This crap is the same thing as my Jansport bag. Instead of a rugged tree-hugging image, somebody simply sews on a label to booksacks and fanny packs and trys to pawn it off as warez.
Better watch for them to trademark those terms next.
Hypocrite. You belittle someone (and require the use of profanity to do it), and attack the speaker and not the argument. Then you quote the following "The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it."
I use to believe in open source, Linux, the FSF, etc. (and I backed up my belief with monetary donations to the cause as well as developing software). But, it is becoming very clear to me by the example of people like you that OSS is not about freedom. It is about power. You want to be number one, just like MS, Sun, etc. and are no different. The problem is this effort is populated with people who think they have all the answers for the use of computers. News alert! 99.99% of the people don't give a crap about gcc, gdb, emacs, the GIMP, or KDE vs. GNOME. They want solutions. They don't want to spend hours of their free time diddling aroung with/etc files or recompiling their kernel every other day. You can go off and claim these people are stupid because they are hackers, but you would be exposing you immaturity. Most people want things to work, and Windows, for the most part, delivers.
You even start off by claiming that people view computers in one of two ways: as tools or as toys. I hate to break it to ya, but most Linux users probably fall into this latter category.
The Web was fluke in the sense that TBL didn't set out to create something of this magnitude. His original intent was to create a system to dissiminate scientific information at CERN. The fact that it took off like it did was, like many other technical innovations, accidental. It didn't take off simply because it was open. You are incredibly naive to think this is the reason.
SMP: Ummm...I just tried to install a DUAL NT setup a few weeks ago, and I can tell you it doesn't have SMP even NOW.
And I can tell you it does. I have a dual processor system at work running NT very nicely.
Unix and the Internet are innovative ideas from the open source community? Ya, right! Neither of these things originated from any open source movement (btw, back then it was called shareware). And certainly, neither came from RMS.
I guess that is the next big thing. Open source taking credit for all computer innovations. Sound like some corporate entity you know and hate?
It tells me you are a troll since you ignored the original question.
Hi. My name's Leo, and I like Word. ("Hi, Leo.")
on
Microsoft-Compaq-BeOS
·
· Score: 1
I like Word, too, but it took a bit to make the transition from LaTeX. Once I figured it out, though, Word makes many things alot easier (except references -- if anyone can recommend a way to handle references in Word like BibTex does, I'll drink a beer to you and your family).
Now, if someone would develop an office assistant with Elizabeth Hurley in a teddy, I might use it.
I wonder when MS magically disappears at some point in the near future (hmm, maybe by an alien ship kept at Roswell to be used by the DoJ) and any memory of MS is wiped from the member's of society by satellites orbiting the Earth, what company are you paranoids going to go after next?
... because it's better to share source code, right? I am being a bit sarcastic because the people who generally advocacte that anything that is not OSS is crap are
1. singularly condeming MS and not giving Compaq their share of the responsibility (supposedly, Compaq entered the deal and then went to MS to get their blessing -- maybe they came bringing gifts?)
2. upset that the code was shared. Isn't this what you people want?
Personally, I believe in intellectual property and the right to keep things you develop secret, if that is your choice. But in a forum which frequently calls on any commercial interest (Sun's Java, BeOS, Windows, Photoshop, etc.) to release their source code at the expense of being trashmouthed, I find some of your reactions pretty hypocritical.
Of course, MS solutions have worked, and better than just 'good enough'.
0. My dissertation research is done entirely on NT. I tried Linux, but found myseld spending way too much time doing system administration tasks and not enough time doing actually research.
1. I work for an R&D govt contractor doing simulation and modeling, software development, and other scientific endeavors. All of our deliverables, from programs to reports, are done on NT. Our customers are very happy.
2. Dell runs there WWW site on NT.
I think the current antiMS sentiment is 80% fad. Remember, computers are not sentient. They are a tool. Use whatever helps you get the job done.
I think it is a typical bandwagon reaction to all of the antiMS sentiment in the industry. Clearly *every* application will not need to be rewritten or changed.
Personally, I hope that MS has a team of hotshot OS programmers working on the real Windows 2000 version while the official hacked version is being beta'ed as a trial ploy.
I'd describe myself as a moderate. Actually, I'd describe myself as someone who sees computers as a tool and not something to get too emotional over. That doesn't mean they are not my passion, but I've seen so many things come and go (RIP Nextstep) that I'm kinda tired of advocacy.
Registry's fine. No phantom devices detected (I've never heard of this). Last hardware upgrade was an Intel video capture card. I've even used a beta device driver for my graphics card before with no trouble.
I do quite a bit of programming for work and for my dissertation research. For work, I do ANSI and Windows specific programming. For my dissertation, after trying Java and not happy with the performance of Swing, I switch back to MFC. Some of my programs write and read from the registry, particularly my dissertation research. I also am writing COM components which must be registered. Still, no problems. My next project is to get a second PC for some distributed COM programming tests. After I learn how it works, I don't expect problems.
You don't have a choice? What OS are you using right now to read this?
I'm not sure what the logic is with this supposed lack of choice. Unless you put your computer together from scratch, you bought it from some vendor. Did you buy it knowing a priori that it would come with Windows? If this was so distasteful, why didn't you exercise your choice and a) buy from a vendor that doesn't sell computers with Windows such as VA Research or b) put your own computer together?
So, please try your best to explain what choices are being suppressed by your lack of getting a refund? I don't think the refund has anything to do with choice; it reeks of mob rules from a group of people who are used to everything being free of charge.
I think you are missing the point to why 99.999% of the people buy computers. It isn't to spend countless sleepless hours tweaking/etc files or poring through video card and monitor docs to make sure settings will work under X Windoze. It isn't because they want to make sure they are using kernel version 2.0.2.1.3.44.5.2.3.44.5... by recompiling their kernel every other day. It isn't to use vi/emacs/gcc/gdb to write their own check balancing program from scratch in C because current offerings have some obscure bug that can't be fixed because the former developers got bored with the project. It isn't because they want to go out and learn obscure markup commands in LaTeX to help their kids write a report for school or update their resume.
No, it's because for 99.999% of the people who buy computers want an integrated solution that works. They don't care about source code. They don't care about some counterculture movement that proclaims everything that isn't free in the economic sense as "junk". Word works. Games work. Internet access works. Visual C++ works (great). Quicken works.
I have used Linux, BeOS, Nextstep, and NT. I do things with my computer that most people do and things that very few people do. I have had fewer problems with NT than I ever had with Linux (Of course, the Linux-heads will doubt my Unix abilities. That's fine, but you don't know what they are.)
Don't want to use MS products? Don't. But don't go blabbering about choice if you are going to advocate that people shouldn't use Anything But Linux (ABL).
COOL name has already been taken
on
Microsoft's COOL
·
· Score: 1
If you had read the article closely, you would know that MS is using COOL as a code name for the project. I doubt very seriously that the name would be used in a commecialized fasion.
Slashdot should begin documenting cases of Net-stupidty such as this. After accumulating quite a few instances (which might take all of an hour), I bet some large media site would pick up on that pretty quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
This crap is the same thing as my Jansport bag. Instead of a rugged tree-hugging image, somebody simply sews on a label to booksacks and fanny packs and trys to pawn it off as warez.
Better watch for them to trademark those terms next.
Hypocrite. You belittle someone (and require the use of profanity to do it), and attack the speaker and not the argument. Then you quote the
/etc files or recompiling their kernel every other day. You can go off and claim these people are stupid because they are hackers, but you would be exposing you immaturity. Most people want things to work, and Windows, for the most part, delivers.
following "The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it."
I use to believe in open source, Linux, the FSF, etc. (and I backed up my belief with monetary donations to the cause as well as developing software). But, it is becoming very clear to me by the example of people like you that OSS is not about freedom. It is about power. You want to be number one, just like MS, Sun, etc. and are no different. The problem is this effort is populated with people who think they have all the answers for the use of computers. News alert! 99.99% of the people don't give a crap about gcc, gdb, emacs, the GIMP, or KDE vs. GNOME. They want solutions. They don't want to spend hours of their free time diddling aroung with
You even start off by claiming that people view computers in one of two ways: as tools or as toys. I hate to break it to ya, but most Linux users probably fall into this latter category.
The Web was fluke in the sense that TBL didn't set out to create something of this magnitude. His original intent was to create a system to dissiminate scientific information at CERN. The fact that it took off like it did was, like many other technical innovations, accidental. It didn't take off simply because it was open. You are incredibly naive to think this is the reason.
SMP: Ummm...I just tried to install a DUAL NT setup a few weeks ago, and I can tell you it doesn't have SMP even NOW.
And I can tell you it does. I have a dual processor system at work running NT very nicely.
Unix and the Internet are innovative ideas from the open source community? Ya, right! Neither of these things originated from any open source movement (btw, back then it was called shareware). And certainly, neither came from RMS.
I guess that is the next big thing. Open source taking credit for all computer innovations. Sound like some corporate entity you know and hate?
Well, your threats to spend your $2000 somewhere else are sure to get Dell moving faster.
Such hubris.
Items 3, 4, and 5 are as mundane as saying "Humans need oxygen to breath."
Let's see.
The original question was, paraphrase, have MS products been used such that they were 'good enough'.
I answered affirmatively by providing three examples.
What questions did he answer?
Good point.
Jerry Falwell?
Newt Gingrich?
(I've never met them, though)
It tells me you are a troll since you ignored the original question.
I like Word, too, but it took a bit to make the transition from LaTeX. Once I figured it out, though, Word makes many things alot easier (except references -- if anyone can recommend a way to handle references in Word like BibTex does, I'll drink a beer to you and your family).
Now, if someone would develop an office assistant with Elizabeth Hurley in a teddy, I might use it.
Sheesh!
I wonder when MS magically disappears at some point in the near future (hmm, maybe by an alien ship kept at Roswell to be used by the DoJ) and any memory of MS is wiped from the member's of society by satellites orbiting the Earth, what company are you paranoids going to go after next?
... because it's better to share source code, right? I am being a bit sarcastic because the people who generally advocacte that anything that is not OSS is crap are
1. singularly condeming MS and not giving Compaq their share of the responsibility (supposedly, Compaq entered the deal and then went to MS to get their blessing -- maybe they came bringing gifts?)
2. upset that the code was shared. Isn't this what you people want?
Personally, I believe in intellectual property and the right to keep things you develop secret, if that is your choice. But in a forum which frequently calls on any commercial interest (Sun's Java, BeOS, Windows, Photoshop, etc.) to release their source code at the expense of being trashmouthed, I find some of your reactions pretty hypocritical.
Of course, MS solutions have worked, and better than just 'good enough'.
0. My dissertation research is done entirely on NT. I tried Linux, but found myseld spending way too much time doing system administration tasks and not enough time doing actually research.
1. I work for an R&D govt contractor doing simulation and modeling, software development, and other scientific endeavors. All of our deliverables, from programs to reports, are done on NT. Our customers are very happy.
2. Dell runs there WWW site on NT.
I think the current antiMS sentiment is 80% fad. Remember, computers are not sentient. They are a tool. Use whatever helps you get the job done.
I think it is a typical bandwagon reaction to all of the antiMS sentiment in the industry. Clearly *every* application will not need to be rewritten or changed.
Personally, I hope that MS has a team of hotshot OS programmers working on the real Windows 2000 version while the official hacked version is being beta'ed as a trial ploy.
I'd describe myself as a moderate. Actually, I'd describe myself as someone who sees computers as a tool and not something to get too emotional over. That doesn't mean they are not my passion, but I've seen so many things come and go (RIP Nextstep) that I'm kinda tired of advocacy.
I do ok with NT and BeOS.
Registry's fine.
No phantom devices detected (I've never heard of this).
Last hardware upgrade was an Intel video capture card. I've even used a beta device driver for my graphics card before with no trouble.
I do quite a bit of programming for work and for my dissertation research. For work, I do ANSI and Windows specific programming. For my dissertation, after trying Java and not happy with the performance of Swing, I switch back to MFC. Some of my programs write and read from the registry, particularly my dissertation research. I also am writing COM components which must be registered. Still, no problems. My next project is to get a second PC for some distributed COM programming tests. After I learn how it works, I don't expect problems.
So, how many crashes have you had today?
None.
You don't have a choice? What OS are you using right now to read this?
I'm not sure what the logic is with this supposed lack of choice. Unless you put your computer together from scratch, you bought it from some vendor. Did you buy it knowing a priori that it would come with Windows? If this was so distasteful, why didn't you exercise your choice and a) buy from a vendor that doesn't sell computers with Windows such as VA Research or b) put your own computer together?
So, please try your best to explain what choices are being suppressed by your lack of getting a refund? I don't think the refund has anything to do with choice; it reeks of mob rules from a group of people who are used to everything being free of charge.
I think you are missing the point to why 99.999% of the people buy computers. It isn't to spend countless sleepless hours tweaking /etc files or poring through video card and monitor docs to make sure settings will work under X Windoze. It isn't because they want to make sure they are using kernel version 2.0.2.1.3.44.5.2.3.44.5... by recompiling their kernel every other day. It isn't to use vi/emacs/gcc/gdb to write their own check balancing program from scratch in C because current offerings have some obscure bug that can't be fixed because the former developers got bored with the project. It isn't because they want to go out and learn obscure markup commands in LaTeX to help their kids write a report for school or update their resume.
No, it's because for 99.999% of the people who buy computers want an integrated solution that works. They don't care about source code. They don't care about some counterculture movement that proclaims everything that isn't free in the economic sense as "junk". Word works. Games work. Internet access works. Visual C++ works (great). Quicken works.
I have used Linux, BeOS, Nextstep, and NT. I do things with my computer that most people do and things that very few people do. I have had fewer problems with NT than I ever had with Linux (Of course, the Linux-heads will doubt my Unix abilities. That's fine, but you don't know what they are.)
Don't want to use MS products? Don't. But don't go blabbering about choice if you are going to advocate that people shouldn't use Anything But Linux (ABL).
If you had read the article closely, you would know that MS is using COOL as a code name for the project. I doubt very seriously that the name would be used in a commecialized fasion.
Ohhh! Very good!
Slashdot should begin documenting cases of Net-stupidty such as this. After accumulating quite a few instances (which might take all of an hour), I bet some large media site would pick up on that pretty quickly.