[Wolves] Linux vs Windows 7

[Andy Jewell]

>From: wolves-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk [wolves-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk] On Behalf Of dick_turpin [dick_turpin at archlinux.us]
>Sent: 07 September 2009 13:46
>To: Wolverhampton Linux User Group
>Subject: Re: [Wolves] Linux vs Windows 7

>DragonMaster wrote:

>Now you see this raises an interesting question
>> "The main reason for using
>> Linux is that <everything> comes in the box, there are very few extras
>> that need to be located these days for a 'standard' machine beit desktop
>> or server, and that is a big boost for a tinkerer like me.
>If this was MS I.e. W7 and it came with Office, SBS blah blah blah
>bundled would we all be up in arms?
>I'm thinking in terms of the court cases and the fact IE is bundled?

>See for me it begs the question everyone wants MS to not be allowed to
>bundle a browser yet install a KDE based distro and you have  Konqueror
>by default. Now I understand that you can un-install Konqueror with
>minimal damage (It will break some things) but IE is way too tied in but
>it still smacks of double standards to me but then I always was
>controversial ;-)

It's all about monopolies. Monopolies have to follow different, stricter rules, because of their dominant position.

Besides it not being possible for Linux to become a monopoly, due to its very nature, it currently has such a small market share that, even if it was controlled by a single entity (like MacOS is for example) it still wouldn't be constrained like MS is. If Ubuntu ever go as dominant as Windows (yeah, right!) it would be constrained too. Those constraints are there to stop monopolies from anti-competitive behaviour: MS's bundling of Explorer was anti-competitive at the time whenit was jostling with Netscape for dominance. It may sound whiney, but it's the law (here, europe and the US).

Andy D'Arcy Jewell
SysMicro Linux Support

T:  +44 (0) 844 991 8804
M: +44 (0) 7961 605631
F:  +44 (0) 844 357 7020
E:  andy.jewell at sysmicro.co.uk
W: www.sysmicro.co.uk