42
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
yup. And if all those downloads are like the 3 times I downloaded it they're not used![]()
Download numbers are utterly useless statistics. There's things I've downloaded dozens of times because I can't be bothered to look up where I put the CD I burned with the thing on it...
Originally posted by Max Habibi:
The number of frivolous downloads for both IE and firefox can be assumed to be equal, unless you're willing to indulge in the a priori assumption that one product is superior. Accordingly, the ratio of the downloads is a useful indication of the tread. To wit, that trend is the increasing popularity of firefox.
Originally posted by Ryan McGuire:
Another possibility that would make the percentage of frivolous downloads unequal would be whther or not downloading is most likely form of distribution. Ryan
Originally posted by Eric Pascarello:
All I can say is every browser has it flaws.
Originally posted by Eric Pascarello:
One reason why you see so many problems with IE is the same reason you see problem with windows and not MAC.
Eric
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
42
"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Originally posted by Ryan McGuire:
Another possibility that would make the percentage of frivolous downloads unequal would be whther or not downloading is most likely form of distribution. For instance, IE is included on many new PC straight from the dealer without the need for a download (frivolous or not).
There will be glitches in my transition from being a saloon bar sage to a world statesman. - Tony Banks
Hopefully what will happen is that Microsoft's capitalist instincts will kick in and they will realise that they have to improve their product. The problem they face is that Firefox's success is not just about browsers. If Firefox becomes widely popular, then the average person's mistrust of "geeky" open source projects may decline, and more people may become willing to try Linux et al. With any luck Microsoft will be worried enough about this to consider making a product that not only works, but is tested before release
42
Originally posted by Paul Sturrock:
Hmm. I can't see MS thinking this way till IE's market share drops below 50%. Only having a c90% share of a market is not going to have whoever manages the product suffering from sleepless nights.
And MS are good at defending their market share in ways other than improving a product - take for example the recent deal with the NHS, the world third largest employer, which will now be a 100% MS organization.
People (by which I mean non-technical) won't try Linux etc. till it is supplied with the machines they buy. Only a very few OEM's sell PCs with Linux installed. My folks - who I think may be typical of users their age (60), who don't come across computers as part of their work - are still a little sketchy on what an Operating System is let alone the relative benefits of one over the other.
There will be glitches in my transition from being a saloon bar sage to a world statesman. - Tony Banks
Now this really send a shudder down my spine. Its bad enough that the government has tied themselves into such a long term deal on something this important, but with Microsoft? What's going to happen when the NHS's systems start showing the good ol' Blue Screen Of Death on a regular basis? I know MS aren't the worst company out there at producing software (far from it), but they do have a reputation for producing very buggy releases. I really hope their contract with the NHS has clauses that can punish them or cancel the contract if things go pear shaped. Especially as I live in the UK and may need to rely on the NHS computer system........
Originally posted by Dave Lenton:
Maybe there could be regulation to force new computers to be sold with more than one o/s (with perhaps a boot up menu to choose which one to select), although that may mean a bit of flaffing around with partitions and the like. To be honest I can't see many governments having a go at doing this (as a lot have lucrative deals with MS), apart from maybe the EU which has had a few recent arguments with MS.
[ April 14, 2005: Message edited by: Dave Lenton ]
42
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
Ah, more laws...
Don't like something, make a law for it...
Let's for once be smart and stop overregulating everything.
There will be glitches in my transition from being a saloon bar sage to a world statesman. - Tony Banks
Isn't that what the EU is best at?
I would like the (or a) government to encourage the use of more than one o/s, preferably by encouraging more than one at a time to be supplied in new computers.
42
Dave Lenton:
I would like the (or a) government to encourage the use of more than one o/s, preferably by encouraging more than one at a time to be supplied in new computers. Now this doesn't necessarily need a law to happen - maybe something like tax breaks could be used. If that doesn't work, then maybe organisations like the EU can look into anti-competition practices of the computer suppliers (which I suspect they may be guilty of). If none of these work, then maybe yes, we could have a law of some kind, but this law should be aimed at suppliers rather than users. It should also, like all laws, have an initial evaluation period to see if its working before being permanently implemented.
42
It isnt appropriate to say that less viruses affect Macs than Windows... The fact is that many more viruses are created for Windows than any other OS. This is because Windows is still by far the most popular OS, and most people who have enough skill to write a virus but not enough sense not to seem to be Microsoft haters.I see Macs becoming a popular secure alternative too because less viruses effect Macs then windows.
“Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.” - Rich Cook
Good point, and one that was also made in the article (where is that damn article???) The viruses that exist for the Microsoft platforms do a better job of exploiting that platform's security vulnerabilities than the viruses for Mac/Unix do, and therefore tend to be more severe. Again, I think the fact that significantly more viruses exist for the windows platform than any other contributes to this...To me, that's evidence that Apache on Unix is in fact safer than Microsoft IIS, even after adjusting for the relative popularity of the platforms.
“Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.” - Rich Cook
42
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
Leave it up to the market. If there's a demand suppliers will react. Apparently there is no demand so they don't.
Originally posted by Ben Souther:
Why do we need governments to do this for us?
Why not just vote with your own dollars?
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
Unless the government forces users to use another OS they're not going to use something inferior for their purpose. And as most users' purpose is playing games and surfing the web they've no use for an OS that has a nice commandprompt but a crappy GUI and for which few games are released.
There will be glitches in my transition from being a saloon bar sage to a world statesman. - Tony Banks
pie. tiny ad:
Building a Better World in your Backyard by Paul Wheaton and Shawn Klassen-Koop
https://coderanch.com/wiki/718759/books/Building-World-Backyard-Paul-Wheaton
|