What would Microsoft have to do?
-
Why not? Back in the day, the Apple and Motorola team was looking quite good. MS never had better products than Appple - just better marketing. LOL... Is that why Excel constantly won awards on the MAC platform? Microsoft has done some really excellent work. But I agree with others, if it wasn't them, it would have been someone else. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
ok. "never" was the wrong word - they do/did/will have some good stuff. but what they have isn't so much better than everyone else. what they really had/have is brutal, edge-of-the-law marketing. -c
-
A while back in response to a post (http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?forumid=1159&select=93109&tid=93017#xx93109xx ), christian wrote this: You're joking, right ? M$ might be behind most of the jobs we can get as of now, but I hope to goodness you're not claiming without them we'd all be using Apple ]['s and ZX81's Why do people not give Microsoft credit for all the things they have done? I don't think we would have had as much progress right now without Intel and Microsoft. I know we would be further than a ZX81 but I don't think we would have 2Ghz and $799 PC prices. Computers today without MS would probably run at the speed of a 486, and we'd have to run some $600 Unix OS while costing us $5000 for the hardware. Remember that it was Bill Gates who wanted a PC on every desktop. Without MS and Intel linux probably wouldn't have gotten off the ground. So please don't slander a company that has been so good to the industry by writing something cheesy like 'M$'. I don't bite the hands that feed me because imagine a world without Microsoft. If you don't think words hurt, just remember all of MS's "partners" who testified against the company for the DOJ. We almost lost a good thing(and we would have if Gore got elected.) So my question is how loyal to Microsoft are each of you? What would MS do to make you not support them. Do you use their products, but would still stick with them if the climate had changed and jumped from asp to jsp? I know it would take alot for me to give up Microsoft because I know how good they were and are to the industry. I :love: Martin Marvinski
Hey, I've been quoted !!!! Martin Marvinski wrote: Why do people not give Microsoft credit for all the things they have done? You mean like saying 'M$ might be behind most of the jobs we can get as of now' ??? Do you seriously believe I'm wrong, and without Microsoft we WOULD be using Apple ]['s ? We'd all be using Mac's, and better off for it. Martin Marvinski wrote: I don't think we would have had as much progress right now without Intel and Microsoft. Really ? I'm interested as to how you believe that Wintel has had the monopoly on ideas ( especially ones stolen from XEROX ) ? Martin Marvinski wrote: I know we would be further than a ZX81 but I don't think we would have 2Ghz and $799 PC prices. You know why we have these things ? AMD. Without AMD, Intel would be selling us 800 MHz processors about now. See what happens when there is competition ? Martin Marvinski wrote: Computers today without MS would probably run at the speed of a 486, and we'd have to run some $600 Unix OS while costing us $5000 for the hardware. Why, why, why ? How can you *think* that ? Martin Marvinski wrote: Remember that it was Bill Gates who wanted a PC on every desktop. So ? It's also Bill Gates who said no-one would ever need a PC faster than a 286. Martin Marvinski wrote: So please don't slander a company that has been so good to the industry by writing something cheesy like 'M$'. you're a sensitive little puppy, aren't you ? Martin Marvinski wrote: So my question is how loyal to Microsoft are each of you? I'm loyal to *me*. When M$ do a good thing ( GDI+), I say so. When they do a bad thing (C#, no C++ conformance in VC7 ), I say so. I live in the real world. Martin Marvinski wrote: I know it would take alot for me to give up Microsoft because I know how good they were and are to the industry. So if Apple or Linux takes over, you'll stick with M$ to your detriment ? I doubt it. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Did he also mention that you should respect your elders? I :love: Martin Marvinski
Martin Marvinski wrote: Did he also mention that you should respect your elders? *John's* grandfather ? I doubt it - he probably just had a piece of wood with nails hammered into it, or a gun full of buckshot to make the point.... Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: 1. Security - If they don't solve some of their OS security issues they are in deep $hit. Linux and Apple are not going away and if Microsoft continues to stumble, one or both could make serious strides in the market place Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. They are also the #1 target because they are so big. If Linux was that widely used, they would most likely have 5 times as many security problems. Mike Mullikin wrote: 2. Subscription based licensing - This whole concept concerns me. I do not want to be tied to an internet connection. I know right now they say subscription based licenses will be optional, but what happens tomorrow? If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. We could be concerened with just the newest. As for the internet connection, it will most likely be integrated into your telephone bill and not having one will be like not having a telephone. Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Right now only about 10% of the people upgrade. When an OS costs Billions to develop, then it makes sense that it costs 199 an upgrade. Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. Mike Mullikin wrote: 3. Product Activation - People should be considered innocent until proven guilty. I don't like being inconvenienced so Microsoft can sell a few more copies of Office or Windows XP. Microsoft has been one of the fastest growing companies in world history and Gates is the richest person in the world. In my humble opinion this was mainly due to DOS, Windows and Office being the most pirated pieces of software in the world. The legal copies far outweigh the illegal, but the sheer number of copies in use is what makes it so great. If Microsoft trys to milk the cow too often or too hard, people may look to cheaper alternatives. If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? If you follow the laws then you shouldn't have a problem with MS. You will just get your Product Code and thats that. The only people who will have problems are those who try to cheat MS out of their hard earned money. Mike Mullikin wrote: General Arrogance - Confidence is a wonderful thing - Gates and Ballmer exude it. However with the world-wide economy in the dumps, a bunch of
Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. And that's a big achievement, isn't it ?</sarcasm> Martin Marvinski wrote: If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. What world are you inhabiting ? The majority of users buy a PC and expect it to last as long as a TV does. No WAY are they going to pay for a new OS so they can still run the same software they always have, not to mention the abject terror they would feel at the thought of replacing the OS. Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Of COURSE they would. And without video piracy the cost of hiring a video would drop as well - these are not money making corperations, but benevolent entities. Pass the weed. Martin Marvinski wrote: Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. No, now that the PC growth boom has slowed down and there's not enough people to speed it up again, the only way for M$ to continue their rate of growth is to charge more and/or more often. I don t begrudge their right to make money, that is what a company does. But let's not kid ourselves, OK ? Martin Marvinski wrote: If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? Simply put - having to call them over and again, when I upgrade my PC, the fact that they can *shut down* an OS by no longer offering activation for it, all of this is a *bad* thing for the consumer. Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has to defend itself. If almost got broken up. If it had just been quiet it may just as well have been. They barely got out of that one thanks to the pro-corperate Bush administration. There is a difference between defending oneself and being arrogant. Did you not follow the story, or is it those rose coloured glasses of yours coming into play ? BTW I note you just got here - welcome. Don't worry about me, I'm always opinionated. :-) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: 1. Security - If they don't solve some of their OS security issues they are in deep $hit. Linux and Apple are not going away and if Microsoft continues to stumble, one or both could make serious strides in the market place Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. They are also the #1 target because they are so big. If Linux was that widely used, they would most likely have 5 times as many security problems. Mike Mullikin wrote: 2. Subscription based licensing - This whole concept concerns me. I do not want to be tied to an internet connection. I know right now they say subscription based licenses will be optional, but what happens tomorrow? If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. We could be concerened with just the newest. As for the internet connection, it will most likely be integrated into your telephone bill and not having one will be like not having a telephone. Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Right now only about 10% of the people upgrade. When an OS costs Billions to develop, then it makes sense that it costs 199 an upgrade. Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. Mike Mullikin wrote: 3. Product Activation - People should be considered innocent until proven guilty. I don't like being inconvenienced so Microsoft can sell a few more copies of Office or Windows XP. Microsoft has been one of the fastest growing companies in world history and Gates is the richest person in the world. In my humble opinion this was mainly due to DOS, Windows and Office being the most pirated pieces of software in the world. The legal copies far outweigh the illegal, but the sheer number of copies in use is what makes it so great. If Microsoft trys to milk the cow too often or too hard, people may look to cheaper alternatives. If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? If you follow the laws then you shouldn't have a problem with MS. You will just get your Product Code and thats that. The only people who will have problems are those who try to cheat MS out of their hard earned money. Mike Mullikin wrote: General Arrogance - Confidence is a wonderful thing - Gates and Ballmer exude it. However with the world-wide economy in the dumps, a bunch of
"If everyone upgraded at the same time..." I could say alot to this, but I'll leave it at...HAHAHAHAHA! Product Activation - as was stated before, there are MILLIONS upon MILLIONS who have illegal MS software, which is actually a bonus to M$. Because if I couldn't get it free, I wouldn't use it (as I bet MILLONS upon MILLONS of others would say the same). So, if I (and MILLONS upon MILLONS of others) don't use M$, then M$ loses their monopoly which in the end results in a competitive market, (which there is not one now). Does M$ have a monopoly (*cough* justice depart *cough*)? Goto the websites of dell, hp, compaq, gateway...etc and see what OS system options they give that you can get with your computer.
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: So please don't slander a company that has been so good to the industry by writing something cheesy like 'M$'. When someone says M$ it doesn't bother me, because I'll turn around and use $un when that comes up :) Thats usually enough to let others know how I feel :-D James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
James T. Johnson wrote: When someone says M$ it doesn't bother me, because I'll turn around and use $un when that comes up Cool - I'll use that next time I write my friend who works for $un :-) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
I just have to agree with you :) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Anders Molin wrote: I just have to agree with you You agree with this tripe ? Computers today without MS would probably run at the speed of a 486, and we'd have to run some $600 Unix OS while costing us $5000 for the hardware. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Hey, I've been quoted !!!! Martin Marvinski wrote: Why do people not give Microsoft credit for all the things they have done? You mean like saying 'M$ might be behind most of the jobs we can get as of now' ??? Do you seriously believe I'm wrong, and without Microsoft we WOULD be using Apple ]['s ? We'd all be using Mac's, and better off for it. Martin Marvinski wrote: I don't think we would have had as much progress right now without Intel and Microsoft. Really ? I'm interested as to how you believe that Wintel has had the monopoly on ideas ( especially ones stolen from XEROX ) ? Martin Marvinski wrote: I know we would be further than a ZX81 but I don't think we would have 2Ghz and $799 PC prices. You know why we have these things ? AMD. Without AMD, Intel would be selling us 800 MHz processors about now. See what happens when there is competition ? Martin Marvinski wrote: Computers today without MS would probably run at the speed of a 486, and we'd have to run some $600 Unix OS while costing us $5000 for the hardware. Why, why, why ? How can you *think* that ? Martin Marvinski wrote: Remember that it was Bill Gates who wanted a PC on every desktop. So ? It's also Bill Gates who said no-one would ever need a PC faster than a 286. Martin Marvinski wrote: So please don't slander a company that has been so good to the industry by writing something cheesy like 'M$'. you're a sensitive little puppy, aren't you ? Martin Marvinski wrote: So my question is how loyal to Microsoft are each of you? I'm loyal to *me*. When M$ do a good thing ( GDI+), I say so. When they do a bad thing (C#, no C++ conformance in VC7 ), I say so. I live in the real world. Martin Marvinski wrote: I know it would take alot for me to give up Microsoft because I know how good they were and are to the industry. So if Apple or Linux takes over, you'll stick with M$ to your detriment ? I doubt it. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Writing "M$" all the time is really cheesy, neither fun nor statement, and absolutely wimp.
peterchen wrote: Writing "M$" all the time is really cheesy, neither fun nor statement, and absolutely wimp. To be honest, I think you're all a pack of pussies for making such a fuss over it. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. And that's a big achievement, isn't it ?</sarcasm> Martin Marvinski wrote: If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. What world are you inhabiting ? The majority of users buy a PC and expect it to last as long as a TV does. No WAY are they going to pay for a new OS so they can still run the same software they always have, not to mention the abject terror they would feel at the thought of replacing the OS. Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Of COURSE they would. And without video piracy the cost of hiring a video would drop as well - these are not money making corperations, but benevolent entities. Pass the weed. Martin Marvinski wrote: Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. No, now that the PC growth boom has slowed down and there's not enough people to speed it up again, the only way for M$ to continue their rate of growth is to charge more and/or more often. I don t begrudge their right to make money, that is what a company does. But let's not kid ourselves, OK ? Martin Marvinski wrote: If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? Simply put - having to call them over and again, when I upgrade my PC, the fact that they can *shut down* an OS by no longer offering activation for it, all of this is a *bad* thing for the consumer. Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has to defend itself. If almost got broken up. If it had just been quiet it may just as well have been. They barely got out of that one thanks to the pro-corperate Bush administration. There is a difference between defending oneself and being arrogant. Did you not follow the story, or is it those rose coloured glasses of yours coming into play ? BTW I note you just got here - welcome. Don't worry about me, I'm always opinionated. :-) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Hi Christian. Being opinionated is what makes life intresting. So how's your Linux computer doing? ;p I remember reading that in the 80's IBM's PC was about 3000 dollars and that did not include the monitor. To develop hardware and software costs lots of money. If you had a multitude of companies they would not have enough resources to develop and inovate as much as MS and Intel. I read that last year alone that MS spent over 5 billion dollars on research and development. Remember that it was IBM ( at that time facing it's own anti-trust problems) that introduced the "blue book" of hardware and made the whole industry by using off the shelf hardware (i.e. Intel's cpu). Remember that there were a bunch of different hardware platforms and none of them were compatible with each other. That is why without MS there would not have been the progress there is now. Q.E.D. I :love: Martin Marvinski
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. They are also the #1 target because they are so big. If Linux was that widely used, they would most likely have 5 times as many security problems. Baloney! If it's so secure, how come they just had to patch the worst security flaw EVER in a Windows operating system? There was a UPnP vulnerability in which your computer could be exploited just by connecting to the Internet! Martin Marvinski wrote: If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. We could be concerened with just the newest. As for the internet connection, it will most likely be integrated into your telephone bill and not having one will be like not having a telephone. Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Right now only about 10% of the people upgrade. When an OS costs Billions to develop, then it makes sense that it costs 199 an upgrade. Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. That would be nice, but it will never happen. Newer MS OS's often won't run on older hardware, so a lot of low-end users or those without much money don't upgrade often. They probably also don't have big broad-band connections that would allow a subscription-based model to work, either. Martin Marvinski wrote: If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? If you follow the laws then you shouldn't have a problem with MS. You will just get your Product Code and thats that. The only people who will have problems are those who try to cheat MS out of their hard earned money. What if you have a laptop? What if you are, say, on a plane and have no Internet connection, and the OS thinks your configuration changed and you need to reactivate? You are toast. And although MS claims that no personal information gets sent to them, how can we be sure? And remember, we have MS to thank for two huge annoyances - 8.3 filenames and backslashes for path separators. Even STILL, in these days of long filenames, we at my company have to keep certain filenames as short (8.3) or else something somewhere will break. As far as backslashes for path separators, C was around before MS (I believe), which makes it MS's fault when I have to write code like this: CStirng someFile = "..\\some\\path\\file.txt"; Or access UNC paths like th
Navin wrote: Baloney! If it's so secure, how come they just had to patch the worst security flaw EVER in a Windows operating system? There was a UPnP vulnerability in which your computer could be exploited just by connecting to the Internet! How does that vulnerability become the worst ever? Any vulnerability is bad, even more so when script kiddies get to run the code of their choice. But it doesn't make it any worse than the exploit that code red used. also, shit happens; remember red hats snafu about a year ago, something about shipping a server component with the default password of 'q'? [Going from memory that was the password anyway, but my memory likes to play tricks from time to time :)] James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
-
Anders Molin wrote: I just have to agree with you You agree with this tripe ? Computers today without MS would probably run at the speed of a 486, and we'd have to run some $600 Unix OS while costing us $5000 for the hardware. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
How dare you call my comments tripe! I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use X| linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. I :love: Martin Marvinski
-
Hi Christian. Being opinionated is what makes life intresting. So how's your Linux computer doing? ;p I remember reading that in the 80's IBM's PC was about 3000 dollars and that did not include the monitor. To develop hardware and software costs lots of money. If you had a multitude of companies they would not have enough resources to develop and inovate as much as MS and Intel. I read that last year alone that MS spent over 5 billion dollars on research and development. Remember that it was IBM ( at that time facing it's own anti-trust problems) that introduced the "blue book" of hardware and made the whole industry by using off the shelf hardware (i.e. Intel's cpu). Remember that there were a bunch of different hardware platforms and none of them were compatible with each other. That is why without MS there would not have been the progress there is now. Q.E.D. I :love: Martin Marvinski
Martin Marvinski wrote: So how's your Linux computer doing? I've just installed Solaris, actually, and looking forward to using a compiler that supports templates properly, so I can get my hands dirty with them. I'm ordering 'Modern C++ Design' next payday, along with some cool image processing books. However, I also run XP, W2000 and W98 ( for different reasons ), and I must say although the shine has gone off XP with regard to a few things, I still like it a *lot*. Martin Marvinski wrote: I remember reading that in the 80's IBM's PC was about 3000 dollars and that did not include the monitor. That's right, and CD burners used to be $2000. Any technology becomes cheaper as demand grows, R&D and tooling costs are paid for, etc. Martin Marvinski wrote: If you had a multitude of companies they would not have enough resources to develop and inovate as much as MS and Intel. Innovation comes from competition - as I've noted, the reason Intel release processors at such an accelerated rate nowadays, and at increasingly cheaper starting prices, is AMD. Martin Marvinski wrote: I read that last year alone that MS spent over 5 billion dollars on research and development. Probably. They are huge though - they develop just about every type of software, remember. Martin Marvinski wrote: Remember that it was IBM ( at that time facing it's own anti-trust problems) that introduced the "blue book" of hardware and made the whole industry by using off the shelf hardware (i.e. Intel's cpu). That's right - they built it not expecting it to have a market. They hardly 'made' the industry. Their inferior platform took off because it had their name on it. Martin Marvinski wrote: Remember that there were a bunch of different hardware platforms and none of them were compatible with each other. Not actually true - remember MSX ? But you're right in general, and it *was* a nightmare. Software still came out for all the platforms, developers just spent more time on versions for more popular platforms ( which is why Atari ST games were often better than Amiga ports, although the Amiga was a better platform ). Martin Marvinski wrote: That is why without MS there would not have been the progress there is now. Bollocks. 1/ It's true that the process of a monopoly was probably sped up b
-
How dare you call my comments tripe! I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use X| linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. I :love: Martin Marvinski
Martin Marvinski wrote: How dare you call my comments tripe! I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. I feel so embarrassed. It's now obvious you've been trolling. Well, you got me. :-) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: I don't think we would have had as much progress right now without Intel and Microsoft. I know we would be further than a ZX81 but I don't think we would have 2Ghz and $799 PC prices. Why not? Back in the day, the Apple and Motorola team was looking quite good. MS never had better products than Appple - just better marketing. Martin Marvinski wrote: Without MS and Intel linux probably wouldn't have gotten off the ground. The GNU utilities (which make up the bulk of most Linux distributions) were started on 68000's and whatever mini-computer hardware was around at universities in the mid 80s. To oversimplify, the GNU project was started because of overly-restrictive OS licenses used on the various Unixes and VMS systems of the day. So, if you want to get picky, GNU (and hence Linux) should be seen as a reaction to Unix and VMS licensing, not MS. MS and Intel just* made x86 processors common - which made them an obvious target for the Linux kernel when that came along in the early 90s. If Apple had won, Linux would've ended up on 68Ks first. Martin Marvinski wrote: how loyal to Microsoft are each of you? I'm not "loyal" to them at all. I write for Windows cause that's where the money is. In fact, I feel ever-so-slightly stifled by MS because their dominance makes it unprofitable to write for other platforms. -c * - no small feat, i know
Chris Losinger wrote: Why not? Back in the day, the Apple and Motorola team was looking quite good. MS never had better products than Appple - just better marketing. It wasn't just better marketing basically Apple wouldn't and still refuse to allow other people to make their computers. The IBM model of computer proliferated because anyone could build them hence the competition from Compaq, Dell etc. Apple could have quite easily been in the position Microsoft is in today or alternatively there could possibly have been more of a choice when it comes to operating systems with Microsoft and Apple battling it out for market share. Apple made a bad business decision and stuck to it. Anthony.
-
How dare you call my comments tripe! I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use X| linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. I :love: Martin Marvinski
Martin Marvinski wrote: Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. :-D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: How dare you call my comments tripe! I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. I feel so embarrassed. It's now obvious you've been trolling. Well, you got me. :-) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
You are the one who is not being reasonable. All my arguments make sense and are quite logical. I wish people would just respect the tools they use and not act childish with 'M$'. I :love: Martin Marvinski
-
"If everyone upgraded at the same time..." I could say alot to this, but I'll leave it at...HAHAHAHAHA! Product Activation - as was stated before, there are MILLIONS upon MILLIONS who have illegal MS software, which is actually a bonus to M$. Because if I couldn't get it free, I wouldn't use it (as I bet MILLONS upon MILLONS of others would say the same). So, if I (and MILLONS upon MILLONS of others) don't use M$, then M$ loses their monopoly which in the end results in a competitive market, (which there is not one now). Does M$ have a monopoly (*cough* justice depart *cough*)? Goto the websites of dell, hp, compaq, gateway...etc and see what OS system options they give that you can get with your computer.
John Uhlenbrock wrote: Goto the websites of dell, hp, compaq, gateway...etc and see what OS system options they give that you can get with your computer. You forget, Dell went with linux as an option for a while, but they dropped it. Why? Its not profitable! If people aren't going to buy it why keep the added cost of training tech support and making sure that all the hardware is compatible with it. I think Windows has gotten to the point of where its like Kleenex® or Q-Tips®. Nearly everyone calls facial tissue "Kleenex" and whatever Q-Tips are called "Q-Tips". This is just a case where a product has become synonymous with its function. In the computer industry we wouldn't dare think that Windows has become synonymous with the OS, but I bet a majority of the computer illiterate out there would. John Uhlenbrock wrote: upon MILLIONS who have illegal MS software BTW, you forgot a $ in MS :-D James If it seems I'm 100% pro-MS, its only because it seems my roommate and I are the only people on my campus that don't like Linux. I believe that you should use the right tool for the job and so far Linux hasn't come up more than a couple of times. Usually because of mySQL and PHP, but I can achieve the same with ASP and custom ASP components or with the Win32 version of each. Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
-
You are the one who is not being reasonable. All my arguments make sense and are quite logical. I wish people would just respect the tools they use and not act childish with 'M$'. I :love: Martin Marvinski
Martin Marvinski wrote: You are the one who is not being reasonable. All my arguments make sense and are quite logical. I wish people would just respect the tools they use and not act childish with 'M$'. Oh no - you were *serious* ??? How dare you call my comments tripe! Last I heard, it was called an opinion, and I was entitled to one. I called the idea that a monopoly brings lower prices tripe, and it is. I think Microsoft should add a loyalty clause to their EULA. If you violate it you would lose your license to use Windows(TM). Um, yeah - right. You're SURE this isn't a joke ? You would then have to use Linux and then you would really be sorry. Bwhahahahahahaha !!!! I'd laugh as you try to beg MS for forgiveness in your Vi or Emacs editor while I happily sit in front of Visual Studio.NET. VS.NET can kiss my hairy posterior. But you'd have to pull VC6 from my clammy fingers. Metrowerks also sucks IMO. It is one of my worst peeves that these hypocrites use MS and then malign them with 'M$' and not giving them the kudos they deserve for all they have done. I'm not a hypocrite, I just don't pucker up to people for making money off me. If their products sucked totally they would be out of business. Bill doesn't want your love, he wants your money. It's a business, not a religion. Deal with it. Ban all those who are ungrateful to Windows and force them to use linux. Then you'll learn to apprieciate what you have. If you're not trolling, then you must be on drugs. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Microsoft has just released Windows XP the most secure MS OS. They are also the #1 target because they are so big. If Linux was that widely used, they would most likely have 5 times as many security problems. Baloney! If it's so secure, how come they just had to patch the worst security flaw EVER in a Windows operating system? There was a UPnP vulnerability in which your computer could be exploited just by connecting to the Internet! Martin Marvinski wrote: If everyone upgraded at the same time we wouldn't have to support so many different versions of an OS as developers. We could be concerened with just the newest. As for the internet connection, it will most likely be integrated into your telephone bill and not having one will be like not having a telephone. Microsoft would also lower the price on every copy because of the economies of scale. Right now only about 10% of the people upgrade. When an OS costs Billions to develop, then it makes sense that it costs 199 an upgrade. Once we have a subscription based model everything will be cheaper. That would be nice, but it will never happen. Newer MS OS's often won't run on older hardware, so a lot of low-end users or those without much money don't upgrade often. They probably also don't have big broad-band connections that would allow a subscription-based model to work, either. Martin Marvinski wrote: If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation? If you follow the laws then you shouldn't have a problem with MS. You will just get your Product Code and thats that. The only people who will have problems are those who try to cheat MS out of their hard earned money. What if you have a laptop? What if you are, say, on a plane and have no Internet connection, and the OS thinks your configuration changed and you need to reactivate? You are toast. And although MS claims that no personal information gets sent to them, how can we be sure? And remember, we have MS to thank for two huge annoyances - 8.3 filenames and backslashes for path separators. Even STILL, in these days of long filenames, we at my company have to keep certain filenames as short (8.3) or else something somewhere will break. As far as backslashes for path separators, C was around before MS (I believe), which makes it MS's fault when I have to write code like this: CStirng someFile = "..\\some\\path\\file.txt"; Or access UNC paths like th
Navin wrote: . As far as backslashes for path separators, C was around before MS (I believe), which makes it MS's fault when I have to write code like this: CStirng someFile = "..\\some\\path\\file.txt"; Or access UNC paths like this: CString uncPath = "\\\\computername\\driver Those backslash characters are used as escape keys. They use them in Unix too. If you wanted to include an apostrophy you have to have it. It is not something MS created. I :love: Martin Marvinski