It's actually OOXML, not MSXML. MSXML is a COM-based XML parser.
I actually do agree with your opinion on why standards exist and what they do to competition. I also think Microsoft's actions in regards to ISO are reprehensible. But given your obviously non-biased opinion (posted with one of your fivesockpuppets) on how markets should work, at least in regards to IBM, I wouldn't try and set the rules for other companies, either.
Trolls like you have bombed that account into worse than -1 territory.
No, *twitter* has sunk that account (both of them, actually) into karma hell. Trolls, by definition, have no moderation privileges, so while you might call people who reply to you "trolls", they are not the same people who are modding you down for your passe "advocacy" style. That is the community's job - a community who has repeatedly told you that you are not welcome until you stop making them look like idiots by association. But you're incapable of or unwilling to take the hint. Instead, you've organized an army of sockpuppets that shill each other's posts, have the same spelling and grammar mistakes, talk about the exact same things with the exact same demeanor and style, and repeatedly mention how awesome twitter is.
It's actually OOXML. MSXML is something else, a COM-based XML parsing library.
BTW, you already posted with two of yoursockpuppet accounts in this article, some of them in the same thread. That's unfair and dishonest, and you shouldn't be doing it. The vast majority of people on Slashdot get along with only one account, and we take responsibility for our own words and the reactions they generate as far as the community-driven moderation system goes. When you're a little community of your own with five accounts, it's hard to take you seriously.
Actually, I'm not sure. I would say himself? Some people say that twitter is a paid Microsoft troll, whose activities are designed to bring ridicule and dismissal to the free software and Slashdot in general.
He's already ground two multi-thousand post accounts into negative karma hell because of things like these. Now he has five accounts he uses to reply to his own posts and pretend he's multiple people arguing about the same thing.
In my book, that kind of behavior is dishonest and unacceptable.
Creative's behavior is reprehensible, but the topic is irrelevant. twitter now has a grand total of five Slashdot accounts (that I know of). How would you like to be involved in a thread where you think you're talking to different people that are actually the same person? What possible purpose would having all these accounts possible have other than gaming the moderation system?
Be aware that "Mactrope" and "inTheLoo" (the person who posted the original message) are the same person, both sockpuppets of well-known Slashdot troll twitter.
In case you didn't notice, that's the opinion of the CEO of the Mozilla Foundation. Please explain how this is some sort of vague Microsoft plot? Shame on you for trying to blame this on Microsoft. How disingenuous can you get?
That and Microsoft can't stand competition from Apple any more than it will release new versions of IE and Office on OSX. Yes, we can expect Mozilla to not like this, but we can be sure they also hate the way IE is forced on Windows users too. It's too bad that perspective is lost in the Wintel press, isn't it?
Office will be released for OS X. When Mozilla doesn't like it, it's because Apple is eating into their market share in a dishonest way. I'm not sure how IE is forced on me, BTW. I haven't updated to IE7 (mostly because my browser of choice is Firefox). You want to guess how I prevented it? I unchecked the update when it became available, and then WU asked me if I didn't want to see it again, so I clicked "Yes". Holy crap, talk about forcing IE on people.
If you dig deeper, you find stories about how Jobs announced his intention to make Safari available on Windows though iTunes.
You seem to dig deep only in topics that matter to you. One paragraph above you said IE is forced on people, which is not true. I guess you didn't dig deep enough when Slashdot told you that was the case? Shame on you for not digging deeper and...
It's too bad that perspective is lost in the Wintel press, isn't it?
...not being intelligent enough to consider another perspective. But then this is not about effort, is it?
Most articles are better researched and though out than this one.
Like the one where Slashdot told you IE was being forced on users, I bet.
I hope this clears the issue up.
Sure, you just blamed Microsoft for something Apple did. That should do it for most people.
Props to the people who modded you up, BTW. You sure cleared things up for them!
that and ad hominem attacks go hand in hand with Microsoft defense, don't they?
I don't think anyone is defending Microsoft, unless you consider pointing out the fallacy of your argument that they are to blame for something Apple did a defensive stance. But then you seem to be good at the "have you stopped beating your wife" approach.
The point of my comments here was to point out how this issue has been spun and to speculate on the spinners.
Well, your point is incorrect. Or are you calling Asa and the Mozilla Foundation spinners?
You have not added much to that and I wish you would shut up.
Wow, you sound exactly like twitter and Erris. It's just uncanny.
What and how I named this account is none of your business.
But what and you do with all your sockpuppets (and how) is everyone's business, since you're using them to game the system and disrupt discussion. It happened before and it's happening now. The question is, how long can you go before the moderators wise up to what you're doing? And are you going to grind more accounts down to negative karma territory, and in turn create even more sockpuppets to get around the 2-post per day restrictions? When does it end? Why don't you try being an honest advocate instead? Wouldn't that be a lot easier?
You really are serious, you're actually blaming Microsoft for this, aren't you? You also do it here, except that since that account is already at negative karma, you really don't care about using the "M$ Windoze" thing. And then you use another sockpuppet to shill your own posts. Is it difficult to keep the sockpuppets straight? Is it difficult to remember in which ones you're supposed to type M-i-c-r-o-s-o-f-t and W-i-n-d-o-w-s correctly? I guess it's hard. Unfortunately you are too lazy so you give yourself away by linking to your twitter journal. But when someone wonders about it, you pretend to play dumb. Wow.
Anyway, I should probably reply to your post or someone will mod me offtopic...
Between that and the fact that you know you don't have Safari installed, anyone who's had their morning coffee would have done OK.
Please twitter, you've crucified Microsoft for far less than this. Bold letters, etc. It doesn't matter. I mean you just said "Windoze" users are stupid, and now they're supposed to be clever because it's an update from Apple?
Why is it that every company has to make it's own custom package manager for Windows?
Why should Microsoft provide package management to competitors? Besides, it would be a logistical nightmare. When Quicktime goes tits up, who are these intelligent users going to call? Apple? Nope, they're going to call Microsoft. That's ridiculous, really. Besides, it's not like it's difficult to write a simple auto updater. Mozilla does it on Linux as well, don't they? Why do you think that is?
There are two big reasons that won't happen. No one trusts Microsoft and Microsoft would rather die than give users real choices
Actually, I'd go back to the "why should Microsoft help their competitors" argument.
More on topic, if it were not for the games Microsoft plays, people would not be afraid to install another browser.
People are not "afraid", they just don't know any better. But a lot of them do. Witness the massive market share that Firefox has today. People got fed up with IE, heard good things about FF and installed it. That's how it's supposed to work.
I could have IE if I wanted it but I have not needed that in more than five years.
Good for you. Right out of the twitter book of quotations.
I think I'm going to spend a few hours soon writing up the seminal Twitter Sockpuppet Log, get it? As in your "Vista failure log"? Then maybe people will realize who they are giving mod points to. It's really especially lame when you use your own sockpuppet accounts to shill your own posts. That's dishonest. Other people have played that game here, and all of them have eventually been found out and filtered off the discussion space.
If Microsoft doesn't change an application, they're stagnating and can't effect change because they have ceased to be able to innovate. If they change it, they're deviating from the UI paradigms we've become intimately familar with.
If OOo suddenly changed their interface it would be hailed as supreme innovation, regardless of whether or not the changes actually work.
The question is, does the change make you more productive, and can you revert back to the usual interface if it doesn't. The first one is highly subjective, and depends on each individual user. Most people I've talked to about the Office 2007 changes say they are better off with the new UI, but a few have gone back to the old one because they didn't feel comfortable.
It's always better to consider all the aspects of the issue before making comments like these.
I meant AV software used the way most people use it. They think they can do all sorts of dumb things because the AV will protect them, they check their brains out and download that SUPER FUNNY SCREENSAVER recommended by werioijij@uiiijij.net.
I take responsibility for the integrity of my own computers. It's the vendor's responsibility to provide me with the tools to do that.
That's because most applications are not written with privilege separation in mind, like they are in *nix. It's an unfortunate legacy from all the Win9x years.
That will hopefully start to change now with Vista, but IMO it should have been forced in the Windows 2000 timeframe. We'd all be better off.
I don't use AV for Windows, either. At least not in "resident" mode. I have a scanner I use occasionally on stuff I download that I don't fully trust.
15 years of no viruses, no malware, etc. The secret? No secret, just avoid being stupid. AV software is like driving a car with the intention of crashing it all the time, but wearing a seatbelt and thinking everything's OK.
I recognize the need for advertising to support valuable online services, so I'm not reacting in the usual "OMG THIS SUCKS" demeanor. But Google has been successfull where other ad pushers have not because they understand that users are annoyed by ads, and theirs are the least annoying so far. If they can keep this "clean" where it doesn't become an annoyance, more power to them.
It's a shame they have to patent it, but given today's IP climate I also understand why they have to go that route. Of course if anyone else had gotten a patent on this they'd be crucified, but this is Google.
The more reprehensible of non free software companies will deny a flaw exists when it's presented to them and beg the discoverer to keep quiet while they "fix" the problem... forever and then act angry when the flaw is revealed to the public.
You meanlikeMozilla? I'm not sure if private security mailing lists, "confidential bugs" and all that are reprehensible, but they might be. Or do you mean another type of "reprehensible"?
Their existence may be repulsive
You mean like Mozilla, or do you mean another type of "repulsive"?
When I posted that to the ML I had not realized that it was actually a mistake on my part related to headers. As you can see from that thread, the other members of the LUG were in disagreement, but I tend to be a bit hard-headed. After further consultation with some of them (mostly via email), I see that I was actually wrong. Cox is really not filtering anything coming off my box, though they still of course block port 25 as do most ISPs. Most posts in this article reflect my mistake.
So, I'm sorry for having wasted everyone's time. My tin foil hat is a bit tight these days.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't decide if you're actually serious or not. What is the limiting factor that you believe would prevent you from doing that?
Fascinating - most normal people would simply say "that's not me".
Still got modded down as usual though.
I'm having trouble figuring out if you replied to the wrong post. Are you talking to me? What does .NET and Bangalore (?) have to do with all this?
I actually do agree with your opinion on why standards exist and what they do to competition. I also think Microsoft's actions in regards to ISO are reprehensible. But given your obviously non-biased opinion (posted with one of your five sockpuppets) on how markets should work, at least in regards to IBM, I wouldn't try and set the rules for other companies, either.
No, *twitter* has sunk that account (both of them, actually) into karma hell. Trolls, by definition, have no moderation privileges, so while you might call people who reply to you "trolls", they are not the same people who are modding you down for your passe "advocacy" style. That is the community's job - a community who has repeatedly told you that you are not welcome until you stop making them look like idiots by association. But you're incapable of or unwilling to take the hint. Instead, you've organized an army of sockpuppets that shill each other's posts, have the same spelling and grammar mistakes, talk about the exact same things with the exact same demeanor and style, and repeatedly mention how awesome twitter is.
How long do you think this can last?
BTW, you already posted with two of your sockpuppet accounts in this article, some of them in the same thread. That's unfair and dishonest, and you shouldn't be doing it. The vast majority of people on Slashdot get along with only one account, and we take responsibility for our own words and the reactions they generate as far as the community-driven moderation system goes. When you're a little community of your own with five accounts, it's hard to take you seriously.
He's already ground two multi-thousand post accounts into negative karma hell because of things like these. Now he has five accounts he uses to reply to his own posts and pretend he's multiple people arguing about the same thing.
In my book, that kind of behavior is dishonest and unacceptable.
Creative's behavior is reprehensible, but the topic is irrelevant. twitter now has a grand total of five Slashdot accounts (that I know of). How would you like to be involved in a thread where you think you're talking to different people that are actually the same person? What possible purpose would having all these accounts possible have other than gaming the moderation system?
Be aware that "Mactrope" and "inTheLoo" (the person who posted the original message) are the same person, both sockpuppets of well-known Slashdot troll twitter.
Note that "inTheLoo" is one of twitter's sockpuppets, along with "Mactrope", who just happened to also post (or rather, shill) in this thread.
Never mind
All he needs now is to invite the other two sockpuppets and they can have a party.
It's just incredible.
http://slashdot.org/~inTheLoo
Shame on Slashdot for not seeing through this.
In case you didn't notice, that's the opinion of the CEO of the Mozilla Foundation. Please explain how this is some sort of vague Microsoft plot? Shame on you for trying to blame this on Microsoft. How disingenuous can you get?
That and Microsoft can't stand competition from Apple any more than it will release new versions of IE and Office on OSX. Yes, we can expect Mozilla to not like this, but we can be sure they also hate the way IE is forced on Windows users too. It's too bad that perspective is lost in the Wintel press, isn't it?
Office will be released for OS X. When Mozilla doesn't like it, it's because Apple is eating into their market share in a dishonest way. I'm not sure how IE is forced on me, BTW. I haven't updated to IE7 (mostly because my browser of choice is Firefox). You want to guess how I prevented it? I unchecked the update when it became available, and then WU asked me if I didn't want to see it again, so I clicked "Yes". Holy crap, talk about forcing IE on people.
If you dig deeper, you find stories about how Jobs announced his intention to make Safari available on Windows though iTunes.
You seem to dig deep only in topics that matter to you. One paragraph above you said IE is forced on people, which is not true. I guess you didn't dig deep enough when Slashdot told you that was the case? Shame on you for not digging deeper and...
It's too bad that perspective is lost in the Wintel press, isn't it?
Most articles are better researched and though out than this one.
Like the one where Slashdot told you IE was being forced on users, I bet.
I hope this clears the issue up.
Sure, you just blamed Microsoft for something Apple did. That should do it for most people.
Props to the people who modded you up, BTW. You sure cleared things up for them!
I don't think anyone is defending Microsoft, unless you consider pointing out the fallacy of your argument that they are to blame for something Apple did a defensive stance. But then you seem to be good at the "have you stopped beating your wife" approach.
The point of my comments here was to point out how this issue has been spun and to speculate on the spinners.
Well, your point is incorrect. Or are you calling Asa and the Mozilla Foundation spinners?
You have not added much to that and I wish you would shut up.
Wow, you sound exactly like twitter and Erris. It's just uncanny.
What and how I named this account is none of your business.
But what and you do with all your sockpuppets (and how) is everyone's business, since you're using them to game the system and disrupt discussion. It happened before and it's happening now. The question is, how long can you go before the moderators wise up to what you're doing? And are you going to grind more accounts down to negative karma territory, and in turn create even more sockpuppets to get around the 2-post per day restrictions? When does it end? Why don't you try being an honest advocate instead? Wouldn't that be a lot easier?
Anyway, I should probably reply to your post or someone will mod me offtopic...
Between that and the fact that you know you don't have Safari installed, anyone who's had their morning coffee would have done OK.
Please twitter, you've crucified Microsoft for far less than this. Bold letters, etc. It doesn't matter. I mean you just said "Windoze" users are stupid, and now they're supposed to be clever because it's an update from Apple?
Why is it that every company has to make it's own custom package manager for Windows?
Why should Microsoft provide package management to competitors? Besides, it would be a logistical nightmare. When Quicktime goes tits up, who are these intelligent users going to call? Apple? Nope, they're going to call Microsoft. That's ridiculous, really. Besides, it's not like it's difficult to write a simple auto updater. Mozilla does it on Linux as well, don't they? Why do you think that is?
There are two big reasons that won't happen. No one trusts Microsoft and Microsoft would rather die than give users real choices
Actually, I'd go back to the "why should Microsoft help their competitors" argument.
More on topic, if it were not for the games Microsoft plays, people would not be afraid to install another browser.
People are not "afraid", they just don't know any better. But a lot of them do. Witness the massive market share that Firefox has today. People got fed up with IE, heard good things about FF and installed it. That's how it's supposed to work.
I could have IE if I wanted it but I have not needed that in more than five years.
Good for you. Right out of the twitter book of quotations.
I think I'm going to spend a few hours soon writing up the seminal Twitter Sockpuppet Log, get it? As in your "Vista failure log"? Then maybe people will realize who they are giving mod points to. It's really especially lame when you use your own sockpuppet accounts to shill your own posts. That's dishonest. Other people have played that game here, and all of them have eventually been found out and filtered off the discussion space.
If OOo suddenly changed their interface it would be hailed as supreme innovation, regardless of whether or not the changes actually work.
The question is, does the change make you more productive, and can you revert back to the usual interface if it doesn't. The first one is highly subjective, and depends on each individual user. Most people I've talked to about the Office 2007 changes say they are better off with the new UI, but a few have gone back to the old one because they didn't feel comfortable.
It's always better to consider all the aspects of the issue before making comments like these.
I take responsibility for the integrity of my own computers. It's the vendor's responsibility to provide me with the tools to do that.
That will hopefully start to change now with Vista, but IMO it should have been forced in the Windows 2000 timeframe. We'd all be better off.
Yes, by about ten years.
15 years of no viruses, no malware, etc. The secret? No secret, just avoid being stupid. AV software is like driving a car with the intention of crashing it all the time, but wearing a seatbelt and thinking everything's OK.
It's a shame they have to patent it, but given today's IP climate I also understand why they have to go that route. Of course if anyone else had gotten a patent on this they'd be crucified, but this is Google.
You mean like Mozilla? I'm not sure if private security mailing lists, "confidential bugs" and all that are reprehensible, but they might be. Or do you mean another type of "reprehensible"?
Their existence may be repulsive
You mean like Mozilla, or do you mean another type of "repulsive"?
My patience for these parasites is exhausted.
Indeed.
So, I'm sorry for having wasted everyone's time. My tin foil hat is a bit tight these days.