Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 6/5/2002 5:32:00 AM EDT
Ralph Nader, a communist at any speed, now wants to curb America's most succesful, privately owned company, Microsoft (MSFT) http://www.cptech.org/at/ms/omb4jun02ms.html [i]The federal government spends billions of dollars on software purchases from one company that is continually raising prices, making its products incompatible with previous versions in order to force upgrades, deliberately creating interoperability problems with would-be competitors, and is well known for engaging in many other anticompetitive practices.[/i] Does a 2002 Golf GTi still cost $8000 like back in 1984? Do the spare parts interchange? Does VW allow GM to build a car after VW blue-prints? I just about fscking had it with those anti-big-evil-capitalists-must-be-destroyed assholes. It's called capitalism not charity.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 6:06:48 AM EDT
Cars have gotten cheaper. It's inflation and government-mandated safety features that have caused prices to "rise". If you were able to buy a hot-off-the-assembly-line 1984-style-but-built-in-2002 VW Golf, paid for in 1984-equivalent dollars, it would cost less than what you would have paid in 1984. VW also hasn't suddenly started giving its cars away "free" to undermine and ruin its competitors -- a practice known in, say, the steel industry as "dumping" -- nor has it reengineered its vehicles to be incompatible with any brand of gasoline other than the one it sells. Microsoft, by contrast, cut off Netscape's "air supply" by giving out IE "free", bundling it with their OSes, and finally integrating IE's libraries into their OSes. Microsoft killed off WordPerfect by developing MS-Word in tandem with OS releases, months before the interfaces were released to external developers -- and even then, they only released some of the information, so that Microsoft's internal developers could use OS features that nobody else knew existed. Microsoft played kingmaker among "third-party" developers by refusing to allow some companies to compete against others. One reason Microsoft's current ".NET" software isn't selling as fast as it might is that businesses are justifiably afraid Microsoft will try to force them into paying transaction fees in a few years. Microsoft already floated the idea about two years ago, and had to pull back sharply when businesses told them "no way" -- but like the Clinton gun control schemes, that only means Microsoft is going to wait until the time is right to push for transaction fees again. Same with annual contracts, time-limited software, forced upgrades, and so on. Microsoft isn't in the business to provide helpful tools -- they might have been once, but they certainly aren't any more. Like Enron's false trades, faked "line congestion", unnecessary plant shutdowns, and price escalation, Microsoft is in it to take as much money away from YOU as it possibly can.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 10:02:03 AM EDT
And in the process, they have made computers affordable, fairly reliable, easy to use, broadly compatible, and very common. You Microsoft haters really don't get it.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 10:34:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Torf: And in the process, they have made computers affordable, fairly reliable, easy to use, broadly compatible, and very common.
View Quote
I thought Apple did that back around 1980.
You Microsoft haters really don't get it.
View Quote
I don't particularly hate Microsoft, but I do find it funny that they've created this mythos surrounding the company that their products are reliable or easy to use, much less "compatible". Because their OSes suck -- i.e., they have no process protection, something that every serious OS for the last, uh, thirty years or so has had -- system crashes are a constant problem. My Win98SE machine locked up solidly the first time I tried to reply to this thread, in fact. A real OS wouldn't have allowed that to happen; with appropriate memory protection schemes, Netscape never could have hosed the machine to the point that it locked up. Ease of use was largely stolen from Apple, who stole it from Xerox. Unfortunately, Microsoft layered the windowing on top of MS-DOS, so it's a hodgepodge of crap. Compatibility? Well, most programs will run on Win95, Win98, and WinNT -- but some will only run on NT, and some won't run on various versions of the OSes. So it's a crapshoot. Just because I don't like what Microsoft has done doesn't mean that I hate them. I think their software sucks, I think people are idiots for having bought into Microsoft's FUD, and I think that far better products are available for much less money. But it's your choice whether to use their stuff or not, and whether to pay the "Microsoft tax". Just don't bitch when I refuse.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 10:47:16 AM EDT
A real OS like Linux?
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:14:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/5/2002 11:17:19 AM EDT by Aviator]
[jumps in with both feet] OK, here is my take. Apple: Had a good product but shot themselves in the foot many years ago by insisting they have their fingers in everything that had anything to do with MACs. If you needed a hard drive, you paid big$$ for it and bought it from Apple. Meanwhile the PC market was like the wild west. Everyone and anyone was making stuff (hardware, software) for PCs. Competition dropped the prices and a LOT of stuff got developed/Invented. Apple was meanwhile sitting on their asses and shoving MACs down the throats of schools. They got left in the dust and were never really able to catch up. As a side note, lots of schools are now switching to PC networks. Linux: Good OS if you like to learn cryptic commands. Bad if you just want to sit and use the computer. Go ahead and tell me how "Easy" it is to install it now, and I'll tell you "easy" is relative. You may find it easy, but most people don't like to do anything but put a disk in a drive and turn the thing on. it is very stable, and uses very little overhead, but its not ready for prime time yet. Microsoft: Not perfect, but in my opinion, they have done more for advancing the use of computers than most other companies. When I got out of the Army and decided to get certified I went looking into Novell, Microsoft and some others. I went with Microsoft because they seemed to be living on the leading/bleeding edge. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:42:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/5/2002 11:42:46 AM EDT by Torf]
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed:
Originally Posted By Torf: And in the process, they have made computers affordable, fairly reliable, easy to use, broadly compatible, and very common.
View Quote
I thought Apple did that back around 1980. [blue] They started out OK and like Avaitor said, they used closed architecture. Stuff ended up being twice the price of PCs.[/blue]
You Microsoft haters really don't get it.
View Quote
I don't particularly hate Microsoft, but I do find it funny that they've created this mythos surrounding the company that their products are reliable or easy to use, much less "compatible". [blue]Many, if not most of the problems that users encounter is caused by inferior parts, and hardware conflicts. PC makers try to upgrade proof their machines, and it causes a lot of problems for above average users.[/blue] Because their OSes suck -- i.e., they have no process protection, something that every serious OS for the last, uh, thirty years or so has had -- system crashes are a constant problem. My Win98SE machine locked up solidly the first time I tried to reply to this thread, in fact. A real OS wouldn't have allowed that to happen; with appropriate memory protection schemes, Netscape never could have hosed the machine to the point that it locked up. [blue]Again, Windows works pretty well considering they have little control over the hardware. Sure there are a few fundamental flaws. I don't like everything about them.[/blue] Ease of use was largely stolen from Apple, who stole it from Xerox. Unfortunately, Microsoft layered the windowing on top of MS-DOS, so it's a hodgepodge of crap. [blue]It is the cheapest and most widely used thing going. Hats off to them. They took an emerging technology and caused the creation of standards that made the internet possible. Sure they made money on it too. Nice work, if you can get it.[/blue] Compatibility? Well, most programs will run on Win95, Win98, and WinNT -- but some will only run on NT, and some won't run on various versions of the OSes. So it's a crapshoot. [blue]NT was never designed with gaming in mind, and WIN98 95 and ME are very compatible. Don't forget that there are two types of OS. Business and Home. Win2000 is a big improvement in compatibility over NT (which is growing obsolete) and WINXP provides compatability for a broad range of previous versions. Besides, don't you look on the software box to see if your OS is compatible with the software?[/blue] Just because I don't like what Microsoft has done doesn't mean that I hate them. I think their software sucks, I think people are idiots for having bought into Microsoft's FUD, and I think that far better products are available for much less money. But it's your choice whether to use their stuff or not, and whether to pay the "Microsoft tax". Just don't bitch when I refuse. [blue]I don't hate anyone else either, and I don't care if other people choose other platforms. I was just taking issue with your comments on their business practices. They may have done illegal things, I am no legal expert, but their overall contribution to the individual person has been very positive. It cannot be argued that individual people were hurt. Perhaps a few other companies were hurt by their practices, however larger companies have more resources to develop more products. It is called [b]entry barriers[/b].[/blue]
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 12:59:31 PM EDT
You know, it's easier for all concerned if you use the standard quoting mechanisms. But I'll leave it as you did it -- subject to the 3500 character limit and the pain in the ass you made it to show attributions. . . .
Originally Posted By Torf: Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed:
Originally Posted By Torf: And in the process, they have made computers affordable, fairly reliable, easy to use, broadly compatible, and very common.
View Quote
I thought Apple did that back around 1980. [blue] They started out OK and like Avaitor said, they used closed architecture. Stuff ended up being twice the price of PCs.[/blue]
You Microsoft haters really don't get it.
View Quote
I don't particularly hate Microsoft, but I do find it funny that they've created this mythos surrounding the company that their products are reliable or easy to use, much less "compatible". [blue]Many, if not most of the problems that users encounter is caused by inferior parts, and hardware conflicts. PC makers try to upgrade proof their machines, and it causes a lot of problems for above average users.[/blue]
View Quote
Hardware has little if anything to do with why Windows crashes every five minutes. It is because of pathetically bad software design on the part of Microsoft. In contrast, Linux machines don't crash every five minutes. Even when they're running on the same hardware (as in, dual-boot systems). Linux, and other reasonably well-written OSes, can run for weeks or months without trashing themselves internally. With any of Microsoft's OSes, it is generally recommended that you reboot at least daily to prevent problems due to the OS leaving so much garbage around its memory space that it clogs itself up. Your attempt to lay the blame on hardware issues is just plain ridiculous. If you had a clue . . . but then again, you obviously don't. (cont'd)
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 1:00:14 PM EDT
Ease of use was largely stolen from Apple, who stole it from Xerox. Unfortunately, Microsoft layered the windowing on top of MS-DOS, so it's a hodgepodge of crap. [blue]It is the cheapest and most widely used thing going. Hats off to them. They took an emerging technology and caused the creation of standards that made the internet possible. Sure they made money on it too. Nice work, if you can get it.[/blue]
View Quote
I thought Al Gore invented the Internet. Microsoft sure as hell didn't. The Internet was running before they existed, and it'll keep going long after they're gone. Microsoft ignored what you probably think of as "the Internet" until they nearly made the company irrelevant, then engaged in a massive catchup-and-destroy effort to try to take control.
Compatibility? Well, most programs will run on Win95, Win98, and WinNT -- but some will only run on NT, and some won't run on various versions of the OSes. So it's a crapshoot. [blue]NT was never designed with gaming in mind, and WIN98 95 and ME are very compatible. Don't forget that there are two types of OS. Business and Home. Win2000 is a big improvement in compatibility over NT (which is growing obsolete) and WINXP provides compatability for a broad range of previous versions. Besides, don't you look on the software box to see if your OS is compatible with the software?[/blue]
View Quote
Here you're blathering about the hardware again. Hardware has nothing to do with whether various software packages are compatible with each other -- at most, it's a question of "add more memory"/"add more disk space". What are you, a basketweaving major??
Just because I don't like what Microsoft has done doesn't mean that I hate them. I think their software sucks, I think people are idiots for having bought into Microsoft's FUD, and I think that far better products are available for much less money. But it's your choice whether to use their stuff or not, and whether to pay the "Microsoft tax". Just don't bitch when I refuse. [blue]I don't hate anyone else either, and I don't care if other people choose other platforms. I was just taking issue with your comments on their business practices. They may have done illegal things, I am no legal expert, but their overall contribution to the individual person has been very positive.[/blue]
View Quote
Oh, bullshit. So you don't have a clue about what they've done or why they've done it, you just wanted to issue a kneejerk statement that Bill Gates is the latest incarnation of Jesus because he brought computing to the masses? It is to laugh. Well, not really, but it's so pathetic that one has to anyway.
[blue]It cannot be argued that individual people were hurt. Perhaps a few other companies were hurt by their practices, however larger companies have more resources to develop more products. It is called [b]entry barriers[/b].[/blue]
View Quote
No, it's called "monopoly power".
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 1:27:22 PM EDT
I work for a company that has been threatened with multimillion dollar fines unless they pay an extortion fee of $250,000 to remain "compliant" after MS arbitrarily changed their licensing scheme. We have been saddled with Citrix because of the capricious and illogical licensing practices that are intended to generate fresh revenue (because nobody is buying their new OS's) and lock our organization further into the MS OS infrastructure. Our management is very seriously considering moving to an extortion-free platform. I remember the browser wars, which Microsoft clearly won. The only folks still using Netscape now are Linux zealots and masochists. I saw MS use marketing hype filled with misinformation, FUD, and lies to drive Novell under. Not that Novell didn't shoot themselves in the foot too, but that's another story. Also, I won't soon forget the way MS transformed their certifications from a meaningful program into a paper doll mass production revenue source. I have worked with Microsoft since the mid 80's and their modus operandi is all too clear at this point.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 2:35:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/5/2002 2:52:13 PM EDT by Master_Blaster]
Truth is, if MSFT wasn't doing it, Oracle, Netscape, & others would be there making the same attempts. Oracle's abortive network set-top box comes to mind; an intriguing idea that had some merit, but, it would have made Oracle the player w/ controlling interest in the design. .NET is a 2nd attempt on the part of MSFT, (J++ was possibly the 1st try), to retain power in the development arena. For example, C# is essentially Java, but retains the pointer from C++, & adds a few other conventions &/or features from other languages. Its purported power is its ability to use tools written in other languages, & C# is supposed to mimic Java's multiplatform compatibility. The rub? - These features work if, & only if, the host machine runs in the .NET framework. All these features are leveraged on MSFT's .NET framework - the app won't run otherwise. That companies have rebuffed paying for "software services" is no surprise. Frankly, when I initially learned of the scheme, I was surprised that MSFT believed it would sell. Maybe they just [i]wanted[/i] to believe in it. Changing the user mindset over the status-quo vendor-buyer relationship will be a hard sell, at best. I know I'm not excited over the prospect of having to fork over more $$$ for "services" that have formerly been standard features. MSFT may have bitten off more than it could chew this time around. I've been cutting my teeth on MS stuff since I started programming a few years back. I don't know nearly enough yet to qualify as an expert. I find it interesting, among other things, that the WIntel duopoly has held to the less efficient big->little endian binary task set, rather than the more efficient little->big endian PowerPC from Motorola. I think MSFT does some good work, but not necessarily always the best work. I remember when Word was less friendly than WP, but Word evolved & WP virtually vanished (Does it still exist?). The OS has certainly improved over the years, though the core problems probably still remain undisturbed. However, Nader is a [moon]-pirate. Like Jesse (Makin'AnotherShakedown) Jackson, he doesn't "work" for free.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 3:17:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/5/2002 3:20:39 PM EDT by cgwahl]
I'll admit, I'm not a MS fan but in the beginning they did a lot of good stuff. If I recall correctly they helped standardize a lot of hardware stuff because all these companies were doing their own thing and a particular word could mean just the oposite depending on what that company wanted it to mean... I use whatever OS will come with my computer and MS Word (other than that I try to avoid using MS products, except for a game they might introduce, when I can)...someday I want to install Linus on my box or a box but I don't have the time to learn it nor teach my mom how to use it if such and such doesn't work correctly. Apple, while I'm told has a good OS for some reason when I use it annoys me. They screwed up big time in the beginning. I believe if they had released clones in the beginning or sooner than they originally did they'd be the dominant one today. It was kind of smart to get friendly with schools. Easy for teachers and the students...but there mistake was thinking that would make it so the students parents would by Apple computers. In some cases I'm sure it worked and still works but because of the cost the PC market won big time... Linux, I hear nothing but good but the problem is its still at the point you have to [i]know[/i] computers to use a Linux box. At least with MS you can be some common moron and use the computer. Sure it crashes a lot but I guess thats the price to pay. Personally, I think the MS monopoly will be gone in 10, possibly 20 years. People and companies are getting fed up with them and know that there are just as good (possibly almost as good if not better) alternative. I truly believe Linux will be what nearly everyone has in about 10 years or so (unless Apple does something drastic). A lot of people are working be it (because of things like Red Hat or just a hobby) on it and it won't be long until it gets to the point where the common moron can use it...and its cheap or free!!! Not some $100 for an upgrade or $200 for the real deal... Plus as far as browsers go, Netscape is still viable (heard good things about N6 although I don't use it and Opera is doing a good job, a better job in fact from what I've seen. Unfortunately I'm still in the habit of clicking the E icon instead of the O one...[:)]
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 3:25:26 PM EDT
IMO Microsoft markets adequate software. I think their strength is in marketing what they sell. AFA their business practices, survival of the fittest. Why hasn't anyone gone after WalMart, Homo Depot and Lowe's? Eddie
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 7:08:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cgwahl: Linux, I hear nothing but good but the problem is its still at the point you have to [i]know[/i] computers to use a Linux box.
View Quote
The problem with Linux is that it is still saddled with a 35-year old user interface. Sure they have a GUI of sorts now, but you still have to have the underlying skills to fix it when it stops working. When it becomes native GUI, and the horrible CLI is 90% hidden, then I could see it eclipsing MS.
Plus as far as browsers go, Netscape is still viable (heard good things about N6 although I don't use it and Opera is doing a good job, a better job in fact from what I've seen. Unfortunately I'm still in the habit of clicking the E icon instead of the O one...[:)]
View Quote
Netscape is so slow and bloated... they have forgotten the point of the browser. I don't want to read my email, browse my newsgroups, and build web pages all from the same 200MB program. I just want to browse the frickin' web, with as little overhead as possible. That's why I've been using Opera for several years and I absolutely love it. It's very streamlined and quick. My favorite feature is the ability to disable graphics on a page... this comes in very handy on www.ar15.com because all the graphics really slow you down. With version 5.0, even Java works right most of the time. Every now and again I'll have to fire up IE to visit some e-commerce site, but 80% of my time's spent in Opera.
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 8:49:01 AM EDT
They took an emerging technology and caused the creation of standards that made the internet possible.
View Quote
What? For most of the history of the Internet, Microsoft didn't support TCP/IP on any of their platforms. A company I worked for bought NT to run on our servers, and we couldn't use it because it didn't support a single routable network protocol! Microsoft said that wasn't necessary. Doesn't sound like they wanted to connect networks. Until late 1994, Bill Gates was still blathering about how they would put the Internet out of business. Although in early 1995, after Gates changed his mind, Microsoft did catch-up pretty quickly. How in the world could you use the phrase "creation of standards" in reference to Microsoft? I can't think of any standard that their software supports that they haven't tried to ruin. Torf, you really need to pay closer attention to what's going on.z
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 9:37:38 AM EDT
I've been using Opera for about a year and I put it before the IE icon in my quick launch bar. There are only a few commercial sites that work exclusively with IE but those are the minority. I like the Opera feature of opening new pages in the same window, unlike IE, which crashes my computer after I open too many windows.
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 9:38:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: You know, it's easier for all concerned if you use the standard quoting mechanisms. But I'll leave it as you did it -- subject to the 3500 character limit and the pain in the ass you made it to show attributions. . . .
View Quote
So sorry 'your majesty'. I left it pretty clear, and I don't have the time to decode nested {quote} loops. It's much easier my way Mr. HTML code Nazi.
Originally Posted By Torf: Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed:
Originally Posted By Torf: And in the process, they have made computers affordable, fairly reliable, easy to use, broadly compatible, and very common.
View Quote
I thought Apple did that back around 1980. [blue] They started out OK and like Avaitor said, they used closed architecture. Stuff ended up being twice the price of PCs.[/blue]
You Microsoft haters really don't get it.
View Quote
I don't particularly hate Microsoft, but I do find it funny that they've created this mythos surrounding the company that their products are reliable or easy to use, much less "compatible". [blue]Many, if not most of the problems that users encounter is caused by inferior parts, and hardware conflicts. PC makers try to upgrade proof their machines, and it causes a lot of problems for above average users.[/blue]
View Quote
Hardware has little if anything to do with why Windows crashes every five minutes. It is because of pathetically bad software design on the part of Microsoft. In contrast, Linux machines don't crash every five minutes. Even when they're running on the same hardware (as in, dual-boot systems). Linux, and other reasonably well-written OSes, can run for weeks or months without trashing themselves internally. With any of Microsoft's OSes, it is generally recommended that you reboot at least daily to prevent problems due to the OS leaving so much garbage around its memory space that it clogs itself up.
View Quote
If your windows crashed every 5 minutes than you are either an incompetent computer user, or are a sucker for buying a piece of crap HARDWARE! (yes hardware! It does matter!)
Your attempt to lay the blame on hardware issues is just plain ridiculous. If you had a clue . . . but then again, you obviously don't. (cont'd)
View Quote
I have built and worked on many computers, and have used many more. If you think that all hardware is created the same, then you are naive. My computer doesn't crash at all. I reboot once a week to keep it quick. You must be doing somthing wrong. I even have 10 programs running right now. Everythings fine.
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 9:55:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed:
Ease of use was largely stolen from Apple, who stole it from Xerox. Unfortunately, Microsoft layered the windowing on top of MS-DOS, so it's a hodgepodge of crap.
View Quote
I thought Al Gore invented the Internet.
View Quote
No comment.
Microsoft sure as hell didn't. The Internet was running before they existed, and it'll keep going long after they're gone. Microsoft ignored what you probably think of as "the Internet" until they nearly made the company irrelevant, then engaged in a massive catchup-and-destroy effort to try to take control.
Compatibility? Well, most programs will run on Win95, Win98, and WinNT -- but some will only run on NT, and some won't run on various versions of the OSes. So it's a crapshoot.
View Quote
I am well aware of how the internet came to be, and how it grew, and the standards that are in use. Microsoft has been a major player in internet growth. Why anyone would try to run all software and all OS's God only knows. Run 1 Microsoft OS, and your troubles will be minimal. Don't play games on NT. NT is for business.
View Quote
Here you're blathering about the hardware again. Hardware has nothing to do with whether various software packages are compatible with each other -- at most, it's a question of "add more memory"/"add more disk space". What are you, a basketweaving major??
View Quote
Ooooh! Another personnal insult! Nothing bolsters a weak argument like insults! If you don't understand the impact that hardware can have on the performance of Windows, then this is useless. Windows has some basic flaws and workarounds. It is not perfect. It is however 99% reliable on a properly built and tuned machine. There is nothing that Microsoft did that will cause your computer to crash every 5 min. People who have this experience probably need to do some housecleaning. I know this routine, I have to do it every year or so.
Just because I don't like what Microsoft has done doesn't mean that I hate them. I think their software sucks, I think people are idiots for having bought into Microsoft's FUD, and I think that far better products are available for much less money. But it's your choice whether to use their stuff or not, and whether to pay the "Microsoft tax". Just don't bitch when I refuse.
View Quote
Oh, bullshit. So you don't have a clue about what they've done or why they've done it, you just wanted to issue a kneejerk statement that Bill Gates is the latest incarnation of Jesus because he brought computing to the masses? It is to laugh. Well, not really, but it's so pathetic that one has to anyway.
View Quote
I never said any of that, but you knew that. I submit that you are trying to be provacative? If you don't like Microsoft, don't buy it, and if you disagree with people on the forum, give arguements. Your continual barrage of insults is typical of a Ralph Nader worshipping, WTO protesting, Big Business hating activist.
No, it's called "monopoly power".
View Quote
Call it what you want, but just try to start a car company. You will learn about entry barriers real fast. And will you cry foul if other carmakers try to undercut you in price?
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 9:59:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By zoom: Until late 1994, Bill Gates was still blathering about how they would put the Internet out of business. Although in early 1995, after Gates changed his mind, Microsoft did catch-up pretty quickly. How in the world could you use the phrase "creation of standards" in reference to Microsoft? I can't think of any standard that their software supports that they haven't tried to ruin. Torf, you really need to pay closer attention to what's going on.z
View Quote
The internet really didn't exist in '94 the way it does today. The internet today is propably 100 times the size and 1000 times as useful as it was in '94. 1994 was the 'stone age' compared to now. I was involved at that time, and I know what it was like to 'surf'.
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 10:14:24 AM EDT
I just don't get it... Lets say company [b]A[/b] sells a product, which does mathmatical calculations (AKA a calculator), and the public likes it. No more counting on your fingers. Now lets say you own the design / creation of the operating software which Company [b]A[/b] runs it calculator on. Why cant you create a calculator too? I don't get it. I created the damn software, I can do what ever the hell I want with it! As long as my code isn't copied from Company [b]A[/b], by all means I should have the right to have 4,000,000,000,000,000 calculators available. I think Microsoft should tell the government to go to hell. Maybe I am just a greedy snob, but if I design something, I will put whatever I want into it. Microsoft should tell the government, SEE YA. Bill Gates should break it all up, and tell the end customer: "Sorry. Because we can't put our calculator in our own software, you are going to suffer. All Microsoft products will be discontinued and no longer supported. I hope your unix skills work well."
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 11:08:27 AM EDT
One problem Red, the 'all benevolent' government wont let them do that either! I guess even the government realizes that folks are better off with Microsoft.
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 8:46:00 PM EDT
nader is a major league ahole. And to think that jerk wants to be the President. People should just stop whining about Microsoft this, Microsoft that, that shit needs a rest. I tried to like Apple, but where the hell is the right mouse button? While browsing with [b]IE[/b], how do you open up a link in a "new" window? Long live MICROSOFT!
Link Posted: 6/6/2002 8:57:47 PM EDT
Microsoft has created two camps of people ; those who like its pretty interface and those of us who have to preform voodoo magic to get it working again (Without losing Aunt Mable's recipe collection ). IMHO windows reached its peaked in Windows for workgroups . Linux problem is that you do have to have a brain to use it . I can do anything in Linux that I can do with windows and most of the software I use is [i]FREE!![/i] .
Top Top