Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: <EclipticZero> on 16 December 2001, 16:13
-
Do any of you understand a thing about how Windows works? or are you all just saying Windows sucks because you like to agree with all the "l33t hackers" who use Linux?
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
Do any of you understand a thing about how Windows works? or are you all just saying Windows sucks because you like to agree with all the "l33t hackers" who use Linux?
In my case, the former. And more than that: I know about how Microsoft works. That pretty much settles it for me.
-
ok i am tire of this linux or unix whatever i want a fucking OS the doesn't hide shit from me and OS is all about fucking internet i like programming and fucking playings games. linux and unix whatever they don't have games and i don't like there desktop there color or boot up whatever is lame .
-
quote:
Originally posted by killerangel0101:
ok i am tire of this linux or unix whatever i want a fucking OS the doesn't hide shit from me and OS is all about fucking internet i like programming and fucking playings games. linux and unix whatever they don't have games and i don't like there desktop there color or boot up whatever is lame .
Translation: I Love Linux!
-
The Webmaster: Seeming you know so much about how Microsoft works, maybe you could explain to me how the new .NET services will work and further more, about Microsoft's Cairo Concept List that will be implimented into the upcoming Blackcomb Operating System.
killerangel0101: As for you, you didn't answer my question at all, and you didn't even make sense on what you were saying.
Voidman: perhaps you could answer my question as well, thanks. :)
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
Voidman: perhaps you could answer my question as well, thanks. :)
I have a better idea. Why don't you explain to me why we need to know a *thing* about .NET? Or why I should care about any concept Microsoft has (to my knowlege they've never had an original concept). Let alone any new Black-Bomb operating system. I've used every one of their OSs extensively and they keep promising, I keep being disappointed. What could they possibly do to convince me this is going to change. By the way Mr. Gates, please register so we can rate you. (http://smile.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
Voidman: perhaps you could answer my question as well, thanks. :)
Actually I won't wait for you to explain to me why I need to know about these things. I'll tell you why they scare me and why they should scare others. One of the *biggest* reasons I hate Microsoft is because of their practices. And because they are too big and powerful, not just in the software world. It's not enough for them to have a monopoly in desktop computer OSs, browsers, Office products, and have pretty much wiped out the File/Print server players. But they want to own the Internet, and ultimately they really want to own the world. If you can't see that then have a buddy pin you down and pull those blinders off. .NET and Blackbomb is Microsofts way to take control of the Internet. This *should* scare people and they should fight it. They don't play with others. They do their own thing, they mass advertise, and it is done, everyone else goes out of business, even though the product sucks.
It's not enough I have to see those freakin' XP commercials on every channel on TV every 5 seconds, but Paul Allen (cofounder MS) bought out my cable company so I have to pay the fiddler if I want broadband access. Then he goes and buys out zdtv (now techtv) which used to be a good program, 75% Linux and 25% other, now it's a freakin' Microsoft show with a Jerry Lewis (in his old days) look-a-like geek spreading stupidity. I have to see MSN wrappers on my EX-favorite web sites. Microsoft this, Microsoft that, STOOOOOPPPPPP!!!! I'm going to blow.
Now they come out with the X-Crocks and it wouldn't surprise me that they will use questionable practices to push the other players out of that market. Because they've made a lot of money from a lot of stupid people they shouldn't have the right to buy out/monopolize everything in site. It's driving me to start thinking of another profession because Microsoft goes against every one of my moral values. They have definately used their first monopoly to create several other monopolies in my opinion and *that* my freind is illegal.
The most I can do is to try and push alternatives hoping MS doesn't wipe out everything else in site.
[ December 16, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
I totally agree that Microsoft are trying to take control of the Internet, but to be perfectly honest, I don't see why they shouldn't. If you haven't noticed an improvement from Microsoft's old products and their new products then there's seriously something wrong with you. I'm not here to say Windows is the best, I'm only here to ask curious questions why you think Microsoft sucks.
If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today. If Microsoft does take control of the internet, which it is obvious that's what they're trying to do, how do you know they'll screw it all up?
.NET sounds fantastic, infact, having all of these new .NET services should be interesting to hear about. My Photos for example will be able to help the average computer user add, remove and even share photos with the family and friends.
Of course, a lot of us novice computer users may not need this; however, Microsoft are obviously trying to help out the average computer user improve skills by making it easier.
Same goes with My Calender, which is also an interesting service. To me it sounds like you know quite a bit about computers; however, there are shitloads of people who know nothing about it, and that's where Microsoft's Blackcomb comes in and helps these people.
I can see why you don't like Microsoft, after reading your previous message and that's fair.
Thanks for responding VoidMain, all appreciated.
:)
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
I totally agree that Microsoft are trying to take control of the Internet, but to be perfectly honest, I don't see why they shouldn't.
I think you are mentally disturbed... The Internet is like "air" and I've been on it since it was still the ARPANET. I suppose you think Microsoft should take over "air" and charge you for every breath you take, let alone the uncomfortable feeling you would have when the first "MSair" virus makes it's rounds.
quote:
If you haven't noticed an improvement from Microsoft's old products and their new products then there's seriously something wrong with you. I'm not here to say Windows is the best, I'm only here to ask curious questions why you think Microsoft sucks.
Sure Microsoft products have improved somewhat but not in many ways that they *should* have been improved. They should have improved by being a better citizen in the standards commitees instead of going out and doing their own thing.
quote:
If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today.
What, virus traps?
quote:
If Microsoft does take control of the internet, which it is obvious that's what they're trying to do, how do you know they'll screw it all up?
To tell you the truth, if they took over the internet I wouldn't care if they screwed it up or not because I would become a cave dweller.
quote:
.NET sounds fantastic, infact, having all of these new .NET services should be interesting to hear about. My Photos for example will be able to help the average computer user add, remove and even share photos with the family and friends.
But monopoly is key here. It strickly relies on things like MS SQL Server (another concept not developed by MS but purchased from Sybase). I suppose you want Ford to own the highways too.
quote:
Of course, a lot of us novice computer users may not need this; however, Microsoft are obviously trying to help out the average computer user improve skills by making it easier.
Yep, that's what they tell you, and that's what you hear on their commercials.
quote:
To me it sounds like you know quite a bit about computers; however, there are shitloads of people who know nothing about it, and that's where Microsoft's Blackcomb comes in and helps these people.
That's where you are wrong. That's where http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com/ (http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com/) comes in and helps people.
Rather than repeating some of my "specific" reasons for thinking Microsoft OSs are inferior feel free to search this message board for some of my other posts. I don't like to repeat myself.
Enjoyed the chat!
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
I totally agree that Microsoft are trying to take control of the Internet, but to be perfectly honest, I don't see why they shouldn't. If you haven't noticed an improvement from Microsoft's old products and their new products then there's seriously something wrong with you. I'm not here to say Windows is the best, I'm only here to ask curious questions why you think Microsoft sucks.
Okay, let's go for a dose of something called reality here. Say Microsoft is successful in taking control of the internet. You know all that free stuff you can download? It'd be gone. You know those low prices you can get when you shop online? Also out the window. But, most importantly, you know how you can go online and read anybody's opinion (take this site for instance)? I guarantee you, that would be the first to go.
Microhack is NOT a benign or altruistic company. Similarily, they do not want control over they exchange of information online so that they can do everybody favors. They want to be able to tax that exchange, censor the stuff they don't like, and leverage the internet to expand their monopolies and ensure their continued existance.
quote:
If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today.
This is where you begin to REALLY show your ignorance. First of all, Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak is the person responsible for the desktop computer. He had a dream and he built it, and that is the spark that ignited the flame. The other Apple cofounder, Steve Jobs, had a very big hand in bringing a graphical interface to a personal computer (called the Macintosh). And you know where Bill Gates got the idea? Apple. Bill Gates licensed parts of Apple's OS for Windows (he didn't even invent DOS, his prior OS - he bought it). However, Apple was too generous with the terms of that agreement and got royally screwed; the important part is, though, that Apple made the computer what it is today, and M$ pretty much stole the idea out from under them.
quote:
If Microsoft does take control of the internet, which it is obvious that's what they're trying to do, how do you know they'll screw it all up?
The best proof for that is their track record. Microsquish doesn't just suck at security; they have no concept of security whatsoever. One of the big reasons they want to take control of the internet is so that they can take control of the information, namely your information. Think identity theft is scarey now, just wait until .NET really gets underway.
quote:
.NET sounds fantastic, infact, having all of these new .NET services should be interesting to hear about. My Photos for example will be able to help the average computer user add, remove and even share photos with the family and friends.
The truly sad thing here is that Microsoft will not be doing anything new with .NET. What they do is take a free idea and add a price tag to it. You don't need Windows XP to share photos or do anything else on the internet; heck, you can probably even find a way to do it easier for free without having to buy XPee.
In any case, the services provided by .NET are not the purpose for it's existence; they are the lure. The purpose is to drive all competition out of the OS marketplace by making it so the internet can only be used from a Windows machine. That is what .NET is really about. (And if you think you'll be able to access any .NET service from Linux or Mac OS, then I have some prime lakefront real estate on the moon you may be interested in.)
quote:
Of course, a lot of us novice computer users may not need this; however, Microsoft are obviously trying to help out the average computer user improve skills by making it easier.
No, they are not trying to help the average computer user. In fact, their entire mission rely's on the ignorance of that same average user. The one thing that would truly challenge Macrohard's power would be for the average computer user to educate themselves so they wouldn't become dependent on M$.
quote:
Same goes with My Calender, which is also an interesting service. To me it sounds like you know quite a bit about computers; however, there are shitloads of people who know nothing about it, and that's where Microsoft's Blackcomb comes in and helps these people.
I can see why you don't like Microsoft, after reading your previous message and that's fair.
Thanks for responding VoidMain, all appreciated.
:)
They key to Microsoft's success in taking over the internet is in convincing people like yourself that you need them, when the truth is that they are dependent on you.
So, do us all a favor, and go buy an iMac. I can personally guarantee you that there is nothing you can do a Windows box that you can't do with a Macintosh. (You won't miss out on anything on the internet, either.)
-
Gump, I wondered how you got those 5 stars. Now I see how!
-
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
That is true. If it wasn't for Microsoft Windows we wouldn't have processors running at 1ghz+, we wouldn't have Video cards with a built in GPU capable of displaying incredible 3D images w/good FPS, we wouldn't have advanced sound cards, etc.
Why, Microsoft doesn't make the stuff? You may ask. The answer is simple, Microsoft Windows started becoming more and more system demanding therefore forcing hardware manufacturers to make faster/better hardware to make the latest and greatest OSes run decent. God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS. The only APIs compatible with Linux is OpenGL and OpenAL. Direct3D and Direct Sound are definatley superior to OpenGL and OpenAL because of all the Eye/Ear Candy that can be used with the API. Why would CPU/Memory/chipset/hard drive makers improve thier hardware for Linux since runs fine on low end systems? We all can thank Windows for the advancement of technology.
-
quote:
Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS.
I certainly won't pretend to be a gamer, I'd rather be out doing the real thing but I can't help to remember back when Doom II came out. Right away there was a version for Linux. You gamers probably know the guy's name, I certainly dont but I think he founded idSoftware? At any rate the documentation that came along with the Linux version included a comment by the guy who wrote it. It roughly said, "Why did I write a version of Doom II for Linux and give it out for free? Because Linux gives me a woody."
-
EclipticZero wrote,
".NET sounds fantastic, infact, having all of these new .NET services should be interesting to hear about. My Photos for example will be able to help the average computer user add, remove and even share photos with the family and friends."
--------------------------------------------------
I like the concept of .NET where we will be able to go anywhere on the net with a single passport.
I don't like the concept of .NET because it will lock any OS that isn't running a .NET OS out of alot of sites. I don't think it is right for Bill to do this because it will cripple the World Wide Web for other OSes. Knowing Microsofts track record, there will be alot of big sites that will jump on the .NET bandwagon. I don't think it is right to lock users of alternative OSes out of the net. Microsoft needs competition. If Bill crushes all alternative OSes it will result in a future of Microsoft products that aren't improved much because there will be no compelling reason for him to lure new computer users in plus the free MS updates we know and love(LOL) will probably no longer be free.
-
quote:
Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
That is true. If it wasn't for Microsoft Windows we wouldn't have processors running at 1ghz+, we wouldn't have Video cards with a built in GPU capable of displaying incredible 3D images w/good FPS, we wouldn't have advanced sound cards, etc.
Why, Microsoft doesn't make the stuff? You may ask. The answer is simple, Microsoft Windows started becoming more and more system demanding therefore forcing hardware manufacturers to make faster/better hardware to make the latest and greatest OSes run decent. God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS. The only APIs compatible with Linux is OpenGL and OpenAL. Direct3D and Direct Sound are definatley superior to OpenGL and OpenAL because of all the Eye/Ear Candy that can be used with the API. Why would CPU/Memory/chipset/hard drive makers improve thier hardware for Linux since runs fine on low end systems? We all can thank Windows for the advancement of technology.
Nah, it's still a load of dung. Okay, M$ made their OSes more demanding, thus causing a round of updates to the hardware. But _why_ did they make this switch? To copy Apple, or course. Thus in turn, making credit go to Apple for continuing to innovate while M$ continued to copy them.
Okay, let's go after another flaw in this logic. "Why would hardware manufacterers update their software so Linux would run faster?" is more or less your statement. Hardware manufacturers don't make upgrades for the convenience of the poor souls out their running Winblows; they make upgrades so that they can sell them. As long as they can continue to up the Mhz, they can continue to sell the babies. It has nothing to do with Windows (which runs fine in any flavor on about a 700Mhz computer - I could also use said computer to run just about any game I wanted).
-
quote:
Originally posted by VoidMain:
Gump, I wondered how you got those 5 stars. Now I see how!
Why thank you! I am rather fond of the job I did in that reply, too. :cool:
BTW, I'd completely missed noticing my rating until you said that . . . makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. :D
-
Actually we have the gamers to thank for the ever increasing hardware specs. Like gump420 pointed out, Windows does not need the highest spec hardware, I have Win2k running quite nicely (for a MS product) on an AMD K6-2 300 with 96Mb and a 4Mb graphics card. It works fine for word processing, even runs Autocad2000. It's just no good for playing games:- modern games need 1.5Ghz and 256Mb, 3D graphics etc (or a Playstation (http://smile.gif) ). It goes in a cycle - hardware improves, games are written to take advantage of it. Improve the hardware and the game runs better/faster, until the next round of games demand even higher specs. The guys out there with the top of the range pc's are the ones who play games on them, not the people who use them for work or surfing the net.
-
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
Too bad they are NOT what they are today. Maybe they would be better? Amigas doing video editing on <50MHz...try that on any M$ O/S. Cannot be done. What is the clock speed on the Playstation? Still better clock for clock. Imagine having an Amiga class system with the technological advances of today with 2.0+ GHz. Wow...kinda boggles the mind, huh? Do you realize how fast 2GHz is? Do you realize how slow your system is running once you realize how fast 2GHz is? I do realize that the processor is not the major player in the speed of a PC - even if you had an infinitely fast Processor it would still take its time due the the other bottlenecks in a system. BUT...with 2GHz on tap Windows is just a total PIG.
Windows is like the Space Shuttle...It takes minimal power to send man into space. But to generate that power takes energy. To make that energy takes fuel. That fuel has weight which causes you to use more energy, which causes you to carry more fuel...which is more weight..etc. A gigantic SNOWBALL until you actually have enough fuel to carry all of the weight to do a simple task of getting the man (or a satellite) into space. Run Linux at 2GHz...or for that matter run any other O/S at 2GHz. Comparable to M$?...you decide!
Yeah, I will say that Microsoft had its place, but they have overstayed their welcome and have become like a rabid dog; attacking anything in their path. Sure, they helped us all follow a path to what we believed were "new" standards. But they have eradicated the true standards with their standards and ruined everything else in the process. Look at networking...it has totally changed and revolved around M$. They put stuff into their products that force other manufacturers to follow because they "must" maintain compatibility with M$. This philosphy of needing to maintain compatibility with M$ in order to survive is true, and that my friends, is the sad part.
In response to the comment earlier that Bill bought DOS. Well, that could not be the furthest thing from the truth. What REALLY happened? Check this out...After the initial attempts with other companies (like DR), IBM knew that there was a suitable "core" of an operating system out there that would fit their needs into getting an O/S off the ground within their very shore time table, but it needed modifications. They knew of Bill Gates and his capabilities as well as the company that wrote the operating system application. The problem for them was that if they approached the company with their plans for a PC around the other companies operating system, the price for the O/S would go through the roof (because IBM had deep pockets and was desperate). So rather than IBM trying to license the O/S directly they told Bill Gates to use their (IBM's) money to buy the O/S and modify it for IBM and then license it back to IBM. The money that young Mr. Gates bought the O/S from was not even his money - it was IBM's money! I guess IBM tried to rip off the company that wrote the code that Mr. Gates bought and they got their just reward. What goes around comes around. I got this story first hand from a friend of mine who was one of the corporate execs that was on the team that went to Mr. Gates to make the deals. Here is a really crappy part of the whole thing. A few years ago, this gentleman had requested meeting with Mr. Gates to ask for a Job with Microsoft (he had been part of the layoffs at IBM a few years earlier). Bill Gates did agree to meet with him (after all he owes part of who he is to this man). Guess what? Mr `I'm so f*cking rich I can buy the world' Gates told him no. His whole reasoning was that he needed to get away from the past at M$ and get on with the future and that having around someone from that era would not be good for the company. What a load of SHIT! Hey - thanks for everything NOW GO FUCK YOURSELF! Sadly enough this guy is one of the nicest old guys I know. In fact, he fixes up old PC's for FREE and gives them to low-income families that cannot afford one. Bill Gates as a person will...WILL pay - probably not in this life, but...well...you know.
(what a resouce we have in VoidMain, no?)
And there is my $.02 :D
-
Wow! I am impressed BoogerHead! And thanks for setting the record straight on my comment earlier about MS "buying" DOS. In fact as I read your post I remembered seeing a very good show on that exact topic (I think it was on PBS). You were *right on* as I remember it.
Speaking of Amiga. That reminds me of my Commodore days. Started with a VIC-20 (20k of RAM) and the C-64 (wow! 64k of RAM) and they had built in ROM-BASIC. My timeline memory isn't the greatest on this but yours seems to be pretty good. When did the VIC-20 come out in relation to the PC w/DOS? Was it after? If it was before, where did the BASIC code come from that they used?
I know Apple, Atari and some others predated the Commodore but I never had experience with them. Did they also use ROM-BASIC? And didn't the Amiga come out of Commodore, or Amiga bought out Commodore, or are the two companies in no way related?
I would love to meet that friend of yours and help him with his "feed the world" efforts with the free computers thing.. They surely would not include MS software. Just to hear the stories. I worked with someone simililar to that who was at the first computer shows when Apple released their first machine and he got a contract as a distributor. He also invented the first ISDN modem, made a lot of money, then lost it all in other bad deals. He is also a great guy and now just has a low key tech position. If you met him you would never know but I love to hear his stories.
[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
I was not intending to correct anyone about the M$ not buying the software - I believed that they actually did buy it until I was corrected by Jack. Regarding the BASIC - this was basic, not DOS. Yes they (M$) had a basic available, but IBM wanted a true DOS that would allow storage onto media, as well as systems that could be updated without sending them back or having a tech go out to replace PROMS. IBM wanted a business class machine, not a playtoy (which most machines out with only BASIC were not designed for business). As you can see from the introductory price of these machines, business were the only ones who could truly afford them. Alas MS-DOS was born and they rest is...history. (http://smile.gif)
-
The only reason I brought up BASIC was because there was a question as to how it ended up in MS' hands in an earlier thread...
-
quote:
Originally posted by <EclipticZero>:
Do any of you understand a thing about how Windows works? or are you all just saying Windows sucks because you like to agree with all the "l33t hackers" who use Linux?
I understand how Windows "doesn't" work which is why I are one of those "l33t hackers" who use Linux.
-
VoidMain:
And didn't the Amiga come out of Commodore, or Amiga bought out Commodore, or are the two companies in no way related?
The Amiga was designed by a company called Hi-Torro (who became Amiga Inc) in the mid 1980's. Atari loaned some money to them when they ran short of capital. Commodore paid off the loan and aquired Amiga in 1985, forming Commodore-Amiga as a subsidiary. It was Commodore that briught Amiga to production, and then killed it off through poor management, lack of advertising, and concentrating on building PC clones. SeeThe History of the Amiga (http://amiga.emugaming.com/ahistory.html)
for a detailed account.
Two points that may be of interest:
1. The early Amigas shipped with a version of MS Basic (which sucked badly). Commodore got a very good deal on the licencing, probably the lkast company to screw MS
2. There is a free Amiga emulator available for Windows and Linux called UAE
UAE (http://www.freiburg.linux.de/~uae/)
You need a copy of the Amiga ROM to run it though.
-
Amiga's "Video Toaster" was a pretty cool product. I had a coworker who was as nutty about Amiga as I was/am about *NIX. He used to put in some pretty good jabs...
[ January 20, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by killerangel0101:
ok i am tire of this linux or unix whatever i want a fucking OS the doesn't hide shit from me
You mean like keep it configuration data in a binary file, I hate that anout windows too.
Most linux configuration is in plain text files in /etc
quote:
and OS is all about fucking internet
Linux was developed over the internet
quote:
i like programming and
All linux distro come with a complete set of programming tools
quote:
fucking playings games. linux and unix whatever they don't have games
You don't call Quake 3 a game ?????
It even performs better under linux (http://213.40.196.64/content/4/23735.html)
quote:
and i don't like there desktop there color or boot up whatever is lame .
Then change your window manger or even easier configure it to use different colours, Most window manager even have GUI tools to do this.
(Edited to fix really bad UBB coding)
[ January 21, 2002: Message edited by: joel ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by killerangel0101:
ok i am tire of this linux or unix whatever i want a fucking OS the doesn't hide shit from me and OS is all about fucking internet i like programming and fucking playings games. linux and unix whatever they don't have games and i don't like there desktop there color or boot up whatever is lame .
Translation: I obviously don't deserve to use a computer. I should go back and play with my Windows toys.