Slashdot Mirror
Is It Wrong to Love Microsoft?
vd writes "Given most comments on Slashdot, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft. An article on CoolTechZone, though, argues that not everyone should dismiss Microsoft outright. According to Varun Dubey, Linux is over-rated, Macs aren't worthy and Windows deserves respect and some love. From the article: 'What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.'"
2 almost pro-MS posts on
someone please hit me...
Troll!
Never trust a man wearing a coat and tie!
doy.
...because they're jealous that they didn't start it.
Yes, it is.
"most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!"
This guy really must not like open source developers.
Although I agree with the article, I fear that many Slashdot geeks' heads have just exploded. /Sits back, grabs the popcorn //Fark > Slashdot
I love Microsoft for how much they've helped the development of the web. I'm in IE7 Heaven, baby!
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
Why is this in apple.slashdot.org?
FTA:
and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to
I'm to assume that the bugs currently in windows are there by design?
http://www.watacrackaz.com
Wow - paychecks from M$ must have gone out yesterday.
Team Rusty Nuts
You can't rush procrastination!
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
So I've spent away 4 moons, 8 arms and 8 legs. The lame "Mac is so expensive" argument holds little water. Yes, they were more money but it wasn't the huge gap between say a cheap Ford and a Mercedes. If they were really that bad the company would have folded years ago.
Trolling is a art,
"...Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs." Sure, Windows was a lot cheaper, but then it cost the hair and the heads along with both your paycheck and temper.
Kool-Aid sales up substantially.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Illegally destroyed competition in the OS space.
Suppressed or destroyed competition in the app space.
Dictated an artificial (e.g. unnecessarily expensive) software replacement cycle.
Empowered unscrupulous businesses to spy on your every web surfing move.
I hear people say that things aren't so bad with the current state of desktop computing. After all, Windows rarely crashes anymore and you can surf the web, play games, read email, etc. What else is there? To be quite frank, a lot. It is difficult to quantify all of the software development that hasn't been done because of Microsoft's oppressive control over the desktop. I estimate we are at least three generations of software development behind because most businesses would not risk competing with Microsoft. Just 5 years ago I can remember reading stories about companies that decided NOT to compete in a particular area because they feared Microsoft would crush them. Forget the companies put out of business or the people who had to find a new job. The loss of advancement in software technique is incalculable.
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
Are we, Zonk?
Taco have you guys on some kind of a quota system? Or do you get bonuses for generating a certain amount of page hits?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Sadly they are right, even though i dispise Microsoft all together there is no way to get around them. Because almost anyone that uses a computer learned how on Microsoft. They are the main platform in most business's these days. As a Networker if i don't know windows there really is no way of me making any money at all. I love linux and Mac's are only good for video editing, music editing, graphic's and i think thats pretty much it. But try teaching someone to use linux or mac when they have been in elementary, middle, and high school and only used Microsoft products. Its not easy. So yeah Microsoft is great for business's but if you do know more than the average person stick with what you know and you like.
It had all the features it took Microsoft ages to nearly get working many years before and at a far lower price. Shame Commodore were morons.
Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered.
In what universe is that true?
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Yes, it is.
Next on the agenda: is genocide really that bad of an idea?
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Is it wrong to love a house trained drug dealer?
I love how idiot proof Windows is. It prooves how people are idiots.
You obviously don't read at threshold: -1.
"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
What a worthless article. If it were a Slashdot comment, it'd be moderated to -1, Overrated.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
As long as they support and continue to develop/promote Trusted Computing, yes.
This is far more nefarious than any web browser war, because with TC, Microsoft can move from strongly suggesting what software to use to mandating (or, more properly, forbidding) it.
I think it's safe to say that Mr. Dubey is afflicted with Stockholm Syndrome.
First of all, the writing is less than stellar. Second, all of it is opinion based without any sort of facts to back it up, or in depth explanation of his point.
And then there's this: Lets be fair and honest about this. Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touche
Gee, I remember something called the Apple II doing this long before microsoft was the force it was. What a maroon.
Short answer: yes.
Long answer: yes.
Evidence: slashdot.org
Next!
I sure don't want any!
What price sheet have you been reading? Or do you know the difference between hardware and software?
This is posted in the Mac section just to start the "entuiastic" Mac people generating pageviews and income for Slashdot or what?
And in regards to Given most comments on Slashdot, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft.
the important part here is the first part of the sentence. If you believe Slashdot represents the tech community/pros in general with this (here often FUD based) hate, you need to broaden your horizon.
Windows is NOT easy to use *correctly*.
This "ease of use" includes people running as Admin with all the services running and basically wide open to the universe. That's "ease of use".
I won't pretend that Linux or BSD is any easier but I really don't think this "ease of use" label is meaningful.
"Chainsaws are easy to use!" -- Said the current reigning king of the one armed people.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
This is the greatest sentence ever written in the history of man. Thank you for your penetrating insight.
perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
If you like Microsoft so much why don't you just marry it?
In the real world people do like Microsoft products and people that think software is a religion (FSF) are laughed at and ignored.
Yes, absolutely it is wrong to love Microsoft. For that matter, it is wrong to love any company that you are not directly a part of, and even then loving a company is fraught with pitfalls. Love is something that must be reciprocated in order to have any meaning. It is a shame that English has evolved to the point where we "love" or "hate" things that we enjoy or dislike.
Microsoft has done a lot of things, some good, some bad, some neither. Businesses are just that way. Is Microsoft worthy of respect? Sure. They have done something that other computer companies only dream of: they own several of the markets that they are part of. But does that mean we should hate them? Does it mean we should love them? Of course not.
People who feel strong emotions towards companies that they have very little part in (having neither worked there nor been part of the founding and building of it) are misdirecting their emotions. Save your love for your neighbor, don't waste it on Microsoft.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Plug and play was by no means a pioneering effort by Microsoft, the Macintosh has had it forever, so long in-fact that it had no name on Mac OS, not until it was a new feature in Windows did Microsoft give it a name. We Mac users just knew it as "stuff working when I plug it in just like it should"
Also I would argue (and I know there are many on both sides) that the Mac OS was prettier, cost more, and was easier to use as well.
Good things cost more, it's a fact
If you want a good car, you'll pay more than if you just want a cheap car...
While there could be a good article written that intelligently discusses some of the things Windows does right and shortcomings of Linux, this ain't it.
ironically enough, it's considerably less wrong to love microsoft if you use a mac. sure, bill gates likes to make snide remarks about the mac os, and they do silly things like plugging their ears and pretending the ipod doesn't exist, but the fact of the matter is, mac users don't have to put up with the worst thing that microsoft does, and that's of course, windows.
and many of microsoft's products are quite good, and worthy of praise. i'm a content owner of a microsoft mouse, and have been pleased with it. the mac version of office, too, is a fine product (yes, i know word and its idiosyncracies are inherently awful, but it's a good mac version of word).
now i don't love microsoft. and i surely don't love this article, which sounds like it was written by a twelve-year-old who was inspired to expound upon his joy after discovering the menu animations in windows xp. but that said, perhaps people who aren't tied to windows are in the best position, to judge microsoft's products solely upon their merit for the task at hand. sometimes microsoft wins a fair fight. but at least when you're not on windows, when they're not the best option, there's no impediment to making another choice.
...that was some god-awful writing. I think cool tech zone needs some editors.
Yet another pathetic attempt by Slashdot to start a flamewar to generate ad revenue.
Some loser blogging his opinion of a few mainstream OS'es is not news!
What they "pioneered" was using feedback and network effects to force a marketplace to accept an inferior product at monopolist prices, costing the world trillions in lost productivity and lost opportunities.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
YHBT
Just curious. Give the author credit for having the balls to post it.
From the article: 'What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows,...'
Technically speaking, they haven't given us anything, but lies, more lies and damn lies. And of course the free Internet Explorer with glow in the dark power stripe.
Ok finished being silly.
They know Vista is not all that its supposed to be. Now they must rally their support.
Dubey doesn't get why MS is hated, that much is obvious from the "article". Rather than providing arguments, he publishes a load of fanboy drivel that's as inane as any Linux or Mac zealotry I've seen.
IOW: Nothing to see here, move along.
Okay, if you insist:
FTA: It is about time we stopped being hypocritical and appreciated a job really well done.
But it isn't. Popular or not, most of their products are mediocre hack-jobs that thrive despite their quality, not because of it.
Wow, worse quality statistics than Netcraft could provide, xenophobia, rewriting history... This article is subtly clever piece of satire.
Oh, wait, this guy is being serious?
We all know that M$ is evil and Apple will save us all. After all there should be only one company that sells both hardware and software, and you are an idiot if you ever think otherwise.
Sometimes things get monkeyed up, you know, buggy software. /. Usually a Microsoft bug works in Bill's favor.
- what is suprising is that the mistake placed it in the Apple side of
Good lord, it's a troll article.
Macs were/are more expensive, but because Apple maintained tight control over the hardware, things Just Worked.
PCs were/are cheaper, but because there are so many flavors of hardware (hint: do a Newegg search for an nVidia FX5500 card, or similar), MS can't possibly write decent drivers for all, and so must rely on 3rd parties, and things didn't Just Work.
PCs were/are easier to add (cheap) hardware to (ISA NE2000 NIC anyone?) but you needed to know jumpers and IRQs.
Which is cheaper in the long run?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Finally, an article that actually gives Microsoft an objective look not skewered by the linux and mac trolls on the net
To say that Windows was a "Pioneering" effort is like saying Columbus "Discovered" America, when there were already people living here.
Give me a break. Why do people insist on re-writing history?
kulakovich
It doesn't, therefore you don't have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!
I am neither "pro" nor "anti-mircrosoft"; I'm "pro-whatever-tool-gets-the-job-done." But, crap like this really is horrible; I would honestly like to believe that most Linux developers are sitting up at night developing Linux...I mean, hell, few are actually lucky enought to make money doing that during the day...most people have to work to support their hobbies.
dude.
It is very easy, when you live in your own OS world, to reach out your hand and point at all the other OSes and say, 'they are bad!", and I'm not saying that people hasn't tried that other OS they are pointing at. I'm saying that they've dug themselves into a religious trench holding their position in fear of discovering something new or to have let go of their hate for the other, different things.
Yes, I've made the very same mistake. I held onto my precious Amiga until early 1995, only to find out that I've lost years of Intel PC experience by looking the other way. I also was a poor student back then too, so I wasn't likely to buy myself a new computer. But I think the OS love/hate wars are very much the same as the old Amiga/PC discussions.
My personal experience has lead me to atleast try and stay away from the religious discussion, they never lead to anything constructive. I have both Windows and Linux PCs at home, and I use them all with erhm.. almost equal passion and love.
When the OS you are using meet your needs in terms of quality and functionality, and you're satisfied with that. Then why go to the step of switching platform? If Mr. X at accounting has a PC that does the job for him, then why should he go to the bothering step of switching?
Getting a bit side tracked here, well, Microsoft and Windows. I think the problem is, a lot of people are confusing the OS with the company. The way Microsoft has been conducting business is appaling. Whether people wanna respect and give some love to their OS, or not, well.. I don't care.
...that take 15 years to produce a piece of software that only slightly manages to make good on already 15 year old promises. As in: Windows XP is actually the Windows that Microsoft (or rather: their marketing department) promised us (and what we paid for) with Windows 3.11. It's just 15 years late...
Microsoft's core business is *NOT* making technologically good software. It's all about making lot's of $$$$ as quick as possible.
I, for one, do not love $$$$. I love technology. So I do NOT love Microsoft. I love OSS.
Two pages of the same old piffle and bullcrap cobbled together with second hand string. Honestly, how old is the author? It reads like a dashed off report for a middle school class.
Slow news day?
This "article" is oversimplification followed by oversimplification. No one arbitrarily hates M$ simply because they're the big gorilla; rather the things they have done NOT in the name of ease of use, but in the name of extending the M$ hemegony.
On A personal note, I don't buy Mac because the company is Apple (although I do have a greater appreciation for the company) or the CEO is Steve Jobs (which MIGHT actually be a reason to NOT buy Apple). I do it because it makes my computing life easier and makes me more productive.
Blacker than my baby girl's stare. Black like the veil that the muslimina wear. Black like the planet that they fear...
Putting aside grammatical mistakes of the "article", why do people capitalize MAC as an abreviation for Macintosh? Is there some acronym I'm not familiar with, or does the Mac have some sort of fancy software handling of my NIC's MAC address? Perhaps they are trying to emphisize their distaste for it by shouting?
I've always thought security was overrated too. That's why I post my SSN on my public web site. Sort of a challenge for anyone who think they can use it for something malicious.
This "article" is just laughable, even from the perspective of a .NET developer like myself.
Is this just me? I really think he's missing what Linux is all about. It's not supposed to be the most user-friendly environment. There are people that WANT to have to "recompile the kernel if [they] want to so much as change your modem" because they're looking for that kind of option and flexibility.
I'm not even a hardcore Linux user (I've had Fedora Core for only a few months now) and even I can see this. Am I entirely wrong?
The cat's in the bag and the bag's in the river.
Note to self, 8-5-2005:
CoolTechzone neither "Cool" nor "Tech".
I must say that emotional ranbling about Windows without any nods to the subversive business practices and thievery that is the REASON people love to hate MicroScrote is really annoying. I'm sorry, my job does not depend on how I "feel" about autodetection notification bubbles. It depends on UPTIME, AVAILABILITY, SECURITY. I don't usually lower myself to insults - but whoever wrote this article should be writing for People magazine or US! - not tech articles.
-- kortex "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts"
I definately agree. I know I am probably going to be modded troll for saying this, but Windows is a VERY reasonable OS. Crashes all the time you say? My computer hasnt crashed for over 3 years. Don't get me wrong, I use linux as well, but this site seems to be far too rabidly anti-MS.
/. crowd) by taking so long for making Vista, which from what I heard did not live up to its hype.
Really does sound like they lost some of their 'charisma' (what was still left amongst the non
+1 funny, -2 overrated. Life isn't fair.
Anyone with the self-respect not to shell out money to be treated like a criminal and an idiot hates Microsoft.
In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!
Not since sometime in the 90's. In my opinion, GNOME/KDE are both easier to use than XP. Tastes, may vary, however.
Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers...
And this is why we can respect Microsoft in the same way we respect Hitler for single handedly brining Germany out of a massive depression.
"No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs"
;)
Since when is price an issue in usability? So since Windows is cheaper it is magically allowed to be harder to use but still be declared easier?
Logic like this makes it easier to hate Microsoft...when even their apologists don't make sense it is EASY!
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
I actually like them as a company and I enjoy using their products. Now, before you flame me, hear me out.
I'm a professional IT security engineer with 8 years experience in IT. I use MS products at home and at work, as well as Mac OS X, Linux, Solaris, and OpenBSD. I feel that MS gets a bad rap for security, monopolising the market, being evil, etc. Guess what? They are in the market to make a profit, even if that means stepping on toes to do it. Companies exist to make a profit. Full stop. If it were not for MS, the average computer price would be outrageous. MS helped drive down the cost of computers to where the average person can afford them.
Security. Yes MS has had issues with securty, and porbably will continue to have issues, but guess what? Security is a process, not a product. People need to exercise common sesne when using computers that are networked, including moms and teens. It's not terribly unobvious that if you download stolen music and other files that you may end up with malware on your system. Duh! My mom knows that.
Without MS, the US would not be in as strong a position technology-wise. Like it or not, technology has little to do with anything but making money. Innovation is nice, but at the end of the day, it's Bill G and Steve B who are raking in the cash, not Steve J.
Linux is not the answer to replace MS. It works for some, but only those who are savvy enough to grok it. The average user wants a machine that just works, and they don't want an Apple.
There is a place for MS in this world just the same as there is a place for Linux and Apple, and every other technical company out there.
Wow, that was a totally useless article written by a shameless MS fanboy.
It's utter garbage, Windows is secure because if it weren't, it would have even more viruses! and Linux doesn't do anything well. Basically all this guy does is kiss Microsoft's ass and insult everyone who has ever clashed with them.
Gee, what a thoughtprovoking and informative article.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Was this another one of those entries for a reader-written article? If this guy thinks the XP install procedure is great, he hasn't used it much.
I use Windows because the software I use needs it in order to run. I don't necessarily *like* this situation.
Yes.
HTH.
--
Karma: Chameleon (you come and go)
Do mine ears decieve me? I think macs are quite worthy, if not better than a WinTel PC. Sure, they cost a lot, but not nearly as much as they used to, and with the limited experience I've had trying out Tiger, Macs are very worthy.
It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind)
Did anyone else just remember back to that lovely lovely video of good 'ol Bill , and that scanner :)
'Plug and play' *grin*
anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft.
If software tools and hardware didn't evolve people like me wouldn't have fun software development jobs and our clients would have had to make do with 64K RAM, SSDD floppies, monochrome monitors, and notepad-style documents.
I've got dozens of friends who have made a career of rewriting old code and creating new code as new hardware/software abilities present themselves.
So why do we use Visual Studio
When you have a client that prefers a certain Windows software tool for whatever-purpose and they are dangling a 12 month development contract in front of you, you would be crazy not to sign up to make them happy. Yeah, the money is okay too
With respect to Microsoft haters, Yoda had it correct. Fear leads to hate. Hate leads to anger. Anger leads to destruction. C'mon, snuggle up to
Cogito Ergo Sum
Of course it is!
Having said all that, there is nothing wrong (as such) with loving Microsoft. If you like a product, find it easy to use and it allows you to do what you want to do, spend less time doing boring stuff and generally make the time you spend with it enjoyable then good for you. Some people can't stand it, some people love it.
Personally, I don't have a problem with Windows. I know it inside out (well, reasonably), can troubleshoot the few problems I have and so I'm reluctant to change to something else. Yes, the shell is a bit crappy, but XP+Cygwin in my mind is better and easier than Linux especially when under the latter my modem, sound card and network all fail to work.
Finally as for the "loving" comments, I find it odd that anyone could love an operating system. For me, the majority of the added value are the applications than I run on top of it. Sure the OS may have some neat tricks and features but I spend more time tinkering and using the apps than the OS directly.
But then I'm probably not your average Slashdot reader.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
"More than 95 pecent computers in the world use one form of Windows OS or another. The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world?" Is it just me, or is it annoying when an article writer displays ignorance of such basic details as capitalization, punctuation, etc. It's one thing posting comments on Slashdot, it's another thing when you are ostensibly writing a professional article....
The linked article was barely longer than the submission, and probably shorter than a large number of Score: 5 posts that will appear in response to it.
The gist, it seems, is that because Microsoft has given the world some good, usable software, we owe it a debt of gratitude. Sorry, but my gratitude is limited to the fees I voluntarily paid Microsoft. I don't need to love them, or to agree with any of their tactics.
The Microsoft as of late is a patent-hungry company looking to maximize its existing revenue streams (we knew that day would come), and has seriously considered unbelievable options like purchasing Claria. It is really hard to feel love in my heart for something like that. It is also difficult to sit in awestruck amazement at the great achievements of Microsoft when they are pulling in $40 billion or so a year to support their endeavor. Look at what small shops like BeOS, with a smaller budget than Microsoft spends on lunches, achieved in such a short period of time.
I do think Microsoft makes some great software, and it remains my platform of choice, but I owe them no debt, nor do I need to bias my opinions of some of their actions because I like VS.NET.
At any rate, I've been a Mac user since 1989, but in that time I've also used Windows and on occasion, Linux or other Unix-based systems. (I grew up the son of a DEC engineer, so I'm one of those rare Mac users that actually wanted a command-line in the old Mac OS. Userland Frontier forever!) Over time, I've come to realize that every OS has its strengths and weaknesses. I'm still most comfortable using a Mac, but that doesn't mean I don't get a kick out of some things in Windows, or even Linux --- although Linux still lags behind the others in terms of being usable right out of the box, IMO. The point is, I'm comfortable with leveraging the strengths of each platform to overcome the weaknesses of another, and as a result, I feel like I can provide better "service" to my employer, my friends looking for answers to questions, or just to my own sense of discovery.
Is there no more room for the multi-platform technologist, or does everything have to be segmented off into yet another "if you are not with us, you are against us" box? Isn't there enough of that already in the real world without fucking up technology as well?
I use Macs for work, Linux for education, and Windows for cardplaying.
One thing that MS has in favor is that Apple never had to deal with multiple hardware configurations. Having to support every video or network card and having to be backwward compatible doesn't help too much. Of course Linux too has to support the universe of hardware configurations Windows has too, but this is only possible because anyone can compile the drivers to fix them on demand, something only super users are willing to do.
All of the operating systems suck. In one way or another, they all have their problems. I'm so bored of idiotic, pointless bickering over which operating system is "teh 1337" and which one "sux0rz." Arguing about different variants of the SAME OS is even more stupid. It's all a matter of personal preference. They all have flaws, and if you like your OS enough, you can live with them and even fix some of them. Please, for the love of God, can we get back to the stuff that matters!! Of course, I haven't seen anything that fits that category on Slashdot in months...
--------
This isn't the sig you're looking for. Move along.
The article is a f*ckign rant, however there is some validity to the statement. Without Windows we wouldn't have the popularization of computers we have today. "A computer in every household" and then some (I have four ... between my wife and I). Microsoft helped that happen and they do deserve some respect for that.
As for now? Yea, they still hold a >90% market share. You can say what you want, but when it comes down to it the reason is that for many businesses there is no accessible substitute. And this trickes down into the home. Microsoft still deserves some love. Profiteering gluttons, WTFever, I can get a Dell for $299 with Windows installed. (not that I would... just a case in point. I prefer to roll my own)
Linux has its place. But Microsoft has carried the brunt of the load in bringing the desktop to the common man.
-everphilski-
They go do something like this.
Microsoft hires Wal-Mart exec
Nobody can tell me that Linux sucks if they haven't given Ubuntu a serious chance. The problem we have is that people try some random distribution for 5 minutes and it's either too hard to install (Gentoo/Debian) or it sucks (Fedora,Mandriva). Then they make a sweeping judgement of all Linux.
/. is purposefully posting these flamebait articles on purpose to get lots of posts to make up for when the moderation system was broken. Anyone else think that?
The reason people who know about comptuers hate MS and like Linux is because they are smart enough to realize this. They are also so nerdy that they use their computer differently from normal folk. And for those nerdy uses Windows often fails miserably and Linux exceeds.
Anyone out there who is a Linux hater because you tried Red Hat a few years ago and it didn't work with your hardware, try an Ubuntu LiveCD today and see if you change your mind.
Also, I'm beginnign to think that
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
To be frank, after reading TFA I felt like this was a 12 year old who has only known Windows and tried Linux once somewhere and didn't like it. This is blog material more so than an actual article.
/.? I saw apple mentioned only in passing in the article...
I'm not sure why the editors felt this was a good "article" to post... There wasn't really anything of substance here. Just an opinion... and a poorly written one at that.
And as somebody else has already asked... how is this the apple section of
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
I've stopped trying to defend Linux from my pro-windows colleagues (and yes they are all techies), and just adopted an attitude of saying 'if you prefer Windows, use it'. Strangely enough since starting to do this they all start coming to me with pro-linux comments, and a couple even with questions on how to get started. My personal explanation for this is that they felt threatened by something they did not know, which is the only reason I can think of for someone becoming that defensive.
It should always come down to using the right tool for the right job. Windows works better on my computer because it was made(and certified) to work with Windows XP. This means that XP runs flawlessly and Linux distros struggle to work properly. I have a computer to get things done and not to tool around with the OS. In my opinion XP is a good OS. If my computer was made to run a Linux distro then I am sure it would run just as well if not better. People should just face the facts that sometimes the right tool comes from MS.
Bend over Zonk and give MS some hot male love. Can you imagine a more flamebait provoking "article"? And why the "Apple" section?
I am not a fanboy. I love the detail apple puts into their looks but Microsoft is not the devil either.
I find it quite depressing to see people, some of whom have no idea what microsoft does besides windows and IE, bashing them because it's what everyone does. People still bashing windows because 95 was very buggy.
I admit. Windows is still not as secure as say linux. It will probably never be at this rate. But it's gotten a lot better. And honestly, just read a simple tutorial and set up a firewall. Windows even comes with one now. IE is a load of horseshit. So use firefox. No one is stopping you.
Then there is the deal with bundling software. When did getting more for your money become bad?
Apple puts in a media player, a lot of games and "200 new widgets!" that might have replaced tons of commercial apps. But that's innovative and kind. Same with linux. When MS included the media player (a very decent one at that), its heresy.
I am saying people should screw apple and linux (I run linux on dual boot and use it quite often now) and worship MS. No. That would be stupid. These are tools. You USE them. You don't need to form life long alliances. I am just asking people to make judgements for themselves as apposed to jumping on the bandwagon and just bashing winbl0ws cause its l33t.
My two cents.
...and that doesn't start off this classic "Mac vs. PC-discussion" on an ideal footing, imho.
http://www.unwords.com/unword/dopeler%20effect.htm l
While it might be hard to love Microsoft, its hard to detract from the consistency it creates for the average user in how it is so widespread... Joe Sixpack can go anywhere, sit in front of a computer and generally know how to interact with it. Any average person should be able to appreciate that.
Things like that are what is good about windows, even for its faults. Technical supremacy is easy to create and implement, but to integrate it and have it accepted by the masses... Thats obviously the tricky part. MS managed it though...
Overclockers
Could someone please remind me why I keep visiting this stupid website...
an example of Malicious (to microsft) FSS code:
Firefox.
Talk about throwing the sheep to the wolves
*DrugCheese rants*
Personally, I don't "hate" MicroSoft. I just don't trust them.
.net and C# stuff. It doesn't look all that bad, it has some great ideas. It's also semi-standardized by ECMA (see for example this and this) and there is also the open and free Mono initiative.
For example, take the
But I just don't trust MS anymore. After all, even the windows API was an ECMA standard, (here) but even so they kept changing and "extending" it to deliberately be sure that their implementation was the only working one (see wine, always running behind the newest stuff). So why should I spend my time to learn something that WILL be obsolete in a year or so (this is just ONE example)?
MS has done just about everything they could to make sure everybody would lose every bit of trust in their action. Some hate is just one of the consequences...
Once you're past that, and throw their networking implementation out of the way, it's a fairly useful OS. Keep in mind that the core of the OS was designed in an age where people were still thinking about these newfangled 3.5" floppies, had never heard of Ethernet, and were more interested in running MSPaint than Doom, which didn't exist yet.
Ask yourself this: If Microsoft fixed multi-user permissions and made security on the network side job #1, would you a) consider Windows a "real" OS or b) hold the past against Microsoft and continue to rag on Bill Gates.
If you answered A, great, you have a broad mind, and are willing to consider all options. If you answered B, you're deciding based on emotion, not empirical evidence.
This is not an "article", but someone's utterly biased rant (blog entry?) against Microsoft critics. I would imagine most would dismiss it as that.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
-dZ.
Carol vs. Ghost
Let's all congratulate him on a job well done!
I (personally) find Windows to be around the right level of trade off between the "I want to be consumer electronics" Mac ethos and the "compile your own damn Kernel, biatch" way in the Linux world.
We all know Win9x stunk like hell. NT was too lacking inuser friendliness. Win 2k and XP really are solid and useable for a lot of people, though. The last time I say the fabled BSOD other than through overclocking and shitty drivers - probably 2001 or something.
Office is a slick bit of kit for people like me who can make a tidy sum developing and selling (cha-ching!) custom solutions centred around it. Word surely sucks but Excel is top notch and Access being good for smaller projects.
At the risk of sounding like an astroturfing troll, mainstream MS software just gets the job done and if you know what you're doing - with the minimum of fuss. OSS is all well and good, and a wonderful concept, but until it's got those Ts crossed and Is dotted, Microsoft just offers a more compelling option for those wanting to run a business that don't have the resources of someone like IBM.
In 5-10 years maybe I'll be singing the praises of a Linux/OO.o/xSQL solution, and I hope so too - I like the concept and theoretical freedom.
People don't hate Microsoft because of their products; they hate Microsoft because of their business practices.
;)
Microsoft isn't buggy, it's evil!
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Linux rules and Microsucks drules!!
Your Operating System wears army boots!
I know yours is but what is mine?
Ah, the sweet sweet sounds of 4th grade, how I miss it. Can we get back to the New for Nerds, Stuff that matters now?
www.olin.edu
Every OS sucks (warning video clip)
. there used to be a sig here.....
I have no problem with people hating Microsoft for its anti-competitive or other questionable practices, if it truly goes against their core principals.
.org) - bugs are a fact of life in complex code.
:)
The people I have a problem with are those that blindly abuse Microsoft simply because it appears to be the "done thing". I particularly find it amusing when people who have probably pirated Windows anyway complain about "huge bugs", the resolution of which is far beyond their comprehension or technical ability.
Some people fail to grasp that fixing bugs in something as monolithic as Windows is not a case of editing activex.c and changing a few lines of code. Any fixes have to be extensively tested against lab kits to ensure that they will apply on every conceivable bit of kit that people run Windows alongside. Incompatibility with Norton Antivirus, for example, is a "bugette" for most programs but is a show-stopping, front page news story for Windows & Microsoft.
Not to mention the fact that something as big as Windows will have bugs proportionate to the number of lines of code and code complexity. I don't care who you are - whether you're Microsoft or the Apache Software Foundation (or any other OSS-friendly
Anyway, getting back to my point - I have nothing but respect for people who choose to slate Microsoft for the things it has done in the past which are questionable (if not legally, then ethically) - whilst exclusively using Linux or another non-Windows OS.
It's those who jump on the anti-MS bandwagon at every opportunity, whilst playing the latest DirectX-powered game on Windows XP, with hardware that they installed and had running in a matter of minutes with Windows abstracted "Add New Hardware" functionality that annoy me.
FWIW I run both Linux and Windows at home, as desktops and am a sysadmin running both OS at work. So, I'm pretty impartial
I wouldn't say that I "love" it, but in my limited experience, it does the job.
Every time I install a (pirated?) copy of Win2K on a boxen, I go through, disable most of the services, and put on a firewall. Everything's peachy, since I'm the only user, and I don't CLICK HERE!
That doesn't mean I don't keep MEPIS and Knoppix live cds around, mind you.
If you even have to ask youself this, you shouldn't be here you should be here or possibly here
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
Parallel universe alert! I think we lost a time war and this is now the freaky alternate time line in which Windows was easier to use than the Mac and Amiga!
You sir, are an idiot.
Now go and dry off Bill, he's getting out of the pool.
1.) Mac OS had that pretty little bubble before XP.
2.) If that fancy little bubble "makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it", then the fact that, once installed things actually WORK and KEEP WORKING absolutely make OSX worth the price.
3.) "In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem"
Uhm, no you don't.
- Most stuff is supported by loadable kernel modules, which are loaded and unloaded as needed.
- If you don't do kernel modules, most decent modems are supported with the plain old serial driver. It's only when you start to get into crappy software modems that you have problems. Indeed, I remember having those same problems under Windows, back in about 1997, which is why I returned the foolish modem and got a decent "real hardware" modem.
Nothing easier than Windows? Mac OS has ALWAYS been easier than Windows. Windows got easier because they kept copying Mac OS. And whiles Windows isn't as buggy as it used to be, it's still full of Microsoft spyware.
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
If I was logged in at home and if I coincidentally had mod points I would mod you up. Right on.
I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
Um, let's see, grep, ls, sed, awk, file, wc, less. Anything on the commandline exceeds anything in Windows when it comes to data manipulation. If I absolutely have to use a Windows machine at work a always install cygwin, vim, emacs, XKeymacs just because there is nothing comparable in the Windows world. All that stuff came from Unix aka Linux. Oh, and don't forget that Linux allowed all of us to have the power of Unix on our Desktops, for free nonetheless.
Linux/Unix is probably the best development enviroment. I always feel like I'm programming with a broken finger when I use windows.
I perfer Gnome over the Windows GUI. Even if I didn't like Gnome, there are many other enviroments that I can use as an alternative. Hell I even use Ratpoison sometimes, there's nothing comparable to that in the Windows.
Don't give me that crap that Linux is not user friendly, because it is. I don't have anything but Linux on my computers, and my wife, who is by far not computer literate, can do everything she wants.
I use Linux because I want to drive a Muscle Car, not a Go Kart.
Not in the way that you might think at first. Microsoft helped convince millions of people to buy a rock (what good is the PC without software?, its a rock) for no reason other than "I should find out what this is about". I remember, years ago, a neighbor asking me if he should buy an Apple or a PC. I asked, "What do you want to use it for?", he had no idea, just thought he'd ought to learn about it. $3000 at the time, I was and still am astonished at the power of marketing to convince people to plop down that kind of cash without a reason - he didn't even know if he would use it much. BUT it was that marketing that got a PC into almost everyone's home (and business) that enabled the internet to become what it is today. Without an infrastructure that reaches (most) everyone there would have been far fewer reasons to create the WWW, web pages etc.. Its like the telephone originally, far less useful if you could only call businesses from other businesses (for example). So we may hate em for what they became, but they did get a low cost PC everywhere and that opened a lot of doors for alot of business both directly and indirectly.
Yet another security through obscurity screed.
So, how many copies of Longhorn compared to Mac and Linux are there?
Given most human opinion, it would appear that anyone with even a slight sense of smell hates the smell of human poo. An article on PooEatersInc, though, argues that not everyone should dismiss the smell and taste of human poo outright. According to Ilov Poo, dog poo is over-rated, cow dung isn't worthy and pure human excrement deserves respect and some love. From the article: 'What has shit given us? It has given us food, sure, it is runny sometimes and the reliability leaves something to be desired (constipation springs to mind) but nothing tastes like a bowl of steaming poo in the morning. No one is even close to the ease of use that poo offers - out of the toilet bowl and into your cereal bowl. Sure, bird droppings are a lot prettier but then it is hard to collect and often leaves stains on your clothes .
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
BTW, This whole article is a flamebait/troll, what's it doing in the Apple section? Because he throws a few jabs in at Apple about how much it costs?
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
What you have to understand, friends, is that there are two kinds of love. There's the good kind of love, as between a man and a woman. Usually his sister, in areas where this broadcast is popular. That's the best kind of love, friends... Then there's the wrong kind of love, from which only evil can grow. Every time you induldge yourself in this sinful kind of love, friends, you help bring SATAN a little more into this world. You guessed it my friends, I'm talking about the love between a man and an evil mega-corporation. I don't care if it's Wal Mart or Microsoft, this sort of love is WRONG! Why, I heard the other day that some people are even trying to make the merger of two evil mega-corporations legal under our judicial system! We can not allow this to take place, friends! When the evil mega-corporations have the same rights as a man and his sister SATAN will come forth into this world and rule it for a thousand years mark my words friends! But you can help stop it friends, yes you can! And all you need to do is send whatever you can spare friends, to the following address...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This guy is just trying to get a rise out of people like /.'ers. Look at his ridiculous exaggerations, like:
Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job.
I know how to code fairly well, and I have no intentions of writing any malicious code for any OS at all.
Or how about: I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
Note how he doesn't focus on the open source aspect at all, or stability, or ANYTHING positive about linux, and that each OS has their respective benefits.
The list goes on and on, with every statement made being incredibly closed-minded. He reminds me of a roomate I had a few years ago that wrote into our college paper just to get a rise out of people (with such wonderful articles as "Our football team sucks" and "The girls here are ugly.")
Ignore the fool.
you geeks think that the more complex the better...but were it not for the simplicity of ms software none of your complex software would be possible...
Is this an effort to see if we can exceed the number of comments for the intelligent design/evolution thread yesterday? It's a good start, but I'm not sure if it'll make it... the article is such an obvious troll, it's embarassing to see it get the airtime on such a well-visited forum as Slashdot. There are closed-minded haters/bigots/etc on both sides of the issue, and all of them should be ignored. Cut the 10% most extreme from either end and the rest of us can have an intelligent conversation.
Let's A be a Windows 2000 with all security patch applied. Simply do on A cmd : telnet 1.2.3.4 80 and just after in an other shell: netstat -an How strange, no connections are in SYN state. Don't worry that's just a security patch that break the thing. Microsoft, as usual going from unsecurity to unusability.
The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
/ /www.cooltechzone.com
Anyone else find it funny cooltechzone is run on apache and linux?
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http:
Before editing, there was a large section in which Chuck Norris and Suzanne Somers both praised Microsoft for giving them muscles and a perfect bone structure. Otherwise, the infomercial is spot on.
Man I hate when I get suckered into feeding advertising dollars to troll tech writers.
He is, after all, a kind of hero of mine. He behaves in ways I only wish I could... and his disdain for rude people closely matches my own.
So is it wrong to love Microsoft? I guess not, if at heart you're a fan of such behavior that Microsoft displays. It is lawless, careless and dominating. It cares nothing about the negative impact it creates so long as it achieves the bottom-line it targets. So if that's what you admire, then by all means, love them... but what does it say about you?
Heheh, kidding.
But seriously, I've thought this for a long while. True, it's free, and (arguably) good as a server platform. But hugely overrated - Linux nuts often (not always) seem to consider it a viable replacement to Windows or OSX for *everyone*, which it is not...especilly when you consider that users don't care about the "morals" behind their software, just whether they can share files with others and keep working the same way that they're used to.
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
microsoft is fine and dandy for businesses of all shapes and sizes. Sure, they're software all interoperates great once set up, and is perfectly secure provided the server/clients aren't connected to the internet. So, if you're a small, medium or large business, it's perfectly ok to like microsoft; especially since MS techs are so easy to come by and generally are pretty inexpensive.
If you're a windows tech, it's perfectly fine to like microsoft. They give you so much work, you don't know what to do with yourself.
the problem with microsoft comes about when you're a developer and you're trying to create cross-platform software. Windows fights you.
Or, if you're a web surfer who either doesn't use windows or uses windows, but is fed up with IE's problems (its penchant for spyware) and your alternative browser doesn't work on IE-only sites.
or, if you're trying to create an alternative operating system and get your foot in the door with a hardware vendor (ie- BeOS). Microsoft protects itself with it's contracts and treats them as trade secrets so you can't challenge them in court.
or... well... all those fucking patents microsoft has.
Microsoft may be mostly bad, but there are some places where they can really help out. Although, as would be the case with any OS, if you run in a pure environment, interoperability works best when all machines are running the same software.
Is there reason to hate microsoft? hells yeah!
is there reason to love microsoft? it really depends who you are. But something's gonna happen that will make you curse them.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
I think it sucks because it sucks. My 3 year old niece users that logic all the time.
"MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world? It doesn't, therefore you don't have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!"
How many time do you have to say this. The biggest problem with windows isn't it's popularity, it's the sheer stupidity in the name of usability. It's like an unlocked car where a key (password) isn't used to start the engine. And for that claim that linux developers spend their time writing malicious code for windows I think that's the most ludicrous comment I've heard. It's immature to say such a thing.
Who writes articles like these?
One small flaw in the argument: Microsoft wasn't always hated. During the 1980-1990 time period (approximately), they were seen as one of the "good guys". In particular, during the movement of PCs into large corporations in the 1984-1990 period, Microsoft was viewed by many as a strong supporter of personally-directed computing resources against the tyranny of the Data Processing Department. While their technology was never the best, it had its good points (MS-DOS 3.3; even Windows 3.1), and as Steve Gibson has pointed out its openness allowed a huge industry of improvements to spring up, which formed the basis for today's software industry.
So, my question to Microsoft fans is, what happened between 1990 and 2000 that turned Microsoft from hero to goat? You be the judge.
sPh
But what bugs the crap out of me is the way they've leaned on OEM's not to offer any other OS alternative. MSFT has tilted the playing field in their direction and they've done that with anti-competitive practices. They're a convicted monopoly who bought themselves out of that mess with their lobbying clout.
If MSFT was where they are because they make good products at fair prices I'd be their biggest supporter. But that's not the case. My love for OSS stems not from it being free but by the freedom it offers. Free of DRM if I choose not to run it. If I need more capacity, I just install it with no fear. Free of the worry of some MSFT-funded dirtbag organization like BSA coming in to audit my software.
And if feels really good not running Windows on the bulk of my machines. And it feels good helping companies get off the upgrade treadmill and the CAL-go-round.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Can Zonk be confined to his own section? I nominate vapid.slashdot.org as a place to shunt any articles he approves.
From the dictionary:
In what sense was Windows ever a "pioneering effort"?
The whole article reads as if it were written by a not-terribly-bright teenager who thinks he's a computer expert because he's managed to install Power Toys. Take a look at an early paragraph:
Anybody else get the impression that if the author read it out loud, he'd tack on "...so THERE!" and stick his tongue out?
Is it wrong to love Microsoft? It's about as wrong as Michael Jackson love. Next question.
Are Slashdot's glory days now over? Is drivel like the referenced "article" really worthy subject matter for discussion? I don't think so.
You don't need to have strong feelings either way about Microsoft to appreciate that the article is mindless crap written by a moron.
Why do the editors waste our time with this rubbish?
To say that people who program on Linux stay up to write Windows viruses, is equivelant to saying that every democrat stays up all night planting evidence against the republic president.
Get a clue!
1. Post ignorant Linux bashing. /.
e .php to your Adblock filters before RTFAing.
2. Get mentioned on
3. ???
4. Profit from banner ads!
Seems to be SOP for Dvorak, Coursey, and now this guy.
You might want to add http://www.cooltechzone.com/special_images/adimag
...your hard drive and your toy-router break at the same time ? It happened to me yesterday at home. I plugged in a new hard drive, and plugged my modem straight into my computer. Installed WinXP SP1, and before i could even get to update it, my computer got raped by spyware and shitware and popups and shit. UGH. I was trying to be a dummie and do things from scratch like my mom would do, by following instructions from the manual, and i ended with an fresh and unusable install of WinXP. I never heard of anything similar on any non-MS OS. Thats more than enough for me to hate Bill personally.
Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain. I. Asimov
and this article is an absolute disgrace to our cause.
Clearly there are flaws in windows, including security, which this guy just brushes under the carpet. And he clearly hasn't used linux in a while -- I can't remember having to recompile my kernel too recently to get things working.
This isn't even an article! I've seen slashdot posts that are more insightful (and better structured).
There are pros and cons to both OSes, and I personally feel there are more pros on the side of Windows. But this article is the kind of drivel that gives us windows fanboys a bad name.
The million companies that Microsoft has absorbed, the million of companies that Microsoft has destroyed, the fact that DOS was basically stolen, as was most of the idea for Windows.
It's easy to pretend to love a tyrant, but when you know the truth about their rule, it's hard to really say "What a swell guy".
This guy sounds like a guy who wants to get everyone back to Microsoft for some reason, and personally I have to say that smells a bit too fishy for me.
"No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered"
should read
"Windows is not even close to the ease of use that the Mac offers"
Those two extra capital letters that scream the user doesn't know jack about Apple's product.
BeOS. Apple. OS/2. Amiga. Commodore. Atari. All were easier to use than Windows. Some were easier to use than the current iteration of XP, and were more stable to boot.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Let's extrapolate his next article: "Bill Gates is not as humorless or power-hungry as everyone says. Plus, Linus Torvalds eats babies."
It's not that I totally hate Windows - it is nice and easy to get a system up and running with it, and it's good for the quick and dirty work of everyday work in a business setting. (MS Excel PivotTables are invaluable to me and my coworkers when working with a lot of the data we have to analyze and report on frequently.)
The main problems I have with Windows is also the greatest thing about it: ease of setup and use for the average computer user. For instance, my wife, an attorney, needs a bunch of different very specialized (and expensive) computer programs for managing her own day-to-day operations. These programs were not written by hordes of Windows developers. They were written by small shops that cater only to Windows users that are also lawyers. They are very buggy. She has had ALL KINDS of problems with different apps crashing Windows XP w/ Service Pack 2 because of how poorly coded some of these programs are. Yes, they get the job done most of the time, but they have turned her Windows computer into an administration and support nightmare for me. I can't take a look at the guts of Windows to figure out what's going wrong, she gets simplistic or no error messages when things go wrong, and to do maintenance on her machine now basically requires frequent reinstalls of programs or paying lots of money for support from the companies that coded the crap in the first place!
So no, Windows isn't all bad, especially when you have a more highly qualified support staff in a moderate to large company like mine, and when using the more widely tested, debugged, and visible programs like MS Office and video games. But for individual or more specialized use (and for supporting family member's personal computers) Windows can be a real pain-in-the-ass.
What you conveniently fail to mention is that we wouldn't be where we are in terms of ubiquitous computers everywhere if not for Microsoft. Microsoft made PC's cheap and easy to use. Without Microsoft, I'm guessing that you wouldn't have a job, since there wouldn't otherwise be a computer in every household in the developed world. You shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. If Microsoft went away today (and somehow magically took all copies of their software with them), we'd see massive drop off in personal computer use since there are no other viable alternatives, even in 2005.
I don't respond to AC's.
I just can't get enough of its great taste, and it's so helpful in so many situations!
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
After reading this article, it is clear to me that this man is trying more to get attention than he is trying to present an objective argument. > [...] I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not! > [...] as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows! These comments are so far out there in terms of prejudice that there is no way this man could actually have a goal of creating a legitimate argument.
Laughed when I read this article. It looks as though he wrote it to deliberately provoke a response from the /. massive.
I also dislike the way he claims that if it were not for Microsoft us "normal people" would not be working in IT.
Firstly, you can't just include all computer workers into such a broad demographic. Joe the 1st line log n flogger is a far cry from Mike the Oracle Unix DBA.
I would have ended up working in IT anyway. It's in my blood. I had a computer long before I'd ever heard of Windows, and if MS wasn't around I'd be using something else.
While some of the points he makes are almost valid, they are backed up with nothing apart from opinion, and heavily biased opinion at that.
In conclusion then: "-1 flamebait"
Shame we can't mod the world.
This may or may not mean anything, but at least on my visit, this article was surrounded by ads for Anti-Psychotic Drugs and Longhorn Media Center.
Draw your own conclusions.
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
That was never the problem with Mac. The problem was incompatibility. How many BBSes had a "Mac Files" file area? None of my friends had Macs, and the vast majority of games and other applications were PC-based. Could you upgrade your memory or hard drives in a Mac? Probably, but who knew? I'm supposed to buy special Apple-Memory? Please. Apple should have used Intel years ago, and focused on selling the operating system SEPARATELY.
I know many people who would certainly pay to get MacOS installed on their PC. Including me. Maybe some day it will happen.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
It's funny to think that somebody would willingly make themselves look like a doofus.
Is it wrong to love Microsoft? Do some research, like the rest of us.
This guy sounds as if he has Stockholm Syndrome, where he has become sympathetic to his captor.
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
Their anti-competitive practices, coupled with their purposeful squashing of superior technology, added to their managing to convince the entire world that they need to upgrade their entire system 3 times a week, has been far more detrimental to computer technology than helpful.
I submit that if MS were to play nice instead of trying to horde all the technology for themselves (you know, to make all that money), the entire scope of technology would be lightyears ahead of where it is now.
And, on top of all that, Microsoft is actively attempting to take the freedom of how you use your personal computer, and the internet out of your hands.
So, do I give a fuck how stable Windows is? Not really. Not when I consider how much better things would be if the monopoly/7 ton gorilla that is Microsoft didn't exist at all.
My site
My films
From the article:
...It must have been a typo. I'm sure he mean to say:
In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP...
(Listen to that sweet, objective tone: that's what makes CoolTechZone The Ultimate Source For Tech News - as we all know)
In Linux, you have [the opportunity] to recompile a kernel if you want to [fall back to using a] modem, [for some mysterious reason]! Give me a break guys, Linux [is comparable to] Windows XP, [except it's possible to fix bugs that others never cared to fix]...
This "column" is the worst sort of drivel. Maybe it's a slow news day, but this is just pig shit. No excuse.
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use"
Sure thing bub. Last time I checked, when I plug my usb card reader into my Linux system running Gnome, the card pops up on the desktop and I'm done.
I tried that same usb card reader in my Windows XP box at work and nothing happended. I searched the internet and the Windows wanted to put the device on drive E:, but I had drive E: mapped to a network share. I had to remove the share, breaking all kinds of things, to use it.
Linux is light years behind Windows XP
This Article is light years behind the present day. He's talking about what Linux was like five years ago.
On a pure opinion tidbit, with little basis in fact. Let me preface this by mentioning that I get paid to write Windows software, I do it using a Mac, or Linux (Novell's Linux Desktop). This guy hasn't paid too much attention to the reasons for the Microsoft hate. Most senior technology people have a certain distaste for Microsoft not because of the pedantic political tripe spread by the hardcore anti-MS people, but because of bitter experience. I personally have a strong opinion about how poorly Adobe treats it's customers, but I'm not out to tell you why I feel that way. Microsoft has put out products that are consistantly just good enough. They have more often than not, used illegal, or unethical behaviour to strong arm products into the marketplace. In very few instances have the used free market success. The XBox being one, and it only worked because they had nearly infinite resources to sell the hardware at a loss. There is a love & hate relationship with Microsoft within the tech community. While I respect what they have accomplished, I don't feel that it's realistic to characterise their success as completely legal or ethical. Raising prices on the software to hardware vendor simply because that vendor wants to preload an alternative operating system on some systems, not even 10% of them. Forcing licensees to pay for a Windows installation for every computer shipped regardless of if the computer shipped with Windows on it or not, and refusing to offer fair pricing to other vendors. Believe it or not, this would be termed 'price fixing' in many industries, as Microsoft has effectively been setting the price you pay for computers for 15 years now. No, it's not that MS is evil, it's that after 15-20 years of Microsoft's business practices, people are looking at other alternatives, which has only served to bring some of Microsoft's abuses into a more public light. Insiders have known about this stuff for years, but it wasn't until they became public knowledge that governments felt any pressure to actually do anything to make it appear that they care (they don't, Microsoft, IBM and Apple generate billions in revenues for governments worldwide).
I don't understand why people use terms like "love". Its only code executed on some hardware. If people would put personal arguments aside, I think a lot more work could be done. ... Is it wrong to have a preference towards Microsoft? Not really. But it could imply a level of close-mindedness in that I doubt most Windows users have used ANYTHING else. But that is not the user's fault. ... And for some people who cannot stand "open source" because of the attitudes and philosophy of some of the developers or communities, well that doesn't make much sense either.
A simple formula would be that people should use whatever gets the job done given their personal needs, finances and philosophies. If your philosophical view on software or ability to pay comes before your need for certain functionality, then that is okay. It is your PERSONAL choice. It doesn't need to be imposed on others.
In the end it isn't logical to assail on personal preference.
Linux Resources
Why is this in the "Apple" category? Apple is mentioned once in TFA.
It was like someone wrapped their meat in a MS EULA and spooged all over their keyboard while looking at a video of Bill Gates giving a keynote speech.
I am surprised that he author did not attribute Windows to the second coming and Bill Gates for saving the world from what he thinks was the computer dark ages.
It is nothing more than love ad-copy....move along.
And ironically, it's the most user-friendly piece of crap that has ever been made.
:-(
Linux is no piece of crap, but it's not user friendly
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
So that's why the Mac has always come with a one button mouse...
what does price have to do with usability?
Well for starters the best damn non-console gaming platform. Man where the MSDOS years a headache for gamers. Plug-and-play and DirectX are a blessing. Sure it took time for them to work properly but look at the state of PC Gaming today. Buy game, put CD/DVD in, click on install, run game. Also, .Net rocks as a developpment API. And it'll get better and better with time.
"You superiour intellect is no match for our puny weapons" - The Simpsons
"Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!"
/ /www.cooltechzone.com
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http:
Seems it's good enough to serve TFA...
eventually they work out the bugs. That isn't something to brag about.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
"In a nutshell, it's not so much as that the software is secure; it's simply that no one is interested in spending sleepless nights writing a virus that won't give them the satisfaction they get from causing havoc. "
From the latest Netcraft survey I've read, Apache still show's %70 Market Share. So according the the Author's logic, we should be seeing CodeRed, et al. for Apache NOT IIS. According to the authors logic why would someone spend "sleepless nights" focusing on the %29, instead of the %70?
How come we don't see the same type of devestating worms that we've seen directed at IIS, being written and directed at Apache?
Seriously, I would like to see such authors as these explain that to his readers.
Awesome!
Does anyone else remember "Team Gates" ? A website where people who love Billy could gather together without fear of oppression? ...I still remember an animated gif I saw regarding it..
"Team Gates - for the worst kind of asshole."
One of tyhe biggest disappoints of MicroSoft is that it has one of the largest R&D shops in the tech world (with an impressive array of papers at this weeks SIGGRAPH), but just ships products that copies others products. Vista is MacOS deja-vu all-over-again, not to mention a dozen other examples.
Personally I started respecting Microsoft a whole lot more when the developers started blogging on a large scale. Few people can possibly have missed Raymond Chen's excellent blog Old New Thing which really explains a lot of the things that Slashdot would consider "cruft" and "archaic design" in Windows. For those who missed it I would recommend the post about file-system tunneling. On one hand it is a downright revolting workaround to make old apps work and behave as one would expect, but on the other hand one has to respect the obviously huge amounts of thought and effort that went into it.
To some part this also goes back to a bit of a reaction against Slashdot and similar places obsession with hating Microsoft. They are a lot better than they were in say, 97. With NT under the hood Windows is an a lot more agreeable operating system. Slashdot may scoff at Microsofts security effort, but in all honesty it seems to be going fairly well form my perspective. Updates are quicker and more plentiful (also most vulnerabilities seem to be announced because the fix showed up on WindowsUpdate than because an exploit was found). Recompiling large part of the system with automatic buffer checks (where possible, this is C/C++ we are talking about) has helped the severity of a lot of exploits. The new low-rights IE seems to be a good approach to insulate any problems further (borrowed from UNIX daemons granted, but the OS-level security infrastructure is sound, and applying it in a useful way to desktop applications really is a new thing), check out the IE teams blog for information about that work by the way: IEBlog. They may not have had the best place to start from, but it does seem to be going the right way (I mean, hey, just getting a working software firewall in place was a huge leap forward), which I would think everyone can agree is a good thing.
Another popular blog is Michael Kaplan's blog dealing with internationalization stuff like character encoding and input support.
Overall I could link blogs for quite a while, pretty much all major Microsoft products have developers blogging. It can be interesting to have a read, they are often well written, have a nice technical content and give a bit more understanding for how things work (and may help cure some of the more irrational hate for Microsoft :).
Microsoft pushed *personal* computing when this was unusual, and emphasized (for their own reasons rather than out of philanthropy, which is hardly the point) a computer on every desk, computers at home, etc.
They also made operating systems cheaper than they had been before; they had to, to sell them at a price that individuals could afford; they put price pressure on computer and OS vendors of all kind.
Microsoft also came out with a free Web browser when the competition was (while not outrageous) still payware. [Of course, then they integrated it into their operating systems and claimed it was an inseparable component.]
The company employs a lot of smart, interesting people.
Does Microsoft have some problems, and do Microsoft employees sometimes have ethical lapses? Yep. But it's a big company which (despite its current reputation) produces an operating system which most computer users tolerate well enough to use, and lots of other software besides.
The idea that Microsoft is uniquely eeeeeevil or something seems to be everywhere; some of the companies which complain most about Microsoft's success (read "domination") I get the impression would like nothing better than to the be ones enjoying that success / domination.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Wow. Talk about your flamebait. Posting a pro-MS story on /. is just asking for trouble. But posting it in apple.slashdot.org is really over the top.
Now... addressing the , "is it OK to love Microsoft" question. It all depends on who you are and what your point of view of technology is. Let me explain:
1. There are people who love certain company/technology just because they are told the technology is good. Non-technical Sun Microsystems fans tend to be an example of this. They are told that Sun Microsystems is a good company to buy stock in, so they assume that the products Sun produces are good. But this is not the case. Trust me, I've worked with a few really bad Sun products for the past five years and I welcomed HP-UX with open arms where support and reliability are concerned.
2. There are people who love a technology because of it's status symbol ranking. Notable in this arena is Apple. Apple produces decent products, to be sure. But they are extremely expensive for what they are. They've been making a break with this as of late, so this isn't the ideal example, but there are plenty of products out there that fall into this realm. Think Adobe Photoshop vs. everyone else. Depending on your needs, Adobe Photoshop might be financial overkill. In many cases Paint Shop Pro or even GIMP might be enough. Especially where you don't need professional print features. But there are people out there who won't touch anything but Adobe Photoshop even to the extent of pirating it.
3. There are the people who actually know technology well. They might be programmers or engineers. To them, there are two possible divisions. The first one are the people who came up with the technology first. I know quite a few people who worship the DEC Alpha. Even to the extent of passing around unsubstantiated rumours that Itanium 2 is really a DEC Alpha in disguise. They hate everything else that has come along since the Alpha because their battle cry is that they had 64-bit RISC processing back in 1992.
4. The second group are those who know even more about technology than the people in example 3 above. These people usually have a really good clue about what constitutes good technology. They've usually been around a long time and have seen fads come, go and return as "new" again. They usually quitely shake their heads and take the more pragmatic view of choosing the most well designed technology. (They tend to be OpenVMS and Unix users)
5. Then there are the retarded suits who base what makes a technology company good on their stock portfolio. This group is the least well informed and are the most likely candidates to love Microsoft. When they get mailings from various tech companies, they'll ditch anything from smaller companies (even if the technology is superior to larger companies) and only go with big name brands. Dell, HP, Oracle, Sun, Microsoft, IBM, etc... To them, these are the only options. They even tend to eschew companies like Epson, Gateway, Corel, Redhat even though there might be some very good technology coming out of these companies.
So, the question, "is it OK to love Microsoft" is really a non-starter. Security and reliability issues aside, Microsoft has done very little in the way of creating new and useful technologies. They just buy up technologies rather then developing them from the ground up. The company is not run by engineers, it's run by businessmen. The approach is to do just enough to make their technology usable, but not to make it superior. Where they want real performance is in their profits. And that is completely counter to excellent software engineering. For someone like me, I can't love a company that doesn't engineer things properly. Of all the companies I've had to deal with, DEC was probably THE best technology company out there with a real eye on great engineering. When they got taken over by Compaq, a good deal of that got shitcanned. When HP took over Compaq even more got given away, sold off and
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Because Netscape and Stacker are dead and forgotten and can't defend themselves. Sure, Microsoft has created the Internet Browser market: just look at the competition!
I wonder how this guy can praise Windows for its ease-of use when you can't even connect a Windows Mobile 2003 Pocket PC to a Windows XP SP2 PC via bluetooth. If you ever make it work, Windows will automagically break everything apart.
Or the need to reinstall the OS at least once a year just to ensure it's fresh and clean. Otherwise Windows with the help of third-party products will commit suicide, rendering the PC useless.
I can write the list forever. When I get to use a Windows machine, I can't help the habit of opening another desktop. Or a proper file extension manager.
Oh, and has this guy seen kernel modules like ATi's or nVidia's? Has he ever seen someone "apt-get install nvidia-glx"?
The most archaic-appearing part of Linux is probably hardware and low level process management. 95% of linux hardware drivers require editing a configuration file through a text editor, often through trial and error (xorg.conf anyone?). The "mount a drive to access it" is stupid, and it's sad that neither supermount, submount or ivman work well enough (yet) to replace it (none have worked for me). It's still ridiculous how many hardware types require kernel recompilations as well.
And when Linux applications crash, there's no easy and elegant way of killing them. For example, MPlayer crashed last night when I tried playing a video file with an unsupported codec. It was gmplayer, and the window froze up and stopped refreshing in a Windows98-esque crash. I couldn't click the "X" in the upper right corner and get an "End now" box as in Windows, or right click the the icon in the taskbar to end the process. I had to bring up xterm and "killall gmplayer." That didn't work, so it was "ps -ax" followed by a "kill 9 pid." It's pretty lame that I had to start up one program to kill another program, and that I had to use three commands in the process.
Why isn't there some universal way of killing apps through X? Gnome had something like that I think, but why isn't it some standard X keyboard shortcut ("hold down control-q and click the window to kill the program") in place? There's ctrl-alt-bksp for killing X after all.
I have a hard time seeing Linux advance on the desktop, when it is still so much harder managing devices and unresponsive programs on Linux than on Windows or OS X.
This is an infalmmatory, trollish, childish article. It is not news. It rehashes tired old claims that have been dissected to bits in previous discussions here. The grammar is poor, the points are weak, the article is unconvincing.
Now how the hell does this get to the front page of Slashdot?
-phozz
I thought some other company did that. Obscure little outfit. What where they called... IBC? IBD? IBM? Something like that?
Yes, yes it is.
(It also wrong to require body text when a subject will do.)
I.. Love.. This.. COMPANYEEEEAAAAHHHHH!!!! Well, at least someone does.
Mod this "news" -1 flmebait.
Mod the blog it came from -1 troll.
No matter how right or wrong someone's opinion is, posting it as "news" is just silly. How can you post this and not expect a flamewar?
Nasa spent billions making a pen capable of writing in space. The Russians just use a pencil.
Gees, Macs weren't *that* expensive.
Yes, Johnny, there is a reason not to love MS.
"God of Rock, thank you for this chance to kick ass. "
This is one of those articles that is written by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about, and who doesn't really have much to say. Pity I wasted my time reading it.
-- Cheers!
Well written - Hehehe
"Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
The only difference is, Linux programmers crash windows for free. Microsoft Programmers actually get paid to write code that crashes Windows.
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
but asking the question is too!
My penguin ate my sig
I see a lot of people criticizing Microsoft for anything from security problem to price of licensing. Most people claiming that Linux of whatever breed is the best! and oh my If you don't use it then you must be a fool! Answer this question, If Linux is free, which it is, it seems that is almost cant be given away! Why does this free software that is so much better and easier to use have such a small market share? Explain!? I use Windows and Linux, and have been for many years. As an administrator I use Linux for some things and windows for other. My guess is USERS find windows more useful, while administrator find Linux more useful.
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit!
I remember when I first saw Windows in action. After playing with it a bit, I thought to myself, "What a klunky GUI Interface". GEOS on my old Commodore 64 was better, except that this has a lot more screen real estate.
Most of you've probably never heard of GEOS or Geoworks (and there was an IBM PC version that came out around the same time as Windows). Before windows made the switch to 32 bits, I'd say the IBM PC version was almost in every way superior to Windows. Both from a UI standpoint, and from a programmer's API standpoint. Why didn't it succeed? There's two reasons:
1. Marketing power. Berkeley software, the sellers of Geoworks, while they were brilliant at selling Geos on earlier platforms, like C64, really screwed up marketing their product for the PC.
2. Microsoft used the fact that they held the keys to MS-Dos as leverage. It is well documented that Microsoft steeply discounted MS-Dos to vendors that sold Microsoft operating systems. Any other OS, or windowing evironment, was forced to sell in non-mainstream channels.
It wasn't until 1995 and windows 95 that I feel that Microsoft caught up in user interface design to some of the other early forerunners. Those forerunners however, were 10x more innovative then Microsoft has ever been.
People think Microsoft Windows is special because it was their first experience with a windowing operating system, and it sure seemed better than DOS. They know that Macintosh came first, so they feel inclined to find some reason to say why it was inadequate--and that's usually by saying (justifiably) that it was too expensive. What they don't realize is that there were quite a few graphical windowing environments that also predate windows (for various platforms). A lot of them ran on expensive machines (such as the Amiga, the Atari ST, and the Macintosh), but a few of them were very cheap and ran on PC hardware.
I dislike Microsoft because, at a time when computers were a hodepodge of competing standards, it marginalized the tools I loved and used. I was forced to use it, and it felt clunky, and was buggy. I took Microsoft almost 10 years to write an OS that had enough UI improvements, and was stable enough, for me to feel like it would be technologically competitive with some of the best of those early systems.
In other words, I feel that the industry got set back 10 years.
By the way, I've been using Linux off and on since 1995. I used Linux because its stable and powerful. However, Linux really does suck too. Especially as a Graphical operating system. It's built on all the cruft of good old ancient UNIX.
Dossey's Rule #1: If an OS is good, it will be marginalized.
hating microsoft doesn't mean that you have to like linux or apple.
most of the people that hate ms, including myself is having the feeling towards the company because we disagree with their questionable "ethics". we dont like the idea of a company producing zero "innovation" each year yet people are still being screwed with their software licenses. we dont like insecure software. we dont like having things installed on our computers by default that we don't want - and an OS that blocks us from deleting them. we dont like an OS that forbids us from playing music and movies under DRM.
sure, microsoft has been a "pioneer", but they've got pretty much the same number of years (roughly) to get things right?
i like linux because it's free, secure and common tasks are easily scriptable. a lot of things are easier to do for my research - but that has nothing to do with hating microsoft (eventhough the two are inclusive here amongst the slashdot crowd i agree). i agree that ms office is sufficient to do a lot of the tasks.
why was this article even posted on the frontpage in the first place?
my blog
...it was written by Calimero.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
bullshit, and at the time windows 95 came out a decent PC was over $3,000. Four years earlier I obtained a NeXTStation for $2800 (30% educational discount), and it had a MUCH more polished and crisp/responsive GUI than Microsoft has EVER been able to produce (and on a 25MHz 68040 too). Right about '95, at work I had SGI Indy for less than $5,000 and IRIX GUI was also lightyears ahead of 95. I've noticed the only people who are hardline about the superiority of windows are those who haven't worked on say five or six alternative OS. Ignorance is not knowledge.
What a load of tosh! It would appear you get a
:-) Lets see...
story submitted on slashdoty now simply by stating
an option which is controversial!
What's next?
"SCO's a really great company!"
"Osama bid Laden's a really nice guy!"
"The Twin Towers needed to be demolished!"
"Windows Viruses are a good thing!"
Anyway, as a Windows programmer... the reason why Microsoft should be hated is because:
1) Microsoft's anti-competitive (illegal) practises.
2) Windows over complicated and badly designed architecture(s).
There's no doubt that Microsofts office suite is currently unriveled (Sorry OOo lovers!), but that's mainly becuase Micosoft have squashed all the opposition.
P.S. I recently bought a Mac mini for my mother-in-law. Wow! What a really lovely little computer! And MacOS X is _really_ nice. I've just bought some books on programming Cocoa... just got to buy a Mac now
return 0; }
Where's one's sense of history and perspective?
Berkeley Systems' GeoWorks was in many ways much nicer than Windows, ``run(ing) with a crispness Windows can only dream of on a 386'' (and was quite usable even on a lowly 8086).
http://members.fortunecity.com/pcmuseum/geos.htm
VisiOn was tracking quite nicely as well, but was undone by MS FUD.
PenPoint was way cool as well.
and of course, while MS was busy w/ Windows 3.1, NeXT had NeXTStep.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
I would first check his credentails before reading his "article". Nowadays all websites are desperate for so called contributors to generate content. Anybody who can spell can become an insta-pundit on matters totally foreign to them. Who is he ? Has he been in IT for long ? Does he have first hand experience with the products he is comparing and editorializing ?. Based on what he wrote, anyone who has a background in IT can dismiss it as full of shit. No need to even discuss
...that specifically those WITH A SLIGHT knowledge of computers hate Microsoft, while those that ARE INTELLIGENT know better then to dismiss outright anyone in the industry. the days of a black & white (not talking about race here) world in terms of choices and standards went out years ago, stop living in the past thinking that there's a single answer to every issue.
sigs suck
Should we inform him that the 1.0 release of the Linux kernel is outdated? I'm not going to go and say "Well on distro XYZ my (random model)modem worked perfectly" but this is just ridiculous. Think what you want of linux and it might very well be overrated but call things how they are
Turn based strategy game that runs over XMPP. Phalanx
No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered.
Can I get some of whatever you're smoking?
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.'"
Just like windos. Except that Apple couldn't hide the cost in unfair and illegal monopoly deals with OEMs.
I want article moderation, please. For this one, -1 Flamebait wouldn't have been enough, but it would've been a start.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"Okay, if you insist:
FTA: It is about time we stopped being hypocritical and appreciated a job really well done.
But it isn't. Popular or not, most of their products are mediocre hack-jobs that thrive despite their quality, not because of it."
You don't get it, do you?
After all it:
"is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!"
And then you have the nerve to claim he doesn't provide arguments...
Turn off the compiled headers option, and watch out for "include" discrepancies in the header files you are using. For example, in some compilers might include , so when you are using functions from and you might mistakenly include only . This would then compile on the compiler you're used to, but would not compile on a different compiler. Neither compiler is broken in this scenario - it's your code that's broken.
However, the compiled headers option in Visual Studio is a "bug", IMO.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Can someone fire Zonk?
Thanks.
Fuck it
This is not news. Yes, Microsoft was the underdog that brought the PC and computing to the masses. I myself wouldn't be where I am today without Microsoft. Macs were expensive and sucked. Everything else was totally out of reach, except for the toy stuff that had no traction in business whatsoever.
Fast forward. Microsoft abuses the market dominance it gained by being the software company for everyman, and straps them in for a long ride they can't get out of by creating a never ending parade of de-facto proprietary protocols and file formats. Instead of focusing on the consumer, Microsoft's attention wanders over to Wall Street, where pin-striped suitboys educate them to the importance of ever increasing valuations. The customer takes a back seat. Incompatibilities with open standards are the norm. Crushing competition is the norm. Funding FUD campaigns via crazy SCO shenanigans is par for the course. Saying "security is our number one priority" with a straight face, while pumping out a never ending stream of useless insecure upgrades and creative licensing schemes which take and take and take is how Microsoft operates today.
My old friend is now my enemy. Microsoft abused my trust. I invested no small amount of time into MS products, and today all that know-how is useless to me, because I refuse to continue participating in the MS world domination game. Their products do not make my life easier or better. They make me frustrated, steal my time,, isolate me from other computing platforms, and make me poor.
If someone gives you a cookie, and then starts whacking you upside the head, would you say they are your friend?
Yet another pointless /. article. Just like this one- who knew cutting out the middle man saves you money! Now that's news.
I'm disappointed in this article. Maybe I've been reading too many well written articles and books lately, but I'm used to people having "evidence" to back up their claims.
I was hoping, though I should have known better, that this article would cover some of the pros and cons of use of Microsoft products. I was wrong. The author just wrote it to insult geeks and incite us into a rage.
There is no comments section available with the article. Not only does the author of the article feel the need to insult the lot of us, he is also protecting himself from defending his points publicly. So, what do we do? We bitch here and his article gleams, unscathed, untattered by the harmful discussion of facts.
Anyways, I'm seriously debating never visiting CoolTechZone again after seeign that they've publish this.
Come to think of it... Have I ever had a reason to visit it before?
I don't think so!
Stockholm Syndrome? He's in full-on Patty Hearst mode!
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Its hard to love the milk when the cow is mad.
Yes. Yes it is
but in my opinion, there is a definate problem with Microsoft... admitting that you like ANY of their stuff seems to be socially unacceptable - i mean it's not ALL bad. it's like saying ALL of Apple's stuff is the best, or indeed that ALL things Linux are the greatest. most things are a bit of both.
By the way, i like the way this article sprawls into a pro MS rant on the second page... makes me wonder if someone wanted to get their page hit rate up and submitted this to /. ....
No, really, I don't think there was a single piece of evidence (or even an example) supplied to support a single thing that guy said. How come these idiots get published when perfectly intelligent journalists are out there on the streets with signs saying "Will Write for Food"?
Wow, what a waste of time to read.
;p) makes this dream possible without making it any harder to write cross-platform software than it is to write something in the developer hell that is Windows.
"Nobody wants to write a Linux/Mac virus because the market isn't big enough."
Sure, that's a reason. Maybe the solution to worms and viruses is to not have one company with a monopoly on desktop OS's. You know, so that no single OS is a big enough target to be worth it. Might as well try it, since obviously even having a monopoly on the desktop OS market doesn't get you enough money to write secure software. Portable code, open standards, and readily available OS source code (you know, so you can see where all the bugs in the implementation are
His only other technical argument is that Windows XP's plug and play works better than Linux's, something that's rapidly becoming less and less true. So what? Macs do it better still, have since the dawn of time, and they're $500 now.
The rest of the time he just blathers on about how Sun and Oracle are just as bad (probably true) because they just sue Microsoft whenever they need to boost their bottom lines (doubtful; it takes long enough to sue Microsoft that it's not really a short term strategy), because all they make are useless products (Sun? Sure. Ever heard of Oracle DB, though?).
This... "thing" seems more like a thinly-veiled troll than an attempt to persuade anyone or provide any kind of insight.
Game... blouses.
For Windows 2000. If you can ignore Active Directory, 2000 is a pretty damn solid platform. It just seems that Microsoft can't produce anything of meaningful quality unless they are actively under investigation for anticompetitive behavior.
Cut to 2 years later: I'm browsing computer books at Barnes & Nobles and drinking Starbuck's coffee. In front of me is a new Microsoft publication on ActiveX technology: big, shiny red and white cover and nearly 3 inches thick. I pick it up and begin reading the foreward wherein the author writes something like
I felt like Michael Douglas' character DFENS in Falling Down - stewed, screwed and tattooed. I resolved to avoid Microsoft development tools whenever possible thereafter.
Acorn (now defunct but progenitor of ARM) had a wimp GUI years before Microsoft Windows and one which all who have tried both acclaim as far easier to use. See http://productsdb.riscos.com/admin/ros_test.htm for the reasons why. It is still extant. The ROX desktop, http://rox.sourceforge.net/ is based on it.
There are no emotions involved in business -- at least, there shouldn't be. I dont hate Microsoft, but I do think they have cost many businesses, and the economy itself, billions of dollars due to their bad practices.
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
That'll teach me to use [Preview]. At least, until I forget again. :P
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
plug it in again and...no joy. For every user that uses it for the first time it needs admin rights. So make the user admin temporarily. Had to jump this hoop with more than one device.
I switched to Mac (not MAC, it is not an acronym) and life is good. As with everything the devil is in the detail; I have no problem making and keeping XP work, but I guess like most of us I stopped noticing all these little anoyances until I saw a better way...
A good accomplisment? Probably not. Yeah it let in some innovation but not much. Mainly it sowed confusion and prevented the establishment of standards that would have moved the industry along faster. Where it did establish standards it mainly were undesirable ones. Witness all the legacy crap like parallel ports, old fashioned serial ports, and Bioses. How long did it take just to get something sensible like USB to be implemented?
On the other hand apple was a pioneer, though not always the inventor of PC methods. First (working practical) use of dynamic memory. First widepread use of memory mapped video (yes we have gone back to graphics cards but for anyone who used CGA you now what I mean), first integration of post script, First affordable Graphical user interface, first affordable mouse system, cut and paste between applications, Firewire, first consumer freindly unix desktop. first extensible files system (HFS+), metadata in file system, long liberal file names, Application oriented message passing scripting language (apple script). Self discovering local networks (first appletalk, now bonjour) If we include NeXT then we can include an OS based on Object oriented programming, Display postscript, First use of optical drives...,
Pioneering, but not settling. Not always inventing but perfrecting. They drove innovation by adopting it early and creating needs for it. Look at the first affordable desktop publishing. That required a Gui, and the ability to edit graphics as objects, and thus a mouse.
Microsoft...hmmm what can we say... they did settle the land and run on cheap hardware. Of course Cheap is why it was also so shitty. Macs were all configured at a high level. You didnlt need a pile of add on cards or figure out the interrupts and ports the card conflicts created. When you did need cards they were autoconfigured by the OS. macs had true plug and play from the day the mac II came out. Windows never really mastered plug and play till the PXI bus.
Linux on the other hand plays to a different market. Wheras macs were at the maximally configured end of the spectrum. linux allowed you to diassemble everything and configure it exactly how you wanted. Not a shrink wrapped solution like widows that tried to do it for you and consequently invented horrors like the registrtry, incompatible DLLs, and resource conflicts. Instead Linux is a tinkerer's toychest. Of course that's why it comes in third for desktop and ease of use. But it's also starting to become an innovator in software ideas as more tinkerers get linked together.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Mac's are only good for video editing, music editing, graphic's and i think thats pretty much it.
This is a big misconception many people have about Macs, Mac are for more than just these. Macs can pretty much do everything Windows are tasked for. There may be specific apps that are only ported to Windows but more than likely there's a Mac app that can do the same or similar things. Database, there are dbs for Macs, same thing with wordprocessing and spreadsheets. Afterall Microsoft has MS Office for Macs, Office 2004 for Mac - Professional Edition. Financial and accounting software, there's Quicken 2006 for Mac. And not only can you run Mac software on a Mac but you can also install and run Windows and Windows software as well. By using virtual machines such as Virtual PC, the one below comes with Windows XP Home, Macs can run more software than any other computer. Virtual PC for Mac Version 7 - Windows XP Home Edition It may run as slow as molasses but it can run them. Try that on a PC.
Falcon
Written on an HP PC running Windows ME.Should there be a Law?
Ok, I'll bite. He Says what amounts to "People don't write virus's for macs, because they only have 1% market share, and virus writers get more Kudos', for causing havoc with 95%'.
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but when it comes to mac OS X, surely Anyone who writes a working virus/worm for this platform, is going to get far more kudos than writing yet another windows virus, simply because they would be the first to do so. Even if this was a proof of concept...Ok, I'll bite. He Says what amounts to "People don't write virus's for macs, because they only have 1% market share, and virus writers get more 'Kudos', for causing havoc with 95%'
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but when it comes to mac OS X, surely Anyone who writes a working, self replicating virus/worm for this platform, is going to get far more fame than writing Yet Another Windows Virus (tm), simply because he would be the first to do so. Even if this was just a proof of concept and never maliciously released, The news of such malware would spread around the internet faster than the virus itself could ever - the Macs reputation as virus free, would no longer stand.
Yet, no-one has yet come up with a way to do this, Until this ever happens, this repeated 'Macs don't have enough market share for viruses' argument is bogus.
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
:P
You get what you pay for.
I dont object to microsoft per sae... What Microsoftt has done that gratest on my nerves, and costs my clients, computer users at large, as well as seriously impacts all information workers worldwide is...
Microsoft has made it acceptable to ship products that are of exceptionally LOW Quality, and have made it an acceptible industry wide practice. Blame crappy software on Microsoft's policies.
Every time Linux boots God smiles.
Slashdot's job is to manafacture controversy.
Why does everyone seem to be so down on the nazis? They were remarcably efficient at what they did, gave us a lot of scientific research we will never duplicate, spured on the world in the development of many new technologies both that they invented and we invented to counter them. Sure, they had some problems, but all around they weren't all bad....
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
Anyone else see the Suicidal Linux brief at DEFCON this year. It basically went over why you wouldn't want to deploy Linux as your baseline OS in a company or organization. I think he articulated the fact that Windows has a well-known level of suckiness in general but at least compared to other OS's a baseline rollout of it can be controlled much better in respect to patch management, releases, updates and etc...
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
Vista/Longhorn has been in development for so long, and the feature benefits are so predictable, that I don't think "copying" is an allegation that is at-all justified in this case, to be honest. Apple themselves are yet to release anything very original in OSX (Spotlight is cool, but let's face it, BeOS was doing the more-intelligentfile management thing first), and they've had the benefit of being able to release additions like that as (for-cash) "updates", which isn't really MS's business model.
"Mac's are only good for video editing, music editing, graphic's and i think thats pretty much it"
You forgot that Macs don't have floppy disks - I mean, how are you really supposed to do without those in today's demanding corporate environment?
Fast forward to 2005: there is something called Mac OS X - you may have heard of it. It's good for a few more things than the "niche" market as defined by Apple's competitors.
There's no 'on' position on the Slacker switch!
Bad arguments... bad rehtoric... just plain bad article. The editors of Slashdot put it up here to inflame the community I think. Ugh. I like Microsoft for other reasons, but not for the ones written in this article. There's no accounting for taste. I guess people like things for different reasons, but this guy doesn't really got a clue.
Is it Wrong to Love Microsoft?
Hmm...threatening customers with the BSA, making patches available 9 months after an exploit is found, not really creating much of their own software for the past 10 years (all through acquisitions), treating customers like crap, threatening OEMs if they try to sell alternate operating systems, stealing intellectual property, and buying their ways out of court cases they should, in all fairness, lose.
Yes. Next inane question?
AccountKiller
From the summary:
No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
In other words, Windows was the easiest OS in the world to use. And Mac OS doesn't count in my little competition because it was expensive.
I'm not saying Apple is better, but it is a piss poor argument to say Windows was the best OS as long as you only count, well, Windows. I mean come on. If you are going to only count the OS that cost as much as Windows, which for most people was $0 since it was pirated, then you aren't really doing a comparison.
And really it wasn't that much more expensive. I don't get it. If you had bought a PC, plus DOS, plus Windows, would you really have had a cheaper PC? I actually don't know the answer to this question as in 1985 I bought neither a Windows Computer or a Mac computer, but I know now that if you were to buy a Mac Mini or a Bargain Basement PC (With an OEM windows), you would find yourself only saving maybe $200. (I challenge you to find a computer with WindowsXP for 300, even without a monitor and keyboard/mouse) Now $200 is a lot, but when you consider that most Macs have a life of 4-5 years and a bargain PC has a life of 18 months, I would say you can justify it. Also that bargain PC will sell for $50 in 2 years while the Mac Mini may sell for $250 easily.
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
I keep seeing the argument that if microsoft hadn't been there, we wouldn't be where we are today. As if microsoft invented personal computers. I think this is the worst fallacy ever spoken.
Like someone else mentioned, its IBM that really made PCs affordable. And at the time microsoft bought DOS from another company (no, they didn't invent that either), CP/M was already much more advanced than anything microsoft had at the time. However, because of questionable business backstabbing decisions on IBM's part, it was DOS that became the dominant PC OS.
As for the GUI, microsoft didn't invent it either, and I can assure you that if windows wasn't there, there would be another graphical desktop OS. Why? Because Apple had it, and IBM had to compete with them. Having a GUI was simply the next logical step. In fact, I recall CP/M having some basic GUI long before windows. Granted, it was primitive at the time, but it could have turned into much more.
If we completely discard this, we are still forced to see that there have been many alternatives, such as Apple and Amiga, who had their own graphical operating systems much ahead of microsoft.
What would we have if microsoft hadn't been there? Quite possibly more than we have now. But I can tell you that its not microsoft that brought the progress we saw, its customer demand, and that would still have been there, microsoft or not.
I find it oddly appropriate that the ads served up by Google for the second page were for Anti-psychotic drug ambulance chasers.
Even Google could detect that Dubay's meds aren't working.
Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
This is M$ at work. M$ can always afford purchasing the opinions of spineless writers. This is a perfect example. What has Linux given us? If you look at how clustering has revolutionized theoretical physics and chemistry, you start seeing the tip of the iceberg. Windows is nowhere near this capacity. At least, nobody writes clustering sofware for Windows. You can offer your own reason why. Oh, yeah, Google runs Linux and *nix. OS software is the straw hat that Microsoft likes to attack. If they succeed, in making OSS seem evil, then they can extend their propaganda to Google. "Google is evil because they run OSS!" How dim do you have to be to take pleasure at seeing Windows offer silly graphics and cheap sound effects while it connects a new device? I rather like the fact that my devices are ready instantly on my Mac, without fanfare or cheap thrills. But, really, the main reason I chucked Windows for good was that I was tired of configuring stuff on Windows. For f*&k's sake, I can give myself shell access to my mac just by checking a box. As far as I know, this is not even possible on Windows. According to the Wall Street Journal, Macs are cheaper than comparables Windows machines. And, frankly, having a computer that requires zero configuration and works flawlessly is more than worth the trivial extra cost. Or, none, if you believe the WSJ and other surveys. It would have been nice if this guy had taken note of the fact that Windows hosting is more expensive and less reliable than *nix hosting. So, Windows has given us, well, nothing. Microsoft can buy favorable opinions. Slashdot has no obligation to disseminate them, however. Editors should exercise better judgment.
"...who search the reason of things
Are those who bring the most sorrow on themselves." --Euripides, The Medea
You bet! My two problems with them is that they have sloopy, crashy code in the OS. The second is that they are one of the few OS's NOT based on UNIX. I personally have no love for Microsoft.
Go to the w3.org and put Slashdot.org through the validator.
Of course there is no software available that compares to Windows. That's the definition of a monopoly!
"Given most comments on Slashdot, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft."
I love the arrogance that assumes slashdot postings are representative of all people who have "even a slight knowledge of computers".
I would dare say that there is a larger number of IT professionals who *do not* read slashdot than the smaller number of linux/open source zealots who do.
Linux and open source are wonderful things, but they are not the only way that is "good", "right" or "true".
It does not take a genius to know why "tech" people hate microsoft. I personally was excited about M$ when they started Windows 95, but after they stopped doing new cool stuff, I moved on.
Also, you can always use the "new cool stuff" variable as an indicator of things to come. You can be assured that in another 3 to 5 years, businesses will move on as well.
About twice a year I work on one project or another that shows just how much I hate them. I'm not talking fanboi hate, or my OS is better than your OS hate.
Case in point: I'm using Virtual Server to test moving our DC's to IPSEC to make them more resistant to WINS attacks. To do so requires three DC's and a Workstation. it takes, roughly, 80 steps to build the infrastructure to do this. About 60 of those steps is broken or doesn't work in some way. I've spent five days so far, on three different implementations, and I STILL don't have the pre-reqs in place to test the hypothesis!
Sure, it's an easy target to say I'm not qualified to do this, but that's a strawman attack. The failures are conflicts in the way _microsoft_ suggests you operate. Want to isolate the network? you can't update the machines to the current SP's. Want to use a standard vhd to base your network off of? Better hope it's up to date. Want to install Certificate Services? Better hope IIS6 is enabled first cause it won't work installing it after the fact (or uninstalling cert services, installing IIS6 and reinstalling Cert Services.)
this amount of headache in just TESTING a theory does not make me happy with applying it to a PRODUCTION environment.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Linux hasn't given us shit, well, except shitware that is.
Seriously, I know this is flame bait but where has open source EVER innovated or been the first to do something.
Linux isn't even secure or stable, as compared to other unixes such as BSD / OpenVMS / etc.
I love the Mozilla and Apache project, and have even contributed large amounts of my time (spread over 4 years since it began), besides those projects being well-designed with great QA and check-in rules, and fairly clean code in places, even those projects haven't really innovated anywhere.
Everything mozilla is doing now, Opera did a few years back.
Windows DOES deserve love and respect.
Its an interesting statement that this guy brings up many points that are more opinionated than the republical party
===Quote===
In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
===QUOTE===
If you wanted to you could compile all of the drivers as modules fairly easily. Depending on your hardware load the module that you particuarly wanted. Its not that difficult and it does not take up that much memory as you only have to load the modules that your going to use.
The hatred for Microsoft from most people that I know and deal with is not about anti trust and so on. Its about Them designing software that is not compatible with industry standards, The huge amount of vulnerabilities and design flaws in the operating system that leave unsuspecting users systems open for exploitation. Yes some of the virii may have been designed or written by linux or open source programmers but at the end of the day the hole is there and its a result of shoddy code and bad practices. Its only when Microsoft gets so much negative press that they actually do anything productive about security and improve their tactics. If microsoft had traditionally been more proactive about security it would probably not have had so many issues.
Apparently the Marketing Dept in Hell is hiring again and this article is just a proof of concept.
I'm guessing you're under 30, or you didn't start programming until you were older.
Back when I started programming (and I'm only 35), MS was not even a glint in Gates' eye. I learned how to program on Intercolor's Compucolor II, thank you very much. :)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
In the 'old days' (80's-early 90's) users expected the software to be (nearly) bug-free and just run. Over the years (mid-90's to now) as we've transitioned more and more to MS technology the bar has dramatically lowered.
Users no longer expect their systems to run consistently or correctly.
They've come to believe (and rightly so) that most software is flaky and undependable and that's the way it is.
The days of having to explain to management why a system had to be brought down every 12-18 months for an upgrades are gone.
Now we distract users with visions of interoperable utopia's (that we both know will probably never actually function reliably) and blind them with new features (that they mostly don't need) and no one discusses ridiculous concepts such as uptime, accuracy or consistency.
What a relief.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Oh, and just for the record, I can write slightly more than two bits of code (At least, I think I can. What exactly is a bit of code anyway?), and I have no dreams of hitting Windows with YADV (yet-another-dumbass-virus). Of course, there's no way an intellectual like this would ever use a universal qualifier when it was inappropriate to do so.
I will now go back to flogging myself for wasting time responding to this nonsensee.
blah, blah, fucking blah. What is this shit doing here? What the fuck happened to slashdot?
I for one welcome our computer overlords, and hope that my loyalty lands me as the new Duke of Michigan!
GeoWorks Ensemble was *LIGHT YEARS* ahead of Windows in terms of ease of use in the early 1990's. It even had customizable user levels which give newcomers a simpler experience while allowing advanced users to enable all of the bells and whistles in the included applications.
The classic MacOS was easier in most respects -- the installation of device drivers (control panels and extensions) was a drag-and-drop operation, and all programs came with a standard installer. And no, it wasn't more expensive -- a number of my friends back then used Macs, as did schools, and the benefits were well worth the price.
There's a reason most experiences technical people (and most experienced PC people) hold Microsoft in contempt -- we've actually used competing products, and we know how Windows actually stacks up. It's been a mediocre competitor at best in terms of features and ease of use -- the main reason it dominates is due to the illegal practices that Microsoft was *convicted* for.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
I have a Dell workstation (dual Xeon, 2GB of RAM, RAID0, etc) that is less than 1 year old running Windows XP SP2. I booted it up this morning and the "press ctrl-alt-del" window didn't look right -- it looked flat and had a white frame -- it isn't even supposed to have a frame at all!
So viewing this as "just" a visual "glitch", I tried to log in. I gave it the 3 finger salute and received the (also flat and white framed) login window. After entering my credentials, it tried to log in. 15 minutes later it was STILL trying to log in!
I eventually tried to shut it down, but nothing would work... so I had to turn the computer off.
At home, I've had my PowerMac G5 for almost 2 years and I've had 0 problems with it. No weird "visual glitches", no instances of not being able to log in, nothing. And it's not just a workstation -- it hosts mail, file, print, and web servers as well... which have also been extremely solid and perform very well. And no, this is not Mac OS X "Server"... it's just the workstation version of Tiger. It runs 24/7 while my Dell workstation is turned off every night.
As far as Microsoft goes, respect must be earned. I have no respect for a company that operates as illegally and reprehensibly as they do.
So I call BULLSHIT, Mr. Dubey. Windows is STILL buggy, the Mac is not only far more stable, but also far more capable.
"To make a mistake is only human; to persist in a mistake is idiotic." Cicero
I hate to answer a question with a question, but it seems appropriate.
- Kevin
The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act.
This article stems from that insecurity and that lack of confidence in self which is borne out of the memorization-method of education that India has.
I might be one of the few who doesn't hate MS. Yeah, I know they screwed their way to the top. All of their OS's are unstable. They charge way too much. They create their own standards on top of the industry. Yep, they are the 5 billion ton gorilla with a huge target on their back. But, like them or not, they haven't had any real competition. No one has tried to compete with the WinTel duopoly. Mac's are way too expensive for most people, which takes Apple out of the race. Linux? What? Joe Public isn't smart enough with computers to use it. So you are left with the defacto desktop standard, Windows.
The delineation on Linux or BSD, between root (administrator) and ~/ (user) is profound.
On anything MS, it's grey and you can allow (read let the world in) by something as trivial as setting a user account able to read the default www dir.
Thus opening the gamut of IE vulnerabilites.
Try that on a system designed to allow proper delineated access.
For Christs (purposefully capped) sake, the (M$) marketing guru's will mandate user access to anything and everything in Longhorn (or whatever the marketroids deign to call this abomination), so that (Shit won't break).
Mark my words, (excessive french sweet sounding drool) We have seen you before, and we will see your successor!
I wish/hope that engineering will eventually override M$(S) marketroidness, but history has proven me, and every othe administrator wrong.
Perhaps this is MS's last chance?....
Oh, and they're more expensive.
Oh, and less warez.
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus
V-a-r-u-n D-u-b-e-y
Windows was buggy? Heh heh. How about was buggy, is buggy, and always will be buggy.
You just sit there, Varun, your gaze fixed on your monitor while the pretty XP eye candy lulls you into thinking that your using a high quality piece of software. The rest of the planet is abandoning your favorite product in favor of something that does work (and works damn well at just about everything that I've thrown at it -- and that's a lot). Windows is suitable as a platform for running Firefox (never IE!) and playing a few games. And that's it.
Oh yes, we all hate Microsoft because we're jealous of it's success, of Bill Gates' fortune, or whatever. Uh huh. Right. Sorry to burst your little bubble there, but we hate it because they waste our money and, most of all, our time. It's been a stain on the computing industry for the better part of two decades.
Interesting that in going on thirty years of coding, I've never once dreamt of writing a virus. Guess I'm a freak or something.
Yes, that's true. But only if you're an idiot. I haven't recompiled a kernel in several years (modules are quite nice that way) and even then, it was never to do something like changing my modem. I have no idea where you got this idea, but whoever told you this was spouting crap. To quote Wolfgang Pauli:
I won't even attempt to address your jingoistic comments about the EU and your infantile attempt to explain business motives. And I've made a mental note to never visit ``CoolTechZone'' again. (``Ultimate Source'' my eye.)
Have a nice day and call us when you get a clue.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
As this article reveals http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25169 MS-Vista will make your current high end PC hardware obsolete.
From the article
I hope we're all just loving Microsoft for this
# ~: no sigs today
Linux: $0 Windows: $299 MacOS X: $129 If they are just comparing the operating system they really shouldn't say that Windows is cheaper. Now if they go buy OEM versions of the operating systems. Apple gets their OS from Apple so ummmm no mark up. Dell, Gateway, HP, NEC, get their OS from Microsoft which they have to pay for it. I really don't understand how they can say MacOS costs more...
The MacOS was first released in 1984, and it was a fairly easy-to-use environment from the start.
Many early Mac users were nontechnical people.
Windows 1.0 came out in 1986, but Windows didn't start becoming popular until Windows 3.0 in 1990, and at that point people still had to deal with DOS memory managers and AUTOEXEC.BAT/CIONFIG.SYS files.
That gave the Mac a *HUGE* head start, and it was at a point in 1984 in ease-of-use terms that Windows didn't approack (arguably) until the Windows NT release in 1993.
Windows wasn't even the first "easy to use" GUI environment on the x86 platform. See my other comments about PC/GEOS (GeoWorks Ensemble).
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
The Aquaducts!
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
Add 'CoolTechZone' to the list of sites that feed trolls. That article manages to make OS Views look well informed and insightful.
--Matthew
It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort.
A pioneering effort in what? The plug'n'play was just a sorry way of immitating what apple was offering to its custommers. I can imagine Bill screaming to Balmer "Steve! I WANT THAT!"
One comment here said that DirectX works pretty well. I won't argue that it does not,but you only get it on windows. You want crossplatform? You go OpenGL, and most game makers offer both OpenGL and DirectX capable software.
I could give some credit to MS for bringing the PC in many (many, many...) homes. But they are still guilty of making the average PC user think that rebooting and reinstalling and crashing of an OS is actually how things should be.
It's wrong to love MS. Their OS would be great, if they gave a damn about it and the tech savvy users, but since there are many more Joe Sixpacks than techies, MS will listen only to the former. And the state the OS is in shows just that.
He dismisses Linux and Macintosh with extreme bias and little objectivity. He has probably never touched a Linux system... And although Macs are a bit pricey, he probably hasn't messed much with them either. This is typical of someone who has grown up knowing nothing other than windows... Windows is not the end-all be-all solution to desktop computing. It might have helped start it, but now (as previously pointed out by another poster) it's quite possible that it is suppressing growth of the industry in some ways...
The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
Pure opinion. Worst kind of "reporting"/"journalism" possible.
In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!
Do you? I just add a new module - or in a lot of cases, using a kernel that compiles most things as modules (gentoo's genkernel comes to mind)...Do you need to recompile a new kernel when you boot up knoppix? Not the last time I used it (yesterday)...
Basically what the stupid courts in Europe said was, hey, you're doing a great job, and you must pay for it! This coming from a bunch of people who couldn't even agree on a constitution!
Not to sound partisan, but this sounds awfully jingoistic, neo-con. That's not what they said at all.
Microsoft made some products which it would like to ship together with its OS, no where in the EULA does it say that "you are not authorized to install other software" If Mr. John Doe thinks media player is the worst piece of software he has ever used, he is free to go and download Winamp or Musicmatch Jukebox (neither of these offer free full versions).
True, it doesn't say you can't install other software - but it does try to wrest control from those pieces of software, and has various incompatibilities made to break that software, and keep promoting their own software.
Lets be fair and honest about this. Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touches.
Created the market? Wasn't that Apple? Like the category that this story is in?? And ease of use? Sure, if your computer never ever has a problem in the registry...I'm sure that many core Windows developers couldn't tell you exactly everything that the registry does - it's not documented. Good luck figuring shit out.
Jesus, and the grammar is particularly awful.
Run on sentences like this that make me want to die definitely do remind me of those people in high school i knew that would say hey what's going on and not really use any punctuation not even a comma.
Awful article. Terrible. Never post again.
AccountKiller
- microsoft "single handedly created the market for personal computers": utter BS. IBM was under heavy threats from a then-recent anti-trust settlement and was forced to find an OS vendor for its new PC design rather than promote OS/2 with all the muscle it had shown in pushing OS/360. The IBM executive who socialized with Bill Gate's mom pretty much handed Gates the keys to the kingdom when other DOS work-alikes were available.
- Macs... cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.... Yes, it costs more. I bought a 128K Mac and printer for $3K in '84...and it DOES MORE...It sitll runs. and I jumped to buy it when I did because nobody else had a "word processor" that integrated graphics in the document as gracefully. Mac's have always been ahead of Windows in ease of use and functionality. TFA exagerates the price difference.
- explaining Microsoft's dismal security lapses as simply the result of its market share is dishonest.
/. readers never bought this line and shouldn't now. That the browser and OS are joined at the hip by ActiveX, for instance, is one of the reasons windows is a more vulnerable platform and a fair article would mention that. - Microsoft does not deserve "the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it". Microsoft has been shown in court, repeatedly, to have threatened PC makers, to have used its huge financial strength to suck all the money out of emerging markets such as browsers where its own products were neither novel nor particularly competative [has anyone forgotten what MS did to Netscape?] and to have used bundling to deter and disuade the non-technical majority of users from using other applications than those provided by Microsoft. Even proficient users have difficulty uninstalling Microsofts bundled apps [my office forbids the use of IE yet we CAN'T rid ourselves of it entirely.]
Arrrgh! this bum just wants to get a rise out of us. Its not worth my time to say more.....actually, the Eds probalby just set this crap in front of us because traffic has been a bit light on
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
When a windows guy finally gets his say and he ends up being more bigoted and zealotry than the worst foss fundamentalists.
All things have their strengths and weaknesses.
One size does not fit all.
"Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs." Accutally Windows XP is more expensive than "Mac OS" From Amazon: (OSX - $114) (XP Home - $187) (XP Pro - $248)
Forgetting who these companies are and looking purely at products:
Windows/PC: Fast, cheap, not good (spyware, buggy, still not easiest to use, nothing really new or innovative)
Mac OS/Mac: Fast, good, not cheap
The Mac being expensive does not make Windows a "pioneering effort" if the Mac still got there first.
And no, you should not love microsoft, or apple, or linux. You should love your family, now go home ;)
Argh, can't spell, I meant Monty Python of course.
If you limit your definiton of computing to software that runs on cheap home PCs you've almost got a point.
If you're talking about computing in general you're way way off. Unix is much older than DOS.
The fact that you have only recently been able afford to run Unix alike systems on home PCs does not make DOS the oldest operating system. It simply means it was affordable to the mass market for a longer time. It's not older by any means and it is, derivative of unix commands that predated it by many years.
should have gotten his article hosted on a trustworthy microsoft server....
instead he's hosting his attack on everything that is good and pure on a LINUX server !!!!!
Break out the flowers and love beads.
... (Bong hit)
Wow man, windows is like
Well sure it had some hardware incompatibilty. But the concept of plug and play, like man, they invented it. No other os had a self detecting driver identifying... (Bong hit)
You know man, of course the bad dudes would target such a great system trying to bring it down. If some other os becomes this great... (Bong hit)
Is It Wrong to Love Microsoft?
:|
:x
that's like asking if it's wrong to love having sex with little boys.
i can't even begin to count how many headaches i've gotten from various version of windows over the years... nevermind IE... sure, i still have problems, but it's changed to "i have to fix this. better find a way" from "goddamned piece of worthless crapass garbage WHAT THE HELL DID I PAY FOR?!" and now life isn't as stressful.
~it's the ultimate dinner show~
Yes it is wrong to love Microsoft.
Microsoft is ripping us off constantly. If I buy Windows for $100 then I pay $20 for the product and $80 into Bills pocket. The profit margin (around 80%) is way too big. Windows is the only part of a PC which increased in price in the last decade.
Microsoft is using unethical bully tactics to get rid of competitiors (Windows 3.1: if DrDOS then crash with obscure error, Internet Explorer is an 'integral part' of the operating system, etc.).
For me, these are enough reasons to hate em.
Markus
I'm glad someone finally said it. This is the article I would write if anything I wrote would ever be read.
It all boils down to two simple words...
"Look"
and
"Feel"
Its a bit tedious really. I've been listening to MS bashing for 15+ years now. Get over it. They aren't perfect but its not worth droning on about.
2) the lowering of expectations for the reliability of computers.
(this horse is beaten almost to death already, but what the hell, I'll bite)
It would be a much more quickly passing problem, lasting for a year or two, not ten. By the time everybody and his dog had discovered that Linux was susceptible to malware, Linspire (the "log in as root" distro) would be in serious PR trouble.
The other major distros would have made Security Enhanced Linux with tight policies the default. This would break a lot, and be a pain for many users. Installing third party software would be really laborious. But the distros and the users would put up with that if malware bacame a big deal on Linux.
Gpg signing of software is already becoming mandatory; the installers could just refuse to install something that was not signed by the distro.
17" Powerbook 1440x900, 2GB, 100GB disk, 3 years warranty: $3898+tax.
17" Dell Inspiron 1920x900, 2GB RAM, 100 GB disk, 3 years warranty: $2376+tax.
I'm a nature photographer.
I have been fortunate in my career to have used many different computing systems besides those made by Microsoft. If you only know a single system (doesn't matter which one), your thinking and approach to problems will be framed by that knowledge. I've seen this verified many times by new hires.
The article credits Microsoft with way too many things and shows a definate lack of knowledge of computing history. It's more sad than anything. If you've never seen or been in a car, of course you'll think that the company who makes the bicycles everyone has is really great.
My personal opinion is that Microsoft has put the computing industry at least *10* YEARS behind where it should be. I feel this way because of all the non-Microsoft systems I have used over the years. There have been so many excellent ideas that appeared years before Microsoft incorporated them, if they incorporated them at all.
A few years ago, I was tasked to build an application for the iPaq. I put together the basics of the application in VB for Win32 so I could send it as a demo to the clients and get a better idea of what they wanted, thinking I could cut and paste a lot of the code when I started working on VB for PPC.
.NET has a smaller subset for their handheld version than for their PC version. This was before .NET. The syntax was different! For loop syntax was different. (Or was it the if statement? I haven't looked at the source in years and I no longer work there.) It was sufficiently different that I started from scratch rather than making minor mods on the code. You don't make for loops in C different in Windows and Linux. There was no benefit for having a different syntax.
.NET fixes that problem.)
Wrong.
Some things I get. I know
I give lip service to the standard Microsoft hatred when it comes up. I like Linux and use it whenever possible. But the fact that they switch syntax like that makes me hate them. (And, granted,
You said it better than I did. TFA was not worthy of our time and the /. eds are just yanking our chain.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
Have your opinion, but don't bash MS just because.
.net and other development tools at the same time.
They have acted no differently than any other company does to protect market share and profits.
I assume that none of the MS bashers holds any MS stock (check your retirement plan portfolio)?
I am a developer that works mainly the MS technologies and I have run everything from CP/M to Unix and almost every MS OS from it's initial beta (95-XP). There have been so few OS related problems, that I can not even remember what they might have been.
XP has been on my main system for years and I only turn off or reboot every few months (excluding sleep mode), mostly due to bad software installs or hardware failures.
It has never, ever, crashed, even though I regularly run SQL Server, IIS,
I have used Unix systems. I had a multi-user system in my basement in the early 80s. The *nix trend does nothing for me.
I have little actual time on a Mac, but I acknowledge and respect Apple's tech and innovations.
I love IE. Firefox? I have not installed a non-IE based browser since Netscape 3. Not to say that I have not used it on other's PCs.
Sure Windows could be better. No question. Sure the monopoly seems unfair. But isn't this one of the ultimate goals of any corporation? And could you imagine a corporate office where you can't run an application in the next cubicle because the OS is incompatible?
For the record, I have no MS affiliation in any way.
Yes it is.
-><- no
I wonder if their marketing department aren't spoon-feeding these articles to newspapers and websites.
... copy-cat product, it's sudo R&D practices, and how they have smited compnaies and denounced innovation from competitors.
that what you state is True Innovation!
What HAS Microsoft done in the past 30 years that was innovative (instead of a reaction to market pressures,) novel (something uniquely new) or generous (like free as in 'libre')
Microsoft reflects Bill Gates "biggest baddest bully in the whole playground" mentality.
He and Microsoft were convicted and managed to buy off any punishment like a student who's rich enough to buy off the faculty.
I'd still like to hear of something not derivative or purchased from Microsoft.
It might be a short list given the screams of "Make it more like the Mac" that I've been hearing for the past twenty years.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
There is nothing illegal about using your M-60, as long as you do not use it to commit a crime.
Therefore, what you're really saying is that "since people can use firearms to commit crimes, it is silly to expect them to do anything but use firearms to commit crimes", a typical piece of anti-gun rhetoric. However, one could make the same argument about knives, baseball bats, and automobiles, thus demonstrating the flaw in your logic, since modern legal systems are (at least in theory) based around the presumption of innocence.
However, this brings up the whole "well, you don't NEED a machine gun" agrument, to which I reply: in a free society, need justifies nothing. If I take my machine gun to the range, and use it perfectly legally, then there is no harm to me having it. The issue really comes back to the idea "well, you MIGHT do something bad with it". Having an automobile, I might engage in illegal practices with it; do you propose to take it away before I do something bad, or do you wait until I have actually done something wrong?
In a nutshell, the whole anti-gun argument revolves around presumption of guilt on the part of your citizenry, which is not a way to run a free republic.
Hardware compatability.
How many different kinds of hardware can Windows plug and play these days? How many different chipsets?
Sure, its just drivers..but the ability to run out of the box without issue for millions of people with vastly different configurations, I feel, is a very strong aspect of MS Windows and something no other OS can claim.
I have been a satisfied user of Windows since '95, and allthough I take crashes for granted, a proper substitute has never reached me.
One things I wouldn't want to miss in a Linux build is the 'ease of use' (ok, call it the habit of using it) of the desktop : So no commandline stuff, as I am quite happy we left the DOS-commandline-era behind. :
Also, I am a frequent user of 3d modeling- and mapping software
How much support is there out there to run the more known apps (like 3DSMax, Lightwave) and the less known apps (like GTK Radiant, other small [Window] mapping tools)?
Together with mapping/modeling, I also use my computer alot for gaming : How well are Windows-emulators able to run games that haven't been ported to Linux yet ?
So, alot of questions : And allthough I know how to use Google, I think it's better to hear it from the horse's mouth.
If anyone has a good advice, or can point me into the right direction it will be much appreciated.
put down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard. Are you kidding? Apple had long filenames on Windows disks long before Windows 95 did. How did they manage that? It was pretty easy, and in fact the same way windows 95 later copied. they just wrapped the old 8.3 names with a layer that looked up the short name as was actually stored on the DOS disk.
What do you think would happen to the world economy if Microsoft only would release longhorn for PPC?
Uh dude, apple has switched many times and many processors and never left their currentusers behind. I was playing crystal quest, a game from the mid 90's on my OSX computer, just yesterday. When apple switched to intel they are still going to be compiling apps for my present computer.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
As the "software" guy of a small (about 2-3 PCs a day) oem in australia, I find microsoft one of the biggest pains in the arse to deal with, thier pre-install system support is a bit of a joke for the small builder as its largely non existant, even after hounding our microsoft rep about it (on the quaterly visits he makes, largely to make sure we are not breaking the rules they set up) he sends me to the monolith of a website with no specifics on where to get the information we need, which, after much hunting, turns out to require a username and password that they will not issue to someone selling OEM coppies, must be useing the "heres a floppy, the rest of the repair info is hidden on your HDD" method for screwing customers out of their right to own hard copies of their software. And, after all the BS we recieve from them about it, we find some very helpfull articles on overclockers.com about it, and are told by our MS rep that, due to australian copyright law, we can't make slipstream disks as ANY copy of their data not on a cd they provide is against the law....
Yeah, after installing so many, I do have a little pent up anger ^_^
...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!1!!1!!ONE!!` ~!11221!!TWO!!
There, I said it.
If it's possible, can the article itself be modded a -1 Troll?
a posting that's pro-Windows is news, kinda like a Bigfoot sighting
What about a microsoft news bigfoot sighting? : )
You can't take the sky from me...
Given most comments on the forums of The American Atheist website, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of science and evolution hates God. An article from The Bible , though, argues that not everyone should dismiss God outright. According to the priests, the Pope, and other religious spokespeople, evolution is over-rated, Darwin isn't worthy, and God deserves respect and some love.
I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.
Depends...is it tough love?
I hate slashdot. I didn't always hate slashdot. I used to love slashdot. But now it is just a forum of repetitious and boring commentary. The most egregious is the blame Microsoft crowd. They forgot that MS was once the one and only open solution. If you wanted to build your own computer, you couldn't choose Apple, Commodore, Atari or Amiga. They would only sell you their OS if you also bought their hardware. In fact that was the only way to get their OS. When Microsoft started selling Windows, thousands of companies sprang up to sell customized, commodity based computers. There still are thousands of companies that do just that, even in the face of competing with Dell, Gateway and HP/Compaq. But, and this is amazing, you don't even have to buy from them. You can buy your own hardware, put it together yourself and run Windows. Apple became marginalized because they didn't allow any one else to sell or buy their OS to run on custom, commodity hardware (except for a brief foray into allowing a few select, and ultimately burned, companies to do that). They also burned a lot of their customers. I remember a friend who bought an Apple II GS. Guess what happened to him. Apple scrapped the entire line and he was left with a door stop. Microsoft has the most market share because no one was willing to compete in their market, selling an OS that runs on commodity hardware, until after they already had the most market share. I was an early adopter of OS/2. But their registration center burned down and they lost my registration information. They then burned me by not providing an upgrade to Warp that they had promised early adopters. Guess who I adopted next. The whole Microsoft is a monopoly argument is such a joke. There are hundreds of operating systems available, but nobody uses them so it must be a conspiracy by Microsoft. Companies can't make money selling competing operating systems pre-installed on a computer so it must be Microsoft's fault. Dell, Gateway and HP/Compaq make a business decision to sell Windows pre-installed but that too is Microsoft's fault. Amazing.
Today a workmate was telling me about a visitor who had bought an Apple iBook a week ago, and was now totally devoted to it. I've never got my hands on a working Apple PC or laptop.
At work, I've just finished installing WinXP on my workmates PCs.
At home, I dual boot WinME and various flavours of Linux (currently Xandros 3.0 OC).
I use what works, subject to availability and price. I have one PC with a licensed copy of Windows at home so I can do stuff from work, if I feel so inclined. If I want to read email, chat or websurf, I reboot into Linux.
Microsoft is not making a hell of a lot of money out of me, because the only new OS I've acquired in the last 3 or 4 years is a 'nix of one sort or another, straight off the cover CD of a computer magazine.
What's to love or hate about any computer company ?
By and large I do my own tech support, but I'm happy to admit I don't know everything.
Everything can crash, if it's broke, just fix it. That's what I learnt all this stuff for!
Don't blame me, it's usually 2 in the morning when I post
I tinker and build my own PCs but have never deviated from microsoft.
I felt I out to, so got myself a big box of Suse (seemed germanic and reliable) and put aside a day to get stuck into it.
It started off well, it installed, stuff happened on the screen and some of my devices were installed correctly.
The problems started when I tried to get all the drivers for all my devices working. When I tried to get the refresh rate sorted out and all manner of other little niggling problems.
I genuinely did want to get Linux running, I really wanted to use it, but throughout the process I kept on and on running into problems I knew how to easily fix with windows - but didn't have a clue how to with Linux.
In the end it boiled down very simply. I had tasks I needed to get done. I knew how to do them in windows, but not a clue for Linux. Even assuming I got everything working - the best I could aim for was a system that let me do all the stuff I could do before.
I'm getting really sick of all the Linux stories saying "you can now do something in Linux, you can already do in Windows." What Linux needs is to be able to announce "You can do everything you can already do in Windows AND a load of Linux only stuff" - otherwise what's the point?
If you can't get me to switch over, then god help you in your attempts to get the 95%.
As much as Slashdotters and I don't like some of MS's business practices, the computer industry would not be close to anything without them. Apple dropped the ball big time, and nobody who's been there would want to go back to the pre-DOS days when almost every computer was different. Back in 1987 when I started at my university, we had SGI, VAX, DEC Unix, Atari ST (great for control applications), a few Suns, EWS6000 (?) and PCs running whatever operating system and networking. All in the same department, and you constantly had to switch between systems. When I went back for a visit last year, it was basically all Windows and Linux.
Obligatory quote:
REG:
They've bled us white, the bastards. They've taken everything we had, and not just from us, from our fathers, and from our fathers' fathers.
LORETTA:
And from our fathers' fathers' fathers.
REG:
Yeah.
LORETTA:
And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers.
REG:
Yeah. All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return?!
XERXES:
The aqueduct?
REG:
What?
XERXES:
The aqueduct.
REG:
Oh. Yeah, yeah. They did give us that. Uh, that's true. Yeah.
COMMANDO #3:
And the sanitation.
LORETTA:
Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the city used to be like?
REG:
Yeah. All right. I'll grant you the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done.
MATTHIAS:
And the roads.
REG:
Well, yeah. Obviously the roads. I mean, the roads go without saying, don't they? But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct, and the roads--
COMMANDO:
Irrigation.
XERXES:
Medicine.
COMMANDOS:
Huh? Heh? Huh...
COMMANDO #2:
Education.
COMMANDOS:
Ohh...
REG:
Yeah, yeah. All right. Fair enough.
COMMANDO #1:
And the wine.
COMMANDOS:
Oh, yes. Yeah...
FRANCIS:
Yeah. Yeah, that's something we'd really miss, Reg, if the Romans left. Huh.
COMMANDO:
Public baths.
LORETTA:
And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg.
FRANCIS:
Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's face it. They're the only ones who could in a place like this.
COMMANDOS:
Hehh, heh. Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.
REG:
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
XERXES:
Brought peace.
REG:
Oh. Peace? Shut up!
They should ditch everything else and stick to making mice. I love my intellimouse explorer.
Freedom would be not to choose between black and white but to abjure such prescribed choices. -Theodor Adorno
Someone writing up why they think windows is so great or why mac is so great or why linux is so great is not news. Get a clue.
Microsoft is the fo shizzle yo! I mean really y'all, it is great software. Look at all that has been accomplished by people who use it or at least cut their teeth on it and moved on to Linux or whatever. I grow tired of all the MS bashing really, childish IMHO but alas i regress to a troll...my bad. Microsoft is the kind of company people dream of...makes a great product for all practical purposes and makes tons of money. Sure commie types don't like it but that capitolisim at it's finest. Spell checkers be damned I will plod ahead! Microsoft has more product out there than everyone else combined...they are the most hacked/cracked software in the history of the world! Flatery at its finest I love Microsoft...come out of the closet and admit it...Microsoft pwns us all!
Unless you have shares, or other such controlling interest, in a company then really: stop loving it. Find a girlfriend.
I'd say this guy is merely a pro-MS zealot, exactly like the anti-MS zealots here on Slashdot that he bashes.
Let's look at the article piece by piece:
Recap on alternative/joke names for MS.
States explicitely that "I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!". He's clearly already marked out his opinion as essentially content-less uninformed flaming, exactly what he complains about when it happen to MS.
Calls Windows a "pioneering effort". Now, I'm no Linux or Mac fanboy, but I was under the distinct impression that Windows had very little innovation compared to the Mac. IIRC various Microsofties have even admitted as much before, albeit off the record.
Regurgitates the long-disproven "popularity => more successful breakins" argument. More popularity equals more cracking attempts, I'll grant you, but that's not the same as successful security breaches. And anyway, haven't we already disproven this whole argument?
"Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job."
Bwaaaaahahahahahaaaaaa! As everyone knows, the two main groups who write viruses are security professionals offering a "proof of concept", and script kiddies. The overwhelming majority of coders/developers have never written (or certainly released) a virus in their lives.
In addition, given it's mostly VBScript kiddies - who are almost universally poor programmers - the runaway success of most Windows viruses is even more damning.
"XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it."
Dunno what version of windows he's using, and not to deny Windows has got better over the years, but I still have plenty of issues even these days with unrecognised hardware, pieces of hardware detected twice, crashes due to dodgy device drivers, etc.
"In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!"
Now, I'm not that au fait with the low-level Windows or Linux processes, but I understood that they both used monolithic kernels (ie, drivers not in userland). Surely this means that Windows also has to "recompile" the kernel when the device drivers change? If so it might be hidden behind a pretty user-interface, but it's the same damn architecture and the same design problem.
Tackles the anti-trust cases. Totally ignores Microsoft's documented illegal behaviour and instead blames it on jealousy from competitors. Riiiiiight...
Suggests Sun and Oracle's business models are based around sueing Microsoft. Is he confusing "Sun" with (the Microsoft-backed) SCO, and "Microsoft" with Linux?
He's actually suggesting these companies sue Microsoft because they see it as an easy revenue-earner, rather than a highly risky attempt at redress against the richest organisation (with the most expensive and persuasive legal team) in the world. Mind-boggling.
"Microsoft made some products which it would like to ship together with its OS, no where in the EULA does it say that "you are not authorized to install other software" If Mr. John Doe thinks media player is the worst piece of software he has ever used, he is free to go and download Winamp or Musicmatch Jukebox (neither of these offer free full versions)."
Yeah, they don't write it into the EULA where anyone could see it, but you don't need to do that when you've got the CEO of Dell's balls in your office drawer. It's harder to prove, and leaves less obvious marks for the next lawsuit.
Oh, and the key thi
Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
I think that the worst problem caused by Microsoft is not so much in what the have given us ( the consumers of the world ) it is in what they have denied us. Because they have used and abused their monopoly power unchecked for so long. Microsoft establishes a defacto 'state of the art'. It is accepted by the general consumer that most computers work like Microsoft based machines. Here is a simple example. the .Net environment and IDE are much improved, in fact as a professional developer of Microsoft based products I would have to say it as a whole is light years ahead of their last IDE.
That being said the same technology was available for development on the NEXT box ( by same I mean an IDE that was as easy and intuitive to use and an object library that was as rich and easy to understand). That technology was available 10 years ago and if Microsoft hadn't quashed Objective C in favor of it's far less superior IDE
we could easily be 10 years more advanced in IDE and object technology now then we are. THAT is Microsoft's fault , they abuse their OS monopoly in
a way that sores up their other shoddy projects
and in the end the consumers lose.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
W95 was also the debut of the Registry with all it's attendant obfuscations and encrypted entries. No more of this human readable
Then there were the help files. I taught myself how to use Win3.11 to quite a high level purely from the bundled helpfiles. W95 seemed a lot less helpful. However I think the nadair was reached with WinME when I was tryng to troubleshoot my wife's PC and suddenly though "all these halp files are, are a lit of reason's why the problem is not MS's fault".
Then there was Stacker - where MS bough out just enough of the company to squash the product. Everyone has their favourite MS unfair competition story - that was the one that made me realise these guys were not playng fair
And there was the chap on USENET - demon.local - who posted a message subject "Bastards! Bastards! Bastards!". Apparently he'd found a bug in 95, reported it and was told he'd be given 30 days free credit while they looked into it. He was outraged - he spent his own valuable time tracking down a bug for Microsoft to improve their product, and in return they threatened to charge him money if they couldn't replicate it in 30 days. How to alienate your techically adept userbase in one easy lesson...
The final straw for me, was finding that getting a copy of office for my dad's new XP machine doubled the cost of the computer (which we'd already bought) and that we'd need a new printer and scanner. None of which was advertised, of course.
These are some of the landmarks on the journey from me as a MS enthusiast c.1990 to a Linux evangelist in 2005. It's not that I woke up one day and thought "linux looks cool", MS had to work long and hard before I started to think of them as the enemy.
There's a line, arguably a subtle one, between wrtiting novice-friendly software and treating your users as idiots. Further on in the same directin there's another one markign the start of treating the user with contempt. As far as I'm concerned, MS crossed first one, then the other, and have not so much as looked over their shoulder the whole time...
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
I think that with the taskbar, Windows leapfrogged Mac, and the thing is still better than the Doc.
Yes, I've gotten into huge dumb arguments about how shortsighted I am for not realizing that seperating "launch new apps" from "return to running app" is just retrograde idiocy that stops me from grokking a truly object-centered way of thinking. Whatever. Having every running "task" visible and one click away, vs putting launching new things 2 clicks away, works really well IMO.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
It's not just that hes PRO mac, it's that hes taking a deragatory stance on other OS's.
EG: the people that work on linux stay up writting viruses for windows.
'Mac's are unworthy' and 'cost an arm and a leg and etcetcetc'....
I do agree microsoft deserves some credit in some aspects, but this guy is straight up trying to say its superior to everything else and everythign else sucks... BOOOOO TO THIS ARTICLE
In my mind, the problem I've always had with Microsoft is not (despite the various issues with bugs and viruses) the Operating System. MS has done a fair bit to improve windows over time, but it's the bigger picture that worries me.
Microsoft is not just windows. It's a large, heavy, ruthless corporation. Unlike many ruthless corporations, MS also has a strong ability to crush other companies... hence the antitrust issues. So yes, while MS may have helped fund and bring some technologies to light, I can think of more than a few that were squashed when the refused to bow down and hand themselves over to MS...
Try as I might, I just can't take someone seriously - in any argument - when they can't even spell whatever they're arguing about.. MAC? Why do people persist with this errant capitalisation?
How much can someone possibly know about an entity if they can't even get the name right, I mean really...
"I hate Windows 99, it's so crappy."...
Yes. It's find to realize that Windows has improved, but Microsoft is still so far from a non-dysfunctional software company that it is not deserving of anyone's love.
ttuttle is a rankmaniac
If the eds are gonna make us read a steaming pile of bias and hogwash, the least we can do is get a good laugh.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
Why do you trust our corporate masters?
To maintain that monopoly your company will have to lock out potential competitors with patents, laws, or failing all that good ol' threats and intimidation.
Your point, "there's nothing wrong with a monopoly" strikes me as naive. Capitalism, like a game or sport, only has a chance of half-way working when there's a somewhat level playing field. Monopolies are broken like the Black Lotus and Mox cards in Magic the Gathering, and they must be regulated as such. Please go crack open a history book and look up trust busting.
Sometimes the government will allow a monopoly to continue to exist provided the company is willing to allow itself to be regulated by the government. It's my understand that this is how Southwestern Bell worked at one time.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
First of all, the writing is less than stellar. Second, all of it is opinion based without any sort of facts to back it up, or in depth explanation of his point... Gee, I remember something called the Apple II doing this long before microsoft was the force it was. What a maroon.
The value of one's opinion is judged by the listeners.
If a preacher is preaching to the choir, nobody in that audience is going to disagree with him. You'll just see a lot of heads nodding in agreement. Nobody is going to ask for proof, since you're telling them what they came to hear.
This site is rabidly anti-Microsoft/pro-Apple. Not many people ask for evidence when one makes a statement that's pro-Apple. However, when one makes a pro-Microsoft statement, the clueless yet opinionated people jump on the person, asking for supporting evidence to justify the statements made against their beloved platform. They don't really want proof, for their opinion is already made. What they're really doing is simply complaining that a statement was made that they don't agree with.
I've been in computers for 20 years and Apple didn't play much role in my learning. My original computer was a Commodore 64, and I moved on to a 10 mhz PC. I used the original Macs with the small B&W screen but I didn't like them. The user interface turned me off. I've tried subsequent Macs and the same thing that turned me off about the original Macs turn me off now. I also find Mac enthusiasts to be filled with too much zeal. They seem willing to throw away logic in favor of raw emotion- not the kind of people I like to be associated with.
No, I do not "love" Microsoft, but I certainly don't like Apple, and it's not due to inexperience. I don't understand the enthusiasm and I think much of the userbase on Slashdot is a bit misguided.
A timely case in point is how it broke into and gained dominance in the web browser market: it is a fact well documented in court records that this was purely because of being able to leverage it's desktop monopoly into control of the newly established web browser market. Yeah, both MSIE and Netscape sucked, but MSIE wouldn't have gone anywhere without the desktop monopoly and, oh yeah, ripping code from Mosaic.
Then there has been the strong arm tactics it has used, and still uses, with OEMs and partners. BeOS fell to that one. It won the right to distribution, but MS ensured that even when it came on OEM machines, it was not in the boot loader.
There has been sabotage. The AARD code against DR-DOS was one, but broken implementations of HTTP, TCP/IP and Kerberos make problems, too.
There have been smear campaigns spreading misinformation about competitors and their products (esp. Novel Netware) MS has also used its partner the BSA to raid businesses using competing products and negotiate contracts with an MS-only infrastructure in their place. There have been forged video evidence in US courts, but no charges of perjury. There were cases where the executives either perjured themselves or committed treason, no middle ground: they did this by swearing in court that their products were so shoddy that national security would be threatened by releasing the source code, yet they turned around and showed the source code to China.
Currently, there are problems with MS trying to use the WMA and WMP formats to break into the audio and video market. The EU has found them guilty of illegal, anti-competitive behaviour, but has been waffling on actually enforcing any punishment.
Currently, the licenses for 2000 SP3, XP SP 2 and later even give MS administrative rights to the machine. That's a back door by another name.
The list of ethical / legal problems could go on for pages. Why is Slashdot suddenly pushing so much stuff from MS apologists? How about more article about companies with a future, like Opera, Apple, IBM, etc. Or tools like OpenOffice, or codecs like Vorbis, Dirac, or Theora, which anyone could use. Shoot, such a big deal was made about Greasemonkey having some minor flaws, yet nothing has been said about greasemonkey being patched. How about an article on that and a moratorium on doing marketing for MS?
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
"Given most comments on Slashdot, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft."
Shouldn't that be "...anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers who lives in their Mom's basement and posts on Slashdot all day hates Microsoft"?
Grown-ups don't bother hating companies or the tools they provide. We use whichever tools we find useful - some of which may actually be Microsoft products.
Bill Gates was a good coder, as were many of the early Microsoft coders. Look at analysis of Altair BASIC and see how they used all kinds of optimisation tricks to get as much as possible into the limited RAM of the Altair.
l _gates_write_code/
This is why Microsoft became a bit of an expert on BASIC. Of course as soon as they expanded the software declined in quality and the cheese factor increased.
Can't find the original analysis, but there's an article here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/05/15/could_bil
...single person I know in meatspace has gotten royally hosed running windows, usually several times. And I don't mean total losers, people who HAD running firewalls and AV. People who had made an attempt to "check the oil and tire pressure before leaving on a trip". I know several people who just gave up and bought new computers because their old ones were "broken". they weren't physically broken, just windows hosed. Did any of them ever get any satisfaction from the corporation that sold them that buggy insecure stuff, the expensive crap with NO WARRANTY? NO. They had to pay and repay to try and keep it fixed, and they never got any satisfaction for the sheer annoyance of getting hosed. Oh ya, it's REAL FUN to tear down your setup and drag it to the fixit shop, or hire someone to come over and fix it, or bug a friend or relative. And what do they see at 99% of the computer stores on the shelf if they want to "shop around"?? More WINDOWS, there hasn't been any real market competition in Joe sixpack retail user space because no one stocks it with the exception of the token Mac here and there for most of the last decade.
MS has COST the computing public a decade of lost productivity and billions of dollars. MS should have had it's incorporation charter yanked years ago. They are a truly a bogus disgusting company. but..oddly enough, their hardware is OK. Keyboards, etc. Maybe they should just switch from being a software company.
to love Microsoft if your under 18. Although with a name like Microsoft, it's not likely to impress the ladies. Humungobangbang might have been a better choice.
This article was not only poorly written, but it is obvious that it was written by someone who hasn't even used Linux or Mac OS extensively. A microsoft fanboy is just as bad as a Mac fanboy or a Linux fanboy.
Microsoft has done some things well. For instance, when you buy a copy of Windows XP it is expected that you can install that software, regardless of hardware, it will work. Windows is expected to work with every possible configuration. Apple has the benefit of choosing their hardware. This is the same reason you rarely see games crash on consoles.
Obviously, software that crashes isn't really good software, but I still think people should give credit where credit is due for the things Microsoft did right.
That being said, this article sucks. The author uses outdated statistics and spends the whole time arguing that Microsoft is without sin. This requires him to rationalize every Microsoft screw up. There are a lot of things that become sacred cows, but Microsoft is a new one on me.
My Company - Red Cedar Technology
Go figure.
--- SER
> No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered.
What planet did THIS person come from?
Go play with your network settings in XP. When you finally get back, (assuming you don't get TOTALLY lost) try to say that again with a straight face.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
All I can say is that Microsoft's products--in doing what they thought was needed to help more people use computes--did nothing but dumb down the general population until they were total morons. They don't even need Apple's one-button mouse. The new MS users need the zero-button mouse!
I was on a the phone with a guy in Dell's support group yesterday, trying to diagnose a D600 laptop's refusal to identify the AC adapter type. The laptop would noticably get power when plugged in b/c the screen got a bit brighter. However, right there on one of their BIOS pages it says "AC adapter: not detected" and the batteries are in a "discharging" or "idle" state. While plugged in, the laptop doesn't use battery power, but doesn't charge either.
Dell's response was for me to boot into Windows and check the power options tab to see if it said it was charging there. I even unpluged the adapter and re-inserted it and Dell's own Windows tools popped up a dialog saying "adapater not detected...laptop will not charge." This support tech then said that the only thing left to try was re-installing the OS.
After laughing a bit, I had to ask him if he seriously thought the operating system had a damn thing to do with a hardware failure that was noted by the BIOS before the OS was even booted? Jeez....
huh? no company cant afford to give up it's installed base. Indeed the smaller the market share the harder it's gong to be to do so. They'd lose users and income faster thatn they gained new ones.
that's totally illogical.
It's not wrong to love an abusive spouse but that doesn't mean you shouldn't leave them for beating you up.
Amongst programmers there is a lot of pressure to talk shit about MS. Having used both Java and MS for about 10 years now I can say without doubt that MS makes it easier for people to write good programs (that only run on Windows). That's probably why they won the OS war in the first place...with their only competitor at the time, Apple, you'd have to fork over $1000 just to get a command line. So you gotta give MS some credit...what good is an operating system when there is a dearth of available compelling software? I don't like MS because they charge so much money for their software. But there are some reasons to like MS.
The article is a troll. I don't know who the author is, but he doesn't write very well.
Personally, I agree with his sentiments that Microsoft does not deserve to be reviled by the developer community; but throwing around insults to everybody who has taken a bite out of Microsoft (Sun, the EU) doesn't contribute to reasoned debate.
Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
I love my Mac Powerbook, but I also love my 5-button Bluetooth mouse by Microsoft, along with Office 2004 for the Mac. I'm I allowed to live?
"Me fail English? That's unpossible." - Ralph
"most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!"
If this guy thinks droves of Linux developers are also Windows virus writers, he's a bit off target. I can honestly say that:
a) I develop Linux kernel code at night, not viruses
b) I don't know how to code for Windows
c) I don't have a Windows box to test on
d) I don't have time to muck about with viruses
I suspect this applies to lots of Linux developers. I don't mind Windows as a system, I just have an utter lack of interest in working on it. And I'd much rather build something useful than something destructive to other people.
"Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touches."
This guy is drinking some crazy kool-aid if he thinks Microsoft created the market for Personal Computers.
The Restraining order was lifted weeks ago.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
It's the GUI that America Online first used for their DOS client (ever heard of AOL?), and it was one of the most easy-to-use GUIs ever made for the PC platform.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
ITS FREE YOU FUCKIN JERK
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
It's not the victors who write history, but their fanboys.
I love Microsoft, because their Critical Security Patches generate an almost six-figure income for me!
Fun aside, I have been working with computers since the early 80s and I like it all! Where would we be without Microsoft -or- Apple? Competition generates innovation.
And, yes, Linux and Open Source is overrated. Most Open Source projects are crippled with horrible bugs anyway - I prefer to buy my software, so I can yell at least at a poor customer service rep and don't have to feel guilty to curse at a poor programmer who has dedicated so much spare time to generate shitty code.
As with Linux: No, I haven't found any Cubase clone or even Photoshop clone (although gimp is good, but not THAT good) for Linux - as long as I don't have that, I am not interested and consider it a server OS or for the interested to get a better look under the hood of an OS.
It's wrong to love a company. No one should suck corporate cock.
It's a piss-poor article that even a happy user of Windows like myself would hate.
Can we update slashcode so that we can rate an article? I'd love to mod this article +5 Funny.
Thanks.
Why does everyone seem to be so down on the communists? They were remarcably efficient at what they did, gave us a lot of scientific research we will never duplicate, spured on the world in the development of many new technologies both that they invented and we invented to counter them. Sure, they had some problems, but all around they weren't all bad....
"I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!"
I can accept that the author of this article believes that Windows is better than Linux at some things. I can't, however, begin to fathom how a comment like that could come out.
One could argue that the Windows GUI is better looking and/or more user friendly. I'll even let you argue ease of installation. But I know of nobody that isn't either funded by Microsoft or an employee of Microsoft that would argue that Windows has better network code and/or that Windows is better for application severs, such as a database or web server.
That sentence alone begs the question, "Has this person even used Linux a day in his life?" If the answer to that question is yes, I believe it's safe to assume that he is either extremely under educated or this entire article is likely another biased article to inflect FUD into the business world.
My lame blog.
And both implemented them before Microsoft did.
Both were also DOS compatible, so legacy software concerns had nothing to do with it.
Microsoft was just slow. It was more profitable that way.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Most people look at me strangely when I use edit, but it's still one of the simplest and easiest to use text editors out there. It's like vi, but without all the weird key commands. (Ok, it's not as versatile, but it works for most simple tasks.)
Notepad, by comparison, is awful for anything other than grocery lists, and WordPad -- lets just forget it exists. (Edlin is roughly as awkward as vi, and nowhere near as useful).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
To give you a little perspective, I have a WindowsXP desktop dual booted with Fedora Core 4 Linux, Windows XP Professional laptop, and Mac Powerbook at home and so have sufficient experience with all of them. >>"Is it wrong to love Microsoft?" First of all, the short answer is- no, it isn't wrong. >>"The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!" I am curious what your experience with Linux is. I agree that Linux is not for everyone, but for a developer, researcher, network manager or someone looking to build their own systems there is nothing like it. Considering the fact that you have the source to do what you choose with makes it a tremendous platform. People have ported it to the Xbox, powerpcs, palms, ipods and all kinds of other antique devices and it still works the same. There is even a version (called busybox) that is under 1Mb and can be carried on a floppy. It is this flexibility and extensibility that people love. >>"It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort." Not really. >>"I understand the criticisms about the security of the software, the critical flaws and what not but again, we must look at things in the proper perspective. More than 95 pecent computers in the world use one form of Windows OS or another. The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world? It doesn't, therefore you don't have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!" What you say is true- but you require some perspective as well. There are some basic security decisions that Windows has made that people disagree with, the most important of which is that every user and process my default runs as an administrator. For the average, home user this is dangerous. Otherwise, your point on security is valid. >>"Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job." Hmm... I wonder why everyone who knows programming wants to his Windows with a virus? Is it because people who program prefer other platforms? >>"XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it." I agree- it is one of the strengths of Windows. But can you install Windows on a powerpc, or a Sparcs, or an Xbox or ANY other hardware of your choice? You can with Linux, though not as easily. I'm just demonstrating why people like other OSes. >>"In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out." >>Ummm, have you actually used Linux lately? I suggest you try out a user friendly version like Fedora Core and then rewrite your column. >>"This reminds me of the bundled issues with the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it." Some, but not all, of the lawsuits are justified. Microsoft has been anti-competitive. Not many people dispute that- not even Microsoft, they settled in a lot of cases and agreed to future improvements in their behavior. >>"Microsoft made some products which it would like to ship together with its OS, no where in the EULA does it say that "you are not authorized to install other software" If Mr. John Doe thinks media player is the worst piece
It's not wrong to love Microsoft, it just shows very, very, poor taste. That's all.
Scores of users who readily accept that things don't work very well, and that computers are generally irritating.
... Oh My!
Viruses, zombies, and worms
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
"Don't hate the playah baby, hate the game"
MjM
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!
This guy is a real asshat. I sit at night writing up non-malicious code that will hopefully make Linux a (more) superior product to microsoft offerings. I'm not sure how this article even got posted, this guy doesn't sound like very credible individual, nor does he sound very intelligent. To overlook the individual strong points of both windows and linux and mac, and to say something to the effect of "linux is dumb and stupid cuz its dumb, and mac is too much munee" is not only subjective and total bs, but makes this guy look like a punchy jack-ass. I like certain aspects of windows, I love the macOS ui, but I use linux on my desktop (for various reasons, mainly development). I would really like if this guy would post again with 1 iota of support for these silly arguments. and also, his comment about windows bringing the PC to the mainstream..yadda yadda... what about MAC?! the Apple I/II/IIE i remember being pretty much the first guy on the scene, as far as the personal computer goes. Mac (to me at least) put computers in our homes and offices and schools. This guy is a moron.
sigSEGV - doy!
Being a longtime PC freak and MCSE, the thing that irritates me most about Microsoft is thier blatant attempt to dumb down the software in an attempt to avoid turning another generation of young people into software novices.
After all the Commodores and Ataris went away most of us gravitated towards the 286's and 386's. In the early days of Windows you could manipulate the hell out of DOS before Windows started loading. Back then you needed to use the command line to insert certain programs into different sections of memory in order for them to work correctly or at all. You had to do this as a regular end user if you wanted to run the latest software or games. The instruction manuals for even the lamest games had you doing this command line stuff. After a while the command line functions became more interesting than the games or software. This lead to hundreds of thousand of PC Novices many who became experts. Many of the Open Source Pioneers fall into this catagory.
Then came Windows 95, Windows 98.. and so on. Each with less and less DOS commands. Then 2000 Pro and XP. Now thier is no need for command line functions. No teenagers at home learning about the command line. Here we have a documented calculated agenda by Microsoft to market an OS that can't be manipulated much by anyone, creating generations of PC illiterates who dont know the different between RAM and hard drive space. Make no mistake about it. This was a calculated deicision by Microsoft executives in the mid 90's.
Who are they to decide the level of PC expertise of our society in the name of a better bottom line.
BeOS is effectively dead. OS/2 is being EOL'd in 2006. Linux and BSD are community-created software which came from outside the marketplace. Sun's x86 offering is a curiosity at best.
MacOSX requires hardware blessed by Apple, so it still doesn't directly compete.
What's left?
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Yeah, there are always guys who prefer to pay for love and for whom the most important thing is that the object of their love is easy ... and the fact that this easy object has many bugs and viruses does not bother them ...
....
...
I prefer true love - not for money. And object of my love is not easy! I have to learn it! But I am quite sure it is free from a lot of bugs and viruses
But I accept if someone preferes love for money
This is one of the worst articles I have ever seen on slashdot. It had no fact supporting its claims. The claims are all opinion based, the author is obviously biased to other OS's. I wonder if he has even ever used a windows computer, let alone any other operating system. Please keep you opinions of the OS's to yourself until you know the facts and understand the arguments.
Microsoft does do one thing correct - games. I'm sure there are some stinkers, but for the most part, MS gives their developers the time and resources to put out top-quality games.
For that, I am grateful to them.
Many years ago, there was no such thing as chemistry, because it was all a big secret called alchemy, alchemy was closed source chemistry. The point being is, if anyone wanted to do basic research into the fundamental nature of matter, they had to reinvent the wheel, they could not build on the discoveries made by others. Even Issac Newton was very secretive about his research into Alchemy.
It is very ironic that B Gates by holding to the principle that computer science is a modern version of alchemy, managed to turn base metal into virtual gold and in so doing became the richest man on the planet.
Imagine how good our operating systems would be now, if source code was open from the beginning, published and peer reviewed just like any other science.
Mr Gates you held back computer science and for this I do not admire you.
It's called an elephant's trunk whereas it is in fact, an elephant's nose, a nose by any other name would smell as sweet
For reasons already covered to death in other comments, the article is clearly written by either an idiot, a Microsoft shill, or both.
One of my pet peeves is people referring to Apple as "MAC". This is wrong for two reasons.
1) Apple is the company. Macs are the computers they make.
2) "Mac" is the short form of "Macintosh". "MAC" is an acronym for "Media Access Control", and refers to the unique identifier on NICs.
[/soapbox]
-Cybrex
Boundless Expansion, Self-Transformation, Dynamic Optimism, Intelligent Technology, Spontaneous Order- BEST DO IT SO!
"XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out."
When was the last time he used linux????
Obviously never heard or kernel modules....
This is what I hate about linux bashers, they bash an operating system they know nothing about.
- Sig
I think a more accurate observation is Microsoft should be praised for their level they have achieved given the fact they have to support everything under the sun. Varun's good experiences with Windows is shared by many people but at the same time also not by many people. Unfortunately many people often experience quite the opposite of Varun.
Given that Microsoft makes the most widely used desktop OS and that many people have the opposite experience of Varun, it's logical and factual to state that Microsoft has the dubious distinction of having the user base with the highest number of dissatisfied users in the world. So when MS luddites state the main reason there are more virii for Windows than Mac OS is because the shear number of the Windows installed base, it's fair to state they also have the greatest number of failed and dissatisfied users in the world.
This is in huge contrast to MacOS. It's feature rich, stable, secure, integrated and very elegant. Where Apple has a real advantage over Microsoft is that Apple sells the hardware its OS runs on. Apple knows exactly what hardware to support. I used to administer and use Hewlett Packard RISC workstations running HP-UX. It was a time I will never forget. To those of you have never experienced using certified hardware, suffice it to say life is easier and the sun always shines on you. Your biggest concerns are when to mow the lawn and if your mobile phone has a good charge. This is a glimpse into a typical Mac fan's experience.
As for the statement about Apple not being a big enough target for virus writers, I think it's totally off base. Apple is the holy grail of desktop OS's and to topple its status as untouchable is too great to ignore. I've heard many talk about bringing MacOS to its knees but few have succeeded. If you don't believe me then check into the permission structure of MacOS 10. Without an admin password it is very difficult compromise. Even when a user has admin priveledges there is still a password required to make system changes. Admin authentication is required to touch ANYTHING above a home directory. About the only level of destruction that can be achieved is within a user's home directory. Of course there is the chance the admin password is something easily guessed.
As for Linux I must say I agree a bit with Varun. I consider BSD superior in most areas to Linux and wonder why the enterprise is gravitating towards Linux. I predict the reasons that are compelling companies to move to Linux from Windows will be the reasons that companies move to BSD from Linux. Since I've used/administered HP-UX I am probably a little biased towards BSD. HP-UX was one of top dogs when Windows was still in its infancy. Windows has yet to attain the credentials that HP-UX, AIX, IRIX and Solaris have garnered.
When XP SP4 arives, oops I mean Vista, it will be more of the same from Microsoft. MS fans will blindly laud the release while the rest of us will yawn at what is a substandard OS to us. While Apple does borrow, once in a while, from Microsoft, Microsoft borrows from Apple by a factor of at least 10 or more. If Windows fans want to see more features from Microsoft in the future then they better count on Microsoft to continue their tradition of copying the MacOS.
Nuf said for now.
Installation could be a pain, but preinstallations would have rendered that moot.
OS/2 2.0's GUI in 1992 (the WorkPlace Shell) was far closer to Win95's GUI than anything else, and folks seen to have adopted that GUI just fine even though it uses two mouse buttons.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
A lot of people talk about "ease of use" when it comes to Windows. From your average user's point of view, perhaps windows is easy to use in that it doesn't take much brain power to install an application from a CD and then run it by double-clicking an icon the desktop. But ease of use comes to a halt quickly when you try to do anything much more advanced than that.
Example: Yesterday, I was charged with installing printer drivers on Windows XP for a network-connected printer. This should really be child's play, but even the latest and greatest Microsoft printing system turned the whole experience a long, drawn-out nightmare. I'd get the drivers installed and the port configured, but when I tried to print a test page, Windows would only say that there was an error printing. That's it. No offer to explain the details, no log messages to examine, nothing. Just "Sorry pal, the whole thing just doesn't work. Please try again." By the end of it, I was pining for CUPS. It ended up being a 3-hour job.
This is generally typical of my Windows experiences. I'm very thankful that most of my work is Linux/BSD administration. Even though the software can still be buggy and/or difficult to understand sometimes, at least you know *why* things fail and can google for leads to a solution.
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
Sure,Windows was NOT prettier than any Linux AND then it cost both your arms and legs.
This article is long on emotion and short on hard facts. The author states his opinions in strong terms, but doesn't provide facts to back them up. As a result, it is just a waste of time.
An infinite number of monkeys used an infinite number of typewriters...and this is exactly the kind of article they would produce.
-Barkeep, a draft of your most hazardous brew, for the world is slowly stepping into focus, and I don't like what I see.
Here is a note I sent to the editor over at Cool Tech Zone. Slashdot I see back to linking the usual crap :)
Gundeep,
I would like to make some comments regarding Varun's recent article titled "Is it wrong to love Windows". This column was full of wild statements and accusations but lacked any serious substance or evidance to backup the statements. Reading the article, Varun comes across as an individual who failed to research the material before commenting on it. As the editor of Cool Tech Zone, you should feel ashamed for not doing a better job in editing the content before releasing it to the public, in fact Varun's comments regarding Sun Microsystems at the end of article are what I would consider borderline slander / defamation, and I would consider yourselves lucky if Sun Microsystems doesn't take legal action against you. I have taken a few minutes to break down Varun's article, in the hopes that he will learn from his mistakes.
Varun's first comment about Linux being overrated and existing out of spite, is complete nonsense. Linux, as with other open source software, exists to provide a choice. If you look at the history of Linux, and why Linus wrote the Linux kernel, it has nothing to do with Microsoft. In fact I'd be pretty confident in saying that Windows is the last thing on the minds of Linux kernel developers. Most Linux kernel developers are pretty cool guys, professionals, and extremely intelligent. Linux is far from overrated, one of the key reasons Linux is so successful is not because its an alternative to Windows, BSD has been around of years offering that, and didn't have the impact Linux has had. Linux simply better in server environments that Windows? Why? Linux has enterprise grade features that Windows simply doesn't have, if you take the time to look through some of the networking features that are in Linux, and you come from a server background, these are things you want in a server. The reason Windows failed in server environments is that Windows is flawed in design when it comes to security, this is not the fault of the engineers, more of a legacy thing with Windows NT 3.x, trying to keep application compatibility with previous version of Windows. The other key reason Windows failed in server environments, is the GUI. You don't need a GUI to manage servers, if you are a "skillful" administrator, the GUI is a liability not an asset. Most enterprises utilize SNMP to manage servers, while Windows does support SNMP, you have a HUGE overhead on the system due to the GUI. Linux doesn't need the GUI, in fact the only people I know who install the GUI on servers are people who don't know Linux very well. On the same hardware, Linux will outperform Windows time and time again, not only because of security, but because Linux doesn't have the overhead of the GUI, and its not something you can turn off in Windows. This is one of the core reasons Linux picked up steam in the server environments, and left Windows behind. Then features such as 802.1q and FEC, and just the sheer networking performance and advanced features in Linux is something Windows cannot compete with. To say Linux isn't good at anything and is overrated is pure nonsense.
The next comment you made was that MacOS (I assume you mean MacOS X, because MacOS is definately not pretty) is expensive. MacOS X is $169, about the same price as Windows XP Professional, and MacOS X ships with excellent applications such as iPhoto, Garage Band, iMovie HD, iDVD and much more. MacOS X is also a lot smoother and faster, and is production 64-bit.
The statements you made regarding malicious code and viruses is so off the wall, that I can only conclude you were doing some kind of illegal substance while you wrote the article. The people who write malicious code and viruses typically do not have any kind of OS agenda, they typically fall into two catagories, misguided young/talented programmers, and misguided programmers from poorer countries. People who write malicious code are curious and then do somethi
In 1983-84 the list price for an IBM XT was $7,495. The initial price of the first Macintosh was $2,499.
The IBM AT which was also released in 1984 retailed at $4,000.
The Mac 512 was then released for something over $3000 but with twice the memory of the AT. The Mac Plus was later released back at the $2500 price point.
Even in 1987 the high end macs continued to be a deal compared to other name brand PC's. To quote Dan Knight:
You can read the rest of his article about the Mac-PC price relation at LowEndMac As far as I can tell, Microsoft had absolutely NOTHING to do with the eventual affordability of PC clones. The price dumping was due entirely to IBM's failure to patent their architecture, thus allowing anyone and their dog to carve out their own share of IBM's retail profit margin.
Are you kidding?
Survey the thousands upon thousands of citizens of India who either lost loved ones or are still living with the aftermath of Bhopal about what they think of Union Carbide.
Survey the thousands of people whose retirement was wiped out by the burnouts of Enron about how their medical bills may drive them into poverty.
Survey environmentalists around the planet about what they think of the parent company of the Exxon Valdez (and countless LARGER accidents" and the damage done to the environment.
The most hated? Maybe the company most expected to abuse their leadership position in the industry, but the most hated?
Maybe by many vocal slashdotters, but Microsoft doesn't hold a candle to how other companies have (intentionally or not) caused millions of people around the world to associate hate with a corporate entity.
Microsoft has done many baaaad things. But when it comes to causing environmental damage, wiping out people's savings, or just plain killing innocent people, they are just plain amateurs.
methinks thou just wants another reason to trash them
Live Long and Prosper - Thanks Leonard. You are missed.
Given most comments on Slashdot, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft.
Given most comments on IslamicJihad.com, it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of religion hates Americans.
I wish we could mod articles down... what an idiot.
I fail to see how comparing Microsoft (a company) to genocide (an action) is relevant or funny.
I don't respond to AC's.
1) An out. An excuse for any given software company's lack of success in the market. "That poor little company would have succeeded if it weren't for big, bad Microsoft, never mind the comparably poor quality of its products."
2) Amusing anecdotal evidence for the perceived comparative quality of a software product. "Boy this Linux sure owns my Windows 95 machine, which blue screens all the time! Too bad Windows XP is based on DOS LOL!!!"
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
What they were exceedingly good at is signing a contract with IBM that said all PCs would have their operating system on it. As the PC marketplace grew, it gave them a pretty much locked in revenue stream.
I would take issue with this statement; when the PC first came out there were three operating systems available for it (PC/MS-DOS, CPM-86 and UCSD). IBM wanted the marketplace to decide which was the best one. Microsoft did not have any kind of leg up with the other two competitors initially, all three were established software vendors.
Microsoft very quickly established itself as the most popular OS for the PC (I will refrain from saying "best") and went on from there.
myke
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Oh man, what a great day to start my weekend. I was going to go see Wedding Crashers at the theater, but I think I've already had enough laughs to last a few days.
There's nothing critical, insightful, or useful in this piece of pure opinion, divorced from the facts.
My favorite line:
t has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Although it's *possible* to set up Linux to boot you directly into a browser kiosk mode as root with no consoles and no extra confusing 'windows' or 'shortcuts', and all ports wide-open for your conveninece--until a Linux distro comes along to do just that, (hmm, "Open Root Linux" has a ring to it) Windows will win on the "ease of use" front. Hey, if spyware, trojans, worms and viruses are to be synonymous with "ease of use", they can have it, I'll happily surf along on my 'uneasy to use' secure desktop, blissfully unaware of their pain and suffering over on the dark side...
The cost of the OS's themselves have always been very close to the same for MAC and PC. So it is ridiculous to compare the cost of hardware. I personally have always paid top dollar for my PC hardware, and when someone does that the prices are comparable to Mac's. Now if you want to go get the latest deal at one of the PC retailers you will pay a lot less, but you aren't buying top of the line hardware and your system performance will reflect that. I use both OS's, and Mac is 'worthy.' They released the OS that microsoft has been promising for two years and isn't planning on delivering for two more. Hell I used to have to use my PC to get the features that my Mac lacked, now I am finding myself turning to my Mac for the features my fully updated Windows XP Pro installation lacks. In fact, the only time I use my PC these days is to play video games. Microsoft is falling behind, and a company with their market power shouldn't be playing catchup. I am hoping that in Dec 2006 when they release Vista they haven't missed all the new advancements that will happen between now and then. Otherwise they will just continue to be two years behind.
-Moduz
Did Amiga have easy to use wifi? No? Did Amiga have a media player, instant messaging program, or web server built in? Did it have 3D graphics?
If it still existed today, you *bet* it would have all of those things. The Amiga's core strength was multimedia -- the Video Toaster beat EVERYTHING that the PC had to offer in its day.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
The real question is whether it is a venal or mortal sin to love Microsoft. Am seeking to retain Constantine on this point.
Free Adam Smith! (Or best offer.)
Is it wrong to love Windows?
( ) Yes
( ) Hell Yes
( ) F*** Yes
( ) My Windows XP box works just fine, what's wrong with you people?
( ) Linux rools, Windows droolz!
( ) I (heart) CowboyNeal
I am so smart!
I am so smart!
S-M-R-T!
I mean S-M-A-R-T!
No one loves windows. I own windowsforever.com and the traffic on it is damn slow comparing to linuxforever.com.
The most informative and or insightful thing I'll see today.
IBM's entire culture underwent a change because of the DOJ, and Microsoft owes part of its existence to the fact that IBM was limited in what it could do to make the PC an IBM-only product.
Microsoft, on the other hand, hasn't had to change a thing. If anything, their abuses are more brazen now then they were in the Netscape days.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Microsoft doesn't really give away anything*. It sells us Windows or we steal Windows, but on the whole, MS takes our money in exchange for copies and liscenses of and for its software.
We all know where to look to find something that's free.
* If you'd like to claim that MS gives away Internet Explorer, WMP, Word Viewer, countless open standards, etc., then you should also take notice that these great majority of the PCs in use today were sold subject to the "Microsoft tax." The manufacturers of these machines paid Microsoft OS liscensing fees even on machines they sold that did not include Windows installed on them.
Is this guy on crack? Not to sound like a troll, but seriously consider the possibilities of heavy narcotics in this man's possession. He has some valid points, but seems to generalize against all things non-windows, and even points out that the major competition for WMP don't offer free full versions. I respond to that by saying that they don't have the software giants' backing to do that, and therefore cannot afford to offer a full version for free. Also, he seems to think anyone with coding knowledge wants to whack windows with a virus, and that just isn't true. I'm a programmer in ASP, Java, any form of BASIC you want and myriad scripting languages. I use XP pro, and that's because I'm too dense to figure out Linux, no matter how hard I try. I can use DSL from my pendrive, but that's about it. From his logic, I want to destroy my computer. Not so. Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox now, to avoid the karma hits. It was just a first reaction to his open letter.
#include <disclaimer.h>
#include <beer.h>
if you are a nerd -- even if you are a Linux/Unix nerd -- you probably owe your livlihood to Microsoft. Not that there's anything wrong with criticizing them when they invite it, and they certainly invite it from time to time. But the rational mind should be well-balanced enough to give them their due.
How was 'plug and play' (or other Microsoft projects) a 'pioneering effort'? Macs worked that way since they supported add-in cards!
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
In Soviet Russia, Microsoft loves YOU!
I've seen sites with extremely solid, fast, affordable infrastructures built on MS products. The key is they have top notch staffs that know how to exploit the technology and make it work. Sites without those skills generally have problems. The same can be said of any vendors technologies. Skilled engineers make the difference.
... if you've not been exposed to anything else.
After having seen the paradigms that drive the development of Mac and Linux, Microsoft's poor engineering and duplicitous business tactics become indefensible.
I'm not even willing to say that Linux or Mac is the best OS evar. Clearly there is ample room for improvement. But they *are* tolerable where Windows is not, if you're not the sort of person who has seen only Windows and so thinks "computers crash all the time".
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
With Windows being the only option when buying a new PC from most vendors, and with Microsoft requiring key ISVs to only develop for Windows in order to obtain the latest and greatest developer information, Microsoft didn't have to do that much marketing to the end user.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Its relevant because this is a discussion of Microsoft. As far as humor goes...your sense of it is clearly broken. Study up so that you can emulate it.
Here you go.
Read the part about "hyperbole."
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
I give Microsoft credit for some of their marketing efforts even though they went too far and used underhanded tactics to become a monolopy. (If you can require the computer manufacturer to install the latest version, you can convince the consumer that they are using old, inferior products and to buy newer.)
I firmly believe that if Microsoft had not managed to force other companies out of the market with their tactics, that the windows concept and variety of useful products, including security, would have happened many years earlier.
Microsoft products are useful, but I would never say I love Microsoft because they have done so many good things for us.
Before Microsoft started their window program, there were already programs that had started to allow their spread sheets, word processors and data bases to use each other's data. A used a program called SMART that was based on the BASIC language. Quarterdeck started their windows system about the same time as Microsoft, but I believe both followed from the work that APPLE had already started. Without quarterdeck's memory manager, QEMM, windows would have had more problems. Even Radio Shack's Color Computer had third part software that allowed common data for spread sheets and word processors.
The Window's concept was inevitable. The only credit I give to Microsoft is for recognizing the importance of shared data and capitalizing on it.
Pushing the romance analogy, I tried to love Microsoft but they never came up with a 32-bit clean version of QuickBASIC. I tried to make things up, but then they dropped QuickBASIC entirely for VB!
Do i really care for someone who can't notice the diffrence between Mac and MAC?
The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent...
Also another point:
The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
The guy obviously loves GUI, and his WindowBlinds themes... fine Linux desktop enviroments are not up to play with the big boys yet, no reason to dismiss a whole OS on a few faults when your never going to come into contact with the real power. Its like saying AS/400 is crap at running games... therefore its crap full stop.
"What do you mean you have no ice? Do you expect me to drink this coffee hot?" - Random Customer, Clerks
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I think it's great how people are so trusting of all the non-MS companies to think that if they were in the same situation Microsoft is, they wouldn't do the exact same thing.
That does not make it right though. And certainly not something to love them for.
On another note, WTF, LOVE a corporation? Are you people NUTS?
Lotus SmartSuite is still around and includes Lotus WordPro (a rebranded AmiPro) and Lotus 123.
:-)
I know a couple of people who still use WordPerfect, and only one of them is a lawyer.
Office has capable competitors -- it just isn't a competitive marketplace anymore.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
A quick whois.sc check shows this site which seems to be the most part about Microsoft products is hosted using the Apache server, with FrontPage extensions enabled. Why not IIS? Isn't open source software "crap"
Server Type:Apache/1.3.33 (Unix) mod_auth_passthrough/1.8 mod_log_bytes/1.2 mod_bwlimited/1.4 PHP/4.3.10 FrontPage/5.0.2.2635 mod_ssl/2.8.22 OpenSSL/0.9.7a
Install, Then Run
Is this a pity party for freakin MS?
Now, I've defended them, and got attacked by apple fans - and people with dictionaries - once before on this site, but come on.
MS has done some good things, and if they weren't so freakin power hungry, we'd probably be much more greatful, but their entire embrace and extend and then control mentality is why they are the great evil.
even though everyone loves a winner, nobody likes a bully.
So for now (at least while do no harm holds true), I love the fact that really smart people have a choice between google and Ms when it comes to employment. ROCK ON Amanda! And the rest of us have a choice when it comes to operating systems that you can use without becoming a level 74 dungeon master first.
because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
There is nothing illegal about making no sense.
Say for instance you suggest that Microsoft has "a unique product that no one else has ever developed before" by your second paragraph. How can you suggest that when there were at least 4 or 5 virtually identical (and popular) products on the market when Windows was first introduced?
Making no sense on teh internets is not hard. For everything else there's Mastercraft
This is nothing more than a classic case of viral marketing and Microsoft FUD. I guarantee that you will see more and more of this crap as Vista gets nearer to release. I have now completely lost the little remaining respect I had for slashdot. There is no way that Zonk thought this article was informative or interesting. The author says that Linux is not "terribly good at doing something because it is not!" This kid has obviously never stepped into a data center - never mind worked in one. Just about every other fact is wrong as well . The whole article is nothing more than a pre-pubesant rant and the fact that is on /.s home page, shows just how far this site has sunk.
I've had it with /. and its brain dead moderators.
I'm signing out for the last time and heading to greener pastures - digg.com where at least I have a say what makes the home page.
From TFA:
This reminds me of the bundled issues with the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it. It's just sad, unfair and uncompetitive. Basically what the stupid courts in Europe said was, hey, you're doing a great job, and you must pay for it! This coming from a bunch of people who couldn't even agree on a constitution!
Because we all know that constitutions are such trivial documents...
Hey Europe! My dad can beat up your dad! Also, I don't know grammar.
The really sad thing with Microsoft and Windows is that Linux and other FOSS projects like Samba revealed problems by implementing communication in a valid, if different than Microsoft's expectations. I remember a few TechNet articles where a vulnrability's exploitability or fesiabilty of said exploit relied on a "Samba" machine who apparently intentionally did things wrong to break Windows' otherwise solid networking.
Microsoft's attitude to exception handling and piss-poor adherence to even their own closed, and often backwards standards are things I find funny to this day.
I also remember the early versions of Winsock 2.0 that had a habit of opening multiple connections for every connect() call actually run by a program. I loathed the eventual call from someone that I "flooded" their server and I was an evil hacker while such threats were pretty much empty and idiots jumped at every blocked connection attempt notice in their "firewall" logs.
Windows NT had a friendly habit of wanting to establish a NetBIOS session with every client that connected with a networked service (such as IIS). So people browsing a public site would have connection attempts from that site (assuming the managing admin didn't know better to filter those outgoing requests out) on ports that were starting to be known for security problems. I had to address more than 50 calls during my company's site tenure on Windows NT because of that "feature".
I think I hate Microsoft for being Microsoft. The crappy software and poor practices are just a symptom of them being who they are.
First, I develop on Linux and I use Linux mainly, although I have a computer at home for the family running Windows.
...but it doesn't mean Microsoft was wrong...
Maybe you're not just spouting off lies and exaggerations, but list just one time you can say without a doubt that Microsoft "stole" something. They may have "strong-armed" OEMs not to include Netscape and WordPerfect, but, at the time at least, they were both inferior. I don't completely discount their argument that if a user sees something sitting on the Windows desktop on a brand new machine that they associate it with being part of Windows. Why should they have to endorse whatever OEM's say?
I downloaded both Netscape 4.0 and Internet Explorer 4.0 and Netscape 4.0 really sucked...I still think WordPerfect is inferior.
Anyway, stop getting pissy. Microsoft might not have cuddled up to the other software companies, but there's no reason they should have to, and I suppose they have that to blame for people hating them. (see Google's results for NYC, NC) They put a link to their competitors. Go Google!
This article is satire, right? I mean, so much incorrect information in it, it _has_ to be satire.
Microsoft, I think, realizes it's not about the difference between closed source and open source software. They are more about the spreading of ideas and experiences than the spreading of code. With Linux, we have yet to get beyond the code (Although it's finally starting to happen). With Microsoft, we're already progressing art, entertainment, business, communication and beyond.
A company must balance itself between closed doors and open doors. When I think about it, even a human doesn't want to live in a completely open environment. There's no privacy. No chance to be truly creative. Microsoft is natural.
Computing environments are about the sharing of information, art and ideas in the best way they can. I workout the idea of social networks over and over again and I know one things certain. They need to be decentralized.
The end result of my social network over and over again is something like Microsoft which is Giving Freedom in so many ways to open AND Private sharing of ideas, information and art.
Microsoft is creating a world that breaks down geographic limitations. So many people, including myself, seem to be attracted to Linux. Shouting open source is only one small piece of the puzzle. What is the point of reinventing a simular wheel? Why not strive to be truly inovative? Microsoft, on many fronts, gets people to break away from the wheel and become truly innovative and creative. Even programmers are forced to be innovative because of microsoft. Because of Closed Source, they gain a fresh foundation to create something completely new, in addition to working with life, not code. They are forced to work outside the box because the original code is not available.
I guess what I'm saying is that when I look at the big picture, Microsoft is creating a world. Google/Orkut is creating a world. Friendster/Myspace is creating a world. We should all have infinite possibilities to come and go from these simular realms which allow us to exchange ideas, information and art.
Microsoft is doing a pretty good job. I'm sure they see this big picture.
Is this serious?
MFC first, Win32 second are the most horribly designed APIs ever conceived. They are so much inconcistent, they contain so many logical errors and logical flaws, that nobody has got around to writing a descent object-oriented GUI library that reuses Win32 in a significant degree while maintaining the programming principles of the implementation language!
.NET's Window Forms: I thought that Microsoft would finally do a fully object-oriented API, managing to reuse its old code while introducing modern principles...but alas, I was once more fooled by them: Window Forms have the same 'strange' features that MFC and Win32 have! for example, events of controls are methods of the parent window! Toolbars need the damned image objects! I still can't place a combobox in a toolbar without messing with lots of code! Window Forms still can't be stretchable and maintain the controls' geometry, as in Qt/Swing!
Qt and Swing reimplement everything on their own, from the look and feel of Windows to the MDI environment. WxWindows follow MFC logic (objects with message maps, and management with new/Create - delete/Destroy ? no thanks).
Microsoft should really be shot with a double-barrel shotgun from 2 feet away for managing to give C++ such a bad name! if it wasn't for the horrible MFC, C++ would be the premier language of choice, and it would have been evolved by now with garbage collection (the only thing badly needed, in my opinion).
I think Bjarne Stroustrup must file a lawsuit against Microsoft for making C++ seem so ugly in the face of developers worldwide! I know this because from '98 till now C++ is dismissed by VB developers because VB is the easy way and C++ is the hard way, while this division is purely artificial!
Microsoft is also to blame for messing up the C language on Windows! they did it on purpose so as that C code on Windows is not really portable to UNIX environments! for example, they used 'WinMain' as the entry point of C programs, instead of 'main' that was the standard for more than 20 years!
And finally two words about
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU MICROSOFT? YOU HAVE THE BEST PROGRAMMERS...WHY CAN'T YOU STILL CAN'T CREATE A DESCENT API?
This coming from a bunch of people who couldn't even agree on a constitution!
The politicians agreed, the people haven't, so far. It's called democracy, dick head.
It's obvious the author is not honest. It's obviously easy to write such fluffy stuff. It's obviously not written for any one looking for information or insight. It's gossip, cheap.
But is there a name for that kind of article? Also, it's summer. Have to find something to cover.
http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
Oddly enough, I actually switched from XP to OS X about 4 months ago, and transition-wise it took me all of about 2 hours to get used to.
.NET issue, too - that's the only reason I still use my XP laptop for anything except website compatibility testing.
I think that it gave me quite a useful perspective, too - there are a lot of things wrong with XP, as well as many excellent things (although it *has* taken them about 20 years to get there). Also, there are one or two small issues with OS X, but that's a whole other can 'o worms.
But yes, you're absolutely spot on: until there's a Linux distro that can offer the "comfort" factor, seriously replicating Windows and OSX ease of use, it's not a contender.
And you have my sympathy over the
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
This has been argued soooooooo many times that it is now a waste of time and energy.
(I know I'm ranting and I sound like Mr.-Perfect-I know-everything)
Here it is in simple terms: Microsoft and it's programmers are in it for the money. Linux programmers are in it for the prestige of having a quality piece of software out there with their name on it.
I've used Micosoft OSs since 1982. All I have seen is slip-shod software at an exorbitant price and the audacity of charging more for 'fixes' and 'upgrades' that should have been part of the original product.
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
Because it has an old Mac troll on the first page?
Anyhow, from the first page: "therefore you don't have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!"
Methinks this gives the OSDL a good case to blow this guy out of the water.
What Would the Fab Five Do?
There are people out there who won't touch anything but Adobe Photoshop even to the extent of buying it!
Buddy is really happy about XP's PNP automatically detecting and installing drivers... as if it is some major innovation.
Well, let's see, ADB, SCSI, FireWire... for the most part even ancient Macs you could plug in devices and they just worked.
And don't forget seamless networking. In the 80s over LocalTalk/AppleTalk, we were plugging in computers, printers, and such and they just worked. And we were playing network games too... I fondly remember playing SpacewardHo with 6 buddies in my backyard.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
Hey, what do you call it when someone ignores another's words and attacks them for who they are, not what they say? Something like... oh, right. Ad hominem. I think you fail it.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
They I both fine. I love the people who made Linux and love Microsoft aswell. I find nothing wrong with them - nor the "high prices." It's their product, they never asked you to buy their software. When they advertise, they are just telling you some information you -might- not know (in an ordinary civilian's point of view).
Do you know how much time they spent on making Windows XP from the ground? Why don't you get a batch of 10 to 20 programmers and try to rebuild a clone of Windows XP from the ground and scratch including all the plug-and-play drivers, etc? It's totally obvious, you won't succeed in making it as good.
Microsoft doesn't hire programmers that aren't good, that's for sure! From what I know, MS has the programmers in the world -overally- (not literally, 'the best' or 'god-like').
Linux is fine too, I just don't like it in certain areas or aspects (ie, you need a Linux port of every game). Sure its security is good too, but I think Windows XP has just as good security if you know how to use, handle, deal, fix, etc with machines.
It all depends on the user. On regular school computers on that horrible DSL internet (75 KB/sec aka 750kbit), those computers get hundreds to thousands (depending on the school computer employee) of viruses, trojans, spyware, and malware (mostly spyware) a month.
Hey, it's not MY fault that you aren't using Windows XP/98/95 --PROPERLY-- and the way it's --SOPOSSED-- to be used and getting all those viruses, trojans, etc. It's the users fault. If he can't get Firewall software or a Routor, that's his fault. Maybe he should have planned and thought about that earlier before hooking his PC or machine up to the internet (which includes saving money for one).
Or how about Anti-Virus? Same reason as with Firewall, should have been planned. Not my fault (aka Microsoft, not their fault), but yours.
If your computer gets hacked, not my fault - but yours. Why? You either (depending if you setup the PC or someone else did) had poor security configurations, low-life/end Firewall/Anti-virus software, or let someone (ANYONE) trojan your PC or whatever. I can keep my computer Virus, Trojan, Spyware, Malware, Hijack free as long as I want. If I want to decide and make a risk on opening a website I've never heard of when searching for Single-Player Game Hacks (specifically hacks), and I end up being redirected to one of those *.ws websites that hijack your browser - then it's all my fault.
Whatever you open, whatever you're about to look at or see, is ALL YOUR FAULT. When users blame Microsoft for anything, they are twisted people.
WHEN YOU INSTALL ANY MICROSOFT PRODUCTS, YOU ARE GIVEN A FREAKING ------DISCLAIMER------ TELLING YOU THAT ANYTHING BAD/UNEXPECTED HAPPENS IS YOUR FAULT.
Idiots... (the ones who blame Microsoft for cases related to this)
Users can be pretty stupid. Firstly a lot of young kids usually download files they have no clue what it is and who the person on the other end is. Though I understand this problem is common and probably shouldn't be talked about.
The best thing microsoft ever did was gain a monopoly. The windows monopoly standardised the entire OS and software business. The only problem is that they forgot to let other companies participate...
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
This entire story is basically flamebait for the Slashdot crowd. I've been programming since most of the slashdotters were in diapers I'm sure (over 25 years) so I would say I know a thing or two about computers. Contrary to the slashdot lead-in, not everybody who knows something about computers hates Microsoft.
Most of the rhetoric comes from people who simply don't understand the nature of the computer business and the market in general. Software, operating systems in particular, have a tendency to become monopolistic by nature.
For example, at one time WordStar was the only word-processor anybody used. They had 90%+ of the market. Then Wordperfect came along and they took 90% of the market. Then Microsoft Word came along and they took 90% of the market. The same is true for spreadsheats, starting with Visicalc, then Lotus, etc.
This doesn't occur because the companies in question are brutally unfair, but because it is the nature of the beast. It's much easier for people to use the software they used at their last job, or to interact with somebody who uses the same software.
Now, Microsoft doesn't make a perfect product by any means, but whether it is Word or Windows, they have been a remarkably good steward of the monopoly-mantle; managing to hold onto it for years. Just look at the way Wordperfect totally screwed up their monopoly. All I can say is thank God Microsoft didn't leave us in Windows95 hell forever like they could have.
Microsoft's agressiveness is the only thing that has kept the computer market from collapsing and having to go through another OS/2 debacle.
Someday, maybe Linux will reach the level where it can take on the mantle. When/If it happens, it will happen very quickly and Linux will enjoy the position Microsoft now holds.
Quite frankly, Linux has had it's chances in the past. If 1995 through 2000 didn't provide a hole you could drive a truck through, I don't know what would. But, the Linux community simply doesn't have the capabilities to compete. They let Microsoft get Windows 2000 out, which fixed the vast majority of problems with Windows. XP further solidified Windows as a very good operating system (far better than Linux for everyday use by end users).
You say nobody who knows anything about computers likes Microsoft, I say nobody who knows anything about computers could possibly not consider Windows XP and impressive piece of software (not perfect, but certainly impressive).
With Longhorn endlessly delayed, I see another small opportunity in the next couple years for Linux to make a stab at things, but at the rate Linux is developing, it will simply never make it in time.
Love 'em or hate 'em, Microsoft has managed to keep a step ahead of everybody else for a long time now.
"No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered."
...
... but even windows needs 20+ drivers to be installed after a standard win install
3 letters: OS2
I do not hate windows, some marketing issues bother me (patents, forced OS with hardware, bulshitting everyone about how everything else sucks, closed file formats)
Linux: it is the cheapest UNIX variant that has the most drivers..... i like it because it is a convenient environment for me to work on
Also if you have servers and need to develop IMHO you better do it in the same environment (scripting, testing, whatever)
Mac: since the new MAC OS is unix based, and since the OS and drivers are written for that hardware a mac is a better guess when doing specific stuff
Actually I am thinking about seeding out my 1 and only win machine and buy a minimac to replace the 30 kilo box with a desktop little thing
Also just compare a windows/pc laptop to a MAC how drivers are an always-problematic issue with a laptop on a PC, especially when it comes to Linux/BSD
anyway Is it OK to hate Microsoft ?
Half the population thinks that "Ordinary tomatoes do not contain genes, while genetically modified tomatoes do.".
I despair when I think of the level of education of my countrymen.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
OMG.. The whole "article" is filled with obvious flamebaits...
Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!
the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus
Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
This coming from a bunch of people who couldn't even agree on a constitution! (europeans in general)
Sun and Oracle to just sue Microsoft whenever their profits are down due to insanely stupid and useless products that no one is buying.
and so on, and so forth (I got lazy getting quotes). How have this ever been considered an article ? this is obviously someone who likes to troll and we're all just feeding him.
"No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. ""
Since 1985 until around 1995 AmigaOS blew the socks off Windows for EASE OF USE.
It took until 1995 for Windows to have such things as true pre-emptive multitasking and proportional slider bars. Windows still does not have dynamic RAM disks, datatype libraries, user installable filing systems.. I think it only just recently added symbolic and hardlinks or file notification (if it even truly has it yet).
Windows does not have a truely standardized scripting language which AmigaOS had by around 1990.
Windows still lacks, virtual desktops, virtual screens.
And.. wait... you forgot BeOS. Which is even EASIER to use.
Windows for ease of use? Stop me... I'm beside myself with myrth at the pure BS factor of that statement.
Windows brought ease of use to the desktop if you exclude just about every other OS ever written.
No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
It really seems this person is completely oblivious to how much Linux has improved over the past few years. I made the switch to Linux a few years back, and I've never looked back. I have four PCs, and of them, three run Linux and one runs Windows XP. Linux is rather easy to use, once you get past the steep learning curve. It took a few months for me to get a handle on the OS, but after that, It's been nothing but smooth sailing. I've had my systems running non-stop for upwards of three months without a reboot without any degradation in performance. I never have to defrag, never have to check disks for errors, nor do I have to scan for viruses. Hardware support could be better, but considering I use Red Hat/Fedora, most times I pop in a card or other device, and Kudzu finds and configures it during boot, or if it's hotplug, it hooks it up within seconds. When hardware doesn't work, it's because drivers for the device haven't been written for Linux. In my experience, I've had only one scanner which didn't have Linux drivers available; all other hardware worked immediately without a problem. We Linux users do not spend our time writing viruses for Windows out of spite. From my experience with fellow Linux users, we're looking for a reliable OS that's cheap, efficient, and relatively easy to implement -- three characteristics which Linux possesses. The vast majority of us are white hat, often finding security vulnerabilities and reporting 'em. Hey, Linux isn't completely secure itself, but when a security vulnerability is discovered, the Linux community of developers write and distribute a security patch within days -- not weeks or months like Microsoft. The reason Linux doesn't have any major viruses is because most viruses that do any damage require root-level access, which most users of Linux who know what they're doing do not use the root for everyday purposes. If I remember correctly, if Microsoft made Windows an open-source OS, and allowed developers to write security patches for the system, within 90 days, Windows would have virtually no security vulnerabilities. Don't get me wrong -- I wholeheartedly agree that Microsoft has been vital in the evolution of the modern PC. Without MS, most workers in the IT industry wouldn't have a job. In fact, I'm using a Windows XP machine right now as I type this. I will give Microsoft a lot of praise for taking a stronger stance on information security with the latest versions of Windows, and will say that historically, Microsoft inspired many physical security features that were adapted to later operating systems. In fact, I would consider Windows to have better physical security than Linux, since using GRUB, one can access and change the root password with a couple of simple commands. Using Windows, you would need to reboot the machine with a special boot disk and modify the SAM, which still can't guarantee all security markers will work with the new password hash. Overall, I would say I find this article very uninformed, and it's obvious the author hasn't used a Linux operating system in years. Using Linux now, I've become accustomed to some features and wish they were available in Windows. Definitely _DO NOT_ discount the Linux operating system!
~Mike (Titan_X)
yes, windows works, But the nice front bit you see working hides a very messy interior that is very inefficient and uses up shed loads of CPU Time doing nothing. plus then people hate MS for being so anti-competitive
I would place "loving Microsoft" right up there with "priests loving alterboys", "MJ loving little boys in PJs", the "leather & chains crowd loving S&M", and "Gollum loving the One Ring".
/. crowd that favor the adrenaline rush that comes with the danger of having sex in a public place. Just don't confuse love with sex, nor respect and admiration with business accomidation.
MSFT doesn't deserve "love" per say, but does deserve the respect one would give to a coiled rattlesnake, or to a stick of dynamite sweating nitroglycerin in the hot summer sun -- dangerous and unpredictable enough to threaten your (company's) health. MSFT is an unrepentant convicted monopolist with deep pockets, a battalion of lawyers, and owns (or rather leases) the ears of many a politician.
But, I guess there are a (very) few among the
Not the f**king car analogy. God, get a life and grow the **** up you dumb ass.
We really should start moderating articles. Where is the argument? He just say Microsoft is great and the others wished they were so they sue. NEXT!!!
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
Im freelance developer and i never hated microsoft like most other people on this board. Sure, i knew i never downloaded winzip after i got winxp (no need since zip support built in) and that microsoft is monopolistic but i never
really thought about what it meant.
However, there are a couple of 'features' build in Vista which are going to hurt my software dearly, and that is the crux of the problem i have with microsoft. They bundle everything in their software, so there is really no need for the average user to go out and buy/download freely any other software.
I think it would really help if microsoft was not allowed to bundle anything else with windows and the users had to manually download the rest of stuff from online (internet explorer, zip etc). That way, there is atleast a drop of motivation for the users to try to download the best 'add on' like Firefox etc etc.
But then again, the problem i described here is typical of every sector in realworld, with the rich using their amassed wealth to get richer and the poor having less and less opportunity to establish even a foothold.
Staying one step ahead!
Sure, occasionally they break a few kneecaps, and torch a few buildings, but most of them are probably real good to their faimlies, and to winows and orphans, even the ones that they helped create. Your honest, local, neighborhood business man is highly over rated anyway, and mostly exists to spite the mega corporations.
"Frabjous".
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Al Gore did not *INVENT* the internet, however he did sign into place the laws or whatever that turned it from a government only network into the public. Credit should be given where it is due. Without him and others like him the internet may have remained government only.
Well, then again, you might want to consider that a 1.7GHz Pentium M, for a lot of tasks, is faster than a 3GHz Pentium 4. Not that this has anything to do with the Steve's Reality Distortion Field, but his claims were at least plausible, if not correct.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
What a stupid article. The title is silly (love an OS? is it wrong?)! The article is completely empty of any information whatsoever. I wonder how this made it to a /. story. Do the editors feel guilty that the site hosts many anti-MS stories and comments?
...).
/the right|your preferred/ tool for the job and appreciate it's strenghts and weeknesses without having to invest it with emotions and ethics like Love or bad/wrong.
I don't love Microsoft. I do like Windows XP as a desktop OS, and use it. It's a great OS (at last). There are many other MS products I can't stand (Word, Outlook,
At the same time, all the servers I install are Linux, and even though I use XP as my main desktop, I recommend Macs to home users who just want a computer for Internet access and home use, and who don't happen to specifically need Windows.
You can use
The way he talks about linux - shitting on its user friendliness and recompiling the kernel (I've been using fucking SLACKWARE for years without needing to this once), makes me think he tried to migrate once but he couldn't get used to the change.
I know I've personally tried to convince myself to go back to windows a few times, but in my case it never works (for reasons see above +5 Insightfuls).
If you read around forums, read letters sent to magazines etc, you see this same old story all too often - I tried it, my stuff didnt Plug-and-Play, thank you goodnight.
Either that or he's being paid by MS... in fact never mind all that other stuff...
Its a survival response I guess. I've loved every computer that I've used as a desktop except for my Windows computers.
Some of my Windows computers were adequate but I just never could warm up to them. Unlike some of my other machines the passion of Microsoft craftsmen never seems to shine through. Maybe they don't care enough or maybe their designs are too constrained by the requirments for incremental increases in market control with each new version. In any case, by and large I find their products to be of low quality and buggy-geek-feature-laden compared to the competition in categories where competition still exists. Unfortunately they produce the operating system and every product that runs on that operating system suffers from their lack of vision and passion and their drive to incrementally increase their control of the market with each new release. The only time they care about quality is when there is a threat of revenue loss or a reduced rate of growth.
I love computers and computing technology. Its been my job, my hobby and my passion for many years now and when possible, I buy machines and software from people whose similar disposition shines forth in their quality products.
I don't believe that Microsoft leadership is creative, visionary or passionate about their products in anything remotely like a constructive way. Even their passion is a marketing ploy. As soon as the competition in a product area goes away they no longer have direction (nothing to copy) in the evolution of their product and they lose the incentive to make it better and it shows. Microsoft only makes pretty good products in an area until the competition is dead and then the quality sinks and the hostage users pay and come to love their abusive master and their "quality" products.
After Microsoft's external competition dies in a category the only competition left for their product comes from the previous version of their own product. This eliminates any incentive for support and backward compatibility. Ironically compatibility remains the main selling point of Windows systems.
I have nothing against Microsoft and people who love them for whatever reason as long as they don't systematically obliterate my access and option to use quality products crafted by people who give a darn. I'd willingly pay Microsoft for great products if I ever thought that they produced one. As things stand I am essentially forced to buy and use their products in a way that is shutting the door on quality competition. It isn't right.
I would think that all of those MS lovers out there would be rooting for Linux. Linux getting better makes MS strive to be better. Isn't this obvious?
The same logic would apply to Mac -- in a big way. MS must look at Mac on Intel and think, "Buddy, we'd better make some big improvements."
This is my constructive response to your column at CoolTechZone on the 5th of August titled "Is it Wrong to Love Microsoft?" To give you a little perspective, I have a WindowsXP desktop dual booted with Fedora Core 4 Linux, Windows XP Professional laptop, and Mac Powerbook at home and so have sufficient experience with all of them.
>>"Is it wrong to love Microsoft?"
First of all, the short answer is- no, it isn't wrong.
>>"The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what's more, I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!"
I am curious what your experience with Linux is. I agree that Linux is not for everyone, but for a developer, researcher, network manager or someone looking to build their own systems there is nothing like it. Considering the fact that you have the source to do what you choose with makes it a tremendous platform. People have ported it to the Xbox, powerpcs, palms, ipods and all kinds of other antique devices and it still works the same. There is even a version (called busybox) that is under 1Mb and can be carried on a floppy. It is this flexibility and extensibility that people love.
>>"It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort."
Not really.
>>"I understand the criticisms about the security of the software, the critical flaws and what not but again, we must look at things in the proper perspective. More than 95 pecent computers in the world use one form of Windows OS or another. The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world? It doesn't, therefore you don't have as
many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!"
What you say is true- but you require some perspective as well. There are some basic security decisions that Windows has made that people
disagree with, the most important of which is that every user and process my default runs as an administrator. For the average, home
user this is dangerous. Otherwise, your point on security is valid.
>>"Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job."
Hmm... I wonder why everyone who knows programming wants to his Windows with a virus? Is it because people who program prefer other platforms?
>>"XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it."
I agree- it is one of the strengths of Windows. But can you install Windows on a powerpc, or a Sparcs, or an Xbox or ANY other hardware of
your choice? You can with Linux, though not as easily. I'm just demonstrating why people like other OSes.
>>"In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind
Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out."
>>Ummm, have you actually used Linux lately? I suggest you try out a user friendly version like Fedora Core and then rewrite your column.
>>"This reminds me of the bundled issues with the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it."
Some, but not all, of the lawsuits are justified. Microsoft has been anti-competitive. Not many people dispute that- not even Microsoft,
they settled in a lot of cases and agreed to future improvements in their behav
There is a reason why business people and not engineers run companies. Granted, they don't know the technology as well as a developer would, which is to be expected, but neither do the developers know marketing, finance, accounting, or operations nearly as well as business people do.
If your organization were made up entirely of engineers, you'd have great software being made, but the end product would be fractured and only accessible to other engineers or those who make a persistent effort of getting to use the software. Kinda like Linux.
Engineers make the product and are responsible for making it as well as possible, whereas business people are responsible for making sure that the engineers are funded, the product makes it into wide distribution, and smoothing the interface between developers and Joe Sixpack.
IMHO, Linux suffers from a lack of business people, and Microsoft suffers from being too heavily weighted with business people.
Makes it so easy to love i love MS more than my own mom
Around the time I was jumping to Win98, the Mac had OS 9. If anyone's going to argue Win was buggy, they should not ignore that Mac OS was buggy too. In fact, I encountered the "bomb" (total system crash) on a daily basis with the Mac OS 9, and if I happened to have a file open at the same time as that crash, BYEBYE file. It would get trashed.
On Win98, individual programs might crash, but it didn't take the whole system with it. And if I had a file open, it would not get corrupted in the least by those crashes.
Does this guy give any reasons why he doesn't like Linux? Does he give any concrete reasons why he doesn't like Mac OS? He says prices, but look at the Mac Mini. I'd be hard pressed to find PCs that cheap. And MM comes with Tiger and iLife 05. 2 guidelines with software: the best things in life are free; better software generally costs more. It seems like an oxymoron, but guaranteed it is a paradox. Microsoft doesn't deserve our love because obviously it doesn't love us. It loves the corporate guys. But even then, it still has the same security problems. And I don't buy that bullshit about "95 % of the market is Windows." It happens to be very easy to write a virus for windows. First of all, the monolithic approach to software just sucks. If one thing goes wrong, the whole system goes kaput. And the shoddy code just makes more security holes. Yes, I'm sure there are holes in Mac OS and we already know about the ones in Linux. But the Windows holes are so easy to exploit. And there are just a lot of them. Anyway, that's my rant.
I guess it's kind of like the Monty Python spoof of the Jewish Zealots' rebellion, as portrayed in _The Life of Brian_....
zealot: "How _much_ do you hate the Romans?"
Brian: (trying to gain approval) "A lot!"
zealot: "Alright. You're in!"
You have to hate Micro$oft in order to have credibility, because for anyone to understand computing (technology and/or culture) and like Micro$oft is, well... incredible!
Well, an Audi is more expensive than an Opel of a Ford, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth more.
I would rather be a bloody stump with no legs and arms and happily be using my PowerMac than have to suffer thru endless crashes and bugs with MS Windows.
=^..^=
Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
...and I think, hey, if MacOS puts an end to that sort of bullshit, I'm actually coming out far ahead of the game.
Macintosh cost more in initial cash outlay, but did it increase productivity?
I think back over the endless days I've spent fixing Windows problems, the loss of data when Windows has bluescreened, the loss of billable time and the loss of my hair...
The cost of an operating system and applications is one helluva lot more than merely the sticker price.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
I've posted this before, but this story makes it particularly apropos:
Microsoft has Billions of dollars, and yet they can't deliver products that are well documented, well-architected, stable and secure? If they could do that, they might get more respect.
Come on people, Microsoft does make a pretty good mouse. Five buttons counting the scroll wheel and a reasonable price.
What's that you say? They make an operating system too?
They're branded, they have a name to defend. If your IBM laptop starts pouring forth blue smoke, you'd then feel that IBM sucked. IBM cares if you think they suck. eMachines cares less.
That's the rationale, I'd suppose. Not terribly borne out by those IBM-branded hard drives with the nasty habit of crashing, but you're really paying for the label in any case.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
is it wrong to love O.J. ??
The answer: yes.
The question: why is this posting in the Apple section?
Don't underestimate the power of The Source
Yeah, used to. About six years ago I even hated Apple (please forgive me for that past mistake). Then I starting programing and doing high memory intensive graphics stuff. Windows just wouldn't cut it. I would end up having to reboot the machine about a dozen times on a Windows 9x computer. Even on XP it would end up crashing allot. Starting into college for a computer graphics major I needed something better. Thus I got my Mac. Did it cost more, yes. But is it worth it, even to a funding low college student, absolutely. Oh yeah, I have had my Mac lock up on me so that it required a hard reboot, but that was thanks to a Microsoft program.
Some guys love to get tied up, fscked, and flogged, and even pay for the privilege. We accept that, just like we accept Varun's love of Microsoft, which amounts pretty much to the same thing.
I think that quote from your article says almost all. You adore Microsoft. Good for you. You hate [L]inux (it's not capitalized). Good for you. That's really about the only objective part of you article. You don't think linux is good at doing something? You're opinion... It's misguide at best, but it's really wrong. Did you know at Microsoft for the longest time their e-mail servers were Unix machines? That was because their e-mail applications weren't up to the task. This I know because I worked there. Haven't checked recently, so I don't know if they're still using unix for e-mail.
Also, some of the world's largest, most complex, and savviest applications are running on linux platforms. Do you ever use Google? Google (last time I checked) is up over 40,000 linux servers running the show. Ever shop at Amazon? Amazon runs almost exclusively on linux and Solaris (Sun) boxes under the covers.
Sad, unfair and uncompetitive? Maybe you're only fifteen years old. If you were older and had any sense of history and knew what Microsoft has done in the past you'd understand better. Microsoft has gotten where it is, become what it is, with blatant disregard for fair and competitive business practices. (Not sure what "agreeing on a constitution" has to do with anything in your thesis.)
Continue to love Microsoft, it's a warm fuzzy world from your view. You obviously are part of the target demographic.
You're probably going to get hammered for your column. You deserve it.
Based on the content of your post I'm assuming that that you meant to write "Macroshaft".
Linux is only free if your time has no value. --Jamie Zawinski
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
do you see the pattern here. How many of them did it all?
As for dynamic memory I used to sell computers when it first came out as well as build memory boards for the s-100 buss. Beielve me nearly all uses of it were not stable. the Apple II was the first to concqure it by putting the refresh cycle on the backside of the cpu memory fetch cycle. 8080 based systems could not do that becuase the clock cycle was too short and the memory fetch was irregularly spaced in clock intervals.
machines that used memeory mapped video were primarily monolithic MOBO, games machines. All office equpiment almost without exception was S-100 buss or PC buss based. None of these had memory mapped video.
yeah atari was such a widespread used machine, they still dominate the market. Who gives a flip about atari. No bussniess ever used one.
As for the rest of your points the parent poster was really clear not to say invented. he said pioneered and made the disctntion. Pioneers did not build their wagons, pots and pans or riffles. they did integrate thos into a portable home they could take west and survive in. Xerox never pulled that off.
SGI's were NOT user frindly I've owned several and still do. They were no different than SUNs in colored boxes with wicked fast graphics. The user interface was not freindly evenif it was colorful.
If you dont think the mac was invented for DTP, you dont remember very well.
No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered
Mac?
Meaning to ask you, how are the temperatures in teh White House?
What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
What has Microsoft given you? They didn't give you Windows. You paid for that or stole it. They didn't give you these updates that fixed security and bugs. You had to pay for those too, in the form of a new OS.
Windows 98 is not the same OS as Windows XP. And you will have to pay for Vista when its available, to get further updates, security patches, etc. XP at least offers a better update facility, but it leaves a lot to be desired for a Linux user like myself who is used to apt, yum, synaptic, and that whole GPL thing.
From where I am standing Microsoft costs about as much as Apple without the polish or *nix core technology. That's not a very good deal. But if that's what you're used to, or what you like... well, its your money. At least you'll be spending more of it than me. That makes me smile.
Actually, Crystal Quest dates from the late 80's. In fact, it was the very first color Mac game, on the Mac II, in 1987. Yay, Casady & Greene.
I know because baby, I WAS THERE!! (that game was great. and I've used macs since 12/84...)
So I guess that you are saying that the question addressed in the article should have been a question of education and not a question of love.
Yes, with an if, long answer: No, with a but
Sig removed because it was obnoxious
In my opinion windows is crap. Yes. It may have some features that other some other OS doesn't have (actually I think these "features" are actually only there because of developer support for windows, eg "Mac doesn't play my games" - That's not a FEATURE, it would be if macs weren't CAPABLE of playing 2D games, but they aren't as supported.) anyway, the main reason I don't use windows is because of it's legal battles and stuff. If windows wasn't around then all of our apps might be using Java (or probably better) on every architecture imaginable, loads of "Vapourware" products would exist... Who knows, we may be flying around in VR with our brains in jars, but the point is m$ keep ripping off ideas (often then patenting them) making it impossible for others to progress. Eg. Mac is brought out in black and white with crappy multitasking. Then Amiga is brought out with pre-emptive multitasking, thousands of colours etc. Stuff should be built up but what do most people today use? Non pre-emptive multitasking, slow, insecure OS on a machine that needs HUNDREDS of MHz to get away from it's original use with a character based interface. Meanwhile QNX is popular only in embedded markets, PowerPC is only being implemented where people CARE about performance (next-gen consoles) and anyone with a good idea has to battle it out with other legitimate innovators for around 4%-6% of the market share!
... the worst article i have ever read on slashdot... it sounds like he's having a temper tantrum. "This coming from a bunch of people who couldn't even agree on a constitution!" perhaps you would like to draft a constitution that would be acceptable to all the sovereign nations of Europe? "Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers" what personal computer did M$ make again??? oh i'm sorry... they had REVERSI!!! If he is arguing that REVERSIIIII!!! single handedly created the PC industry then i'd agree... :p
"Microsoft is perhaps the most hated company in the history of business"
ever heard of Carnegie?
and as several people have pointed out, disqualifying Mac based on the fact that it was "expensive" (i dont know if it was or not personally) is retarded. thats like disqualifying Corsair or Kingston because they are too expensive, obviously simpletech is the best!
Live according to the Categorical Imperative. If the Categorical Imperative tells you not to live by it... ignore it
Umm.... Is this a trick question?
Without Microsoft heavy-handed grip on the PC industry in the 80's and early 90's, computer software technology would have leaped forward much faster than it did.
Microsoft held us back, in some cases by as much as 10 years. YES 10 YEARS!
Consider this: in 1985, you could buy a PC running MS-DOS. Because of MS, there was no graphic desktop, no GUI, 640KB of RAM maximum, single tasking os, short filenames, 16 color low-res graphics, no sound or multimedia, horribly cryptic configuration of new hardware (remember manual IRQ assignement hell?), the list goes on......
All of this for less money than a green-screen IBM PC with MS-DOG.
In 1985, you could buy an Amiga, which had preemptive multitaksing, full color graphics with hardware-accelerated animation, hardware-based wavetable sound synthesis, long filenames, auto-configured hardware expansion, Unix-like shell, the list goes on.
It took 10 FSCKING YEARS for Micro$oft to catch up. It wasn't until Windoze95 that these features became quasi-usable (though very unstable) with Micro$oft-based PCs.
For 10 years, Micro$oft told people that preemptive multitasking and multimedia were useless. Then, they claimed to have invented it.
What we need is a study that measures blood pressure while people are using their favorite operating system ?
hate the game. Yes that's right.
A very wise man once said that. that wise man was Booker T.
five time five time five time wcw champion.
It just doesn't feel small.
lol!!! if you have to ask then the answer is a resounding NO!!!
yeah but what OS could we use to play all BAttlefield 2, Thief 3, Age of Empires, Counterstrike, WoW???
Slashdot and other technological news websites should ask proof of ID before letting children write up articles.
Further to that, a quick IQ test wouldn't hurt, it surely would weed out these boli-boli simpletons.
I understand there is a lack of writers and that is why CoolTechZone, OSNews will accept just about anything.
"I hate" - since when is this journalism?
"Varun Dubey" - couldn't your parents have chosen a less retarded name?
and get into a 12 step program.
Is Slushdirt that anxious for topics? Why did this even get posted?
No its not wrong to love Microsoft, provided you have a sufficient amount of MS stock and actually like Windows, or make a living because MS somehow manages to produce crap inspite of having the capital to hire the best engineers possible.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
I don't have the time to write every reason I loathe Microsoft. In a nutshell, I hate what effect they have had on the IT industry, I hate their products, and I hate their practices.
However, someone wrote a good essay that covers many points. See http://sillydog.org/msbad.html
PS I also hate the way Bill Gates ripped off all this money from people and companies, then gives a bit back to charities to make it look like he's generous or something.
1. Macintosh. Until the early '90s, Mac OS was a lot cheaper than Windows, simply because until the '386 Intel didn't make a processor that could handle big (for the time) bitmapped graphics screens. When you're operating on objects larger than 64k using a CPU that had to perform MMU operations every time you reloaded a segment register the whole idea of bitmapped graphics is a joke.
...
2. Amiga. Real-time microkernel, accelerated graphics in 1985. Bit of a problem with the game machine rep, but it was a killer video engine.
3. Mini and workstation: Xerox, Sun, AT&T, IBM, DEC, SGI, Intel,
4. GEM on Atari, PC, etc...
Microsoft wasn't even vaguely "the man on the white horse". They had lots of great marketing, but their implementation was worthless until the 386 got down to an affordable price and they came up with a 32-bit API. Yes, I know people were running Windows on 286 and even 8088, but you had to be dedicated.
They started out with a bought copy of the base for both their OS and for BASIC.
Actually although DOS 1.0 was simply bought and not wirtten by MS at all, BASIC indeed WAS written my Microsoft from scratch. In fact BASIC was one of the last products for which BillG himself personally wrote code. True, BASIC was not invented by Microsoft, but the MS dialect became the defacto standard for PCs. By 1980 almost all PC makers licensed BASIC from Microsoft (Commodore, Tandy/Radioshack, Apple and pretty much all S100-type machines were supplied with it). Even the one big player that was a holdout (Atari) had MS basic available as an option from a 3rd party.
Even before DOS, Microsoft was a dominant player in languages. If you want to know why BillG hates accepting flat-fee licensing deals but loves to accept them (as it did when it bought DOS) look no further than its licensing deal with Commodore--it got a big wad of money to supply BASIC for the PET but not a dime for subsequent machines--including the C64. BillG learned a lesson in deal making from Jack Tramiel--and to this day MS employs a take-no-prisoners, Tramiel-style negotiation techniques. That is a big reason for MS' success--not the quality of its software.
I don't know when you started building systems, but it used to be (and may be still) that when you bought a mother board with an Intel CPU, you paid an MS tariff. They assumed that you would run DOS purchased or pirated. Of course, if you bought it, you paid for it twice. A lot of garage-based PC Builders never bothered to give out a copy of the DOS you were paying for with the CPU either. MS still had the brazen cojones to complain about "piracy".
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
Based on the comments I've read in response to this post I have gathered up several generalizations about this group:
1. You've never owned your own business
2. You've never taken a class on business or competitive business practices
3. You believe competition is standing by and letting your friendly competitor take away your market share.
In a competitive capitalistic business environment your goal is to constantly increase your profits. Because of inflation, just maintaining regular customers will achieve this goal however this is not enough. Businesses always want to grow infinitely and so they will strategically accumulate resources (be it money, securities, other businesses, raw material sources) to make this infinite growth possible. If I own a plumbing outfit that is growing rather large in size, I may one day decide to buy out a local plumbing supply warehouse. This guarantees me lower prices on the parts used for installation thus I can charge the same price to my customers and make even more money. On top of it, I now have all the purchasing data for every competitor in my area. Does this make me an evil company? No, if anything it shows the brains behind the operation by expanding your business into relevant markets as a way to increase profits while enhancing your original outfit.
For whatever reason when Microsoft expands into relevant markets everyone gets into an uproar. Suppose you are a well-off computer application development corporation and Microsoft shows up one day offering you $500 million. The book value of your coporation (plus goodwill) is valued at around $300 million with industry average earnings. Your forecasts predict your corporation will hit a value of $500 million in a minimum of 5 years. What do you think your board of directors is going to do? They're going to sell out since you'll probably get 166% of the share value per share. For Microsoft, they can offer deals noone can refuse because they have the capital to do so. For these companies, the wisest choice is to sell the company and collect the money.
Addressing the 'quality' of products back when Microsoft & Apple were close competitors, why is it that Microsoft thrived? Gee, maybe because they targetted a market that actually had money to spend: the corporate market. Sure, Apple had easy to use products and an intuitive GUI but they went after the educational market. And on top of it corporations shied away from cutesy little boxes in favor of IBM's more mature (and boring) looking alternatives.
I'm not saying that Microsoft isn't a fun company to rag on but don't hate on them just because they're not afraid to run a business and do what it takes to be number one.
I love what they do with Dev Tools, .NET Framework and Server operating systems (W2K3 rocks). SQL Server is pretty good, too, as are some other server products. XP is finally usable after so many years of patching holes.
But Office division and MSN need a good hard kick in the ass. I'm not even beginning to talk about Business Solutions and some other divisions whose purpose of existence is unknown.
So I guess you can love Microsoft if you learn to not see a few large, cancerous pimples on its face.
That's the short answer.
Here's a better reason why not to.
How Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson Blew the Microsoft Trial
Basically, the evidence biased him so much that he couldn't keep his mouth shut, which caused the case to get irreparably damaged. How's that for irony?
Whatever your love or hate for Microsoft tech, my main peeve is this: With a certified monopoly at the helm, there is NO WAY for us to measure what cool things MIGHT have gotten developed had this 900 lb. gorilla not put a choke-hold on my beloved industry. Opportunity cost...
As much as many of us would like to deny it, Microsoft has indeed given us some good things. Most notable amongst all of this is how they brought the computer into the home and to everyone and his grandmother. This is truly a mighty feat. Viruses, bugs, and lowered expectations of computers aside, they have indeed done this. Although, quite honestly, in recent years, it seems to have outlived its usefulness. OS X is a superior design and any *nux system is wonderfully simple, versatile, and powerful (even if some are really frustrating to set up). Windows was for the common folk. Times are a`chanin' though....
For castles made of sand must eventually return to the sea.
Yes
Welcome to the land of the free...pay toll ahead...no photography...please open your bag...
"In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!"
Where did he get this information? I can't stand it when writers make these outrageous claims in order to discredit Linux. You don't have to like it but don't lie about it.
"If it is just us, seems like an awful waste of space." -- movie: Contact
There's only one valid reason to dislike Microsoft. Windows, Linux, BSD, etc..etc all have bugs, can crash, flawed in some way, so it's rather difficult to come up with a strong technical argument that stands out as each have their own pluses and minuses.
The only valid reason not to like Microsoft, is their overly restrictive license agreement.
Donald Ray Moore Jr. (MindRape) damageD Cybernetics
there is nothing to be ashamed about.
It is, howver, it's own punishment.
just don't "LOVE" microsoft, ask any girl as to why that just won't do...
besides, it's just so much more fun to hate something
I believe sex is highly over rated... unless it involves me
As probably one of the few people who've been in wrecks in both a Corvair and a Pinto I've go to tell you that neither car was as bad as people who've never driven them made them out to be.
So. . . MS Windows was a pioneering effort?
Apple Macintosh, Atari ST and Amiga all did it first and did it better. (Atari and Amiga were both copying Apple, but they copied faster and better than Microsoft could!) Only in the world of Microsoft could you follow the lead of three other companies, with a product markedly inferior to all of them, and call it Pioneering.
Likewise, only Microsoft could follow the lead of three other companies with an inferior product and then be hugely successful selling it. That's what's so damn frustrating.
Of course that's a drop in the bucket compared to the long record of crimes and misdemeanors Microsoft have perpetrated. Yes, Microsoft is probably the most hated company in the world, but it didn't happen by accident. They earned their infamy.
heh, at the national lab where I worked in the mid 90's there was a multiplayer jet fighter game on the SGI's that was banned because it saturated the network. It was cooler than the flight simulator available on Microsoft OS of the time, though Flight Simulator was fun too.
Ease of use? Windows?
How many times have you had to explain "Yes, press Start and then Shutdown. No, really. Yes, START then SHUTDOWN."
It's not that Windows is easy to use, it's that folks have been using it for a long time, are used to how it works. Mac folks can make the same argument. A change to something else would require a lot of effort compared to figuring out the latest and greatest [Platform Choice Here].
Anything is possible given time and money.
The right answer first appeared in Jerry Popek's UCLA Locus in the 1980s, and has been in some IBM UNIX systems since IBM bought the technology. It really ought to be in Linux.
It works like this. When you open an existing file for writing, you actually start to write a new file. But unchanged blocks are shared, using a copy on write approach. If you close the file normally, the new file replaces the old file.
If the program or system crashes, the old file remains intact and unchanged. So there's always a good copy of the file. No special action is required in the program to make this happen.
The program can also call "commit", to force the new version to replace the old one immediately, or "revert", to roll the file back to the "old" state. But that's optional. A program might do this after finishing some transaction, for example.
That's how to do it right.
After reading many of these responses I would say that there is a strong consensus among this bunch of kind hearted technogeeks that its OK to love Microsoft if you don't know any better. If you do know the score and still insist that you love Microsoft then the consensus is that you are a liar in your heart and you are so desperate for the approval of others that you would condone the elimination of 5% of humanity if the other 95% insisted that it was OK. From all this I conclude that technogeeks are kind hearted but intolerant of real evil.
Next on the agenda: is genocide really that bad of an idea?
Is Redmondite a race?
Microsoft Actimates Barney!
; en-us;172657)
(And true to Microsoft form, it has a few "glitches". http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb
But seriously, pretty much all current computer tech is just a "combintion of other people's technology and ideas". Trying to point that out as a Microsoft-specific problem is ridiculous.
The key is, how well does a company *implement* this combining of ideas and technologies into desireable products? Xerox had a *research* facility where all those early ideas like the GUI and the mouse came from. Scientists doing research don't try to market final products based on their findings. That's not their area of expertise.
Sometimes, to enable someone's good product idea to flourish, it needs to be bought out by someone with much deeper pockets, who can re-brand it and give it the marketing push it deserves. Microsoft is great at doing this - and to me, that's not a bad thing at all. And when they buy something and re-brand it, and that financial "push" wasn't really needed - it usually fails on them. (EG. Microsoft's failed experiment selling wireless routers, NICs, etc.)
Sure, Windows is a decent enough product to satisfy alot of people. But to say you love Microsoft because you like how Windows works is somewhat like saying you love Hitler because he improved Germany's economy. Not as extreme, but my point is that all of the things the author loves about MS have come at a price to everyone else involved in the IT industry.
Compare a monopoly power that assimilates or destroys all competition to a benevolent group of great, smart people who write code mostly because they just love to write code.
This is why I love Linux.
-Lod
His name is Varun. Sounds Indian/Pakistani to me. There are subtle and not-so-subtle clues in his poor written English that imply his ethnicity as well.
He loves Microsoft and their products, because Microsoft and their products make for a bounty of hard-earned dollars, pounds, and euros fleeing our corporations' pockets as ill-educated, poorly-qualified Indians get picked off the street to do support work and Americans get ditched working for Wal-Mart and their ilk.
The Premier in Delhi and the Junta in Karachi should thank Mr. Gates for providing them economic growth and/or a safety valve so all of their smart, forward-thinking citizens don't cause trouble with their despotic and repressive regimes there, either by being paid into submission at home or sent overseas to work for peanuts elsewhere.
This si more telling of slashdotters than it is of microsoft. Microsoft doesn't need love, it has happy customers that keep coming back, high-quality successful products that are better than most of their competitors, and a strong feel for where computing is headed. They have all this, and are hated for it.
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
They crushed the competition and they did it illegally. With the exception of XP their main products that no longer have serious competitors are junk. Any postive qualities that XP has are the result of some paranoia about "competing" products that can only muster 5% of the marked combined. If ever that 5% becomes 2% then you can expect XP to sink from its current quality (whatever you deem that to be) to the pits of hell where Word, Excel and Pointless Power live.
Why was this dreck posted again? Because most people just glance at headlines and fill in the blanks? Wish I'd done that.
Imagine if everyone who developed a (GREAT)technology had to take care of getting people to widely accept and use it. What if every feature in MS office that was not internally developed had to be discovered and purchased by the user. Microsoft buying up and combining all these different technologies into their well known and constantly used suites actually does drive innovation. I'm not sure who exactly developed the scroll wheel on mice, but Microsofts Intellimouse was the first one to market.. They built in great funtionality into Office and Windows which definatly helped make the product successful.
The linked article is just an advertisement to drive traffic. It holds no value and is entirely meant to promote a flame war benefiting the site's bottom line. Why should I trust anything CoolTechZone publishes if they publish this?
Ferom the linked "article" [i.e. one of those tone-weight pieces of smelling crap]:
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
Ok, tell me, which of you guys couldn't write such a short, pointless, ignorant piece of rant after a dozen beers on a deserted island without tv, women, football, electricity, books and weed ? Because, sincerely, no different circumstance could make me write and/or let be published such a useless piece of crap writing.
So as you don't misunderstand me: it's not what he says, it's how he says it.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
"No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs."
As I recall M$ copied a lot of their "ease of use" from the mac.
and BTW the mac OS does not cost the moon etc... Last time I saw an "upgrade copy" of windows XP for sale it was double the price of Mac OSX tiger. Why should a 3-4 year old upgrade version of an OS cost so much more than a full version (with Developer tools) of a brand new OS???????
Microsoft isn't all bad and if you game it's really the only option for an OS. but to dismiss Linux and Apple in an attempt to justify M$ is ridiculous.
Worst op-ed piece ever.
Cheepnis... lemme tell you something: do you like windows, anybody?
. htm
I love windows. I simply adore windows. And the cheaper they are, the better they are. And cheapness, in case of windows, has nothing to do with the piracy or the price -- althought it helps
but true cheapness is exemplified by visible nylon strings attached to the jaw of the giant windows programmer...
I tell you, a good one that I saw one time... I think the name of the software was "It Conquered The World"... and... Did you ever seen that one? The window looks sort like an inverted ice-cream cone with teeth around the bottom...
Adated from Zappa'z Cheepnis
http://www.cupandblade.com/cheepnis/mst/fzoncheep
--------
* Sigh *
I mod TFA as -1 flamebait. Or a late April 1 post.
What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn't work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort.
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it.
I am sure it is a business model for companies such as Sun and Oracle to just sue Microsoft whenever their profits are down due to insanely stupid and useless products that no one is buying.
Lets be fair and honest about this. Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touches.
OK it HAS to be a joke.
"The aqueduct."
The author had it right.
"it would appear that anyone with even a slight knowledge of computers hates Microsoft"
Furthermore, if someone steals your stuff you don't hate them because they have stuff. You hate them because they have YOUR stuff. In many people's opinions Microsoft stole their stuff. That includes users who paid the built in tax on every machine they ever bought and the excessive prices for low quality products that resulted from the illegal destruction of the competition. When this opinion becomes prevalent enough Microsoft will be treated as a criminal.
If you stole the only well in town then all of the "happy" customers in town will pay your "low" prices for your "high" quality product and they will kiss your posterior until they get around to rearranging your anterior.
It was the only post worth anything in this entire article thread. Windows XP is much more stable and flexible than the Windows that most people seem to think of when they are expressing their hate towards MS. Many don't even realize that XP isn't based on DOS. Their lack of knowledge while spouting BS is well...just sad.
XP is very solid, if you just get a firewall (which you should have anyway) and turn off the services you don't need. Is that really that hard for all these supposedly knowledgable geeks? IE is a different story, so here's an idea: DON'T USE IT!
I'm glad to see MS is improving IE finally (I've been reading that blog as well), but they've taken way too long to do it. The important thing is that it means that efforts such as Firefox have succeeded in pushing the sleeping giant to action. That is good for everyone.
I can't hate Microsoft while I type from their OS. Their OS isn't the problem--it isn't any more insecure at this time than Apple or Linux--it's the attackers that are to blame. Many seem to forget that. It's their lame asses that make computing worse for everyone.
Even with 3% Mac marketshare and even smaller percentage of programmer/hackers, OS X still regularly has critical vulnerabilities. If they had more users, even more would be found. It's a newborn operating system that still suffers from some really stupid mistakes due to their inexperience. You look at System 7 and before, and their operating system was the freaking laughing stock.
Now they're based on BSD, but they're based on an older version of it with their own modifications, yet they haven't managed to patch parts of it that were patched in the other BSDs 10 years ago. While their image is good, their usability is awful, and it shows in their marketshare.
Yet it's cool to like Apple, and just as cool to hate MS. Apple integrates a browser with their OS--nothing wrong with that! Apple integrates a media player with their OS--nothing wrong with that! Apple includes DRM in their latest platform--nothing wrong with that! Apple forces fairly basic upgrades to cost $129 every year or 1.5--nothing wrong with that! Apple's hardware costs more and performs worse--nothing wrong with that!
Seriously, the tech communities I can find are all a highly predictable, boring, broken record. They're supposedly geeks that shouldn't care what others think, and I still remember when it was that way, but it certainly isn't now. They're even more insecure, unlikely to think for themselves, and participants in group-think of any group I've ever seen, save maybe the Abercrombie freaks.
There, I got that out. I feel better.
Disclosure: I am a Gun Nut (if you're a liberal wanker) or a Freedom Fighter (if you're a conservative wanker.) I do not hunt animals, I do not rob people, and I only shoot at properly constructed and licensed ranges.
There is nothing inherently illegal about owning an M-60. As it is fully automatic it is considered a Class 3 weapon. Any American citizen that has not lost their right to possess a firearm may apply for a Class 3 permit from the ATF. Upon receipt of the permit, the holder may purchase and keep fully automatic weapons. It should be noted that in many jurisdictions the application is routed through the County Sheriff and many of those fine individuals decide not to forward the applications, in effect abridging the rights of those citizens who live under their jurisdiction.
There was for a while on a ban on the manufacture and import of Class 3 weapons, but you could still own those that were already here. With the expiration of the Brady Act, that ban no longer exists so it is now possible to buy brand new Class 3 guns (yay!)
The M-60 is tremendously fun to shoot (albeit very expensive) and the individual weapons are valuable pieces of our national military history.
I scanned it rather quickly, but it is apparently this guy understands very little.
He discredits Linux and Mac's security based on obscurity, stating that because these two OS has little market share, there's little incentive to write malware targeting such platforms. Both operating systems (at least I know there exist viruses pre-OSX) have had some minor viruses, but they are hard to spread.
And his notion that Linux needs a kernel recompile for changing one piece of hardware is so kernel 2.0. If you're using a hardware modem, switching the modem is no problem. If you're using a soft-modem, most likely you only need the kernel headers and the source code for those modules. Most retail Desktop Linux have support for the linmodems, and free software purists have accused company like Madriva and SuSE of selling out by bundling close source driver with restrictive licensing.
He also claims that Microsoft brought the computer to the masses. Microsoft bought DOS from someone else and stuck it on the IBM PC, and IBM had put together the PC so quickly so that only the BIOS wasn't off the shelf and Compaq was the first to reverse engineer to make the PC clone. Who's the innovator here? Windows is arguably a rip off from Mac OS, heck even the name explorer is rather a pun on Finder. And Steve Jobs took the GUI idea from Xerox's Alto. So who's the innovator?
Microsoft have shown to be a follower in technology and strong arms it into the user. The typical users here won't know if there are alternative software out there (even if they do they're too lazy to try out the others) if their crappy IE and Windows Media Player is bundled together. Their security is still horrendous, despite the recent emphesis on security. There isn't a single Windows that doesn't yield a default Administrative user, and the end user hardly knows that they're not supposed to be running with Admin rights, and wonder why the heck they're getting all the malware infected deeply into Windows. Malware manages to corrupt even Windows DLLs.
Linux, is admittedly, not very user friendly, but at least it is very predictable. Most of the errors I've come across can be attributed to my misconfiguration.
Mac OSX, despite having a vocabulary that I'm not comfortable with, is predictable, unobtrusive, and knows when escalation of priviledge is necessary, and prompts the user then.
If he wants to sit around fixing Windows deeply infected with malware, then Windows is prefect for him and therefore should be loved. I intend to stay the heck away from Windows if I can.
But I find Windows Xp with sp2 far more stable than any Linux distro I've checked out. That would be some early Red Hat's, Suse 9.1 Pro, Fedora 2, 3 and 4, Turbo linux 2000.. and some others. Also it's bit easier to install new programs in Windows enviroment.. just click it. You know..
Next Slashdot Poll please!
realkiwi
Or is it Steve B?
plug in boards on macs were nornally third party hardware not made by apple. Even so the NuBuss could handle plug and play from day 1.
I think he also must have failed English, inconjunction with being a crazy zealot. He clearly needs to have his exclamation points taken away from him. Unfortunately, given such zealotry, I suspect that his campaign would shift from pro-Microsoft to anti-grammatical-correctness overnight.
Did anyone else notice the excessive use of exclamation points in TFA? I am by no means a great writer, but I recall rather vividly a quote from someone (either a former instructor or someone else--enlighten me) that I will paraphrase as such: One should use exclamation points sparingly but not exceed more than two during the course of one's life. This gentleman has exceeded his exclamation quota, and I believe he needs to come in from recess. The hot weather is making him delusional.
I'd also like to thank the parent for a wonderful, step-by-step commentary on Varun's article.
He who has no
everybody repeat after me: Every OS Sucks.
Sure, on /. (or any other forum, for that matter,) Microsoft is hated. But to say that it's one of the most hated companies is ridiculous. For nerds, maybe, but for the MILLIONS of people who've made a mint from Microsoft, I'm sure they are smiling every time they hear that Windows boot-up song.
People have a tendency to love something until it gets too big, and then they start to hate it. A second example of this is Wal-Mart. To think that Wal-Mart does anything in their stores that K-Mart doesn't do is ridiculous....you get the same products from the same departments in both places. Wal-Mart, though, did make their supply chain work better and used technology the right way, therefore saving them money. That's why Wal-Mart is now the king. So, people hate Wal-Mart now because it's too big. Makes no sense to me.
I'm a Mac user at home and a Windows user at work. Would I use Macs at work if I could? Well, of course, but until that happens, people need to get a life and get over their hatred of MS....after all, a lot of you reading /. are doing so from your Windows XP machine, whether you admit it or not. I am.
What you knee-jerk flame monkeys continually miss when it comes to the success of Microsoft is that it came because Bill Gates understood the market better than the competitors. DOS, (and eventually Windows) didn't thrive because of license agreements, they thrived because DOS and the PC platform was business friendly. The development of the "Killer Application" in the form of affordable spreadsheet, Word Processing, and database programs for the DOS platform along with hardware at an affordable price made the PC market viable. Apple could have competed for the market as could IBM or Atari.
To re-use the car analogy - in the beginning cars were custom built by hand. They were expensive and only available to the very rich. There were also few parts, tires, roads, bridges or even maps because there just wasn't a large enough demand for them. It wasn't until Henry Ford came along with the Model T that the automobile moved to the mainstream, and created other supporting business as well. A rising tide floats all boats. Apple could have easily dominated the market, but chose to be elite, and too controlling over their software and hardware. IBM could have competed, but they were too interested in selling their mainframes that they didn't see the value in PC's the smaller businesses. Atari and Commodore could have competed, but their computers were more toys than office computers. Additionally - they weren't able to get the business apps like WordStar, Lotus 123 or DBASE written for them. Further, when workers decided they needed to bring their work home with them, they were able to have compatible formats for their work on their home PC's.
All this talk about one box or OS being superior to the others is a load of crap. The Model T (or its OS equivalent DOS) didn't have to be the best car ever designed, it just had to do the job at a reasonable price. Having the best hardware or OS means nothing if you don't have the applications you want to run on them. Microsoft's strategy created a win-win situation for IBM and the hardware manufacturers, the developers who wrote and sold apps for that platform, and Microsoft with DOS and eventual windows platform,.
The hatred of Microsoft comes because of their continued success and unashamed capitalism. It really doesn't matter if Bill G personally wrote DOS from scratch any more than it matters if Starbucks employees hand pick every coffee bean or musicians only sing their own songs. They provided what the business community needed, and made many people very rich along the way with related hardware, parts and software sales. They didn't try to keep it all to themselves like Apple did initially.
As soon as someone else figures this capitalism thing out they might just be able to gain market share or even topple Microsoft. Too bad their too busy feeling so superior about themselves rather than giving the market what it wants and needs.
What I found funniest about this article (other than the total cluelessness of the author) was that all ten Google ads surrounding it on the page were for virus, spyware, and trojan protection tools.
Have you read my blog lately?
Mac OS X is a great alternative for Windows the desktop
Linux is an excellent alternative to Unix for the sever market
Linux can do desktops and Mac OS X server can do servers, but there strengths lie else in the other arena.
If you've never used an other operating system for a decent amount of time then you have no authority to speak of alternatives. Its like a guy who lives off McDonald 's all his life and then proclaims there are no substitutes to his diet and defends McDonalds for feeding him all his life.
"You shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you."
What the hell does that mean. How is Microsoft feeding the computing industry, would you care to elaborate. Or would you like me to go through the list of many worthy competitors it has driven under by strong arm monopolistic practices or fines they've had to pay for stealing other's software. Earliest example I can think of historically is Stacker, but there are many many more.
OSes I've installed, used or administrated in the past:
Windows 2003 Server XP/2000/NT ME/98/95/3.0
Mac OS X/9/8/7/6
Irix
Solaris
HP-UX
Linux (Red Hat)
MS-DOS
OS/2
NeXTStep
Be OS
QNX
VAX
AIX
Domain/OS
Acorn Risc OS
BBC Micro
It is true that Gates flipped (bought and resold) an OS to IBM that he didn't write.
It is equally true that Xerox is responsible for a lot of the initial research underlying personal computers today. So is AT&T Bell Labs (particularly Unix/Linux/Etc.) but you don't hear too many people bitching on their behalf.
It is a gospel truth that Steve Jobs is the most brilliant technologist of our time and has personally done more to advance computing than any other individual.
But let's look at what Microsoft did that all of these other talented individuals and ivory tower research institutions and intellectuals FAILED to do.
Microsoft took all of these breakthroughs and made them work in a consistent, easy, and cheap way that EVERYONE could use.
Xerox didn't do it. They made copiers. Apple didn't do it (mostly because Apple's board fired Jobs in the late 80's - stupid bastards) they just sat around and thought that because they were first they were the best.
Jobs made mistakes of arrogance early in his career, they set him back. I think OS X is brilliant and I'm waiting for Apple to stage the biggest comeback in the history of business, but their early mistakes were real.
Microsoft and Gates are not the arrogant fat cats they are painted to be. On the contrary both Gates and his company are models of humility in the technology world.
They work obsessively hard to create and maintain customer satisfaction .... AND THEY SUCCEED.
More people use Windows because it meets more of the needs THEY care about.
When the multi-headed tantrum throwing minuscule minority of the technologically gifted and academically capable DOES THE SAME THING ... then you can bitch about Microsoft.
Until then pick on something that's held up progress rather than helped it...like the GPL.
If you want to open source use a variant on the BSD license, or Apple's license.
The GPL is the single biggest limitation to Linux's success. No one can code a worldclass OS for free, or without a project mgr and schedule.
IMHO, the GPL is a legal virus crafted by a brilliant, warped, and egomaniacal mind (Richard Stallman).
Thousands if not millions of high quality man-hours have been robbed of most of their economic value. If you have worked under GPL at any time then you are one of those people who got robbed.
Why? Because Stallman was jealous of Microsoft's success.
As a programmer I believe my work has value, and I want to be paid for it. Guess what? If your work DOES have value people do pay you. It's simple economics.
So many people pay Microsoft because Windows has great VALUE to MANY people. Also, simple economics.
Apple understands this too, which is why they don't release ANYTHING under the GPL even though they support open source development.
I support Microsoft because they have done a better job of delivering more value to more people.
I support Apple because they (Jobs and his team) are the best innovators in the business.
Everyone else just doesn't measure up. Maybe one day they will, but today they don't. The market does not lie.
MS supports their hardware too. They support their keyboards, mice, network adapters, and other hardware that they actually sell.
Do they, though?
I recently discovered that the US$100 Microsoft game controller I bought no more than a couple of years ago is now officially no-longer-supported by Microsoft. The latest versions of the (very necessary) Windows drivers for this device are not even available on-line; if my driver CD gets scratched or lost, I'm SOL.
Does that count as "support," really? MS in this case only supported the hardware for the length of its sales lifetime, not the length of its useful lifetime. This was the first piece of MS hardware I ever bought, and it's looking like it will be the last, too.
(1) My main (serious) desktop system
:-)
(2) My secondary (Windows/gaming) system
(3) My tertiary (OS testing/playing) system
(4) Wife's main (serious) machine
(5) File server (for common files)
(6) Firewall
Oops. That's six machines.
I actually have nine in total, not including the Mac, because I found that multiple cheap SCSI boxes can make very good file servers. YMMV.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Why is this story posted under "Apple"? It's about Microsoft. Could the iSlashdot iEditors please limit the Apple iPropaganda to the banner ads? Thank you.
I think it's great how people are so trusting of all the non-MS companies to think that if they were in the same situation Microsoft is, they wouldn't do the exact same thing.
IMO the point is to not to let any company get to such position. The point is not trying to find one which wont abuse such position and thus can be loved. :)
hany
I see my evil plan is working just fine.
Everywhere I go, I recommend Microsoft's very latest offerings knowing full well that they are not ready for the light of day and that a feeling of dissatisfaction, no hatred, of Microsoft can only come of recommending a product which is so early in its life cycle, which only the technically savvy will bother to try at this early juncture anyway. At the same time, I leave bitter reminders everywhere of previous generations of products which were likewise wronged early in their lives by my overeager recommendations.
Everywhere I go, I foment the dislike, the bitterness, and the fear of Microsoft's supposed dominion over us all. And I am served....
How am I served? Am I served because only the most bright, the most sensitive, the most pure among the technical ranks will bother to care. I am served because they turn away in disgust and leave this market. I am served because the users ultimately don't care and continue using the products I nurture through my evil machinations.
I am served because you are no longer here. I can now do with your users as I like. I can turn them to my ways, make them dependent, and continue to keep them for myself. For my customers. For my profit. For my entertainment.
Run punk. Run.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
I use both a PC and a Mac. After some time with the Mac I could nail down the main difference in philosophy and user base between the two. PC's are like a home built car. You can buy pre-made kits but it's still a kit car. You can customize it out the wazoo to have something utterly unique and you can make it do what you want. Want a sport car, make it low and wide. Want an offroad car, make it big and beefy. The PC approach means high flexibility but some reliablilty issues and it means some parts don't always want to work together and when it breaks you fix it. Mac is more like a production car. Sure it's not going to beat a high performance kit car in price or in performance, but everything fits properly, all the pieces work together and offer you simplicity. You turn the key and it goes. It breaks, the dealer fixes it. But, it looks like every other car from that same model, has the same performance as anyone else who bought that model, the same factory colors etc. You sacrifice flexibility in the design and it takes more effort to customize it to your needs. Apples are great. You take it out of the box and turn it on and your done. Want to add an Apple upgrade? Just plug it in, your done. PC's are an open architecture with parts made everywhere. You get to pick and choose what you want but there is no garauntee that everything is going to work together. Some people want to just put the key in and go. Some people want to pick and choose. Different people, different philosophies. Both valid.
Most notable amongst all of this is how they brought the computer into the home and to everyone and his grandmother.
You really think that Microsoft Basic was that important a part of the success of the Apple-][ and TRS-80 and the rest? I mean, it was OK for a Basic, and Applesoft was more capable than Integer, but most users never used Basic... they just ran canned software... particularly on the Commodore-64 and Atari-800s that really brought the computer into the home to everyone and his grandmother... and I'm not sure they were using Microsoft Basic anyway...
This is so true. Remember people- its because of MS that people THROW THEIR COMPUTERS AWAY when they are filled with Spyware.
Open Source Sushi
This guy is full of sh*t! He doesn't have any facts right at all! Apple started the personal computer industry! If not for Apple, there would be no Windows! And to another lie: Macs do NOT cost an arm and leg, they are cheaper to buy and maitain if you do the math! A Dell/HP/Whatever costs more than a Mac with approx. parallel specs! I respect Windows users preferring Windows, most of them don't know any better anyway, but I hate it when people like this create lies!
it [Windows] was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
Somebody mod the article -1 Flamebait, please. For those who wonder why, read.
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
I'll agree the products are not as buggy as they used to be, but I find usability still quite bad (having to use a Windows box at work every day).
So I'll continue to dislike Microsoft for both reasons, thanks.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
anyone else think that was a poorly written article?
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered
ahem... AmigaOS, anyone?
This has to be a joke article, it has the rantings of 12 year old.
Given all the ads on this site (there's like 90% adds and 10% content) I expect they are just posting controversial things to generate revenue.
Don't even bother with this. It's not even an article. It appears to be an article, but the content is no better than some rantings you'd find in a blog.
What if the company does reciprocate though? Microsoft is well-known to hand out lots of freebees at Microsoft sponsored events, it's easy to see how people might form a crush on them.
Many other companies do things as well to reward people who act as outside evangelists. So strong emotions it seems to me are sometimes justified - as long as a company really does give back.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Author: Varun Dubey
I forbid everyone from responding to this article. First, it is poorly written. Second, it is a troll that has been submitted by the troller. Third, clearly it has not been age verified, as I think it is a legal violation in some places to allow 13 year olds to publish on the Internet.
> No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered.
Digital Research's GEM Desktop was just as easy to use, and was a hell of a lot faster (and another great feature was that it was available on platforms other than PC Compatibles). Ventura Publisher ran better on my 5Mhz 8088 TI Professional (another example of better engineering not winning the day) than the windows version ran on my 33Mhz 80386 computer under Windows 3.1 (3.0 was worthless).
"In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem!"
Linux uses kernel modules for (most) non-critical drivers, he abviously knows less about computers then he should to be writing such an article. The use of modules combined with excellent hardware recognition means I haven't had to worry about adding (or removing) hardware in a long time. Even better, when I do add new hardware I don't have to bother with the driver installation, if it works it works automagically (nvidia and other proprietary drivers excluded, but the installation is still trivial).
Windows XP has gotten a bit better in the same regard.
The thing that gets me about these types of articles isn't that they get written (we know there is a FUD war going on already) but that Slashdot seems to be continuing to cheapen itself by essentially trolling its own readership.
Nice job, whoever wrote the article!
/. community.
You managed to scare up 1200+ posts with a poorly written rant.
Not sure who looks worse: you or the
Nicely done!
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
billybathgates the megalomaniacal gangster - oh! if he only had love he wouldn't have grown up this way.
In any case, he certainly has made up for it in the meantime by TAKING everything he can possibly can, damn morality, legality, and anyone else but his own greedy ass, leaving in his wake, the bloated, shitty, dumbed down paradigms of IT anyone in the industry is stuck with today. There is just no avoiding the monumental mess he has made in his frenetic, singleminded scramble for wealth and control.
I think I speak for many when I say: bill, you just stink on the world!
They knowingly have inadequate QA for products. Despite this they still market military and medical applications. These are areas that reliability of the product could mean lives. This is inexcusable.
Laken
Oudergem
Sint-Agatha-Berchem
Elsene
Vorst
Sint-Jans-Molenbeek
Sint-Gillis
Sint-Joost-ten-Node
Schaarbeek
Sint-Lambrechts-Woluwe
Sint-Pieters-Woluwe
Ukkel
Watermaal-Bosvoorde
Brussels
It doesn't matter, they modded your broken post up anyways. That means they either read your mind, or didn't understand it at all.
---
What subliminal message?
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
Yes, it's wrong to love microsoft.
Despite them giving us "easy to use" features, a lot of that came from others' yeah linux is guilty of that too, but, microsoft has stolen shamelessly to add on to its OS.
Hell, they tried to claim that the MSX was their technology back in '86 until the MSX computer started bombing in '87. Then they denied they ever made such comments.
1) Flambe
2) Flaimbate
3) Flameboy
4) Flamebait
5) All of the above
Doctor: Don't mind him, it's the steriods talking.
Enough said.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
XP is very solid, if you just get a firewall (which you should have anyway) and turn off the services you don't need. Is that really that hard for all these supposedly knowledgable geeks? IE is a different story, so here's an idea: DON'T USE IT!
That's a big problem for me. Sure I can do that, along with other people in the know (well unless I am at work in which case I have little choice but to run the services demanded by IT folk). But can you honestly say it's a good system that has dire consequences for the vast majority of the populace that does not know how to do those things? Shutting off services is really the only answer as a firewall is only good until someone figures out how to bypass it.
I can, right now, give a Mac to someone - they can plug it right into "the internet" and I know that I can come back in a year and it will still be running as well as it was before. Can you really say that about XP, even now that it ships with the firewall on?
I can't hate Microsoft while I type from their OS.
That's funny, I can because I do. Day to day use of Windows is what keeps my dislike alive and humming. I guess the difference is I also use a Mac day to day. (and other UNIX systems from time to time).
Even with 3% Mac marketshare and even smaller percentage of programmer/hackers, OS X still regularly has critical vulnerabilities. If they had more users, even more would be found. It's a newborn operating system that still suffers from some really stupid mistakes due to their inexperience. You look at System 7 and before, and their operating system was the freaking laughing stock.
Indeed earlier versions were poor - for local security. Some people still use OS 9 web servers because they have no exploits whatsoever. I think it's the military.
I personally got into Macs when OS X became stable (for me that was 10.1, close enough). They made the right choice and made people create user accounts, made sure the computers started out with services turned off by default. That is why even if a vulnerability is found in any partiuclar service (like SSHD) that it's pretty unlikley you're going to see a real exploit for it - because the potential target base is not the 10% of computers that are Macs (you confuse marketshare of sales vs. running computers) but instead the 1% of those computers running SSHD. The vast majority of computers bought really require no services running at all that keep open outside ports.
Now they're based on BSD, but they're based on an older version of it with their own modifications, yet they haven't managed to patch parts of it that were patched in the other BSDs 10 years ago. While their image is good, their usability is awful, and it shows in their marketshare.
The usability is poor? It hasn't seem to have hampered Windows much which is far worse off in this regard.
Yet it's cool to like Apple, and just as cool to hate MS. Apple integrates a browser with their OS--nothing wrong with that!
They include a browser with the OS. They did not integrate it. Finder for example does not use the browser. You can use it in other apps through a library but that is distinct from it being embedded in all parts of the OS.
Apple integrates a media player with their OS--nothing wrong with that!
Again you misuse the word "integrate". Heck, Apple doesn't even include Quicktime Pro. Also, I would argue that providing seperate media players for video and audio encourages user choice. You don't have to use Quicktime for video, it's just handy it's there. I use VLC much of the time myself.
Really MS does not "integrate" mediaplayer either, but they subtly encourage you to use proprietary WMV for audio - I am pretty sure iTunes rips MP3 by default (my apologies if it now uses AAC as the standard, though at least that's a real standard).
Apple includes DRM in their latest platform--nothing wrong with that!
No they don't. You are confusing the DRM
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...what the hell is the safeword for us Windows users?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They are not the same at all. Linux uses modules which makes things very easy. Winblows, even if it had the same mechanism, screws things up with intentional confusion like TWAIN, where hardware drivers and user interfaces are married. Take a quick tour of kernel modules sometimes and you will be impressed. As a sanity check, compare your experience with Knoppix to Windoze XP.
Debian kernels come with all free modules and they are not hard to use. They are placed in /lib/modules/kernel_number/. Distributions like Knoppix and Mepis use hotplug and other hardware recognition to configure devices on boot in a way that XP will never match.
It's not hard to use module utilities yourself. Just make yourself root and play. To see what modules your have try "lsmod". If it all flies by to fast, try "lsmod |less". If you want to manually install a module for a device that refuses to identify itself, use "modprobe name". To remove a module, "rmmod name". To see more about how your computer is set up, try manpages or poking around /proc. A quick google search will answer questions manpages don't.
Now compare that to having to run Winblows Update all the time, digging trough all manner of inconsistent GUIs for settings or that mother of all evils, The Registry.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
It should be quite obvious that this is a joke. Varun Dubey, if Google is to be believed, is involved with OpenBSD.
:P
Consider this:
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it.
The clue is in the "slightly high price". He's taking the piss. Which also explains the specious marketshare argument.
So it's amusing to see real Microsofties falling over themselves endorsing this "fan's" intelligent and well-reasoned viewpoint.
iqu
It's precisely and only because they first had the support of users that they could then impose these kind of contracts on OEMs and ISVs to preserve their dominance (which, as has been pointed out time and time again, almost any company in their position would have done).
Seriously blows the GP out of the water, and is very informative.
---
Light is filtering down from above. Would you like to use DIVE?
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
Wrights invented first manned, powered
aircraft in level flight.
There were earlier remote-controlled
powered aircraft, as well as manned gliders in level flight, and manned, powered aircraft in non-level flight.
I'm good and sick of this.
For the past ten years (since my PB1400 days) a decent Mac was within $100 of the price of COMPARABLY EQUIPPED PC box, and for at least the past five years, cheaper.
You can also thank Windows for the virus / trojan / worm hell - on balance it's not an OS I would invest time or money in given the choice.
Running a lab with 1:3 PC:Mac, I can tell you that it takes as much time to babysit those 1/4 PCs as to take care of the 3/4 Macs.
Who's more expensive now?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Looks like someone's pulling for adsense hits.
What a cheap way to get web hits.
> XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it.
Yea, right. Try plugging in an Epson ES-1200C scanner or some other legacy hardware. My scanner will run on Linux, and I'm not going to go purchase another scanner just to run Windows. Nor am I going to purchase 3rd party drivers. If it were just the scanner, I might purchase a new one, but it also includes an automatic document feeder.
I read slashdot a lot, and I have barely scratched the surface of the much loved *nix OS side of things. I have not touched MAC OS at all. And I am pretty far into the MS side of things as a career. I can say with a certain combination of servers, applications, and the right OS you can do things I've never even seen mentioned here on /. When a *nix or MAC setup can do some of the things that the normal home user doesn't even know that windows products can do (like Sharepoint Portal, Live Communications, ISA Server, etc.) Then I might be impressed. But fact of the matter is unless someone can prove me wrong, I'll keep making my money setting up businesses with solutions that you can't get through the "others" out there. Thanks, end of line.
Just like MSFT. I'm thinking a cellmate would be absolutely perfect.
Suck it down.
Plain and simple. Maybe someone else would have, then again maybe not.
Spine World
What the hell? Slow news day or something? I can hardly belive that this was given space on the front page. Windows has alot to like about it, but the person who wrote this artical obviously has very VERY little experience with other OSes. The crack about the EU "Not even being able to agree on a contitution" is just pure gold. Windows reputation has just been lowered simply by association with this guy.
I would love to re-read this same artical written by a serious IT professional with wide experience and backed up by soild arguments not just emotional cat box liner.
Mr Pro MS
tisk tisk tisk.... if you really want to argue about it you might think if Mr Gates was not a good businessman what we now call Windoze XP might be the newest biggest brittest version of OSX or even OSx. The code that started bill was orig. created by Xerox but they failed to copyright it, it was then stole by the woz or steve (im not sure which) they also failed to copyright it, so then it was stolen by the great and powerless BILL 'the borg' Gates who was smart enough to copyright it. So in my opinion the only thing Bill Gates and MS have going is that they are smart enough to copyright a good thing.
just my opinion
sin cera
Blkbird
Varun, meet Douglas!
I'm sure you two will get along famously.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Linux should be capitalized. It's a proper noun.
I wouldn't mention it, but it undercuts your message when you're blatantly wrong about something right off the bat, even if you're substantially correct about the rest.
it's exactly the same as the question in Life of Brian: "What have the Romans ever done for us?" We tend to hate anything that's big and unweildy and probably doesn't have our best interests at heart. But we can't deny that Microsoft has fuelled the industry. Look around you. If it weren't for MS none of this would be here. For better or worse...
I am huge fan of Linux, I dislike Windows and would prefer not to use it. But I hate Microsoft as a corperation. Sure they were pioneers in the beginning maybe but what now ? They steel software from others and don't play well in a group. All they care about is the almight dollar. Michael
Linux: For those able to think out side of a window
Microsoft has effectively eliminated its commercial competition in the desktop OS market. It is no longer viable for a commercial entity to attempt to create an OS in the desktop space.
If that isn't a monopoly position in that market, I'm not really sure what would qualify...
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Being big makes you a target plain and simple.
/. on XP or 2000 machines as opposed to Linux.
IBM, Dell, etc take heat for silly decisions, while small computer shops nobody notices. People complain about poor case and motherboard design when Dell makes 1U cases that sag, but there were few complaints when motherboard makers started implementing early SiS chipsets (that could not be more buggy). Why? They're a big target and an easy hit.
IE takes lots of heat for security and features while Mozilla gets away with it a lot more. Now Firefox goes mainstream and a security issue makes the newspaper despite being so impossible to exploit. Why? Because it's moving up in the %'s of the browser market.
The government is also a pretty obvious target.
Microsoft doesn't necessarily produce anything that much worse than many of the MILLIONS of software developers out there, but of course because it's got billions of dollars and a product used on 99% of workstations out there, people target it. Rebel against the force!
Is it wrong to like Microsoft? Not at all... But Microsoft doesn't like you- you're small and insignificant to them, in comparison to a small developer.
Mistakes are just magnified, but ultimately aren't any worse.
Many slashdotters rebel against the force of Microsoft and move to their Linux-ey goodness, but I'd say a very good percentage of users of Slashdot are surfing
M$ does something very complicated. For the exposure/number of users they have, they SHOULD take more care in their coding practices for security and stability, but compare to every other software developer, they're probably one of the better.
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
There seems to be a lot of ads on CoolTechZone - some google adsense and a few direct banners to hardware vendors. It appears that Dubey wrote his 'article' as flamebait to attract some extra traffic from slashdot, knowing the effect that microsoft has here. (1062 Comments as of this writing)
I like using it, I do not like supporting it. Macs just suck in my opinion, I don't care about eye candy so much and to me that is all the mac represents. Linux...my wife uses Linux, I have it as a dual boot setup on my laptop. Never use it though. There is simply no reason to do so for me.
Many of the deals Microsoft made with PC makers and with application developers were made in the early 1990's when Microsoft Windows was 16-bit (v3.0 and 3.1) and was still gaining marketshare.
The PC users at that time were mostly running DOS, and some ran Windows, DESQView, or OS/2 as multitaskers, but GUI applications were few and far between.
Windows didn't obtain the kind of user support that *you're* talking about until well after Microsoft Office had been around for a few incarnations (around the time of the Windows 95 release). Before that, it was just one of many GUI environments and toolkits in use (albeit one of the more prevalent ones).
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
I hate Linux. I think it's the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
I have the strange feeling this moron has never had the fortune of setting up (or paying for) a server of any kind.
I am getting somewhat tired of hearing about Macs costing an arm and a leg + other things. For many purposes, Macs aren't incredibly more expensive than PCs, particularly in the laptop market. Price out a typical laptop from Dell or IBM, with a good sized hard drive, Gig of RAM, DVD+-RW, solid video card, Firewire, etc. It will come out to just about $2000. Price out a similar Powerbook 15", you'll get about $2700. Take out the 20% educational discount, you're all of a sudden pretty damn close to the $2000 mark.
.pdf handling vs. Crap .pdf handling
Next, there is the issue of software. Apple offers much more useful software integrated with their OS. Consider the following:
iMovie vs. Windows Movie Maker
iTunes vs. Windows Media Player
Safari vs. Internet Explorer
Smooth
OS integrated CD burning that works vs. one that doesn't
Obviously, Mac OS X is much more useful out of the box. Then, add to that much better hardware design, much better OS design, and no asinine 'take a tour of windows xp' or 'help make office better' garbage.
On top of that, probably due to ease of use, Mac OS X Server has the cheapest overall cost of ownership between hardware/software licensing and support (more support and license costs on M$, MUCH more support costs for Linux).
Overall, Apple has its shortcomings (hardware price, integrated ftp/smb clients, Superdrives that break), but it really doesn't deserve to be discounted so quickly.
Partial Credit: The Engineer's Best friend
"Well, the bridge didn't fall all the way down!"
Short answer to question in title...
Yes. Absolutely you're wrong.
It always facinates me how much the geek community reveres Steve Jobs and distains Bill Gates. It's got to be the alpha male/Jock factor, because if you look at how they've treated people around them you realize they're both bastards.
Jobs was a wannabe hippie colledge drop out who, through screwed over his best friend to the tune of $5000
tried to screw over almost everyone who worked on the original macintosh on their stock options, and is generally regarded as a horrible, abusive boss.
Bill Gates is a guy with actual geek cred, and everyone who was around him during the first couple years at microsoft got a piece of the action.( Although I hear he was a horrible, abusive boss as well ) Paul Allen fared pretty well, and BillG promoted his college buddy to CEO.
Now ask yourself who would you have wanted as your boss/friend
"What has Microsoft given us?" ..That's like defending a fruit vendor because they gave you a discount, before attempting to murder, and succeeding, on the least knowledgable of their competition. Lets look more at "What has Microsoft taken from us.", such as their many upheld, and ridiculous patents for tuings which they did not in any way create. It's a much better idea, since microsoft gave us DOS (which they stole from someone else), and got the GUI design from - guess where - not their own heads!
I think I finally understand why they call it a "kernel". While running just a _few_ Linux applications, my CPU heats up at around 100% usage (full power) and starts exploding with memory leaks and seg faults, much akin to burnt popcorn in a microwave left unmanaged. I think I'll try some BSD popcorn instead...
It's nearly impossible to find 93 octane in California. There is one "specialty" gas station I know of that carries 93 in Los Angeles. But in general, the highest you find is 91.
So, yeah, all the Mercedes-Benz's and BMW's and Porsche's in California are all running on 91.
My other first post is car post.
Linux is overrated: Mac and Windows fans still are not willing to accept that the GUI dose in fact get in the way.
Linux is that whole "Operating system your way" you don't pick out "The Linux distro" you find one that is entirely tweeked for you.
Some (or maybe most) linux fans lose track of this and we get distro wars.
It's no secret Taco likes Debian, I like Slackware, Knoppix is populare for Linux advocates etc.
Your making tradeoffs and well.. How many fast food places get away with having a creepy Mascot? "Have it your way" burger king.
That is also the real reason Microsoft is so hated.
Oh come on Linux makes major blunders, IBM screws up, Apple is no saint and Sun Microsystems was known for it's occasional laps of sanity.
We forgive them all. Becouse I can switch to BSD, Sun users can ditch solarus for Linux (if needed) Apple users have options. But Windows is the ball and chain, you MUST use it and you must live with it. You didn't have a choice.
Choice is god, We all want choices. We all want options. We all want freedom.
That is over rated as far as anyone who supports Microsoft is conserned.
Microsoft is far byond anyone else:
Microsoft Windows started off so far behind the tech curve they might as well have admitted they'd never catch up.
Amiga was far and byond Microsoft Windows. As an operating system Windows only recently passed up Amiga with Windows XP. Thats pritty good for a long dead platform.
Geoworks had Windows 95 beat and was introduced when Windows 2.x was on the market.
Apple would have been far byond Microsoft Windows but instead of working on new technologys Apple spent it's time answering all the nitpicks of the computer user base. Apple didn't know that all thies nitpicks were not from the users themselfs but actually talking points from Microsoft and did not represent the wishes of the typical user.
As a result Apple went around fixing things that didn't need repair instead of actually improving the operating system and hardware.
Other companys who were not so nieve ignored thies talking points and as a direct result left the market (the REAL reason Microsoft published those complaints).
While Microsoft pulls ahead not by supereor R&D but by slowing down (or crushing) everyone else it should be admitted Microsoft IS very much ahead of it's time. That I don't mean they are creating wonderful things before anyone else could but they do things before the technology is ready or capable of handling it.
Usually there is a right way and a wrong way to do something but when a technology is just too early there is only the wrong way.
At that point three operating systems will jump at it and do it the wrong way.
Linux will do it with a temporary hack or kludge untill there is a right way. Mac Os offers hardware upgrades making the right way a reality.
Microsoft Windows includes the wrong way in the operating system and leaves it that way long after a right way is commen practace.
I don't actually exist.
BS. Apple started the personal computer trend with the AppleI and followed with the Apple II. Business were using DOS and spreadsheets. There were IBMs, Tandys, etc. And excuse me, the Amiga, of all the computers was probably least the toy. As for the comparision to Columbus, note it was the spaniards that brough the deadly viruses to the the new world* - Just like Windows. *Including syphillis. (Untrue history that the new world had deadly syphillis - see Nova/PBS tv).
Too bad some of the best wine I've ever had can be bought for under $10/bottle.
Amiga.
And as for $$$... when I got my amiga for $800AU in 1989, the comparable PC was an XT costing about $1200AU at least (admittedly with mono monitor - but the amiga could use a TV and had *colour*).
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Parent is the proper reply to TFA.
TFA is utter garbage and it's author is a complete idiot, but Microsoft does MANY things well for the common computer user and then some.
I don't agree with most of Microsoft's tactics, but they have thrived and created a market that allows the entire world to enjoy many aspects of a universe that would otherwise be much more difficult to enter.
Why do you discuss nonsense so much? Do you think that your awesome mega powerful display of mindpower in a bbs will erradicate the OS you dislike? Imagine Billy saying "oh boy! this ModemButterfly guy at Slashdot thinks windows sucks... Ok people let's all pack our stuff and leave forever" We all have our differences in taste. You know what I'd really like? That we all stop arguing about which OS should be evaporated and teach the common user to install Linux and Windows in the same machine and not having to choose between the two. I like both. I love Slackware and Gentoo and WinXP and Win2K3 -don't have MacOS 'cause I can't afford a Mac- and I recognize they're all good and thanks the Great Magnet, They're very different!
so lets ponder this... WHERE would we play all these games??? wow its just dawned on me, all these game i personally have..dont be rediculous and say linux. i guess the obvious next option would be Mac??
I didn't hate Microsoft until the release of Win98. Once they started integrating the browser into the desktop, they lost any respect I may have once had for them.
Oh my god, how can you even call that an article?
There is barely a worthwhile argument in it, and it reads like it was written by an eight year old. And the crap that guy has written down has actually spawned yet another huge religous/platform discussion, which I anticipate will contain a lot of crap too.
I hope there is some conservation of poo law at work here that will stop everything turning to shit.
but "Everything is better than windows" threads always leave me feeling a little dirty.
Windows is extremely ambitious, more than Apple or Linux. Much more. It's just that most of the differences are below the surface and don't show up in day-to-day discussion.
For instance, Macs control their hardware. If someone comes out with a card that Mac hasn't approved, and it doesn't work in a mac, they don't even try to adapt to it, do they?
I bet that when they move to Intel, they will still only allow "Approved" hardware.
On top of that, MacOS has generally been more simplistic. Macs limped along with cooperative multitasking for quite a while after windows eliminated it in 3.1.
(Please correct but don't hate if I got this wrong, I'm not a heavy mac user)
On the flip side, Linux has a much simpler software and library model than windows.
Windows attempts to allow ALL applications to share libraries and desktop functions, even (epically) if the apps have never heard of each other.
You can drop almost any type of application into a Word document--spreadsheets and drawings from different vendors.
Apps all share DLLs that can be updated, a system written for a library version 3.2 may have that version replaced and has to handle it. Linux apps generally link to a specific library version.
The Linux GUI shells are getting much better (by emulating MS & Apple), but after playing around with them for a while you realize they have almost no depth. Drag & Drop generally only works within one application (or suite of apps) at a time, same with embedding one set of data in another.
The reason Linux doesn't do this stuff is because it would make Linux MUCH less reliable than windows.
Take the following: I install a Windows app. In doing so, it replaces a DLL in windows/system that Windows uses (Causing a reboot). This adds functionality that windows didn't expect. The same DLL is used across any 32 bit version from 95 through XP and expected to work.
A comparison: I install a Linux app. During the install it replaces a library used by the desktop manager to add some functionality. (Say, modifies how drag & drop works for all applications or replaces X86 with a new version).
You (obviously) have to restart X which is pretty much same as rebooting, all your X apps are killed, etc, and would have to adapt to various unknown software that may or may not even exist as you are writing your piece.
Would you be able to ship something that did this and worked across every Window Manager and every Distro and didn't disturb the stability of the system or any other apps that use the library you replaced?
And yet this happens many times during the lifetime of a typically windows install.
Windows is too ambitious and should have concentrated more on quality all along--but it still fits the home market better than the competition, and if it had insisted on 100% stability from the beginning, it would not have the market position it has now.
It still sucks.
A consistent track record tells us that Microsoft can not be trusted. I'm sorry for the "do gooders" trying to look at Microsoft from a good light.
... because there was no competition... Now that firefox has come on the scene ... Microsoft are thinking about doing something.
What happens when Microsoft has no competition (as all other monopolies have done in history)?
- prices go up
- quality goes down
- the consumer loses out
Look at what happened with IE when Netscape was out of the way. IE has been a piece of s**t for a long time
If you think Microsoft needs protection or support, you are VERY SADLY MISTAKEN.
End of Story
Move On
AC
But even if they are, care to explain what the "oh, I get it; people really aren't that ignorant" explanation is for the NSF results? Or that a third of Americans don't know that light travels faster than sound? Or that more than half think that lasers work by focusing sound?
Historically, political polling tends to be accurate to within a few points. How, then, are you accusing the NSF survey of massive incompetence? Aside from "man, those answers are scare", that is.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Agreed 100% with this article.
buy products from a convicted criminal, especially while the criminal continues to cheat, lie, and steal on a regular basis?
YES!
Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
in a word yes. what more do you need to say.
looks like microsoft is getting more and more desperate every day!
Lets ignore how Apple basically stole UNIX from the Open Group. They never licenced it, you know.
Mod parent up--
I drive a Volvo!
(And what's even sublter about the comparison that Ford now owns Volvo--an appropriate analogy considering the number of examples of Microsoft's own "buyout" tactics.)
While I agree with the article's author on the fact of Linux bieng over-rated, I differencetiate from there on. Mac OSs only pro is the way it looks? Aparently hte author has never used OS X, with it's wonderufl functionality, or used Mac OS 9 or previous, with it's fugly style. MS single handedly brou8gt hus affordable computers? So they could have done it without the hardware companies? And with the insults to the EU, COME ON! Jesus Christ he sonuds like a 14 year old throwing out insults as fast as he can think of them. And Sun and Oracle jsutsuing for profits? Has he ever been involved ina suit? A good number of suits cost more than the immeadiate profits. He's an immature fanboy. This is coming from a WIndows fan writing on a Windows machine who wouldn't have it any other way.
Virus Trojan Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam. Virus Trojan. Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam Virus Trojan Zombie Virus Spam. Virus Trojan Zombie. Spam Virus Trojan. Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam. Virus Trojan Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam. Virus Trojan. Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam Virus Trojan Zombie Virus Spam. Virus Trojan Zombie. Spam Virus Trojan. Zombie Spam Virus. Trojan Zombie Spam.
Personally, I'm impressed with this guy. He actually managed to troll on the front page.
Nonetheless, a troll article is all this is, and as such, it should be taken lightly.
In addition, during this file transfer, viruses won't run. And the trojans I found have ground to a halt. Even the dashboard trojans are asking for permission to load as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while using malware on my G5, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen it crash faster than my Windows XP machine - it's only needed rebooting once. My ZX80 with 1K of RAM crashes more often. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that G5 is a "superior" computer.
Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use G5 over other more malware ridden computers.
This is simply not true. Apple created the market for personal computers. IBM tried to compete, but eventually lost when companies (such as Compaq) reverse-engineered the IBM bios and made compatible systems, rebirthing the market into basically the form we see today.
Did Microsoft do this? These systems were all running Microsoft software, but we're talking 1982 here. This is DOS, an OS Microsoft purchased, not developed; and, as it was originally named, it was more Quick and Dirty (QDOS) than it was revolutionary.
Microsoft is not successful because they make good software. They are successful because they are good businessmen. They leverage every bit of market penetration they can get to force exclusive contracts upon their distributers, meanwhile distancing them from industry standards to prevent any unnecessary compatibility that would threaten their monopoly.
What drugs are on? People hate Microsoft.
They obviuosly don't. People don't care enough about operating systems to switch.
So lets rephrase the question...
WHY DOES EVERYONE ON SLASHDOT PREFER LINUX?
Maybe it's because you come in the bookmarks of preinstalled distributions.
Maybe it's because you are linked to - and from other linux sites. Hense you attract Linux Users.
Maybe it's because you don't really advertise in the Windows Users' domain
Maybe it's because Linux users are proud to be nerds, and this is slash-dot, the imfamous and the internet's most geekest website ever.
- you have a picture bill gates with some sort of star trek cyborg thing.
News for Nerds?
"You are switching your computer off at 5:30pm? ha ha ha, my uptime will be far greater than yours....ha ha ha..I'm going to stay here alnight! "
Maybe it's because your "sections" panel reads:
BSD, Linux and NOT windows.
---
You are a BSD and Linux User Website, almost entirely.
Maybe i'm wrong. But i'm sure there have been millions of users who have sat down in front of linux, and after 20 minutes think "Oh, yeah, that's why I like Windows - I can actually do things with it, like write documents"
Maybe I am wrong.
Yes, yes it is.
I think I finally get it. Microsoft really are pioneers! Pioneers offed the Native Americans, Microsoft offed all the companies that helped Windows dominate in the 80s and 90s (Stac Electronics, Wordperfect Corp, Lotus Development, Netscape, numerous utility makers, etc.).
Many before the Wright Brothers were able to get self-powered, heavier-than-air vehicles off the ground. What the Wright Brothers were successful at was their use of control surfaces, enabling them to steer the plane around a figure eight course and demonstrate more stability and controlability than their competition.
Did they develop the GUI?
No Xerox did. And no Apple didn't develop it.
Being accurate Xerox refined the GUI idea. They did not invent the idea.
TI created an AI computer using Unix for the OS and a GUI for the user interface.
To make it work TI invented "Plug and Play" and Apple liccensed it (making a very big deal about TIs efforts, not clamming any credit)
Microsoft not only copied "Plug and play" they did a very bad job of it.
Did they develop Desktop Publishing Software?
No
Xerox did.
I don't actually exist.
Microsoft can't get any more marketshare.
Apple owns the computer graphics world and Linux owns the servers.
On the Desktop the alternitive to Windows is (in this order) Linux then MacOs. MacOs is prefered but people don't want to buy a new system. Apple could be selling them for $5 and people would still call it "too expensive" becouse of the $5,000 they already invested into a PC.
At the office the alternitive to Windows is (in this order) MacOs then Linux. In this case they don't see the vast amounts of free software and so they don't see the software they need.
Most of MacOs apps are commertal and thusly in sight of the manager who desides what platform to use.
In graphics it's MacOs, The alternitives being high end Unix boxes, SGI and SUN.
Less and less so over time.
In servers it's Linux. The alternitives being BSD, and Solarus. In that order.
BSD when the workload overwhems the Linux box.
Solarus when you absolutly MUST have the highest preformence (and pay through the sphinter for it).
MacOs X can do the job it's just not popularly known for it.
I don't actually exist.
I was going to warn you not to drink the Cool-Aid, but I seem to be a bit too late. So, while you stumble around in the jungle waiting for the hand of Gates to pluck you up to Redmond, I sit here typing on my Linspire 5.0 PC while updates for some of my programs are happening in the background via a p2p connection to CNR. Don't worry about all the bodies we'll send a crew of penguins out to clean up the mess in a week or two. So drink-up and enjoy the Cool-aid from Redmond!
I lost my sig...
Actually, you missed one thing that Macs really don't do as well as PC's - games. That is one thing you do need a Windows PC for (running them under Virtual PC isn't going to cut it, if they even would run in the first place).
One, other than the games that comes with Windows my computer doesn't have any games installed. Years ago I bought two cds with games and was given another one and though I installed those when I reinstalled Windows I didn't bother to reinstall them. Secondly when I go into a store that sales computer games I see Mac games as well as PC games. Not as many maybe but then again Macs don't have nearly as much of the market as PCs do. As Apple gains more market share more games will be written or ported to Macs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
He does make some good points. While Linux is far from being a bad OS to work on, and not exactly as difficult as the reader makes it out to be, it's still not quite there in the desktop world. At least from my perspective (a professional software developer), open source packages do work, and you can write good code, but many times I find the documentation skim, and many fustrating limitations with the technology (MySql in general for instance). To a large extent, the LAMP platform is over rated. Windows is fine, far from perfect, but it shouldn't be discounted.
His architecture was undoubtedly good, initially, but then the weight of the whole thing started to shift towards the win32 subsystem, which even got to take shortcuts to the hardware and everything else in the end.
So, we ended up with plain Windows, warts and all, on top of something resembling a microkernel, similar to OSF and some other unices that had their underbelly replaced by Mach.
The whole win32 layer should have been completely re-implemented, as lightweight services, keeping only the sane parts of the application level API, and shove the rest into a compatibility thing that should be deprecated from day 1. Apple is able to pull that stunt quite well (cf. Carbon).
Cheers,
Emile.
All generalizations are false, including this one. (Mark Twain)
In this industry, only winners live. All the suppliers rely on each other in the life chain. To survive a little bit longer, every player has to bind himself to the boat has the biggest chance to win. So the winners get stronger. Microsoft doesn't deserve any love. It's surviver.
Simple, really.
Yes. Yes it is.
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
That's why I hate Microsoft. Their published docs only reflect reality where nobody's making money any more.
The good stuff? You get to help make it.
And Microsoft keeps what makes them money.
Closed open source.
(And people talk about Steve Job's reality distortion field.)
on our hands, on our arms, on our backs, ...
we chose to let them do it because they promised impossible things cheap and then slipped us the mickey when they could only deliver 20% of what the other guys could have.
Most developers (companies, and their management) wanted to get a niche market and then have the secure position of maintaining it.
Microsoft broke that paradigm because they knew that a commodity owned by a single company is a monopoly. Now that they have the monopoly, they are trying to do the same thing, except with the whole market and not a niche.
And we let them do it. We must not forget that our $99 or $1999 or whatever, and our participation in their forums supported them.
The only way to beat the monopoly is to make the OS a true commodity, and we know how to do that.
So Windows can connect devices by just plugging them in. My Linux machine seems to be able to do that as well. But at least with Linux, the device doesn't magically stop working overnight and make me pull it out and put it back in again just to get that pretty little bubble.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
With all due respect, both WFW 3.11 and NT 3.51 were released around the time I suggested that the Windows user base really took off (Feb 1994 and June 1995 respectively).
Both of them also followed the time that OS/2 was hurt by ISV deals and PC preloads by at least two years, and perhaps three.
I hardly think my history lesson is skewed. You may want to revisit your memories again...
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
I was setting up a network for a client the other day, and I realized why I hate Windows so much.
At every step, it assumes it's smarter than you. It's the wizard-and-paperclip stuff, but it's in more than just user-oriented stuff.
I was setting up a printer, with a separate network print server, in a DMZ, so that it's accessible from both a publically-accessible wireless network, and from a private office network.
In order to set it up, I wound up having to physically haul the printer to each of the workstations, set it up via USB, temporarily reconfigure the network and plug the ethernet into a different router, and then finally put everything back how it was supposed to be.
All this because Windows doesn't appear to have any way for me to simply set up the printer, specify the file I want to use for the driver, specify the network address I want to use (even if it's not accessible at the time of setup), and move on.
Aarg!
Pete Forsyth
Loving windows is about the same...and illegal in some parts of the EU.
While Microsoft's billions of monkeys on computers create super buggy, pain in the ass, corporately-designed shit for software, I do owe them both my arms and legs, my retracted middle finger once in a while, and a life's worth of gratitude.
While only 16 years old, I hold a steady job as the I.T. Consultant, Sysadmin, and Web Applications Developer for a local company, making thousands of dollars every year while still in school.
Without Microsoft, I would not have my job. I would not have a career set out for me in which I am so deeply interested and entertained.
Shit! IIS demolished PHP again! But hell, I'm making 3 figures just fixing this crap.
I thank Bill Gates for your creating DOS, I thank his monkees for doing everything else, and I thank Microsoft for getting technology where it is today, because who knows where technology would be today if Bill was still in jail.
But Microsoft, you still suck.
Hmm... I wonder why everyone who knows programming wants to his Windows with a virus? Is it because people who program prefer other platforms?
That's right, every other programer in the world prefers to use linux.
Linxus can be nice to develop on, but it would be the height of stupdity to assume that all programmers prefer linux. Just like I wouldn't suggest that all programmers prefer windows or macs based from my biased point of view
for the record I program, and although I have both windows and linux running at home my preference is windows. If you care why, it is because of the generally unfinished nature of many of the programes I use on a daily bases, compared to the windows market.
I think there is an important underlying point that a lot of us are missing in this discussion (and related ones.) That is that, like many posters have correctly mentioned above, early Microsoft execs were not so concerned with making the greatest product in the world. They knew this, and all of there competitors knew as well. This is entirely unimportant though. The important question to ask is "Why were they so unconcerned with generating quality products?" The answer is that, again, like many people have noted above, they didn't need to. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are two of the most influencial execs in modern business, and two of the most moving and convincing speakers to date. Because of this they were able to secure contracts and agreements that other, more abrasive, potential partners were unable to grasp hold of. This brings me to my next point: Because of this advantage over its competitors Microsoft was able to spend less time inovating, and generating truely quality material and more time securing its place as the near overwhelming tech giant it is today. What is important here is that if you fast-forward twenty years or so you see that we're still using Microsoft products in more places than anyone (even MS) would have thought. A lot of people like to go open source with their OS becuase they think it's cool to hate "the Man". The same goes with browsers; sure Firebird, or Firefox, or Firehippo, whatever it is this week, is a neat little browser, but the security risks make one ask if it's really worth it right now. I hate using gay analogies, but if you use Pantene ProV shampoo, what kind of conditioner are you going to use? The same kind... now is that a consipiracy? Do you purposfully go out and buy differing hair products just so "the Man" (the hair care product mfg.) doesn't get his extra dime? No, that's silly. The same goes with MS. As a developer for the Marines I am surrounded by MS products. Everyone in the military and government employment offices uses it, and it's all over organizations and corporations across the world. It doesn't matter if it's easier to use, or if it more fun, or if it looks better, or if it's the most popular, or if it does your homework; what matters is at the end of the day, how much time did you spend rewriting a document because your coworker's MS Word program couldn't understand your format. How much time (and stress, ultimately) could you have avoided by realizing, sometimes it's OK to "give in to the Man."
- Be polite; be professional; but have a plan to kill everyone you meet -
This is the most unfortunate aspect of operating system expectations to date. Barring a genuine hardware problem, all users should expect that their operating system will never crash.
Now the vast majority is so well conditioned, that halving the frequency of crashes on their system is seen as a benefit, when they shouldn't have been allowed to happen in the first place.
I've worked with someone who has high praise for SGI. I've not played with their OS myself, but from what I've heard they're a company that takes responsibility for it. As I understand it the bug policy is along the lines of "If your application can cause a problem with our OS, it's our fault, and we will fix it, at no cost to you." They believe in your right to trust that their OS is bullet-proof, providing of course that the hardware is maintained.
When will Microsoft and other commercial vendors to offer that kind of stability? When can we expect a crash-free OS to be the norm rather than the exception?
AMD and Apple? Bad examples, I think. What the hell does AMD have a monopoly on? What does Apple have a "monopoly" on? iPods? iTunes? No, Apple has market dominance, but no monopoly. Further, the market dominance it has is in one localized area. And iPods haven't been around long enough yet to see if they'll outlive the fad stage.
Google? Possibly your one good example. Except I'm not sure how well the "monopoly" concept applies when you don't have to pay any money for the good or service. In any case, I'm not sure that Google actually has a monopoly on searches. Yahoo and MSN are still in the mix--I'm sure Google still gets a great deal of the search traffic, but are there some numbers I could look at to compare?
Rather than having equated monopolies with being automatically bad/evil, perhaps I should have equated monopolies with dictatorships. Now, as you might point out, dictatorships are not necessarily bad/evil either. But there is that old saying about how power corrupts...
But that's not proof. So yeah, I'm sort of vaguely, weakly able to entertain the notion of the friendly monopoly except... wait! no, wtf!
-----> Look, it's like this: If I'm the only guy that can supply you with carrots, and if you and a million other people need (demand) carrots to live, then it's a happy day for me! I can charge you any damn price I like, and as long as you don't kill me and raid my carrot storage bin, I win!
So it goes like this:
>1. Horde all the carrots in the whole world
2a make everybody in the whole world love carrots and rig it so they can eat nothing else but
2b destory and kill all the means of production of carrots that I don't directly control
3. $$$ PROFIT!! $$$
This has been your economy 101 class for today kids, thanks for attending.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
I tend to hit /. so fast during the week (often literally doing so between compiles when I have some down time) that I'm not always careful about the specific phrasing I use.
:-)
Sorry for the confusion.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Microsoft is bad. Without them computer technology would be twice as advanced. Whenever you get a powerful monopolistic corp involved in anything, it only serves to slow down progress. This is what Microsoft has been able to accomplish. I'd say it started with the realease of Windows 3.1 or so.
Need more proof, just look at the oil industry. We were supposed to be flying around in solar power vehicles by 1996. Yeah right, our vehicles are less effiecient now then they were in the '80s, hmmm...