"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:mP6dnaT9Ea0BhbPVnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com ...

> Well the issue is essentially this.
>
> If someone wants Windows, what do they do? They buy a PC.
>
> If they want MacOS, what do they do? They buy a Mac.
>
> If they want Linux (assuming they even know it exists in the first
> place)? Buying a pre-installed Linux system is generally only possible if
> you *know* about it ahead of time and even then selection is limited.
>
> The only realistic way to get Linux on any PC is to install it manually
> and therein lies the problem. People in general can barely handling
> installing an application...you expect them to install an OS? Any OS?
> There is a *very* good reason why PC manufacturers include Recovery CD/
> DVDs with their computers and not Windows install CDs.
>
> So ultimately the issue has little to do with Linux being better or worse
> or being free or not free. It has everything to do with availability in
> such a way that the average person can actually obtain it.
>
> If Linux was placed on even ground in terms of pre-installed availability
> with Windows then things would be very different.

They indeed would be different. If a Best Buy PC booted up, said Linux or
Vista, Vista $50 -- Microsoft would be in a whole world of hurt. Right now,
Microsoft is running their business on predatory and extortionist pricing.
Due to "bundling" practices. Cracking at the seams too.