A debate Issue...

A debate Issue...

Post by Leo Cambilargi » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Hello readers:

I am an Information Science degree undergrad.  I am doing a debate on some
issues which are often discussed here.  Anyone who has an opinion or
comment is free to make them.

1) Will MS continue to dominate the computer software market? why or why
not.

My response so far:

I beleive MS has saturated the software market with their Products.  They
overestimate the internets full ability to support crap.  (In my opinion
windows philosophy is crap, it only so happens that people use it)   They
now intend to produce a consol game.  To enhance their range of products
perhaps.  Nintendo has Super Mario, Playstation has it's known title. and
MS?  "We will put the internet on TV."  It wont work so well.

I believe that MS can be compared to the Roman Empire in a way.  Both
rose to a "glorious" height, then declined.  In history we saw the fall of
the Roman empire, we have yet to see the decline of MS.

There will come a day when a system without *will come out and uses
will see a new way to do computing.  And MS will have no choice but to try
to compete.  Their weakness will be what made them stong so far.  The
ability to incorporate worthless crap.

OK to define what I mean by CRAP.  All you who have a word to say must
understand this after all right?  Bloated Software which obscures
essencial raw power for the sake of astetics.  We know that things can be
asteticly nice without compromising efficiency, however because unknowing
uses may make a mistake and therefor be unable to use a system, it would
be in the advantage of Moneys interests to insure that critical mistakes
didn't happen.  MS solved this riddle by developing a system which guides
the user through all actions.  This system if the core of CRAP.  Computer
experts know that they are doing, they don't need to be guided.  This
brings my next point.  They build their systems around the idea that
people do NOT know how to use a computer.

I believe there are other ways of making the Newbie use a computer without
being an expert.  That is why MS will fall.

Leo Cambilargiu

 
 
 

A debate Issue...

Post by Stuart Fo » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:

> I believe there are other ways of making the Newbie use a computer without
> being an expert.  That is why MS will fall.

Share with the group.  I'm interested to hear your ideas.

Stu

 
 
 

A debate Issue...

Post by DeAnn Iwa » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Hello readers:

> I am an Information Science degree undergrad.  I am doing a debate on some
> issues which are often discussed here.  Anyone who has an opinion or
> comment is free to make them.

> 1) Will MS continue to dominate the computer software market? why or why
> not.

> My response so far:

> I beleive MS has saturated the software market with their Products.  They
> overestimate the internets full ability to support crap.  (In my opinion
> windows philosophy is crap, it only so happens that people use it)  ....

    To debate well, it is often more effective to inundate your audience
with facts, rather than vague accusations.  For example, when you make a
statement like "windows philosophy is crap", you will only irritate
people who like windows.  You will not change anyone's mind.  You will
be more effective in your debate if you state why you have these
opinions, rather than just spouting them off.  Otherwise, you leave
yourself open to easy rebutal (such as, well, 90,000,000 windows users
think you are wrong enough to pay $200 for the product).
 
 
 

A debate Issue...

Post by Darren Winsp » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:22:10 +1000, Leo Cambilargiu


> 1) Will MS continue to dominate the computer software market? why or why
> not.

I'm not sure.  There market share is bound to decline at some point (I
don't know when), but whether they will still hold 50% or more of the
market is anyone's guess.

Quote:> My response so far:

> I beleive MS has saturated the software market with their Products.

They have.  It's a shame Office is so horrid...

Quote:> They
> overestimate the internets full ability to support crap.  (In my opinion
> windows philosophy is crap, it only so happens that people use it)

The Windows philosophy?  I don't like it, but it has its advantages
and disadvantages.
Advantages:
1) Standardisation.  Talking Win95 and later, Windows has a more or
   less consistent interface.  This means you can sit at any Windows
   machine and be able to use it so long as you are comfortable with
   the Windows interface.
2) Ease of learning.  The Windows interface is simple, so people can
   learn it quickly.  Note; I have not said no other OS is easy to
   learn, we're jsut talking about Windows here.

Disadvantages:
1) Standardisation.  If you don't like the Windows interface, tough.
   This is why I don't like the Windows philosophy, it discourages
   choice.  Under X, I have two big choices, GNOME/Gtk and KDE/Qt.
   Chose which you prefer, or mix and match, it's your choice.
2) Complexity (Or lack of it).  The Windows command line is very poor,
   especially compared to the likes of the Unix and Unix-like CLIs.

I would not describe the philosophy as crap.

Quote:> They
> now intend to produce a consol game.

They intend to produce a games console.  I'm not sure if that would be
good or bad.  The console market does need competition, since Sony are
beating up the N64 simply by using their market share, and the
Dreamcast isn't impressive compared to a PC even now, before its
release.

The PSX2 does look promising, though.  Its specs are impressive,
although I think the PC, especially with the GeForce256 coming up,
will have it beat before the end of next year.

Quote:> To enhance their range of products
> perhaps.  Nintendo has Super Mario, Playstation has it's known title. and
> MS?  "We will put the internet on TV."  It wont work so well.

The internet simply doesn't look good on a TV.  The text is too
blurred.  The only time I've seen a set-top-box capable of creating a
truly readable image on the TV was from Acorn, which had one based on
RISC OS, which had a font-rendering engine capable of producing
readable WYSIWYG on a 640*256 (EGA isn't it?) resolution.

Quote:> I believe that MS can be compared to the Roman Empire in a way.  Both
> rose to a "glorious" height, then declined.  In history we saw the fall of
> the Roman empire, we have yet to see the decline of MS.

The Roman empire collapsed because of its size.  MS may go the same
way, although I believe they'd really split themselves up before that
really happens.

Quote:> There will come a day when a system without *will come out and uses
> will see a new way to do computing.

I saw that with RISC OS.  Unfortunately, Acorn simply weren't big
enough and American corporations got the backing of our government.

Quote:> And MS will have no choice but to try
> to compete.  Their weakness will be what made them stong so far.  The
> ability to incorporate worthless crap.

Heh.

Quote:> OK to define what I mean by CRAP.  All you who have a word to say must
> understand this after all right?

Definately, although I don't agree with your idea of "CRAP".

Quote:> Bloated Software which obscures
> essencial raw power for the sake of astetics.

How do you tell when it gets to the point where it is obscuring raw
power?  This is too subjective.  Code-bloat and inefficient code is
what I would consider "CRAP" but, once again, where do you draw the
line?

Quote:> We know that things can be
> asteticly nice without compromising efficiency,

Not in the computer world.  Every time you add one little bit of eye
candy, you are reducing efficiency.  How acceptable that level is is
subjective.  I myself like eye-candy a-plenty, although if that means
turning on Active-Doorstop (TM James Sutherland) so I can use a JPEG
background, it kills my games because they seem to continuously swap,
so that's a no.

Quote:> however because unknowing
> uses may make a mistake and therefor be unable to use a system, it would
> be in the advantage of Moneys interests to insure that critical mistakes
> didn't happen.

That is right.

Quote:> MS solved this riddle by developing a system which guides
> the user through all actions.  This system if the core of CRAP.

Eh?  I'd say it's at the core of ease of use or learning.  It's not
just MS who guide you through actions, virtually every company does it
to some extent or another.

Quote:> Computer
> experts know that they are doing, they don't need to be guided.

This is mostly true.  I find MS products to be too intrusive in the
'guidance' sense, but that may be because I'm too lazy to go through
endless configuration dialogues to disable things like the Evil
Paper-Clip From Hell (TM).

Quote:> This
> brings my next point.  They build their systems around the idea that
> people do NOT know how to use a computer.

Many people don't.

Quote:> I believe there are other ways of making the Newbie use a computer without
> being an expert.  That is why MS will fall.

The problem is figuring out how.  In order to bring out these "other
ways" you'd have to totally rethink the current GUI and possibly CLI
way of doing things.  Most GUIs these days, despite being subtly
different, do all have the same basic principles.

--
Darren Winsper - http://www.veryComputer.com/
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.veryComputer.com/

"The only thing stopping GDI from plastering Kane to the floor and
making him scream 'I am Solomon's *' is that Orca Bombers are a
bit on the expensive side" - Zagadka in alt.games.tiberian-sun

 
 
 

A debate Issue...

Post by Joseph T. Adam » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


:     To debate well, it is often more effective to inundate your audience
: with facts, rather than vague accusations.  For example, when you make a
: statement like "windows philosophy is crap", you will only irritate
: people who like windows.  You will not change anyone's mind.  You will
: be more effective in your debate if you state why you have these
: opinions, rather than just spouting them off.  Otherwise, you leave
: yourself open to easy rebutal (such as, well, 90,000,000 windows users
: think you are wrong enough to pay $200 for the product).

How about:  "Resolved, that Microsoft's * of the desktop
operating systems and software market has peaked, and will be eroded
by higher-quality free alternatives."

Joe

 
 
 

A debate Issue...

Post by The Ghost In The Machi » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Leo Cambilargiu

 wrote on Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:22:10 +1000

Quote:>Hello readers:

>I am an Information Science degree undergrad.  I am doing a debate on some
>issues which are often discussed here.  Anyone who has an opinion or
>comment is free to make them.

>1) Will MS continue to dominate the computer software market? why or why
>not.

They will, for some time. Unclear how long, especially
since their software is perceived to be absolute crap, when in
actuality it's merely flaky, misdesigned, and misimplemented. :-)
However, it is quite clear that the entire industry is going
to have some problems with very large, integrated projects
IMO -- how can the industry guarantee that these projects
are produced as per the specifications?

Quote:

>My response so far:

>I beleive MS has saturated the software market with their Products.  They
>overestimate the internets full ability to support crap.  (In my opinion
>windows philosophy is crap, it only so happens that people use it)   They
>now intend to produce a consol game.  To enhance their range of products
>perhaps.  Nintendo has Super Mario, Playstation has it's known title. and
>MS?  "We will put the internet on TV."  It wont work so well.

It's not clear what the "windows philosophy" is to me, apart
from the desire to make a profit (and possibly stifle any competition).
Although presumably it can have something to do with using cutesy
illiterate little icons for printing a document, as opposed
to the simple English word "print" (gosh, what a concept!),
or a floppy meaning "save" (and when was the last time one saved
to a floppy?).  Also, is there a point to the button bar when
one can use the pull-down menus instead?  Which one's more
understandable, quicker, and more usable?

And then there's that stupid idea of a *horizontal* scrollbar
for a vertically presented list.  Horrid.

See http://www.veryComputer.com/
shameful GUI design - many of them by Microsoft.

Quote:

>I believe that MS can be compared to the Roman Empire in a way.  Both
>rose to a "glorious" height, then declined.  In history we saw the fall of
>the Roman empire, we have yet to see the decline of MS.

No, but they do seem to have reached their peak, and are declining
as the Linux Barbarians(tm) swoop from the hinterland and eat
their lunch... :-)

(Yum.  Profits.)

Quote:

>There will come a day when a system without *will come out and uses
>will see a new way to do computing.  And MS will have no choice but to try
>to compete.  Their weakness will be what made them stong so far.  The
>ability to incorporate worthless crap.

>OK to define what I mean by CRAP.  All you who have a word to say must
>understand this after all right?  Bloated Software which obscures
>essencial raw power for the sake of astetics.  We know that things can be
>asteticly nice without compromising efficiency, however because unknowing

Just as a point of didactism: the word is either "aesthetics", or
perhaps "esthetics". :-)

Quote:>uses may make a mistake and therefor be unable to use a system, it would
>be in the advantage of Moneys interests to insure that critical mistakes
>didn't happen.  MS solved this riddle by developing a system which guides
>the user through all actions.  This system if the core of CRAP.  Computer
>experts know that they are doing, they don't need to be guided.  This
>brings my next point.  They build their systems around the idea that
>people do NOT know how to use a computer.

>I believe there are other ways of making the Newbie use a computer without
>being an expert.  That is why MS will fall.

I take it you're referring to good, competent instruction/documentation?
Agreed, with some reservations; in particular, the system should
still be easy to use. This is *not* the same as gooeyfied,
just to be clear; in fact, a program can be clear without
using a GUI; the 'rm' command, which is a staple of Linux,
for example, does two things, and both of them well:

 * removes files
 * recursively removes directories

and really doesn't need any sort of a GUI -- just a UI. :-)
More complicated tools such as 'ifconfig' may benefit some
from a well-implemented GUI, but really don't need it if they are
well-documented, with examples; the traditional Unix manpage
method of documentation does have some shortcomings, unfortunately
(mostly: "where do I start reading?").

Good documentation can offset a number of shortcomings
in a command-line tool, and poor or incorrect documentation
can muddle things horribly for the newbie user trying to figure
how what to do, and how to do it.  Once the industry understands
this and embraces it deep into the very heart of the development
process, we may all be a bit happier... :-)

(One hopes that the proliferation of the Web will encourage
the development of good writing styles and practices.
Sadly, I have my doubts that this will in fact happen; instead,
we'll get a lot of junk that looks cute, or is techno-neato-keen-
hacky-|33+-stuff. But there's always hope... :-) )

Quote:

>Leo Cambilargiu

--