Are you also asserting that bundeling WMP isn't illegal?
Yes.
All this shit is a fight of the lobbies. It just so happens that the world is full of hippies that are against "the man, man", so Microsoft loses these battles. Why do so many people have a problem with Microsoft's inclusion of useful (and well-coded) software in their operating system. It would be an entirely different issue if they restricted you from installing alternative programs, or if they hard-coded IE to, say, block mozilla.org or something. That would be illegal.
I really didn't want to bring up a car analogy, but here goes. What if somebody were to sue General Motors for including their own engines in their cars? Isn't that an antitrust issue? They're basically forcing everybody who wants to use a GM car to use a GM motor. Sure most car-drivers don't care, but there's a few people who are pissed off that they can't have a Toyota engine installed, even though the end user can always switch out the engine whenever they want. Let's sue General Motors.
Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?
(Also, I'll remind you again that I'm a Firefox user. I hate Internet Explorer with every fiber of my being, but personal vendettas and opinions shouldn't be brought into the court room. Just because IE sucks and is ruining the internet, doesn't mean that it's illegal. Everybody has a choice of what operating system they use, and Microsoft shouldn't have to advertise other people's products.)
Well, if Microsoft is convicted then the most logical thing for the courts to do would be to restrict them from including ANY web browser with their OS... or else how do they determine which browsers should be included? It wouldn't be right to have a court order to include browsers x and y, because then what about browser z? If things are to be "fair" to the consumer, Microsoft would have to include Firefox, Opera, Chrome, Netscape, Safari, Flock, Lynx, and Avant. And then what about IE? Will Microsoft still be allowed to include IE with Windows as long as they include others?
I love how I always get modded Troll or Overrated when I speak in favor of Microsoft or against Linux.
(Hint: I use Firefox, I use Winamp, I use Notepad++, I use Google. The only Microsoft product you will catch me using besides Windows is Paint because I can't be assed to burn Adobe CS3 to disc so I can install it to Win7.)
Anti-trust laws are in place to keep corporations from screwing the consumer by keeping prices and such down when there's no competition. That's why mergers are looked at so closely and why the Sirius-XM merger was almost cockblocked. They were afraid that the prices would go through the roof because they were the only two satellite radio companies and their merger would end all competition.
Microsoft's inclusion of Internet Explorer with Windows is not an anti-trust matter. Where is the harm to the consumer? I don't see any. In fact, removing Internet Explorer from Windows would be a burden to the consumer. Even though I'm an experienced Windows user, I didn't even know it came with built-in FTP support, let alone would I know how to use it. What the fuck is Opera trying to pull here? Anybody who uses Internet Explorer anyway would just get it from Microsoft's site. Does Opera think they will gain more market share? NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF OPERA. To be honest, Opera is just alienating their potential users by coming up with this retarded lawsuit which will harm consumers more than it helps their market share.
..... well then it's not a real package manager in the sense that a package manager is being described. Plus, in Windows 7 (and I believe Windows Vista too), it's just called "Uninstall A Program". Windows 7 has a link to the "Windows Marketplace", but that opens in, of all things, a browser.
Get home basic edition and install it on an Asus eee pc, then maybe you will have something to contribute to the conversation.
Windows 7 has plenty of optimizations and is supposed to be able to run (smoothly, in fact) on netbooks. Also, Vista has been benchmarked time and again to run better than XP on any machine with a decent processor and more than 1.5GB of RAM, about the same as XP with 1-1.5GB of RAM, and slower than XP with <1GB of RAM. Seven is supposed to do even better than that.
For me, typing "7even" made it easier to establish that I'm talking about Windows 7. For example, "I installed 7 7 times." just looks weird.
Anyway, no, I didn't find that the 64-bit version lacked driver support. Every driver that I've found that works for Vista x64 also works for 7even x64, fully-featured, with no problems related to the fact that this is a different OS.
If you can't run an OS decently on a 3 year old machine it's not worth running it.
So we should halt all technological progress because you don't feel like buying a new computer? There's a reason that 99% of the resource-intensive features in Vista and 7even can be turned off.
I know I'm going to be down-modded for this, but it must be said.
Let me start off by saying that Windows Vista is no longer the piece of shit that it once was. Ever since SP1, the many problems that Vista used to have have been gone. I was using Vista Ultimate since July and had absolutely no issues with anything, and it actually runs faster (gasp!) than XP on my machine. (Let me point out that my machine has a Q6600, 4GB of RAM, and an 8800GT)
Now that that's out of the way, allow me to tell about how much better Windows 7 is. I've been using 7even for three weeks. I installed the leaked build 6959, and besides a few major problems with Firefox's rendering, I had no issues with it. I then installed 7000 a couple days before its official release because I couldn't stand how horrible Firefox was acting up. And finally, I downloaded and installed Windows 7 x64 from the public beta site and got a legitimate key. With each new installation brought new improvements to speed and functionality.
7even is not Vista with an updated UI. Besides the obvious UI improvements (which took some time to get used to, but I find them more useful than before), just using 7even, you will notice that Microsoft must have put a lot of time and money into rewriting and optimizing code. An argument could be made to call 7even "Vista SP2", but I am convinced that there are enough updates and improvements that separate 7even from Vista that it deserves its own name. Microsoft removed so much bloat, improved UAC, added a couple necessary features, and added much-needed improvement to features present in Vista (for example, an AWESOME improvement to the defragmenter that makes me actually want to use it rather than a third-party program). And the taskbar, while some accuse it of copying the Mac, is actually an improvement of Mac's dock... You can't switch between individual windows in Mac, which is something that pisses me off being an employee of a TV station who uses Macs with Final Cut Studio.
Not really. He was able to fire off thousands of passwords a minute and left it running overnight. Whereas, if they would only allow his IP address 5 failed attempts within, say, a 30 minute period, he would have had to switch proxies every 5 password attempts. Beside the fact that he will probably run out of proxies by midnight, it would also take him probably 5 seconds to establish a connection with the proxy and then only be able to use that proxy for 5 password attempts. It would be much more hassle than it's worth, and would make 100 password guesses take probably 20 times as long as they would have without proxies.
I don't know... I'd say healthcare costs are more likely to rise. Anybody who is so obsessed with their TV that they would go through all that trouble to watch it would probably have a heart attack within ten minutes.
...Because people will now use decent operating systems that don't go into kernel panic half the time? Because viruses sharply decrease? Because there is no monopoly? Because of the growth of OSS?
(bracing for being down-mods)
Windows is actually quite stable on my machine. I've run Windows XP (and x64), Vista Ultimate x64, and I am currently running Windows 7, and I have never had any problem with BSODs. Sure, there's the occasional one when I fuck up a driver installation, etc, but that's it.
And your thing about viruses is complete hogwash. It's been said many times before that viruses are most common in Windows because Windows possesses the largest market share. Sure, it's not as inherently secure as nix, but if Microsoft dies you can be sure to find plenty of new viruses popping up for Linux and Mac.
No monopoly? I wouldn't say that. Linux is (for the most part) free, because it has no monopoly. There are hundreds of distros, and all of them are good for different things. What do you think is going to happen if Microsoft goes belly-up? I'm sure that 80% of Windows users will go to Mac. 18% of Windows users will go to Ubuntu. The rest will keep using Windows, not realizing that their OS is no longer updated. My point is that Mac will become the new monopoly, and Ubuntu will be even stronger in the Linux world (and could eventually become a commercial empire on its own).
The demise of MS will only lead to better software
Some software will be better. Other software that's great, but no longer developed, will become unusable.
more competition
I beg to differ. There will be less competition, due to the death of a competitor. Simple mathematics.
lower prices
Also wrong. See above.
and no more annoying unpaid tech support calls from your parents/grandparents/brother/etc
The parent makes fantastic points that I would like to add to.
FTA: "That report paints Midori as an Internet-centric OS, based on the idea of connected systems, that largely eliminates the dependencies between local applications and the hardware they run on that exist with a typical OS today."
I see a major problem with this. The very large majority of software that would require powerful hardware are things that absolutely CAN NOT function over the Internet. Gaming is one example of this. You're telling me that I need to handle the lag between me and the "processing server" AS WELL AS the lag between the "processing server" and the game server? No thanks.
Other examples are things such as Photoshop, video editing and CAD. These kinds of software require a high-speed (as in 6 inches of printed conductivity, not as in 6Mbps of Internets) connection between the monitor and the processing unit.
This new model of Microsoft's might be usable for making spreadsheets and writing documents, but I already have Google for that.
The ONLY regulations that the Internet should have must be to regulate unregulation. That means the government should impose regulations to keep the service providers from imposing their own regulations. Without such regulations, the Internet becomes the property of the providers and it all goes to shit.
You know, I actually prefer to remain logged-in to all my sites all the time. And when I find myself to be logged out of a site like, say, Facebook, I curse under my breath because I have to hit the Secure Login button:(.
But you make a good point about public spaces, and if most people are like me and rather stay logged in forever, more sites need to implement a system like Slashdot has: the "Public Terminal" checkbox. You remain logged in forever UNLESS that box is checked. That way, you can be SURE your info isn't saved.
I'm not sure how long that takes to 'expire' if ever, it only removes it if you sign-out before leaving, otherwise you sign in automatically.
If I understand your actions correctly, then that would be an issue with Firefox (if that's the browser you use) settings. By default, Firefox will store all sessions until you close the entire program, or the sessions expire. So, even if you don't check the "Remember Me" box, the session will still exist until all of Firefox is closed, not just the site.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably a rare occurrence, but this means bystanders won't be able to photograph crimes in progress without alerting criminals.
That's no problem. The government will have enough of their own cameras by the time this law passes.
Try to cry less, please.
Are you also asserting that bundeling WMP isn't illegal?
Yes.
All this shit is a fight of the lobbies. It just so happens that the world is full of hippies that are against "the man, man", so Microsoft loses these battles. Why do so many people have a problem with Microsoft's inclusion of useful (and well-coded) software in their operating system. It would be an entirely different issue if they restricted you from installing alternative programs, or if they hard-coded IE to, say, block mozilla.org or something. That would be illegal.
I really didn't want to bring up a car analogy, but here goes. What if somebody were to sue General Motors for including their own engines in their cars? Isn't that an antitrust issue? They're basically forcing everybody who wants to use a GM car to use a GM motor. Sure most car-drivers don't care, but there's a few people who are pissed off that they can't have a Toyota engine installed, even though the end user can always switch out the engine whenever they want. Let's sue General Motors.
Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?
(Also, I'll remind you again that I'm a Firefox user. I hate Internet Explorer with every fiber of my being, but personal vendettas and opinions shouldn't be brought into the court room. Just because IE sucks and is ruining the internet, doesn't mean that it's illegal. Everybody has a choice of what operating system they use, and Microsoft shouldn't have to advertise other people's products.)
Am I the only one who found this attempt at humor disturbing and objectionable?
Yes.
You are asserting that you can think of no way to remedy an illegal bundling of software other than harming the consumer.
No, I am asserting that what Microsoft is doing is not illegal, you dolt.
Well, if Microsoft is convicted then the most logical thing for the courts to do would be to restrict them from including ANY web browser with their OS... or else how do they determine which browsers should be included? It wouldn't be right to have a court order to include browsers x and y, because then what about browser z? If things are to be "fair" to the consumer, Microsoft would have to include Firefox, Opera, Chrome, Netscape, Safari, Flock, Lynx, and Avant. And then what about IE? Will Microsoft still be allowed to include IE with Windows as long as they include others?
Sorry, but what point did I miss? I still fail to see where the inclusion of Internet Explorer with Windows is harmful to the consumer.
I love how I always get modded Troll or Overrated when I speak in favor of Microsoft or against Linux.
(Hint: I use Firefox, I use Winamp, I use Notepad++, I use Google. The only Microsoft product you will catch me using besides Windows is Paint because I can't be assed to burn Adobe CS3 to disc so I can install it to Win7.)
Anti-trust laws are in place to keep corporations from screwing the consumer by keeping prices and such down when there's no competition. That's why mergers are looked at so closely and why the Sirius-XM merger was almost cockblocked. They were afraid that the prices would go through the roof because they were the only two satellite radio companies and their merger would end all competition.
Microsoft's inclusion of Internet Explorer with Windows is not an anti-trust matter. Where is the harm to the consumer? I don't see any. In fact, removing Internet Explorer from Windows would be a burden to the consumer. Even though I'm an experienced Windows user, I didn't even know it came with built-in FTP support, let alone would I know how to use it. What the fuck is Opera trying to pull here? Anybody who uses Internet Explorer anyway would just get it from Microsoft's site. Does Opera think they will gain more market share? NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF OPERA. To be honest, Opera is just alienating their potential users by coming up with this retarded lawsuit which will harm consumers more than it helps their market share.
On a related note, will Apple have to stop including Safari with OS X?
Quicktime, too.
..... well then it's not a real package manager in the sense that a package manager is being described. Plus, in Windows 7 (and I believe Windows Vista too), it's just called "Uninstall A Program". Windows 7 has a link to the "Windows Marketplace", but that opens in, of all things, a browser.
Windows doesn't have one of those.
Dear stuck-up elitist Linux user, how the hell am I going to find a package manager if I don't have a browser installed?
Get home basic edition and install it on an Asus eee pc, then maybe you will have something to contribute to the conversation.
Windows 7 has plenty of optimizations and is supposed to be able to run (smoothly, in fact) on netbooks. Also, Vista has been benchmarked time and again to run better than XP on any machine with a decent processor and more than 1.5GB of RAM, about the same as XP with 1-1.5GB of RAM, and slower than XP with <1GB of RAM. Seven is supposed to do even better than that.
For me, typing "7even" made it easier to establish that I'm talking about Windows 7. For example, "I installed 7 7 times." just looks weird.
Anyway, no, I didn't find that the 64-bit version lacked driver support. Every driver that I've found that works for Vista x64 also works for 7even x64, fully-featured, with no problems related to the fact that this is a different OS.
If you can't run an OS decently on a 3 year old machine it's not worth running it.
So we should halt all technological progress because you don't feel like buying a new computer? There's a reason that 99% of the resource-intensive features in Vista and 7even can be turned off.
I know I'm going to be down-modded for this, but it must be said.
Let me start off by saying that Windows Vista is no longer the piece of shit that it once was. Ever since SP1, the many problems that Vista used to have have been gone. I was using Vista Ultimate since July and had absolutely no issues with anything, and it actually runs faster (gasp!) than XP on my machine. (Let me point out that my machine has a Q6600, 4GB of RAM, and an 8800GT)
Now that that's out of the way, allow me to tell about how much better Windows 7 is. I've been using 7even for three weeks. I installed the leaked build 6959, and besides a few major problems with Firefox's rendering, I had no issues with it. I then installed 7000 a couple days before its official release because I couldn't stand how horrible Firefox was acting up. And finally, I downloaded and installed Windows 7 x64 from the public beta site and got a legitimate key. With each new installation brought new improvements to speed and functionality.
7even is not Vista with an updated UI. Besides the obvious UI improvements (which took some time to get used to, but I find them more useful than before), just using 7even, you will notice that Microsoft must have put a lot of time and money into rewriting and optimizing code. An argument could be made to call 7even "Vista SP2", but I am convinced that there are enough updates and improvements that separate 7even from Vista that it deserves its own name. Microsoft removed so much bloat, improved UAC, added a couple necessary features, and added much-needed improvement to features present in Vista (for example, an AWESOME improvement to the defragmenter that makes me actually want to use it rather than a third-party program). And the taskbar, while some accuse it of copying the Mac, is actually an improvement of Mac's dock... You can't switch between individual windows in Mac, which is something that pisses me off being an employee of a TV station who uses Macs with Final Cut Studio.
IP Limit - Very easy to bypass with a proxy list.
Not really. He was able to fire off thousands of passwords a minute and left it running overnight. Whereas, if they would only allow his IP address 5 failed attempts within, say, a 30 minute period, he would have had to switch proxies every 5 password attempts. Beside the fact that he will probably run out of proxies by midnight, it would also take him probably 5 seconds to establish a connection with the proxy and then only be able to use that proxy for 5 password attempts. It would be much more hassle than it's worth, and would make 100 password guesses take probably 20 times as long as they would have without proxies.
I don't know... I'd say healthcare costs are more likely to rise. Anybody who is so obsessed with their TV that they would go through all that trouble to watch it would probably have a heart attack within ten minutes.
(bracing for being down-mods)
Windows is actually quite stable on my machine. I've run Windows XP (and x64), Vista Ultimate x64, and I am currently running Windows 7, and I have never had any problem with BSODs. Sure, there's the occasional one when I fuck up a driver installation, etc, but that's it.
And your thing about viruses is complete hogwash. It's been said many times before that viruses are most common in Windows because Windows possesses the largest market share. Sure, it's not as inherently secure as nix, but if Microsoft dies you can be sure to find plenty of new viruses popping up for Linux and Mac.
No monopoly? I wouldn't say that. Linux is (for the most part) free, because it has no monopoly. There are hundreds of distros, and all of them are good for different things. What do you think is going to happen if Microsoft goes belly-up? I'm sure that 80% of Windows users will go to Mac. 18% of Windows users will go to Ubuntu. The rest will keep using Windows, not realizing that their OS is no longer updated. My point is that Mac will become the new monopoly, and Ubuntu will be even stronger in the Linux world (and could eventually become a commercial empire on its own).
The demise of MS will only lead to better software
Some software will be better. Other software that's great, but no longer developed, will become unusable.
more competition
I beg to differ. There will be less competition, due to the death of a competitor. Simple mathematics.
lower prices
Also wrong. See above.
and no more annoying unpaid tech support calls from your parents/grandparents/brother/etc
You're dreaming.
The parent makes fantastic points that I would like to add to.
FTA: "That report paints Midori as an Internet-centric OS, based on the idea of connected systems, that largely eliminates the dependencies between local applications and the hardware they run on that exist with a typical OS today."
I see a major problem with this. The very large majority of software that would require powerful hardware are things that absolutely CAN NOT function over the Internet. Gaming is one example of this. You're telling me that I need to handle the lag between me and the "processing server" AS WELL AS the lag between the "processing server" and the game server? No thanks.
Other examples are things such as Photoshop, video editing and CAD. These kinds of software require a high-speed (as in 6 inches of printed conductivity, not as in 6Mbps of Internets) connection between the monitor and the processing unit.
This new model of Microsoft's might be usable for making spreadsheets and writing documents, but I already have Google for that.
"I'm proud to be Swedish, where at least my software is pirated"
Fixed. :)
And refixed. :)
The ONLY regulations that the Internet should have must be to regulate unregulation. That means the government should impose regulations to keep the service providers from imposing their own regulations. Without such regulations, the Internet becomes the property of the providers and it all goes to shit.
But you make a good point about public spaces, and if most people are like me and rather stay logged in forever, more sites need to implement a system like Slashdot has: the "Public Terminal" checkbox. You remain logged in forever UNLESS that box is checked. That way, you can be SURE your info isn't saved.
I'm not sure how long that takes to 'expire' if ever, it only removes it if you sign-out before leaving, otherwise you sign in automatically.
If I understand your actions correctly, then that would be an issue with Firefox (if that's the browser you use) settings. By default, Firefox will store all sessions until you close the entire program, or the sessions expire. So, even if you don't check the "Remember Me" box, the session will still exist until all of Firefox is closed, not just the site.