|
All software should be free or very small priced or not everybody will have it.
you've opened my eyes !!!
from now on we'll stop to charge our customers if they want to use our software...
so every company that needs it, could use it for free and greatly reduce their expenses !
and don't forget my profit by doing this: i will live longer and more healthy because i'll have to sell my car (i wouldn't be able to afford it anymore) and thus i'd have to walk to the place i'm working (so i have some more fitness training in the morning).
in addition i would have to get a new job to pay the rent of my apartment or to buy me food. maybe i could find some outdoor work... then i could go outside, after 10h sitting in front of my computer, and do some physical activities like collecting garbage or cutting lawn in a park... yep, this would be really good for my lame spine...
cheers, case
|
|
|
|
|
It's worth to mention here that according to the GNU GPL the "free software" is "about the freedom, not the price". You still get the money and you can keep your car.
|
|
|
|
|
True, but this guy's views dictate that he beleives all software (and now hardware) should be free. I think that is what Mike was refering to.
|
|
|
|
|
Even I could do better than them!
I love it when people get so cornered they need to throw out that line in defence. If you can do better, DO SO. People will move to your product if it is truely better. Of course, you wouldn't make any money off it because you believe all software should be free? (from your reply below).
And what do you do for a living? It obviously can't be any aspect of software development if you have that view.
|
|
|
|
|
OS/2 is dead and BeOS too... 
and DOS was outdated since its first release...
|
|
|
|
|
|
True, but should OS/2 have died? BeOS was doomed from the start because it came along WAY too late to compete with Microsoft, and nobody wrote any drivers for it.
Anyway, the operating system is not the subject of this poll, so maybe we should just ignore this entire thread until Chris gives us a reason to argue about OS's.
It's my fault for starting this thread, because I mis-read the poll. My apologies for leading everyone astray. However, the fact that so many have responded merely illustrates my abilities as a born leader.
|
|
|
|
|
I voted DR Dos , just so that I could write a comment. I don't care who has the upper hand on the desk top as long as our best interests as users/developers are served .I have no way of knowing who will be best at that in a few years time .
My hovercraft is full of eels.
|
|
|
|
|
The wheels fell off my toothbrush.
Giles
|
|
|
|
|
One in six would prefer, that there where many different OS'es. I can understand this as a reseller, I can understand it as a consumer, but as developer I would prefer only one OS.
As it is now, where the desktop market is dominated by M$, it is hard enough to make your applicaitons compatible with the different variants of Windows OS'es.
Christian Skovdal Andersen
|
|
|
|
|
And Microsoft is thrilled that you have to develop for all their different OSs. It keeps you busy with the Windows side of things and gives them a reason to introduce yet another OS (WinXP) in the name of "unification".
Regards,
Alvaro
|
|
|
|
|
XP? that's old news. in six months, everyone will be worrying about Win-2002.
-c
------------------------------
Smaller Animals Software, Inc.
http://www.smalleranimals.com
|
|
|
|
|
"M$" yeah ok...I have a really hard time believing you could write just one version of an application for linux and be sure it would be compatible with 95+% of the linux boxes. Windows is pretty darn flexible when it comes to compatability...I have been impressed each year.
|
|
|
|
|
You should actually try some ?NIX programming. Not only do you have a much better chance of writting an application compatible across all Linux boxes, but it could quite easily be compatible with *most* versions of Windoze to as well.
Windows  flexible  easily impressed ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
My first computer was Sinclair ZX Spectrum, and I LOVED it  . I've read that Linus Torvaldson's favourite computer was Sinclair QL. Maybe he should have sticked to it, instead of making Linux.
I vote pro drink
|
|
|
|
|
My first one was a ZX 81, I also loved that one. (Just hated the keyboard)
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
my first 16bit (!) computer with 3.14mhz and 32kb ram - i really loved it !!!
btw: i voted for windoze... 
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah the TI99/4A rocked. I got one when I was 12. Taught myself BASIC on it to make space invaders aliens dance around the screen. Of course I didn't have any drive or tape backup so I had to record my programs on paper and re-enter it every time I rebooted.
Ahh, The good old days....
Josh
josh@that-guy.net
|
|
|
|
|
Speccy Rulez Forever =)_
Thought my first computer was BK0010-01 (very popular Russian computer) 8-bit + 16K RAM + 16K ROM + Tape Recorder as the storage device. But the ZX-SPECTRUM was the REAL =) love for me.
ps: voted for Windows
Best regards,
-----------
Igor Soukhov (Brainbench/Tekmetrics ID:50759)
igor@soukhov.com | ICQ:57404554 | http://soukhov.com
|
|
|
|
|
Sure Apple has suffered from a dearth of software and tons of bad press over the years, but give them credit where it is due. Without the innovation of Apple over the years, we would not have Microsoft Windows, at least not in the form it is today. They stole the idea, implementation and styling from Apple years ago and they continue to do it year after year.
I wish for a world where the system that is responsible for all the creative thinking and continues to be a superior platform got the recognition and success it deserves.
Sef Tarbell
|
|
|
|
|
Well said code master. 
Microsoft always rips off from apple. 
|
|
|
|
|
.... Or maybe Microsoft doesn't let pride get in the way of a good idea. The thing that really gets me mad are all these vendors who think that their product is soooooo brilliant, when clearly all lack in some way.
I appreciate Microsoft because they have brought a semblance of order to a crazy industry. That's why they're successful. Hire software engineers from Apple, Digital, Sun, HP, Borland etc. so that these people can build thier expertise into Microsoft software.
It's all very well criticising, but try getting tech support out of Sun or Oracle. At least Microsoft documents their systems.
Cheers,
Karim.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft did not steal from Apple. They both stole from Xerox (PARC project in 1970's) 
I vote pro drink
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for stating this. The minute I read the "Mac is King" I went searching to see if anyone remembered the truth!
Eric Hansen
ehansen@pmsi.cc
|
|
|
|
|
The *only* reason Macs seem to work so well right out of the box is because there are so few upgrade options outside of Apple. When you have that much control over a limited hardware selection, it's not really that hard to write a reliable OS. Considering a PC can be mutated into literally THOUSANDS of combinations of hardware, I think Windows and Linux does a pretty damn fine job of wrapping it all up for you.
And for the record, Microsoft did NOT steal from Apple. They both stole from Xerox.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
.