Microsoft

[Roger Oberholtzer]

On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:10 -0500, Ronnie Gauthier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 22:26:27 -0400
> Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 22:25 +0200, Dirk Moolman wrote:
> > > I saw on the news tonight, that a judge overseas (in Europe), stood by
> > > the previous ruling of 2004, that Microsoft must make more information
> > > available to other companies, to allow them to integrate their products
> > > into Windows.
> > > 
> > > My personal opinion is that linux will eventually overtake microsoft,
> > > and become the word software leader.  I just don't know how far off that
> > > is.
> > 
> > <IF>, like if the raging debate over on the Fedora list is any
> > indicator, there could be a distro that could remain rock solid for a
> > length of time, linux would have already won. Ric 
> 
> Why it will be years, if ever, before Linux can say "We're close".
> 
> MS products are not designed by geeks but by marketing type pinheads who
> dictate what code the geeks will write. This results in products that
> for the most part simply work, at least for the clueless user. Now we
> are not talking about their server products here but OS and apps for the 
> mainstream everyday clueless user.
> 
> Linux products are designed by geeks for geeks and marketed by geeks to 
> geeks. The average clueless user does not fit into that concept in any
> way, shape or form and wont ever fit it. When a Linux distro gets a pinhead
> and the geeks listen you may then find an acceptable linux product.

While this is very true, I think this has been changing quite a bit. The
better Linux software does take user clarity into account. Just as Linux
is almost overcompensating for the earlier lack of hardware support (to
the point where it is more likely Linux will find/support all your
hardware more so than, say, Vista), I think ease-of-use has seen great
strides. Sure, MS has bucks to spend designing an interface. But I
suggest that MS's perceived ease of use is more just that the stuff gets
used so much. All the oddities have become assimilated into how people
work. Take a newbie and set then loose with Word, and I am very doubtful
if they will fine it more intuitive than OpenOffice.

I have a graduate degree in psychology (Human Factors Engineering),
which is the cognitive part of all that, not the ergonomic. IBM and the
US military are the big employers here. Not MS. So it could very well be
as you say: marketers guide MS software development. Not people actually
trained to do this. And marketers are better than geeks at this for
exactly which reason? Perhaps at making an interface that sells, not one
that is really good.

If MS DID use geeks to design their interfaces, I bet they would still
maintain their market share for things like word processors. How many
companies do you know that sat down and compared ease-of-use when
choosing these products? More likely, they just used whatever came with
the computer.

I am very hesitant to concede that the MS interfaces are so very good
and are in any way a reason for market penetration.

> But that is not very likely as the vendors that need to be on board for 
> such a thing to happen just refuse to open their source up to the Lunux
> community.
> 
> The last problem is $$. Linux is free and there is no way to afford the
> pinhead and his/her marketing method of development and deployment for
> the desktop environment.

So, perhaps Linux needs to recruit GUI developers in much the same way
it does for coding. A person who can make a nice GUI must surely be as
interested in sharing this as is an open source programmer. Having said
that, I think some of the bigger Linux projects are doing this. As well
as graphic artists and writers.

Give it time.

> just my .05

Just my 3 SEK.

-- 
Roger Oberholtzer

OPQ Systems / Ramb?ll RST

Ramb?ll Sverige AB
Kapellgr?nd 7
P.O. Box 4205
SE-102 65 Stockholm, Sweden

Tel: Int +46 8-615 60 20
Mobl: Int +46 70-815 1696