Microsoft takes on the free world

[Richard Urban]

Now what other software has UAC?

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Nina DiBoy]

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

But their products and business practices (buying out the competition,
trolling for patents) don't show innovation.

--
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

 

[Frank]

But their products and business practices (buying out the competition,
trolling for patents) don't show innovation.

They're not meant to. They show marketing skills. The Gates/Ballmer
partnership will go down in marketing history as one of the, if not the,
most successful ever.
No partnership has ever achieved what they have. You've got to give them
their earned respect.
Warts and all.
Frank

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Now what other software has UAC?

A poor (very poor) attempt to do what Linux and *NIX has been doing for
years.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

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.
Frank

You dimwit! Microsoft wasn't sued by competitors it was charged by the state
for its monopolistic practises. Both in the US, in some of the US states
and in Europe.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Nina DiBoy]

In the case of the System Center tools, you are wrong. All the
innovation came from MS.

I won't disagree because I don't know enough about the system center tools.

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?

I may have exaggerated a bit but my point was that MS innovates way less
than they used to, and much less than the OSS community. They depend
more now on predatory business practices and patent trolling.

--
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

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

They're not meant to. They show marketing skills. The Gates/Ballmer
partnership will go down in marketing history as one of the, if not the,
most successful ever.
No partnership has ever achieved what they have. You've got to give them
their earned respect.
Warts and all.
Frank

We do. We do. Heck, haven't you looked at my sig? I give Ballmer my earned
respect with every posting here. <snort>

BTW, wonder why Billy Gate$ has divested himself of so much MickeyMouse
stock? Think he realizes the end of the free lunch is near?

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Nina DiBoy]

Now what other software has UAC?

ROFL! None, thank goodness. However, linux has a similar security
feature where in the user is prompted to provide the root password in
order to complete certain tasks. And linux has had it much longer than
it's feeble existence in Vista. Being forced to provide a password is
much more secure than just annoying the user by prompting them to click
on a button. Anyone who hacks the machine with remote access or
physically accesses the machine is not going to be stopped by clicking
on a button.

Is this all microsoft "innovation" is?

--
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

 

[Justin]

But their products and business practices (buying out the competition,
trolling for patents) don't show innovation.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion so I'll just remind you that
people obviously disagree when looking at current solutions.

 

[Justin]

I won't disagree because I don't know enough about the system center
tools.

So what you are saying is that you are not familiar with MS' entire product
line? Then how can you comment on MS as a whole?

I may have exaggerated a bit but my point was that MS innovates way less
than they used to, and much less than the OSS community.

Now THAT'S something to talk about.

 

[Justin]

ROFL! None, thank goodness. However, linux has a similar security
feature where in the user is prompted to provide the root password in
order to complete certain tasks. And linux has had it much longer than
it's feeble existence in Vista. Being forced to provide a password is
much more secure than just annoying the user by prompting them to click
on a button. Anyone who hacks the machine with remote access or
physically accesses the machine is not going to be stopped by clicking
on a button.

Is this all microsoft "innovation" is?

Nope, that was already explained.

 

[Justin]

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.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! CHECK-MATE!

"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."

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

 

[Justin]

And what exactly was it they couldn't do? Also, why should they be able to
do WHATEVER they want? In that case, make your own OS.

There's a lot LESS to be done with OSX then Windows.

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

You are a Wintard, aren't you? You just don't get it.

HAHAHAHA! You linux freaks are all the same. Common sense is dead to you.

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.

Nope, mine was just fine. Yours is complete BS. Radio = Web Browser. Car
= OS. You just can't cope with reality.

The argument, since you missed it, is that why would people seek viable
alternatives THAT COST MONEY if they have a free version already. Answer,
paying for a web browse is COMPLETE BS! MS was smart enough to know that
early on. Oh gee, wait...browsers are now FREE!!! Thanks MS!

Essentially, Ford owners can only use Ford radios, because Sony's
won't work properly.


That's precisely what makes Microsoft a monopoly.

Actually, an earlier post already proved exactly why MS is NOT a monopoly.
By pure definition alone.

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.

That's a down right lie. I have three Apple store within normal driving
distance from me. You just can't cope with reality. macmall.com. Teachers
have been doing it for many many years. I guess you're just dumber then the
average teacher.

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Justin wrote:

The argument, since you missed it, is that why would people seek viable
alternatives THAT COST MONEY if they have a free version already. Answer,
paying for a web browse is COMPLETE BS! MS was smart enough to know that
early on. Oh gee, wait...browsers are now FREE!!! Thanks MS!

Not IE you Wintard. You have to PURCHASE Windoze before you can run IE "for
free".

BTW, for your reading pleasure (you do read, don't you?):

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/05/why_linux_will.html

http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2007/05/put_up_or_shut.html

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Frank]

Frank wrote:




You dimwit! Microsoft wasn't sued by competitors it was charged by the state
for its monopolistic practises. Both in the US, in some of the US states
and in Europe.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

You know nothing moron! The DOJ does not instigate investigations on it
own. They only investigate complaints made by someone else. In this case
it was a competitor of MS's who made that complaint that lead to the DOJ
antitrust investigation.
Guess who that made the original complaint?
The States, once the case has been made by the Feds, then jump om the
band wagon so-to-speak.
You're a real know nothing dumbass aren't you?
(snort)
Frank

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! CHECK-MATE!

"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."

Not really, Justin. There is no doubt that Linux and OSX are functional
operating systems. Where they come up short (especially Linux) is in 3d
party support, because commercial software developers are naturally going
to focus on the platform that has 90+ percent of the installed base.

As to whether 90+ percent is a monopoly, call it what you will. No one
can dispute that Microsoft has enjoyed a unique and privileged position
in the software industry for many years. Nor can anyone dispute that it
has used of its power unsparingly, to put competitors out of business and
ensure that virtually every new PC goes out with Windows installed and
paid for.

But I do think the edifice is finally beginning to crumble. Microsoft
has tried to develop new lines of business, but it has not been
successful in many of them. And now their cash cow -- the desktop OS --
is under siege. You and Frank can tell yourselves that Ubuntu falls
short of being a serious contender, but in reality it is very solid, very
stable, very free OS, and it's getting better all the time. The big boys
in Redmond damn well know it, too. This noise about "265" patent
violations, without a clue as to the nature of these supposed violations,
suggests fear verging on paranoia. It almost reminds me of Joe
McCarthy's Wheeling speech, where he claimed to have a list of 205 known
Communists in the U.S. State Dept.

Charlie

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

You know nothing moron! The DOJ does not instigate investigations on it
own. They only investigate complaints made by someone else. In this case
it was a competitor of MS's who made that complaint that lead to the DOJ
antitrust investigation.
Guess who that made the original complaint?
The States, once the case has been made by the Feds, then jump om the
band wagon so-to-speak.
You're a real know nothing dumbass aren't you?
(snort)
Frank

You ****wit, you said it was law suits by competitors. At least, try and
keep your story straight. <snort>

Here, this might help you figure out your problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[john]

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

I agree with every word you said - especially the first sentence.

 

[Justin]

Not really, Justin. There is no doubt that Linux and OSX are functional
operating systems.

If linux is as functional as you say then there is 100% no doubt that there
is a viable alternative. Thus disproving the monopoly.

Don’t get me wrong. Linux has it’s place. I just don't feel it has it's
place in the average business desktop.

Where they come up short (especially Linux) is in 3d
party support, because commercial software developers are naturally going
to focus on the platform that has 90+ percent of the installed base.

3D party? As in CAD? Animation? I beg to differ.

As to whether 90+ percent is a monopoly, call it what you will. No one
can dispute that Microsoft has enjoyed a unique and privileged position
in the software industry for many years. Nor can anyone dispute that it
has used of its power unsparingly, to put competitors out of business and
ensure that virtually every new PC goes out with Windows installed and
paid for.

Welcome to business. If OSX and Linux where "as good" as you say it is then
people would want it. Vendors would offer it.

If MS where to buy out Apple then THAT would be a monopolistic practice.
All this BS about including a browser is a bunch of crap. Not opening up
their OS to let anyone do whatever they want is ridiculous. Why would
ANYONE warranty a product that allows anyone to do whatever they want to it?
MS is the only company that is expected to do as such. Apple isn't. Why
not?

But I do think the edifice is finally beginning to crumble. Microsoft
has tried to develop new lines of business, but it has not been
successful in many of them. And now their cash cow -- the desktop OS --
is under siege. You and Frank can tell yourselves that Ubuntu falls
short of being a serious contender, but in reality it is very solid, very
stable, very free OS, and it's getting better all the time.

The desktop as itself sitting in a corner by itself? Yes. Try to deploy
Ubuntu in a 1000+ workstation environment with countless mixed hardware. I
only have 300+ and can't do it.

Now with the new tools MS has released I wouldn't think of it. I've given
linux an honest go and it always fails me. Then I backed down and told
myself if linux can at least install on our unimportant machines I would
still give it a go. Every 5 years I have less and less of a reason to try.

The big boys
in Redmond damn well know it, too. This noise about "265" patent
violations, without a clue as to the nature of these supposed violations,
suggests fear verging on paranoia. It almost reminds me of Joe
McCarthy's Wheeling speech, where he claimed to have a list of 205 known
Communists in the U.S. State Dept.

I quit looking at lawsuits. You only hear about what the media choose to
pick up on. There are countless other lawsuits we never hear about between
all these companies.

 

[Justin]

Justin wrote:


Not IE you Wintard. You have to PURCHASE Windoze before you can run IE
"for
free".

And your point was? I have to buy the car before I can use the radio.
You're lost again aren't you?

BTW, for your reading pleasure (you do read, don't you?):

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/05/why_linux_will.html

http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2007/05/put_up_or_shut.html

I couldn't care any less about this patent crap. The media is turning it
upside making bold claims that MS is going to shut down linux using
business. The world is full of idiots and bigger idiots that get spoon fed
by the media.