar? I'm trying to avoid browser based emailers like
Gmail etc.

Any comments would be appreciated.

Hi Yabby.

Why don't you give Thunderbird a try from Mozilla, the makers of Firefox. Pretty similar to lookout exposed and much, much safer for all of us!

http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/

Yabby,outlook will work if you pay for the upgrades.Currently I'm using outlook with windows 7.The new computers are faster and cheaper but you have to pay for additional programs.That is the rub.Corportatocracy wins again.

They are trying to force you to use Windows Live, which normally requires an internet connection. GMail offers more features (like POP3 and IMAP), and works offline if you install Google Gears http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10152019-2.html and intergrates with most mobile phones. Integrating with mobile phones means you can synchronise your contacts in your mobile phone with GMail - effectively allowing an offline backup, of your phone contacts http://www.google.com/mobile/mail/

If you want a normal PC application, try thunderbird as mentioned above, or for something closer to Outlook:

http://www.dipconsultants.com/evolution/

Both are free.

I would read Google's privacy policy before giving a huge corporation access to my private mail. It might not suite your personal privacy beliefs, whatever they may be.

Just a thought!

Gawd Arjay, I am glad I don't live in your head.

Mind you, I'd recon Microsoft is as paranoid as you. They never had the super computer market, and now they all run Linux. They've now comprehensively lost the embedded market to Linux. They are in the process or being wiped out of the mobile phone market. There are still some Windows CE smart phones out there, but they are being slaughtered by Android (Linux), Nokia (Symbian), iPhone (BSD), Meamo (Linux) and Blackberry.

You would think they could out manoeuvre Google in the internet because they controlled the predominant browser (Windows Internet Explorer). But no, Google now owns the major revenue stream from the internet - ads. And because Microsoft deliberately crippled Internet Explorer to prevent applications like GMail from migrating into the cloud, it is being replaced by likes of Firefox, Chrome and Opera.

So they fight back by reducing the price of Windows 7, and try to make up the revenue stream by replacing applications like MSN Messenger and Outlook Express with web equivalents that display ads. You can gauge how successful that will be from Yabby's reaction.

It will get worse. Google is now working on the Google Operating System. It isn't really an operating system. Its just a browser that can run on bare metal - without windows. Companies have already started using it as a BIOS, so you switch on the computer and can immediately browse the internet, read your email, access new feeds, write documents and spreadsheets. This is without needing a power hungry hard disk, and without buying a single Microsoft product.

And you know what Arjay - all this stuff is free. Free in a why you probably don't understand. They use what is called a copyleft license. Google it. There are copyleft replacements for Windows, Office, Outlook, Messenger, Paint, Photoshop - you name it, it is all available, free.

If you feel like you are being manipulated by a Corportatocracy, it is because you let yourself be. There are alternatives. There has been for a decade now.

Well said rstuart.

I've been a linux user/developer for about 8 years now and don't miss the corporate stuff one bit :)

In fact, I get frustrated everytime I have to work with the stuff, so restrictive.

Anyway, Yabby asked for a mail program similar to Outhouse. Thunderbird would serve him well and is free as in beer and free as in freedom to boot :)

PS Arjay:

It's about time you got with the group and ditched the N.W.O. stuff. I'm surprised you would gladly give your money to the enemy :P~

Far too early for me to even consider windows 7.
Micro softs last effort made me gun shy.
Still running xp with service pak 2 and outlook.
Updating daily and so far so good.

rsuart some programs are free,however with the computers you will note that you get very few programs.rstuart your attempt at derision says more about you than myself.

Raw mustard I made no mention of NWO.I will be vindicated in the future on my stance of the corporate dominance of our lives being wrong, but expect no acknowledgment or thanks from people who are too smug and secure in their beaker frog existance as the temp slowly rises.

Yabby has been loitering around in a dam somewhere, you are supposed to know what you are letting yourself in for.
Keeping up with the latest at any cost is not the way to go.
You should have asked an eight year old for some advice before blundering yourself around.

I use Mac where nothing's free but the upside is that it always works.

Arjay: "with the computers you will note that you get very few programs"

Not good at taking advice, are you? You didn't google copyleft. And as a consequence you still don't get it.

There are free versions of just about any software you might need. It is not Microsoft Software. It might not work the way you are familiar with. But is exists. It is completely free. And it is completely legal. You just download it off the internet, or from a DVD on a magazine cover.

In the same vein there are user groups out there that will help you find the right software, install it, and use it. They will even find cheap hardware for you to run it on. They do this for free. They are live both in Internet forums, and in real life meetings. They do this primarily because they get their kicks out of helping others.

You might notice the only two people here who offered Yabby concrete advice, RawMustard and myself, happen to run this and use software. And I'd wager RawMustard participates in self free software community just as I do.

If you are interested in any of this I can give you sites that have this software, addresses of forums where you can ask questions, and if you live in a capital city the names of groups that meet regularly and will help you with this stuff.

But whether you choose, don't continue to whinge about being caught up in some global Corportatocracy conspiracy. Microsoft makes good software and is opting to pay for it is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. But nonetheless your choice to stay with the Corportatocracy is just that - a choice, made by you.

Thanks rstuart, you saved me the trouble.

>>But whether you choose, don't continue to whinge about being caught up in some global Corportatocracy conspiracy<<

It always amazes me that people complain interminably about Microsoft's hegemony and consequent pricing practices (how many times have Windows users paid for the same basic product?) without bothering to research alternatives.

After many years of trepidation (I am entirely non-technical) I finally made the switch to Ubuntu a couple of years ago. As a result I've already saved many hundreds of dollars personally, and many thousands for the business.

Firefox for the browser, Thunderbird for mail.

Plus Sun VirtualBox for those (fortunately very few) annoying "Windows Only" applications such as MYOB. Including those times I need Internet Explorer to talk to the Australian Tax Office... how dare they tell me what I should run on my computer! With XP SP1 safely quarantined inside VirtualBox, inside Linux, I don't need to worry about Vista, Windows 7 or whatever new usage tax Microsoft wants to impose.

Belly, I've switched to Windows 7, as my old girl was regularly
crashing, things get fairly dusty out on a farm. So as part of
buying a new computer, it seemed to make sense to upgrade the
OS as well.

I think that rstuart has it about right, MS can see advertising
Dollars with every email sent, by getting rid of Outlook Express
and trying to force people through their new system, but I think they
are making a mistake. Ignoring what consumers want is a fatal
flaw in business, IMHO anyhow.

I would have happily paid them something for Outlook Express.
That Evolution programme suggested by rstuart, looks very similar,
so I might try it. However I'm not sure how we'll go if there are
conflicts with Windows that appear and what happens then.

In fact I don't have a problem in paying for software, but I have
a problem with them ignoring what I want and telling me what I now
should do. Arrogance has cost MS alot of money in the past and
will clearly continue to do so, as we can see by peoples reactions.

It was Apple's arrogance, which got Bill Gates going in the first
place, when he took off, with Windows 3 and Office 94. MS seem
to have forgotten that lesson.

Anyhow, thanks for all the suggestions, I might try a number of
them.

@ Arjay

I'm on your side you dill, I think you misinterpreted my post?

I was simply wondering why you would pay for software from a company that represents what you're against?

This is one of the reasons I switched to linux years ago. It gives me freedom and hurts their bottom line. Amongst other things :)

http://www.softpedia.com/progViewOpinions/Evolution-for-Windows-43304,.html

rstuart, I tried to download that Evolution, but no luck. So
I did a bit of a google search and found these posts.

It sounds great in theory, but not much good in day to day use,
for those like me, who don't want to fiddle with software, but
just want it to do its job.

There is no mention of Windows 7 either.

Sounds to me like if somebody comes up with a similar programme
that actually works and flogs it for 20-50 bucks, they could
sell millions!

There are a huge number of happy Outlook Express users out there,
who are going to be majorly pissed off by this MS decision.

Outlook is nowhere near as convenient to use, as Outlook Express.

Sorry about that Yabby. I use Evolution myself - but under Linux, not Windows. I made the mistake assuming the port to windows was kosher.

By way of trying to make up for that little mistake, here are a couple of others you could look at:

http://www.pmail.com/
http://www.eudora.com/

Mind you, that is about it. It exhausts my repertoire of free Windows Clients.

Thanks for trying rstuart. I do appreciate it.

I've been reading quite a few of the reviews etc online and it
seems that with programmes like Thunderbird, they work fine with
Firefox, but less so with Windows. Some have not yet been updated
to handle Windows 7 either.

I even had a look to see if MS flog Outlook on its own, but nope,
they want you to buy their whole 600$ Office package. Stuff them,
I already have Office 2000, I don't need an update.

I'm not sure how many copies of Windows have been sold, but it would
be huge, I presume hundreds of millions. Many of these will be
wanting a working, easy email solution, similar to Outlook Express.

Even at 20$ a pop, thats 20 million for a million copies sold, so
enough $ to eventually create a market based solution, when smart
software developers twig at the opportunity created here. Sadly
it won't happen overnight, but as more people like myself
highlight the problem, somebody will make alot of money, giving
us consumers the solution that we want.

Like others have said - other - safer - opportunities are out there.

Being a Mac user I do not have to suffer the Windoze nonsense. I would say Thunderbird is the best option and the demise of Outlook E is not the end of the world, in fact it's a step in the right direction.

Yabby,
For what it's worth.
I use windows7 but have been on the dark side for quite some time.
I.e. I use Firefox and Thunderbird , couldn't be happier absolutely no problems.
Both are better IMO than MICROSOFT OFFERINGS! more stable and more apps

Rstuart has a few sour grapes over the revelations of he climategate/GW scam.That is that is the main reason for venting his spleen upon myself.

Take it like a man rstuart.Admit that you are wrong and all will be forgiven.

PS.Monkton is right about the plot for Global Governance and it is still on the agenda.The next step via the Bank of International Settlements,IMF and World Bank will be a Global Currency owned by a cartel of private banks in which they create money from nothing, diluting via inflation everybody's earning capacity and stored wealth.

How many people lost super and savings during the GFC? The money did not evaporate,it just moved to fewer hands.

The same scenario happened during the Great Depression.It was deep and prolonged because the printing presses created money for the bubble economy for Wall St, while real production withered.

The US has real unemployment appraoching 20%.You cannot have a recovery based on decreasing production,while the banks make fake profits based on expectation.Eventually the derivatives unwind and stark reality strikes a mortal blow.

Arjay, you seemingly can't help yourself with your conspiracy
fetish! You are trying to turn a thread about email programmes
into yet another dreamtime of yours.

If things are as bad as you claim, what on earth are you doing,
with banknotes to your name? You could join UOG and sleep
on silver bars, or gald bars or whatever asset you are comfortable
with. We all have choices including you.

If those "evil" bankers are making so much money, why don't you
buy shares in their companies? They are after all, freely tradeable.

Arjay, its time that you dealt with your fetish, you are becoming
as bad as runner.

Yabby, be kind to Arjay.

>>Arjay, you seemingly can't help yourself with your conspiracy
fetish! You are trying to turn a thread about email programmes
into yet another dreamtime of yours.<<

Remember the old saying "To a hammer, everything looks like a nail"

>>It always amazes me that people complain interminably about Microsoft's hegemony and consequent pricing practices (how many times have Windows users paid for the same basic product?) without bothering to research alternatives.<<

Actually, Pericles, people complain precisely because they *haven't* got an alternative. Saying they should just get off their bums and fix it doesn't work for everyone - it assumes everyone's got the same ability and opportunity as you. Not everyone's in that boat. Anyway, what's the problem with giving MS a bit of stick? From what I've seen, they make their billions out of not robustly writing code but cultivating the hope in its users that the next bigger and better version will solve the bugs; they're just keeping a captive market on a slow drip in other words. All the while they are ruthlessly exploiting and/or killing off their commercial rivals who would provide a bigger array of IT solutions to the wider public. It's a form of hegemony and it's great to see the freeware movement out there fighting back and expeditiously flowing around the big boulder in the middle of the stream.

Good morning all, before rushing out the door to head butt a different type of cow, what a great thread.
And how good would it be if we had a permanent one to inform such as me about better ideas.
It is very true the very young know far more than some[ me] will ever know.
rstuart you should be bottled, your words help many thanks all.

Exactly RobP. And to extend on what you've added. Isn't it convenient that government continue to aid and abet this hegemony through our education system and its many online departments.

Why are we encouraging and paying extortion money to a huge external corporation that provides an inferior product, treats its customers like thieves and has been convicted of monopolistic crimes, when we have a perfectly viable, immensely superior product which is free of all shackles including fiscal ones.

Why aren't our education departments saving billions a year and rolling out Linux and associated free and open source software, enabling our young to learn without the constraints of a certain corporate culture and associated financial penalties.

The benefits afforded by linux or even the free BSD's are enormous compared to anything from the closed, hidden in secrecy, corporate world. Australia is a real backwater when acknowledging this. It's about time our illustrious Luddites in power grew a brain and gave our people and kids a fair suck of the source bottle! The future is here and now and the future is GNU/Linux.

I could rant on and on about the injustices perpetuated on society by the use of Microsoft/Apple products, there's just no good reason to be still using them.

*I could rant on and on about the injustices perpetuated on society by the use of Microsoft/Apple products, there's just no good reason to be still using them.*

RawMustard, it seems to me that you are committing the fatal flaw
of seeing the world through your narrow perpective. We all do it,
so you are not alone.

You and others might be tinkerers of software, prepared to spend
endless hours finding solutions. People like me and millions of
others, including Govt, simply arn't interested. Consumers today
don't want a product, they want a solution which works.

So if you want that solution in Govt, offer the service. When
Govt does a deal, they might pay 50$ for a Windows programme, for they are buying bulk. Given that it costs them well over 50$ an
hour to employ a teacher, its hardly worth their while, having
thousands of teachers tinkering with Linux, at 50$ plus an hour.

To me a computer is a means to an end, not a means that I want to
stuff around with. I have other interests. If a couple of hundred
$ worth of software can provide that solution efficiently, then
I am happy to pay it, which leaves me time to get on with more
interesting and important matters.

You're making an assumption Yabby.

>>You and others might be tinkerers of software, prepared to spend
endless hours finding solutions<<

Your assumption is that if you instal non-Microsoft/Apple software, you are required to "tinker". This is not necessarily the case.

I am profoundly non-technical, and have been running Linux systems for over a year, without any problems. I use no more computer-awareness than I needed to run a Windows system, the most complex task being the ability to download files from the internet.

Almost everything is "automatic". There are regular updates to the software components, the handling of which needs nothing more than clicking "yes" and entering your password. They rarely ask you to restart your computer. I've never had a blue screen of death, or its equivalent. It handles everything I need - even initiating a connection to the internet using a brand-new wireless broadband modem (that the supplier doesn't "support" under Linux) is simple - in fact vastly simpler than under Windows.

For those residual "Windows only" applications, I have installed Sun's VirtualBox. It quarantines an old Windows XP SP1, that is theoretically "out of date", but happily runs MYOB, Internet Explorer (insisted on by the Tax Office) and shares files with my main system.

I have a stable system. There are more recent versions of the operating system available, but I don't need to bother myself with them. Open Office does everything that I used to do in Word, Excel, Powerpoint etc. And reads and writes in their format when you need to. I am increasingly using Google for diaries, email etc. The first time you receive an email containing the phrase "shall we meet at 10.30 on Tuesday", and notice that Google is already offering to put the meeting in your diary... that's when you know that being a geek is absolutely not a requirement any longer.

So, if you will allow me to quote:

>>it seems to me that you are committing the fatal flaw
of seeing the world through your narrow perpective. We all do it,
so you are not alone.<<

>>Isn't it convenient that government continue to aid and abet this hegemony through our education system and its many online departments.

Why are we encouraging and paying extortion money to a huge external corporation that provides an inferior product, treats its customers like thieves and has been convicted of monopolistic crimes, when we have a perfectly viable, immensely superior product which is free of all shackles including fiscal ones.<<

RawMustard,

We shouldn't automatically be buying MS products, I agree. But Government procurement is still steeped in the buy-in-bulk mentality. What's more important to them is maintaining continuity with their past policies than looking to the future. It's a big thing for them to change tack to open source although the idea has already been floated. The PS is also quite lazy, so there's another major impediment to positive change.

The truth is there are people in Government that are using open source products for their specialist needs. But the spine of the IT system is all Microsoft.

They say the Public Service moves at two speeds: glacially and like greased lightning. If history's any guide, when they finally do get out of the ice age, they'll move very fast. I hope.

Yabby,

It sounds more like you don't want to mess around with different software. You seem to have taken the Microsoft bait that their products are better because they say so. While I've not used Open Office, I've heard from a number of sources (now Pericles) that it's just as good as MS. Microsoft thieved other company's market share and ideas and open source is doing it back to them. Love it.

*it seems to me that you are committing the fatal flaw
of seeing the world through your narrow perpective. We all do it,
so you are not alone*

Pericles, those are indeed very wise words! :)

You are telling me about one single computer, used in the last
year.Yours. Should that kind of statistic give me the confidence to
agree that tens of thousands of Govt computers should all convert
tomorrow?

You might agree that conflicts in software can waste huge amounts
of time and money.

When I examined the idea of using various email programmes, the first
thing that I did was to go and do a bit of net surfing, to read what
many others had experienced with those programmes. Yes, some were
happy, but a great deal were frustrated by constant conflicts
and with nobody being paid, there was nobody to fix them.

So my point remains. That is the kind of service that a Govt dept
would need, before installing software that runs their computers
and I doubt if they will get it for free.

Yabby: "You are telling me about one single computer, used in the last
year."

I live at both ends of the scale. In my day job I manage the computer affairs for a largish organisation (several hundred employees). It is all based on Linux. Suffices to say it does a much better job than Windows in most ways and worse in a couple - well one really.

At the other end of the scale I am the "computer support" of last resort for my neighbours and relatives. At the very low end, where I am asked to "just get me a computer so I can communicate with the grandkids", I now install some form of Linux. It doesn't get viruses, it doesn't suffer from "bit rot" (ie get slower over the years), it plays well with other Microsoft machines, it is rock solid reliable and if something does go wrong gives clear error messages like "A timeout occurred when taking to the SMTP server while downloading the body of the email" instead of "Error 0AE04579012, Task Failed". It is also drop dead easy to setup. You just need a CD and a internet connection. No hunting around for applications, no credit cards, no agonising over whether they are worth the money. Something like 20,000 of them are all nicely categorised on the menu, covering ever possible category, all virus free.

So quite the opposite of what you say, this "expert" says is less fiddly to install and easier to maintain in the long run. The only downside is it doesn't run Microsoft applications like high end games, like MYOB, and like ASP. As Pericles says you can run some them in a virtual machine, but to me that comes under your category of "fiddly".

Finally, for what it is worth I current have a support ticket raised with Microsoft. The machine concerned is currently unusable because by a bug introduced by one of Microsoft's updates. This has happened to me on a couple of occasions over the decades with Microsoft systems. It has never happened with open source systems.

You read far too much into what I say, Yabby.

>>Should that kind of statistic give me the confidence to
agree that tens of thousands of Govt computers should all convert
tomorrow?<<

I was simply addressing your proposition that you need to be a software tinkerer to use anything but Microsoft. Which I know from personal experience to be untrue.

Linux is not a solution that will fully find a home in Government departments for a while, that is true. However the reason has nothing to do with technical issues, incompatibilities or software "conflicts", but with simple organizational dynamics.

There is at this moment an army of good folk working in Government who owe their livelihoods to the presence of Microsoft software. Take it away, and their marketability disappears overnight. So they will cling on as long as they can, fighting tooth and nail against any change.

As you'd expect.

But one day, possibly even quite soon, a Department will add up all the Microsoft-related costs, and compare them against the Open Source offerings. Which, as you have understood from this thread, are gaining in popularity and awareness every day.

Those costs will include the software itself, the costs of any re-education or training, and the costs of support both current and future.

One of the aspects of Microsoft license costs is that you can guarantee that they will continue to crop up on a regular basis. Redmond needs to be fed. While on the other hand, the cost of Open Source support will inevitably decrease over the years, as the first burst of unfamiliarity is overcome. At that point, the value of having a veritable host of Open Source developers, all collaborating to make stuff better (rather than find ways to earn more money for the corporation) will become highly visible.

Listen, I'm not trying to persuade anyone. I've been around long enough to know that people - and government departments - make decisions for their own reasons and at their own pace.

But the tide has turned. At some time it will, inevitably, wash away the Microsoft sandcastle.

*I was simply addressing your proposition that you need to be a software tinkerer to use anything but Microsoft. Which I know from personal experience to be untrue.*

OTOH Pericles, I am fully aware that you are a highly intelligent
fellow, so what might seem easy to you, might not be so easy for
the average Govt user.

The actual cost of software, would be peanuts, compared to the
cost of labour. Where Gates made his money was by the sheer
understanding of the value of being "the standard". Apple could
have done it, but sheer ignorance on their behalf, back in the
days when Windows 3 was launched, cost them that role.

*At that point, the value of having a veritable host of Open Source developers, all collaborating to make stuff better (rather than find ways to earn more money for the corporation) will become highly visible.*

Oh I am all for the competition Pericles. My point there is that
many simply don't understand marketing. Consumers/Govts don't
want to buy products, they want to buy solutions. There is a big
difference! If somebody can put together a package, using open
source software, to market those solutions, then there will be a
ready market.

My brother works for a Govt dept and he dislikes MS. But it sounds
like the way they make decisions about computers, has more to do with
annual budgets. If there is money left in the budget at the end
of the year, the computers are replaced, wether they need them or
not!

Yabby: "Consumers/Govts don't want to buy products, they want to buy solutions."

Perhaps. But that doesn't stop some of them moving to open source anyway. For example, the French Police:

http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars

Or the entire Brazilian government:

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39196592,00.htm
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/EXTEDEVELOPMENT/0,,contentMDK:22407934~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:559460,00.html

As you can see from the second link, the Brazilian's have been at it from 2003, still haven't pulled it off, but are persisting anyway. The French did a much better job of it.

Yabby: "If somebody can put together a package, using open source software, to market those solutions, then there will be a ready market."

Ever heard of Red Hat, Ubuntu, Novell? That is exactly what they do.

I suspect the problem Brazil struck is many people simply don't want to move away from what they are familiar with. And fair enough, as a million little things change. But some are for the better.

A little story: what finally pushed me away from Microsoft is they discourage backups. OK, you are saying WHAT? Well, they do. The problem isn't the backup. It is the restore. You see, Microsoft is worried you might take a backup and restore it on another machine, and thus have 2 copies of something you paid for once.

If you are using Linux a simple and reliable way to backup the system is just to take an image of the file system. Restore a Linux image onto even vaguely similar hardware and it will run fine, and be exactly as it was before because everything - programs and data, *is* exactly as it was before. But restore a Microsoft image, and it will check the serial numbers of all your devices, notice they have all changed, decide it has been pirated and die, maybe immediately or maybe a month later.

(cont'd...)

(...cont'd)

The Microsoft sanctioned way of restoring your software is to reinstall it, go through the activation procedure, then restore the data files from the backup. But invariably, you can't restore some data, either because you didn't know where the application stores some of its data when you did the backup, or because it is simply impossible. For example the Windows Registry stores data from all sorts of programs, including the Windows Operating system itself, and in particular details about the hardware. Restore the registry from a sufficiently different machine and it won't boot. As a consequence, you can't restore the millions of little settings you didn't write down.

Rinse, lather and repeat for other software Microsoft charges a lot of money for - like Exchange. Exchange is, without a doubt, the best way I know of to be certain you will loose your corporate email. And one of the reasons is because you can't back it up. But oh, you say, you just you can re-install it and restore your data. The problem is, that procedure doesn't always work. Why not? Well, as soon as you start running Exchange, Microsoft starts patching it - as you know. This invariably means the software that writes the backup isn't the same as the software on your original CD's, which means there is a chance the backup isn't compatible.

If you are in the know, use the right (Non-Microsoft) tools to do the backup, all these problems can be overcome. But it is ... tedious. Handling this tedium while the entire company breathing down your back because they have nothing else to do with the computers are down is enough to put you off Microsoft for life.

*Ever heard of Red Hat, Ubuntu, Novell?*

Rstuart, clearly they are not doing such a good job, or your list
of examples would be longer then just the French police and Brazil.

*A little story: what finally pushed me away from Microsoft is they discourage backups.*

You make my point for me here. I don't blame MS for being concerned
about their intellectual property rights, we know what happens when
they lose control, as in the music industry. But in your case,
MS ignored your needs to a solution in terms of backup, it has cost
them $.

In fact we all, including me, have a "I hate Microsoft"story to tell.
The very arrogance which Apple displayed back in the 90s and MS
took advantage of to get where they are today, they now commonly
display, thus the many protests. I don't blame anyone for that.

So I am all for competition, the more the better. But it brings
me back to my original point to Rawmustard, that it would be a bit
early for Govt depts to rush to alternatives and as you show,
not too many have done it so far. But Pericles is correct, it will
eventually happen.

See the bright side, Gates can't take it with him. Given that he
is the world's largest doner to charitable causes and seems to be
spending his money fairly wisely, rather then giving it to a Catholic
charity which likely will only encourage even more unwanted babies,
at least the money I spend on MS products will eventually land up spent on
a good cause :)

>>My brother works for a Govt dept and he dislikes MS. But it sounds
like the way they make decisions about computers, has more to do with
annual budgets. If there is money left in the budget at the end
of the year, the computers are replaced, wether they need them or
not!<<

Govt departments go through this routine with any expenditure, IT or not. The problem is that departments are given a fixed block of funding on an annual basis. In the context of the operational complexity that some agencies face, it's actually very hard to spend exactly what's been allocated in their annual budget. The biggest threat to an agency is a big underspend in a slow year where it is entirely possible the Government will permanently reduce the allocation for the next year. So agencies do things like put people through training courses, make renovations and change PCs (things they can organise very quickly) in the month or two before the end of the financial year when they can see they're on track for an underspend. It can lead to some perverse outcomes. But, OTOH, it does force a certain budgeting discipline on the agencies. Swings and roundabouts.

I know that you are sincere, Yabby. But it is pretty amazing that you trot out the lines from the Microsoft playbook quite so easily. It shows how deeply they have managed to entrench their message in the minds of the masses.

From "Linux equals tinkering", via "software conflicts waste huge amounts of time and money" through "cost of software is peanuts, compared to the cost of labour", right down to the "Bill Gates is a great bloke, so buying his products must be a Good Thing"

>>Given that [Gates] is the world's largest doner to charitable causes... at least the money I spend on MS products will eventually land up spent on a good cause<<

Like many of the excuses they promulgate, this one is weak on logic.

i) Bill's fortune is in Microsoft stock. So the money he is spending is shareholder money, not Microsoft profits.

ii) If you or your business is keen on providing money to charity, wouldn't you prefer to choose the destination of those donations rather than simply pay the Microsoft tax?

You said this without moving your lips.

>>If a couple of hundred $ worth of software can provide that solution efficiently, then I am happy to pay it, which leaves me time to get on with more interesting and important matters.<<

You must be that rare bird who doesn't have to spend many frustrating hours whenever the system decides to die on you.

And I had to chuckle over this.

>>So I am all for competition, the more the better.<<

If you mean it, then you and Microsoft are poles apart. They hate competition, and will do anything to eliminate it.

But you are right, all of that is irrelevant. Microsoft achieved their control over the PC operating system many years ago, and they aren't going to give up without a fight.

One thing is for certain, though. The battle is no longer about product, or product performance, or product security, or product features, or product stability.

It is about how far you can stretch market control before it snaps.

Pericles, I went through the "I hate Microsoft" phase, then one day
it dawned on me that emotion had overtaken reason and I was the loser,
not them. So I will endevour to explain it to you, but it might
take a couple of posts, not all written right now, as I need to get
going soon.

I'll also separate what I've spent on operating system, the net etc
and business software.

I refused to own a computer which ran on MS-Dos, I loved those early
Apples in the early 90s, but refused to join the Apple mononopoly,
for if you bought one, everything HAD to be Apple.

So in 94, when Windows 3 was released I bought my first computer.
I had to buy Windows 3 separately for that, it cost 46.50 $.

The next thing that I upgraded to was Windows 98, about 5 years
later, again when I upgraded computers. I went through my " I
hate Microsoft" phase and refused to upgrade, until 4 years ago,
when I bought an Acer with Windows XP. It truly was a huge
improvement over Windows 98.

I was told that manufacturers only pay around 50$ for a license,
but lets say its 100$. 3 operating systems have lasted me 15
years, so about 5 years each. That's 20$ a year. Then Windows
Explorer and Outlook Express were all thrown in for free.

Given that a cup of coffee now costs 4$ in many places, I
don't think that 20$ a year for my computer operating system, is
that unreasonable.

When I eventually upgraded to XP, I had to frankly admit that it
was far superior to the old 98 and yes, I had been a stubborn mug
not to upgrade earlier.

tbc

Yabby: "or your list of examples would be longer then just the French police and Brazil."

The list of examples could have filled the entire post, but two were enough to provide counter examples to your claim "That is the kind of service that a Govt dept would need, before installing software that runs their computers and I doubt if they will get it for free."

They were also my attempt at balance: one that was a wild success, and one that is on a rocky path. I did omit another kind entirely. And that are the ones that don't occur at all. They are usually very large organisations nosily threatening to go down the open source path, but then end up staying with Microsoft. Apparently it is a great way to beat down the price.

You are also wrong in saying large organisations aren't suitable for open source. If you do your computing "in house", you will have dedicated IT staff. These people have come up through universities, comfortable with Unix. Thus you find these large organisations tend to use Unix heavily. Not that they have much choice. Any computer bigger than a PC, from Sun pizza boxes to IBM mainframes and Hitachi supercomputers, don't run Windows. It is some variant of Unix or nothing. Thus for example, large financial organisations are usually Unix shops. Places like the New York Stock Exchange, for example.

Microsoft's primary market is people like you. Not so small that their computing support is in some sense outsourced, not big enough to employ professional computer people to develop their own computer systems in house. The relatively small amounts Microsoft charges means it simply isn't worth the effort to discover if something available for free might do the same job, because even if it did the change over would be hugely expensive.

That in itself is perfectly reasonable. But you seem unhappy with that justification, and want to defend Microsoft by saying its products or support are somehow better that open source. That hasn't been true for a while now.

I wasn't going to reply to Yabby's post after I wrote mine, well, because it just isn't worth debating the arguments put forward by windows drones. (Sorry Yabby, but it's the most correct way to describe most windows users who are locked into a mind frame of ignorance.) After reading his reply's I felt perhaps I should.

Now lets look at the tinkering aspect of computers between Linux and Windows which is Yabby's biggest gripe it would seem. It was the main reason I switched all those years ago.

Let's take Yabby's request for an alternative mail program to Outlook.
A Windows user needs to first research an alternative, this include ease of use, ease of installation, ongoing costs, initial pricing and licensing terms.
Once a program is decided upon, the user will either have to download the program from the internet or purchase the program from a traditional bricks and mortar store. Upon purchase the user will then proceed to attempt installation of the chosen program. Before the user can complete the installation of said program, the user will be required to answer a myriad of confusing questions they are usually ill-equipped to answer, the most daunting of which is the agreement to a Eula written by lawyers simply to confuse and remove rights from the user. In my experience 75% of computer users fail to reach this point due to the complexity(or as Yabby calls it, Tinkering) of installing commercial software on a Windows machine.

Time taken to legally install an alternative mail program in windows? Well, hours in my experience.

Continued...

Now lets take the same situation on my child's computer running Debian Linux, the Parent of Ubuntu Linux.

My child decides to change email programs from the standard Evolution program to something else. Her first step is to type into a run input "aptitude search email" a window pops up listing several available free as in beer and free as in freedom programs. Thunderbird catches her curiosity. She then types "aptitude show thunderbird" into the same window which gives a detailed description of the said program for her perusal. She decides she likes the sound of this program and decides to install it. She types "aptitude install thunderbird", she is then asked for an administrator password; she types this password and in approximately sixty seconds her program is installed with no further input from her.

Installing a complete operating system in linux is not much more complex and only needs to be done once in your lifetime.
My current operating system is seven years old and is current and up to date, it's been host to several new computers in that time. That's right, I've changed computers every year for the last seven years and still use the same installed system I installed seven years ago. This is not even possible using windows or Apple.

Continued...

The only reason Linux is a tinkerers wet dream, is because Linux users are "legally allowed" to tinker to their hearts content, if they "choose to do so".

Windows is a tinkerers nightmare because Windows users are "forced" to do so when they would prefer not to! They "legally are not allowed without paying money" to tinker past the complexity of installing their systems.

So Yabby, please refrain from claiming Linux is only for tinkerers, because you clearly have no experience in making such claims!

And as far as solutions go, How much tinkering does a windows user have to endure to install a complete Office solution in Windows?

In Linux if it wasn't auto installed when getting a new system, I simple type "aptitude install openoffice". In sixty seconds I'm good to go. Same for groupware solutions and anything else you could imagine.
No tinkering here, not one bit and many good solutions to choose from!

Oh and did I mention spyware and viruses are a non issue on Linux? Much, Much tinkering there on Windows huh?

Oops forgot to add my conclusion.

And it simply goes like this:

If you're not into to Tinkering, then clearly as I've demonstrated, Windows is not for you!

Both my children have been using Linux from the get go and you know what, They hate Windows for it's complexity and restrictiveness. They think their teachers are on drugs, The Microsoft Drug of Illusion and Ignorance.

Yabby

My experience echoes that of Pericles and Rstuart, less so with Raw Mustard because I believe in recycling rather than consuming. My PC system is 9 years old - I converted to Ubuntu Linux about two years ago. The only thing I am likely to change this year is the monitor - really want a flat screen, meanwhile I am not adding to the trash heaps of consumable goods and will donate my old monitor.

Also I am free to donate the money I safe to a variety of charities, knowing full well where my hard-earned dollars are going. I also have donated to the Linux people - small business needs all the help it can get, not so the monopolies like Microsoft and Apple.

Finally, you asked for advice, people have gone out of their way to help and explain to you the alternatives to Microsoft - maybe you could at least thank the people who have offered such good advice.

Back to my points to Pericles, I'll come to the other points in time,
one by one.

As for business software, in 94 I was operating a seafood export
company as well as a farm. I decided that I needed a database, a
spreadsheet and a word programe. Individually the quotes were
around 1500$ for all three, from various companies, Gates packaged up the lot for around 500$. That was Office 94. I bought it.
I updated it to Office 2000 some 6-7 years later, when one of those
update deals were done, for around 3-400$, IIRC.

When the GST came along, I had to get more serious about paperwork
and computers, so first I bought MYOB for a few hundred $, but
at that time it was simply not designed to process the kinds of
businesses that I was running, so to the back of the cupboard it went.
So I tried that common American programme that many use, can't think
of the name right now. That was not much good either. I needed software that adjusted to my business and the way I ran it, not
the other way around.

So I invested in some books to learn how to use Office 2000 properly,
did a bit of tinkering and set up a simple system to do my BAS, which
I still use today. So lets say 1000$ spent with MS, over 15 years
of use, that's 66$ a year, hardly huge money.

What I have learned, is the value of being part of the standard.
My brother hates MS, so years ago he installed Eudora on his and
my mothers computers. When sending digital photos became commonplace,
I was sharing photos with friends around the world, but not my family,
as they got sheets of numbers.

I use all sorts of devices on the farm, which have a driver. From
sheep weighing crates, to microscopes which I can now view on my
computer screen, all have drivers for MS. Many now have drivers for
Apple, but I am yet to notice many having drivers for Linux.

*You must be that rare bird who doesn't have to spend many frustrating hours whenever the system decides to die on you*

Pericles, I had lots of problems with Windows 98, but once I
became less stubborn and switched to XP, things improved dramatically
and no, I never have had frustrating hours since then, apart from
Windows 7 not including Outlook Express. I still think that they
have made a huge mistake there.

*They hate competition, and will do anything to eliminate it.*

Pericles most large companies do. But I have to be realistic and
find the rippoff by Canon and HP, when I buy one of their printers,
far more extreme. I have a drawer full of replacement inks here.
Next they invade my computer, to see what inks I am using, without
request. 5mls of printer ink for 25$ is a frigging rippoff!
Then of course when the warranty expires and the printer dies, the
new printer uses a different ink cartrige. I've spent far more on ink, then I ever have on software.

*You are also wrong in saying large organisations aren't suitable for open source.*

Rstuart, I said that Govt is not so suitable for open source. In
many cases, like large corporations, efficiently run, with a great
IT backup system, it would make perfect sense.

But show me where Govt, with its many departments, commonly not
the smartest staff, is run with that kind of efficiency. Every school
these days, has its cluster of computers. So for Govt it makes sense
to be part of the standard and the reality is that MS is still the
standard.

RawMustard, sadly I am just a humble peasant, so not as smart as
your kids. This week I ordered one of these:

http://www.dealsdirect.com.au/p/usb-digital-microscope-up-200x-magnification/

Mine is down at the post office, awaiting pickup. they are seemingly
sold out now, but I checked the specifications this morning on the
website and oh dear, only Windows drivers.

So to overcome these kinds of problems, best I just stick to what
is common. I'll let you fanatical types do the tinkering and
creating competition for MS.

Severin, all that saving the planet is of course wonderful, but I do
remind myself that 220'000 new extra people a day are born, over
and above those who die. So resisting trading in your old computer
might make you feel great, but I don't think its going to make a
huge difference, quite frankly.

For the record, if you read my earlier posts, I did in fact thank
rstuart for his assistance and even tried some of his suggestions.

Yabby: "I checked the specifications this morning on the website and oh dear, only Windows drivers."

The reason they only offer Windows drivers is Linux supports the device as standard since October 2008.

http://www.marshalltradecorp.com/coDe/misc/usb_microscope_linux.html

Why is it supported? Well the chip it uses internally is used by a lot devices. In the Windows world this is hidden. Every OEM re-badges the things, supply their own re-badged software that only works with their specific device. I can only guess why they do this. Maybe so they can claim their product is somehow better, with no easy way for you to check. Maybe so their software can stick their logos and brand name under your nose every time you use the device.

Under Linux the situation is different. The driver is written by volunteers. They aren't about to engage in those sorts of games of course, as it just creates more work for them. Thus the one Linux driver will just work with every device that uses that same chip internally.

You will probably find this product is identical under the hood:

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270502851295

As you can see, it is selling for AUD$47, delivered. There is also a 400x version:

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270496122455

So in this case, you may well have been better off with Linux. At the very least if you move machines and have mislaid the driver CD, you can still use it. And since it outputs data via a standard Linux subsystem, all Linux software will support it - not just what is supplied by the manufacturer.

That said, a cautious person won't just assume Linux would support it. You have to spend 15 minutes with Google to check. And if it doesn't, you are out of luck - you have to find one with a different chip set. As you said, some will find this far too fiddly compared with just using Windows. But as you can also see, knowing a little more about what you are buying often has its own rewards.

*You have to spend 15 minutes with Google to check. And if it doesn't, you are out of luck - you have to find one with a different chip set. As you said, some will find this far too fiddly compared with just using Windows.*

Rstuart, I doubt very much if those devices will do 200 or 400
magnification of any usefullness, but they should do 50, which is
all I really need for most things. I read the first URL which you
posted, now it seems that in some cases there is a lot of tinkering,
checking etc, with each device. So yes, for me that would be too
fiddly.

There are reasons for that. If I lived in the city, spent most of
my time in an office, perhaps I would want to tinker too :).

But between a farm, a workshop and a house, I have that many things
with that many manuals and problems to solve, I already do huge
amounts of tinkering nearly every day, so some things I want to
outsource, let others figure it all out. I just want the thing to
run!

I just wish that there were more common standards, life would be
that much easier. In my workshop for instance, I need to carry
various bolts with various threads. There is Whitworth, then of
cource UNC and UNF, then metric fine and metric course. That is just
bolts!

With tractors, I have a John Deere. One of the main reasons I bought
it, was because everyone around here has a John Deere, so for parts,
breakdowns, both are easily solved. Those with exotic machines can
be stuffed for weeks, no parts sorry and no mechanic who knows about
them.

So there are numerous examples, where sticking to the standard
pays off in my situation. But then I'm not in an office all day, staring at a computer in front of me, even bored perhaps.

Yabby: "I read the first URL which you posted, now it seems that in some cases there is a lot of tinkering, checking etc, with each device. So yes, for me that would be too fiddly"

Indeed it would. But my point was as of October 2008 the driver was included as a standard part of the Linux. So, no fiddling is required after that date.

Yabby: "There is Whitworth, then of cource UNC and UNF, then metric fine and metric course. That is just bolts!"

Don't get me started.

I think it is safe to blame the US for the current state of affairs. Had they had the spine to move over to metric when the rest of us did, ours would have been the last generation that had to put up with this crap, for nuts and bolts anyway.

Yikes, Yabby.

I hadn't realized quite how deeply you had supped the Microsoft Koolaid. You are word perfect.

>>Given that a cup of coffee now costs 4$ in many places, I
don't think that 20$ a year for my computer operating system, is
that unreasonable<<

So true. But what about the cost of your latest move to Windows 7? Including the cost of installing all your programs again, from scratch?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd446674%28WS.10%29.aspx

>>lets say 1000$ spent with MS, over 15 years of use, that's 66$ a year, hardly huge money.<<

Absolutely.

However, anti-virus software is a necessity. After all, IE and Outlook are the major targets for viruses.

Makes it just a little more significant than a few cups of coffee. But not too much more. They know how much pain they can safely inflict.

The messages you have subliminally assimilated are exactly what makes Microsoft so wealthy. You are prepared to pay a regular amount to them, in exchange for some - mostly illusory - peace of mind.

So, you're happy with Microsoft. That's great. You are in the company of many millions of others who have come to rely upon Microsoft to tell them how smart they are for buying their products. Over and over again.

>>it makes sense to be part of the standard and the reality is that MS is still the standard<<

That's what they would love you to believe.

>>I just wish that there were more common standards, life would be
that much easier.<<

Microsoft are passionate devotees of "standards" too.

So long as they are their own.

Anything that looks like an open standard - i.e., one where everybody works on a level playing field - is anathema to Redmond.

If you'd like, I can post some interesting information on Microsoft's pursuit of ratification of OOXML as a "standard".

But it is mostly documented by what Microsoft encourages you to you term "fanatics", so it is unlikely to have any impact.

>>I'll let you fanatical types do the tinkering and creating competition for MS.<<

And I'll let you continue paying your Microsoft tax.

*So true. But what about the cost of your latest move to Windows 7? Including the cost of installing all your programs again, from scratch?*

Pericles, I am not even sure how much less they would charge, without
a copy of Windows 7. I'll ask my supplier, next time I see him.
As to programmes and files, his offsider came out, she did it all
for me. There is a cable that connects the two machines, but for
Office I needed by original discs, which I still had. Say it adds
100$ to the machine, over 5 years I'm back to 20 bucks a year.

Anti virus, yes I used to pay CA for VET, 50$ a year. Now it seems
MS offer a free programme, so I now use that.

*The messages you have subliminally assimilated are exactly what makes Microsoft so wealthy. You are prepared to pay a regular amount to them, in exchange for some - mostly illusory - peace of mind.*

Err so what if they are wealthy? I have never suffered from envy.
For me its about value for money and convenience. I want to use
my computer for fun, for business etc, for that what I pay is
basically peanuts.

*Microsoft are passionate devotees of "standards" too.
So long as they are their own.*

Indeed. They are acting like many large corporates do, driven on
by super fund managers who want a larger paycheck. So we have Govt
regulators to prevent them being too greedy, then of course the
army of anti microsoft people like Rawmustard, yourself and others,
who are passionate about them not succeeding. So why should I worry? :)

But you have got me curious now, so one day when I buy a laptop,
I might just do the exercise and see how well it matches up with
Linux etc. Meantime there is no good reason why my 10 year old
copy of Office, should not do another 10 years on this machine,
or the next machine.

Yabby: "Meantime there is no good reason why my 10 year old copy of Office, should not do another 10 years on this machine, or the next machine."

Actually, there is a reason why it won't.

With every release of Office, Microsoft changes the file formats it uses, so no older version can read it. But after a few months Microsoft in their infinite generosity releases a plugin for the previous version of Office that lets it read the new format - but only for the previous version of office.

Microsoft doesn't sell old versions of office, and you can't buy a second hand one as Microsoft's license forbids it. So over time, if a growing organisation doesn't regularly upgrade all their copies office they will end up producing documents some parts of the company can't read. Obviously enough that ends up being intolerable.

Microsoft has developed a particularly effective way of exploiting this at Universities. At the start of each year they give away time bombed copies to the new students. These copies work for 6 months or so, then the students must pay for them. Seems like a harmless enough promotion, until you realise the Uni's start getting assignments they can't read. So they upgrade, then start issuing documents the older students can't read. So they upgrade, then start emailing resumes to companies that can't read them.

It is very clever or insidious, depending on your point of view.

There is a way off the treadmill. Use Open Office. It is free, does the same job as office, and will be updated to read the newer office formats sooner than the old versions of office.

I naively used to think people would get the sh1ts with this and get off the treadmill. After all, there has been no significant new features since Office 95 or so. But you got to hand it to Microsoft. They keep the level of pain tolerable. Everyone seems to think paying for the new version is less painful than retraining everybody to use the alternative.

*Actually, there is a reason why it won't.*

Rstuart, that remains to be seen. Changing the standard is easier
said then done and doc and xls are still the standard.

I've so far only had two cases where it was an issue. The docx file
was automatically opened by Windows 7. The secretary who tried to
send out xlsx files, as I don't think she knew how to change her
new programme, was told by a bunch of farmers that she would just
have to fax out the information. BTW that company went broke soon
afterwards.

More and more companies are now sending out info by pdf files, for
of course the reader is free.

I doubt if my accountant will lose the ability to open xls files.
Database files are all internal here, so I'll watch the story unfold
with interest and it certainly won't affect my accounting system.

So I should remain at around 20$ a year as my MS contribution.

I wonder how many times Pericles can drive over the Sydney Harbour
bridge for that :)

No-one is trying to convert you, Yabby. From experience, I know that it would be easier to introduce runner to Wicca.

If you are prepared to pay the tax, fine. If you are prepared to let your PC supplier do your upgrade in exchange for cash, fine.

>>As to programmes and files, his offsider came out, she did it all
for me.<<

To most folk, reloading all their programs - often from the original discs - was a non-trivial task. You must have a very simple system indeed. Far simpler than mine. How much were you charged for the exercise?

The reality is that you end up arguing only with yourself.

Because what you will be unable to do is convince people who have already experienced the freedom-from-Microsoft that open source systems bring, that they are by definition "tinkerers" and "fanatics".

We merely share a dislike of being taken for a ride. Especially when it is presented as being Good For Us.

And of course In Our Own, Best Interests.

*From experience, I know that it would be easier to introduce runner to Wicca.*

ROFL Pericles. I really isn't that bad :) I do indeed change my
mind on things and freely admit to having once been a MS hater.
In the end however, reason has to dominate emotion and when I looked
at it rationally, it was my loss, not their loss. I just see this
all from my perspective, which is quite different to your perspective,
which was my original point to RawMustard.

*How much were you charged for the exercise?*

Nothing extra, for when she delivered the computer, the bill was
already written out. I asked her to give me a hand, moving the stuff
that I wanted to move and she was happy to do that. The real problem
was not the software, but the Telstra mobile modem, which for some
reason refused to accept the new computer. The Telstra helpline is
not the best either.

But once again, when buying a computer, my perspective would be
quite different to yours in the city. Its in my interest that we
have somebody in the region, who lives here and sells, services
computers. These two people have been working hard, trying to set
up their business and have a good name so far. So I saw one of them
down the street, mentioned that I wanted a new computer and gave
her a figure to work with, that I was prepared to spend. They can't
make a living by volume, but they can do it through great service.

Now yes, I could have gone to the city, haggled over every last
cent etc. That would mean that people like these two would simply
close up shop and not exist here. That would not be in my interest,
for when I need a spare cable, or have a problem, need some advice
etc.

That is the point really. My perspective is quite different to
yours. .

You can stop now, Yabby. We all know where you are coming from. There's no need to apologize.

>>when she delivered the computer, the bill was already written out. I asked her to give me a hand, moving the stuff that I wanted to move and she was happy to do that<<

All power to the folk who look after your computing needs. And all power to you for generously supporting them.

Unfortunately, it cuts right across your previous "anti-tinkering" argument, since these lovely people clearly did the tinkering on your behalf. So all your rabbiting on about loving a tinker-free life with Microsoft was simply code for "I outsource my tinkering".

And there's absolutely no shame in that, for either you or for them. You both get what you want.

You still fall into the Microsoft-Koolaid trap, though, by suggesting that people who don't use Microsoft are "haters".

>>I do indeed change my mind on things and freely admit to having once been a MS hater.<<

Add this to your other epithets - "tinkerers" and "fanatics" - and a picture starts to build.

>>In the end however, reason has to dominate emotion<<

Your "reason" is that your supplier only delivers Microsoft solutions, and performs the necessary "tinkering" on your behalf. Which, as I said, is all perfectly fine.

But the emotion, as evidenced by your sneers above, is also predominantly manufactured emotion. Manufactured by you.

Enjoy Windows 7. And whatever replacement for Outlook Express that you find.

I strongly suspect, however, that you will succumb, and pay the tax.

Do let us know, won't you?

*So all your rabbiting on about loving a tinker-free life with Microsoft was simply code for "I outsource my tinkering".*

Well that is partly true. The other part is that since I sorted out
how to use Office for my BAS etc, there is virtually no tinkering,
just the same repeat every 3 months. Next is that whilst Windows 98
had lots of problems, XP was pretty well problem free, so more no
tinkering. So far Windows 7 looks pretty good, apart from their
fatal mistake of excluding Outlook Express. But yes, I want somebody
within phone reach, that if there is a problem, they can fix it.
If I buy some new gizmo, I don't want to jump through hoops, to
check if there are drivers for some other operating system or not.

On a farm I likely have far more big toys to play with, then you
in your office, so it makes sense to oursource some of the tinkering :)

Given the various posts, I don't think its unreasonable to call
RawMustand an anti Microsoft fanatic. So is my brother. Rstuart
OTOH, can commonly see both sides of an argument, all credit to
him. You seem to just hate Microsoft :)

*Do let us know, won't you?*

I sure will. Meantime you let us know, what you spend a year in
crossing the harbour bridge won't you?

Yabby Wrote:
"I don't think its unreasonable to call
RawMustand an anti Microsoft fanatic."

Thankyou, but let me just defend myself a little here. I'm not so much anti Microsoft, I'm anti getting royally shafted by criminal, unethical, and morally corrupt corporations. These are many, other than Microsoft.

You see, the difference between people like me and people like you. Is that people like me actually give a damn about the treatment of our fellow man. We see the damage done to society by theses corrupt organisations and take action to stem their filth. People like you on the other hand, don't give a rats as long as it's beneficial to you alone, quite selfish really.

See how easy it is for two people to play the ad hominem game, but I digress.

Anyway, after all this Yabby, if you ever decide to join the ranks of caring people and request help with your computing, I'll still offer my wisdom if I can see it will benefit you. A tip for free with your Windoze 7 adventures. A smear of KY helps the Windoze tax go in easier, enjoy your tinkering :)

Just to add some exciting news on the linux front.
Announcements like these are what drive me to use and promote Linux, Yabby. It's cooperation like this that moves us forward and into freedom of our computing experiences and knowledge, these are very exciting times for open source advocates. Soon Microsoft, Apple and other stalwarts will either have to join in(can't see it) or fade into insignificance.

Just imagine a device that does everything and is open to everyone to improve upon, can you see the benefits to all people?

This is really exciting :)

http://www.osnews.com/story/22875/Nokia_Intel_Merge_Moblin_Maemo_Into_MeeGo

You genuinely don't get it, do you Yabby.

>>You seem to just hate Microsoft :)<<

I did a quick shuffle through my posts here, and I cannot for the life of me see where I have said anything that gives you the impression that I hate Microsoft. In fact, I have been very careful to look at your situation entirely dispassionately - something you appear unable to do.

Where, for example, are the sneers that compare to your accusations of "tinkerers". Or the clear suggestion that anyone who disagrees with Microsoft's product strategy must by definition be filled with "hate" and "fanaticism"?

These are your words, Yabby. It amazes me that you feel it necessary to make these accusations, since you obviously owe Microsoft nothing. Where's the benefit?

The reality is that your observations on tinkering, hatred and fanaticism reflect precisely Microsoft's defensive posturing against open source software. At this level, you present indistinguishably from a Microsoft employee, drone or shill.

I am sure that you are none of these, which makes your position a little odd. Even people who have "big toys to play with" should try to keep an open mind.

>>Meantime you let us know, what you spend a year in crossing the harbour bridge won't you?<<

I use public transport, either bus or train. Neither has any bearing on my expense on software, as I would have to pay it anyway, even if I used Windows.

Or are you suggesting that the two expenses are somehow related?

Pericles

I think the answer to Yabby's curmudgeonly attitude is very simple:

He doesn't like to admit he may be wrong. Childish, yes, but nonetheless true. One can see this attitude in other threads - for example his simplistic understanding of biological and environmental factors in human behaviour.

For the same reason a religious person may cling to obviously false beliefs, Yabby needs to cling to his belief that he is superior - to admit to a mistake would bring his world crashing down.

But, that said, Yabby provides a continued source of entertainment and I wouldn't want him to change - all forums need a Yabby, keeps the rest of us sharp.

Cheers

rstuart wrote:
"The reason they only offer Windows drivers is Linux supports the device as standard since October 2008."

Hehehe! Yes rstuart, if only people understood how much tinkering is not required in Linux. If only they would just admit their lack of understanding and ask questions rather than just blindly defend a company who's sole purpose is to make money at any cost and to stifle innovation in the attempt to maintain their monopoly position.

Perhaps Yabby would like to hear from all the people shafted by the likes of HP, Brother, Lexmark, Creative and others when they fail to provide drivers for older hardware on new Windows operating systems, rendering their perfectly good hardware obsolete; thereby forcing their wallets out of their pockets again and again.

Severin wrote:
"My experience echoes that of Pericles and Rstuart, less so with Raw Mustard because I believe in recycling rather than consuming."

All my systems are recycled Severin. My argument was to show the lack of tinkering required to maintain a Linux system. A rolling release system is much easier to administer and maintain than the perpetual yearly reinstall of system, software, drivers and personal settings.
Not to mention the regular security updates to all, what a Windows nightmare that is. As you know, a simple sudo aptitude update && sudo aptitude upgrade, updates the whole system including all software on Linux with no fuss and no rebooting.

My system at home/work is quite complex, encompassing many computers and devices, commercial software is just not up to the task. the tinkering would be a nightmare not to mention the costs.

At last I can catch up here, for I have been tinkering all day,
but with big toys, not office gear.

I did however give my computer guy a call and asked about Linux.
He says that so far he has no consumer call for it, because many
programmes like MYOB and others require Windows and many games simply
arn't available on Linux of Apple. He says that some people do indeed make
a hobby out of hating MS, he seems to have a point there :)

He also mentioned that if one has a problem, its difficult to find
anyone who knows much about it, wheras lots seem to know a fair
bit about MS products.

*We see the damage done to society by theses corrupt organisations and take action to stem their filth.*

Violins playing here Rawmustand, as we give you one halo, a little
tarnished :)

*I cannot for the life of me see where I have said anything that gives you the impression that I hate Microsoft*

Pericles, I was under the impression that you thought that they were ripping
you off. Perhaps you simply intensly dislike what they do.

As I have shown with my figures, I have no reason at all to think
that they are ripping me off. But then I only have a single computer,
not a fleet of them, like you do in your business. I also for the
life of me can't see any good reason to start again and learn how Openoffice
functions, when I already have my old Office 2000 doing my accounts
as I wish. Yes, that took a bit of time and tinkering to figure
out, but now its in place, I'm paying nothing extra per year and
have not, for the last 10 years.

Severin, don't ever try to make a living as a psychologist lol.
You might just go hungry.

Raw Mustard

:-)

Thank for confirming your green footprint. Excellent point with respect to supporting old hardware.

As for tinkering! Hours of my valuable time wasted on Windows maintenance: defragging, cleaning out temp files, eliminating viruses and so on.

AND

I have never faced a blue screen of death with my Linux system.

I believe in a competitive marketplace - monopolies by their nature stagnate innovation, cooperation and freedom of choice.

Yabby, all you needed to say was that you have specialised needs for windows that you have put time and effort into which works for you. That would have been a fair comment, nuff said so to speak :)

There was no need for you to deride a system you are not familiar with, this is how we get into these long and arduous rants :)

So in the end did you find an alternative to doutlook? :P~

As we near the end of this thread, Yabby, there are still two questions that I feel need to be answered at some point.

One is straightforward: did you get around to replacing Outlook Express, or did you simply pay up?

(Incidentally, this gives rise to another thought: what have you been using for email in the meantime...?)

The other is more complicated, and you might like to think about it for a while.

Why are you investing so much time and energy in defending Microsoft?

You clearly have no serious interest in considering alternatives. You can't really be bothered to understand why there are people who prefer those alternatives. And you trot out all the mindless slogans used by Microsoft to denigrate those people, without really thinking them through.

In fact, why did you start this thread in the first place, if you never intended listening to the feedback?

Sorry, that's three questions.

Or four, if you count the one in parentheses.

I just had a quick Google for what other Windows folk have done about the lack of email in Windows 7.

Here are a couple of snippets.

"Unfortunately, the last version of Outlook Express (6.0) was bundled with Internet Explorer 6.0...and Windows 7 will not allow you to install IE 6.0 in order to get Outlook Express. However, if you want to go so far as to install the Windows XP virtual PC within Windows 7, then you can install and run Outlook Express in the XP virtual machine."

Hmmmm. Doesn't exactly meet the "no tinkering" standard, I think.

But I'm really surprised your supplier didn't point it out. It does after all provide your ideal solution - Outlook Express under Windows 7.

This one made me laugh, though.

"Windows 7 has an email client included: See folder \Program Files\Windows Mail\ Within this folder there is a HIDDEN file "WinMail.exe". This is the well-known 'Windows Mail' from Vista. But this program doesn't work. To get it work you need to replace the file 'msoe.dll' in this folder with a version of Vista (you need the same version from Vista: 32-bit or 64-bit). To replace 'msoe.dll' in Windows 7 you need to take ownership of 'msoe.dll'."

And here's an early indicator that we're on the downward slope.

"Here's some beef with WML ... I just upgraded my Vista business laptop to Win7 and now have absolutely no access to all the emails I saved to my hard drive. Not only that, but if I want to send an email, it sends it from live.com and not my Verizon email account or my business website email account. I need to be able to import all my Vista Windows Mail emails and contacts and seemingly have no way to do it. Thanks Microsoft!"

http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7network/thread/6251127f-e8c7-4abf-81ca-b321a4ccbf6d

It is very sensible of you to outsource all this pain, Yabby.

*did you get around to replacing Outlook Express, or did you simply pay up?*

Pericles, I still haven't made a final decision, so meantime I'm
running two email programmes. I'm using Windows Mail to find out
how good or bad it really is. There I have had to change how I used
to file things into folders and use the folder system in IE.
Meantime, as I think I mentioned, when my computer man popped in
the first time, he pushed a couple of buttons or whatever and hey
presto, my old Outlook from Office 2000 worked in XP mode
or something similar. He did say that Outlook is in fact available
to purchase separately in its latest version, something which I did
not see on the MS website.

So short term I'll just use those two and maybe later on, when my
mind is not so focussed on a couple of livestock nutrition
experiments, I'll make a decision. There is really no rush to do
anything, now that those two are working ok.

*Why are you investing so much time and energy in defending Microsoft?*

Hang on, for me OLO is time to relax and unwind lol, it takes my
mind off more complicated challenges that I'm busily solving.
I did in fact try some of Rstuarts suggestions, even mentioned that
if/when I bought a laptop, I might try Linux just for fun, so that
I can compare both systems.

I simply don't see the issue as black and white as many of you do
or the reasons that you give don't affect me in the same way as
they seem to affect you.

IMHO credit where credit is due and it was Gates who broke the
Apple monopoly and through a cheap operating system, enabled the
PC revolution. Clearly hundreds of millions think that they are
getting value for money, or they would not buy his programmes.

cont.

Your points have in fact been valuable, as they made me write down
exactly what I had spent on software over the years and what it
cost me per year of use. There is a certain objectivity in that.

So for me the MS story is not black and white as for many here, but
shades of gray, we each have a different situation and circumstances,
which gives us a different perspective. That was my point to
Rawmustard.

Yabby: "IMHO credit where credit is due and it was Gates who broke the Apple monopoly and through a cheap operating system, enabled the PC revolution."

No he didn't. Firstly, there never wasn't a monopoly. At the very least is was CP/M versus the Apple ][ versus the Commodore 64 versus the Atari versus ... a whole pile of ecosystem of little PC's.

What wiped out most of them wasn't Gates. And it wasn't IBM, who produced the first PC, even though it was only the PC and Apple who were left standing at the end. Do you know what it was Yabby? I bet you don't.

Although IBM produced the first PC, they did it in an odd way, for IBM anyway. Rather than use all in-house components, they used stuff off the shelf. That included the operating system, which was Microsoft's MSDOS, one the off the shelf operating systems available at the time for the CPU they were using. Yes, the choose Microsoft because Bill Gates by all reports did a sterling sell job. But there were any number of others they could have chosen, and in the end it wouldn't have made much difference. Microsoft didn't even write the original MSDOS, they bought it.

Not only did IBM use off the shelf components, they published the design. You could (and I did) buy the PC/XT technical manual which had circuit diagrams for the entire machine. In fact it even contained the complete source code for IBM's BIOS. I guess that BIOS could be considered one of the very first pieces of open source software.

As a consequence, anybody could knock off IBM's design, go buy the same components as IBM did and start producing near identical PC's. This included the operating system IBM used, which could be bought from Microsoft. Hundreds if not thousands of OEM's did just that. Every OEM slavishly followed IBM's design because otherwise it would not run MSDOS. When IBM produced the next designs, the PC/XP and later the PC/AT, the pattern was repeated.

(cont'd...)

(...cont'd)

Because there was nothing much to distinguish between the various OEM PC's, competition was vicious and prices plummeted. As a result the IBM designs wiped every other design out, including IBM's in the end. I don't recall what IBM called the design that followed the PC/AT, but it failed in the sense that OEM's didn't bother copying it. So prices for its components didn't drop, and the design just faded away. IBM got out of the PC business a few years later. The PC/AT design by that time had developed a life of its own. By now every OEM understood the importance of standardisation. IBM's lead wasn't needed any more.

If you look at who won out of this, it wasn't the OEM's. Compaq, Gateway, Osborne - they are all history, victims of the very commoditisation they used to wipe IBM out. And it obviously wasn't the creator of the PC, IBM. It was the component suppliers. Almost all of them did very well. Intel and Microsoft in particular did extraordinarily well, but not because they had extraordinary products. Rather it was because they had a monopoly on the components they produced - the CPU and the operating system. We have a name for that duopoly today - WinTel.

So have you figured out what set this off yet Yabby? Probably not. Obviously the magic source was the IBM's design being open and copyable, while remaining an iron fast standard. Obviously computers aren't like bolts in that way - they seem to tend toward standardisation. But why was it open? Surely IBM knew what would happen - after all everybody else copied IBM's other designs in the same way.

(cont'd...)

(...cont'd)

Well IBM did know, but they had no choice. They had a huge anti-trust suit hanging over their heads, brought by the US government. It was hanging over their heads precisely because previously they had used propriety hardware, and a closed operating system that made their systems near impossible to copy. And as I said, computers aren't like bolts. They do tend toward a single standard, and by hiding the details of the current designs for a while IBM ensured they owned the standard, thus creating a nice little monopoly for themselves.

Naturally after a couple of decades of this everybody got pissed off, pollies became involved, public prosecutors were asked to fix the problem and IBM's next hardware design effectively had to be open source. The computing systems you see today is what developed from that open source design.

The hardware with a few exceptions effectively remains open source today. Anyone with the know how can design a new PC. What is left of the natural monopoly the seems to develop around computers is now owned by Microsoft. It it maintained in the same way - by setting the standards, but hiding them for a while so everybody is behind you. By the time they catch up, the standard has changed. If another standard threatens to take hold, you deliberately use it but extent in a competing product which you sell for peanuts. Ship it with the Windows for free if necessary. Eventually your extended standard which only you know takes hold. Rinse, lather and repeat. This strategy even has a name now - Embrace and Extend.

(cont'd...)

(...cont'd)

Having seen what happened to IBM, Microsoft spends a great deal of time and energy telling everyone how lucky we are to have a monopoly running the show, how important it is to have a single standard, and how the current revolution in computers could not have happened without them. That would be the kool aid Pericles keeps referring to. It is all rubbish of course. What is important is standards, and as the current hardware ecosystem shows you don't need a monopoly to enforce them. Openness works just as well.

Anyway, this has turned into a long rant. Sorry to bore you. But just to repeat: Bill Gates did not enable the PC revolution. He rode on the back of it. I am tempted to say "like a parasite", but that would be a little unkind.

That was actually an interesting story Rstuart, so I'll tell it to
you from my perspective :)

I used to have an IBM golfball for officework, I looked at computers
but there was no way I was going to use MS-Dos. Push this code, that
code, bugger em. I had a business friend who had an Apple, quite
amazing it was, but everything had to be Apple from A-Z, or they
would not deal with you and when they did, for an extremely high
price. Some friends had Ataris and similar, but they mainly played
games on them, something that I was not into.

When Gates released Windows 3 in 1994, that changed everything!
On top of that came Office 94, at a major disount price. Finally
a computer that I could use, with software that I could use, at
a reasonable price. So I bought an Osborne for my business.

By 95 Telstra/MSN was established and we country bumkins
could actually go on the internet, for 5 bucks an hour. Later on they
changed it to 9$ an hour and I rang my MP outraged. He did not
know what the internet was at that time :) I told him that this
had a future in a country like Australia, but those lines were
not burning coal like power generators, they should get reasonable.
It went from there.

If you check the MS figures, you will see that they took off with
Windows 3. It was not an Apple, but similar enough to an Apple and
Gates sold his sofware to anyone, you did not need to buy an MS
computer, printer etc, as was the case with Apple.

Everyone had the VHS/Beta story fresh in their minds. Gates made
the most of it. Good luck to him.

No, you didn't mention it Yabby.

>>Meantime, as I think I mentioned, when my computer man popped in the first time, he pushed a couple of buttons or whatever and hey presto, my old Outlook from Office 2000 worked in XP mode or something similar<<

You originally informed us that:

>>So I dug out my old copy of Outlook 2000, but that won't work either<<

Now your "computer man... pushed a couple of buttons or whatever and hey presto, my old Outlook from Office 2000 worked"

Given that "pushing a couple of buttons" is Yabby-shorthand for "setting up a Windows XP Virtual Machine inside Windows 7", I think you did very well.

It's also quite interesting, the way your story keeps morphing.

Originally, the person who "popped in the first time" was female.

>>Nothing extra, for when she delivered the computer, the bill was already written out. I asked her to give me a hand, moving the stuff that I wanted to move and she was happy to do that.<<

Now it seems she was a he, and there were multiple visits.

Nothing wrong with that, of course. That's why you outsource. As long as your supplier is close by, competent and reliable. Which they clearly are.

But it does beg the question, why you posted in the first place.

You weren't without email. And you weren't even without your beloved Outlook.

Odd.

And for the sake of historical clarity, Microsoft's marketing masterstroke was to convince PC suppliers to pay a license fee for each machine shipped, regardless of the operating system that was actually delivered.

Manufacturers had a choice. Pay $x per unit shipped, or $4x per license.

Some more history:

>>So I bought an Osborne for my business<<

Interestingly, it was the boss of Osborne, John Linton, who took a stand in 1985 against the idea of paying Microsoft for the privilege of receiving nothing. He bundled OS/2 Warp with his machines in an attempt to break through with a superior package. Unfortunately, the Microsoft tax cut his margin to ribbons, and the company folded the following year.

Pericles, you clearly weren't following the story, as it unfolded
over time! Sometimes, with only 350 words, shortcuts are taken,
so perhaps I did not express things clearly enough for you to get
the drift. So I'll explain.

The guru is an engineer who is sick of city life, so moved to the
bush. His offsider is a farmers wife. She delivered the computer
and helped with the transfers. When I still had a couple of
issues, I rang him and he came out, some days later. I mentioned
the email problem and he gave me the options. That was a number of
days after I bought the computer and started then thread.

Apparently one can run any programme in Windows 7, in Xp mode or
Vista mode or whatever.

Yup, I outsource some things, focus on others. When I bought my
LED tv recently, I looked at the manual, looked at all the wires
leading to a couple of satelite dishes etc, picked up the phone
and rang the local tv guru. 60$ and half an hour after walking in
the door, he had everything up and running, so I tipped him 10 bucks :)

OTOH, last night I reread the 70 page manual for a 9000$ feed
mixer I'm about to crank up, chains, belts, augers everywhere.
Then the second lot of 20K worth of other equipment is arriving
later this morning, for my experiments.

I also focus on the stock market. About a year ago, I had a very
public OLO discussion with Keith, who thought I was a fool for
buying BHP shares at 25$, WBC at down to 14.70. I pinned my ears
back and kept buying. I picked up tens of thousands of $ from all
that, as I hope to do with the feeding nutrition experiments.

To me that makes perfect sense. Outsource the trivial and irritating
stuff that others know far better, focus on the big ticket things
that involve serious money. After all, we can't know everything,
so it makes perfect sense to me and gives me more playtime, which
matters.

Gee, I guess I wasn't paying attention, Yabby.

>>Pericles, you clearly weren't following the story, as it unfolded
over time!<<

You might like to fill me in sometime on the stuff that I missed. It was obviously important.

But to summarize the tiny amount that I do understand:

- you bought a new computer from your local supplier

- it came with Windows 7, but without Outlook Express

- on the first visit, the local supplier installed the machine, transferred the files and reloaded your software

- on the second visit, the local supplier completed the installation, solving the "couple of issues" that you mention and setting up the virtual XP system under Windows 7, so that you could run Outlook. Which wouldn't really be your first choice, since you would prefer Outlook Express

- at some point in the future, you may decide to stick with the Windows Mail and Outlook combination you have, operating in a Virtual XP system under Windows 7. Or buy Outlook Express, which - presumably - will be installed by your local supplier.

>>To me that makes perfect sense. Outsource the trivial and irritating stuff that others know far better<<

It makes perfect sense to me too.

But that still doesn't explain why you - who agrees that others know about the "trivial and irritating stuff" far better than you - should suddenly turn into an advocate of Microsoft, complete with word-perfect pontifications from their ever-ready "Linux is for geeks" handbook.

From experience, I know that it is pointless getting into a pissing contest with a Microsoft tech; they have a firmly vested interest in their team winning.

But it is something of a surprise to come across someone with absolutely no reason to take sides, spruiking their sales pitch, as if to the manner born.

For someone who outsources everything to do with installing systems, you sure gave the impression, for a while, that you knew what you were talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_(computer_retailer)

Pericles, my Osborne came from this mob, who seemingly set up
under Osborne in Australia, later on. Eventually I gather, they
were bought by Gateway. In 1994, they were giving great deals.

To complete the story of my computer, on the first visit there were
a few things we could not finish, as we could not connect it to the
internet, due to Telstra. I thought I might as well upgrade the
modem too, as the other one had played up, so bought one from a
nearby town. It took around 4-5 days to sort out the Telstra
drama. Once I had the internet sorted out, I had a couple of issues
and the guru came and fixed them. At the same time he wanted to know
a bit about astacology, so I gave him a quick lesson.

*and setting up the virtual XP system under Windows 7, so that you could run Outlook*

The way I understand it, that is already part of Windows 7. You can
apparently run any programme in XP mode or Vista mode etc. You
just have to know which button to push :)

*From experience, I know that it is pointless getting into a pissing contest with a Microsoft tech;*

I really don't know what they think, I haven't talked to a MS
employee for many many years. From memory it would be the mid
to late 90s.

The way I see things, AFAIK is rather common in the everyday
community. Just about everyone I know uses Windows, apart from
my brother. I do know a few dedicated Apple fans, but they seem
to be mainly from the arty farty community. And yes, their general
view would be that Linux is for geeks, some businesses, etc.
That would not be MS talk, but community talk.

*For someone who outsources everything to do with installing systems, you sure gave the impression, for a while, that you knew what you were talking about.*

Pericles, I have never claimed that. How computers and other office
machines work, simply does not interest me

The way I saw it Yabby, you claimed linux was for tinkerers only.
Clearly, now that you've explained yourself better, it shows just how much Windows is clearly for Tinkerers LOL!

Never have I seen a linux user tinker... err go to so much trouble to receive email :)

>>I live at both ends of the scale. In my day job I manage the computer affairs for a largish organisation (several hundred employees). It is all based on Linux. Suffices to say it does a much better job than Windows in most ways and worse in a couple - well one really.<<

rstuart, you are very informative. As a system administrator (I imagine) of a company of a couple of hundred, you would certainly know your stuff.

-- -- -- -- --

After reading through the thread, the score is about Linux 100, Microsoft 1.

Not only is Linux free, you don't have any issues reloading software, no issues with virus software, no issues backing it up and no compatibility problems with alien software. (Have I missed anything.) As an open source product, you know it has been developed by a collective that really enjoy their work and who want to be a part of creating a product that has no artificial, commercial boundaries.

Equation: buy Microsoft, feel good and powerful and be wrapped up in its image but really only be its slave, versus anonymously download linux for free and have a simple time using and maintaining the software.

Mmmm, tough choice.

RawMustard, for all your chest thumping and feelgood stuff, I don't
think that you are giving MS sleepless nights just yet :)

I'd say that Google is their real threat as they have serious
money. How good is their Chrome operating system?

*After reading through the thread, the score is about Linux 100, Microsoft 1.*

That is really up to the marketplace RobP. Consumers vote with
their wallets every day. They clearly don't agree with you!

Anyhow, thanks for all the many intersting contributions and
thanks everyone for keeping a sense of humour. Its not always
this friendly on OLO.

Having lurked on this thread since it started, I have to say that I've been persuaded to give Linux a go. I've been toying with doing so for a couple of years now :)

Over winter I'll install it on a desktop PC we have that isn't too old and doesn't get used much. If it works out without software conflicts I'll be happy to install it on this machine or its successor.

Yabby - my understanding is that Chrome is a web browser at this stage, rather than an an operating system.

I agree Yabby, this thread has been very entertaining and informative. Rstuart, many thanks to the links you gave - I may even afford to update some of my hardware.

Also, Yabby you are quite correct that Microsoft is not threatened by open source while the old adage remains true:

You can't fool ALL the people all the time, but you CAN fool some of the people ALL of the time.

Cheers