Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:03:34 10/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 2001 at 16:56:26, Christophe Theron wrote: >On October 27, 2001 at 11:15:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 27, 2001 at 04:19:47, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 26, 2001 at 20:43:14, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>> >>>>On October 26, 2001 at 19:12:03, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>OK, then you definitely work for MS. Most observers mention the need to have >>>>>256Mb of memory and a very fast processor in order to run XP. >>>> >>>>Question the observers. Most memory companies have gone so far as to say that XP >>>>will only run well with 512MB RAM or more. Hmm, I wonder why they say that? And >>>>if you see an article saying something similar, ask if the author is only saying >>>>it because of the noise that memory companies have made. The Register has >>>>written a few columns on how much memory XP really needs, and the consensus is >>>>that it will perform just fine with 64MB, which I have witnessed personally and >>>>consider to be true. >>>> >>>>>Windows 95 runs on my 386sx 20MHz, and it has only 5Mb of memory. I just have >>>>>to >>>>>wait a little minute every time I want to open an explorer window. But I swear >>>>>W95 works on my 386sx 20MHz notebook. >>>> >>>>I don't doubt that. But I remember running 95 on a 486/80 (WAY faster than a >>>>386sx) with 8MB RAM and it was a DOG when running any more than one program. >>>> >>>>WinXP will run just fine on any Pentium (including 60MHz) with 64+MB RAM. I have >>>>seen it myself running just fine on a P5/133 and a P5/60 isn't so much slower as >>>>to make it unusable. >>>> >>>>>Why should I let a chance to Microsoft to have a look at what's going on >>>>>inside >>>>>my computer? >>>>> >>>>>The question "are they going to have a look or not" is totally secondary. >>>> >>>>By running a Microsoft OS, you are giving MS the opportunity to do that no >>>>matter what, whether you like it or not. MS could upload every single keystroke >>>>you enter without your knowledge, if it wanted. >>> >>> >>> >>>Hey, you finally got it! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Same for any other operating >>>>system you might use. >>> >>> >>> >>>Please mention another operating system I could use. >> >>There is an alternative. I don't run windows on _anything_ I personally >>use. From the laptop I am using right now to post this, to the quad in >>my office, to the file servers and firewalls at the office, to the >>workstations used by faculty there... > > > >Yes, I know someone would point out Linux, and I do not disagree with you. > >However it is not an alternative for me. > >I write programs to be sold to as many customers as possible. When I look at the >current state of the market, it scares me. > >I have a relatively reliable way of evaluating which OS my potential customers >are using. I look at the statistics of my Chess Tiger site (www.chesstiger.com). >At least it gives me a picture of my market segment. > >What I see on today's statistics is: > Windows 97.0% > MacOS 1.3% > Unknown 1.0% > Linux 0.7% > WebTV 0.3% > >Does it make any sense for me to use Linux then? It definitely does. There are two issues: (1) what system do you use for _development_ and (2) what system(s) do you target for sales? My program runs just fine under windows. But it is developed and tested under linux... > >This has nothing to do with the quality of the OS. I consider Linux (and Unix in >general) as THE reference OS of all times. After all, Unix and its flavors have >successfully been used since more than 30 years on many different platforms. >What other OS can beat that? > >Naturally I could use Linux to develop my chess algorithms and port the >resulting code to Windows when it is ready. But coding Chess Tiger only takes a >marginal amount of time (testing it is what takes 90% of the developpement time, >but most of this is done with automated procedures). > >Tom was joking about "living in the woods". Well, using Linux would be like >living in the woods. I don't want to live in the woods, because I need to live >the same life as my customers. I have to live the same experience as they do, so >I can feel their needs and improve my products accordingly. > >If all my customers are using Windows and I'm using Linux, I don't think I am >living the same experience as they do. If I do that, then I live in the woods, >and they live in town. > >I do not know what to do about this situation, and that's why I hate it. > >I am forced to use an operating system which is 90% driven by commercial >considerations: forcing people to buy more powerful computers to do the same >thing as they did before (bloated OS), directing people to use selected >commercial services instead of cheaper or even free alternatives (the ".NET" >propaganda, Windows Media Player hold up, forcing people to download selected >partners updates and services), forcing people to pay regularly to renew their >software license (which allow to get money without actually improving the >software), and so on... > >But as you only use Linux, you probably do not have any idea of what I am >talking about. Lucky you... :) > > > > Christophe > > > > >>>Hint: there is no other alternative. >>> >>>Still not understanding my concerns? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> The question is not whether or not you're giving them a >>>>chance to do it, it's what they're actually doing. And it has been independently >>>>confirmed that MS is NOT uploading personal information about you. Just a hash >>>>of your hardware. >>>> >>>>>>I'm the last person to tell somebody to use Windows, but if you don't use it, >>>>>>I'd prefer that your reasons be based on accurate information. :) >>>>> >>>>>Come on. I have seen where Microsoft is taking us over the years, and as the >>>>>justice is not willing to stop them, the only way to keep a little bit of >>>>>privacy and control over our information systems is to realize what's going on >>>>>and to resist. >>>> >>>>Or just use something else. I don't see why you're getting so worked up about >>>>this product activation scheme (which is presumably what you're talking about). >>>>Look at it from other viewpoints. >>>> >>>>1. A lot of the more expensive software requires dongles. Would you prefer a >>>>dongle over a fairly harmless/painless "product activation" scheme? Or how about >>>>programs that require you to insert the CD every few times you use them? >>>>Microsoft doesn't make you do that, either. In terms of copy protection, the >>>>product activation scheme is not as bad as many alternatives in use by companies >>>>that you would probably consider less evil than MS. >>>> >>>>2. If MS does not take actions within their means to prevent piracy, it becomes >>>>legally very difficult to prosecute pirates. In effect, our legal system is >>>>_forcing_ MS to do something in the vein of product activation. >>>> >>>>I often enjoy reading your posts a lot because I think they are very well >>>>thought-out, balanced, and objective, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. >>>>If you really believe in all this Brave New World, Orwellian sort of stuff about >>>>Microsoft, you are free to go live in the woods and send letter bombs to people. >>> >>> >>> >>>If I express my concerns so loudly it is precisely because I do not opt to live >>>in the woods and act as you say. >>> >>>It beats me to see how the sheep tries desperately to protect the wolf. >>> >>>Stockholm syndrom? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.