Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?


Give money to big open source competitor: Evil.
(http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/is_microsoft_trying_to_kill_apache)

Give money to big commercial OS competitor (aka Apple): Evil.

Use open source without paying (BSD TCP stack): Evil freeloaders.

Do it yourself instead: Evil proprietary software vendor.

Add your own features: Evil proprietary software vendor.

Follow the standard: Evil proprietary software (See Sun's Java lawsuit)

Make the standard: Evil proprietary standards.

Mimic someone else's features: So evil we'll sue you over look-and-feel.

Don't upgrade your software at all: stifling the web ecology.
(http://www.onenaught.com/posts/44/microsofts-internet-explorer-slows-down-web-development)

Don't include the software at all: Windows package management sucks 
because you have to download stuff.

Charge money: Microsoft tax.

Don't charge money: Illegal bundling.

Don't give away source code: Evil proprietary.

Give away source code: Evil proprietary.

I suspect if Microsoft open-sourced Windows and allowed derivatives, 
Linux users would complain they're just trying to take development 
resources away from Linux. :-)

Yes, this is somewhat of a troll. But I'm interested in hearing what 
people think MS could do that wouldn't be either evil or immediately put 
MS completely out of business.

If you don't like trolls, don't answer. :-)

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?
> 
> 
> Give money to big open source competitor: Evil.
> (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/is_microsoft_trying_to_kill_apache) 
> 
> 
> Give money to big commercial OS competitor (aka Apple): Evil.
> 
> Use open source without paying (BSD TCP stack): Evil freeloaders.
> 
> Do it yourself instead: Evil proprietary software vendor.
> 
> Add your own features: Evil proprietary software vendor.
> 
> Follow the standard: Evil proprietary software (See Sun's Java lawsuit)
> 
> Make the standard: Evil proprietary standards.
> 
> Mimic someone else's features: So evil we'll sue you over look-and-feel.
> 
> Don't upgrade your software at all: stifling the web ecology.
>
(http://www.onenaught.com/posts/44/microsofts-internet-explorer-slows-down-web-development)

> 
> 
> Don't include the software at all: Windows package management sucks 
> because you have to download stuff.
> 
> Charge money: Microsoft tax.
> 
> Don't charge money: Illegal bundling.
> 
> Don't give away source code: Evil proprietary.
> 
> Give away source code: Evil proprietary.
> 
> I suspect if Microsoft open-sourced Windows and allowed derivatives, 
> Linux users would complain they're just trying to take development 
> resources away from Linux. :-)
> 
> Yes, this is somewhat of a troll. But I'm interested in hearing what 
> people think MS could do that wouldn't be either evil or immediately put 
> MS completely out of business.
> 
> If you don't like trolls, don't answer. :-)
> 
You've put words to thoughts that have been rattling around in my own 
head but couldn't pull together.  Basically their sin is being big. 
Still hate 'em of course.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?

Sure, the XBox is a great product, and has pretty much killed my impulse 
to game on a PC.

> Follow the standard: Evil proprietary software (See Sun's Java lawsuit)

That one was actually because they didn't follow the standard, even 
though they signed a contract saying they would.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

> Yes, this is somewhat of a troll. But I'm interested in hearing what 
> people think MS could do that wouldn't be either evil or immediately put 
> MS completely out of business.

Hehe yeh, I have never heard any MS-basher suggest an alternative business 
strategy that would actually make MS a decent amount of profit.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> 
> Yes, this is somewhat of a troll. But I'm interested in hearing what 
> people think MS could do that wouldn't be either evil or immediately put 
> MS completely out of business.
> 

Start a colony somewhere in South America? Oh ... wait ... someone 
already did that and the end result was Evil(tm)

I dunno. I don't think there is anything that Microsoft could do that 
wouldn't be construed as evil. I know of one MS subsidiary (Ensemble) 
that had a pretty good sense of humor about itself becoming part of the 
MS "empire" They had screens throughout their office with MS and a Borg 
cube. ;) [Yeah, ask me how I know... I interviewed there, I cracked on 
the first onsite interview, though... :( I knew what their process was 
like, I was so freaking nervous that I forgot everything I knew :/]

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?

  Microsoft is scary as hell.

  The OOXML issue is a good example of this. Microsoft convinced a big bunch
of countries to raise their voting status in the ISO standardization
organization for the sole reason to vote on the OOXML standard. After
that these countries abandoned the ISO organization, causing it problems
(because by the ISO rules any standard requires at least 50% of votes to
be passed, and now there's a big bunch of voters who are not voting).

  Let me repeat that: Microsoft, a PRIVATE COMPANY, succeeded in making
a bunch of COUNTRIES to raise their voting status on ISO for the sole
purpose of voting for a standard proposal made by that PRIVATE COMPANY.

  Not individuals. Not other companies. COUNTRIES. Independent states.
Those with independent governments.

  If that doesn't scare someone shitless, I don't know what will. The only
other organization which has the same kind of power over the world countries
is the OPEC cartel. And this isn't a private company, but a bunch of other
countries.

  Is it any wonder that *anything* this monster organization does is seen
as evil?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:


OPEC.Evilness = Microsoft.Evilness * 1000

Post a reply to this message

>  The OOXML issue is a good example of this. Microsoft convinced a big 
> bunch
> of countries

You massively over-estimate how interested governments are in such 
matters... They have lots of *way* more important things to be concerned 
about than whether Microsoft can push an XML standard through ISO or not! 
Last time I checked, the governments didn't even run the national standard 
organisations in most countries, let alone anything to do with ISO.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> You massively over-estimate how interested governments are in such 
> matters... They have lots of *way* more important things to be concerned 
> about than whether Microsoft can push an XML standard through ISO or not! 
> Last time I checked, the governments didn't even run the national standard 
> organisations in most countries, let alone anything to do with ISO.

  Well that's exactly my point: The more the reason why it's so
unbelievably scary that MS succeeded in pulling out that stunt (and
the exact reason why the ISO organization was in trouble after the
voting for OOXML was over: The countries were not interested in
anything else than the OOXML and abandoned the organization after
the fact).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?
> 
> Sure, the XBox is a great product, and has pretty much killed my impulse 
> to game on a PC.

But... but... It's running *Windows*!  And it has DRM!  Eeeevil! ;-)


>> Follow the standard: Evil proprietary software (See Sun's Java lawsuit)
> 
> That one was actually because they didn't follow the standard, even 
> though they signed a contract saying they would.

They *did* follow the standard. They passed more of the 
standards-checking tests than Sun's implementation did. You just had to 
check the checkbox in the development environment that said "complain 
about Microsoft-only extensions" if you wanted complaints about 
Microsoft-only extensions. The MS JVM was actually better and more 
standard than Sun's were.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message