Microsoft finally got it correct

Some months ago, I visited a Microsoft site to see if it could identify my OS correctly.  I am a Linux user and the site identified my computer as a device running Windows 8.

I do not think that it is so difficult to identify the OS of a computer correctly.  I mean, this site can do it pretty accurately.  Was that a careless mistake on Microsoft's part?  Is it possible?  Or was it a poor strategy to report larger figures for Windows 8 market share?

Whatever the case, everyone knows 8 was a disaster and 8.1 did not help much.

Anyway, after all this time, I visited the MS site again and, to my surprise, it can now see me as a "non-windows user" :P  Wow!  I call that improvement!

Finally, Microsoft says I am not running Windows

To show my appreciation, I took the time to fill up the survey and evaluate the site.

Going from A to B in KDE, GNOME, and Windows

As a Linux user, I've learned to appreciate the differences of doing things using the different desktops available.

I started thinking of how one can see going from point A to point B in KDE and GNOME and I could not help to find some amusement in this metaphor.

Ready for the ride?  "How do I go to B?  Let me count the ways:"

KDE: 
Wanna go to B?  Take this path...or maybe the one less traveled by.

The KDE way(s)

KDE is famous for having multiple paths for traveling.  Do you want to turn off the computer?  Well, you can use the menu, or you can right clic and select LEAVE, or use the widgets that are normally placed next to the clock on the bottom panel.  Hey, even the cashew gives you an option to turn your computer off!  KDE developers want to keep choices for users.  I personally like that approach because, despite what some people say, it does not reduce my productivity.  Actually, it keeps my brain sharp.

However, I must admit that, when you first travel the KDE path, it can look remarkably like this:

GNOME: 
Wonderland?  Simply go down the rabbit hole, Alice.

Simplicity is Gnome's motto.  To travel from A to B in Gnome is like taking a pleasant walk inside a cool, futuristic tunnel: only one path, shielded from outer interference, conveniently signaled and illuminated for you.  You cannot get lost!

There is a downside to it, though.  In fact, some experienced users find Gnome's approach over-restrictive, almost claustrophobic.

Follow the path.. You cannot miss B!

I am not writing this as a complaint, for I am sure both approaches appeal and satisfy different users.

How could I complain about choice?

Wait, I do have a complaint!

I used it for over 13 years, but I still resent the Windows way!

Windows: 
Thou shalt not go to B (unless you disobey the rules) 
Windows would tell me that going from A to B was either impossible or forbidden.  Want your computer to wake you up to a song?  To have a wallpaper?  Or more recently, to have a menu?  No way!!

But you could always circumvent the prohibition with third party, often cracked software.  Then, why blocking the road in the first place?

Microsoft, you might not want it, but users want to go to B!

I know how to use Windows properly, so it's not my fault!

"I know how to use Windows properly, so it's not my fault."

With that declaration and the particular stress on the possessive adjective, Mr. Valmers started his testimony before the inquiring eyes of a judge and the jury members, who began whispering and shaking their heads in disapproval. They had listened to the technical report of a software expert before the afflicted average computer user sat in front of them.

Sensing the effect that his initial words had on the atmosphere of the room, Mr. Valmers paused timidly and cleared his throat before the microphone, causing listeners to tilt their heads for a second that became awkwardly long. Pierced by the prying eyes of the prosecutor, the fifty-something owner of an infected PC wished he could have uttered something like: "I know how to use Windows. I took courses to learn how to use my Windows computer, you know, so do not patronize me, techie." However, he just sat there, mute, as a target for the questions that, sooner or later, would dart from the mouth of the implacable man in front of him.

Mr. Valmers thought for a second. How could he prove that he did nothing wrong according to what he learned in those Windows courses he took? In spite of the fact that the expert had made it clear that such action was a pre-requisite for a secure Windows computer, no instructor had ever told him that he was supposed to disable autorun. Darn pedantic guy! But then, why was it that the stupid autorun feature was enabled by default in Windows if it was so dangerous? Mr. Valmers had done what he was told in four courses to be safe from malware: he bought an expensive antivirus (what a poor investment!), he had that software installed along with MS Security Essentials, and he made sure that the Windows firewall was on as he browsed the Web. Religiously, the man had downloaded antivirus updates and the traitor software never gave a warning of the infection that had him sitting as a fool in front of all those people that looked down on him.

"This is not fair," he heard himself say, "if autorun is so dangerous, or Windows is insecure, I am not to be blamed. I did not do anything to make my computer any more vulnerable than it was when I bought it."

How he wished that Microsoft's CEO, that bad-tempered bald guy, had been there in his place! This guy was actually the one who was responsible for all computer infections...He was the careless person that approved the release of such a defective product for mass consumption!

"It was your negligence that caused the infection. It was your computer, Mr. Valmers, which was spreading viruses to several Government institutions," charged the prosecutor, assuming a stance of superiority. "Your computer," he stressed with poorly-concealed satisfaction.

The possessive adjective lingered for an additional second on the thick air of the room and echoed inside Mr. Valmers' head. "Your computer, your computer," repeated a hypnotic voice while the man felt as an insect pinned on a wall.

All of a sudden, that simple four-letter word opened his heart with hope in a Joycean epiphany.

"Yes, sir, it was my computer," he replied. "But, according to the EULA, Windows is not my software. I do not own it. I did everything in my power to secure my computer, but I cannot do anything to improve the condition of the software".

Murmurs of the listeners grew until they became a tidal wave of noise that forced the judge to demand silence... (to be continued)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, this is a piece of fiction I am working on. However, it can turn into a reality if people are dumb enough to accept Microsoft's newest trickery: a call for banning sick computers from the Internet. Read about it here.

A prickly questionnaire

When people see my OS, they always ask the question "What version of Windows is that?" I answer that I use Linux and most of them look at me as if I had spoken a word in some sort of an alien language. Then, afer I tell them what Linux is and what it can do, most of them give me a funny look, that funny look, as if I were delusional.

I understand that people feel comfortable with Windows, despite the fact that this OS has a talent for hiding or corrupting files, failing to rescue documents, getting all sorts of infections, and "upgrading" to mostly cosmetic features instead of significant ones. After all, under Windows, you can bloat the computer with third-party software to patch holes or obtain the benefits that an OS should give you...or, at least, to try to get very close to that.

However, without third-party solutions, Linux can rescue your files, even when Windows gives up on you. Read this. In addition, Linux has a price that is difficult to beat , and its learning curve has been grossly exaggerated.

I created this questionnaire (based on my experience with Windows) to ask back to those people who think that Linux was not a good idea for me. Maybe, this is going to explain my choice more clearly to them.

A Questionnaire for Windows Users--from an ex Windows user

1. When was the last time that Windows succeeded at rescuing your files?

2. Was the need to rescue files derived from a virus infection, a hacker intrusion, or a normal crash of your OS?

3. Do you truly think that your OS crashes should be considered "normal"?

4. What OS were you using last time you got a virus in your computer?

5. If your antivirus detects a virus but can't remove it...do you know how to remove the threat manually?

6. If you do... Is that an easy process that you can repeat in exactly the same way for all viruses?

7. How long does it take to remove a virus (in average) using your AV software?

8. And without it?

9. Are you happy when you add up the cost of the OS, the office suite, and additional security software?

10. Do you pay for all that?

11. If you pay for your OS, do you do it because you are entirely satisfied with the product, because you are a loyal costumer, or because you have no choice?

12. If you did not pay for your OS, are you a proud pirate?

13. Would you like to get a legal suit from an economically-powerful software company?

14. What would you do if you got one from the company that makes your OS?

15. If you pirate not to pay for software...don't you think that using only free software makes more sense?

16. When was the last time you had to pay for your hard disk to be formatted and your OS to be reinstalled?

17. Do you feel satisfied calling formatting and reinstalling "regular maintenance operations"?

18. If you install your OS yourself...how long does the process take?

19. Did you include the time for the office suite and all the programs that you like in your answer for #18?

20. Do you have any guarantee that the next version of the OS you use will support your printer, scanner, and other hardware?

21. How about the files you made with the office suite you paid for? Will those be supported, or are you going to be expected to buy a new office suite?

22. If you consider carefully your answers for #20 and #21, do you think that the company that makes your OS really cares for your needs as a costumer?

23. If you understand that the company wants to make a profit at your expenses and it overlooks your needs, why do you support it with your money and why are you even willing to pay others to solve the problems that the company's products create?

24. If your answer was "because there is no choice", you know there are other choices. If fact, you are seeing one. Why are you brushing off the question?

25. How much more are you willing to take in the name of your OS? Let me rephrase that, "What does it take for you to try other choices?


I asked myself all those questions a year ago and that explains why I am using Linux today. Of course, I had to learn to operate this new OS and I made mistakes. However, in all this time, I haven't had anything that resembles--even remotely-- all the problems I had with Redmond's OSs. Nothing justifies all the money and time I wasted with Windows in 11 years.

One thing is sure: when my Linux computer finally stops working, at least I will know that my OS did everything possible to keep it alive. Windows, on the other hand, just tells you that your computer is not "good enough" to run the OS. But I learned that, for Microsoft, no currently available computer is good enough to run the latest version of Windows anyway. Mark my words: your nice computer running 7 today will be "obsolete" by the time Microsoft releases Windows 8. However, we know that, although some of the hardware might have become "older", what is actually obsolete for the Redmond software company is their OS, not the computer itself. And they have no regrets about spending any amount of money to fool you into believing that your hardware is to be blamed!