But this is the thing, anger Microsoft yes, but what will the repercussions of this anger be? the only thing they'll do is entice Dell by sweetening their already sweet ass deal.
I stick to this being just a silly ploy to screw Microsoft down a little more as the need for Windows becomes less and less a necessity in the marketplace and merely just another option for people to use. Regardless if Dell supports Linux or not the playing field with MacOS, Linux and Windows is becoming more and more on the same level as times goes.
Larger business is welcoming these changes and why not? any smart business will always keep their options open, who wants to be stuck relying on another businesses success for their own operation and to function correctly? I know for sure that my business doesn't want to be put in such a position. Look at Norton for instance they relied on a need that Windows provided, now they have been burned by this need, proper business ethics points the finger at Microsoft and say "BAD BOY DON'T DO THAT!", Microsoft says "HA! I don't care I'm invisible" and now other company's large and small a like will see that ethics and understand they cant rely on Microsoft to not work against them at any possible time.
Yeah i know ms fan boys will spout how wrong i am etc, etc but that record is old and busted now because Linux desktop is a reality and its not as hard it has been in the past. Businesses are seeing its viablity and if the larger company's start supporting it, it will become as easy as Windows to use (if not easier.) Heck Ubuntu is very easy to use as it is, it just needs that little push and WAYYYY it goes:)
I have given out dozens of disks, and each person really, really wanted to try it. Successful installs to date? You guessed it... Zero. Not one person was willing to spend two seconds learning even the most basic information about the beige box under their desk. In talking to people over the years I have learned that the idea that they would 'change' their computer to be about the same intellectually as asking them the grow an extra limb.
I don't know about you but i tried Ubuntu for the first time today. I'm a Windows and Linux user, I run CentOS for my servers and Debian for testbeds for application development. I use Windows to code on for the funky IDE's and for Photoshop and have a vast array of VMs that i do all manner of things with on the side.
I downloaded Ubuntu, the 650meg ISO. Mounted it in my VMware system and clicked 'Switch On' within a few seconds i had Ubuntu working of the CD, i clicked "install" and within about 5 - 10mins after a reboot later it was already updating it's software and ready to use. It had a word processor, web browser and a mail client ready to go, not really something you'd have to train people to find. I then went to add / remove packages which was another name for a funky packages manager and it was as easy 1-2-3.
The conclusion that i made up was that my Girlfirend could use this, my mum also, and they wouldn't have issues what-so-ever.
I then showed my business partner and said "what do you recon?" and being a very business minded person (im the brains he's the bean counter if you will:)) he said two things "How easy does it plug into other computers?" and "How much does it cost?", I said "Look" and a click later it found my windows network shares and i said it's free. He said "that if we were a newly established company that didn't want to cop windows licensing fees this solution would be a dream, we'd just need to have Ubuntu supported computers and away you'd go".
What i think Ubuntu should do is setup sort of like an investigation system, List all the premade ready pcs which Ubuntu works on straight off the mark. List them as a resource for businesses, and when it comes time for a company to do an infrastructure change refer to the site to find which PC's are Ubuntu / Linux ready. That way we'd know what we can use it on and help businesses take the right steps without worrying about support, etc.
I know its not a simple as that but it would be a great start.
I'm sorry but Microsoft taking the Linux community seriously? WHA?
All i can say about that is.... BAHHHHHHH.... BAHHHHHHH... BOOO *SQUEAL* (pull stupid face and jump up and down like a baboon).
Microsoft ISN'T taking us seriously. Microsoft is WORKING an angle. A research angle to produce something to disrupt the Linux market perhaps? and maybe try and win some of them over with their already sabby product line? Why oh why would anyone from the Linux community want any part of it? the whole point of Linux is to stay away from defective-by-design built operating systems and applications.
When Microsoft magically fixes this (which by the looks of Vista they haven't) then I'll act seriously but when MS is trying to hock the same shit time and time again then... what am i saying.. even if they do that i still want no part of it.
Remeber we are also told that the TCO Linux higher then Windows, oh wait ANOTHER PLOY FROM MICROSOFT!
Linux is free end of story. If you cant run a piece of free software cheaper then piece of commercial software then confucius say "RTFM and stop blaming Linux!"
Simple rule.. Microsoft == business "Make money don't care about anything else" Linux != business "Written by people in free time out of passion and the drive to do so"
When i look at something I try to see where its coming from, Microsoft comes from fairly black and well just black perspective there isn't anything white about its, its profit and profit no profit then get shitty and chuck chairs.
Linux happily does what they do, upholds a simple outlook "we don't want your bucks we just want to build an os" attitude and the "Oh we pissed off Microsoft" well that was just a Bi-product of their works and a RMS extremist view, which seems to really be taking shape over the last few years.
Why after all this time has Dell decided to even look at Linux this way? They don't care what geek customers want, they only care about sales and profit, Vista does the job they need it too and they get paid well to sell it, its not as if Dell is getting hammered by its shareholders to come up with solutions other then Windows because sales are at an all time low.
It comes down to the fact that Vista didn't prove to be this solution that everyone expected because no one is rushing out and purchasing it off the shelf. As a result Mr Dell just trying to pull a hard one over Microsoft, screw them down so-to-speak because selling via the hardware manufacturers has become only real way for Microsoft to sell their product at all.
I see this just a common ploy for Dell to flex its muscle against Microsoft, if Dell would go to Linux (or imagine OSX), HP and IBM would eventually have to do the same. If it wasnt for these companies Vista wouldn't sell because I dont see anyone really rushing out and purchasing copies straight off the self, lining up in queues the night before hoping to get their hands on a copy of Vista, because really who's going to waste money something that isnt really that much better then what they already have (XP)?
Regardless of what Microsoft markets and sells Vista maybe better than XP in someways but its no revolutionary operating system that people MUST have, its simply just another version of what everyone has now (just with a funky GUI and a few other gadgets).
This whole issue is just the hardware vendors making sure Microsoft remembers who's "really" the important card holders in the industry and who they should be kissing ass too.
Microsoft owns SMB concept??? Microsoft took that idea from an earlier program with a copyright attached to it (or GNU License or whatever), muddled up the standards on it and then sold it as their own.
They put a patient on their version of it, but its like Microsoft going off and patenting HTML because they created Internet Explorer, i know they could if they would but it was created before their time, publicly used and accepted, isnt a patient something to stick to "invention" you as an person (company) has created, not something you've flogged off someone else, messed up to make it work against the standards then attempted to seize an industry by distributing it? There really has to be a bit of lead way here for poor linux who all along has to play catchup because of this (i know making it sound worse the what it is:))
Obviously all they can do is cover the specific features they have added to this concept not the entire concept itself.
I think you cant simply threaten and threaten until you go blue in the face. I think its misuse of the law and eventually they will have to lay down their cards.
This website can stand for a means to do this. But lets take a look at this issue more specifically, there can not be a single line of Linux code stolen from Microsoft, a) MS is closed source b) Linux has its own development methods and processes applied, so all sudden the most smartest bunch of hackers in world scheme is magical assault to circumvent Microsoft's security (be that having a spy in the organization) then steal secret high profile code to adapt to the kernel because its much easier then figuring it out for themselves? Come on, they'd have to prove this in order to prove that anything was flogged and if they did that what would that do for their reputation (yet again). Also if the code was stolen don't you think Linux would know what the code is already?
If any part of Linux is to infringe on a MS patient its the software that runs on Linux in which the persons responsible for developing that application is in the firing line, not Linux itself. Heck wouldn't we love to sue the operating system because of applications of which it runs:)
In either case Microsoft is backed into a corner one they cant continue to perpetuate forever and it will result with egg on their face.
They go off and advertise on/. then they tell everyone that they arnet supporting linux? obviously the marketing dept doesnt speak to the support dept very often at lenovo...
Granted, but this all boils down to the fact that they cant do too much because of legacy and all sorts of issues can stem from putting a fortified memory enviornment, its a shame they cant plug the leaks a bit better and soon rather then later... and put up with the legacy issues now rather then sit back and hope that they can eventually fade these issues out over time.
Again money is the big issue here and the reason why we have this vista package the way it is at present. Add more more more and people will see more "lights on the dash board of the car" so-to-speak rather then adding better "fail safes" in the engine to stop it from overheating.
The main feeling I got from reading the artical was that the developers attempted to "fix" security issues by adding top level precautions.
Instead of working on lowerlevel aspects of the operating system such as memory allocation/protection and better user to superuser management all they've done is add prompts and precautions....
Two things come from this...
a) In computing the term "hacking" is all about making something do a function or proceedure that was not supposed to be its original purpose, on that train of thought is merely a matter of time before people just implement hacks that work around these prompts or precautions.
b) prompts and precautions piss the general public off, how many times do you hear "i switched my firewall off because it always gives me these stupid errors that annoy me when all i'm trying to do is just surf the web" now the operating system does this?
Yes i'm a bit disapointed too, Vista just looks like a bit of mac, a bit of firefox, a bit of new style microsoft eye candy (give 2 - 3 weeks and it will be boring to everyone). On top of that they try their very best to make it look nothing like *nix....
"Google sux cause it preset something in one particular brand of PC".
Wow!
MS and piles of other companies do this all the freaking time and everyong cops it on the chin and says
"oh its microsoft and their os so they have the right to"
A big round of applause should go to the "ms fanboy club" who got their comments posted 1st under this artical.
The way i see it, its very easy to remove preinstalled software that google or most other companys have set on branded pcs such as Dell, or Lenovo. Such as the AOL dailer or Sonic CD Burner software. Its more difficult to remove that these then say perhaps... IE which you freaking cant!
Oh mod me down, the satisfaction of telling crowds to piss off is so much more satisfying.
I think the antitrust issues which microsoft was absconed for in the past really needs to be tightened just a tad.
Lets say Microsoft keeps going down this road enabling buyers to always utilise their products first over another vendors system. I can see every vendor be at risk of being downsized or knocked out of business.
Imagine, need a graphics application? install microsoft photoblahblah, adobe photoshop users see the simplicty and functionality of microsofts app to be the same and because windows makes it easier to implement their applications over competing applications people take presendence of ms photoblahblah not because its a better product but because its easier and more convienient?
I see "easier" and more "convienient" something thats starting to annoy me, because its an excuse that people use all the time to defend Microsoft. Take away that excuse alone and debate the finer points of operating systems and software and Micosoft is left behind.
But lets face it, compare DOS to today's systems compare Win3.11 aswell, even 95 was difficult for people to install and setup. XP and Vista represent ease-of-use and simplicity that people want today but how many car manufactors do you know that make the engine more simpler so people can fix it themselves without going to a mechanic? At the end of the day microsoft wants to cut everyone and everything out (even IT specialists if they can) through ease-of-use and simplicty.
The price we pay for that simplicity quite frankly isnt worth it, I see it causing more issues in the progression of technology then it will fix problems and more so it hurts people/companies who have perfectly good ideas and the "right" to make money in this industry.
Oh yeah Microsoft made the OS they are allowed to do whatever they like, right? They also own the cpu and the graphics card too? lets just break down what their product does. Its just an operating system it maps memory and timeslices the processor. The other stuff is not an os, the GUI is not an OS element. Microsoft Windows is a fully pledged environment not simply an Operating System like linux (but we know linux is even less then that).
So how far does this environment go before it simply encapsulates everything? My view they have the OS, GUI and Web Browser. Being a web developer it means that the whole windows system from the word "get go" can see my programs (websites) and how long will it be before the whole process of developing a website in windows is encapsulated using windows based products and windows based tools?.NET anyone?
For that reason alone I refuse to even touch.NET.
Yes people want ease-of-use and yes other solutions are not as easy as ms based apps, but how far will this ease-of-use take us before we end up shooting ourselves as users in the foot?
At present people dont see how previlant the dominance of ms based systems are at the moment because its simply crept up on us, in my view they've already won and hold all the cards and what every blaitent choices they make can destory anyones business at a keystroke, regardless if they are set out to put you out of business or not.
Having said that how are you going to feel creating your next program? how are you going to feel knowing your excellence and time will be merely a template of disaster for yourself later down the track if you were to create something of originality and perhaps popularity?
The day a large corporation falls at the hands to a patent infringement case will be a day to remember.
At the moment its just like this big school yard fight and they give each others black eyes by hurling stones in the playground. Though, at the end of the day its the lawyers who are making the real money... the corporations just get the satisfaction of temporarily wounding a competitor.
The real loss is when companys get downsized as a result to these legal games and hardworking employees cop it in the ass.
You know it seems so senseless and absent minded to create a virus/trojan like this.
Most people would want be exploiting the whole "remote" aspect of the whole virus/trojan concept and try and gain access to peoples porn / warez / music would one stop to think?
Plus how does it know if its Warez, sheet, it could be perfectly legitimate software its deleting? What does it do scan for the licence number, contact adobe and check to see if its authentic, if not, go and run the removal application?
Before that there was nothing but an answering machine telling callers
"Hi you've called Google. We know you care about us, but on the flipside, we dont. You can try and email us but we wont respond to over 90% of the emails we recieve. PS dont forget to visit www.google.com.au and click on 'Signup to Adwords'. Thank you and Good bye."
So now that they have an office, they've hired a desk full of people to say that manually?
As I see it, the main issue is whether the nVidia and ATI drivers take GPL sourcecode from the Kernel and build that source into their closed source drivers.
I dont know if its the case anymore but i remember way back when i needed some dodgy winmodem drivers and had to use non-gpl drivers to get the horrible thing to work I remember distinctly when adding the module i had this message appear:
"Warning: Loading this closed source mofo will taint the kernel... Bad GPL Juju blah blah"
Maybe not those words exactly but does this not happen anymore?
Antiquated isnt perhaps the best way to describe microsofts product line or business model. But i think understand their what they are implying.
And that is they are inefficent in the sense that Google simply makes a dallor off something as simple as click on a web browser and not so much a company relying on so many factors to do with various other technical aspects.
Microsofts method of making money boils down to centrally two software packages, the Windows OS and Micorsoft Office. These two applications are MS's core products and no other software package that they have come out with makes anything close to these two applications.
Googles method of making money, Adwords. Banner clicking advertisment.
So whats the difference between the two really aside from the fact they do completely different tasks? Nothing, they both address fairly similar markets. Small to Mid to Large Businesses.
The process of turning over a dallor in Googles view
a) has very little to almost absolutly no cost to google b) doesnt require dependancy of other computer related companys to "jump on the band wagon" so-to-speak c) no r&d d) no security patches need to be applied every 2 weeks.... The list never ends.
The only thing google realy depends on is that people use them, Again its come down to who was there first and who grabbed the general market at the time with a really sellable product that worked for the masses. How can microsoft really hate them for that, its exactly what they did to get rich:)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rate you funny not insightful :)
:)
But this is the thing, anger Microsoft yes, but what will the repercussions of this anger be? the only thing they'll do is entice Dell by sweetening their already sweet ass deal.
I stick to this being just a silly ploy to screw Microsoft down a little more as the need for Windows becomes less and less a necessity in the marketplace and merely just another option for people to use. Regardless if Dell supports Linux or not the playing field with MacOS, Linux and Windows is becoming more and more on the same level as times goes.
Larger business is welcoming these changes and why not? any smart business will always keep their options open, who wants to be stuck relying on another businesses success for their own operation and to function correctly? I know for sure that my business doesn't want to be put in such a position. Look at Norton for instance they relied on a need that Windows provided, now they have been burned by this need, proper business ethics points the finger at Microsoft and say "BAD BOY DON'T DO THAT!", Microsoft says "HA! I don't care I'm invisible" and now other company's large and small a like will see that ethics and understand they cant rely on Microsoft to not work against them at any possible time.
Yeah i know ms fan boys will spout how wrong i am etc, etc but that record is old and busted now because Linux desktop is a reality and its not as hard it has been in the past. Businesses are seeing its viablity and if the larger company's start supporting it, it will become as easy as Windows to use (if not easier.) Heck Ubuntu is very easy to use as it is, it just needs that little push and WAYYYY it goes
I have given out dozens of disks, and each person really, really wanted to try it. Successful installs to date? You guessed it ... Zero. Not one person was willing to spend two seconds learning even the most basic information about the beige box under their desk. In talking to people over the years I have learned that the idea that they would 'change' their computer to be about the same intellectually as asking them the grow an extra limb.
I don't know about you but i tried Ubuntu for the first time today. I'm a Windows and Linux user, I run CentOS for my servers and Debian for testbeds for application development. I use Windows to code on for the funky IDE's and for Photoshop and have a vast array of VMs that i do all manner of things with on the side.
I downloaded Ubuntu, the 650meg ISO. Mounted it in my VMware system and clicked 'Switch On' within a few seconds i had Ubuntu working of the CD, i clicked "install" and within about 5 - 10mins after a reboot later it was already updating it's software and ready to use. It had a word processor, web browser and a mail client ready to go, not really something you'd have to train people to find. I then went to add / remove packages which was another name for a funky packages manager and it was as easy 1-2-3.
The conclusion that i made up was that my Girlfirend could use this, my mum also, and they wouldn't have issues what-so-ever.
I then showed my business partner and said "what do you recon?" and being a very business minded person (im the brains he's the bean counter if you will :)) he said two things "How easy does it plug into other computers?" and "How much does it cost?", I said "Look" and a click later it found my windows network shares and i said it's free. He said "that if we were a newly established company that didn't want to cop windows licensing fees this solution would be a dream, we'd just need to have Ubuntu supported computers and away you'd go".
What i think Ubuntu should do is setup sort of like an investigation system, List all the premade ready pcs which Ubuntu works on straight off the mark. List them as a resource for businesses, and when it comes time for a company to do an infrastructure change refer to the site to find which PC's are Ubuntu / Linux ready. That way we'd know what we can use it on and help businesses take the right steps without worrying about support, etc.
I know its not a simple as that but it would be a great start.
You've missed the point, this isn't about moms solitaire machine or the fact your lazy bastard and cant do anything.
This is about already existing Linux users wanting to go back to Microsoft? Try RFTA before you speak.
I'm sorry but Microsoft taking the Linux community seriously? WHA?
.... BAHHHHHHH .... BAHHHHHHH ... BOOO *SQUEAL* (pull stupid face and jump up and down like a baboon).
... what am i saying .. even if they do that i still want no part of it.
.. Microsoft == business "Make money don't care about anything else" Linux != business "Written by people in free time out of passion and the drive to do so"
All i can say about that is
Microsoft ISN'T taking us seriously. Microsoft is WORKING an angle. A research angle to produce something to disrupt the Linux market perhaps? and maybe try and win some of them over with their already sabby product line? Why oh why would anyone from the Linux community want any part of it? the whole point of Linux is to stay away from defective-by-design built operating systems and applications.
When Microsoft magically fixes this (which by the looks of Vista they haven't) then I'll act seriously but when MS is trying to hock the same shit time and time again then
Remeber we are also told that the TCO Linux higher then Windows, oh wait ANOTHER PLOY FROM MICROSOFT!
Linux is free end of story. If you cant run a piece of free software cheaper then piece of commercial software then confucius say "RTFM and stop blaming Linux!"
Simple rule
When i look at something I try to see where its coming from, Microsoft comes from fairly black and well just black perspective there isn't anything white about its, its profit and profit no profit then get shitty and chuck chairs.
Linux happily does what they do, upholds a simple outlook "we don't want your bucks we just want to build an os" attitude and the "Oh we pissed off Microsoft" well that was just a Bi-product of their works and a RMS extremist view, which seems to really be taking shape over the last few years.
I think its funny how this whole game is played.
Why after all this time has Dell decided to even look at Linux this way? They don't care what geek customers want, they only care about sales and profit, Vista does the job they need it too and they get paid well to sell it, its not as if Dell is getting hammered by its shareholders to come up with solutions other then Windows because sales are at an all time low.
It comes down to the fact that Vista didn't prove to be this solution that everyone expected because no one is rushing out and purchasing it off the shelf. As a result Mr Dell just trying to pull a hard one over Microsoft, screw them down so-to-speak because selling via the hardware manufacturers has become only real way for Microsoft to sell their product at all.
I see this just a common ploy for Dell to flex its muscle against Microsoft, if Dell would go to Linux (or imagine OSX), HP and IBM would eventually have to do the same. If it wasnt for these companies Vista wouldn't sell because I dont see anyone really rushing out and purchasing copies straight off the self, lining up in queues the night before hoping to get their hands on a copy of Vista, because really who's going to waste money something that isnt really that much better then what they already have (XP)?
Regardless of what Microsoft markets and sells Vista maybe better than XP in someways but its no revolutionary operating system that people MUST have, its simply just another version of what everyone has now (just with a funky GUI and a few other gadgets).
This whole issue is just the hardware vendors making sure Microsoft remembers who's "really" the important card holders in the industry and who they should be kissing ass too.
See this is what i don't get.
:))
Microsoft owns SMB concept??? Microsoft took that idea from an earlier program with a copyright attached to it (or GNU License or whatever), muddled up the standards on it and then sold it as their own.
They put a patient on their version of it, but its like Microsoft going off and patenting HTML because they created Internet Explorer, i know they could if they would but it was created before their time, publicly used and accepted, isnt a patient something to stick to "invention" you as an person (company) has created, not something you've flogged off someone else, messed up to make it work against the standards then attempted to seize an industry by distributing it? There really has to be a bit of lead way here for poor linux who all along has to play catchup because of this (i know making it sound worse the what it is
Obviously all they can do is cover the specific features they have added to this concept not the entire concept itself.
I think you cant simply threaten and threaten until you go blue in the face. I think its misuse of the law and eventually they will have to lay down their cards.
:)
This website can stand for a means to do this. But lets take a look at this issue more specifically, there can not be a single line of Linux code stolen from Microsoft, a) MS is closed source b) Linux has its own development methods and processes applied, so all sudden the most smartest bunch of hackers in world scheme is magical assault to circumvent Microsoft's security (be that having a spy in the organization) then steal secret high profile code to adapt to the kernel because its much easier then figuring it out for themselves? Come on, they'd have to prove this in order to prove that anything was flogged and if they did that what would that do for their reputation (yet again). Also if the code was stolen don't you think Linux would know what the code is already?
If any part of Linux is to infringe on a MS patient its the software that runs on Linux in which the persons responsible for developing that application is in the firing line, not Linux itself. Heck wouldn't we love to sue the operating system because of applications of which it runs
In either case Microsoft is backed into a corner one they cant continue to perpetuate forever and it will result with egg on their face.
They go off and advertise on /. then they tell everyone that they arnet supporting linux? obviously the marketing dept doesnt speak to the support dept very often at lenovo...
I guess then only time will tell if those *changes* are going to be affective in terms of security.
Granted, but this all boils down to the fact that they cant do too much because of legacy and all sorts of issues can stem from putting a fortified memory enviornment, its a shame they cant plug the leaks a bit better and soon rather then later ... and put up with the legacy issues now rather then sit back and hope that they can eventually fade these issues out over time.
Again money is the big issue here and the reason why we have this vista package the way it is at present. Add more more more and people will see more "lights on the dash board of the car" so-to-speak rather then adding better "fail safes" in the engine to stop it from overheating.
The main feeling I got from reading the artical was that the developers attempted to "fix" security issues by adding top level precautions.
...
Instead of working on lowerlevel aspects of the operating system such as memory allocation/protection and better user to superuser management all they've done is add prompts and precautions....
Two things come from this
a) In computing the term "hacking" is all about making something do a function or proceedure that was not supposed to be its original purpose, on that train of thought is merely a matter of time before people just implement hacks that work around these prompts or precautions.
b) prompts and precautions piss the general public off, how many times do you hear "i switched my firewall off because it always gives me these stupid errors that annoy me when all i'm trying to do is just surf the web" now the operating system does this?
Yes i'm a bit disapointed too, Vista just looks like a bit of mac, a bit of firefox, a bit of new style microsoft eye candy (give 2 - 3 weeks and it will be boring to everyone). On top of that they try their very best to make it look nothing like *nix....
Trouble is NASA doesn't want to build it themselves. So there's $5 million for any enterprising groups who can develop a simple version themselves
So the question remains, How much money will you recieve if you can install linux on them?
Yet another Gnome/KDE interface based operating system
Manual virus removal instructions:
They are just calling it an exploit just so they dont get into trouble ;)
* Bitch Bitch Bitch * * Winge Winge Winge *
... IE which you freaking cant!
"Google sux cause it preset something in one particular brand of PC".
Wow!
MS and piles of other companies do this all the freaking time and everyong cops it on the chin and says
"oh its microsoft and their os so they have the right to"
A big round of applause should go to the "ms fanboy club" who got their comments posted 1st under this artical.
The way i see it, its very easy to remove preinstalled software that google or most other companys have set on branded pcs such as Dell, or Lenovo. Such as the AOL dailer or Sonic CD Burner software. Its more difficult to remove that these then say perhaps
Oh mod me down, the satisfaction of telling crowds to piss off is so much more satisfying.
I think the antitrust issues which microsoft was absconed for in the past really needs to be tightened just a tad.
.NET anyone?
.NET.
Lets say Microsoft keeps going down this road enabling buyers to always utilise their products first over another vendors system. I can see every vendor be at risk of being downsized or knocked out of business.
Imagine, need a graphics application? install microsoft photoblahblah, adobe photoshop users see the simplicty and functionality of microsofts app to be the same and because windows makes it easier to implement their applications over competing applications people take presendence of ms photoblahblah not because its a better product but because its easier and more convienient?
I see "easier" and more "convienient" something thats starting to annoy me, because its an excuse that people use all the time to defend Microsoft. Take away that excuse alone and debate the finer points of operating systems and software and Micosoft is left behind.
But lets face it, compare DOS to today's systems compare Win3.11 aswell, even 95 was difficult for people to install and setup. XP and Vista represent ease-of-use and simplicity that people want today but how many car manufactors do you know that make the engine more simpler so people can fix it themselves without going to a mechanic? At the end of the day microsoft wants to cut everyone and everything out (even IT specialists if they can) through ease-of-use and simplicty.
The price we pay for that simplicity quite frankly isnt worth it, I see it causing more issues in the progression of technology then it will fix problems and more so it hurts people/companies who have perfectly good ideas and the "right" to make money in this industry.
Oh yeah Microsoft made the OS they are allowed to do whatever they like, right? They also own the cpu and the graphics card too? lets just break down what their product does. Its just an operating system it maps memory and timeslices the processor. The other stuff is not an os, the GUI is not an OS element. Microsoft Windows is a fully pledged environment not simply an Operating System like linux (but we know linux is even less then that).
So how far does this environment go before it simply encapsulates everything? My view they have the OS, GUI and Web Browser. Being a web developer it means that the whole windows system from the word "get go" can see my programs (websites) and how long will it be before the whole process of developing a website in windows is encapsulated using windows based products and windows based tools?
For that reason alone I refuse to even touch
Yes people want ease-of-use and yes other solutions are not as easy as ms based apps, but how far will this ease-of-use take us before we end up shooting ourselves as users in the foot?
At present people dont see how previlant the dominance of ms based systems are at the moment because its simply crept up on us, in my view they've already won and hold all the cards and what every blaitent choices they make can destory anyones business at a keystroke, regardless if they are set out to put you out of business or not.
Having said that how are you going to feel creating your next program? how are you going to feel knowing your excellence and time will be merely a template of disaster for yourself later down the track if you were to create something of originality and perhaps popularity?
But thats kinda the risk you have to take being a software company that secures windows machines.
oh no no no no no, let me rephrase that for you
But thats kinda the risk you have to take being a software company that writes applications windows machines.
Such things taint the ability to innovate with PCs.
The day a large corporation falls at the hands to a patent infringement case will be a day to remember.
At the moment its just like this big school yard fight and they give each others black eyes by hurling stones in the playground. Though, at the end of the day its the lawyers who are making the real money... the corporations just get the satisfaction of temporarily wounding a competitor.
The real loss is when companys get downsized as a result to these legal games and hardworking employees cop it in the ass.
The satellite crashes into you!
You know it seems so senseless and absent minded to create a virus/trojan like this.
Most people would want be exploiting the whole "remote" aspect of the whole virus/trojan concept and try and gain access to peoples porn / warez / music would one stop to think?
Plus how does it know if its Warez, sheet, it could be perfectly legitimate software its deleting? What does it do scan for the licence number, contact adobe and check to see if its authentic, if not, go and run the removal application?
Before that there was nothing but an answering machine telling callers
"Hi you've called Google. We know you care about us, but on the flipside, we dont. You can try and email us but we wont respond to over 90% of the emails we recieve. PS dont forget to visit www.google.com.au and click on 'Signup to Adwords'. Thank you and Good bye."
So now that they have an office, they've hired a desk full of people to say that manually?
And patient laws are no different in attracting controversial issues such as this?
Oh wait a miniute people make money from that so is must be okay then.
As I see it, the main issue is whether the nVidia and ATI drivers take GPL sourcecode from the Kernel and build that source into their closed source drivers.
I dont know if its the case anymore but i remember way back when i needed some dodgy winmodem drivers and had to use non-gpl drivers to get the horrible thing to work I remember distinctly when adding the module i had this message appear:
"Warning: Loading this closed source mofo will taint the kernel... Bad GPL Juju blah blah"
Maybe not those words exactly but does this not happen anymore?
Antiquated isnt perhaps the best way to describe microsofts product line or business model. But i think understand their what they are implying.
.... The list never ends.
:)
And that is they are inefficent in the sense that Google simply makes a dallor off something as simple as click on a web browser and not so much a company relying on so many factors to do with various other technical aspects.
Microsofts method of making money boils down to centrally two software packages, the Windows OS and Micorsoft Office. These two applications are MS's core products and no other software package that they have come out with makes anything close to these two applications.
Googles method of making money, Adwords. Banner clicking advertisment.
So whats the difference between the two really aside from the fact they do completely different tasks? Nothing, they both address fairly similar markets. Small to Mid to Large Businesses.
The process of turning over a dallor in Googles view
a) has very little to almost absolutly no cost to google
b) doesnt require dependancy of other computer related companys to "jump on the band wagon" so-to-speak
c) no r&d
d) no security patches need to be applied every 2 weeks
The only thing google realy depends on is that people use them, Again its come down to who was there first and who grabbed the general market at the time with a really sellable product that worked for the masses. How can microsoft really hate them for that, its exactly what they did to get rich