Slashdot Mirror

As I sit here 4 or 5 days in my Windows 10 Professional version, bought, paid for, came on high end laptop from day one, is indicating that it is not a valid license and that I need to activate it.

If you're too full of yourself to run the activation troubleshooter, that's on you. They had this fixed the next day, so I can only imagine what you've been up to over the weekend.

From the parent comment: Why did they go out of their way to call this one "free"?

Microsoft has, apparently deliberately, been releasing Windows 10 updates that cause problems.

Apparently, if you pay a monthly fee, in the future Microsoft will remove the problems. Three of the articles:

Microsoft's got a new plan for managing Windows 10 devices for a monthly fee. (July 27, 2018)

Windows 10 Leak Exposes Microsoft's New Monthly Charge. (Aug. 4, 2018) Quote: "Ever since its creation, Microsoft has described Windows 10 as a service. The fear has always been that this meant Microsoft would start charging users a monthly fee to maintain the operating system, and now a new leak has confirmed this is exactly what will happenâ¦"

Windows 10 SHOCK: Is Microsoft about to start CHARGING a monthly fee? Stunning claims made. (Aug. 6, 2018)

Some of the many articles about Windows 10 update problems:

Windows 10 Essential Updates Have Serious Problems (Jan. 10, 2018)

Windows 10 April 2018 Update could break a ton of critical features on your PC (May 3, 2018)

Microsoft Admits July 10 Patches Caused Skype and Exchange Server Problems. (July 18, 2018)

Windows 10 April 2018 Update problems: how to fix them. (Aug. 23, 2018)

This article says that Microsoft should pay users:

Windows 10 update 'fail' -- Microsoft MUST pay out as users still 'plagued with problems' (June 13, 2018) Quote: "Windows 10 users should be compensated after Microsoftâ(TM)s updates have caused havoc with PC owners 'plagued with problems' and some facing huge bills to fix software issues."

Windows 10 is Spyware:

Windows 10 is possibly the worst spyware ever made. "Buried in the service agreement is permission to poke through everything on your PC." (August 4, 2015) Microsoft and Microsoft employees have full access to everything on every computer? I don't know of anyone or any company that should allow that.

2 issues, IMO:

A huge social problem: Conflict of interest. People who do Windows OS support make more money if there are many problems.

Microsoft employees and managers seem to me to lack social ability.

In 2001, there was Windows Advanced Server Limited Edition

Technically, it's an early 64-bit release of Server 2003.

So, now a "web-browser" is part of an opertaing system after all? Didn't we have a legal case some years back to decide this, the entire SlashDot crowd cheering the "no it is not" side of the argument?

distribution families give users the option to download packages that contain source code instead of executable code

The lousy implementation — whereby the original author's source code is itself repackaged inside the SRPM — is, likely, the turn-off for many. Because it makes it harder than necessary to "tinker". For example, I can edit a FreeBSD ports Makefile easily and bump the upstream version number — this is a lot more tedious to do than with an SRPM. Also, to pick build-options (WITH_ALSA, WITHOUT_PULSEAUDIO) requires looking inside the .spec file and typing a very long command-line, whereas with ports it is an interactive screen with checkboxes and radio-buttons...

Though the option is there, it's just rarely used by end users.

Which brings us right back, full circle, to the question I posited up above: "why would you use an open-source application without compiling it yourself"? I know, such people exist, I just don't understand their motivations...

I hate to bust your bubble here but Microsoft only has mainstream support for Windows 8 (8.1 is a service pack) as well as Windows 10. Take a look here and Win 8 is only mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 which is not that far away. Sure you can get extended support for Vista, Win 7 and even Win 8 but you will be paying for that.

Actually, you're the one who has it wrong. Microsoft preempted the original Windows 8 release with the 8.1 release. They no longer support 8.0 and the 8.1, Update 1 release is the one being supported through 2023.

Think of if like Windows 98 vs 98SE.

I will concede that Microsoft only support 8.1 (which is a service pack for 8.0), however mainstream support for 8.1 is January 9, 2018 (as per the Microsoft web site). I did not explain it properly however I did provide the URL for the Microsoft support information site. Even if you still had MS Win 8 you can still get a free upgrade to 8.1 see here so even though I was technically wrong in stating Win 8 was mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 there is no associated cost with upgrading to Win 8.1 and getting free "mainstream support" at least until January 9, 2018.

There are two types of support Microsoft provides for their operating systems, they are "mainstream support" which is free while "extended support" requires you to pay for it and somehow I doubt most home PC users would pay for this service.

I hate to bust your bubble here but Microsoft only has mainstream support for Windows 8 (8.1 is a service pack) as well as Windows 10. Take a look here and Win 8 is only mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 which is not that far away. Sure you can get extended support for Vista, Win 7 and even Win 8 but you will be paying for that.

Actually, you're the one who has it wrong. Microsoft preempted the original Windows 8 release with the 8.1 release. They no longer support 8.0 and the 8.1, Update 1 release is the one being supported through 2023.

Think of if like Windows 98 vs 98SE.

With increasing backdooring of PC hardware by malicious actors with the resources of nation states behind them (coughnsacough), and the broad acceptance of "features" like hardware level remote access built into Intel CPUs, I wonder if these boards are going to become the last refuge of people who want a system secure from governmental intrusion.

Something like Windows 10 Mobile's support for Azure Active Directory, or are you talking about something else?

https://redmondmag.com/articles/2015/05/29/active-directory-for-windows-10-mobile.aspx

Pegatron named as Microsoft Surface fondleslab foundry

Microsoft Inks Deal With Pegatron Over Linux and Chrome Use

Pegatron Gets OEM Orders for Blu-ray Xbox 360 Consoles

Several more companies should join in, then the US Government should start an anti-trust lawsuit against all of them.

This was the angle Google was using in 2011 against H264 patent aggregation groups. http://redmondmag.com/articles...

What is the difference here?

All of the rich companies joining together to establish the exclusive ability to create products and services is where this ultimately leads.

http://redmondmag.com/articles...

Make of these what you will.

This has now been fixed, apparently.

http://redmondmag.com/articles/2014/01/16/windows-xp-resource-hog.aspx

Take a look at the PC screens at Home Depot (Windows XP). Fry's Electronics (heck, they sell the new stuff... they're using XP on the store's floor). My dentist office (XP). It goes on. What other big hitters that I've missed? http://redmondmag.com/articles/2013/09/23/xp-still-in-use-by-28-percent.aspx indicates 28.98% are still using XP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.1x#DR-DOS_compatibility

See also post below: "Internet Explorer is a crucial part of the OS! It just happens to be really convenient for smothering our competitors, too."

Oh, and while we're at it: http://redmondmag.com/articles/2013/08/22/windows-8-security-issues.aspx
So there are arguments for this, I'm sure, but it rankles me. A computer should be first and foremost under the control of its owner--in the case of PCs, the end user.

QED.

In what respect is C# and .NET "not going to be around for long"? AFAIK, Microsoft's roadmap doesn't include getting rid of them any time soon. They're too important for LOB applications.

Behold :)

SQL Server 2012 To Bring Some Price Hikes

http://redmondmag.com/articles/2012/03/23/sql-server-2012-price.aspx

No wonder there so many odbc install questions related to firebird sql

ps : customers are very sensitive to price hikes

No. Microsoft is telling the entire industry they want to go after the mobile/entertainment segment. They don't really want to pursue the SMB and generic PC market anymore. They still have this fantasy of catering to the large enterprise market however. Which is laughable because those markets are filled with Linux clusters and ESXi boxes. Rumor has it the next version of Server will be PowerShell CLI only. Think Server Core edition for everything. GUI will be replaced by CLI more or less.

Microsoft is leaving their bread and butter under the assumption that the grass is greener on the other side. Steve Balmer should be FIRED!!!! The only reason Apple is succeeding as well as they have is because they opened up and exploited new market opportunities. By Microsoft leaving the turf market the they have now via chasing rainbows and waterfalls, they leave a lot of pissed off people in the wake and a gargantuan vacuum to be filled by....someone else. Will that be Google or Apple? Who knows. It sure as hell wont be Microsoft though. That's for damn sure!

I think the DR-DOS settlement was more like hundreds of thousands.

Why would you think that?

A dying software empire.

Really?

Revenue for the quarter, which ended on Sept. 30, 2011, was $17.4 billion, up 7% from last year's first-quarter revenue result. Net revenue was $5.7 billion, up 6% from the previous year's 1Q result. Microsoft met financial analyst's expectations on earnings per share, delivering $0.68 per share in the quarter.

On Slashdot Microsoft has been dying (anytime soon now) for almost as many years as Linux has had it desktop breakthrough (any time soon now).

A dying software empire.

Really?

Revenue for the quarter, which ended on Sept. 30, 2011, was $17.4 billion, up 7% from last year's first-quarter revenue result. Net revenue was $5.7 billion, up 6% from the previous year's 1Q result. Microsoft met financial analyst's expectations on earnings per share, delivering $0.68 per share in the quarter.

Sorry, I did not pull out my whole war-chest on this, and that's my fault. This particular link was (as you rightly point out) not exactly relevant to the topic. I have done the research and currently IT workers according to Federal law are NON-exempt. My links are buried in Email somewhere. However a little bit of searching will find exactly what I'm talking about.

With a quick Google search (which I should have done, not you), here are a few that are more relevant. I used to have the DOL link, but it is not working now. However, the second link below summarizes from a legal perspective that in California at least, you have to past 6 figures to be exempt.

http://redmondmag.com/articles/2008/12/01/the-help-desk-overtime-bomb-is-ticking.aspx

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/it_overtime.html

I am rather annoyed that the Federal (DOL) stuff I had I can't find now. I've dug through these in the past. All I can find now is for California, but I'm certain I had at one time the links to show for the Federal law too.

Microsoft PAC used to be, but not anymore - and even then that doesn't properly represent leanings of individual employees, which were predominantly Democratic for a decade now.

Really, all you need to do is to hang around the campus in Redmond in the morning and count the Obama stickers. ~

(though of course it's also possible that fewer Republicans just donate more each)

I find this funny and sad at the same time. Their PCI certification needs to be revoked. Besides it has been done before to Citi. http://redmondmag.com/articles/2008/07/02/citibank-hack-shines-light-on-pci-compliance.aspx . if a bank can't be compliant then the PCI needs to be abolished because it appears to mean nothing to large financial institutions.

Right, because Microsoft is so ethical that they would never deliberately sabotage Windows to prevent customers' copies of DR-DOS and WordPerfect from running on it, have a pattern of stealing code, abuse monopolistic position to pressure their customers (system vendors) from shipping Netscape, or secretly bankroll a third party lawsuit against a competitor.

And if you think Microsoft has suddenly become ethical because they haven't done anything similarly offensive with Xbox 360--well, that's only because they haven't managed to kill off Sony and Nintendo yet. One only needs to look at Windows, Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office to see what sort of product (non-)innovation happens to product domains which Microsoft ends up competing.

But it's that case, when the MS started its push of the big corporation against an usual person.

Microsoft did not instigate charges in Ponosov case. Under Russian law, it was not needed for the prosecution to proceed, nor was MS later claim that it has no legal qualms with Ponosov sufficient to close the case.

One thing of note is that, in Russia, copyright infringement is a criminal case, not a civil one. Therefore, it's not the copyright holder who takes the infringer to court - it's the government, and it can do so regardless of whether the rights owner wants to continue with the case. So long as they have evidence that the crime (i.e. infringement) did happen, government will handle the prosecution. It's a seriously fucked up law, and what's worse is that the punishment can be a prison term (yes, even for small-scale infringement).

There was a rather vivid example of that not so long ago. If you recall Ponosov's case - he was sued by the government, and Microsoft tried to distance itself from the prosecution in a public letter. Ultimately the case was dropped when Putin personally remarked on the stupidity of the case (they were looking for a 5 year prison term for 10 unlicensed copies of Windows).

And how are GUI tools on Linux any different?

PS isn't limited to the command line; it can also interact with any COM applications, an extremely common task. WSH let you totally automate window interaction - I don't know if PS does, but this plugin for PS seems to aim for that.

MS has a reputation for adding security as an afterthought, which almost always makes for very poor quality security. The whole "secure by design" concept just isn't part of their general dev cycle.

Supposedly Microsoft "learned their lesson" back in 2002, and Bill Gates loudly trumpeted Microsoft's "Trustworthy Computing" initiative back then...

“As problems with [its approach to software development] have surfaced over the years, Microsoft patched the utility or application in question rather than reconsidering the basic architecture which left these avenues of attack open,” comments Dan Kusnetzky, director of worldwide operating environments for IDC. “Since Microsoft users have been loudly complaining about this for quite some time, it's surprising that Microsoft is only now ‘hearing’ user demands to make security a key design goal.”

-from http://redmondmag.com/articles/2002/01/22/users-enthusiastic-about-microsoft-security-initiative.aspx

I dunno whether the initiative really "stuck," but at least IIS seems to have ceased being a complete security nightmare (IIS 5 was terrible, IIS 6, much better.... IIS 7, haven't heard anything bad yet...)

A) MS will make some drastic changes to boost Vista. Like remove DRM

B) MS will go back to XP and continue selling that until they try yet again at a new OS.

I would like to know where they get these numbers from.... I am in New York and my highest paying job has been $39,000.00 to date and that is for doing desktop support. Which includes new installs, hardware/ software install, upgrades, inventory, drive imaging, movng equipment, troubleshooting, software integration, and network troubleshooting. I also have several Microsoft and CompTIA certifications... even checking monster.com for just an MCSE type job I only see 50 - 60k per year and that is with 5 - 10 years experience and a 4 year Bachelors in I.T. or Computer Science. From what I have seen on the support side of the house in terms of compensation is no where near those numbers for compensation. Even this is rediculous http://redmondmag.com/salarysurveys/ an MCDST for $57,000+ I would like to know where that job is in the U.S. .... California only ??? an MCP for $70,000.00 .... really ??? so an MCP on Windows XP should get me that ? Can anyone please tell me where the heck they are getting this data from ?

You're making the mistake of assuming that they are working for the company from which they draw a paycheck. It's kind of hard to make that jibe with the observed behavior

In those other 66%, they're not clue free. Quite the opposite, it's a problematic situation, where the roles of vendor and customer are intentionally switched and the customers are obeying orders from the vendor to the great disadvantage of everyone else at the company. They couldn't give a rat's ass if your mail doesn't work or the web server is down or NAS/filesharing doesn't ever work, just as long as it's all not working on MS.

The Novell deal works into this somewhere [...], Microsoft is playing to ensure it has a finger in everyone's pie to make up for the loss in sales revenues. For Windows and other products to survive as well as Microsoft wants them to, the costs will have to come down, and Microsoft will do that, to keep their flagships afloat.

I have been very puzzled by the Microsoft-Novell-Linspire-Xandros deals. Microsoft has been giving money away to companies that they claim are violating their patents, and neither Linspire or Xandros have relevant patents that I know of that would justify Microsoft's relationship with them. I now believe, as you do, that they want to have economic ties to these various GNU Linux vendors so that these vendors will craft solutions that wrap around Microsoft solutions. Doing so will allow them to dictate the terms to these vendors, as in Linspire's unfortunate decision to make Windows Live Search the default search on Linspire 6.0.

It all snapped into focus for me when I read this article that shows how, in order to get prime biz opportunities with the beast of Redmond, it is necessary to leave your iPod at home, and not even talk about "googling" or Google solutions. Microsoft's insistence reminds me for all the world of the Scientology cult. In both cases, they say one thing in public, but demand blind obedience in individual private dealings. Of course, you could say that all companies want to encourage the use of their products, and discourage the use of others, but Microsoft is different. It's a monopoly, and its dominance of the desktop market triggers anti-trust analysis when it demands blind obedience in this fashion.

So I believe that Microsoft is basically trying to create cultural expectations that they expect their business partners to be their best advocates in the field, and IMHO, it seems to be working. I actually like Kevin Carmony, and I like the fact that Linspire is bringing FOSS to mainstream consumers who otherwise would never be exposed to FOSS. And yet, Linspire's message about Microsoft has become increasingly conciliatory, to the point where Kevin Carmony has become, like so many other CEOs whose companies are Microsoft business partners, a voice of reconciliation and acceptance toward Microsoft, as in this quote from Kevin Carmony's 14 June 2007 Linspire Letter:

But isn't Microsoft the enemy of Linux?

They certainly compete, just like Ubuntu, Red Hat, and Novell compete with each other, but we all have to live in the same desktop computing ecosystem. I'd prefer to use diplomacy and cooperation, than go to war. Linspire plans on working with Microsoft, just like we have with dozens of other partners, to build a better Linux. We will never force anyone to use what we produce. The choice to use, or not to use, the "better" Linux we strive to produce will always be up to you, but I like the idea of finding a mutually advantageous way for Microsoft and Linspire to work together.

Again, I like Kevin Carmony and Linspire, but what we see unfolding in the Microsoft-Novell-Linspire-Xandros deals is a process of accomodation, as Microsoft moves to co-opt its competitors, and align their business interests with its own. Simply put, if a business environment is a constellation of celestial bodies like our solar system, Microsoft wants to be the Sun, and certainly not merely even Jupiter or Saturn. It wants to dictate the terms of interaction, so that it can skim off value from each and every transaction. And it can succeed in doing so. And that is what makes Microsoft so dangerous, IMHO.

Which brings up the issue of .Net . I personally try to avoid using Microsoft products, simply because I don't want to have that kind of undue influence in my life. I understand that for man

Man, thanks for that link!!!
What a scary Scientology like company! That article gives me the creeps!

What he describes is exactly what Scoble and his team did. He talked about it before stepping down. There are also other similar initiatives there as well. One infamous group from way back was Team99.

The whole thing operates like a cult.

Corporate and institutional FOSS users can be helped out here by a change in the media environment. We can just call Microsoft's bluff. As of 17:53 pm on 2007-05-22, we have 514 people who have signed up to be "sued" by Microsoft for Microsoft's "patent claims". Wink, wink, nod, nod.

If we continue to get a large response to the "Sue me first, Microsoft" list, we have a greater chance of getting media exposure for the fact that Microsoft makes bluffs, and just backs off of those bluffs. We ignored SCO, and so we can ignore Microsoft, too. The place to sign up to challenge Microsoft to sue you is here:

http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?titl e=Sue_me_first%2C_Microsoft

The story about our "Sue me first, Microsoft" challenge appeared here yesterday on Slashdot. A story appeared here today in Redmond Mag on-line. So we practically have Microsoft surrounded. Heh. Okay, maybe not. But we're getting there.

Christian Einfeldt,

Producer, The Digital Tipping Point

(now if'n you can get Vista to install w/o a GUI, well - that I've gotta see...)

Actually with the server version of Vista you will be able to, just hasn't make much sense with the current desktop version. Of course, its a bit funny that this is mentioned as being an innovation in the article, but thats for another day ;-)

Microsoft no longer sees Office as it's cashcow.

Sharepoint is the new cashcow.

Microsft Sharepoint is an all in one company intranet, document management, CRM and internet portal system for medium to large companies that has been gaining significant market in recent years. Sharepoint entrenches a company in Microsoft technology far more than Office ever could or ever will.

Much of the killer features on offer in Office 2007 are features leveraging Sharepoint.

If your company has already invested in Sharepoint or is thinking about using it, the choice of Open Office versus Office 2007 is a no brainer. Choosing Sharepoint and then Open Office instead of Office 2007 would rate as a category 5 blunder.

If Open Office supporters want to see it thrive they better keep their eyes on the ball and not the man because MS Office has passed the ball to Sharepoint some time back now.

So Scott Adams thought of this on Nov 16? Hmmmmm. What about what Doug Barney wrote on Oct 1??? http://www.redmondmag.com/columns/article.asp?Edit orialsID=1490 Barney's Rubble Bill for President Is it time for Gates in 2008? by Doug Barney October 2006 Every four years pundits, radio talk show hosts and U.S. citizens beg for a presidential candidate who's not a career politician. And every four years the two major parties nominate -- you guessed it -- career politicians! No true, non-political alternatives have the party backing, or, it seems, the ability to connect and gain our trust. I guess voters don't mind career politicians after all. Donald Trump is too full of himself (but Letterman would have great material), Ross Perot was too preachy and weird, and Arnold is too foreign (meaning he legally can't run; not that I'm against Austrians). Here's a name that could overcome all these obstacles: Bill Gates. Not the old Bill Gates spouting technology, wearing ill-fitting clothes and crushing competitors for sport (though his company is doing this with relish and third parties are paying the price). No. I'm talking about the new Gates of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. As far as I can tell, Gates has not pledged allegiance to either party (probably the only thing he and I have in common). In 2004 Gates gave only $22,500 to candidates with a slight edge to Democrats. For someone with Gates' pockets, this is as close to giving nothing as you can get! I mentioned this idea to my mother and her eyes opened wide (the way they did every time my high school assistant principal called) and she exclaimed "Wow!" After a few seconds of thought she said "Wow" again. Bill has no major skeletons (I'm guessing) and has taken non-political, purely rational stances on today's major issues. Who would you trust to develop a policy on global warming? Who is today's best ambassador to the third world, to India, to China? But Bill has no experience in foreign policy! True, but neither did the governor of Georgia, California, Arkansas or Texas. Imagine if our fundamental approach to the world was based on logical approaches to curing disease, spreading opportunity, saving the environment and teaching children. A foreign policy flowing from this river would be rich indeed. Imagine offering our enemies all of these benefits. Would Iran rather have nukes or freedom from disease? Maybe they'll go for the A-bombs, but will all regimes react the same? I doubt it. And remember, Bill promised to retire in two years, just in time for his new job in 2008. We'll just have to live with a total gutting of U.S. anti-trust laws! Who are you going to vote for? Let me know at dbarney@redmondmag.com. Doug Barney is editor in chief of Redmond magazine and the editorial director of Redmond Channel Partner magazine. You can contact Doug about "Bill for President" at dbarney@redmondmag.com.

This lab works on boring but vitally important topics like security and proving that algorithms are correct. Microsoft Research has become what Bell Labs once was.

Microsoft Research is the only industrial lab that can convince well-paid tenured professors to quit their cushy academic job to join Microsoft. All this purchasing of brain power has paid off handsomely for Microsoft. Has anyone noticed the awesome reliability of the current generation of Microsoft products?

Windows 98, ME, and 95 were horribly unreliable. Yet, Windows XP is quite good. Now, MS SQL has proven to be quite reliable.

Windows Vista is so good that it will bankrupt several of the software utility companies that make anti-virus software.

Google is no match for Microsoft. The morons who bought Goog le at $500 per share will face a rude awakening.

Seriously. Every time Microsoft partners with someone it means they're doomed. Remember when Microsoft "partnered" with any of these guys?

* Netscape
* Palm
* Symantec and McAfee
* Sendo

Ahhh, fond memories: http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsI D=5285

Since they started dumping money into political campaigns and hired their own lobbying group about ten years ago Microsoft has become one of the most generous contributors to politicians in the country:


LXer: How Microsoft wastes its money on anything but software
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/55497/index.h tml


Election 2004: How to Excel in DC
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0438/040922_news _microsoft.php


A Bug in Windows GOP (Seattle Weekly)
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0522/050601_news _microsoft.php


Microsoft And The G.O.P.: Antitrust Insurance?
http://www.time.com/time/reports/gatesbook/lobbyin g.html


Microsoft's lobbying efforts eclipse Enron
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-835267.html


Redmond | Feature Article: Following Microsoft's Money
http://redmondmag.com/features/article.asp?Editori alsID=440


News Alert 9/6/01: Microsoft
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v6/alertv6_26.as p


Commentary: It's Back to Charm School for Microsoft
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_45/b3654183.ht m


"The Think Tank As Flack" by David Callahan
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/1999/991 1.callahan.think.html

No kidding. My brother made a [MS-based presentation] for school, and after saving it in at least three compatibility versions (one of which was a honkin' 12MB, for about four slides) it still didn't work on the school computers.

PDF would have been one way to go, but only for stuff that you won't re-edit or re-use. My solution was to go full W3C-compliant HTML + CSS for most text documents and presentations. OpenDocument is an extension of that concept.

People laughed at the web a bit too before it caught on. And some hadn't even caught on to the Internet by that time, such as our esteemed Chairman Gates who in 1995 even went as far as to call the Internet a "passing fad" and "unimportant." I recall many people wanting to prioritize Gopher since it was already more established. However, when it came down to it, so many people found the usefulness of a format that anyone can implment, distribute or read/write. From there it took off like wildfire.

Ignoring the time wasted in the 'browser wars', the complaint about HTML was that it was not advanced enough for more complex documents. OpenDocument scratches that itch. And, being XML, browsers could even be made to render it. There's money in reducing work (and data) lost to format incompatibilities.

They have also said a 32-bit version of the Longhorn server would be available.

http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?Editori alsID=7046

Of course you have to trust them. Not only were they right about Google being a one hit wonder, but also were spot on back in 1995 about the Internet being a passing fad.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3649/i s_199705/ai_n8761763

From : http://redmondmag.com/columns/article.asp?Editoria lsID=842
2. Brad Silverberg ?Silverberg is widely considered the man who launched Windows 95 and IE. He was lured from rival Borland Software, a move that incurred Borland founder Philippe Kahn's considerable wrath (nothing could be more grating to Kahn than a Microsoft limo showing up at Borland headquarters to whisk away a trusted lieutenant). After leaving Microsoft, Silverberg boarded his bike and pedaled around Canada for a month. Now he's a major force behind Ignition Partners, a VC firm that's a Who's Who of Redmond alumni, including Richard Tong and Cameron Myhrvold.

From: http://about.com/od/delphifornet/a/conspiracydnet_ 2.htm
Do you know that the man behind Delphi is Anders Hejlsberg, one of the original members of the Borland company.
During his time with Borland he extended its' Turbo Pascal compiler. Eventually he became the chief architect for the team which produced the replacement for Turbo Pascal - Delphi. As a chief architect at Borland, Hejlsberg secretly turned Turbo Pascal into an object-oriented application development language, complete with a truly visual environment and superb database-access features. Once touted as the "VB killer," Delphi has remained a cornerstone product for Borland.
In 1996 he left Borland and joined Microsoft where he was the man behind J++ and the Windows Foundation Classes. More recently he has led the team which has created the C# programming language, and he's been a key participant in the development of the .NET Framework. ...
According to the suit:?Among the defecting workers were Paul Gross, Borland's senior R&D VP, and Anders Hejlsberg, a major player in the development of Borland's technology.?Microsoft offered Paul Gross a $1 million signing bonus, stock options, and title to real estate near Microsoft's headquarters. He left Borland for Microsoft in September 1996.?Microsoft offered Anders Hejlsberg a signing bonus of $1.5 million and stock options. Microsoft doubled the bonus to $3 million after Borland made a counter-offer. Hejlsberg left Borland in October 1996.

RedmondMag covered WebSideStory's stats catching up with OneStat's two months ago:

Two Web analytics companies that track usage of Web browsers now agree that Microsoft's Internet Explorer usage share is below 90 percent due to competition from the open-source Firefox browser.

RedmondMag, IE Usage Falls Below 90 Percent in Both Major Surveys, 2 March 2005

"Thirdly, we don't cut off the old file formats. So we maintain backward compatibility with the old Office file formats. I've got a bunch of customers who are using StarOffice to import their old Office documents and then export them to Office XP. Now go figure--we're the migration tool."

--- Scott McNeally, CEO Sun Microsystems.