See how easy that is? What most geeky dweeb nerds don't get is that most people don't give a shit about what browser they use.
Firefox is in some ways superior to IE. It's like the old lie about Beta being "better" than VHS when it clearly wasn't. It was better in one or two dimensions, but as the market proved those dimensions weren't the important ones.
IE is still winning because nobody but angry, sweaty nerds with pancake grease pouring out of their pores cares that much about their browser. OK, I guess a slightly larger cross-section than just SlashDot, but still.
Are you going to whine about the desktop calculator market if some genius develops a super-advanced desktop calculator 100x better than MS calc.exe, but calc.exe still has dominant "market" share?
No, he understands perfectly. There is no web browser market. It's a silly idea. Just like there is no "replacement desktop UI" market for Windows or Apple. Just like there is no "taskbar" market. Just like there is no "network stack" market. These things are expected to be in the OS. If you want you can probably go find something obscure to replace any of these things, but whining about their inclusion in the OS is tilting at windmills.
Yes I have used Eclipse, and continue to occasionally. I usually go back and forth between Eclipse and Netbeans depending on which seems better for what I'm doing at the time. Currently I'm on a Netbeans kick because they have such nice web services support.
I've never used KDevelop, but I'm interested in how it's better. I'll have to check it out. Considering VS2008's autocomplete is pretty close to perfect, it's hard to imagine something "light years" ahead of it, but I'll keep an open mind.
You want sweet - try the latest SQL Management Studio. Autocomplete for SQL, including DB context. Now _that's_ f'ing hot.
Not used VS, eh? Yeah - it's that much better. Don't get me wrong, Eclipse and Netbeans have come a long way but VS is just so much more integrated and helpful in so many ways.
and it's made me realize how much more precisely the Java APIs are defined compared to Microsoft's stuff
Umm.. guh? Windows API's? Buh? Really, what in God's name are you on about? The.NET libraries are no more or less precise than the Java libraries, that doesn't even make any sense.
You can not buy a generic PC without paying an M$ tax, even if you want another OS.
See, now why would you revert to blatant lies like this? Of course you can buy a "generic" PC without paying for any MS products. Why would you create a lie which is so easily disproved?
As for my deal, I just find this petri dish of idiocy re: Microsoft to be an affront to all sense of rationality, that's why I defend MS. I'll also defend Google or Apple against any charges of being a monopoly (while occasionally painting them one argumentatively - I absolutely do not think they are).
I see. So the market has chosen a defacto standard you don't like. And game vendors have chosen to develop for Windows.
If I was one of you drama queen nerds who hates MS so much, personally I'd abstain from using it no matter what. Are those games so important? Testing your apps in IE hardly counts as "needing" windows, you're just using it to test compatibility.
Immediately stop using any MS product unless required for work. Otherwise you're part of the problem - if people demanded what (you consider) better, MS wouldn't be in business.
You're right. If you arbitrarily tack on enough qualifiers to something, you can always make it true. Let's call the market "The Microsoft Developed Windows Operating System Market". Let's create another market and call Apple a monopoly - the "Apple OS X Operating System Market".
I was lying about you being right, by the way. You're still wrong. I can join a Linux machine to an Active Directory domain. I can browse Windows file shares. I can interoperate with pretty much any aspect of the Windows OS environment from Linux.
As for the Office Suite, seems Open Office has done pretty well, hasn't it? In fact I have used it and recommend it to people. The fact that most people are too dumb to investigate their alternatives is nobody's fault but their own.
None of those companies have monopolies. This is just late 20th century socialism/liberalism catching up with us.
Let me tell you a monopoly - exactly one company controls every avenue for you to get power. Exactly one company controls your access to oil. Exactly one company controls your access to food or water.
This late 20th century fiction about monopolies created by consumer choice (demand-based) instead of by a scarce supply will hopefully go the way of autism-vaccination links in the future.
Explain this to me, I'm genuinely curious. Why do you use Microsoft Windows if you don't like it? Did someone kidnap a relative and tell you if you didn't use Windows they would give them a wedgie?
More specifically, what has Microsoft done that forces you to use Windows? Does Microsoft write every app you use and do they refuse to port to other OS's?
Umm.. No. Entering the desktop OS market is very easy. I can download a free base-OS from any of a number of OS's and customize it, or just build a Linux kernel-based OS with bits and pieces culled from the Internet. Then I can sell the OS and support for it.
One person could build a fairly customized OS with nice logos, unique functionality, etc.. in a matter of a few months at most.
The simple undeniable fact is that entering the desktop OS market is quite easy.
False. Google has a monopoly (according to SlashDweeb logic). Ergo if they abuse it by unfairly favoring their own products or putting in onerous requirements in their contracts, the EU should get $35 trillion dollars from them.
Lies. There is "almost no barrier to entry to creating a desktop or server operating system" but you asshats label MS a monopoly. I can go download an open source OS and modify it and sell it (with available source code), or I can download the Linux kernel and download all the GNU shit and make an OS.
What's the difference? I see - there is none. If MS is a monopoly Google is a monopoly.
Note that I would contend neither is a monopoly, but it's really just up to the whims of whoever's in the white house.
Nice lies. All businesses that are successful _are_ doing a great job unless they break the law and that breaking of the law costs stockholders money or rises to the level of a felony.
It's funny to claim Microsoft isn't successful or has broken the law (anti-trust is a civil matter - any administration can choose to interpret it however they like) but the fact is they are the most successful computer company in the world.
You're a retard. Like the shit-dripping retarded interpretation that "proves" Microsoft is a monopoly, any accusation of Google being a monopoly is just retarded.
Customers have many viable alternatives. If Google was hit by an asteroid tomorrow and went down, "oh shit, guess I better go to www.yahoo.com or any one of the other web search sites". Or "oh shit, I better wait a few days for someone to popup and take their place.
Any "thinking" that labels as a monopoly a company based on intellectual property they created versus a physically limited resource is irrational.
You do know those numbers are a lie? Linux has far more than 1% market share. I think your numbers are for "desktop" OS's. In the server market Linux has far more usage.
What is the barrier to entry in the desktop operating systems market? That's right - very little. Any schmuck can take the Linux kernel and download some free shit and call it an OS.
You are stunningly right. I'm so tired of the DRM whining. The real problem is the DMCA. The market, if allowed, will solve the DRM problem. If the copyright holders release too onerous a DRM scheme people will crack it and widely use the crack. If the DRM scheme is OK, people won't bother. Take iTunes - there are cracks but by and large most people don't mind the iTunes DRM scheme.
This court did not decide a matter of science. They decided a matter of law, namely parents weren't able to put their hands into the pockets of the vaccine makers.
Your rant would be appropriate if people were calling for a ban on the 25 thinks crap. Nobody is. Instead, people find the concept annoying. I find robot-voice hip-hop annoying, and I also don't listen to it.
I find all the chain letters annoying, and wonder why 90% of the forwarders are women.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple. Firefox is not superior.
See how easy that is? What most geeky dweeb nerds don't get is that most people don't give a shit about what browser they use.
Firefox is in some ways superior to IE. It's like the old lie about Beta being "better" than VHS when it clearly wasn't. It was better in one or two dimensions, but as the market proved those dimensions weren't the important ones.
IE is still winning because nobody but angry, sweaty nerds with pancake grease pouring out of their pores cares that much about their browser. OK, I guess a slightly larger cross-section than just SlashDot, but still.
Are you going to whine about the desktop calculator market if some genius develops a super-advanced desktop calculator 100x better than MS calc.exe, but calc.exe still has dominant "market" share?
No, he understands perfectly. There is no web browser market. It's a silly idea. Just like there is no "replacement desktop UI" market for Windows or Apple. Just like there is no "taskbar" market. Just like there is no "network stack" market. These things are expected to be in the OS. If you want you can probably go find something obscure to replace any of these things, but whining about their inclusion in the OS is tilting at windmills.
Yes I have used Eclipse, and continue to occasionally. I usually go back and forth between Eclipse and Netbeans depending on which seems better for what I'm doing at the time. Currently I'm on a Netbeans kick because they have such nice web services support.
I've never used KDevelop, but I'm interested in how it's better. I'll have to check it out. Considering VS2008's autocomplete is pretty close to perfect, it's hard to imagine something "light years" ahead of it, but I'll keep an open mind.
You want sweet - try the latest SQL Management Studio. Autocomplete for SQL, including DB context. Now _that's_ f'ing hot.
Yeah, wishful thinking has turned into delusional thinking around here.
Not used VS, eh? Yeah - it's that much better. Don't get me wrong, Eclipse and Netbeans have come a long way but VS is just so much more integrated and helpful in so many ways.
and it's made me realize how much more precisely the Java APIs are defined compared to Microsoft's stuff
Umm.. guh? Windows API's? Buh? Really, what in God's name are you on about? The .NET libraries are no more or less precise than the Java libraries, that doesn't even make any sense.
Actually, the machines were demonstrably capable of running Vista.
You can not buy a generic PC without paying an M$ tax, even if you want another OS.
See, now why would you revert to blatant lies like this? Of course you can buy a "generic" PC without paying for any MS products. Why would you create a lie which is so easily disproved?
As for my deal, I just find this petri dish of idiocy re: Microsoft to be an affront to all sense of rationality, that's why I defend MS. I'll also defend Google or Apple against any charges of being a monopoly (while occasionally painting them one argumentatively - I absolutely do not think they are).
I see. So the market has chosen a defacto standard you don't like. And game vendors have chosen to develop for Windows.
If I was one of you drama queen nerds who hates MS so much, personally I'd abstain from using it no matter what. Are those games so important? Testing your apps in IE hardly counts as "needing" windows, you're just using it to test compatibility.
Immediately stop using any MS product unless required for work. Otherwise you're part of the problem - if people demanded what (you consider) better, MS wouldn't be in business.
You're right. If you arbitrarily tack on enough qualifiers to something, you can always make it true. Let's call the market "The Microsoft Developed Windows Operating System Market". Let's create another market and call Apple a monopoly - the "Apple OS X Operating System Market".
I was lying about you being right, by the way. You're still wrong. I can join a Linux machine to an Active Directory domain. I can browse Windows file shares. I can interoperate with pretty much any aspect of the Windows OS environment from Linux.
As for the Office Suite, seems Open Office has done pretty well, hasn't it? In fact I have used it and recommend it to people. The fact that most people are too dumb to investigate their alternatives is nobody's fault but their own.
None of those companies have monopolies. This is just late 20th century socialism/liberalism catching up with us.
Let me tell you a monopoly - exactly one company controls every avenue for you to get power. Exactly one company controls your access to oil. Exactly one company controls your access to food or water.
This late 20th century fiction about monopolies created by consumer choice (demand-based) instead of by a scarce supply will hopefully go the way of autism-vaccination links in the future.
Explain this to me, I'm genuinely curious. Why do you use Microsoft Windows if you don't like it? Did someone kidnap a relative and tell you if you didn't use Windows they would give them a wedgie?
More specifically, what has Microsoft done that forces you to use Windows? Does Microsoft write every app you use and do they refuse to port to other OS's?
Umm.. No. Entering the desktop OS market is very easy. I can download a free base-OS from any of a number of OS's and customize it, or just build a Linux kernel-based OS with bits and pieces culled from the Internet. Then I can sell the OS and support for it.
One person could build a fairly customized OS with nice logos, unique functionality, etc.. in a matter of a few months at most.
The simple undeniable fact is that entering the desktop OS market is quite easy.
False. Google has a monopoly (according to SlashDweeb logic). Ergo if they abuse it by unfairly favoring their own products or putting in onerous requirements in their contracts, the EU should get $35 trillion dollars from them.
Lies. There is "almost no barrier to entry to creating a desktop or server operating system" but you asshats label MS a monopoly. I can go download an open source OS and modify it and sell it (with available source code), or I can download the Linux kernel and download all the GNU shit and make an OS.
What's the difference? I see - there is none. If MS is a monopoly Google is a monopoly.
Note that I would contend neither is a monopoly, but it's really just up to the whims of whoever's in the white house.
Microsoft is under no obligation, "monopoly" or not, to provide anything to their competitors. Only an asshole would think they are.
What next, you going to whine that Office isn't available for Linux? Or that the .NET libraries aren't? Pathetic.
Nice lies. All businesses that are successful _are_ doing a great job unless they break the law and that breaking of the law costs stockholders money or rises to the level of a felony.
It's funny to claim Microsoft isn't successful or has broken the law (anti-trust is a civil matter - any administration can choose to interpret it however they like) but the fact is they are the most successful computer company in the world.
Here's an idea then.. Don't use fucking google! How hard is that? Or better, use Tor. God you people whine like little baby girls.
You're a retard. Like the shit-dripping retarded interpretation that "proves" Microsoft is a monopoly, any accusation of Google being a monopoly is just retarded.
Customers have many viable alternatives. If Google was hit by an asteroid tomorrow and went down, "oh shit, guess I better go to www.yahoo.com or any one of the other web search sites". Or "oh shit, I better wait a few days for someone to popup and take their place.
Any "thinking" that labels as a monopoly a company based on intellectual property they created versus a physically limited resource is irrational.
You do know those numbers are a lie? Linux has far more than 1% market share. I think your numbers are for "desktop" OS's. In the server market Linux has far more usage.
What is the barrier to entry in the desktop operating systems market? That's right - very little. Any schmuck can take the Linux kernel and download some free shit and call it an OS.
Last I checked...nobody is doing that. Who could you possibly mean?
You are stunningly right. I'm so tired of the DRM whining. The real problem is the DMCA. The market, if allowed, will solve the DRM problem. If the copyright holders release too onerous a DRM scheme people will crack it and widely use the crack. If the DRM scheme is OK, people won't bother. Take iTunes - there are cracks but by and large most people don't mind the iTunes DRM scheme.
This court did not decide a matter of science. They decided a matter of law, namely parents weren't able to put their hands into the pockets of the vaccine makers.
Your rant would be appropriate if people were calling for a ban on the 25 thinks crap. Nobody is. Instead, people find the concept annoying. I find robot-voice hip-hop annoying, and I also don't listen to it.
I find all the chain letters annoying, and wonder why 90% of the forwarders are women.