Re: [tlug] Re: Why Vista Sucks (was: linux: it's becoming ubiquitous)

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

emiddleton@example.com writes:
 > Attila Kinali wrote:
 > > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:23:40 +0900
 > > "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com> wrote: 
 > >   
 > >> As Mark Shuttleworth pointed out bluntly at BALUG last week, whatever
 > >> else you say about Microsoft, there's one thing you can't take away
 > >> from them: they made software cheap for the masses.  This is not true
 > >> of open source, not yet, and maybe never.
 > 
 > Probably just a slip up and he meant they "made cheap and nasty software 
 > for the masses" ;)

If there's a difference, I don't know what it is.  The masses have
that; they do not have our allegedly vastly superior alternative.

Mark Shuttleworth has the courage to admit why that is true.

 > Customization is one of the services you may have to pay for.

I'm not talking about customization, I'm talking about Microsoft Word,
which is deservedly the most popular editor in the world.

 > The advantage of the open source model is that they can have
 > features implement irrespective of your business model.
 > Customization might not be free, but it is a lot cheaper then
 > reimplementing everything to add a couple of features.

The only reason anybody would want to reimplement Microsoft Word is to
remove features.  But that's why it is the most popular, because
there's something there for everybody (except us, of course).

As for cheaper, Dave M explained why that ain't so.