Disgusting attitude.

[Doctor V]

Zombie, you have this way of avoiding questions you don't want to answer, and manipulating the ones that you do.  Whats the matter, can't face the facts?  I never said anything about wether or not OEMs reserve whatever.  The question said shoudln't they.  An OS, and applications that run on an OS are not the same thing, they are different different different.  Did you know that, when you install Linux, you have complete control over what applications are going to be installed with it.  And Retailer is allowed to at any time remove any applications from linux, add whatever they like, and sell it.  Isn't that the way it should be.  Well it is, and only a fucktard could think any different.  If M$ could build the best OS (which they can't as the only reason that its dominant is that they were the incumbent dominant OS long before win3.1 ever existed) and everyone used it, that would be one thing.  But using an OS, good or bad, to force people to pay for inferior applications is wrong, and no sensible person (which there are few of in the US gov.) would ever allow it.  If I want to buy a good laptop but don't fucking want Internet Exploder or Lookout Express, then dammit, I should be able to get one, and without paying a tax to M$.  And M$ using their money to prevent anyone from selling them is BS and illegal (but MS gets away).

V

[ November 05, 2002: Message edited by: Doctor V 0.8.7 ]

[preacher]

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:


It would be very foolish to even attempt removing every bit of IE code from Windows. If you did your GUI would be as usable as Windows 95 without IE4 and the desktop update was.

I don't know why anyone using Windows would only want the capability of using a bitmap as a wallpaper, I don't know why they would want to lose the ability to customize Window backgrounds, etc. Hiding the IE icon is good enough of a solution if you ask me(which XP SP1 does if you choose not to use the MS software like IE as a default). XP SP1 offers you the opportunity to change program access and default programs for certain tasks at any time. When you choose another browser as a default browser w/SP1 there is still enough IE code left functional in Windows for Windows Explorer to reap the benefits of intergrating the IE browser into explorer. Mozilla does not enhance Explorer at all, nor does any other browser. The IE intergration into Explorer was a good thing(it is no wonder why KDE does the same intergration stuff with Konquererr). I still want to know why people don't complain about software intergration in other OSes..I mean, the other OSes are doing the same thing MS is doing. The bottom line is intergration is not bad. Combining functions of different software into an OS adds so many more features into the OS(Window Manager). Since when has the evolution of software been a bad thing?

Also, no...the OEMs do not reserve the right to uninstall the default MS software that comes with Windows. If MS wants thier software to come with Windows that is the way it should be. The OEM'ss do not make Windows therefore they don't have the right to say what should and shouldn't be in Windows. They have the right to install extra software that will co-exist with the MS software(remember, MS software does not cripple any alternative programs). They should have the right to sell computers without Windows pre-installed..but they signed the contract saying they can't so I guess it is thier own fault.

OEM's don't give a fuck about Linux and they don't really want to sell a comp with no OS because they lose profits that way. They get Windows cheap(probably about $5 per copy) and they sell it for around regular retail price (included in the cost of the computer). That makes them alot of extra $$$. Linux is not a profitable solution for them, so why would they want to waste thier time with Linux? Selling a comp with no OS at all obviously will cut how much profit they make too, so why would they want to sell OSless computers?

Remember, companies aren't in business to lose money...no, no, no...they are all about making money.      

[ November 05, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

So you are saying that there is no other way that you can use jpegs and gifs on the desktop without IE.  Thats funny because Mac OS and Linux dont require a web browser to view those file types. You say that without IE, you couldnt have a file browsing utility with a back button. Thats odd, but Ive seen many file browsing utilities with back buttons that were not web browsers. I guess MS programmers are just too stupid to have figured out this difficult coding. As for kde doing the same thing with konqueror, you might not know a lot about linux, so I will tell you. Kde and konqueror are not integral parts of the linux operating system. They are programs that are run on top of the OS and can be removed without impairing the OS.

As for hardware manufacturers selling computers with windows preinstalled, why dont they go a step further. Dont you think Windows should be installed on all hard drives that can be bought seperately? I mean that will increase profits. Nobody uses any other OS anyway, so why give them a choice? Hell I mean they get it for $5 so what is an extra $5 anyway?

[Calum]

quote:Originally posted by bazoukas:
   Or maybe you are one of those who just love corporate America so much, that you are willing to bend over for them all the time.

that's exactly what zombie90210 is. And we're not talking about bending over backwards either...

as for his question evasion, it parallels many politicians.

Zombie90210, every other popular operating system (Solaris, RiscOS, BeOS, Linux, GNU, MacOS and so on) manages to display compressed image files, and have file managers that are not integrated into the system. Some things are more integrated than others, but can be completely disabled. IE cannot be disabled, and it poses a serious security risk for any computer with it installed which is connected to a network. Even if you do not use IE, it is part of the system, so you never know what it is doing or failing to do. The same deal applies to a microsoft firewall! this is as bad as having no firewall, surely? I think firewalls need to be configured for each personal circumstance, and by rights shouldn't be made by the same people that make the system. That they should not be open source is a farce on top of it all.

Try and respond, zombie, i am sure you will pick the least relevant parts of what i said and blow them out of all proportion in an attempt to divert people from true discussion, like you often do.

[ November 05, 2002: Message edited by: Calum & his insidious little spies ]

[HibbeeBoy]

Zombie, I can see that you like Windows XP and it allows you to customise it the way you like and it performs the tasks you need it to do. I don't have a huge problem with Windows applications such as Office whatever. My argument is more with Microsoft licensing, pricing, security and controlling attitude to the consumer and to businesses. Why can't I get an OS and then the applications ? Why does the OS control my PC and not the otherway round ? Talking of customising, the first thing NT network admins seem to do is stop the user from customising the desktop, loading applications and setting up screen savers.
There's nothing I like more than asking a potential vendor if their application will run on Linux, it makes them stop and think for a second. Not that I am in the market to buy anything, I just like to make them think about it.
I was in CompUsa and I saw something that made me smile. All the XP boxes had security tags (Winona Ryder just cuts them off) and all the Linux stuff was there on the shelf, no tags.

[Calum]

very good post. i agree with you indeed.

[emh]

quote:
Having IE and WMP intergrated into the OS is a great idea if you ask me. Take for instance..compare Windows 98 to Win95 without IE4+plus the desktop enhancement.

I actually preferred the look of Windows 95 to Windows 98.

 

quote:
Without IE Windows 95 can't use gif, jpeg, jpg, png, etc. as a Wallpaper(it can only render bitmaps).

I don't like using anything other than bmp's for my background anyway, because using jpegs, gifs, etc. take up system resources in Windows.  It's not that hard to save a picture file as a bitmap.

 

quote:
 Without IE you don't have those nifty lil back and forward navigation buttons for surfing Windows explorer, without IE you can't enable single clicking to open files, without IE you can't add wallpapers to different folder Window backgrounds, without IE you can't have an active desktop wallpaper(say for instance you want to have a news site or even something like this forum as your wallpaper you can see the updates, new news, new posts, etc. from your desktop). IE enhances Explorers' rendering capabilites big time.

So?  I don't want a website as my background.  I don't always use my computer to surf the internet, I use it for many other things as well.  These are all superficial features that I've never cared for, and, if Linux didn't do any of this, I wouldn't really care.

 

quote:
Don't most distros of Linux come with Konquerer and Mozilla? That is bundling a browser(s) with the OS too, so why don't you bitch about it? Doesn't KDE 3 use Konquerer as an explorer(like Windows+IE)? That is making the browser an intergrated part of the GUI...why don't you bitch about that?

For the record, I don't like that KDE uses Konqueror to browse files anymore than I like that MIcrosoft uses IE to browse files.  However, the main thing to keep in mind is that Konqueror is not integrated into the OS, it's just there.  IE, on the other hand, is forced on to your OS and you use it no matter what, even if you use a different browser to surf the internet with.

 

quote:
WMP being intergrated into the OS allows for you to play music from folders without even having to open the full media player.

So does Winamp, Real Player, Quicktime, and every other media player, depending on your file associations.

[quote}
 Also, if you have tried WMP 9 on XP and Win9x/2K you would see that the enhancements that XP gives to Media Player from having it binded into the OS make it a much better product.
[/quote]

Why should I buy a different OS just to use their media player?

 

quote:
 In Win9x/2K you can't play quicktime media, VCD's, SVCDs, DVDs with WMP9 out of the box(you have to install extra codecs), you can't minimize WMP 9 to the taskbar and use it as a taskbar player in pre-Windows XP OSes.

I can use Quicktime, MPlayer, and other programs to watch all of those.  And I can watch DVD's on my DVD Player.  I think it's better to have separate programs specializing in each function, because, since they're concentrating on that function, they work better.

 

quote:
The taskbar player is an example of what can be accomplished when the software is part of the OS...it is binded to everything in the OS..even the taskbar and the taskbar player is the result of that intergration.

Again, it's a superficial feature.  I'd rather use other programs that do the job much better.

 

quote:
 Personally, I really like the taskbar player too because it is always there for the clicking no matter how many windows you have open and it doesn't clutter the desktop. If you have video playing in the taskbar player the little video Window always stays on top making it easy to watch videos and do other stuff at the same time. WMP looks terrible in Win9x/Win2K too(the XP skinning engine makes WMP 9 look alot cleaner and more modern).

I guess it depends on personal preferences.  But I don't see the advantage of WMP over any other media player.

 

quote:
Don't most Linux distros come with XMMS installed by default...that is bundling a Media Player with the OS....why don't you bitch about that since it is soo bad?

You're missing a very important distinction here.  XMMS, while it is included with most distros, it is not an integral part of the OS.  It can be installed and uninstalled at any time, unlike Windows Media Player.  WMP is forced into the OS, whether the user wants it or not, and he/she can't remove it if he/she finds he/she doesn't want it there.  At least http://www.litepc.com is working to make these "integral components" optional features.

 

quote:
I think the intergration is fine. It isn't like MS stops you from running other browsers and media players. If you are really worried about losing a whole 15MB of space from those apps being installed you need a larger hard drive.

I don't know how you've compressed your data that much, but I can assure you, IE and WMP take up far more disk space than 15 MB.  Internet Explorer is always in the system memory, regardless of what browser you use.  The point is, it shouldn't be Microsoft's decision what software we should use.  The people selling the computers, and more importantly, the people buying the computers, should have the final say.


 

quote:
Apple bundles Apple software with thier Mac OSes..why don't people bitch about that? You guys complain about shit that every other OS maker does. MS makes the Windows OS so MS has the right to bundle whatever MS software with thier OS that they want to bundle.

The difference here is that Apple makes all of their own hardware to run the OS on, so they can pretty much do what they want.  And I really don't have a problem with MS having their extra programs as options on the install CD, I just have a problem with them being forced on to the operating system uninstallably.  Not everybody wants these programs installed.

[enigma]

quote:Originally posted by Crunchy(Cracked)Butter:
Can't IBM sell computers without windows?  Were they stupid enough to make deals like this with MS with regards to software?

it is fucking stupid, but i understand why. see, Dell servers use Intel procs and Intel and mn (new name for ms- micro-nazism) made a deal, mn says "ill bloat up windows so it takes up more proc usage" and intel said "ok and i wont sell any computers w/o windows" or something to that extent. but that is WHY they do that, as to why you cant install your own OS, i dont know, but ive made my own computers my whole like, starting at 8 and ive used ONLY, ONLY! AMD procs, for that reason. and i usually just used win2k because i couldnt get win4lin to work on my linux desktop, but i think ive changed alot of that, and ill make counter-strike work this time             so yeah thats the whole scoop. I guess you could always look at the "Whats Bad" article at this site.. whenever ive posted something like this in other forums, i would include the WhatsBad article but i guess its kinda dumb to do it here ok thats my reply.

[Calum]

that's the main reason i didn't want to spend $90 on win4lin. will it work? who knows? and after that i didn't feel like being $90 worse off for nothing.

also,  

quote:ehm:
The difference here is that Apple makes all of their own hardware to run the OS on, so they can pretty much do what they want. And I really don't have a problem with MS having their extra programs as options on the install CD, I just have a problem with them being forced on to the operating system uninstallably. Not everybody wants these programs installed.

This is the integral thrust of the argument.
personally, i agree with zombie274845793 that M$ can put whatever they like into their crummy product, BUT i strongly disagree with their being allowed to lie about it and say that you must have windows or your stuff will be 'incompatible' (with what? windows? what if nobody bought windows? would EVERYBODY have incompatible systems? no, they just would none of them be compatible with windows, which nobody would have so no big whoop!). I also disagree vehemently about M$ forcing people to buy computers with windows preinstalled. In my opinion it should be illegal to sell a computer with ANY system preinstalled, and if the buyer cannot install a system themselves then they shouldn't be using a computer in the first place. Or they should get a mac.

[DC]

Back to the main point, it's quite simple. Either Dell sells all their PC's with Windows, or MS won't let them sell it at all. And I personally can't blame Dell for choosing the MS road - if they don't their competitors will, and Windows *is* more popular in the real world so Dell will be dead very soon.

Zombie: you're so full of shit. Integrating IE with Win has not - or should not, in a good design - affect the features of the desktop. Anything that can be implemented using IE can be implemented without it - but without the overhead.

WMP9 having restrictions is not due to not integrated but due to lack of codecs (which hasn't got anything to do with integration in whatever wierd way you look at it) or general UI weaknesses/lack of features.

The problem is not binding IE with Windows - it lies with forcing it on the user, by tying it into the OS and by not offering alternatives. Linux apps aren't tied to the OS and can be shut off (and replaced) without affecting system performance, and without affecting normal system operations in times you don't need the prog. Also, Linux has numerous different browsers and other stuff bound with it, leaving you with a choice.

Besides, tying stuff in the OS is a horrible design flaw, since you can't unload it. If I want to play UT2k3 on my Win box, I have to put up with the loss of performarance caused by the GUI and apps taking up memory. In Linux, I can swich off everything not needed for the game, and start a fresh X session without GUI for optimal performance (not that I'm that desperate for those extra 2 fps, but imagine having to do a calculation that takes up multiple hours - the performace difference by simply not having unused stuff in memory is huge).

[DavidLiverpoolUK]

Once upon a time there was a land where lived a large flock of sheep, a small den of wolves and a family of porcupines. It was the habit of the wolves, whenever they became hungry, to kill and eat a sheep. But they left the porcupines alone, not wanting to get their noses poked. The sheep, fearful of the wolves' sharp teeth, but holding a majority in the government of the land, passed a law outlawing everything sharp. The wolves just laughed, because they pretty much ignored all the laws anyway. But the porcupines, wanting to be law-abiding citizens, had to remove their sharp quills. This made the wolves very happy, because they could now eat the porcupines as well as the sheep.

[Fett101]

quote:Originally posted by Calum & his insidious little spies:
and if the buyer cannot install a system themselves then they shouldn't be using a computer in the first place. Or they should get a mac.

But by your laws that would be a preinstalled OS and illegal.

[slave]

Microsoft integrates IE, WMP, etc. into their OS.  So what.  It's their software and their right.  If you don't like it, don't use it.  Nobody is making anyone use Windows.  Some people have a hard time grasping that.

[Doctor V]

quote:Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:
Microsoft integrates IE, WMP, etc. into their OS.  So what.  It's their software and their right.  If you don't like it, don't use it.  Nobody is making anyone use Windows.  Some people have a hard time grasping that.

Dummy!

M$ IS making people use windows.  Their illegal marketing deals with OEMs, sabotoge of rival software, and manipulation of standards does that.  If windows didn't have such tight deals with OEMs maybe people would have more of a choice.  Every walked into a PC shop and found any new PCs sold without windows?  If the gov woke up and realized that standards should not be propriatary ever, other products could be released that would work with windows documents.  Someone sends you an excel file that you have to use, and OO can't open it, what choice is there.  Fuck, they are even trying to make Linux illegal by lobbying congress to require DRM in all digital devices.

You retartedly say, 'its their software and their right'.  What are you some kind of super adam smith lazziefare econ supporter.  I got news for you.  If business had the right to just do whatever they wanted, society today would end up like Brazil where there are a few ultra rich, and masses in utter poverty that have no rights whatsoever.  I think putting a restriction on what the richest man in the world does with his company is not going too far to prevent such a situation.

V

[slave]

quote:Originally posted by Doctor V 0.8.7:


Dummy!

M$ IS making people use windows.  Their illegal marketing deals with OEMs, sabotoge of rival software, and manipulation of standards does that.  If windows didn't have such tight deals with OEMs maybe people would have more of a choice.  Every walked into a PC shop and found any new PCs sold without windows?  If the gov woke up and realized that standards should not be propriatary ever, other products could be released that would work with windows documents.  Someone sends you an excel file that you have to use, and OO can't open it, what choice is there.  Fuck, they are even trying to make Linux illegal by lobbying congress to require DRM in all digital devices.

You retartedly say, 'its their software and their right'.  What are you some kind of super adam smith lazziefare econ supporter.  I got news for you.  If business had the right to just do whatever they wanted, society today would end up like Brazil where there are a few ultra rich, and masses in utter poverty that have no rights whatsoever.  I think putting a restriction on what the richest man in the world does with his company is not going too far to prevent such a situation.

V

So, are they making *you* use Windows?  Do you use Windows?  Nothing's stopping you from building your own computer and putting Linux on it, and furthermore there are companies you can buy computers with Linux preinstalled from.  As for "mutilating standards," wasn't Bill Gates' slogan when he founded Microsoft "we set the standard"?  If you don't want Windows to be the standard then for god's sake do something about it.  Tell as many people as you can not to use IE.  Email webmasters if their page wasn't tested in Mozilla properly, etc.  But as long as a company controls what OS goes onto 97% of personal computers, they will always set what the standard is.  You know everyone in the world could dump windows *today* and Microsoft would go out of business overnight.  So don't tell me this isn't a problem that ignorant computer users have created themselves.

[ November 08, 2002: Message edited by: Windows XP User #5225982375 ]

[Kintaro]

What you dont see is that the people using Windows dont know what Linux is! XP Luser, if Linux was so bad, why would i use it... Im better then you in every way, i know more about life and computers then you closed little mind will ever!

And im not the only one, there are MizillionkazillilionDillions of us...

People better then you/zombie/rrs on this forum:
Me
Calum
m0r
voidmain
psyjax
chaosforages
macman
and everyone one else pretty much!

You people seem to think life in limited to Computers, i have come to the conclusion that its the Windows Zealots that are the real nerds. Because your minds are to closed to comprehend anything but Computers, how easy they are... and stuff... Your minds are to closed to comprehend anything that is not helping you... And your selfishness has made you into very evil individuals... But of cource, thanks to the Internet you can take out your life frustrations on us at the forum. We dont goto Windows forums posting "Windiws sux u l4m3rs" we do advise people when we can. You people dedicate your lives to bothering us on the forum.

So next time you call sombody a low life, yours are as low as they get, i advise all, and most of you to please seek help. Social indiferences can be a problem... I had them when i was 8 years old too. Most of us know what life can be like but you could at least commit mass murder and bombings instead of taking it out on us.