Slashdot Mirror
MS Exec Testifies In Favor of OS Manipulation
Niscenus writes: "The NYTimes, where free registration is required, reports that a Microsoft VP, Christopher Jones, explains that Microsoft must be allowed to prevent competitors' programmes from being installed for the consumer's best interest. Most interesting quote: 'In his written testimony, Mr. Jones said the states' proposals would confuse consumers, enabling competitors to cover up icons like the "Start" button on the Windows desktop screen that consumers use to navigate and even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows.' Any dualboot LiLo user who learned they can't defrag the hard way can understand this ..."
Is it just me, or does Microsoft seem really condescending all the time? I don't understand their PR policy of considering their users idiots.
...However appropiate that labeling may be. ;)
I was once in favour of some sort of moderate compromise. Allowing OEMs more leeway with what they can do with th OS and eliminating anti-competitive activies from MS at a sales level. (The "MS-tax", punishing alternative OS, etc.) After reading that, maybe we need to disband Microsoft, take the source code and OSS it. Not so much from a consumer standpoint, but if this the official MS line, then maybe MS shouldn't exist.
According to this statement, it seems that Microsoft is even reserving the right to prevent people from doing that. Can you imagine Windows detecting changes in the Master Boot record, and not booting if grub or lilo is installed? Can you imagine Microsoft only "supporting" people who have only their operating system installed?
It's not too hard to imagine, of course...
Your reality is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. - Baron Munchausen
"Any dualboot LiLo user who learned they can't defrag the hard way can understand this ..."
Would someone explain to me what the issue he refers to is?
(Personally, I use System Commander 7 --- mouse-enabled boot loaders are a Good Thing (tm) )
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
What do covering up the start button and installation have to do with one another? I really don't understand why you need to prevent installation just to avoid having the Start button obscured. Couldn't you just make the windows task bar Always-On-Top? Or just disallow anything to be drawn there while not in fullscreen mode?
His argument is pretty weak for the VP of a major corporation. Hopefully the court sees through it.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
I'm completely disgusted.
In his written testimony, Mr. Jones said the states' proposals would confuse consumers, enabling competitors to cover up icons like the "Start" button on the Windows desktop screen that consumers use to navigate and even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows.
Yeah, God forbid we should allow a competing operating system to start up instead of Windows. If this is the kind of stuff coming out of a Microsoft exec's mouth during trial, the states must be having a field day.
Now what's all this about the Start button? Maybe Microsoft has predicted that the next step for companies who are trying desperately to get into the desktop (Yahoo, etc.) to offer their own customized Start Menu replacements?
"even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows"
This is part of their *defense* against punishment for illegally using monopolistic powers?
KFG
...that some of you may have thought of as well. I propose we stop caring about Microsoft and it's bullshit and instead work to make Linux (as a whole) better. Seriously. I've heard this before, and I've also heard people rally behind it - and yet I still see no action.
Instead of posting stories about Microsoft and its gayness, why don't we post stories about ~gasp~ Linux! I say we all ignore this thread and all others that may come our way that focus on Microsoft. Let us focus on the "Linux Community" - that will destroy Microsoft's monopoly far more efficiently than the judicial system ever dreamed of.
We wave the flag of freedom as we conquer and invade.
Gets someone needs to code a defence against entries that make the html tables too wide.
Letter To Iran
"I don't trust goats," --To Catch a Spy
As long as Microsoft keeps on supporting projects such as this one, I'll be able to cope with its infamous commercial behaviour.
Not one for eating his own dogfood I guess.
Check out netcraft( his site )
-- kjh
Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson was right on: Cut out the OS - give it to a separtate company and let all the other's compete as they choose on applications.
As long as this clear separation is avoided, there is bickering and cheating - in particular from the side of Microsoft. They are very skillful in this game. That's why they got there in the first place.
The company owning the OS and writing applications to it always has an advantage and Microsoft tried and is succeeding in blurring the border between OS and applications to keep this advantage.
This opportunity to clean this up was missed due to the fact that the judges of the appeals court are wimps.
Just look at the possibility of being prejudiced. Has it ever been looked at if any of the judges or their close relatives had any stock or mututal fund with Microsoft stock in it? I doubt it.
The courage to do "what is right" is missing in the US judidical system, things are done which are "politially right" or "don't hurt the consumer". What a mess!
Very disappointing.
First of all, if MS isn't confronted on its monopolistic tactics, it might not be possible to run other software. The guy in the article was arguing for that ability.
Second of all, people are doing a lot of work to make linux better. Herculean efforts are underway as we speak. Hang out at the dot (dot.kde.org), or at any number of sites at sourceforge if you're missing out on it. Or at freshmeat. Or any one of hundreds of other sites.
Finally, the line about "microsoft and its gayness" was kind of offensive.
Everyone I know who uses Windows thinks its far too expensive, too crappy, and too monopolistic. MS products are notoriously crash-prone and user-unfriendly. And, MS prides themselves on user-friendliness. I don't want to have to take 20 minutes to figure out how to get XP to identify Mozilla as my default browser. I don't want to plug in hardware and pray. I want it to be EASY and STABLE. The stupid dog in XP doesn't serve any purpose, and, therefore, removes from user-friendliness. The Sys Admin tools in XP are unwieldy for me to use, and I consider myself a power-user. I don't want to use Windows Update, because I'd rather download the patches separately. Windows has gotten unwieldy over the years, and I think its time to convert to The Light Side(LINUX!) And, I think most users would rather go through a bit of a learning curve then to have to learn how to use Windows, then to realize that many features SUCK.
Slashdot is a waste of time. I enjoy wasting time.
What person has Linux installed (and set to default boot) installed on their computer that would be confused when linux booted or when the star button changed it's appearence? Even if the company was selling a dual-boot system, it would have been specified as such and most likely would still have boot to Windows by default.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Microsoft is the same way: they don't give you much, but they are going to fight tooth and nail to keep you from getting confused by too much choice. Come to papa Gates, he'll take care of you, just like papa Stalin did before.
Look, with the settlement as written, Microsoft will release a new OS, some app will break (as they inevitably do) -- then it becomes a big shouting match about did Microsoft do it on purpose or not. Who does that help?
The problem with all this stuff is they are trying to do one thing, which is protect Netscape, but they have to write it in some generic legal way so that isn't obvious -- so you wind up with vague terms like "good cause".
- adam
where the seller sees the destruction of his product as a good thing? If this is Microsoft's way of doing business, Microsoft's insane...but you probably already knew that.
Instead of posting stories about Microsoft and its gayness
Pardon me, sir, but I am gay, and I certainly take offense to being likened to anything Microsoft-ish.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
I've used WindowsME and there's NO WAY to cover up the START menu with an icon. That's fucking bullshit. I don't know why people let these lying pricks get away with saying that. Even if it were true, you can ALWAYS press the start menu button (now available on all Keyboards that come w/ OEMs).
I love the part about, "even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows". Please, there's no reason to think that's bad except from MS' exclusive point of view where good means it makes them money. There is no impairment of function by allowing users to start up into another OS.
When MS says they're doing this stuff to benefit the consumer, its pure fucking bullshit.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
I'm not sure what the netcraft output means:
The site www.christopherrjones.com is running Apache/1.3.20 Sun Cobalt (Unix) PHP/4.2.0 mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6b mod_auth_pam_external/0.1 FrontPage/4.0.4.3 mod_perl/1.25 on Linux
The sun cobalt stuff is a little confusing. I think it's a linux box, though.
Let's see if I can simplify this fecal blizzard a bit:
"We can do anything we like to control our users, because we have their best interests at heart.."
Get fucked, pinque boi. How do you know what my best interests are, mmm? You assume you know what's best for me, you paternalistic piece of shit.
Okay, so the swearing isn't helping my point, but I'm just really, really irritated with this. Now, what can I do? Mmm, already have dual-boot goodness. I've pirated my only copy of Win98 several times. What's left, donations to OpenSource groups? Ahh, fuck it. The laws are for-sale in this country, war is brewing in the Middle East, and I'm unemployed. I've got more important things to worry about.
"Avast! Prepare for the rodgering!" THWACK! "Arrr.. me nards.."
With no worries about antitrust prosecution, we're going to see a lot more of this stuff. We've already seen them state flat out that "donated" computers must have a legal Microsoft OS and attack the GPL directly; more FUD will surely follow.
The only question is how far their "customers" can be pushed. My guess is pretty far. Never underestimate the pointy-hair factor. Most places, "learning something new" is interpereted as "complete retraining". PHBs regard doing anything new the way a nun would regard going to work in a brothel.
About the only thing we can do is to make sure Open Source solutions don't get wired out due to:
1. Laws or standards that mandate the use of patented/licensed technology. (*Must* use GIF, *must* pony up US$5000 to Unisys.)
2. Laws that specify "maufacturer's liability" (release an Open Source program; get sued if somebody doesn't like it.)
3. Laws mandating DRM hardware/software.
I'm sure we're going to see a flood of these from the Microsoft keiretsu.
Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
I'm not gay, and I thought that comment was in poor taste as well.
Not a good way to rally the troops, especially the same-sex partnered coders.
Why is covering up the start button a bad thing? If there is a start button to cover up, haven't they sold a license of windows? How does that impact their sales?
So I guess if MS decides, in the future, to replace the Start button with something else...we should go to court stop them because it would leave us all dazed and confused? And how about all of those poor confused Mac users wandering the halls - who cares about them? On top of that, perhaps we should sue MS for confusing AOL users with MSN.
Bottom line - Gates is like Landru from the original Star Trek. When posed with the observation that without creativity, the "body" dies Landru replied that creativity continues but is reserved for him.
I want to be alone with the sandwich
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
However, with utter stupidities such as this one, I always feel that response is mandatory. Not that it would make any difference, I know but I just won't let anybody, especially not bustards from M$ to treat me like a moron and I will tell that publicly every time. OK, already feeling better!
OTOH, it is obvious that they are prepared not to ever end this, so something seriously has to be done. Is this person, as a VP, speaking for himself or for the company he represents? One would imagine that any VP probably enjoys autonomy to the certain degree but I seriously doubt the same applies to Microsoft.
Call it paranoia, lunacy, ignorance, arrogance, crime or all this together, it is now definitely to the point of no return and looks f_ing scarry. Breakup into two or three companies would be a joke, nothing can be achieved this way. These maniacs have to be stopped!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Which leads to the question what would happen when (after browser & co were made part of the Windows) Microsoft decided that MS Internet(R) is part of Windows. With Microsoft's ever-extending definition of what consitutes the Windows operating system this wouldn't be too far a stretch for their Marketing department I guess...
I mean, God! What was I thinking? Wanting a duel boot! Sure, Micro$oft, take control over my MBR, I dont want it! Lilo? Who needs it? I mean, its not like I actually wanted to run Linux after I installed it...
I've triple booted between NT4, W2K, and Linux as well as dual booting between WinXP and Linux. I've used Lilo and Grub on the MBR as a boot loader and haven't had any issues with defrag. Even if there is an issue, you couldn't blame M$ directly. The defrag utility is made by those $cientologists at Executive Software (Makers of Diskeeper) in the same way that the backup program is made by Veritas. Microsoft pays money to these companies to have a lite version of their product included in the OS.
Before responding to this thread, think about what you're going to say. If you're blowing off steam, don't bother. If you are aware of a particular issue with LILO and a MS product, please fill us in on the details. I'm curious.
Microsoft's biggest fear is that the personal computer operating system (read Windows) will become a commidity. If that happens then their business is purely based on moving product in a competitive environment. In a competitive environment there is no sales because your OS is the de facto standard. You have to win every sale based on price, not product. In an evironment like that they can't compete against the likes of Linux and BSD.
That's how I read it. (Editorial & emphasis mine)
Quite the arrogant lot those Microsoft folks.
"The great thing about multitasking is that several things can go wrong at once." -me
I'm sure this explains why I can't use my GE toaster and my GE microwave at the same time without the power in the kitchen going out.
::Colz Grigor
Or maybe it's just the circuit breaker?
I don't see the problem with releasing a 'Lite' version of Windows, with all the middleware stripped out.. I mean, how is this the 'support nightmare' that Microsoft makes it out to be? An OEM would stick Windows Lite, and whatever third party stuff they want on a system, and sell it.. Microsoft would support the operating system, and the OEM, or the third party software maker, would support the rest.. The only downside I can see for Microsoft, is that they wouldn't have thier foot so far in the door, because they only supply the operating system.. Anyone else see my point?
RaGe
We're all just noise on the wires..
Mr. Jones said the states' proposals would confuse consumers, enabling competitors to cover up icons like the "Start" button on the Windows desktop screen that consumers use to navigate and even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows.'
:) hehehe !) and find Linux a pleasure to use over windows anyday. There is something about linux that allows you to be creative in the way you work whereas Windows just wants you to do everything the Lame-arse way...
/. don't bother pointing this out cos I don't care!!!!
Who cares about the start button? Who has implied that they would want to cover the start button? It seems to me that Microsoft are just trying to scare their faithful users into sticking with them so that M$ can continute controlling their computers!.
It also seems to me that the trial going on is avoiding the main issue which is that they are a monopoly by preventing competing software (OS and Desktop) from being used on their OS. Then they attack Linux?!?! Do you see the Linux users trying to block M$? Of course you don't because they want everything to work together. If the justice dept. running the trials had any sense they would force M$ to stop preventing competing software and allow all software/OS's to compete with them!. If they think their software is so great then it would win wouldn't it? But NO they know it is crap and so will try anything to stop their $ rolling in.This is when Linux will have it's big chance at taking over then desktop.
And before I get flamed for this I use both Windows at work (Because I have to) and Linux at home (although I have got my own linux box at work now
Rant Over
Mark.
PS. I know my spelling is crap so all you smart-arse people who spell check all the comments on
---- There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that don't
What scares me most is the fact that most judges are about 75 years old and that most lawyers (including the ones that present the case) have only used computers with a button on the bottom left part of the screen that says "start". They'll probably think it's something that comes with the computer, and has nothing to do with Microsoft... and that linux is something you find somewhere in "start > programs > linux". A judge might think putting Linux on a PC is like a Ford dealer substituting the Ford badges with the dealer's brand name...
You see, I think that's one of the problems. I've actually met a system administrator (IQ of about 60) who thought Linux was installed on a DOS partition, and that in any case you need a Microsoft product to get the system running (ie. to partition the harddrive...)..... Just imagine a 75 year old judge...
Opps. "Taco" should read "Taco Bell." Please don't mistake "Taco" for Cmdr Taco.. my analogy would fall apart at the seams... or would it?...
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
It was exactly this sort of nonsense which was the root cause of the French revolution. The parallels
are there. There will soon be another revolution in the US and this kind of thing will be sorted out most effectively.
But it's becoming a necessity!
I no longer blame Microsoft. I design hardware and software and I am begining to think that consumers are 100% responsible for the state of the computing market today.
Microsoft, as I see, it is simply responding to the pressures consumers have been putting on manufacturers all along. It's a sad state that is deeply tied to the design of computers.
The Operating System is a crucial part of the computer. Mostly because the computer has nothing to offer but performance. It's up to the OS to apply algorithms and extract functionality.
As a result the operating system isn't a feature of the computer but an altogether separate product in its own right.
The automobile may need an engine but the functionality comes from the dashboard which rarely affects critical performance concerns.
Until consumers show interest in computers beyond email and web surfing, I believe we're always going to be fighting uphill.
How come not many neighborhoods have a public server locally hosted that the community can use to communicate, check the policies, vote from home, attend neighborhood meetings?
Consumers are way too passive for any industry's good. We will have to take that into consideration for a long time I'm afraid.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Alright. The DoJ clearly isn't doing a good job. The states' case is just going to be appealed anyway and likely won't do a very good job either. Why don't we just apply the same standards you and I would be held to? Let's get together a jury of Microsoft's peers. Let's see here:
1) Microsoft is an OS vendor. Sun, Be (what's left of 'em), and Apple ought to be there.
2) Microsoft is an office apps vendor. Lotus might like a seat.
3) Microsoft is a video game console vendor. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo have some choice words.
4) Microsoft provides internet service. Let's add AOL/TW.
5) Microsoft provides a web server, a database, a mail server, and other such apps. Let's get someone from the Apache foundation, Oracle, Sendmail, and what the hell, the Samba team too.
6) Microsoft writes a lot of buggy code, so let's get an old Netscape exec in too to round out our dozen.
I'll bet we'd see some substantive remedies then!
Before you complain that Be is hardly a peer of Microsoft, consider how 12 upper-middle-class white folks can be considered peers of a poor black woman.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
Doesn't matter. Boot viruses load before the OS does anyway. Although in one way it makes sense to speak of a 'dos boot virus' since most of them were written on, compiled on, and intended to infect, DOS machines, in another way it makes no sense at all, a boot virus is a boot virus is a boot virus. There is really no DOS involved, because of course the boot virus does indeed load on boot, pre-empting the OS (whatever OS it happens to be) and taking direct control of the hardware.
So, yes, a 15 year old 'DOS' boot virus can and will take down an NT machine. Or for that matter Linux, OS/2, Darwin, etc.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
I don't care what other meanings it has, it's still offensive.
If it's offensive, stop it.
Don't rationalize your wrongdoings.
I live in a giant bucket.
it's only associated like that because people are bigots and view homosexuals as lame and or stupid. as a friend of mine pointed out the other day, saying something is gay is the same as taking any other minority and applying it to some crap.. "man those cars are built by (n-word), they suck", or "microsoft is a bunch jews". calling microsoft gay demeans the gay community, irregardless of "gay" having different meanings in the past. The fact is, no one says that they're "gay" anymore when they mean "happy", gay means homosexual and every other meaning has faded away.
BTW for all of you reading this thinking just how much you hate gays, "the best defence is a good offence" applies. You don't like others because you don't like yourself. Deal with your sexuality first before hassling others about theirs.
The source to the operating system is not what is needed. Besides, with so many Linux Zealots raving about how crappy windows is, I am not sure that it would really be taken advantage of anyway. What should be done is to have the file-formats open sourced. This would allow people to use the Data/Files they created on any system they want and with any application they wish. This much is currently expected with the right to rip MP3's from CD's you own.
As I see it, it is only right that you should pay for an application you use if it is sold as a proprietary application. However, you should not be forced to continue to use that application to manipulate your files if a superior alternative exists.
Neither Microsoft nor Corel nor any other provider of a quality word processor owns the copyright to works I create with their application. So why should they require me to use only their application to manipulate those works.
END COMMUNICATION
This does include preventing allowing pre-installed software. The article is not written in the way I originally posted it, so some of the bias is with the editor, and some is from within your need to see bias (this is just as common as actually being biased, as it is a form of bias in and of itself).
Your argument, and several that I've read, will show the good thing about XP; with seperated libraries, when the system crashes or freezes, it IS Microsoft's fault. If you have a problem filtering memory leaks, switch to OpenBSD, but don't whine to me that photoshop is responsible for locking up your system...that is in the power of Microsoft to prevent.  Now, if you honestly believe all hardware errors that occur in the BSOD's are really the problem of the hardware vendors, I'd be interested to know what hardware you're currently using...
It's not just Netscape; unfortunatly, the focus on the that lone, viable application has nearly totally stripped the appearance of the potency of the claims. Ironically, since NS was unable to compete as well as IE for the known reasons, it prevented NS from getting better development.  The fact is, when Mosaic was bought and abused and became IE, IE was nowhere near as good as NS at the time, but new computer users (anyone using 95 with their first pre-built computers, most commonly) didn't understand the idea of alternative software. Netscape is just the archetype. This is an issue that goes beyond computer literacy....
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
That's one of the dumbest ideas I've heard in a long time.
What are the problems with it?
1) it requires you keep track of that floppy, and remember that you need it. When you typically reboot your system once every three months, that can be a challenge.
2) it requires that your system check the floppy drive. It's common to take the floppy out of the boot sequence, to either speed up the boot sequence or to make it a bit harder for a casual attacker. (In an office, the BIOS may also be password protected. It won't stop anyone who knows how to clear the BIOS, but many casual attackers won't know this.)
3) it requires that your system have a floppy drive. Most of my systems don't - they have an IDE ZIP disk in place of the floppy.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I'm sure that, sometime during the antitrust cast against Rockefeller's oil monopoly, they cried about how the quality of oil the consumer gets would decline if they were'nt in charge of every drop of it.
Yep, the old "we're doing it for the consumer's benefit" plea. How can they continue with the "Msft is a giant because of consumer choice" party line and, at the same time, do everything possible to take away consumer choice? And I don't mean consumers 'chose' dos back in 1981 and so it's gotta to be that way forever. I mean, just like in the US once a politician is democratically elected he isn't in power forever, every 2-4-6 years he has to be chosen again.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Would it be illegal for them to sign a contract saying they would only serve pepsi in exchange for pepsi at a reduced price? No.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
When I read the article, I couldn't believe the coincidence of the name. I guess part of all this was to see if it would go up. I guess the XP icons pushed it through. I've known Chris for a long time, but every once in awhile, you can chance like this and you just have to take it. I should point out, even though I did put the link in, the article is /quite/ like I wrote it. Just look at the link to me, http a mailto; I actually fixed that;)
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
Here's what usually happens:
LiLo gets placed on the MBR
When back in Windows, defrag is eventually run
Defrag says there's an error on the drive, run scandisk.
Linux newbie runs scandisk and gets the message:
Newbie "repairs" this error
Newbie either cannot reboot the system or cannot get to Linux without a boot disk.
Either newbie gives up on Linux or asks experienced person for help.
Some people re-install various times thinking it was their fault that something went wrong, when it's only partially so. Usually, I recommend using NT's bootloader to point to Linux, which allows you to be able to boot to Linux and defrag safely.
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
Mr. Jones answered: "I don't think people buy Windows because Microsoft is a monopoly. I go to work every day to build great products that people are going to love."
:-)
Unfortunately, counsel did not retort, "If you believe the users love your products, set them free. If they come back, they are yours. If they don't, they were never yours to begin with."
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I've had to help more people through similar problems than I've had to explain Free Speech/Free Beer.
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
progman.exe, aka Program Manager, has no Start button.
As a consumer, I am now confused - by Mr. Jones' testimony.
Fuck you American imperialists, capitalism is evil!
C'est la lutte finale
Groupons-nous et demain
L'Internationale
Sera le genre humain
I don't see people becoming more computer literate! I see windows (XP) getting dumber! Is it too much to ask that people actually understand how a computer works?
Maybe one day, people will learn Perl by the age of 10. Maybe one day, people will understand the difference between a word processor and an operating system!
The REAL problem is that people who use windows are VERY dependant on windows. They don't understand computers at all. They understand a box with a start button.
People were more computer literate when there was DOS and winblows 3.1. Windows 95 just made them idiots!
Asking the country to switch to Linux is like asking the country to switch to electric cars.
-- A cat is no trade for integrity!
unnatural, huh? so you suppose gay people CHOOSE to be gay? Why the hell would anyone choose to be gay? when did you CHOOSE to be straight? Sexuality isn't something you choose. Homosexuality happens in other animals as well, from aligators to penguins. Perhaps they chose to be gay as well, cuz it's the "in" thing to do??
lemme ask you this. if one of your kids turned out to be gay, what would you do? If you think you can control their sexuality, or "protect" them, you're wrong. Are you going to be disgusted at your own child?
As for your eating shit comment, I have no idea where you get this idea that gays eat shit, any more so than heteros do.
Netcraft ways:
The site www.christopherrjones.com is running Apache/1.3.20 Sun Cobalt (Unix) PHP/4.2.0 mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6b mod_auth_pam_external/0.1 FrontPage/4.0.4.3 mod_perl/1.25 on Linux.
And despite this, I expect he'll see 200 posts in his message board by tomorrow accusing him of being an "evil microsoft tool".
You're not off by the level of understanding, though suggesting age is related (not far from 75, myself) might be a bit off. However, you example is smack on the nose! This is what makes explanations and testimonies by Dickie and others very important, as they (he in particular) are fairly good at explaining that in a way even non-computer users can understand.
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
I don't care what other meanings it has, it's still offensive. If it's offensive, stop it.
Why is the argument for overly P.C.-isizing one's comments more valid than the argument for the reader to simply choose against taking offense?
It seems to me that there are two components to an offense: the offender, and the offendee. Why should the offender be compelled to censor his verbiage, and the offendee not expected to control his emotional reactions?
There will always be offensive people, but it remains *your* choice whether to take offense, or to simply ignore the comment. That choice is the difference between lot of unecessary distress, and a bit of serenity.
the states' proposals would confuse consumers, enabling competitors to cover up icons like the "Start" button on the Windows desktop screen that consumers use to navigate and even allowing a competing operating system like Linux to start up instead of Windows.
are they saying that some confused customer will create a new paration on their HD, format it, and install and configure linux on it all out of confusion???
how bout -5, homophobic and ignorant.
nice how you guys are posting as AC's, whats the matter, don't want everyone to know yer full of hate and fear?
It used to be possible to run gcc under the older versions of Windows (9X, NT, 2000). But under Windows XP, they sabotaged any attempt to make the Gnu libraries the default.
When you try to install the Windows version of gcc under XP, the OS detects that the MS libraries are no longer the default, and it immediately resets the links to the Gnu libraries to point to the MS libraries.
That creates a "jolting experience" for anyone who tries to compile Gnu software under XP.
The flintstones still refer to "gay" as happy, and if it is good enough for the children of America, it is good enough for me.
Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
You can't kill people...unless you get a license to hunt the poor, but I'm going somewhere with this. What's the total cost to companies running MS sofware over the past decade? Security flaws (don't forget the "we don't have to encrypt passwords on NTFS) to servers bogging down from VBS attachments. Articles having to be rewritten because of unknown lockups or crashes. Bob knows how much else...and these are the people that sided with Microsoft!
BUT! There is one difference; Stalin was a bastard at using power but great at politics...Gates is just incompetent at coding and construction and has to buy politicians....
That could have come out better, but the fourth glass of JB is making it difficult to say things the way I want to.
Um...IT'S YOUR FAULT FOR VOTING!
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
Only two
He probably won't notice...he doesn't seem to check, as I told him a day or so in advance via the board.  I posted there because he said it was easier to use it than play email/phone tag...
I just couldn't resist plugging his site...
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
Je suis l'morse!
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
....yes.... you frog eating weenie....
Ignoring something that offends you is one thing, ignoring the rationalization for something that offends you being acceptable is another.
I live in a giant bucket.
Ooh, can I get confirmation on this by anyone?
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
This is bloat beyond belief and slows down the system to a crawl.
and
Performance wise, Linux rocks Windows.
I'd love to see you install Win98SE in under 80 megs with no cumbersome graphics interface for text based tasks.
Maybe you are forgetting that the reason why Linux takes 500mb to install is because it is packed full of programs? With Linux, gone are the days when you had to search for an ftp client, office suite (koffice, abiword), programming IDE/compilers, IRC client, ssh client, Instant Messenger applications, and much more. They come pre-installed all for the ease of the user. And they are free, in the best sense (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm comparing it to your explanations of the virtues of windows because of it's elimination of proprietry disk formatting applications, apps to look at pictures, etc).
With Windows it is in there and I can rel;iebly know that the all systesm are the same, not similiar, but exactly the same.
And from now on, all houses will be built from the same blueprint. This way plumbers, electricians, gas companies, etc, will know exactly where everything is and how to fix it. And you can forget needing to ask your host where the toilet is, you already know because it's the same as your house.
But wait, there is Linux. Yes and when all the required apps and utiltities ever come out of beta, I might consider it
Perhaps you don't understand the nature of open source, or the Linux community in general. Applications rarely reach 1.0, because we consider them always in development. A beta version of a linux application can often be equal to, or superior to it's windows counterpart. Why does Mozilla want to release a version 1.0? Because of a mindset like yours that looks at numbers rather than features and stability. So that people like you will be willing to use it. All that changes is the version number, and if it was called Mozilla 0.4.25 it wouldn't change a thing.
Performance wise, Linux rocks Windows. and it damn well better considering that the native Linux interface is the command line and the native Windows interface is a GUI
You say you use Win98? Did you know that it's native interface is Dos? What has this got to do with anything? Linux has a GUI. You say you like IceWM, but at the same time you call for a unified interface like windows, which means looking at KDE/GNOME, the only two viable options for fresh converts who feel a need for a windows-like interface. We are bound to this only because of Windows.
As for the programming limitations, I'm not knowleadgable enough to argue about them, but I do know that that is an issue that won't affect 90% of people.
If Linux wants a place on the corporate desktop, then Linux must have it's own consistent libraries, componants and GUI. Just like all the suits look the same, all their computers must look the same.
Offices can choose Gnome or KDE for their standard interface. One decision and they have a standard desktop. What's the big issue?
I could argue that Linux's diversity is good. While everything is consistent users become comfortable. They don't learn to understand the computer in any way, or learn the concepts behind it. It's like your view of the world - you don't fully appreciate or understand it until you are exposed to other people's worldview. If people were given different ways of doing things (like Gnome vs KDE vs Enlightenment vs IceWM) then users will begin to understand the concepts behind the computer, seeing what is essential and what is optional. Eg, is a Start button an essential component of using a computer or optional? How would I load applications without it? Users won't take any extra time learning the computer, but they will certainly understand it better for the time they spend on it. I am a creationist, and diversity is one of the greatest gifts from our God. For those who believe evolution - diversity is absolutely essential for something to advance.
The point is that Bill Gates/MS Marketting&Legal or whomever have done more than enough as far as one can in a capitalistic society to more or less be equivelated to someone on the level of Stalin.
Working hard and getting the breaks? You could say they worked hard...but MS software in general hasn't been worked out too well. If ever a law is passed requiring software be warranted, you just watch to see how MS explains what is and isn't their fault...see my XP protected libraries comment in the same article....
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
I think Bill is a tool. Steve too.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Computer makers could configure their machines to have them start a competitor's software, but only if Microsoft first opted to do the same with its own equivalent feature.
So if someone installs say 5 non-ms programs that start up automatically, Windows will load up 5 of it's own programs?? WTF? Why do users have to drain system resourses for junk they don't use?...tell me how this is in the best interest of Windows users?
$cat
You take a common viewpoint, and i am pretty sure to be flamed if i post a response to it. *sigh*.
The reason he said gays eat feces may be because that *is* done. There have been polls done in homosexually-oriented magazines, by gays for gays, that ask what things they like to do for sex. Playing with poop is on the list. I don't mean to be a flamer or a jerk - but the information is out there.
I don't know about everyone else, but I *choose* to be straight. I like women. I don't like men. To be totally honest, I can see why men like men - they have many features that women just don't have (not speaking physically), and they do have big muscles and all. But I'm not homosexual. I would never have sex with a man. Because on one level that seems just a bit wrong to me, and on another level, I choose in myself that i will never take that path.
Now, it should be pointed out (*dons asbestos suit*, thanks whoever-you-were for your sig) that a common excuse for behavior is "i didn't have a choice, I was born/made/caused to be this way." Whether it's true or not, that's another story, but what i'm saying in this paragraph is that it's also a common excuse for something someone doesn't like about themself, or feels that someone else doesn't like about themself.
Gay people do not have to be gay. They can change their minds, many do, going from either side to the other. Because people change, from liking women to liking men to liking women, or whatever the case may be, I'd say it's a choice, a decision.
You can't be made gay, without some choice or action on your part. (*asbestos suit is warning of dangerously high flame levels*) You become that way. and maybe you don't sit down and decide to be gay. Just like you might not sit down and decide to eat french fries every time you go to mcdonalds. But the fact is, you can change, you can not eat those fries, or whatever. You can decide not to act a certain way, not to let yourself have certain feelings. It's not set in stone, is all i'm saying.
This is a deep, difficult subject, and i'm having trouble saying quite what i want to. please email me, if anyone wants to flame/discuss with me.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
If they made their own hardware platform, then nobody would care what they did with their OS. Its when they try to control the generic PC market that I take offense.
EnkiduEOT
There is no trap so deadly as the trap you set for yourself
-Raymond Chandler, The Long Goodbye
Here we have yet another senior MS executive who is saying that
- MS should be able to restrict competition if it thinks it's in the interests of the consumer
- arguing that the decisions that they made about Netscape (and found to have been illegal and against consumer interests) are in the consumer's interests
- arguing that having a machine boot up into Linux by default is bad for consumers. (remember that they argued that Linux is one of the few viable competetor to themselves).
They are, in effect, arguing that the DOJ agreement should stand because it would allow them to continue the sorts of anti-competitive actions that they've been convicted of, and that the agreement is supposed to remedy.Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
If you're going to do something as pointless as posting song lyrics that have nothing to do with the story to be discussed, then at least get the lyrics right (at least you chose a good song, although perhaps in your case you should remember that other Tremeloes' song, "Silence Is Golden").
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Because, yeah, you couldn't change it before. Yeah.
[insert witty comment here]
Then someone in Redmond is incompetent. But we knew that already...
No, they're not. The people in Redmond know very well how to make good software. They have to... or else, how could they manage to consistantly avoid doing it (making good software) by accident?
Remember: When you buy M$, you're supporting terrorism!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's hard to sell office PCs at loss.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
of Microsoft to impair competitors' software and flood courts with cases where everyone and his brother who wrote any software for Windows will sue Microsoft for losses suffered from this?
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
I mean, seriously dude, what they're arguing here is that it's good that they're shutting out competition. That's about as anti-free-market-capitalist as you can get. A free market has competition. Microsoft is the OS market. And it's not good for consumers or OEMs.
I'm not saying that Rich=Evil. But I don't believe that Rich!=Evil either. But it's sure evident that Microsoft is Rich AND Evil.
The argument that MS is making here is essentially "our right to innovate must be protected at the expense of everyone else's." Since Microsoft is always trumpeting the 'right to innovate' unencumbered, then logically they should recognize that if another company innovates something better than a start button, for instance, then that company should have the right to implement it with out Microsoft interfering. If a third party introduces a modification that users find confusing, then people won't buy it. People don't need Microsoft to tell them what they find confusing. Let free market forces determine what innovative features be included, no matter where they come form.
But logic and consistency seem to be beyond these hypocrites. They are only interested in protecting the 'freedom to innovate' and allowing a free market when the deck is stacked in their favor. Everyone else's freedom to innovate be damned.
This is a repost but I reread my own words and thought it deserved it's own topic.
r l= / ibrary/en-us/dnwue/html/ch02b.asp
Well, I've recently taken a look into M$ UI principles and it looks like we have it all wrong.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
"User in Control
An important principle of user interface design is that the user should always feel in control of the software rather than feeling controlled by the software. This principle has a number of implications:
* The operational assumption is that the user -- not the computer or software -- initiates actions. The user plays an active rather than reactive role. You can automate tasks, but implement the automation in a way that allows the user to choose or control it.
* Because of their widely varying skills and preferences, users must be able to personalize aspects of the interface. The system software provides user access to many of these aspects. Your software should reflect user settings for different system properties, such as colors, fonts, or other options.
* Your software should be as interactive and responsive as possible. Avoid modes whenever possible. A mode is a state that excludes general interaction or otherwise limits the user to specific interactions. When a mode is the best or only design alternative -- for example, for selecting a particular tool in a drawing program -- make sure the mode is obvious, visible, the result of an explicit user choice, and easy to cancel."
If only M$ would listen to their own advice!!! Hypocrites.
This just goes to show you that they know how to play nice, they just don't want to.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
The way I read the article the MS VP is in one sentence talking about the desktop, and then talks about the web browser. This FUD about the start button is a straight out attempt to pull the wool over the gov'mints eyes again. Last I looked the 'Start' button was hardcoded into explorer.exe not in iexplore.exe.
Ironic, isn't it, that "gay" has become slang for "stupid"? The word was originally coopted by homosexuals in an attempt to battle the stereotype of being moody and depressed. Whether or not that worked, you have to admit it's kind of funny that manipulating a word's meaning to make a point eventually came full circle.
"How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
This post for instance, explains about how Microsoft added a software loop to Windows NT 4.0 to intentionnally slowdown the OS on Cyrix processors, so as to give partner Intel a competitive edge.
I can already see it.. MS completely opens up their APIs, and first we'll see all spyware and adware vendors hacking in, creating even more devastating plugins that install to your computer "just because they can do it easily".
It would nullify all my false sense of securities right away, but perhaps not for all the people just use computers without understanding what actually makes it tick. This is a scary vision.
The site says "I am a student"!! no mention of M$ are we sure we are at the right place?
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
Did any of you think for a moment that maybe they're trying to protect us from something horrible with the comment about the Start Button? What if your start button/menu was replaced with an ad. That'd get old fast, but it's all completely possible. I know companies like Gateway would love it. Okay, now let's take it a step further and say that all your windows now have built in ads. That gets old even faster, but it's still within the realm of possibility.
As far as the other OS's being installed, I agree that they should not be able to say that Windows is the only thing that can be installed, but I do think that they should not have to support a computer that has something else installed that they do not make. You expect MS to walk computer illiterates through a Linux problem? You must be joking. You have to think about it from a technical standpoint, it's just not good.
At least MS is better than Apple, they allow you to choose your hardware. Apple seems to have been more monopolistic as to what they allow on/in their hardware/software. They even ignored developers for a long while. Look where this has lead them, into the slumps. They no longer develop an OS, but an OS theme. They sue people for things that look too similar to theirs.
Phreak Out
-]Phreak Out[-
Mr. Jones answered: "I don't think people buy Windows because Microsoft is a monopoly. I go to work every day to build great products that people are going to love."
What was left out of the transcript:
Mr. Jones then added: "And every night, I come home curl up in my bed, with Mr. TeddyBear, and cry until I fall asleep."
Carbon based humanoid in training.
If you really want to show the courage of your
convictions lets see you stop liking women and
start liking men. If someone did this I might
reconsider how obviously wrong you are.
As it is, this whole situation with Catholic
priests is a perfect demonstration of the
situation. Here is a bunch of gay guys that said
"being gay is a choice, I don't have to be gay.
I can be celebate." Great outcome, huh?
... which shows one more point: when reading files in text mode under Windows, CTRL-Z (0x26) is regarded as the end of the file. So if you're writing stuff that might be executed under Windows, safest bet is indeed always to use binary mode.
This sig under construction. Please check back later.
Though I've never encountered your experience, I'm quite curious as to how or what utility you used to convert the ext2 to VFAT.
I haven't seen scandisk run during boot since the first version of Windows 98. I should point out, however, I am not an expert in the world of Windows, only on how Windows interacts with various operating systems.
If you could detail the events in converting ext2, I may beable to hypoth-o-think the issue.
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
I was unable to find the specific events that will occur if you install LiLo to the MBR, but I did find various warnings about installing LiLo to the MBR if you are dual booting. Ironically, this often involves a claim that Windows will not boot (typically not true, as most Linux distros will add Windows to the LiLo conf file).
/boot partition (or /root if you didn't make a seperate partition for /boot).
My first experience with this was with Mandrake 6.0 which persisted to 7.1 (the latest version I've tried), and found this to be true with many RH-style distros. LiLo users should leave LiLo on the boot partition (if you're using LiLo with the lba32 BIOS extension, you can do this past the 1024th cylindar).
Fixing the MBR will put NT's bootloader on it, resulting in only being able to boot to Windows (but you can point to Linux if you've installed a bootloader to the
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
I love this guy's comments. IMHO, this was the worst week MS has had in the whole trial, including the week of Allchin's video.
After testifying under oath that Windows XP could not be modular, Gates confirmed under cross examination that it could be modular. That a modular version works, exists and is shipping. And that the only reason PC OEM's don't use it is because MS won't let them.
He also admitted that several of the actions the appeals court found illegal would not have been prevented by the MS/DOJ settlement, but would have been by the State's proposal.
Gates tops it off by threatening the court. Issue an order we don't like, and we will take Windows off the market. Thereby initiating a new dark age.
Then, this VP gets on the stand and says in effect that OEM's can put whatever icons they like on the desktop, but MS will still decide what programs carry out what functions. MS, in other words, would be compelled by the DOJ settlement only to appear to obey the law.
Don't think for a second that all this was lost on the judge. The one place MS' government allies cannot protect it is in open court. If she were so inclined, the judge could dismiss the State's case and rubber stamp the DOJ settlement and be done with it. Unless the MS boys made that impossible. Last week, they did.
I didn't make that comparison, you did. At issue isn't how many people Stalin killed, but his style of economic organization. Stalin built the Soviet economy by single-mindedly focussing on political unity, productivity, and centralization, which is quite analogous to the style of non-competition and centralization Gates apparently wants in the computer industry. And that's a quite valid comparison because, in the end, whether pushed by Gates or Stalin, this economic strategy is doomed to failure, even if it looks attractive at first. What's particularly obnoxious about Gates is that he proclaims himself a free-market champion when what he is arguing for is Soviet-style centralization in the computer software industry.
Cobalt used to sell Linux rack servers before they were bought by SUN. I believe SUN plans to migrate those products to Solaris, but I'm not sure whether this has been done already.
(I rent a site on one of those boxes myself.)
WWTTD?
Sure, if not for the fact that most of the Slashdot crowd couldn't spell a complete sentence correctly if their life depended on it. Sign me up for the illiterate vote!
I must be bored.
But there are better reasons to look down at the /. mentality than that! </smug>
And there are worse forums than /., for example http://www.fijilive.com has a forum which seems to be mostly made up of racist insults between the two main races on those islands. They use english because using either fijian or hindi would be conceding to the other side :-)
The URL in the story points to some poor guy who is absolutely not an MS exec and who finds it hilarious that he's linked from Slashdot, and writes on his page that "Well, now we KNOW that /. can't possibly check its links".
The correct page for this Microsoft executive is here.
There will always be offensive people, but it remains *your* choice whether to take offense, or to simply ignore the comment. That choice is the difference between lot of unecessary distress, and a bit of serenity.
Ignoring the fact that someone is hurting you is just as bad as ignoring the fact that you're hurting someone else. Fine, don't love gays. Not all gays love heteros. But why needlessly hurt someone when you can avoid it simply by using more appropriate words? Why?
In MacOS there are lots of "extensions" which extend the UI, by adding special hot spots, menus, tweak the (consistent BTW) save and load dialogues. I have used many and like some. What does MS gain by keeping these off of the OEM market? What's wrong with selling a Compaq Desktop with and "Enhanced Start Menu?". This may be confusing to some consumers, but some may benefit. Isn't that what an ecosystem is about?
And none of that part of the UI would be changed by allowing other programs to be installed. I agree that the basic UI paradigm hasn't changed, but it hasn't changed in KDE, Gnome or MacOS either. If it was changed, then people wouldn't buy it because it would make their computing experience confusing. This is called competiion.No argument from me on that point.
Make meEnkiduEOT
There is no trap so deadly as the trap you set for yourself
-Raymond Chandler, The Long Goodbye
FDisk isn't exactly the tool of choice; it doesn't even let you choose where to place a partition...
I have encountered it within a few Win98'ers, but I've only experienced it myself within WinME. Near the very end of the scandisk section, after having gone over most of the disk, ScanDisk will inform you of an "error" in the "bootsector" which it believes to be improperly formatted or inaccurate data. If you repair this error, ScanDisk either removes any boot information (resulting in a halting LiLo screen or a blank screen, but never a "No Operating System Found" message) or replaces it with a basic NT bootloader. When replaced with a basic NT bootloader, your system will only be able to boot into Windows.
I do not know whether the 98 users have these issues as a service pack or from an alteration in SE, but I've not see the original 98 users have an issue. However, if ScanDisk consider a non-NT/Windows bootloader an error, so will Defrag, as a result, defrag will tell you there's an error and you be told to run ScanDisk and the circle of death is complete.
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum
Obviously you've put a lot of thought into this. Why is that? If you're happy being who you are, why do you need to pay attention to what other people do with their lives? Why do you have to sit there and think up rationalizations about why people are gay and whether or not you can choose to be gay and that you *prefer* to be straight...etc.? Sounds pretty much like you've got some issues to deal with. This is not a flame, it's just what seems to be true from your lengthy, essentially useless explanation of why you are not gay and why others don't have to be.
I can understand perfectly well someone who considers themselves gay or lesbian or bi trying to understand why they are the way they are, and offering a rationalization to the world...that's because of all the homophobes (er...closet homosexuals who are uncomfortable with who they really might be?) on the other end wasting their and other's time thinking up reasons why someone else's behavior which really shouldn't concern them is wrong or able to be changed...why should it be changed? I guess this goes to those in the LGB community for which nature vs. nurture is a sticking point as well: don't you realize, that's not really the issue, despite what the Christian fundamentalists, social conservatives, radical queer theorists, etc. tell you?
To all of you: don't waste your time and everyone else's. Why does it matter whether God, the environment, their genes, or their own fucking choice made them that way? Let the people live in peace. Life is too fucking short.
Dave D.
If you would think a person that host websites for a living and runs Linux/unix on his server (Think Computing) is a MS VP, your badly mistaken.
You seem to have never called windows tech support. There is no such thing, unless you buy a boxed verson of windows...which I have never knowen to occur. Usually people get it on new computers...MS doesn't support that OEM version of the OS, the manufacture does. So the manufacture does support the whole system, and if they do something dumb like cover up the start button, it's their problem to support it. Now if you're talking about after purchase software doing something dumb like that...well its the problem of the company that made that software to support it. In either case the company that did it would be supporting it, so they SHOULD be able to support it just fine.
But in any case I still don't see that kind of thing happening. But I could see MS using the stance of, if its not all MS software we have no control over what happens, crashes failures loss of time/data not our fault its got non MS software.
LinuxWorx
Spelling errors are intentional as are gramatical error
Yep, you can see them too at the Museum of Soviet Calculators, a way cool web site. Mostly, they were junky knock offs of Japaneese models. You had to be special to have one. I also remember reading about their failed efforts to keep up with the growing US PC market by making poor quality Apple II clones. Duh, you don't think a country that put gaurds around photo coppiers would make other means of publication available would you? Thanks for pointing it out for us!
Oh well, with the demise of the old devils our friends in Washington are free to clamp down and act just like the old USSR. Hopefully, the good people of Europe and Asia can get their acts togeter enough to provide US citezens with alternate places to live. Sheesh. As our government eliminates the Bill of Rights so that they can tax us all to hell, there's less practical difference between here, Canada, England and France. Competition, my friend, is a good thing.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Thank you.
The thought of "high-class lawyers" brought a smile to my day, and the fact that you are referring to lawyers in Microsoft's pay makes it all the sweeter...
Hey!!! the parentheses are good for something
The article reports that the MS party line is to hold back on or prevent interoperability and connectivity. These are two keys to ecnomic growth in the IT-sector imparing them is to go against a free market. The MS execs are even down to using weasle words and phrases, much like big tobacco companies did when they were in the hot seat.
Trials are about facts. Reading this and other articles about the punishment phase of the trial and focusing only on statements of fact, striking all the "I {do | do not} believe"-type statements, leaves very little doubt about the benefit of a massive breakup. Odds are that breaking up or dissolving the company would actually create an economic boom.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Hey I'm sure that defrag say's somthing to the effect of 'Your boot record is corrupt' e.g. MBR != M$, and the default option is to replace it with the m$ MBR. Assuming that you trusted microsoft and didn't know any better that'd screw your dule boot.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
If it's offensive, stop it.
Barking commands at people is not going to get them to change their minds or their behavior. Perhaps it might have been lost on some, but my post was intended to be funny. That said, I hate the fact that people use the word "gay" to mean "stupid," "poor-quality," "unfair," or any other negative term. How should I combat this?
What I won't do is complain and whine about how "offended" I am. That never works. What I will do is dialog with people and ask them, "Is this really what you mean?" I think many people throw the word "gay" around like a cheap whore primarily because they have no gay friends or family (that they know of). Once people realize that their words have meaning and impact on other people, then they usually change their minds.
And if they don't, then they're just bigots and get added to the killfile.
It stands to be said again and again: You have no right to not be offended.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Not for Microsoft. They have a monopoly. MS can and does FORCE all of the OEM's to install the newer operating system. Everything you say would be applicable but for the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly. I never said that Microsoft always provided an inconsistent interface. I said that Microsoft only provided it to maintain their monopoly, not for the good of the consumer or the ISV's. When MacOSX threatened to make the old Windows interface look, well old, Microsoft responded by making their interface INCONSISTENT with the old interface in order to add "snap".
No it wouldn't, it would hurt Compaq's bottom line becuase Compaq wouldn't be able to call it Microsoft windows but Compaq Enhanced windows. Just as the enhanced Sony Vaio interface, you claim, is hurting their sales. The converse also holds true, if Compaq were to create a useful enhancement to the interface, they would benefit the consumer and their own brand, not Microsoft. You seem to be under the impression that any alteration to the Microsoft UI would be labelled "Microsoft". That would be a trademark violation and illegal. OK, here's a few for you:- Adding the cofusing IE disk browsing in addition to the standard Explorer browsing to kill Netscape. By my count, there are in NT, three different screens to browse my hard disk, all of them different in subtle ways.
- Double clicking on mp3's launches MSMediaPlayer by default.
- Forcing OEM's to hide the Netscape icon in favor of the IE icon
- Forcing OEM's to prominently display the MSN icon over the AOL/Earthlink icon.
- Allowing "Open Office Document" to have a special place in the Start menu.
- Preventing OEM's from removing the IE icon.
- Preventing OEM's from showing the Real Networks icon on the Desktop.
- Preventing OEM's from installing QuickTime by default.
I'll think of some more. Have you read Penfield Jackson's Findings of Fact? You really should read it. Boy, you really have been drinking the Bill-Aid. I never said it didn't benefit people. I did say that Microsoft doesn't provide much consistency across versions and that they change the UI to stifle competition. Show me a company which runs Windows95, 98, 2000, NT4.0 and XP and I'll show a company with a seriously harried IT staff. Most big companies upgrade everything at the same time because of inconsistencies from version to version. How? Alterations can be beneficial or detrimental. Are you saying that it's impossible to improve the Microsoft Windows interface? It's perfect then, eh? Changing the UI, BTW, doesn't have to change the underlying system calls (unless you're microsoft trying to fuck a potential competitor). The same software will still run. Ever heard of modularity? Microsoft has nothing to lose. Customers can't find things. Customers need retraining. Microsoft doesn't pay for training! If you think that people don't need retraining when they move from 95 to NT to 2000 to XP you are sorely mistaken. Which customers did they lose? They have a monopoly. They have a monopoly. Repeat after me: Microsoft is a monopoly.There is no trap so deadly as the trap you set for yourself
-Raymond Chandler, The Long Goodbye
Uh, yeah. The Catholic Church big, rich, and evil. Just take a gander at the last 1,000 years of history there, Chief. It's not evil *because* it's big and rich, but it's big and rich because it's evil.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yes I know what modular means. I happen to be a programmer. However, I'd say that most of the people out there do not. It's kind of like a graph. You have the people at the top who know how to do things like this. Then there are the people they are friends with who do not, and some who do. They link to more people, etc etc. And eventually you get to the average Joe who barely knows how to press the connect button to start up AOL.
-]Phreak Out[-
You're right. The next time I walk down the street and give a black guy with the cheery greeting, "How's it going, nigger?" I'll give him your lecture on the necessity of controlling his emotional reactions if he he gets huffy.
OEMs would continue to support their installed users, just as they do now. OEMs would have no Empire to which to pay per-CPU licensing for the WinBloze images which they already have and are already shipping. I'm confident that they'd shed a single tear for the simplicity that was a monopoly OS market, then move on. The OEM channel wouldn't even hiccup, but probably _would_ shift to bundling competing non-orphaned OSen and portable apps as quickly as it could. Systems with Linux & OpenOffice or such pre-loaded on them by the OEM would be available day after tomorrow. Also available (from some OEM or other - I'm NOT claiming they'd all support multiple platforms or choose the same single one) would be:
BeOS - Which would see a sudden recovery
OS/2 - Would rise from its uneasy grave and probably dominate the consumer "OS" market in two years
Some really compatible WinAPI OS that's not even heard of now
XP lusers, indeed anyone with MPA, would throw out some CDs, but everything that works now (for an unspecified value of "works") would still work if a judge (or a nuke) took out the monopolist.
A MAJOR scramble would ensue to fill the vacuum left by the monopolist, and that might not be too pretty, but it _would_ be market driven, at least. First in the requirements to fill the gap would be ability to run the existing Imperial code, but that would fade as soon as the major apps got ported to POSIX. Hardware manufacturers would scramble to learn to write Kernel modules. Intel would lose its monopoly market.
Micro$oft dead would be a great thing for the rest of the software industry. A lot of MCS"E"s would have retraining to do.
Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.
I actually am pretty convinced that OEM's *pay* to put those ugly stickers on their machines.
Bzzzzzzzt!! Wrong.
Intel & M$ pay the OEMs, in the form of "advertizing allowances", to put those stickers on their machinery, as they pay the OEMs to play their jingle at the end of the TV commercials. The stickers are almost unquestionably part of the deal. In order to qualify for an "advertizing partnership" with the monopolist, and get $15 off each and every WinBloze license you buy/ship, you _must_:
1) Bundle WinBloze on each and every machine you ship, no matter how badly your customer whines for a naked PC or a Linux install. Selling just _one_ Linux PC blows your $15 rebate on _all_ 2 million other systems you'll ship this year, "co$ting" you $30e6, so it's out of the question.
2) Put the little "Designed for WinBloze" sticker on each and every machine also. I really wonder who they think they're trying to fool with that, because it certainly does not discourage a single Linux hack from trying to install Linux on a machine that's clearly intended to run WinBloze. We just peel off the offending sticker, and Linux doesn't care one way or the other.
3) Throw up a M$ logo at the end of each and every commercial you put on TV. That nets you a $10,000 partnership in the commercial. Mo' money!
4) Bend over and (publicly) kiss BillG's ass whenever he asks. That doesn't cost money, just pride...
5) Other things which don't co$t you anything, but which further the propaganda goals of the Empire, like putting a link on each and every page of your OEM e-commerce website that says "${OEM} computers come pre-loaded with only _genuine_ Micro$uck WinBloze" and points to the piracy webpage of the monopolist.
Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.