Microsoft takes on the free world

[Doris Day - MFB]

I disagree. The new System Center tools will make my work life much
easier. I'm starting with System Center Essentials as I don't need another
OS roll-out solution so this smaller all-in-one model will work out best
until we need the bigger father solution later.

I find this software to be VERY innovative.

Apple has a different take on Microsoft's innovation. Take a look at
this ...

Be interesting to see how Microsoft protects its "innovation" and patents
when Apple goes after it. Like I said ... IP rights are bullshit, no
matter who tries to exercise those rights. Only the lawyers will win and
the whole industry will be thrown into chaos. Should MickeyMouse, after all
these years of NOT protecting it's patents against Linux, all of a sudden
try, they're in for quite a tussle. Will be fun to witness when IBM and
Apple and others start exercising theirs as well.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

I don't care so much about who gets sued. But when you get sued and lose
and lose repeatedly (though not every time) I think that speaks to the
character of the company. The last I read, the EU is still complaining
that Microsoft is not following the rules of the last settlement. If
Microsoft really really was such a honorable company, they wouldn't need
to walk the line, the would be praised for going one step farther than
necessary.

When I was a Microsoft fanboi, I believe that Microsoft would change it's
ways and would actually start doing what was right. Though this is from
the Inquirer and a couple of years old, it still says alot about Microsoft
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=24621

9 Billion dollars in lawsuit settlements, it sure seems like they could
have avoided alot of that, if they really were a company of honor and
doing what was right.

It's only money and there are enough Wintards around willing to pay the
Microsoft tax to support these fines and penalties. The lusers -
Microsoft's customers as always.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

At the moment, I'm not saying it's better or worse either. I'm saying
that most of the recent technologies that MS has released in the past
few years are from other smaller companies they have bought, then just
rebranded the software. Or imitate the UI features from competitors
(Visual Interface Similar To Apple), or imitate features of the security
model of more secure products (such as *.nix OSes).

The reason MickeyMouse is now trying to take on the world ...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=437

A most concise and right-on explanation about what MickeyMouse is doing and
a pretty sound conclusion ...

http://tinyurl.com/2ldngh

"Should Microsoft really start to sue companies, then maybe the United
States will be avoided as a market by an increasing number of companies,
headquarters of American companies (except for Novell) will be moved
outside the U.S., and Microsoft will be responsible for the worst recession
in the history of the United States!"

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Nina DiBoy]

I disagree. The new System Center tools will make my work life much
easier. I'm starting with System Center Essentials as I don't need
another OS roll-out solution so this smaller all-in-one model will work
out best until we need the bigger father solution later.

I find this software to be VERY innovative.

I said it to Dick, but I'll say it to you too.

Most of the recent technologies that MS has released in the past few
years are from other smaller companies they have bought, then just
rebranded the software. Or imitate the UI features from competitors
(Visual Interface Similar To Apple), or imitate features of the security
model of more secure products (such as *.nix OSes).

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"Very simple Nothing I like better than insulting Linsux losers, fanboys
and trolls like you."

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Guest]

I just want to say I think Doris is HAWT!!!

Actually I just wanted to contribute to the discussion and didnt have an
opinion either way on the MS monoploly thing. I work on the systems that
people pay me to work on. Dont really care who's they are as long as I get
paid. ... That way I can keep building my "shrine" to Doris.

 

[Dale White]

I'm not going to dig around for the full transcript, but if you will accept
wikipedia for a source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The last paragraph in the appeals section

"However, the appeals court did affirm in part Judge Jackson's ruling on
monopolization. The D.C. Circuit remanded the case for consideration of a
proper remedy for "drastically altered scope of liability" that the court
had upheld, under Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The DOJ, now under the
administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, announced on September 6,
2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead
seek a lesser antitrust penalty."
Not wanting to make this a political argument, but under Clinton, they were
pushing to break-up Microsoft, under George W, they opted to slap the wrist
and move on. If nothing else, the court of appeals agreed Microsoft was in a
monopoly postion

From: http://www.antitrustinstitute.org/Archives/61.ashx
While Bush said he would not take a stand on Microsoft, Sen. Slade Gorton
told reporters, with Bush standing silently at his side, that Bush would
"seek to resolve [the case] in a way that does not break up the company" and
that "I don't think a Bush administration would have brought the case to
begin with."

 

[ArameFarpado]

If Microsoft did not innovate, Vista would be "EXACTLY* the same as
Windows XP. It isn't!

I am not saying it is better or worse. I am just stating what you, so
obviously, miss.

Vista ?
Windows born of a mac-os sorry imitation, and now vista is it returning to
it's origins, imitating mac-os again in it's gui.
The so call WOW has started 5 years ago...

It's core beguins now to work in a way that unix does over decades... no
credits for that at all.

Inovation? you're still using anti-virus, anti-spywares, using extra apps to
try to mantain your system "clean", still defraging disks (do you know
you're the only guys that still does it?), and the list goes go on and on
of obsolete things.

New things ?
I used UDF cdroms in win95 with a program called "directcd" from adaptec,
and now M$ changed it's name (and proabably other details) to "Live File
System" and act as it is there creation...
I wonder if those corrupts also patented that...

In a while, M$ will be presenting IPv6 to the world as it's inovation...

you're bullshit is amaizing:
you use to say that linux sucks mostly because some hardware doesn't work in
there... now that the same shit is appening with vista, you say it's the
manufactories fault. wasn't allways ?

i don't hate windows, no sr... (use it until win98SE, then i start to
desagree with some of the actitudes the newer windows have to the user)
but i would like to be free to chosse my OS when i go to the store to
purchase a new computer, and that is almost impossible in my country for
now, until things are this way, i have to be hungry with microsoft and call
it a corrupt campany. Other than that, i don't care to what others use for
SO... only matters what i want to use.

This attack to the free software by microsoft is imoral, and mister Balmer
should'd be hanged side-by-side with Saddan... yeah, i'm really pistoff.


best regards

 

[Frank]

Such as?
MS currently controls about 93% of the desktop OS market.

So... you won't consider MS a monopoly until when? until they've acheived
95%? 98%?
Oh OK, that clears it up...

Primary characteristics of a monopoly
a.. Single Seller: For a pure monopoly to take place, only one company can
be selling the good. A company can have a monopoly on certain goods and not
on other goods.
b.. No close substitutes: Monopoly is not merely the state of having a
unique or recognizable product, but also that there are no close substitutes
available for the function the good fills.
c.. Price maker: Because a single firm controls the total supply in a pure
monopoly, it is able to exert a significant degree of control over the price
by changing the quantity supplied.
d.. Significant Barrier of Entry: In a monopoly, it is usually harder for
other firms to get into the industry to provide the same goods or services
as the company who is already the dominant firm of the industry.


-- hell, even monkeyboy Ballmer loves to play semantics:
=======================================
"We don't have a monopoly. We have market share. There's a difference."
- Steve Ballmer
=======================================

john...monopolies in business are not illegal in the USA.
Frank

 

[ArameFarpado]

Sorry to came back, but i just found another obsolete thing, and it is in
this newsgroup:

this ng is blocking utf8 charset ?
i send my reply in uft8 and it turned to us-ascii...

you are using ascii and iso8859 charsets that use diferent codepages for
diferent countrys and blocking utf8 that is the unification for all
ocidental world.
a Vista newsgroup doesn't suport utf8 yet ? great inovation, yes sr...

 

[Frank]

I said it to Dick, but I'll say it to you too.

Most of the recent technologies that MS has released in the past few
years are from other smaller companies they have bought, then just
rebranded the software. Or imitate the UI features from competitors
(Visual Interface Similar To Apple), or imitate features of the security
model of more secure products (such as *.nix OSes).

Actually that's the old "go to" remark about MS innovation.
Reality is MS's R&D is one of the largest, best funded and most prolific
R&D's the world has ever seen.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/mar06/03-065000PatentPR.mspx

Frank

 

[Justin]

I said it to Dick, but I'll say it to you too.

Most of the recent technologies that MS has released in the past few years
are from other smaller companies they have bought, then just rebranded the
software. Or imitate the UI features from competitors (Visual Interface
Similar To Apple), or imitate features of the security model of more
secure products (such as *.nix OSes).

In the case of the System Center tools, you are wrong. All the innovation
came from MS. In the case of Defender , the original code came from another
company however since then 100% of the code has been re-written. Granted,
no inovation there however, in the case of Forefront, the entire management
process is 100% Microsoft innovation.

Your claim is that MS hasn't innovated anything over the past few years. At
least one item proves you wrong.

Anyone care to add an other? DX10 maybe? Longhorn Server?

 

[Justin]

Yup, IT says IN PART and doesn't discuss which part. Also, make sure to
check out the settlement:

"However, the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code nor
prevent Microsoft from tying other software with Windows in the future."

All they did was settle and force MS to share code. WTF is that all about?
So much for proprietary!

I agree with the criticisms section.

I'm not going to dig around for the full transcript, but if you will
accept wikipedia for a source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The last paragraph in the appeals section

"However, the appeals court did affirm in part Judge Jackson's ruling on
monopolization. The D.C. Circuit remanded the case for consideration of a
proper remedy for "drastically altered scope of liability" that the court
had upheld, under Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The DOJ, now under the
administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, announced on September 6,
2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead
seek a lesser antitrust penalty."
Not wanting to make this a political argument, but under Clinton, they
were pushing to break-up Microsoft, under George W, they opted to slap the
wrist and move on. If nothing else, the court of appeals agreed Microsoft
was in a monopoly postion

From: http://www.antitrustinstitute.org/Archives/61.ashx
While Bush said he would not take a stand on Microsoft, Sen. Slade Gorton
told reporters, with Bush standing silently at his side, that Bush would
"seek to resolve [the case] in a way that does not break up the company"
and that "I don't think a Bush administration would have brought the case
to begin with."

Whose fault is that? Linux and OSX are viable choices. They simply lack
in function.

In addition, the desktop market is not the only thing MS deals with.

Now for all the trolls who want to argue that OSX and Linux do not lack
in function, please note you will only enforce the fact that MS is NOT a
monopoly by doing as such. I believe you call that CHECK-MATE.


100% should do it.



This hasn't happened.


There are plenty of close substitutes.


Funny! I'll play with this one. According to alias, Vista costs $800
USD. So that makes Vista the most expensive OS on the market.

However, I can't escape reality. Vista has a price. Does OSX? Either
way Linux being FREE is a clear example of MS NOT taking advantage of
this one.


This doesn't hold true either. In fact multi-platform is becoming the
norm.

 

[Justin]

Essentially the main determination was due to the tie in that Microsoft
was
able to impose on its customers. They provided the operating system and
then purposely used it to both bundle a web browser that was totally tied
into that system along with refusing to provide enough information on the
inner workings of Windows to allow competitors like RealNetworks to build
an alternative.

Yet, there was plenty of alternatives. Real Networks could have done
whatever they wanted.

Should Sony sue Ford for supplying their own radio in my truck? The notion
is absurd.

People want that they can't have. Since MS is in demand, they're the
target. If Apple had more market share then foreign countries would be
fining them for source code instead.

 

[xfile]

Not to be a Microsoft hater, but...

Same here but I am changing now...

"We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of,
intellectual property," says Ballmer in an interview. FOSS patrons are
going to have to "play by the same rules as the rest of the business," he
insists. "What's fair is fair."

What honor? Using WPA silently checking a user's system?

It would sure give the impression that they realize they are losing market
share and can't handle it. Instead of releasing superior products (namely
on the server side) they simple take the easy route and try to kill the
competition off, it's why I'm not the Microsoft fanboi I was 10 years ago.

Again, totally agreed, and you are not alone.

I am currently stationed in Asia and I have good connections to several
government high levels; I'll make sure they feel threatened.

Have no idea for why the company wants to declare a war against the world.
But if they wish to, the world will be ready.

 

[john]

john...monopolies in business are not illegal in the USA.
Frank

perhaps not, but the business practices that got them there, and continue to
keep them there are.
things like price fixing, market manipulation, predatorial sales agreements,
etc...
at least the USAG and the EU think so.

 

[Cal Bear '66]

By USAG do you mean Alberto Gonzales?

How can the a**h**e think when he can't remember ANYTHING?

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

I just want to say I think Doris is HAWT!!!

<BLUSH>

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Whose fault is that? Linux and OSX are viable choices. They simply lack
in function.

Lack in function!!! Geez, you're one funny guy. Linux is more functional
than Windoze will ever hope to be. If there's anything lacking, it's
substance between YOUR ears. You just haven't the brains to figure out how
to use the functionality Linux offers.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Yet, there was plenty of alternatives. Real Networks could have done
whatever they wanted.

Not when MickeyMouse refused to divulge certain things inside of Windoze
that RealNetworks needed to know to get the functionality they wanted.

Should Sony sue Ford for supplying their own radio in my truck? The
notion is absurd.

You are a Wintard, aren't you? You just don't get it. A better analogy would
be like this: Sony would like to sell radios that work in Fords. But Ford
won't tell Sony what kind of plug is required to hook up to the Ford's
antenna. Essentially, Ford owners can only use Ford radios, because Sony's
won't work properly.

People want that they can't have. Since MS is in demand, they're the
target. If Apple had more market share then foreign countries would be
fining them for source code instead.

That's precisely what makes Microsoft a monopoly. The fact that through
marketing, it has been able to get Windoze on 95% of the computers in the
world. One has a difficult time even finding a computer today that doesn't
come preloaded with Windoze. But I'm sure you know all this. You're just
playing dumb because you're a Windoze FanBoy.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Frank]

perhaps not, but the business practices that got them there, and continue to
keep them there are.
things like price fixing, market manipulation, predatorial sales agreements,
etc...
at least the USAG and the EU think so.

It's the violation of the antitrust laws that create the problems for
any monopoly.
And all monopolys are easy targets for law suits. Especially from their
competitors who have the minority market share. It's almost standard
business practice for small (off times failing) competing companies to
sue their larger competitors. It's a tactic that sometimes works and
provides capital (out of court settlements) that otherwise they would
not have had.
You've got to remember, these large, multi-national corps view and
conduct business as a war.
They are not benevolent entities.
Frank