Nice Troll. This gets my vote for Troll of the year! I have to say... being marked as Funny is appropriate. People, please don't bother refuting this one! Laugh and move on...
I don't get it. You say "great improvement over XP" and then you rip it to shreds. You've made a great case to *not* use it. I like your commentary. Your post is very informative, but I know I won't be trying it out after reading your post and several of the others!
It will take time... perhaps a long time. But he's not a kook. Microsoft is having trouble dealing with the new landscape and new competitors, mainly Linux and Apple.
Many of us will eventually be using Vista and complaining the way we do now. But this is clearly a different landscape and industry since Windows XP was released.
I couldn't agree more. I can't think of one thing to look forward to in the M$ release.
I was laughing this morning because my work computer (which runs XP, and is my only Microsoft system) locked up on boot up. Only the power button would work. A couple of days ago I got the blue screen of death. I get something really *nasty* like this at least once a week for no apparent reason. So when my computer locked up this morning I thought... "Great, they don't even have the last system working yet and now we're going to have to start the process of even getting to this point all over again."
It's so painful when they have an upgrade. I'm only comforted by the fact that the general public is starting to react the same way. Conventional wisdom is now says to wait for a major Service Pack or 2 before upgrading. People are getting smarter but it's been a slow and painful process!
Agreed. This is what shareware is now... Which *is not* maximum freedom for the user, but *is* maximum freedom for the distributor. I wouldn't even attempt to resolve this conflict in freedoms myself. I'm no expert on this.
I would call into question the intent of the GPL, which I still maintain is a workaround for working within the copyright framework and expanding freedom where copyrights were intended to restrict.
Never said it did divorce the legal standing of the GPL from copyright law. I think you miss understand my point. Stallman doesn't believe in patents and he doesn't believe in copyright law. The GPL was created to come as close that ideal as possible *within* the framework of copyright law.
Perhaps the argument can be made that GPL within copyright law is better than nothing at all. I wouldn't attempt to argue that either way. I *think* Stallman and many people in the Free Software movement would rather see copyright law abolished altogether than maintain a GPL. This would afford maximum freedom and minimum control and therefore serve the overall good. Am I wrong in this interpretation?
It is because of copyright law that we even need GPL. Note how Stallman always used to refer to the copyleft to oppose copyright. Do you even understand the purpose of the GPL and the philosophy behind it?
You've hit the nail on the head. DRM is about making money. Not about providing good services. It's simply the difference between being customer centric vs monopolistic. DRM doesn't mean anything more than that.
It's perfect timing. A couple of days before the official release to the public. This couldn't have been more perfectly timed. This is truly embarrassing and quite honestly, M$ deserves it for having such a contempt for consumers.
Funny thing is... I don't care at all personally;-) My plan was to just not use any of these draconian technologies anyway. And if everyone simply took that attitude, the problem would fix itself in a heartbeat. That goes for Windows Vista or M$ Office as well.
He did the stand up thing. He told us that it could be done. He didn't release his findings publicly which would put him at risk. Someone else will do it though, especially knowing it's possible.
I'm not an M$ fan at all or a DRM fan either. But I can understand their desire to protect their assets. Even if this wasn't cracked though, I think it went too far in terms of exploiting consumers and would more than likely been defeated in the market place. Sony Beta was an inferior system to VHS but VHS won because it was more open. IBM PC was the same thing. Linux will be the same as well. These schemes probably look good to the execs when they're coming up with them, but it all quickly breaks down when it's exposed in the market place!
Just wait and see... Mark my words. The history *will* repeat itself.
I've been using Reiserfs for years and I've never had an issue and I don't ever have to reinstall. I've been upgrading for years as well. I understand the point about fixing the system, but I would maintain that if things hose themselves up really bad, you're not going to worry too much about fixing them, you're going to get new hardware, reinstall, and restore from backup.
Since I've *never* known reiserfs to fail, I would always assume a hardware issue first. I'm sure this is true of other file systems on Linux. Things are so stable and well tested that you're more than likely facing a hardware fix if something goes wrong.
I hope criminal case against Hans Reiser doesn't kill the file system too. I hope he's not guilty but things don't look good for him right now.
I hope this is going to be the last time we end up having to "deal" with this nonsense. It is my fervent hope that this OS will erode Microsoft into obsolescence for good. Then we can finally get to the business of using our computers for progress instead of being unnecessarily held back by ONE company.
Microsoft sucks a lot of time and resources from the world and it's high time they just "go away".
This is just patently stupid. I here this from the ill-informed, lay persons all the time. Anyone with any knowledge of the software industry wouldn't dare say something so blatantly and obviously wrong. I think this notion is adequately rebuked regularly here.
One of the most effective things about Open Source and Linux is the small targets they have traditionally represented. Now I'm not advocating that Linux/Open Source/Free Software stay small and underground. I would love to see widespread adoption. I only wonder how the larger target is going to fair out. Companies like Microsoft can go after a slam dunk target and really hinder Linux/Free Software in more effective ways when it's consolidated instead of being represented by small, fragmented entities.
Case in point:
The only reason SCO went after IBM was because they had money. Notice that SCO didn't bother with Open Source Development Labs and kernel developers, which are poor for the most part.
I echo the sentiment about keeping the various bodies separate and focused on their respective tasks. Hopefully their interests won't ever be in conflict with each other so they can continue to be effective.
Wild Tangent is made up of the biggest bunch of crooks in the spyware industry. I'm not thrilled about Vista coming, in fact I loathe every new Microsoft product as it tends to make life more difficult and awkward.
Having said that, I think it would be wonderful if Spyware companies like Wild Tangent were put out of business for good. They provide NOTHING to people and they take away A LOT. They degrade your computer performance, invade your privacy, their software is shit and disrespectful the the rest of the system's resources, eventually they make your system deteriorate and crash all the time, and they are difficult to remove. But that's not what you're told when you install it. I've never installed any of their stuff, but my family members have and I always have to fix it when it breaks everything.
As I say, I'm anything but a Microsoft fan, but I consider Wild Tangent an enemy to users everywhere for misleading them (which, by the way, is the only way companies like Wild Tangent survive).
The person who posted this should have found a more reputable source to provide criticism. I consider this post a POSITIVE feature of Vista. There is plenty of stand up criticism out there for Vista. I'm of the opinion that Vista will suck almost as bad as previous Windows versions. Each version sucks and each version sucks in some ways more and in some ways less than the last one. Microsoft has moved laterally in their improvement since 1995. Why would that change?
I don't play games so I could care less about them working in Vista, but let me just say this... Microsoft needs to address their reputation for being a real computer system and not a toy. Games don't help in defeating that stigma. This is why they have a gaming console now. PC games are never going to go away, but they will likely lose popularity because console games "just work". You don't have to worry about hardware or deal with jumpy response, console games eliminate that.
For me... I use Linux only and I don't play games. None of this directly affects me:-D But seriously, we need to engage in research supported criticism, not in CEO rant.
This is some of the best stuff to happen in a long time. There aren't too many examples where Microsoft has so blatantly made life purposefully difficult for "their customers". I'm proud to *not* be one of "their customers". They keep this up and they won't have any "customers" (or victims).
I don't advocate breaking the law and distributing content illegally, but I do advocate putting the consumer first and this is something that Microsoft has consistently *not* done. And there's no end in sight to putting the consumer last. To Microsoft, the "customer" is something to "deal with", a nuisance, not the entity they want to provide good services to and satisfy.
I like this policy. It will badly damage the record industry, the movie industry and Microsoft. This has been repeatedly shown in past schemes and will continue to be shown in this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this mean that you're not human? Or does it mean that you're a megalomaniacal arrogant prick?
Nice Troll. This gets my vote for Troll of the year! I have to say... being marked as Funny is appropriate. People, please don't bother refuting this one! Laugh and move on...
I don't get it. You say "great improvement over XP" and then you rip it to shreds. You've made a great case to *not* use it. I like your commentary. Your post is very informative, but I know I won't be trying it out after reading your post and several of the others!
It will take time... perhaps a long time. But he's not a kook. Microsoft is having trouble dealing with the new landscape and new competitors, mainly Linux and Apple.
Many of us will eventually be using Vista and complaining the way we do now. But this is clearly a different landscape and industry since Windows XP was released.
I couldn't agree more. I can't think of one thing to look forward to in the M$ release.
I was laughing this morning because my work computer (which runs XP, and is my only Microsoft system) locked up on boot up. Only the power button would work. A couple of days ago I got the blue screen of death. I get something really *nasty* like this at least once a week for no apparent reason. So when my computer locked up this morning I thought... "Great, they don't even have the last system working yet and now we're going to have to start the process of even getting to this point all over again."
It's so painful when they have an upgrade. I'm only comforted by the fact that the general public is starting to react the same way. Conventional wisdom is now says to wait for a major Service Pack or 2 before upgrading. People are getting smarter but it's been a slow and painful process!
Agreed. This is what shareware is now... Which *is not* maximum freedom for the user, but *is* maximum freedom for the distributor. I wouldn't even attempt to resolve this conflict in freedoms myself. I'm no expert on this.
I would call into question the intent of the GPL, which I still maintain is a workaround for working within the copyright framework and expanding freedom where copyrights were intended to restrict.
Never said it did divorce the legal standing of the GPL from copyright law. I think you miss understand my point. Stallman doesn't believe in patents and he doesn't believe in copyright law. The GPL was created to come as close that ideal as possible *within* the framework of copyright law.
Perhaps the argument can be made that GPL within copyright law is better than nothing at all. I wouldn't attempt to argue that either way. I *think* Stallman and many people in the Free Software movement would rather see copyright law abolished altogether than maintain a GPL. This would afford maximum freedom and minimum control and therefore serve the overall good. Am I wrong in this interpretation?
It is because of copyright law that we even need GPL. Note how Stallman always used to refer to the copyleft to oppose copyright. Do you even understand the purpose of the GPL and the philosophy behind it?
You've hit the nail on the head. DRM is about making money. Not about providing good services. It's simply the difference between being customer centric vs monopolistic. DRM doesn't mean anything more than that.
It's perfect timing. A couple of days before the official release to the public. This couldn't have been more perfectly timed. This is truly embarrassing and quite honestly, M$ deserves it for having such a contempt for consumers.
Funny thing is... I don't care at all personally ;-) My plan was to just not use any of these draconian technologies anyway. And if everyone simply took that attitude, the problem would fix itself in a heartbeat. That goes for Windows Vista or M$ Office as well.
He did the stand up thing. He told us that it could be done. He didn't release his findings publicly which would put him at risk. Someone else will do it though, especially knowing it's possible.
I'm not an M$ fan at all or a DRM fan either. But I can understand their desire to protect their assets. Even if this wasn't cracked though, I think it went too far in terms of exploiting consumers and would more than likely been defeated in the market place. Sony Beta was an inferior system to VHS but VHS won because it was more open. IBM PC was the same thing. Linux will be the same as well. These schemes probably look good to the execs when they're coming up with them, but it all quickly breaks down when it's exposed in the market place!
Just wait and see... Mark my words. The history *will* repeat itself.
I've been using Reiserfs for years and I've never had an issue and I don't ever have to reinstall. I've been upgrading for years as well. I understand the point about fixing the system, but I would maintain that if things hose themselves up really bad, you're not going to worry too much about fixing them, you're going to get new hardware, reinstall, and restore from backup.
Since I've *never* known reiserfs to fail, I would always assume a hardware issue first. I'm sure this is true of other file systems on Linux. Things are so stable and well tested that you're more than likely facing a hardware fix if something goes wrong.
I hope criminal case against Hans Reiser doesn't kill the file system too. I hope he's not guilty but things don't look good for him right now.
I hope this is going to be the last time we end up having to "deal" with this nonsense. It is my fervent hope that this OS will erode Microsoft into obsolescence for good. Then we can finally get to the business of using our computers for progress instead of being unnecessarily held back by ONE company.
Microsoft sucks a lot of time and resources from the world and it's high time they just "go away".
This is just patently stupid. I here this from the ill-informed, lay persons all the time. Anyone with any knowledge of the software industry wouldn't dare say something so blatantly and obviously wrong. I think this notion is adequately rebuked regularly here.
One of the most effective things about Open Source and Linux is the small targets they have traditionally represented. Now I'm not advocating that Linux/Open Source/Free Software stay small and underground. I would love to see widespread adoption. I only wonder how the larger target is going to fair out. Companies like Microsoft can go after a slam dunk target and really hinder Linux/Free Software in more effective ways when it's consolidated instead of being represented by small, fragmented entities. Case in point: The only reason SCO went after IBM was because they had money. Notice that SCO didn't bother with Open Source Development Labs and kernel developers, which are poor for the most part. I echo the sentiment about keeping the various bodies separate and focused on their respective tasks. Hopefully their interests won't ever be in conflict with each other so they can continue to be effective.
Wild Tangent is made up of the biggest bunch of crooks in the spyware industry. I'm not thrilled about Vista coming, in fact I loathe every new Microsoft product as it tends to make life more difficult and awkward. Having said that, I think it would be wonderful if Spyware companies like Wild Tangent were put out of business for good. They provide NOTHING to people and they take away A LOT. They degrade your computer performance, invade your privacy, their software is shit and disrespectful the the rest of the system's resources, eventually they make your system deteriorate and crash all the time, and they are difficult to remove. But that's not what you're told when you install it. I've never installed any of their stuff, but my family members have and I always have to fix it when it breaks everything. As I say, I'm anything but a Microsoft fan, but I consider Wild Tangent an enemy to users everywhere for misleading them (which, by the way, is the only way companies like Wild Tangent survive). The person who posted this should have found a more reputable source to provide criticism. I consider this post a POSITIVE feature of Vista. There is plenty of stand up criticism out there for Vista. I'm of the opinion that Vista will suck almost as bad as previous Windows versions. Each version sucks and each version sucks in some ways more and in some ways less than the last one. Microsoft has moved laterally in their improvement since 1995. Why would that change? I don't play games so I could care less about them working in Vista, but let me just say this... Microsoft needs to address their reputation for being a real computer system and not a toy. Games don't help in defeating that stigma. This is why they have a gaming console now. PC games are never going to go away, but they will likely lose popularity because console games "just work". You don't have to worry about hardware or deal with jumpy response, console games eliminate that. For me... I use Linux only and I don't play games. None of this directly affects me :-D But seriously, we need to engage in research supported criticism, not in CEO rant.
This is some of the best stuff to happen in a long time. There aren't too many examples where Microsoft has so blatantly made life purposefully difficult for "their customers". I'm proud to *not* be one of "their customers". They keep this up and they won't have any "customers" (or victims). I don't advocate breaking the law and distributing content illegally, but I do advocate putting the consumer first and this is something that Microsoft has consistently *not* done. And there's no end in sight to putting the consumer last. To Microsoft, the "customer" is something to "deal with", a nuisance, not the entity they want to provide good services to and satisfy. I like this policy. It will badly damage the record industry, the movie industry and Microsoft. This has been repeatedly shown in past schemes and will continue to be shown in this one.