The Big Facebook/Google/Apple/Microsoft Debate

[Cerez]

I'll start this thread, seeing as there's recently an avid interest in how the products of these companies affect our lives -- and rightfully so. Feel free to chip in and discuss anything relating to these companies and their products. Your experiences with them, discovered new things, latest products, researches, etc. Just be respectful to everyone's preference and opinion.

 

This is a parliament hearing about the NSA's recent access to the database of these companies -- who secretly collect information from their users, often to great detail:

 

[Xeby]

Like i said before.. Apple a is piece of shit company... Microsoft is following. About Google.. well... they are tracking when you use the search engine.. and stupid Chrome browser. But Android is a good mobile OS. Is not Google success.. is a Linux form around the world developers success ! Android track you with stupid google services. If you dezactivate that.. you don't have a problem. Can't say the same for dezactivating tracking on stupid iphone and other products that use icloud shit !! Facebook is a spy social website for tracking sheeples people that put they own private information and thinks that is cool... LOL..! Its a same method like Apple do. This why those corporations has alot of money.. this is a sheeples people fault !

[Guest Deleted]

braindevice

[eezstreet]

more like worst company.

 

Let's review, shall we?

• Created and then shut down Google Code, Google Code Search, Google Wave, Google+, among numerous other half-baked ideas.
• Google Buzz put everyone's contact details from Gmail into the public and you had to opt out of this feature. Good thing that Google Buzz was also shut down, right?
• At one point, they didn't hide people's passwords for certain things like YouTube and other sites. If you typed in your password, it wouldn't hide it with *s or other symbols. This lasted for probably a week (probably less, I can't remember) before getting revoked.
• Dart, which was a thinly-veiled attempt to get everyone to use Google Chrome and everyone called them out on it.
• Go, not to be confused with Go! because Google said "fuck that programming language, we're cooler than them" and forced the original Go language to change its name.
• They've been selling search results to advertisers since Google Toolbar was a thing.
• YouTube's monetization mess, where fake companies were assuming copyright of music, video, etc and stealing money from other people (like the original person who created them!)
• Scroogle used to be a way to search Google without cookies being placed on your machine. Except they got DDOSed by Google in 2010.
• Speaking of cookies, their cookies can track you for up to 24 years.
• They broke copyright by placing authors books up on Google Books without their permission.
• They own all commercial rights to what people produce in Google Map Maker.
• Gmail messages are read and scanned by software that then allows advertisers to deliver targetted ads based on what you email.

Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google

[Xeby]

I use Google Chrome because its the fastest browser and Google is a cool advertising company that makes good products. I use Android and love it. It beats Apple in every way if you have the latest update  The most advanced mobile operating system  I also like Windows 10 and can't wait to use it because it will be the best Windows ever unifying everything and making more optimizations overall

 

Google is the best company

Probably you are a little kid that not think at all. Like others sheep people @ world.

[Syko]

Like i said before.. Apple a is piece of shit company... Microsoft is following. About Google.. well... they are tracking when you use the search engine.. and stupid Chrome browser. But Android is a good mobile OS. Is not Google success.. is a Linux form around the world developers success ! Android track you with stupid google services. If you dezactivate that.. you don't have a problem. Can't say the same for dezactivating tracking on stupid iphone and other products that use icloud shit !! Facebook is a spy social website for tracking sheeples people that put they own private information and thinks that is cool... LOL..! Its a same method like Apple do. This why those corporations has alot of money.. this is a sheeples people fault !

 

I can't understand why so many people have an irrational hatred for Apple. I'm far from an Apple fanboy (the only mac I have is a Mac Mini I got fairly recently), and I've gotten rid of my iPad in favor of an Android tablet. I still think Apple makes great products though. The only real downsides to their products I can think of are price and the closed-off nature of Mac and iOS, which was one of the main reasons why I switched to Android.  

 

Also, you probably actually use a lot of services from these companies that you trash talk. Linux isn't all sunshine and rainbows either. It's great that it's free and open, but it can also be a pain in the ass from time to time, especially if you aren't a tech wizard nerd who spends all day tweaking an OS.

[Ping]

Never owned any Apple products. Don't care to change that either.

[Cerez]

I still think Apple makes great products though. The only real downsides to their products I can think of are price and the closed-off nature of Mac and iOS, which was one of the main reasons why I switched to Android.

 

I'll add behind-the-scenes information hoarding on their users, and a gradually degrading quality in their initially well designed products to that.

 

Linux isn't all sunshine and rainbows either. It's great that it's free and open, but it can also be a pain in the ass from time to time, especially if you aren't a tech wizard nerd who spends all day tweaking an OS.

 

Depends on which distribution, but yes, GNU/Linux can be difficult at times. I find that Fedora only needs an initial setup, and then it's solid as rock and perfect for work (no maintenance needed); and Ubuntu needs about as much setting up as Apple -- namely, very close to zero -- but it feels too much like Windows and Mac for my taste.

 

Up until the latest two releases, Mac OS X was more stable than any Linux distro I've tried. It's a pity they have to destroy that for the sake of better commercial sales. Linux is solid and reliable -- more reliable than Windows -- but apps occasionally do crash in Linux. Fortunately they're generally well designed and fast loading, so that doesn't pose much of an issue. I've never lost any data so far.

 

Linux has one major advantage over all closed platform, corporate OSs -- it's made and maintained by the community, which means no overwhelming private interest, minimal privacy issues, and software made to be used, as opposed to commercial software just made to sell. That is a big difference when it comes to having a computer you can use for an extended period of time, and keep on using.

[eezstreet]

The way I look at it:

- Apple: Company that asks itself "How can we make more money?" and rubs their hands together. All they want is money, really. I can't really fault them for that.

- Microsoft: Used to be bad, but have changed their ways. In an ironic twist of fate, MS, the company beat known for claiming that the GPL is a "viral license" (well ya...it is), has now released DOS, their C++ compiler, the entirety of TouchDevelop and a large variety of their mobile apps under the GPL. They're also working on a ROM that you can flash onto Android phones. Fucking brilliant.

- Facebook: Don't understand the hate on this one. You're putting your information on there for people to see, and then they've run a few scientific experiments on the site. Really I have respect for them that they do that, as it shows that they're interested in how they're impacting their users' emotional state.

- Google: I've said my piece already.

 

Basically, I think it's irrational to hate a corporation just because they're a corporation. Do you hate Valve because they're a corporation?

[Xycaleth]

- Microsoft: Used to be bad, but have changed their ways. In an ironic twist of fate, MS, the company beat known for claiming that the GPL is a "viral license" (well ya...it is), has now released DOS, their C++ compiler, the entirety of TouchDevelop and a large variety of their mobile apps under the GPL. They're also working on a ROM that you can flash onto Android phones. Fucking brilliant.

GPL is still pretty bad IMO. There's a lot of restrictions associated with it (all in the name of free software) which will put people off of it. Of the open source Microsoft projects, none of them are licensed under the GPL as far as I can see. A few licenses I saw were the MIT license, Microsoft's own Open License, Apache 2.0, etc.

[Cerez]

Basically, I think it's irrational to hate a corporation just because they're a corporation. Do you hate Valve because they're a corporation?

 

Actually, I do, LOL! Not simply because they are a corporation, but because they are completely closed, like the rest of the corporations we've mentioned above. I prefer DRM-free games, and GOG's service as far as downloadable games go.

 

Of the open source Microsoft projects, none of them are licensed under the GPL as far as I can see. A few licenses I saw were the MIT license, Microsoft's own Open License, Apache 2.0, etc.

 

So MS-DOS is still private property, huh? These are things I find hard to understand. A whole universe was built on DOS, and it's been under copyright for long enough. The public has adopted it and used it to the maximum. It should belong to the public, not some old guy sitting in his office, not giving a care about the world anymore.

[z3filus]

These so called spy programs are meant to aid police forces around the globe, to identify anything illegal. The big fuz about this, is securing this intel from hackers, pedophiles and stalkers.
I've got nothing to hide, and my Facebook is filled with game invites and random status updates. Facebook is weird for their privacy settings, they seem to want to share your photoalmbums..

I don't own any Apply products because I think they are too complicated. Requires to sign up this and that.

Nothing is simple these days.. and I have grown a bit anti-american..

 

[eezstreet]

I don't quite think you understand how code copyright works, @@Cerez. An MIT license basically says "Use this, just don't make any money on it". Or maybe MIT allows for commercial distribution, I forget. I don't totally remember the differences between BSD/MIT/zlib/Open/Apache/Eclipse/whatever. But I agree with Xycaleth, GPL kinda is evil because it can worm its way into projects and wreak all kinds of legal havoc. Fun fact: The MP3 library used by Raven was GPL'd, so they would've had to release the source anyway.

 

I also don't understand that logic that corporations are evil because they're closed. A corporation is no different than a business like GOG. And businesses can't be totally transparent anyway, for obvious reasons (like divulging trade secrets, credit card info, etc). I think we should all be kinda grateful that the vast majority of crap isn't held under some stiff trade secret laws or something.

 

Also, I'm pretty biased towards Valve anyway, so probably not the best example. I'm not a great fan of their games, but Source 2 will be powering Rapture. 8)

[Cerez]

I also don't understand that logic that corporations are evil because they're closed. A corporation is no different than a business like GOG. And businesses can't be totally transparent anyway, for obvious reasons (like divulging trade secrets, credit card info, etc). I think we should all be kinda grateful that the vast majority of crap isn't held under some stiff trade secret laws or something.

 

Perhaps I need to clarify what I really mean by "closed". Companies and corporations are required to keep certain secrets about their operations. This is something that the consumer usually has no interest in anyway, and that I would label "company/business privacy". Companies also have right to exclusively own a product they have created, naturally, as long as that product does not contain the open source work of others -- in which case they are usually obligated to contribute back to the community by publicly releasing the updated/changed source. This is done to ensure that progress can be made from everyone's work.

 

Where I have a problem with a closed attitude ownership -- where a company keeps all its assets and products to itself -- is when their product(s) are affecting the lives of millions of people. When something becomes so widely adopted and relied on by so many people, I believe the community deserves the right to be in involved in the development of that product. If we are talking about a "free country" and "democracy", to use political terms, then democracy in this case would mean that people have a say and insight into the development of such products. Full control would not be in the hands of corporate management, with completely restricted access to anyone from the outside to see. Such enormous scale private projects should be required to become open source projects. Otherwise corporations are taking over our lives with exclusive control over their widely distributed products. Such power over the people should not be given into the hands of a few. What right do corporations have to control our lives and limit our options and resources? It's feudalism building all over again.

 

I've taken this a step further in order to illustrate my point, but I hope this clarifies what I mean when I say "closed".

 

In the case of Steam, as a company they are locking you into buying games only from them, and games that run only using their proprietary platform. It's a very similar business model to Apple's App Store. Then, with a large enough consumer base, they have control over distribution and can dictate terms, and determine what software is released and what is not. At least Valve actively queries their customers, and allows certain (controlled) community impact with features such as Steam Greenlight -- which is why they appear to be a little bit more open -- but the other companies we have mentioned above do far less, and keep all control and decision over their products' development to themselves.

[Xeby]

 

[z3filus]

In the case of Steam, as a company they are locking you into buying games only from them, and games that run only using their proprietary platform. It's a very similar business model to Apple's App Store. Then, with a large enough consumer base, they have control over distribution and can dictate terms, and determine what software is released and what is not. At least Valve actively queries their customers, and allows certain (controlled) community impact with features such as Steam Greenlight -- which is why they appear to be a little bit more open -- but the other companies we have mentioned above do far less, and keep all control and decision over their products' development to themselves.

It's called good business.  Ubisoft does it too.. most companies do it, and there's nothing bad about it.   Not everything has to be a conspiracy.

Men invest in these heavily, so they need to have a 100% solid concept that they start to work on, and that concept(game, mobilephone,console) needs to sell. Nobody want's to loose thousands of dollars.

No one is taking over our lives. You make your own decicions on what to buy and who to follow. Don't be a slave to the advertisements. Nobody NEEDS to buy a new iPhone every year, or a tablet. etc. etc.

 

I love this video.  "We think too much, and feel to little"

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6xnp5Rq2Nk

 

[Cerez]

No one is taking over our lives. You make your own decicions on what to buy and who to follow.

 

I want to buy a computer without Microsoft Windows at a local store. I haven't been able to do this since I can remember. Where can I find one? Nowhere. All thanks to Microsoft. No matter what computer I buy, I will have to pay my taxes to Microsoft. (Why should I?! I don't want to!!!)

 

This illustrates my counter argument perfectly. Just because they leave you a few options (like buying an Apple computer instead) doesn't mean that they are not controlling the market, your spending, and your usage, and your life. By dominating an aspect of our lives, they are taking away freedoms we've had before their arrival. That's what many-many corporations do. It's powerful business, sure, but not "good" business in any moral regard.

[z3filus]

I want to buy a computer without Microsoft Windows at a local store. I haven't been able to do this since I can remember. Where can I find one? Nowhere. All thanks to Microsoft. No matter what computer I buy, I will have to pay my taxes to Microsoft. (Why should I?! I don't want to!!!)

 

This illustrates my counter argument perfectly. Just because they leave you a few options (like buying an Apple computer instead) doesn't mean that they are not controlling the market, your spending, and your usage, and your life. By dominating an aspect of our lives, they are taking away freedoms we've had before their arrival. That's what many-many corporations do. It's powerful business, sure, but not "good" business in any moral regard.

 

Build your own PC. 

 

 

Ofcourse microsoft windows comes with any computer you buy from store.  Again, it's just business. Nothing more. Whether it's related to computers, or clothing or perfumes,

all companies and brands are constantly trying to create something "new and better" and Microsoft just happens to be a very large company that dominates the computer industry. 

Facebook and Twitter have also paid off many big companies involved in media business, so that each TV program "needs" to be also online 24/7 "follow this- follow that"

Skype managed to slip itself to mobile phones, which also was just another tactical business move. How many mobile phones are there? A lot of kids and teens use Skype @ School.

 

 

But this still doesnt mean that any specific company would be secretly controlling our lives and spying on us from hidden cameras in Televisions and/or Freezers  :D

 

[Cerez]

Ofcourse microsoft windows comes with any computer you buy from store.  Again, it's just business. Nothing more. Whether it's related to computers, or clothing or perfumes,

all companies and brands are constantly trying to create something "new and better" and Microsoft just happens to be a very large company that dominates the computer industry. 

 

@, I'm not sure I am following you... So you're saying it's okay for a corporation to take away my freedom of buying a computer with an OS of my choice because it's "just business". There are many kinds of business, but this is one kind I don't like. Slavery was "good business", too, let's not forget that...

 

By dominating, and taking over, Microsoft has curbed my freedom of choice. And this is just one example where a corporation has taken over and controlled an aspect of my life. I can think of many.

 

Build your own PC. 

 

And spend three times the amount? Have you ever tried to find the parts for a computer like that? I have... It's not as simple as walking into a shop and making your pick. It's not something everyone can do, and it's hardly a substitute. Especially if you're looking for a laptop.

 

But this still doesnt mean that any specific company would be secretly controlling our lives and spying on us from hidden cameras in Televisions and/or Freezers  :D

 

If these corporations don't hold detailed personal information about their users, then why on earth would the NSA be interested in the data they hold? Think about that. The NSA would not make such a bold and risky move if it wasn't for valuable information.

 

Google is tracking everyone's searches. It's a proven fact. Apple is tracking your usage of your Apple devices (and who knows what other information they're receiving), proven fact. Facebook is selling statistical user information to third parties -- ads don't pay the bill, that's what they're really making a living of -- proven fact (check their user license agreement). Microsoft has/had a backdoor for data access to everyone's Windows computer, proven fact. And there is reverse engineering evidence that the cameras of iOS devices can be activated remotely without the user's knowledge (without the indicator light turning on). This can be done either by Apple or by a hacker. Why, may I ask? What the reason for implementing such technology, if it isn't to spy on someone in the first place?

 

With the giant servers Apple has built to host their iCloud data, do you really think they're not keeping any sensitive information on their users?

[Xycaleth]

 So you're saying it's okay for a corporation to take away my freedom of buying a computer with an OS of my choice because it's "just business"

That's not quite right. You're under no obligation to make use of Windows on computers you buy. You can ask get a refund, from the laptop manufacturer, for the Windows license that comes with your computer. However, the manufacturer may say that you must also return the device if you choose not to use the preinstalled Windows.

 

 

 

Google is tracking everyone's searches. It's a proven fact.

They do much more than this. The majority of websites use Google Analytics, which tracks which pages you've visited, how you arrived at websites, how long you have been on them, etc. Through this, Google can track almost every page you access across the web. Going back to searches, personally, I like the fact that Google's search results are personalised to what I'm more likely to find useful. If you've tried using a search engine which doesn't record your searches, such as DuckDuckGo, the results you get are pretty terrible.

 

EDIT: Just as I say Windows can be uninstalled... http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/windows-10-to-make-the-secure-boot-alt-os-lock-out-a-reality/

[Cerez]

That's not quite right. You're under no obligation to make use of Windows on computers you buy. You can ask get a refund, from the laptop manufacturer, for the Windows license that comes with your computer. However, the manufacturer may say that you must also return the device if you choose not to use the preinstalled Windows.

 

EDIT: Just as I say Windows can be uninstalled... http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/windows-10-to-make-the-secure-boot-alt-os-lock-out-a-reality/

 

Windows can be uninstalled, yes -- though if you've already had to pay for it, you might as well keep in on a partition...

 

What you're saying is true, @@Xycaleth, but in practice most manufacturers will tell you to get lost -- either buy with Windows, or don't buy their product at all. This is because Microsoft is exercising their business power and encouraging (or, in many cases, forcing) manufacturers and retailers to sell only with Windows installed.

 

My point is that you can't walk into a store and ask to buy a computer without Windows installed, or say, with a GNU/Linux operating system installed, whereas in the early PC days, before the rise of Microsoft as a monopoly, you could find computers will all kinds of systems installed. As a computer user this is a serious restraint to me. I've had to pay Microsoft on multiple occasions for software I don't use, and never needed. All because they have complete control over the market, and over the people.

 

Like I said, I am just illustrating from personal experience what corporate control really means, and how it affects our lives. Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook are all involved in actions like this, as are supermarket chains, and other giant corporations.

 

It's good to be aware, and to avoid supporting them where we can. Much of their power, after all, comes from mass consumption -- from our purchases. And, more importantly, we have to be aware of the fact that when in power, these corporations (especially in the IT scene) have means to monitor and track our every move, and keep detailed information on us. Which is something you'd want to avoid as much as possible. Not because you're doing something bad, but because it gives the person in power control over your life.

 

Nobody wants to be a sheep.

[Cerez]

Just for fun:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[eezstreet]

False. You can find plenty of laptops and desktops that don't have Windows on them (try Newegg), and in fact I prefer this on laptops anyway as it almost guarantees to eliminate the shovelware that gets placed on laptops, and makes dual-booting a cinch since you're not working with the UEFI bootloader introduced in Win8.

And...as a bonus, these laptops cost several hundreds of dollars less than their Windows counterparts in some cases. Additionally, you can often just call the manufacturer or go on their site to get a Linux version without even going through a middleman like Newegg. I've done this before for a friend.

 

Also - there was hardly any variety in older machines at all. You had Unix or DOS on an IBM machine at your local computer lab, probably. If your parents were stupidly rich, you MIGHT have had an Apple II or Amiga, or perhaps your school was outfitted with one. Linux didn't even come out until 1991, and Amiga was well on its way out by then. Windows 95 really did change everything, and computers really started to become a home thing by then. By then, it's the same thing as it is now- Linux, Mac, Windows. Or if you like to be cute and do something different, you've got BSD.

 

If you want a computer and you don't want to use MS, go right ahead, the option is available. Use OpenOffice instead of Word and Powerpoint. There's no corporate control over anything. MS is simply a business like any other, same deal with Apple, Google, whatever.

 

I ultimately think it's pointless to be concerned about privacy or about corporations tracking you. What are they going to be using that information for? I mean, I guess it might be different in other people's shoes, but I don't think anybody is going to care that I ate lunch at Hardee's and ordered an unreasonably large double cheeseburger. The people that blabber about privacy are the people you should watch out for, because they most likely have a dirty little secret.

 

Oh and uh...you should probably know that GNU/Linux is just what Richard Stallman likes to believe it's called. It's just simply called Linux. There's actually a special version of Linux that he uses, it's called gentoo, otherwise known as "nope nope nope nope nope."

[Cerez]

False. You can find plenty of laptops and desktops that don't have Windows on them (try Newegg), and in fact I prefer this on laptops anyway as it almost guarantees to eliminate the shovelware that gets placed on laptops, and makes dual-booting a cinch since you're not working with the UEFI bootloader introduced in Win8.

And...as a bonus, these laptops cost several hundreds of dollars less than their Windows counterparts in some cases. Additionally, you can often just call the manufacturer or go on their site to get a Linux version without even going through a middleman like Newegg. I've done this before for a friend.

Newegg is not exactly an average local computer store, is it? They are a specialty online retailer. They don't have the same pressure from Microsoft as local stores do. You have to know about them first, and their offering is only helpful if you live in the US, really. The amount the shipping would cost does not make it a viable choice for Australia, or the rest of the world. And I know of no such specialty retailers in Australia. In fact, they might be one of the very few choices in the world where you can still get a non-Windows PC for a reasonable price...

 

Also - there was hardly any variety in older machines at all. You had Unix or DOS on an IBM machine at your local computer lab, probably. If your parents were stupidly rich, you MIGHT have had an Apple II or Amiga, or perhaps your school was outfitted with one. Linux didn't even come out until 1991, and Amiga was well on its way out by then. Windows 95 really did change everything, and computers really started to become a home thing by then. By then, it's the same thing as it is now- Linux, Mac, Windows. Or if you like to be cute and do something different, you've got BSD.

That's not right. Before the rapid mainstream rise of Microsoft products, you could buy computers running all sorts of operating systems. There was no one-sided monopoly on the PC market. The monopoly started with Windows 95, really, and Microsoft's rise to business power. After Windows' mainstream success, the only other operating systems that saw significant development were Apple's and those of the GNU/Linux family (with a few small exceptions): https://everlastingstudent.wordpress.com/timeline-of-operating-systems-since-the-1950s/

 

And this is not to say that Windows 95 was that good. It had its pros and cons, like every other OS. It was Microsoft's aggressive business strategy that drove other systems out of the PC market. Apple has survived only because their products were catering to a specialist market at the time, with their own hardware -- therefore being independent of Microsoft's influence.

 

Oh and uh...you should probably know that GNU/Linux is just what Richard Stallman likes to believe it's called. It's just simply called Linux. There's actually a special version of Linux that he uses, it's called gentoo, otherwise known as "nope nope nope nope nope."

A little respect, please, @@eezstreet. Richard Stallman created the idealogical foundations upon which the Linux open source community was built, and he has just as much right to use whatever GNU/Linux distribution (OS) he likes as any of us do. He's definitely not alone in using Gentoo, either -- there are those who prefer it, and Gentoo, too, has its advantages -- like any other operating system.

 

The reason I choose to call it GNU/Linux is to pay my respect to all those who have created it. Not just Linus Torvalds' work on the Linux kernel, but also to everyone who has contributed to the GNU project and created the foundations for open operating systems. The whole community. I'm aware that the short and commonly preferred term for the type of OS is simply Linux. In fact, I somewhat resent the "Linux" label in that Linux is not a product, a brand, or a company, like the way it sounds. It is a whole range of openly developed operating systems, and the forefront to a whole software movement. Hence why to me GNU/Linux fits better to describe a type/category of operating systems developed from the GNU and Linux source.

 

Also, from a technical standpoint Linux by itself does not do much at all. It needs the GNU code in order to function as an OS.

 

I ultimately think it's pointless to be concerned about privacy or about corporations tracking you. What are they going to be using that information for? I mean, I guess it might be different in other people's shoes, but I don't think anybody is going to care that I ate lunch at Hardee's and ordered an unreasonably large double cheeseburger. The people that blabber about privacy are the people you should watch out for, because they most likely have a dirty little secret.

I think you're missing the point. It's not about what stupidities of your activities the company records. (I use "stupidities" here in the literary sense. No offence intended.) It's about the fact that those records can be used against you in more ways than you can imagine. Especially if the political climate shifts and new legislations start to take effect. Once recorded, this information may be kept for a lifetime, or longer.

 

More importantly, this information is used to herd us like sheep towards the pen.

 

Edit: What you need to ask yourself is, is it really worth trading my personal freedom and right to privacy for using this company's goods and services? Be mindful of what power you are giving to those whose products you support. That's all I ask.

 

But I've monopolised this thread long enough. Let's get back to general company and product rant, shall we?

 

That new start menu in Windows 10 gives me the creeps! How can you merge an entire tile screen with the start menu and think you can practically get away with it?

 

Besides, I don't see what was so wrong about the Windows 8.1 tile screen as a launch menu. If anything they should have provided both options as a configurable feature, but not merge them together! What were they thinking??

 

[eezstreet]

Newegg is not exactly an average local computer store, is it? They are a specialty online retailer. They don't have the same pressure from Microsoft as local stores do. You have to know about them first, and their offering is only helpful if you live in the US, really. The amount the shipping would cost does not make it a viable choice for Australia, or the rest of the world. And I know of no such specialty retailers in Australia. In fact, they might be one of the very few choices in the world where you can still get a non-Windows PC for a reasonable price...

 

 

That's not right. Before the rapid mainstream rise of Microsoft products, you could buy computers running all sorts of operating systems. There was no one-sided monopoly on the PC market. The monopoly started with Windows 95, really, and Microsoft's rise to business power. After Windows' mainstream success, the only other operating systems that saw significant development were Apple's and those of the GNU/Linux family (with a few small exceptions): https://everlastingstudent.wordpress.com/timeline-of-operating-systems-since-the-1950s/

 

And this is not to say that Windows 95 was that good. It had its pros and cons, like every other OS. It was Microsoft's aggressive business strategy that drove other systems out of the PC market. Apple has survived only because their products were catering to a specialist market at the time, with their own hardware -- therefore being independent of Microsoft's influence.

 

 

A little respect, please, @@eezstreet. Richard Stallman created the idealogical foundations upon which the Linux open source community was built, and he has just as much right to use whatever GNU/Linux distribution (OS) he likes as any of us do. He's definitely not alone in using Gentoo, either -- there are those who prefer it, and Gentoo, too, has its advantages -- like any other operating system.

 

The reason I choose to call it GNU/Linux is to pay my respect to all those who have created it. Not just Linus Torvalds' work on the Linux kernel, but also to everyone who has contributed to the GNU project and created the foundations for open operating systems. The whole community. I'm aware that the short and commonly preferred term for the type of OS is simply Linux. In fact, I somewhat resent the "Linux" label in that Linux is not a product, a brand, or a company, like the way it sounds. It is a whole range of openly developed operating systems, and the forefront to a whole software movement. Hence why to me GNU/Linux fits better to describe a type/category of operating systems developed from the GNU and Linux source.

 

Also, from a technical standpoint Linux by itself does not do much at all. It needs the GNU code in order to function as an OS.

 

 

I think you're missing the point. It's not about what stupidities of your activities the company records. (I use "stupidities" here in the literary sense. No offence intended.) It's about the fact that those records can be used against you in more ways than you can imagine. Especially if the political climate shifts and new legislations start to take effect. Once recorded, this information may be kept for a lifetime, or longer.

 

More importantly, this information is used to herd us like sheep towards the pen.

 

Edit: What you need to ask yourself is, is it really worth trading my personal freedom and right to privacy for using this company's goods and services? Be mindful of what power you are giving to those whose products you support. That's all I ask.

 

But I've monopolised this thread long enough. Let's get back to general company and product rant, shall we?

 

That new start menu in Windows 10 gives me the creeps! How can you merge an entire tile screen with the start menu and think you can practically get away with it?

 

Besides, I don't see what was so wrong about the Windows 8.1 tile screen as a launch menu. If anything they should have provided both options as a configurable feature, but not merge them together! What were they thinking??

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP-r6rzIWtI

Your argument about Newegg is ridiculous. For starters, they do lots of ad campaigns (including TV ads). Secondly, Newegg isn't the only place that sells Linux computers, and you ignored my point about calling manufacturers. There's plenty of brick-and-mortar stores that sell Linux computers, but it requires searching and researching, just like with any specific product. It's tempting to say "Well, I can walk into Staples and pick whatever laptop I like and it is guaranteed to have Windows or Mac." However, you'd be browsing a store's stock, and not actually searching for what you want. If you want to say "Well, MS and Apple are flexing their corporate dominance!" this is tempting too, but false. I used Staples as an example here. They're a business meant to make money, and keeping Linux laptops in stock is simply not going to be financially viable when Linux makes up a very small margin of laptop users. Complicating this is that there's so many Linux distros out there, and maybe someone wants Arch instead of Ubuntu, or maybe they want Gentoo, or Mint, or RedHat, or Fedora, or Scientific Linux, or...

 

Sure, Win95 was prone to crashes, but it took off in popularity due to an established base of users (DOS and Win3.1), plus it had a user interface which was simple to use, and it had integrated "plug and play" drivers" which made it a cinch to install on most hardware. The whole reason that Linux has never been super popular is because it has an association with being difficult to use (which is ESPECIALLY true with Arch and Gentoo).

 

As for GNU/Linux, I point to a quote by Eric S. Raymond:

Some people object that the name "Linux" should be used to refer only to the kernel, not the entire operating system. This claim is a proxy for an underlying territorial dispute; people who insist on the term GNU/Linux want the FSF to get most of the credit for Linux because [stallman] and friends wrote many of its user-level tools. Neither this theory nor the term GNU/Linux has gained more than minority acceptance

 

The kernel was developed independently from the FSF, but they just decided to call it GNU/Linux. Even Linux thinks the logic behind it is ridiculous. The kernel also does not require GNU code in order to work.

 

Oh uh...about Stallman...

 

Anyway, what personal liberties do you think are being sacrificed here?