Linux {ARTICLE}:Do you like windows more? Or are you suffering of interface addiction?

Status
Not open for further replies.
cool_cat

cool_cat

Explorer
PS:This is a article with source mentioned.NOT written by me.:)
______________________________________________________________________

Posted February 26th, 2009 by j00p34
Are we suffering interface addiction?

windows user

I've been a windows user for a very big part of my life, just like the most people in the western world I guess. I've converted myself to a Linux user, and these days I administer a mixed windows/Linux environment.
Sometimes when I've been away from windows for a while, (I really try to avoid the windows machines,I have to do some maintenance now and then) I sit myself at the desktop I know from all these years.
mental reward

And sometimes when this happens I experience a slightly discomforting feeling: It feels nice, like my brain gives out some kind of reward for seating myself at the windows desktop. This pleasure is always very short lived because it's almost immediately replaced by the frustration of crippled and illogical design.
addictive features in interfaces

But still it's there for a moment, it's something that feels a bit like smoking a cigarette after trying to quit smoking for a few days. Only much less strong. This sensation made me think: "might there be some addictive feature to user interfaces, making it difficult to change operating systems?"
I know the brain is built in a way, that it gives us rewards for doing certain things. This is why gambling machines have so many lights. It's rewarding to your brain to look at such a machine.
Read the complete article here:

Do you like windows more? Or are you suffering of interface addiction? | Handle With Linux
______________________________________
Since this thread is swerved away from it's Original Purpose ,this thread will be Just One More GNU/Linux and FOSS Discussion thread.:)
 
Checksum said:
One glance at the title, and I knew who posted it.
Click to expand...

I just rewarded myself with hot cup of tea and fresh smoke in the morning for guessing the OP, without looking at the thread-starter's name... oh, the joy of winning. :)
 
awww cmon! linux needs more such champions of enthusiasm, so please don't rag on dear praka :D

all hail linux!
 
Maybe this is a bit off topic

I donno why a large number of Linux users and the whole of Mac itself boo Windows. Its right that Linux and Mac have their own advantages over Windows, but that doesnt mean pulling a successful operating system down by counting its weak points. Great lot of Mac ads pull down Windows. I was given a MacBook at my college, but in no time I wanted a Windows/Linux based. I currently use Windows Vista most of the time, then comes Kubuntu and then Windows 7 beta. I dont think they shud be compared. Its upon people which they like and which they dont. But when people praise about Linux/Mac in a sarcastic way over Windows then it looks like they dont want people use Windows.
 
Did you win fanboys ,before jumping here to LOL ,care about which section this is(open source) and what I wanted is a sane discussion unlike the few teenage kids and some aged win fanboys putting their a$$ on every such threads.are you funded by M$?What's wrong with Microsoft? ? and @ionicsachin:this is about FOSS and GNU/Linux in OSS section.not any pro-M$ shit.

==============================================

!=

(Linux is Not Windows)

It is a truth that Interface addiction can be a bad case for window$ users trying GNU/Linux.Gnome with it's simpleness or kde4 still fails to attract whining newbie window$ users who expects everything comes as a service and every other sane operating systems must be similar to window$.that sucks. the blind window$/m$haft fanboy fellows(not a generalization ,I know few agrees to my tries here) would not care about reasoning expect that they want to whine,yawn and FUD on every thread regarding GNU/Linux and FOSS - go and learn why someone will strongly support against monopoly :

Welcome! - Free Software Foundation

The GNU Operating System

--

About Free Software

Free software is a matter of freedom: people should be free to use software in all the ways that are socially useful. Software differs from material objects—such as chairs, sandwiches, and gasoline—in that it can be copied and changed much more easily. These possibilities make software as useful as it is; we believe software users should be able to make use of them.

--

continued..
 
It's not the Gates, it's the bars

by Richard Stallman

Founder, Free Software Foundation

(This article was published by BBC News in 2008.)

​
To pay so much attention to Bill Gates' retirement is missing the point. What really matters is not Gates, nor Microsoft, but the unethical system of restrictions that Microsoft—like many other software companies—imposes on its customers.





That statement may surprise you, since most people interested in computers have strong feelings about Microsoft. Businessmen and their tame politicians admire its success in building an empire over so many computer users. Many outside the computer field credit Microsoft for advances which it only took advantage of, such as making computers cheap and fast, and convenient graphical user interfaces.





Gates' philanthropy for health care for poor countries has won some people's good opinion. The LA Times reported that his foundation spends five to 10% of its money annually and invests the rest, sometimes in companies it suggests cause environmental degradation and illness in the same poor countries.





Many computerists specially hate Gates and Microsoft. They have plenty of reasons. Microsoft persistently engages in anti-competitive behaviour, and has been convicted three times. (Bush, who let Microsoft off the hook for the second US conviction, was invited to Microsoft headquarters to solicit funds for the 2000 election. In the UK, Microsoft established a major office in Gordon Brown's constituency. Both lawful, both potentially corrupting.)





Many users hate the “Microsoft taxâ€, the retail contracts that make you pay for Windows on your computer even if you won't use it. (In some countries you can get a refund, but the effort required is daunting.) There's also the Digital Restrictions Management: software features designed to “stop†you from accessing your files freely. (Increased restriction of users seems to be the main advance of Vista.)





Then there are the gratuitous incompatibilities and obstacles to interoperation with other software. (This is why the EU required Microsoft to publish interface specifications.) This year Microsoft packed standards committees with its supporters to procure ISO approval of its unwieldy, unimplementable and patented “open standard†for documents. (The EU is now investigating this.)





These actions are intolerable, of course, but they are not isolated events. They are systematic symptoms of a deeper wrong which most people don't recognize: proprietary software.





Microsoft's software is distributed under licenses that keep users divided and helpless. The users are divided because they are forbidden to share copies with anyone else. The users are helpless because they don't have the source code that programmers can read and change.





If you're a programmer and you want to change the software, for yourself or for someone else, you can't. If you're a business and you want to pay a programmer to make the software suit your needs better, you can't. If you copy it to share with your friend, which is simple good-neighbourliness, they call you a “pirateâ€. Microsoft would have us believe that helping your neighbour is the moral equivalent of attacking a ship.





The most important thing that Microsoft has done is to promote this unjust social system. Gates is personally identified with it, due to his infamous open letter which rebuked microcomputer users for sharing copies of his software. It said, in effect, “If you don't let me keep you divided and helpless, I won't write the software and you won't have any. Surrender to me, or you're lost!â€





But Gates didn't invent proprietary software, and thousands of other companies do the same thing. It's wrong—no matter who does it. Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, and the rest, offer you software that gives them power over you. A change in executives or companies is not important. What we need to change is this system.





That's what the free software movement is all about. “Free†refers to freedom: we write and publish software that users are free to share and modify. We do this systematically, for freedom's sake; some of us paid, many as volunteers. We already have complete free operating systems, including GNU/Linux. Our aim is to deliver a complete range of useful free software, so that no computer user will be tempted to cede her freedom to get software.





In 1984, when I started the free software movement, I was hardly aware of Gates' letter. But I'd heard similar demands from others, and I had a response: “If your software would keep us divided and helpless, please don't write it. We are better off without it. We will find other ways to use our computers, and preserve our freedom.â€





In 1992, when the GNU operating system was completed by the kernel, Linux, you had to be a wizard to run it. Today GNU/Linux is user-friendly: in parts of Spain and India, it's standard in schools. Tens of millions use it, around the world. You can use it too.





Gates may be gone, but the walls and bars of proprietary software he helped create remain—for now. Dismantling them is up to us.

It's not the Gates, it's the bars - RMS
 
Comes vs. Microsoft

The class-action lawsuit initially sought more than $330 million and alleged that Microsoft engaging in monopolistic and anticompetitive conduct which caused customers to pay far more for software than they would have if there had been competition. The case was settle out of court for undisclosed terms.

This resource was made available thanks to many lawyers and researchers in the Comes vs. Microsoft case. Texts were provided by Doug Mentohl and the following is an index of exhibits:

Credit: Doug Mentohl

Boycott Novell Comes vs. Microsoft

--
 
prakashan said:
@ionicsachin:this is about FOSS and GNU/Linux in OSS section.not any pro-M$ shit.
Click to expand...

I mentioned i am off topic......and what u thot while typing "pro-M$ shit" is what i ve mentioned there.....Its like Linux fanboys always try and find ill points of Windows....heck...99% pros use Linux and 99% non-pros use Windows...and maximum on this Globe are non-pros...
 
Special delivery for praka123

bill-gates-b.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Well ,It is normal behaviour if I or anyone questions the so called rock on which you sits?(M$).

--

Show Me one point where M$ is right?huh? monopoly,FUD ,anti-competitive practices,patent warfare on GNU/Linux and what Not?grow a sense of understanding the "Other side" before getting the typical anger on questioning the monopolist M$ which people are clinked on to.

Know about Microsoft DRM,pro-software patents stance,anti-Linux ,YES -ANTI-LINUX Stance - this is what I hate the most.

steve ballmer about Linux - Google Search

what is DRM?

DefectiveByDesign.org | The Campaign to Eliminate DRM

Software Patents:

No a les patents de programari!
 
I use Kubuntu, but i never say i dont like Kubuntu. Abstraction...why shud i go and learn all the languages and make softwares (yes i love GNU but i donno anything else than C). I dont want to get into the complexity, why shud i care what code is running behind my GUI, software developers and relateds shud work on it, thats their work. What if there is something like Open Source Hardware in future, why wud i go modding an Open Source Motherboard, I ll let the hardware modders do it and then select the best of what they can offer...Why do Mac and Linux use Windows to prove that they are better...almost everywhere Mac comes up there is a point that "We are better"....People dont want complexity, they want ease...and thats what the title of ur thread, many get addicted to what they began with, thats where the OS charms..
 
Linux is right everywhere, in all the points u have mentioned above, but why isnt that linux users number growing rapidly outside the "pro" zone....
 
Behind the scenes of Microsoft's ongoing patent war against Linux

by Matt Asay

Even as Microsoft has slipped into the mainstream of open source by embedding it in its products and adopting open-source strategies for services such as customer relationship management, it continues its subversive fight against Linux.

Linux is different, you see. Open source, as Microsoft is starting to recognize, is just another part of its ecosystem, one that it must support, if it wants Windows to continue to be a first-class computing citizen.

The open-source operating system, however, is competition--Microsoft's top competition, if CEO Steve Ballmer's words are to be taken at face value.

In this context, Microsoft's recent patent deal with Brother makes sense. Otherwise, as ZDNet UK opines, it's a deal that causes much head-scratching:

This time, the lucky donor of cash for secrets is Brother, which will now be allowed to use Microsoft patents to make printers.

As Microsoft doesn't make printers--indeed, (it) doesn't even make printer drivers--it is an interesting exercise to try and guess what's actually happened...(Microsoft) sends in the lads to midsize companies (that) would really suffer from a long court case, and who cares about that lovely legal fact of intellectual-property life: paying off a determined litigant is often cheaper than winning...If Microsoft cares about looking like a company more interested in innovating openly than doing closed deals, then it should be open on details such as which patents are involved.

Otherwise, Microsoft's trick of gaining revenue from licensing open-source software behind closed doors will smell more and more like extortion.

​
Slowly, behind the scenes, Microsoft continues to try to portray Linux as risky and Microsoft's patent coverage as insurance. Given that the company selling the insurance is also the one threatening a lawsuit, however, Microsoft needs to step very carefully to avoid the "extortionist" label. I personally believe that it has already crossed the line and needs to get back to competition between products, not lawyers.

Microsoft Windows competes well against Linux. The company doesn't need patent trickery. It has a compelling, valuable ecosystem that it can use against Linux. Why does it continue these Linux kidney punches, of which Microsoft claims it has closed more than 500 deals?

Perhaps Microsoft is the company with something to hide? The last time I checked, Linux was open source, with everything available for public inspection. In the Brother patent deal, as in all the others, Microsoft has made absolutely nothing available for public inspection to test the veracity of its claims. That's a sign of weakness, not of strength.

Behind the scenes in Microsoft's war against Linux | The Open Road - CNET News

--

PS: the sane people can expect trolls/bigots/M$heads bashing Linux and Open Source in this gamers forum.next time before targetting Linux posts ,Moron - check you got something left in your brain-regarding sensibility-and that is in general.:)

^This was not a reply to @ionicsachin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom