On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 05:02:33PM +0000, garry saddington wrote:

This sort of thing makes me so angry. Most people who promote proprietary software against free software are either unwilling to learn anything new, too lazy to learn anything new or plain just scared of their own inadequacies (ie. it took them long enough to learn what they now use, and scared in case they can't do it again). In any of these cases I would not like these sorts

If it were that simple then exactly the same argument would work for promoting OSS over proprietary software. Especially where you have OSS which is considerably more mature than a proprietary "equivalent"...

of people teaching, or advising those who teach, my children. An educated person with a closed mind is a very sad sort of individual.

-- Mark Evans St. Peter's CofE High School Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109 Fax: +44 1392 204763

--- garry saddington wrote:

Yes you could use the reverse argument but it is proprietary software that is entrenched and not free software. i don't use free software because of the reasons stated above and i am sure that all on this list don't either.

I use free software because I believe in the open-source ideals. I am a developer for a number of open-source projects and it is the thrill of helping others that I like. -- Thomas Adam ===== "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net ________________________________________________________________________ BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save £80 when you order online today. Hurry! Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be. http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21064/*http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk

--- ian wrote: [..snip..]

The only reason the rest of the company still use Windows is that the accounts system depends on it and they need something to practise on for fixing other people's stuff. I can't see us ever buying new products or upgrades from MS for work since there is nothing in the new stuff

This is only true (on the now rare occassion) if the program they are using is specific to windows. In about 90% of the cases there is a Linux equivilent. If you ask me, the one reason many companies stick with MS is because it is proprietry and so they have this inherent idea (ha!) that support is good, since they paid for it, they should get support for it.

really that worth having and by the time it is, there will most likely be Linux alternatives. The way I look at it is that the more people that use FLOSS, the more it gets accepted so the more people use it etc. Its constantly improving and at worst forces costs down by providing

FLOSS seems to be 'ok' -- I hope it catches on. -- Thomas Adam ===== "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net ________________________________________________________________________ BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save £80 when you order online today. Hurry! Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be. http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21064/*http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk

On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 10:40, Richard Rothwell wrote:

Ok - so who is going to address BECTa on this? I've got some contacts there, I bet other people have Ian - are you in touch with the boss for the FLOSSIE conference - want to go for him? Do we want a concerted effrot or a single approach?

Of course any decision in here won't be binding, but it might help if we're working together.

I think its probably better to go for independent lines. I was thinking I would write for clarification on behalf of the OpenOffice.org community. AFFS Chairman can do the same on behalf of AFFS, you could write on behalf of Schoolforge UK. Maybe someone else on behalf of Suse. Then maybe some individuals on behalf of their schools. In the first instance asking for clarification from the CEO Owen Lynch opens a dialogue. Then we can come back if its not to our liking and write to the Chairman etc.

===== rgds, Richard Rothwell -------------------------------------------------------------------- rind (n) acronym for 'rind is not defined'

________________________________________________________________________ BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save £80 when you order online today. Hurry! Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be. http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21064/*http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk

-- ian

You'll find that the laptops on offer through this scheme are pretty restrictive. For example there's only one Sony laptop specified. Some suppliers do specify the paid-for Sun version of Open Office, but of course many specify MS Office. As for an e-mail client, this is usually covered by MS Outlook or the bundles Sun Office equivalent. Outlook express also fits the specification. As for pricing, as far as I can tell this is fixed for the contract period which extends for a minimum of one year. I've yet to compare this 'like for like' with current pricing specified in up-to-date computer magazines. I'll let you know what I discover. David Bowles Education Support

On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 21:14, Thomas Adam wrote:

...

--- garry saddington wrote:

...

Yes you could use the reverse argument but it is proprietary software that is entrenched and not free software. i don't use free software because of the reasons stated above and i am sure that all on this list don't either.

I use free software because I believe in the open-source ideals. I am a developer for a number of open-source projects and it is the thrill of helping others that I like.

This machine is running entirely free software and I guess I use it 90% of the time. The only thing I use Windows for these days is specialist schools applications (Complex Word documents) and picking up E-mail sent to my Learning Machine account -that's just laziness cos I could get it here. The Specialist Schools form is complicated and runs text boxes across pages which is a problem for OO.o at present but I dare say that this will get fixed before long and then I could be an entirely MS free zone. The only reason the rest of the company still use Windows is that the accounts system depends on it and they need something to practise on for fixing other people's stuff. I can't see us ever buying new products or upgrades from MS for work since there is nothing in the new stuff really that worth having and by the time it is, there will most likely be Linux alternatives. The way I look at it is that the more people that use FLOSS, the more it gets accepted so the more people use it etc. Its constantly improving and at worst forces costs down by providing competition for the proprietary monopolies. On that basis alone Government has a responsibility to promote a healthy FLOSS industry. I believe they are beginning to get the message but still a long way to go. At least BECTA are doing a bit of research - ok its 3 years after everyone else but come on, this is a government quango, you can't expect them to be innovative or quick off the mark ;-)

-- ian

As far as I can recall the way the spec is worded the reference to e-mail omits the term 'freeware' as an exclusion. Hence Outlook Express is a valid e-mail client. David Bowles

On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 10:11:02PM +0000, David Bowles wrote:

...

As for an e-mail client, this is usually covered by MS Outlook or the bundles Sun Office equivalent. Outlook express also fits the specification.

The latest spec would appear to exclude Outlook Express, since it is "freeware". The only thing which would appear to be acceptable according to the spec is something POP3 based. Which clashes with the "security policy" of some of the RBCs.

From the Email part of the spec at http://www.lft.ngfl.gov.uk/index.php?i=307

'Facility for offline email reading and composition. Freeware or shareware is not acceptable' That would seem to eliminate Outlook Express (which in my view ia a good thing given the numerous viruses that have been caused by the bad coding in Outlook Express!), however it seems to imply the use of Outlook which is even worse! Has anybody had any response from BECTa as to why 'Freeware or shareware is not acceptable'? Alex Brett alex.brett@brettcomputers.co.uk On 23 Dec 2003 at 13:47, David Bowles wrote:

As far as I can recall the way the spec is worded the reference to e-mail omits the term 'freeware' as an exclusion. Hence Outlook Express is a valid e-mail client.

David Bowles

...

On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 10:11:02PM +0000, David Bowles wrote:

...

As for an e-mail client, this is usually covered by MS Outlook or the bundles Sun Office equivalent. Outlook express also fits the specification.

...

The latest spec would appear to exclude Outlook Express, since it is "freeware". The only thing which would appear to be acceptable according to the spec is something POP3 based. Which clashes with the "security policy" of some of the RBCs.

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-linux-uk-schools-help@suse.com

Well, I've just checked out the MS license agreement that accompanies the Internet Explorer and Outlook Express 6.x upgrades, and this spells out in no uncertain terms the fact that Outlook Express is an upgrade component of the OS that can only be run on a machine with a valid (paid for) licence to run a MS operating system. The bottom line is MS Outlook Express is NEITHER freeware NOR shareware. Period. Mow this looks like a gross abuse of MS's monopoly position that's been bought into and further reinforced by BECTa, and is a valid criticism against BECTA's blatantly unfair MS-centric restrictive specification. BECTA has specified a playing field with a steep slope towards the wide open Microsoft goal mouth! DAVID BOWLES PS: Here's just a small part of the MS Outlook Express upgrade licence agreement that ships with this download: "* You may install and use one (1) copy of the OS Components on each of your computers running validly licensed copies of the applicable OS Product, provided that you use such additional copies of such OS Components in accordance with the terms and conditions above. Microsoft retains all right, title and interest in and to the OS Components. All rights not expressly granted are reserved by Microsoft."

...

'Facility for offline email reading and composition. Freeware or shareware is not acceptable'

Ah yes, but is Outlook Express freeware or shareware? Ask a Microsoft lawyer what he thinks about this.

As for Outlook Express, well this comes bundled along with the Windows operating system along with Internet Explorer.

So go ask a MS lawyer if Outlook Express is 'Shareware' and I guarantee the answer will be NO.

Furthermore MS absolutely never ever does 'freeware', does it?

Pigs might fly, but MS do f...

David Bowles

On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 02:06:53PM -0000, Alex Brett wrote:

From the Email part of the spec at http://www.lft.ngfl.gov.uk/index.php?i=307

'Facility for offline email reading and composition. Freeware or shareware is not acceptable' That would seem to eliminate Outlook Express (which in my view ia a good thing given the numerous viruses that have been caused by the bad coding in Outlook Express!), however it seems to

When was the last time Microsoft coded anything well?

imply the use of Outlook which is even worse!

IIRC Outlook actually uses Outlook Express for handling email. So it *should* be barred too. Insisting on an offline system has all sorts of issues which do not appear to be thought through. But the people behind the LFT dosn't appear, IMHO, to have thought through the consequences of a lot of their decisions. -- Mark Evans St. Peter's CofE High School Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109 Fax: +44 1392 204763

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 11:49:24AM -0000, Adrian Wells wrote:

...

Insisting on an offline system has all sorts of issues which do not appear to be thought through.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this Mark. I would always urge users to use "off-line" (i.e local email server) as opposed to on-line

I'm interpreting "off-line" to mean that everything is stored on the laptop itself.

(hotmail et al). One has complete control over virus scanning, corporate ID,

I'm intrepreting "on-line" to mean a situation where data is stored on another machine accessable by a network protocol. This includeds IMAP(S) as much as HTTP(S).

backup & duplication control (important for 'professional' users), access

The moment you hand over the laptop over to a teacher you cease to have much control over it. Typically you can expect that very little backing up or updating will be performed. Storing all email on the laptop adds complications if the machine breaks down, if it comes into the possession of third parties and if it is reassigned to another teacher.

etc. Although becoming less of an issue (although I see broadband soon becoming as slow as modems), is the unnecessary use of bandwidth. On top of this I would also recommend an OE (or similar) reader as I've not yet found

A lot of these type of programs are responsible for wastage of bandwidth. Through inappropriate defaults such as sending outgoing messages in "bloat mode". -- Mark Evans St. Peter's CofE High School Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109 Fax: +44 1392 204763

--- Adrian Wells wrote:

Understood and agreed! :-)

We make the teachers sign for the laptops and one of the conditions is that they are handed in at the end of term

Why? Realistically, do they sit in a cupboard for the hols (honestly?)... Cheers - and hope everyone has had a good one so far! -- Matt ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html

On Sun, 2003-12-28 at 10:07, Adrian Wells wrote:

...

Why? Realistically, do they sit in a cupboard for the hols (honestly?)...

Clearly not! There are two issues.

*People treat laptops worst than pool motor cars, they are usually subjected to even more careless misuse during the long teacher holidays and come back with damaged drives, cases & screens and it's not unusual to have to empty them of sand! legitimate use? Why should they and their kids mess up a resource that is then denied to others because of their stupidity and carelessness. If ya wanna mess with stuff (expensive kit that doesn't belong to you) , buy yer own!

Might have been a better strategy to subsidise or give tax relief for teachers buying their own laptops/desktops for all the reasons here. Let them decide and then take responsibility. Breeding dependency culture and developing a "Nanny State" is IMHO counter-productive. <SNIP>

. The less tinkering and options to change the better.

Just set the Machines up so you need to be admin to install anything. Ownership confers responsibility, so let those who want to tinker tinker but make them own the thing, if they mess it up for themselves they have to sort it out. Its why shared laptops is a bad idea in the first place. You could produce something like Mandrakemove, so each user had his/her own CD and USB RAM making the machine itself just a dumb piece of hardware, I suppose. <SNIP>

This multiple method approach has been both the guiding light and the downfall of the PC since it tends to both provide a soup that spawns evolution and one that produces lots of naff code. The view taken by apple was, "if you write a program, here's the code to close it - it works!" On the PC, there's more ways to close a program than you can shake a stick at. And when Mentor (dolphin) falls over, some wagg will tell you that you closed it the wrong way! What they meant was, that they put their "close down code" in the wrong place :-)

Maybe a better approach would be to take technology education seriously and put far more emphasis on understanding some of the key issues involved in using technology rather than assuming that everything is fine as long as you can make fairly superficial use of Microsoft Office. The level of expectations in understanding the fundamentals of IT compared to mathematics and science is abysmally low. I think more focus on *fewer* but more *fundamental* applications would help and it would also save money because without the dependency on masses of expensive and often distracting software it would be easier to deploy FLOSS systems more quickly, easier to train teachers and increase the quality of transferable skills in the most important areas. Regards, -- ian

Hi mate,

...

Why? Realistically, do they sit in a cupboard for the hols (honestly?)...

Clearly not! There are two issues.

*People treat laptops worst than pool motor cars, they are usually subjected to even more careless misuse during the long teacher holidays and come back with damaged drives, cases & screens and it's not unusual to have to empty them of sand! legitimate use? Why should they and their kids mess up a resource that is then denied to others because of their stupidity and carelessness. If ya wanna mess with stuff (expensive kit that doesn't belong to you) , buy yer own!

I come at this from another perspective entirely. I have to make myself inherently trust the spirit of the people I work with. Yes, it back fires spectacularly, but the pros outweigh the cons. There's no reason why they're significantly more likely to get messed up during these two weeks than any other. And I'm not going to spend any of my hols sorting out laptops. And, yes - I'm very happy for teachers to use them for their own means. In fact, I've been encouraging it madly this last year. The turn around in attitudes of those who don't have their own is well worth the effort that it causes me from their tinkering. I want people to be confident with the kit when they're teaching it. And the reason the kids are confident with it is because they're exposed to it (and mess it up regularly). The group I'm talking about do not own their own - and if they did then they wouldn't be fussed about taking the laptop.

*The weakest point in ANY network is a laptop! The network's all cosy, clean, virus fee and sitting behind a fire wall, then suddenly meltdown! Some dipstick who knows best has loaded all kinds of everything onto the laptop and disabled the AV because their kids game doesn't like sharing a computer with any other software (because the rules don't apply to them) and then decided to plug it into the network - cool!

Agreed. I agree completely technically. But I'm not in the business of taking decisions to make my life easier (and I'm not suggesting you are either, geezer!). Just that I think it's worth it the extra sorting and solving time to have these resources out there.

We like to have a clean-up and software update while the machine is not needed, then we sit them in a secure cupboard so they're ready for use when really needed :-) Of course if we don't get them during the holiday, we have to do it during term time!

Not me. I'm doing it in work time. I'm sure there's a couple of hours it's not being used in term time? (And so they do end up in a cupboard...)

And in any case, why should a sacred few have exclusive access to what is a shared school resource during the holiday? Come on you lot, who swans about in the school minibus and have all your fuel and repair bills paid for by the school?

No not a sacred few. Share the wealth. Have a blinding New Year, one and all! -- Matt ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html

Hi Paul,

ROFLMAO What does that mean? Sorry but I don't have a mobile phone.

Are you sure you should be on a linux mail list? You luddite! You sound like an apologist for M$; you can have any OS so long as its Windoze.

Not wishing to get on your case specifically, because you're not the only one, but childish misspelling of anything to do with Microsoft is just that, childish. Either one has a valid argument or one does not. Not liking something because it's fashionable or because of prejudice doesn't hold water. One needs to use the best tools available which fit the need and the budget. Sometimes it's one of the many flavours of LINUX, sometimes it's a windows solution, another time it may be Novell, or Unix, or one of the umpteen other OS's available, or even a mix - they ALL have their strengths and weaknesses! I've used many and even written my own OS once! As to Luddite, if standing back and reassessing the situation on a regular basis rather than running full tilt in the middle of a startled herd makes me a luddite, then please, let the luddites reign! And if setting out your viewpoint, even if it's wrong, makes just one of the herd prick up it's ears and think for itself, even if it reaches the same conclusion as before, that must surely be a good thing! (better if they agree, obviously!) (get it? Christmas? reindeer? herd? :-) ) I think you'll see that I was careful not to specify any OS other than Apple/MAC (PC may have been hijacked by IBM (not Microsoft), as windows was by Microsoft, but it stands for personal computer, even if it has LINUX on it!) and OE as an example of the genera of program because it's well known. Although it stifled interface innovation (single button mouse? How annoying and limiting is that? and now round to boot!), by dictating procedures and code to be used, one was always sure of slick reliable software. If you do not take this approach, you need to either, spend a fortune on ensuring good quality code, not bother about the quality but sell on some other aspect, or constantly offer updates. Either of the latter are not really acceptable in a consumer led society - but that IS what we put up with, be it from the LINUX camp or Microsoft or any of the others. May everything Microsoft crash & burn and none of their back-ups work for the new year! Just joking, can you imagine the mess world-wide! :-) Paul, (and everyone else) have a great 2004 Adrian (Luddite) Wells

On Monday 29 Dec 2003 11:38 am, Adrian Wells wrote:

Hi Paul,

...

ROFLMAO

'R'oll 'O'n 'F'loor 'L'aughing 'M'y 'A'patures ;) 'O'ff HNYTYA

What does that mean? Sorry but I don't have a mobile phone.

[snip] -- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000

Hi David, On Tuesday 30 Dec 2003 12:42 am, David Bowles wrote:

Courting criticism and playing devil's advocate here...

No criticism due here. You have a valid point.

I personally object to the rabid hate-quest against 'Micro$oft'. Surely we would do better advocating alternatives such as Linux on the basis of their merits rather than what looks to an outsider like prejudice.

However, the problem is more (I think) with with terminology and phrasology than ideology. Everyone here wishes to advocate Linux because of it's positive points, and not because of the alternatives negative ones. Linux is good and bad for all the reasons that we all know. M$ is good and bad for all the reasons that we all know. It is just that both the products and business activities of M$ do create much emotions in people. The problem that this thread has highlighted and discussed (okay whinged about too) is the very poorly defined Spec based on vague and inaccurate preconceptions and (in my personal opinion) a failed attempt by people trying to look knowledgable. The fact that *we* know that this spec is effectively meaningless and wrongly restrictive is not kn doubt - what to contructively do about it should be more the point of this thread.

This reminds me of born-again Apple users, some of whom come across as frustrated 'flashers' underneath their macs.

There is nothing wrong with mac users - as long as they remember to take their medication.

Happy new year,

David

...

Hi Paul,

...

ROFLMAO

What does that mean? Sorry but I don't have a mobile phone.

...

Are you sure you should be on a linux mail list? You luddite! You sound like an apologist for M$; you can have any OS so long as its Windoze.

Not wishing to get on your case specifically, because you're not the only one, but childish misspelling of anything to do with Microsoft is just that, childish. Either one has a valid argument or one does not. Not liking something because it's fashionable or because of prejudice doesn't hold water. One needs to use the best tools available which fit the need and the budget. Sometimes it's one of the many flavours of LINUX, sometimes it's a windows solution, another time it may be Novell, or Unix, or one of the umpteen other OS's available, or even a mix - they ALL have their strengths and weaknesses! I've used many and even written my own OS once!

As to Luddite, if standing back and reassessing the situation on a regular basis rather than running full tilt in the middle of a startled herd makes me a luddite, then please, let the luddites reign! And if setting out your viewpoint, even if it's wrong, makes just one of the herd prick up it's ears and think for itself, even if it reaches the same conclusion as before, that must surely be a good thing! (better if they agree, obviously!) (get it? Christmas? reindeer? herd? :-) )

I think you'll see that I was careful not to specify any OS other than Apple/MAC (PC may have been hijacked by IBM (not Microsoft), as windows was by Microsoft, but it stands for personal computer, even if it has LINUX on it!) and OE as an example of the genera of program because it's well known. Although it stifled interface innovation (single button mouse? How annoying and limiting is that? and now round to boot!), by dictating procedures and code to be used, one was always sure of slick reliable software. If you do not take this approach, you need to either, spend a fortune on ensuring good quality code, not bother about the quality but sell on some other aspect, or constantly offer updates. Either of the latter are not really acceptable in a consumer led society - but that IS what we put up with, be it from the LINUX camp or Microsoft or any of the others.

May everything Microsoft crash & burn and none of their back-ups work for the new year! Just joking, can you imagine the mess world-wide! :-)

Paul, (and everyone else) have a great 2004

Adrian (Luddite) Wells

-- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 09:44, Richard Rothwell wrote:

Beg to differ... <SNIP> A monopolist knows that they are inefficient and overpriced. The barriers to entry are the major defence they have. For this reason I'm very happy to have the refered to as Micro$oft, but I'd hope it encourages people to study economics

Take a look at http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_12/ghosh/index.html for some global economics related to FLOSS. Particularly the table at the end showing the real costs of commercial software in developing countries. If the Gov want to spend a little with real impact in bridging the technology divide it would put a few million into say OpenOffice.org and FLOSS education applications so that not only our schools benefit but all those around the world, too. Train the locals how to set up and maintain GNU/Linux thin clients and use recycled machines as terminals. Take all those old machines out of landfill, increase the global knowledge pool of tech support and provide educational tools for everyone and still save money on license fees. Who would this hurt? Only Microsoft. UK providing World leadership in ICT? Ooo-er, let's not upset the USA ;-) -- ian

On Tuesday 30 December 2003 12:00, Richard Rothwell wrote:

Hi All,

A while back I asked for information about any cases where the examination boards _required_ schools to use specific proprietary software for their syllabuses or examinations. I did not get any direct evidence, if anyone has anything to add please let me know.

HOWEVER

I am aware that some of the examiners for this summer's GCSEs will be following marking schemes that are Microsoft specific. I am thinking of writing a letter to all the examination boards and ICT principal examiners, from SchoolForge I guess, pointing out the minor differences in syntax and menu structure between different suites of office software. This will I hope not only prompt the boards to remind their examiners to be flexible but will also flag the existence of alternatives to the Microsoft product - without mentioning names.

At A-level we use Knoda and MySQL for database applications and so at a recent coursework standardisation meeting I brought this up with the chief moderator. The reply was extremely positive and I was urged to continue but when submitting to a moderator I ought to include a covering letter explaining the software choice and its differences. The actual words used were 'lay it on thick'. regards garry

----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Rothwell" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:00 PM Subject: [suse-linux-uk-schools] Office software and exam boards

A while back I asked for information about any cases where the examination boards _required_ schools to use specific proprietary software for their syllabuses or examinations. I did not get any direct evidence, if anyone has anything to add please let me know.

I have never come across this but you could have a look at all of this information on their websites.

HOWEVER

I am aware that some of the examiners for this summer's GCSEs will be following marking schemes that are Microsoft specific.

Obviously you can't be specific here but if you could provide some broad examples of the kinds of things you mean - that would be helpful. I can't really get wound up about it without having a little more information. The only examples I have seen that may fit along these lines are the 'how to' questions. How do you insert an image into a DTP document, for example. The questions are never app specific and IIRC the mark scheme was fairly generic for these types of answers and went through the steps rather than the menu names. Darren

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 00:42, David Bowles wrote:

Courting criticism and playing devil's advocate here...

I personally object to the rabid hate-quest against 'Micro$oft'.

Hate the sin not the sinner. Its difficult to entirely ignore M$ since its their two profitable lines that are the main problem. Its the monopoly/de facto standard that is the problem, but since its a monopoly there only happens to be one company involved.

Surely we would do better advocating alternatives such as Linux on the basis of their merits rather than what looks to an outsider like prejudice.

But the main advantage of using MS products is the monopoly on running apps and file formats. Its impossible for Linux to have greater merit in those areas while the monopoly exists and these two factors over-ride technical merit - if not the world would never have standardised on DOS in the first place.

This reminds me of born-again Apple users, some of whom come across as frustrated 'flashers' underneath their macs.

An Apple monopoly could be worse than a M$ one since the systems involved are no freer and might be argued to be less so. -- ian