You also can't forget that once SP2 is released, any new machines people buy will have Windows XP SP2 already installed.
MSDN has always allowed you to order a CD with SP2 on it. Or, you could easily get a friend to do it for you, or find a university. It's not like there aren't ways. I'm on dialup and have installed every XP update without problems.
The only app I can think of that does that is IE. Why would you be using IE anyway?
Every other application flashes the taskbar. This has been the default behavior since Windows 98. If your app is forcing itself to the top somehow, blame it on the application developer.
It's a metaphor, son. One side in this race believes in unquestioned authority, tight control, sacrosanct wealth, and operation through secrets. Care to guess which? Hint: It runs as deep as the software they choose.
To a liberal, you're talking about Republicans. To a conservative, you're talking about Democrats.
Surprise, not everyone believes what you believe.
But one thing's for certain, if you take politics so personally that you even harbor vitriol over the webserver they use, you need to seriously get a little perspective. People can use IIS if they want, or they can use Apache.
It's actually known as the only Windows operating system that works better when you upgrade it from Windows 98 as opposed to a fresh installation. Apparently, the registry is fubared on a default install.
By the way, they more than made up for it with Windows 2000 and XP, based on the NT kernel--I can't even imagine all these people here who still use Windows 98 in their minds to gauge Windows. Windows hasn't been the same beast since late 1999.
Um, they are both documentaries, and Moore has stated this.
Um, I just told you Moore has stated he is making no claims that Fahrenheight 9/11 is rooted in impartial fact but is an op-ed piece. Hell, right now the Daily Show is running a rerun with Moore on it, and he says the same damn thing.
If you still think Bowling For Columbine is a documentary even after it's been proven he completely distorted facts, well, then clearly you're more concerned with believing what Moore tells you than what the facts are.
There is a difference between what O'Really and the radical right wing talkers do and what Moore does.
What does O'Reilly have to do with this? He makes it clear his show is an editorial commentary show. Not a documentary.
Both are propagandists. The Right pretends to be fair, Moore does not.
There is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE, except that you agree with Moore and don't agree with the right. So suddenly, they're "pretending to be fair" and Moore isn't. Is that why Moore came out after Cannes and said his film was supported by facts and would go after anyone claiming otherwise with a suit of libel?
That's like MoveOn.org pretending to be fair. Surprise, surprise, people who believe in their opinions think they're being fair. You have chosen to adhere yourself to the left, and so you think they're fair.
The Right has constant access to the airwaves, Moore does not.
Give me a break. The journalism industry is dominated by liberals, and a recent poll even proved this. If a conservative filmmaker made a "documentary" that stretched the truth like Moore did, papers like the L.A. Times would be all over it. Hell, did you even know Moore gave back his documentary Oscar? Of course you didn't, because the liberal media didn't report on it. If a conservative filmmaker had done that, it would, again, be on the front pages as "SO-AND-SO GIVES BACK OSCAR."
Bush and company lies, constantly, incontravertibly. Moore does not.
Ah, and so your biased agenda emerges. You don't want to see truth, you just want to believe everything Moore says because, again, he tells you what you want to hear. I already gave you lies that Moore has told, including a link to an even bigger list on Bowling For Columbine as well as a Slate article that listed Fahrenheit 9/11's lies (Iraq never threatened a single American?).
After the 9/11 Commission determined that there was nothing wrong with the Saudi flights, suddenly Moore changed his tune, and the film was an "op-ed piece."
Moore is one man, and the radicals are legion. They are not equivalent.
You are biased. Believe what you want about Moore, even in the face of truth. I've offered you facts. All you've offered with your post can be summed up as, "Nuh-uh, the Right lies and Moore doesn't. So there!" You're sure convinced me.
People are "spoiled" to expect the things they like.
Linux users are spoiled on Linux things. Windows users are spoiled on Windows things. News at 11.
Oh, I'm sorry we just wanted another Microsoft-bashing article to meet the daily quota (remember when Slashdot went for days without a Microsoft article?).
Most of your arguments didn't actually argue anything but were just knee-jerk reactions to someone daring to prefer Windows over Linux, complete with valid reasons to back up his opinion. I'm curious why you even got modded up.
Get real. Even Microsoft programs don't share the same interface as each other.
Cite an example.
KDE or Gnome are much better in this respect. Other Linux programs may not fit in so well, but neither do third party programs on windows. Your claim is bogus.
Wow, you've blown away his claim by...not offering any counterpoint. Just telling him he's wrong. Nice. You actually cite GNOME and KDE as evidence, when the fact you have two competing desktop environments invalidates your entire point that they're consistent at all.
I could spend hours searching the web for the right windows program to do the job, then probably have to buy it, but instead I search for 30 seconds with my package manager and install it in no time.
This is just an outright lie. You can find Windows freeware in seconds. There is plenty out there, and it doesn't take "hours searching the web." Ever heard of Google? You're just making shit up to bolster your argument.
Even if I have to tweak some config files, it still takes me less time than tracking it down on the web.
Again--Google. They call it a "search engine," don't ask me why.
Have you been to tucows or other similar sites. There are more random windows programs than Linux ones. The only difference is that Free Software is generally much better than Freeware.
Wow, can't argue with that kind of subject, anecdotal evidence. "The only difference is that Free Software is generally much better than Freeware." Care to cite examples? Evidence of any kind? Proof?
Besides, you just contradicted your earlier claim that it takes you "hours of searching on the web" for Windows programs. Now all the sudden you can just visit Tucows? Sweet.
Is this a serious gripe or just whining?
It's a serious gripe. Keeping track of endless arcane project names is more difficult than remembering Winzip, Microsoft Word, or WinDVD. On Linux, it's "tar -jxpvf something.tar.gz" or something called "xine" that doesn't even have an Open button--it has a "://" button that calls itself an "MRL Browser." At least there's KOffice, even if the K-prefix naming scheme is completely amateur and unprofessional.
A valid argument for once. It doesn't apply for everyone though. Not everyone is into 3D games, or games in general. I'm fine with solitaire, and mahjong.
Then stick with solitaire and mahjong forever. If Linux desktops had a proper binary installation/uninstallation API that created uninstaller instructions, menu entries, and so on, you'd have commercial vendors writing more applications. But for that to happen, APIs would have to settle down. Can you run a Red Hat binary from six years ago on a Red Hat system today? No. But you can run a Windows 3.1 app on XP today (you can even run some Windows 1.0 apps).
Sure, if I was bloody rich. I would have to spend at least $5,000 dollars to get the equivalent programs on Windows.
No, you wouldn't. Have you used an OEM Windows machine? They come with Office, DVD players and rippers, music players, e-mail, games, and more.
The "hassle" is not worth that much money. I'd rather take the ten minutes to learn how to use the program. I'm not that lazy.
Except that it takes way more than ten minutes to learn most Linux applications. Most of them are hacked together in QT over a weekend by some non-intuitive programmer who thinks GUIs are evil compared to the command-line. If you want to keep with that, have at it, and the rest of the world will continue to use Windows and Mac.
You're lucky then. I've had no such luck with either 2000 or XP. XP crashed twice a day and SuSe
...Nobody would be using Word, and it wouldn't be the standard office document format.
Some of you on Slashdot make it out like it's a worldwide epidemic of file incompability, with documents not showing up correctly on other people's Office installation. It's just not true at all (if it was, the three major businesses I've worked at in the past four years would have gone out of business).
I think it's just juvenile anti-Microsoft vitriol from OpenOffice fans (by the way, how do I get rid of that stupid light bulb?).
Care to cite an example? I and nobody else I know have ever experienced this--or are you referring to something like Office 97 from seven years ago when they changed file formats for the new version?
I always see these vague claims that are modded up yet never actually proven to be true. Usually it's one guy's little anecdotal story of some document that didn't like his third-party Word macros or something.
You also make a very naive but very common mistake, in assuming that everybody is somehow born knowing all sorts of arcane microsoft bs, but for some mysterious reason they must go scouring the internet to find out simple, beginner-level linux tasks
But that's the truth. You make the same assumption most other people here make--that arcane Linuxt asks aren't difficult or are "common knowledge" and "basic noobie stuff."
You just read it here, how big a secret can it be?
Is there a link to Slashdot.org in the Gentoo installer to let people know to read it here?
Why is it almost every article there is some guy who complains about the lack of "shell tools" on Windows, and we all have to point out Cygwin yet again?
Cygwin, Cygwin, Cygwin. Get it through your heads, people.
Care to cite a single example of where Microsoft phones home without the user's knowledge or consent? I always hear claims of "spyware" in Windows XP, but I never see any evidence of that. The most they can offer is Windows Media Player. You know, that software which opens its privacy page on the first run so you can tell it what exactly you want it to do as far as grabbing song titles.
If people are going to parrot these claims all the time without ever providing any proof of them, it's just going to make this community look even sillier.
...because Michael Moore himself said it wasn't. It's, according to his own words, an "op-ed piece on the last four years of the Bush administration." It's his political pamphlet.
Hell, one lie I can think off the top of my head immediately is his assertion that Saddam's Iraq never killed or threatened a single American. Things like that made my jaw drop in the theater, but of course, the Moore fans sitting around me were just spellbound and didn't question. I guess people ignore truths when it supports their viewpoint, ignoring the Western hostages during the Kuwait invasion, the decade of firing up at our fighters in the no-fly zone, Saddam's boasting of terrorist sponsorship.
For the record, Bowling For Columbine wasn't a documentary either, and Moore has even stopped pretending it was. He even gave back his Oscar, though none of the liberal media reported it so it seems nobody even knows he did (surprise).
If a conservative filmmaker made the same stretches of truth Moore did, most people here would be all over it, calling it "another case of the conservative scumbag liars" or other such vitriol. But because this place is generally left of center and Moore tells them what they want to hear, suddenly it's a truthful documentary. Nobody seems to care that the 9/11 Commission already released their conclusion about the Saudi flights--that nothing wrong happened. And Richard Clarke, painted as a moral hero in the film? He's the guy who personally authorized the flights to begin with! That fact is not mentioned.
If people want to hear about stretches of truth in Fahrenheit 9/11, check out this Slate article. I think the silliest thing I saw in the film, which actually made me laugh out loud (much to the chagrin of the liberals there) is when Iraq was protrayed as this peaceful Eden with kids flying kites and nothing but peace and quiet, then suddenly come rolling the US tanks. Pure propaganda, plain and simple, and for a website full of people who complain about, say, Microsoft propaganda, it's surprising so many people are quite okay with propaganda when it voices a viewpoint they themselves already agree with. Personally, I don't believe in propaganda in any form. But that's just me--a level-headed guy who doesn't drop down and suck the dick of anyone who makes a film that plays yes-man to me, left or right.
Doom III is being developed specifically as a single-player game. id Software wasn't even going to include multiplayer support until they decided to unveil a 4-player max demo at E3.
You in the Linux community have put enough pressure for Microsoft to compete again. The parent is right; Windows Longhorn will indeed ship with all the compilers pre-installed, specifically so that no matter what machine you sit down at, the tools will be available to you.
They've been more open lately, specifically because the heat being put on them. As a result, they're slowly becoming a better company. I'm very happy with the.NET technology and the level of community involvement the developers have shown. Thanks to the OSS community.
Who the hell wants some crappy camcorder-made copy of a movie, anyways? I'll bet you only fans of the movie. People that buy that crap are only doing so to have a copy until the DVD is released. If they released DVDs and movies at the same time, there wouldn't be this problem. Or, at least we'd know his customers meant to infringe upon the copyright holders.
I can't help but get the impression you're trying to justify piracy. It doesn't matter if someone just might get the DVD when it comes out because they're a fan. And it's not the studios' fault simply because they don't release a DVD at the same time, or at the time you think they should.
Also, once again, copyright infringement is NOT stealing. Nobody is deprived of property.
It's theft of intellectual property. Just like how people "stole" Valve's source code, or people commit "GPL theft."
I don't know why people get hung up on terminology. Whether or not you use the word "theft" doesn't affect the severity of the crime, but I can't help thinking the only reason people bring this up is to lessen the negative connotation of associating piracy with theft. I'm sorry, but they really are the same thing. The law is clear on intellectual property theft.
It says that no matter what one company can do to try to make their development platform closed and proprietary, the open source community can retort back with their open standards.
If it's "closed and proprietary," why did Microsoft publish the CLS for any compiler to follow and go to the ECMA to make it all a public standard? If this was all really so closed and mysterious, Mono wouldn't have been able to be created.
This is the first time I've ever thought of.NET as something positive.
I think this illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of.NET here on Slashdot. Most people didn't actually read up on it but instead dismissed it back in 2000 as another Microsoft thing.
This was a blatant attempt by Microsoft to reign in wandering developer mindshare. Also, it is part of their strategy to bring the application space back from the web, to the desktop-- Microsoft's desktop.
If that's true, why did Microsoft make the specs public, create a public standard for the language, and create a public Common Language Specification so that anyone can compile anything to.NET's IL?
I honestly think they're not thinking of.NET in those terms at all. Their main draws of technology will be Indigo, Avalon, WinFS, Aero Glass, and so on. That's what they plan to draw people to Windows with..NET is more of the basic infrastructure that we now all get to benefit from because of a port to Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
And both came from VMS.
You also can't forget that once SP2 is released, any new machines people buy will have Windows XP SP2 already installed.
MSDN has always allowed you to order a CD with SP2 on it. Or, you could easily get a friend to do it for you, or find a university. It's not like there aren't ways. I'm on dialup and have installed every XP update without problems.
The only app I can think of that does that is IE. Why would you be using IE anyway?
Every other application flashes the taskbar. This has been the default behavior since Windows 98. If your app is forcing itself to the top somehow, blame it on the application developer.
It's a metaphor, son. One side in this race believes in unquestioned authority, tight control, sacrosanct wealth, and operation through secrets. Care to guess which? Hint: It runs as deep as the software they choose.
To a liberal, you're talking about Republicans. To a conservative, you're talking about Democrats.
Surprise, not everyone believes what you believe.
But one thing's for certain, if you take politics so personally that you even harbor vitriol over the webserver they use, you need to seriously get a little perspective. People can use IIS if they want, or they can use Apache.
It's actually known as the only Windows operating system that works better when you upgrade it from Windows 98 as opposed to a fresh installation. Apparently, the registry is fubared on a default install.
By the way, they more than made up for it with Windows 2000 and XP, based on the NT kernel--I can't even imagine all these people here who still use Windows 98 in their minds to gauge Windows. Windows hasn't been the same beast since late 1999.
Um, they are both documentaries, and Moore has stated this.
Um, I just told you Moore has stated he is making no claims that Fahrenheight 9/11 is rooted in impartial fact but is an op-ed piece. Hell, right now the Daily Show is running a rerun with Moore on it, and he says the same damn thing.
If you still think Bowling For Columbine is a documentary even after it's been proven he completely distorted facts, well, then clearly you're more concerned with believing what Moore tells you than what the facts are.
There is a difference between what O'Really and the radical right wing talkers do and what Moore does.
What does O'Reilly have to do with this? He makes it clear his show is an editorial commentary show. Not a documentary.
Both are propagandists. The Right pretends to be fair, Moore does not.
There is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE, except that you agree with Moore and don't agree with the right. So suddenly, they're "pretending to be fair" and Moore isn't. Is that why Moore came out after Cannes and said his film was supported by facts and would go after anyone claiming otherwise with a suit of libel?
That's like MoveOn.org pretending to be fair. Surprise, surprise, people who believe in their opinions think they're being fair. You have chosen to adhere yourself to the left, and so you think they're fair.
The Right has constant access to the airwaves, Moore does not.
Give me a break. The journalism industry is dominated by liberals, and a recent poll even proved this. If a conservative filmmaker made a "documentary" that stretched the truth like Moore did, papers like the L.A. Times would be all over it. Hell, did you even know Moore gave back his documentary Oscar? Of course you didn't, because the liberal media didn't report on it. If a conservative filmmaker had done that, it would, again, be on the front pages as "SO-AND-SO GIVES BACK OSCAR."
Bush and company lies, constantly, incontravertibly. Moore does not.
Ah, and so your biased agenda emerges. You don't want to see truth, you just want to believe everything Moore says because, again, he tells you what you want to hear. I already gave you lies that Moore has told, including a link to an even bigger list on Bowling For Columbine as well as a Slate article that listed Fahrenheit 9/11's lies (Iraq never threatened a single American?).
After the 9/11 Commission determined that there was nothing wrong with the Saudi flights, suddenly Moore changed his tune, and the film was an "op-ed piece."
Moore is one man, and the radicals are legion. They are not equivalent.
You are biased. Believe what you want about Moore, even in the face of truth. I've offered you facts. All you've offered with your post can be summed up as, "Nuh-uh, the Right lies and Moore doesn't. So there!" You're sure convinced me.
People are "spoiled" to expect the things they like.
Linux users are spoiled on Linux things. Windows users are spoiled on Windows things. News at 11.
Oh, I'm sorry we just wanted another Microsoft-bashing article to meet the daily quota (remember when Slashdot went for days without a Microsoft article?).
Most of your arguments didn't actually argue anything but were just knee-jerk reactions to someone daring to prefer Windows over Linux, complete with valid reasons to back up his opinion. I'm curious why you even got modded up.
Get real. Even Microsoft programs don't share the same interface as each other.
Cite an example.
KDE or Gnome are much better in this respect. Other Linux programs may not fit in so well, but neither do third party programs on windows. Your claim is bogus.
Wow, you've blown away his claim by...not offering any counterpoint. Just telling him he's wrong. Nice. You actually cite GNOME and KDE as evidence, when the fact you have two competing desktop environments invalidates your entire point that they're consistent at all.
I could spend hours searching the web for the right windows program to do the job, then probably have to buy it, but instead I search for 30 seconds with my package manager and install it in no time.
This is just an outright lie. You can find Windows freeware in seconds. There is plenty out there, and it doesn't take "hours searching the web." Ever heard of Google? You're just making shit up to bolster your argument.
Even if I have to tweak some config files, it still takes me less time than tracking it down on the web.
Again--Google. They call it a "search engine," don't ask me why.
Have you been to tucows or other similar sites. There are more random windows programs than Linux ones. The only difference is that Free Software is generally much better than Freeware.
Wow, can't argue with that kind of subject, anecdotal evidence. "The only difference is that Free Software is generally much better than Freeware." Care to cite examples? Evidence of any kind? Proof?
Besides, you just contradicted your earlier claim that it takes you "hours of searching on the web" for Windows programs. Now all the sudden you can just visit Tucows? Sweet.
Is this a serious gripe or just whining?
It's a serious gripe. Keeping track of endless arcane project names is more difficult than remembering Winzip, Microsoft Word, or WinDVD. On Linux, it's "tar -jxpvf something.tar.gz" or something called "xine" that doesn't even have an Open button--it has a "://" button that calls itself an "MRL Browser." At least there's KOffice, even if the K-prefix naming scheme is completely amateur and unprofessional.
A valid argument for once. It doesn't apply for everyone though. Not everyone is into 3D games, or games in general. I'm fine with solitaire, and mahjong.
Then stick with solitaire and mahjong forever. If Linux desktops had a proper binary installation/uninstallation API that created uninstaller instructions, menu entries, and so on, you'd have commercial vendors writing more applications. But for that to happen, APIs would have to settle down. Can you run a Red Hat binary from six years ago on a Red Hat system today? No. But you can run a Windows 3.1 app on XP today (you can even run some Windows 1.0 apps).
Sure, if I was bloody rich. I would have to spend at least $5,000 dollars to get the equivalent programs on Windows.
No, you wouldn't. Have you used an OEM Windows machine? They come with Office, DVD players and rippers, music players, e-mail, games, and more.
The "hassle" is not worth that much money. I'd rather take the ten minutes to learn how to use the program. I'm not that lazy.
Except that it takes way more than ten minutes to learn most Linux applications. Most of them are hacked together in QT over a weekend by some non-intuitive programmer who thinks GUIs are evil compared to the command-line. If you want to keep with that, have at it, and the rest of the world will continue to use Windows and Mac.
You're lucky then. I've had no such luck with either 2000 or XP. XP crashed twice a day and SuSe
...Nobody would be using Word, and it wouldn't be the standard office document format.
Some of you on Slashdot make it out like it's a worldwide epidemic of file incompability, with documents not showing up correctly on other people's Office installation. It's just not true at all (if it was, the three major businesses I've worked at in the past four years would have gone out of business).
I think it's just juvenile anti-Microsoft vitriol from OpenOffice fans (by the way, how do I get rid of that stupid light bulb?).
Care to cite an example? I and nobody else I know have ever experienced this--or are you referring to something like Office 97 from seven years ago when they changed file formats for the new version?
I always see these vague claims that are modded up yet never actually proven to be true. Usually it's one guy's little anecdotal story of some document that didn't like his third-party Word macros or something.
You also make a very naive but very common mistake, in assuming that everybody is somehow born knowing all sorts of arcane microsoft bs, but for some mysterious reason they must go scouring the internet to find out simple, beginner-level linux tasks
But that's the truth. You make the same assumption most other people here make--that arcane Linuxt asks aren't difficult or are "common knowledge" and "basic noobie stuff."
You just read it here, how big a secret can it be?
Is there a link to Slashdot.org in the Gentoo installer to let people know to read it here?
Why is it almost every article there is some guy who complains about the lack of "shell tools" on Windows, and we all have to point out Cygwin yet again?
Cygwin, Cygwin, Cygwin. Get it through your heads, people.
Care to cite a single example of where Microsoft phones home without the user's knowledge or consent? I always hear claims of "spyware" in Windows XP, but I never see any evidence of that. The most they can offer is Windows Media Player. You know, that software which opens its privacy page on the first run so you can tell it what exactly you want it to do as far as grabbing song titles.
If people are going to parrot these claims all the time without ever providing any proof of them, it's just going to make this community look even sillier.
...because Michael Moore himself said it wasn't. It's, according to his own words, an "op-ed piece on the last four years of the Bush administration." It's his political pamphlet.
Hell, one lie I can think off the top of my head immediately is his assertion that Saddam's Iraq never killed or threatened a single American. Things like that made my jaw drop in the theater, but of course, the Moore fans sitting around me were just spellbound and didn't question. I guess people ignore truths when it supports their viewpoint, ignoring the Western hostages during the Kuwait invasion, the decade of firing up at our fighters in the no-fly zone, Saddam's boasting of terrorist sponsorship.
For the record, Bowling For Columbine wasn't a documentary either, and Moore has even stopped pretending it was. He even gave back his Oscar, though none of the liberal media reported it so it seems nobody even knows he did (surprise).
If a conservative filmmaker made the same stretches of truth Moore did, most people here would be all over it, calling it "another case of the conservative scumbag liars" or other such vitriol. But because this place is generally left of center and Moore tells them what they want to hear, suddenly it's a truthful documentary. Nobody seems to care that the 9/11 Commission already released their conclusion about the Saudi flights--that nothing wrong happened. And Richard Clarke, painted as a moral hero in the film? He's the guy who personally authorized the flights to begin with! That fact is not mentioned.
If people want to hear about stretches of truth in Fahrenheit 9/11, check out this Slate article. I think the silliest thing I saw in the film, which actually made me laugh out loud (much to the chagrin of the liberals there) is when Iraq was protrayed as this peaceful Eden with kids flying kites and nothing but peace and quiet, then suddenly come rolling the US tanks. Pure propaganda, plain and simple, and for a website full of people who complain about, say, Microsoft propaganda, it's surprising so many people are quite okay with propaganda when it voices a viewpoint they themselves already agree with. Personally, I don't believe in propaganda in any form. But that's just me--a level-headed guy who doesn't drop down and suck the dick of anyone who makes a film that plays yes-man to me, left or right.
Doom III is being developed specifically as a single-player game. id Software wasn't even going to include multiplayer support until they decided to unveil a 4-player max demo at E3.
You in the Linux community have put enough pressure for Microsoft to compete again. The parent is right; Windows Longhorn will indeed ship with all the compilers pre-installed, specifically so that no matter what machine you sit down at, the tools will be available to you.
.NET technology and the level of community involvement the developers have shown. Thanks to the OSS community.
They've been more open lately, specifically because the heat being put on them. As a result, they're slowly becoming a better company. I'm very happy with the
Mozilla/Firefox didn't innovate mouse gestures, or tabbed browsing.
How's the performance on that compared to running natively in Windows?
Who the hell wants some crappy camcorder-made copy of a movie, anyways? I'll bet you only fans of the movie. People that buy that crap are only doing so to have a copy until the DVD is released. If they released DVDs and movies at the same time, there wouldn't be this problem. Or, at least we'd know his customers meant to infringe upon the copyright holders.
I can't help but get the impression you're trying to justify piracy. It doesn't matter if someone just might get the DVD when it comes out because they're a fan. And it's not the studios' fault simply because they don't release a DVD at the same time, or at the time you think they should.
Also, once again, copyright infringement is NOT stealing. Nobody is deprived of property.
It's theft of intellectual property. Just like how people "stole" Valve's source code, or people commit "GPL theft."
I don't know why people get hung up on terminology. Whether or not you use the word "theft" doesn't affect the severity of the crime, but I can't help thinking the only reason people bring this up is to lessen the negative connotation of associating piracy with theft. I'm sorry, but they really are the same thing. The law is clear on intellectual property theft.
It says that no matter what one company can do to try to make their development platform closed and proprietary, the open source community can retort back with their open standards.
.NET as something positive.
.NET here on Slashdot. Most people didn't actually read up on it but instead dismissed it back in 2000 as another Microsoft thing.
If it's "closed and proprietary," why did Microsoft publish the CLS for any compiler to follow and go to the ECMA to make it all a public standard? If this was all really so closed and mysterious, Mono wouldn't have been able to be created.
This is the first time I've ever thought of
I think this illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of
This was a blatant attempt by Microsoft to reign in wandering developer mindshare. Also, it is part of their strategy to bring the application space back from the web, to the desktop-- Microsoft's desktop.
.NET's IL?
.NET in those terms at all. Their main draws of technology will be Indigo, Avalon, WinFS, Aero Glass, and so on. That's what they plan to draw people to Windows with. .NET is more of the basic infrastructure that we now all get to benefit from because of a port to Linux.
If that's true, why did Microsoft make the specs public, create a public standard for the language, and create a public Common Language Specification so that anyone can compile anything to
I honestly think they're not thinking of