Discussion on:

Microsoft's plan to retain the throne as king in a Windows world

Do you think that Microsoft will achieve its internal goal of reaching a billion new users by 2015? Or do you think that Microsoft will have to literally give their software to emerging markets and developing nations in order to compete with open source alternatives?

When Gates was asked about the effect that software piracy in foreign countries like China was having on Microsoft Gates replied that as long as they were going to be stealing an OS that they would want it to be Windows.

Once people become accustomed to a certain way of doing things they are less likely to change. Selling software for $3 to 1 billion new customers after you've not only recouped your initial ivestment but made a killing to boot is still 3 billion dollars. And that's doesn't even count the profits they'll earn from support.

They could give it away for free to the people in these countries and it would still be profitable in the long run.

MB

the amount of profit they make from so egregiously overpricing their software rentals in the rest of the world, doesn't it!

Can the infrastructure in the 'developing world' handle that much? Can the world be brought up to the 'standard' of the current western world without collapse? Outside the current topic I guess...

Maybe the OLPC machines will be all that anyone can run in the future!

If Microsoft really wants to help they should get behind the OLPC program. That will help more than trying to get kids hooked on there software like some software dope dealer.

As I remember it;

OLPC "May we have a copy of your windows software with source code for this project we're doing to help underdeveloped nations?"

BILL "We'd love to sell you a copy but you won't be able to distribute the source code after signing our NDA."

OLPC "We're a humanitarian project and are unable to pay for software. Would Micorosft be willing to donate?"

BILL "We may be able to provide an old version of WindowsCE for you to embed in the hardware platform."

OLPC "I think we may have to stick with open standards and go with a Linux or BSD based OS then."

BILL "Well screw you then, I'll start my own Microsoft early branding project in the underdeveloped nations. It'll be great and force them all to by cell phones and televisions to boot."

Ah Bill, he always knows to steal a good idea when he sees it.

It's just good business!!!!! GO BILL GO

yeah, from the business person angle; Bill's a Genious.. go Bill go.. what new innovative way will you think to take the money from ill-informed customers with?

(hey, I'd happily take money for crap too if I where in his possition. I'll admit it.)

Hehehe.. reminds me of my old university roommate. We had an ongoing debate over Microsoft:

- rara MS, they make great profits
- Baah MS, they gave up competing based on product quality years ago

Before you go and stick humanitarian needs down Microsofts throat you need to take into account why the country is underdeveloped. Microsoft is a business and needs to make money to survive. Just like Ford, GMC and the Nike's you are wearing. Red Hat needs to make money also I don't they will freely support Linux in underdeveloped nations. It is funny how Microsoft finds blame for everything on these boards and now this. America is built on Companies just like Microsoft and if this is not true please correct me. Asking Microsoft to give away their product IS too much to ask just like it would be for Starbucks to send them coffe and tea, Apple to send them computers, Ford to send them cars, and Kellogs to soend them food. $3 to get college students going is fine. It doesn't brain wash anyone, besides I learned about Linux while using Windows......imagine that. We need to figure out why these countries are underdevoloped and pointing the finger at Bill Gates is not how we learn these things.

Yeah, I may be stretching it with the humanitarian bit but arguing that MS needs to monopolize underdeveloped nations like the've done in the US stretching it the other way pretty good too.

The company isn't starving at teh door to the poor house. It wouldn't blow the budget for them to compete with quality products rather than pretty makeup.

The humanitarian thing was also a bit of a continuation of the OLPC comment. An early article (probably newsforge.com) interviewed the fellow who started the project and one of the first questions was "why not use WindowsCE?" and he basicaly said that they had tried but the only thing MS was willing to give them was an old WinCE build with source or a new "slimmed down" winMobile version without source. They didn't really have any interest in helping, only selling. Within a month, MS had a report out about a new cellphone with winMobile they where developing for third world countries. It use the cell network, plugged into a tv and took a keyboard through an adapter.

If it's not the MS way or initiated by them, MS has no intereste in it.

I get the business angle but MS has been successful enough that they wouldn't suffer by adding some ethics into there business strategy.

its kinda ridiculous to talk down on bill when it comes to humanitarianism i mean the guy has willed something like 98% of his worth to charity. his kids will only get i think 1M (could be wrong on figure but point is its pocket change to bill).

wasn't sure who's comment your responding too. Your right about the humanitarian side of Bill though. Bill the creater of Microsoft has pleanty to answer for. Bill the humanitarian deserves aplause.

I was impressed with the 1 mil per child in his will also. He's giving each of his kids enough to get them started in whatever they choose to do without simply handing over the family cheque book. I thought that was fantastic. Heck, you know they're going to have strategic minds like there father so the'll succeed in what they choose to do with or without a starter.

Update:

It seems as of april 2007, Microsoft has a few OLPC machines they are sqeezing versions of Windows into. My emotional reaction is to remember how Bill "borrowed" a few Apples once so he could see about writting user space applications for them but this is for OLPC and Negroponte had to say "yes" first so here's hoping it helps though it doesn't sound like the Windows OLPCs will be remotely open.

Has Microsoft ever come up with an original idea? When hasn't Microsoft stolen or bought software/ideas from someone else?

MS is a disease and the worldwide eradication of it can only promote goodwill and benefits for all.

EMD

I'm no fan of MS and my posts will support that but MS has helped a lot of people, companies, schools and believe it or not, all other OS's.
How, some with financial support, some with computers and software, some by showing the way to accomplish certain aspects of computing even though they are based on other OS platforms. The graphical interface has pushed every OS out there to develop one of their own. Nobody seems to realize that all OS's and even the hackers contribute by showing us the cracks, the weakness's and discoveries made by an accidental input of the keyboard. Special effects, not that I like them are a lot like a lot of the graphic areas that have been pushed way beyond to HDTV and other spinoff benefit's. I say applaud them all, the good, the bad and the very ugly trojans as they have helped in making our systems more secure.

.

What, you don't want to see MS help out these people or get involved? Yeah i think if i'm a business man i do want to make some profit, even if it's $1.50

Why couldn't none western countries handle it?? Why would they collapse? If my old Dad can work with MS I think anyone in the world can!

I have followed Microsoft?s tactics for years and quite frankly, I?m not impressed. I would like to see Open Source, seriously put the hurts on them. They make billions of dollars on software that constantly needs updated, non-compatible and over priced. They want to impress me, let them cut prices to a third, improve their finished product before it goes on sale and be more customer friendly. You have a problem with their software it costs YOU money to fix THEIR problems. I know these things will never happen, is why I hope Open Source, runs them out. With Microsoft?s track record, I see this $3.00 software having to be replaced after a period of time.

Not long ago people were complaining that Microsoft had enough profits and should lower their prices. Now Microsoft is making a generous offer and people are complaining that it?s all an evil plan for world domination. I think most of the complaining is coming from the same people who spend more on a pair of shoes or one night at a nice restaurant than a piece of MS software. I don?t believe that corporate America is basically good but I like this offer to help the tech-less masses of the world and I think it has the potential to help a lot of people besides just Bill Gates.

For sure, I think the Linux people need to bashing MS because thats what linux is really good at. I know this fight between MS and LX is like a Football game, Edmonton VS Calgary or Dallas against Houston. it will never end.

For me anyhow, that end is when vendors stop providing drivers for only Microsoft products and when Windows fanboys stop pissing in my ear about how great Windows is.

I got no issue with anyone else making an educated decision to use Micorosft. I'll happily make Windows run as well as it can for an employer. If the RFI/RFQ says Windows is the best solution then go with it and be happy.

My issue is with the brand name blinded telling me Windows is the best thing since sliced bread; because that's what they use after all and we're all dumb for not joining in.

Microsoft's complete lack of competition based on quality products instead of backroom schemes is another issue.

Microsoft's continued FUD over patent infringement is another issue. Have they ever actually identified the infringements or are they simply going to continue to value the effects of a business bogeyman?

The inability to fix personality traits of Windows on my own is another issue. You know, sometimes I open a program then continue with something else; I don't want the new program to steal focus, I want it to load in the background and wait till *I'm* ready to use it.

We don't need to go into cost/benifit or license discussions here.

The rest of your posts border on Trolling so I won't respond to them futher.

I believe a lot of what you say is factual with respect to drivers support for hardware and software. It will take a huge demand for it to persuade hardware and software manufacturers that there is a demand for their products. I can only see China's general public having the ability to influence manufacturers to this extent. They potential buying power of China is immense and far outstrips the present market but it hasn't come to this crossroad in China's development as yet. China's government like France has gone to Linux based OS and software as has France and other governments but it has yet to push demand to the height it needs to go to push developers down this road. Time will change some aspects of the markets but I sincerely hope all Mac, Windows , Linux and Unix stay successful as the entire lot help to make computing better for everyone with contributions from all of these Operating systems.

The combined sum of all the OS continues to push computing ahead in general and for that I'm truly happy.

In your earlier comment you mention that MS has helped. I applaude for where they have shown true selfless help (ok, good will is a type of profit but I'll accept that motivation). Heck, if all Bill does for the next decade was walk around africa throwing money at problems, it'll make a huge difference. If he turns that strategic mind we all hate so much towards humanitarian ends instead of business ends then the possible benifits multiply. Credit, where credit is due by all means.

Like I mentioned, if drivers are available for all platforms then I could care less what Bob runs at home. My grief stems from constantly being told that MS is the greatest based on no technical merits along with constantly having to jump through hardware hoops that shouldn't be there in the first place. I've said it pleanty before, if an employer runs Windows, I'll tune it to run like an F1 racer. I'll install it at home to learn how to tune it like an F1 racer. I'll run something else for all my day to day work though.

Hardware manufacturers produce drivers for Windows because one driver will work across all versions except 64 bit versions (thats another kettle of fish), with Linux you have to create a driver for every version out there. When Linux makers agree to use a common SDK for items like video, audio, printers, etc., then hardware makers will likely start creating drivers for Linux.

You say that Windows has no technical merits, but I disagree, why is it then that Linux wants to be so much like MS products. OpenOffice tries to be like Office, KDE and Gnome want to look like Windows. You complain about the costs for Windows, and complain about MS's patents. But the cost is also tied to MS having to defend itself in court, eg. Real Networks complaining to the EU about Media Player, except Real will never see the light of day on one of my systems because I don't want the spyware that it bundles as part of the package. At least with MS, I know they are not bundling some third party spyware as part of the installation.

We complain about the security of Windows and act like Linux and Apple don't have flaws, which is hilarious, considering Linux and Apple send out fixes on a constant basis but no one cares to report on what doesn't affect the vast majority of users. We make a big thing when MS adresses twelve items while Linux sends out a fix for fifty-six vulnerabilities in the same time frame.

You say your grief is being told that MS is the greatest on no technical merits, but what about all the Linux users wo claim that Linux is the best while ignoring its flaws and inadequacies. I have either been extremely lucky or something because I have never had to jump through hoops to install hardware on any of my Windows boxes, it is usually installed during installation or the hardware came with drivers. But, have found it very frustrating to find drivers that work for my Linux boxes. You claim you will install it at home to tune it like an F1 racer, but admit it you have it installed at home to play a racing game where you are the F1 racer, otherwise you would have a test box at work for fine tuning Windows.


Another fallacy is that Linux is easy to install now, yes the initial install takes twenty minutes, but the updates takes anywhere from one to three hours on first boot. I'll grant that Linux may be good in a business environment but for home computing it doesn't come even close to Windows for pure breadth of capabilities, only Apple comes close to meeting a home users wants in computing, but most home users want gaming and right now that gives Windows the advantage.

Hardware manufacturers don?t need to produce a driver for every distribution of Linux; that?s complete bunk. They need a driver for X.org and a driver for the Linux kernel. Distributions will include the kernel update and the newer X.org and life goes on happily. Really though, there?s no reason that a hardware manufacture need even make there own drivers with the mob of self motivated developers just looking for a new puzzle to fiddle with. Like Eric Raymond says; if the driver code is so important, put it on a chip and give us a generic interface to write drivers around.

Win64 drivers will come along with stable software. That?s no stretch of the imagination. I find it kind of funny that the *only* changed needed between 32bit and 64bit *nix machines is to recompile the driver against the 64bit library. It?s that simple, it?s not rocket science and barely even computer science really.

Windows has some technical merits. I'll agree fully with the right tool for the job credo. My complaint is that Microsoft has given up on product quality in favor of competition purely through marketing. On the other side, it's that I keep having people tell me how great windows is blindly defending it as if they have personal stake in the company yet they provide no technical reasons. More often, they only know Windows and can't really compare both OS on a design level.

I grew up with Windows. As the son of an IT manager, we always had a work provided machine at home which I got use of when not actually needed to remote into the office. I tweaked the hell out of Dos (my error messages where even ?adjusted?). I tweaked the hell out of win3.11 running a two node BBs at the time. I went through win95, win98, winNT, winXP. It was a mix of boredom with MS, the unending depth of exploring a Linux distro and the more functional network stack in *nix systems.

I think a lot of MS time in court is by there own doing. Companies are not looking for excuses to go to court (Patent Trolls aside). The EU dug into them with very valid reasons, they may have strayed from those reasons but that?s another debate. The US gov dug into MS but backed down in the end. It?s not by accident that MS finds itself taken and taking to court so often. They?re still overcharging for a product with poor quality control.

As for spyware, I?m not running win32 outside of gaming these days so it?s not an issue for me. If you want to compare OS; I can install my OS and retain complete or near complete functionality with or without a GUI, with or without an internet browser. I can install Windows with or without Solitaire. When MS truly provided untied software in it?s bundling then that complain goes away too.

I?ve been banging my head against some config issues. I don?t claim there are no flaws in Linux but I won?t accept false claims of flaws within Linux from those who can?t tell the difference between the kernel, separate applications and the consolidated distrobution. I can run windows and get 60 to 80% of my hardware?s possible performance or I can run Linux and get 80 to 95% of my hardware?s possible performance; efficient use of the machine is key. The majority of Linux folk I?ve seen hear are fully open about the flaws in Linux but they won?t accept a claim of a presumed flaw when it?s actually a lack of user knowledge. They also realize that in the FOSS world, frequent updates is a good sign not an indication of more bad coding being ducktaped.

My hardware install hoops; I install the hardware, I dig out the vendor?s driver disk, I install the driver hopefully avoiding the trinket software the vendor included with it (ATI TV Player sucks rocks). Perhaps I instead install the driver from the MS website; oops, driver has issues, please install a driver from your vendor. We?re also talking about the defacto for hardware vendors to provide drivers for. Some just work, some work great once installed, some suck rocks but that?s perhaps a vendor quality issue.

My *nix hardware install hoops; I install the hardware, I boot. The kernel recognizes the hardware, it?s available for use. I start X for some GUI work and it runs through the kernel driver or it has X.org has an additional driver. Where this fails? ATI binary blob sucks rocks (I tried AMD?s new install process but 254 fps won?t cut it). nVidia provides a better running binary blob. HP provides no driver outside of win32 for my scanner/printer. These are all vendor issues that would be fixed (probably within a week) if they gave developers driver interface specs.

I claimed I would happily install it for an employer and tune it to run as well as an F1 race car (highly tuned and efficient machines I hear). I claimed I?d install it at home to learn how it works and how to tune it to run as well as an F1 race car. I said my current install is only to play games on this day but didn?t specify the game. I never said I didn?t have it installed at home, I already have the winXP license so I may as well cut a boot partition for it. I use Windows where software demands I do so; this means when there is no *nix counterpart or for self training towards employer?s needs.

The last bit:

Have you installed winXP recently? It?s great off the latest install build disk with slipstreamed updates but boy howdy does it suck to reboot twenty times over two or so hours while it get?s updates until sp1, then sp1, then updates, then sp2, then updates; always needing a reboot.

I installed Linux on a fresh VM the other day to play with some new software before mixing it into my primary install. From DVD.iso to drive; 20 min, 5 min to run through the config settings and I?m up and running. I used to pop open the graphic package manger and pull the updates in small chunks, this is a habit left over from the modem days when it was better to get multiple small pieces rather than a big piece with some small glitch in it. Without the graphic package manager;

Welcome to Linux kernel version 000.00.0
Login: userblah [enter]
Password: userpass [enter]
userblah@localhost$ sudo urpmi ?auto-update

the first time, leave it to do it?s thing in a separate terminal window while I go on to use my computer for stuff (multitasking is fun). Actually, I do the same thing for my first login of the day taking about ten seconds to type and rarely more than ten minutes to complete; again while I move on to doing other things.

Please, tell me more about the fabled Windows instant updater and how it beats the hell out of updating a Linux machine.

Yeah I rant a lot. But I should clarify; my complaint with MS is that they continue to sell to a blind population without providing a quality product. My complaint with vendors is that they think there hardware is only ever going to run on win32/win64. My complaint with MS fanboys is being repeatedly told that Windows is the second coming of Christ and we?re all idiots for every choosing something else and not opening our wallets to Brother Bill. I?ll happily accept arguments based on technical merits and concede points where I?m wrong. I?m here to learn and am open to new knowledge. I can?t except uneducated FUD about non-Windows from people who?ve never used anything else and couldn?t tell you more than how to click an icon.

Some Linux distributions are a nightmare for a new user to learn, others are dead simple; True. Linux drivers (they call them Kernel Modules) have to be created for each individual distribution; False, wrong, incorrectly educated, miss-informed or whatever phrase you want to use. I?ll agree with the first point, I can?t let the second point stand uncontested unless you have some technical basis for that opinion. My basis is the understanding that Linux distros are assembled from commodity parts; build a kernel module, everyone get?s to use it, build a X.org module, everyone get?s to use it.

A driver for every distro ?
Really really wrong.

As for your comments on installation, even if you accept the defaults modern distros will install much faster than windows.

You can and do get hardware compatibility issues, but they are much rarer.

You can get lost when faced with the plethora of linux installation options.

But I can still take the default install of say Mandrake and get it on a PC faster,
Than a fresh install of XP,
than an update of a pre-installed OEM.

In fact it takes less time than getting the latest service packs, removing crapware, installing office, SQL and VS 2005 and putting useful security software on there.
All of which have equivalents and come with the default install of Mandrake as standard.

May be you should have another go at it.

Yes there are problems, yes with a windows mindset 'obvious' things are obscure. But it's way better than the picture you paint.

A big company offering it's product for a reduced price is normally great for the customer. With Microsoft's history, I think this is simply another early branding campain; dump cheap product on the market so people won't look at the competition. It's the same thing there many computer vendor agreements do for them; get the customer hooked early when they only know that a computer comes with Windows.

If microsoft could shrink laptops and invetro deployment they'd jump at the chance to have that kind of blind brand loyalty from birth. Besides, just think what that would do to OLPC.. even humanitarian projects are competition unless they are Microsoft initiated.

(Note: I'm all fired up with the SamsungMicrosfot anouncement and may be venting more than usual.)

They probably will as well, this move is part of the strategy.

Anyone who thinks they are doing this out of the goodness of their heart I still have five penthouse flats going cheap, great view from Olympus Mons !

Personally I think they are a bit late, but their marketing muscle and a few sweetheart deals with budget pc suppliers might pull it off.

.
This is classic Microsoft strategy. Step 1. Displace competitors even if they must take a loss to do it. Step 2: Without competitors, and when customers are hooked, raise prices.

In the U.S. we got a bit of a "$3" offer once. It was the irresistible $89 Windows 95 upgrade that helped to defend against OS/2 at the time. Vista Ultimate upgrade: $279.

It all depends on how forward-thinking the foreign governments, businesses, and consumers are. It would be far wiser for them to standardize around Linux and FOSS apps instead.

Always look a gift horse in the mouth, that's where the teeth are.

Or the sh*t if you are at the wrong end.

People have always complained since the war between MS and IBM's DOS and such is the nature of a lot of people which includes ME. If the complaints are valid and constructive then there is a place for them. If they are nothing more than personal and emotional disatisfaction based on nothing more than cost, insecurity, faster speed and such like, then we will have those issues to deal with for all time. I do agree with you with respect to me spending more on a pair of shoes, dinner out or an ice cream than MS software. The reason is simple, I supported MS up to and including XP but since they have elected to continue with their ridiculous way of activation, reactivation, validation and suchlike, I really have come to my end with MS. I do apologize but I simply can't understand some of the support guys in India when I do have to reactivate. It's just too much to go through especially when I have bought and paid for a legal, valid copy of MS software. Sorry, but it's my time, my expense to maintain their system of doing this and it's just wrong. They need to find another way of doing all of this without forcing me to do it for them. Is anyone getting any of this ? Time for a change and if MS can't or won't, then I have to and I make no apology's for it as I never bought into any of that, I only bought the software.

you only bought a lease to use the software, it was never yours, says so in the EULA.

intrepi. I very much agree with you. though for me, its about the amount of time and energy I have to go through when I want to reinstall A LEAGALLY PURCHASED PRODUCT. I make decent money, I can afford to buy Vista. But, I despise WGA. WGA wastes my time. Time is more valuable then money in the long run.

Excuse me but MS-DOS and IBM-DOS were always the same product except in one area, IBM's DOS required a chip on the motherboard to compile Basic while MS-DOS had the compiler as part of the package, this allowed for companies like Compaq to come to the market. Both DOS's were created by Bill Gates and it was one of IBM's first blunders in the PC marketplace, they wanted to go proprietary. The second blunder was OS/Wharp, which was also created by MS, but IBM did not believe that graphics were an important factor, so MS came out with Windows 95 which placed more importance on the UI because other systems were graphically superior, remember the Amiga and the early MACS. IBM didn't believe in the home market so all therir systems were geared to the business market. By the time they saw the light it was to late for them.

As for your problem in support calls being handled in India, did you know you can request the assistance of a North American call centre just by requesting it. It is funny that call centres were moved to India because of an abundance of workers, not costs. Call Centre work is somewhat like dishwashers in restaurants, no one here wants to do it. I never understood that as I found help desk work to be challenging and more interesting than other tasks such as network troubleshooting and maintenance.

The gripe about activation is invalid as well, if everyone was honest enough to have legal software that would be fine, but everyday my mailbox is filled with offers of software titles at ridiculous prices, and you know as well as I do that these are all illegal copies. There are millions of people out there who want to use MS software without paying MS for it, reminds me of Linux users who want everything but don't want to pay for it. You have a legitimate copy of Windows, so what if you have to click on one extra button to verify it, the software you are acquiring is free isn't it and you are secure in the knowledge that third party spyware is not part of the package.

You know the old adage about there being no such thing as a free lunch, Linux is not free by any stretch of the imagination. Time is money and a lot of time is used in maintaining a Linux workstation. I am not a fanatic over Windows but I also don't go decrying MS for what they have done to bring computing to a larger segment of society. Bill Gates is not evil incarnate, that honour I give to the heads of oil companies and their supporters. Your arguments are tilting at windmills, Linux has its place, but Windows also deserves respect despite it perceived flaws it has made computing a part of everyday life and given us the tools that we now take for granted (Internet, IMs, instant access to information, media sharing, etc.)

If you pay nothing for it you likely had to download the .iso, burn it and run the install yourself. The currency is time as you mention.

We should discharge the myth that all Linux/BSD users require everything to be at no cost. That is bunk. Software developers tend to have a higher ethic about software copywrite; it's the skript kiddies and criminals that bypass legalities. There are a number of Linux and BSD distrobutions sold at reasonable prices but that's the difference; reasonable. The fact that so much of the FOSS community released unpaid versions of there software is truly a blessing but it's not the only way. FOSS folk tend to care more about the liberty to see the source code.

It could be Windows, Linux, Unix, osX, Dos or Plan9 for all I care but if I change a few USB plugs and have to revalidate my license because it triggered WGA; well, any OS that would do that to the paying customers is a steaming turn on delivery.

Like George Carlin says; all those police raids and gards at the borders ain't stopping the drug delivery plans from getting in, it's only slowing down the legitimate border crossings and providing a false sense of security. You really think that WGA is is giving pirated software users grief? Nope, it's like the plans, the pirated copies are still getting installed and cracked. It's just the legitimate users who suffer WGA indignities.

I might point out that I've seen complaints about WGA from many very intelligent and well spoken people presenting arguments based on fact rather than reactionary emotion. Your comment seems to completely discount all that though.

"If we where all honest MS wouldn't have to shove WGA down our throats with overbearing scope." - Yeah, that excuse doesn't fly.

I did like your history of Dos review though. That was good squishy to read again. I thought win95/os2 parted company due to developer and project management conflicts but I've never been able to find a detailed account of the whole event.

Are "safe" with a legal license on WGA, why are there so many false positives? Also, why should I have to install WGA "critical" updates before it will let me install the update I need/want and that actauly is critical? It may not seem like much, but over 25 or 30 machines, that gets time consuming in set up, implementation and verification. WGA has not had any effect on piracy. Look at the Vista Launch. Google Vista WGA Errors. Also, all that WGA crap is running in the background constantly, checking, Vista uses resources to "keep you honest." So, I paid $400 for an OS, that requires 1 GB (min) of ram so it can check constantly to see if I tried to pirate it? MS just pushed the cost of preventing piracy off on to their buying customers in terms of product cost and resource management. Its like the police requiring you to pay to have a Breathalyzer in your car, BEFORE you EVER get a DUI! Its just aggravating legitimate users. Vista is one big DRI platform to protect content for "Premium Providers" (read Hollywood, RIAA). I am in support of MS stoping piracy. I agree that it is their right. But WGA has proven to be ineffective, inconvenient, and problematic.
I have no problems paying for software. I own 3 retail copies of XP Pro, and 1 retail copy of XP 64Pro. I also own a boxed Suse 10.0, and a redhat 9.0. Activateing windows is not the issue (Ghost clean install, problem over). Its the fact that WGA uses resources, is buggy, and takes up time at work installing when I have better stuff to do.

absolutely no reason why a good plan for World Domination cant help a ton of people along the way. But, time will show if this move actually helps people in developing nations, or just pulls another Avon/Nestle scam on people who cant afford the loss/price. But, also, an average "middle class" worker in India can make $3 a day. So, one days pay translates to a copy of some MS software. Office in America, student edition, is equivelent to a days pay for someone in the 35-40k a year range. But, usually you need a student ID/etc to get a copy of the student edition.

This is so transparent, who is going to fall for it? Vista is the current product, XP, which is what the bargain bundle runs on, will be supported for, I think, 4 years. It is at that point that $3 turns into $300. Virtually giving away an obsolete product to people who can't afford the current one, and thereby snare a probable upgrade makes good commercial sense for M$. But how will the suckers pay for Vista in 4 years time? Will they be so impressed/desperate/confused that they will do themselves financial damage to get the upgrade?
This is the way drug dealers work in the schoolyard.

have you looked into XP Starter Edition...its limited to 3 windows open at any given time.....

...but after the support on XP runs out, and no more critical updates are produced, the world will be left with an inevitable 'Bot' army for hackers & spammers to easily exploit and launch their campaigns from.

It is also conceivable that introduction of computers to under-developed countries may spur the same growth (and consequently business investments) that we have seen during the last decade in India. One could easily take the view of this charitable gesture as a move by M$ to ensure that there will be emerging cheap labor markets to exploit by 'Off-shoring advocates' of which M$ is already heavily invested in.

I could not agree more.

For an area of the world where computing is but a dream even XP basic is something, they will at least be using a system that is still on the majority of computers in the industrialized world. What is so different from the OLPC project which uses a crippled version of Fedora, at least XP is used on the majority of computers of the world. This package is geared toward students in the third world, what is so wrong with offering both an OS and a productivity suite to governements where $3 per student is a doable deal. Any other company who did the same thing would be lauded for its good work, but here everyone thinks because its MS making the gesture its evil. I may be a techie but I don't think Microsoft is the evil in this world, I reserve that distinction for the oil cartels who would destroy the planet to protect their profits. Get a perspective people and focus on what is going on in the real world and get your noses out of your hard drives and ranting on the big bad Microsoft. Trying to bring educational technology to bear in these countries is not a bad thing, while we are used to much more, for these countries it is a leap of a century.

Shugar is a very basic window manager to run over X but I was under the impression that being a Linux distrobution base, children would be free to add too and modify there own system as they like. Some will only ever use the basic functions but may grow up to be brilliantly educated where other's will dive into the software and grow up inherently understanding computers to the core.

I believe one of the primary goals is to give kids an open and transparent system with source code so they can learn how the hardware interacts with software and how the software code works it's magic.

Your still thinking in prorpietary terms though but it's common with Windows devoted so no worries. Here's the thing though; functions are far more important than brands. If you teach a kid to only use a Black and Decker pry-hammer model 2z then that kid is only ever going to be able to use the branded hammer. Teach them how to hammer a nail and they can use any hammer they pick up. Teach a kid to only be able to do things the Windows way and we'll end up with nations just like ours where most people can check email and facebook and take whatever is shoved down there throat.

The same example; highschools these days usually have a computers class with a room ful of windows machines. Maybe Win98, Maybe winNT, WinXP on newer systems and Vista eventually when driver support comes and new machines get baught.

The kids that come out of the class can use Windows but drop them infront of there friend's osX or the small town geek's *nix and they're lost; "this stupid system doesn't work, I can't find IE or anything"

Have that computers class with a few Mac, a few Windows and a few *nix machines running X and whammo, young minds see more than one flavour of computer. They become familiar with whatever they may sit infront of in the future. They may use windows at home or Mac at home or *nix at home but they get exposure too all the major GUI. the learning is far more valuable than teaching students to use the single brand of hammer from our earlier example.

FOSS community says "The pie is pleanty big enough for everyone to have a pice. Have a few machines each running something different, even Windows and the other closed OS"

Microsoft says "Run Windows. Run only Windows. Teach only Windows. Don't ask too many questions. Don't try to look under the hood to see how it works and don't forget to send us our software taxes when demanded of you."

If functions don't exist in the current system, *nix users can get the program they need and be on there way all in about five minutes. Imagine how cool Windows would really be if Microsoft vetted all win32/win64 programs actually making sure they worked with Windows then provided them along with updates through the Windows Update website?

"Gah, I need program XYZ to edit this file and I only have it on the work computer.. oh.. wait.. let me hit the Windows Update and Software Catalog.. there it is, and not even written by MS but they're providing me the download.. wicked, my files open and I'm off to working."

Linux/Unix *is* the Windows codec and driver repository but including all other possible software packages you may want both imature and a week old through to ten years old and still doing what it does best.

But to clarify. It's not Big Bad Windows, it's big bad Microsoft and this is because they where once liberated the computing world from IBM's monopoly control then turned around and put themselves right in that same possition to dictate what computerdom may and may not do with it's 1s and 0s. No, Microsoft really has earned the ill will they have within the technical community.

With Microsoft, we have a busling and lucritive security and support industry.

With FOSS, we'd have a busling and competitive service industry.

There's a subtle difference; keeping computers running well enough to get work done vs providing solution development and maintenance from time to time.

.
In America, a company selling a $500 product for $3 in order to displace the competition is considered dumping and it's illegal. Only a monopoly selling $44 BILLION and clearing $18 BILLION profit annually could afford to give product away like this. Everyone who pays the premium prices is funding this giveaway.

Microsoft is a company that just cannot find a way to be satisfied with $44 BILLION per year. They should be focusing on keeping paying customers happy.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 800 million customers paying premium prices are worth far more than a billion of them at $3 a pop. And, I am supposed to put up with capricious WGA de-activations for this?

There is $3 software available for all. It's called Linux and OpenOffice.

Yeah let?s give the Techless mass, as one person said, Linux. might as well stay in the dark ages at this point. I know LX has has moved to a more gui interface but MS is still easier to work on and support because it's all the same.

the new $3 software is call MICROSOFT.

many desktop distros are as easy to install as XP and unless you start getting into features of the nth degree in office, just as compatible.

I use both. when a client is in a budget crunch and they are not a power office user, I send them to ubuntu with open office. It's the $1.00 operating system. no need to reconfigure, just use it. word processor, spreadsheet, presentation manager, database, publisher, graphics program, what more could you ask for. and all the support you need is right here on TR!

"Third World" contries such as India, they are more on the Linux bandwagon then we are here in the US. So the cost of support could very easily be cheaper for Linux then Windows in many developing nations.

I seriously doubt underdeveloped countries who have never used a computer before would care if it was Linux or Windows.

The main window mangers in Linux are all the same too, if you can figure one out good enough, then you can work with them all.

I thought not!

I have been a Win-only user for a long, long time. Late last year I made a switch to Linux, I have tried several distros, on older and newer equipment. At home, my less than a year old dual core XP media center system rarely even gets powered on anymore, instead my 5 yr. old notebook with Linux gets most of my attention these days.
And guess what, I have had very few problems using it, and it costed less than $3. to setup.
If you trust that much in MS, you will get burned, take some advice from the many other people who respond often, MS is trouble.

Their product is easier to use in your perception only. It took little time for me to make the switch for basic usage, and everything else takes about as much time as it did to learn it in Windows.

So, since you are now branded as an MS groupy, I will have to part ways with you. If you decide to actually give a linux distro a try, we can chat again. But since you seem to be an MS junkee, and blind to all of MS BS, I can wait until you get burned too!

I thought I was harping on poor William a bit much the other day when he came through the comments and put a Ra Ra Microsoft against all the threads.

check out his join date. Maybe he's just new and needs some time to learn about technology or watch the rythm of the commentaries growth.