JB>I'd like to know one major preload vendor who will load OS/2 or Unix an
JB>give 
JB>support..  As far as I can tell, the folks who have purchased Macs have
JB>informed decisions, but that is truely the only option available for th
JB>that even know about Apple..  IBM (w/respect to OS/2) doesn't want to d
JB>with the home market (unfortunately).
 
      Yet there is also a reason for this, it's called consumer demand.
Unless a signifigant market share suddenly begins to demand alternative
operating systems, no major manufacturer will offer such alternatives.
However, should such a demand surface, these same manufacturers will
adapt to service that market.  The reason other operating systems are
not preloaded on systems is simply that consumers do not desire them to
be.  It is the consumer that defines the market.
JB>I'd suggest you check your facts..  Microsoft is currently playing a li
JB>game where they say that removing Internet Explorer also removes other 
JB>functionality within the system.  It's their way of trying to show that
JB>is 
JB>integrated within the OS, which is a total crock.  Secondly, OSR1 and O
 
       The initial edition of Windows 95 did not include Microsoft
Explorer.  Explorer was introduced as part of SR1 and continued with
SR2 and SR2.5.  Removal of all the files necessary to operate Explorer,
according to Microsoft, will disable Windows 95.  However, if someone
simply doesn't want to see Explorer on their system a superficial
removal can be performed in a mtter of seconds.  There is also nothing
at all to prohibit those who desire Netscape, or any other browser,
from loading that browser on their system. 
        I personally believe it is halarious to suggest tyhat
government can make judgements involving operating systems and computer
programs.  Here we have a case where something is working quite well in
the private sector without government interference and people are
clamoring for government to get involved and "fix" it.  IMHO,
Washington ought to tend to it's own problems and leave Microsoft
alone.
JB>That might just happen, especially with names like IBM, Novell, Netscap
JB>Sun, and others who are teaming up to make Java-based applications a 
JB>reality.. With Java, it is no longer inherent that the OS running those
JB>applications comes from Microsoft.  Do you realize that the reason Micr
JB>is in the position they are in is because of their strangle-hold on the
JB>preload market?  When Microsoft can no longer leverage the market with 
JB>proprietary applications running on top of their own OS, they are in 
JB>trouble..  I'd rather see things happen this way instead of whatever th
JB>goverment is trying to do.  It turns out that Microsoft might just have
JB>better excuse now for Windows97 not being released until late '98, and 
JB>not making it out until mid '99..
 
      I can assure you, if we allow government to wade into the
software industry and start making nonsensical demands of programmers,
the delays of the past will seem insignifigant.  Something else that
needs to be considered, 75% of the PC market remains in the hands of
clone manufacturers and Microsoft has no contractual bind on what these
manufacturers pre-load on their systems.  There overwhelming support of
Microsoft is a direct reflection of consumer desire.
     The entire thrust of all of this is to force people to take
something they have no desire to take.  Consumers are not up in arms
over Microsoft, in fact, considering their purchases, one would have to
say people are pretty satisfied with Microsoft.
JB>I know Windows is a pain, hence the reason I use OS/2..
 
         That does explain a great deal...
 
                                              /\/\ike
--- RBBSMail/386 v0.997
---------------