Re: [NTLK] convincing arg against MS OS

From: Lee, Christopher J (
Date: Thu Jun 06 2002 - 17:55:22 EDT

But all of that has a great deal more to do with MS business practices
(which in my humble opinion are no more abhorrant than any other tenticular
multinational) than with the actual OS. I guess what I was saying is that I
have yet to hear a convincing argument aginst WinXP that was DIRECTLY
related to the OS from someone who had actually used it. I am MORE than
willing to admit that the OSX interface is quite delightful compared to XP.
If there were an x86 version I would run it myself.

-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [NTLK] convincing arg against MS OS

maybe their licensing schemes?(the oft postponed "you've got to keep paying
us for upgrades whether you use them or not) or the way they force
companies into OEM contracts? (you pay x dollars for windows if you don't
manufacture pc's with any other OS installed, or y dollars if you want the
freedom to install the OS that your customers want) or perhaps their track
record for theft of intelluctual property ?(W2K actually credits apple
ciopywrite in some spots of the source,so they're making progress) or the
way they say things like "we've got kerberos" when they're kerberos is
different from everyone elses to the point of not really being kerberos? or
perhaps the way they insult and beat up on the federal government the
anti-trust lawsuit (wait a minute... i think i got to take that last one
back....) JMHO

On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Heiko Cultus wrote:

> > Perhaps I'm biased, but I've failed to find ANYONE that had a
> > argument against using WinXP other than ethical/MSHatred reasons.

Read the List FAQ/Etiquette:
Read the Newton FAQ:
This is the NewtonTalk mailing list -

-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: Read the Newton FAQ: This is the NewtonTalk mailing list -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 14:01:53 EDT