Upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for only $39.99!

[psxphill]

What you're doing here is conflating neutrality and objectivity to imply that, because I have an opinion at all, my opinion is "biased" and therefore valueless. By this logic, the only person whose opinion should be taken seriously is the person with no opinion at all, and debate is inherently pointless.

No, you lack objectivity. I know that because your argument is flawed and only serves to back up your bias.
 
You're suggesting that you are entitled to an opinion that is provably wrong.

[psxphill]

You keep saying that I'm wrong, but all I'm seeing, looking back over this thread, is you telling me that my predictions are wrong because they haven't come to pass yet. Well yes, that's why they're predictions and not statements of fact at present time. You may think they're highly improbable while I think the opposite, but there's no way to say that either of us is wrong on that count until we observe how things play out.

Your opinions are however based on your provably wrong gems, such as:
 

The problem is that I'm not the one implying that - Microsoft is. They want everybody to move to Metro, whether on the desktop or on a tablet, and they want everybody to get their "apps" from the Windows Store so that they get a cut of it.

You justify every thing with "it's clear this is the way they are going", when to someone who is objective it's actually not clear at all. If you take what Microsoft have said at face value then you wouldn't be making these claims. If you're going to ignore what is here now & what Microsoft say about the future, then you deserve to be called on your paranoia.
 
Microsoft have just added an app store, it's not that big a deal. If they allowed desktop apps too then at least developers might sort out their installers.

[psxphill]

That is my analysis of their behavior. It's quite possibly wrong (though I don't think so.) What it isn't, at this stage, is provably false. You keep acting as though saying "no, you're wrong!" is proof of same, and if I disagree then I'm just not objective enough, but that's not how it works.

Your statement about Microsoft trying to force you to use windows store apps is provably false. I've been running Windows 8 for a while now and they have never once tried to force me to use it.
 
You could argue that while they haven't done it yet, you think they will do. But then you're not analysing their behaviour, because they haven't actually done it or even hinted that they will. You are only analysing your guess of what their behaviour will be,
 
My analysis of your behaviour is that you're scared that if enough people prefer apps from the windows store that there is no business case to develop desktop apps or for Microsoft to support running them, then you'll be left without an operating system that you like.
 
"Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself"
 

or the developers who are now going to have to fork out to Microsoft just to be able to distribute their software? NO.

I'm a developer and I can distribute my software without paying Microsoft. If I chose to write a tablet app for Windows RT then Microsoft do have a monopoly for distribution, like Apple do on the iPad. However with Microsoft testing & hosting the app, taking payments then sending me my cut, it sounds worth paying for. If there was more than one store, then I'd need to get my software on all of them as the more stores there are the less likely it is that users will visit them all.
 
It doesn't sound great for open source who want everything for free, but someone has to pay. Even free hosting for open source projects has to make money somewhere, usually from people who don't use the open source software at all (like advertisement, where it's the customers of the products advertised that are saddled with the cost).

[psxphill]

It's not free as in beer, it's free as in freedom.

And you have the freedom free to write any software you like for windows 8 tablets. The thing that is being complained about is that it costs money.

[psxphill]

As far as freedom, you know it isn't about "free to write a program"'. Its about freedom to do whatever you damn well want with the software on your computer.

And there is nothing to stop you doing what you damn well want with the software on your computer either.
 
People have been making **** up about Microsoft locking your computer down in the "next version of Windows" for ages.
 
Anyone who thinks it will ever happen needs to put their tin hats back on so nobody can steal their thoughts.

[psxphill]

I'm not anti-Microsoft in the was I was 15 years ago, I'm happy with whatever OS runs the apps I need and gets the job done with the minimum of hassle. It just so happens, the answer is rarely a Microsoft product.

I've never been anti-Microsoft, but I didn't have a windows machine until 12 years ago. For the majority of people Windows is the minimum hassle. They know that they can buy a printer in PC world and it'll work.
 
I like visual studio and use that a lot. I don't use Office much, but I don't use anything in it's place either.
 
I've tried other browsers and email clients but always end up back with IE & Windows Live Mail.
 
I've tried Linux and ended up back on Windows again. I use Linux and unix at work because I have to, it's not that I don't know how to use it.
 
And I like running (or at least trying) the latest versions of software, for various reasons.
 
I could waste time lolling on message boards about how Microsoft sucks because they aren't perfect, but nothing is.

[psxphill]

As one example: On my linux box, I've swapped out the entire GUI multiple times: From Gnome to Unity to KDE to Openbox. Can't do that on a windows box.

Having multiple GUI's is one of the reasons that Linux will never win any desktop share. If they could actually come up with one good one, then it might stand a chance.
 
You might think it's really neat that you can do that, but the fact that you even have that choice is an extra burned on the majority who would live with what they are given.

[psxphill]

Err... That is what Unity is. Ask most muppets what linux is and they will tell you its Ubuntu. The Steam Client for Linux is being specifically optimized and released for Ubuntu to start. People in the know will still use distro x, y or z with desktop environment x, y or z, but Ubuntu (whether you like it or not) is becoming the de-facto standard for third party targets. Which, in turn, means that Unity is becoming the standard desktop environment.
 
In Arch land where I reside, there are already murmurings with the newbs why Unity isn't in the main repos.

Unity is only the shell, it uses gnome underneath as the desktop environment. It's also the name of a Linux distribution that uses openbox to cause ultimate confusion.
 
Ubuntu has been touted as the next big thing for years, if steam goes well then it could become a viable desktop operating system that is free as in beer, if not free as in spirit. It will only succeed if people spend money on games though.
 
Ubuntu make their money by also providing Amazon search results when you're searching for local content. Amazon is very toxic in the UK, because like Starbucks they avoid paying any corporation tax at all. Not exactly the kind of company you really want to be involved with. http://www.theweek.co.uk/uk-business/46200/how-does-amazon-minimise-its-tax-payments
 
I think I'd rather use Microsoft products :-)

[psxphill]

"They" ? Who are they?
The Ubuntu people? IBM? Intel?
 
There's no monolithic entity pushing linux. That's what's so beautifull about it. That's why you can use linux in a wrist watch, and a wireless router, and a tablet, and a desktop computer and a supercomputer cluster.
 
 
And if we're at "I'd rather have other people choose for me" as a culture, then it's over. The big men in suits won.

They are Ubuntu, they are the ones making money out of pushing Linux. They wouldn't be doing it if there were no money in it.
 
Software is a tool, it's not a religion. I put companies that promote Linux alongside Television Evangelists.
 
I run android on my phone because it came with it. I chose the phone on other factors. The software was chosen for me.
I'm in a room with 5 things that are running Linux & none of them are easy to install something else on either, including newer distributions let alone another OS
We're already there as a culture & Linux is just as big a part of it as Microsoft or Apple.

[psxphill]

IBM and Google are television evangelists? I think we can end this conversation here. We don't have any frames of reference that are in the same realm of sanity.

You can't even read English, so we may as well end the conversation here.
 
I didn't say they were TV evangelists, I said that I put them alongside.
 
They are saying the things that you eat up, but they are just trying to find a way to screw money out of you. Google have nailed it.

[psxphill]

People don't use linux because of games or because some craptastic shovelware program doesn't run natively on it that they just CAN'T live without.

A lot of people don't use Linux because of the lack of hardware and software support. I've only used laptops for the last 12 years and Linux driver support has always been poor when I've tried it. I was surprised when a real hardcore Linux geek I know bought a sony vaio & he's now happily running Windows on it as it actually has drivers for all the built in hardware.
 
They don't want to learn anything new, if you can't get them to upgrade from XP to 7 because it's different, then switching to Linux is never going to happen.
 
You'll never be able to convince your broadband supplier that the reason the internet is not working right has nothing to do with you running Linux.
 
Commercial software that people rely on hasn't been ported.
 
Hardly anybody knows how to use it. Not helped by the differences between distros.
 
Steam are the first business to have any real faith that Linux on the desktop can succeed. Maybe it will pay off for you eventually, maybe it won't.
 
Just because there is software that nobody can be bothered to write for Linux, doesn't make it craptastic shovelware. Maybe they just want to reach the widest audience. Especially for commercial software, where you're trying to sell software making it not only not free as in beer, it's definitely not going to be free as in spirit.

[psxphill]

So, Google invented Linux and is the be all/end all? Runey called you on not making sense - this post does not help your case.

I never said they invented Linux. Please try reading slower and more carefully, you might find it helps.
 
It seems Mitt Romney is better at debating than Linux users.

[psxphill]

I have found linux support stellar for most all hardware these days except for some wifi chips. It must have been a while since your last attempt.

Is wifi not important? I've been using wifi almost exclusively for networking for 12 years.
 
Tell me a distro that you think every single piece of hardware in my laptop will have drivers for and I'll install it on a spare drive & let you know how I get on.
 

No hardcore linux geek would ever buy a Sony product. I had a Sony laptop once. It barely ran on Windows, and was impossible to divest of shovelware as the proprietary drivers were embedded in a reinstall routine that would just reinstall the shovelware. It was an absolute piece of crap. If he was a real linux guy, there are many many companies which manufacture and sell laptops with excellent linux support. Lets see, there's Asus, and Dell, and Lenovo...

Well he is a real Linux geek and it's a really nice bit of hardware with no shovelware at all. The speed was amazing. I am not impressed with asus or Lenovo hardware. The new xps 13z from Dell looks nice, but that's no good for you as it comes bundled with Windows 8. I tend to buy Dell stuff as their support has consistently been good for me, I'd always get on site support with accidental damage though.
 

I am not sure why you staunchly refuse to adjust your view of linux to its current state. I get you think it sucks, but don't spread FUD because you couldn't get it to work.

I could ask you the same, but you'd only say that you are right.

[psxphill]

There is no monolithic entity pushing linux.

The more Ubuntu takes off the worse canonical will become. http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/canonical_now_solicits_donations_when_downloading_ubuntu_says_dont_freak_out
 
I like this comment: "I guess if the current users didn't leave after Unity, nothing is really going to shock them."
 
 
Google haven't particularly played fair with android either. Holding back the source until their own device is launched.
 
So no, there is not one company that is doing the dirty. It's a load of them.
At least Microsoft writes the software they sell, Ubuntu & Google have taken the hard work of others to make money from.

[psxphill]

Latest Linux Mint, latest Ubuntu, latest Fedora. take your pick.

Which one is best?
 

I can't stand lacking multiple desktops at windows 7 at work, but other's wouldn't care, because they never got used to that feature f.x. Ditto for whatever is your particular favourite thing.

I tried it back in the 9x years when Norton (?) included it in one of their packages. I never got on with it, but there are multiple add on's that allow you to do it.
 
Microsoft even has one of their own that has been recently updated (I assume for windows . http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx
 
or an open source one that appears to still be going http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/

[psxphill]

Pretty stupid comment indeed. If you don't like the Unity desktop, just run "sudo tasksel" and pick something different. Or choose a different installation medium right from the beginning (e.g. the Xubuntu or Lubuntu ISO). Unlike other OSes, you're not limited to that one and only desktop environment, you know?

It seems very user unfriendly to have to run a command to change desktop. Isn't their a configuration screen?
 
Will Steam be supporting the other distros?
 
You say you're not limited to one and only desktop environment as if that is a good thing. You must have loved it when Bluray and HD-DVD were getting exclusive movies so you had to buy two players, so much choice. Its a pity that everyone grew up and spoiled it for you.