I'm a PC.... a Linux PC
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Sep 22, 2008 6:53 AM EDT |
Microsoft is running their “Life Without Walls” campaign http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1596 the irony is that When there are no Walls, there is no need for Windows. And then there's this http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/windows/featureStories.as... the Life without walls themes. Spot the Penguins, obviously Microsoft's ad people don't do Irony. |
| techiem2 Sep 22, 2008 8:41 AM EDT |
heh. Yeah, I can't stand the latest commercial. And it really annoys me that "PC" has come to equal "Windows" (I suspect primarily because of the Apple Ads) Especially since according to the proper definition of a PC Macs are PCs as well....and of course Linux boxes....and BSD boxes...and OS/2 boxes...etc...etc...etc.... |
| theboomboomcars Sep 22, 2008 9:13 AM EDT |
I think we should call all linux PCs Tuxs. That way we can go around saying I am a Tux. :) |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 22, 2008 9:32 AM EDT |
Call Linux PCs Tux[es], too damn formal in my opinion. What's wrong with a T-shirted, shorts wearing with flippers PC? Guess that is kinda long ... but it really tells the true story [with the exception of those blasted server types running the Enterprise]. Now this is really getting long. BBL [Be Back Later] |
| dinotrac Sep 22, 2008 12:38 PM EDT |
The only part I didn't understand was the lack of appropriate theme music behind the guy from the space station. If they're relying on Windows for anything important, shouldn't "Say a Little Prayer for Me" have been playing in the background? |
| jdixon Sep 22, 2008 1:10 PM EDT |
> Especially since according to the proper definition of a PC Macs are PCs as well....and of course Linux boxes....and BSD boxes...and OS/2 boxes. If you take the literal definition, then Commodores, Apple I/II's, Amiga's, Tandy's, et.al., were all PC's. > If they're relying on Windows for anything important, shouldn't "Say a Little Prayer for Me" have been playing in the background? I'd go for the theme from Jaws myself. |
| herzeleid Sep 22, 2008 1:16 PM EDT |
So, essentially what you're saying is, just about everything is a "pc" - so basically, the term has become meaningless, and nobody knows what anybody is talking about anymore. But I've seen several software vendors that understand the difference. For example, when you go to the firefox download site, you have 3 platform choices: "pc, mac and linux" - not "pc, pc and pc" as some here would insist. I like the "I'm a tux" idea - or better yet, "I'm linux" as in the Novell ads. |
| jdixon Sep 22, 2008 1:47 PM EDT |
> ...just about everything is a "pc" PC stood for personal computer. I believe IBM gets credit for creating the term, though I'm not certain. So, strictly speaking, anything that is a computer and is intended for use by an individual is indeed a PC, regardless of the hardware or software it uses. That said, the term quickly came to be used exclusively for IBM compatible computers by most people. But even limiting the definition to that case, there was no limitation as to OS or software. AFAICT, the term PC has never exclusively referred to Windows machines. |
| number6x Sep 22, 2008 1:59 PM EDT |
I am a person. I use a PC, and I have chosen to use a Linux PC. |
| herzeleid Sep 22, 2008 2:17 PM EDT |
Quoting:So, strictly speaking, anything that is a computer and is intended for use by an individual is indeed a PC, regardless of the hardware or software it uses.That's where I disagree. The personality and capabilities of a computer are determined not by the cpu type, but by the operating system. Quoting:AFAICT, the term PC has never exclusively referred to Windows machines.OK, go to the firefox download site and look at the 3 platform choices: pc, mac, linux Do you not see one choice among the 3 platforms which refers exclusively to ms windows? |
| herzeleid Sep 22, 2008 2:21 PM EDT |
Quoting:I use a PC, and I have chosen to use a Linux PC.The term is IMHO self contradictory. We have no pcs at my place, but we have mac and linux. The hardware is quite similar but the personality is quite different. At the university where I worked, we used some software called "pcnfs" which provided something called "pc to unix connectivity". So we would install the pcnfs client software on pc side, and the pcnfs daemon would run on the unix side. In the "pc to unix connectivity" equation, the pc side was ms windows, and the unix side was linux. The hardware on both sides could be identical. It's the OS that made one side "pc" and the other side "unix". |
| techiem2 Sep 22, 2008 3:09 PM EDT |
Yes, the whole thing is rather confusing anymore. But it seems to me that Apple caused a good bit of it by defining PC as Windows with their ads. And unfortunately most of the industry seems to have followed them. |
| jdixon Sep 22, 2008 3:12 PM EDT |
> In the "pc to unix connectivity" equation, the pc side was ms windows... I believe that the pcnfs client actually ran at the DOS level, not at the Windows level. |
| theboomboomcars Sep 22, 2008 3:13 PM EDT |
It seems we are just misinterpreting what PC stands for. It doesn't stand for personal computer it stands for pile of crap. |
| DiBosco Sep 22, 2008 3:56 PM EDT |
I am fairly certain the term PC was around a long time before Windows appeared. I seem to remember the phrase being used when I was at university in the mid '80s. To my mind it's nonsensical to have PC and a computer running windows as interchangable phrases. PC = personal computer, whether it's running Linux, Windows or any other OS. Unfortunately, seems like the idiotic advertising company who came out with the Apple ads have made people think PC is for Windows only. |
| jdixon Sep 22, 2008 4:08 PM EDT |
> I am fairly certain the term PC was around a long time before Windows appeared. Since the original IBM PC's ran DOS, It's a safe bet it was, yes. |
| dumper4311 Sep 22, 2008 4:54 PM EDT |
>"Unfortunately, seems like the idiotic advertising company who came out with the Apple ads have made people think PC is for Windows only." Don't think for a minute that was by accident, from either camp. It was strictly intended; "a Mac is different and much better than a mere PC" is the message Apple wants to convey. MS on the other hand, wants to convey the message that "We are The Personal Computer, and anything else is nonstandard and irrelevant". I tend to agree with jdixon on the terms origin, but while the literal use may be applicable to any platform, it's original popular use was quickly associated with the IBM PC compatible line - MS or PC-DOS at the time. This has sadly been co-opted to be synonymous with "Windows PC" in modern culture. Interesting isn't it, the damage that can be done by taking a clear technical term and altering it's meaning to suit a political/corporate purpose? |
| herzeleid Sep 22, 2008 6:47 PM EDT |
@jdixon - > I believe that the pcnfs client actually ran at the DOS level, not at the Windows level. Yes, technically you're correct - it was possible to use pcnfs from dos. But these machines were all running windows 3.x |
| helios Sep 23, 2008 10:14 AM EDT |
Then just call them "TC's" (tux computers) |
| gus3 Sep 23, 2008 11:47 AM EDT |
And Carla Schroeder will play that role in the commercials. ;-) |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 23, 2008 1:03 PM EDT |
Reminds me of those Novell ads. Say what you will of Novell, but Mac v.s. PC v.s. Linux was well done. Much better than MS's Seinfeld ads :-D |
| gus3 Sep 23, 2008 1:43 PM EDT |
I agree. I downloaded them for the occasional snicker. |
| NoDough Sep 23, 2008 5:11 PM EDT |
You are all correct. PC meant Personal Computer long before Windows arrived on the scene. That having been said, the definition has changed. Change is a continuous part of life. Get used to it. The current perception by the public at large is PC=Windows, Mac=Apple, and I doubt they realize there are any other options. Right or wrong, perception is reality. BTW, this is not necessarily a bad thing for FOSS. Let's say you introduce someone to Linux and they ask, "What does it run on?" 1998 Answer: "It runs on all types of PCs." Response: "Huh?" 2008 Answer: "It runs on PCs, Macs, PlayStations, XBoxes, smart phones, and just about every other type of computer." Response: "Wow!" PC, once ambiguous, now neatly defines Windows computers making it easier to explain things to noobs. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it (until it changes.) |
| herzeleid Sep 23, 2008 5:41 PM EDT |
Quoting:The current perception by the public at large is PC=Windows, Mac=Apple, and I doubt they realize there are any other options.Then again there are the more progressive software vendors e.g. mozilla, who offer programs for the platforms "pc, mac, and linux" Quoting: BTW, this is not necessarily a bad thing for FOSS. Let's say you introduce someone to Linux and they ask, "What does it run on?" 1998 Answer: "It runs on all types of PCs." Response: "Huh?"Actually, my answer back then was: In addition to normal x86 hardware (i.e. the same garden variety hardware as is used by pc operating systems), it runs on mips, sparc, alpha, power and mainframe hardware. edit: If you tell people that linux runs on "pcs" they say "oh so it's a windows program then?" |
| DiBosco Sep 24, 2008 3:59 AM EDT |
Quoting: edit: If you tell people that linux runs on "pcs" they say "oh so it's a windows program then?" That's staggering. AFAIK, we didn't get those "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" ads on the TV in the UK, so I don't think it's got quite that far here. People here tend to talk about a "Windows machine" and a "Linux box" - no idea why the terms arose like that. (Mac is rarely seen here.) The power of advertising is quite alarming at times! |
| NoDough Sep 25, 2008 9:15 AM EDT |
Quoting:The power of advertising is quite alarming at times! Perception is reality. People don't make decisions based on actual truth. They make decisions based on perceived truth. Therefore, if the advertiser can control the buyer's perception, he can control their decisions. |
| jdixon Sep 25, 2008 12:08 PM EDT |
> Therefore, if the advertiser can control the buyer's perception, he can control their decisions. Of course, that only works as long as the advertiser is believed. How many people actually believe anything they see in advertisements anymore? For me, advertisements are entertainment, not information. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 25, 2008 12:33 PM EDT |
To me they're not entertainment but an annoyance. I'd *die* for a TV that can detect when commercial blocks start/end and automatically mute during commercials. |
| happyfeet Sep 25, 2008 1:08 PM EDT |
@Sander - Amen to that! |
| theboomboomcars Sep 25, 2008 3:03 PM EDT |
I watched a TV show on Hulu last night and one of the commercials was just a picture of a Honda Pilot, someone saying the Pilot by Honda, then it showed the Honda H sign. That was it. My type of commercial. |
| jezuch Sep 25, 2008 3:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'd *die* for a TV that can detect when commercial blocks start/end and automatically mute during commercials. Well, I guess that in the future when absofreakinlutely everything will be visual and digital (and there will be no meaningful life for me) we'll have an equivalent of present-day bayesian anti-spam filters, only that they will be filtering our daily fix of "visual content" and, based on a personal training database, throw out everything that doesn't match our preferences. Just a guess... |
| tracyanne Sep 25, 2008 4:54 PM EDT |
@Sander: You'll die before then. It's not that it can't happen. But I can't see the corporates doing anything like that. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 25, 2008 7:14 PM EDT |
Perhaps I should get a Dreambox and reprogram that. |
| jacog Sep 26, 2008 8:44 AM EDT |
We have the perfect method for avoiding TV advertising at home... we have no TV. |
| gus3 Sep 26, 2008 11:54 AM EDT |
But... but... how do you watch commercials during the Super Bowl? They're the best part! |
| jdixon Sep 26, 2008 5:04 PM EDT |
> We have the perfect method for avoiding TV advertising at home... we have no TV. We have a TV. What we don't have is television service. We're in a valley, the hills to either side block all the over the air transmissions, there is no cable service, and satellite services cost more than we're willing to pay. |
| tracyanne Sep 26, 2008 5:55 PM EDT |
We just whatch ABC (that's Australian Broadcasting Commission), they don't have ads, being publically funded. In addition the programs are better. No dancing with the stars, no Big brother, no Australian (American, British etc) Idol, in fact no "Reality" shows. And ABC has Dr Who. |
| azerthoth Sep 26, 2008 7:11 PM EDT |
I want that TV station. No (non-)reality shows, and Dr. Who? sign me up. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 26, 2008 7:27 PM EDT |
azeroth: BBC has the same. My main reason for getting digital TV is so I get BBC 3 and 4 (normal cable only carries BBC 1 and 2). For a while, BBC ran the newer Dr. Who series daily at 18:00h (20:00h my time). Sweet! |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!