it only does anything if you're running linux as a hyperv guest, so its no different to any other driver
you shills aren't even funny, you're jut stupid
i defend linux because i choose to moron, for the same reason that other kids step into a fight to fend off a big fat bully, not that you would understand that as nobody in their right mind would defend microsoft without being paid
i don't need to hang shit on microsoft to make linux seem more mrketable, because linux sells itself
i do it because i love reading the moronic reactions from you shills
dotslash is fun ain’t it?
go beg Google or Apple they would definitely pay you some nice cash
i defend linux, not google or apple. i'm not sure why you would even suggest it, but i guess you're just that desperate
that's like a bully stealing some kid's money and wondering why he doesn't want to be friends the next day.
if microsoft gave up their fud campaign against linux, and really contributed to linux (as in not just dodgy drivers to make their own product more marketable), and gave linux a fair go in the OS market, maybe they wouldn't be considered such a bully, but why the hell would they do that?
maybe you've been living under a rock for the past decade, but microsoft hasn't changed that much. if anything they're becoming smarter at their games (like funding SCO to take the beating for them, or bribing walmart execs to take linux oems off their shelves, suing companies using linux rather than suing linux distributors, as just a couple of examples out of many)
didn't say there was anything wrong with it (legally), just that microsoft using linux is contradictory to their own culture and deserves a good slashdot bagfest (considering their business practices and fud campaigns against linux in the past)
microsoft has also denounced the gpl in the past; guess that won't work now huh
if you don't like it, go tie yourself to a tree and get pissed on by dogs passing by
no, because apple isn't anti-competitive like microsoft (apple is more of a closed ecosystem, with people only buying apple who choose to, not by lack of choice), so "m$" will always hold the title
by inspection of both windows and linux source code, the microsoft lawyers might find large portions that are the same. the only question is, which one is infringing?
if nothing else, microsoft using linux validates the gpl on their part (after all, they have to agree to it to use it), so i'm sure this will come up in any court battles over gpl violations by microsoft in the future (which there are no doubt many)
am i a contributor to windows because i've written software for it? so what if it had nothing to do with making it a better OS and was only to serve my own interests, but you seem to be making a case for me
Slashdot Mirror
why the web took off in the first place... i mean really took off
for isps, banning porn is like telling cca they can no longer sell normal coke, only sugar free (coke zero)
internet traffic will plummet
you shills aren't even funny, you're jut stupid
i defend linux because i choose to moron, for the same reason that other kids step into a fight to fend off a big fat bully, not that you would understand that as nobody in their right mind would defend microsoft without being paid
i don't need to hang shit on microsoft to make linux seem more mrketable, because linux sells itself
i do it because i love reading the moronic reactions from you shills
dotslash is fun ain’t it?
go beg Google or Apple they would definitely pay you some nice cash
i defend linux, not google or apple. i'm not sure why you would even suggest it, but i guess you're just that desperate
that's like a bully stealing some kid's money and wondering why he doesn't want to be friends the next day.
if microsoft gave up their fud campaign against linux, and really contributed to linux (as in not just dodgy drivers to make their own product more marketable), and gave linux a fair go in the OS market, maybe they wouldn't be considered such a bully, but why the hell would they do that?
maybe you've been living under a rock for the past decade, but microsoft hasn't changed that much. if anything they're becoming smarter at their games (like funding SCO to take the beating for them, or bribing walmart execs to take linux oems off their shelves, suing companies using linux rather than suing linux distributors, as just a couple of examples out of many)
why don't you wake up and smell reality? moron
didn't say there was anything wrong with it (legally), just that microsoft using linux is contradictory to their own culture and deserves a good slashdot bagfest (considering their business practices and fud campaigns against linux in the past)
microsoft has also denounced the gpl in the past; guess that won't work now huh
if you don't like it, go tie yourself to a tree and get pissed on by dogs passing by
if you don't use hyperv, their "contribution" does nothing
keep an eye on antivirus vendor quarterlies and when profits begin to slump you can be sure that a new threat will raise its ugly head before long
as the old saying goes "i'll rub your back if you rub mine"
all antivirus vendors are no doubt involved in perpetuating the need for their products, and they are experts at it
hyperv drivers don't count as a contribution to linux, just as an addition to it
microsoft is not comparable to the bulk of linux users
Microsoft doesn't take the hard approach of FOSS fanatics
bahahahahahahahaha!!!!!! you are such a tool
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#Competition_from_Microsoft
not that i care one way or another about the topic of conversation, but you're apparently not familiar with microsoft business tactics (the three e's)
i agree, but there's no reason why the OSS community can't spend a bit of effort bitching about microsoft on dotslash
so,
(Windows TCO) less (Windows licensing costs) still > (Linux TCO)
that wouldn't make a good sales pitch
GPL is protection from people profiting from others' work to make a product in tended to be free for use
gpl doesn't prevent you from profiting from someone others' work. where did you get that from?
no, because apple isn't anti-competitive like microsoft (apple is more of a closed ecosystem, with people only buying apple who choose to, not by lack of choice), so "m$" will always hold the title
Are you suggesting that MacAfee has been creating viruses?
mcafee the person, no
mcafee the company, duh! (have you been living under a rock)
i'm not sucking any cock
i'm simply poking holes in an argument from someone who clearly sucks windows cock
go back to sucking your own cock
now it would be called "ballux"
you can rent Windows servers from Rackspace
that doesn't mean they have a data center full of them
by inspection of both windows and linux source code, the microsoft lawyers might find large portions that are the same. the only question is, which one is infringing?
i wonder if there are any data centers in the world (not owned by microsoft to some extent) that run any version of windows
if nothing else, microsoft using linux validates the gpl on their part (after all, they have to agree to it to use it), so i'm sure this will come up in any court battles over gpl violations by microsoft in the future (which there are no doubt many)
enough to appear as one of the 20 biggest contributors
quantity != quality
they may have actually made linux worse/more buggy and created more work for the regular kernel contributors to integrate and debug
they've used endusers as beta testers for years, and now they're using linux kernel developers as debuggers
am i a contributor to windows because i've written software for it? so what if it had nothing to do with making it a better OS and was only to serve my own interests, but you seem to be making a case for me
It has greatly improved Linux
no it hasn't. it has only improved linux operating as a guest on a windows vm server.
microsoft's contribution had nothing to do with linux on its own
go back to licking windows, moron