That makes sense, except that MS makes VS, which adds an additional layer to the argument. MS developers use VS-specific features in their work, like SourceSafe integration, MS-specific add-ins, etc. If one or two developers used a competing product, not only would they be spending money they don't have to and abandoning their company's core product suite, they might impact release schedules. There are copies of just about every competing product known to man in the MS labs, just not in day-to-day use by the programmers. How do you think MS found out about Visio, or FoxPro?
"...and that doesn't work the way their mind does..."
My mind works better on the beach. My mind works better with a 40" flat-screen. My mind works better if I get to smoke at my desk. My mind works better while stoned or drunk.
Since when is a company exerting some control over its processes not good for the company? If I owned a Jaguar dealership, and one of my employees bought a Mercedes because he doesn't feel comfortable in a Jag, I'd help him find a job that was more comfortable for him. I would do this by firing him from his current job.
Call me a tyrant, but an employee has a responsibility to support the company he works for by at least using the products that company makes at work. Use whatever you want after hours, but on my time it's my products.
That's wrong. Microsoft's mantra is (and I quote) "Eat your own dog food". Except for developers doing work for Mac and Unix, MS people use Windows at work. They use Visual Studio to code in, and Outlook to check their email. They use Visio and Project to do design and project management. Anything else doesn't make sense, and is bad for business. Of course, the Office for Mac team has Macs, and the IE for Unix team has Unix boxes (Sun, I think). Any time you use a competitive OS/product at Microsoft, you'd better have a good business reason to be using it.
OK, now you're trolling. First off, none of what you said is actually in reply to my post. My post was posted in order to post one thing: that.Net is not the same as Web Services, which in turn is not the same as Passport, which is still not the same as Hailstorm. Some of these things are independent of each other (like.Net and Web Services), and some of these things are built one off of the other (like Hailstorm and Passport). So then you got off on some rant where Excel programmers are emailing users' spreadsheets to each other without the consent of the users of Excel. I can adress that point anyway, 'cause I'm versatile like that. Yes, you are paranoid. For several reasons:
Unlike in the Open Source community, people who want to work on a product team at Microsoft actually go on a job interview. They are interviewed over the course of days, for hours at a time. They are forced to code while being watched. They are drug tested and background checked. I know, I went on one (no, I was not hired. It was for the consulting group, and I didn't have enough eperience as a billable employee. Boo Hoo.). In short: they are good. Real good.
Yes, it's true that some malicious or shoddy code could slip through, and it does. Why would this not happen in Open Source projects? Because everyone who uses Open Source reviews the source code before they compile it? Nope. I bet 99% of the installed executables on your machine are a complete mystery to you. Because that number is %1 higher on my computer, I'm an idiot?
Unlike Open Source programmers, Microsoft programmer's code=their careers. You'd have to be insane to ruin your career over putting a stupid backdoor in Excel. Meanwhile, Open Source programming is a hobby. Who's going to get fired for screwing up Apache?
Because closed software is paid for, there is a level of legal recourse for users who are affected by malicious programmers. With Open Source, you sign your life away by clicking on "Accept".
"Rogue Programmers"? Funny. The Open Source movement is based on "rogue programmers" "bucking the system" and "doing it their way". I'm more afraid of some 7337 4@}{0r coding my office apps than some cube jockey up in Redmond with his manager up his ass.
So, your scenario is possible, but the programmers responsible are sent to jail (since MS would know who put in the backdoor within moments), and users get to sue MS for damages. It's just as possible in Open Source, except that nobody knows who did it, and nobody gets to sue.
Web Services are built on SOAP, which is built with XML. Web Services are a concept made possible by XML and SOAP, not a development environment and platform built on a Common Language Runtime, or CLR. Web Services are so platform agnostic, they make Java look proprietary. You can build Web Services on Sun. You can build Web Services with Tcl. You can use Java to write SOAP and Web Service-enabled apps on any platform, even (trumpets) Linux.
I shouldn't have to explain why.Net is platform-specific, but I will..Net, although it can be, will never be ported to other OSs without being reverse engineered. It is primarily a Windows technology, and will neither be free like beer nor speech. This isn't a problem to me since they pay me to write software for a living, and I like to eat. It might be a problem for some of you, and definately means that.Net isn't Web Services. My post wasn't a troll at all, just an effort to afford anti-MS posts the same nitpicking that FreeBSD vs. Debian vs. Whatever posts already enjoy.
Funny you might say that, since basically anyone writing.Net apps is writing open source apps, whether they like it or not.
Also, Passport is a subset of Hailstorm functionality. Please explain how Microsoft providing these services as Web Services impacts a decision to use.Net (a completely seperate concept from Web Services). Since Windows was written in C++, should we not use C++?
I took a limo home from NYC to NJ 2 or 3 nights a week.
I got signing bonuses.
I worked 60+ hours a week.
I did have a dog in my office.
I learned more languages/OSs/technologies in a year than most programmers learn in a lifetime.
I too, made great friends
As a result of the dot-com bust:
I almost got evicted.
I had to learn to live off of $400/wk (unemployment max)
I felt like a jerk.
Now I've got a good job, and the dot-com-level salaries are here to stay. Casual work environments and flextime haven't gone anywhere either. Companies remember the sting of losing all their employees to dot-coms, and treat people better than they used to. I never stopped liking practical used cars, or cheap food, or apartments with character, instead of big fancy lofts. I still drink Bud in a can, just like always. I ended up with a %50 raise over what I was making two years ago. I feel like I did OK. The dot-com rise and fall wasn't all that bad, as long as you keep a level head, and don't get too big on yourself.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm getting sick of "artists" whining about lost profits. These people are in a tiny minority of creatives that do exactly what they want to do, and still manage to make some money at all.
If full and outright MP3 sharing becomes totally legal, then perhaps instead of selling a million copies of their album, they only sell 1,000 copies,
Exactly. Meanwhile, artists that would normally only sell 1000 copies sell a million. See what happens when the Industry marketing machine is rendered ineffective by the internet? Actual consumers get to make informed choices about what music to consume. Not to mention that for the indie musician, touring makes up a signifigant portion of their income and lifestyle. Those artists don't care who infringes on their copyrights, just as long as they show up to the clubs. In fact like artists, and not businessmen, they prioritize the widespread appreciation of their music over profits gained from its sales.
they would have less time to spend creating new music as well as not being able to go on tour as much if they needed to hold down a job...
God for-fucking-bid anybody has to get a day job to support their hobby of creating music. Musicians are the only artisits I can think of off-hand that have a decent chance of getting rich off of their art. They should thank their lucky stars they had that chance, not mourn its loss. The public will pay for goods and services what it thinks is fair, given the freedom to do so. File sharing has given us that freedom, and we're voting with our dollar. We've elected independant musicians with that vote, and I'm pleased as Hell that my music might have a chance over NSYNC, thanks to file sharing.
Why make a clear case if it's still going to look like a standard PC? That would be like making a clear car that looked just like a 1992 Plymouth Acclaim! Take a clue from the G4 cube, and if you have the chance to make the shape of the case whatever you want, make it something special.
I can't agree with that, either. I'm a professional programmer, with kids to feed. I have some observations:
Programmers almost never get to chose which languages to code in. They are usually hired based on their skill in a language the company already uses, or are trained in a language the company (read:CIO) has decided to standardize on.
This whole argument makes me feel great about VB. What's easier than "If" and "End If", automatically capitalized for you by Visual Studio?
There are about 1/1000000th as many commercial software products in Python as there are in C, or C++, or VB or even COBOL. This makes the whole argument kind of moot, doesn't it?
Anyway, 999 out of 100 programs are written in C++ or VB nowadays, and are written for Windows. Until this changes, Python discussions about Emacs and white space are mostly pointless. Also, I agree with the guy who won't try Python based on/. posts. Who has time to download and install a language every time they want to decide whether or not to use it? He's doing his research here, and has decided to stop researching, based on your attitudes. That doesn't make him an idiot.
Ummm, wrong? Shrug, they can "talk" about putting something like this together all they want, but the WebTVs I've seen for sale are just for web surfing.
OK, then you're wrong too. Look here for info on a device that receives DirectTV signals, records video, cruises the web, and displays interactive TV content. Maybe it's not everything that was in the article, but it certainly isn't just for surfing. Especially the interactive TV part. Have you ever seen enhanced TV programming? I don't think you have. I did the NBA on NBC last year, and it rocked, if I do say so myself. Live stats during the game, player profiles, in-game chat with other users watching the same TV program. Go back to the NBC ETV link to see about a dozen shows that made the "light of day". Once you get a WebTV+ box, you can also watch E! 24 hours enhanced, datelineNBC enhanced, Comedy Central enhanced, Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune, 24 hour Game Show network, etc, etc. Is that enough "light of day" for you?
Ummm, so what? It still can't do anything mentioned in CmdrTaco's fantasy.
"So what"? The most successful convergence platform ever gets a "so what"? I already proved that the WebTV platform can do some of the stuff in the article by itself, and act as a GUI/controller for the rest, and that it's already in a million homes and costs way less than it could, and your reply is "so what?"? If that was flame bait, then let me just take the bait real quick:
One of less than 100 industry insiders in producing enhanced television content posts insider information on a possible solution to the problem posed, and you reply that you don't get his point. You should be ashamed of yourself, seriously. Stop getting your opinions on consumer television products from consumer television product sales brochures before you post a reply to an expert, dude. Next time, follow the links past the homepage, and don't waste my time creating anchors. If you don't see my point, just assume it's because you don't get it, which is probably the case more often than you know.
Wrong. Microsoft and others (AOL) are already well on their way to putting together this device minus DVD ripping (cough. MPAA. cough.). Check out The Microsoft TV Platform for more info. WebTV never "had" anything, since it's still in more than a million households, and is the most successful "convergence" platform ever. How do I know this? Because I helped build enhanced content for NBC. Part of the Enhanced Broadcast Group's responsibilities included HDTV and convergence. With the 9Mbs data channel of the HDTV feed, users have their downstream net connection built into the signal. They can use a modem for upstream if necessary. See the ATVEF site for news on what is probably the coolest thing in computing ever.
If I were designing it, I'd use a $99 WebTV+ box (or interface card) to allow an HTML interface to be laid over TV content. WebTV even has a CLI that can run basic hardware and serial port functionality in script. Also, WebTV's serial port could be used to communicate with and control a rack of devices, each of which could be used to implement any of the functionality described in the article when it is developed. Except for, of course, DVD ripping, which will arrive on a cold day in Hell. Why not just get a 500 CD/DVD changer/burner and screw the magnetic storage altogether?
That's hysterical. SQL Server isn't mature enough for you? Then, what is? MySQL? HAH! Oracle? Where's the dev tools? Seriously, get your head out of your @**, and realize. SQL Server is the best database platform in the world.
Is it just me, oir could this article have been shortened a bit, or at least presented as more of an outline? Was it necessary to include transcripts of an individual attack on a single system in order to illustrate the concept of honeynets? Way too long to read completely and thoroughly.
Also, the content was kind of unrealistic, but I won't continue on that track. Karma's low enough without getting "redundant"-ed.
No, the theory here is that what theives are stealing is a facsimile of the product, because it's exactly the same as the product itself, minus the cost. When's the last time you heard of somebody Xeroxing the dictionary? That's because the dictionary is sold at a fair price, and the atoms involved (binding, cover, portability, convenience) offer added value. Thieves only steal what's easier to steal than buy. Everyone bought Toyaota Cressidas, even though Lexus made effectively the same car for $15000 more. That's because the copy (Cressida) was effectively the same as the original (Lexus), minus the price tag and the fancy "L". Toyota wised up, and stopped making the Cressida. Then, it added value to the Lexus (better suspension, engine, interior appointments, etc) so that people would stop "stealing" the 15 gs by buiying Cressidas instead. That's what the RIAA needs to do, Coward. Get it?
This is a classic example of people's reaction to a product with less intrinsic value than its purchase price. Instead of the Industry spending all its money on making sure Napster doesn't trade any of its works, why doesn't it add value to those works above and beyond the music data, in order to bring consumers back to paying for them? I still buy vinyl, even though I've got about every song I could ever want on mp3. Why? Because there's no comparison between the feeling of holding a shiny black (or red or clear) LP, with all of the elaborate liner notes, distro catalogs, etc. that you get when you buy a real record. Plus, I can get a 7" (aka 45) for two bucks from Insound, with free shipping a lot of the time. Maybe the Industry needs to lower the price of CDs until they make sense to buy because it's easier than stealing them, instead of making them harder to steal, so that the consumer grudgingly buys them. A consumer that buys your product and doesn't like it will eventually figure out a way to get it without paying. The RIAA's problem isn't Napster, it's that they've finally gotten busted for selling a product for about double what it's worth, and offering no more value than stealing it.
Maybe they could allow you to register the CD on the artist or label's site, and get access to better concert seats, discounted merch, "club-only" early ticket sales, etc.
Attention: RIAA- Put the value back in your products, or we'll keep stealing them!
Good for you. I like to put gas in my car one tablespoon at a time, and pay for it with pennies. I don't trust debit cards, and bills are for cash-newbies. Too many car owners these days rely on GUI elements like speedometers, instead of us hardcore users that count the yellow dashes in the road. Did you know that there's people out there with "lives" that consider themselves "programmers" that even use MS IDEs? Wimps!
One good thing about Clippy... its (his?) construction allowed for the basis for the Agent SDK. This is a pretty cool piece of work. Check out the Agent homepage. I used it to add voice recognition capabilities to an intranet application. Otherwise, Clippy does suck.
Want to open Word docs, Excel spreadsheets, Powerpoint presentations? Use MS Office. Works great. These file formats are no more proprietary than Photoshop or Illustrator. Office has desktop dominance for a reason. It is hands-down the best productivity suite for ANY OS.
You should probably ask before you post. What this discussion is about is Microsoft (and others') proposed BUSINESS PLAN for distributed software..Net is something different altogether..Net is a software development platform based on the CLR (Common Language Runtime) that changes VB and introduces C#, along with introducing the Web Services concept to developers. One of the capabilities of.Net is the ability for software components to reside on diparate and heterogeneous computers all over the internet. This might enable a company to make desktop software that uses SOAP to gather bits of data from the 'net, but most likely NOT. The main uses for SOAP have been from one web server to another. This is because:
Not everyone has a constant connection to the Internet. Office can't crap out just because your friend beeps in on Call Waiting.. Developers know this.
Not every Web Services provider can garauntee 100% uptime, which would be necessary to support the availibility of Web Services.
ROPE (MS's implementation of SOAP) isn't fast enough to provide the kind of responsiveness that people look for on the desktop.
Not even Microsoft has worked out the revenue model for Web Services.
In closing, before everyone freaks out about "M$" taking their cash (read:actually having to pay for Microsoft software they use anyway), visit msdn.
Slashdot Mirror
That makes sense, except that MS makes VS, which adds an additional layer to the argument. MS developers use VS-specific features in their work, like SourceSafe integration, MS-specific add-ins, etc. If one or two developers used a competing product, not only would they be spending money they don't have to and abandoning their company's core product suite, they might impact release schedules. There are copies of just about every competing product known to man in the MS labs, just not in day-to-day use by the programmers. How do you think MS found out about Visio, or FoxPro?
Oh, please:
"...and that doesn't work the way their mind does..."
My mind works better on the beach. My mind works better with a 40" flat-screen. My mind works better if I get to smoke at my desk. My mind works better while stoned or drunk.
Since when is a company exerting some control over its processes not good for the company? If I owned a Jaguar dealership, and one of my employees bought a Mercedes because he doesn't feel comfortable in a Jag, I'd help him find a job that was more comfortable for him. I would do this by firing him from his current job.
Call me a tyrant, but an employee has a responsibility to support the company he works for by at least using the products that company makes at work. Use whatever you want after hours, but on my time it's my products.
That's wrong. Microsoft's mantra is (and I quote) "Eat your own dog food". Except for developers doing work for Mac and Unix, MS people use Windows at work. They use Visual Studio to code in, and Outlook to check their email. They use Visio and Project to do design and project management. Anything else doesn't make sense, and is bad for business. Of course, the Office for Mac team has Macs, and the IE for Unix team has Unix boxes (Sun, I think). Any time you use a competitive OS/product at Microsoft, you'd better have a good business reason to be using it.
So, your scenario is possible, but the programmers responsible are sent to jail (since MS would know who put in the backdoor within moments), and users get to sue MS for damages. It's just as possible in Open Source, except that nobody knows who did it, and nobody gets to sue.
Web Services are built on SOAP, which is built with XML. Web Services are a concept made possible by XML and SOAP, not a development environment and platform built on a Common Language Runtime, or CLR. Web Services are so platform agnostic, they make Java look proprietary. You can build Web Services on Sun. You can build Web Services with Tcl. You can use Java to write SOAP and Web Service-enabled apps on any platform, even (trumpets) Linux.
.Net is platform-specific, but I will. .Net, although it can be, will never be ported to other OSs without being reverse engineered. It is primarily a Windows technology, and will neither be free like beer nor speech. This isn't a problem to me since they pay me to write software for a living, and I like to eat. It might be a problem for some of you, and definately means that .Net isn't Web Services. My post wasn't a troll at all, just an effort to afford anti-MS posts the same nitpicking that FreeBSD vs. Debian vs. Whatever posts already enjoy.
I shouldn't have to explain why
Funny you might say that, since basically anyone writing .Net apps is writing open source apps, whether they like it or not. .Net (a completely seperate concept from Web Services). Since Windows was written in C++, should we not use C++?
Also, Passport is a subset of Hailstorm functionality. Please explain how Microsoft providing these services as Web Services impacts a decision to use
-
I got a cool-ass job in The City.
-
I took a limo home from NYC to NJ 2 or 3 nights a week.
-
I got signing bonuses.
-
I worked 60+ hours a week.
- I did have a dog in my office.
-
I learned more languages/OSs/technologies in a year than most programmers learn in a lifetime.
- I too, made great friends
As a result of the dot-com bust:-
I almost got evicted.
-
I had to learn to live off of $400/wk (unemployment max)
-
I felt like a jerk.
Now I've got a good job, and the dot-com-level salaries are here to stay. Casual work environments and flextime haven't gone anywhere either. Companies remember the sting of losing all their employees to dot-coms, and treat people better than they used to. I never stopped liking practical used cars, or cheap food, or apartments with character, instead of big fancy lofts. I still drink Bud in a can, just like always. I ended up with a %50 raise over what I was making two years ago. I feel like I did OK. The dot-com rise and fall wasn't all that bad, as long as you keep a level head, and don't get too big on yourself.God for-fucking-bid anybody has to get a day job to support their hobby of creating music. Musicians are the only artisits I can think of off-hand that have a decent chance of getting rich off of their art. They should thank their lucky stars they had that chance, not mourn its loss. The public will pay for goods and services what it thinks is fair, given the freedom to do so. File sharing has given us that freedom, and we're voting with our dollar. We've elected independant musicians with that vote, and I'm pleased as Hell that my music might have a chance over NSYNC, thanks to file sharing.
Speaking of Apple...
Why make a clear case if it's still going to look like a standard PC? That would be like making a clear car that looked just like a 1992 Plymouth Acclaim! Take a clue from the G4 cube, and if you have the chance to make the shape of the case whatever you want, make it something special.
Anyway, 999 out of 100 programs are written in C++ or VB nowadays, and are written for Windows. Until this changes, Python discussions about Emacs and white space are mostly pointless. Also, I agree with the guy who won't try Python based on
Ummm, wrong? Shrug, they can "talk" about putting something like this together all they want, but the WebTVs I've seen for sale are just for web surfing.
OK, then you're wrong too. Look here for info on a device that receives DirectTV signals, records video, cruises the web, and displays interactive TV content. Maybe it's not everything that was in the article, but it certainly isn't just for surfing. Especially the interactive TV part. Have you ever seen enhanced TV programming? I don't think you have. I did the NBA on NBC last year, and it rocked, if I do say so myself. Live stats during the game, player profiles, in-game chat with other users watching the same TV program. Go back to the NBC ETV link to see about a dozen shows that made the "light of day". Once you get a WebTV+ box, you can also watch E! 24 hours enhanced, datelineNBC enhanced, Comedy Central enhanced, Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune, 24 hour Game Show network, etc, etc. Is that enough "light of day" for you?
Ummm, so what? It still can't do anything mentioned in CmdrTaco's fantasy.
"So what"? The most successful convergence platform ever gets a "so what"? I already proved that the WebTV platform can do some of the stuff in the article by itself, and act as a GUI/controller for the rest, and that it's already in a million homes and costs way less than it could, and your reply is "so what?"? If that was flame bait, then let me just take the bait real quick:
One of less than 100 industry insiders in producing enhanced television content posts insider information on a possible solution to the problem posed, and you reply that you don't get his point. You should be ashamed of yourself, seriously. Stop getting your opinions on consumer television products from consumer television product sales brochures before you post a reply to an expert, dude. Next time, follow the links past the homepage, and don't waste my time creating anchors. If you don't see my point, just assume it's because you don't get it, which is probably the case more often than you know.
Wrong. Microsoft and others (AOL) are already well on their way to putting together this device minus DVD ripping (cough. MPAA. cough.). Check out The Microsoft TV Platform for more info. WebTV never "had" anything, since it's still in more than a million households, and is the most successful "convergence" platform ever. How do I know this? Because I helped build enhanced content for NBC. Part of the Enhanced Broadcast Group's responsibilities included HDTV and convergence. With the 9Mbs data channel of the HDTV feed, users have their downstream net connection built into the signal. They can use a modem for upstream if necessary. See the ATVEF site for news on what is probably the coolest thing in computing ever.
If I were designing it, I'd use a $99 WebTV+ box (or interface card) to allow an HTML interface to be laid over TV content. WebTV even has a CLI that can run basic hardware and serial port functionality in script. Also, WebTV's serial port could be used to communicate with and control a rack of devices, each of which could be used to implement any of the functionality described in the article when it is developed. Except for, of course, DVD ripping, which will arrive on a cold day in Hell. Why not just get a 500 CD/DVD changer/burner and screw the magnetic storage altogether?
That's hysterical. SQL Server isn't mature enough for you? Then, what is? MySQL? HAH! Oracle? Where's the dev tools? Seriously, get your head out of your @**, and realize. SQL Server is the best database platform in the world.
Is it just me, oir could this article have been shortened a bit, or at least presented as more of an outline? Was it necessary to include transcripts of an individual attack on a single system in order to illustrate the concept of honeynets? Way too long to read completely and thoroughly.
Also, the content was kind of unrealistic, but I won't continue on that track. Karma's low enough without getting "redundant"-ed.
Cool. How's your Mac working out?
No, the theory here is that what theives are stealing is a facsimile of the product, because it's exactly the same as the product itself, minus the cost. When's the last time you heard of somebody Xeroxing the dictionary? That's because the dictionary is sold at a fair price, and the atoms involved (binding, cover, portability, convenience) offer added value. Thieves only steal what's easier to steal than buy. Everyone bought Toyaota Cressidas, even though Lexus made effectively the same car for $15000 more. That's because the copy (Cressida) was effectively the same as the original (Lexus), minus the price tag and the fancy "L". Toyota wised up, and stopped making the Cressida. Then, it added value to the Lexus (better suspension, engine, interior appointments, etc) so that people would stop "stealing" the 15 gs by buiying Cressidas instead. That's what the RIAA needs to do, Coward. Get it?
This is a classic example of people's reaction to a product with less intrinsic value than its purchase price. Instead of the Industry spending all its money on making sure Napster doesn't trade any of its works, why doesn't it add value to those works above and beyond the music data, in order to bring consumers back to paying for them? I still buy vinyl, even though I've got about every song I could ever want on mp3. Why? Because there's no comparison between the feeling of holding a shiny black (or red or clear) LP, with all of the elaborate liner notes, distro catalogs, etc. that you get when you buy a real record. Plus, I can get a 7" (aka 45) for two bucks from Insound, with free shipping a lot of the time. Maybe the Industry needs to lower the price of CDs until they make sense to buy because it's easier than stealing them, instead of making them harder to steal, so that the consumer grudgingly buys them. A consumer that buys your product and doesn't like it will eventually figure out a way to get it without paying. The RIAA's problem isn't Napster, it's that they've finally gotten busted for selling a product for about double what it's worth, and offering no more value than stealing it.
Maybe they could allow you to register the CD on the artist or label's site, and get access to better concert seats, discounted merch, "club-only" early ticket sales, etc.
Attention: RIAA- Put the value back in your products, or we'll keep stealing them!
Good for you. I like to put gas in my car one tablespoon at a time, and pay for it with pennies. I don't trust debit cards, and bills are for cash-newbies. Too many car owners these days rely on GUI elements like speedometers, instead of us hardcore users that count the yellow dashes in the road. Did you know that there's people out there with "lives" that consider themselves "programmers" that even use MS IDEs? Wimps!
File sharing IS the reason people get broadband.
etc, etc...
One good thing about Clippy... its (his?) construction allowed for the basis for the Agent SDK. This is a pretty cool piece of work. Check out the Agent homepage. I used it to add voice recognition capabilities to an intranet application. Otherwise, Clippy does suck.
Want to open Word docs, Excel spreadsheets, Powerpoint presentations? Use MS Office. Works great. These file formats are no more proprietary than Photoshop or Illustrator. Office has desktop dominance for a reason. It is hands-down the best productivity suite for ANY OS.
You guys are hysterical. When the MS guy couldn't answer a question, he was an idiot. When Bob says "I'm an idiot", he's a genius.
Yeah, not to mention the US needs a cultural revolution, except that we've got nothing ancient to throw out. Viva la China!
In closing, before everyone freaks out about "M$" taking their cash (read:actually having to pay for Microsoft software they use anyway), visit msdn.