There’s been a opportunity for open source, Linux, and
openSUSE to spread like a disease; as many of you know
M$ has been planning “pay-as-you-go” computing, meaning
if you want to use a program for 2 hours, you have to pay
a fee for each hour on the net, or writing a report…
Thus, scaring you, minimizing the urge to discover, to write,
to experiment…
I don’t think the average consumer knows how much money
they put in the PC ( running Windows of course), M$ applications, and other peripherals. I think it will take a long time
for the consumer (which is stupid, usually doesn’t do research, and wants to buy fast / without stress) to realize that Linux is
the operating system that should reign king.
But, if Microsoft can get this going (they recently filed a patent: Microsoft eyes metered-PC boondoggle • The Register
Maybe, just maybe, we can get the point across! That you can stop wasting your money!
I ask all the users of Linux, open source, and the believers in
breaking away from the evil empire, UNITE! Fight harder! Spread the word, whether it be on “Facebook”, “Twitter”, anything that can help the cause!! Like I said, this may be our time to shine!
Find the evidence, show it to all you know, give Linux disks out, and install it everywhere possible!
there is nothing wrong with pay as you go. Some software is rather expensive, and if you only need to use it a few times it is not worth coughing up a few hundred dollars for it.
"“Beyond simple activation, the user may be able to select a level of performance related to processor, memory, graphics power, etc. that is driven not by a lifetime maximum requirement, but rather by the need of the moment,”
Reminds me of IBM licensing models. Both IBM and Google play a lot with Cloud Computing, and it seems to me that this MS approach follows the same direction. The easiest way to charge you for certain apps and a certain performance is to run the app remote from your computer. In order to not lose the hardware vendors on the way, it will probably be some form of distributed computing on local machines, though.
there is nothing wrong with pay as you go. Some software is rather expensive, and if you only need to use it a few times it is not worth coughing up a few hundred dollars for it.
Then why do you use Linux? Why don’t you go and get “Word” instead of OpenOffice? Do you spend your money buying M$ apps, that are compared to trash, accounting we can get better ones for free?
I don’t see why you use openSUSE, why don’t you get Vista Ultimate, and get some M$ fanboys and see who can get it to run on the least bit of RAM?
M$ in not an innovator, and certainly not worth throwing your money at them…
True, there is nothing wrong with pay as you go. Some software is worth supporting. But in the article, 80 cents per hour for browsing. First off, I don’t want Microsoft knowing where I browse. Secondly, paying 80 cents per hour…if you do a lot, like 14 hours per day for one month is $336, that doesn’t figure in music or office. So it’s a lot to cough up. Next up is, why pay Microsoft for their software, when there are better apps out there. If you want to support software, great, support the open source software.
Exactly, we need to rethink our computing itineraries…
really think about why we need the computer… and
why M$ is not the way to go, it’s not the future…
we need open source to be publicly known, that it’s not
illegal, and is safe…
Like I said, we need to UNITE! Not taking an aggressive aproach,
but to show more and more people, that it is the solution… Stating
it in a simple, but powerful way; exposing the truths of software
business, and why to re-look at what conventional users are funding…
actually I do use microsoft Office because there is no linux office software that meets my needs. Having used openoffice to create a few hundred page document, experienced it getting rather sluggish as the document grew in size, and then having all the formating screw up when getting it ready to be opened with Microsoft Office, which is what it needed to be viewed by.
Seems you are rather arrogant if people don’t use what you want them to. As I have said before I dual boot Opensuse and Vista. Why I use Opensuse and vista is my business not yours
Jonathan_R, that 80 cents browsing is a British tabloid adding that to try and make a story out of nothing. No one will ever charge for browsing, simply because it would never work, and people would simply move to a different software. Pay as you go software is going to be aimed at companies who will basically be using the hosting and software of other companies. Like Adobe are doing now, offering you the ability to use their software online for a price. It’s all moving towards cloud computing.
I have no problem with it… I’m am trying to rally
open source users that believe in spreading
open source across the software tundra…
I don’t care of you use Microsoft Office instead
of OpenOffice, it is not my choice. I am trying
to bring a point across… that I, and hopefully
many other users, think open source should be
more widely used and appreciated; and in the
means of advocates (meaning other users who
believe in this cause) for open source and what it truly
represents
Whether the solution be a plan, social advertising, or
a full on offensive (attacking violently… but I don’t believe
this is the way to be sought out)
I use OpenOffice professionally, and I also use Microsoft Office. I use Microsoft Office only when I have to (at work). I have used OpenOffice to correct Excell spreadsheets. I am also writing a book and have not experienced the formatting issue, or the sluggishness. I use a variety of formats; odt, odm, rtf, doc, html, and pdf.
Do you have another source to contradict the validity of the OP’s article? Can you prove it’s a tabloid?
As to your claims, that no one would ever pay that, you are seriously misguided.
In explaining various bundles of software and computing power, Microsoft said an Office bundle, for example, could cost $1 an hour, a gaming bundle $1.25 an hour, and a Web browsing bundle 80 cents an hour.
One bundle, for example, might include selections for Office, Gaming, and Browsing. Office options, which would include word processing and spreadsheets, might cost $1.00 per hour, while the Gaming bundle, with 3D graphics support, would run $1.25 per hour. Internet browsing would cost $0.80 per hour, according to the application.
Anyway, I could continue all day with links and quotes. It is apparent, that you are not familiar with this topic, and have not read up on it. It is apparent that you are spreading misinformation.
It’s been a long time since I engaged a Microsoft troll. I hope you aren’t a troll, and will take this lesson to heart and read up first before just saying things.
Put yourselves in Microsoft’s shoes… You have the majority
of the market… greedy for money… so what do you have to do to get more? and present it as a good / smart alternative
Pay-as-you-go, is the perfect answer…
Conveying it as cheaper, and better; and as we know, they are
more dynamic, free software…
Personally, when I have to use Microsoft Word, I dread it; with the stupid - a** paper clip, it screws up all of my formatting,
it says everything is wrong (like grammar), and the fact that it auto-formatting feature sucks…
I believe open source is the way, allowing you to modify the source code, and really do whatever you want…
pay as you go is the perfect answer. Because if you follow it, and it is already in action by microsoft. It is simply hire purchase. You buy your computer at a lower price, and pay for the applications you use, in personal usage until you reach a certain price then you own the applications. In business use with cloud computing you pay for using those applications and storage hosted elsewhere.
You are right, you do have to pay to browse, 80 cents is **** good price. Why, because that is for people who do not have an internet provider and as such are paying for internet usage as they use it. Which a number of isp’s already do, so again not unique to microsoft.
Go to microsoft, learn about pay as you go, it is actually nothing like the OP, who has a natural hate for microsoft in a number of posts is trying to lead people to believe it is.
If you knew the UK you would know that the Register is one of the larger tabloid papers.
And I have just written a large book to which openoffice could not handle, and to which the formatting screwed up on, so my experince with openoffice is different to yours.
I’m glad you think it’s the perfect answer. You pay it!
You also missed that it’s not 80 cents for browsing. It’s 80 cents per hour for browsing. As I illustrated before, 14 hours of browsing per day is $336 per month. At 5 hours per day, it’s $120 per month. Most ISP’s charge way less than that. Usually somewhere around $20-$40 a month.
Want to pay for the games you play? How about the great deal of $1.25 per hour? Let’s say 3 hours per day. That’s $112.50 per month. Suppose you do documents to. At $1 per hour, and say 4 hours per day, that’s $120 per month.
So, if you just surf and do documents, you might pay $240 per month. That’s a steal! Sign me up right now!
You say to go to Microsoft?! Obviously, you are not reading the entire post. My last post contained the link directly to Microsoft’s press release on the pay-as-you-go, aka FlexGo.
Do you like making yourself look like an idiot? I lived in the U.K. For 2 years. I have also know the Register for quite some time. When I find two or more sources that confirm a particular source, then at least for that article, it’s good. So I don’t care if YOU think their a tabloid. The story is confirmed and reliable.
> So, if you just surf and do documents, you might pay $240 per month.
> That’s a steal! Sign me up right now!
One could still simply go and buy a regular computer and the software, right? MS is targetting the poor, not regular users. What do poor people do right now?
they don’t use a computer (limited access to information)
they use a cheap box with pirated OS and software (no or not enough security patches)
The MS plans provide these people with a very inexpensive (or even free) computer. That’s not a bad thing per se, right? Looks like a win win situation. Of course I see various problems with that.
But rather than bitching about MS world domination plans: What could be a FOSS solution?
The goal is clear: Provide poor people with affordable IT.
LinuxMonster761 wrote, On 01/02/2009 04:56 PM:
> But would any of this be useful? Considering, those “poor” users
> could buy a marginal computer, and put open source software on
> it…
That’s the posh definition of “poor”. I’m not thinking of people who can save 200 bucks a year to buy a computer. Nor is Microsoft, I guess.