Well, I'm not you and I'm damned sick of having to keep a long-ass list of usernames and passwords for sites I really don't care much about. If I have to register to post a comment on some blog, I don't really care if someone steals that registration or password because I'm not likely to ever visit that blog again. If I could use a single ID to avoid registering at different sites 4 days a week, I'm all for it.
The second point is that nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use it. If you don't like it, just create a new password for each site anyway. It doesn't prevent that.
(Sidenote: Stop requiring registration for moronic things! I don't want to give you any personal information to post in a damned blog!)
(Also, why do all these misguided technophobe posts always get modded up first? I thought this was a site for technology enthusiasts.)
It's not always that clear-cut. The same people who propose "saving" the environment at any cost are those firmly opposed to "saving" the Iraqi people from their horrible dictator. Guess what: "saving" the environment would require the first world to intercede in the affairs of the third world, the exact same thing you environmentalists all oppose when Bush does it.
And what if "saving" the environment is only possible through the starvation of billions of people? Is it still worth it?
We can still live in a planet that's warming at the current rate. Humans are pretty clever, we've adapted to hundreds of climates our bodies aren't designed for, and we'll adapt to a "globally warmed" one. Given that, is it worth the starvation of billions of people? What if the warming increases our food production while at the same time having minimal impact on life otherwise? Wouldn't THAT be worth it to save millions of starving people?
What you're suggesting is the environmental equivalent of Total War. There was a big fuss in the news a few days ago because the US has been in Iraq for longer than the US participated in WWII. What does that imply? That the press thinks we'd be better off carpet-bombing the entire nation of Iraq rather than spend any longer there? There's a big difference between a Total War like WWII and a scuffle in Iraq.
The first step to solving any problem is to determine whether the problem is worth solving. That's where we're at right now.
"Linux sucks" I think it actually ok by this point. There have been enough articles about how the Linux GUI stinks, how DVDs don't play, etc that I don't think people are as offended by "Linux sucks" as they once were. Or maybe there are just fewer Slashdot Linux zealots around for whatever reason. Stories that appear on the front page seem to have decently good moderation, IMO. Even political stories usually tend to have differing viewpoints modded up.
But if you want a real challenge, go to the Games section and opine that any Nintendo product sucks. I think the Wii controller is a stupid idea, but if I posted that I'd be modded to -1 in an eye-blink. And don't dare say anything about the Xbox 360 being a decent product! Now there's some serious moderation abuse.
You're just paranoid. The simple fact of the matter is that Windows is so prevalent, especially in the commercial world, that they simply don't even think about alternatives. In a typical IT office of a dozen people, there's a very very good chance that everybody there uses Windows both at work and at home. And even if they wanted to choose a cross-platform program, they have no Mac or Linux computers available to test it with. When the vendor comes in to sell the product to them, he doesn't say, "it works on Windows only" and they don't ask.
How many times have you seen a software program for download, but it doesn't say what OS it's for? They're always for Windows, and to the author of that program the thought of using something other than Windows is so alien and not only did he not port the program, but he didn't even bother to say what OS it ran on.
You're in "public." That term means that other people can take photos of you. Cope with it.
Microsoft isn't doing anything wrong here, not by any stretch of the imagination. Besides, it's not like you can search-by-face or something ridiculous like that... what information are you afraid will get out?
I'm working on a product right now called a Sound Squid. Through years of intensive research (unsupported by double-blind tests of course! People who aren't audiophiles are human trash and shouldn't be allowed to touch my $5000 headphones!) I've discovered that the common squid, by using its various air pouches, tentacle positioning, and movements of its staring eye can enhance any listening experience.
Your Sound Squid kit comes with: 1 (One) 10 gallon aquarium 1 (One) squid, family Loliginidae 8 (Eight) water-proofed high quality tentacle clips 1 (One) computer-controlled Sound Squid->digital interface 1 (One) instruction manual in English, Japanese and French
All for the low, low price of only $7,500!
You may also be interested in the following accessories: Gold-plated Monster brand tentacle clips ($1500) 1 week worth of squid food ($350)
profitability: In this regaurds the Xbox ia terrible. A failure. A abject failure. In 10 years it still will not recover Ms investment.
Are you an accountant? Because, seriously, there's no way that a normal customer would case in the slightest how much their device made profit for the company that made it. Seriously.
The reason, and ONLY reason, you're bringing up profitability is because it's a quick and easy way to make Microsoft look bad... especially among people who don't realize that Microsoft never planned or intended the Xbox to make a profit! If MS didn't expect a profit from it, and it didn't make a profit, then is it still a failure?
So you're 0 for 1 right out of the gate.
Innovation: Not that much. As someone pointed out the HDD wasn't the first, the PS2 did it first. The only real innovation was that it was a cheap PC slickly packaged as a console.
Sure, if you utterly ignore Xbox Live, Xbox Live Arcade, the ability to rip music, the ability to use it as a Media Center (given, the software sucked, but it existed which is more than you can say for the PS2 or Gamecube), the HDTV support, the ability to display on a (VGA) computer monitor, and all the other goodies it innovated.
0 for 2.
(Ignoring the tripe about your specific situation-- I think we both agree that you don't represent the entire customer-base for the Xbox.)
And fromt he sales total this is true of most gamers.
The sales total!? Have you seen the sales of Halo 2? Are you kidding me?
0 for 3.
The Xbox was Microsofts learning failure. they took the leasons and moved on.
No, it wasn't a failure. It was always intended to grab a foothold in the gaming market, not to dominate it. It wasn't intended to make a profit in the first generation. This is all well-documented. By Microsoft's own standards, it's been a success.
They learned focus groups should not be the only thing you use to design your interface.
Are you talking about the Dashboard interface? What's wrong with it?
They learned games genres are important and no matter how well you do it; not every one wants a FPS or multiplayer.
That must be why it has so many platformers, RPGs, and Adventure games. And a couple of Sims.
But the box was ugly,
Irrelevant opinion, IMO. I'm not going to say it's beautiful, but I don't think it's any uglier than most electronics. And it's decidedly more attractive than my surround sound box.
the tech was so so,
Compared to what? The Gamecube? It had tons more memory, more CPU power, more GPU power. It had more than the PS2.
the intergration was good but the games were lackign diversity.
The only genre of games it was missing was Japanese RPGs. And, as I posted above, it had two genres that do not appear on other consoles, Western-style RPGs, and Adventure games.
Thus A Terrible rpoduct.
I think you're stretching the poor word "terrible" far more than it deserves. Even if all you've said here was true and relevant (very little of it is), then it's still at least mediocre. Let's reserve "terrible" for consoles like the N-Gage.
The Dreamcast was designed with HDD support also, as I recall. The Nintendo 64 and SNES both had expansion slots that could (theoretically) accept a mass storage device of some type. That doesn't change the fact that the Xbox popularized the HD, and that every other console maker is now shipping their console WITH the mass storage instead of "the option" of mass storage.
Also I think you're fuzzy on dates... I don't recall hearing anything about a PS2 HD until Final Fantasy 11 came out, and that was several months after the Xbox was released. the PS2 HD was also a total flop; when they redesigned the PS2 case, they got rid of the HD port!
If you notice above on a quick count on the types of stories (pro/anti brand x/y/z), you see that MS has the best "good guy" ratio.
I would argue that that's because they simply have the best gaming hardware and most notable games out right now. Gears of War gets press because it's selling a crapload of copies... and nothing for PS3 or Wii is at the moment.
I do agree that Sony gets a bad rap here, but I still say that the Nintendo fanboys outnumber the Xbox fanboys on this forum 2:1 or more.
Yes, but this isn't talking about increasing the gas tax, it's about adding a whole new tax. And since it's a "tax" and not a "fee," I can guarantee it'll apply to everyone and not just the people who are causing the problem in the first place. I'm already paying for too much crap, like stadiums and the government putting up "Obey the Speed Limit!" signs on traffic-clogged roads you can't even hit 20 MPH on. I don't want to pay for "carbon." Especially since I'm not pulled in to the whole global warming panic in the first place. (To be clear, I have no problem with fuel self-sufficiency for the US, or raising the cost of gasoline.)
1) the Xbox was a terrible product with a very limited genre list and cost MS a fortune. The 360 is good.
1) What the hell does it matter how much it cost MS? Is that how you judge every product? "Well, I liked this vacuum, but it cost Hoover too much, so I guess it's a bad product." Crazy.
2) Adding a hard drive was, if not revolutionary, was on the far end of evolutionary. Notice that every console in this generation has some kind of mass storage device... that's Microsoft's influence. So is Sony and Nintendo's game download service; Microsoft had Xbox Live Arcade years ago. So is Sony's HDTV support; Xbox was the first console to support HDTVs. Xbox is the first console since the SNES to get PC-style RPGs and Adventure games-- so while it may have a "limited genre list," it has two genres that no other consoles had. How about taking over the mantle from Sega and having the most Sega games published? What other console can play Panzer Dragoon Orta?
If you are capable of judging the console market from a neutral perspective, you'd realize that the Xbox is probably the most forward-thinking console in ten years. Sure it has downsides, all consoles do. But even if the Xbox 360 totally tanks and there's no sequel, there's no denying that Microsoft has changed the landscape of console gaming forever. That's more than the Sega Dreamcast can claim.
But please justify your comment that it was a "terrible product" with at least ONE valid example.
2) Fanboys are always loudest and th emainstream tends to have the fewest fan boys. Also Xbox tends towards western formerly PC style games. Which happens to cater to the slashdot demographic. If we were to go to say RPG planet the concensus would be different or to Hello kitty fan club the concensus would be different again.
You're obviously wrong, because the vast vast majority of fanboys here (as I posted above, but you seem to have ignored) are Nintendo fanboys. Nintendo games couldn't be further from PC games.
I pay enough taxes already. I own a decently efficient car, I ride a train to work (well, I drive 10 miles to the train station each day), and I don't drive much on weekends. If you're going to make a "carbon tax", make it for those assholes that commute 50 miles a day in a Ford Expedition. I have enough taxes already.
"Conspiracy?" Look, you're so far out in wacko-land by this point that you aren't even worth talking to, because nothing I type here in the real world is going to fit in your Microsoft conspiracy fantasy.
That said, while I worked at Microsoft, I didn't participate in any conspiracies. That should be obvious and go without saying, but I forgot there were insane people here on Slashdot.
Secondly, regardless of how much research was done in Europe, the simple fact of the matter is that I can't go to a store right now and buy an OS made in Europe. I can buy a blender made in Europe, or a refrigerator, or a car. Why not a computer OS?
From my understanding, you don't legally have the right to burn a CD of the music unless allowed by the copyright holder. So if anything Apple's DRM allows you to do MORE than the law requires. I'd love to see evidence otherwise.
They just made it hidden by default. Like Safari does with the status bar.
(I had a friend who used Safari for like a year and a half, and one day he complained to me that he wished it had a status bar. It never occurred to him, apparently, to check the View menu for an option to turn on the status bar, the same way you would with any other toolbar. So maybe you do have a point about IE7... either way, get used to it, because Windows Live Messenger and some other Vista apps are the same way.)
Except for the people who KNOW how to fix it can do it in a matter of hours (probably, depending on the bug), but the people who have never worked with programming before will take literally months to do it. It's not a very efficient use of people's time if you respond to every bug with "fix it yourself." In addition, it's rude to burden somebody with months of work to improve a project that you (supposedly) support and want to see succeed.
OK, which platform's native GUI should they use? A native windows GUI look would look like shit on OS X.
Are you seriously suggesting to us that Firefox *does not know* what platform it's being installed on? Seriously?
OF COURSE Firefox knows what platform it's being installed on-- THEY COME IN DIFFERENT DOWNLOADS! Your post has to be about the dumbest thing I've ever read. It's like you're trying to make "make it look like the host OS" into some horrible technical process that has to happen when each OS already has its own installer.
And, as a Mac OS X user, I can safely say I'd much prefer a Windows Vista-looking theme to Firefox than the crummy one it actually comes with. Vista-themed apps aren't all that out-of-place in OS X, except possibly for the colors. The Firefox 2 theme just looks like some weird alien application.
Oookkkk... assuming this is actually true (mine works fine), what the hell relevance does this have to the topic? We're talking about FIREFOX losing its way, not IE7.
I don't work for Microsoft (my resume is a month out of date, sorry), but I do have to ask this question:
Guilty of what?
My "logic" doesn't declare anybody guilty of anything, by association or otherwise. I'm just basically saying "put up, or shut up" to European business in general. Stop suing American companies just because you can't compete with them. Either bend over and take it, or start some competition. (I'd love some competition. Like I said originally, if Europe hadn't been napping during the computer revolution, Microsoft probably wouldn't be a "convicted monopolist" right now.)
All I'm saying is that I'm sick of the complaints from Europeans on how the US manages the Internet, how US businesses (notably, Microsoft, Boeing, VISA, MasterCard) are "too successful" in Europe, etc... when the reality of the matter is that the reason those companies are so successful is because Europe basically had no decent competition of its own. The EU is FINING these companies because the EU failed to compete with them. IMO, that's worse than anything Microsoft did to become a "convicted monopolist."
Europe doesn't have a successful OS because European businesses were totally asleep at the wheel when they should have been working. So now you don't really have much of a right to tell American businesses how to manage themselves, and you certainly shouldn't be fining them for YOUR mistakes. American businesses took the risks, and now they're reaping the benefits.
If Europe wants to seriously become a competitor in these industries, they'd stop fining VISA and make their own competing credit card company. And, who knows, maybe they'd even succeed. There's an effort there with Airbus, albeit an entirely misguided one. (Gee, which airliner will the airlines choose? The one that requires billions of dollars in airport renovations, or the one that fits easily on existing runways?)
(Disclaimers to prevent stupid replies: Yes I know the EU wasn't finalized when those companies industries were in their infancy, yes I know Linux made Linux in Europe, yada yada.)
You mean the Kernel that was made specifically to be compatible with one already made in the US?
No doubt Linus is a great man and has taken on a huge project, but he's not enough by himself to change my mind about this issue. By the time Linux started, it was already too late for the computer industry in Europe anyway.
The deal was done as a coupon code. If you were one of the first thousand, you got a $200-off coupon code for that item. Once you had the code, you could come back at your leisure to set up the order for it.
I know you're trying to do some snarky Microsoft-bashing, but the last time was about two days ago when Slashdot posted that the number of people downloading movies and TV shows from Xbox Live was overloading Microsoft's servers because they didn't anticipate the demand.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I'm not you and I'm damned sick of having to keep a long-ass list of usernames and passwords for sites I really don't care much about. If I have to register to post a comment on some blog, I don't really care if someone steals that registration or password because I'm not likely to ever visit that blog again. If I could use a single ID to avoid registering at different sites 4 days a week, I'm all for it.
The second point is that nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use it. If you don't like it, just create a new password for each site anyway. It doesn't prevent that.
(Sidenote: Stop requiring registration for moronic things! I don't want to give you any personal information to post in a damned blog!)
(Also, why do all these misguided technophobe posts always get modded up first? I thought this was a site for technology enthusiasts.)
It's not always that clear-cut. The same people who propose "saving" the environment at any cost are those firmly opposed to "saving" the Iraqi people from their horrible dictator. Guess what: "saving" the environment would require the first world to intercede in the affairs of the third world, the exact same thing you environmentalists all oppose when Bush does it.
And what if "saving" the environment is only possible through the starvation of billions of people? Is it still worth it?
We can still live in a planet that's warming at the current rate. Humans are pretty clever, we've adapted to hundreds of climates our bodies aren't designed for, and we'll adapt to a "globally warmed" one. Given that, is it worth the starvation of billions of people? What if the warming increases our food production while at the same time having minimal impact on life otherwise? Wouldn't THAT be worth it to save millions of starving people?
What you're suggesting is the environmental equivalent of Total War. There was a big fuss in the news a few days ago because the US has been in Iraq for longer than the US participated in WWII. What does that imply? That the press thinks we'd be better off carpet-bombing the entire nation of Iraq rather than spend any longer there? There's a big difference between a Total War like WWII and a scuffle in Iraq.
The first step to solving any problem is to determine whether the problem is worth solving. That's where we're at right now.
"Linux sucks" I think it actually ok by this point. There have been enough articles about how the Linux GUI stinks, how DVDs don't play, etc that I don't think people are as offended by "Linux sucks" as they once were. Or maybe there are just fewer Slashdot Linux zealots around for whatever reason. Stories that appear on the front page seem to have decently good moderation, IMO. Even political stories usually tend to have differing viewpoints modded up.
But if you want a real challenge, go to the Games section and opine that any Nintendo product sucks. I think the Wii controller is a stupid idea, but if I posted that I'd be modded to -1 in an eye-blink. And don't dare say anything about the Xbox 360 being a decent product! Now there's some serious moderation abuse.
You're just paranoid. The simple fact of the matter is that Windows is so prevalent, especially in the commercial world, that they simply don't even think about alternatives. In a typical IT office of a dozen people, there's a very very good chance that everybody there uses Windows both at work and at home. And even if they wanted to choose a cross-platform program, they have no Mac or Linux computers available to test it with. When the vendor comes in to sell the product to them, he doesn't say, "it works on Windows only" and they don't ask.
How many times have you seen a software program for download, but it doesn't say what OS it's for? They're always for Windows, and to the author of that program the thought of using something other than Windows is so alien and not only did he not port the program, but he didn't even bother to say what OS it ran on.
There's no conspiracy.
You're in "public." That term means that other people can take photos of you. Cope with it.
Microsoft isn't doing anything wrong here, not by any stretch of the imagination. Besides, it's not like you can search-by-face or something ridiculous like that... what information are you afraid will get out?
I'm working on a product right now called a Sound Squid. Through years of intensive research (unsupported by double-blind tests of course! People who aren't audiophiles are human trash and shouldn't be allowed to touch my $5000 headphones!) I've discovered that the common squid, by using its various air pouches, tentacle positioning, and movements of its staring eye can enhance any listening experience.
Your Sound Squid kit comes with:
1 (One) 10 gallon aquarium
1 (One) squid, family Loliginidae
8 (Eight) water-proofed high quality tentacle clips
1 (One) computer-controlled Sound Squid->digital interface
1 (One) instruction manual in English, Japanese and French
All for the low, low price of only $7,500!
You may also be interested in the following accessories:
Gold-plated Monster brand tentacle clips ($1500)
1 week worth of squid food ($350)
Can you afford NOT to buy a Sound Squid?
Laptops always have integrated video to save space. Where would you put the video card otherwise? They're jam-packed as is.
I guess I could see maybe removing the CD/DVD drive and replacing it with some sort of swappable video card, but then how do you load the game?
profitability: In this regaurds the Xbox ia terrible. A failure. A abject failure. In 10 years it still will not recover Ms investment.
Are you an accountant? Because, seriously, there's no way that a normal customer would case in the slightest how much their device made profit for the company that made it. Seriously.
The reason, and ONLY reason, you're bringing up profitability is because it's a quick and easy way to make Microsoft look bad... especially among people who don't realize that Microsoft never planned or intended the Xbox to make a profit! If MS didn't expect a profit from it, and it didn't make a profit, then is it still a failure?
So you're 0 for 1 right out of the gate.
Innovation: Not that much. As someone pointed out the HDD wasn't the first, the PS2 did it first. The only real innovation was that it was a cheap PC slickly packaged as a console.
Sure, if you utterly ignore Xbox Live, Xbox Live Arcade, the ability to rip music, the ability to use it as a Media Center (given, the software sucked, but it existed which is more than you can say for the PS2 or Gamecube), the HDTV support, the ability to display on a (VGA) computer monitor, and all the other goodies it innovated.
0 for 2.
(Ignoring the tripe about your specific situation-- I think we both agree that you don't represent the entire customer-base for the Xbox.)
And fromt he sales total this is true of most gamers.
The sales total!? Have you seen the sales of Halo 2? Are you kidding me?
0 for 3.
The Xbox was Microsofts learning failure. they took the leasons and moved on.
No, it wasn't a failure. It was always intended to grab a foothold in the gaming market, not to dominate it. It wasn't intended to make a profit in the first generation. This is all well-documented. By Microsoft's own standards, it's been a success.
They learned focus groups should not be the only thing you use to design your interface.
Are you talking about the Dashboard interface? What's wrong with it?
They learned games genres are important and no matter how well you do it; not every one wants a FPS or multiplayer.
That must be why it has so many platformers, RPGs, and Adventure games. And a couple of Sims.
But the box was ugly,
Irrelevant opinion, IMO. I'm not going to say it's beautiful, but I don't think it's any uglier than most electronics. And it's decidedly more attractive than my surround sound box.
the tech was so so,
Compared to what? The Gamecube? It had tons more memory, more CPU power, more GPU power. It had more than the PS2.
the intergration was good but the games were lackign diversity.
The only genre of games it was missing was Japanese RPGs. And, as I posted above, it had two genres that do not appear on other consoles, Western-style RPGs, and Adventure games.
Thus A Terrible rpoduct.
I think you're stretching the poor word "terrible" far more than it deserves. Even if all you've said here was true and relevant (very little of it is), then it's still at least mediocre. Let's reserve "terrible" for consoles like the N-Gage.
The Dreamcast was designed with HDD support also, as I recall. The Nintendo 64 and SNES both had expansion slots that could (theoretically) accept a mass storage device of some type. That doesn't change the fact that the Xbox popularized the HD, and that every other console maker is now shipping their console WITH the mass storage instead of "the option" of mass storage.
Also I think you're fuzzy on dates... I don't recall hearing anything about a PS2 HD until Final Fantasy 11 came out, and that was several months after the Xbox was released. the PS2 HD was also a total flop; when they redesigned the PS2 case, they got rid of the HD port!
If you notice above on a quick count on the types of stories (pro/anti brand x/y/z), you see that MS has the best "good guy" ratio.
I would argue that that's because they simply have the best gaming hardware and most notable games out right now. Gears of War gets press because it's selling a crapload of copies... and nothing for PS3 or Wii is at the moment.
I do agree that Sony gets a bad rap here, but I still say that the Nintendo fanboys outnumber the Xbox fanboys on this forum 2:1 or more.
Yes, but this isn't talking about increasing the gas tax, it's about adding a whole new tax. And since it's a "tax" and not a "fee," I can guarantee it'll apply to everyone and not just the people who are causing the problem in the first place. I'm already paying for too much crap, like stadiums and the government putting up "Obey the Speed Limit!" signs on traffic-clogged roads you can't even hit 20 MPH on. I don't want to pay for "carbon." Especially since I'm not pulled in to the whole global warming panic in the first place. (To be clear, I have no problem with fuel self-sufficiency for the US, or raising the cost of gasoline.)
1) the Xbox was a terrible product with a very limited genre list and cost MS a fortune. The 360 is good.
1) What the hell does it matter how much it cost MS? Is that how you judge every product? "Well, I liked this vacuum, but it cost Hoover too much, so I guess it's a bad product." Crazy.
2) Adding a hard drive was, if not revolutionary, was on the far end of evolutionary. Notice that every console in this generation has some kind of mass storage device... that's Microsoft's influence. So is Sony and Nintendo's game download service; Microsoft had Xbox Live Arcade years ago. So is Sony's HDTV support; Xbox was the first console to support HDTVs. Xbox is the first console since the SNES to get PC-style RPGs and Adventure games-- so while it may have a "limited genre list," it has two genres that no other consoles had. How about taking over the mantle from Sega and having the most Sega games published? What other console can play Panzer Dragoon Orta?
If you are capable of judging the console market from a neutral perspective, you'd realize that the Xbox is probably the most forward-thinking console in ten years. Sure it has downsides, all consoles do. But even if the Xbox 360 totally tanks and there's no sequel, there's no denying that Microsoft has changed the landscape of console gaming forever. That's more than the Sega Dreamcast can claim.
But please justify your comment that it was a "terrible product" with at least ONE valid example.
2) Fanboys are always loudest and th emainstream tends to have the fewest fan boys. Also Xbox tends towards western formerly PC style games. Which happens to cater to the slashdot demographic. If we were to go to say RPG planet the concensus would be different or to Hello kitty fan club the concensus would be different again.
You're obviously wrong, because the vast vast majority of fanboys here (as I posted above, but you seem to have ignored) are Nintendo fanboys. Nintendo games couldn't be further from PC games.
I pay enough taxes already. I own a decently efficient car, I ride a train to work (well, I drive 10 miles to the train station each day), and I don't drive much on weekends. If you're going to make a "carbon tax", make it for those assholes that commute 50 miles a day in a Ford Expedition. I have enough taxes already.
(OK, I feel better. What is the moderation for RANT?)
-1, You know what he meant you pedantic ass
A couple points:
1) The Xbox is a damned good product, regardless of how you look at it. The Xbox 360 is even better.
2) The bias in the comments here is for Nintendo products. The Xbox bias is NOTHING compared to the Nintendo bias.
"Conspiracy?" Look, you're so far out in wacko-land by this point that you aren't even worth talking to, because nothing I type here in the real world is going to fit in your Microsoft conspiracy fantasy.
That said, while I worked at Microsoft, I didn't participate in any conspiracies. That should be obvious and go without saying, but I forgot there were insane people here on Slashdot.
Secondly, regardless of how much research was done in Europe, the simple fact of the matter is that I can't go to a store right now and buy an OS made in Europe. I can buy a blender made in Europe, or a refrigerator, or a car. Why not a computer OS?
From my understanding, you don't legally have the right to burn a CD of the music unless allowed by the copyright holder. So if anything Apple's DRM allows you to do MORE than the law requires. I'd love to see evidence otherwise.
They just made it hidden by default. Like Safari does with the status bar.
(I had a friend who used Safari for like a year and a half, and one day he complained to me that he wished it had a status bar. It never occurred to him, apparently, to check the View menu for an option to turn on the status bar, the same way you would with any other toolbar. So maybe you do have a point about IE7... either way, get used to it, because Windows Live Messenger and some other Vista apps are the same way.)
Except for the people who KNOW how to fix it can do it in a matter of hours (probably, depending on the bug), but the people who have never worked with programming before will take literally months to do it. It's not a very efficient use of people's time if you respond to every bug with "fix it yourself." In addition, it's rude to burden somebody with months of work to improve a project that you (supposedly) support and want to see succeed.
OK, which platform's native GUI should they use? A native windows GUI look would look like shit on OS X.
Are you seriously suggesting to us that Firefox *does not know* what platform it's being installed on? Seriously?
OF COURSE Firefox knows what platform it's being installed on-- THEY COME IN DIFFERENT DOWNLOADS! Your post has to be about the dumbest thing I've ever read. It's like you're trying to make "make it look like the host OS" into some horrible technical process that has to happen when each OS already has its own installer.
And, as a Mac OS X user, I can safely say I'd much prefer a Windows Vista-looking theme to Firefox than the crummy one it actually comes with. Vista-themed apps aren't all that out-of-place in OS X, except possibly for the colors. The Firefox 2 theme just looks like some weird alien application.
Oookkkk... assuming this is actually true (mine works fine), what the hell relevance does this have to the topic? We're talking about FIREFOX losing its way, not IE7.
I don't work for Microsoft (my resume is a month out of date, sorry), but I do have to ask this question:
Guilty of what?
My "logic" doesn't declare anybody guilty of anything, by association or otherwise. I'm just basically saying "put up, or shut up" to European business in general. Stop suing American companies just because you can't compete with them. Either bend over and take it, or start some competition. (I'd love some competition. Like I said originally, if Europe hadn't been napping during the computer revolution, Microsoft probably wouldn't be a "convicted monopolist" right now.)
All I'm saying is that I'm sick of the complaints from Europeans on how the US manages the Internet, how US businesses (notably, Microsoft, Boeing, VISA, MasterCard) are "too successful" in Europe, etc... when the reality of the matter is that the reason those companies are so successful is because Europe basically had no decent competition of its own. The EU is FINING these companies because the EU failed to compete with them. IMO, that's worse than anything Microsoft did to become a "convicted monopolist."
Europe doesn't have a successful OS because European businesses were totally asleep at the wheel when they should have been working. So now you don't really have much of a right to tell American businesses how to manage themselves, and you certainly shouldn't be fining them for YOUR mistakes. American businesses took the risks, and now they're reaping the benefits.
If Europe wants to seriously become a competitor in these industries, they'd stop fining VISA and make their own competing credit card company. And, who knows, maybe they'd even succeed. There's an effort there with Airbus, albeit an entirely misguided one. (Gee, which airliner will the airlines choose? The one that requires billions of dollars in airport renovations, or the one that fits easily on existing runways?)
(Disclaimers to prevent stupid replies: Yes I know the EU wasn't finalized when those companies industries were in their infancy, yes I know Linux made Linux in Europe, yada yada.)
You mean the Kernel that was made specifically to be compatible with one already made in the US?
No doubt Linus is a great man and has taken on a huge project, but he's not enough by himself to change my mind about this issue. By the time Linux started, it was already too late for the computer industry in Europe anyway.
The deal was done as a coupon code. If you were one of the first thousand, you got a $200-off coupon code for that item. Once you had the code, you could come back at your leisure to set up the order for it.
I know you're trying to do some snarky Microsoft-bashing, but the last time was about two days ago when Slashdot posted that the number of people downloading movies and TV shows from Xbox Live was overloading Microsoft's servers because they didn't anticipate the demand.