You're posting on a web site owned by a company that positions itself as a palladin of open source, yet closed off access to their (once freely available) main product years ago. SourceForge is the ultimate example of these double standards that according to you only exist when considered in the context of things you happen to hate, like "Windoze".
Eventually, all free software users understand the benefits of real freedom and shuns non free.
As always you fall into the trap of thinking people (normal people, you know, out there in the real world) somehow subscribe to your unquestionable religious techno babble rather than simply wanting to use their computers to get work done. "Freedom" as promoted by people like you must be absolute, expressed in pure black and white. Reality is much more complicated than that, and the more you "evangelize" this type of argument, the less people will sign up for your nirvana.
As for your always tiresome prediction that "M$" is about to go under, good luck. It's going to take a lot more than silly little lie-infested lists and wasting your time preaching to the choir.
Why don't you spend 1/10th of the energy you expend on FUD'ing Microsoft by lobbying OSDN (or OSTG or whatever it's called this year) to open up the software that hosts the vast majority of free software projects in the planet? Now that would be a worthy cause.
Welcome to the Sockpuppets Of People Who Disagree With Twitter's Bullshit Therefore They Must Work For M$ club, also known as SOPWDWTBTMWMdollarsign_club. I am a sockuppet of Macthorpe, who is himself a sockuppet of jbl, who is himself a sockpuppet of KeithRussel. You can pick any combination thereof for yourself. Remember to punch your card when you get in, otherwise we have problems getting Bill to give us our bi-weekly check for $12.50.
Yeah, really hard to find alternative shells for "Windoze". Maybe you're so ignorant that you've been looking for "window managers" when they're really called "shells"? Oh, I forget. You don't even use Windows, and you haven't in years. I guess that's what makes you quite the expert on the topic.
make it so the user can chose pieces of each without conflict
Yes, that only happens in the free software world. Yes, the "open with" menu I have here must be a figment of my imagination. You are so ignorant it's just painful.
As an example, sometimes I want gedit, sometimes write, sometimes kate, sometimes bluefish, sometimes vi
Holy shit, you have more than one text editor in Linux?? Oh my god, that is like so cool!
This does not mean they are not purchasing their market share
At least they are not trying to fake it like Bruce Perens.
I wouldn't have said this five years ago, but I think Real Soon Now people like you are going to have to start accepting that maybe IIS6/7 is simply good, and that's why they're gaining market share. I don't think they'll ever overtake Apache, but seriously, this "M$ must be buying market share and killing people" paranoia becomes ridiculous and untenable to say the least.
Compare this to the average GUI maze of tabs and checkboxes
You mean:
Open the MMC and right-click on the object of interest
Find the relevant checkbox, which you should be able to locate easily after you've done this twice
Alternatively, click on the "Help" button to read the "rational directions" or do a Google search. Wow, there's information about IIS out there!
Activate checkbox
Click OK
If you're feeling adventurous you can of course open the IIS metabase file on a text editor and do exactly the same thing, but whatever floats your boat.
Bill Gates thinks you should do and enjoy pressing "I agree" and "forward".
Oh, I see what you did there. Clever, yes. Would you like to point out to us where in IIS there is an "I Agree" button?
I'm actually curious as to what you think is so inherently superior about the 1337 text editor approach? Is that your security blanket or something? When was the last time you actually administered IIS, BTW? I ask because I honestly don't see a "maze of tabs and checkboxes" there, but just a utilitarian UI to manage server settings.
Everyone who goes and reads that list should definitely read the first comment.
Working for most of the Fortune 1000 is miserable right now
If you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what working for a Fortune 1000 is like (if that even qualifies as some sort of unique experience), why even make such a statement at all? And Jesus, there are a thousand companies there. I'm sure not all of them are the black pit you seem to be so intimate with.
Much of their M$ heavy stock funded retirement plans never gained their value back
Wait a sec. here, are you actually claiming that most of the Fortune 1000 have retirement funds which are based "heavily" on "M$" stock? And that is the reason they are in so much trouble? Seriously? I'd like to see some proof of that, thanks.
The Mississippi River bridge collapse
So let me see if I have this down. "M$" has some sort of evil effect on the Fortune 1000. Ergo -> rivers collapse.
I'm not sure, but I think this is a new low even for you. What is it, the idea that IIS might actually be a good piece of software that drives you to this kind of frenzy?
Isn't that punishing people for their thoughts? i.e. "thought crime"?
No, they are arresting him for driving 150 miles with condoms and beer to have sex in a house with a child. They are arresting him for telling someone he thinks is a child that he'd like to fuck her. They are arresting him for sending the child pictures of himself naked. That's called intent.
But such a person entrapped
There is no entrapment here, except maybe in your head.
This is like arresting a guy for rape if he gets a hardon by looking at a hot woman
Wow. If you don't understand what the actual offense is in this case, why are you arguing about it?
Until a crime TAKES PLACE you cannot be guilty of thinking about committing a crime.
A crime did take place. Soliciting a minor and crossing state lines with the intent of engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor. If you don't like the laws that govern this behavior then you need to go talk to congress. Arguing that a child wasn't victimized is irrelevant in the context of those laws.
Quite frankly I have a hard time believing anyone can question intent in these cases, and therefore that the individual is a menace to society. But whatever floats your boat. Like I said, as long as no laws are broken and no one's constitutional rights are violated, I'm all for putting them away for a long time.
There's a lot of overreaction, I agree. But if the average time needed by that vigilante group to snag a perv is any indication, I'd say it's quite common. I know children who were also propositioned online, for example. In one case actually stalked because the perv lived in the same city. But I don't use my personal experiences as metrics. There's a poll out there by the Pew Foundation I think that has some alarming numbers.
i knew a girl who was 14 and dating a 21 year old in the military when i was in highschool and her parents were ok with it.
I know a group of people like that too. They live in Utah. And the parents of the children are usually honky dory with what happens to them as well.
People do all sorts of dumb things for various reasons. Your data point does not quite convince me that a teenager is intelligent or mature enough to understand the ramifications of her actions, or for that matter to realize that decisions related to those actions are being taken for her.
But I guess stupidity breeds stupidity - quite literally in some cases.
It doesn't matter that the child is fictional if it's enough to drive an adult to do that. The law is not defending the fictional child, it's punishing the perpetrator that had the intent to harm the child. These people are not behaving that way because they figure the child does not exist.
It's all semantic blabber until your child is victimized, I guess. And as long as the poor pervert's constitutional rights are not being violated, I'm perfectly fine with doing whatever it takes to get him to spend a few years taking long showers with Bruno instead of trying to abuse vulnerable children.
If you have a problem with that, I suggest you write your congressman.
The law is designed primarily to protect victims. That's why the law is written along the lines of "X with intent to commit Y". There's nothing questionable about the legality of what MSNBC is doing. If there was, they would have been shut down a long time ago, or simply never even started.
Never at any point was there an actual child who was in danger
If I have a gun and say I'm going to kill you because you skinned my cat but someone notifies the police before I actually go to your house, I suppose that's a good argument. After all, you were never in danger, right?
These scumbags are all adults. They engage in sexually explicit conversations with someone they believe is a 15 year-old child, which more often than not includes them sending grainy pictures of their genitals and whatnot. Then they drive hundreds of miles (sometimes across state lines) to the house of the 15 year-old. They walk in with liquor, ropes, condoms and porn videos. Sometimes they walk in naked. To meet what they believe is a 15 year-old child whose parents are not home. Apparently I'm to conclude that they just wanted to borrow an XBox game or maybe some sugar?
You'll forgive me if I think that what MSNBC is doing is valuable, even though of course they do it for the ratings. Sexual exploitation of minors is a serious problem in this country. As long as our law enforcement entities are fixated with catching evil terrorists, I'll take the media's help any day as long as they don't break any laws or infringe on anyone's constitutional rights.
I hope that when the next undercover investigation on electronic voting machines or some form of government corruption surfaces I'll see the same level of outrage directed at the "offending" journalist as I'm seeing here. I hope they're called "moles" as well.
This is an expression of the idea of freedom of the press. It doesn't matter that it targeted a hacker convention. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Part of the reason there was a melt down in the late 90's was because people realized they were not going to make any money in personal computing as long as M$ was allowed to operate the way they do.
Bwahahahahahahah!!!
Oh my god, I think it's been a while since I laughed so hard at something you wrote.
So if we consider for a second that "M$" did indeed kill Netscape (as opposed to Netscape killing themselves), that Netscape deservedly died long before the actual boom happened, and that the vast majority of dotcom flops where things like Pets.com and Kibu.com and Kozmo.com and WebVan and so on and so forth which had nothing whatsoever to do with software or hardware or IT in any way shape or form, what you're suggesting is that the hoodwinked investors for all these companies suddenly realized that "M$" was going to get to them, so they started buying Herman Miller Aero chairs and foosball tables en masse to burn through all of those VC billions?
Or is it that those companies got their VC funding because someone was afraid of "M$"? Or that the VCs stopped giving money to them because of something "M$" did or didn't do?
Hell, in fact I'd be happy if you just pointed me to a major dotcom bust that had based their "business model" on software that somehow competed with Microsoft in one way or another. I'm sure that you can apply the same zeal to that as you seem to put into collecting your "Vista suxxorz" FUD?
I gotta tell you, I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this effluvia of yours correctly, but maybe my contempt for your puerile theories is definitely getting the best of me. What exactly do you smoke, snort or shoot that makes you come up with these priceless little jewels?
M$ is sure to make this one of those awefull non-standards like ACPI
Standard enough for Linux and BSD to implement and use? Where's your standard?
Want to bet their idea of a no charge "implementation" is a NDA protected SDK?
Want to bet ISO and JPEG (the group) would not even give it the once over if that was the case?
They will then force it [... Windoze... M$... doom... etc]
Right, just like they did with the bitmap and DIB format. Oh, but you're cynical. I forget.
If jpeg 2000 is not good enough, there's PNG.
So you simply don't understand what each format is intended for or what their issues and strengths are. It's just the usual "that incompatible thing over there is good enough even if it's not, as long as it's not M$" attitude.
JPEG2000 is patent-encumbered, unfortunately. JPEG obtained "assurances" that no one would nail them later, but if I have to choose between the JPEG and Microsoft to defend me against submarine patents, my money is on Microsoft. Alternatively, you can always imagine that the patent system has disappeared and hope for the best.
they would simply surrender their patents
You know, I'm sure they'll do that - as soon as everybody else does. Patents are an unfortunate mexican standoff, and you can hardly blame Microsoft for the state of things. Oh wait, you can. You also hilariously blame them for the dotcom bubble burst, so I guess anything is possible.
they don't like free formats
Are you still going on about that? God, even the article says it was a mistake, which was corrected.
Let's just hope this bad idea dies with Vista.
Ah, your cute journal entry. BTW, I'm still waiting to hear how it is possible for all those Vista licenses you claimed Microsoft was "stuffing the channel" with miraculously managed to get themselves connected to teh interwebs?
I am sick of hearing propaganda about the "bubble" of the late 90's. Many if not most of those companies were crushed by the incumbent powers of the time, which include M$
You are actually blaming Microsoft for the dotcom burst? Seriously, no shit?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Oh my god. Hey, I know - why don't you go through this list and tell us which of those sophomoric money pits were "crushed" by "M$". That should be really entertaining. Or better yet, why don't you write another little journal entry with lots of dollar signs and lies that explains how these "companies" and their excellent "business plans" were victimized by Microsoft! I know I for one would be really entertained by that.
Had M$ allowed competition or freedom on their platform, there would be a choice of UIs and this would be a non issue.
I'm not sure I understand this. How does "M$" not allow something to happen on their platform? You've been able to use alternative Windows shells for ever. Some of them like Aston are quite good, or you could use Litestep or GeoShell if you were feeling adventurous.
M$ has kept their old school, forklift upgrade treadmill running
When Microsoft ships often, it's an "upgrade treadmill", and when they take 5 years to ship a new OS then they can't ship software. Which is it? And how do they "keep" you on a treadmill? By supporting Windows XP for the next seven years? And still selling it through Dell and other OEMs as well?
M$ has not provided a stable and modern OS as a reward.
I'd love to see what you think is not "stable" or modern about Vista.
It's hard to hate and complain about free software because it's written by people who tell you everything they know and expect nothing in return.
Bwahahaha, spare me the poetry. Save it for your karma whoring, OK? There is no functional difference between trying to find information to solve problems in "Winblows" and "Linsux". You are OK with people calling it "Linsux", right?
More importantly, gnu/linux works and keeps working.
You mean "I tell people Linux is perfect and Windows crashes every five minutes and is evil, and when they get to the promise land all they have to do is deal with RTFM and deficient documentation, yay"
The only fact you left out was that Vista does not work
Yeah, all those millions of licenses you famously claimed "M$" was "stuffing the channel" with have apparently managed to get connected to the internet.
it's getting longer every day.
If you keep adding more FUD, opinion pieces and lies to it, I'm sure it will be really big by the time Vista reaches 50% market share in mid-2008. Like that press release from RedHat that details a migration from Unix to Linux. Rather informative if it wasn't for your infantile "they left M$ OS" dribble.
Actually I'm the one employed by Bill Gates (he personally brings me my check for $12.50 every two weeks), since jb is a well-known sockpuppet of mine. Or wait, was I one of his sockpuppets? Hmmm.... We'll have to ask twitter. I'm sure he knows.
Everyone has an agenda. Yours seems all the bigger and nastier, but you seem to think no one will notice. I guess around here that's par for the course. If you were doing all this somewhere more neutral you'd be laughed off in no time. But hey, more power to you preaching to the choir and all that.
By your reasoning, the web should be filled with people complaining about gnu/linux, Apple and every OS. That's clearly not the case
Hmmm. It's not? Well I don't know about "filled", but are you actually claiming that no one complains or even seeks help on the internet to get Ubuntu running or solving a problem with app packages on OS X? And hell, since there are about 98 Windows users for every Linux one I expect that the volume of problems will be significantly higher for Windows... and why am I even saying this? It's frakin' logic, for god's sakes.
People know about Vista but don't want it. only 12% of either group wants it. The rejection is universal.
Oh my god, 12% of people don't want it but "the rejection is universal"? Do you actually read what you type?
[anecdotal dribble, half-lies and buzzwords]
Facts are inconvenient. You can compile all the misleading little bullet point lists you want and need in your journal, but the reality is that after seven months Vista has surpassed the market share OS X managed to accumulate during the last seven years, and like XP and Windows 98 before, XP will be Vista's largest competitor for the foreseeable future. No amount of creative generalizations, lies and insightful-sounding "M$ is dying" rants will change that. Linux still has less market share than Windows 98. Those are the facts.
And BTW, props to you. No matter how one tries to counter your lies and FUD, one invariably ends up coming across as trying to defend Microsoft. You've become very good at that. I want Microsoft to have as much pressure and competition as possible. I want them to play nice. But every time I come across one of you FLOSS "evangelists" my hope that an organized and sane free software movement will give Microsoft a real run for its money goes down a notch.
They're not "strongly worded", they are nothing more than clever combinations of lies and misrepresentation of facts peppered with impressive-sounding buzzwords, infantile creative spelling (and bad spelling at that) and lots of irrelevant or downright misleading links. twitter has been at this for long enough that he's figured out the perfect "mod me up!" formula, and this is key because the day he doesn't get modded up is a bad day indeed for him. He lives for his mod points.
For example, he has a journal entry right now that lists his "M$ Vista sucks" bullet points. He claims that the FAA "saved millions by leaving other M$ OS behind". If you actually bother to load up that story, it is nothing more than a RedHat press release, and the FAA migrated to Linux away from another *nix platform. "Windoze" was never even involved. Most of the other links are similar lies and blatant misrepresentations, probably added in the hope no one will bother to click on them. The rest are nothing more than opinion pieces, which hardly validate his tired "M$ is dying" mantra.
You must be thinking about his rants about the *IAA and "big dumb companies", which I will admit sometimes are actually on target.
Oh, and I'm not sure if you can discern the difference between defending Microsoft and pointing out someone is just lying. If you consider that to be an "MS fanboy" then I suppose you can put me in that category. I'd dare anyone to find a single post I've made here where I actually behave like a fanboy in heat. I use their products and I have my own problems with Microsoft, but I don't wank off on teh interwebs with FUD and disingenuous lies to further my "join us or die" agenda.
The first victim of a twitter post (not counting grammar and spelling) is the truth. After that, it's all downhill no matter what you say.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, for example here.
Your poetic hillbilly effluvia is entertaining, as always.
Yeah, but you're also a charter member of the Sockuppets Of Sockpuppets Of Sockpuppets Club... Club =)
I guess when the pickins are slim you need get 'em where you can.
As always you fall into the trap of thinking people (normal people, you know, out there in the real world) somehow subscribe to your unquestionable religious techno babble rather than simply wanting to use their computers to get work done. "Freedom" as promoted by people like you must be absolute, expressed in pure black and white. Reality is much more complicated than that, and the more you "evangelize" this type of argument, the less people will sign up for your nirvana.
As for your always tiresome prediction that "M$" is about to go under, good luck. It's going to take a lot more than silly little lie-infested lists and wasting your time preaching to the choir.
Why don't you spend 1/10th of the energy you expend on FUD'ing Microsoft by lobbying OSDN (or OSTG or whatever it's called this year) to open up the software that hosts the vast majority of free software projects in the planet? Now that would be a worthy cause.
Welcome to the Sockpuppets Of People Who Disagree With Twitter's Bullshit Therefore They Must Work For M$ club, also known as SOPWDWTBTMWMdollarsign_club. I am a sockuppet of Macthorpe, who is himself a sockuppet of jbl, who is himself a sockpuppet of KeithRussel. You can pick any combination thereof for yourself. Remember to punch your card when you get in, otherwise we have problems getting Bill to give us our bi-weekly check for $12.50.
Yes, that only happens in the free software world. Yes, the "open with" menu I have here must be a figment of my imagination. You are so ignorant it's just painful.
Holy shit, you have more than one text editor in Linux?? Oh my god, that is like so cool!
Crap, I spilled pop all over my keyboard.
Anyone who reads that journal entry of yours should definitely pay attention to the first comment.
At least they are not trying to fake it like Bruce Perens.
I wouldn't have said this five years ago, but I think Real Soon Now people like you are going to have to start accepting that maybe IIS6/7 is simply good, and that's why they're gaining market share. I don't think they'll ever overtake Apache, but seriously, this "M$ must be buying market share and killing people" paranoia becomes ridiculous and untenable to say the least.
You mean:
If you're feeling adventurous you can of course open the IIS metabase file on a text editor and do exactly the same thing, but whatever floats your boat.
Oh, I see what you did there. Clever, yes. Would you like to point out to us where in IIS there is an "I Agree" button?
I'm actually curious as to what you think is so inherently superior about the 1337 text editor approach? Is that your security blanket or something? When was the last time you actually administered IIS, BTW? I ask because I honestly don't see a "maze of tabs and checkboxes" there, but just a utilitarian UI to manage server settings.
Everyone who goes and reads that list should definitely read the first comment.
If you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what working for a Fortune 1000 is like (if that even qualifies as some sort of unique experience), why even make such a statement at all? And Jesus, there are a thousand companies there. I'm sure not all of them are the black pit you seem to be so intimate with.
Wait a sec. here, are you actually claiming that most of the Fortune 1000 have retirement funds which are based "heavily" on "M$" stock? And that is the reason they are in so much trouble? Seriously? I'd like to see some proof of that, thanks.
So let me see if I have this down. "M$" has some sort of evil effect on the Fortune 1000. Ergo -> rivers collapse.
I'm not sure, but I think this is a new low even for you. What is it, the idea that IIS might actually be a good piece of software that drives you to this kind of frenzy?
No, they are arresting him for driving 150 miles with condoms and beer to have sex in a house with a child. They are arresting him for telling someone he thinks is a child that he'd like to fuck her. They are arresting him for sending the child pictures of himself naked. That's called intent.
There is no entrapment here, except maybe in your head.
Wow. If you don't understand what the actual offense is in this case, why are you arguing about it?
A crime did take place. Soliciting a minor and crossing state lines with the intent of engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor. If you don't like the laws that govern this behavior then you need to go talk to congress. Arguing that a child wasn't victimized is irrelevant in the context of those laws.
Quite frankly I have a hard time believing anyone can question intent in these cases, and therefore that the individual is a menace to society. But whatever floats your boat. Like I said, as long as no laws are broken and no one's constitutional rights are violated, I'm all for putting them away for a long time.
There's a lot of overreaction, I agree. But if the average time needed by that vigilante group to snag a perv is any indication, I'd say it's quite common. I know children who were also propositioned online, for example. In one case actually stalked because the perv lived in the same city. But I don't use my personal experiences as metrics. There's a poll out there by the Pew Foundation I think that has some alarming numbers.
I know a group of people like that too. They live in Utah. And the parents of the children are usually honky dory with what happens to them as well.
People do all sorts of dumb things for various reasons. Your data point does not quite convince me that a teenager is intelligent or mature enough to understand the ramifications of her actions, or for that matter to realize that decisions related to those actions are being taken for her.
But I guess stupidity breeds stupidity - quite literally in some cases.
It's all semantic blabber until your child is victimized, I guess. And as long as the poor pervert's constitutional rights are not being violated, I'm perfectly fine with doing whatever it takes to get him to spend a few years taking long showers with Bruno instead of trying to abuse vulnerable children.
If you have a problem with that, I suggest you write your congressman.
If I have a gun and say I'm going to kill you because you skinned my cat but someone notifies the police before I actually go to your house, I suppose that's a good argument. After all, you were never in danger, right?
These scumbags are all adults. They engage in sexually explicit conversations with someone they believe is a 15 year-old child, which more often than not includes them sending grainy pictures of their genitals and whatnot. Then they drive hundreds of miles (sometimes across state lines) to the house of the 15 year-old. They walk in with liquor, ropes, condoms and porn videos. Sometimes they walk in naked. To meet what they believe is a 15 year-old child whose parents are not home. Apparently I'm to conclude that they just wanted to borrow an XBox game or maybe some sugar?
You'll forgive me if I think that what MSNBC is doing is valuable, even though of course they do it for the ratings. Sexual exploitation of minors is a serious problem in this country. As long as our law enforcement entities are fixated with catching evil terrorists, I'll take the media's help any day as long as they don't break any laws or infringe on anyone's constitutional rights.
This is an expression of the idea of freedom of the press. It doesn't matter that it targeted a hacker convention. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Bwahahahahahahah!!!
Oh my god, I think it's been a while since I laughed so hard at something you wrote.
So if we consider for a second that "M$" did indeed kill Netscape (as opposed to Netscape killing themselves), that Netscape deservedly died long before the actual boom happened, and that the vast majority of dotcom flops where things like Pets.com and Kibu.com and Kozmo.com and WebVan and so on and so forth which had nothing whatsoever to do with software or hardware or IT in any way shape or form, what you're suggesting is that the hoodwinked investors for all these companies suddenly realized that "M$" was going to get to them, so they started buying Herman Miller Aero chairs and foosball tables en masse to burn through all of those VC billions?
Or is it that those companies got their VC funding because someone was afraid of "M$"? Or that the VCs stopped giving money to them because of something "M$" did or didn't do?
Hell, in fact I'd be happy if you just pointed me to a major dotcom bust that had based their "business model" on software that somehow competed with Microsoft in one way or another. I'm sure that you can apply the same zeal to that as you seem to put into collecting your "Vista suxxorz" FUD?
I gotta tell you, I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this effluvia of yours correctly, but maybe my contempt for your puerile theories is definitely getting the best of me. What exactly do you smoke, snort or shoot that makes you come up with these priceless little jewels?
Standard enough for Linux and BSD to implement and use? Where's your standard?
Want to bet ISO and JPEG (the group) would not even give it the once over if that was the case?
Right, just like they did with the bitmap and DIB format. Oh, but you're cynical. I forget.
So you simply don't understand what each format is intended for or what their issues and strengths are. It's just the usual "that incompatible thing over there is good enough even if it's not, as long as it's not M$" attitude.
JPEG2000 is patent-encumbered, unfortunately. JPEG obtained "assurances" that no one would nail them later, but if I have to choose between the JPEG and Microsoft to defend me against submarine patents, my money is on Microsoft. Alternatively, you can always imagine that the patent system has disappeared and hope for the best.
You know, I'm sure they'll do that - as soon as everybody else does. Patents are an unfortunate mexican standoff, and you can hardly blame Microsoft for the state of things. Oh wait, you can. You also hilariously blame them for the dotcom bubble burst, so I guess anything is possible.
Are you still going on about that? God, even the article says it was a mistake, which was corrected.
Ah, your cute journal entry. BTW, I'm still waiting to hear how it is possible for all those Vista licenses you claimed Microsoft was "stuffing the channel" with miraculously managed to get themselves connected to teh interwebs?
You are actually blaming Microsoft for the dotcom burst? Seriously, no shit?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Oh my god. Hey, I know - why don't you go through this list and tell us which of those sophomoric money pits were "crushed" by "M$". That should be really entertaining. Or better yet, why don't you write another little journal entry with lots of dollar signs and lies that explains how these "companies" and their excellent "business plans" were victimized by Microsoft! I know I for one would be really entertained by that.
I'm not sure I understand this. How does "M$" not allow something to happen on their platform? You've been able to use alternative Windows shells for ever. Some of them like Aston are quite good, or you could use Litestep or GeoShell if you were feeling adventurous.
When Microsoft ships often, it's an "upgrade treadmill", and when they take 5 years to ship a new OS then they can't ship software. Which is it? And how do they "keep" you on a treadmill? By supporting Windows XP for the next seven years? And still selling it through Dell and other OEMs as well?
I'd love to see what you think is not "stable" or modern about Vista.
Bwahahaha, spare me the poetry. Save it for your karma whoring, OK? There is no functional difference between trying to find information to solve problems in "Winblows" and "Linsux". You are OK with people calling it "Linsux", right?
You mean "I tell people Linux is perfect and Windows crashes every five minutes and is evil, and when they get to the promise land all they have to do is deal with RTFM and deficient documentation, yay"
Yeah, all those millions of licenses you famously claimed "M$" was "stuffing the channel" with have apparently managed to get connected to the internet.
If you keep adding more FUD, opinion pieces and lies to it, I'm sure it will be really big by the time Vista reaches 50% market share in mid-2008. Like that press release from RedHat that details a migration from Unix to Linux. Rather informative if it wasn't for your infantile "they left M$ OS" dribble.
Actually I'm the one employed by Bill Gates (he personally brings me my check for $12.50 every two weeks), since jb is a well-known sockpuppet of mine. Or wait, was I one of his sockpuppets? Hmmm.... We'll have to ask twitter. I'm sure he knows.
Hmmm. It's not? Well I don't know about "filled", but are you actually claiming that no one complains or even seeks help on the internet to get Ubuntu running or solving a problem with app packages on OS X? And hell, since there are about 98 Windows users for every Linux one I expect that the volume of problems will be significantly higher for Windows... and why am I even saying this? It's frakin' logic, for god's sakes.
Oh my god, 12% of people don't want it but "the rejection is universal"? Do you actually read what you type?
Facts are inconvenient. You can compile all the misleading little bullet point lists you want and need in your journal, but the reality is that after seven months Vista has surpassed the market share OS X managed to accumulate during the last seven years, and like XP and Windows 98 before, XP will be Vista's largest competitor for the foreseeable future. No amount of creative generalizations, lies and insightful-sounding "M$ is dying" rants will change that. Linux still has less market share than Windows 98. Those are the facts.
And BTW, props to you. No matter how one tries to counter your lies and FUD, one invariably ends up coming across as trying to defend Microsoft. You've become very good at that. I want Microsoft to have as much pressure and competition as possible. I want them to play nice. But every time I come across one of you FLOSS "evangelists" my hope that an organized and sane free software movement will give Microsoft a real run for its money goes down a notch.
For example, he has a journal entry right now that lists his "M$ Vista sucks" bullet points. He claims that the FAA "saved millions by leaving other M$ OS behind". If you actually bother to load up that story, it is nothing more than a RedHat press release, and the FAA migrated to Linux away from another *nix platform. "Windoze" was never even involved. Most of the other links are similar lies and blatant misrepresentations, probably added in the hope no one will bother to click on them. The rest are nothing more than opinion pieces, which hardly validate his tired "M$ is dying" mantra.
You must be thinking about his rants about the *IAA and "big dumb companies", which I will admit sometimes are actually on target.
Oh, and I'm not sure if you can discern the difference between defending Microsoft and pointing out someone is just lying. If you consider that to be an "MS fanboy" then I suppose you can put me in that category. I'd dare anyone to find a single post I've made here where I actually behave like a fanboy in heat. I use their products and I have my own problems with Microsoft, but I don't wank off on teh interwebs with FUD and disingenuous lies to further my "join us or die" agenda.
The first victim of a twitter post (not counting grammar and spelling) is the truth. After that, it's all downhill no matter what you say.