>>   IMO they should invest their resources on making better products rather
>> than trying to gain some 0.1% of market share by dubious means, which is
>> only negative PR for them and can cause a backlash. You don't get a
>> positive image of yourself by bashing your opponents. You do it by doing
>> a good job and offering high-quality products, and letting your products
>> speak for you.
>
> That isn't the way M$ does business. Typically they achieve market share 
> by eliminating competition rather than producing quality products.
>
> Of course, if they *did* sit up and start making better products, that 
> would be nice...

AIUI MS are trying to crush Linux by improving their products in areas where 
they think Linux is better.  Nothing wrong with that, happens all the time 
in every industry - it's just up to Linux to fight back just as hard by 
improving their software in areas where they are currently behind MS (which 
they have been doing).  It's just normal business behaviour between two 
competitors.

Post a reply to this message

>  Why do you think MS is so hated and eg. Apple isn't? Because Apple 
> doesn't
> use so many glaringly dubious attack tactics and get the hatred of every
> living being on Earth.

Sorry, but that's obviously not true, maybe in online forums and chatrooms 
the geeks complain about MS, but in real life nobody cares, and that makes 
up for far more of the MS customer base.  Think about it, if *everyone* 
really hated MS so badly they would actively look for alternatives and MS 
would lose most of its market share, but it's not like that.

Next time someone says they hate MS and don't do anything right, ask them 
how they would run MS differently, and how they would make more profit than 
MS is currently making.  Bash MS or not, they are still a very successful 
company and can afford to pay the best people to make sure it continues to 
be very successful.  Some unknown person in an online forum (who knows 
virtually nothing about how MS works) saying how he thinks MS should be run 
differently is just laughable.

Post a reply to this message

On 1/27/2009 8:22 AM, Warp wrote:
> nemesis<nam### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>> Warp escreveu:
>>> 2) Why does Microsoft care about Linux, with its... what? Less than 1% market
>>> share?
>
>> I think they are more worried about enterprise Linux server installs,
>> which go beyond that puny 1% mark.
>
>    Even if 10% of companies used Linux in their servers, how much does
> that mean in the total revenue of Microsoft?

The majority of revenue for MS comes from two (sets of) products: Office 
and Windows.

For Windows, the licenses are pretty evenly split between new computer 
sales and Enterprise licenses[1].

While the PC Sales are a nice bag to hold, it means you're vulnerable to 
trends in the whole industry.  For instance, new PC sales this year were 
down, meaning a lot of MS's revenue was lost.

The Enterprise market is what they really like, because they sell 
licenses by the thousands.  If Linux makes headway here, combined with 
the loss of new PC licenses, then it can *really* hurt MS.

[1]Since the days of Windows 95, MS has failed to convince a majority of 
home users that upgrading is worthwhile.  They do sell *some* licenses 
as upgrades for home users, but it's a practically non-existent revenue 
stream for them.

...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Not sure. Over 6 months ago. Any idea where that might be stored? Any file
> timestamp unlikely to change since install?

ls -lh /bin/sh

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Not sure. Over 6 months ago. Any idea where that might be stored? Any
>> file timestamp unlikely to change since install?
> 
> ls -lh /bin/sh

2008-05-03 21:59

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Sorry, but that's obviously not true, maybe in online forums and chatrooms
> the geeks complain about MS, but in real life nobody cares, and that makes
> up for far more of the MS customer base.  Think about it, if *everyone*
> really hated MS so badly they would actively look for alternatives and MS
> would lose most of its market share, but it's not like that.

I read that people get used to things working badly, and I confirmed it with
my sister. I once watched through the process after she logged in, pointed
at the error popups that appeared, and she just indifferently said "oh yeah
that appears every time, I just close it". She didn't even like... *tell*
me so I can try to fix it.

Or the time I saw her very quickly click on all the FlashBlock placeholders
on a Flash-heavy page (it was clear she had done that a dozen times). She
didn't ever think there had to be an easier way (there is a domain
whitelist).

Post a reply to this message

> I read that people get used to things working badly, and I confirmed it 
> with
> my sister. I once watched through the process after she logged in, pointed
> at the error popups that appeared, and she just indifferently said "oh 
> yeah
> that appears every time, I just close it". She didn't even like... *tell*
> me so I can try to fix it.

Yeh that was kinda my point, normal people don't care enough about things 
like that to even try to find a solution, let alone go around publically 
announcing how they think MS could be run better.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> Yeh that was kinda my point, normal people don't care enough about 
> things like that to even try to find a solution, let alone go around 
> publically announcing how they think MS could be run better.

M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow 
"normal" for computers to not work correctly.

I mean, if your car occasionally stalled for no apparent reason, you'd 
demand to have it fixed. But if your computer sometimes doesn't work, 
everybody seems to think that that's just "how it is", and that this 
incorrect behaviour is somehow "acceptable".

Unfortunately, as more and more stuff becomes computer-controlled, 
people find it more and more acceptable for things to not work properly. 
  For example, mobile phones that occasionally "crash" and have to be 
"rebooted" to make them work again. TVs that occasionally "forget" where 
all the channels are and have to rescan for them. And so on.

10 years ago, if you bought a TV and it sometimes stopped working 
properly, you'd call the manufacturers and demand that they fix it. 
Today, it seems to be the attitude that "oh, well, it's a high-tech 
thing; it's inherantly impossible to make it actually work properly". WTF?

Thank you, Micro$oft.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
> I read that people get used to things working badly, and I confirmed it with
> my sister. I once watched through the process after she logged in, pointed
> at the error popups that appeared, and she just indifferently said "oh yeah
> that appears every time, I just close it". She didn't even like... *tell*
> me so I can try to fix it.

Exactly.  People just take it for granted that such things are normal 
behaviour associated with computers.  They don't think it could be any 
different.  That's why so many people hate computers and would gladly 
drop it if there was other way to watch videos, chat and browse the web. 
  They think it's an issue with computers.

> Or the time I saw her very quickly click on all the FlashBlock placeholders
> on a Flash-heavy page (it was clear she had done that a dozen times). She
> didn't ever think there had to be an easier way (there is a domain
> whitelist).

FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my 
parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single 
Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox 
open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and 
click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because 
she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before her...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escreveu:
> M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow 
> "normal" for computers to not work correctly.

Oh, crap!  should've read this first... who said top posting is bad? :P

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:

> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my 
> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single 
> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox 
> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and 
> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because 
> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before her...

...did you just call somebody a dog? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> As someone who runs Linux on his desktop... I agree.
> 
> I use KDE 3.5. Yesterday I tried GNOME. Today I tried KDE 4. My opinion
> was "I want to go write a desktop environment from scratch NOW! None of the
> current ones is any good!"

	Try KDE 4.2? Just came out and is "supposed" to be the first in the 4.x
series that was really meant for end users.

	You may be right about DE's, however, Windows doesn't even come close
when it comes to window managers. No way will I sacrifice my WM for
anything Windows provides.
	
-- 
"Scotty, beam us a board!" (2x4 drops from sky)


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:

> 	You may be right about DE's, however, Windows doesn't even come close
> when it comes to window managers. No way will I sacrifice my WM for
> anything Windows provides.

I've yet to find a WM that's less annoying than Windows.

(Unless you count AmigaOS, anyway...)

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:01:45 +0100, scott wrote:

> AIUI MS are trying to crush Linux by improving their products in areas
> where they think Linux is better.

If they do that, that's fine.  Historically, they haven't, though (in 
general, I'm sure someone could say "well, they did here"), but instead 
have engaged in FUD and using scare tactics ("Linux is tainted by 
proprietary code that Microsoft owns", for example - allegations that 
have never been proven, but have in fact been successfully refuted over 
and over).  Of course, the use of these kinds of scare tactics pull 
resources from Linux development in order to defend against them, so MS 
uses that strategy to slow development of a competing product down.  With 
varying degrees of effectiveness - having a pool of volunteer coders 
helps with that....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow
> "normal" for computers to not work correctly.

	Unintended side effect. People think it's normal because it happens on
most other computers they know (all running MS).

> I mean, if your car occasionally stalled for no apparent reason, you'd
> demand to have it fixed. But if your computer sometimes doesn't work,

	Not if almost all your friends' cars also exhibited this behavior.

-- 
"Scotty, beam us a board!" (2x4 drops from sky)


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:26:24 -0500, Warp wrote:

> >   If Microsoft (and especially Steve Ballmer) stopped trolling around
> >   and
> > concentrated only on what they are good at, they could get a better
> > reputation. But no. I think that at least with Steve Ballmer it's some
> > kind of odd twisted imago reputation which he *wants* to maintain, for
> > some incomprehensible reason.

> For Ballmer (and Gates before him), it's all about control.  They don't 
> like what they can't control, so they have to either try to control it or 
> destroy it.

  And that's why he always tries as hard as possible to become the
laughing stock of the internet with his stupid antics?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >   If Microsoft (and especially Steve Ballmer) stopped trolling around and
> > concentrated only on what they are good at, they could get a better
> > reputation.

> I don't think so.

  You are probably right: The damage has already been done and there's
nothing MS can do to fix it.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my 
> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single 
> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox 
> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and 
> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because 
> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before her...

  Download an IE skin for Firefox and change Firefox's icon to that of IE.
See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with it.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   You are probably right: The damage has already been done and there's
> nothing MS can do to fix it.

Exactly.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow 
> "normal" for computers to not work correctly.

Not really. Personal computers never worked consistently right. Mainframes, 
yes, but not micros or PCs.  (And by PC, I mean everything from TRS-80 to 
Apple ][ to Commodore PET to ...)

> I mean, if your car occasionally stalled for no apparent reason, you'd 
> demand to have it fixed. But if your computer sometimes doesn't work, 
> everybody seems to think that that's just "how it is", and that this 
> incorrect behaviour is somehow "acceptable".

Because nobody really understands how a computer is *supposed* to work. 
Those that do hang out on geek lists and bitch about how broken they are.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   You are probably right: The damage has already been done and there's
> > nothing MS can do to fix it.

> Exactly.

  But they could at least try, rather than keep making an ass of themselves.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
>> Or the time I saw her very quickly click on all the FlashBlock
>> placeholders on a Flash-heavy page (it was clear she had done that a
>> dozen times). She didn't ever think there had to be an easier way (there
>> is a domain whitelist).
> 
> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my
> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single
> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox
> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and
> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because
> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before
> her...

I used to use that machine until I got a new one, so it has four passworded
accounts, one for each family member.

IE isn't used in any machine in my house :)

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   But they could at least try, rather than keep making an ass of themselves.

Like what? I'm not sure what they do that's "making an ass of themselves" 
that's anywhere near as bad as Apple mocking them, for example.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   But they could at least try, rather than keep making an ass of themselves.

> Like what?

  Like Steve Ballmer stopping making himself the laughingstock of the
world year after year.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escreveu:
> nemesis wrote:
> 
>> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my 
>> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single 
>> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox 
>> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and 
>> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because 
>> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before 
>> her...
> 
> ...did you just call somebody a dog? ;-)

yes, my sister actually.  It's ok between brothers.  I call her stupid, 
she calls me nerd. ;)

Post a reply to this message

Warp escreveu:
> nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my 
>> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single 
>> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox 
>> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and 
>> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because 
>> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before her...
> 
>   Download an IE skin for Firefox and change Firefox's icon to that of IE.
> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with it.

I might try that.  I remember at University I used to change the IE icon 
to point to Firefox in every station I got to. :D

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
> I used to use that machine until I got a new one, so it has four passworded
> accounts, one for each family member.

While I lived in the house, the PC was organized that way, yes.  Once I 
left, they felt there should be an easier way. :P

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Like Steve Ballmer stopping making himself the laughingstock of the
> world year after year.

Hey, it works for Madonna. At least you know what *his* focus is. :-)

Somehow, I don't see him being all suave like Jobs. And unlike Apple 
computers, people don't generally make the buying decisions on Windows 
enterprise servers based on whether the CEO jumps around a bunch at product 
launches. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:01:03 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:26:24 -0500, Warp wrote:
> 
>> >   If Microsoft (and especially Steve Ballmer) stopped trolling around
>> >   and
>> > concentrated only on what they are good at, they could get a better
>> > reputation. But no. I think that at least with Steve Ballmer it's
>> > some kind of odd twisted imago reputation which he *wants* to
>> > maintain, for some incomprehensible reason.
> 
>> For Ballmer (and Gates before him), it's all about control.  They don't
>> like what they can't control, so they have to either try to control it
>> or destroy it.
> 
>   And that's why he always tries as hard as possible to become the
> laughing stock of the internet with his stupid antics?

I have a feeling that he really doesn't care what other people think of 
him.  As much as he's worth, why should he?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   Download an IE skin for Firefox and change Firefox's icon to that of IE.
> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with it.

I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?

Still, that's one way to get people to use sane software. ;-) I wonder 
if you can do something similar for OpenOffice? (Although, to be honest, 
you wouldn't need to change *that* many things...)

Also... I remember having a conversation that went something like this:

Me: Dude, you don't seriously use IE, do you?
Her: No, don't be stupid! I use Avant.
Me: ...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 escreveu:
> Warp wrote:
> 
>>   Download an IE skin for Firefox and change Firefox's icon to that of 
>> IE.
>> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with it.
> 
> I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?

She uses MSN a lot and perhaps Hotmail also works better -- integrated 
:P -- in IE.

> Me: Dude, you don't seriously use IE, do you?
> Her: No, don't be stupid! I use Avant.
> Me: ...

LOL

Post a reply to this message

>>> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with it.
>>
>> I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?
> 
> She uses MSN a lot and perhaps Hotmail also works better -- integrated 
> :P -- in IE.

I'm guessing also that a lot of those pointless Flash games and similar 
only work well in IE.

>> Me: Dude, you don't seriously use IE, do you?
>> Her: No, don't be stupid! I use Avant.
>> Me: ...
> 
> LOL

"No! Of *course* I don't use IE! It's buggy and insecure. I use [a thin 
skin over the top of IE] instead. It's way better."

"...uh..."

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:25:27 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>>> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?
>> 
>> She uses MSN a lot and perhaps Hotmail also works better -- integrated
>> :P -- in IE.
> 
> I'm guessing also that a lot of those pointless Flash games and similar
> only work well in IE.

Um, not if they're Flash games....Flash runs in Firefox....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:54:41 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>   Download an IE skin for Firefox and change Firefox's icon to that of
>>   IE.
>> See how long it takes for her to notice there's something wrong with
>> it.
> 
> I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?

Outside of Microsoft-owned sites, there are sites that still use 
ActiveX?  Really?

I don't run into them *ever* unless I'm downloading something from the 
MSDN site.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm guessing also that a lot of those pointless Flash games and similar
>> only work well in IE.
> 
> Um, not if they're Flash games....Flash runs in Firefox....

And how much do you want to bet that the entire site markup is only 
tested with IE?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm guessing the first time she visits a site that demands ActiveX...?
> 
> Outside of Microsoft-owned sites, there are sites that still use 
> ActiveX?  Really?
> 
> I don't run into them *ever* unless I'm downloading something from the 
> MSDN site.

The server administration console for Trend Micro requires ActiveX, for 
example. (Not that this matters to a home user. I'm pretty sure I've 
seen various Internet equipment or ISP websites that also demand ActiveX 
though.)

I'm drawing a blank on real "websites" that require ActiveX, but I think 
there are a few outside M$.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The server administration console for Trend Micro requires ActiveX,

I've seen a fair number of "enterprise" type sites needing ActiveX. 
Basically, places where it's cheaper to tell your customers what to use than 
it is to maintain multiple versions and break out of the sandbox in various 
ways.

> I'm drawing a blank on real "websites" that require ActiveX, 

Not since XMLHTTP stopped being an ActiveX control and got ported to other 
browsers.

Even MS is getting away from it, really.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Neither of those is going to stand long.
> 
> I see MS doing lots of new things that aren't on Linux, tho. You don't 
> stay ahead by not inventing anything new.
> 
What exactly? Just being clear that "every time" they announce some new 
"feature", its either something like .NET, which a lot of people don't 
want at all, or trust, *or* someone goes, "Gee, doesn't GFBunk (or some 
similarly weirdly named thing) already do that on such an such OS?"

>> BTW, here the one about how the EU may have finally gotten so annoyed 
>> at IE being integrated in MS' machines that they may require new 
>> installs to "include" an alternative browser "standard" in all of 
>> them? Can't imagine that making things better for them either...
> 
> Or, honestly, for the users or browser vendors. At this point, nobody 
> can actually *sell* a browser, so I'm not sure what the point of not 
> giving away a browser is, or how you decide which of the 8 or 10 popular 
> browsers out there you should be including.
Hmm. Well there is that. But, the point is "competing", not "every", 
so... Sure they will just pick which ever one has the most market share 
at the time, which would be... Hmm... lol

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> its either something like .NET, which a lot of people don't 
> want at all,

There's a lot of people who don't want a computer at all. Hence, OSS is 
worthless.

> or trust, *or* someone goes, "Gee, doesn't GFBunk (or some 
> similarly weirdly named thing) already do that on such an such OS?"

I see Linux copying a lot of stuff that MS does on Linux file systems, for 
example. When Linux adds something like the ability to watch for changes to 
the file system or the ability to take a snapshot of the file system without 
disrupting operations, I don't see too many people complaining "Hey, doesn't 
Microsoft do that already?"  But if Microsoft adds virtual desktops, I can 
guarantee people will croon that's been in Linux for years.

You're getting caught by confirmation bias here, methinks. Any small 
improvement is going to be seen as a small incremental improvement just to 
make money on upgrades, or sufficiently close to what someone else already 
did that you can dismiss it. If they do something large and new, you say "I 
don't trust Microsoft and they're the only ones I can get this from, so it 
isn't valuable." (While leaving off the "to me" you should be putting at the 
end, mind.)  So, no, of course you don't think they've done anything new.

The list of new things they've done recently is widely available, so I won't 
bother going thru it.

> Hmm. Well there is that. But, the point is "competing", not "every", 
> so... Sure they will just pick which ever one has the most market share 
> at the time, which would be... Hmm... lol

That's my point. The inclusion of IE isn't keeping anyone from buying 
Firefox or Safari.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow 
>> "normal" for computers to not work correctly.
> 
> Not really. Personal computers never worked consistently right. 
> Mainframes, yes, but not micros or PCs.  (And by PC, I mean everything 
> from TRS-80 to Apple ][ to Commodore PET to ...)

Or rather, you mean "any computer that hasn't really worked right"? :-P

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Invisible wrote:
>>> M$ has somehow succeeded in convincing people that it is somehow 
>>> "normal" for computers to not work correctly.
>>
>> Not really. Personal computers never worked consistently right. 
>> Mainframes, yes, but not micros or PCs.  (And by PC, I mean everything 
>> from TRS-80 to Apple ][ to Commodore PET to ...)
> 
> Or rather, you mean "any computer that hasn't really worked right"? :-P

BTW, I'm not sure where Microsoft comes into this, except as being the first 
popular OS that ran on hardware they didn't make themselves. When your PSU 
is flakey and it makes your video card crash your video card driver with 
spurious interrupts, somehow it's Microsoft that gets blamed.

As someone who drove college cars in college, it didn't take Microsoft to 
convince me that if you have POS hardware, you're going to spend most 
weekends underneath it fixing it. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
>>
>> As someone who runs Linux on his desktop... I agree.

I might second this, but I have no idea where KDE and Gnome are going
right now.

> 
> BTW, both latest Gnome and KDE 4 are pure finesse when compared to the
> geeky desktop environments I had to cope with in the old days.  Anyone
> remembers when Gnome used to come with Lispy Sawfish and Xeyes? ;)

Both KDE and Gnome have always (when I've tested them, haven't for a
while now) been awful compared to light, fast, capable and geeky
Afterstep. They are just too Explorer -like with start-bars etc (which
is probably a good thing from a basic user's eye)

> They also hold up quite well when compared to Vista.  Aqua is another
> level, though...

Aqua is the one that OSX uses, right? It's still pretty far narrowed
down to Apple hardware and the short moments I've had with it haven't
been extra pleasant, but it could be good when you get used to it (I
just don't know, the first contacts just haven't been wonderous).

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> 
> FlashBlock?!  My sister won't even touch Firefox!  Anytime I'm at my
> parent's and leave the computer for others to use -- it's a single
> Windows passwordless session (because it's "easy") -- I leave Firefox
> open with a clean new tab.  First thing she does is close Firefox and
> click on the old blue e.  It's like dog conditioning, I guess, because
> she seems to not even realize it's a web browser sitting just before her...

Have you ever tried, what happens if you change the Big ol' E to start
Firefox? :)

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> The list of new things they've done recently is widely available, so I 
> won't bother going thru it.
> 
Seen the lists, seen the rebuttals. Still not impressed. Especially when 
some of them are things like "Added a mess of new features to DirectX", 
which would be available without it, except that they insisted you "had 
to" make them only work in DirectX. A lot of the time, the problem with 
OpenGL isn't that it "can't" do something, its that the hardware doesn't 
let it use those features. The other issue is a correlary, "If you can't 
use those features, it takes longer to replicate them the hard way, than 
if it could just "use" them in the first place.

And again. I have "never" seen any case, personally, where someone said, 
"Ooh! MS is doing that with their OS? Better put it in Linux!" Not 
unless it is something in the class of user interfaces, and those tend 
to be used to "hide" things you don't want people mucking with, as much 
as making it easier to use. Its.. taking a 1940's engine, slapping a 
2009 body on it, applying a fancy new kind of paint, then saying, "Look, 
look! Isn't the new version great, compared to that ugly hack over 
their?", while the people you are pointing at have a brand spanking new 
turbo charged, fuel efficient, bio-diesel, electronic fuel injected, 
monster, sitting in a basic frame and a cheap plastic shell. Only... 
That is rapidly changing, and one side still has the better "engine", no 
matter how many gadgets the other one glues onto theirs, without 
fundamentally changing it.

Windows borrows, Linux evolves. The only time it ever seems to work the 
other way around is when MS decides that Windows needs to poison the 
well, and Linux has to adapt by developing resistance to the poison, 
like all the attempts made over the years by MS to "obfuscate" 
protocols, with the clear, and often within internal documents, intent, 
of sabotaging compatibility.

The problem isn't Windows per-say. Its the entire philosophy behind it, 
and the compromises made to a) rush it out the door all the time, or b) 
undermine others, just to get a slight edge over everyone else. Its 
better to work towards a fully usable solution, not keep tacking on half 
assed ones, the way they end up doing it, from their "new" security 
model, which just causes people like me, who "despise" storing data on 
the same partition as the OS, to pull our hair out, to defraggers that 
still, to this day, don't have the common sense to defrag the "unused" 
space, or optimize program access (never mind all the third parties that 
figured that one out as far back as Win3.11), to.. an endless list.

FOSS has an excuse for this, they don't have thousands of developers 
working 24/7 on *one* project, trying to make it bloody work right. 
MS... doesn't. Their goal is just to make things look impressive, and do 
enough to sell the product. Its not until it becomes obvious that they 
have problems, or someone else is biting their ankles, or something 
never did work, and enough people are annoyed, that they even "attempt" 
to fix it.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
>
> I see Linux copying a lot of stuff that MS does on Linux file systems,
> for example. When Linux adds something like the ability to watch for
> changes to the file system or the ability to take a snapshot of the file
> system without disrupting operations, I don't see too many people
> complaining "Hey, doesn't Microsoft do that already?"  

Is there such thing from MS? I know that (at least some) storage systems
can do that and VMWare ESX can do that, but is there implementation from
MS (possibly with HyperV?)?

> But if Microsoft
> adds virtual desktops, I can guarantee people will croon that's been in
> Linux for years.

I'll shout "Finally" rather than croon. One thing I've been missing on
Windows since the 90's.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
> MS... doesn't. Their goal is just to make things look impressive, and do
> enough to sell the product. Its not until it becomes obvious that they
> 

Part of this has been disgussed here before - MS lives by selling
software (and hardware) and most of computer users don't have a clue of
what's happening under the bonnet, so they have to do (also) visual
changes (which aren't always improvements) to make people see a
difference to older system. Hence one goal automatically is to make
things look impressive.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> BTW, I'm not sure where Microsoft comes into this, except as being the 
> first popular OS that ran on hardware they didn't make themselves. When 
> your PSU is flakey and it makes your video card crash your video card 
> driver with spurious interrupts, somehow it's Microsoft that gets blamed.
> 
> As someone who drove college cars in college, it didn't take Microsoft 
> to convince me that if you have POS hardware, you're going to spend most 
> weekends underneath it fixing it. :-)

Yeah, that's right. Because a faulty power supply *completely explains* 
why Word crashes when you open certain documents. Oh, wait... actually 
it doesn't. :-P

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Yeah, that's right. Because a faulty power supply *completely explains* 
> why Word crashes when you open certain documents. Oh, wait... actually 
> it doesn't. :-P

I didn't say that.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> And again. I have "never" seen any case, personally, where someone said, 
> "Ooh! MS is doing that with their OS? Better put it in Linux!"

No, but I've seen things added to Linux that were available a while ago on 
Windows. Of course the Linux people didn't go "had to have that," at least 
not out loud, any more than features MS "steals" from Linux are advertised 
that way.

> Windows borrows, Linux evolves.

Yeah, OK. Whatever.

> which just causes people like me, who "despise" storing data on 
> the same partition as the OS, to pull our hair out,

I had no problem moving my home directory to a different partition.

> to defraggers that 
> still, to this day, don't have the common sense to defrag the "unused" 
> space, 

Sure they do. Have for ages.

> or optimize program access (never mind all the third parties that 
> figured that one out as far back as Win3.11), to.. an endless list.

They do that too, and have for ages.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Is there such thing from MS?

What, watching for changes without polling?  There have been multiple ways 
to do that sort of thing for years and years. I think Win95 had it, and more 
recently with NTFS you have the USN journal, so your program doesn't even 
need to be running to watch for changes.

> I'll shout "Finally" rather than croon. One thing I've been missing on
> Windows since the 90's.

Well, there's a bunch of add-on packages that do a decent job of it.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message