>Now why would anybody want to use a vastly inferior product
Vastly inferior is hyperbole.
> that runs only
>on a rather unreliable and insecure platform, capped by the fact that you
>lock yourself into a pay-pay-pay cost spiral when yoou can have a superior
>product for free?
People use Windows not because of Windows, because most people don't an
operating system from a potting shed, but rather because of the
environment. Their printer works with Windows (the HP 6100 does not and
never will work with Linux). They have a lot of Quicken files they don't
want to bother with transferring. It's all convenience.
>Honestly, I can understand when people still choose one of the Windows
>flavours as their desktop operating system. But I can't think of one single
>reason where NT would beat BSD or Linux as a server operating system
Same thing.
John
P.S. I don't like monopolies, but reality is reality.
