Can someone shed some light...

My apologies if this is in the wrong spot, seemed ok but I have been wrong before. There is also no "computer" related conspiracy forums here (at least that I saw)

Now unless my facts are flawed, here is what I was thinking about this evening.

There are several different computer operating systems. The main systems being Windows by the thief Bill Gates and all the Mac OS systems (Leopard, etc...) Windows is in a league all it's own and will not be my focus here.

I am more interested in Linux operating systems. Linux was derived from Unix by my man Linus Torvalds. All the Mac operating systems are Linux based (from my understanding) yet Mac computers are way more expensive then most Windows operating computers. How can this be when almost all Linux operating systems are open source; meaning free. Why is it that when you order a computer on-line, the cost to have a Linux operating system installed rather then Windows is more expensive when it is an open source system. Usually only about $20-30 more but it takes no more time and effort to load Linux over Windows. If anything, it is easier to load.

Steve Jobs is a crook as well in my opinion. The iPhone is based on a Linux operating environment as well. So why in the hell does it only work with Windows and Mac systems on Itunes only? There is no support for any other Linux system, like Ubuntu. There are some hoops to jump through in order to do it and with a little on-line help I was able to overcome my problem and sync all my music through something other then Itunes.

These 2 thieves have a stranglehold on the computer business as a whole. How can Steve Jobs take an open source operating system and charge for it? This is why I hack and crack. This is why my iPhone is jailbroken and hacked. This is why I run Linux as opposed to Windows. There are a few drawbacks but they are overcome with a little research and some trial and error. How can these 2 men hold us in the palm of their hands with their crookery?

Just something I was pondering this evening. If I am wrong, please correct me. Thanks!

Semper Fidelis

-Nate

Hey Nate, it is kind of ironic that I am replying from my iPhone, but I digress. I couldn't agree with you more, the stranglehold that windows and leopard have on the consumer are outrageous, borderline monopoly. I really hate how mac is so Nazi about their devices. They are capable of so much more then they allow, hence jailbreaking. Steve jobs' marketing wizardy is second to none, I just wish they had the consumer in mind in stead of their wallets.

-E-

reply to post by Acid_Burn2009


Here are my theories on this:

As for the overall price, Macs are more expensive because they are "special" plain and simple. The "PCs" are for the poor folk, Macs for the rich/posers. AND DON'T YOU DARE CALL A MAC A PC...despite "PC" standing for "personal computer" (note: I am not trying to say Macs are owned just by rich people or the other way around...just generalizing)

And the whole costing to add linux...it's because they can. Not everyone knows or cares to load up their own crap on their computer...so they charge for the "labor" probably. Or they are straight up seeing how far they can bend us over.

I think most of it boils down to they are seeing how much we will take, like with oil prices. They will do it until they can't get away with it any longer.

Thanks...
Glad I am not alone here. Been running strictly linux for about a month following a 2-3 month dual boot just to get used to it.
Couldn't be happier with it.

Back on topic, I just don't get it. Most people are buffoons though and think because they can crank out an excel spreadsheet they are computer genius'. So unless there is a Linux revolution, looks like things will be stuck this way for quite some time.

Oh, and I love my iPhone now that it is mine. Jailbroken, unlocked and whatever else you can think of I have done.

Borderline monopoly? Oh it is my friend but most people don't know any better. The "I can't use my computer without windows" mentality needs to go. Wasn't Gates already taken to court several years ago for having a monopoly on net browsers?

Semper Fidelis

-Nate

reply to post by Acid_Burn2009

Acid_Burn2009

I'm reminded of something I was told by someone at DEFCON 3. He said that he felt sorry for the current group of hackers growing up with the movie Hackers, instead of Wargames like he had.

You appear to be proselytizing and grandstanding, so I'm not sure if you're actually looking for serious answers, or just looking for excuses to bash everything non-linux...but on the offchance that it's the former, I'll try to answer your questions.

All the Mac operating systems are Linux based

Not exactly. OSX is unix-based, which is not quite the same as linux-based. Apples are fruit and oranges are fruit, but oranges are not apples. Similarly, OSX is based on unix, and linux is based on unix, but OSX is not based on linux.

The iPhone is based on a Linux operating environment as well.

Also incorrect. iPhone OS is based on OSX, which is based on Unix.

Mac computers are way more expensive then most Windows operating computers.
How can this be when almost all Linux operating systems are open source;

1) Your initial premise is incorrect. MacOS is not a Linux variant.
2) Even if it were, you're paying for the "privilage" of owning a "sleek and sexy machine." You can also expect to pay more when shopping at Nordstrom's than Kmart...even if the Kmart item is more durable, lasts longer, whatever.
3) Apple has a history of using higher quality components. They chose to use motorola rather than the cheap, badly designed intel processors that IBM used in the PC. They chose SCSI instead of IDE busses. Historically macs have had vastly superior hardware to PC's, and consequently had higher price tags. Apple has long since sold out, and this is no longer true...but since they've historically been pricier, they've been able to get away with continuing to be pricier. Their customer base is accustomed to it, and some even take pride in paying more, however ridiculous that may seem.

why in the hell does it only work with Windows and Mac systems
on Itunes only? There is no support for any other Linux system

I don't have a definite answer to give you, but I would guess that the reasons are related to marketing decisions, not technical ease. Why support Linux? What motivation is there? The Mac and Windows platforms have substantially more marketshare, and the Linux community has a history of building their own applications anyway.

There are some hoops to jump through in order to do it and with a little on-line help I
was able to overcome my problem and sync all my music through something other then Itunes.

You make my point. Why should they support you when you're perfectly willing to just grumble about it and do it yourself then pat yourself on the back and brag here on ATS about how clever you are for being able to?

How can Steve Jobs take an open source operating system and charge for it?

He didn't. Linux != Unix.

This is why I hack and crack. This is why my iPhone is jailbroken and hacked.

And that is why they don't support users like you. There's no money in it for them.

Any other questions?

reply to post by LordBucket


I am quite familiar with War Games. Great movie. I am not that young...not that old either. Hackers was entertaining, that's about it.

My intent was not to bash everything non-linux nor was I bragging about what I was able to do here on ATS. Simple statements, nothing more nothing less.

Thanks for the info, it was helpful. I am afraid your post just reinforces that these two moguls have a strangle hold on the computer market.

Semper Fidelis

-Nate

reply to post by Acid_Burn2009


I think the trick is that it is no longer open source once it is modified beyond recognition, and patented. Which I will admit that I am not an expert in this by any means, but is that not what Macintosh did? They took the simpleist Unix style OS and modified it.

The better question is how can we get in on this scam.

Where there is money to be made, you can bet your last dollar that someone wants to steal it, patent it, and mass produce it.

[edit on 11-3-2010 by therewillberevolt]

reply to post by Acid_Burn2009

I am afraid your post just reinforces that these two moguls
have a strangle hold on the computer market.

Very much so. It's long since been an integral part of Microsoft's marketing strategy to squeeze out anyone and everyone they can. For example, their standard contract with PC distributors requires that they do not install any non-Microsoft OS on their machines. This is a large factor in why so most distributors absolutely refuse to install Linux on their machines. You would think it would be great for them...they could install Linux for free, and sell their machines for ~$100 cheaper. But doing so means Microsoft will no longer license windows to them. And of course you're probably familiar with MS's history of implementing non standards-compliant features for Internet Explorer and encouraging web developers to use them, so that IE is the only browser capable of displaying web pages properly. Microsoft has a history of this sort of behavior. As anyone with fond memories of Netscape Navigator will attest to.

With Apple it's a bit different, since they do both hardware and software, but traditionally they've written licensing agreements such that it's a violation of terms to use anything non-appla with apple-anything. They've loosened up on this in recent years, but traces of these tendanices remain. For example, it's against the iPhone Software Development Kit ToS to develop iPhone applications on any non-apple hardware.

The GNU/Linux GPL forces derivative works to be FOSS. You can't just steal someone's ideas and work and go rip people off for billions because you have rich banker friends and the other guy didn't. Access to brain power, not capital, is what drives innovation. Linux companies make money from support services instead of from selling product.

That's why (new) Macs were based on BSD which is a true UNIX and has no such licensing restrictions. Derivative works can be completely proprietary and closed source. That way Steve Jobs can continue to steal ideas from other people and profit from them.

wiki.networkdictionary.com...