Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft 'under attack' On All Fronts

khujifig writes "The Beeb are carrying a story looking at the challenges facing Microsoft in the next few years. This includes a brief description of the M.Home (sans Clippy) which the Beeb describes as "a far cry from real life", and a discussion of the next few years competition for Microsoft. They go on to highlight Linux, OpenOffice.org, the GIMP and Firefox (which Gates himself has used: "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,"), and look Apple in relation to Longhorn. Not as bad a read as I was expecting. Their summary: Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts, and either needs to innovate or die. "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?."" It should be said, tho', that articles like this have been written about MSFT for a long time - and there's still billions in their war-chest.

671 comments

  1. The Internet is only a part of computer usage... by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quite the pro OSS piece... To answer the question posed in the summary, "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?" Because there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail.

  2. Obligatory Song Quoting... by Avyakata · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's the end of the world as we know it...

    ...and I feel fine.

    1. Re:Obligatory Song Quoting... by Cursive23 · · Score: 0

      Interesting to note that Microsoft actually tried to get the rights to use that song for the premiere of Windows 95, but REM declined to sell out the to the machine. When asked for comment REM couldn't be reached, as they were boarding their private jet for Italy to have their own custom couture wardobes made.

      Microsoft's second choice was "Start Me Up" by the Rolling Stones.

    2. Re:Obligatory Song Quoting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?."

      apparently this moron only uses email and a little surfing?

      I play guild wars and many other great games. I dont use linux.

    3. Re:Obligatory Song Quoting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Score: -1, Redundant by Gaming Console

  3. The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which Microsoft product "The Gimp" is supposed to attack? Paintbrush?
    I thought The Gimp was Adobe Photoshop concurrent, and AFAIK, Adobe has not yet been bought by MS.

    1. Re:The Gimp? by bhtooefr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Picture It is Microsoft's competitor to Photoshop Elements...

    2. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      >I thought The Gimp was Adobe Photoshop concurrent

      Gimp is a bit ahead of the current photoshop, and enough people see MS and Adobe as heads of the proprietary software field that they may as well be one. It's a bit like Gnu and Linux, always being seen together.

      So when Gimp beats photoshop, they're also beating MS.

    3. Re:The Gimp? by bogado · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since there is no Photoshop for linux or many other SOs that gimp run (BSD, solaris ...) the gimp allows people who want to use a Photoshop alike app to run from MSWindows.

      But those people could run to MacOSX and keep their photoshop. But this would require a change of hardware.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    4. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought The Gimp was Adobe Photoshop concurrent...

      I don't think that word means what you think it means.

    5. Re:The Gimp? by tepples · · Score: 1

      the gimp allows people who want to use a Photoshop alike app to run from MSWindows.

      True, GIMP might allow migration from Photoshop Elements for new installations, but for somebody trying to switch without having to buy new hardware, many makers of graphics tablets aren't willing to contribute specifications to a Linux driver effort.

    6. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does in French and Dutch.

    7. Re:The Gimp? by jsrlepage · · Score: 3, Informative

      um.... Paint .net?

      or is it the other way?

      --
      This is my opinion. Everyone has a right to my opinion.
    8. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, you have missed the brilliance of the Microsoft strategy.

      If I run Adobe Photoshop, I run Windows.

      If I run gimp, I don't need Windows.

      Derek

    9. Re:The Gimp? by JeffTL · · Score: 1

      You have to get a new box every few years no matter what OS you're running, so people can switch to OS X for their photoshop needs probably as easily as going to Linux, if they just hold out for when they are ready to buy a computer anyhow.

    10. Re:The Gimp? by adam1101 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Believe it or not, MS does have its range of Photoshop-like products. And no, I don't know anyone who uses them either.

    11. Re:The Gimp? by Ramses0 · · Score: 1

      Call me a recycler, but this was discussed on /. before, it's clear that GIMP is a direct competitor to MS.

      --Robert

    12. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If I run Adobe Photoshop, I run Windows.

      Yeah I know. This is one of my pet beaves. When oh when is Adobe going to port it to the Mac? How hard can it be? Wake up Adobe!! There are a lot of us you no!!

    13. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here we speak English... the language of the United States of America!

    14. Re:The Gimp? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      You dont have to atall, that's the microsoft mentality.. I run current versions of linux on my workstations that were built in 1998 and 1996 respectively, they run just fine and i've no need to replace them.
      Replacement parts and upgrades are available cheaply on ebay if i so choose.
      I have a mac running OSX 10.4 tiger aswell (latest right now), it's dual 450mhz G4 but i'm not sure how old it is, tho it's definately not current hardware.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    15. Re:The Gimp? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Really? Photoshop seems to work quite well on my mac.. And older versions ran (poorly) on sgi workstations aswell.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    16. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not unreasonable to expect correct English in an English-language forum.

      been to McD's in any medium sized city recently?

    17. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > Gimp is a bit ahead of the current photoshop,

      What the Fuck?!?

      What on earth do you mean by that? How can you seriously claim that the GIMP is ahead of Adobe Photoshop CS. If you are going to make a crazy statement like that back it up with some evidence.

      If you are a rabid GIMP apologist you could claim:
      The GIMP is "ahead" of Photoshop on price,
      The GIMP is "ahead" of Photoshop on source code availability,
      The GIMP is "ahead" of Photoshop because it runs on Linux and Photoshop doesn't,
      but the GIMP still pales in comparison to Photoshop which dominates the market.

      The GIMP is not ahead of Photoshop on features or usability.
      Time and efficiency are a price most graphics users are not willing to pay.

      In what meaningful way can you claim the GIMP is ahead of Photoshop?

    18. Re:The Gimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardware is dirt cheap and doing interesting things with computers is much more pleasant with fast hardware. I guess if scraping by with hardware that's nearly 10 years old floats your boat, great, but don't expect anyone to believe that modern hardware is necessitated by "the microsoft mentality".

    19. Re:The Gimp? by bobbyjack · · Score: 1
      doing interesting things with computers is much more pleasant with fast hardware

      What? Sorry, but that's incredibly subjective. Sure, you might find ray-tracing, video editing, or playing yet-another-first-person-shooter 'interesting'; others prefer designing beautiful frameworks, exploring self-modifying algorithms, or optimising for speed/memory. 'Challenging' is often far more interesting than 'comfortable'.

      If everyone had your attitude, we'd be even bigger slaves to the penis-competition that Intel/AMD host.
  4. Why is it better? by JFlex · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,"

    What makes it so much better? I've been using Firefox for a while now and it seems like more then 'just another browser' to me.

    1. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      What makes it better is it cost him millions of dollars.

    2. Re:Why is it better? by zwilliams07 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think what Bill means is...

      "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer is better...at downloading malware, spyware, viruses, and leaving your machine gapping open to the world."

    3. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because of corporate image. Microsoft realizes that Firefox is at least a worthy competitor to IE, but it would look absolutely terrible for the company if their very famous captain came out and said 'Well, what do ya know...our competitor's product IS better.'

    4. Re:Why is it better? by Gopal.V · · Score: 0, Troll
      What makes it so much better?

      For one, slashdot renders properly in IE. Secondly it does come with my box - not as a 4 Mb download I have to make afterwards. It is not a good product for the sole reason that it existed to kill netscape's "web apps" - which are coming back as Mozilla.

      I've been using Firefox for a while now and it seems like more then 'just another browser' to me.

      Then firefox has failed. Firefox was meant to be "Just a Browser" , not the "An Application Platform by itself" Mozilla route. That is the what it was meant to do - and it sure does. It's a browser - a good one , but just a browser still.

    5. Re:Why is it better? by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least he admits to knowing what the word "browser" means. He pretended not to during the antitrust trial.

    6. Re:Why is it better? by Eagle5596 · · Score: 0

      Because IE means Bill still has a huge market share. He wouldn't admit Firefox was better even if it was so obviously better that there was no reason to use anything else ever again. You and I may try Firefox and say "Wow! MS needs to get with the times", but Bill still has to be on damage control.

      No doubt some MS junkies will read his quote and it will change their minds about trying out firefox, thus with a single and simple comment, he probably saves at least 5% market share.

    7. Re:Why is it better? by Rallion · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Then firefox has failed. Firefox was meant to be "Just a Browser" , not the "An Application Platform by itself" Mozilla route. That is the what it was meant to do - and it sure does.

      Is that why it regularly consumes well over 100MB of RAM and more than triples what I've seen from any other browser?

    8. Re:Why is it better? by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Most users don't take the time to explore their browser. Firefox out of the box is nothing special. Firefox with a few extensions and some tweaks to its settings (Especially enabling http pipelining) is hot stuff. If you do web development, some of the plug-ins you can get for Firefox put it in a class by itself. The flexibility you get with plugins makes it well worth considering in corporate platform deployments as well.

      The biggest problem with Firefox at the moment is that these features aren't well-advertised and you have to do a lot of googling to find documentation on the more esoteric stuff. Once corporate IT types get a feel for what you can do with firefox, I suspect IE usage will plummet.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    9. Re:Why is it better? by masklinn · · Score: 5, Insightful
      For one, slashdot renders properly in IE. Secondly it does come with my box - not as a 4 Mb download I have to make afterwards.
      Maybe you should factor in the l33t 10th of megabytes updates of MSIE you have to run on your browser that "comes with your box not as a 4Mb download"
      (oh, and i have no real problem with slashdot rendering in Firefox)
      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    10. Re:Why is it better? by Silverlancer · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, that is because Windows doesn't properly read the memory usage. Tweaking it to read it properly and to limit the cache size, it uses about 35MB here for about 25 tabs. Thats about 15 times more memory efficient than IE.

    11. Re:Why is it better? by log0n · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you define success by aiming for the lowest common denominator and achieving the mundane.

      Isn't that what we all get on Microsoft for?

    12. Re:Why is it better? by tobybuk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If there is one thing we should know by now is when MS thinks it is coming under pressure it will unleash the attack dogs.

      Anyone who thinks that IE will never be as good as Firefox is very very naive. Just as MS need to innovate to survive so does OSS.

    13. Re:Why is it better? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      You still need to use IE to update Windows though :(

      My system is so bloated at this point that I'm dreading the day I'll have to reinstall everything.

    14. Re:Why is it better? by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Secondly it does come with my box - not as a 4 Mb download I have to make afterwards.

      The fact that it comes with the OS is not a reason that makes it better than other browsers.

      (That said, I understand the "conveniently located" thing, and the fact that if some browser weren't included things would be worse--unless you want to distribute by CD, BBS, or FTP or something.)

      --
      R.Mo
    15. Re:Why is it better? by tepples · · Score: 1

      You say Firefox uses 35 MB for 25 open pages and that IE uses an order of magnitude more. Have you compared it to Maxthon, a tabbed-browsing shell around IE?

    16. Re:Why is it better? by SolusSD · · Score: 0

      sounds like you just have a bone to pick with microsoft. Firefox isn't at fault for not being packaged with windows. Rendering problems exist acrossed all browsers, at least the firefox team has fixed the rendering issue in a timely matter. As far as being "more than a browser" i believe you misinterpreted the parent. He was simply stating that is isn't "just another browser". It is one that stands out from the crowd.

    17. Re:Why is it better? by Stween · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How long have you had that firefox session open for? I find that firefox hogs more and more memory the longer it's been running. Eventually, after a few days, things are swapping so much I have to close down firefox, wait for that 150MB to free up, then restart.

      I'm on a reasonably up-to-date Debian unstable, on a 1GHz Athlon with 256MB RAM, which should be more than enough to run a browser and plenty other things besides. This, I feel, does not help firefox's cause, even though it's certainly not the usual behaviour for 'most' web users to leave their machine on overnight. I just find it convenient sometimes to keep a bunch of tabs open, especially if I'm leaving the computer on for whatever reason anyway.

    18. Re:Why is it better? by cashman73 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most users don't take the time to explore their browser. Firefox out of the box is nothing special. Firefox with a few extensions and some tweaks to its settings (Especially enabling http pipelining) is hot stuff.

      Which is exactly why most users still use IE over Firefox. Most users are just that, users . They don't want to spend hours tweaking their computer out of the box. They want to open up their PC, turn it on, and check email, write papers, do what they have to do without worrying about any of the functions, "under the hood,..." in the same way that when you drive a car, most drivers just want to turn the key and drive, not worrying about stuff under the hood. Unfortunately, what they (and Microsoft) fail to realize is that, computers are a lot more like cars; left with maintenance unattended, they will eventually become useless.

    19. Re:Why is it better? by the+plant+doctor · · Score: 1

      It doesn't take hours, just a few minutes, less than 5 to get the themes and set the configuration the way I like. I fail to see the point here? I think it's more ignorance. Most new FF users don't know that stuff like Adblock exists or what pipelining can do for a broadband connection. I know non computer savy folks who once pointed to these options were ecstatic to use them.

    20. Re:Why is it better? by jtpalinmajere · · Score: 1

      People who consider Firefox 'just another browser' are those responsible enough not to visit sites that would otherwise infect their machines with virii and other garbage (read: visiting pr0n and warez sites). I like the whole tabbed browsing thing, but that's really the only thing that differentiates Firefox for me. If IE had tabs I'd probably still be using it since I don't tend to visit the aforementioned types of sites on any kind of regular basis. I'd also wager that a vast majority of people in "end user" land probably wouldn't use, or perhaps even know about, the tabbed browsing.

      The only 'better' thing about firefox (from an end-user perspective) is that it is secure enough to allow semi-safe passage through pr0n/warez land with nothing but your eyes being scathed.

    21. Re:Why is it better? by Simonetta · · Score: 1

      This is an astute comment! "Say, that's astute, Let's get together and form an institute!"

      There needs to be a web site called LinuxIsBetter.com that explains exactly why open source is better that the corresponding MS apps and how exactly to configure the plain vanilla OSS ap to be so much better than the MS app.
      You just can't have this info scattered all over the web in obscure sites. And please go lightly on the acronyms.

    22. Re:Why is it better? by segmond · · Score: 1

      It's not just another browser, It is the OTHER browser. The majority of people can name only IE and Firefox. This is what makes Firebox "special", if it was just another browser in a market with say 5 other browsers that have the same marketshare as it does, then "another browser" will qualify. But since it's the second most popular browser now, it is the OTHER browser, Konqueror might be more qualified to be labeled "another" browser...

      --
      ------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
    23. Re:Why is it better? by snorklewacker · · Score: 1

      Firefox using a piddly 35 megs for 25 open pages is something I'd like to see. Maybe if they're all the same page, or one screen of simple HTML, sure.

      I regularly see Firefox go berzerk with memory usage, to the point where it takes MINUTES for it to swap back in on Windows. Early on in the process, the window will be visible, but it will take 5-15 seconds to respond to each mouse click. Process Explorer meanwhile puts its mem usage at over 200 megs. Perhaps the Joe Sixpacks are used to this poor behavior and will just reboot -- it'll probably happen faster than all the thrashing.

      Is it still doing that asinine thing of flushing out all its RAM when minimized? There's still no user-visible option to turn that behavior off.

      I used Maxthon back when it was MyIE2, and it's a pretty reasonable browser. Still, with FF, I get Adblock and Sage as extensions, and built-in I get typeahead find (it's amazing how quickly people pick up and love the behavior of "just type it and it will search").

      --
      I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
    24. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE is better at making me rich."

    25. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should factor in the 10 MB of extensions that many users install after installing the browser.
      (oh, and i have no real problem with slashdot rendering in Firefox since I installed slashfix)

    26. Re:Why is it better? by l3v1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For one, slashdot renders properly in IE. Secondly it does come with my box - not as a 4 Mb download I have to make afterwards.

      Just so you know, the ability to render badly formatted pages "correctly" is _not_ a good thing, because it promotes bad coding. Regarding the download thing... just add together how much mbs of updates have you patched your base IE6 since winXPvanilla. Oh, you don't know ? That's one more point against it in my world. But the point is, even IE7 won't have near as good standards compliance as Safari, Firefox or Konqueror has already. I have more reasons if someone wants to listen. For example the extentions I use with Firefox (e.g. adblock, targetalert, send referer, gmail notify, etc.) make it so much better than IE has ever been.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    27. Re:Why is it better? by masklinn · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Maybe you should factor in the 10 MB of extensions that many users install after installing the browser.
      Please do list how you manage to reach 10Mb worth of extensions dear anonymous coward
      (oh, and i have no real problem with slashdot rendering in Firefox since I installed slashfix)
      Which i haven't installed for slashdot isn't broken in my Firefox rendering
      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    28. Re:Why is it better? by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't take hours, just a few minutes, less than 5 to get the themes and set the configuration the way I like

      Now. When you first started, it probably did take hours. No one starts in computers all-knowing.

      I know non computer savy folks who once pointed to these options were ecstatic to use them.

      Exactly the point. Most users will NOT dig into the available options. They are too afraid of breaking something.

      Look at the latest offerings from MS. They all have an option for turning off least used menu options (personalized menus). This hides large numbers of menu items. So the user uses a few things (ie: bold, italics), and does not even know that you can have small-caps (or what small-caps even means).

      So having an average user go to a search engine, type in the correct search phrase, sift through the thousands of returns to locate an obscurely named plug-in, install it, set it up, well.....

      And don't tell me about the plug-in sites. YOU know what they are, user's do not.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    29. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's an unfixable bug related to how Firefox swaps on Windows. Something to do with how the underlying framework manages memory. See Bugzilla 76831

    30. Re:Why is it better? by the+plant+doctor · · Score: 1

      Firefox can automagically download and install plugins for you if you don't have Flash, etc. reliably for Windows (I'll assume that's the OS you're referring to). Extensions are easily found on one page with a description no need for a search engine. As I said, once stuff like pipelining is pointed out, most users are ignorant that this can be done so they don't know enough to search for it. Even they can accomplish this in a few minutes once someone instructs them how to. I'm just saying it doesn't take a lot of time. Just a little education. But you're right people aren't willing to go search for ways to make Firefox faster on their own. With a little prodding though... I do feel like Firefox pushes the browser very well but they don't go ahead and say to new users "Look what else you can do!!!!" They just insert bookmarks for themes and extensions and make a mention of it on the homepage while you download.

    31. Re:Why is it better? by Precipitous · · Score: 1

      A lot of replies to this post deal with the qualities of Firefox that most users won't use (too technical) or don't care about (application platform? I can see my Granny dancing a gigue!)

      There are in fact many scenarios in which IE is better than Firefox. Granted, Firefox remains my default browser. It suits my my nerdy needs excellently. However, there are a number of sites that I need every day, that Firefox doesn't render properly , or doesn't work with at all. Note that Slashdot isn't in the "need" category. I have to keep IE around for those situations.

      You can blame this on non-standard HTML. You can blame it on ActiveX. You can blame it on NTLM and a slightly non-standard usage of kereberos on NT domains. Most people don't care if it ain't fair. What people see is that there are almost no sites that Firefox can do, but IE can, while there are many that IE can load, that Firefox can not.

      Thus, IE appears to work, and probably does work better, for most users.

      --
      My motto: "A cat is no trade for integrity."
    32. Re:Why is it better? by RetroGeek · · Score: 1

      Firefox can automagically download and install plugins for you

      Yes, you're right. I meant extensions :-)

      I still think people are too afraid of breaking something to make changes. I know people who have been "using" a computer for several years, yet when I point out that they can set some preferences they get all defensive (read paranoid). Everyone lives in their own comfort zone.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    33. Re:Why is it better? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      What people see is that there are almost no sites that Firefox can do, but IE can, while there are many that IE can load, that Firefox can not.
      I'll agree that the number of sites rendered properlu by Firefox is lower than IE's, but come on... 'almost no sites Firefox can do'? I think you meant something else. I browse the web with Firefox all the time and *virtually never* come across a site that doesn't render/work 100% fine.

    34. Re:Why is it better? by srleffler · · Score: 1
      Of course, you do have to factor in the 15-20MB of Firefox updates to fix security holes. We're up to 1.03 now, with 1.04 coming out in a couple days, and every update requires downloading the whole browser again from scratch. The MSIE updates have better automation too.

      I'm guessing you have broadband. The slashdot rendering problem only shows up on dialup connections. The display bug shows up when the page is rerendered multiple times during the download, which only happens on a slower connection.

      Yes, I am a Firefox user and hate IE, but nobody gains from having a false picture of the merits of the two browsers.

    35. Re:Why is it better? by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      I've been a happy MyIE/Maxthon user for a couple of years now - and yes, it has effective ad-blocking.

      It also has the advantage of being a Windows "native" - the interface for Firefox looks a little amateur by comparison, aside from its resource hogging.

    36. Re:Why is it better? by SComps · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Just so you know, the ability to render badly formatted pages "correctly" is _not_ a good thing, because it promotes bad coding.


      Maybe it's just me, but I really disagree with that. The ability to render badly formatted pages indicates a flexibility to produce output from poorly written code. Most of the world doesn't care about 110% compliant HTML, it cares about being able to see the webpage they've requested.

      Most people just don't care about the code behind the window.

    37. Re:Why is it better? by sean23007 · · Score: 1

      Well, while he was browsing he realized that he was running Windows and desperately needed to patch his machine. Since he's an expert, he knew that he needed to go to the software update website, but nothing worked, because Firefox is inferior to IE (not because windowsupdate.com blocks all non-IE browsers, of course). As a result of attempting to browse the internet with Firefox instead of IE, his Windows machine was hacked within minutes and Russians got his credit card number. Clearly, this is not a problem with Windows, or with windowsupdate.com. It can only be because Firefox isn't as good as IE.

      Bill, you're a genius!

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    38. Re:Why is it better? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Maybe when it has a MSI installer and correctly caches web content in a Active Directory environment (no, you idiot, don't transmit the web cache over the network!), maybe corporations might START looking at using it. Right now, it doesn't work in a corporate environment.

    39. Re:Why is it better? by MynockGuano · · Score: 1

      Please do list how you manage to reach 10Mb worth of extensions dear anonymous coward

      By installing half of TBE.

    40. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For one, slashdot renders properly in IE. Secondly it does come with my box - not as a 4 Mb download I have to make afterwards.

      Slashdot comes with your windows box? It didn't come with mine, but I don't remeber a download.

    41. Re:Why is it better? by masklinn · · Score: 1

      1- Installing TBE is retarded, even TBE author advises you NOT to install it
      2- Although it's slow and bloated, TBE install is quite light since the package is "only" 281kb
      3- Let's add TBE and Web Developper (fully localized version, the english only one being only 110k), we're reaching 500kb (280+230), ok, now what? As a fairly extensive extensions user (I have ~30 extensions loaded) my extensions folder (with uncompressed extensions y'know, not packaged ones) is a mere 3.5Mb, compressing it yields under a megabyte of data...

      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    42. Re:Why is it better? by Silverlancer · · Score: 1

      There are certain settings in the about:config you can set to fix that ;). Of course it should run fine without tweaking to begin with...

    43. Re:Why is it better? by SunFan · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem with Firefox at the moment is that these features aren't well-advertised and you have to do a lot of googling to find documentation on the more esoteric stuff.

      I found most of the important customizations in the preferences dialog, such as unchecking all the automatic stuff and crippling javascript, and the bookmarks editor is fairly self-explanitory. The Flash blocker extention is also critical, but was easy to install. Occasionally, I'll dip into about:config to tweak my useragent and a few other things, but those are 100% optional. Probably the hardest thing by far, at least on UNIX, is to put all the appropriate symlinks into the plugins directory.

      Perhaps Firefox should direct users to the preferences area on the first use, at least to make it clearer there is more than just a browser window.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
    44. Re:Why is it better? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Just curious, but is it really fair to compare to IE? I know you say "any other browser", but IE is the primary "other browser".

      How much of IE's RAM footprint is hidden in Windows system processes that are running? Just curious, I really have no idea.

    45. Re:Why is it better? by megarich · · Score: 1

      Your right what does make i.e soo much better? You can't go on saying something is better and then not explain why its not better. Although in this case its sadly implied "its better because I own ms and you don't!"

    46. Re:Why is it better? by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Which i haven't installed for slashdot isn't broken in my Firefox rendering

      Now that you mention it, I haven't seen the messed up Firefox/Slashdot rendering in quite some time. Perhaps it was fixed in 1.0.3?

    47. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      almost no sites that Firefox can do, but IE can.

      Think you missed the qualification there. That wasn't saying that there were no sites that firefox can do full stop!
    48. Re:Why is it better? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      the fact that if some browser weren't included things would be worse

      Yes, its too bad MS killed the ability of box makers to install whatever web browser (or other software they wanted) on the computer and have it easy to find by say, putting an icon on the desktop.

      I remember when Netscape couldn't even pay OEMs to put Netscape on the computer because the OEMs didn't want to lose their "preferred" status with MS. Supposedly, with the "end" of the anti-trust suit, OEMs could pre-install Firefox on their boxes. Are any of them doing this for a competitive advantage, like they would in the old days?

    49. Re:Why is it better? by fLameDogg · · Score: 0
      I have to agree with you about many users being too afraid to "break something" to do even simple tweaking. One person in a newsgroup I read has been urged by other readers several times to switch to a new profile in Outlook Express to solve some problem or other. (I'm not convinced it's going to help, but I don't use OE much, and not at all for Usenet, so I haven't butted in.) She keeps saying she's going to try it one day, but she's--wait for it--too afraid of breaking something.

      I see it also with people I help/work with. They will follow my directions, but most of them are too afraid to just poke around and see what happens.

      --
      fD
    50. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was trying to say that while there are IE only sites, there aren't Firefox only sites - which is of course an effect of Firefox's superior standards conformance!

    51. Re:Why is it better? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      I keep hearing this, and I have no idea where it comes from.

      http://www.cbserviceslondon.com/FireFox/FirefoxMem Usage.png

      Over 4 hours CPU time, and using less than 4.5MB RAM. Do you know how long you have to keep a browser running to use 4 hours of CPU time? Weeks. What did I do to get this figure? Nothing, really. I cleared the cache, then looked what it was using.

      Hell, explorer.exe is taking over three times what Firefox is, and it does jack all in comparison.
      I don't know where you get your memory usage figures from, but it's certainly not my experience.....

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    52. Re:Why is it better? by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just me, but I really disagree with that. The ability to render badly formatted pages indicates a flexibility to produce output from poorly written code. Most of the world doesn't care about 110% compliant HTML, it cares about being able to see the webpage they've requested.


      I disagree, not in principal but in practice. Remember that the reason we have this abomination that passes itself off as HTML is because IE was:

      1) So lax about it
      2) Encouraged it by not following the standards
      3) People wanted to target the #1 browser

      Now if people targetted HTML compliance, and proper formatting we wouldn't have to worry about being locked in ever. A webmaster would design 1 site and it would just work. Remember although the user doesn't care how it's written, the user will make a fuss that the site fails. The more users raising a fuss about badly coded sites, the faster they will disappear into oblivon.

      What I want to happen is the following:

      1) IE users move off big time, Firefox, Opera, Safari, etc. reach a combined browser dominance of ~80% of the market.
      2) At this point, Mozilla, Opera, & Apple own the market. They include a "Strict Mode" that will only render properly coded pages, default to on!
      3) Users bitch to webmasters@foo until the rest of the community is now in tune with the standards.

      This would be the greatest thing for the internet in general. Thereby reducing lock in and increasing standards. Unfortunately by the time IE bites the dust, there will probably be a newer, bigger and badder distraction on the internet that will fill in the hole...

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    53. Re:Why is it better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have heard that even on the Microsoft campus, a lot of people have been using Maxthon b/c it's the only way to do tabbed browsing w/ the IE engine.

      Just the lack of tabbed browsing alone marks IE as being way behind. The only thing it's better for is within-company intranet sites designed by lazy %%%%s who didn't code to standards.

    54. Re:Why is it better? by securehack5 · · Score: 1

      If its "just another browser" , what makes internet explorer any different? How is it better, these comments about iexplore and firefox are pointless and a waste of time. Make a list of current features and downfalls for each browser and leave it to the consumer to decide what is better.

    55. Re:Why is it better? by Headcase88 · · Score: 1
      Even out of the box, FireFox is marginally better than IE, though. It is nearly impossible to argue that IE is actually better than Firefox, 'cept perhaps two points:
      1. Some sites that I've never been to don't support FF fully (The so-called /. bug doesn't affect much)
      2. IE comes with Windows, but Gates wouldn't want to admit that that is the reason IE is "better", would he?
      Meanwhile, FF renders pages faster (it seems faster to me, anyway), doesn't accumulate Spyware as quickly (and the Open Source community reacts as fast to it as IE ever will), has tabbed browsing, more inuitive text searches (by this I mean ctrl+f), a less cluttered toolbar, uses a capable search engine by deault*, is less likely to lose time-consuming information**, and all this on top of the ability to quickly add themes and plug-ins (Forecast Fox and Tabbrowser Preferences are some of the better ones).

      Gates is following Hitler's rule; people are more likely to believe a big lie (IE is better than Firefox) than a small one (IE is comparable to Firefox). Hell, they're both big lies if you ask me.

      *Don't believe me? Try typing "video games" into the address bar of both browsers; Firefox does a Google I'm Feeling Lucky and brings up Gamespot. IE uses MSN search and, after 10 lines of sponsers and news, brings up the Cincinatti tourism page as a first choice. I wish I was making this shit up.

      ** Example: Sometimes my mom will be typing up an email for a few minutes and accidentally click on some link and leave the page. In IE, this oftentimes loses the information forever. In Firefox, click "Back" and it's almost always still there. Your mileage may vary...
      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    56. Re:Why is it better? by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      Well, look out for more legitimate sites, too. I recall that Newgrounds allowed advertisers to sell their slots to other advertisers, which led NG "unable" to control the kind of stuff in their ads (including possible spyware). "Unable" as in they didn't want to threaten their sponsors by not allowing this sort of behaviour; they needed the money back then and now they're starting to clean up their ads to support growth of the site.

      Lots of other sites happen to contain ads with similar stories, which is why one will likely have Spyware on their computer even if they don't download anything suspicious. Any browser, of course, has it's own unique loopholes that let spyware in, and each browser has a team that's out to fix those problems up. Firefox seems more reactive compared to IE, ironic since Microsoft is the one with all the money.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    57. Re:Why is it better? by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was primarily comparing to to Opera, which has an extremely similar set to Firefox, when the most common plugins are used.

    58. Re:Why is it better? by Rallion · · Score: 1

      People say it's Windows fault, which makes me wonder why other browsers (and I do NOT mean IE) use so much less RAM.

      35MB does tend to be just about right in my experience for actual physical memory usage -- most of it gets swapped out into virtual memory, so that using the browser slows down my entire system.

      The bottom line is that whether it is actually using the RAM or not, it's either making it unavailable for other programs, or running slowly because of swapping.

    59. Re:Why is it better? by Rallion · · Score: 1

      My guess is that that's all paged. You don't have the TM set to display VM usage, so I don't know. I say this because if I start the latest version of Firefox, with no extensions installed, it uses 18MB of memory (+10MB VM) right off the bat, with the default start page. (Just a google search box...)

    60. Re:Why is it better? by mikefe · · Score: 1

      I'm sure all of the times I've download the various versions of Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird have outweighed many times the amount of data my machines have downloaded for IE/OE. And I'm not counting the non-windows systems I have.

      Luckily, FF/TB 1.1 will have incremental updates that will reduce the download requirements for updates.

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
    61. Re:Why is it better? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Think about the following:

      1- The original IE team was disbanded. The codebase has not been maintained seriously for *years*
      2- Chances are this codebase is ugly and huge, and we all know that IE is very buggy and non-standard compliant.
      3- Microsoft cannot allow IE to change every 3 months, and they cannot afford to start from scratch all over again.
      4- Microsoft has a history of perverting standards to their own end.
      5- Microsoft has lots of resources, but as we all know, putting more people on a late project makes it even later.

      Microsoft has been resting on its laurels for a little too long.

      Given all of the above, I'd say the next version of IE will simply be worse than the current one. For Microsoft, things are going to get worse before they get better, exactly how it went for Mozilla. Now however Mozilla has put its hard years behind, they are on a roll.

      I wouldn't be surprised if the version of IE that will come with Longhorn will be so bad that people will switch en masse.

    62. Re:Why is it better? by tobybuk · · Score: 1

      Some interesting points. Let me play devils advocate a little:

      >> 1- The original IE team was disbanded. The code base has not been maintained seriously for *years*

      So it may take people a little while to get into. But MS employ some very clever people here.

      >> 2- Chances are this code base is ugly and huge, and we all know that IE is very buggy and non-standard compliant.
      Most of it was in the source leak that happened a few months ago - It's not that ugly (so I've read)

      >> 3- Microsoft cannot allow IE to change every 3 months, and they cannot afford to start from scratch all over again.

      Agreed about changing all the time, but as for cannot afford - plain wrong.

      >> 4- Microsoft has a history of perverting standards to their own end.
      Not relevant to this argument. Because they have 90% of the Market they can make their own standards to a degree.

      >> 5- Microsoft has lots of resources, but as we all know, putting more people on a late project makes it even later.

      There is no suggestion that the IE update is late or behind schedule - longhorn maybe but not IE.

      I think MS will come out fighting with a cracking browser that will be good enough to stop people moving to Firefox (until Firefox gets a major update anyway.)

  5. SOAP by boschmorden · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?."

    I didn't know Gmail had a SOAP interface.

    1. Re:SOAP by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      XmlHTTP without ActiveX.

      AJAX apps are getting more popular now.

    2. Re:SOAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's exactly the point, the normal user doesn't need a "SOAP" interface when he/she can do everything just using a browser

    3. Re:SOAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contrary to what MS would like you to believe...

      WebServices != SOAP

      SOAP is *one* implementation/standard for implementing webservices. There are several others that have been around a lot longer.

      Of course, if you are a MS fanboy, then webservices are SOAP, and are a shiny new thing that just came out when .NET did! Oh, and MS invented webservices too!

    4. Re:SOAP by boschmorden · · Score: 1

      Wow, way to take a stab in the dark. Unfortunately, you're wrong, I'm not MS fanboi. Better luck next time! Maybe you should remember to take your medication.

    5. Re:SOAP by BRonsk · · Score: 0

      Oh, and MS invented webservices too! It's only fair if you consider that they invented the web in the first place... Talk about an inovative company !

  6. "just another browser"... by respyre · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... that had things like tabbed browsing and live bookmarks a year before ie 7. psh

    1. Re:"just another browser"... by Stween · · Score: 1

      You do realise that if it were the other way around, and IE had tabbed browsing before Firefox, Firefox would still be labelled the better of the two? Perhaps the addition of tabbed browsing would even constitute cries of "feature-bloat!".

      Oh, we're a fickle lot, aren't we?

    2. Re:"just another browser"... by mcwop · · Score: 1
      There was a time when IE did have nice features in comparison to other browsers. The IE for Mac for a time (OS 9) was decent.

      Now it just plain sucks in comparison to other options.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    3. Re:"just another browser"... by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      There was a time when IE did have nice features in comparison to other browsers.

      You mean back when there was something called "competition" in the browser market?

      Then came the monopoly with its years of stagnation.

      Now there's a breath of competition, and MS is once again forced to actually improve its software.

      And some people don't know why monopolies are bad.

      So what's the greatest new feature that can be found in Word or Exel in the last 5 years?

    4. Re:"just another browser"... by OneSeventeen · · Score: 1

      Actually, I used to love IE, until I started researching web standards. Primarily, the CSS box model. Now that I'm into using the DOM with CSS and javascript, I'm even more IE opposed.

      If IE7 cut activex support, adhered to w3c based standards, and used normal javascript instead of the microsoft version, then I would happily use it. The fact that firefox does this, AND has extensions, AND has the DOM inspector, and more, that makes me ask why go back to IE?

      I've even read IE7 won't adhere to W3C standards, because microsoft doesn't like the standards. Great, now I get to develop and design websites, then spend twice as long getting it to work in IE.

      If only microsoft didn't insist on creating their own standards, maybe I wouldn't be so against purchasing their software. Glad it's finally having an impact on them, even if it is only in the media realm.

      --
      "Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed." -C.S. Lewis
  7. One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the small businesses out there want support for a product even if they never use it. They want to know it's there. They also want to know that it's going to be supported by the same people for a long time. Think of it as security.

    This isn't about which is the better product... it's about which one will get the project done AND be supported if shit hits the fan.

    Support does NOT mean Forums or RTFM. They want real people. The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it. If it breaks they want someone to call to get it working again.

    The same is for large companies except in the fact that they want support of future innovations. You are institituting a large scale database project... you are using My-SQL... something goes wrong... what do you do? Post in a forum, email a friend...

    Same situation you are using MS-SQL, you can call tech support and bam get an answer or at least a much more educated idea.

    I'm dissing open source. It's awesome and I think it keeps innovation alive and is always an alternative. But without the support... you aren't going to get the backing you might want.

    1. Re:One word reason "Support" by lachlan76 · · Score: 5, Informative

      you are using My-SQL... something goes wrong... what do you do? Post in a forum, email a friend...

      Or you can get support from MySQL...you did buy a commercial license right?

    2. Re:One word reason "Support" by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it."

      Then why do they use Windows rather than Linux? You just defeated your own argument: they're more concerned with having someone to blame when it goes wrong than having something that 'just works'.

    3. Re:One word reason "Support" by FauxPasIII · · Score: 1

      > you are using My-SQL... something goes wrong...
      what do you do?

      Hmmm... does somebody want to point out to this guy that MySQL is, and has for a very long time, been funded by professional support?

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    4. Re:One word reason "Support" by thelexx · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    5. Re:One word reason "Support" by EpsCylonB · · Score: 0, Troll

      Then why do they use Windows rather than Linux?

      Linux isn't easy.

    6. Re:One word reason "Support" by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      It's all about people being used to Windows.
      To fix this problem, they need to learn about better OSes right in the school. Oh, wait... UK?

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    7. Re:One word reason "Support" by strider44 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      plenty of people think that the level of support in OSS is superior to that of Windows, simply because you can have competition of support. Businesses etc pay third parties to support their software. Simple competition between those third parties drives down cost of support and generally raises service.

    8. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah. Like the time our exchange email server went down (hardware) and bringing it up on the new machine took a week with the techs on the phone to microsoft almost all week. Seems there were problems: (1) the version we had didn't work on the new MS operating system (2) the new version couldn't import the mail files and user preferences from the old one.

    9. Re:One word reason "Support" by mcsporran · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've always found it interesting that management put so much store in support, when what they are paying for is usually an Indian, who will sound enthausiastic, but in reality is just following the scripts. If it's an issue that a competent admin can't resolve, there is very little chance that the "support" will resove anything without you having to repeat yourself (and wait) endlessly as the fault gets escalated through various layers of support. Typing the error message into google may be a faster and more effective solution.

      --
      This is NOT a signature.
    10. Re:One word reason "Support" by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      You haven't had to admin both of them have you?

    11. Re:One word reason "Support" by telbij · · Score: 1

      It's all about people being used to Windows.

      This is really what it comes down to. Windows' inertia is astonishing. What makes it even harder to combat is the fractured nature of the Linux desktop. As geeks we want to be able to customize everything, which I believe is open source software's greatest gift to humanity. Unfortunately all this configurability comes at the price of usability. As Linux gains more momentum, hopefully some company will emerge that can provide a 'standard' window manager and desktop environment that can gain critical mass and public acceptance. The beauty of Linux is that the other options will continue to exist for anyone who wants them.

    12. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As many others have already pointed out, you can get support for virtually all OSS products. For small and medium businesses, that's fine. For large businesses, it's no better than the support you get from commercial software vendors.

      When you've deployed thousands of copies of a package and a few percent of your installs crash every day, it can be devestating, but I don't know of a software or hardware vendor that will even look at the problem unless you can reproduce it in a reasonable amount of time on a single machine.

      Meanwhile, OSS developers are happy if you can reproduce the problem at all. It doesn't really matter to them if it takes you several days and thousands of machines or not, they will work on it.

      The net effect is that for large companies, the only reasonable way to get support is to use OSS, higher OSS developers and look to the OSS community for support. If the commercial software vendors don't already know this, they are in denial.

    13. Re:One word reason "Support" by necrognome · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you want to play the commercial license game, then there are superior DBMSs, like, pretty much every other DBMS out there (Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, ...). The business case for MySQL is "free as in beer."

      --


      Let's get drunk and delete production data!
    14. Re:One word reason "Support" by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

      I happen to agree with you here. I'm trying to convert some of our systems from windows to linux, and ran into alot of questions from people. The most heard one is "What do we do if something goes wrong? We have (paid) support now. Do we have this guarantee as well with opensource programs?" to which i have to say "no" most of the times. I can't give them black on white that if Evolution decides to crash on every system, or OpenOffice screws up huge documents, that this will be fixed in a short period of time.

      But most of all people don't want to make the switch because this whole setup (linux instead of windows in a large corperate environment) is not 'mature' enough; the amount of companies running a sitewide windows environment is ridiculously higher than companies running an opensource variant. Or so i would think. Anyone who claims different is invited to present me (actually, the people i'm trying to convince) with some evidence.

    15. Re:One word reason "Support" by Peeteriz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Last year I have had an index corruption on a sizeable (32 mil entries at 2kb) table on our live MSSQL server, and we couldn't find out a way to do anything with that index file, since all attempts to do this just returned error messages.
      Indexes are recreatable, and we could easily have time for dropping all indexes, deleting any references to such indexes and recreating them - but the glitch wouldn't allow to do this.
      The MS knowledge base for that error message contained a single sentence that basically said - 'Known issue since 2003, no workaround available'.
      The phone support suggested us to reinstall the computer/SQL server, and populate the data from backups.

      We had other issues with other, fairly niche commercial software - and it is clear that the vendor support is useless, and it is not an argument.
      The real support will be provided either by in-house people or third-party support companies. Or by the vendor charging extra in an attempt to compete with these third parties.
      This support is as available for open source programs as for closed-source programs. It is a separate service.

    16. Re:One word reason "Support" by philipkd · · Score: 1

      Is this founded on experience?

      Nobody calls Microsoft when they have a problem, do they? If I knew my employees were throwing away our money on expensive Microsoft support, I'd fire them.

      If you call Microsoft, you will lose your first hour talking to a dimwit who is just fumbling through canned responses.

      If that dimwitted, canned response is good enough for your company, then you need to re-hire.

    17. Re:One word reason "Support" by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      A midget in a box with a notepad is better a better DBM than MySQL :)

    18. Re:One word reason "Support" by Xarius · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that. If you took someone who had never used a computer before and sat them in front of a fully featured linux distro, they would not find it any easier or any more difficult than windows.

      You only know what you learn.

      --
      C17H21NO4
    19. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same is for large companies except in the fact that they want support of future innovations. You are institituting a large scale database project... you are using My-SQL... something goes wrong... what do you do? Post in a forum, email a friend...

      In my case and many others, switch to postgres.

    20. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The business case for MySQL is "free as in beer."

      You've never read mysql's licensing policy, have you? They claim to be GPL, but it's not quite the case.

    21. Re:One word reason "Support" by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      Linux isn't easy.

      Neither is Windows when you hit a snag. Linux is at least 100% configurable from the command line.

    22. Re:One word reason "Support" by mrmagos · · Score: 1
      I always fail to see the point in this argument.

      When there is a serious problem, who do you think a small business owner calls first? The software vendor? Absolutely not. They will call the retailer whom they purchased the product from, or the local support consultant, who has been contracted before in offering support. In most cases, this is one in the same.

      Yes, there will be cases where the consultant won't know the solution. Now, who will he call to find the solution? Do you think the customer (small business) really cares, as long as it is resloved?

      Personally, I use my judement of the situation. Is this a business-critical problem? If not, I'll probably check the forums, or call a friend (actually, I will do a google search first, regardless of severity). If it is serious, I'll call the vendor and pay for the support call. I've never had to, but this would be a call to Novell (suse) or Microsoft for me. They charge about the same.

      If you're intelligent enough to make good decisions for yourself, and reccommendations for others, this should be a non-issue.

      --
      Never start vast projects with half-vast ideas.
    23. Re:One word reason "Support" by EpsCylonB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your right, Windows is easier because most people are already familliar with it.

      The issue isn't why windows is easy, the issue is that windows is easier than linux.

    24. Re:One word reason "Support" by LnxAddct · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then you haven't used Linux. For the past 2 years or so Linux has been superior to Windows in both GUIs, stability, and ease of use. I've got everyone from my 7 year old cousin to my girlfriend currently using Fedora. Everything "just works" and they love the features avaible to them (even just little things like being able to drag a file into a folder and have it instantly available to the web at large, or drag it into a different folder and have it password protected but still accessible to the web). If an admin isn't skilled enough to run linux, then they shouldn't be in charge of *any* system. They are not qualified regardless of their years of experience or degree/certificates. If you only know one OS and only certain applciations on that OS I don't want you anywhere near anything I'm doing because you'll only know one way of doing it and you'll be completely ignorant of possible alternatives that might work out better in the end. Only knowing one OS is like only knowing one programming language (can you even call yourself a programmer if you only know one language?), if you are one of those people you dont really have an interest in what you are doing, you were probably taught it at school and thought it'd be a good money maker. I want someone who knows and understands the options available to them so that they can assist me in making the best choice. If all they know is Microsoft, I can assure you that someone somewhere is losing money that they shouldn't be.
      Regards,
      Steve

    25. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither is Windows.

    26. Re:One word reason "Support" by rarity · · Score: 1

      Linux isn't easy.


      Neither's Windows. It's just better at disguising it's lack of ease of use beneath shiny dialog boxes and cutesy animated dogs. Peel away the surface and you'll find the same scary complicatedness that makes up any operating system. People (for values of "people" that don't include "hardcore techies") just want things to work, preferably without any independent thought and an absolute minimum of dialog-, manual- or FAQ-reading. I wonder just how helpful this attitude has been in helping M$ secure their position.

    27. Re:One word reason "Support" by dodobh · · Score: 1

      Linux is easier than Windows.

      Your comment and mine have equal value.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    28. Re:One word reason "Support" by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Informative

      Realistically, how many people get *actual* support from Microsoft?

      I mean incidents, not just knowledge-base articles.

      I work in a ... very... large company (one of the top five in the Fortune 500) and I'm in the Australian section of one division. Our support is handled by Dell. We don't ever call Microsoft, and frankly I'd be stunned if Dell staff do either.

      If Dell switched to RedHat, that would make no difference to the users as far as support goes. We'd still call our HelpDesk and they're either Dell or go to Dell as the next level.

      The original OS vendor is neither here nor there. The support comes from other companies.

      Even if a company was to call Microsoft and log an issue, there's a big support cost. Windows doesn't come with support for free (possibly a couple of phone calls for personal users though). Businesses have to pay for support. Why call someone when you can get a contractor on-site?

    29. Re:One word reason "Support" by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      Linux is easier than Windows.

      Your comment and mine have equal value.


      Except that your comment is divorced from reality.

      Microsoft have founded there entire software empire on the lowest common denominator of users (often at the expense of security).

    30. Re:One word reason "Support" by gr8dude · · Score: 1

      I agree with the opinions stated by others.. There's one thing I have to add though - about Microsoft and their support.

      Their knowledge base is very well built. Many problems one encounters can be easily solved, provided that the person knows how to use the 'search' button.

      I believe that the quality of a company's support is not measured in 'how many calls we handle', but in 'how many calls were avoided due to our fantabulous knowledge-base\forum\FAQ...'

    31. Re:One word reason "Support" by huge+colin · · Score: 1

      Mm... no, I don't think so.

    32. Re:One word reason "Support" by drakken33 · · Score: 1

      That's the point I was going to make.

      Let me just add, why would a company be "institituting a large scale database project" on site without employing a competent admin for the DB system they plan to use anyway?

      --
      Andy.
    33. Re:One word reason "Support" by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Oh my, an anectode! Clearly MS support isn't worth shit because they didn't help you!

      Anyway, it basically comes down to the question of "What is support?"

      Does support mean that the vendor guarantees a bug-free program and will work to fix any bugs? Some would say yes. Personally, I don't think this is realistic for all cases. Sometimes shit happens, like in your case.

      Some might argue that at least a bug listing of "you're fucked" is more support than nothing.

    34. Re:One word reason "Support" by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Hah, no kidding. In MySQL, or some other free database, it might have taken you a week of research and fiddling with things before you came to the conclusion that you were, indeed, fucked. At least Microsoft's site gave you the answer right away.

    35. Re:One word reason "Support" by drakken33 · · Score: 1

      But what's your role in the company? If you're in the IT dept. then it's your job to have at least a working knowledge of any systems you plan to role out and support it in house. Otherwise you have to convice the IT dept. that they should acquire this knowledge and support it in house. A good Linux admin should need third party support in the same way that a good Windows admin shouldn't.

      You can get support for Linux from third parties if you really want it. Red Hat, for example, offer support for their enterprise offerings.

      --
      Andy.
    36. Re:One word reason "Support" by statusbar · · Score: 1

      What did these same people do when Microsoft Office or Outlook screwed up? Did Microsoft fix the problem in a short period of time? Or did they say 'This problem might be fixed in next year's version'?

      --jeff++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    37. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hah, no kidding. In MySQL, or some other free database, it might have taken you a week of research and fiddling with things before you came to the conclusion that you were, indeed, fucked. At least Microsoft's site gave you the answer right away.

      So, buy a support contract from MySQL if you want support. Same as MSSQL except that the support company is optional.

    38. Re:One word reason "Support" by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      So he picked a bad example. That doesn't invalidate his point.

    39. Re:One word reason "Support" by malakai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I got to call bull on this one.

      I've had my share (roughly four) of 'major' issues with SQL Server, all with very large databases (ie, just rebuild it from a backup wasn't an alternative). Calling MS PSS is always the last choice. In all cases I found the SQL Server support beyond incredible. In two cases I had them sending me a runtime debugging monitor and they had top tier PSS support actually watch and log in realtime SQL Server taking a crap.

      The issue in one case had to do with computed columns and indexed views. While syntaxtically legit what I wrote to occur on that column, it defeated the Deterministic/non-Deterministic requirement check, and this at some point led to an invalid mem read.

      The amount of support I got was almost too much to handle. The app was not fully in production (call it final testing), and I was almost receiving too much communication and phone calls from MS PSS on the issue (was damn busy). They figured out a work around for me, tested it against the database for me (that was one big-ass rar file I set them. around 62gig for the set of data we were testing aginst, they downloaded it all weekend). To develop the work around they even looked at my data access layer and made sure the performance would be adequate.

      And, in the end, this PSS support call was free. The problem was in SQL server, not hardware or setup.

      I have other stories for the other serious problems I've had with sql. I can't attest to this level of support on any other MS product, but with SQL, you get more than what you pay for.

      p.s, as part of the anti-FUD, can you post the KB article # that has "Known issue since 2003, no workaround available" in it.

    40. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same situation you are using MS-SQL, you can call tech support and bam get an answer or at least a much more educated idea.

      If you've got the 'right' kind of support. Two years ago we ran into a problem with Power Users (DBAs in this case) trying to initialize performance counters on Win2k Advanced Servers - running SQL Server. We're talking a large bank - 4th largest in the U.S.

      We were told by our MS *Premier* support guy that this was clearly a SQL Server problem (it wasn't) and the bank didn't have the right kind of support to get immediate assistance.

    41. Re:One word reason "Support" by Politburo · · Score: 1

      True, but as others have noted, what's the point of using a free program if you have to pay for the support?

      This isn't to say that the MS-style is better, but I think it hurts the idea of "Free Software" when there's a big catch -- gotta pay for support.

    42. Re:One word reason "Support" by megarich · · Score: 2, Informative
      Your right but what's sad I trust forums more than I trust "real" support. Forums can give me quick and hard to find solutions. Support people just give me a lot of BS with sometimes no solutions and the good ol' runaround....

      I never called MS-SQL support so I don't know if they really are as good as you claim. All I do know from my past experience a generally issue you can find in a forum easily and can call up and get an easy answer. A bigger problem it may take days to get an answer from support. So yes while the support is there, its not always as simple as "bam ... get an answer or at least a much more educated idea"

    43. Re:One word reason "Support" by Some+Bitch · · Score: 1
      True, but as others have noted, what's the point of using a free program if you have to pay for the support?

      The point is freedom, not lack of cost.

    44. Re:One word reason "Support" by hedora · · Score: 1

      I had the same problem with MySQL. As I couldn't tell what the problem was from the error message, I cut and pasted it into google, and after 2 minutes, found out that you type this into the MySQL console:

      repair table foo;

      To think that I could have saved myself all of that time and hassle if I had paid Microsoft for a support contract...

      (My MythTV computer tends to overheat and crash, and MySQL is set to MyISAM, so index corruption is to be expected...I would change it to use durable transactional tables if the data was more important.)

      In general, I've found that the 'first line' of technical support is internet search engines. Open source offerings generally archive tech support requests made to mailing lists, and these lists are usually read by the developers.

      This means that searching for an answer online is often easier and more effective than calling a good tech support line would be.

      For example, I've hit bugs that were last seen five years ago by one person and found the solution online. If that bug had been handled over the phone five years ago, and I had called tech support, what are the chances that I would have talked to someone that actually remembered how to solve the problem?

      That's not to say that professional tech support can't be worthwhile. However, the full disclosure of bug reports and problem resolutions with open source software give it a huge advantage. This probably means that the job of an open source tech support team is easier then the job of a closed source team, but I've never done professional technical support, so I don't know.

    45. Re:One word reason "Support" by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Was just discussing the general decline of tech support last week. Isn't it interesting how many companies will now refer users to a forum/discussion group to get their tech support questions answered? If you actually want them to help, you better be ready to pay.

      So the difference in support between commercial/non-commercial software is nothing in many cases. Your best bet/first line is the user community.

    46. Re:One word reason "Support" by thethibs · · Score: 1

      The most important feature of the open source movement is the effect it has on Microsoft's product planning.

      --
      I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
    47. Re:One word reason "Support" by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      When I impliment solutions for my customers whether it is based on FOSS or not, I am their primary support person. And yes, I am on call 24x7.

      Support really is not an issue anymore. The consultant is the support mechanism. The vendor may be an escalation point. But in FOSS, I can always go *to the developers* of the software and ask them. My role is to abstract the support process and get things back up and running fast.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    48. Re:One word reason "Support" by dodobh · · Score: 1

      Not really. Microsoft's empire was founded on _cheap_, and then on a bunch of marketing agreements which did not let PC makers ship other operating systems.

      Ease of use is a relatively new term, and it has come into use only because there are so many people who have learnt to use a particular interface and don't want it changed,

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    49. Re:One word reason "Support" by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Well, that certainly seems to depend on who you ask.. those shouting "Lower TCO!!" seem to be focused on cost, no?

      One must also recall that the context of a "what's the point of using a free program if you have to pay for the support?" comment is a managerial context. i.e., many people here talk about how to convince management to switch to OSS. One of these reasons is cost. Management generally isn't interested in ideological bullshit.

    50. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really don't get it, do you?

    51. Re:One word reason "Support" by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      MySQL is MUCH cheaper then Oracle, DB2 or SQL Server. It can easily cost $25,000 just to install Oracle (License, time, machine, consultant).

      The business case for MySQL is "free as in beer."

      The business case for MySQL is 'low cost for support', 'installs in 5 minutes', 'small resource usage' and 'simple to use'.

      However, I wouldn't recommend it for any large application.

    52. Re:One word reason "Support" by Burstgoof · · Score: 1

      Oh please. Just because Linux may have a better handle on security related issues, doesn't mean it 'just works' any more than Windows. The 'most people' referred to in the parent have no clue what security is or isn't happening behind the scenes...they just want an interface that works.

      Did the document open? Good. Now I edit it. Did the document save? Good.

      End of story.

    53. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you don't have to pay for support. You can, but you don't have to.

    54. Re:One word reason "Support" by Politburo · · Score: 1

      No, I think it's you (or whoever other ACs) that don't "get it"...

      I'm not arguing for or against anything in my posts here. I'm simply raising discussion points and wasting time at work. Not everyone has an ideological agenda.

      You can't assume that people will simply understand the concept of 'Libre Software' overnight, do you? The word "free" has different meanings. Because we live in a capitalist society, in the context of goods and services, free is generally assumed to mean "without cost". So when you say "Free Software" most people are thinking 'Hey, software for no money!' That's great. Now you take someone who is in charge of purchasing decisions, tell them "Hey, we want to use Free Software on this project. The support will cost $xxx." Most people will say "Free? Then why the fuck does it cost $xxx? That's not free!"

      If you don't understand how this confusion can occur at this point, don't bother replying.

    55. Re:One word reason "Support" by Politburo · · Score: 1

      That's correct. It's assumed in this discussion that support is desired.. this discussion stemmed from a situation where a person had an application that was not working properly, which is a situation where one generally desires support from the vendor.

    56. Re:One word reason "Support" by DA-MAN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft have founded there entire software empire on the lowest common denominator of users (often at the expense of security).

      Not true. Microsoft founded the entire software empire by capitalizing on opportunity presented.

      All of the non-geeks that I know hate Microsoft with a passion. Complain that nothing works as advertised. So how does a company stay on top when the majority of the users hate the product? Leverage.

      Microsoft has a lot of intertia from when it was the best thing around. Linux interfaces were pretty lame (fvwm anyone?) copies of Windows. MacOS had the most basic of task switching and crashed more often than not. And OS/2 tried to sell itself as Windows++, which was it's fatal move. Why buy Windows++ from IBM when I can wait for a real Windows release from Microsoft.

      Since then Microsoft has pretty much blackmailed every OEM into shipping with M$ latest and greatest at a discount or paying full price. Since paying full price on a product whose margins are ever shrinking was so bad for their business they went for it.

      Anyways my rant can be summed up into this:

      Microsoft founded a software empire by leveraging their monopoly illegaly (DOJ agrees). The fact that it's #1 is because users had no choice. In my area the #1 power comany is PG&E because it was the only choice forever, and now that there is deregulation and competition PG&E still has intertia.

      If you disagree and thin that Microsoft really got there by building easier to use software, then the Mac would be at the top spot. It's easier than shit, and was easier when all this was going on too.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    57. Re:One word reason "Support" by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      My MythTV computer tends to overheat and crash, and MySQL is set to MyISAM, so index corruption is to be expected...I would change it to use durable transactional tables if the data was more important.

      ...because nothing says "MySQL is t3h r0xx0rz" like telnetting into your TV to fix a corrupted table.

      Seriously, man, how much uber-1337 hypothetical MyISAM speed do you need to view a TV guide?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    58. Re:One word reason "Support" by hedora · · Score: 1

      That's kind of what I thought when I noticed it was set to MyISAM. The debian packages defaulted to it, and I'm too lazy to change it.

      If anything, that computer is too uber-l337...I'd be happy to trade 50% performance for hardware stability, but it's what I had laying around...

      (I wouldn't have mentioned the MyISAM thing, execpt that I didn't want to accuse MySQL of corrupting my data...)

      By the way, I ssh into my TV, and then view the program guide and listen to my ogg's over an encrypted, tunneled http connection. What do you think this is, the nineties?

      Telnet. Geez. ;)

    59. Re:One word reason "Support" by raw-sewage · · Score: 1
      Support does NOT mean Forums or RTFM. They want real people. The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it. If it breaks they want someone to call to get it working again.


      As a manager, though, I want people working for me who can read forums, who are willing to subscribe to mailing lists, who can R-and understand-TFM.

      I agree that most people are not technical in nature, and most probably don't care about the manuals, or any details about the system, but you have to have someone in your organization who can work in that capacity.

      Would you pay your own in-house tech support to have zero knowledge of your application and be nothing but the folks who call the commercial tech support?

      And if you want to completely outsource all of your technical work, fine, but you better pray that noone takes advantage of your ignorance.

      Case in point: the number of truly technical people in your organization should be proportional to the number of systems for which you expect support.

      Though, from my young, limited experience, corporate America seems as though it would rather pay outrageous one-time fees for support rather than pay a competant staff a reasonable salaray.

    60. Re:One word reason "Support" by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      It can easily cost $25,000 just to install Oracle (License, time, machine, consultant).

      I've installed Oracle on my own machine once or twice in the past. I'm no DBA, and this was hardly a production environment, but it really didn't take that long to do.

      Other than that, I agree with you. You use Oracle when you need Oracle. When you need Oracle, the licence is most likely one of the smaller costs associated with the project.

    61. Re:One word reason "Support" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did the document open? Good. Now I edit it. Did the document save? Good.

      Have you tried Ubuntu lately?
      That's pretty much how it works...

    62. Re:One word reason "Support" by KingBahamut · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm...this is a largely unfounded claim. Let us go down the line here.

      Commercial systems require their customers to depend on their companies for technical support. If there is a problem, users must often wait on hold (while paying for a toll call). Who in their right mind calls Microsoft anyway? While decentralized, it is often easier to get help with problems in Linux, because of a large community of developers and sysadmins that exist on any level, novice or veteran. As well as numerous At Cost Distros that actually give you support if you pay them for it -- Xandros, Linare, Redhat, Mandriva, and Suse/NLD. Ubuntu, rare in its form, offers support for a nominal fee per system.

      So the claim that RTFM and Forums are the only support structures available is Farkian Dumbass and Farkian Asinine. Clearly the words of an uneducated individual.

      And Honestly, using Messy SQL, Im forced to support this monumental peice of crap at my current place of business. MessySQL has nothing on Oracle, Sybase, MySQL, or PostGRESQL. It Truely is a POS (thats not Point of Service either).

      --
      "God of Rock, thank you for this chance to kick ass. "
    63. Re:One word reason "Support" by mikefe · · Score: 1

      And how much is your company paying MS for support?

      There is a well known rumor that MS supports their bigger/higher paying customers better than everyone else. Can you refute this?

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
    64. Re:One word reason "Support" by malakai · · Score: 1

      I'm a consultant. I don't pay MS any yearly support fee. I do subscribe to MSDN, but the yearly cost on that is like 600 bucks.

      The companies I was working for when the two biggest problems occured with SQL Server, both were not dealing directly with MS. They were buying their MS Product from a third party ( no MS -Select). they were pretty large, but had no direct deals with MS. Dell/Compaq-hp was who they went to with any issues.

      I think MS is smart enough to realize if someone's having an issue with SQL Server, it's more than likely not running a beauty parolors hair-management-system, and so they take extra care for those calls.

      Kinda like, I expect better support calling on the Visual C++ line, then calling ont he Excel VBA help line.

  8. My prediction for the future of MS by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Funny

    One day, Microsoft will market their own flavor of Linux, out of spite.

    1. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by maharg · · Score: 1

      .. and I will refuse to purchase it, also out of spite. Hah! Take that, Micro$haft !

      --

      $ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
      @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
    2. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by utlemming · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We all laugh, but an interesting move would be to have a version of Linux that would run Win32 binaries. Or at least a package that would allow Win32 packages to run. Honestly, how many of us /.er's would run that? All of the sudden you have the flexability of OSS with the freedom of being able to run whatever you want. I wouldn't be suprised if Microsoft was developing such a thing. Of course they wouldn't want to release such a beast unless it was nessasary -- when it looked like more and more were abandoning Windows for Linux.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    3. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      MS never does anything out of spite. There's no profit in it. (Isn't that the 300th Rule of Acquistion?)

    4. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by youknowmewell · · Score: 1

      They'll probably call it Lindows or something like that...

    5. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      I'd probably end up using a free downstream build called CentWin, or stick to Debian variants.

    6. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      I understand the Lindows/Linspire joke, but honestly I think Winux would be a more amusing name.

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    7. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by bhalo05 · · Score: 1

      The day that happens it the day it would be not necessary anymore, since that would mean windows monopoly'd have already fallen. Might be an ultimate desperate move, but I doubt it would be much useful to MS at that point.

    8. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by taylorwood · · Score: 1

      You just blew my mind.

    9. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Agilus · · Score: 0

      This sounds like what Apple has done with OS X. And I'd say it's been successful so far (it hooked me).

      --
      hackshop.com - My tech hobby project hub
    10. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by m50d · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nah. They want it to go the other way. They'll concentrate on SFU until it's up to the point where any random linux program works on it with a straight recompile. Then, windows will have the full spread of OSS programs available for it, as well as all the MS stuff, while linux only runs what it now runs.

      --
      I am trolling
    11. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Xyde · · Score: 1

      It would certainly halt linux development somewhat...why go to the effort of developing for linux when your win32 version will run mostly fine anyway?

    12. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Yosho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmmm.. A package that would allow Linux to run Win32 binaries? So, something that's not an emulator, but translates application's system calls from Win32 libraries to Linux libraries? I've even got a great recursive acronym for it! WINE is Not an Emulator!

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
    13. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, that will be MSUX? I think the M is redundant.

    14. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      By then, Microsoft's stock will have been unlisted, and their employees will have jumped ship to work at Red Hat, Novell, Sun, Apple, and IBM. The future lies in these companies, not Microsoft.

    15. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

      I think he meant a Win32 library implementation that doesn't blow chunks.

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    16. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, what do you think .NET IS???? They can just port that to whatever they want and you can run the apps. Duh! So we all switch to free Linux, we still have to pay M$ for .NET so we can run Office and everything else. Nothing changes. That's the plan.

      And don't tell me Mono will solve this. It will be the same game all over again. M$ puts their own proprietary crap in .NET and either doesn't tell anyone about it or patents parts of it.

      All is fair with M$ and war.

    17. Re:My prediction for the future of MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day, Microsoft will market their own flavor of Linux, out of spite.

      They already have: MS Linux: Shipping in November 2003.

  9. bleh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With that subject I was hoping the revolution had started and geeks where lining up in trenches near Redmond, this is just lame.

  10. Google GMail vs. Exchange? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google GMail doesn't seem like a serious threat to Exchange. Postfix, yes, but a third-party service which reads your email...no.

    1. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be joking. You are aware that in every IT shop, every Exchange admin's favorite activity is to read other people's emails, right? There is very little privacy in email -- scanning by a program interested in showing you ads is hardly worse than being under the scrutiny of a guy in the IT department who could actually do something malicious with the information.

    2. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by frostman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      GMail as a service shouldn't be attractive to businesses for precisely that reason.

      But what if Google sells a "GMail appliance?"

      All the features of GMail, but on your own VPN, and nobody but you controls the data. Starting to look more interesting.

      Add the ability to plug in any service you want where the ads normally are... company announcements, whatever.

      Now *that* would be really attractive, I think, to a lot of companies. I don't know how well their Search Appliance worked out, but a GMail appliance could indeed be a threat to Exchange.

      --

      This Like That - fun with words!

    3. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by rvw · · Score: 1

      Gmail is not a threat for Exchange, as they are different services. But it is a threat for Hotmail, and that is MS as well....

    4. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      An OPEN SOURCE GMail appliance? If not, it's not going to be much different than closed-source Exchange to most of the people on this board...

    5. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by Verio+Fryar · · Score: 1

      All the SMTP servers read your messages. It is part of the protocol!! Also, most mail servers can be modified to analyze the messages (i.e. antivirus), extract statistics, even copying the messages. Your ISP could make a profile of you in the same way that gmail could.

    6. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      It's all about the service agreement, bucko. Businesses are usually happy to let ISPs retain and filter mail for backup and spam, but they would be pissed if someone started using the content to target advertising or look for prospects. That last bit is what makes GMail unique; you're authorizing your ISP to act on the information in mail not intended for it.

    7. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by downsize · · Score: 1

      we are getting a bit OT here, but within the context of the gmail vs exchange and your comment regarding reading other's email because exchange allows it, is bogus.
      it does happen, but it is *clearly* logged (that another user has another's mailbox open). and the majority of the time, it is only when security plays a factor, either by request or authorization that you must scan (and there better be damn good cause). however, this is a very grey area that has been argued many times over one's privacy at a company which employes you.
      however, gmail is a minor threat to hotmail, perhaps not yahoo at all, but all will die to either fastmail or shinyfeet as they give what the user's want, not what the company wants as a new revenue stream. and even if there was a gmail appliance, they would have to provide admin ability to access emails of the accounts created.

      --
      do you have shinyfeet?
    8. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by xtracto · · Score: 1

      And that may be the way :). I was suprised the other day I was looking for something in Google and suddenly I got into this page. They have thought about enterprise appliances, it would be nice to have a review of this hardware/services.

      As for mail I think it is not really worth to buy a "really good" email system for inhouse use. Why? well, usually normal workers will be quite happy with their current email client, or forwarding to their preffered service and being google main buisness information Searching (or managing if you like) the only use for this would be if an Admin could look for certain information inside themail of all the workers.

      God, I would really hate to work in a company with such politics =oS

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    9. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by sean23007 · · Score: 1

      Um, how could that work? The great thing about Gmail, aside from the awesome UI, is that their system receives millions, or billions, of messages a day, and by running their search algorithms on the spam and on your incoming messages, they can determine what's spam and what's not. It's actually ridiculously accurate. If you were running that for a few hundred users, and Google couldn't run their search on the incoming files, you would be completely unable to block spam. Sure, it could run only on the messages that come to you, but it wouldn't be as effective, since what makes it effective is the volume it receives. Gmail would not be Gmail if it weren't for Google.

      Also, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it ... if you really wanted this type of application, check out the Hula project. It aims to be exactly what you want.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    10. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by Takeel · · Score: 1
    11. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by damiam · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of other good spam blocking solutions, and GMail has a lot going for it besides its filtering

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    12. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by xenoterracide · · Score: 1

      Gmail isn't really a threat to exchange it's a threat to MSN and Hotmail. which is owned by Who? Microsoft. I use gmail, why I don't have annoying flash ads, 2GB+ space, and free POP. I would have to pay for that elsewhere.

    13. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by SunFan · · Score: 1

      But what if Google sells a "GMail appliance?"

      IMO, there is huge potential for appliances like this, because of the zero-admin aspect of them. Just point e-mail clients to the appliance, and there's instant email. E-mail is pretty well understood, now, and there's nothing that would prevent an appliance from providing a web interface that covers all the basics (aliases, attachment blocking, etc.).

      This is also where people wondering about Sun's Grid can better understand their pitch. It's a matter of outsourcing _all_ system administration that isn't specifically related to your app. There is also no hardware procurement and depreciation cycles. No additional sysadmin payroll taxes and benefits.

      It seems IBM is testing the waters on this front, too, with their rent-a-supercomputer that was in the press recently. Also, offloading their PC division might indicate some foresight into the future of thick clients. Even Sun is hinting at giving away SunRays in the future if people sign up for a "desktop service plan", not unlike cell phones or cable TV.

      I wonder how Microsoft could compete in the 'grid' marketplace. They certainly don't have the virtualization technology that IBM and Sun have, unless they plan on running virtual PCs on Windows servers. However, the odds that Microsoft could host multiple companies on the same set of servers securely are slim, while Sun and IBM can basically guarantee security, at least at the OS level.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
    14. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by autophile · · Score: 1
      But what if Google sells a "GMail appliance?"

      I used to laugh every time I heard the word "appliance" used in a high-tech context. But no more. Now there's a washing machine with a back button.

      --Rob

      --
      Towards the Singularity.
    15. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GMail is a threat to Postfix? Or Postfix is a threat to Exchange?

      GMail is a MUA. Postfix is a MTA. Exchange is an MTA + stuff, including proprietary extensions in order for MUAs (Outlook) to access additional functionality.

      I've always considered it absurd (I've always used Postfix as an MTA and whatever MUA I wanted), but my cow-orkers actually choose MSWin and Exchange just for the shared calenders. Apparently there's no free software alternative. I seriously hope that one would be provided soon, but that's actually what seems to matter to those people.

    16. Re:Google GMail vs. Exchange? by clandestine_nova · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea, but what if they took it farther? Google has shown themselves to be more than capable when dealing with cross-browser, intuitive interfaces.

      Imagine that sort of application, for enterprise, but add on to it. What else do they need? Calendaring? Task management? Google could, conceivably, create a slick and attractive interface for the management of all of those necessary corporate/business functions.

      I mean, it's not that much of a stretch - Yahoo! has their calendar, but what does Google have? More importantly, why don't they have something yet? I'd be willing to bet you'll see something that integrates all of their services in a concrete manner soon, and from their it'll just be another step to packaging it up and selling it as an application.

      --
      Discworld.
  11. Get real.. by xlr8ed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts, and either needs to inovate or die.

    Microsoft is about likely to go under as IBM, they may take a hit now and again, they they always come out fighting.. Look atthe X-Box, they had no real console based experenice before, yet they managed to give Sony a good fight, even debuting a year after Sony... I expect that the new version of IE will have everything that FF has, and more...it's just how MS does things...

    I have always looked at MS as a big mean dog...you really don't want to mess with them, and you really really don't want to back them in a corner..

    Please don't talk this as pro-MS, it's more of a pro-reality statement

    1. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Look atthe X-Box, they had no real console based experenice before, yet they managed to give Sony a good fight, even debuting a year after So"

      Did you actually write that???

      They've lost somewhere near 3.5 billion dollars on the xbox fiasco and were utterly destroyed in the marketplace by Sony.

      So uh yeah (pats the xbox fanboy on the head) they sure 'gave Sony a good fight'

    2. Re:Get real.. by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Xbox succeeded because it wasn't a console - it's a mini-PC. They got their games because many game developers are familiar with DirectX, which shows as the majority of games are written for Windows. The new version of IE does not have everything FF and Opera have, as the support for CSS is sketchy.

      GM, Ford and VW are getting hit currently by smaller, nimbler competition from Japanese car makers, partially because the Japanese makers are more focused than GM or Ford is. Sony lost out on the portable music player scene because it was slow and pitted one part of its company (the music and movie businesses) against another (the audio and DVD player businesses).

      While I, too, wouldn't count Microsoft down and out, Microsoft is facing attack on all fronts because it decided to branch into those domains. But don't expect it to win it all.

    3. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No... the gamecube gave the xbox a good fight, Sony didn't even feel the bump under its boot.

      Now with the 2nd xbox... things might actually change to the decribed cenario.

    4. Re:Get real.. by constantnormal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree with you 100%.

      The thing most people forget about when they talk about Microsoft's "death" is that a big cash balance gives you extra lives in the (real) reality. To extinguish Microsoft, you would first have to drain their cash hoard.

      For all practical purposes, Microsoft is invulnerable.

      Even if today's computing industry were to disappear tomorrow, Microsoft has sufficient cash resources to re-make itself many times in other industries.

      This is basically why we have antitrust laws, as there's no other way that a company can be deconstructed to allow new sprouts of innovation to be permitted to grow and blossom -- but as we have seen, Microsoft has already dealt with that, and has the judiciary well in hand.

      One of the fundamental notions of free markets is that competition between players (companies) is an efficient means to both select the best products/ideas and to bring them to the consumer at the lowest cost. When a single player "wins", becoming dominant over all other players in an industry, it it the government's role to break them up into competing entities, and thus restore the proper operation of the free marketplace.

      Textbook theory breaks down when asked to consider the case where a monopoly gains effective control over the government.

      In the fullness of time, such organizations are likely to rot from within, and become vulnerable to toppling from unexpected directions. Meanwhile, the rate of progress in the industry owned by the monopoly grinds to a near-halt, as the monopoly feeds upon the consumers unimpeded by the watchdogs of competition.

    5. Re:Get real.. by xlr8ed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They killed Nintendo, who had what...20 years with consoles, got the Live network up and running faster then Sony did, and all this being THIRD to market... Additionally they got thier name in the living rooms of millions of households...made two Game of the Years, and have millions drooling over the x-box 360.

      Ya, I gues you are right...they completely failed at the target...unless the target wasn't to make money the first time around...but then again..they always said they were going to lose money on the x-box..

      I bet they plan to fail as much at the x-box 360

    6. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Xbox succeeded because it wasn't a console - it's a mini-PC."

      By 'succeeded' I guess you mean that it was a marketplace failure that was kept artificially alive by MS blowing through 4 billion dollars all just to tie Nintendo for last place in the market.

      Is that what you meant by 'succeeded?'

    7. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Also, who is "attacking" them on this front? http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/ 03/1735254&tid=109&tid=126&tid=137

      Seems to me that THEY are the ones doing the "attacking."

    8. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What exactly drives a human being to rabidly support a gigantic corporation because they have a good marketing machine and a popular product? Enlighten me - I must know what it is about this combination that is so seductive to people like you.

    9. Re:Get real.. by BRSloth · · Score: 1

      I have always looked at MS as a big mean dog...you really don't want to mess with them, and you really really don't want to back them in a corner..

      Yeah, that is said in TFA. But they also noted that some "big nice dogs" aren't running away from MS barks and decided to go to fight.

    10. Re:Get real.. by leomekenkamp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft is about likely to go under as IBM(...)

      According to Lou Gerstner, IBM was dangerously close to the edge. Read (about) his book about getting elephants to dance; you can find enough info on the web, for instance here.

      nice quote: "Gerstner says that few people even understood how perilously close the firm was to running out of cash."

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    11. Re:Get real.. by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      By succeeded I meant it generated sales, so much so that it became a viable competitor to the PS2.

      Most people were not asking whether to get a a Gamecube or a PS2. They were asking whether to get a PS2 or an Xbox.

      The Xbox outsold the PS2 in the US, which is a huge market. And if the current exchange rates stay the same, the PS3 will be relatively more expensive than the XBox 360, especially in the US.

      I recognize Xbox's surprising success, seeing as it was just a miniature PC, and I'm a hardened Playstation fanboy.

    12. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I expect that the new version of IE will have everything that FF has, and more

      Try reading the IEBlog some time. The big news is that they've implemented the alpha channel for PNG images. This specification is almost nine years old. Every other graphical browser has supported it flawlessly for years.

      Also remember that the Internet Explorer development team was disbanded. Nobody's worked on it for three years, they've all been off doing more interesting things with Longhorn. Now that Firefox is gaining in popularity, they've been reassembled to rush out a new release to try and stave off Firefox. This is an extremely hostile environment as far as development goes.

      I expect Internet Explorer 7 will have one big new end-user feature, probably tabs, and a few bug fixes. Maybe they'll go on to implement bigger and better things in 7.1, but 7.0 is an interim release rather than any big development.

    13. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The XBox lives because of Halo. I'm decidedly NOT a MS fan (Debian all the way), but I do love my XBox with Halo (and Project Gotham Racing, Rallisport Challenge, Morrowind, Fable, etc). My XBox keeps me away from any need for a MS OS on my boxen for game playing reasons. I also buy 90% (at least) of my XBox games used, so that I don't contribute any more money back to them than is neccessary. I do buy the hardware new, but then again, that is a loss leader product, and they LOSE money every time one is bought hehe.

    14. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember that the Dreamcast was able to outsell the XBOX in Japan for a while

    15. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The Xbox succeeded because it wasn't a console - it's a mini-PC

      So I'm guessing I could write documents and run spreadsheets on an Xbox then? No? Hm...

      Regardless of the underlying architecture, the Xbox is a videogame console. It plugs into your TV and has controllers and you put games in it. There may be differences between its roots and the roots of PS2 or Gamecube, but for all intents and purposes Xbox is as much a videogame console system as anything Atari created back in the day. Are electric vehicles not considered automobiles because they don't have internal combustion engines?

      So, yes, Microsoft came into the videogame console market with little/no experience and may not have hit a grand slam but they hit a solid ground-rule double and drove in a few runners.
    16. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So, yes, Microsoft came into the videogame console market with little/no experience and may not have hit a grand slam but they hit a solid ground-rule double and drove in a few runners."

      Uh yeah. Sure whatever you need to say to justify the money you wasted on your xbox fanboy.

      MS and the xbox -> "may not have hit a grand slam"

      You're so pathetic it's just sad.

      The xbox is the greatest console market flop ever. There isn't any other company that even remotely comes close to how badly MS has blown it. None. Ever.

      And thankfully I doubt there ever will be again.

    17. Re:Get real.. by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Xbox succeeded because it wasn't a console - it's a mini-PC. They got
      their games because many game developers are familiar with DirectX, which shows
      as the majority of games are written for Windows.


      Incorrect. The Xbox is a console, not a PC, as anyone who has written a game for it would know. Think about it:
      only 64MB of RAM, no virtual memory, a minimal shred of an OS. And it's just a bare-bones subset of DirectX, too.
      You make some calls to set things up, then everything is reduced to "here's a big block of pre-built data, can you render
      it for me please?" It's not like a PC at all.

    18. Re:Get real.. by xlr8ed · · Score: 1

      I suppport no company rabidly...not a single one. I want Linux and Mac to do awesome things. It cause new things to develop. Mac does something, and Microsoft returns the volly...and then Linux turns aroung and ups the pot some more, and the comsumers are the winners just about everytime.

      What I have a problem with is fanatics, or anti-corp BS..if you thinks corporations are "evil" then move out of this country..stop talking to the people who live next door to you..becuase they are the ones working at the "evil" corporations..still don't like "gigantic corporation", stop driving a car, watching TV, talking on the phone, eating (unless you grow ALL of it yourself, from seeds you gathered), etc.. they hall have big companies behind them..

      And lastly...if you think that the RMS doesn't want the exact same thing that Bill Gates wants, i.e. power...you are sadly mistaken.

      FYI, I have x86, sparc and mac hardware in my home, and have a Gentoo webserver sitting right next to my 2003 server.

    19. Re:Get real.. by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You missed the parent's point and got bogged down in specifics. What Microsoft did was attempt to enter a market that had been historically dominated by two other large companies, and with zero previous experience managed to carve out a good chunk of it on their first try. There are countless reasons the Xbox did that well and just as many reasons that it didn't do any better, but the general trend seems to be at least what MS expected to happen, if not better.

    20. Re:Get real.. by MORB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They won't go away, just like IBM didn't go away.

      However, I think that like IBM, they are at a point where the business model and the vision they had since the begining, which was the right thing to do and took them where they are isn't anymore what the market wants.

      So, now they are big and they aren't anymore the nimble little startup that see clearly where the market is headed. They see tons of other companies doing a lot of different stuff, and they don't know which one is right. In addition, they probably have a firm belief that what they are doing since 30 years is the right way to go, since it took them where they are now.

      Microsoft's biggest asset is their presence on the market, not their money. If they don't understand where the market is headed, they will loose their monopoly, no matter how much money they throw at the problem.

      I think at some point they'll have to realise that being a monopoly spanning every areas of software development isn't something they can sustain anymore, and they'll have to redefine what microsoft is ought to be.

    21. Re:Get real.. by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      I can't argue with history. Microsoft has entered many different markets, such as instant messenger, search engines, game hardware and software, PC hardware, and others. And they did succeed against the tide.

      But the problem with succeeding in different markets is that investment, both financial and human, is required on all fronts. And that's exactly what can cause problems for them. Stream-lining and focusing one's business is what produces consistent profits and bottom-lines.

      That's one of the reasons IBM decided to do away with their PC business, and why HP is facing difficulties now, while Dell is rolling. As they say, it's easy to get good results, but it's hard keeping those results up.

    22. Re:Get real.. by incom · · Score: 1

      Killed nintendo? Nintendo cleared more profit than sony and ms xbox division (which lost money) combined. So all nintendo did is save the cash they could have used on floods of marketting and bribing(sony) or buying(MS) game devs, and came out financially ahead if not in console sales. Nintendo has over 5 billion in it's warchest, it it ever starts losing money it will really turn up the heat, but being the apple of gaming seems to be profitable right now.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    23. Re:Get real.. by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      Which software (e.g. OS, applications) to use on a desktop computer is an individual decision. There is no "war", just people making choices. If more people realize that they have a choice other than MS, this is good. To any given person, it is not important if MS controls 99% or 95% or 80% or 50% of the OS market as long as their applications run on a variety of OSs. Unless MS is going to hire the police to force people to use MS products, your "pro-reality" statement is silly; who in the user world cares if MS is "a big mean dog"? (Now if you are suggesting that MS should illegally use its market position to prevent applications from being ported to other OSs, then you might edit your comment to Please don't talk this as pro-MS, it's more of a pro-mafia statement.)

    24. Re:Get real.. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Xbox succeeded because it wasn't a console - it's a mini-PC. They got their games because many game developers are familiar with DirectX, which shows as the majority of games are written for Windows.

      Talk about missing the forest for the trees...

      It doesn't matter *how* they succeeded, the point is that it did. Calling it something other than a gaming console won't suddenly make the Xbox unsuccessful.

    25. Re:Get real.. by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      GM, Ford and VW are getting hit currently by smaller, nimbler competition from Japanese car makers

      They're getting hit because their management was in the style of "increase EPS for next quarter" - let's slash R&D, anything that's a long term benefit short term cost, and crank out a few more nice-looking heavy gas-guzzling SUV's.

      That works great until it becomes clear that gasoline is becoming very expensive. Who's done years of R&D into making small fuel-efficient durable cars?

      US management needs to buy in to the long term health of their companies. Making most of their compensation stock options that can't be exercise for something like 5 years would be a good start.

      Frankly, it wouldn't be a bad start for some worker compensation to be in stock options that can't be exercised for 5 years, either.

      We're all in this together, whether we believe or not.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    26. Re:Get real.. by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      MS may be facing some unintended consequences from their success in the gaming market. Have you been to a videogame store lately? The PC section has shrunk dramatically, it's all console stuff now. Why does this matter? Because there are a lot of people who stick with Windows simply for gaming. If PC gaming is dead, that's one less reason to run Windows.

    27. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft is about likely to go under as IBM

      WRONG. Where is Microsoft's diversification? XBox?!? LOL.

      Microsoft's revenue stream is becoming more and more devalued every day. People on the cheap can replace Microsoft with GNOME desktops, and people who want to pay for all the spit and polish can go to Apple. Given that IBM, Sun, Novell, and Red Hat can undercut Microsoft's entire product line, where does that leave Microsoft?

      Customers who are locked in will start to realize the shift in the marketplace, and they, too, will develop an exit strategy from Microsoft. This next phase in dropping software prices will mean that even re-writing Visual Basic scripts will cost less than the savings in licensing costs.

      Unless they really pull a magic rabbit out their ass, I don't see how Microsoft can survive.

    28. Re:Get real.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Microsoft has sufficient cash resources to re-make itself many times in other industries.

      No they don't. They spent 1/3 of their cash last year on dividends and lawsuits. If their stock remains stagnant, expect more dividend payouts in the years ahead. That cash will vaporize faster than you think.

    29. Re:Get real.. by SunFan · · Score: 1


      That's a really good point. Add that future consoles will play at HD resolutions, and even the benefits of a high-res computer monitor go away. A modest HDTV, receiver, and good all-around speakers will destroy the PC gaming experience for less cost overall, especially considering that the same HDTV components apply to watching movies and TV, also.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
    30. Re:Get real.. by ThousandStars · · Score: 1
      There are countless reasons the Xbox did that well and just as many reasons that it didn't do any better, but the general trend seems to be at least what MS expected to happen, if not better.

      The main reason the Xbox succeeded, apart from the importance of DirectX that made ports so (relatively) easy, is that Microsoft can afford to subsidize its Xbox group to the tune of $1.2B per year. Sony relies on the PS2 for much of its profit, while MS relies on Windows and Office to float its other efforts.

      FWIW, today's WSJ has an article about just this issue in the Marketplace section. The newspaper requires a subscription to read it online.

    31. Re:Get real.. by SunFan · · Score: 1


      The vast majority of markets Microsoft competes in are inevitably going to be dominated by commodity software. Microsoft's revenue is like a sand castle, and the tide is coming in (Linux is free, Solaris is now free, OpenOffice.org is free, GNOME is free...all are "good enough").

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
  12. It will by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts, and either needs to inovate or die.
    Eventually, MS will die. But we everybody will be dead before that.

  13. Out of touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Firefox (which Gates himself has used: "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,")

    How out of touch is this guy? Has he not noticed the bajillions of complaints about crappy Internet Explorer?

    Even Lynx supports HTML element types that Internet Explorer doesn't. No joke. <link> for example.

  14. Games by koutkeu · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?." Sadly because i play games, and to play 99% of the games out there you need windows.

    1. Re:Games by Xarius · · Score: 1

      Yes but with more and more reputable people claiming windows is going under, games companies will have to start supporting the alternate oses sooner or later.

      --
      C17H21NO4
    2. Re:Games by floydden · · Score: 1

      ... I don't know, the games I play under Linux and Transgaming's Cedega out perform the same games under Windows even though the Windows boxed have higer ended hardware.

    3. Re:Games by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      I guess life is a lot easier if you have two PC's at your desk. On my right side is a new PC with Ubuntu Hoary. On my left is an older (but well-upgraded) PC with XP Pro. Usually the XP system is turned off, unless I need to transfer something or play a game.

    4. Re:Games by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      So buy an X-Box and still have access to most games released on the PC whilst not having to re-install the whole thing every few months.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    5. Re:Games by mshiltonj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      to play 99% of the games out there you need windows.

      Funny, my PlayStation plays games just fine, and it doesn't run Windows.

    6. Re:Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not being able to get XP (I cannot agree to the EULA), and Longhorn not being out, I'm stuck on Win98SE.

      Plays most games fine, but there are a lot of new games coming out 2000/XP only.

      So It looks like the only market for me are Linux games.

      Transgaming is a choice I might make, but while Transgaming are not as compatible with new games as WinXP, there's no need for me to get it. I already have '98 for old games.

    7. Re:Games by ookaze · · Score: 1

      OMG a blatantly false affirmation like that get modded +5 Informative ?!!!!
      Of course most games are on consoles, PCs are far from having 99 % games, in number of titles or sells.

      Recently, there is an assault of MS-shills mods and posters, it started with the assault of anti-Linux ads.
      This story is a perfect example, a lot of FUD, pro-MS crap is modded "+5 sth" in the talkbacks. I've never seen that before on Slashdot.

    8. Re:Games by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      No, for 99% of the games out there you need an Xbox, PS2, or Gamecube. Just take a look at the persentage of space EB is committing to PC games these days, PC gaming is dying.

    9. Re:Games by Eric+S+Raymond · · Score: 1

      then run wine or win98, winme, winxp dumbass.

      --
      Bypass Compulsory Web Registration -- http://bugmenot.com/
    10. Re:Games by Senzei · · Score: 1
      I call bs. Poor graphics driver development alone is enough for linux to fall short of windows on game performance. Yes, it is getting better, but things still just are not good enough. Respectable performance I could accept, but "better than windows on a faster system" is pure crap.

      That said, show me a couple of benchmarks proving it and I will buy it. The last time I seriously looked at windows vs linux game benchmarks was three months ago, maybe things are better now.

      --
      Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
    11. Re:Games by Dimble+ThriceFoon · · Score: 1

      90% of >real games he should have said. :p i'm a PC gamer, and i like PC games. i use linux and would be delighted to play PC games on linux. vive la revolution

    12. Re:Games by xenoterracide · · Score: 1

      unlike some of the people who replied I know what ur saying I dual boot gentoo linux/ windows xp because games (most) don't work or work as well in linux. I have gotten neverwinter nights to work but it ran slow. windows machines don't have higher end hardware but they do have better drivers, I know that ATI only updates linux drivers about 1/10 to 1/100 of the time for their windows versions, and these drivers are less robust to start. and creative doesn't even make drivers for linux (alsa sounds fine to me though) nvidia isn't any different. I hope this changes but... it may not. and emulation is not the same as running it natively, I shouldn't have to run one processor sucker just to run another, when I could run it without. and yes I've used wine and it doesn't use that much, but you need all you can get with games like doom3.

    13. Re:Games by koutkeu · · Score: 1

      Clearly you're not a gamer. I have a Xbox and a PS2 somewhere taking dust in a corner. The fact that there is more console games on the market doesnt make them good games. The games i play are mostly RPG, MMORPGs, SIMULATIONS and STRATEGY WARGAMES. Now name me 1 game in this category on the consoles. ( Only games on console i played and finished are KOTOR, JADE EMPIRE ). The day console gaming provide titles like CIV series, silent hunter, falcon, opart, NWN, Baldur Gate, eq, wow, i will reconsider buying a console. This has nothing to do with pro/con microsoft post. Using linux to run games is not worth the effort as the idea behind games is having fun. Spending 2 hours to find a way to make your new game run under linux is not my definition of fun. Beside for certain games ( MMorpgs like eq ) runing them under linux is a breach to their EULA and can ( happened already ) get your account banned ( you can bash Sony as much as you want, it wont change the fact that they will ban your account if they find out ) The solution is maybe a linux based GAMING os. If the gaming industry would invest in making a small GAMING ONLY os it would make linux viable for alot of people. Sa again if you're a real gamer you have no other option than microsoft AT THIS TIME. If it was to read mail, browse the net, download crap and play with 324342 useless programs like image editing, office crap all you need is a 486 computer with some old linux distro.

  15. Why? by Tangurena · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why should I want my appliances to be hooked up to the internet? So my fridge can order groceries for me? So that JoeHacker can alter the temperature on my fridge remotely? Has anyone bothered tp think of security and privacy?

  16. Die ? by EpsCylonB · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft will never die, its far too rich now to disappear completely, it may have diversify like IBM. If they have enough money to throw at the XBox project without blinking an eye then they will eventually find something that is profitable. They may never make the kind of dosh they have from Windows and Office but while they can afford to hire the best talent they are virtually guaranteed to stay in business.

    1. Re:Die ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what they said about the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire, the Hittites, the Babylonians, CowboyNeal poll options, and Clippy. Nothing lasts forever (thankfully).

    2. Re:Die ? by strider44 · · Score: 1

      They're a company, which means that if the shareholders decide to liquidate or pull out due to bad performance then MS will easily die.

      Can is not the problem, will is.

    3. Re:Die ? by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft will never die, its far too rich now to disappear completely

      If I am a shareholder or an investor, it's not the richness of the company I'm interested in but the continuous growth of my stock. If it doesn't rise, I take it as good as dead. Thing is, MS can keep on the rise also with PR, and without too much innovation, which would be much better,

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    4. Re:Die ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      If you look at how Microsoft has to bleed off its cash to prop up the stock prices, I wonder how long they can keep it up?

      How could they possibly diversify to compete with IBM and Sun? IBM and Sun can roll out thin clients through the cable and telco companies and completely cut Microsoft out of the chain, for a few dollars a month. Microsoft has no security model to compete against partitions/containers in UNIX over a VPN to a home desktop. I mean, even SunRay on Trusted Solaris is run in the tightest military shops, where Windows is a joke.

    5. Re:Die ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want to see Microsoft die. I want to see them have to compete without the inherent advantage of "being Microsoft".

      Personally, I'd love to see the day I would want to purchase something created by Microsoft because it was genuinely worth purchasing, out
      of a broad selection of alternatives.

      For now, I'm not purchasing or using any Microsoft products, because they simply aren't what I want or need.

  17. Don't shoot your eye out by llZENll · · Score: 2, Informative

    Quit being silly, XP is blowing all other OSes out of the water with marketshare, the fact that 95% of all programs run under XP and no others will keep MS alive for a long time, I couldn't live without them, as many others couldn't.

    The simple fact is it costs far more to change platforms than MS charges, and for the 95% who don't care what platform they use they will use MS, how can anything go up against a billion dollar advertising campaign? MS will be around for quite a while, learn to live with it, news and articles such as this grow tiring...

    1. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      95% of all programs, eh? Got a reference for that number?

      Or maybe you mean "95% of the programs on the shelf at best buy?"

    2. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by j0e_average · · Score: 1

      I suppose you could say the same about GM and Ford back in 1970.

      Microsoft has (and keeps) the marketshare because 99.999% of the storebought PCs have Windows pre-loaded.

      If consumers had to shell out $199 for a copy of Windows when purchasing a new box, you'd see a much different picture.

    3. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Inaffect · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Whats more rediculous is that there is an entire community of nerds that isn't satisfied just making software and letting people use it - they have to defeat the big, bad evil Microsoft and devote hours of their time to talking about it. Give me a break people. Microsoft is just some company, its not the anti-christ. Its annoying and the only people who really care are these software elitists that make people not want to even download anything like Firefox. Linux will never be better than Windows and Firefox will never be better than IE until you start recognizing that they both in many ways have a superior interface. Instead, you people blindly convince each other that the products you use are superior, when in fact, you are some 5% minority on the entire planet. Until then you are doomed to tell yourself "what you want to hear" for eternity

    4. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Xarius · · Score: 1

      What collective anus do people pull these statistics from? How can this even be measured? Any computer purchase no doubt counts as a windows purchase, yet people immediately erase windows and install linux...

      In fact I'd wager almost all linux boxes were, at some point, windows boxes.

      --
      C17H21NO4
    5. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by INeededALogin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the fact that 95% of all programs run under XP and no others

      wtf?!? Did you just pull this right out of your ass. First off, XP is less than 4 years old(Oct 2001). That is an extremely brave statement to say considering that almost every application can run on previous versions of Windows and today we have virtual machines to run any OS anywhere as well. But... what applications do you really need that have no replacement?

      Games... You got every OS on that one, but console gaming is clearly an alternative.

      Office... OpenOffice, and you can run MS Office on OS X.

      Video Editing... several open source projects and Apple has all but destroyed Adobe's Premiere.

      Image Editing... several multi-platform apps

      Audio... iTunes/Quicktime/Real Player/Media Player... all multi-platform, some more than others

      Browser... several multi-platform apps.

      Chatting... several multi-platform apps.

      So exactly what programs can you not live without? I think you are exaggerating.

    6. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Eagle5596 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a big thing you are missing here. In a lot of markets Linux is making small inroads in the form of a the dual boot systems. At my place of employment everyone who doesn't use Linux straight out dual boots. They haven't switched over completely yet but for the purposes of compatibility they dual boot and spend some of their time using Linux.

      Often this turns into a lot of their time. The fact is that when using Linux I can read any document you give me, and mount/use any drive on the network, I have full compatibility. Windows hasn't got this important feature because they are being deliberatly obtuse and not interoperating. The guy down the hall starts to feel outmoded when me with my Linux machine and Betty with her Mac can interoperate together completely and can both interoperate with him, but his machine can't do the same.

      MS simply has to change this practice. They also have to get serious about supporting more applications. A lot of the publishing work we do is in TeX because TeX is pretty much the defacto standard of professional publishing. MS has rudimentary at best support, whereas Linux and Mac make it easy as pie.

      There is a serious growing threat here, and as has been shown numerous times the idea that it costs more to switch platforms is false. It costs nothing more to dual boot, and often the cost of switching is zero or less, especially in an environment that has been dual booting for a while.

    7. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The simple fact is it costs far more to change platforms than MS charges.

      For a company in wich "time is money", that is true.
      Trayning staff to work with new software is time consuming, and that may eat some profit. But not for home users, who are tec savy or curious in the first place.

      Yes microsoft may not go away, but from were I'm standing, they are losing market share even in the desktop.

    8. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those preloads do not cost the consumer anywhere near $200. More like $20. And the OEMs preload Windows because it's by far the cheapest for them to support:

      $20 + Windows Support < $0 + Linux Support.

    9. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to defend the grandparent, but the applications you didn't list are the irreplacable ones. They're the custom designed business applications that most major firms have. The cost of having all these apps rewritten to support changing platforms is, in the short term, more than simply staying with the current platform and buying/upgrading systems as needed. This will ensure a steady source of revenue for Microsoft for the forseeable future.

    10. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by llZENll · · Score: 1

      yes i did ;) but i think its a fair statement. I didn't mean just XP, but XP as win32, since XP is about 70-80% of the current windows install base, saying XP is win32 is a fair statement imo. since win32 is 95% of the market it is logical to assume 95% of the software is also win32, i would actually guess its more like 99% since pretty much any good software running on linux or mac is also on win32.

    11. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what mystical support are you talking about?

    12. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Ok, now how about the Pharmacy software our hospital uses to ensure that patients get a correct dose? Oh, and it has to support a bar code scanner... hmm, when we looked into it, the only solutions relied on Windows.

      What about our lab software for preparing reports on blood samples? All those solutions were Windows also...

      What about our ER reporting software? Windows.

      What about the software needed to report claims to Medicare? Windows.

      Now, of course, I'm sure I'll get told by all the Linux zealot that with some PHP and MySQL I could have made all these applications from scratch without using any proprietary code whatsoever... but you know what? We're undermanned and underfunded as it is, and we can't go 3 years without a pharmacy software package for someone here to code one from scratch. (Even if the staff would tolerate that delay, we need it for HIPAA compliance.)

      Your mistake is that you're seeing only the home market. Go work in a corporation and see how many cross-platform solutions are really out there. (Hint: Not many.)

    13. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Henk+Poley · · Score: 1

      95% of all programs run under XP

      Just interested, but where did you get that number from? An absolutely overwhelming number of applications are available for UNIX, and of course the same can be said for Microsoft Windows. So I'd like to know who made up that number.

      It's not like when you have 100 times the people you can also sell them 100 times as much different software titles. General solutions will stick and will make specific software unnecessary to everyone but a tiny group.

    14. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Henk+Poley · · Score: 1

      That's also why Open Source can work, software that everybody could put to use in a usefull way thrive on being open and generaly available.

      btw, I'm not saying "OMG!!1 L0LLerz! Micr0$oft is d00med!". People have accused me far too many times of that. Microsoft has lots of money, lots of mindshare and lots of inertia behind it. For companies to do anything drastic in any direction away Microsoft is probably a bad idea and wouldn't work out that well. (I can only say, 'start slowly'.)

      Though for individuals I'm not that sure. Linux is free and all. With Live CDs it's not really that difficult get up and running, just to try it. It won't hurt you. And in general, individuals don't have the money spend to do all the nice stuff you can do with your computer.

      I mean, I've been doing some desktop publishing stuff with Open Source software that I simply couldn't have do with the same effort (both time and money wise, being a student and all) with existing commercial software.

      On a side note, Microsoft is currently asking software vendors (at least in The Netherlands) that make domain specific software if they would like to re-licence their software under an Open Source licence. They then go to tell everyone that basicly all vendors told them a firm 'No!' (due to invested money, time it would take to clean the codebase, etc.).

      How odd..

    15. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by sugar+and+acid · · Score: 1

      The problem is as you pointed out, these specialty apps that everybody runs. But that is really a legacy issue and these are the apps that lag behind in any change in platform that has occured in the past. A good question to ask is what system did they use during the 90's. I bet you it wasn't a windows based solution, but probably either a unix or dos based one. The shift to the new windows based software took a long time, and only when the budget allowed.

      Any major shift to a platform is going to occur first in more generic computing environments without a lot of specialty apps. Like general office word-processing environments. The specialty software vendors will follow.

    16. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      The guy down the hall starts to feel outmoded when me with my Linux machine and Betty with her Mac can interoperate together completely and can both interoperate with him, but his machine can't do the same.

      Windows is about the only one that doesn't "play nice". You can give your research team (if you have one) some nice Sun workstations running Solaris, and run your servers on *BSD, and everything will still interoperate easily and play nice together. It isn't hard to have a heterogenous computing environment (different machines and OSs for different needs) and still have everything compatible and interoperating - as long as you don't add Windows to the mix.

      A lot of the publishing work we do is in TeX because TeX is pretty much the defacto standard of professional publishing. MS has rudimentary at best support, whereas Linux and Mac make it easy as pie.

      This was my problem when using Windows - not TeX specifically, but the general array of software that was useful or desireable for the work I was doing that was a pain on Windows. Mac, and Linux, and BSD, and Solaris all have a large amount of software that is just there "out of the box" and integrates easily into the system. Windows and Office offer the same integration, but that's all that's on offer on Windows.

      Jedidiah.

    17. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What collective anus do people pull these statistics from?

      Yours! That's why you are so sore each morning.
      Sorry to break it to you now but it was so much fun we just kept going.

    18. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      windows runs TeX just fine. (Either free distributions like miktex [similar to tetex, but easier to upgrade] or texlive [also available on linux and OSX]).

    19. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by swiftstream · · Score: 1

      MikTeX + Editor of your choice (I use TeXnicCenter) makes TeX on windows trivial.

      And since when does Apple support TeX?

      --
      Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
    20. Re:Don't shoot your eye out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are some 5% minority on the entire planet

      Yes, thats cause we care.

      You can continue living in you soft crows' poop bag till "eternity", and teach the other 94.99999999999... percent to too. And yes, you'll love to get poop updates and pay for them.

      Scum should live in scum.

  18. Maybe they won't die anytime soon.... by RaisinBread · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But hopefully they'll get up off their lazy butts and get to work.

    How old is IE? Wonder if the recent Firefox buzz hasn't got them back in the shop feverishly working on IE 7. Wonder if many of the feature in the said browser won't mimic those found in Firefox (opera, safari, etc...)

    How old is XP? Wonder if the recent Jaguar/Panther/Tiger buzz hasn't got them in the shop.... (you get the idea).

    I hope we can keep them lumbering for a few more years. It would sure be nice to see them either start to *really* innovate or throw in the towel.

    If you make them lose money long enough, it doesn't matter how much they have in the war-chest: like any good capatalist, they'll pull out when they realize its not growing anymore.

    1. Re:Maybe they won't die anytime soon.... by masklinn · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How old is IE?
      IE6.0 is 4 years old (was released in October 2001)
      Wonder if the recent Firefox buzz hasn't got them back in the shop feverishly working on IE 7.
      It sure has
      Wonder if many of the feature in the said browser won't mimic those found in Firefox (opera, safari, etc...)
      Perfectly true, many of the features in said browser won't mimic those found in Firefox, Opera or Safari (BTW the way you phrased it is misleading, Opera or Safari are full fledged browsers, completely independant from Firefox itself), check the IEblog for more informations.
      Some progress is done though, a few CSS bugs will be fixed and we'll (finally) get a fully implemented (supposedly) PNG transparency, but from the informations we have it's still clearly lacking in implementations (HTML, XHTML, CSS, SVG, HTTP1.1) and features (tabs)
      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    2. Re:Maybe they won't die anytime soon.... by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      But hopefully they'll get up off their lazy butts and get to work.

      It will make no good if they continue to not focus. MS has a huge amount of people working on their projects, probably much more than Apple, Sonny, IBM (FOSS projects), Mozilla, GNU, Linux, etc. But MS still doesn't have more people than Apple, Sonny, IBM (FOSS projects), Mozilla, GNU, Linux together.

      While MS refuses to focus the development, it will be late and not inovative.

    3. Re:Maybe they won't die anytime soon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you make them lose money long enough, it doesn't matter how much they have in the war-chest: like any good capatalist, they'll pull out when they realize its not growing anymore
      Microsoft earned 2.56 BILLION dollars last quarter on revenues of 9.6 BILLION dollars. That's a 27% profit margin. What are you smoking?

  19. ms under attack? by Neitokun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    since when is this new? much of this software has been out for a while, and there have been many news stories about firefox gaining on IE, and how OOo is better than MSOffice. the real point of this story is that people want to flip MS the bird. it's a natural reaction, but it's not productive.

  20. Better Headline! by zeromemory · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft 'under attack' On All Fours

    1. Re:Better Headline! by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      When do we start calling them 'beleaguered'? That's what I want to know.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  21. Microsoft stranglehold. by Boogiesbunny · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Name a company that can seriously put all of there resources together and pose a serious threat to Microsoft?

    Only niche market software sources are able to peck away at MS.

    People are brainwashed into following the most marketed item with all of the fancy surface features.

    1. Re:Microsoft stranglehold. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can name that tune in three letters - IBM

    2. Re:Microsoft stranglehold. by Nailer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Name a company that can seriously put all of there resources together and pose a serious threat to Microsoft?

      Google.

      And you meant 'their'.

    3. Re:Microsoft stranglehold. by SunFan · · Score: 1

      I nominate Sun.

      1) The Sun Grid is highly underrated. Most companies could probably cut their server rooms in half by renting time on someone else's grid and avoiding the added power bills, staffing, years-long depreciation, benefits expenses, etc. Private servers are _expensive_. Microsoft's kludges are _expensive_.

      2) SunRay is highly underrated. At the most recent quarterly announcement, Sun hinted at a "Display Grid" that involves free SunRays in exchange for services subscriptions. Imagine having just a thin client on your desk at home, using practically no electiricty, with no moving parts to break, no fans, no system administration, and only a power cable and a broadband adapter to set up. It's the ultimate "grandma approved" PC.

      3) Solaris 10 is some seriously cool stuff. They've integrated much of Trusted Solaris into the standard system, and it ships with virtualization features that no one else comes close to for the price. Containers+ZFS+SMF=one hell of a tough server. Also, JDS3 is the best desktop on UNIX, ever (CDE is finally #2, OpenWindows is gone).

      4) The latest StarOffice/OpenOffice.org plus JDS gives corporate customers with large installed bases something to think about. Microsoft is most definitely the most expensive desktop system, now, which puts Microsoft-only customers at a competitive disadvantage. CFOs looking at their financial statements start to wonder whether those massive licensing and support costs for Microsoft's software are worth it.

      5) J2EE middleware is the main competition to .NET middleware. Also, Sun has hinted that their entire JES stack will go open source, including a database, and that they will support the Apache Harmony project to some extent. Comparing a .NET stack to JES should be a no-brainer.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
  22. Tired of MS bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Previously I was a pro-linux; now; i'm just a happy microsoft user. Use windows for gaming, 3D programming (directX and openGL have their pro/con).
    I'm tired of microsoft bashing.

    Heck; NO I dont use IE/Outlook/Office ; but WinXP just works for me and I dont want to lose my time making a second OS work for my hardware. Cygwin does the trick for unix compatibility.

    I just think Microsoft lacks vision; they do generic products of predictable quality (and, that quality/reliability went way up in the last years). But... they dont have have anything breaktrough; very very flashy; and most of their APIs are horrible (from a programmer view). But heh... it works; and LINUX has lot of flaws too; ohhh man lots.

    1. Re:Tired of MS bashing by sloanster · · Score: 1

      Previously I was a pro-linux; now; i'm just a happy microsoft user.

      OK, I'll feed the troll, just for gits and shiggles

      Previously I was pro-microsoft; now I'm a very satisfied Linux user. I use Linux for gaming, multimedia, all kinds of programming.

      I'm tired of microsoft cheerleading.

      Nah, I don't use IE/Outlook/Office, even though I could run them via wine if I really cared. Linux just works for me, and I don't want to spend time futzing around with an expee install for no reason. wine does the trick for windows compatibility, although I much prefer native linux apps.

      Sure, Linux can still be improved in some areas (what operating system couldn't?) but to paraphrase the anonymous coward, "heh.. it works; and microsoft has lots of flaws too; ohhh man lots."

  23. Re:But where is the competition? by porcupine8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's talking about more than OS, though. Firefox is over the 10% mark and growing.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  24. What about IP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next you could video-conference with a friend to swap recipes, or watch a cooking show stored on the hard drive of the media hub in the living room.

    Video-conference! Wow, can't wait for that.
    You read it here folks, in the future there'll be no copyright, and you can actually use the tecnology they are selling, to legaly store and view things you didn't pay for.

    Ohh, and Duke Nukem Forever will suck.

  25. Microsoft tactics by distantbody · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Looks like Bill will have to redouble his virus release efforts to exploit all of his competitors flaws. I wonder how long its been since he has coded.

  26. Gates out of touch... by NormAtHome · · Score: 1

    This just reinforces my opinion that Bill Gates is so out of touch with the average user that it's laughable that he's the one (even if it's more behind the scenes than not) that's giving MS it's vision of where the company should go. Microsoft should be much more driven by what the end users want, it's seemed to me that for as long as I can remember Microsoft has been jamming their idea of what the people should want and how they should work down everyone's throat and that's just plain wrong.

  27. Oh, and on a side note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most people don't buy Microsft OS to surf the web and check email. Here are the 3 biggest reaons people buy Microsoft. 1. It's the standard, Im sure many don't even understand the options. 2. It 'supports' more variety of hardware then any other system by far. When a customer buys gadget X, it will work with windows. 3. See 2, except apply it to software. Windows has he largest variety of software.
    All of these things can probably be tied to market share. So it does matter how good or bad or free and OS.. if it can't compete in those 3 areas, then it can't overtake MS. Many will keep hoping that someone will chip away at the dominance of MS, but I think the opposite will happen. Just like so many websites only working properly in Explorer; it wasnt like that 5 years ago.
    I personally have done my part to convert emai/web surfing type people to Macs, but I can't with a straight face tell people in the real world running small business that they are going to be happier with Macs. Because the first time a customer or vendor says, "ya get the image file, its in our proprietary format", just download the software for it. ( it will only run on a Windows machine ).
    My two cetns

    1. Re:Oh, and on a side note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they already have gadget X, odds are if it is older than a couple of years, it will not work with XP. The mfg wants you to buy the new, improved model.

    2. Re:Oh, and on a side note... by gobbo · · Score: 1
      I can't with a straight face tell people in the real world running small business that they are going to be happier with Macs. Because the first time a customer or vendor says, "ya get the image file, its in our proprietary format", just download the software for it. ( it will only run on a Windows machine ).

      To which there are two answers: download Graphic Converter (shareware) to open up damn near anything, or "can't you just use a simple TIFF/PDF/JPG/$COMMONFORMAT?"

      Of course the other option for Mac users dealing in graphics is VirtualPC, for just this purpose plus testing... or an old P3 500 in a closet for emergencies.

      Small businesses often find Macs cheaper due to lack of downtime and no need for a service contract, as well as the ease of deployment, simpler user support, better security, and a longer upgrade cycle. ROI is very good as well, not to mention slower depreciation. The main reason to avoid Macs for small business is being wedded to some niche program like ACCPAC... but that can be limited to that one machine that needs it.

      When a customer buys gadget X, it will work with windows.

      Yes, after your witch doctor is done blessing it. :-P

    3. Re:Oh, and on a side note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't with a straight face tell people in the real world running small business that they are going to be happier with Macs.

      I heard that Quickbooks will be ported to Linux.
      Add OO.org and Firefox, and what more does a small business need?

    4. Re:Oh, and on a side note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looky here.

  28. Strategery! by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    "Bill Gates has a clear strategy. His company has very deep pockets."
    Buy them out or spend them into the ground? I think this strategy will only work when XP SP3 or Longhorn drops in price to $4.99 (to cover the manufacturing and shipping costs.) Maybe they will just start giving Windows away for free? I think this is their only option.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Strategery! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      start giving Windows away for free?

      There goes that enormous portion of MS' revenue stream...

      Oh, they have to give Office away for free, too...

      Revenue shrinking even further...

      Of course, they never made money on .NET...

      *POOF*

  29. Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by dtfinch · · Score: 0, Troll

    Microsoft is rich. They could give away everything they make for free for 20-50 years before going bankrupt. But for the moment, they're not even hurting. Their profits are still increasing every quarter, and most of their company isn't even focused on their core products. They're working on tons of research projects, most of which will never see the light of day outside of Microsoft's headquarters. They can scale back as much as is needed to protect their margins going into the future. Companies like Red Hat do pretty well earning only 1/300th the revenue that Microsoft brings in. Microsoft isn't going anywhere for a long long time.

    1. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by pandrijeczko · · Score: 3, Insightful
      They could give away everything they make for free for 20-50 years before going bankrupt.

      This is a popular misconception.

      Long before their bank-balance reached zero, investors would be dumping MS shares on the market in order to get rid of them. The prices of the shares would drop, the value of the company would drop and, in turn, so would that bank balance even more.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    2. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like what is happening right now...

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=MSFT&t=5y

      MS's insiders are dumping their shares as fast as the law allows.

      MS has issued 10.5 billion shares to grow the company over the years. They just had to hand back almost their entire cash horde to those 10.5 billion shares, and the people holding them, to keep them from dumping the stock.

      MS's cash pile is tiny in relation to the number of shares they've issued.

    3. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Tom · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is rich. They could give away everything they make for free for 20-50 years before going bankrupt.

      No, they couldn't. MS is based largely on their stock value - their actual physical assets are pocket change compared to that.

      It would be headline news if MS quarterly profit would fall. If they started losing money, you'd read it in the mainstream press, front page, above the fold.
      All that negative press and the past history, plus the fact that they don't really have much to back up the stock means that stock prices would plummet.

      Yes, MS could survive for a while on their cash alone. However, once they get to that level, they would have to, because stock holders would be selling like crazy.

      They might recover, but it's unlikely that they would, because everyone and their dogs would use the opportunity to look for alternatives. When your company is built on the product of someone who is making headlines as going down the drain, you pretty much have no choice but to investigate alternate options, or your stock holders will hang you for being careless.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    4. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by leomekenkamp · · Score: 4, Informative

      They could give away everything they make for free for 20-50 years before going bankrupt.

      So nice to see clueless moderators mod this nonsense up. NOT!

      Get your bloody facts straight!

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    5. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhhhh...let the diehard MS fanatics figure this stuff out on their own.

      Trust me, it will be hilarious...

    6. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I think you are mistaking cash for net worth. MS has (last I heard, though before the big dividend) $56 Billion in cash, where cash is defined as literal money in the bank and short term low risk investments (T-bills, etc). MS's net worth is far higher.

    7. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Market capitalization?

      Watch what happens to that as revenue growth continues to slow and turn negative.

      The 10.5 billion shares they have issued is a fragile bubble...

    8. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by gaspyy · · Score: 1

      Well, they have 60 billion in cash and 27 billion total yearly (in 2004) operating expenses (20 billion in 2002). So in theory they could survive for 2 or 3 years giving EVERYTHING away for free and not making any money at all.

    9. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by gaspyy · · Score: 1

      For moderators: according to the parent link, they have 60 billion in cash and 27 billion total yearly (in 2004) operating expenses (20 billion in 2002).

      So in theory they could survive for 2 or 3 years giving EVERYTHING away for free and not making any money at all.

    10. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      Moderation 0
      30% Overrated
      30% Underrated
      20% Troll

      I guess I'm an overrated underrated troll.

    11. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually almost all of the cash is either already gone or earmarked for distribution to the shareholders.

      And the shareholders are demanding more as the stock continue to sink/flatline.

      10.5 billion shares all demanding a decent return on investment is way,way,way more cash than MS can ever hope to generate every year. Which is why the insiders are dumping their shares as fast as they can. Use the stock to grow as fast as possible, sell near the top and bail, and let everyone else hold the bag after you're gone.

    12. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      That's if they are unable to cut back their expenses.

    13. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by TopDawg · · Score: 1

      I looked and noticed that in less than 2 years, Bill Gates has unloaded 234.5 million shares or nearly 25% of his total holdings. Does anybody know why he's doing this? Is it to fund his foundation? Is he diversifying? I find it difficult to believe he's spending the proceeds. Even he would find it tough to spend over 5 billion dollars in two years.

    14. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by korielgraculus · · Score: 1

      Apparently he has been doing this for a long time, not just the last few years. He pumps large amounts of it into his charitable foundation and also has other investments/companies than MS that presumably eat up a lot of that.

    15. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      MSFT insider trading

      Notice that there is practically no insider buying, especially any outright purchases (most "buys" are simply compensation from MSFT to executives).

    16. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Your info is old. MSFT shed 1/3 of their cash in dividends and lawsuit payouts. It's likely they will be forced to do more dividends, because their stock isn't all that attractive to long term investors.

      3 years...2 years...1 year...

    17. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      MSFT going down like the Hindenburg would probably cause the IT industry to go into shock for several years. During that time there will be enormous migrations to Linux, Solaris, and Mac OS, which are the only viable platforms in the long term, now. Coincidentally, all three are (or soon will be) significantly open source (Darwin, Linux, and OpenSolaris).

      Hmmm...I wonder if Microsoft has the legal standing to open source Windows XP? It took Sun at least five years according to blog postings about OpenSolaris. I wonder if Microsoft had that level of insight in 2000.

      Probably not.

    18. Re:Obligatory MS isn't dying troll by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      Yikes... still not getting it.
      Cash means... cash in the bank. Like you have X dollars in your account, we shall use $100 in the example.

      Now lets say you sold yourself, and issued shares of yourself to others. Lets say you have 10 shares outstanding that the market is willing to pay $1000 each for. Your market capitalization is $10,000. presumably the market has accounted for the fact that you have $100 in assets in your account. So this year, you spent $3 more than you took in. Your account still has $97 in it. The investors in you panic and sell your shares all the way down to $.01. This sucks, but you still have $97 in your account. if someone comes along and buys those 10 shares, he has essentially bought $97 for 10 cents. Theoretically, the share price should not have dropped below $9.70.

      This is why many old giant companies that have gone out of business (Grumman comes to mind, Kmart more recently) never had their share price go to 0 or anywhere close. Their assets (real estate, facilities, patents, useful technology and machinery, etc) were in summation worth many billions of dollars and therefore the price of the stock floated at the (Worth of assets)/(#Shares outstanding) mark.

      The stock price, which makes Bill and the shareholders happy, has no real effect on the operation of the company. They have so much cash in reserve that it is not necessary for them to sell new shares into the market to stay afloat. If MS stock goes to 0, they still have $56 billion (or whatever the figure is) in the bank to play with.

  30. Move Along, Nothing to see here - lookeylou. by amcdiarmid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This should be old news to Slashdot readers. We all know that Office is the cash cow that leverages windows across the enterprise. Or SMB.

    Really, most new Microsoft "lines" have failed miserably: Passport, MSNBC, ... It's just that since they do so much badly that it all gets integrated into their OS/Office/Back-office. That's when people stop buying competing programs.

    Besides, most companies are afraid to compete with Microsoft: Just look at MacAdobeMedia. They were formed explicitly because of fear. Most companies that are competing with MS started in an area that Microsoft moved into (Skype).

    Q:What do you call a clumsy 800lb gorilla?
    A: Sir (or an 800lb gorilla)

    1. Re:Move Along, Nothing to see here - lookeylou. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      A: a gorilla drunk off of power and money, who is wobbling ever closer towards a cliff

  31. Rehash-stories-continue dept. indeed... by zenmojodaddy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I submitted this self-same story about six hours ago and had it rejected. Presumably the subtitle means that at least one of Slashdot's editors has a sense of humour.

    Way to make a guy feel wanted, you arseholes. *sob*

  32. MS is weak by slapout · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think Microsoft is in the weakest position it's been in in a long time. Their new OS has been delayed. Their browser is full of holes. VB 6 developers are not moving to .net like they hoped. Their new OS will contain a lot of DRM that nobody wants. Mac and Linux are both making inroads. This is a prime time to get people to switch to something else.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    1. Re:MS is weak by Strudelkugel · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think Microsoft is in the weakest position it's been in in a long time

      I'm not so sure. Seems to me the number of exploits in FF and Safari are increasing. (I'm a FF user as well.) Put on the tin foil hat and one might guess that Longhorn is being delayed while exploits for competitive products increase in number. If Microsoft does a good job improving security management in Longhorn, it will be a big hit.

      As for VB programmers, those not using VB.Net are either still using VB 6 or went to C#. Where else would they go? C++? Java? Perl? If anything, they might chose Python, but VB.Net would be an easier transistion than that.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    2. Re:MS is weak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, do is that how you really rationalize reality??

      1) You have latched on to the MS PR mantra of 'all computer systems are insecure' and see every hyped theoretical exploit in Linux/OS X as 'further proof of what you've been saying all the time that you're not an imbecile for running MS software since see all system have security issues'

      2) So you probably see security as some retarded MS %49 vs OpenSource/Apple %51 comparison

      3) Longhorn will have 'a lot more security' bringing it much 'higher' than OpenSource/Apple

      4) MS is teh security winnah!!!!!!

    3. Re:MS is weak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not as weak as your cliche post.

      I read that same exact thing 6 years ago.

      *yawn*

    4. Re:MS is weak by SunFan · · Score: 1


      Numbers of exploits are irrelevant. Microsoft's products are not worth the price paid, and that's the whole point. Look how much GNOME has advanced in the past two years, and consider that it'll be another two years before Longhorn ships. Also, look at how Apple completely took Microsoft by suprise with Mac OS X. It'll be until Longhorn ships (_years_ after Mac OS X) that Microsoft even comes close.

      Microsoft has peaked.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
    5. Re:MS is weak by Strudelkugel · · Score: 1

      Look how much GNOME has advanced in the past two years

      GNOME is now better than KDE? (ducks)

      Also, look at how Apple completely took Microsoft by suprise with Mac OS X

      I don't think OS X took Microsoft by surprise, but the iPod sure did.

      Microsoft has it's share of problems, but if it had a better CEO it would, IMHO, be a lot more responsive to the demands of the marketplace. The problem Apple has is that Jobs is apparently the best, and maybe only, CEO who can make Apple work. Once Jobs retires, Apple is probably screwed since Jobs isn't the type to groom a successor, evidently.

      The status if any given tech company is not entirely dependent on the state of its technology.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
  33. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by JohnTheFisherman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why read the Beeb when you have an optical mouse and a DVD burner? :)

  34. Not an attack a correction. by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Honestly having 90% + market share is to much for any company. People are starting to realize that there are tools better fitted for their own needs. So Microsoft is not always the answer. It is not saying that microsoft products are perfect or they are utterly crap. But there are some jobs better fit by microsoft products and other fitted with other products. Now that consumers are getting use to downloading application for free and reading reviews on other products. The 90% stranglehold that microosft have is leaving. Windows is no longer considered a part of the computer. IE is not the Internet. As general knowlege grows the less stranglehold Microsoft will have. It is much like the drop in prices for our geekly services. Back in the 80s and 90s we were getting premium pay for simple jobs such as swapping drives or running backups even the Title "Computer Operator" was considered a high tech job, but as more people got use to computers many of the simple jobs are now done by people in accounting or marketing, or the janator is doing it. Just because it is common knowlege. Why was the mainfraim replaced with PCs because they were cheper and fast enough to get the work done. The same is happening with Microsoft. Will Microsoft die, Probably not but there market share will probably drop to 25-40% and still be the #1 software company. When people look at linux or apple and see a 2%-10% market share. They say it is low. But with all the competition out there 3% market share is pritty damn good.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  35. very interesting... by Bigos · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Can anybody smell the rot at Microsoft? Will somebody's prediction that was on /. in April come true?

  36. Re:But where is the competition? by telbij · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mac ownership is still at less than 2% and Linux can't really be considered to be a more secure and desktop-ready alternative to XP or 2000.


    According to Gartner Mac market share is at 3.7% for Q1 2005. Not to mention that Macs tend to be used longer (still using a 400mhz G4 from 2000 as my primary computer when my PC from the same time has long been recycled).

    As for Linux, maybe not desktop-ready, but clearly more secure than Windows? Oops, I fed the troll.

  37. Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The real issue is not outside influences but internal meltdown and customers who fail to see the need to upgrade. Longhorn will be competing with XP and little, if any, of the new features Longhorn provides have any benefit to "normal" users.

    Meanwhile Office is already very hard to push.

    And the future isn't the PC, for end user computing. The switch to mobile is already well under way, and that's a platform Microsoft doesn't own.

    1. Re:Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself by Secrity · · Score: 1

      XP is still competing with Windows 2000. There are many corporations (with lots of seats) that see no need to adopt XP.

    2. Re:Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      They must adopt on 30-Jun-2005 (when they are small) or 30-Jun-2010 (when they are big).

      Monopolies on closed source give you no choice. It is close to Soviet-communism: We Know What Is Good For You (tm).

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
  38. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by SilentChris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    However, MS IS looking at web and e-mail. A little over a week ago I got a call from an MS recruiter asking if I wanted to interview for the MSN web services division (my resume was posted online). It was my first ever call from MS (although I've approached them a few times before).

    Basically, they're looking for people to code things like Outlook Live, which is essentially a web service edition of Outlook Web Access. According to the recruiter, they seem to be going full-speed toward services (while keeping an eye on the cashcows).

  39. Neither choice seems likely... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 1


    Their summary: Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts, and either needs to inovate or die.

    I suppose, if these were in fact the only two options, M$ would in fact die, as they have never been in the business of innovation.

    However, the real situation is not nearly as simple as Beeb makes out...M$ will weather this latest crisis, just as they have weathered all previous ones. Their stranglehold on the marketshare isn't likely to be broken any time soon, and the depth of their pockets insures that they can wait out any siege.

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

  40. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Moby+Cock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail

    Not to the vast majority of computer users. Most people I know think that the Web and the Internet are the same thing.

    The computer using experience for most is: email, web surfing (this includes shopping on eBay) and gaming.

    Digital photography is starting to push into that list more and more, but let's face it, Picassa is a great app and the price is right!

  41. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by bmalek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For some users there is not more to using a computer than web and e-mail. For example, my parents rarely use their computer for anything other than the two.

    That being said, one of the main advantages to Windows is that when my parents have a problem with their computer there are many people they can ask to help fix the problem (although they unfortunately normally turn to me). Now, how many people can you turn to for tech support on a Linux box? In some situations many, but overall far more people would not have anyone to turn to.

    As long as this stays the same Microsoft will still retain its hold on the market.

  42. Attack? Which attack? by D4C5CE · · Score: 2, Funny
    Their summary: Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts
    Which reminds us of Linus telling the New York Times:
    Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.
  43. Microsoft is a lost cause by krray · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mr Gates told me, and challenged my assertion that Firefox's 'market share' is growing rapidly.
    "So much software gets downloaded all the time, but do people actually use it?" he argued.


    And I have to say that software gets [forcefully] purchased all the time as well. Heck, I can remember buying dozens of computers -- ranging from desktops made into back-office quasi-servers to full blown workgroup type servers. To get each and every one of those machines the Windows tax had to be paid (at the time). I'm sure those machines are counted in Microsoft's totals for market share as well.

    They still run Linux to this day.

    Heck, I can count now HUNDREDS of computers that I'm responsible for that all originally legally ran Windows. Care to guess which Linux distro I used on them? Sad -- but a lot of those installs showed up as only one (1) [bittorrent] download...

    Mr. Gate's arguments don't and won't fly for too much longer. Microsoft days are numbers -- and yes, I am ready to sell-short their stock when the day(s) come. Might as well make money on their misery -- they certainly have on mine.

    1. Re:Microsoft is a lost cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So much software gets downloaded all the time, but do people actually use it?" he argued.

      Yes, Bill, they do.
      Fireofx averages about 10% of the access requests on my non-geek servers now which I would say is quite rapid growth. It won't get much higher than this until big corporations start switching which many of them are very reluctant to do. IE is about 85% which is rather depressing.

      I just spent last weekend helping cleaning up a friends machine which has got heavily infected with spyware/malware etc. It took me 2 days to sort the resulting mess out. All because his young teenage son had done a bit of pr0n surfing. The fact that IE lets you easily deliver unsigned, unsecured, unidentified executables to a users desktop and update the registry without them knowing anything about it is nothing short of criminal.

    2. Re:Microsoft is a lost cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but my family has 8 computers, all with at least a windows partition, and only 4ish windows licences... Sun rise, sun set.

    3. Re:Microsoft is a lost cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh -- agreed 100%. I don't doubt that REAL numbers are in fact that Microsoft has 85-90% of the desktop market share. Heck, I as "alpha geek" am guilty of setting people up with Windows in the 90's (and have regretted it since :). Mom & Dad have a iMac for a reason. My brother still loves his Cube. Knoppix CD's are handed out all the time -- some come back and want office setup/installs done which is good money too. The difference? Those with Mac's and Linux don't call nearly as much. I charge a little extra for my knowledge (making more doing non-Microsoft work and *happy* about it :) -- and in the long run? They save. And share their knowledge with friends, co-workers, relatives, etc. Fortunately Microsoft does have a LONG way to fall -- and hopefully stretched over a longer period (not a sudden mass switch) will just make the "work" last that much longer and be that much more profitable. With Windows ... you really still need someone to cleanup the mess all the time. Most geeks I know are sick of their garbage. Others will follow.

  44. How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been a Firefox user for a while. The main reason? Firefox has had stuff built into its browser Microsoft STILL doesn't have. Before the XP SPs, IE didn't have built in popup blocking. What a fucking throwback.

    The only thing IE has over IE (which probably won't last too long) is some, just some, websites aren't viewed properly in Firefox as they were designed for IE.

    What disgusts me the most about Microsoft is they have so much potential and so many resources, yet they squander it and believe their own hype. Back in the day, when Gates saw Netscape as a threat, he beefed up Internet Explorer and Windows and kicked Netscape's ass, deservedly so. Once he eliminated the threat, he simply abandoned IE where we've had fundamentally the same browser since the 90s. MS sees a threat, beefs up to fight it, wins, and then abandons it to starve to death.

    Once OpenOffice picks up more steam (namely complete interoperability with all Office suites), you can guarantee free Office-lite from MS to combat them and a better Office suite. If OpenOffice is defeated, we'll have the same MS Office until 2010.

  45. Microsoft Owns your boss's head. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bottom line is Microsoft is IBM and the PC is the mainframe. Yes, you can cut costs using other technologies but Microsoft is the safe path for any not too smart PHB. Microsoft owns your boss's head; just like IBM owned your boss's boss brain way back when. Remember, if you get cute and talk about Linux, your job will get shipped to India. So shut up and smile and use Microsoft products.

  46. Isn't it like that for everone? by Spez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft is under 'attack' on all fronts, and either needs to inovate or die.

    Isn't it like that for every company in this domain? I mean, there are a lot of them who just copy, but those who work well and make big bucks, usually its the law : Inovate or die

    --
    I wouldn't mind you in my head, if you weren't so clearly mad -Lews Therin Telamon
  47. Re:Games - WELL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you stopped using windows, developers would have a reason and need to develop your games for Linux! Simple economics 101.

  48. Re:Real question by oscartheduck · · Score: 0

    See, now, I archive emails in gmail a hell of a lot, so I do use gmail search all the time and have to say that if it's a choice between either searching through folders/looking back eight months for the email from the people at FAFSA that told me how ot get in touch with them, and searching for the word "FAFSA", I'd rather do the search.

    When I think of all the emails I've deleted due to only having 1MB or 2MB to use, and then I think of my situation now where I can hit archive and forget about it until I need to search for a keyword, well, if Gmail would have come along several years ago then my life would have been a lot simpler.

    --
    How to use coral cache: http://slashdot.org.nyud.net:8090/~oscartheduck
  49. This has never happened before! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft has never been under attack until now. In fact, this might be the first time said company has ever been mentioned on Slashdot. One thing seems clear: Microsoft will quickly disappear and everyone will start running BSD forever and ever again.

  50. As bad as Microsoft is... by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As bad as Microsoft has become over the years, they were needed at the time ( some odd 15 years ago or so ).

    We needed their marketing power to jumpstart the PC market, as the more talented companies like Apple just weren't going to do it.

    Forcing a pseudo standard via their monopolistic practices is what brought us to this point, and I don't think we would have advanced as far as we have if we still had 20 companies running around catering to hobbyists or niche markets..

    However, the need for this has passed. Its time for the giant to step aside and let the rest of us get back to work. They if course will not go down with to a long and expensive fight. But their time has come and gone, its just a matter of how long will they keep flapping around like a beached whale before they concede to reality.

    ( A similar thing is just now starting to happen in the 'entertainment industry' as well )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:As bad as Microsoft is... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
      We needed their marketing power to jumpstart the PC market

      I think that's the wrong way of looking at it. The PC was very much a business-only platform until Microsoft came out with Windows - this meant that home use became practical, more PCs could be built at cheaper cost.

      Certainly, at the time of the 386 CPU, Commodore had the home market pretty much sewn up with the Amiga, at least in Europe, and Atari with the ST to a lesser extent. The fact is that Commodore made a few stupid blunders and couldn't ultimately compete with cheaper PC hardware.

      Microsoft were simply in "the right place at the right time" and with clever marketing were able to make the PC look like a viable home platform - despite the better graphics & sound capabilities of the Amiga and ST.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    2. Re:As bad as Microsoft is... by dustmite · · Score: 3, Informative

      There was one reason PCs "could be built at cheaper cost", and it had nothing to do with Windows: The famous reverse-engineering of the "IBM PC" allowed the market to be flooded with hundreds of compatible clones, all competing vigorously on price. I still remember the days when just about every PC's major marketing tack was "IBM compatible".

      Most PC purchases at this time were not even for the purpose of running Windows - most business and home users still ran DOS. Microsoft had nothing to do with "making PCs cheaper", they only took advantage of the fact that PCs were becoming cheaper anyway.

      PCs also subsequently advanced at a rapid rate, getting more powerful very quickly. Combined with their low cost, flexibility and configurability, they just took off. And MS, as you say, were "in the right place at the right time".

    3. Re:As bad as Microsoft is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As bad as Microsoft has become over the years, they were needed at the time ( some odd 15 years ago or so ).

      Eh? 15 years ago, Microsoft was still at Windows 3.1 and relied on DOS heavily. Neither jumpstarted the PC market. Microsoft was able to take advantage of the explosion in the PC market because of their luck and duplicity. If you want to give credit to who jumpstarted the PC market, that would be the hardware makers, with their rapid, amazing advancement in technology (chip speed, graphic capabilities, RAM, etc.) and most importanly, their ability to cut cost (it pains me, but I must give credit to Dell and Gateway, too as the box assemblers).

      Even if MS created an OS more advanced than Tiger 15 years ago, the PC market would remain stagnant or of slow growth because of the cost of the hardware. MS has nothing to do with that part.

    4. Re:As bad as Microsoft is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were the mainstream at the time, but that doesn't mean that they were needed. Had they not been there, someone else would've, possibly someone who wasn't as bad.

      In many ways Microsoft was consistently behind its time; e.g. when Microsoft finally came up with a mainstream protected, multitasking, 32-bit operating system, PCs had had processors capable of that for two generations that were skipped entirely? (When Win95 was released, Pentiums were current - 386 and 486 machines could run just as advanced operating systems just fine, and could've done so years earlier - as Microsoft knew perfectly well based on WinNT).

    5. Re:As bad as Microsoft is... by korielgraculus · · Score: 0

      Microsoft had a lot to do with making PC clones viable though, by maintaining a non-exclusivity clause in their contract with IBM, allowing them to sell the OS they sold to them (PC-DOS) as MS-DOS to other computer manufacturers.

      Otherwise, who knows ... PC compatibility may never have happened and we could all be sat here typing away on Macs (and yes, I know some people already are!).

  51. What I dont quite get by BronxBomber · · Score: 0
    is how their situation is different from any other major or minor corporation/business in any country where capitalism is the prevailing economic model.

    After all, in ANY business, wouldnt lack of innovation/creativity be seen as fatal?

    --
    ...both interiorlly, and exteriorlly.
  52. Too much dependency on internet by SySOvErRiDe · · Score: 1

    "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?"

    What would happen if my connection to the internet went down. Or when online servers that host the service goes down. Google is good but everyone makes mistakes. For some people, a few hours of downtime for email could be disastrous.

    And if you rely on some application to be available all the time when you need it, its best to have it on your own computer.

    Also what about the flexibility that is available with keeping your data on your system? Even if its an Microsoft proprietary data format or whatever, there's always people out there willing to hack it down for open use.

    But if its sitting on some server somewhere far away, where its exclusive access to you, is via a browser, the number of choices on what you could do with your data are alot fewer.

    1. Re:Too much dependency on internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's not a dependancy, it's the best of two worlds:

      a) you could still have a backup on your computer of your important documents (as you would have anyway, since you'd be working on them...)
      b) google is very rarely down, it's also a redundant network so your data is pretty safe

      plus you can access your documents from any place (any browser w/ internet connection is enough)

    2. Re:Too much dependency on internet by SySOvErRiDe · · Score: 1

      it's not a dependancy, it's the best of two worlds:

      a) you could still have a backup on your computer of your important documents


      Currently, google's offerings of gmail does not give you the option of backup documents on your computer unless you take 'copy and paste' as a backup method.

      Using a word processing program on your computer instead allows you to save, and if you really wish to have that 'online flexibility' a better option would be to store the file on ftp or via email.

      b) google is very rarely down, it's also a redundant network so your data is pretty safe

      Still even then, although I trust google is a pretty reliable and robust network, google does not offer assurance of service and are not liable for any downtime. In other words, technically (and legally I suppose), they don't 'have to' maintain the network to be functioning at 99% uptime, except as part of a company policy.

      plus you can access your documents from any place (any browser w/ internet connection is enough)

      Yes that's true, but looking at the bigger picture if you wanted to maintain your own personal redundancy to downtime, you'd ftp or email it to yourself. Most likely, any internet terminal you come across should have Word (or OO).

    3. Re:Too much dependency on internet by smash · · Score: 1
      Currently, google's offerings of gmail does not give you the option of backup documents on your computer unless you take 'copy and paste' as a backup method.
      Pop3 support exists.

      smash.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  53. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by DenDave · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I actually think that Microsofts battle is on a different front. I think they have lost the mindshare of the public. With all the bad rap and the competing good rap on other alternatives it seems that the user is becoming less tolerant to the faults.

    About a year or two ago, most users dodn;t moan too much about the BSOD's or the virus/worm attacks. Heck they didn;t even bugger too much about functionality problems. Nowadays, however, I hear much more moaning and frustration.

    If microsoft loses the attitude of the user then I think their model is broken.

    --
    -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
  54. You don't have to download it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Idiots need browsers, too, ya know.

  55. Huh? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

    Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?

    Because if I just use firefox and gmail without an OS I won't get anywhere? Maybe with all that zeal our poster could have said something "Why use Internet Explorer if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?"

    Well maybe I wasn't graced with a g-mail account (yes many people are in that boat, and many people don't even know of gmail). Maybe I use something other then firefox or IE. Maybe I like my yahoo or hotmail, etc.

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually it should be:
      "Why use OUTLOOK if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?"

      and ofcourse you can use any browser you want

    2. Re:Huh? by Deeze · · Score: 1

      "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?

      Because if I just use firefox and gmail without an OS I won't get anywhere?"

      Because maybe you can use firefox and gmail with a non-MS OS installed, which just might be easier to obtain if you have a broadband connetion?

    3. Re:Huh? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      What OS will you use to allow you to utilize that broadband connection? The point is they worded the story so badly that it would confuse some people. On a board like /., where I expect the people here to be up and up on the knowledge scale - the author should have written "Windows" instead of "Microsoft". MS is not a product it is a company name.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
  56. Re:Real question by mmmike · · Score: 0

    unlike IE, the firefox security vulnerabilities have been fixed in a timely manner.

  57. Why the high bar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before the XP SPs, IE didn't have built in popup blocking. What a fucking throwback.

    But it does now. So while your argument may have held water some time ago, it won't float today.

    Once OpenOffice picks up more steam (namely complete interoperability with all Office suites)

    Why such a high bar for OO.o? MS Office doesn't have 100% compatibility with "all" office suites, so why demand this of OO.o?

    OO.o already does a *great* job with MS Office files, with only a few minor caveats. Would you demand JoeBlow's NiftyOffice compatibility as well?

    1. Re:Why the high bar? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

      Once OpenOffice picks up more steam (namely complete interoperability with all Office suites)

      Why such a high bar for OO.o? MS Office doesn't have 100% compatibility with "all" office suites, so why demand this of OO.o?


      The original poster said "all Office suites." Note the capitalization. It would be fair that if OO is to be a viable alternative, it should be able to open the documents users have already created on Office. It doesn't do a bad job at this, granted, but it could always improve.

  58. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "and gaming"

    Which is neither surfing the web or email. What was your point again?

  59. Common Utility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea behind Open Source as far as I see it is to raise the bar of what is Common Utility.
    There are certain types of software that culturally should not need support. These kinds of software are so ubiquitous that if someone doesn't understand their use then they are not qualified to hold a job doing the things that this software allows to do.

    Email, Gimp, Internet Browser are these kinds of Common Utilities. If you have to call techsupport to use these, then you need to get a different job.
    Open Source makes tools like this ubiquitous and says, basically, that these things are simple, need to be simple, need to be decoupled from marketting, need to be available.

    Microsoft needlessly weaves these Common Utilities into a bloated interface and acts like these are big and important features.
    Common Utilities are analogous to a jack in a service station or a fork in a kitchen. Imagine if your employees don't know how to use a fork and you have to pay tech support to have them walked through? Microsoft tech support is analogous to tech support for using a fork or spoon to eat. Why would any responsible business person support this nonsense? Why? Probably because they own some of the stock which seems to be the only reason anyone ever argues to use Microsoft so-called tools.

  60. Pirates of Silicon Valley by agoos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At the end of this movie, Steve Jobs says to Bill Gates, "We're better than you," to which Gates replies, "You just don't get it... That doesn't matter!" This still holds true today. It doesn't make any difference if Microsoft has no imagination or invention because the mass of consumption and forces of conformity give them room to sit back and relax. While others need to innovate, MS only needs to assure their customers that the stolen ideas will come a few months later. (Or years later.)

  61. Re:Real question by mikeleigh · · Score: 1
    Or take the question a step further, and ask why you even need Firefox at all, when you already have IE, and it is less buggy and bloated
    Because not everyone has access to IE. We don't all use windows as our OS of choice.
  62. Pointless article by katorga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A software house has to innovate or be replaced by a software house that does innovate?

    How is that news? That is the primary fact of the software market. Since the core markets for software are totally saturated and "over-featured" that shifts the focus from innovating on existing products to innovating in the arena of pricing models. That is exactly what is happening.

    Mysql is not an innovative database; instead the pricing model for Mysql is the innovation.

    That said, I've been watching MS for decades now. They never ever give up. My guess is that once the current "monopolist" leadership retires, a younger, more innovative crew will take over the company and start mixing proprietary software, OSS software and services to deliver a new pricing model.

    If you combine MS's brand recognition, market penetration, and massive warchest with truly "cool" products priced appropriately, they will be a even greater powerhouse and effectively leave Linux (but not OSS applications) in its niche.

  63. Another attack on MS Whitebox Enterprise Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Consider this an attack on Microsoft. MOD up:

    I am not a troll, perhaps a bit off topic, but this is great news.

    Seems the owner of the whiteboxlinux.net and whiteboxlinux.com domains has decided to offer them on ebay as a peace offering between wbel and himself.

    This is really great news so lets hope someone with WBEL enthusiasm steps up to build a respectable community site.

  64. Re:Real question by psyon1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Did you compare the number of security holes on each browser that allowed remote access to the system? Yes, we see Mozilla/Firefox bugs all the time, but they are fixed quicked, and far less severe. I do believe the last "bug" in Firefox/Moz that gave system access was actually do to a bug with Windows shell extensions, and the developers still went out of their way to work around it so people wouldnt be affected.

  65. Re:But where is the competition? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Must say OS X having *nix type thing at back confuses geeks.

    OpenOffice, Firefox, GIMP... OK, I know I will get flamed but none of them can race with "native" stuff of OS X. OS X user doesn't mean a GIMP fan automatically. OK, I respect GIMP but.. Photoshop CS? Come on.

    Forget Longhorn etc, OS X is currently years ahead of Windows and Linux combined.

    If user can't get Services menu working when he selects any object, forget racing with Apple and especially Adobe.

    BTW- I won't buy Photoshop CS to home and Elements are too Light. So, just want to give reality check. Hope one day GIMP becomes professionals choice.

  66. Too discourteous to Sir Gates.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....come let's not forget his Knighthood, peeps.

    I certainly won't - now he's one of us, he's fair game if he ever comes round to my place !

    I'd like to give you some gifts - a cricket bat with your name on, a carbon fibre tennis racket which doesn't bend too much when pushed very hard, and not forgetting the newly designed wrap around golf clubs.

    Come on, Sir Bill, I can help you with your vision - I can show where the light switch is!

  67. Re:Games - WELL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And miss out Counter Strike 2 ? Are you serious ?

  68. billions in their war-chest. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    I heard from Someone Who Would Know that they could forego all income and pay all their staff at full salary for at least three years.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    1. Re:billions in their war-chest. by wtd · · Score: 1

      Problem is, a lot of Microsoft's value is tied up in their stock. If they tried to actually do this, their capital would rapidly vanish due to investors jumping off a sinking ship.

    2. Re:billions in their war-chest. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Bug, or feature?
      I've always suspected the amount of shares of MSFT in circulation add a 'liquidity network effect', if you will, to decisionmaking at the CTO level.
      Is Redmond to IT what Rome is to Christianity?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    3. Re:billions in their war-chest. by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      According to this information MS had 60 in cash (in 2004) and burns about 28 per year.

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    4. Re:billions in their war-chest. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given their dividend payouts recently, Microsoft will be out of cash in three years, even with full revenue.

  69. Re:Real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not drink and log in to slashdot at the same time.

    How serious are IE bugs compared to the ones in firefox? How many serious flaws are actualy fixed, and how fast?
    As it has been stated before, firefox is opensource, the flaws are more obvious. But dispite that, it has minor security flaws in comparison.

  70. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by SolusSD · · Score: 0

    and much more than email linux is capable of

  71. More Insightful than Funny by MisanthropicProgram · · Score: 1

    I think you're on to something. Not that MS would do it for spite, but I think if Linux gets more market share, I would think MS would port some of their software to GNU/Linux, or more likely, MS/Linux. They'd be stupid not too. After all, their growth is slowing and to continue growing, they're going to have to find other markets.

  72. Re:But where is the competition? by tobybuk · · Score: 1

    Maybe over 10% of one or other section of users but not of everyone I don't think. But since you mentioned it I'll invite you to quote your source please?

  73. That is what happens when you get lazy! by PenguinBoyDave · · Score: 1

    Microsoft come to accept that everyone would be happy to tollerate sub-standard products. Blue screens, resource intensive products that lock up more often than not, viruses, security holes, etc. When you are asleep at the wheel you're going to get passed. The fact is that Microsoft isn't going to be the reigning king forever. I fully expect Open Source / Linux to eventually take a majority of the marketshare. Firefox and Thunderbird will go a long way toward introducing others to Open Source, and the benefits of it.

    --
    I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
  74. all? by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Name a company that can seriously put all of there resources together and pose a serious threat to Microsoft?

    The problem with Microsoft is that they've become too big and they have way too many products.

    There's not a single company who can fight with Microsoft. But all of them are fighting with them: Sony, Nintendo (xbox), Linux, mac os x, solaris (windows), mysql, postgresql, oracle, IBM DB2 (ms sql), firefox, opera (ie), google, yahoo (search engine, MSN), openoffice (office)

    Microsoft just can't win. After having 95%+ of market share in desktops they need to search a way to grow even more to satisfy the stock buyers, so they fight in every market. And they can fight against a single or a few companies, but not against the whole IT industry

  75. Attacks on numerous fronts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only was this a badly written article ('tho', 'inovate', the 'beeb'?) but it reeks of somebody who doesn't understand business. People innovate under pressure. Microsoft has owned the market space for two decades now and has had little competition. Now there is "attacks on numerous fronts" and you guys think that'll be the end of them? Um, no that's not how business works. Microsoft will either:

    a)Buy out competitors and continue the monopoly or;

    b)M$ will innovate and have a competitive dialogue with their business competitors which is not only good for the market and themselves but also good for us-the consumers.

    I know many of you hate M$, and will be modded up accordingly to your committment to the M$ jihad, but M$ ain't going away.

    1. Re:Attacks on numerous fronts? by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's not so much "attacks" on numerous fronts but "immovable boulders".

      Is X-Box going to displace Sony in the console space?

      Are the (current) minority of Linux servers and desktops going to be running Windows anytime soon?

      Is MS Office going to be able to compete when applications move even more web-based and Adobe/Macromedia are sat there waiting?

      Is MS going to be able to displace Apple iPod and iTunes from the music player market?

      On the "gadget" front, no-one can decide yet whether they want Pocket PCs with or without cameras and mobile phones. Symbian is there already, some embedded Linux is there also, Windows Mobile is a player but this market hasn't settled yet.

      Add to that, OSS apps are making small bites into the Windows desktop - Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.

      Historically, Microsoft has survived through constant expansion but the areas it's now trying to expand into have those "immovable boulders" already sat there.

      MS won't die through shrinkage, it'll die through lack of expansion because the moment that happens, the shareholders and investors will leave in their droves.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  76. Favoritism in their coverage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Where's the reference to Microsoft as a ``beleaguered'' company?

  77. Except one thing by Safety+Cap · · Score: 0, Troll
    ~ the gimp allows people who want to use a Photoshop alike app to run from MSWindows.

    "alike app" is right.

    GIMP::PhotoShop
    Two tin cans and a string::Top of the line cell phone

    --
    Yeah, right.
    1. Re:Except one thing by bogado · · Score: 1

      ohh here we have a tipical troll. And since I am quite naive, I will bite his bait...

      Sure Photoshop has huge advantages over gimp. And for the simple fact that gimp don't work natively with CMYK make it quite useless for people who want to create stuff for printing. But gimp is very useful and compares head to head with PS in other realms, like making images for the internet for instance.

      Sure the PS (photoshop) cell pohone has a camera built in and maybe an MP3 player. But not all people need those. Sure the gimp cell phone may seem a little strange to some, but it is hardly two tin cans and a string.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    2. Re:Except one thing by Eagle5596 · · Score: 0, Troll

      More along the lines of: GIMP::Photoshop New Military Technology::Tired old civilian technology Photoshop is ok, but GIMP is better. Have you ever even used it? The interface is a bit rough around the edges, less so these days than the past, but it has an enourmous amount of power behind it.

    3. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well, that's only true if the two tin cans have the worst, most convoluted interface that could be conceived... Perhaps two tin cans that you need to stand on your head to use....

    4. Re:Except one thing by mark-t · · Score: 1
      Gimp _is_ very good.

      But other than the advantages of PS that you mentioned, The Gimp's biggest failing is its user-interface. It's simply not intuitive for most people, as far as I can see, and the learning curve seems to simply be far too steep to justify its use.

      For example, given a machine with both The Gimp and Photoshop, and a person who has never used either... seriously, which one will they have a preference for after trying both for just a few minutes? Bet you anything they'd pick Photoshop. The Gimp, unfortunately for itself, seems to be a more acquired taste.

    5. Re:Except one thing by Forager · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More along the lines of: GIMP::Photoshop New Military Technology::Tired old civilian technology Photoshop is ok, but GIMP is better. Have you ever even used it? The interface is a bit rough around the edges, less so these days than the past, but it has an enourmous amount of power behind it.

      How do you figure?

      Photoshop is the compilation of years of work, hundreds of millions of dollars in R&D, and -- most importantly -- over 15 years of industry feedback and exposure. Adobe has crafted Photoshop to fit real world needs, based on input from people who actually use it in a professional setting.

      Indeed, at this point, it's impossible to say which has more influence: industry over Photoshop, or Photoshop over industry.

      The GIMP, while an admirable effort -- and certainly one worth continuing -- is nowhere NEAR ready to take a place on the professional stage. Just the lack of native CMYK support alone is enough to render it useless for pretty much every company, individual graphic designer, and photographer I can think of.

      Saying that the GIMP's interface "is a bit rough around the edges" exposes you as an enthusiast, but probably not a professional user (that is, one who earns his living off of graphic design). The difference between a good, familiar interface and a rough, unfamiliar interface can translate into massive ammounts of lost time. At this point, after 15 years, the Photoshop interface has become something of a standard; when you open a graphic design program you expect certain hotkeys to do certain things, certain menus to be in certain places, and certain tools to work certain ways. Everything that deviates from those expectations translates into lost time. The GIMP is rife with breaks from the "standard" interface.

      I know that slashdot is hardly the place for Adobe users, but uninformed "our OSS product is better because it's free" thinking is bad for all of us. I'd love to be able to replace Photoshop with the GIMP some day, and maybe I will. But if people really believe that the GIMP is a viable replacement for Photoshop today, I fear that day will never come.

      -F.

      --
      student of animation and the fine arts
    6. Re:Except one thing by B3ryllium · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I use Photoshop for 'drawing' shapes and text, and then applying their supplied effects. Gimp is far from sufficient for me (what? no pre-stocked vector shapes library? Pshaw!), so I find it amusing when people claim it's 'ahead' of Photoshop. In other words, I concur with your acquired taste assessment.

    7. Re:Except one thing by sandman935 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're spot on. I started out using PS 2.0 and the interface is what keeps me from using GIMP. I've tried, but I really don't want to devote the time needed to make the switch. Free is nice, but my time isn't free.

      --

      Defecation occurs.
    8. Re:Except one thing by m50d · · Score: 1

      Hardly. The gimp works and works fine. It's more like working phone::fancy phone with mp3 player and camera and stuff on.

      --
      I am trolling
    9. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I used to be one of the photoshop detractors. It's funny what groupthink does when you're part of the creation of it. I really believed gimp was the bees knees because I was contributing to its code, using it, and because I heard all the testimony from other gimp users about how much better than photoshop it must be.

      Then I went & used photoshop 5.5 for 45 minutes on my girlfriend's powerbook. Never had such a quick turnaround in my life. I went right back to Gimp, gave it one look and thought "What is this shit?" and stopped caring (and developing) for it.

      I'm no graphic artist, but I'll go to the gf's macs before using gimp on my own desktop.

    10. Re:Except one thing by sandman935 · · Score: 1

      No argument... I do indeed appreciate the value and ideal behind open source software, but I think I'll wait for GIMP to mature a bit more before I devote more time to it. Call me selfish.

      --

      Defecation occurs.
    11. Re:Except one thing by shotfeel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Reminds me a little of some of the discussions about CoreImage in OS X. There was some thought that this could make it easy for someone to write the fabled Photoshop killer.

      The replies I thought most interesting centered on the thought that Photoshop isn't about the filters etc. that CoreImage can do. Its about a very refined set of editing tools, and even more important, the way Photoshop has been integrated into the workflow for print and eleectronic publication.

    12. Re:Except one thing by kaehler · · Score: 1

      Well, I for one use neather. Without going into details, I could not get PS to do what I needed no matter how hard I tired (a co-worker who uses PS had no problems). I was able to easly do it in GIMP. So I for one feel that GIMP is mor intuitive...

    13. Re:Except one thing by stinkjones · · Score: 1

      Wow. I don't even know what CMYK is. so support for it doesn't matter to me. I find the GIMP a little more confusing, but i am simply not an expert in photoshop or GIMP. What i do know is that the GIMP does have an unbelievable amount of power. My friends, who are programmers/web designers love the GIMP, but hey maby that's just cuz it's free. But i don't think so since they could steal photoshop, even write their own cracks for it...

    14. Re:Except one thing by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      I can't say I've ever entirely understood this attitude. I have used both GIMP and Photoshop a fair amount, and they both have their ups and downs. Certainly if you're doing any print work Photoshop is a given - ther's no comparison. Fromm there it really depends on what you're doing. In general I would say that Photoshop is probably ahead on most fronts, but the difference is far from night and day.

      If I was back doing graphics professionally I'd definitely shell out for Photoshop - it has a number of small advantages and a little bit more polish, and who knows I may want to do some print work sometime to. As it stands I am doing other things for a living, but still have a need to do occasional image manipulation. If you think I'm paying for Photoshop in that situation you're dead wrong. There are really 2 markets here and each is big enough to support its own product. If you're a serious proffesional then Photoshop makes sense. If you're anything less than that the difference between GIMP and Photoshop is small enough that GIMP really is a good choice. Certainly I'd take GIMP over Photoshop Elements any day.

      Jedidiah.

    15. Re:Except one thing by solios · · Score: 1

      As a professional pixel-pusher, I can (with as much authority as you'd care to give me) say that the GIMP ought to be compared more to PaintShop Pro or similar. You can make stuff with it, but.... colorspace is complete balls, the FOSS attitude of "YOU DON'T LIKE IT? YOU FIX IT!!!!" doesn't fly, and dear gods the interface is horrible.

      I mean, horrible.

      Adobe's main advantage is that they do all the work. The fact that Photoshop is becoming progressively more and mote fuctard friendly is proof that they're listening to user feedback - the fact that performance has gotten steadily and measureably worse since 5.5 is proof they're ignoring the power users, who are the people who have the most to gain from The GIMP being brought up to Industry Standard levels of useability.

      Here's the thing.

      Most artists can't punctuate their way out of a paper bag. You're lucky if you can find one who scored anything above a C in the more "nerd-friendly" math classes in public school and college. You're DAMNED lucky to find one that can actualyl write html without using an IDE like Dreamweaver or GoLive. Good luck finding one that knows WHAT Perl or C++ or Ruby even IS, let alone how to actually get anything done with them.

      Artists are as likely to be coders (or to even understand coding concepts) as Linus is to shit a Picasso while he's sitting on the porcelain throne.

      The sooner GIMP contributors realize this, the better.

      FOSS seems to have a hardon for "Good Enough" - well, for graphics professionals, Photoshops is "Good Enough". GIMP isn't. We need something as good as or better than Photoshop.

      I'll start actually using the gimp on a day-to-day basis when it can open complex (not in terms of colorspace, I'm all RGB, as I work For The Screen) Photoshop 5.5 documents and preserve the text as editable. If it can't use all the fonts on my system (several Classic Font Suitcases as well as modern fonts) or open said documents without a hassle, I Can Not Use It.

      Why do you think we keep shelling out more and more money over shorter and shorter periods of time for the thing?

    16. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I find the GIMP a little more confusing, but i am simply not an expert in photoshop or GIMP. What i do know is that the GIMP does have an unbelievable amount of power."

      That's retarded.

      If you don't know what you're talking about, shut up. If you have any contact with professional use of Photoshop you should have a vague grasp of what CMYK is. If you don't have any contact, how are you qualified to say that GIMP has an "unbelieveable" amount of power?

      Oh, you're not. This is Slashdot, after all.

    17. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Couldn't have said it better.

      The same goes for music. There's a reason none of the FOSS apps have made any major dent in the pro audio world, and that is that workflow and polish are actually really important there.

      Go look at Cakewalk Sonar. They did a major upgrade last year from 3.x to 4.x. What were the major selling points?

      * Better integration with video
      * Surround sound mixing support
      * Workflow improvements like track folders, "birds eye" views of projects and so on.

      Nothing from the FOSS side of the fence can touch the first two features, and as for workflow... don't even think about it. What they're improving, FOSS hasn't even got near to thinking about yet.

      Which is why, as a music professional, I still buy proprietary software.

    18. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you have obviously never worked for a software company before.

      Adobe has never asked it users how to make the product better and has never done any R&D to make the software better meet it's users needs.

      Some idiotic product manager at Adobe just conjures up product features out of his ass, writes up the spec with crayons in an incomprehensible mishmash of english and kindergardener and then screams at the developers to be done last week already until the overworked little bastards can push out the request from the list of 100 requests from 99 other product managers and 6 levels of bosses all screaming at him to get the job done or he's fired.

    19. Re:Except one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GIMP is a piece of shit and the guys who run the project are pompous asses. Even if the GIMP were just a copy of photoshop it would be better. But it isn't even that. Most things are not intuitive and hard to find. Worse, the asses in charge of the project don't listen to suggestions from users and just expect users to get used to doing things the hard way (try creating shadows, or manipulating layers). I wish another group of people would take over that project or fork it. The GIMP is unfortunately one of the better reasons NOT to use Linux.

    20. Re:Except one thing by namekuseijin · · Score: 1

      "The GIMP is unfortunately one of the better reasons NOT to use Linux."

      In what way exactly is a user-land graphical editor free-software program ( with a Window port btw ) related to an operating system kernel?

      --
      I don't feel like it...
  78. Innovate or die? by CHESTER+COPPERPOT · · Score: 1

    Gather around everyone, P. Diddy's on /.!

  79. Microsoft is a fighter and a thinker by Badgerman · · Score: 1

    Though I'll decry Microsoft's problems, I do use their products often (usually as I have no choice). What I've found is this - Microsoft will fight and Microsoft will think.

    The fights they pick we may not like. The plans they make we may not agree with. But the company is a self-survival machine and it's managed to do quite well for itself. Like it or not, they got to the top.

    It may not always be on top. It may have to share the top. But they've got a deep war chest and people who are damned smart.

    If Microsoft has weak points its inertia and the ability to adapt effectively. Microsoft sometimes takes too long to get things done, and some Microsoft plans seem to be less than stellar.

    It won't go away. But the Microsoft of 10 years from now will NOT be the Microsoft of today.

    --
    "The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
  80. Re:But where is the competition? by tobybuk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Any post that doesn't bend over and get buggered by the phallic symbol that is Linux will by default be moded Troll/FlameBait.

    On the other hand, to be moded +5 Insightful just post something like 'Linux does this much better than M$ Windows' (Topic agnostic comment)

    Is Slashdot really overrun only by morons who think that Linux is beyond reproach? For gods sake people Windows and Linux have great S/W written for them.

    And look, I didn't even prefix my post with something like 'I use Linux but...'

    Mods, do your stuff to me.

  81. Not 'Microsoft', but their business model by Gothmolly · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If it wasn't MSFT, it would be IBM. Or Novell. Or Lotus. Or ... Google. Any company whose business model is like MS', whose products are like MS', is going to come under "attack" from the market. For "attack", read: "Educated consumers switching to a better product". This is not zealotry, this is years of MS growing crusty, expensive and bloated. Sound like IBM In the 80s? MS is going to have to adapt, like any other organism, or it will be replaced by faster and more efficient organisms (companies).

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  82. Uses of computers far exceed email and a browser by RonMcMahon · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The comment in this posting; "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?" show an incredible naivety. If you visit any common business you'll discover that applications other than the 'big three' (Word, Excel and Powerpoint) are more likely to be running than the big three. Why? Well, for almost any business there is need for tools that perform a specific function that is tuned to a particular business or industry's needs. Sure everyone needs and uses a browser, email and a word processor, but until there is the ability to cleanly move all of the custom tools and solutions (for which the world's business have paid us programmers trillions to build) to an alternative platform without great loss of time or expense, Microsoft and Windows will continue to win.

    Perhaps in the not-too-distant future there will be some tool out there that will ensure 100% compatibility and transferability of proprietary systems to open solutions. Sure, there are jumps and fits today in that direction, but we are not at that magical point yet.

    To that end, it really is Microsoft's challenge to 'innovate' enough to stay ahead of the Linux pack while not biting off so much that the product never ships (aka Longhorn).

  83. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Quite the pro OSS piece...

    Like many Windows users, you seem to forget that OSS != Linux.

    You can run Windows and happily install Firefox, GAIM, OpenOffice, The Gimp and a host of other OSS applications on Windows.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  84. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  85. Gates Quote by cashman73 · · Score: 0, Redundant
    "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,"

    And this quote is a surprise to who? That's a big shocking news story of the day; Bill Gates prefers IE over Firefox! Like duh!

  86. Marketing by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I still think it was the marketing that made the difference.

    I was also an ST user, but I had to do the leg work myself. I had to be a 'fan'. One store in town.. No ads.. Hell, lots of people here didn't even know there was such a beast as a 'Atari Computer'... Apple was marginally better, they had 2 stores.. and did market to schools and ad agencies ( the niche markets, that get you nowhere in the long run )

    In my area the 'business world' was still running all sorts of things, but yes DOS was high on the list.. which helped get the funds needed to do proper marketing ( and subsequent control of the competition )

    When 'windows' appeared, it came at me via the news and was forced down my throat.. It was hard to avoid the marketing machine.

    Being in the right place at the right time is meaningless if you don't act on it..

    But to be honest, its al theory, no one really knows what would have happened 'just if'.. This is just my opinion from having grown up in the middle of the entire thing....

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  87. What has to happen by bananahead · · Score: 4, Interesting
    For Microsoft to survive this generation of 'attack from all fronts', much more serious things have to change, and serious also means difficult.

    Microsoft has not lost its ability to innovate because its people aren't smart any more. They have not lost their ability to innovate because they just don't have any more great ideas. They have not lost their ability to innovate because of poor management or leadership.

    Microsoft has lost its ability to create innovative products for three reasons:

    1) The company is now run by HR, which is forcing a politically correct agenda into the rank and file. The biggest head on this hydra is the review process, where you are reviewed by your direct manager. From this review comes rewards and longevity at the company. Because of the onerous process, people tend to drift into comfortable spots where they have a great relationship with their manager, and stay there. If you don't do this, you run the risk of being one of the lower echelon that is managed out of the company. There is no peer review, the system encourages favoritism. The process is completely destructive to innovation, you do what your manager wants, not what is right for the company. They are different things.

    2)Microsoft cannot move innovation from the research groups into the product groups because the product groups are completely disfunctional and understaffed. Once the 35% y/y growth stopped, it became all about revenue, and headcount became a scarce commodity that had to be completely justified. Because of this, the resource pool is spent on the most critical areas, which tend to be test and sustaining engineering, and whatever Bill wants to fund this year. This leaves little for new features and innovation. In fact, the feature list for Office has over a thousand new features on it, they can fund maybe 30. The 30 are picked by Sinofski or Bill. The rest are dropped. Work from Research is ignored.

    3)Employee morale is at an all time low. The place is just not fun to work at any more. The stock option program is gone, replaced by a stock award program that gives the employee one-tenth the leverage they had with options. The stock has been flat for 5 years. The will and desire of the average employee is gone. It's just a job.

    Microsoft has to address these three problems in order to remain competitive. I, personally, do not believe they can fix these issues. It will take them a long time to die, and it will be painful to watch, but they will join the ranks of AT&T, DEC, SUN and the long list of other one-time greats.

    --
    A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
    1. Re:What has to happen by scottme · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has not lost its ability to innovate because its people aren't smart any more. They have not lost their ability to innovate because they just don't have any more great ideas. They have not lost their ability to innovate because of poor management or leadership.

      Bullshit. Microsoft never demonstrated any ability to create innovative products. I challenge you to name any significant innovations that came from within Microsoft, as opposed to being "borrowed" from others.

      Microsoft's skill has always been to take other people's innovations, make them pretty, and market the hell out of them. And they've done very nicely on that basis. But their track record on true innovation is derisory compared to true innovators like HP, IBM, Apple and Xerox.

    2. Re:What has to happen by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That *IS* innovation.

      And this is coming from one of the biggest Microsoft haters out there.

      Similar in the way that Dell provides *innovation* in the computer industry, MS is *innovative* in the software industry.

      They just aren't technically innovative, they have innovative business models.

      Note, however, you can be immoral and unethical, but still innovative.

      MS is a very innovative company. They pull tricks no one else has ever thought of.

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    3. Re:What has to happen by Coryoth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Work from Research is ignored.

      Having worked in the research department of a company that behaved like this I can relate. We had a small team in research, but they were very good people, and we were given a reasonably free hand to look into new areas and come up with new things. The problem was that the product people, and management, largely ignored (or equally often misintepreted) our ideas. It wasn't a communication issue, it was just that mamangement was extremely focused on the product that had and struggled to look outside it at all. I actually had a research project forcibly shut down because it was so much better than the current product. I had used some outside libraries to kickstart development, and it was a pure NIH decision.

      In the end we had a huge blowup of a Dilbert cartoon posted in the office and directed people's queries there. It read something like:

      PHB: This is Bob from the research department, he'll be presenting their latest findings.
      Bob: We at the research department have conducted a study of how our research gets used.
      Bob: We have found that all our research is either ignored, or misinterpreted by idiots, such as yourselves.
      Bob: Therefore, we have decided not to actually do any research anymore, we'll make stuff up. If you play along we'll make sure the comparative salary survey goes your way.
      Bob: Anyway, it's 3 o'clock, and that's quitting time in the research department.
      Wally (to Dilbert): I have a new hero.

      Jedidiah.

    4. Re:What has to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I beg to differ. Microsoft has never had a great ability to innovate in the first place. They lacked any great vision beyond "putting Windows on everything". They were once a good software company, though, but whatever I liked about their softwares died with Word 4.0 and ever since, they've been putting crap after crap into the market.

    5. Re:What has to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I agree with you, except in mentioning SUN. They completely turned around in the past three years and we have to wait a couple more years before passing judgement. I think SUN actually has a chance of out-living Microsoft, if only due to OpenSolaris becoming Linux' adjunct in the marketplace.

  88. FORTUNE: GATES VS. GOOGLE by coats · · Score: 2, Interesting
    http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles /0,15114,1050065-1,00.html "GATES VS. GOOGLE Search and Destroy" is a relevant article in the May 2 edition of Fortune:
    Microsoft was already months into a massive project aimed at taking down Google when the truth began to dawn on Bill Gates. It was December 2003. He was poking around on the Google company website and came across a help-wanted page with descriptions of all the open jobs at Google. Why, he wondered, were the qualifications for so many of them identical to Microsoft job specs...
    --
    "My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
  89. Rusty Gates by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Gates' IE might be better than FireFox. Because Gates' intranet is built (presumably) for IE-feature applications. And, most importantly, because his intranet is secured by a huge staff of people with some of the latest IE bug reports. That unique bubble is keeping Gates, and his minions, out of touch with the security nightmares his products create for his customers.

    MS has long been kept ahead by its huge external developer program. But IE bugs can't be addressed by those developers, because the source is secret. Ironically, that integration between app developers and the market is OSS' true strength. Exactly where MS has made its greatest success. Will Gates finally starve up in his ivory silicon tower?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  90. Corporate America today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since micro$oft has billions in their war-chest, their strategy may be to litigate rather than to innovate. They will certainly use their software patents whenever they can to eliminate their competition.

    1. Re:Corporate America today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sun should rent out their lawyers. A dozen or so $2 billion lawsuit awards should do the trick.

  91. Re:Games - WELL by wernercd · · Score: 1

    Thus comes the problem: which comes first - the chicken or the egg

    Gamers aren't going to switch without the Programers making Games for [Insert Non-MS OS here]

    Programers aren't going to switch without the gamers.

    It's the same reason that 64 bit programing hasn't really taken off. Without the proccessors and the OS, programers have nothing to program for (I am talking main stream... not servers)

    Sure there are some emulators and the ability to play games on other systems gets better with time, but until the latest and greatest play on Other OS's right out of the box. The options are getting better, but it's like TIVO - There are some options out there that are better. But the easiest option is what works for most people. the learning curve is to steep.

    As for me - HL2, WoW, SWKotOR, etc... those are why I buy my machines. I can play them hassle free on WinXP and with a little knowledge, vigilince and good setup have a secure box - What reason do I have to switch?

  92. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by geoffspear · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Do you think it's a coincidence that your user ID seems to indicate that you've been on Slashdot for "about a year or two"?

    The average person who doesn't self-identify as a nerd doesn't moan about Microsoft sucking. Look at their total market share. Sure it might slip a few percentage points here and there, but it's still huge, which shows that the majority of people still buy their products. Claims that they've "lost their midshare" are ridiculous when you consider that there's no other OS that even comes close in terms of market share.

    Bash Microsoft all you want, but don't underestimate them.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  93. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmm, I work in a big building full of people who use computers for more than Email, Web and Gaming. It's this strange custom called a J O B -- you Linux users should try it sometime.

  94. All empires fall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to remember Gates once saying that MS is so big that if they ever got into real trouble they wouldn't know it for two years.

    1. Re:All empires fall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      So, if we now know that Microsoft is in trouble, that means they started going downhill two years ago and managed to keep it secret? That would make sense, as within two years of recent history saw the rise of Firefox, the vast improvements in OO.org, the slick niceness of Mac OS X, and the unprecedented announcement of OpenSolaris.

  95. M.Home? by d9000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I first read this, I thought it was a new Windows worm.

  96. Re:FP for Annette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wouldn't know. She won't go out with me.

  97. Microsofts Success is not tied to thier technology by Lt.+Pierogi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft is going to die because there is better technology out there? That's a newsflash. There has always been better technology. DOS and Windows were never better than Mac OS. DEC had great technology. That didn't stop them from dieing. If technology was the driver for a company's success we would all be running Xerox software.

  98. The End will come by PerfectMark · · Score: 0

    M$ like everything in this world will not last forever, every Empire fails at some point. It's just a matter of time.

  99. Face it people by splatterboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    M$ is the biggest due to corporate usage -The massess are not going to switch until the systems they work with on a daily basis do. Peolple buy M$ because thats what they use at work. Familiarity and fear.Fear of the unknown and of being "left out". Period.

    Linux isn't "harder" and Mac is still out on the fringe of what people will commit their dollars to.

    They will remain huge in the same way that Mcdonalds, Starbucks, Nike, and General Motors stay huge. Omnipresence. People just wont commit their hard earned money to something new - experimental. America loves the overdog.

    Now, if a few mega-corps switch - then others will follow and the backlash could be huge for M$ because nobody would switch back. Thats the big M$ fear. Once people see the light.

    --
    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." ~The Honorable Daniel Patrick Moynihan
    1. Re:Face it people by Thats_Pipe · · Score: 1

      Exactly what I was thinking. People won't just switch based on their own free will. They will switch when they see it as being a viable choice. To me, this means we need to forget about most people above the age of 25-30 and work on getting the younger generation interested and informed about alternatives. All this talk of govenments and schools switching over to OSS is promising but we won't really notice any impact on MS until years down the line when the children begin looking for jobs. They get to put more down on their resumes than MS products, showing that they are more adept to using a computer, no matter what OS or software is currently being used.

      --
      "You see them trees out back, I take care of them. I'm a tree, I'm a tree wizard." - Crazy Homeless Guy
  100. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by dsginter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    but let's face it, Picassa is a great app and the price is right!

    Picassa needs to get its own camera download interface and replace Microsoft POS. Let's see, I've just downloaded images from a camera, what do you want to do? Thanks to Microsoft, you get two options:

    1) Upload to web (Microsoft approved, of course)
    2) Print online (Microsoft approved, of course)

    What crap.

    --
    More
  101. Exactly!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support is a red herring.... just a checkbox that isn't really used.

    Where I work support is a huge management deal.... but when I asked the SysAdmins to call MS to find out how to setup a 20GB RAM Disk on a 32GB system. I find out they don't purchase support from Microsoft.

    Why does it matter then that the supplier could provide support if they are unwilling to pay for it!?

  102. Picasa by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...while Google's free Picasa will meet the everyday needs of most consumers.
    But only runs on Win32/IE 5+... :(

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    1. Re:Picasa by Kildjean · · Score: 1

      It would be really cool if google released some of its software on Mac and Linux... :)

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
  103. Re:But where is the competition? by porcupine8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, I've seen figured cited at anywhere from 8% to a patently unbelievable 35%, but 10% or so seems to be the most common. Here's one study.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  104. Installed user base vs. market share by gobbo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mac ownership = installed user base... don't have figures on that but in the late 90's it was around 50 million.

    Market share means percentage of what's being sold, a useful figure for projecting influence and company health, but it's generally confused with 'how many Macs are out there being used' -- especially by trade press.

    The long service life of Macs adds significantly to the installed user base. I'd like to see more reliable recent figures, if anyone knows where I can find them.

    These stats are part of an overall climate of FUD, the fog of commercial war; the stats on media player usage are equally confusing.

    1. Re:Installed user base vs. market share by telbij · · Score: 1

      The long service life of Macs adds significantly to the installed user base. I'd like to see more reliable recent figures, if anyone knows where I can find them.

      Seems like such statistics would be impossible to generate reliably.

    2. Re:Installed user base vs. market share by MynockGuano · · Score: 1

      That's never stopped anyone from coming up with those types of statistics before...

    3. Re:Installed user base vs. market share by SenorChuck · · Score: 1
      The long service life of Macs adds significantly to the installed user base.

      Unless you had a G3 iMac that had the analog board die... :-) I suppose that just works to increase Apple's market share though, as those customers tend to buy new Macs instead of spending the $400+ to replace the analog board in the old one.
      --
      A wise person makes his own decisions, a weak one obeys public opinion. -- Chinese proverb
    4. Re:Installed user base vs. market share by telbij · · Score: 1

      That's never stopped anyone from coming up with those types of statistics before...

      You're right! I hereby declare the Mac install base to be 20% of all desktop computers. Take that Microsoft!

  105. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by frankvl · · Score: 1

    y3s!! h3 t0t4lly f0rg0t M$N!! LOL :D :P (b)

  106. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by RetroGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    shows that the majority of people still buy their products

    I would suggest that the majority of people buy a computer which has MS products pre-installed. Very few people actually go out and buy MS products.

    --

    - - - - - - - - - - -
    I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
  107. Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Kildjean · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I think Microsoft has gotten so big they can't handle their own success. This basically leads them to not being able to innovate because they have to invest all of their time to fix the one million errors their OS has or all the security issues. This was demonstrated when the SP2 rolled out. They literally put 75% of their company to fix windows XP.

    Someone here said that Microsoft has become a dull and boring place, and I tend to believe it has. I think their engineers have lost the spice to create really cool things, because we can see that in the evolution of windows. Since Windows 95 we have seen the START taskbar... below. And the only differences are nicer graphics and more compatibility with hardware and games. That is basically it.

    And frankly by the look of things, Longhorn is just looking to be a big fat white elephant. Longhorn will be Microsoft's downfall. Nothing the OS has is impressive, not glass, not Aero... basically its more gloatware... The only thing it had that was amazing, IMHO, was the WinFX foundation and that got ripped out.

    But to say Microsoft entirely is doomed is an overstatement. While I think Microsoft's downfall will be the OS Longhorn, it will rise from the ashes with the new Xbox 360. I guess while they are not innovating on the Desktop they are doing it on the Living Room. So all is not lost for Microsoft.

    In that sense the competition they are getting heavily from Apple will either put them on their toes or bring them to their knees, specially if more governments around the world choose to dump Microsoft for cheaper and better functioning Open Source solutions.

    That is why I strongly believe Longhorn won't be the event they think it will be. The most important group of people that has to upgrade their systems and wont do it in the first 5yrs is the corporate sector. The consumer will prolly upgrade to Longhorn, but not that quickly as you think they can. Mostly because the hardware requirements to run LH with all the bells and whistles are short of obscene and your average PC comes with a Intel Video graphics card that sucks... But on the other hand, their innovative new Xbox 360 will do everything you wanted to do in the living room and will change the way the living room is. In that department SONY doesnt have a chance.

    Everything that is important will happen this summer and by the end of the summer we are going to be well aware of who is winning the war of Microsoft vs The World.

    --
    Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
    1. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by bananahead · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I actually agree with a lot of what you said, I am not so sure the XBOX can save them. It takes a multi-billion dollar business to move the needle at Microsoft, and the new XBOX is still very heavily subsidized and can't contribute much to the bottom line. The original strategy was that they would make it all up on games, but that division has been cut way back as well.

      --
      A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
    2. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I am not so sure the XBOX can save them."

      You're not 'sure?'

      The xbox fiasco isn't ever going to 'save' anything. As one other console dev house owner put it to me recently, the xbox project people are best described as 'Retards with Money'

      As far as I can tell from just how pathetic the new xbox hardware is MS hasn't killed off the whole xbox fiasco out of a need to save corporate face - probably mixed in with some vague, lingering, and impotent desire to still 'own the living' room.

      From the massively negative response the next xbox is getting even in the hardcore xbox circles I wouldn't be surprised if a grownup at MS finally took the initiative to finally can the whole mess.

      With the overall company revenues starting to approach negative growth over the next year or so, sooner would be better.

    3. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Kildjean · · Score: 2, Interesting
      People have the false pretention that when Microsoft entered the Console business they would have been outright the #1 system period. I think they did a great job considering the fact they outdid GameCube and nintendo was a good competitor but if you look at the numbers, although Sony has a strong lead in the sales and number of consoles out there, right now the Xbox 1 as it is, is outselling the PS2. Now why is this happening? Well I think its because microsoft pulled something out of the hat that Sony doesn't even has clear how to even compete against it, and that is Xbox Live. No other game company, including Sony or Nintendo have a comparable system right now that offers the great alternatives for gaming that Live offers to the Xbox Fanbase. And it is the one single product that microsoft has that has 2 years of solid experience in it, and for sony/nintendo to catch up they are going to seriously have to invest big bucks.

      Sure, the console has not received the best welcome from fans and future buyers, because no one really understands why is microsoft is hurrying up to launch a new system when their "old" system is doing so well. This means for most of us that have 2 xbox consoles that in a year or less our consoles will be outdated, so imagine how pissed some people can be. But knowing what I know about Xbox Live and how the system will revolutionize console online gaming as we know it, I know its the winning element Microsoft has that neither competition has and it will be the one thing that will bring the new Xbox a solid base.

      I think that speculating on this event without hard facts is simply trolling. Like I said before, Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation. They are not going to disappear, immediately, but their immediate downfall will be the Longhorn OS. Mark my words... its written all over it.

      To answer the anonymous coward's port; I think you are wrong and I think the developer you "spoke" to is biased and so are you. Let me explain:

      Number 1. The new Xbox Hardware is everything but pathetic. From a computing look, they are running a really impressive piece of hardware. 3 Processors of 3ghz each dual core? Come on not even apple has Dual Core CPU's in their Power Macs, and have you seen the results of the benchmarks AMD is having with their Opteron class CPU's crunching numbers how they are doing. That is just 1 CPU. 3 CPU's that each handles a group of process is going to really elevate the amount of things you can do on that little ugly white box (yes ill give it to you, it looks ugly... looks like a martha stewart thing...).

      Number 2. Sony has never talked about their console and much less nintendo. But I think that jumping forward to a Wireless everything console was one of the things I noticed as a wide eye opener. Microsoft is trully delivering an interesting piece of hardware.

      Number 3. The development platform, FYI and that of your developer is touted to be one of the easiest ones to develope considering the Playstation developer foundation is a pain in the ass and the nintendo one is practically unknown... I think its linux but i am not pretty sure. One thing microsoft has given developers is an excellent toolset called XNA, which I think your developer friend should take a quick look at.

      Last but not least, Number 4: Xbox Live. Which like I told you before, its the one product neither Sony nor Nintendo really have. And in that field Microsoft is a winner. They had all of these thoughts of what Xbox live would be and they did it. And now with the new generation console showing itself up soon, a new generation of Xbox Live will be born to feed the new generation of console player.

      please donot misunderstand me. This is just speculation, since the competition is very tough, but I think that in this department Microsoft will do really good, better fare than it will do when Longhorn launches.

      :)

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
    4. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice summary of the crap every diehard xbox fanboy tells themselves over and over again...

      Xbox 360(Dreamcast 2)

      Dead before the first one is even sold.

    5. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by amyhughes · · Score: 1
      But on the other hand, their innovative new Xbox 360 will do everything you wanted to do in the living room and will change the way the living room is.
      If you live for toys, perhaps. Slashdot has a habit of thinking there's a huge market of People Like Us. Striking it big in the console market, even if you believe consoles will do so much more next time around, does not compare to striking it big in OS and business applications. The next Xbox will not save Microsoft. Not that I think they need saving.

      The only electronic device in my living room is a lamp. What will the Xbox do for my living room? :-)

    6. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Kildjean · · Score: 1
      You are that small minority...

      That doesnt play games or doesnt use the living room for other none than sitting and having a good conversation. Or like you building huge architectures made out of ABS ;) Not that its such a bad idea... :)

      But the gaming industry doesn't attack a small niche... If it were it wouldn't be the 20 billion dollar a year industry it is, and 20 billion a year is a shitload of money... You know how much money Electronics Arts (The largest publisher of games) did last year? they did from 8-9 Billion Dollars. Game engines are getting better and better, i bet you didnt know either that movie producers like James Cameron, Steven Spielburg and Peter Jackson used gaming engines to stage how a scene would look in a movie (I think spielburg lic. the halflife 2 source engine for one of the new movies to check how a complex scene would look rather than pre-rendering it in a huge server farm). Or how games are what most power users use to benchmark a PC to see if it's good for anything. If it doesnt run Doom 3 it's a POS...

      Computer games have become an industry as big and as profitable as any other, inclusive every year its doubling it's numbers and it is comparable right now to the profit some of the largest playmakers in the market, like Microsoft. Microsoft makes around 1 billion per month that is roughly 12 billion a year and Electronic Arts made 8-9 billion? That is only a 3billion dollar difference, which is not a large difference if we putting it side by side. There is a lot of more people playing than working hon... :)

      So to answer your last question:

      What will the Xbox do for my living room? :-)?

      Well alone it will only look good, more or less like a piece of modern art, but if you sum it a TV, you can in addition to playing games own the VCR of the future because with Xbox 360 you can record TV Shows, music and a lot more. It becomes the entertainment hub in your home. Then again maybe you are not a TV person :)

      PS: You have great creative talent with the LEGO stuff.

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
    7. Re:Microsoft Fall from grace and risen again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Eh, I'm still pissed about Windows 95. No XBox for me!

  108. Coz he's a control freak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No, he meant "better for me because it's under my control". He's right about that of course.

    And that's also one of his biggest problems. He doesn't see any way of making profits through collaboration, but only through total control.

    This is why he wasn't able to do the obvious thing of throwing out the Windoze kernel and replacing it with a FOSS one, even if it were BSD. Loss of total control (he'd end up playing catch-up, which doesn't worry the more sane Jobs in the slightest) is anathema to him.

    1. Re:Coz he's a control freak by rpozz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A lot have people have claimed (including Linus IIRC) that the NT kernel itself isn't bad at all, and the main problems I have when running Windows are certainly not a problem of the kernel. There's no reason I can think of for replacing it.

      Microsoft isn't entirely about control, it's about taking advantage of its monopoly with incompatibility with the competition. Gates likes IE because as long as it has a large marketshare, Microsoft can break compatibility with things it doesn't like, thus eliminating them (see the issues with Java and CSS2).

  109. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Eccles · · Score: 3, Informative

    and gaming

    And for many, gaming is also the web. Freecell.com, Yahoo games, Neopets.com, etc.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  110. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by ErroneousBee · · Score: 2, Funny

    My main use for Windows is to terminal emulate onto a real operating system. Its nice that they supply a 3GHz ssystem to do it from, but in reality its nothing a firefox extention couldnt handle.

    Most big businesses are running internal applications that are increasingly being supplied with browser interfaces (all the better to outsource you, my dear).

    --
    **TODO** Steal someone elses sig.
  111. Not relevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Name a company that can seriously put all of there resources together and pose a serious threat to Microsoft?

    The "single company" thing is only relevant if you're a venture capitalist looking to invest.

    MS is under attack from a lot of smaller companies and from the huge but largely non-commercial FOSS community at the same time. If you're trying to find a single monster that might kill MS then you might miss the distributed army that's causing MS's fall from total domination.

    1. Re:Not relevant by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      And thanks to years of certain types of behavior from MS, no one will work with them. At all.

      MS approaches them 'Hey, there's no need to fight, we can work together.', and they pull a shotgun and say 'Get off my property right now. We saw what happened to the last dozen companies you worked with.'

      IBM's gone so far as to set it up where they don't even have to buy from them anymore.

      The only people teaming up with them are desperate, because they're being nibbled to death by the same ducks that MS is, like Sun is by Linux.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  112. To play 99% of the games out there you need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    what? Windows? I haven't heard of that console before.

    Oh, you mean that tiny little area of EB, marked 'PC' that's much smaller than the PS2 and XBox sections, and about the same size as the Gamecube one.

    Sorry, PC Gamers are a specialist market. Like Linux users.

    Many folk who are specialist in their OS choice are general in their gaming platform. Ie, when I want a PC, I use Linux like the long haired GNU freak I am (oh wait, I work a corporate job). When I game, I use a console like normal people.

  113. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by garcia · · Score: 1

    Like many Windows users, you seem to forget that OSS != Linux.

    What's your point? They talked about Linux *and* other free software in the article (OpenOffice, Firefox, *and* Linux). I am not a "Windows user" (as you are using it condescendingly) and I do understand the difference between Linux and OSS TYVM.

  114. I've got a better idea by RMH101 · · Score: 2, Funny

    lets have, ooh, say, a hundred different linux advocacy websites. Then all we need is some sort of web forum where we can all bicker about which flavour is better and why, endlessly and repeatedly...

  115. A historical comparison by speculatrix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it was once said "noone ever got fired for buying IBM".
    IBM were arrogant, dictated prices, killed off 3rd party compatibility and used FUD to defend themselves. IBM dominated the computer business, so much so that their personal computer system, based on the 8088, was able to defeat the many rivals which were much more sophisticated. Many people despised IBM, and people loved Microsoft for as the latter offered the freedom and flexibility people wanted.

    IBM fell from grace, and Microsoft rose up as the Good Guys.

    Microsoft are now arrogant, dominate the market, kill third party products off using undocumented APIs + patents + incompatibilities caused by random patching changes. People despise Microsoft's attitude.

    Meanwhile, IBM have embraced OpenSource and are often seen as the Good Guys.

    People think Microsoft are unstoppable... but will they collapse under their own legacies? Will another organisation take their place and dominate, and could that be Apple (IMHO not) or IBM (IMHO not). Can Sun Microsystems return from the dead with Solaris on x86?

    Personally, I can't wait till the antique architecture and 8088-compatibility legacy of the x86 dies forever. The PowerPC architecture is sweet; Sun's sparc is not bad at all. Arm is almost too primitive (ideal for handhelds). Alpha has been killed by HPaq. It's an exciting time to be an observer, and I'm glad I'm not betting the farm on which computing platform and OS will be the next king!

    1. Re:A historical comparison by bananahead · · Score: 1
      "Microsoft are now arrogant, dominate the market, kill third party products off using undocumented APIs + patents + incompatibilities caused by random patching changes. People despise Microsoft's attitude."

      This is yesterdays news, and really isn't true any more to the extent it can make any difference. The consent decree rendered Microsoft neutered in a number of ways, and YES, they do take it very seriously internally.

      --
      A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
  116. Governments are the real threat to MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Governments are the real threat to MS. And stupid socialist Open Source commies are a big part of that... I love open source... just starting to really fear the socialism that is growing in it.

  117. unless you're volunteering to go install it by RMH101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    then you're not making sense.
    "If an admin isn't skilled enough to run linux, then they shouldn't be in charge of *any* system. They are not qualified regardless of their years of experience or degree/certificates"
    But they're NOT ADMINS. They're HOME USERS. Do you think all home users should have to pay an admin to come in and setup their machine, much like you might have to pay an electrician to come in and do your wiring before you turn on a light?
    Hang on. This isn't actually that bad an idea...!

    1. Re:unless you're volunteering to go install it by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      You pay people to work on your car, pay people to wire your house, pay people to build a deck, you pay qualified people to do just about everything that you aren't qualified to do. Out of the things I listed, you might be able to do some of them which is good, and go for it. Most people are not qualified to set up a computer and paying someone to come out and set it up properly followed by maybe a yearly visit would do wonders for the technology infastructure in the world. It'd also create a whole lot of jobs which is a good thing. If you have a mechanic check your car every year, why not make a qaulified computer person check out your computer every year?
      Regards,
      Steve

  118. Re:Games - WELL by twifosp · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If people stopped using windows, they'd also stop playing games. If you stop playing games, "simple economics 101" would mean that developers would stop making them period.

    Sorry, in this instance, the egg needs to come before the chicken. We need linux ports of popular games before gamers can make the switch completely.

    Until the droves are playing Counterstrike, Half Life 2, World of Warcraft, Everquest #, on linux, linux will not be considered a gamers OS.

    And don't even get me started on the driver support for Linux. Gaming hardware companies need to give Linux more attention before game developers start developing for linux.

    ID software, perhaps you've heard of them, understands this principle and releases both binaries with their games. They don't do this just for the cool factor. ID understands what's up.

    Perhaps one of the most damaging moves for games being developed for Linux was the release of the xbox. This has locked a lot of developers looking to get in on the console cash cow to developing with Microsoft's DirectX. If you're slated to release something on the xbox and PC at the same time, no game developer is going to make a seperate open GL port when they are already using directX.

  119. It'd be no threat at all. by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    A "Gmail appliance" wouldn't be any threat at all to Exchange unless it included the calendaring features.

    This is where the OSS community really has been a dismal failure - calendaring. Sorry, Sunburd does not cut it. Can you designate rights to other users? Schedule resources? Schedule groups? Either no, or nowhere near the level that Exchange/Outlook provides.

    Like another poster said, there's more than just the web and email. :)

    1. Re:It'd be no threat at all. by Hi_2k · · Score: 1

      Sunbird is still beta. They're working on it. Heck, now that you say so, I think I'm gonna go get the latest source and start tweaking.

      --
      When life gives you crap, Make Crapade.
      Sluggy Freelance.
    2. Re:It'd be no threat at all. by EvilStein · · Score: 1

      It's been in "beta" for *years* now. In the meantime, they've allegedly forked off some project called "Lightning."

      Now, nearly 6 months later, there haven't been any updates. No beta releases, no nightly builds, just "first general user release in the middle of 2005."

      Meanwhile, Exchange is growing. And Sunbird can't do squat in a client-server situation (a la Exchange)

      Maybe we'll get lucky and the code for Netscape Calendaring Server will fall from the sky and some Mozilla Org developer will snap it up.

  120. test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    test

  121. The Reality of the M.Home... by macserv · · Score: 1

    "'This is not the home of the future,' says Cynthia Crossley, who is in charge of Microsoft's Windows operating system in the UK. 'All the technology can be bought off-the-shelf and fits subtly into your home.'" ...and all you need is an IT staff of five to keep it all running. I forsee some pretty interesting results coming from hacked bread recipies.

    Meanwhile, Apple has wireless home audio distribution working perfectly, installable in seconds, and usable by mere mortals. It's called Airport Express, and also provides remote printing and inherently extends the coverage of your wireless network.

    Too bad most people will never know about it... gotta love Apple marketing.

  122. Re:Such Bull by symbolic · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Anyone who really decides to be honest with themselves will have to admit that the "support" of most commercial products is dismal. Usually you end up reinstalling something, which doesn't give you a CLUE as to what was wrong, or why it happened. And to top it all off, you get to PAY for this "support" in many situations.

    You can purchase the same kind of support from several Linux vendors, as others have pointed out. I haven't had any experience yet with the Linux vendors, but I can only hope they're more competent.

  123. They're doing *some* good stuff aren't they? by tetranz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I pose this as a serious question.

    I'm a sole inhouse developer in a company with about 100 employees. I build specialized desktop and web tools for sales and logistics and stuff for presenting info to customers etc. Nothing I do is really rocket science but off the shelf tools just don't do what we want so its worth keeping me around. We're a typical company in many ways. MS Office on every desktop.

    I've done some private / volunteer projects using LAMP, I've fiddled with Java, I maintain a Linux web host for a non-profit. I consider myself a reasonably competent programmer despite having written many thousands of lines of VB6.

    For someone in my position, right now, Visual Studio, the .NET framework, either VB.NET or C# (I use C#) and SQL Server make a superb environment to work in for building either WinForms or ASP.NET.

    MSDN is a great resource.

    ASP.NET is finally moving web development out of the stone age with real debugging and abstraction from the tedium of html. According to MS, the new version will be all W3C compliant and yes they do test with FireFox. I'm coming to the concluson that nothing really comes close to ASP.NET for ease of development for web projects. I've used several PHP frameworks. Prado is very cool and I was planning on using it for another volunteer project for a non-profit I'm involved with but good ASP.NET web hosts are appearing, complete with SQL Server that don't cost a lot more per month than LAMP so ... its hard to justify messing with PHP and not much more than a text editor for tools.

    Reading /. sometimes makes me wonder if I'm backing the wrong horse here. Am I blinded by the hype, stupid, gullible, naive or doing the right thing here? So far my choice of platform is getting pretty good results.

    1. Re:They're doing *some* good stuff aren't they? by Senzei · · Score: 1
      ASP.NET does have a lot of wonderful things going for it. Framework-based development is one area where PHP really does not compete well. There are a lot of good ones out there, but none of them really match it.

      That said PHP looks like it is headed in the right direction. Love or hate the object model true exception handling is an awesome bonus to php5. PEAR and PECL are also huge assets, as they provide a central place for people to look for some of the more complex features. The frameworks are getting better, and I think the real final step would be getting a solid method to integrate PHP and the framework of your choice into Eclipse or Visual Studio.

      The real advantage that PHP has going for it is in being open source. It will run on almost anything (at least compared to ASP it will) and will probably see wider adoption as the feature set improves. Also there is a lot to be said for the eventual situation of having multiple frameworks available to use.

      In the end I doubt there will be a wrong horse. I think ASP.NET will stay the heavy handed 800 pound gorilla system, and PHP will be the more lightweight, flexible way of doing it. At that point you just pick the one that fits personal taste. So if it works, go ahead and do it.

      --
      Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
    2. Re:They're doing *some* good stuff aren't they? by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      I'm just a student, but I can certainly understand your point.

      The company I work for is Microsoft-centric, and not because we haven't tried other things (most notably Genexus http://www.genexus.com/), but because it's what works best for our needs. We need to build custom apps for our customers as fast as we can, and if our customers use Microsoft products, the fastest way to cater to them is using Microsoft products such as Visual Studio .NET.

      Of course as a side effect we end up selling our customers even more Microsoft products in the process (MSSQL, SharePoint, etc.), and locking ourselves as well as a side effect. But you people already know that.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  124. But isn't it frustrating.. by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    ...when someone claims that users shouldn't have Macs or "non-Windows" because of the cross-platform issues?

    Macs & Linux boxes are *excellent* cross-platform machines, but all it takes is one little "tweak" from Microsoft to really screw everything up.

  125. Why is parent modded Troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a sad day when any pro-microsoft stament automatically gets modded troll. Many less-articulate MS bashing statements were modded up. Are moderators hunting heretics today?

    1. Re:Why is parent modded Troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Microsoft is the troll of the century, they earned it.

  126. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by kisrael · · Score: 1, Troll

    An excerpt from the firefox forums I posted to : http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=2510 92&highlight=

    # IE has a very usable FTP 2-way client, Firefox has an FTP browser only.
    # IE has a better password-remembering system.
    # Firefox's Ctrl-F doesn't seem to search input form fields.
    # IE's "mouse select jumps to word boundaries" is not perfect but better than Firefox's character based model.
    # Ctrl-N in IE brings up a clone of the current window, complete with history. Firefox opens up my startpage...redundant, because I can easily launch it from the start menu.
    # Ctrl-T in Firefox opens up a new and utterly blank tab...even more useless than the Ctrl-N behavior!
    # IE shows undisplayable characters with box placeholders, Firefox uses question marks.
    # Tabbing in Firefox doesn't doesn't reset the cursor blink cycle, or something, so you don't get instant confirmation that you're typing in the correct box.
    # IE has better drag and drop editing of the toolbars, including the "File Edit View" bar. (I like compressing that bar, 5 small buttons, and the address bar all on one line.)
    # Ctrl-O in firefox is the normal file open dialog...not as useful as IE's URL-or-file-browse feature.
    # I wish Firefox had an option to let each tab have its own close button...often I want to quickly close a bunch of tabs based on their title, but instead I have to switch to each one and close it seperately.

    Some of those are just matters of opinion, none are that that major, but IE does have some usability pluses.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  127. Healthy competition by Ham_belony · · Score: 1

    Either way, microsoft is aware it will face tougher competition in the future, not only from the current big market players like apple, oracle or adobe. They will have to deal with newcomers from the the asian market. China is pushing linux based desktops in their government administration and will be funding new software development companies to develop software for their needs. This would mean that these companies get financial reserves to fund other developments (commercial) and build a firm base against set software houses like MS or all the others. So why do we keep bothering attacking MS when the future will show that we didn't even needed to waste our time on it.

  128. War Chest by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

    It should be said, tho', that articles like this have been written about MSFT for a long time - and there's still billions in their war-chest.

    Has Microsoft paid out its big one-time dividend of $32B yet? Awfully nice of them to get rid of their only hope for medium-term profits.

  129. Linux is a lover not a fighter by aurelian · · Score: 1

    cue the bad 80s soul...ooh-mm-mmmh

  130. I've found OSS support to be often better by Augusto · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've dealt with a lot of commercial 3rd party support schemes, and I have to say, my experience has been extremly positive with regards to Open source.

    I remember a big CORBA corporation, won't name them or their product, but it was basically an ORB. We had used their stuff for previous versions of our product, but it was unstable and a nightmare to maintain. Just to give you an example, telnetting into their software that was attached to our process, would kill the whole server by just typing a random character!!!

    So one day they started asking us "how much money we make" with our product, and wanted to charge us a % of the profits we make! Not only that, they wanted to charge us in the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, for their new support scam to be renewed in a yearly basis. Oh, and the new version of their orb required us to recode our app!

    So when they told us this, one of my co-workers had been testing JacORB. Turns out this our software was faster, more stable and ran in more platforms than the one from the comercial vendor!

    Not only that, but when we had problems, we usually got responses the same day. We even got sent code to patch the software for some problems! All of this FOR FREE!

    I have no problem paying for tech support, but a lot of this support is not only too expensive, but it's very slow and no, it's not much better than the message boards or mailing lists of some of the open source products. Try dealing with Oracle tech support and exchaging code with them, to see how slow it is to get them to fix problems.

    --

    - sigs are for wimps.
  131. Re:Games - WELL by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    Luckily, no one releases games for the XBox.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  132. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by DenDave · · Score: 0
    he average person who doesn't self-identify as a nerd doesn't moan about Microsoft sucking.
    cool, I am gonna tell my boss, my mom and the next door neighbour(and he's a cabinet minister) that they are "nerds"!!!
    Bash Microsoft all you want, but don't underestimate them.
    ROFL!!
    Do you think it's a coincidence that your user ID seems to indicate that you've been on Slashdot for "about a year or two"?
    And this means what? Oh, I should be a hip-and-with it self-gratifying-blogging-geek?
    I am not even going to tell you where to stick your assumptions about me.. I recall having read somewhere... try meeting me in person something about being impatient..
    ..which shows that the majority of people still buy their products.
    Well then I hope you put your pennies in their stock, 'cuz I haven't met anyone recently who has actually purchased any of their software recently, say about a year or two.. Not even the office..
    --
    -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
  133. photoshop zealots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feel sorry for ya man, but didn't you know, photoshop zealots have mod points now.

  134. I'll name 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google.
    This is Googledot. I think we already know enough about Googles plans to take on the world.

    IBM.
    1. Sell Commodity PC business with it's links to MS
    2. Invent Very fast gaming/multimedia chip
    3. Invest lots in Linux. - release own distro (ala IBM HTTP Server (apache))
    4. Sell superfast Cell-based Linux Computers with an IBM linux/ff/OOo build
    4. Port Games from PS3.
    5. Deal with lawsuit from sony for step 4.
    6. Profit
    7. ?

    perhpas not likely, but oh how i wish it were true.

  135. Yup. Blood in the water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Just look at today's (or any day's) headlines on slashdot...

    Microsoft is justified in being paranoid: The biggest factor keeping them in their "leadership" marketshare position is inertia, not "innovation". Ordinary people are starting to wake up to the fact that there is an alternative to expensive, bugggy and insecure proprietary software.

  136. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The computer using experience for most is: email, web surfing (this includes shopping on eBay) and gaming.

    Your post mostly refers to home users.

    What about word processing and other office applications, which is the #2 application in my office (after Email/Outlook)?

  137. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by the_womble · · Score: 1
    If savvy users (to use the BBC's phrase) switch the other will too - the help will be available.

    I use Linux, so with me to rely on for help, so does my father (actually I have very little to do to keep is PC going, his website is another matter.

    MS's hold on the market will not disappear overnight, but it is definitely weakening.

    My family and friends now know they are more likely to get help from me if they use Linux than if they sue Windows - not that I am boycotting MS or anything, its simply easier to help with what I am more familiar with.

  138. Slowed growth for MS in a growing industry -a sign by EMIce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft has real problems and here is why - they approach the market reactively, "innovating" by relying on surveys, focus groups, market analysis, whatever you want to call it. To sum it up -

    if (no complaint)
    stick to status quo
    else
    fix complaint

    The problem is that complaints are usually symptoms of larger problems, and by tacking on simple fixes, Microsoft usually just ends up with a convoluted framework for whatever product they happen to be fixing.

    Your average joe doesn't understand the potential of new technology, he is just reacting to the new-fangled features you just put in. This is why technology design by survey fails miserably. You need someone who fully understands what is at the edge of current technology, and who can creatively apply it in ways that enhance the average joe's life. I don't get the impression that Ballmer gets this idea. In fact, I have heard through the grapevine that the problem is ingrained in Microsoft company culture, and no one challenges it, because the company is conservatively micro-managed from the top.

    Microsoft gets away with this model because the average joe is unaware of innovative concepts while they are new, before Microsoft has copied them. But the software remains clunky, akin to cars of the old days, where you cranked the thing up by hand and put up with the smell, noise, and the breakdowns - because there was still a tangible benefit. People thought this was the nature of cars back then, and accepted it because they couldn't see any better. Better engineering will eventually make computer systems easier to use and more reliable, analagous to what the Japanese did to the auto industry. Aside from good design the Japanese automakers popularized the use of statistics to test their components to make sure the performed reliably, carefully revising materials and design based on what worked, rather than going with the what was most available on the market. The computer industry could use that same sense of perfection, followed through with design by people who understand both people and the techonology, and of course lots of unit testing.

    Microsoft hasn't re-invented itself as management would like shareholders to think, it has only re-hashed itself into something superficially better in order to avoid any more slip. Until the old guard leaves, that isn't likely to happen. This can be witnessed in the company's financials - growth continues, but is slowing in a growing market, despite a monopoly. If you want to make some dough, invest in some Apple stock and watch Microsoft sink in the long run - since it is pretty clear that they will be sticking to their guns with Ballmer. I've never owned a Mac but I've used a few and I see them as the next best thing, especially with the affordable mini model out, a good architecture to boot, and style that drops Microsoft right on its ass.

  139. My two cents by el_womble · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the interesting point that this article raises is that Microsoft is no longer able to bully its competition. Back in the days of the web browser wars and even the GUI wars Microsoft was able to win because it could either undercut, buy out, or out lawyer any corporation on the planet. In the absense of innovation and an active monopoly these appear to be Microsofts only weapons and they are all neutured by OSS. You can't undercut or buy-out free software, and the global nature of OSS seems to give lawyers the willies. There is only one thing left for them to try and thats patents, and I don't anybody really wants to open that can of worms, even M$... but they will.

    Just as Microsoft needs an Apple, I think OSS needs a Microsoft (if only to keep it on its toes) so I don't want to see M$ die completely just reduce its market share to a healthy 30-50%. But I'd also like to see them release some decent products. I can't remember the last time I saw some Microsoft software and thought "Hey thats cool!". They've got the resources what's stopping them?

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
    1. Re:My two cents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft's problems stem from the fact that they could (and did) bully their competition and customers with impunity.

      Microsoft became the monopoly and market behemoth for a simple reason. They had a steady unstoppable income stream. If Lotus was cleaning their clock, they had the msdos revenues. When Wordperfect had a better word processor, they had msdos revenues. When Lan Manager sucked, and Novell ruled, they had msdos and Windows revenues. They used the revenues wisely, building a huge suite of software that eventually took over the world.

      All during that time, they had competition, serious competition. They were forced to improve.

      Since the death of OS/2, the gradual enterprise takeover since NT, they haven't had any competition. The urgency of staying in business that drove Microsoft for years started sounding rather thin. Nothing they did could go wrong. They could bully, put out of business, buy out or preannounce to death any comers. One Firefox exploit that becomes a real problem will cut Firefox's use dramatically. The Microsoft platform has been almost unusable for months on end and they didn't lose any market share.

      It's truly amusing. Microsoft is facing a situation where they have to lead developers into a different api. They have to lead users to a new OS infrastructure that will break everything they now use to fix the major security issues of their platform. Everything that everyone owns that is tied to Microsoft will be broken or replaced in the next few years.

      Why didn't they do it while they absolutely owned and controlled everything, with no viable competition in sight?

      The last time Bill declared war they created a security nightmare for everyone. Security changes everything. They can't put out a trashy v1.0 that freezes the market anymore. Products will take twice as long to get to market. Installed base and binary stability become a noose when security issues arise.

      Microsoft needs to change almost everything from their development to product design to distribution to maintenance and support. It should be interesting to see if they decide that the legal department can generate more revenue compared to releasing new software.

      Derek

  140. a crass analogy by flacco · · Score: 1
    It should be said, tho', that articles like this have been written about MSFT for a long time - and there's still billions in their war-chest.

    F/OSS is a different kind of threat, however. in some respects, MS's billions in the bank are about as useful as a battleship in iraq.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  141. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by rsheridan6 · · Score: 1

    True, but for a lot of people, web and email is all they really use. For those people, any money spent on Microsoft products is a total waste.

    --
    Don't drop the soap, Tommy!
  142. Re:Get real.. (Re: RMS & power) by orasio · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well.......

    RMS had a nice job at a nice enterprise, and a great product he could sell (Emacs, yeah, laugh), and he did sell it.

    He was in a much better position that Bill Gates at the time.
    He could have had some dollars.
    He wanted freedom, not power. Well, freedom _is_ power, but is a much nicer power, because it's power to all the users, and not just to some guy.

    Of course, I believe RMS does want recognition, or even fame, but if he wanted _power_, there would be no point in copyleft.

    GNU is used by lots of people throughout the world, and he has even less power than Linus!!
    But that's not accidental, the GPL warrants that!

  143. And They Will Probably Piss That Away, Too by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    "there's still billions in their war-chest."

    They've already pissed away $37 bilion on a one-time stock prop scheme. What's to stop them pissing away the rest?

    If I had "billions" in MY war-chest, we'd have HAL by next Tuesday.

    As for Gates claiming IE is a better browser than Firefox: Bwahahahahahahaha!!!! Why am I not using it, then, geek-face?

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    1. Re:And They Will Probably Piss That Away, Too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "They've already pissed away $37 bilion on a one-time stock prop scheme. What's to stop them pissing away the rest?"

      The shareholders are already demanding more as the stock continues its slow and steady drop to the teens. All you have to do is divide eleven billion shares into the 37 billion to see just how little cash MS has in reality if they want to keep anyone interested in owning their shares.

      Just wait a couple quarters when the revenue growth turns negative...

  144. Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have been developing this for quite some time.

    How do I know?

    Well I uh *cough* *grin*

    Shhh...

  145. Microsoft pulls out by CPUFreak91 · · Score: 1

    If Microsoft pulls out of the PC buisness, will Apple lower their prices? I think they might since more people would buy it, being the only "preinstalled" OS. Yet if more companies embrace Linux and sell preinstalled versions of it and it becomes much more popular....

    --
    All Your Base Are Belong To Us!!! chown -r us ./base
    1. Re:Microsoft pulls out by Kildjean · · Score: 1

      IT would be a possibility that our generation might not live to see... :P

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
  146. Add Thunderbird to Outlook threat by cynopraxis · · Score: 1

    I like Thunderbird as my outlook replacement. It's easy to install, easy to use, and stable. I'm a developer and it's the type of program I strive to write. My wife uses it and has yet to blow it up or complain about how the address book and contacts works. If it passes her test it can pass any user. Trust me on this. I haven't really used Gmail though I do have an account that a zealous friend opened for me. Do you get a deal by enlisting folks or something =). Anyway, I don't have anything against the MS products that don't suffer from bloat, mission creep, are difficult to use, or cost an arm and a leg.... Ok so that leaves one program. Notepad! Love that little app =).

    1. Re:Add Thunderbird to Outlook threat by Kildjean · · Score: 1

      Ever since I got my Gmail, I got a new interest in reading e-mail again. One thing I think Google should offer with Gmail is to have some sort of Calendar or contact base accesible from the web and synchronizable with PDA's, Phones, ical on mac or entourage... I think if they did that would make me a very happy individual. :)

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
  147. The future of MS is games. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    Sooner or later their computer monopoly will die - it was its destiny since they founded it (just like russian communism). You really can't expect to dominate the market by brute force. It works for some years, but then the people begin to look for alternatives.

    Open source is like a democracy... it's in its nature to work and succeed.

    So what's left for microsoft? To escape from their autoritarian model and rejoin the market they're most successful with: The XBOX.

    What we know for sure, is that the Microsoft as we know it today, will no longer exist.

  148. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


    We will - as we take yours.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  149. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Exter-C · · Score: 1

    It seems that the majority of press is always objective rather than subjective when it comes to matters like this. Especially when they ignite flame wars.

    Most of the articles like this will tend to have some good points but are then jacked up with bias that makes reading the article very subjective.

    There really needs to be more objective press reports written that are peer reviewed before publication. Its not the most ideal solution but im sure there would be some dam fine articles printed.

  150. Re:Games - WELL by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you stopped using windows... developers would have a reason... yaddayadda... Simple economics 101.

    If enough people stand in front of a running truck, it'll eventurally stop. OK who goes first?

  151. Fundamentals by TalMaximus · · Score: 1

    The Internet is one of the primary reasons to own a computer for many users today. My career is in information technology and most of the time I'm only using my home system for Internet functions. The question about why you would need Microsoft when you have a broadband connection is interesting but, as has been mentioned, leaves out the crucial aspect of the operating system. People are too comfortable with Windows. Dell likes Windows, Gateway likes Windows...everybody distributes Windows...except Wal-Mart...occassionally. Firefox is great, Gmail is really great, but they all have to run on an OS and that OS has to be and I emphasize this...'user friendly'. Some can pick up a OSS operating system and just start using it but definitely not the majority of the market share that has made Windows such a dominant force. Jobs told Gates that Apple was better than Microsoft and Gates told him to some effect "That doesn't matter." (Or something like that) He's right. If you want to crush Microsoft go for it, but good luck. The only reason the Xbox has survived is because they can afford to take hits in major areas and just keep pumping the money into the projects. Heck, the superstar of the Xbox (Halo) was orginially Apple's. Until user-awareness reaches a point where mulitple operating system's have a fighting chance on the user-friendliness ground, Microsoft will continue rolling.

  152. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


    You have of course got it backwards.

    The more people turn to Linux for the reason it needs LESS support than Windows, the more likely Microsoft is to go down. And we're talking corporate here, not home users.

    It's quite clear from reports of companies using both or Linux alone that Linux requires fewer sys admins - because it causes fewer problems - than Windows. Personnel expense is something that companies pay attention to.

    And just as home users are switching to Firefox - 50 million downloads in the last year - for the ease of use, power, flexibility, speed and security, so they will switch to Linux as these points are eventually demonstrated to them as well.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  153. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by m50d · · Score: 1

    Like many slashdot users, you seem to forget to RTFA.

    --
    I am trolling
  154. Remember Xenix? by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    We all know how popular that turned out. It was the first, and last, Unix port that Microsoft developed.

    Guess who bought it from them? SCO. Guess who is suing Linux developers and users?

    Chances are better than Microsoft will license the SCO Unix (Unixware, etc) code and build on that, rather than build on Linux. Being that Microsoft and SCO are "buddy buddy" right now.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Remember Xenix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would Microsoft want to build a version of UNIX or Linux? Windows 2003 has major performance and security advantages over Linux, and massive integration advantages over UNIX and Linux. That doesnt look like changing anytime soon, no matter how many Windows Kernel optimisations the Linux Kernel developers copy and adopt. $5 bn a year in R&D says that Microsoft will ensure that is not going to change anytime soon.

      Cant see what the market driver would be.

    2. Re:Remember Xenix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Solaris 10 offers features Windows 2003 has wet dreams about and is shipping today for $0.00.

      No amount of R&D will make Microsoft cost-effective against companies like Sun, IBM, or Apple. For example, Sun is already price-competitive with Dell's servers (apples to apples), doen't have an OEM agreement with Microsoft, and can give software away until the end of time--hardware and support businesses allow that.

      You try to defend Windows 2003, but it is futile. In a market growing more and more frustrated with Microsoft, companies like Apple, Red Hat, and Sun offer better interoperability, better prices overall, better security, better community support, better customer satisfaction, and just better value period.

      One of the earlier posts had it right: Microsoft's future is as a game developer.

    3. Re:Remember Xenix? by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Yeah but Pointy Haired Bosses don't like low cost or free software. They think that kind of software is for hippies or hackers, and full of backdoors. Not that is true, it is just what the typical PHB thinks.

      To a PHB, paying Microsoft a few hundred dollars a copy is cost effective, because of the support that comes with it, and the range of software that Windows can run and work with. They use Windows Server because the same company that supports Windows, also supports Windows Server. Nice for them to get all their support from Microsoft. Microsoft also feeds them reports on how much better Windows is than Linux. Therefore, they trust what Microsoft has to say as true.

      Besides, SCO is trying to sue Linux users, PHBs don't want to risk lawsuits.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  155. This is the just reward for allying with magneto! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as you may recall Microsoft made the first move against RIM with magneto, and now they're under attack on all fronts! It looks like Professor X called in his allies to support this attack on all fronts! Go Tux, Go Firefox, go Gimp! we'll polish off microsoft while cyclops and the rest tackle magneto!

  156. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Like many Slashdot users, you seem to have forgotten to RTFA.

    Grammar Macht Frei!

  157. duh by jonwil · · Score: 1

    (which Gates himself has used: "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,")

    Duh that Gates would say IE is better than firefox.
    Asking Gates that question is like asking the CEO of Coca-Cola if Coke is better than Pepsi.
    Or like asking the CEO of Adobe if Photoshop is better than GIMP.

  158. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah?

    like what? hpc? algorthm deisgn? scientofic computation?

    wouldnt ever do that on windows - even with notepad.
    sorry garcia. you suck

  159. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How much you want to bet that Google is looking at web-enabled "applications"? Click open an attachment and a new Firefox window opens up the Word document in OpenOffice-web.

    Oh, yeah. OpenOffice uses that Java thing that everybody hates. Right.

  160. Re:Except one other thing by shawn443 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For the professional web designer, gimp is plenty good enough. I don't need cmyk, database connectivity with checkin checkout, etc. I need something that can mask, distort, etc. Taken together with Inkscape and the power of xml, for the web designer, gimp is perfect for my use.

    Imagine an image that pictures a town crier proclaiming some new 50% off sale. Now imagine a perl script where the client can insert new text into that image and then with the push of a button that new text is uploaded and replaces the old text. Even a non techie can use this when provided a custom interface. This is the power I want and without spending $800.

    If a client wants a full sized poster, I'll create then subcontract. It's not like I have the printer for this anyway. But, to the point, I believe someday even this will be unnecessary. So for the purely graphical designer, your right, but only for now.

  161. PC Software is becoming a commodity by gathas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    These articles only partially get it right. Alot of what MS makes their big $ off of is becoming a commodity. It doesn't really even matter if Firefox and OOo are "better". This part of the computer industry will become less and less the sweet spot for growth and innovation. If MS concentrates on these markets but fails in the growths area (connected non-PC devices, web services etc.) then they will die. If they climb to the high ground and are successful, I think one day we will be saying "Remember when MS used to make Office?". As much as I like the open source movement, Apple and Google are MS's real problems. Linux, Firefox, OOo are just commoditizing the trailing edge where MS will lose if they try and key fighting on this front. I mean how much more can you improve office, at some point OOo will catch up.

    1. Re:PC Software is becoming a commodity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commodity doesn't mean what you think it means. In order for something to be a commodity you have to be have "an article of trade or commerce, especially an agricultural or mining product that can be processed and resold."

      This means that you take something that anyone can produce, add value to it and resell it to anyone that wants to also resell it to an end consumer.

      In a commodity market you have many producers of the raw product, many processors of the product and many resellers.

      Thus grain is a comodity, but diamonds are not.

      Read your EULA from MS. You are not allowed to resell your windows software, according to them.

  162. Re:But where is the competition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    But you did end it with:
    "Mods, do your stuff to me"
    which is even more guaranteed to get you a good score. I really wish the mods would just mod people who ask for it down. They ARE asking for it after all, why not oblige? ;-)

  163. Re:But where is the competition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a major gaming website with 200k visitors ("unique" visitors; the number is a marvelous piece of guesswork, but it's not just the number of hits) a day. Our Firefox numbers are 7.53% for the last month. Against popular /. beliefs, Opera is at 6.04% - not far behind.

    However, our site is evil, so it doesn't support any other browsers than IE. Life is so much easier that way. (IE, ff and Opera don't agree on the box model, so we chose IE's)

  164. Re:But where is the competition? by tobybuk · · Score: 1

    I confess ;) Much shame is brought on me and my house.

  165. Wireless = Black art? by GojiraDeMonstah · · Score: 1
    From TFA:
    ...where setting up wireless home networks is a black art.

    Come on now, really. A black art? Win XP and Mac OS X will both find the SSID for you with no clicky required. The only thing you even have to do is set the WEP key, and you don't even have to do that (thank you neighbors!).

    On the plus side, I'm going to start putting "black artist" down as my occupation.
    --
    "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a goddamned piece of paper!" - George W. Bush Nov. 2005
  166. Who needs broadband... by Cinquero · · Score: 1

    for Gmail??? It is better to have high speed internet for GMX, Hotmail and others, but Gmail is pretty speedy even on thinbands :-)).

  167. XBox had a few things going for it by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    First it came to market after the PS2, so the graphics technology was superior. The second thing is the ease at which it could be "modded".

    It didn't do too well in Japan, not sure of the latest figures but it wasn't popular simply because the Japanese like to buy their own products.

    XBox360 needs to be superior to the competition again this time, both in technology terms and in terms of software and price.

    While Sony's cell chip may be impressive the chances are it will be a pig to code for.

    1. Re:XBox had a few things going for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, thanks for those random and dumb points about the console market!

      Let me guess, you are:

      1) Not very bright
      2) An xbox fanboy
      3) Don't even read the fanboy console news sites, let alone the real technical and less know sites, and certainly never seen the inside of a real live console dev house

      PS:

      How well did the "it will be a pig to code for" line you little xbox fanboys so desperately tried to pump over the past three to four years work out for you?

  168. Give me Firefox Linux by NAACPsupporter · · Score: 0

    What would rock is for Firefox, or mozilla, to come up with a bundled Firefox/Linux package. Light stuff, with the ease of installation and usage as firefox. Focus 100% on the end user and desktop and give it to me. I would be willing to support it in whatever way possible. This would kill Microsoft and would allow us to have the best OS/Browser combo in the world.

  169. IBM by tsmithnj · · Score: 1

    EOM

  170. Re:Except one other thing by Forager · · Score: 1

    The ability to script out something like that sounds great - if I was in situations like that often enough and knew perl worth a dime I'm sure I'd be interested in it. Though let's be honest - for most of us it's hardly the kind of thing that's going to decide the difference between the GIMP and Photoshop.

    At first, the GIMP sounds great if all you want to do is web design and non-print work. After all, you don't want to spend too much extra money if you won't need the tool's extra functions. But there's a lot more work out there for those of us who do choose to work for print, as well as non-print, and for a mere $600 (because really, in terms of art software, $600 is pretty cheap) it's hardly worth thinking twice about it. And what's more, the problem of interface still stands. Even if all you want to do is digital work, and never work in print, the GIMP's interface remains an issue. If you decide to go down that route, great, you can trade X hours in learning the interface for a $600 savings. For you, that may work - for me, especially since I work in print as well as on the web, it's impractical, and that holds true for my colleagues - I've never worked with someone who uses the GIMP regularly.

    If things change in the future and the GIMP becomes a more viable option I'll be one of the first to jump ship. But for now I'll stick with Photoshop - $150 upgrades every year or two is less than I'm paying to play World of Warcraft, so I'm not complaining =) Who knows, perhaps you'll subcontract one of those posters to me some day =)

    --
    student of animation and the fine arts
  171. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by RoLi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    What disgusts me the most about Microsoft is they have so much potential and so many resources, yet they squander it and believe their own hype.

    No, the don't believe their own hype.

    They just realize that:

    • Web development doesn't need MSDN
    • Web based apps don't need a Windows server
    • Web based apps often run on any browser and can be adapted to do so without many problems if they don't.

    So, web development is Microsoft's worst enemy as it removes the lock-in Microsoft currently has in corporations (a hell of a lot of apps which would have been developed as Win32-apps 10 years ago are now develped as Web apps)

    Therefore, the better browsers are, the worse it is for Microsoft.

    Yes, the only reason MS built IE was to kill Netscape. After Netscape was dead, IE became a liability because the better IE (or any other browser) is, the more attractive web development becomes compared to pure-Microsoft Win32 development.

  172. I still use windows because.. by Coleco · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..there are a few specialized programs that do exactly what I want the way I want.. foobar, guitarrig, eac, reason.. that I'm just not willing to leave behind.

    Other than that, I play the odd game, but my rig's getting out dated again and I'm not sure I'm willing to keep shelling out cash to upgrade. I might just buy an xbox.

    However I've played with Ubuntu, and it really *really* makes me wish I had those programs under linux. It's really nice. There's not a heck of a lot that's keeping me on windows.

    And for the average person that just needs email, IM and browser, linux looks pretty damn good.

    IMO what cinched up the desktop market a few years ago for MS was plug and play. _Every piece of hardware works on windows_. Those of us that remember the day that it wasn't so, remember how huge of a pain in the ass hardware on a pc was; and how totaly insurmountable it was for the average person. If windows didn't expend a huge amount of resources working with hardware vendors to provide plug and play under windows, we might all be using macs right now.

    That was always what was holding back linux for years, but it's just not really an issue now.

    MS is going to have to pull something major out of it's ass to continue competing in the desktop market.

    I have a beef with he article saying that firefox is faster, for me eplorer has always been faster. The article is kind of biased anyway.

  173. Re:But where is the competition? by Elranzer · · Score: 1

    For an OS with no useful taskbar or virtual workspaces, sure...

  174. Money + Monopoly = expansion. by guidryp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would say microsoft is attacking everywhere. They are leveraging money and monopoloy into new markets all the time. Yeah there is some competition nipping at their heels, but it is hard to stand in the way of an unchecked monopoly with a huge wad of cash.

    PDAs/Smartphones: They keep respinning this and getting better and getting more market share. Any prediction when they hit #1?

    Game Consoles/SW: Jan 2007: It is not out of the question to consider that Xbox2 will be the number one gaming console in North America. MS will probably also be a significant publisher (having bought out a pile of gaming companies)

    Next Gen DVD: Microsoft had its own compression format placed as one of the mandatory codecs in both formats..

    The list could probably go on an on, but anwhere money is being made in large amount MS will be there and eventually will be a significant if not dominant player.

    Under-estimate them at your folly.

    1. Re:Money + Monopoly = expansion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is not out of the question to consider that Xbox2 will be the number one gaming console in North America"

      Actually it is. But feel free to believe that if it makes you feel better.

    2. Re:Money + Monopoly = expansion. by guidryp · · Score: 1

      "Actually it is. But feel free to believe that if it makes you feel better."

      If it is out of the question, I would like to know why.

      It certainly doesn't make me feel better to see them use monopoly power to leverage another market takeover. So I don't know what you are talking about there.

  175. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Phisbut · · Score: 4, Informative
    Your post mostly refers to home users. What about word processing and other office applications, which is the #2 application in my office (after Email/Outlook)?

    Haven't you heard of OpenOffice.org lately? You don't need Microsoft to do word processing.

    --
    After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
    - The Tao of Programming
  176. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Senzei · · Score: 1
    I really should change my sig to:

    Slashdot: Where personal anecdotes and broad generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or even intelligence.

    In fact, i'll do that now.

    --
    Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
  177. *My* browser is better! Nyah! by autophile · · Score: 1
    ... and Firefox (which Gates himself has used: "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,") ...

    Newsflash! J. Random Person announces, "I went into other people's bathrooms shortly after they've used them, but it's just another odor, and mine [flatulence] smells better."

    --Rob

    --
    Towards the Singularity.
  178. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail

    Like what? Telephony (Skype is mentioned in the article)? Office Apps (OpenOffice)?

    That only leaves games which is where MS is right now. For the average home user, the ability to play games is far and away the most important reason to choose Windows. For the price of a Windows+Office license, you could (I'm not saying everyone would) buy a nice console to take care of that. Wouldn't it be ironic if the XBox killed Windows?

  179. No Photoshop for Solaris? by Jhan · · Score: 1

    No Photoshop for Solaris you say?

    To further weirden your day, let me also submit this link: MS Internet Explorer for Solaris and HP-UX (Outlook Express is also available).

    --

    I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.

    1. Re:No Photoshop for Solaris? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You DO know photoshopp is from '99 and IE has until version 6.0, do you?

  180. MS writes some of the most horific software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can not wait until the day Microsoft get's out of my life! As a developer I have to work with their technology and everything about it is horrible. From the bug in Word to the disorganized MSDN site. It all has the same bad smell.

    Microsoft's duct-tape and chewing gum model of software develpment can not keep pace nor compete in quality with their competitors. Even Google and Apple have beat MS to market on windows add-ons (Google-desktop and Bonjour).

    Its time the Browser, OS and office products be seen for what they are, commodities. Pay'n MS for these products is one of the world's worst scams.

    1. Re:MS writes some of the most horific software by fitsy · · Score: 1

      ...to the disorganized MSDN site

      (You probably know this, but) The platform SDK is available for download at http://www.microsoft.com/msdownload/platformsdk/sd kupdate/

  181. IE is better? by krygny · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gates, from TFA: "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better,"

    How? I mean really. I can't think of one thing it does better. (And please don't bother replying about Active X, even as a joke.)

    "So much software gets downloaded all the time, but do people actually use it?"

    Just keep telling yourself that. I don't know anyone who has downloaded it, installed it, and NOT continued to use it.

    --
    Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
    1. Re:IE is better? by xutopia · · Score: 1
      well what else would he have said? :)

      Gates: "I tried it and I really liked the tabbed browsing so I innovated it into IE. Also that popup blocking thing was pretty cool so we brought that innovation in IE as well. See Microsoft innovates! At least IE has a ton of free cool toolbars you can plug onto it. Some even learn enough about you to send you promotions you really want! Betcha can't have all that on Firefox!"

  182. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by Eric604 · · Score: 1
    # IE's "mouse select jumps to word boundaries" is not perfect but better than Firefox's character based model.

    O man I hate that. It's totally frustrating when trying to select something and the GDMF selects additional chars.

  183. Netcraft confirms it... by rdwald · · Score: 1

    Windows is dying.

  184. Re:But where is the competition? by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

    Which is actually 15%, considering that Firefox, Mozilla, and Netscape all use the same rendering engine (NS4 notwithstanding).

  185. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least some of those issues can be fixed by extensions. For example, your tab problems can all be configured away if you install TabMix. Yes, that's not standard - but hey, last time I looked IE didn't support tabs at all out of the box!

    Give me something I can extend/customise any day.

  186. Aren't all companies always "under attack" ?? by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I mean, that is supposed to be the entire idea of capitalism: competition. No?

    I suppose that msft has monopolized the desktop for so long, that the very idea of msft having to compete like a normal company is considered peculiar.

  187. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by Aumaden · · Score: 1
    [I'm answering this on the assumption that you have legitimate gripes and are not just a MS shill. If this is not the case, please disregard.]

    Have you ever looked at the Firefox extensions? The Firefox download is tiny, under 5MB[*], because Firefox leaves the "extras" to individual choice.

    Most (if not all) of the functionality you are asking for is available. For example:

    # Ctrl-T in Firefox opens up a new and utterly blank tab...even more useless than the Ctrl-N behavior!

    And what would you have it do? Behave like IE where Ctrl-T does nothing at all?
    Personally, I dislike IE's "Ctrl-N clones the window" as 90% of the time, that is not what I want.

    # Ctrl-O in firefox is the normal file open dialog...not as useful as IE's URL-or-file-browse feature

    In Firefox, Ctrl-L sets the focus to the address bar for entering a URL. Ctrl-O opens the file browser. In IE to open a url I can tyle Ctrl-O; Same number of keystrokes as Firefox's Ctrl-L. But, to open local file, I need to type Ctrl-O, TAB, TAB, TAB, Enter (or, I can switch from kbd to mouse to click Browse, then switch back to kbd) to achieve what I can do with Ctrl-O in Firefox.

    # I wish Firefox had an option to let each tab have its own close button...often I want to quickly close a bunch of tabs based on their title, but instead I have to switch to each one and close it seperately.

    TabX will add a close widget to each tab. Personally, that's too busy to suit me. Plus it's aggravating to click on a tab I wanted to see, only to have it close because I clicked too close to the edge. (Of course, that's why I have UndoCloseTab extension.) Have you tried middle-clicking (scroll wheel) on a tab? It does exactly what you're asking for and is less prone to fumble fingers.

    Use Firefox exclusively for a few weeks and I think you'll find that those "usability pluses" are really familiarity and not usability. And if something seems difficult, take a look at the online help, you may be going about things the wrong way. Or, there may be an extension that will do what you want.

    [*] The IE installer only looks small; it downloads another 12-60MB when run.

  188. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

    Damn, that's very very well said! If I had mod points, I'd give you +99 extremely highIQ/Insightful/UltraInformative right now.

  189. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, they would get help from me if they sue Windows.

  190. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by kisrael · · Score: 1

    I find it useful enough that it would be good to have it as a configurable option.

    Seriously, what's a realistic ratio of how often you want to select from inside the middle of a word to how often you want to copy the whole thing? I'd say it's a about 1:20 for me, so increasing the "target area" for my mouse to hit is a usability win.

    I don't always agree with its rules about whitespace, especially when it comes to HTML markup but even with that, I prefer it to Firefox's old school approach.

    And it's funny usually I prefer the simplistic but easier to predict ideal (i.e. Firefox select) to the "DWIM" approach (what IE does) but in this case I've gotten use to the DWIM select and miss it in Firefox.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  191. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

    #IE has a very usable FTP 2-way client, Firefox has an FTP browser only.

    I don't recommend anyone use IE's FTP system unless they enjoy corrupted transfers (doesn't it always use ASCII mode or something?) Anyway, a real FTP program is much better.

    # IE has a better password-remembering system.

    Debatable. I'm more than happy with the way Firefox handles passwords.

    # Firefox's Ctrl-F doesn't seem to search input form fields.

    A valid point. But how often is it necessary to search within a textarea?

    # IE's "mouse select jumps to word boundaries" is not perfect but better than Firefox's character based model.

    Again, debatable and depends on user preference.

    # Ctrl-N in IE brings up a clone of the current window, complete with history. Firefox opens up my startpage...redundant, because I can easily launch it from the start menu.

    This is something that I really despise about IE. Why would I want a duplicate of the page I already have open?! Anyway, I always start with a blank document, so no time is wasted waiting to load a page which will just be changed regardless.

    # Ctrl-T in Firefox opens up a new and utterly blank tab...even more useless than the Ctrl-N behavior!

    Again, depends on user preference. I see no point in loading a page by default.

    # IE shows undisplayable characters with box placeholders, Firefox uses question marks.

    Boxes better than question marks? Debatable.

    # Tabbing in Firefox doesn't doesn't reset the cursor blink cycle, or something, so you don't get instant confirmation that you're typing in the correct box.

    It seems to me that it resets the cursor blink cycle, at least in 1.0.3 which I'm currently using.

    # IE has better drag and drop editing of the toolbars, including the "File Edit View" bar. (I like compressing that bar, 5 small buttons, and the address bar all on one line.)

    Firefox also has pretty powerful GUI configuration. It's not very obvious, but you can right-click in a blank area of the menu and select "customize"..

    # Ctrl-O in firefox is the normal file open dialog...not as useful as IE's URL-or-file-browse feature.

    IE drives me crazy by not selecting the address bar on CTRL-L, but instead popping up a dialog. Sometimes I just want to edit the current URL from the keyboard, damnitt!

    # I wish Firefox had an option to let each tab have its own close button...often I want to quickly close a bunch of tabs based on their title, but instead I have to switch to each one and close it seperately.

    Right click on the tab and select "close". Or just middle-click it.

  192. MS and Gates time has passed by Axoiv · · Score: 1

    Gates and his MS has already fulfilled their purpose, to put a computer "in all mans office".

    Their time has passed. Now begins a new era.

  193. Um... no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They were doing what a lot of software companies were trying: clone everything in sight, leverage your popular products to market your new clones.

    The difference is that MS happened to get control of MS-DOS (a CP-M clone created by a non-MS person, and debugged to a usable state largely by IBM's software people), and thereby usurped the central role of IBM, which was essentially created and maintained by the US government with corporate welfare contracts.

    MS did a lot of things right, business-wise, but they also had a lot of plain good luck. Bill happened to have a family connection in IBM, they happened to find QDOS, the PC happened to be cloned...

    You can go on all day about how they paid for their ticket, but what they did was win the lottery.

  194. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

    Yes I've heard of it. I donate money to it. What's your argument? OpenOffice demonstrates that there is more to the world then just the web & email.

    In addition, OpenOffice doesn't have a replacement for Outlook, which is the only MS application mentioned in my post.

  195. Former microsoftie Here by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I worked at Microsoft, there was a large push to look at trying to develop a services model out of their support section. They brought in some guy from IBM to push this (after they merged their Product Support Services division with Microsoft Consulting Services and called it Microsoft Services).

    They had two large problems that lead them to either slow these plans down or abandon them altogether (not sure since I no longer work there). The first is that people expect MS to lose money on support. Note that they only lose money because they are darned inefficient at providing support, however, so it is not the great value that it appears.

    Secondly, they don't want to gut their partner program by directly competing with their partners.

    There is a third problem that I don't think they have thought about, however. This is that the services industry is pretty close to what economists call "perfect competition." There are very few barriers to entry. Customers can switch service providers at any time at very little cost. So services will *never* be the cash cow that Windows and Office are. Yet Windows and Office are under what I call terminal attack. The attacks from the open source community are simply not ever going to go away, and Microsoft can never really win this war-- the best they can hope for is a containment strategy which quite frankly isn't working at the moment.

    What about emerging product markets (home of the future sort of things)? Great, and there is growth potential there. However, there is no potential for Microsoft to grow there because these markets are small. And they are competitive. So they could grow rapidly and Microsoft would simply be unable to have this growth translate into similar levels of revenue growth. This means that these markets *will not* satisfy shareholders.

    Microsoft, as a software company, is dying. But it is a death of a thousand cuts and is unlikely to be a dramatic implosion in the immediate future. However, give it five or ten years and we will see a very different picture. I predict that in 10 years, that Microsoft will largely be a media and entertainment business. However, I make the following predictions:

    1) Longhorn will be praised as a great marketing success by Microsoft. It will sell more retail copies than XP.

    2) We are already in the opening period of a war for the desktop. A few battles have gone either direction. Each battle that Microsoft loses will force more interoperability from them and will cause more to fall. It will also bring more expertise to open source software. Battles that FOSS loses will have no long-term implications. The Desktop War is already heating up, with Microsoft launching a counterattack via television advertising ;-)

    3) The consumer market will follow the corporate market.

    4) Microsoft will lose this war within 10 years.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:Former microsoftie Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is a third problem that I don't think they have thought about, however. This is that the services industry is pretty close to what economists call "perfect competition." There are very few barriers to entry. Customers can switch service providers at any time at very little cost.

      Oh, customers can switch at any time? MS could easily get away with using proprietary technology and not offering their customers an escape route. Your argument should be valid, but it should have also been valid for office suites. You'd think that the programs you use to edit documents would be interchangeable, but MS has made sure that they aren't (quite). Similarly, I would hope that mail service outsourced to MS would allow me to move my mail to another platform without error if I chose to do so, but that wouldn't necessarily be the case. MS made their billions by locking customers in to a platform. They will never get into the service industry as it exists today, but I suspect they will try to develop service platforms that make switching prohibitively expensive. Cell phone providers technically provide services, but they use proprietary hardware and used to not offer number portability so you were locked into their particular service. This is just modern American business.

    2. Re:Former microsoftie Here by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      The cell carrier industry is a bad example. Number portability is a problem but the hardware really is not.

      In the cell phone business, at least in my area, there are two main carriers: Verizon Wireless and Cingular. Cingular uses GSM and Verizon Wireless uses CDMA. Both allow me to use any compatible phone, and I can buy phones off the shelf and have them work, but one phone won't work with the other due to competing standards.

      So the problem here is vertical integration. I.e. the only source of cell numbers is from the service provider. If these are not portable, then you cannot go elsewhere to get them. Note historically that telephone numbers had (and still have) both routing and end-terminal information much like an IP address (though there is less routing information in them now that we no longer use exchange numbers for routing and have number portability on land lines).

      Microsoft's problem with the services industry is that it is not vertically integrated. Regarding your email platform, you still have control over your MX record, so you can point it to a different platform, pay for a few months in order to migrate your data away, and be good to go. Unless Microsoft is also your domain registrar, this should be possible. They may try to make it difficult, but it is a web service and should not be that difficult to get your information out of with a little scripting....

      Microsoft's fundamental problem is that there are always upstream providers so they cannot control everything in order to prevent migration.

      As for lockin.... This is why I push Linux for my customers. In my part of rural Washington State, I am the best Linux consultant around. Therefore, this is my form of lock-in. Not to say that there isn't competition, but just that I am in a good niche.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    3. Re:Former microsoftie Here by shmlco · · Score: 1
      Customers can switch service providers at any time at very little cost.

      I'd have to debate that. Keep thousands of customer and transaction records at a company like SalesForce.com, and see just how easy it is to migrate to another system "at any time at very little cost".

      Years back it took months before I get fed up with the performance issues and decided to move my browser Home page from Excite to Yahoo. The reason? Hundreds of stock quotes, article choices, weather tracking, maps, and user preferences had to be painstakingly recreated and reentered.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    4. Re:Former microsoftie Here by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I don't understand. First you say that Longhorn will sell more retail copies than XP, yet you say that Microsoft will lose the war before Longhorn's expected release in ten years.

    5. Re:Former microsoftie Here by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Even with Salesforce.com, you have to compare it to many of the vertically targetted tools which keep data in proprietary formats, don't export well, etc. At least with Salesforce, it is a web application so it should not be too difficult to write a perl script to extract your data. Sure the cost may be substantial, but it is far better than something like VinNow which has proprietary data storage formats!

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    6. Re:Former microsoftie Here by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Hehehe That is good. Made me laugh.

      If Microsoft takes ten years to release Longhorn, it will fail miserably, and even Microsoft knows this. This is why they are falling back to the service pack approach for adding planned features.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    7. Re:Former microsoftie Here by mikefe · · Score: 1

      As for lockin.... This is why I push Linux for my customers. In my part of rural Washington State, I am the best Linux consultant around. Therefore, this is my form of lock-in. Not to say that there isn't competition, but just that I am in a good niche.

      Yes, I have noticed this before. It is the same with small business. With windows everyone knows someone who can "fix" windows to some degree.

      There are a lot fewer that know someone who can "fix Linux" probmems.

      This is especially true in the direct mail industry. I live in the Los Angeles area, and setup someone with Linux. They either keep you or pay for the proprietary system.

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
    8. Re:Former microsoftie Here by mikefe · · Score: 1

      At least with Salesforce, it is a web application so it should not be too difficult to write a perl script to extract your data. Sure the cost may be substantial, but it is far better than something like VinNow which has proprietary data storage formats!

      Why not do the same for VinNow? You're talking about extracting the data from a web service, why not extract the data out of the GUI?

      I'll tell you why. You'd have to deal with all of the quirks of the interface that is geared towards humans. At least with web services, the interface is meant to interact with other programs (your browser) -- even if the browser interacts with the user much like a GUI, extracting the data is easier from web services.

      Though, I wonder why you don't see more scripts that interact with GUIs to extract their data. Many programs even have APIs, which ease the process.

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
  196. Re: Microsoft getting off its lazy butt... by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

    Microsoft only seems to show signs of 'real' progress when it has competition, or if it feels current projects no longer generate a sustainable cash flow.

    If we all stuck with Microsoft products and the competition moped off with its tail between its legs, I highly doubt that Microsoft would continue to update its software so feverishly - being aware of Microsoft's past activity (or inactivity).

  197. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by kisrael · · Score: 1

    [I'm answering this on the assumption that you have legitimate gripes and are not just a MS shill. If this is not the case, please disregard.]

    I'm absolutely arguing on "good faith"--I've actually switched to Firefox and have for about a month. Once I grokked tabs (at first I thought "well, the taskbar is my tab row, basically) as a way of semantically grouping certain webtasks I was hooked. Also I appreciate being less of MS's "bitch" and it might ease the way to changing OSes in the future.

    I understand that Firefox "errs" on the side of future upgradeability, but I do appreciate that when I sit down at an average, vanilla PC, I have a graphical FTP browser via IE. I dislike having seperate downloads for options, because it raises the cost of sitting down at someone elses PC.

    I LOVE "clone this window" and I also really miss how child windows (from shift- or ctrl-click) don't capture the history. In navigating certain webforums, it's a handicap sometimes when I want to go back to the main discussion window from a thread I'm following in a new window but I prematurely closed that main discussion window. I really think it should be a configurable option, and every time I find a window with no "history" I think I'm back in Netscape 4.7 crapland. (And to answer your question, I think ctrl-t should have an option to do what ctrl-n does, i.e. go to my homepage...but this bothers me less than it used to)

    I do use the keyboard a lot (which is why I'm probably missing the speciffic alt-d mapping to jump the cursor to the URL bar) but I gotta say...I think the mouse is used for local firebrowsing a LOT more than the keyboard.

    Anyway, I have used Firefox, and most of these complaints still stand. I don't think it's just newbyism, and the "open link in new window loses the history" is starting to get on my nerves.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  198. Microsoft doesn't need "buzz" to survive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buzz is what its competitors try so hard to create to gain marketshare from Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't need buzz, they've got nearly 100% marketshare, they just need to sit back and keep making the money.

    Firefox has generated about all of the buzz that they're ever going to get, and it's still an insignificant chunk of the market.

    Apple's got more buzz than ever, and their systems are still only around 5% of the market?

    Maybe Microsoft's not attacking new markets as aggressively as they used to, but this may be more a sign of restraint than weakness.

  199. Computers are like commodities, and OS as well by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    It all goes back to my Marketing 101 courses in my (first) BusMgmt degree - until the price drops to $500 for a system, why bother buying it.

    Same goes for HDTV from my viewpoint - I've been a tech leader way too often, burned $8000 on a PC or Mac at times, but the risk/reward ratio is not there any more.

    The diff between a 3.6G Intel PC with broadband and a 2.4G AMD PC with broadband is way less than 50 percent - more like 20 percent if you have sufficient RAM - so why should I pay $2000 for a Wintel box when I can get one that only costs less than $500 for everything all combined?

    That's the prob for MSFT. As price drops for consumer purchase - and people aim for $500 - the OS fraction of $200 plus for MSFT becomes more and more a burden and not worth the cash.

    Markets don't care about ideology. They care about choices - and MSFT is not adding enough value to make it worth it's while.

    [caveat - I own MSFT shares]

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  200. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    Picassa needs to get its own camera download interface and replace Microsoft POS. Let's see, I've just downloaded images from a camera, what do you want to do? Thanks to Microsoft, you get two options:

    1) Upload to web (Microsoft approved, of course)
    2) Print online (Microsoft approved, of course)

    What crap.


    You could, of course, just edit the damn things on your PC.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  201. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by geoffspear · · Score: 1
    In the last 12 months, they've had almost 39 billion dollars in revenue. The fact that no one you personally know is contributing to that revenue proves nothing.

    And no, I won't be buying their stock. I don't buy their products either. See, I hate Microsoft and wish they would go away. I'm just not a moron who's going to claim their business is failing based on no facts whatsoever.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  202. Re:Except one other thing by shawn443 · · Score: 1

    I'm sure on some unemployed basement dweller's /home/basementDweller/cvsCode/gimp folder someone is toying with all the features photoshop lacks.

    "Long this line is, but use gimp soon you will".

  203. Re:FP for Annette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, she wouldn't go out with me either :(

    The guy who got FP must be really special to get such a great girl. I bet he is VERY intelligent and has a HUGE penis. I am very envious of him. But no worry, I still feel richer for having seen his post and thusly met him. I hope he gets FP again.

  204. Of course by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    People pay me to do these sort of things. And sometimes I have them running Linux at the end of the day. This is especially true if they have misplaced their XP CD and COA. And yes, every customer I have moved to Linux has loved it.

    They have to pay me to work on their systems whether it is Windows or Linux, but at the end of the day, I make less money on those I convert to Linux because they call me for tech support less.

    If you have a mechanic check your car every year, why not make a qaulified computer person check out your computer every year?

    If you are a Linux admin, why not have them pay say $10 for analysis of a set of diagnostic tools which can be run once a year (via Cron) and send you the diagnostic reports? Linux automation can make this really easy :-)

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  205. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by kisrael · · Score: 1

    Re: IE FTP...I use it for binary files all the time, never had a corrupted file. Don't know if it does ASCII mode. I don't think it does sftp, which is a drawback.

    Debatable. I'm more than happy with the way Firefox handles passwords.

    I'm not, but I have trouble understanding how it works so that I can complain about it properly...which is itself a complaint. For instance, it seems like once upon a time I told not to remember this one http auth, and now it NEVER offers to remember it. Also, sometimes it gets filling out usernames and passwords exactly backwards, on CGI forms...I'd like it to prefill my username and let me type in my password. Instead, it wants to fill in the password after I type my username...given that my username is a lot more public than my password, some hypothetical badguy who got hold of my computer might know or guess my username, and would be good to go.

    A valid point. But how often is it necessary to search within a textarea?

    You might as well argue "why have taxtareas, don't one line text fields work fine?" So to answer your question, ALL THE DAMN TIME...I edit my website through online forms with textareas, and going back to correct a mistake is a lot harder when I can't ctrl-F find it! Sometimes I have to cut and paste the whole entry into a text editor.

    I've heard this is a known bug in certain versions of Firefox, and I think Firefox's search bar is worlds better than IE's dialog (which has absolutely retarded prefilling behaviors), so I'm not too upset, but still.

    This is something that I really despise about IE. Why would I want a duplicate of the page I already have open?! Anyway, I always start with a blank document, so no time is wasted waiting to load a page which will just be changed regardless.

    I often want a duplicate page to launch child browsing, for instance...I might want to keep a "pristine" copy of the main forum page open, and then have a new one to play with.

    Given that my startpage is ALWAYS one click away, and making a new window on the current window might be arbitrarily difficult (sometimes there's state not captured in the URL) I'd say cloning the window is a good canidate for a config option. And not having shift- or ctrl-clicked windows having a history has no user advantages I can see, and many drawbacks I've run into.

    Boxes better than question marks? Debatable.

    No way...with question marks, I don't know if they were question marks originally, or if Firefox changed 'em. With boxes, I have a pretty good idea that it's a character set I can't view properly. Question Marks as a placeholder for unprintable characters is a bug. (So dabate me. Why are question marks better?)

    It seems to me that it resets the cursor blink cycle, at least in 1.0.3 which I'm currently using.

    Not in the 1.0.3. *I'm* using. Especially with http auth dialog. It sounds like a small thing but it's really grating.

    Firefox also has pretty powerful GUI configuration. It's not very obvious, but you can right-click in a blank area of the menu and select "customize"..

    It's pretty good for customizing what buttons appear, but has no facility for arranging the positions of the bars. (This might be a too tough to do in a sane, multi-platform way)

    IE drives me crazy by not selecting the address bar on CTRL-L, but instead popping up a dialog. Sometimes I just want to edit the current URL from the keyboard, damnitt!

    Heh, I've heard this before...you might be looking for the key pattern "alt-d"--that's why the d in "Address" is underlined...it even gives you a hint, unlike Firefox Ctrl-L

    Though alt-d, URL, return isn't any fewer keystrokes than ctrl-o, URL, return.

    Right click on the tab and select "close". Or just middle-click it.

    It's a lot more steps to right click a menu, locate the "close tab" (in a relatively difficult to hit, last on list position) then to click on a nice red X. And I can't readily middle click on my laptop. I think there is a plugin that fixes this though, and it is a subjective complaint.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  206. Use Firefox, get Zero-day exploits! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I would rather skip past Firefox and Mozilla.

    Zero-Day Firefox Exploit Sends Mozilla Scrambling
    For the fourth time in three months, major security flaws in the upstart Firefox Web browser have pushed volunteers at the Mozilla Foundation into damage-control mode.

    THIS is being touted as a 'more secure' alternative to IE?

  207. Re:But where is the competition? by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 1

    Yes, because the general population could even tell you what a 'virtual workspace' or 'taskbar' was....

    'Useful' is in the eye of the beholder...

  208. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In the last 12 months, they've had almost 39 billion dollars in revenue."

    It is just staggering how many just plain stupid people like you are out there in the world.

    What is their yearly operating expenses - hint it's way up in the many, many billions too...

    How many shares does the company have outstanding - hint it's way up in the billions too...

    Here's a quick pop quiz. Which company is healthier:

    A) A company with a billion dollars in revenue and a billion shares of stock at $1 dollar a share outstanding

    B) A company with a million dollars in revenue and a thousand shares of stock at $1 dollar a share outstanding

    Which way is the revenue growth going up or down - hint it's not up...

    How many products contribute to their revenue - hint it's not more than three by any reasonable account

    I could go on but I don't think your allowance could afford it.

  209. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by jwsd · · Score: 1

    The computer using experience for most is: email, web surfing (this includes shopping on eBay) and gaming.

    Where did you pull that statistics out? From your brain? Don't speak for the majority of people just from your own limited experience.

  210. Last But Not Least by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No doubt in Rome's heyday, nobody thought it would ever fall. And no doubt Enron thought they'd be able to pull the wool over people's eyes forever.

  211. Re:But where is the competition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it interesting you said you recycled your pc instead of bought a new one. Because that is what you have to do with macs if you want a faster/newer CPU or system bus. Yes you can upgrade macs, but only certain parts.

  212. The anwer is simple by jbplou · · Score: 1

    "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?."

    The answer is simply Clippy the office assistant.

  213. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by geoffspear · · Score: 1
    Revenue growth in the last fiscal year was 14.40%. Earnings were down, but still positive.

    I'm not suggesting that MSFT is necessarily a good stock to invest in. Their P/E is probably a bit high, and you can point to all the stats you want to show why their stock price might go down in the near to mid term.

    But you're a freakin' idiot if you think this means they're going to go out of business.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  214. Re:Slowed growth for MS in a growing industry -a s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I agree for the most part, Mac is not a good stock pick right now... They were seen as "the next best thing" back when they released the iMac too, stocks soared then too, only to die off cause it was just a fad.

  215. A professional press uses 4 colored inks by georgeha · · Score: 1

    at least, cyan, magenta, yellow and black, otherwise known as CMYK. If you want your output off that press to match what the customer wants (ie. their corporate logo is exactly right, and people look like people), it helps immensely to be working in terms of CMYK.

    1. Re:A professional press uses 4 colored inks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like the Phaser 840, Phaser 740 and Phaser 340 I own that all use CMYK and work perfectly with Gimp on Linux?

      What _are_ you babbling about?

  216. Re:Windows is easier than Linux by darealpat · · Score: 1

    That is true for some things, but not for some little things that I have experienced, such as printer installation (drivers are "in there"), monitors (same story), motherboards (ditto). This is especially seen when moving a HDD into another machine, or adding new hardware. If a component fails, modern distributions are pretty smart about adjusting... and not naggin you to verify, or whatever it is you have to do in XP.

    I am taking this from the stance of someone who is an average user, who (normally) doesn't install his version of Windows him/her self, etc (just buys the box pre-configured), and has to call on the knowledgeable friend to troubleshoot/rebuild. Those of us who had been around since the late '80's remember just how rough upgrading could be. To a new user, the modern Linux distribution makes life a whole lot simpler, like the modern Windows OS (which si preety close to a distribution, but i'm not going there!), but has a little leg up in said aspects.

    As many posters have said, familiarity is the key, but when the user is just starting out, it is really great to be able to simply setup things without going to driver disks.

    Oh... and anybody else catch themselves right clicking a page in IE and looking for "Save page" as an option...? Easier indeed!

    --
    For every present, there is a past
  217. Re:But where is the competition? by WMD_88 · · Score: 1
    I can upgrade the CPU in a G4/400 to at least 1.4GHz. There are also 1.6GHz, 1.3 dual, and overclocked 2.0 chips that can be dropped in (though the highest may not be compatible with the 400's 100MHz bus). I can upgrade an iMac G3/233 to either a 600MHz G3 or 550(?)MHz G4. A Power Mac 7200 to a G3. A Power Mac 9600 to a G4.

    Upgradability? Good, I say. What PC can go from a Pentium 1 to a Pentium 3?

  218. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you a total idiot? Never heard of the present tense?

  219. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That'd be Evolution, then?

  220. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by darealpat · · Score: 1

    Friend, just in case you missed an earlier comment of mine, I will give you one reason why Mozilla,(and by extension Firefox, since that is what I use on my SO's machine) is just that much better: right click on a page in IE and select "Save Page" or "Send Page"... oops... sorry... you can't, and that is a pity. BTW, I don't know if " Close other Tabs" will help you with your last point... and some of us actually just want a plain old new window, maybe to type in an url or something....

    --
    For every present, there is a past
  221. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by kisrael · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm confused, but aren't all those options available under the "File" menu in IE? So you're kvetching that it's under the file menu and not a right click option? Or what?

    Close other tabs doesn't help with my point, since I want to see what each tab is before I close it...without an extension I click somewhere on the left, on the tab, to bring it to the front, then I mouse all the way over to the right to hit X, and I have to keep going back and forth.

    Re: plain old new window...I still say, it's much easier to type in a URL to a window that has junk on it then it is to get back to where you were in a blank or homepage'd window...therefore, it would make sense to have a configurable "new window clones current window" option.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  222. Re:But where is the competition? by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

    Actually really not so much of Linux: First you can get the same search as in Spotlight with Beagle Desktop search. The Infrastructure für OpenGL accelerated Desktops already is in place, thanks the x.org and last but not least, desktop widgets have been existing for quite a while now thanks to Superkaramba and other desktop widget technologies. You cannot really see most of this stuff, because the x.org stuff is disabled in most cases (otherwise the UI would have been dragged down as badly as in OSX) beagle is rather new and is moving slowly into the distros, with SuSE being first, and Superkaramba and the gnome desktop widgets have been popular for more than 2 years now.

  223. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Microsoft might be a good stock for near-term trading, but it is awful as a long-term investment. Windows and Office are being obseleted by Linux, Solaris, OpenOffice.org, and Mac OS X, which counts for most of Microsoft's revenue. Their future revenue outlook is dismal in a five to ten year timeframe.

  224. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Tim+C · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't need Microsoft to do word processing.

    Yes, I do. All my clients send me documents in either Excel or Word format. If I can't read them properly, or mess them up making edits and sending them back, it's at least embarassing.

    Sure, mis-matched versions of Office can cause problems - but then I can say "well, sorry about that, but I used the right software - could you send it again please? Maybe try saving it as an older version, say Word 97?". If I use OO.o and it messes it up, it's my fault.

    Not fair, perhaps, but that's the way it works in business a lot of the time. Thankfully, I don't have to deal with that sort of crap very often.

  225. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

    Not until it runs well on our existing Windows boxes, and can access a central server for Calendaring, etc.

    Hopefully it's not too far off. I am eagerly anticipating the stable releases of Novell's port of Evolution to Windows.

  226. Re:How is IE better? Can you name 1 reason? Just 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I often want a duplicate page to launch child browsing, for instance...I might want to keep a 'pristine' copy of the main forum page open, and then have a new one to play with."

    You need that middle mouse button again :)

    Middle-click on a link opens it in a new tab. You can keep your "pristine" front page and spawn any children into new tabs.

  227. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Dolda2000 · · Score: 1

    It can access a central server for Calendaring, etc. Since version 2, it is capable of accessing at least Microsoft Exchange and Novell Groupware servers.

  228. Microsoft slowly losing relevance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  229. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by BranMan · · Score: 1


    That's the wedge - Once you are running Firefox, GAIM, OpenOffice.org, The GIMP, etc. etc. - What do you really NEED Windows for, besides Solitare?

  230. Whoah there, cowboy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First you go on about CMYK when bugger all people *care* about that sort of thing, then you diss perl scripting in GIMP becase bugger all people *care* about that sort of thing.

    Can you see the dichotomy here?

    1. Re:Whoah there, cowboy. by Forager · · Score: 1

      Ignoring your hostility, I'll take this post to clarify that I wasn't being snarky about perl at all. If I was frequently in situations like what the authour described, I would indeed be interested in perl. But I'm not, so learning perl for such a minor thing would be wasteful for me.

      you go on about CMYK when bugger all people *care* about that sort of thing

      That kind of attitude certainly won't help the GIMP. Either you're being willfully ignorant or you honestly don't realize that the lack of CMYK support is usually the #1 or #2 reason (behind the interface) graphic designers decide not to use the GIMP. I mean, the inability to work in the colour space of your target medium is something of a majour hurdle for graphic designers who want to adopt the GIMP.

      But you can insist that no one cares about CMYK if you like.

      --
      student of animation and the fine arts
  231. Oooh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brave little boy, there!

    Look, when your monitor is RGB, your scanner collects in RGB, your printer accepts RGB and all your apps on the computer use RGB, how much difference does knowing RGB and CMYK make?

    For a web designer, there IS NO CMYK. You'd need colour calibration software on all PC's and professional help for the user setting it up for the differences that pantone tries to ameliorate.

    The GP knows what they need to know for their job. And $600 for a copy of a paint program that is no better for their work is a bloody stupid thing to do.

    The GP isn't a professional user of Photoshop because it brings nothing to the game. They are *completely* knowledgeable about the power available in GIMP. Do you know your script-fu? Well, if not, then don't tell us about the lack of power in GIMP or the overwhelming superiority of PS.

  232. CMYK not what you mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's pantone. It adjusts for the differences between ink grades, the capability of the phosphors or led's and the vastly expanded capability of the human eye to discern colour in the same way.

    There are colours you CANNOT reproduce in CMYK that you can get with RGB. There are colours that you can produce that will map vaguely onto another colourspace. However, it may be that the eye can see the differences, or it may be closer than the eye can normaly discern.

    Pantone gives a method of matching RGB to CMYK for different devices so that they will be percieved as equivalent.

    Unfortunately, pantone is patent encumbered, so CMYK will still not help here.

  233. interesting... by namekuseijin · · Score: 1

    Changing Photoshop for Windows and GIMP for Linux and you just realize all arguments regarding professional-proprietary-product-with-years-of-R&D vs hobbyist-free-effort-with-years-of-debugging look the same.

    This argument is moot.

    --
    I don't feel like it...
  234. Re:But where is the competition? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    Taskbar is the dock on OS X. I feel sorry having to remind it. If the parent used windowmaker or afterstep, he would understand taskbar is a old approach. With a huge object oriented (hello! I can drag a mail here, to this window and its pasted) OS, taskbar is.. Well, funny :) Got sort of it in Path Finder, cool for app quitting party before I launch some huge game etc.

    Virtual workspace is enabled by many freeware apps, with a huge invention like Expose, need for them is less. Telling as a guy who loves virtual desks since first times I used windowmaker. (openstep)

    One must not forget the amazing support of dual monitors (or add more in some configs) of Mac OS tradition.

    You try to educate the parent but he clearly didn't see the desktops of 8gig Mac using pros. ;)

  235. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

    That's great. I've been loosely following Evolution for Windows since Linuxworld last year.

    I'm really curious how Evolution + Novell Groupware it will work: How will Evolution & iCalendar handle meeting invitations, shared schedules, shared addressbooks, shared discussion groups, etc.

    Because in all honesty, Outlook really sucks at most of this stuff-- most places I know don't use shared addressbooks correctly. It's really disgustingly buggy and poorly designed.

  236. I've started to learn... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Microsoft will never die, its far too rich now to disappear completely, it may have diversify like IBM.

    ...that the bigger you are, the harder you fall. IBM was suffering bigtime, lost tons of money because their business model was failing. If, and I do say if because this has been said for many years now, there is a sudden snowball effect with OpenOffice, shortly followed by real headway for mixed networks (Win/OO for "special" users, Linux/OO for simple jobs) Microsoft will shake at its very foundations.

    Desperation is so expensive you can hardly imagine. My dad worked with IBM at the time, they were really out on a limb. Have you ever tried to create a new cash cow fast because your old one died too quickly? They don't grow fast, you couldn't really push them except by killing the margins you desperately need, and so the company is lost in limbo. It is not a pretty sight. Not to say that Microsoft is there yet.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  237. En contraire by b100dian · · Score: 1

    The long service life of Macs adds significantly to the installed user base
    Actually the installed user base decreases significally the percent Macs are sold: proof: because of the long service life.

    --
    gtkaml.org
    1. Re:En contraire by gobbo · · Score: 1
      Actually the installed user base decreases significally the percent Macs are sold: proof: because of the long service life.

      I think ... something was lost in translation, there. What are you trying to say?

    2. Re:En contraire by b100dian · · Score: 1

      If, e.g. 2% are using Macs, and their "service life" is longer, that means less then 2% are sold (every year, for example).

      Excuse my allambicated english:)

      --
      gtkaml.org
  238. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod this crap down.

    It is off-topic and nonsensical in relation to the parent, not to mention outright stupid. Like many Windows users? Come the fuck on, you 13 year old fucktard.

  239. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quite the pro OSS piece... To answer the question posed in the summary, "Why use Microsoft if you have a broadband connection and combine Firefox with powerful web services like Google's Gmail?" Because there is more to the world than just the web and e-mail.

    you would be amazed at the mass quantities of people who buy $1000+ computers to do just that, the web and email... and that's it.

    i see it all the time, from people in all walks of life.. the welfare mom to the retired exec and everyone in between.. 'web and email', 'web and email' it's all i hear, and it's all most regular folks want or care about.

  240. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by westlake · · Score: 1
    Very few people actually go out and buy MS products.

    Take a look at the software sales chart on Amazon.com, at any given moment, about ten of the top fifty sellers will be Microsoft titles.

  241. Re:Uses of computers far exceed email and a browse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *cough cough* Web services on demand *cough cough*

  242. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by rishistar · · Score: 1

    Hey - don't you dare accuse any of us Linux users of spending our time gaming!

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
  243. Nothing to see here, folks by smagruder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I played around with it a bit, but it's just another browser, and IE [Microsoft's Internet Explorer] is better."

    This, my friends, is only the latest reinforcement of the axiom "Bill Gates, a purported uber-nerd, continues to be out of touch with respect to the future of technology."

    --
    Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
  244. Support.... yeah right. by Ernesto+Alvarez · · Score: 1

    This isn't about which is the better product... it's about which one will get the project done AND be supported if shit hits the fan.

    Support does NOT mean Forums or RTFM. They want real people. The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it. If it breaks they want someone to call to get it working again.


    Let me tell you a story about windows 2000 server and a BIOS raid (highpoint, cheap but usable)we were using to store our exchange information store.

    One day, said information store started showing parity errors that appeared out of thin air. We started searching for possible causes and reading about the error codes that appeared in the event viewer. After reading lots of nonsense on the help files we sent the error codes to MS support.

    In case you're doubting you analysis of the help files, I'm have 5 years experience as a network administrator, as does my co-admin. The third member of our group has a couple of years experience too, trained by us two. We're mostly unix admins, but one of us (not me) is also a veteran windows admin too. We also had our fair share of experience with out exchange 2000 (including cutting it in three, and making a reverse proxy for it with apache). The help files were lots of things to do as workarounds for known problems, with no explanation of the problems themselves or their causes.

    Eventually we concluded that there was some kind of conflict between some unknown windows subsystem and the raid device. It would cause the store to corrupt itself (slightly but enough for it to cease operating) within a few days while operating on the mirrored disks (don't ask me why, we never found out).

    At the same time, the answer from MS support came back, telling us exactly the same shit that was written on the help files cut and pasted into the mail.

    After finding a hardware compatibility list, and not finding the highpoint raid listed (mind you, it's the BIOS raid found on most consumer motherboards) we wrote back asking if there was a patch or update available. The answer was "that piece of hardware is not supported".

    The final result is that we had to get rid of the mirroring disk.

    Now, you were saying talking about REAL PEOPLE instead of mailing lists and newsgroups, but let me tell you that having THAT kind of support is far from having real support staff (it's like having, as I call it, a "meat robot", a person that just follows a script). I've had better experience asking in mailing lists, at least the people hanging down there act like intelligent humans, instead of meat robots.
  245. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by epee1221 · · Score: 1

    His point was that any commonly-used thing Microsoft provides is also available elsewhere. The prevalence of gaming doesn't hurt his case a whole lot.

    --
    "The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
  246. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by epee1221 · · Score: 1

    Well, there's always emacs... :-P

    --
    "The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
  247. No one seems to have noticed the sting in the tail by Javaman59 · · Score: 1
    It should be said, tho', that articles like this have been written about MSFT for a long time - and there's still billions in their war-chest.
    Recently I've started a "OS Predictions" collection, where I keep articles predicting imminent victory of Linux, or collapse of Microsoft. This one is going there. Wish I'd started this 10 years ago, but I reckon there'll be enough wrong predictions over the next ten years to make collection worthwhile.
    --
    I'm a software visionary. I don't code.
  248. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by bit01 · · Score: 1

    I agree with you but there are a couple of points to keep in mind: The stock price and revenue is not a necessarily good indication of market share when the competition has no stock price and there is also good evidence of increasing linux/OSS use.

    With 6 billion plus people in the world the M$ stock price could just mean they've managed to mantain their existing user base with the other 5 billion odd people in the world taking up alternatives.

    Also, see my sig. Just in the last few months, the number of google hits for linux exceeded that of windows. Not scientific of course but interesting nonetheless.

    ---

    GNU/Linux, the world's #1 OS by hits. M$ windows #2.
    Open Office the world's #1 office suite. M$ office #2.
    Apache, the world's #1 web server. M$ IIS #2.
    Evolution, the world's #1 email client, M$ outlook #2.
    Unfortunately mozilla family browsers are still #2, M$ internet explorer is #1, but watch firefox (#3) grow.

    Congratulations everybody, world domination is at hand. ;-)

  249. Re:Microsofts Success is not tied to thier technol by SunFan · · Score: 1

    It isn't technology, it's price. Lets look at recent developments:

    Solaris: $0
    Linux: $0
    OpenOffice.org: $0

    Windows: hundred $ at least
    Office: hundreds of $

    Just like in the 1990s when Windows NT came out of nowhere to dominate UNIX, UNIX/Linux will come full circle and do the same to Windows.

    --
    -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
  250. "Good sutff" from M$??? by Javaman59 · · Score: 1

    M$ didn't get to have 90% of the desktop market, and 60% of the server market, through any technical merit, they got it because they are arrogant bullies, and people are too stupid to buy anything else. Pretty soon those stupid people are going to wise up, and dump M$ in droves. Forget about your career with .Net, that's just another rubbish M$ marketing tool, and it's going down soon. Install Linux at home, and start learning system configuration with /etc, programming with makefiles, and how to browse the help system (all 17 varieties of it). That's the future!

    --
    I'm a software visionary. I don't code.
  251. Re:But where is the competition? by jbplou · · Score: 1

    Your siting 3.7% market share as something to be considered a threat.

    Not to mention that Macs tend to be used longer

    how did you stat this little fact of your, check out the other three nerds in your dorm. I know a person still running windows 95 on p90, that doesn't mean I can just make a statement saying "people tend to use windows 95 still".

  252. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    Unlike many other slashdot users, you seem to have forgotten that the OP was in past tense, and therefore the reply was also. Grammar Macht Frei, indeed. Idiot.

    --
    C|N>K
  253. I hate to post this much... by Rallion · · Score: 1

    But here's a follow-up. No tabs open. Just a blank window. Mem usage is 50MB, VM usage is 40MB. I even cleared everything I could, in an effort to put a dent in it, but it had no effect.

  254. Not really .. by dustmite · · Score: 1

    Not really, because there were also competing DOS clones! I remember some people I knew ran DR-DOS, for example, and it was not only compatible with DOS but had more features. If MS had had such an exclusivity clause with IBM, the PC market would simply have exploded anyway, but with different companies coming out on top as to today (e.g. Caldera might have gotten a lot bigger). The competing DOS manufacturers were eager to differentiate their products by adding new features and so on. However when MS came out with IIRC Windows 3, they added some code to deliberately make it only run on MS-DOS, thus "tying" the two products i.e. Windows 3 to DOS. This meant if you ran DR-DOS you couldn't run Windows, even though DR-DOS was technically capable of having Windows run on top of it). (The resultant MS-Caldera court case dragged out until long after DR-DOS was no longer relevant in the market, even though MS lost that case. Although they removed the exclusivity code later, the damage had already been done, and the message had been clear to competitors: "don't enter the market, we'll just crush you by locking you out".)

    1. Re:Not really .. by korielgraculus · · Score: 1

      There weren't any DOS clones for years after the original PC and DOS combination, all the early clone manufacturers used MS-DOS with their machines (IIRC, I think DR-DOS started as being compatible with MS-DOS 3).

      The "won't run unless it's MS-DOS" is unfortunately a myth. The beta (and only the beta) version of Windows (I think it was 95 though, not 3) tested to be sure that it was based on MS-DOS, but the code never made it to the final release and I for one had it running on DR-DOS as a final product without any complicated patches etc. and without Windows complaining once. IIRC, Caldera did try to use it as an argument in their court case until a release version of Windows was installed on a DR-DOS machine in the court room by the MS legal team. The court case was actually about licensing terms for manufacturers etc. and MS abusing their monopoly position.

  255. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm just not a moron who's going to claim their business is failing based on no facts whatsoever.
    What kind of moron are you then?
  256. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by DenDave · · Score: 1

    Who said they're going out of business? At best, I would challenge their business model. You see if we make an assumption that earnings from operating systems sales are under threat, be it by migrations or massive discounts due to market pressure, then what will they sell to make up for the historically multi-billion dollar income? Understand that it's relativly easy to come up with a business plan to generate say, 100 million $ a year, a plan for 300-500million would be challenging but I am sure they could come up with it.. but anything above a billion??? I see this as a problem for microsoft, replacing the chicken with the golden egg.
    But heck, never mind, anyone who sees this is, in your expert opinion, a moron.
    ROFL@geoffspear (692508)

    --
    -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
  257. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by rtb61 · · Score: 1
    Yes, but by far the most important thing is that Microsoft is a company that is now being forced into and ever more competitive software enviroment where it is losing ground. It profits and it's current war chest are all based on being and mainting a monopoly and the expence of the end user.

    Now going forward the monopoly is being dismantled, profitability is falling and with it share value. So no matter what it does or which direction it chooses it will no longer have a monopoly, so that the compnay that was Microsoft in effect ceases to exist only to inveitably become a significantly less profitable empty shell compared to what is was.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  258. Remember the Auto Industry? by ITgrrrl · · Score: 2, Informative

    This week two of the former Detroit 'big four' had their investment ratings downgraded to junk status. They also seemed to have plenty in the war chest. Didn't help them design cars people wanted. What is 0% financing or rebate but paying people to buy your product? Well, Microsoft keeps on building on top of old technology - expensive to patch, and not quite state of the art. Why do people keep using it? Because they know how and they feel in control because it's the first desktop tool they learned. But, that attitude won't last forever.

    --
    'The longing to be primitive is a disease of culture' George Santayana
  259. Re:But where is the competition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you seen KDE? Not to be flaming, but i think you should do some more research on linux desktops. Some good sites for this...

    http://www.kde.org/ The K Desktop Enviroment (what i use)
    http://www.gnome.org/ GNOME, another Desktop Enviroment thingy. The competitor to KDE
    http://www.xfce.org/ XFCE, a lightweight desktop for less-powerful comps.

    And that's all i can think of...

  260. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by m50d · · Score: 1

    No. That's what I'd say if he had forgotten it that one specific time. I meant he forgets to rtfa, generally. And it was also fitting as closely as possible with the post I was replying to.

    --
    I am trolling
  261. No need for Google OS by dadalo · · Score: 1

    Google (Search, Gmail, next GooFirefox) is getting directly the users without going through OS. MS cannot marginalize Google using OS as Netscape. Google won't make an OS.

  262. Re:The Internet is only a part of computer usage.. by Engie_Viral · · Score: 1

    Ummm, what rock have you been living under? OO.org has better file compatability than any version of M$ Office I have seen.

    You can use the exact same tactic if you have problems: ask to save to a word97 .doc - but I have never had issues with opening the latest format of office douments except for stuff that uses VBA scripting.

  263. What do you mean "Support"? by mangu · · Score: 1
    you are using My-SQL... something goes wrong... what do you do? Post in a forum, email a friend...


    Right, and what is most important, you get a solution for your probelm. Try doing that with a commercial company. Let's see some real cases from my own experience:


    Case 1: call Oracle and tell them you have a problem with Pro*Fortran (Oracle's own implementation of a Fortran interface). I did that and it took six months of discussions until they found out that the product (their *own* product) had been discontinued...


    Case 2: I had a problem migrating a program from VAX-C to DEC-C, both products of Digital Equipment Co. I opened a support call in 1993, and now, 12 years later, I'm still waiting for a solution. It took me two months of talks with four different support people for them to understand that a problem existed, despite me sending them a 50 line program that compiled and ran on VAX-C but not on DEC-C. DEC has been acquired by Compaq and Compaq by HP and still no answer from them. Of course, I solved the problem myself (by a rather ugly kludge), but the support call is, AFAIK, still open and pending a solution.


    Case 3: I opened a support call to Borland on a bug in their C++ compiler. Their answer: "we know about this bug and it should be fixed in the next version". That's how commercial software works, they expect me to pay for a new version of the software, I expect them to fix the problem in this version, which I already paid for.


    Case 4: Another support call on a C++ compiler, this time to Microsoft. Same answer as above.


    Case 5: One of our servers (HP-UX) running an Ingres database died, and the mobo had to be replaced. The CPU on the new computer was more powerful than the old, which had been discontinued by HP. Computer Associates sent us a bill for $15000, because they charge by the CPU performance in the machine running their software.


    So, pleease, try to get a job where you have to work with commercial software and try opening a few support calls before you talk about "bam get an answer". You get much better answers and more educated ideas from Google in five minutes than you get from any software company I know.

  264. try out texmacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    texmacs is available on win32 now. really really cool prog. texmacs.org