281–290 of 454 posts
I guess I'm in the younger half, because on reflection, I realize that not only do I agree, but that this is old news to me. I'm not complaining, though -- this article made me realize something I didn't know consciously. A lot of commenters here seem to argue that Microsoft still has the vast majority of desktop installations, and that this isn't likely to go away soon. I agree (I don't like it, but I think it's tru…
But, Google is my friend. I tell evey one that. Power beyond belief.
Meanwhile, when will MAC die?
I believe in opensource, and all the goodness there.
It is a global village. The MAC is too expensive hardware-wise, and well we don't call it M$ for nothing.
Adler Phoenix, Arizona
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you haven't heard about a free program that does everything that Microsoft Office does and more, then you should really be looking at OpenOffice. 1. It's free 2. It can read all Microsoft and open formats 3. It can export as PDF 4. It runs on Windows, Mac, Linux, ... (written in Java I believe) 5. It's open source 6. Various other features have been added which MS now adds to MS Office in order to catch up (like a…
It's buggy
P.S. We need to remember that Microsoft has Xbox 360 and the Zune. All which work with Windows.
This year, we are starting a new venture. This time, all the developers run on Mac and all the servers are either hosted or running linux. All the presentations are make using Keynote, the intranet is a wiki (no more word) and some google spreadsheets. No one is using Office. The end result: we have not payed a single dollar to Microsoft.
Although big corporations are locked in, the trend is clear. MSFT is going to need a major turn around to get back on their feet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be silly Bob. Apple is not arrogant nor greedy... unless you're a socialist who thinks that all companies that actually sell software are "arrogant and greedy". The stallman cult thinks this and they have gone so far as to have protests against Apple when they sued microsoft! That's how twisted their socialist thinking is-- they support the monopolist against the underdog! If you're 50 years old, get a mac, you…
Its very difficult to be honest and altruistic when your sole reason for being is to make money. This is the motivation for these men that run businesses. Or do you suppose their motivation is to bring happiness to people? Morals and money dont really mix very well. When a companies board of directors sit down to discuss the bottom line, how often do you think moral issues are discussed? Ive never heard any in all my…
The reality is, you make money when you bring happiness to people. You make people happy and they want to give you money they want to buy more of your products because they want to keep being made happy again, or made even more happy.
Thus, the happier you make your customers the more money you make.
Further, making people happy, and making money are intrinsically moral things. Trading with people is honest and moral.
Those who talk of altruism speak of violence. Altruism is the destruction of your self to benefit others. (Literally). Thus socialists throw around the word "altruism" (and "Sacrifice" and a lot of other code words) to try and make it seem moral-- but at the root of it, what they are doing or advocating is putting a gun to your head and taking your money (and your money is just a representation of the labor you put in to earn it.)
So, don't you talk to me about morals-- when its clear you are advocating an immoral ideology.
The bottom line is this: Free people trade with each other and profit by trades that make people happy. This trade is moral, it is honest, and it is right. It is intrinsically peaceful.
Socialists oppose free trade, they believe in forcing people at gun point to "trade" on terms that the socialist approve of. This is not peaceful, this is not moral, and obviously the people who are having their lives threatened are acting under duress--- duress is not compatible with happines.
So, the next time you hear "sacrifice" come out of the mouth of a politician -- realize its not him that will be sacrificing-- its you and he's putting a gun to your head to get richer.
That is the language of the thief and the looter, the socialist and the immoral.
This is so obvious that I shouldn't have to say it-- but its amazing how twisted people's minds get when they are subjected to socialist propaganda day in and day out.
To think you just said people doing things that make them happy, because they make them happy is immoral!
Having used gmail since March 28, 05, gcal since it came out, and other web software as appropriate for a while, I'm a big believer in software-as-a-service because I hate the idea of having desktop software on one computer and not the other. I also own both, an Apple PowerBook and a Dell laptop. I find Windows a lot more keyboard friendly, since I like to fly around with both shortcut keys and the Mac just can't keep up with me. On the other hand, I love Mac's Zen-like environment and the rock solid BSD underneath it -- Windows can seem pretty cheesy with all its pop-up baloons and MS-DOS prompt. However, given the apps and hardware available for Windows, I still prefer Windows because I'm a developer and business guy. I also disagree that Windows is for grandmas. I mean, Paul, which world do you live in? Just because a niche of designers, developers and a few affluent folks use Apple, doesn't mean EVERYONE is using Macs. Your bias clearly shows through here.
I personally am not biased to any particular hardware/OS because I use them all (even Ubuntu/Linux for servers). Having worked with 5 flavors of Unix since 1991, I feel equally comfortable with the nix world, Windows and Mac OS.
In the end, Apple is a cult -- it always has been. Apple isn't any better of a company than Microsoft and neither is Google. I've always had a love-hate relationship with Microsoft. I hate how they try to break stuff (e.g. Java, JavaScript) but I absolutely don't mind using MS Office to get stuff done. And, the fact that I almost entirely use open source for my development/deployment and not feel hampered on Windows combined with the fact that most of my personal information management is done using gmail/gcal, I can use Microsoft to get the best of all world: i.e. MS Office, web 2.0 apps through Firefox, anything open source (e.g. eclipse, rails, mysql), etc., etc. I strongly believe OS will eventually become less relevant for desktops, whether it is Microsoft, Mac, or Linux.
In the end, consumers have personal preferences and corporation want to make money. That's as simple as it gets.
On June 2, 2006 (thanks to gmail's quick search engine for locating the email/date), I sent an email to a bunch of folks pointing them to Paul's "How to start a startup" article (http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html) because I absolutely loved it! On this article, I have to agree with the previous commenter that "Paul Graham is the Ann Coulter of the Web 2.0 world." :-(
Here's a cluestick. HTML (even with AJAX) is not a freaking platform. Wake me up when Google has an actual platform. Until then, Paul can go live in the fantasy world with Larry Ellison where the networked thin client was going to take over years ago. Yawn.