"Dude, I've already got your money." --Charlie Sheen
So there' s no financial incentive for MS to target Linux in this manner...
"Dude, I've already got your money." --Charlie Sheen
So there' s no financial incentive for MS to target Linux in this manner...
How do you mean? As in Linux users returning devices or pitching fits when it turns out that they're not Linux-supported?
Yes I can see this. Consider for example two other identical wireless adapters. One has a chip set that is supported by Linux and the other does not. Now consider a return rate among Windows users of say 0.5% and a purchase ratio of 99% Windows users 1% Linux users. The Linux users will return 100% of the adapters that do not work with Linux and 0.5% of the adapters that work with Linux.
The overall return rates are 0.5% for the Linux compatible adapter and 1.495% for the Linux not compatible adapter. A manufacturer and a retailer will want to know why a particular device has 3x the return rates.
I realized later that he was referring to an off switch for secure boot (which he'd said earlier in the other thread.) The quote from my post mentioning the Windows tax threw me (because I'm still not sure how it connects.)
Ah - now it all makes sense. = D
So, having failed to sell Vista to the OEM's; and having failed to sell Windows 7 to Big Business; Microsoft's sales spiel for the, as yet, unfinished Windows 8 is to be:-
'OK, its no more Mr Nice-Guy; make your hardware so that it only ever runs Microsoft OR ELSE ......... we won't sell you our Operating System.'
Hmm ...... don't actually believe that. Why do you?
rjbl
Pretty sure Windows 7 sales are fine, in fact its usage has surpassed XP thanks for playing.
If the only reason you think your software is better is because it's FOSS, you need to write better software
Bookmarks