 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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] san rrcom> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote in message
news:48a8cd9e$1@news.povray.org...
> 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.
That's quite a heavy statement. Are you trying to justify your hard earned
cash?
~Steve~
> ...Chambers
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.
Make quality software?
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> 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.
>
> Make quality software?
But it would have to be quality software that obeys all the relevant
standards *and* which doesn't compete with anything else. ;-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> 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?
You've shown it's scary.
But evil?
--
CONgress (n) - Opposite of PROgress
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Is there anything Microsoft could do that wouldn't be evil?
Heh heh. If you write it up all over with references as footnotes, I'd
love to pass it around.
Basically, I actually started criticizing Microsoft criticism once I
switched to Linux. I saw an alternative. It worked. It was stable. That
fact alone made me realize a lot of MS bashing I would hear was just
plain whining.
--
CONgress (n) - Opposite of PROgress
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> "Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote in message
> news:48a8cd9e$1@news.povray.org...
>> 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.
>
> That's quite a heavy statement. Are you trying to justify your hard earned
> cash?
Not so much. And it's not really the XBox itself, as it is a
consequence of gaming in the living room. It's much better than having
your PC in a separate room in the house.
In fact, I've pretty much decided to only buy laptops at home from now
on, for the same reason. Being able to do the things I like in the
living room, rather than a separate office / computer room, is so much
more enjoyable to me that it's worth the extra price.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well that's exactly my point: The more the reason why it's so
> unbelievably scary that MS succeeded in pulling out that stunt
It's not scary at all, it's not like ISO writes laws, and actually it just
outlined how bad ISO was organised (didn't they wonder that someday there
might be some big issue that lots of memebers sign up for and then never
vote again?). Anyway, it's not unique, just that for some reason there are
many more vocal anti-MS people online than anti-Nokia or anti-Ford etc.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> John VanSickle wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>> Make quality software?
>
> But it would have to be quality software that obeys all the relevant
> standards *and* which doesn't compete with anything else. ;-)
I have no problems with MS competing with other wares from other
vendors. The mere fact that their software enjoys a larger user base
than that of their competitors is not something I hold against them.
Nor do I have a problem with their packaging IE with their OS. It's
their right to offer their products in any combination that pleases them.
What I definitely do have a problem with, however, was mentioned earlier
in the thread: Running to governments in order to gain an advantage in
the market.[1] I despise that conduct in any corporation. I also
despise breach of contract, which was also mentioned.
Regards,
John
[1] Ironically, the elements of society that most heatedly denounce
corporations that get favors from the government show no interest in
eliminating the legislative powers by which those favors are granted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> It's not scary at all, it's not like ISO writes laws,
Yep. This sort of thing happens in the cell phone industry all the time
too. Carriers in one country don't want to pay for that patents on
technology owned by other countries, so they "corrupt" the standards
(making them work more poorly *and* more expensively) to avoid the
patent problems. No different, really.
I suspect if you were in any other industry, you'd see the same sort of
things happening.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
