just the way the answered the questions seems to imply they are the ones behind the payments and THAT is no surprise. Customers asking for HD-DVD you say? And what is the truth but a state of belief or perception of a belief... Glad to see Microsoft hasn't changed one bit.
do you REALLY think there could be anything interesting in a story which tried to sell the idea that Microsoft should embrace open source software on its platform? WTF are you smoking if you do cause I WANT SOME OF THAT SHIT.
I'm in THAT kind of mood right now so I'll say it, What kind of moron would even think Microsoft would accept open source on its platform for any other reason but to eventually kill it? I suppose, there is alot of evidence that shows their developers suck at finding new ideas and if Microsoft could sucker their 3rd party developers into posting code that Microsoft could take, hide, and make profits from( sucker license ) then maybe I could see them wanting this. But it ain't the open source we all know so is it really open source? IMO, no.
it has happened over and over and over and over. There is nothing but short term cash to be obtained from a partnership with Microsoft since any real growth from that partnership will result in Microsoft taking the market one way or another. The business clowns who keep telling their investors that a Microsoft deal is a good thing are just fooling them to go along so that they can cash out with the short term profits or they are just ignorant of history.
The Zune-scape Microsoft is attempting to create for itself could be one reason for this fallout but I would venture to guess that what Microsoft is doing with the IPTV idiots they now own is more of a concern. Because if you think Microsoft is not going to be funneling MS Music down to those homes, well, you're not very aware of Microsoft's history. IMO
As soon as I read the headline, I was reminded of the DreamWorks clan( Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg ) all wearing Microsoft "BoB" hats back when Microsoft reinvented the user interface of the future. It was a short time after that when we all saw Bill Gates join in the mug shots as they all announced the DreamWorks Interactive partnership( Microsoft and DreamWorks ).
So, what does Microsoft "BoB" have to do with this? Is there any wonder why Katzenberg is committing to back the HD DVD format of a very wealthy financial partner? HD-DVD is as much Microsofts format as it is Toshiba's IMO.
Our t86i allows us to set ringtones and once can set their own. The useful part is when you go to any phone number in the addressbook and assign a ringtone, you move the up/down button through the ringtones and they play the one the cursor is on.
So, on a modern mobile phone, record your voice for YES and NO and label them so they show up in the top of the list. Then, practice making it play each ringtone with the up/down buttons and then show/teach your grandma how to touch the buttons to "talk".
You can add other things later once she gets the hang of it.
Networking is not that important or useful these days so what the heck is the author crying about? There obviously is little incentive for Microsoft to spend much time and effort in this area over the last 5 years of developing this "new" operating system.;-/
but businesses are not even trying. American Express was/is running Microsoft Internet Explorer on their customer service reps desktops AND they have internet access. With all the holes found every day in this combination, these customer service reps use the same browser to access AMEX customer databases.
I don't know if you remember but a few years ago, there was a massive security hole in MS IE and Microsoft didn't/couldn't fix it for about 6 months. The Dept of Homeland Security even put out a recommendation to not use MS Internet Explorer because of this unpatched flaw. AMEX did nothing about it and continued as normal.
Move about a year later and all of a sudden, CNN is on the air with no computer systems and spend the hours on the air discussing how their Windows computers are rebooting on their own. City governments across the country have the same problem and so does AMEX. The cause, a Windows spyware kit, having been installed on all these computers and many more, was crashing on some subset of the computers it was installed on and causing those to reboot. The spyware was already on a bunch of computers and only because there was a flaw which caused it to crash SOME of the computers, was it found out about.
There is no security in corporate America or the various governments. Sure, there are some areas where smart people are doing what's right but it looks like 90% of the rest are feak'n MCSE's with one finger up their ass and the other on the mouse. click, click, click.
These businesses should be made to pay $10,000 every time they lose customer data and for every customer. That doesn't even begin to pay for the hardships of dealing with identity theft, not even close but it would add up to millions quickly and it just might make them think about who's running the company IT department and what they are running.
it is not a surprise that some Microsoft product/tech/whatever is successful, I know people who wouldn't touch Java basically because it wasn't from Microsoft. When Microsoft failed to abide by Sun's Java license and keep their implementation to the specs and then came out with.Net as a replacement, these people were all over it. So their use is not that great of a surprise.
And because of the Windows-only nature of EVERYTHING Microsoft does limits my choice and my customers choice and my mothers choice, my..... choice, why on earth would I want to think for a minute that yet another Microsoft replacement for a partners product is good for me, customer, mom, etc? It is not and it is not a win/win when the only choice is Microsoft. Microsoft plays to keep control of developer API's and therefore,.Net was born to take away Java developers from Sun's API's. Microsoft was very successful in harming Java and they are winning some hearts and minds with.Net and because.Net has patented Microsoft IP in it, touching it on Linux or anything would be an idiotic move. They could have worked with Sun to make Java better but they NEVER do that because Java runs on other platforms and Microsoft does not control the API. OpenGL was handled this way, cross platform C++ framework vendors where handled this way and the list goes on and on.
You can only play with Microsoft if you only play on Microsoft and you are completely controlled by Microsoft via platform ownership and control. That is it. It does not matter if you find one pin prick which seems like fun, like it's cool, etc. It is fucking limiting and 20+ years of Microsoft business practices show this if you are willing to actually look at them out from under their rose colors glasses.
Sorry, I'm getting really tired of this thread. Do some reading on how bad Microsoft is and realize many of those who wrote the pages have been burned by Microsoft one way or another. A freak'n Federal Judge threw the book at them for wrong doing and ordered them split up! It is not a conspiracy theory that they do bad things, it's on the record and there is 1000 times more off the record.
LoB
What I'm getting at is that because of how Microsoft has done and continues to as business methods and practices, their products should be regarded as something to stay away from. Obviously, if you have no possibility of ever doing anything exciting, innovative, or just plain fun and only care if it works on your Windows box, there is no way you'd agree that supporting a company and it's products because of how it damages choice outside that world
It was probably closely watched by Microsoft when that is all Flash was but when Flex came into play, the ballgame changed. With Adobe Flex, the Flash player becomes the runtime virtual machine, if you will, and now there is asynchronous data access between the client( Flash player ) and the server.
Just Google for "JSON Flex" and you'll see what I mean. Flex took Adobe to the next level and became one of the targets labeled a platform threat at Microsoft. IMO.
If it's so much like AJAX then why must Microsoft create this new thing? Is it like OpenGL verses Direct3D? How did that pan out for the once standard 3D platform?
it doesn't fucking matter what it is "like", it's who will control it and in this case it is Microsoft attempting once again to limit platform choice by first creating their own version. And they are not doing to make money off it. They are doing it to make sure Windows stays relevant. How many freak'n times does this have to be said??? Newbies...
Microsoft is FAR from having a monopoly in this product area.
Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows Desktop PCs and has at its disposal millions of preloads a week.
Flash is really the only product that does what it does. It therefore has a defacto monopoly.
And what does that mean? They have marketshare but it is not a bad thing unless you don't like the product. They do not prevent others from competing.
Microsoft is the "little guy" coming onto the stage with Silverlight. I highly doubt Flash will go anywhere, it's insanely popular on the internet today. Just because it's microsoft doesn't mean it's inherantly evil.
Yes it does. Microsoft's long history shows that they will do more to prevent actual competition then they'll do to compete on product merit. And once they crush the other guy, their preload strategies pretty much block any sane business developer from even considering competing. The result, a stale market.
Silverlight could really push Flash to improve htier product, which is what competition is really about.
But when Microsoft is involved, it's a new game and competition is what gets terminated.
I think the fact that Microsoft is working WITH the mono people on this project is a step into the light.
How can adding another product to this area remove choice? right now there is only Flash in this area, the choice is either Flash or nothing.
Adding a Microsoft product to this removes choice over time and history shows that over and over again. As for there not being any other competitor, well there is Sun Microsystems Java FX coming down the line.
LoB
when you've been in this business as long as I have( and many other Slashdot'ers ) you no longer feel that it is a separate issue when Microsoft is involved. Competition is a very good thing and it is an incredible motivation and innovation driver and a market with this competition is exciting and productive.
The problem starts when a company like Microsoft implements protectionism mechanisms to keep their control of the market( Windows ) and drives down/out competition which threatens their market in any way. For Microsoft, any company which develops a product with a customization or developer market and gains a majority market share is a threat. They are a threat mainly because that company now controls many developer minds and therefore are a threat to Windows market position. Quadruple that threat if the product developer actually supports this product on other operating systems. This last bit is usually what throws Microsoft management into a tizzy and a bright red bullseye gets painted on this product and product developer.
It's Microsofts might and willingness to use it which kills competition. What happened to all the email clients when Microsoft pre-loaded MS Outlook in Windows? Had Mozilla not survived in the Linux market and on a good chunk of Windows desktops, there wouldn't be any kind of browser in Windows but MS Internet Explorer and even then, it is always there and required in may cases.
I think it's just that you've not seen how bad Microsoft has been to competition over the last 20+ years.
Let's see if I can explain this: Say you're starting a business and you are looking to open a store front. There is this business park right in the middle of downtown where all your customs already go. So you open up a store front down there and it turns out that the property owner of the business park also has a store front there and it's really close to yours. You think it's no big deal until you start expanding your business and something you do pisses off the business park owner. You don't think you're competing but still he's pissed off. Now, you're finding out that your workers for the expansion are having difficulties getting to work. There's now a guard shack at the entrance and your guys keep getting stopped for no reason at all. You discuss this with the park owner and he claims it's all a misunderstanding, it'll be fixed real soon. After months it does get solved but now there's construction right in front of your business. The park owner again says that it'll be fixed soon. What you didn't realize was that the park owner, all this time, has been setting up his own store front that sells the same thing you're selling. Not only that but when customers enter the park, the traffic routing is directed right by the park owners new business. You only get a handful of customers any more and have to close shop eventually. Still think competition of any kind is good competition?
and exactly when did Microsoft become a company willing to actually compete across platforms? This would be a VERY important day in history so please let us all know. Oh, and the word of Microsoft in court is not worth much so please do not show some Microsoft PR doc or the likes as proof of this epiphany.
It's not about supporting Adobe, it's about keeping choice and competition in this market. Everyone should know that a win for Microsoft is a loss for competition and a loss for freedom of choice. Not to mention the typical loss of innovation.
Compete? That would be great but that is not how they work. Instead of competing, they leverage their monopoly on the desktop and force their products on the market. End of competition, end of innovation, end of market.
Pepsi keeps Coke in check and Coke keeps Pepsi in check. I don't like their exclusive deals with businesses and I stay away from some businesses because of this. But there are other businesses I can go to quite easily and without jumping through hoops.
It's all about Microsoft's methods of doing business and the 20+ years of history they have using these methods. I don't care if there is one bit of a tasty treat coming from them, 20+ years of history says that if the one treat can be forced onto the plate of most customers, soon there will be no other treats to taste, soon that Microsoft treat will taste like shit and cost you a bundle over and over again.
no, Microsoft does not compete, they crush and remove choice. Competition is good and though this might look like competition, solely because it is Microsoft it means that this will limit competition and limit choice in the long run. There is nothing in the past 20 years to show there's any other way for Microsoft.
the big problem here is that they own and control the OS AND they have used that illegally and constantly to harm choice in the applications market. THAT is the deal here. Not all businesses are evil and even if some are, they don't always have the means to dictate what the market gets. Microsoft does all this and more. Bad monopoly, bad Microsoft, bad Silverlight. IMO.
fine, then let someone compete with them except let it not be Microsoft. They have shown how they operate and it is not in anybodies best interest that they play in this field/market. And if you have any hope that a Microsoft technology will get you anywhere but roped, lashed, bolted, and tied to Microsoft you are seriously mislead. And yes, being roped, lashed, bolted, and tied to Microsoft is a bad thing. It terminates choice.
And there's nothing wrong with Flash being a monopoly, it's not like they are preventing others from competing. Not to mention they actually hold no control but control over the Flash environment. Are you attempting to compare Adobe with Microsoft in the evil monopoly market? yikes!
they won't tell you this but IE for UNIX was only done so that Microsoft could pay Mainsoft a ton so at the same time, they could afford the new license fees for Win32-UNIX. Microsoft licensed out the Win32 source to a handful of vendors who, through compatibility libraries, brought Win32 source code compatibility to UNIX. Ofcourse, they did this only long enough for many UNIX vendors to port their UNIX apps to Win32 and establish their UNIX products on the Microsoft platform. Then Microsoft pulled the rug out from under them all, except Mainsoft, with massive license fee increases. All but Mainsoft could no longer afford to support the Win32-UNIX libraries and a whole bunch of apps no longer got UNIX version updates because these companies were not going to now port back to UNIX.
This is why Microsoft should not have been allowed to own both the OS and be an application vendor on that OS. While fine before being a monopoly, once a monopoly AND a very very bad monopoly, the public should have been protected from these kinds of business practices. IMO.
gawd are you living in a dream world. Developers at Microsoft do not run the company and do not determine direction. Never have and never will so wake up and smell the acid that's eating your brain. Microsoft is out to terminate Adobe Flash, gain control of the cross-platform AJAX developers, stop Firefox growth, and force Google to work under Microsofts terms.
Microsoft is losing control of the development community. First it was Java on the servers, Then it was AJAX, and now with the addition of Adobe Flash and Flex. They are losing control and they know it. MS Silverlight is one attempt at bringing those all home to Microsoft and Microsoft's control. Watch for some massive campaign to tie MS Silverlight into college CS curriculum real soon. Remember all the financial deals MSFT was making which resulted in dropped Java courses and added MS.Net courses?
MS Silverlight is their golden egg laying goose. The world needs that goose to drop no egg. IMO.
yup, MS Silverlight is their planned attempt at killing off not only Adobe Flash but also all this AJAX stuff. If they can kill off Flash, they'll make sure developers use Silverlight for browser application development and move as many as possible away from AJAX. In time, they'll start breaking AJAX components in their browser to harm those who stick with AJAX and we're back at web applications which only run on Microsoft Windows and which is ultimately controlled by Microsoft at the API levels. This sticks it to Google too. Because 'Google Must Die' is another Microsoft concept these days.
Read your history books folks, it's all in Microsoft's history. Who needs a crystal ball?
LoB
their goal is to protect Windows, Flash Must Die
on
Cross-Platform Microsoft
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm sorry but MS Sliverlight is a direct attack on Adobe and their Flash product and this is a direct move to protect the Windows monopoly. Adobe Flash is a well established development platform which runs across all desktop computing platforms. Heck, Nokia even has it running on the N800. Adobe is the new Netscape and Flash the new Navigator with MS Silverlight being the new MS Internet Explorer.
So anything which grows that MS product will be good for protecting the Windows monopoly. If Flash is killed off, and in typical Microsoft fashion, MS Silverlight will become a Windows-only product. In 20 years of Microsoft history, there is absolutely NOTHING which shows any other path. A press release does not mean squat when it comes from Microsoft. Talk about doublespeak and truthiness.
And to even think that Microsoft wants to help enable Linux by the goodness of their heart is a fool. At Microsoft, it's all about 'Adobe must die, Linux must die. Long live Windows, long live Microsoft.' and only a complete newbie would/could think otherwise. IMO.
that's great only Microsoft, Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung don't have any advantage in screwing up cable reception. But Microsoft does.
Have you not seen Microsoft join various boards, organizations, and/or committees and constantly nitpick the process, technology, people, etc? There's an old but easy to read book out called "StartUp" which gives a hint as to how Microsoft does business. Meanwhile, back in Redmond, their engineers are busy hacking together their version which only runs on Windows. And in the end, they go off and release their own version while the spend millions in marketing telling the world+dog how wrong/bad/dangerous,etc the standard stuff is and how great their stuff is.
Was Microsoft trying to pull something in this case? It is HIGHLY likely given their history but were they also just inept at building something which worked? Another possibility for sure.
What does Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung have to do with this anyways? It was Microsoft submitting the device and it was Microsoft complaining not Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung
Slashdot Mirror
just the way the answered the questions seems to imply they are the ones behind the payments and THAT is no surprise. Customers asking for HD-DVD you say? And what is the truth but a state of belief or perception of a belief... Glad to see Microsoft hasn't changed one bit.
LoB
do you REALLY think there could be anything interesting in a story which tried to sell the idea that Microsoft should embrace open source software on its platform? WTF are you smoking if you do cause I WANT SOME OF THAT SHIT.
I'm in THAT kind of mood right now so I'll say it, What kind of moron would even think Microsoft would accept open source on its platform for any other reason but to eventually kill it? I suppose, there is alot of evidence that shows their developers suck at finding new ideas and if Microsoft could sucker their 3rd party developers into posting code that Microsoft could take, hide, and make profits from( sucker license ) then maybe I could see them wanting this. But it ain't the open source we all know so is it really open source? IMO, no.
LoB
it has happened over and over and over and over. There is nothing but short term cash to be obtained from a partnership with Microsoft since any real growth from that partnership will result in Microsoft taking the market one way or another. The business clowns who keep telling their investors that a Microsoft deal is a good thing are just fooling them to go along so that they can cash out with the short term profits or they are just ignorant of history.
The Zune-scape Microsoft is attempting to create for itself could be one reason for this fallout but I would venture to guess that what Microsoft is doing with the IPTV idiots they now own is more of a concern. Because if you think Microsoft is not going to be funneling MS Music down to those homes, well, you're not very aware of Microsoft's history. IMO
LoB
As soon as I read the headline, I was reminded of the DreamWorks clan( Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg ) all wearing Microsoft "BoB" hats back when Microsoft reinvented the user interface of the future. It was a short time after that when we all saw Bill Gates join in the mug shots as they all announced the DreamWorks Interactive partnership( Microsoft and DreamWorks ).
So, what does Microsoft "BoB" have to do with this? Is there any wonder why Katzenberg is committing to back the HD DVD format of a very wealthy financial partner? HD-DVD is as much Microsofts format as it is Toshiba's IMO.
LoB
Our t86i allows us to set ringtones and once can set their own. The useful part is when you go to any phone number in the addressbook and assign a ringtone, you move the up/down button through the ringtones and they play the one the cursor is on.
So, on a modern mobile phone, record your voice for YES and NO and label them so they show up in the top of the list. Then, practice making it play each ringtone with the up/down buttons and then show/teach your grandma how to touch the buttons to "talk".
You can add other things later once she gets the hang of it.
LoB
it wasn't until Fiesty but I agree, it works pretty darn well now. But, man it was a pain for Dapper and earlier.
LoB
Networking is not that important or useful these days so what the heck is the author crying about? ;-/
There obviously is little incentive for Microsoft to spend much time and effort in this area over the last 5 years of developing this "new" operating system.
LoB
but businesses are not even trying. American Express was/is running Microsoft Internet Explorer on their customer service reps desktops AND they have internet access. With all the holes found every day in this combination, these customer service reps use the same browser to access AMEX customer databases.
I don't know if you remember but a few years ago, there was a massive security hole in MS IE and Microsoft didn't/couldn't fix it for about 6 months. The Dept of Homeland Security even put out a recommendation to not use MS Internet Explorer because of this unpatched flaw. AMEX did nothing about it and continued as normal.
Move about a year later and all of a sudden, CNN is on the air with no computer systems and spend the hours on the air discussing how their Windows computers are rebooting on their own. City governments across the country have the same problem and so does AMEX. The cause, a Windows spyware kit, having been installed on all these computers and many more, was crashing on some subset of the computers it was installed on and causing those to reboot. The spyware was already on a bunch of computers and only because there was a flaw which caused it to crash SOME of the computers, was it found out about.
There is no security in corporate America or the various governments. Sure, there are some areas where smart people are doing what's right but it looks like 90% of the rest are feak'n MCSE's with one finger up their ass and the other on the mouse. click, click, click.
These businesses should be made to pay $10,000 every time they lose customer data and for every customer. That doesn't even begin to pay for the hardships of dealing with identity theft, not even close but it would add up to millions quickly and it just might make them think about who's running the company IT department and what they are running.
LoB
it is not a surprise that some Microsoft product/tech/whatever is successful, I know people who wouldn't touch Java basically because it wasn't from Microsoft. When Microsoft failed to abide by Sun's Java license and keep their implementation to the specs and then came out with .Net as a replacement, these people were all over it. So their use is not that great of a surprise.
..... choice, why on earth would I want to think for a minute that yet another Microsoft replacement for a partners product is good for me, customer, mom, etc? It is not and it is not a win/win when the only choice is Microsoft. Microsoft plays to keep control of developer API's and therefore, .Net was born to take away Java developers from Sun's API's. Microsoft was very successful in harming Java and they are winning some hearts and minds with .Net and because .Net has patented Microsoft IP in it, touching it on Linux or anything would be an idiotic move. They could have worked with Sun to make Java better but they NEVER do that because Java runs on other platforms and Microsoft does not control the API. OpenGL was handled this way, cross platform C++ framework vendors where handled this way and the list goes on and on.
And because of the Windows-only nature of EVERYTHING Microsoft does limits my choice and my customers choice and my mothers choice, my
You can only play with Microsoft if you only play on Microsoft and you are completely controlled by Microsoft via platform ownership and control. That is it. It does not matter if you find one pin prick which seems like fun, like it's cool, etc. It is fucking limiting and 20+ years of Microsoft business practices show this if you are willing to actually look at them out from under their rose colors glasses.
Sorry, I'm getting really tired of this thread. Do some reading on how bad Microsoft is and realize many of those who wrote the pages have been burned by Microsoft one way or another. A freak'n Federal Judge threw the book at them for wrong doing and ordered them split up! It is not a conspiracy theory that they do bad things, it's on the record and there is 1000 times more off the record.
LoB
What I'm getting at is that because of how Microsoft has done and continues to as business methods and practices, their products should be regarded as something to stay away from. Obviously, if you have no possibility of ever doing anything exciting, innovative, or just plain fun and only care if it works on your Windows box, there is no way you'd agree that supporting a company and it's products because of how it damages choice outside that world
It was probably closely watched by Microsoft when that is all Flash was but when Flex came into play, the ballgame changed. With Adobe Flex, the Flash player becomes the runtime virtual machine, if you will, and now there is asynchronous data access between the client( Flash player ) and the server.
Just Google for "JSON Flex" and you'll see what I mean. Flex took Adobe to the next level and became one of the targets labeled a platform threat at Microsoft. IMO.
LoB
If it's so much like AJAX then why must Microsoft create this new thing? Is it like OpenGL verses Direct3D? How did that pan out for the once standard 3D platform?
it doesn't fucking matter what it is "like", it's who will control it and in this case it is Microsoft attempting once again to limit platform choice by first creating their own version. And they are not doing to make money off it. They are doing it to make sure Windows stays relevant. How many freak'n times does this have to be said??? Newbies...
LoB
Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows Desktop PCs and has at its disposal millions of preloads a week.
Flash is really the only product that does what it does. It therefore has a defacto monopoly.
And what does that mean? They have marketshare but it is not a bad thing unless you don't like the product. They do not prevent others from competing.
Microsoft is the "little guy" coming onto the stage with Silverlight. I highly doubt Flash will go anywhere, it's insanely popular on the internet today. Just because it's microsoft doesn't mean it's inherantly evil.
Yes it does. Microsoft's long history shows that they will do more to prevent actual competition then they'll do to compete on product merit. And once they crush the other guy, their preload strategies pretty much block any sane business developer from even considering competing. The result, a stale market.
Silverlight could really push Flash to improve htier product, which is what competition is really about.
But when Microsoft is involved, it's a new game and competition is what gets terminated.
I think the fact that Microsoft is working WITH the mono people on this project is a step into the light.
How can adding another product to this area remove choice? right now there is only Flash in this area, the choice is either Flash or nothing.
Adding a Microsoft product to this removes choice over time and history shows that over and over again. As for there not being any other competitor, well there is Sun Microsystems Java FX coming down the line.
LoB
when you've been in this business as long as I have( and many other Slashdot'ers ) you no longer feel that it is a separate issue when Microsoft is involved. Competition is a very good thing and it is an incredible motivation and innovation driver and a market with this competition is exciting and productive.
The problem starts when a company like Microsoft implements protectionism mechanisms to keep their control of the market( Windows ) and drives down/out competition which threatens their market in any way. For Microsoft, any company which develops a product with a customization or developer market and gains a majority market share is a threat. They are a threat mainly because that company now controls many developer minds and therefore are a threat to Windows market position. Quadruple that threat if the product developer actually supports this product on other operating systems. This last bit is usually what throws Microsoft management into a tizzy and a bright red bullseye gets painted on this product and product developer.
It's Microsofts might and willingness to use it which kills competition. What happened to all the email clients when Microsoft pre-loaded MS Outlook in Windows? Had Mozilla not survived in the Linux market and on a good chunk of Windows desktops, there wouldn't be any kind of browser in Windows but MS Internet Explorer and even then, it is always there and required in may cases.
I think it's just that you've not seen how bad Microsoft has been to competition over the last 20+ years.
LoB
Microsoft is not a competitor.
Let's see if I can explain this:
Say you're starting a business and you are looking to open a store front.
There is this business park right in the middle of downtown where all your customs already go.
So you open up a store front down there and it turns out that the property owner of the business park also has a store front there and it's really close to yours.
You think it's no big deal until you start expanding your business and something you do pisses off the business park owner. You don't think you're competing but still he's pissed off.
Now, you're finding out that your workers for the expansion are having difficulties getting to work. There's now a guard shack at the entrance and your guys keep getting stopped for no reason at all. You discuss this with the park owner and he claims it's all a misunderstanding, it'll be fixed real soon. After months it does get solved but now there's construction right in front of your business. The park owner again says that it'll be fixed soon.
What you didn't realize was that the park owner, all this time, has been setting up his own store front that sells the same thing you're selling. Not only that but when customers enter the park, the traffic routing is directed right by the park owners new business.
You only get a handful of customers any more and have to close shop eventually.
Still think competition of any kind is good competition?
LoB
and exactly when did Microsoft become a company willing to actually compete across platforms? This would be a VERY important day in history so please let us all know. Oh, and the word of Microsoft in court is not worth much so please do not show some Microsoft PR doc or the likes as proof of this epiphany.
LoB
It's not about supporting Adobe, it's about keeping choice and competition in this market. Everyone should know that a win for Microsoft is a loss for competition and a loss for freedom of choice. Not to mention the typical loss of innovation.
LoB
Compete? That would be great but that is not how they work. Instead of competing, they leverage their monopoly on the desktop and force their products on the market. End of competition, end of innovation, end of market.
Pepsi keeps Coke in check and Coke keeps Pepsi in check. I don't like their exclusive deals with businesses and I stay away from some businesses because of this. But there are other businesses I can go to quite easily and without jumping through hoops.
It's all about Microsoft's methods of doing business and the 20+ years of history they have using these methods. I don't care if there is one bit of a tasty treat coming from them, 20+ years of history says that if the one treat can be forced onto the plate of most customers, soon there will be no other treats to taste, soon that Microsoft treat will taste like shit and cost you a bundle over and over again.
Pepsi and Coke...Not even close.
LoB
no, Microsoft does not compete, they crush and remove choice. Competition is good and though this might look like competition, solely because it is Microsoft it means that this will limit competition and limit choice in the long run. There is nothing in the past 20 years to show there's any other way for Microsoft.
If they win this, you lose.
LoB
the big problem here is that they own and control the OS AND they have used that illegally and constantly to harm choice in the applications market. THAT is the deal here. Not all businesses are evil and even if some are, they don't always have the means to dictate what the market gets. Microsoft does all this and more. Bad monopoly, bad Microsoft, bad Silverlight. IMO.
LoB
fine, then let someone compete with them except let it not be Microsoft. They have shown how they operate and it is not in anybodies best interest that they play in this field/market. And if you have any hope that a Microsoft technology will get you anywhere but roped, lashed, bolted, and tied to Microsoft you are seriously mislead. And yes, being roped, lashed, bolted, and tied to Microsoft is a bad thing. It terminates choice.
And there's nothing wrong with Flash being a monopoly, it's not like they are preventing others from competing. Not to mention they actually hold no control but control over the Flash environment. Are you attempting to compare Adobe with Microsoft in the evil monopoly market? yikes!
LoB
they won't tell you this but IE for UNIX was only done so that Microsoft could pay Mainsoft a ton so at the same time, they could afford the new license fees for Win32-UNIX. Microsoft licensed out the Win32 source to a handful of vendors who, through compatibility libraries, brought Win32 source code compatibility to UNIX. Ofcourse, they did this only long enough for many UNIX vendors to port their UNIX apps to Win32 and establish their UNIX products on the Microsoft platform. Then Microsoft pulled the rug out from under them all, except Mainsoft, with massive license fee increases. All but Mainsoft could no longer afford to support the Win32-UNIX libraries and a whole bunch of apps no longer got UNIX version updates because these companies were not going to now port back to UNIX.
This is why Microsoft should not have been allowed to own both the OS and be an application vendor on that OS. While fine before being a monopoly, once a monopoly AND a very very bad monopoly, the public should have been protected from these kinds of business practices. IMO.
LoB
gawd are you living in a dream world. Developers at Microsoft do not run the company and do not determine direction. Never have and never will so wake up and smell the acid that's eating your brain. Microsoft is out to terminate Adobe Flash, gain control of the cross-platform AJAX developers, stop Firefox growth, and force Google to work under Microsofts terms.
.Net courses?
Microsoft is losing control of the development community. First it was Java on the servers, Then it was AJAX, and now with the addition of Adobe Flash and Flex. They are losing control and they know it. MS Silverlight is one attempt at bringing those all home to Microsoft and Microsoft's control. Watch for some massive campaign to tie MS Silverlight into college CS curriculum real soon. Remember all the financial deals MSFT was making which resulted in dropped Java courses and added MS
MS Silverlight is their golden egg laying goose. The world needs that goose to drop no egg. IMO.
LoB
yup, MS Silverlight is their planned attempt at killing off not only Adobe Flash but also all this AJAX stuff. If they can kill off Flash, they'll make sure developers use Silverlight for browser application development and move as many as possible away from AJAX. In time, they'll start breaking AJAX components in their browser to harm those who stick with AJAX and we're back at web applications which only run on Microsoft Windows and which is ultimately controlled by Microsoft at the API levels. This sticks it to Google too. Because 'Google Must Die' is another Microsoft concept these days.
Read your history books folks, it's all in Microsoft's history. Who needs a crystal ball?
LoB
I'm sorry but MS Sliverlight is a direct attack on Adobe and their Flash product and this is a direct move to protect the Windows monopoly. Adobe Flash is a well established development platform which runs across all desktop computing platforms. Heck, Nokia even has it running on the N800. Adobe is the new Netscape and Flash the new Navigator with MS Silverlight being the new MS Internet Explorer.
So anything which grows that MS product will be good for protecting the Windows monopoly. If Flash is killed off, and in typical Microsoft fashion, MS Silverlight will become a Windows-only product. In 20 years of Microsoft history, there is absolutely NOTHING which shows any other path. A press release does not mean squat when it comes from Microsoft. Talk about doublespeak and truthiness.
And to even think that Microsoft wants to help enable Linux by the goodness of their heart is a fool. At Microsoft, it's all about 'Adobe must die, Linux must die. Long live Windows, long live Microsoft.' and only a complete newbie would/could think otherwise. IMO.
LoB
that's great only Microsoft, Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung don't have any advantage in screwing up cable reception. But Microsoft does.
e rry-Kaplan/dp/0140257314/ref=sr_1_1/104-3608395-58 30353?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187130933&sr=8-1
Have you not seen Microsoft join various boards, organizations, and/or committees and constantly nitpick the process, technology, people, etc? There's an old but easy to read book out called "StartUp" which gives a hint as to how Microsoft does business. Meanwhile, back in Redmond, their engineers are busy hacking together their version which only runs on Windows. And in the end, they go off and release their own version while the spend millions in marketing telling the world+dog how wrong/bad/dangerous,etc the standard stuff is and how great their stuff is.
Here's the book link:
http://www.amazon.com/Startup-Silicon-Adventure-J
Was Microsoft trying to pull something in this case? It is HIGHLY likely given their history but were they also just inept at building something which worked? Another possibility for sure.
What does Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung have to do with this anyways? It was Microsoft submitting the device and it was Microsoft complaining not Google, HP, Intel, Philips, Dell, Earthlink, and Samsung
LoB