To: DrBob From: "Kevin Jaques, B.A., LL.B., of the Jaques Law Office" Subject: Mac v. Windows - Mission From God! Cc: Bcc: X-Attachments: I guess I ain't as subtull as I figgered. You correctly divined the subtext to my message about Linux, namely, my Mac beat your Windows, Nyaa Nyaa! We're Number Two! We're Number Two! However, the literal text was sincere, that we forget there are other systems, now and potentially, that might well be better. But the Mac=Beta argument? That got me going, and I wrote the following yesterday. I had second thoughts. First, it rather nakedly displays my feelings. But what are friends for? Second, if you think I am trying to convert you, you will think I'm an idiot. Please be assured that I am not. So, I am sending it anyway. You sinner! Ultimately, I'm quibbling, because your point is valid. The market does not necessarily reward the superior product. But the analogy is, with respect, quite poor. The VCR interface is hardly inefficient, intimidating, or unreliable on VHS. Even a mac user can find the play button. Then the typical user must sit on the sofa till the movie is over. I don't know what made the beta so great. Did it have additional capabilities, or only better ones (smaller, sharper, brighter)? Did the future of humanity at all involve the choice of VCR format? Am I too mystical to think that computers and computer communication represent an evolutionary leap for mankind? We are finally able to actually augment our own brains! Could there be a global mind created, or its functional equivalent? If it is important, should we worry about the choice of OS? After all, there are many important aspects, such as hardware, communication, system, applications, data. But unless the system provides abstraction, so the programmers can simply make a system call, and rely on the system to control hardware, then either hardware design will be frozen, or programmers will be, let's just say, busy. Unless the system handles the hardware abstraction well, hardware configurations will be troublesome and consume time. The system must support the communication. The applications will be smaller and easier to develop if they can rely on capabilities of the system. The applications will be more usable, if the system offers a consistent interface. The data can be manipulated by more applications, in more ways, if the system provides the structure for the links. Copy and paste was just the beginning. I suggest the OS is central. Even if the OS is important, again, should we worry about the choice of OS. After all, won't the market sort it out? Well, reference your first point, that the market isn't always right. More importantly, the market doesn't work in the presence of a monopoly. I suggest it is patent that there is a genuine danger of an OS monopoly developing. Even if an OS monopoly develops, is that such a problem? The monopoly is Microsoft. Can it be characterized as innovative, or just opportunistic? I am alarmed that recently Microsoft abandoned the CHRP standard, that held real promise for increasing competition between systems and competition between hardware elements. I am alarmed that Microsoft is interfering with the Java standard, by insisting on windows-only features. Was it just bad luck that when Microsoft came out with a new system, Netscape started crashing on it? Wasn't it odd that Word 6 for the Mac runs tens of times slower than Word 5? Wasn't it odd that Word 6 for the Mac runs faster on Windows, when typically the Mac programs run faster? Software companies quietly complain of harsh deals that Microsoft imposes. Are manufacturers with Windows licenses permitted to also carry licenses for other systems? I see a Microsoft monopoly as a real problem.