Do you agree with the OEM executive director of Microsoft Norway?

[miceagol]

Today there was a Q&A session (http://tux1.aftenposten.no/nettprat/vista/) in one of Norway's largest newspapers, Aftenposten (http://www.aftenposten.no/), with the OEM executive director of Microsoft Norway answering questions about Windows Vista.

One of the Q&A goes like this (translated from Norwegian):

What reasons do I have for choosing a relatively expensive operating system like Windows Vista in preference to free linux based operating systems? As for example Ubuntu?
Svein Kroksvingen, Narvik

Johan Fredrik Gørrisen:
You have to consider that yourself. By far most people choose Windows because they emphasize on having a system that works, is upgraded automatically, has a wide selection of software and that is easy to setup and use. As a HW-geek, I think everyone should choose the system that best suits their own needs. Best regards, Fredrik


Do you agree with the executive director? If yes, why? If no, why not?

Let the discussion commence! :)

[happy-and-lost]

No. "Upgraded automatically"? Nothing on the upgrade system in Linux. Under Windows every single piece of software runs a different updater. That's why I love Ubuntu, it just all comes under Synaptic instead which saves alot of time and effort.

[mostwanted]

Almost sounds like he uses Linux in his spare time ;)

[shining]

You have to consider that yourself. By far most people choose Linux because they emphasize on having a system that works, is upgraded automatically, has a wide selection of software and that is easy to setup and use. As a HW-geek, I think everyone should choose the system that best suits their own needs. Best regards


Now, that makes more sense.

[Rhubarb]

It must've been a Freudian slip that Fredrik had made.

[smoker]

Hme, well, windows does have a multitude of spyware apps that linux can't compete with, lol :-)

[SunnyRabbiera]

Ease of use?
Maybe
Updates?
I dont think so

XP still has vulnerabilities in it that are still unresolved, in linux you get updates pretty quick most of the time... especially ubuntu.
Ease of use is a debateable issue as I personally find Linux easier then windows.

[Rhubarb]

By far most people choose Windows
Do they really choose windows? Can the average user choose something else at a computer store.
Hmmmm, let's see, I can choose between OEM XP home, or OEM XP pro ...

As a HW-geek, I think everyone should choose the system that best suits their own needs.
Absolutely, I do think everyone should choose what OS suits them.
--> Most people wouldn't know the difference between xp pro or xp home. Hell most people don't know that there are 2 main versions of xp (yes there's media centre edition, and basic).

[Rhubarb]

Updates?
I dont think so
Yes you do, you get really quick updates to patch your DRM, so you don't accidentally (on purpose) decrypt your purchased music.

This debate will inherently be one-sided here (duh), because we are on ubuntuforums.org
But what Fredrik has presented is an equally one-sided sales-pitch.
Playing on the fear some users have of the big scary Linux monster.

[bastiegast]

As everyone says, I too think this guy was a bit confused, we should mail him and tell him he probably meant ubuntu instead of windows:mrgreen:

Updated automatically? Yeah but what about third party apps? System that works? Tell me which OEM will sell a non configured linux system? Wide selection of software? Allright there might be a wide selection, but prepare to pay, accept all kinds of agreements you dont even know what it says, have your windows install messed up because of all third party apps who wanna use your systray, and a pain to manage all your software, let alone to keep it up to date.
Nah for me its easier to just: sudo aptitude install and sudo aptitude remove if i dont need it anymore.

[drFUNK]

Yes you do, you get really quick updates to patch your DRM, so you don't accidentally (on purpose) decrypt your purchased music.

Nope, they haven't even patched that one yet... Trust me on this one. ;)

[shining]

Do they really choose windows? Can the average user choose something else at a computer store.
Hmmmm, let's see, I can choose between OEM XP home, or OEM XP pro ...


Yes, indeed, I just noticed that also, I didn't pay attention to "choose" the first time.
He's talking about the minority of users that do choose windows. So maybe what he says is right, but it really doesn't matter.

[Rhubarb]

It is obviously a sales pitch disguised as an open interview.
... Well, "open" as far as m$ is concerned anyway.

Fredrik, like any good salesperson / politician, has not answered the question. He has not stated why someone should choose windows over Ubuntu.
He has simply stated what windows can do (poorly).

Asking someone who works for m$ is obviously going to be extremely biased (and ignorant?).
That question would be better asked to someone who is both reasonably important, has an unbiased mind set, and who has good experience in both operating systems.

Perhaps a better question to ask would be one that is more specific.
Like the m$ lock-in with schools in the USA (I give you a discount, maybe some free computers, but you have to stick with m$ for a decade or two).
M$ costs money for schools, what about m$ office and any other useful apps that you need in a school? This costs money.
--> Edubuntu to the rescue!!!! Huzzah!

That could be a poor example question to ask, as my head is v sleepy now.

[miceagol]

You have to consider that yourself. By far most people choose Linux because they emphasize on having a system that works, is upgraded automatically, has a wide selection of software and that is easy to setup and use. As a HW-geek, I think everyone should choose the system that best suits their own needs. Best regards

Now, that makes more sense.

That was also my first thought. :) This guy definetly has never tried a distro like Ubuntu. Does he imply that Linux doesn't have those features too?

I guess that those people who actually choose something choose Linux, because they tried both. And most of those who "choose" Windows don't choose it because of those arguments, they choose it because they have no other choice. Computers = Windows

[Lord Illidan]

We say that Ubuntu works.

And for us, yes, it does.

But how many people have hardware which is unsupported under Ubuntu/Linux and for them, Windows works while Linux doesn't and they justifiably cannot understand how Linux can ever be better than Windows?

Or else, the people who have to do drastic things to get hardware working while on windows it works out of the box? Sound card drivers which have to be compiled, or wifi-support?

Or people who cannot use their windows applications under Linux because they are unsupported, and cannot use the linux apps because they are inadequate, and wine is not enough?

I think we sometimes live in an Utopia, a la-la land where because Ubuntu works for us, we assume that it works for everyone else.

[miceagol]

He's talking about the minority of users that do choose windows. So maybe what he says is right, but it really doesn't matter.

Who are the minority of users that do choose windows? People who need to use a program they couldn't use in Linux (e.g. Photoshop). Not people who prefer Windows Update. ;)

Humans are extreme creatures of habit, especially when it comes to computers. Their first meeting with the computer world was Windows, and that's where they're staying. There's no choice between the two OS before after using Windows for some time.

[Lord Illidan]

Who are the minority of users that do choose windows? People who need to use a program they couldn't use in Linux (e.g. Photoshop). Not people who prefer Windows Update. ;)

Humans are extreme creatures of habit, especially when it comes to computers. Their first meeting with the computer world was Windows, and that's where they're staying. There's no choice between the two OS before after using Windows for some time.

Aye, I agree with you there. Windows update, sucks, no question about that. Same applies for their Genuine Update, and drm crap.

But the real issue is program and software compatibility. Windows can work on systems where Linux refuses to budge. I know that this is NOT linux's fault, it is the fault of the manufacturer, but does the Average Joe who is having problems think the same way?

[boban]

We say that Ubuntu works.

But how many people have hardware which is unsupported under Ubuntu/Linux and for them, Windows works while Linux doesn't and they justifiably cannot understand how Linux can ever be better than Windows?

I think we sometimes live in an Utopia, a la-la land where because Ubuntu works for us, we assume that it works for everyone else.

You missed one point - windows works, because it is preinstalled . I think that when it comes to ubuntu vs windows, ubuntu installation is easier. It is my experience, that WinXp isn't working out of the box when you have to install it yourself. Without service pack 2 I had to install drivers for almost every piece of hardware I had... (with xp sp2 almost everything worked... but with no optimal configuration, I had to install motherboard and gfx card drivers alone)

[EdThaSlayer]

Funny. Windows doesn't just "work", you have to install so much software to feel secure, and it is very buggy compared to linux.Maybe that guy was bribed by M$, who knows?M$ is known to threaten people...such as hardware vendors. The only downside of linux is the hardware compatibility(gets better every couple or months though), and the games(which not a lot of office workers use).

[Lord Illidan]

You missed one point - windows works, because it is preinstalled . I think that when it comes to ubuntu vs windows, ubuntu installation is easier. It is my experience, that WinXp isn't working out of the box when you have to install it yourself. Without service pack 2 I had to install drivers for almost every piece of hardware I had... (with xp sp2 almost everything worked... but with no optimal configuration, I had to install motherboard and gfx card drivers alone)

But you found the drivers, didn't you? And in many cases, it was a matter of going to the website and downloading an .exe file. Very easy. For you, Ubuntu is easier, but then your hardware is supported.

Funny. Windows doesn't just "work", you have to install so much software to feel secure, and it is very buggy compared to linux.Maybe that guy was bribed by M$, who knows?M$ is known to threaten people...such as hardware vendors.

Linux may be more stable, but some linux programs are definitely not.

NOTE : I am being a devil's advocate here, ok? I haven't converted to MS, or anything, I am just trying to think like them.

[miceagol]

Maybe that guy was bribed by M$, who knows?M$ is known to threaten people...such as hardware vendors.

This guy works for M$. His bribe is his salary. :p

[Lord Illidan]

This guy works for M$. His bribe is his salary. :p

Hehe.. I like your new avatar :mrgreen:

[kosmic]

Almost sounds like he uses Linux in his spare time ;)

I subscribe this post ;)

[boban]

But you found the drivers, didn't you? And in many cases, it was a matter of going to the website and downloading an .exe file. Very easy. For you, Ubuntu is easier, but then your hardware is supported.


That is true - most of hardware is "windows certified" (so there are drivers). But I read some other post on this forum about unsupported hardware by windows - the other guy had to run linux to download SATA driver. After that he created bootable floppy (under linux) and in the and he could install windows.

I had similar issue with windows installation from cd with my LiteOn (SOHW-1673S)dvdr. I had to install windows from my friends cd drive, because windows installer were just loosing connection with my dvdr (after research I came to conclusion, that I had to change dvdr firmware to be able to install windows - it worked, but I was able to upgrade firmware from windows only!),


Linux may be more stable, but some linux programs are definitely not.


I think he meant security, not stability alone... Security under windows suxx - you'll have to admit it. After windows installation I always do 3 things: install zonealarm, install avg, install firefox. And that is not obvious or user friendly for most of people out there...


NOTE : I am being a devil's advocate here, ok? I haven't converted to MS, or anything, I am just trying to think like them.

I thought so :)

IMHO main linux problem is not quality of the software but mentality of people. Ask any non-computer-geek about linux, and they will tell you that it is something hard to learn, hard to install, hard to maintain...

But again - how many of my friends called me to help them with their windows, because sth (program crashed / viruses / slow / you name it)? I don't say that they wouldn't call if they would run linux. I'm just trying to show you - that it's all about mentality (windows is known evil, linux is unknown)

[Lord Illidan]

That is true - most of hardware is "windows certified" (so there are drivers). But I read some other post on this forum about unsupported hardware by windows - the other guy had to run linux to download SATA driver. After that he created bootable floppy (under linux) and in the and he could install windows.

I had similar issue with windows installation from cd with my LiteOn (SOHW-1673S)dvdr. I had to install windows from my friends cd drive, because windows installer were just loosing connection with my dvdr (after research I came to conclusion, that I had to change dvdr firmware to be able to install windows - it worked, but I was able to upgrade firmware from windows only!),

I won't argue with that. And I also know that for supported hardware, Linux has become easier to install, at least in the case of Windows XP. I installed XP yesterday, was a mess, almost had to delete of my primary partitions to create an "NT" compatible partition and even now, I have to remove my secondary harddisk to boot windows.



I think he meant security, not stability alone... Security under windows suxx - you'll have to admit it. After windows installation I always do 3 things: install zonealarm, install avg, install firefox. And that is not obvious or user friendly for most of people out there...


Yes, I agree. However, it can be easy to keep Windows secure if you know how.

IMHO main linux problem is not quality of the software but mentality of people. Ask any non-computer-geek about linux, and they will tell you that it is something hard to learn, hard to install, hard to maintain...

But again - how many of my friends called me to help them with their windows, because sth (program crashed / viruses / slow / you name it)? I don't say that they wouldn't call if they would run linux. I'm just trying to show you - that it's all about mentality (windows is known evil, linux is unknown)

My friends usually just re-install the whole thing when it gets slow. They are experts with it!

[boban]

Yes, I agree. However, it can be easy to keep Windows secure if you know how.


I don't think it is easy to know ;) ... Basic security - it's true. But with so many holes in windows even best AV/firewall software won't help you. I don't use win this days much (and when I have to I boot it from vmware), but I remember that I had at least 1 or 2 infections per year...

And again - if you know "how" almost everything is easy :D


My friends usually just re-install the whole thing when it gets slow. They are experts with it!

That was normal procedure with win 95/98... In Xp you have to activate... And you have only limited number of activations (not sure if I am correct with this thou)...

[Lord Illidan]

I don't think it is easy to know ;) ... Basic security - it's true. But with so many holes in windows even best AV/firewall software won't help you. I don't use win this days much (and when I have to I boot it from vmware), but I remember that I had at least 1 or 2 infections per year...

And again - if you know "how" almost everything is easy :D



That was normal procedure with win 95/98... In Xp you have to activate... And you have only limited number of activations (not sure if I am correct with this thou)...

pss..psss....ever heard of cracking?

[boban]

pss..psss....ever heard of cracking?

Nope :rolleyes:

:mrgreen:

[miceagol]

Hehe.. I like your new avatar :mrgreen:

No wonder! Most of the people using this forum are guys according to this (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=61048) ;)

[Lord Illidan]

No wonder! Most of the people using this forum are guys according to this (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=61048) ;)

That poll does look familiar..

[steveneddy]

Most people don' choose windows, it there when they buy the machine.

MOST of the population doesn't even know what Linux is. We can't hold that against them if we are a little geekier than the average computer user.

WE have seen the light, so to speak. We must be a little evangelical about using our OS of choice if we are going to have a Linux dominated world.

Only when computers are sold with Linux installed and the salesman doesn't tell the customer that they can just delete it and install windows if they want.

We need better educated computer salespersons and sales managers for that matter. I have heard them telling people that windows and Mac are all that's offered. Linux you ask.....he's never heard of it.

You guys know that when Ubuntu goes mainstream that these forums will be jam packed with millions of Linux noobies.....what are we gonna do then?

[j3cakes]

I'm only new to ubuntu having used windows for the last 15 years so I'd like to add my copper coins in to this discussion.

A few weeks ago I bought an external hard drive, guess how long it took me to get it working in windows - about 5 seconds. I took it out of the box, plugged the power in and attached it to the USB port on my windows PC. Windows recognised it, installed the drivers and added it to my available drives list in explorer.

How many system files do you have to manually edit to achieve the same thing in ubuntu? I haven't tried because, well, to be honest, I'm too scared, mostly because I don't know what I'm doing in ubuntu. The other day, I bought a second SATA drive for my main PC with the intention of putting Ubuntu on it and using a dual-boot menu; I've since done some research on these forums and I'm not sure I'm going to bother. Edgy, it would seem, has major problems with recognising SATA drives and it sounds like there's a significant risk I could lose the windows partition.

THAT's the reason people stay with windows - you plug your bit of kit from PC World (cause they're the experts, right? hehe.) and, more often than not, it works.

A lot of people like to bag windows but, for the vast majority of people, if they're a little bit sensible about what they do (installing a firewall, keeping AV files up to date, not opening .exe files from unknown senders) you can be relatively free of problems. If you're infected two/three times a year then you're really not paying attention.

There is, of course, the fact that you have to rebuild it every year or so to keep it performing anywhere near its optimum, which sucks big-time.

So far Ubuntu has been a steep learning curve and I'm ok with that because it's a completely new mind-set and I really want to be able to get more out of the hardware I have, but that's because I want to do it; most people who don't work in the industry just want an OS that does it all for them and ubuntu/linux is just not there.

Determining which OS is best for you depends entirely on the criteria you use and 'Ease of Use' is one of the biggest for most non-IS people.

[BWF89]

No. "Upgraded automatically"? Nothing on the upgrade system in Linux. Under Windows every single piece of software runs a different updater. That's why I love Ubuntu, it just all comes under Synaptic instead which saves alot of time and effort.
That's if the program your useing was downloaded through synaptic/apt-get. Some programs aren't in the repositories and require compiling.

[Stanley Krute]

Hi j3cakes

Agreement with your post.

I want Linux to win. Ignoring the issues you bring up,
trying to hand-wave them away, just won't cut it.

There is, of course, the fact that you have to rebuild it every year or so to keep it performing anywhere near its optimum, which sucks big-time.


Recommendation: pick up Fix-it Utilities 7. $30 at Amazon.com
Has the best anti-virus (Trend Micro) plus the best Windows
registry cleaner (Registry Fixer). Inconsistent registry entries
are what degrade Windows over time. A new Dell will have
600-1000 such defects when delivered. Run Registry Fixer until
you're down to a couple of glitches. Then do so every 50-100
hours of use. Keeps Windows young and fresh, obviating the need for rebuilding.

-- stan

[Phatfiddler]

The last time I "chose" anything with Windows, is when I chose to permanently remove it. Go figure.

[ragadanga63]

Don't forget guys that Linux is for free!!! The same Windows system would cost you thousands of dollars on software alone. So I'm not complaining.

Seriously though, I've been a Windows user for 20 years and i agree with some points the director raised such as the availability of apps and ease of use. But Windows is clunky and unreliable. I have two Pc's, one running Win XP and the other running Ubuntu. I've had crashes and broken hearts with my XP. So far, my Ubuntu PC has not had a single glitch. Now all my important files are stored in my Ubuntu. That makes me think, I paid a fortune on my Windows system and all it brought me were headaches. I paid nothing on my Ubuntu (they even shipped me the installation CD's for free to this far corner of the world) and so far i have no problem whatsoever.

While i agree with the director on some issues, if he were in front of me now , i'd spit on his face and kick him in his groin. Thank you, you bastard, for making my PC life miserable and for ripping me off.

[aysiu]

Moved to the Windows forum.

[holihue]

NOT at all

[karellen]

Today there was a Q&A session (http://tux1.aftenposten.no/nettprat/vista/) in one of Norway's largest newspapers, Aftenposten (http://www.aftenposten.no/), with the OEM executive director of Microsoft Norway answering questions about Windows Vista.

One of the Q&A goes like this (translated from Norwegian):


Do you agree with the executive director? If yes, why? If no, why not?

Let the discussion commence! :)

what do you expect him to say? he works for MS. if I were in his position, probably I'd say the same things....Of course, it's highly unlikely I would be in his shoes...