[videobruce]

I came across these links in another forum I find most interesting on M$:

http://www.****microsoft.com/content/whatsbad.shtml

http://www.lamlaw.com/

http://www.attrition.org/gallery/ms/


Well it seems these forums are censored! I'll let you fill in the "****" in the first address. I'll give you 3 out of the four: f*ck

[BladeRunner]

Right.
So we have the first link to a known anti-Microsoft site.
Any information read here should be taken as bias at the very least.
A bias site will not post indifferent material, the whole idea of this site is to be really cool and be "Anti Microsoft".
There are plenty of other sites out there that can offer you a neutral opinion.

The second link takes us to a site that I've never come accross before.
However initial looks would indicate a "Readers Digest" version of the anti-trust action that is currently taking place.
A far better way of reading this information would be to read the whole thing and the actual court journals.
That way you can make sure that things are not being taken out of context or if indeed they really happened.

The final link takes us to a series of "humerous" anti-Microsoft images.
I nearly split my gut open as I viewed some of these "really funny" images.

Well that answers my question then.
MS are still the biggest company out there as being "fashionably anti-Microsoft" is still the thing to be.

Please Note: I fully acknowledge MS have been bad now and again.
I defend them because all in all I'm more than happy with the products they produce.
This bashing of MS, this writing "Microshaft, Micro$oft or M$" just isn't funny.
It's similar to being an eight year old boy and telling all girls that they "smell of wee"
Read childish and something I've certainly grown out of

[sapiens74]

Your a ****ing moron.

Fill in those 4

[DosFreak]

Thanks for the descriptions, Blade. Kept me from wasting my time on useless posts. ;(

[Brian Frank]

Here, let me give you my opinion of Windows: it rules. Like any OS, yes it does have problems. Also, as it's run on 95% or more PC's available (in one form or another) guess what people are gonna go after. 2nd, these anti-MS pukes want to tell me Linux is the future of the desktop. HA! If I want anther desktop OS, I'll be hitting Mac OS X before I hit linux. Reason: Linux and easy to use are polar opposites. Even with KDE and Gnome, Linux feels like a washed up imitation of Windows and is not as user friendly. Also, how many distributions are there of Linux? How different versions of Windows? The former has waaaay more, plus it's split into Debian and Red Hat variants. Windows most recent release is on one core: NT. Also, as much as Windows gets knocked, MS provides a lot of good support.
Take into account how easy it is to go into Best Buy and the like and grab Linux software. 'Even Mac software is easier to come by.

The last thing I'd like to metion is that some of these people are morons and/or are jelous that MS and Bill G. have made the big bucks and they didn't.

And that concludes my rant...

[sapiens74]

Quite well said.

[Davros]

MS tactics disgust me personally. But the OS is the best you can buy (rent?). I do wish they would just focus on the OS, and stop trying to make inroads into every software market out there.

You have to remember, the apparent security of Linux is mostly due to it's not being targeted. When 95% of the computers are running Windows, who's going to waste time finding exploits for other OS's?

Linux is a good idea, but sadly, is not user friendly and too varied.
Lindows is another good idea, but it will be a long, hard road for those guys, and probably will lead to failure.

I heard some speculation lately that Apple is considering whether it should port OS X to the PC or not. This would be a godsend to those looking for an alternative to Windows, without having to sink a load of cash into proprietary hardware.

The industry needs competition badly. Unfortunately no other company has a product that can compete. It's just too hard to make an OS nowadays. Apple is probably the only hope for competition in the next decade, but they are in a tough spot. If they port OS X, they lose their cash cow of system sales. On the other hand, it's quite possible they could more than make up the difference in OS sales alone, if they do it right and keep an eye on MS.

Another thing, most MS bashers have no idea what the enterprise server environment is like. They have no clue what goes into a monster like W2K Datacenter. They think an OS is a desktop, IE, and a Start Button, so they have no clue of the massive effort and imagination the programmers in Redmond have to possess in order to get these things off the ground.

[sapiens74]

Here's the thing. We are complaining about how they treat other companies, when the other companies do the same ****ing thing when they have the chance, especially to the customer. Anyone remember ATT or AOL?

Microsoft has always been fair on pricing and fair to me as a customer. They have provided the best tech support one could hope for and we blame them for being ****ing capitalists.

SO they are opressive business people, so they mistreated SUN, AOL, Compaq?

Who gives a rats ***. If those compaies don't like it they can use Linux. But obviously thier morals don't keep them from making profits with the very help of the company they so despise.

Bottom line is they get mad for doing what they wish they could do, BE THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN.

IN order to be the man, you gotta be THE MAN.

**** all those companies, they are as greedy as MS, and would **** everyone else if they could.

They're just mad that they can't

[BladeRunner]

I would say that 95% of the "problems" are because of jealousy.
Not one of these so called "anti-Microsoft" companies would think twice if given the opportunity to exploit a market and stop, at any cost, another player from getting in too.
Even now we say Netscape effectively saying "We had a monopoly on web browsers, we were stupid and lost it to Microsoft, please can we have it back?"

Another thing that scares me is this idea of forcing Microsoft to strip down Windows and remove components before the next release.
So, instead of me getting my next version of Windows home, installing it and finding all the applications and extras I really need.
Instead I shall have to install the OS, go online and download a browser, go online and download a media player, go online and download a disk defragmenter.....
I do hope that when the judge who is rulling on this case has finished "deciding what is best for the world in general" that I will still have the option to buy a full copy of Windows and not a Lite one.

No place I've ever worked at has had a Windows server hacked.
Now according to these web sites this is impossible, withion an hour of machines being placed on the Internet I should be hacked, have my web site defaced, all our company information posted into Usenet and we effectively being dead in the water.
This isn't the case because:

1. You don't put an unpatched server on a live connection, same as you wouldn't just install Linux and then make that live without configuring and the like first.
2. I keep up to date with security issues on a daily basis, if I have to spend an hour a day just making sure our servers are nice and safe then so be it, small price to pay.

SUN are a bigger bunch of crooks than Microsoft, yet everybody loves them because "they are anti-Microsoft".
I wonder where we truely would be right now with respect to OS's in general if Microsoft hadn't done what they have done.

[BladeRunner]

Oh, I guess I should add a "flip-side" post to be fair.
MS prodcuts can make me mad!!
I can install a desktop OS and watch it fail at 85% for no reason what so ever and give me an error code not listed in any knowledge base item.
I can sit infront of a new Win2k Server I'm trying to add to our domain and watch it simply refuse point blank to join.
I can attempt to promote a Win2k server to Domain Controller status and refuse to replicate the AD.
I can watch our Exchange Server bounce a message when it really shouldn't have.
I can pull my hair out when an MS OS decides it knows better than me by associating a file type to one of it's programs rather than a better option and then not be able to cope with the file.

Those examples are probably just the surface of problems I have had and will have again with MS products.

But, what do I do?
I try and find out the cause of the problem, fix the problem and eventually everything will work as it should do.
What I do not do is:

1. Create an image of a Penguin with a gun-shot wound with the slogan "LinuxSux" under it.
2. Create a web site called linuxsux.com and then rant and rave about it.

Maybe if all these creative people who do the above two actually started working on the Linux project they could help turn it into a viable home/work desktop solution.
Surely it's better to sing & dance about your own solutions rather than attacking the competitors?

[sapiens74]

It's like politics. Instead of saying "Here is why our position is better" they say "Here is why their's is worse"

Never ends.

[lager_brains]

Erm,

Let me see......

I've been using Windows Media player (the free one) for a while watching music videos, system stutters.

I download the latest free RealOne (formerly Realplayer) and my music videos don't stutter and play much better.

No problem. So can I uninstall Windows media Player ?

Nope.

I want choice. The choice of what to have and what not to have on my computer. I think W2K is way too bloated and sorry, but can someone show me the differences between , say Office 95, 97, 2000 and XP ?? Apart from a silly paperclip assistants. What I'm trying to say here is we're being ripped off.

If NT had USB that would have been fine, but W2K gives me a ton of stuff I don't need and eats up a ton of HD space also.

And how have SUN been a big bunch of crooks, Bladerunner ??

I use Windoze because it's the standard. But we all deserve better.

[sapiens74]

IF you are being ripped off then use Linux.

Its free and you can install/uninstall any part of it.


Windows XP includes utilities that save me money. Like managing Zip files, and pictures. Saves me 100 bucks right there.

If you don't like it thats fine. Use something else. Taste is subjective anyway. But dont ***** about MS including too much. Cause some of us get tired of having to buy and install 100 apps after we get a new OS.

[lager_brains]

Yes, ALLOW US to UNINSTALL what we DON'T WANT (IE, OE, WMP etc etc).

Does Window's allow you to do that ??

If so, show me where ??

[sapiens74]

Of course it doesnt . But you can use whatever ****ing app you want in its place.

No one makes you Use IE, or Windows Media.

[Alien]

Quote:

Yes, ALLOW US to UNINSTALL what we DON'T WANT (IE, OE, WMP etc etc).

Does Window's allow you to do that ??

If so, show me where ??

Go to Control Panel, Add or Remove Programs, then click the button for Add/Remove windows components. IE is listed there, & although OE isn't, I'm guessing that as when you download a newer version of IE for older OSs it includes OE, then I'm guessing it'd remove that as well. Media Player is also listed, it's under Accessories & Utilities, then Multimedia.

Though why you'd want to remove IE & OE I don't know - there isn't anything better for windows. AS for MP, there is better, but it still has its uses.

[BladeRunner]

I feel WinXP SP1 is going to make the anti-Microsoft troupe very happy.
Because it will be even easier for them to remove the MS accessories from the OS.
Agreed, no idea why anybody would want to remove IE, it's still miles ahead of Netscape and Opera has issues too.
OE is a nice enough application, but I use "big Outlook XP" so it's of no real use to me.
OE is great as an "included" e-mail program, it's not so good as a news-reader, I'm an Agent user for Usenet anyway.
As for MP, well once you have all the codec's installed it's all I really use - certainly no stuttering on my system, smooth as the proverbial babies bottom.
Real Player is obviously better at playing Real Media files and I like to have a copy of Quicktime installed too.

It really makes me giggle, first MS are ripping us all off and then we get "MS are including too much with their OS"
There are all these rumours flying around that the next version of Windows will have to come in two flavours, one with everything included, IE, OE, MP and the like and anotehr version without those extra's.
Put me down for a full version of Windows please, I prefer nt to have to download a web browser before I can start using the net, I like to have one there as soon as the OS is up and running.

Lets see, purchase OS along, one price.
Or
Purchase OS, purchase web browser, purchase e-mail program, purchase program to deal with Zip files, purchase media player

I'll take the one price all included option I think.

Actually, I think I might go and buy the version of Windows that loads of people on this forum seem to be using, it sounds cool.
That's the one with the built in "Gun to the head" that forces you to use all these MS applications and wont let you install anything else, that sounds like a cool version.

[CrazyKillerMan]

Heh....Blade...you nailed it man. That is quite possibly the best (and most funniest) way I have ever heard anyone showing pride in microsoft. I love Win XP, and I believe its DosFreaks sig that says "Xp spoiled people..." or something. Hell YEAH! Bring on on the additions, im all for it. Im sick of seeing the winzip pop up and all of its lockups. More the better. IE is definatly the best browser out there, hands down. Sure mozilla has some cool features and netscape is the best alternative, but when I sit at a WS with netscape installed, I am a litte dissapointed, especially when Im at school and have to deal with it.

[three]

hmm...well...i think it's best put that Windows is more like Apple and Linux is like the PC, how so? Well, you get Windows as is whereas Linux is more of a custom built OS where you add what you like. Now ppl complain how hard linux is and how it's not user friendly, well...that's what the majority of ppl believed at first when they built their first pc. But as time grew, and with a little patience, more and more ppl started building their own.

i also think it's fair to complain about Microsoft bundling too much apps in their OS. ppl should have a choice what they want. what they are saying about being ripped off is that they are paying for apps they do not need. Not everybody wants IE, OE, or media player so why should they have to pay for it? I mean, given the choice to just 'un-install' it is not a fair option is it? that's like going to mcdonalds and only given the choice of ordering combo meals nothing else and if you didn't want coke and fries, you can just throw it away, now does that sound fair?

now ppl are saying, well...why get rid of IE or OE? It's far superior to Netscape/Eudora...well, remember the time when Netscape/Eudora was ALOT better than IE/OE? Microsoft then decided to bundle it with Windows, raise the price up a tad and then forced Netscape/Eudora out. i think that's what the lawsuits are all about. it's really unfair business practice. i mean, how are other companies gonna survive with microsoft bullying everybody around?

let's be honest ppl, especially the ppl in this forum who, the majority i'm sure build their own pcs. What if you couldn't build your own pcs and could only buy Apple? or heck, can only buy combo meals at mcdonalds?

microsoft is scary, very scary, and at the rate their going, they control the world...honestly....they control almost all the computers in the world....they can have access to any one at any given moment....what's especially scary was that with XP, they added themselves as a user in the 'user groups', imagine all those unsuspecting home users who do not know that?

just a thought..

[Davros]

I'm waiting for the day when Bill Gates' head appears on the screens of every desktop in the world simultaneously, with an evil laugh and a grin saying "Now I finally have you all! muhahahahaha! Submit to me or be destroyed!"