[PLUG] No updates for Windows anymore...

Auke Kok sofar at foo-projects.org
Thu May 18 04:01:34 UTC 2006


I just had to reply, sorry =^)

plug_0 at robinson-west.com wrote:
> Sadly, along with XP: 98Se 98, probably ME, etc. are not easily updated anymore.
> Why did Microsoft do this?

So you wouldn't feel remorse when you switched to Linux or MacOs

> There are a lot of computers around that won't
> run XP let alone anything else that is more recent.  If Microsoft really wants
> to tick people off, it should release a new Windows variant that won't run on
> most of the computers around.

Microsoft does just that, yet another reason to switch to something which 
truly is stable - open source that can constantly be adjusted to fit the 
hardware that is out there and still work on older computers.

> Sure, break driver and software compatibility
> again in mass.  When you realize that Windows programs are easily $29 a piece 
> or more on average, losing a library of such programs could prove quite 
> painful. 
> 
> Are there are any reasonable OSS clones of old versions of Windows?

Fortunately not. Most people realized that it's much harder to clone something 
closed source and open source OS's out there are far more powerfull anyway, 
and they didn't stray long before turning to the light side ;^)

Some fail to give up the dark side and work on a Windows NT clone, in the hope 
that one day the dark side will... prevail

> I like
> Freedos, but when I tried to install 98 second edition over it hoping I'd
> be able to use either system off of the same partition, I ran into major 
> problems.

of course, freedos is """compatible""" but up to certain limits - it doesn't 
replace the underlying OS of windows 98.

 > If I ran Microsoft, I'd release the
> next version of Windows under the GPL and simply keep minor parts of the OS
> proprietary.

I'm not sure whether I would buy your stock then - but with any OSS-aspiring 
OS out there, it's dubious what is the better investment in the long run when 
it comes to closed source. My bet is a fully open source OS and closed source 
applications for the enterprise, but even that sounds like a tough battle...

> At least I'd release the updates under a license that is similar
> to the GPL. 

the problem with that is viral licensing effects of the GPL - once released 
you might accidentally open source closed source components - very tricky and 
lots of lawyers earn their pay from research of these type of issues these 
days ;^)

> The public should not have to pay for Microsoft's programming
> mistakes nor should the public lose access to critical updates because 
> Microsoft doesn't feel like providing them anymore.

I dunno, the problem is that you didn't buy a car that was defective, and can 
demand a free repair. It's more like you bought a book, and there were typo's 
in it. If you used the book for training or worse - teaching, then you do have 
a problem when mistakes in it don't get fixed. Unfortunately the seller of the 
book may not see a financial gain in fixing the mistakes, so you end up 
editing the book yourself. The worst part is just that you don't have the 
print of the book, since it's closed source - but hey - that's what you bought 
in the first place, and you paid money for too.

I hope you get the idea...

> I'm wondering how Linspire and Xandros are doing, but it appears that these
> are purchase only systems and that there isn't an evaluation version.  Vmware
> is nice, but I get tired of worrying about licenses with actual Microsoft
> products even under vmware.  I'm stuck getting evaluation keys for vmware
> because I can't afford the license yet.

vmware player is free, and the latest beta workstation is up for grabs too 
now, no license fees.

> I bet I'm not alone in wondering why I should buy another computer so that I 
> can run Vista.  XP has only been around for 4 years, hasn't it?

I stopped worrying about windows about 10 years ago, only using windows when 
my employer(s) really honestly need me to use windows applications, and at 
work. saves me lots of grey hairs...

> Why isn't Novell putting out it's own competitive desktop product to Windows?

it's called novell desktop linux ;^)

> Novell's networking code is traditionally better than Microsoft's.  If Novell
> would open source NDS, it would really fly as a samba alternative.  Novell
> could probably do well supporting their code even after open sourcing it.

probably encumbered by patents and crosslicensing - I doubt that will ever 
happen, but I have no idea about NDS really, I'm just guessing.

> Is anyone doing anything in particular to acquire the major updates for end
> of life versions of Windows?  

not me ;^)

Cheers,

Auke



More information about the PLUG mailing list