UPDATE: Dan responds in the comments below.
The majority of Microsoft’s customers are thieves that would only pay for Windows if they had no choice.
From Myths of Snow Leopard 7: Free?! — RoughlyDrafted Magazine by Daniel Eran Dilger
Mac bigotry zealotry at its finest: sweeping generalizations backed by nothing more than their cult devotion to the Church of Steve. Last time I checked, the Enterprise comprised the majority of Microsoft’s customers. I work in the Enterprise and part of my responsibilities is to make these decisions to purchase hundreds of Windows computers in one fell swoop – at that rate, the price of Windows is almost dispensible.
For the most part, Daniel Eran Dilger writes one of the (if not the) best Apple commentary and puts together very good observations on Apple’s strategies and dynamics. Every so often, it’s comforting to be reminded that it doesn’t take a whole lot to fall for the fanboy trap that is Apple bigotry zealotry. No, not even Daniel Dilger whose writing I hold at a notch higher than most.
Thanks Dan for clearing that up. I do owe you an apology for offending with my use of the B adjective; and it was neither my intention to quote that one line out of context (hence the link to the full article), nor was it to incite hatred. Admittedly, I did not get the same sense I did in your reply above from reading the original write-up several times.
I do not disagree with you – yes, not all PCs have 100% properly-licensed software, but neither is the Mac immune to piracy, and you don’t seem to disagree with that. Along those same lines, it can be soundly argued that Mac users are likewise thieves. I would be delighted to be proven wrong with empirical data detailing just how business strategies actually impact how many thieves each camp produces, but until then, what’s to prove me wrong when I say those who conclusively make such claims are making “generalizations backed by nothing more than their devotion to the Church of Steve”? It goes without saying that I am not convinced of the argument where one attributes the thievery that goes around to the software publisher’s business strategies. However esoteric the EULA happens to be, the pirates (i.e. the thieves) will do what they do regardless of the platform, and music industry’s recent embracing of DRM-free music has, if anything, proven this to be a logical assumption.
Thanks for the comments Jeff. However, you took my line out of context in order to “prove” that my article was rabid and emotional fan raving rather than simple analysis based upon facts. What I actually said is that Microsoft gained its monopoly position by allowing piracy:
That’s not the case with Apple, which made and currently makes nothing from its software being pirated, because Apple is a hardware vendor.
The majority of Windows users are not properly licensed. You can claim to be upset by that fact, and deny that your company steals software, but I’ve worked for thousands of companies and even more individuals, and I’ve never encountered a PC that was properly licensed in all the software it contained. Even major corporations I’ve worked for have done things like license Exchange Server at its non-enterprise price so they could unwittingly afford to set up a dependance upon Exchange. You have to pay 10x the price for the “Enterprise” edition of Exchange, which is usually necessary because the standard version imposes all kinds of silly limits on what you can do and how big your mailboxes can be.
Microsoft’s customers are thieves in part because that’s who the company has catered to in its often dishonest line of “hey, we are really cheaper than other solutions,” but also in part because Microsoft’s absurd licensing makes people EULA outlaws.
And bigotry is a big word for talking about somebody advocating a technology. You might want to rethink the purpose of what you write. You sound like your goal is to incite hatred, which you don’t really need to do. I’m sure there are more worthy things you can write about, as you seem able enough to phrase things well.