Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news-2.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Huge Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.misc Subject: Re: [Poll] Computing favorities Date: 24 Aug 2015 09:16:59 GMT Organization: Piglet's Pickles & Preserves Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <862181686462048382.178035peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> <876145d6qr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> Reply-To: usenet@huge.org.uk X-Trace: individual.net nP8/k0mxQBf3/05SZ7KxqgPd4cn/2cVO8Uqq24tPzxQi7F5rNt Cancel-Lock: sha1:+OZ+sTnZ+kxAp5zMHN2HjF0sEpQ= X-No-Archive: Yes X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:150267 comp.misc:8473 On 2015-08-23, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Walter Banks writes: > >> You were [not] forced to buy MS products. > > No, *I* wasn't, but that I'm technically experienced and prepared to > make a fuss about it, and even I find it hard to buy a computer without > buying software I don't need. > >> There is no doubt that MS was >> agressive, more than say Bell or AT&T? Look at the bigger picture. Why >> were they able to sell software or services. SUN copied Microsoft office >> for example. BTW, Word is (or at least was) a straight port of the Xerox Document Editor from the Star Workstation. Charles Simonyi wrote both of them. >> I am not saying MS wasn't predatory. The question is why did people >> buy their products? > > Huge numbers had no idea they were buying it at all. They either bought > a Mac and could not read the documents the boss sent at the weekend, or > they bought a "PC" and could. In neither case was buying the software a > conscious act, let alone a choice. Spot on. -- Today is Sweetmorn, the 17th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3181 I don't have an attitude problem. If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.