Slashdot Mirror
The Company Everyone Loves To Hate
In honor of Microsoft's 30th year, Epeeist writes "The BBC is running a Have Your Say article on Microsoft at 30." From that article: "Microsoft will always adapt and buy into other areas to keep themselves at the top. They're the company everyone loves to hate." While they're reflecting, most people are focusing on the now. teslatug writes "Brian Jones, a Microsoft PM on the Office team, has just confirmed that the new default XML format of Office 12 is not compatible with the GPL. Brian believes that LGPL may be compatible, but others have raised issues about the ability to redistribute." Relatedly, shades66 writes "Microsoft's Alan Yates tripped over his own words in responding to the Massachusetts Information Technology Division's late-August declaration for OpenDocument and other open software standards." For some more colourful commentary, smooth wombat writes "John Dvorak has written an article for MarketWatch in which he postulates that the reorganization by Microsoft is actually a prelude to its breakup into three separate entities."
Wow, I'm breathless and speechless! Just read the litany of comments posted on the BBC article, collectively of which these posts represent the general sentiment of the posting community.
If this is so, I'm devastated (but maybe I shouldn't be so surprised, as it is consistent conversations I have casually with friends and family). The general feelings seem to include:
Most disturbing is a seemingly cavalier attitude about what are historical data regarding Microsoft's business practices, products, etc. As an excercise, note that in the list above, each "what's wrong with that?" can be interpreted in two ways.
As for Dvorak's speculation Microsoft is prepping to split into three companies, I don't get that. Why would they? One of Microsoft's major takeaways from the DOJ's penalty phase was not having to split up as a company. I'm am not a businessman, but I can't see Microsoft splitting unless forced to. (Though I wouldn't discount it as some huge PR spin to make it look like they're taking steps to not be the evil empire anymore while behind closed doors (and through underground tunnels) continuing to operate as a single company to ensure their continued position in the marketplace.)
Indeed, I would hate to see what a truly efficient Microsoft could do to Apple, Sun and the open source community. Considering their resources, and if they can whittle themselves down to a highly efficient company, they could put up an effort against their competitors second to none. Now, perhaps that wouldn't be a bad thing. An innovative Microsoft will force the open source community and other companies to become just as competitive, if not more so.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Let's ask slashdotters what they think of Microsoft. Again.
That's bound to produce an enlightening, well balanced, polite thread.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I thought that Microsoft had to break up into separate entities much like Mama Bell did long ago to avoid monopoly issues. Why are people surprised that M$ is considering it now?
My work here is dung.
No, I hate hating them. I'd rather not have such annoyances in my life. I'd just like safe, secure software that does what I want, and nothing that I don't want.
And I'd like them to secure the current operating system before moving to the next one.
For a programmer an improved operating system is one with less program faults, less resource requirements, and better performance on the same hardware. Microsoft seems bound and determined to go in exactly the opposite direction.
Cheaper would be nice too. Darn, they missed that one too.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Actually, the BBC put out some decent programming at one point. But their news broadcasts continue to drift leftwards and even their costume dramas are total crap. I can't believe the Brits are still willing to pay a tax on their televisions just to support that outfit. Wait a minute... were you referring to that evil monopolistic computer company, IBM?
"Standards" designed to make a competitors entry into any given market controlled by microsoft impossible."
An endless FUD compaign against competitors
and choosing to stifle innovation in self interest of controlling the direction of the market to areas they already control.
Microsoft are the greatest company in the world and managed by a genius.
Bill, Seattle
You would think he would let his legal department come up with a better reply than that.
// no
I bought a bunch of MSFT stock in 1987 and rode it up until selling in 2000. However much I despise Bill Gates, I figure I owe him my financial independence at least. So, stick it only partway up your backside, Bill.
Microsoft are the greatest company in the world and managed by a genius. Bill, Seattle
This one made me chuckle. Nice to see the press with a sense of humor. I can't tell whether it's funnier because of the 'Microsoft are' British-ism or not.
Author of Enyo: Up and Running from O'Reilly Media
Personally, I'm waiting for SCO to sue M$, then just settle and let M$ buy up SCO. Then, at least they'll own UNIX... oh, wait, SCO may not own UNIX. Well, at least they can try to own UNIX.
i don't love to hate them.
i love to stop using their products, in favor of better alternatives.
Maybe at 60, we can talk about how MS is old and gray and on the downslope. ... Still, I'm sure our government will leave no conglomerate behind.
But then again, MS has a tad more "retirement" money than most of us
Yea ... Well ... John Dvorak says something stupid every week and just by coincidence alone some of it comes true.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Yeah, Dvorak expects MS to split into:
-MS Systems. They would make Windows, Vista, CE, whatever. They will make TeH M0ney!!!
-MS Software. They would sell Office, Power point, etc. They will make even more Money!!!
-Xbox division. They would sell the xbox and Halo 2. They will LOSE money, a billion dollar for the next two years, that is what MS is planning right now. They will go broke in no time.
Mmmm. That is not going to happen. Why separate the part of the company that make money from the ones that lose it? Only to become more profitable in the short run. They would end up even more stagnant, or broke.
"When it was under attack by the Justice Department there was consideration within the company that it would be broken up by the government." *newsflash* IT ISN'T OVER YET! Check it: www.thetc.org
Wow, don't look at the comments on the BBC page. It's the anti-Slashdot!
But it's pretty tough to avoid the obvious comparison between Microsoft and the Hydra. Think Google & Co. will deal Microsoft a fatal blow? Guess again! It just pops back with three heads instead of one.
John C. Dvorak, the same guy who predicted the 2.5 inch floppy....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
Splitting up the company in such a fashion seems like a good idea to me. Stockholders have the potential to be well rewarded by such a move. The Motorola Freescale split-up was a good deal for everyone involved. Freescale's stock is up (from $14 to $22) and they are doing fine on their own. If some stuff dies then it dies. Products that fail the test don't need to be on life support indefinately.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In a previous discussion here earlier this year I suggested that Microsoft was getting ready to collapse. This was based on the special dividend they paid out which only served to draw down the cash on hand and make certain people much richer. Look for them to issue a few more special dividends then start selling off chunks of the company.
And I really like the other posters comment: "They are going to reproduce?!"
namely, SCO.
Are they dead yet?
Is this really relevant? You think left-leaning news orgs are more intelligent ... BECAUSE they are left-leaning? Well, "like it or not" I don't agree.
The BBC thing is a non-issue, who cares about feedback boards?
The verbal gaffe, who cares?
The Dvorak thing will be linked to again tomorrow - with more biting commentary, no doubt.
There is another giant growing that gets little notice from the slashdot community. Oracle is growing to a very large company; today they are much more than a database company, they have their hands in every type of industry. The only difference is they are building their future applications on open standards (ADF, JSR168, JSR222, WSRP, etc)....
In the South Park movie, Bill Gates got shot in the head and everyone in the theater laughed. Once South Park wants to kill you, the teeming masses will follow.
Gaël Duval Tells Why Mandrake Linux Is Better Than MS Windows
They're the company everyone loves to hate.
I'm not hating them, I'm sick of them...
about time for one, happened with netscape, AOL, antitrust, java and now google.
did you forget to take your meds?
I almost posted something that a MS shareholder (also owned Apple, SUN, IBM, and other tech stocks that did very well) once said to me, but I decided against it. The comment would have been an automatic "-1 Troll"
Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
Does anyone know just how much Gates has contributed to charity? Like most sane developers/technicians, I loathe Microsoft, but perhaps there's something good about it after all? Maybe all the pain we've gone through wrestling with this beast is actually for some good in the end? Or is this just a flash of innappropriate optimism? Are the contributions just a drop in the bucket, or do they really amount to something?
from TFA:
which are restrictions on requirements and restrictions on limitations.and then later:
So something that has limits of the limitations that can be enforced is too restrictive? I think he has it backwards!
--jeff++
ipv6 is my vpn
Quoting one comment:
What?!
Artists and geniuses, methinks.
Ah, an apologist!
How can an XML file format be incompatible with the GPL?
Does that mean we can't link them directly, or include them embedded within a binary?
It's a file format. They going to patent XML?
I'm confused.. I think he only said that for FUD factors, becouse it makes NO sense at all.
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Hmmm, welll, OK.
Is it Microsoft that is evil?
n s/microsoftDejanews.png
s /billgatesDejanews.png
http://www.realmeme.com/Main/evilindex/corporatio
Or is it Bill Gates?
http://www.realmeme.com/Main/evilindex/celebritie
They have done a lot to advance technology
Yes, they gave you DOS 3.3 in 1988 while the rest of us primitives were playing with our Amiga 2000s, Atari STs and the Apple 2gs.
Advanced technology in what way?
Bill Gates donating a million bucks is like me donating $10. It's hard to be impressed with a donation when the sacrifice is so slight. Of couse it is great that the donation was made, but as the song goes, "It don't impress me much". Measured in terms of impact on myself and my family I donate more than Bill Gates does. He gave up nothing (and arguably gains hugh tax writeoffs) by his pittance donations. Do a google search to gain perspective.
90% of the wealth is in 2% of the pockets. Bummer to be in the majority.
the XML format of Office 12 is not compatible with the GPL
Is the Office 12 XML format not GPL-compatible, or is the GPL not Office 12 XML format compatible? The sword cuts both ways; if we're going to complain about Microsoft using a license which isn't compatible with the GPL, we should equally complain about RMS writing a license which is compatible with very little.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
Anything and everything he says is 100% dead wrong. So he is a pretty good indicator of technology directions. Just don;t make the mistake of ever thinking that he might be right.
"I mean, why couldn't an ethical company have accomplished all of these things?"
Welcome to business in the United States of America.
It's pointless to single out Microsoft for bad business practices. How about WalMart? How about Intel for that matter? What about the record labels and movie studios?
Hell, even Apple directly violates a court decision from their lawsuit with Apple records - simply because they know the potential monetary windfall from making the iPod would be higher than any liability from a court case. So the ends might justify the means, but they still acted with no respect for a previous settlement.
There comes a point when a company is generating so much money and influence that it's army of lawyers and lobbyists can either prevent or reduce the impact of just about any lawsuit. Not any, but certainly just about any. It seems to take a large scale scandal and fuck up like what happened at Enron.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
The parts that torque people:
1) Changing licensing schemes, raising costs for companies dramatically, and having the nerve to call it "to lower customer costs".
2) Sending nasty letters to school districts at the end of the semester saying that they are about to have an audit of their licensing scheme, when they are short staffed as it is.
3) Purposely building their technology so it won't work well with other environment, thus preventing interoperability.
4) Illegal contracts regarding what computer companies can or can't sell if they want to be able to sell windows.
Just because they aren't found guilty of a crime in court, doesn't mean their activities are moral or ethical.
Ok, I give up, why you?
If this is so, I'm devastated (but maybe I shouldn't be so surprised, as it is consistent conversations I have casually with friends and family).
Actually, I think the best way to describe you would be naive. Woefully naive if you really think that people give a flying shit about "anti-trust" stuff. That's really just legal-ese, and the only reason that geeks felt that they were anti-trust experts was because they knew of a high-profile computer company that was involved. Real people don't care. MS is the largest software company on the planet by a long shot because they make products that people like and they sell them at a reasonable price. Most people realize that the whole "anti-trust" thing was just a legal maneuver brought about by their competitors (via the DOJ). Only geeks have grabbed onto this court case for dear life as the prime example of what makes MS "eeeeevil". Nobody else really cares. Real people may have read about it, then they moved on with truly important things in their life. So, I guess the best that I can say is, "Grow up, kid. That's how the world works."
Microsoft started as a company full of innovation, looking to bring the world together thru the use of computers, to make life easier and less complicated thru the use of a lot of their brilliant software.
Thirty years forward from the embarkation of a noble dream seems a company likened to a powerhungry politician -- they want to be number one, at all costs, and want to have the say and press their voice into the 'law' that is what we know as personal computing. Hordes of Microsoft employees are leaving citing 'poor work environments' for companies like Google, who treat their employees as their number one commodity, something not suprising -- Microsoft did the same in their inception.
Right now, as a network administrator myself, I see Microsoft falling further and further off of the map. Organizations such as my own, and I'm sure many more, look for interoperability, compatibility, and the ability to use the latest and greatest technology with the greatest ease of lateral movement. Linux as a whole is conducive to this environment, embracing open standards so that everybody can view a document in different operating systems, different platforms, etc. And companies realize this -- Microsoft's ease of use will be lessened as time passes, while the brilliant programmers depart to work for the MS counterparts -- be it Google, Sun, Apple, or whomever. And those programmers will bring to Linux what Microsoft brought to computing in merely an idea thirty years ago.
For Microsoft's birthday, I think a good look at their road travelled is important. It will show them how they started, how they innovated, and how they succeeded. Now instead of innovating, they are eliminiating competition, stopping people from innovating, and stopping interoperability. Look back at your history Microsoft, and see that the noble and humble beginnings you had play a huge part in where you are today. It's still not too late to make a u-turn and take a different road than you are travelling -- because the one you are on leads to a cliff.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Well posted collection of related material, nice job. Can a slashdot editor really learn new tricks?
I don't think any of us are going to "have to hate Microsoft" for much longer. Linux is a credible alternative and very usable. Even if you switched to Mac right now you'd find yourself with much less hate for Microsoft. In a few years, I don't think there will be any reason to choose Windows.
Actually, you forgot some other important companies that have slimy business practices... Red Hat? Debian? Pricing their products at *zero* certainly makes for a *Very* uncompetitive environment. In fact, these guys make Wal-Mart look friendly by comparison. At least Wal-Mart prices their products so that they make a profit. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see commerical OSS makes brought up on "predatory pricing" charges by the DOJ very soon.
To put it bluntly, you're incapable of donating any amount that's useful. His "pittance" has vaccinated more people than your "massive" donation of jack shit ever will. You could live another hundred years, and still not match the Bill and Mellisa Gates Foundation's charitable deeds in five years. Charity isn't about making your own life miserable, it's about making others' lives better.
The biggest reason why MS dominates the market that everyone overlook was how easy it was to pirate. You can't do that easily with a mac because Apple controlled the hardware. Go back 5 years and name a company that didn't have a pirated copy of Windows X, Office X, any windows software. Add to this ease of piracy and the legions of folks who knew how to get around bugs and glitches of the OS. The OS had stability issue but there was always a way to work around it. Until Windows 2k & XP Microsoft was like American cars of the 70s. They broke down but everyone kinda knew how to fix em. Nowadays everyone take their car to the shop for minor maintenance.
...to 'the company slashdot loves to hate'! 90% of the market does not imply everyone hates them, only that the other 10% does (*nix, mac).
>Their lawyers typically manage to get them through the courts despite their actions, and their contributions typically provide a sort of "PR shelter," but in the end what they accomplish is built on wrongdoing.
So aren't most things in life? (One could even argue all of it.) There may be a point when a wrong is too gross to ever admit, despite what good deeds it may make possible, but it seems overly-simplistic to compare Microsoft to the Mob and on that basis condemn them.
As for what another company may have or may have not done, we do not know, but we can reasonably suppose that another company would have been like, well, another company (like Sun). And so I think the question remains valid, what good has Microsoft actually done? And specifically (since I believe they've done more to harm technology than advance it), what are the effects of Gates' contributions?
The tragedy of it all is, MS persists in this at it's own expense. Imagine waking up tomorrow to see MS touting it's new open documant formats, company-hosted utilities for converting to and from other OS's native file formats, a new release of their OS (call it "good neighbor" Windows!) that accepts it's place in a hard-drive's file system and even co-operates with Lilo. Wait, don't faint, yet! How about a live Windows-CD that runs on top of Linux systems, an OS release that includes a free compiler (which creates fully capable binaries with NO STRINGS ATTATCHED!) and a Windows utility that can handle a man page, a .png file, and run .elf binaries? Now, don't you think that would change the ill will to good will? Wouldn't this be a new selling point - "Why *switch* to Linux when we'll generously let you have both?" I mean, come on, would there be any end to the marketing potential? MS is frantically clawing, looking for a foothold in the changing field - and this most obvious answer is staring them in the face, and they can't see it. So down they go, and the rest of us will have a more peaceful co-existence when they're gone.
Hell, I don't hate Microsoft, I pity them. They might have more money than me, but I sleep soundly at night with a serene conscience.
Too bad he's donated somewhere close to $30billion.
Found this on the "Have your say" page:
Microsoft are the greatest company in the world and managed by a genius.
Bill, Seattle
Help find a cure for cancer!
I've spent countless hours of Windows TM downtime through trying to troubleshoot problems or installing the most basic of software.
Total cost of ownership since '95 I reckon around 17,000 uk pounds.
(Based on an average per year direct software Windows TM cost of 200 uk pounds + a MODEST 2 hours per week downtime for 10 years at 15 pounds per hour.)
If you view Microsoft as a software company, they have always had mediocre products. If you think that Microsoft's main product is adversarial behavior, they are one of the most successful companies in the world!
Here's just a tiny, tiny sample: The U.S. District Court's Findings of Fact in the Microsoft antitrust case lists 207 pages of abuses.
that the story includes a photo of Bill Gates that's from Getty Images, and not from Corbis, which Gates owns.
I didn't find the story to be entirely the lovefest that some prior posters were implying. Perhaps the BBC is updating its sampling of comments as they come in?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
TFA which is touted as a "Have Your Say" article seems to be more like a, "have your say article only if you think the sun rises and sets in the collective asses of billy gates and stevie balmer". There is a curious lack of comments below it which dissent from the rather fawning tone of the article.
As for the line "The company that everyone loves to hate". Ummm I hate to disagree with you but I for one do not "love to hate" microsoft. I simply avoid their product in favor of more stable and ultimately more useful products, as much as is possible.
No, he donated the money I had to pay him because i was forced to write my documents (school, office) in M$ Word, or because I was sold a computer with pre-installed Windows. He stole money from many people like me and then gave back a tiny fraction it.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
I think you misunderstand the nature of the product an OSS company sells. I doubt the DOJ will make the same mistake.
how to invest, a novice's guide
it's Microsoft that seeminly hates people. It shows in the condescending way they treat everyone. The way they lock people in. The way they frustrate the user at all opportunity. the way they change their licensing at will. The way they fail to play well with anyone or anything that is not them.
It Microsoft that is the one doing the hating.
Don't you mean bizarro-Slashdot?
Elaine: Yeah! An' he is a friend, Jerry. He is reliable. He is considerate. He's like your, exact opposite.
Jerry: So he's Bizarro Jerry!
Elaine: [pause] Bizarro Jerry?
Jerry: Yeah. Like Bizarro Superman. Superman's exact opposite, who lives in the backwards bizarro world. Up is Down. Down is up. He says "Hello" when he leaves, "Good bye" when he arrives.
Elaine: [pause] Shouldn't he say "Bad bye"? Isn't that the, opposite of "Good bye"?
Jerry: No. It's still a goodbye.
Elaine: Uh. Does he live underwater?
Jerry: No.
Elaine: Is he black..
Jerry: Look. Just, forget it...
namely, SCO.
Are they dead yet?
Netcraft hasn't confirmed anything yet.
Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
You sell shoes. I give shoes away. How is that not "predatory" pricing? MS, Sun, and HP sell operating systems. Debian and Red Hat give away operating systems. I don't see the difference.
But, aslo, I'm curious, since you so adamantly support the DOJ, do you also support tough marijuana laws? Do you support prosecuting little old women with cancer for smoking pot? I mean, if the DOJ, according to you, is infallable, you gotta support that, huh?
"Honor" and then "colourful". What's up with using the American spelling for one and the international spelling from the other?
Signature.
Too bad he's donated somewhere close to $30billion.
His total welth is about $42 Bill-ions .
Or did you mean milions?
Or is it not his money he is spending for charity?
Eitrher way Do not spread FUD.
According to Wikipedia, Gates has donated about 5 billion dollars in charity. Thats about 10 percent of his total wealth. The list of the accomplishments of the Melinda Gates Foundation is quite impressive.
Diss the all you want, but as America continues to forget how to actually make products and sell them to the world, we will be sorry for bashing one of America's star players in the world economy. Someone has to keep other countries addicted to more than wheat and steel. Microsoft is one of the shrinking number of American companies that makes products that other countries depend on.
So, unless you *like* the idea that other countries don't need US software, I'd stand aside and let Microsoft do what they do best: slowly embrace and destroy their competitors - ones that are no longer in this country but countries that intend to make our trade deficit skyrocket and cause economic collapse.
Ack, correction, that's 5 billion in 1999. "As of 2005, the foundation has an endowment of approximately US$28 billion." I wonder how much of that comes from Gates though (other companies donate to it, I believe).
You know, the quotes and sayings on the bottom of every /. page
As of 11:27 PM CET:
Hate the sin and love the sinner. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Take it to heart.
The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
Bottled water distributors sell water. That's their product. Restaurants often give free water with meals. The meals are their products -- not the water. Are they in competition? In the case of Debian, soup kitchens give away water and even soup. Are they in competition with restaurants and bottled water distributors?
My point was merely that your argument is fallacious. Unless this is rhetorical flourish on your part, you've read far too much into that.
how to invest, a novice's guide
It's ironic that a company that regularly describes itself as "innovative" shows genuine fear towards the concept of free-market competition. If Windows, Office, etc. were such high quality, innovative products, MSFT wouldn't need to hide behind proprietary file formats in order to keep its customers. We will only have true free market capitalism when our file formats, communication protocols, operating systems and hardware are based on open standards.
SCO is Microsoft's schill. I see no reason for people not to extend their hate of SCO directly to Microsoft. The money trail is clear.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
That is all...
And any money you donated to charity is because McDonald's is the only fast food shop in town.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Microsoft is the greatest company in the world and is managed by a genius.
This post and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
Microsoft reserves the right to change the terms, conditions, and notices under which it offered the information in this post, including any charges associated with the use of the information contained within. You are responsible for regularly reviewing these terms, conditions and notices, and any additional terms. Your continued use of the the information contained within this post after the effective date of such changes constitutes your acceptance of and agreement to such changes.
Any post made by Microsoft may itself contain additional terms (for example, codes of conduct or guidelines) that further govern use of that post, including without limitation, particular features or offers (for example, sweepstakes). If any terms contained in this Agreement conflict with any terms contained within a post, then the terms in this Agreement shall control.
The posts are only for your personal use. You will not use the posts for commercial purposes. You will not use the posts in any way that is unlawful, or harms Microsoft, its affiliates, resellers, distributors, service providers and/or suppliers (each, a "Microsoft Party" and collectively, the "Microsoft Parties") or any customer of a Microsoft Party, as determined in Microsoft's sole discretion. I can't believe you're still reading this. Microsoft may tell you about certain specific harmful uses in a code of conduct or other notices available through a post, but has no obligation to do so. You may not use the posts in any way that breaches any code of conduct, policy or other notice applicable to the posts. Without limiting the generality of this section, you may not use the posts in any manner that could damage, disable, overburden, or impair any post (or the network(s) connected to any post) or interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of the posts.
If your net worth is $100, fair enough. Dollar for dollar, he gives a higher percentage of his net worth to charity and research than most people do.
-everphilski-
Did I mention pricing at all? Did I mention it even once in my post? Your post hardly justifies wasting the ten seconds I'm taking to reply to it.
"I think it's equally fair to recognize that their contributions are like the societal and charitable contributions of mobsters or fascist dictators or whatever "Lawful Evil" entity you want to name."
Your comparsion is fundamentally flawed. Mobsters and Fascist dictators rule by force, i.e. through violence. Microsoft doesn't point guns at people to dictate policy. And no, claiming their influence is equivalent to pointing a gun is flawed in a free market system. Anyone can always walk away without physical harm.
Vote for Pedro
Some time ago there was a discussion on Bill Gates' charitable donations and whether he was a "good person."
Carnegie built a bunch of libraries, but he also hired Pinkertons to murder striking steelworkers.
I'd say Gates isn't as bad as Carnegie (as far as I know, he's never had anybody killed), but he certainly didn't come by his wealth honestly. I'm not even talking about the anti-trust violations, I'm talking about the multiple instances of MS flat-out stealing code. They did it to DR, they did it to Stacker, and I'm sure there are many more that I've never even heard about.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Trying not to sound a lot like a Bible whacko, I can't stop from pointing you to the Parable of the widow's mite. It concisely demonstrates the parent poster's point.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
"Regarding the "charitable" Mr Gates... let me just say this: if a thief breaks into your house, steals all your money and then donates 1% of it to charitable causes, will you commend him for being such a good person?"
OK. So copyright infringement is not theft, but selling a product to someone who voluntarily buys it is? Dumbass. Learn something about economics before posting stupid comment like this in the future.
Vote for Pedro
As for Dvorak's speculation Microsoft is prepping to split into three companies, I don't get that. Why would they? One of Microsoft's major takeaways from the DOJ's penalty phase was not having to split up as a company.
Why would AT&T break themselves up? Personally I don't think Microsoft will, but there is good reason to do so. AT&T broke themselves up because they wanted to become a technology firm but their consent decree prevented that. So they negotiated a breakup deal that would allow them to do that.
Why would Microsoft break themselves up? IANAL, but by understanding is that they have ths nasty axe hanging over their head called "collateral estoppel"* (which is closely related to 'Res Judicata'). Collateral estoppel holds that absent a change in facts, that facts decided through necessary procedures in one case cannot be relitigated in another. By breaking themselves up, they could protect themselves from the hundreds of civil antitrust suits currently making their way though the court system because they could argue that facts *had* changed and that any new allegations of market power had to be relitigated.
* Collateral estoppel is usually enforced between one party of the lawsuit and a person not party to the original lawsuit. Since it is not mutually applicable here, it is often enforced as "nonmutual collateral estoppel." This is why a slap on the wrist of a company in an antitrust suit when paired with a conviction is so darn dangerous.
I don't think they will. Microsoft is too arrogant to do this. They won't do that unless they are forced to discard the terms of their consent decree.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
This tale is held by Christians and other followers of Jesus' teachings, to mean that a gift is to be judged, not by its impressiveness or value to men, but by measure of what God is seeking from those who worship him. It is also seen as an admoniton to give oneself entirely to God.
So basically, judging based on percentage of wealth given is just as unimportant as judging on total wealth given. What is important is the intent and manner in which it is given. The issue with the parable is that the Pharases gave out of their wealth to make themselves look charitible, while the widow gave out of her poverty for the glory of God. This doesn't make what the GP said any less valid.
"John Dvorak has written an article for MarketWatch in which he postulates that the reorganization by Microsoft is actually a prelude to its breakup into three separate entities."
You mean, like this?
Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
Red Hat? Debian? Pricing their products at *zero*
No, Redhat/Debian are free. There is a difference.
I stopped thinking I was unique when I found out everyone else was to. So does that make me the average user???
... is the BBC heavily regulate (I will not say censor) these 'Have Your say' topics.
I try to post a few every few weeks, but they never get published. Just read some of the remarks and names, and you start to see a trend of bullshit.
Treat these as a you would a political broadcast funded by MS.
One of the BBC comments mentioned what wonderful things Bill Gates is doing for charity in Africa. The most terrible part about the charity of Bill Gates is what the intellectual property laws that Microsoft and others push for have done to the people suffering from AIDS there. The same IP laws that supposedly protect Microsoft's innovations also prevent the manufacture of generic AIDS drugs. So what is $10 Million versus how much more could be done with more affordable AIDS drugs? There is nothing charitable about those contributions when Microsoft profits much more than that through ridiculous IP laws.
For those outside the UK let's make it clear that the BBC promotes using the "Have your say" section all over its news stations. Mostly just its 24 hour channel - News 24 ,but also of late "Have your say" has featured on the 6 o clock news, which is watched by millions every night. My point being is that ANYONE can add to this - and the chief contributors are the ignorant masses. The sort of people who got online within the last two years with XP SP2. The sort of people who haven't even had a BSOD or recall the days when 56k was the best around. Even if they had a problem with Windows in particular (as opposed to the more common spyware/adware woes) they'd simply call someone to fix it rather than festering dislike for the corporate entity behind the software itself - its simply another machine to be fixed, like the washing machine or the gas boiler.
To them, Microsoft is the big corporation headed by everyones famed, friendly geek Bill Gates - and hes a philantropic rich dude, awesome!!! It sounds slightly elitist to say we know the "truth" behind this perceived facade...but really it works on two levels. On one level are the aforementioned Joe Sixpacks, who use computers (and many other things) casually. On another are us, the techies, geeks, nerds, whatever - who use computers several hours a day and are relatively experienced in the craft - we have encountered problems, and want to solve them as opposed to hiring somebody to solve it for us. Microsoft would have to be flawless to avoid criticism from us, and I don't just mean its software - I mean its whole persona, its business practices and its bosses.
What I am trying to say is is that its time we faced up to the fact that one of Microsoft's long term aims was to make its software central to the mainstream market and to satisfy the masses with it. That Have Your Say page is solid proof it has accomplished that particular goal, that and the fact millions of homes in the UK and elsewhere now run Windows contently.
I think it's equally fair to recognize that their contributions are like the societal and charitable contributions of mobsters or fascist dictators or whatever "Lawful Evil" entity you want to name.
...at least they ran on time... errr... they ran? Ummm... I've got nothing.
At least the train's computers wouldn't blue screen of death... Oh wait...
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
"John Dvorak has written an article for MarketWatch in which he postulates that the reorganization by Microsoft is actually a prelude to its breakup into three separate entities."
As if Ma Microsoft wasn't enough, I just can't wait to see a Verizon or an SBC running around in the software business.
Comment from TFA Microsoft has changed the world. At this point, the fact that they have such a large percentage of the market is a good thing. It has also guaranteed that English will be the language of the world for many generations to come. Steph, Decatur, Georgia USA Does this dumb feck realise Windows comes in languages other than English?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
is that they lie. They lie right to your face. They lie when they know that you know they are lying. Alchin should be brought up on perjury charges for the line of BS he fed the DOJ-And we all knew that it was a lie. Cannot undo the browser from the OS-LIE. They mixed software not metal. It could be undone. This open document format thing with Massachusetts. MS could support it. They just want them to go on using MS software and assume that nothing else would work. Don't ask any questions, just keep paying. Total farce.
Bill Gates donates to charity because he cannot find any more ways to spend the money on himself. He would rather buy a reputation as a philanthropist than another 2,000 Ferrari Testarossas. The reputation has more utility to him.
Al Capone set up a soup kitchen during the Depression for similar reasons.
This has been written so many times by so many other people, all from the point of view that they wished Microsoft WOULD make Windows open source. It strikes me that Windows NOT being open source is a good thing.
If Microsoft were to follow the example of Apple and switch to a Posix compliant core - or even an Open-source Linux based core - they would probably make even more money than they do now.
Firstly I'm not saying the software would be free to buy. You'd still buy the compiled software package at PC World or with your new PC - and this is how the majority of people would get it. Optionally you could download and compile the thing but most people wouldn't know how or care how - they want a PC that works. Or you could obtain a pirated copy - at least now there would be no need for pirated copies...
This brings us nicely to stability. Since you could download and compile Windows, geeks will do exactly that. Remember we're in the minority here. Most people don't know how to do this and even if they did couldn't be bothered. So we're downloading Windows, compiling it, fixing bits that don't work and submitting the fixes back to the trunk, making Windows more stable and more efficient.
Of course Office needn't be open source. In fact most of Windows needn't be open source. They'd only open out the core OS - when you finish the download and compile what you get is very rudimentary and you have to add even basic tools: text editors, browsers, productivity tools - yourself. People will release their own packages of these but by and large most will use Internet Explorer (part of a Windows productivity pack which you'd be able to buy if you had the free version of Windows - would only cost slightly less than Windows itself) which of course would stay closed. Only IE's hooks into the OS would be open and so open to scrutiny (and thorough testing, debugging, fixing etc from the community).
Not much would change for the 99% majority of computer users who couldn't care less except their PC crashes less and they can get more done. The 1% of us that are interested end up devoting our time polishing up an operating system, for free, for a company making a hell of a lot of money from selling that operating system (including source code, what the hell most people will do with that is up to them) and feeling good about the fact that we have the opportunity to do this.
Right, because I'm sure you personally know Bill Gates, and he has divulged this information to you. You don't know Bill Gates' motivation, and neither do I. The only person who knows is Bill Gates. If trying to rationalize away his charity so that you can continue to look down at him helps you sleep at night then knock yourself out. But then again, maybe, just maybe, its possible that a very rich man genuinely wants to use his wealth to help other people.
But no, I'm sure you're making such a statement because its true, and not because you have some sort of prejudice against the man.
Right, because I'm sure you personally know Bill Gates, and he has divulged this information to you. You don't know Bill Gates' motivation, and neither do I.
So you'd like to assume the best and the other poster assumes the worst. Given Gates' track record, I think he has more of a leg to stand on. I'm sure Bill probably likes the feeling of helping people, but that doesn't mean that he's suddenly absolved of all his past crimes and transgressions. I view him for what he is, a ruthless businessman, and a human being who exhibits some humanity, and has the kind of vast personal fortune to make a big difference in the world without having a noticeable impact on his lifestyle. I'm sure that the fact that it helps his business and personal reputation quite a bit was not lost on him when he was planning his philanthropy.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
There's an almost elegaic quality to these posts, as if Slashdotters realize that the old Beast is looking green about the gills these days and may not even be around in its present form to celebrate forty years. Getting into their present situation must have taken Microsoft some hard work, ho ho. They have a vast monopoly, 50-60 billion in cash and annal profits of around 12 billion, but everyone says they are a lost jumbo in crisis. Don't be so sure. Even a small percentage of that, properly targeted around some bright and savvy people, could cut a swathe through the IT industry, so I guess Microsoft shouldn't be written off just yet.
Interesting that the article opined that an offshoot of Microsoft's dominance is that it has helped English to become the world's undisputed common language. No more poncing from French-speaking diplomats.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
Trying not to sound a lot like a Bible whacko, I can't stop from pointing you to the Parable of the widow's mite. It concisely demonstrates the parent poster's point.
You don't sound like a Bible wacko but instead you just made yourself sound like a liberal or someone afraid of religion by making the reference of "Bible wacko". Just because someone reads the Bible does not make them a whacko, unless you are a liberal and then you view reading the Bible as the worst thing that someone could do and the person should be put to death like what happened during the Salem witch trials.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
The reasoning might be tied up with patents in one way or another, as a couple of other responses to your post have suggested.
I'm not sure if it'd be too far off to just assume that Microsoft's spreading more FUD, though. Certain people and departments within Microsoft have shown again and again that they're happy to apply Microsoft's own skewed interpretation of the GPL when it suits them... which essentially amounts to "Use GPL'd software and it'll virally affect the licenses on all of your own software, crippling your business."
While no one knows Bill Gates' heart, we can say with certainty that his philanthropy follows the normal cycle of the abusive steel or railroad magnate who felt penitent for his life- and headlong pursuit of money once he had amassed more than he could dream of using, and used charity to assuage his guilt for past wrongdoings. Although the pool of people with this characteristic is, of course, too small to talk in a statistically valid way, there is even a name given to the "syndrome" by psychologists, though I forget what it is...
Put identity in the browser.
Sure I dislike MS for some of it's business practices, which I believe have held back innovation not promoted it.
But I hate RAMBUS way more than MS, for it's court proven fraudulent conduct. I hate using anything that gives them money, but I have no choice unless I want to give up using a PC.
I hate SCO for it's attack on Linux with no proof. Sure, if they had a case then show us the code and I'll agree. But no proof = lies. I seriously hope they go under and the directors end up in gaol.
Do you have a reference to Microsoft stealing code from either DR or Stac?
/.
They were certainly found liable of infringing on Stac's patent, but I don't believe they were EVER shown to have stolen their CODE.
Similarly, do you have any references to Microsoft stealing Digital Research's code? Cloning their OS? Yes. But stealing their code?
Don't make accusations you can't back up with facts. Even on
Microsoft brought computing to the masses
MS hasn't built any computers for the masses, IMB should be credited for making the market bigger by amoung others for using previous standards such as the S100 bus also being used for homebrew or micro-computers so other could use the same or similar hardware to make compatible computers. All MS did was further develop and release DOS after DR, Digital Reearch, started developing it from CP/M.
Microsoft made lots of money by being good at what they do
Other than making money exactly what is MS good at? Releasing buggy insecure software?
Microsoft made computers easy to use
Really? And here I thought Amigas and Macs which were easy to use when PCs still were running DOS.
Microsoft is powerful and is led by the charitable Mr. Gates
Yea, once he became the world wealthiest person he decided to hand out a few pennies. The money put up for health and AIDS was good, but otherwise other "donations" weren't all money, some of it was MS software. Since it's inexpensive to produce more copies of software, basically the software was put into people's hands that wouldn't of bought it anyway so the real cost of providing the software was the cost of copying it and the media is pennies. But because those people have used the software, when they are in a position to buy their own they are more likely to buy from MS.
Like most other businesses, there's good and bad things about MS. And in case anyone gets the wrong idea, I'm using an HP PC running Windows ME right now, I'm not using Linux or a Mac.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Speaking seriously I'd like to know what MS has done to advance technology? I've heard that a number of tymes and have asked but I haven't received an answer yet.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Microsoft are the greatest company in the world and managed by a genius.
Bill, Seattle
Roffle.
My point is summed up by:
"Welcome to business in the United States of America."
And yes we should all complain, but I have no idea what good it will do. The government is so far in bed with the larger corporations that it severely impedes the ability of the government to regulate industry. Beyond passing laws to keep their aging business models and sources of income protected.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
stealing code from either DR or Stac?
Actually it's my understanding that IBM first went to DR for DOS but after sometyme DR decided to hand over the work to MS. Dealing with Stac, I don't recall having heard it before so I googled "ms stac" and found this:
One company that tried was Stac Electronics, which had developed software that used a compression technology to effectively expand the capacity of users' disks. Microsoft wanted to build Stac's technology into the operating system and negotiated in its usual scorched-earth style, demanding a worldwide license for a one-time flat payment and threatening to move ahead with or without Stac's license. Stac refused, Microsoft acted on its threat and unlike most small companies that brush up against Microsoft, Stac sued. A jury, finding that Microsoft had stolen Stac's property, awarded $120 million for patent infringement. Microsoft then swallowed its pride and acquired the technology by settling with Stac, buying a 15 percent stake in the company. Stac now exists as a happy Microsoft partner and the disk-compression business is no more. There are pilot fish that manage to swim with sharks, and there are fish that get swallowed.
Looking at another result, it also says MS was found guilty not of theft of code but of patent infringment.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Just don't step in my toes.
.. that also include thieving game companies that use Linux as a server, but won't release a Linux gaming client. Obese pedos.
And I won't hate you.
For how many times I have to spell out this.
It is NOT fucking Jealousy - it is blocking my way of doing things.
I used to hate Apple ya know?
But now I can play all Quicktime videos
*and* I heard you can play or interface iPod in Linux too
(or something, but I dont have gadget, my sister who runs Fedora might want one)
So my stance is neutral now.
What pisses me off - is when we get singled out, unfairly.
Thanks for Flash Player being multiplatform.
Thanks RealPlayer for releasing a plugin.
Any format or technology that singles Linux out, and yeah sure, I get pretty pissed.
not jealous - PISSED OFF (geddit?)
While I agree with you that corporatism and capitalism are almost always evil enterprises resulting in evil deeds (evil as defined by the religion of your choice) there are gradiations of evil.
Apple has certainly done evil deeds just like every other corporation in the world but not as many as Microsoft or walmart. You can't simply say "every is evil so therefore we should make no judgements". It doesn't work like that.
Enron did a lot of evil shit and you know what some people ended up in jail because of it (none of Bush's buddies but that's a different topic). I would like to see some people form MS in jail. If for no other reason then perjury, evidence tampering and witness intimidation.
evil is as evil does
"You know, he didn't HAVE to give a dime. He DID, because he wanted to"
No he did it because his PR people told him to and to re-habilitate his image. He didn't give a dime till the anti trust suit started. Did he all of a sudden come to jesus and realized that he wanted to help the little people? I think not.
evil is as evil does
This is simply not true. For as much his net worth, he donates quite a bit and actually lives in a very humble house (compared to the size/location that he *could* live in). The B&M Gates Foundation donates quite a bit of money. It's one thing to criticize Microsoft and their business practices, but another to criticize a person who does a whole hell of a lot for his community and could get away with doing a lot less.
(Not) Having evidence to something does not change the truth.
Thats the reason there are lawyers around.
Bill Gates is a principal author of M$ business practice, and
Pablo Escobar, who got his start stealing tombstones and selling
them to smugglers, also donated heavily to charities and soccer
clubs in Colombia. He ameliorated his reputation to such an
extent that he won a seat in Parliament, until his on-going terrorist
activities that claimed the lives of many people landed him in jail
and eventually got him killed. What else could Bill possibly buy
with 40 billion that would mean as much to him as his reputation? Another
$750,000 Porsche 959? Maybe he could apologize to Connie Chung for
calling her "f-ing stupid" on the air.
lives in a very humble house
I'd like to live at your place I guess. I don't think "humble" is an apt description of Gates' house. Granted, he may be able to afford more, but humble it's not.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns