Charges for MS software updates
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Stephane unfortunately a large percentage of CP lurkers are willing to suck Bill's dick and bend over and take it up the arse from him. So in short this means you are up for a lot of 1's and a lot of shit in reply. While yes through his company he supplies products that allow many companies to function and also products that allow many other people to write software for profit. He is still a grade one cock sucker. But too many people have grown acustom to the taste of Bill's spurt so be ready for the barrage. No I don't make my living byu coding to Bill's shit any more, so fuck off. It's through fixing fuck up's of Bill's software so I don't have to be nice. P.S. Kid sister died 14-10-1998, rules just don't seem to apply. Michael Martin Australia "I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end." - Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
:zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
// Quantum sort algorithm implementation
while (!sorted)
; -
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet...":suss: Hmmm...maybe its time to go back to school again[^]:~ John Hudson Its all right - I'll tell the therapist it was all your fault, maybe they won't turn the voltage up so high on the ECT machine this time:omg: http://www.rainbow-innov.co.uk[^]
-
:zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
// Quantum sort algorithm implementation
while (!sorted)
;Daniel Turini wrote: // Quantum sort algorithm implementationwhile (!sorted) ; :laugh: -Nick Parker
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Sort of related... I've never understood why the prorportionally most financially well-off people on this world are the ones that have such a problem spending such small amounts of their money on things which return far more than their cost, yet do not expect the same whent he tables are returned. Anyone care to provide an answer? :confused:
David Wulff
In a world of compromise, some dont - Heckler & Koch
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Congratulations for likely taking an out-of-context misquote even further out of context. (I say likely since I can't find any other reference to this. The closest thing was Allchin observing that the huge base of 9x/NT [350+ million] was upgrade potential [i.e. revenues.] (Clue: Many technology writers, and especially The New York Times, don't like Microsoft or Bill Gates, yet the reporter couldn't find any actual quote for this item.) Bill Gates was NOT referring to fixes and patches--seems to me that he and Ballmer made that fairly clear in other actual comments. Microsoft gives away a lot of technology. Like any company, they must constantly reexamine the freebies and decide whether to start charging for them, leave them as is, update them, cancel them, etc. This is what responsible businesses do. Incidentally, Gates was quite correct when he said; "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime." Speculative booms rarely, if ever, repeat themselves in the same market sector (until, at least, those involved are dead or senile so a new generation can make the same mistakes.)
-
NYTimes[^], (free reg) "...Mr. Gates said the company was considering the possibility of charging for some of its software updates that are now made available free over the Internet..." I have predicted last year that the MS passport gateway would become such thing for anything regarding service packs, run-times, bug fixes. (and had been flamed btw when I posted my views on CodeProject forums). I hope this is only me, I feel getting screwed for over supporting them in the past. MS would sell products, and then ask customers to spend money again for product fixes. It's easy to believe that fixes would be sold as "features", only to lure them (us). Developers relying on server-controlled MS platform run-times, such as the .NET run-time would be screwed (dotnetfx.exe is still free for redistribution at the moment though). This also questions free source code as a whole. Especially in addition to the outsourcing trend. Oh I hate this. Again, from NYtimes "The computer industry experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime, Mr. Gates said in describing the Internet boom". I hope for us all he's off track. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Microsoft can't charge for security or stability fixes, otherwise nobody would patch and they'd have a bigger problem with worms and other kinds of exploits. What they're most likely looking to charge for are upgraded features, like new MSN Messenger versions, or new versions of IE. Compare this to, for instance, Red Hat, who only give you access to their update service at non-peak times for free, and only for one machine. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
-
Microsoft can't charge for security or stability fixes, otherwise nobody would patch and they'd have a bigger problem with worms and other kinds of exploits. What they're most likely looking to charge for are upgraded features, like new MSN Messenger versions, or new versions of IE. Compare this to, for instance, Red Hat, who only give you access to their update service at non-peak times for free, and only for one machine. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
Erik Funkenbusch wrote: Microsoft can't charge for security or stability fixes, otherwise nobody would patch This is also my belief that the platform would fall under. But who knows. Erik Funkenbusch wrote: What they're most likely looking to charge for are upgraded features, like new MSN Messenger versions, or new versions of IE. MS don't have to charge for these. An increasing amount of their latest software require Windows XP to run, so you have to buy an OS first, before you download and use a free product. Regarding IE, the situation is even worse. MS is pushing a new IE version with Longhorn. You have to buy the OS first. But since Longhorn is hardware hungry, you have to buy a new PC first. Erik Funkenbusch wrote: What they're most likely looking to charge My point was that charging for software that was given freely before changes a lot how customers see software. Indeed, as long as a product is free, nobody would really complain about bugs, limitations, ... but as soon as you pay for a product and for upgrades, then the product has to be reliable. Yes, I am talking about SLA here. (service level agreement). I am not sure if Microsoft is ready for SLA in their products. Imagine customers asking reimbursement if the product crashes. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
-
Erik Funkenbusch wrote: Microsoft can't charge for security or stability fixes, otherwise nobody would patch This is also my belief that the platform would fall under. But who knows. Erik Funkenbusch wrote: What they're most likely looking to charge for are upgraded features, like new MSN Messenger versions, or new versions of IE. MS don't have to charge for these. An increasing amount of their latest software require Windows XP to run, so you have to buy an OS first, before you download and use a free product. Regarding IE, the situation is even worse. MS is pushing a new IE version with Longhorn. You have to buy the OS first. But since Longhorn is hardware hungry, you have to buy a new PC first. Erik Funkenbusch wrote: What they're most likely looking to charge My point was that charging for software that was given freely before changes a lot how customers see software. Indeed, as long as a product is free, nobody would really complain about bugs, limitations, ... but as soon as you pay for a product and for upgrades, then the product has to be reliable. Yes, I am talking about SLA here. (service level agreement). I am not sure if Microsoft is ready for SLA in their products. Imagine customers asking reimbursement if the product crashes. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: An increasing amount of their latest software require Windows XP to run, so you have to buy an OS first, before you download and use a free product. I'm pretty sure MS will rethink this decision, at least partially. Windows 2000 will be the minimum platform, I think.. since MS has committed to supporting it until 2007. 9x based Windows will die a horrible death. In fact, Office 2003 won't support 9x at all, and will require Windows 2000 at a minimum. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Regarding IE, the situation is even worse. MS is pushing a new IE version with Longhorn. You have to buy the OS first. But since Longhorn is hardware hungry, you have to buy a new PC first. Again, I think MS will rethink that decision. Microsoft doesn't want to support two different browser capabilities, and they'd much rather people upgrade to the latest version. My belief is that MS will probably charge for a stand-alone version of IE7 for Windows 2000 and XP, as well as Windows Messenger, etc.. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: as long as a product is free, nobody would really complain about bugs Hmm.. you must live in a different world than I do. :-D Getting something for free has never stopped anyone from complaining about what they see as the shortcomings of that product, especially in regards to MS products. Besides, you never really got it "for free" anyways, it was built into the price of the product. Microsoft just doesn't want to keep investing in back porting new technology for old products which do not generate any new revenue. IBM started charging for their updates many years ago for OS/2, and Sun and Red Hat and others go out of their way to make it attractive for you to subscribe to their pay services. This is something that software vendors all over are looking at doing. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: An increasing amount of their latest software require Windows XP to run, so you have to buy an OS first, before you download and use a free product. I'm pretty sure MS will rethink this decision, at least partially. Windows 2000 will be the minimum platform, I think.. since MS has committed to supporting it until 2007. 9x based Windows will die a horrible death. In fact, Office 2003 won't support 9x at all, and will require Windows 2000 at a minimum. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Regarding IE, the situation is even worse. MS is pushing a new IE version with Longhorn. You have to buy the OS first. But since Longhorn is hardware hungry, you have to buy a new PC first. Again, I think MS will rethink that decision. Microsoft doesn't want to support two different browser capabilities, and they'd much rather people upgrade to the latest version. My belief is that MS will probably charge for a stand-alone version of IE7 for Windows 2000 and XP, as well as Windows Messenger, etc.. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: as long as a product is free, nobody would really complain about bugs Hmm.. you must live in a different world than I do. :-D Getting something for free has never stopped anyone from complaining about what they see as the shortcomings of that product, especially in regards to MS products. Besides, you never really got it "for free" anyways, it was built into the price of the product. Microsoft just doesn't want to keep investing in back porting new technology for old products which do not generate any new revenue. IBM started charging for their updates many years ago for OS/2, and Sun and Red Hat and others go out of their way to make it attractive for you to subscribe to their pay services. This is something that software vendors all over are looking at doing. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
Erik Funkenbusch wrote: I'm pretty sure MS will rethink this decision Of course not. Watch those webcasts[^]. The new OS and devices are enabling them. And they keep telling that those OS and devices are enabling us first. This is highly risked though. Before their new stuff reaches critical mass, a few years might be spent waiting for consumers to get convinced of upgrading to the new $costly$ software assurance. Erik Funkenbusch wrote: you must live in a different world than I do Probably, when I talk about SLA, I talk about what a former company I have worked for, a major web hosting company (read: we were hosting the top 5 e-businesses in France). In addition, internet users is used to get everything for free. Now that's the problem. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's name and password. Taking advantage of InternetExplorer to steal user's clipboard.