Gates is still trying to shake off what IBM and others have said regarding Microsoft not being a tech company. But, he is tied to Windows hook line and sinker. His Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, from what I've heard, prevents those accepting funding from using open source software. That is a diehard Windows advocate and Bill will not change that. IMO.
I would rather he spent it on jets, yachts, etc and he stayed the heck away from tech. He's delayed tech and innovation way too much over the past 20 years. We don't need him seeing what someone else starts, grabs it, and then start paying people to use it until they think it is something they want. I'm done with that.
$178 million when 10s of billions were put into it is not being profitable. Didn't they just write off $3 billion for Xbox overheating issues just 8 or so months ago? That's not profitable IMO.
And the rest of it, that's all Windows based and except for Windows itself, leveraged the monopoly position of Windows. What I said was that they were not profitable outside of Windows.
But I am surprised you didn't mention their mice and keyboards. That is the only thing outside of Windows where they have made profits.
and the B&MGF just spends profits from MSFT and even has been said to require Microsoft-only software in computer donations. So no wonder Bill Gates is trying to get others to come up with an idea he can profit from. With Microsoft having been a one-trick pony for all these years, just maybe Bill can find someone else who can come up with a hit.
Knowing the history of Microsoft and Windows, it was not really the product which made the business, it was the business behind the product and that faithful deal with IBM.
So could Bill Gates really build a business around a product which has to stand the test of the market to be successful? Think how Steve Jobs did the iPod and iTunes even though the Mac was still less than 5% of the market. People loved it and when they finally came out with the MS Windows version of iTunes, it opened up a maket of 100s of millions to the product and they came. There was not tying or leveraging of the iPod to a monopoly positioned product.
Personally, I don't think he has it in him do make this work. Just they way he publicly talks about things like speech recognition as the next big thing shows he's not good at doing "the next big thing". And they, Microsoft, have always been followers in tech and only get where they do because they leverage 90% marketshare with Windows. We shall see and he sure does have the bucks to get anything off the ground. And hey, the Spruce Goose got off the ground too.;-)
Greenspan doesn't know how things like rating systems work and especially when computer software is used to do the ratings. Think computer graphics benchmarking software. Even small companies were looking at the way the benchmarks were built and run and finding ways to optimize so they _game_ the benchmarks.
Does Greenspan really think it was a garbage in/garbage out situation? I would think that is just an easy way out of taking more blame for not speaking loudly against deregulation which let the banks play games with mortgages. IMO.
When Microsoft does something which does nothing to protect their position in the market and is more likely to do the opposite, they do it at a snails pace and kicking and screaming all the way. For example, JDBC drivers for MS SQL Server in the late 90s as Java was picking up steam. Microsoft eventually said they'd do it but the release date was 18 months out. Another recent example is the OLPC version of Windows XP which has taken over a year. They don't want to do these things and make more of a PR stunt out of them than actually effort and work. You could also look at the US and EU anti-trust issues still dragging on for years also.
The only thing of interest I glean from this is that GNU/Linux has grown to the point where Microsoft is put into this position of foot dragging. THAT is a very good sign. IMO. I would not expect much real help from MS in regards to improving SAMBA and AD interoperability.
we all know that the oil industry and the US auto industry are in bed with each other. We've also seen many articles on how the US auto industries future is in Silicon Valley and Tesla has been the poster child of all this.
So it is obvious that the oil industry, with all its billions and billions in profits have used that to tighten the credit markets so that start-ups like Tesla can't continue growing. And they are even lowering fuel prices too so that all the alternate energy businesses also lose backing and support.
exactly. The snake-oil guys left the tech sector and moved into the real estate market through the early 00s. I saw that over 40% of real estate transactions were "investments". ie mostly flippers.
Around here, they were converting apartments, and poorly designed ones at that, into condos and getting way too much for dressed up apartments with too little parking.
And it does not help that the news agencies are acting like reality in lending( ie you have to be capable of affording the loan ) is a bad thing.
I'm just wondering where all the scam artists will be going next? Green tech maybe?
they are a marketing company and what they say in public has very little association with the truth. They even lied to a federal judge in one of thier cases( faked a video, said it wasn't faked ).
What surprises me is the press still quotes them. Just like the word "open" means something unique to Microsoft compared to what the world + dog accept "open" to mean, I suspect the word "ethics" has its own MS-ethics definition. They are a marketing company and spin is what they do. IMO
Nice list and much more accurate. Also, the list would probably be 50% longer if the Windows CE versions were included.
Boy, seeing "Cairo" listed reminds me of all the hope of really deep OO( Object Oriented ) desktops and APIs. As usual, it takes Microsoft about 10 years to catch up to what the tech crowds are doing.
if the 'watch me pull a number out of my hat' days of Windows NT v3.1 didn't tell you that, there are dozens of other examples. IIRC, they jumped MS Office or MS Word version numbers in the early 90s also. Who cares what they call it as long as they don't call it GNU/Linux or infringe on any of the names the OSS community know and use. IMO.
hmmm, threw him another carrot they did? aaah, but the stick still looms, it does.
-YoB ( Yoda of Borg )
LoB
Re:.NET developers: ECMA .NET?#??!!#! WTF is that?
on
Mono 2.0 and .NET On Linux
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
and what is MS.Net version 3.5 I see mentioned in my search for MS.Net? Mono is only supporting v2.0 and because that is so old that about half of the MS.Net applications out there won't run on Mono v2.0.
hey, what a surprise and isn't that great to know this whole thing is not to enable Windows developers and apps to work on Linux but so Linux developers and apps can run on Windows.
Mono is a one way street, it's a gateway to train developers who can only go to Microsoft's platform for updated versions of the software stack. And, once you go MS, you can't go back. So where is the ECMA version of all this and has it even reached MS.Net v2.0 compatibility?
Every Microsoft technology I've ever seen/heard of has been a one-way street and that is because they need to protect their businesses. Develop with Microsoft's tools and be their tool. It is now pretty much only in the open source market where tech is growing to solve problems instead of tech being used to protect a financial position as it is in Windows. Does anyone remember the early/mid 90s when there was competition in dev tools and there was a dev tools market?
I'm not so sure about that. I would think "power users" would know what was on the device, Linux or Windows, and would not get it with Linux if they didn't want it. The geeks again would know what they want.
There is a long way to go down from the "power user" down to the neophyte and that is probably where these returns come from. For an example, I was at a party the other day and telling some guys about the OLPC. A wife of one heard me and later was asking me about like she was considering doing the G1G1. I constantly mentioned it was for children but somehow she just heard of all the features and that it was cheap( $200 ) and paying an extra $200 as a charity/donation was fine but she wanted to use it herself. And I'm talking about 30 or so minutes talking to her and more than that discussing it with the guys.
People just don't _get_ the basics about computers and seem to only hear or see what they want to hear and see. And the geeks around me who bought netbooks got Linux on them, wanted Linux on them and tweaked it( KDE mostly ) the way they wanted it.
Maybe in store demo's were not functioning or something or maybe these returns were purchased online without understanding there is more out there besides a Windows PC or a Mac PC. You know, a Linux PC. I am surprised that more highschool kids don't get into Linux more since it is free and there are tons of things to do with it if you just learn where it is(package manager) and find the online tutorials. IMO
so you think what you see in the beta is what they must and will ship? That is just too funny and very naive.
Seeing what Microsoft does is like looking for rain on a dark night. You see it only if you look slightly to the side of what you would think is something that'll expose it to you. For rain, it is a bright light. For Microsoft, it's blogs, press releases, public statements and other things.
talk about a lunatic, I only said that they would likely look at GNU/Linux and nothing more. I do understand migrations cost but so does having your business based on an unsupported OS. It is not like the state of Maine can hire anyone to patch Windows XP outside of Microsoft and you know they won't. They want everyone on Vista.
And hey, there's the Mac too and there is ofcourse that high performance Windows Vista. It'll probably be with SP3 by then so who knows, it might only take 2 CPUs and 2GB of memory to run acceptably.
having the same base kernel does not mean it will be the same distribution. What you said is like saying the because Ubuntu and the Android are based off the 2.6 kernel, they are the same.
Microsoft can base Windows 7 on the Vista kernel yet still make the OS a service oriented distribution. Think of it like Vista Home vs Vista Ultimate vs Vista MediaCenter. They are all based on the same kernel but different distributions( packaging ).
come on, are people really surprised that Microsoft is not only taking MS.Net to the world of Windows-only but also making sure anyone who uses their sites/services are Windows-only partners too?
Get real folks. With out a monopoly hold on the pre-load computer market, Microsoft would be dead meat. They know they need to make sure their customers do not have a choice to try another OS because they will not put their software on another OS. Remember, without Windows they are dead meat. Outside of one package, MS Office for Mac, they have never put their software on another OS with the intention of making a business profit from it. They put Internet Explorer on Solaris to kill off all the Win32-UNIX licensees and keep anti-trust judges from nailing them for it. When Palm had 80% marketshare and WinCE was less than 5% IBM, Sybase, and other dbase vendors released lite versions for the PalmOS. Microsoft released MS Access-lite for WindowsCE.
Miguel is an idiot for kissing Microsoft's ass every time they expose it to him. MS.Net was created to stop Java from taking Microsoft developers over to a cross platform API and software stack plain and simple. Anything "open" about it is a trick/game/hoax/etc because they own the spec.
Microsoft's business is to own/control all software development and make sure it is all done on Windows. This is a fact. Everything they do must first protect the Windows marketshare. This is reality. Open source is a threat to Microsoft when it runs on anything other than or along with Windows. Another fact. So cry all you want Miguel, you're an idiot for following Microsoft and playing the Pied Piper to those too naive to understand. IMO.
why would Microsoft put another desktop OS out there and totally mess up the migration off of XP and on top of that, give them another black eye like Windows ME. Granted, ME was a subset market since Win98 held it's own and Windows 2000 carried the main business user sector so the WinME flop was a consumer issue at best.
From what I see, Windows 7 is going to be the rent-a-Windows kit more to the likes of gOS where it's tied to online services or rental apps. You know, Ozzy's plan now that Gates is out of the way.
But I did get a laugh when it was said that Maine will "hope for the best" with regards to what comes out of Microsoft next. I do think they'll be unpleasantly surprised at what Windows 7 is and probably give GNU/Linux a good look-see as that time approaches. Just my guess.;-)
why would Microsoft put another desktop OS out there and totally mess up the migration off of XP and on top of that, give them another black eye like Windows ME. Granted, ME was a subset market since Win98 held it's own and Windows 2000 carried the main business user sector so the WinME flop was a consumer issue at best.
From what I see, Windows 7 is going to be the rent-a-Windows kit more to the likes of gOS where it's tied to online services or rental apps. You know, Ozzy's plan now that Gates is out of the way.
But I did get a laugh when it was said that Maine will "hope for the best" with regards to what comes out of Microsoft next. I do think they'll be unpleasantly surprised at what Windows 7 is and probably give GNU/Linux a good look-see as that time approaches. Just my guess.;-)
you don't know that. what happened could just have easily shown how skilled he was at piloting. Conditions such as a big tree, could have caused a fatal end in an otherwise fantastic recovery and landing. There aren't many places to land up there without hitting something big and hard.
the sweater, once hypothermia starts setting you skin starts to feel like it is burning hot. You'll start pulling off clothing thinking you are burning up when it is just the opposite and you've now accelerated you demise. so it is not odd if he did indeed survive a crash. It could also have been pulled off his body by animals but there would be blood and other damage indicating how it was removed. There's been little info on the sweater.
ever seen a bear drag a body away for a midnight snack? Atleast one article I read on this had some cop or sheriff or something say that many times they don't find bodies because of the large animals in those wilderness areas.
As far as finding the plane goes, it was covered with snow when the plane was lost so it was not going to be very easy to find if it went down in a very wooded area. the best time to look was probably spring before the ground cover bloomed and trees filled out.
I don't find it all that odd. My guess is that they atleast now have a 10-20 mile radius to search with a much higher probability of finding the wreckage.
Slashdot Mirror
Gates is still trying to shake off what IBM and others have said regarding Microsoft not being a tech company. But, he is tied to Windows hook line and sinker. His Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, from what I've heard, prevents those accepting funding from using open source software. That is a diehard Windows advocate and Bill will not change that. IMO.
I would rather he spent it on jets, yachts, etc and he stayed the heck away from tech. He's delayed tech and innovation way too much over the past 20 years. We don't need him seeing what someone else starts, grabs it, and then start paying people to use it until they think it is something they want. I'm done with that.
LoB
$178 million when 10s of billions were put into it is not being profitable. Didn't they just write off $3 billion for Xbox overheating issues just 8 or so months ago? That's not profitable IMO.
And the rest of it, that's all Windows based and except for Windows itself, leveraged the monopoly position of Windows. What I said was that they were not profitable outside of Windows.
But I am surprised you didn't mention their mice and keyboards. That is the only thing outside of Windows where they have made profits.
LoB
and the B&MGF just spends profits from MSFT and even has been said to require Microsoft-only software in computer donations. So no wonder Bill Gates is trying to get others to come up with an idea he can profit from. With Microsoft having been a one-trick pony for all these years, just maybe Bill can find someone else who can come up with a hit.
Knowing the history of Microsoft and Windows, it was not really the product which made the business, it was the business behind the product and that faithful deal with IBM.
So could Bill Gates really build a business around a product which has to stand the test of the market to be successful? Think how Steve Jobs did the iPod and iTunes even though the Mac was still less than 5% of the market. People loved it and when they finally came out with the MS Windows version of iTunes, it opened up a maket of 100s of millions to the product and they came. There was not tying or leveraging of the iPod to a monopoly positioned product.
Personally, I don't think he has it in him do make this work. Just they way he publicly talks about things like speech recognition as the next big thing shows he's not good at doing "the next big thing". And they, Microsoft, have always been followers in tech and only get where they do because they leverage 90% marketshare with Windows. We shall see and he sure does have the bucks to get anything off the ground. And hey, the Spruce Goose got off the ground too. ;-)
LoB
it is Bill Gates who doen't have
Greenspan doesn't know how things like rating systems work and especially when computer software is used to do the ratings. Think computer graphics benchmarking software. Even small companies were looking at the way the benchmarks were built and run and finding ways to optimize so they _game_ the benchmarks.
Does Greenspan really think it was a garbage in/garbage out situation? I would think that is just an easy way out of taking more blame for not speaking loudly against deregulation which let the banks play games with mortgages. IMO.
LoB
When Microsoft does something which does nothing to protect their position in the market and is more likely to do the opposite, they do it at a snails pace and kicking and screaming all the way. For example, JDBC drivers for MS SQL Server in the late 90s as Java was picking up steam. Microsoft eventually said they'd do it but the release date was 18 months out. Another recent example is the OLPC version of Windows XP which has taken over a year. They don't want to do these things and make more of a PR stunt out of them than actually effort and work. You could also look at the US and EU anti-trust issues still dragging on for years also.
The only thing of interest I glean from this is that GNU/Linux has grown to the point where Microsoft is put into this position of foot dragging. THAT is a very good sign. IMO. I would not expect much real help from MS in regards to improving SAMBA and AD interoperability.
LoB
we all know that the oil industry and the US auto industry are in bed with each other. We've also seen many articles on how the US auto industries future is in Silicon Valley and Tesla has been the poster child of all this.
So it is obvious that the oil industry, with all its billions and billions in profits have used that to tighten the credit markets so that start-ups like Tesla can't continue growing. And they are even lowering fuel prices too so that all the alternate energy businesses also lose backing and support.
Those bastards. ;-)
LoB
exactly. The snake-oil guys left the tech sector and moved into the real estate market through the early 00s. I saw that over 40% of real estate transactions were "investments". ie mostly flippers.
Around here, they were converting apartments, and poorly designed ones at that, into condos and getting way too much for dressed up apartments with too little parking.
And it does not help that the news agencies are acting like reality in lending( ie you have to be capable of affording the loan ) is a bad thing.
I'm just wondering where all the scam artists will be going next? Green tech maybe?
LoB
they are a marketing company and what they say in public has very little association with the truth. They even lied to a federal judge in one of thier cases( faked a video, said it wasn't faked ).
What surprises me is the press still quotes them. Just like the word "open" means something unique to Microsoft compared to what the world + dog accept "open" to mean, I suspect the word "ethics" has its own MS-ethics definition. They are a marketing company and spin is what they do. IMO
LoB
Nice list and much more accurate. Also, the list would probably be 50% longer if the Windows CE versions were included.
Boy, seeing "Cairo" listed reminds me of all the hope of really deep OO( Object Oriented ) desktops and APIs. As usual, it takes Microsoft about 10 years to catch up to what the tech crowds are doing.
LoB
if the 'watch me pull a number out of my hat' days of Windows NT v3.1 didn't tell you that, there are dozens of other examples. IIRC, they jumped MS Office or MS Word version numbers in the early 90s also. Who cares what they call it as long as they don't call it GNU/Linux or infringe on any of the names the OSS community know and use. IMO.
LoB
hmmm, threw him another carrot they did? aaah, but the stick still looms, it does.
-YoB ( Yoda of Borg )
LoB
and what is MS .Net version 3.5 I see mentioned in my search for MS .Net? Mono is only supporting v2.0 and because that is so old that about half of the MS .Net applications out there won't run on Mono v2.0.
hey, what a surprise and isn't that great to know this whole thing is not to enable Windows developers and apps to work on Linux but so Linux developers and apps can run on Windows.
Mono is a one way street, it's a gateway to train developers who can only go to Microsoft's platform for updated versions of the software stack. And, once you go MS, you can't go back. So where is the ECMA version of all this and has it even reached MS .Net v2.0 compatibility?
Every Microsoft technology I've ever seen/heard of has been a one-way street and that is because they need to protect their businesses. Develop with Microsoft's tools and be their tool. It is now pretty much only in the open source market where tech is growing to solve problems instead of tech being used to protect a financial position as it is in Windows. Does anyone remember the early/mid 90s when there was competition in dev tools and there was a dev tools market?
LoB
sounds like they've become the tool instead of the PC being a tool.
LoB
LOL :-)
LoB
I'm not so sure about that. I would think "power users" would know what was on the device, Linux or Windows, and would not get it with Linux if they didn't want it. The geeks again would know what they want.
There is a long way to go down from the "power user" down to the neophyte and that is probably where these returns come from. For an example, I was at a party the other day and telling some guys about the OLPC. A wife of one heard me and later was asking me about like she was considering doing the G1G1. I constantly mentioned it was for children but somehow she just heard of all the features and that it was cheap( $200 ) and paying an extra $200 as a charity/donation was fine but she wanted to use it herself. And I'm talking about 30 or so minutes talking to her and more than that discussing it with the guys.
People just don't _get_ the basics about computers and seem to only hear or see what they want to hear and see. And the geeks around me who bought netbooks got Linux on them, wanted Linux on them and tweaked it( KDE mostly ) the way they wanted it.
Maybe in store demo's were not functioning or something or maybe these returns were purchased online without understanding there is more out there besides a Windows PC or a Mac PC. You know, a Linux PC. I am surprised that more highschool kids don't get into Linux more since it is free and there are tons of things to do with it if you just learn where it is(package manager) and find the online tutorials. IMO
LoB
so you think what you see in the beta is what they must and will ship? That is just too funny and very naive.
Seeing what Microsoft does is like looking for rain on a dark night. You see it only if you look slightly to the side of what you would think is something that'll expose it to you. For rain, it is a bright light. For Microsoft, it's blogs, press releases, public statements and other things.
LoB
talk about a lunatic, I only said that they would likely look at GNU/Linux and nothing more. I do understand migrations cost but so does having your business based on an unsupported OS. It is not like the state of Maine can hire anyone to patch Windows XP outside of Microsoft and you know they won't. They want everyone on Vista.
And hey, there's the Mac too and there is ofcourse that high performance Windows Vista. It'll probably be with SP3 by then so who knows, it might only take 2 CPUs and 2GB of memory to run acceptably.
another freak AC can bite me.
LoB
having the same base kernel does not mean it will be the same distribution. What you said is like saying the because Ubuntu and the Android are based off the 2.6 kernel, they are the same.
Microsoft can base Windows 7 on the Vista kernel yet still make the OS a service oriented distribution. Think of it like Vista Home vs Vista Ultimate vs Vista MediaCenter. They are all based on the same kernel but different distributions( packaging ).
LoB
doh, ff3 and the new-ish /. layout gives me problems getting to the story 'read more' link and somehow it ended up here. Sorry.
Microsoft still sucks for this next phase of their _destroy ODF_ policy and/or plan. Very much so indeed.
LoB
come on, are people really surprised that Microsoft is not only taking MS .Net to the world of Windows-only but also making sure anyone who uses their sites/services are Windows-only partners too?
Get real folks. With out a monopoly hold on the pre-load computer market, Microsoft would be dead meat. They know they need to make sure their customers do not have a choice to try another OS because they will not put their software on another OS. Remember, without Windows they are dead meat. Outside of one package, MS Office for Mac, they have never put their software on another OS with the intention of making a business profit from it. They put Internet Explorer on Solaris to kill off all the Win32-UNIX licensees and keep anti-trust judges from nailing them for it. When Palm had 80% marketshare and WinCE was less than 5% IBM, Sybase, and other dbase vendors released lite versions for the PalmOS. Microsoft released MS Access-lite for WindowsCE.
Miguel is an idiot for kissing Microsoft's ass every time they expose it to him. MS .Net was created to stop Java from taking Microsoft developers over to a cross platform API and software stack plain and simple. Anything "open" about it is a trick/game/hoax/etc because they own the spec.
Microsoft's business is to own/control all software development and make sure it is all done on Windows. This is a fact. Everything they do must first protect the Windows marketshare. This is reality. Open source is a threat to Microsoft when it runs on anything other than or along with Windows. Another fact. So cry all you want Miguel, you're an idiot for following Microsoft and playing the Pied Piper to those too naive to understand. IMO.
LoB
why would Microsoft put another desktop OS out there and totally mess up the migration off of XP and on top of that, give them another black eye like Windows ME. Granted, ME was a subset market since Win98 held it's own and Windows 2000 carried the main business user sector so the WinME flop was a consumer issue at best.
From what I see, Windows 7 is going to be the rent-a-Windows kit more to the likes of gOS where it's tied to online services or rental apps. You know, Ozzy's plan now that Gates is out of the way.
But I did get a laugh when it was said that Maine will "hope for the best" with regards to what comes out of Microsoft next. I do think they'll be unpleasantly surprised at what Windows 7 is and probably give GNU/Linux a good look-see as that time approaches. Just my guess. ;-)
why would Microsoft put another desktop OS out there and totally mess up the migration off of XP and on top of that, give them another black eye like Windows ME. Granted, ME was a subset market since Win98 held it's own and Windows 2000 carried the main business user sector so the WinME flop was a consumer issue at best.
From what I see, Windows 7 is going to be the rent-a-Windows kit more to the likes of gOS where it's tied to online services or rental apps. You know, Ozzy's plan now that Gates is out of the way.
But I did get a laugh when it was said that Maine will "hope for the best" with regards to what comes out of Microsoft next. I do think they'll be unpleasantly surprised at what Windows 7 is and probably give GNU/Linux a good look-see as that time approaches. Just my guess. ;-)
LoB
you don't know that. what happened could just have easily shown how skilled he was at piloting. Conditions such as a big tree, could have caused a fatal end in an otherwise fantastic recovery and landing. There aren't many places to land up there without hitting something big and hard.
LoB
the sweater, once hypothermia starts setting you skin starts to feel like it is burning hot. You'll start pulling off clothing thinking you are burning up when it is just the opposite and you've now accelerated you demise. so it is not odd if he did indeed survive a crash. It could also have been pulled off his body by animals but there would be blood and other damage indicating how it was removed. There's been little info on the sweater.
LoB
ever seen a bear drag a body away for a midnight snack? Atleast one article I read on this had some cop or sheriff or something say that many times they don't find bodies because of the large animals in those wilderness areas.
As far as finding the plane goes, it was covered with snow when the plane was lost so it was not going to be very easy to find if it went down in a very wooded area. the best time to look was probably spring before the ground cover bloomed and trees filled out.
I don't find it all that odd. My guess is that they atleast now have a 10-20 mile radius to search with a much higher probability of finding the wreckage.
LoB