...or "what's Linux":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDh4LKTIxq8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szxmw0p_Urg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBUgEx_91BU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAr3XbqUbjo

If the first two don't make you choke up and/or give you goosebumps- there's no hope for you ;).

Wasn't one of the ladies in this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4
Penny Marshall from "Laverne & Shirley"? She was a lady with kinda reddish/brownish hair with glasses on.
Go to about 00:55 of this video.
If it's not her she looks like her.
I just saw Ali too.
The 2nd video looks like the guy from "Spenser For Hire".
I can't remember his name. He was Spenser's sidekick.

Penny Marshall from "Laverne & Shirley"? She was a lady with kinda reddish/brownish hair with glasses on.

Yeah, I think that's her.

Wasn't one of the ladies in this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4
Penny Marshall from "Laverne & Shirley"? She was a lady with kinda reddish/brownish hair with glasses on.
Go to about 00:55 of this video.
If it's not her she looks like her.
I just saw Ali too.
The 2nd video looks like the guy from "Spenser For Hire".
I can't remember his name. He was Spenser's sidekick.

Yes, Penny Marshall was only one of many famous/ accomplished people in the ad.

Others:


John Wooden (former UCLA Bruins basketball coach): "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group for the good of the group, that's teamwork."

Henry Lewis Gates (professor at Harvard): "Collecting data is only the first step toward wisdom, but sharing data is the first step toward community."

Sylvia Nasar (author of "A Beautiful Mind"): "One little thing can solve an incredibly complex problem."

Penny Marshall (actress, director): "Everything's about timing, kid."

Muhammad Ali (boxing legend): "Speak your mind. Don't back down."

As for the second ad with the "Spenser" guy- 10 geek demerits for you! ;)

That was none other than the finest captain from Star Trek (yes, better than Kirk :D)- Captain Sisko from Deep Space Nine- Avery Brooks.

As for the second ad with the "Spenser" guy- 10 geek demerits for you! ;)

That was none other than the finest captain from Star Trek (yes, better than Kirk :D)- Captain Sisko from Deep Sapce Nine- Avery Brooks.

Are those good demerits or bad ones?
I never was a Star Trek fan but now that I think about it I remember him being on the show.

He'll always be Hawk from Spencer For Hire to me....Driving his Ferrari around the snow covered streets of Boston...He was one bad dude!

Are those good demerits or bad ones?
I never was a Star Trek fan but now that I think about it I remember him being on the show.

"Demerits" are the opposite of "merits", so getting one is "bad" I guess- I was just jibing you ;)

Even among Trek fans, there is a lot of dissension re: DS9 and who was the "best captain"- just standard geek fare...

Nonetheless, Brook's delivery in the ad was excellent, with that Trek-speech-esque style and power, a hallmark of the best soliloquy's from the captains of Trek.

Ironic that a respected academic named "Gates" is featured in a Linux commercial talking about the value of sharing and the community :D

He'll always be Hawk from Spencer For Hire to me....Driving his Ferrari around the snow covered streets of Boston...He was one bad dude!

I remember him driving a white bimmer. Something along the lines of a 750. (I think).
I knew demerits were bad but since you had the work geek to it I wasn't sure what to think.
It's cool. I used to love "Spenser For Hire" and hated it when Robert Urich died.
Maybe I need to start watching some Star Trek reruns.

Yeah you're right, he did have a big Bimmer as well. I do distinctly remember him in a Ferrari as well only because I'm from the area and the comedy of driving a Ferrari in greater Boston.
-Trouble

I remember him driving a white bimmer. Something along the lines of a 750. (I think).
I knew demerits were bad but since you had the work geek to it I wasn't sure what to think.
It's cool. I used to love "Spenser For Hire" and hated it when Robert Urich died.
Maybe I need to start watching some Star Trek reruns.

My intent was to suggest you lost geek "street cred" by not recognizing Captain Sisko ;)

Definately a good idea to watch DS9 from start to finish again.

Watch the 2 hour pilot first, maybe a couple of episodes after that from the 1st season, then I'd suggest watching S3-S5, then go back and finish S1, S2, S6-7.

Ugh, I understand they make the prisoners at Gitmo watch DS9 for hours on end like that RGB ;)
-Trouble

Ugh, I understand they make the prisoners at Gitmo watch DS9 for hours on end like that RGB ;)
-Trouble

30 geek demerits for you- any true geek could watch all that in one sitting :D

He was bald in "Spencer" but had hair in Star Trek.
Girls aren't geeks anyway, you guys are.
;)
LOL!

He was bald in "Spencer" but had hair in Star Trek.
Girls aren't geeks anyway, you guys are.
;)
LOL!

Didn't you hear- girls love geeks...oh, sorry, that was only when they had money from the dot com era :D

...but your geek cred is totally exhausted now- Brooks went au naturale after the early seasons- he had the bald/goatee look for more than half of the DS9 run.

...maybe you never *wanted* any geek cred, though :)

Didn't you hear- girls love geeks...oh, sorry, that was only when they had money from the dot com era :D

...but your geek cred is totally exhausted now- Brooks went au naturale after the early seasons- he had the bald/goatee look for more than half of the DS9 run.

...maybe you never *wanted* any geek cred, though :)

LOL! I love secretly love geeks. That's why I love the guys on this forum and why I'm a member.
Shhhh! Don't tell anyone.
I used to tell people that I wanted to marry a computer person like myself.
One female friend said, "Why?"
Duh. That's something we would have in common.
I'll have to watch the other youtube videos.
I'll have to check out Brooks in ST also.

A little off topic, but....

Iggy Pop (the punk rocker) played Yelgrin, a Vorta that was involved with kidnapping the mother of Ferengi Quark. I think that I was the only one who noticed this!

Maybe not:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magnificent_Ferengi_%28DS9_episode%29
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Iggy_Pop

I told my brother about his appearance (he's a big Iggy Pop fan), and suggested that this may be a good reason to watch the DS9 reruns. He said that it still was not worth watching DS9. :D

It is considered to be the worst of the Star Trek series.

It is considered to be the worst of the Star Trek series.


...now you've opened one of the top Trek religious wars ;)

I think among serious Sci Fi fans, the ones who like the current BSG and Firefly, DS9 ranks either #1 or #2 of all Trek series:

http://slashdot.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=1489&aid=-1

I think the consensus even among less hard-core scifi fans is that they prefer Ds9 to ENT or VOY, ranking Ds9 #1, 2 or 3, with TOS, TNG somewhere in the top three.

Again, I'd suggest most people start with S3 or S4 and watch through the end- the first two seasons put off a lot of people. Like all good music, poetry and movies, sometimes it takes a while to "get it".

The quality of the acting, writing and plots were second to none in Ds9.

Ds9 is the "progressive rock" of Trek- one cannot make a judgement based on one viewing- it takes multiple viewings to "get it". In the case of prog rock music, you need to listen to the same song at least 5 times before making any credible judgments or criticisms about the song. In the case of a TV series, I don't think it's practical to watch a single episode that many times, but I think it's important to watch at least 5 consecutive episodes (not all in one sitting ;) ) before making a judgment- a single rental disc's worth. It's important to watch DS9 roughly sequentially, though, due to the liberal use of multiple story arcs, which was also a significant break for many Trek fans. However, a large portion of episodes stand on their own like traditional Trek, and they usually recapped or had character dialog remind viewers of significant story arc points.

I think the other off-putting factor was the "darkness" of DS9- it was dark before "dark" was "in", predating Firefly, the new BSG and Star Wars Episode 3 and e ban films by over 10 years. If you enjoy any of these, I think you'll be surprised with Ds9 in its entirety.

S1 and S2 are hauntingly similar to the past 7 years since 9/11, an allegory for terrorism, religious/idealogical wars, occupation, etc.

Ironically, for all these deviations from the Trek "norm", Ds9 had by far the most classic Trek tie-ins of any series. Well, not so ironic, as Ds9 is most TOS-like not in it's physical look (the sets and setting) but in the writing quality, character dynamics and "feel".

I was referring to the fact that it didn't have a lot of space travel in it. Since it was based on a station, most of the plots revolved around it. This was also the sentiment at the time of the original airings of the show. Time may have changed that, though.

What the hell is "Firefly" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_(TV_series)). I must have missed that show. I was working second shift, and I didn't have MythTV back then.

I was referring to the fact that it didn't have a lot of space travel in it. Since it was based on a station, most of the plots revolved around it. This was also the sentiment at the time of the original airings of the show. Time may have changed that, though.

What the hell is "Firefly" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_(TV_series)). I must have missed that show. I was working second shift, and I didn't have MythTV back then.

Firefly is a well regarded (among scifi fans), short lived TV series, per your Wikipedia link. The movie Serenity was a sequel/continuation of Firefly.

To address the lack of a starship, DS9 added the Defiant in S3, one reason I suggested starting with S3. The Defiant was permanently assigned to DS9 and used often. In S1 and S2, the "runabouts" (large shuttlecraft) were starship surrogates. Of course, throughout the series, the wormhole was the intended "seek out new life and new civilizations" avenue.

Beaming (I'm a Star Trek fan too) from one OT subject to another:

Troubleshooter -- Just as ridiculous as driving Ferrari in Boston, is driving a Ferrari Super America in Minneapolis. A friend of mine had a Sports Car Garage there. One of his customers was Mr. Pillsbury (of the Baking conglomerate fame) who took his Super America in there for service (my friend showed it to me - it ran like a clock and that unmuffled V12 purr was pure music). Mr. Pillsbury used it only for city driving (a crime), he used his Chrysler 300C for travel (when he drove) - this was in the late '50s.

pcdoctor -- My other half (a retired programmer) is a geek too, so girls definitely aren't excluded from geekdom at all. A friend of mine's wife built the engine in my race car (she wanted an erector set for her 8th birthday - didn't get it though).

Beaming (I'm a Star Trek fan too) from one OT subject to another:

pcdoctor -- My other half (a retired programmer) is a geek too, so girls definitely aren't excluded from geekdom at all. A friend of mine's wife built the engine in my race car (she wanted an erector set for her 8th birthday - didn't get it though).

I was being a smart aleck when I said women aren't geeks. Although when you hear the term geek, I would say it's usually associated with men.

So true, a common misconception.

I dunno, in some circles a geek demerit could be considered a double negative. On that note, forgive me for going back on topic ;)

Anyway, I use linux as my main OS (Gentoo flavored, but i dont rice it). I do so because I'm interested in the server side of computing, a little bit of the programming aspect, the hands on approach, and linux gives me all of that. I also enjoy the challenge of making linux do many of the things other systems can do (not only windows), often times better, and always less capital investment.

I find that more convincing to the average user is the youtube videos of the compiz-based window managers, which I also use. About one in every five people I show that too inquire about using linux, but I haven't converted anyone yet.

Part of the reason is because we are all in our mid to late twenties, and most of my buddies just aren't that interested in computers, and last i checked compiz and or kde4 just weren't ready for the average user. I tell them that there is a learning curve and it probably isnt worth it right now.

I think most of linux is like that. Its a platform by software developers and system administrators, for software developers and system administrators. I admit I haven't played much with the *buntus, but the few times I did, I needed to add repositories to text files just to use the package manager to install certain programs.

That is ultimately why I use Gentoo. It doesn't even try to be GUI configurable, because Linux just isnt wired for that. With great power comes great complexity, and right now I guess I could sum it all up by saying that "this power is great, but the complexity makes it feel 'slapped together' when I drive it".

The good news is that if you hit on something that everyone wants to smooth out, in the end you get an open source project >= the proprietary solution. The reality is that its gonna take a lot of tweaking to give it that seamless feel most of the time, and the rest of the time only a team of uber coders, with no time line, and poor people skills will be able to accomplish that.


They say you build it once to throw it out, and then build it again better. I don't claim I know how to make linux the best OS for HTPC use, or for general desktop use, but I know it can be made better. Perhaps additional a sets of standards needs to be in play, starting with all the shell programs that can't decide whether its better to use '-x' or 'x' for their arguments? Would that facilitate writing GUI apps to glue this stuff together for all those people who will never be able to appreciate the superiority of the CLI interface?

Is it too 'anti-linux-facist' to ask the community to reign it in a bit?

I've used many operating system, but the best for home use, in the context of its time, was the BeOS. 'Ahead of its time' doesnt begin to describe it.

In 2001, I could play four 320x240 @ 30fps videos and 17 mp3s without dropping frames on my PII250mhz. That was when windows 98 couldnt play an mp3 and do anything else with the soundcard at the same time. It still does Drag-N-Drop better than Linux.

It was two apple executives away from replacing the then Mac OS in the mid 90's, and when that didnt work out they were one pending lawsuit against Microsoft from being an Alternate OS shipping on Dells.

The good news is they won that lawsuit, the bad news is that by that time, all that was left were some shareholders. Palm bought the rights to the intellectual property and buried the project.

But fear not, they have an open source project which now, 7 years later, is approaching Alpha (only half sarcastic). Im not allowed to post urls het, but its 'kaiku-os dot org', if you care.

You can still download BeOS R5 from bebits dot com. They now have a 'linux version' that lives in an .img file on you hard disk, which you boot from a floppy. I strongly suggest someone try it, if you're not scared of how it may change your perspective ;)

There was a time when it was called the "Media OS", and was going to be the future. Read all about the sad history and questionable future of the best HTPC platform, and the best Desktop OS that never was, at wikipedia. I just checked today and it looks like there is yet another project to port the BeOS api to the linux Kernel.

Wish I could link you, but I cant.

I dunno, in some circles a geek demerit could be considered a double negative. On that note, forgive me for going back on topic ;)

Anyway, I use linux as my main OS (Gentoo flavored, but i dont rice it). I do so because I'm interested in the server side of computing, a little bit of the programming aspect, the hands on approach, and linux gives me all of that. I also enjoy the challenge of making linux do many of the things other systems can do (not only windows), often times better, and always less capital investment.

I find that more convincing to the average user is the youtube videos of the compiz-based window managers, which I also use. About one in every five people I show that too inquire about using linux, but I haven't converted anyone yet.

Part of the reason is because we are all in our mid to late twenties, and most of my buddies just aren't that interested in computers, and last i checked compiz and or kde4 just weren't ready for the average user. I tell them that there is a learning curve and it probably isnt worth it right now.

I think most of linux is like that. Its a platform by software developers and system administrators, for software developers and system administrators. I admit I haven't played much with the *buntus, but the few times I did, I needed to add repositories to text files just to use the package manager to install certain programs.

That is ultimately why I use Gentoo. It doesn't even try to be GUI configurable, because Linux just isnt wired for that. With great power comes great complexity, and right now I guess I could sum it all up by saying that "this power is great, but the complexity makes it feel 'slapped together' when I drive it".


I think several points are out of touch with the current state of Linux/Ubuntu.

re: compiz

I believe the compiz issue is WAY overused and overhyped. Most people are still using XP. Most people who are willing to try/convert to Linux will be coming from XP or Win98. XP/Win98 don't have any Compiz-like effects. Why would anyone converting want/expect them?

IMO, the inclusion of Compiz in current distros was a knee-jerk reaction to Aero and OSX's 3D effects. Further, I believe that 3D desktop effects are like the 64bit vs 32bit issue- 99% of PC users don't need nor would see any meaningful benefit using a 64bit OS at this time or in the next several years. Similarly, 99% of new Linux users I've installed Ubuntu for turn off Compiz after the novelty wears off. Yes, Compiz is "ready" for your Mom/Joe Sixpack, but I don't think Mom/JSP are ready for overbearing, function-less animations interfering with their routine daily computer tasks. This includes Aero, OSX or Compiz. It's overbearing 3D desktop effects that are a dud, not Compiz.

Yes, the current Linux desktop environments like Gnome, KDE and Xfce are more than ready for Mom's/JSP's. Just give an Ubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu or Mint LiveCD to any average person, let them boot it and use it, and judge the reaction. For the many "normal" people I've converted to various flavors of Ubuntu and Puppy Linux, the thought of desktop Linux not being "ready" in any way, shape or form is preposterous.

The latest Ubuntu's have all the repositories enabled by default. Even if they weren't, on earlier versions, my 9 year old niece opened a simple dialog box like 1000's of other standard GUI programs since 1985's Amiga, Atari ST, and Mac, and click a few obvious radio buttons to add the extra repositories- FAR easier than navigating to 10's or 100's of websites to download installers, then running each of them separately to install common apps and utilities on Win.

re: BeOS-

Good example of how things "might have been" if MS hadn't put the illegal stranglehold on the OEM/retail OS preinstall market. The past 15 years may have been very, very different, with a healthy variety of OS's preinstalled on retail PC's, or at least consumer choice of what OS they wanted to be installed.

I think several points are out of touch with the current state of Linux/Ubuntu.

re: compiz

I believe the compiz issue is WAY overused and overhyped. Most people are still using XP. Most people who are willing to try/convert to Linux will be coming from XP. XP doesn't have any Compiz-like effects. Why would anyone converting want/expect them?


My experience has been just the opposite. No one cares that I can rent a Xen slice for 20 bucks and host 10 domains with email, mailfiltering, websites, XMPP servers etc.

No one cares that I can tar a file on this side, pipe it to ssh, and extract it on the remote side with one command line argument.

No one cares that free software can turn my computer into an enterprise class PBX.

No one even cares that its free, because windows sure SEEMS free to them, after all, it just comes with their computer.

OTOH, show them my spinney cube transparent desktop and they are instantly intrigued. My friends may just not be like yours.


IMO, the inclusion of Compiz in current distros was a knee-jerk reaction to Aero and OSX's 3D effects.


There's a freebsd 3d desktop that I actually think inspired the project. Its been around for years. Its moto is/was "Impress your friends while slowing down your computer."



Further, I believe that 3D desktop effects are like the 64bit vs 32bit issue- 99% of PC users don't need nor would see any meaningful benefit using a 64bit OS at this time or in the next several years. Similarly, 99% of new Linux users I've installed Ubuntu for turn off Compiz after the novelty wears off. Yes, Compiz is "ready" for your Mom/Joe Sixpack, but I don't think Mom/JSP are ready for overbearing, function-less animations interfering with their routine daily computer tasks. This includes Aero, OSX or Compiz. It's overbearing 3D desktop effects that are a dud, not Compiz.


It's easy enough to configure it to keep its useful features, and it is suddenly a tool for productivity. For instance, even with a 24" screen I cannot live without the ability to float my mouse over a window and have everything else go translucent enough to read that one out of 50 open dialogs on my screen.

I'm a 'power user' by any standards though, so maybe most people dont care about that.


Yes, the current Linux desktop environments like Gnome, KDE and Xfce are more than ready for Mom's/JSP's. Just give an Ubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu or Mint LiveCD to any average person, let them boot it and use it, and judge the reaction. For the many "normal" people I've converted to various flavors of Ubuntu and Puppy Linux, the thought of desktop Linux not being "ready" in any way, shape or form is preposterous.


We are grouping Desktop Environments and Window Managers, which isnt really correct.

I don't want to give you the impression that I am a linux hater, cuz I'm not. That said, to imply that Linux is a good of a desktop OS as Windows or MacOS is truly preposterous.

I'm sure you're going to convince me that the world is blind, and I'm misinformed, but please read up on the 'Linux Desktop Myth'

We can keep pretending linux is the Answer For Everything, and getting offended when anyone tries to imply it needs to be changed or has any room for improvement, but I don't think this will get us what we want.

Operating Systems and software in general are tools. I imagine we would still be using steam powered drills if people got as wrapped up in them as in Operating Systems.

I've spent the trouble to convert an office user to oO and Kubuntu, and we had to go right back due to instability in the drivers (probably just a rare coincidence), but more importantly because in every instance oO was not good enough for the MS Office user. Sorry for my inconvenient reality.

These people were motivated by saving the money, but when push came to shove they dropped the big bucks anyway.


The latest Ubuntu's have all the repositories enabled by default. Even if they weren't, on earlier versions, my 9 year old niece opened a simple dialog box like 1000's of other standard GUI programs since 1985's Amiga, Atari ST, and Mac, and click a few obvious radio buttons to add the extra repositories- FAR easier than navigating to 10's or 100's of websites to download installers, then running each of them separately to install common apps and utilities on Win.

Nine year olds today may be the first generation to bring Desktop Linux into primetime. Most 9 year olds today, and in my time, run computers better than my parents.

Google search the 'desktop linux myth.' (http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth) I really don't want to get into this as it has been hashed and rehashed a thousand times over. You may not believe me, but the consensus among linux users is that it just isnt there yet.

You don't even need to go outside this forum for an example. Do I even need to point out that your linux PC WONT be 'Digital Cable Ready' in this decade. I've used Myth and MCE, and no matter how many cool features Myth has that MCE doesnt, this is a deal-breaker for most.

My point was to bring up the BeOS (my favorite OS every), not to bash linux (my second favoirite OS ever), and CERTAINLY not to hype Windows (my distant 3rd favorite OS ever).

Its OK to love Linux, but to tout its benefits while ignoring its faults makes us no better than the average M$ or MacOS fanboy.

Good recent article addressing "Why use Linux"

http://www.pcmech.com/article/why-use-linux/

Also, discussion
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Why_Use_Linux

Google search the 'desktop linux myth.' (http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth) I really don't want to get into this as it has been hashed and rehashed a thousand times over. You may not believe me, but the consensus among linux users is that it just isnt there yet.


Outstanding essay.

However, my interpretation and impression after reading it is that the writer feels Linux *is* "there" now (functionality and usability-wise), but is simply frustrated with the conversion/adoption rate and the retail preinstall issue, which is an illegal monopoly/unfair trade practices issue.

The games issue is dead, IMO, as gamers flock to consoles, plus 1000's of games do run on Linux, when you combine native, emulation and Wine/Cedega. Plus, for HTPC, it's audio and video playback & recording that matters, plus maybe console emulation, covered well in Linux.

We need the IBM's/ Red Hat's/ Google's of the world to back a massive lawsuit to force every computer sold in retail to be sold without an OS, or offer an OS choice at the point of sale, and offer an obvious/easy refund for the retail price of the preinstalled Windows OS if the license is declined. This is how it was prior to 1995- PC's on the shelves of Best Buy had different OS's, and you could buy the OS you wanted (OS2, GeoWorks, etc).

But the essay is an excellent summary of the past 4-8 years of Linux in the "real world".

It appears the essay was written in 2006 (judging from the link references), though, and lots of things have improved in the Linux landscape.

I was a Win Power User back in the 90's, and I'm now a *nix Expert, according to the writers classifications.

The majority of Linux installs I've done have been for Novices, who've had no issue in the conversion. I've converted PC's for many Win power users, too.

The writer is absolutely correct in that most people never install an OS- people like me do it for them, though at this point in time, my Mom and 9 year old niece could install Linux from the typical LiveCD, but couldn't get a Win OS installed from scratch with drivers, apps and settings.

A big practical business motivator is that a duopoly (MS and Apple) is as bad as a monopoly for consumers. And for home built PC's, MS *is* a monopoly. There is absolutely no practical, widely used alternative for homebuilt PC's (i.e. a large portion of HTPC's) *other* than Linux. The liberty to build your own fully functional computer that interoperates with others, their data and on the web is a very, very important principle. If Linux doesn't "fly" and allow a functional HTPC, say goodbye to media use freedoms and choice for the rest of your life. The Grand Experiment of a liberated, public OS being viable "in the wild" will wither and die. I am certain historians years in the future will view Linux as significant an achievement as the printing press, radio, TV and the Internet.

I am very technical, and write Unix software for a living. But I don't want to routinely compile from source either. Occasional make-install's from *.tar.gz's- no big deal, not even for that niece ;) With modern distros and their repositories, *.debs, *.rpms, simple "double click on the install script's", the Linux "old days" are over.

However, I strongly defend my access to the source code and to be free of license encumbrances. I don't own a gun, but I strongly support the right to own one. None of us may stand on a street corner or keep a web blog to pontificate our political beliefs, but I don't think anyone would not fight for the right/ability/liberty to do so if you wanted to, or fight proactively for the right of another to do so.

That's what Linux means to PC users- they may not know how important the rights it asserts/affirms are, but it's sufficient that at least some of us know.

the retail preinstall issue, which is an illegal monopoly/unfair trade practices issue.

We need the IBM's/ Red Hat's/ Google's of the world to back a massive lawsuit to force every computer sold in retail to be sold without an OS, or offer an OS choice at the point of sale, and offer an obvious/easy refund for the retail price of the preinstalled Windows OS if the license is declined.


Why do you think that? I don't like it, because I don't like windows. But I don't see how it is illegal or even unethical.

Why do you think that? I don't like it, because I don't like windows. But I don't see how it is illegal or even unethical.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Business_practices
"The Findings of Fact in the United States Microsoft antitrust case established that "One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed. In 1998, all major OEMs agreed to this restriction."

http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

http://www.news.com/2100-1040-232565.html

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5001157/South-Korea-puts-Microsoft-in.html

http://www.jftc.go.jp/e-page/pressreleases/2004/july/040713.pdf

http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/12/07/HNmicrosoftfined_1.html

http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts/bristol/Default.htm

http://www.webmasterworld.com/msft/3586056.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7266629.stm

http://www.itpro.co.uk/news/125024/court-upholds-microsoft-eu-antitrust-ruling.html

More evidence:

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/133050.asp