Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to grandpinaple
Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST I can see his point. Intel (among others) benefit when Windows upgrades an OS or app, triggering huge numbers of hardware upgrades. A reduction of Windows users would affect that.
This could mean Intel (and video card, memory, motherboard manufacturers, etc.) are sensitive to MS as a market maker. It might go the other way, with MS being dependent upon the hardware manufacturers as market makers (allowing Microsoft to add features, bloat.). With Linux (as a desktop) it can survive on hardware a few generations old.
Mark |
2 edits | Those that use old hardware, would find a way to use it either way, whether it is some other open source OS or Windows 95. The bottom line is those old boxes are being used for mundane use such as testing tweaks and running routers. The corporations and individuals running real applications will always have a need for ever increasing computing power. People don't buy higher end PCs (or at least the sector of the market that is actually a significant percentage of Intel's clientel) to run Vista bloatware gui crap. They do it to run the latest game, the latest data crunching application, to accommodate an increasing amount of server traffic, or to handle larger databases of their own clients.
While I see your point I think it is a very weak one because in reality while linux market share may be low, it's open source and adaptable nature is of no threat to Intel. Microsoft might have some leverage over Intel, but not enough to dictate OS usage as companies like IBM are distributing linux on a mass scale.
The issue here is actually that people in the US wanted a machine... |
