Re: uninstallation

[Billy Forrest <billyf@earthlink.net>]

Oh, but I believe that suggesting viable alternatives will indeed get it done.  Either
you will accept Microsoft and its tactics or you will get tired of it and maybe try
something else.  At this point, we do still have a choice.  I think we would all agree
that Microsoft wants to eliminate our choices.  As far as the Mac and price is
concerned, I feel that Apple has addressed this issue within the last year or so.
Yes, I know that they don't make sub $1,000 machines but this brings to mind the
saying "you get what you pay for".  I recently read an article where 3rd party
hardware venders are cutting corners to help keep a profit margin.  I immediately
remembered how Packard Bell used to use used computer parts in their machines.  You
would never get that from Apple.  Now I'm not trying to convert everyone to the Mac,
but it is definitely there as an alternative.

Bill Forrest
Telecommunications Technician

Steve Cohen wrote:

> And I still say that a lot of the reason that it's easier for Macintosh to achieve
> this is that they are not hobbled by having to support "generic" peripherals.
> Macintosh is not an open standard.  It's a proprietary standard that is selling
> hardware at a markup.  If you want to pay that extra, fine.  But there is a reason
> Macintosh lost battle after battle if not the war, and it's not that the vast
> majority of
> businesses and individuals are a bunch of sheep.  It's that the equipment was
> cheaper.
>
> What I'm saying is that I'm sure there must be a better way to manage all the
> complexity of the PC-clone marketplace than what Microsoft has set out.  I don't
> know what it is.  But since the Apple Macintosh is not an open standard either, I'm
> not sure it's relevant to the discussion.
>
> By all means, use what you prefer.  But I will admit that I get exasperated by
> people who say they use Macintosh as a status symbol that sets them above the herd
> of PC users.  The issue is how to stop Microsoft from building a monopoly.  Telling
> everyone to buy a Mac instead ain't gonna get it done.
>
> Billy Forrest wrote:
>
> > Mitch Stone wrote:
> >
> > > In reply to Steve Cohen's message sent 1/23/98 5:43 PM:
> > >
> > > >It's an excellent point you raise, and frankly, I spend so much of my life
> > > >in the
> > > >Windows
> > > >orbit that I really don't have any idea what the answer is.  How do the
> > > >others do
> > > >it better?  I will leave aside Macintosh which maybe has an easier time of it
> > > >given the tighter linkage between hardware and software.
> > >
> > > The tighter linkage between hardware and software on the Macintosh is not
> > > the reason why application removal is uncomplicated on the Mac. These
> > > operations are relatively easy to perform because they were _designed_ to
> > > be easy. This is strictly an OS issue, so far as I can tell.
> > >
> > > Sorry to be such a humbug on this question, but we _do_ have an example
> > > of how a commercial OS can make basic maintenance tasks non-arcane. Why
> > > leave it aside?
> > >
> > >    Mitch Stone
> > > +---
> > >    Half the lies they tell me aren't true.
> > >                          -- Yogi Berra
> > >
> > >    Boycott Microsoft ** http://www.vcnet.com/bms
> >
> >   I definitely agree with Mitch on this.  The Mac has proven over and over again
> > to be more stable, more reliable, and more user friendly than windows.  It just
> > amazes me that  a better alternative exists yet Mac users are in the minority in
> > most cases.  I mean if you really look at it, the Mac can do everything a wintel
> > pc can do. Except better (in most cases). I use a mac because I refuse to settle
> > for "just good enough" products and I refuse to limit myself. The postings on
> > this list confirm to me everyday that I have made a wise decision.
> >
> > Bill Forrest
> > Telecomminications Technician