Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft as a Company => Topic started by: DavidB on 18 March 2006, 03:28
-
Bill Gates' whiny condemnation of a new $100 laptop developed by MIT for people in "third world" nations has earned the SOB a lot of deservedly bad press. I'm glad people are beginning to see what I've been saying for years: Bill Gates is NOT a philanthropist.
http://www.bostonist.com/archives/2006/03/17/bill_gates_gets_the_gas_face.php
"Bill Gates is an asshole."
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/56332/
"Shame on you Bill."
-
Well, if the screens really are kind of crappy, I would be complaining too. And yes, it's probably a given that he's criticizing this because Google is backing it (and it runs Linux). On the plus side the 100$ system would probably beat having nothing.
This is interesting:
"In addition, Microsoft's antipiracy-minded Steve Ballmer last year called for a move toward the $100 PC for developing nations."
Source: http://news.com.com/The+100+laptop+moves+closer+to+reality/2100-1044_3-5884683.html
Also, these 100$ laptops might have "IEEE 802.11b" support, which would make them "internet capable" @ Bill Gates.
The man has done some good things, but it's interesting how you sort of reminded me that yes, he's the same guy that had/has that wonderful monopoly...
EDIT: Although off-subject, AMD who will be providing the processor for the 100$ laptop, is working on a 185$ computer of their own, as an attempt to "equip 50 percent of the world's population with Internet connectivity and computing capabilities by 2015". It runs Windows CE though. Even if it's a customized version of CE like they say it will be, I do wonder how they're going to make it... "not suck". Why did AMD choose CE again?
AMD's Personal Internet Computer ($185)
http://www.windowsfordevices.com/news/NS4589525979.html
-
Yeah, Bill's a dick. He's letting that "man of the year" crap go to his head... now he thinks he can belittle everyone elses efforts to help people without a lot of money.
"The last thing you want to do for a shared use computer is have it be something without a disk ... and with a tiny little screen"
Gee... lets put a disk on it, increasing cost and, more importantly the power consumption, immensely, and making it shock sensitive, dust sensitive, heat sensitive, and software breakable (even Linux can be messed up with rm -rf /). Oh yeah, that bigger display is also going to raise the price and power consumption.
If Bill Gates can make a better $100 laptop for the target audience (without it being a loss leader, like the X-Box), fine. Until then he should just STFU.
-
Bill just had the right attitude and the right product at the right time and built on it. Hes never been special.
No real computer geek would dismiss linux like he does, hes a business man now hes just after the money...
I don't know why he bothers, hes got more money than he could ever need he only continues his work to promote windows cause its his baby and thus its success boosts his ego.
-
I fully agree with this artical apart from the Linux zealotism part.
And what should they expect for $100 a top of the range crystal clear screen? :rolleyes:
-
I fully agree with this artical apart from the Linux zealotism part.
Sorry that GNU/Linux is a damn good OS. Making thousands of people perfectly happy. Yea, if it was shit, there'd be less "zealots" (apparantly also knows as people who prefer it over the rest of the OSes).
For the record, I've only had to reboot to get into a new kernel or install a different distro. Not after everytime I install software.
-
Sorry that GNU/Linux is a damn good OS. Making thousands of people perfectly happy.
So?
Yea, if it was shit, there'd be less "zealots" (apparantly also knows as people who prefer it over the rest of the OSes).
I didn't say it was shit I just don't like the style of the artical.
For the record, I've only had to reboot to get into a new kernel or install a different distro.
It is a pain having to re-install all your software when you updrade the distro though.
Not after everytime I install software.
I've never had such a problem on any OS because I always install non-shitware.
-
It is a pain having to re-install all your software when you updrade the distro though.
I could install non-system stuff somewhere in my home directory if that was bothering me. Hell I could install everything in my home directory and symlink to the system-stuff I want from /bin etc.
I've had this home partition for ages, even in Debian, Slackware, and different G/LFS setups.
I've never had such a problem on any OS because I always install non-shitware.
You don't install/update Direct X or anything like that, no?
I didn't say it was shit I just don't like the style of the artical.
You said you disagreed with him on the "Linux zealotism part". And hah, alot of it wasn't "Linux" zealotism, more like "decent OS w/o lots of malware (perhaps because it's non-mainstream? Doesn't matter.)" - it would apply to Mac OS X too, but not to Windows.
-
I could install non-system stuff somewhere in my home directory if that was bothering me. Hell I could install everything in my home directory and symlink to the system-stuff I want from /bin etc.
I don't know but when I install a package it just installs, I can't remember seeing any options like that.
You don't install/update Direct X or anything like that, no?
No, I don't need to, I don't play games, and DirectX is part of the OS so yes updating it could fuck things up if it goes bad. That's kind of the problem with Windows DirectX should be just a library it shouldn't effect the rest of the OS.
You said you disagreed with him on the "Linux zealotism part". And hah, alot of it wasn't "Linux" zealotism, more like "decent OS w/o lots of malware (perhaps because it's non-mainstream? Doesn't matter.)" - it would apply to Mac OS X too, but not to Windows.
Would it?
It sounded like "the whole world should use Linux" me, all the time when I was reading that artical I was thinkiing what about Mac OS? What about BSD? What about BeOS?
-
I don't know but when I install a package it just installs, I can't remember seeing any options like that.
Depends on the type of package. Autopackages, I believe, can be installed anywhere. Same with the binary package system I'm working on (which is alot like autopackage). Seeing as I compile stuff from source, just like you'll have the choice to do with nearly all packages on any distribution, I can install in my home directory without a bother.
No, I don't need to, I don't play games, and DirectX is part of the OS so yes updating it could fuck things up if it goes bad. That's kind of the problem with Windows DirectX should be just a library it shouldn't effect the rest of the OS.
Too bad your OS is just one big kludge created and marketed by a monopoly with only money in mind.
Would it?
It sounded like "the whole world should use Linux" me, all the time when I was reading that artical I was thinkiing what about Mac OS? What about BSD? What about BeOS?
He was talking about GNU/Linux, which is what the 100$ laptop will run. GNU/Linux doesn't have much malware floating about. It generally runs very stable, and has lots of different choices for window manager etc., so it'll be stable and fast on even old hardware, or newer 100$ hardware.
-
Depends on the type of package. Autopackages, I believe, can be installed anywhere. Same with the binary package system I'm working on (which is alot like autopackage).
The Ubuntu, Redhat or Vector Linux installation programs never gave me an option but yes some software I installed afterwards did.
Too bad your OS is just one big kludge created and marketed by a monopoly with only money in mind.
What FreeDOS, DR-DOS, BeOS?
Oh Windows, well that isn't my OS, it's Bill Gates' and Steve Ballmer's.
He was talking about GNU/Linux, which is what the 100$ laptop will run. GNU/Linux doesn't have much malware floating about. It generally runs very stable, and has lots of different choices for window manager etc., so it'll be stable and fast on even old hardware, or newer 100$ hardware.
But it isn't the only operating system that will run on old/cheap hardware and it probably isn't the best for every purpose either.
-
The Ubuntu, Redhat or Vector Linux installation programs never gave me an option
Good thing they're not the only choices you have when it comes to installing programs on GNU/Linux.
What FreeDOS, DR-DOS, BeOS?
Oh Windows, well that isn't my OS, it's Bill Gates' and Steve Ballmer's.
Interesting. Since when did you own BeOS?
But it isn't the only operating system that will run on old/cheap hardware
So what, it's what the 100$ laptop people decided it would run, at least by default.
and it probably isn't the best for every purpose either.
The sky is falling.
-
Good thing they're not the only choices you have when it comes to installing programs on GNU/Linux.
Could you suggest something better then?
Interesting. Since when did you own BeOS?
I don't, you're just being pedantic.
So what, it's what the 100$ laptop people decided it would run, at least by default.
And it's a good choice too.
The sky is falling.
zealot.
-
Could you suggest something better then?
Autopackage, and what I do (compile from source). Hell I don't even know if RPM and deb can do it. Probably with source RPMs...
I don't, you're just being pedantic.
And you weren't?
zealot.
Where'd ya get that from? I was being sarcastic. "and it probably isn't the best for every purpose either" - I mean, WTF?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry
-
I know what a zealot is. But what I don't get is why I'm supposed to be a zealot for sarcasticly saying "the sky is falling" after you said GNU/Linux isn't the best choice for every purpose.
-
Oh, fuck it I don't care.
Let's shake hands.
-
Let's shake hands.
OK.
*prepares the chainsaw*
:p
-
Well, Bill's point is that computers cannot be used without a lot of services, and the services are what drive up costs. In his world, average users won't learn to use computers but instead rely on professional help. In his world, users won't help each others but depend on customer support instead.
Obviously, I cannot know about mindsets of the people in third world countries, but his point of view is obviously that people won't learn to use the tools and thus a lot of money is needed to help them use these systems. Personally, I think he's underestimating a lot of people. Then again, when I think about the average windows users, I can see where his point of view is coming from...
-
I think history will repeat itself in that at first only a well few educated minority will own computers, before they filter down through society until nearly everyone has them. I hope a free operating system dominates (or one that's fully compatable with most free OSes) and it'll be interesting to see what happens if it's Linux they choose and the non-techy people start using it, will it mean thet they'll be better users or will it mean that no one will use a computer unless they really know how to use one.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry
Interesting...their list of the most common types of computer zealots curiously omits Microsoft whores. And when I recently tried to edit a couple Wikipedia articles about Microsoft and Bill Gates, my additions/corrections were quickly deleted.
But I'd better not speculate that Microsoft has infiltrated Wikipedia, too, lest I be branded a - *GASP* - conspiracy theorist.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry
Interesting...their list of the most common types of computer zealots curiously omits Microsoft whores. And when I recently tried to edit a couple Wikipedia articles about Microsoft and Bill Gates, my additions/corrections were quickly deleted.
Wikipedia doesn't include not-founded facts, especially when you didn't discuss them first.
-
Wikipedia doesn't include not-founded facts, especially when you didn't discuss them first.
I didn't post UNFOUNDED facts. In the meantime, a little additional investigation brought to light several Wikipedia articles that curiously dumped on the open source movement while ignoring Microsoft. Very strange.
-
How about posting it here first, then we can judge for ourselves?
-
How about posting it here first, then we can judge for ourselves?
Read Wikipedia's articles "Bill Gates" and "Microsoft." They include some token criticisms but are overwhelmingly positive, as if they were written by Mary Jane Foley herself. I can't remember everything I wrote, but I mentioned the "sweetheart deal" (to put it politely) Bill Gates got for the new headquarters for his "philanthropy." I mentioned "Microsoft Auditorium" in the Seattle PUBLIC Library as an example of questionable influence and advertising masquerading as philanthropy.
I mentioned that many critics question Bill Gates' role in public education and the fact that his father is the GATES in the Seattle lobby/law firm Preston, Gates & Ellis.
I believe I mentioned the SCO affair and the fact that Seattle's economic and social life has actually declined under Microsoft. I mentioned these things and more in several posts, all of which were deleted. Everything I posted was either an easily verifiable fact (some accompanied by links to MAINSTREAM media articles) or popular opinion supported by facts. (And please don't tell me Wikipedia doesn't publish opinion until you read their articles about Bill Gates and Microsoft.)
You might also check out their article on "Computer Zealotry" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry The author completely forgot to mention Microsoft zealots (popularly known as Microsofties, Microsoft whores and other choice names).
Microsoft also gets a free ride on the article "Operating System Advocacy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system_advocacy Notice the links at the end of the article. They begin with "Evengelism: A Unix Bigot and Linux Advocate's Spewings" and "Bad Linux Advocacy FAQ."
Yup, there's little evidence to suggest that Wikipedia any more manipulated by Microsoft than are most of the alternative media, the Washington Post, Slashdot and on and on, is there?
-
There have already been cases where a politician has had members of his staff edit his wikipedia entry to remove (true) things he didn't want in there.
-
I'm not convinced, perhapps they've just had problems with the anti-Microsoft crowd vandalising the Microsoft sections and they're overeacting to it as a result.
On second thoughts, may be this isn't the best place to discuss this, perhapps Wiki is.
-
There have already been cases where a politician has had members of his staff edit his wikipedia entry to remove (true) things he didn't want in there.
Yes, that has received a lot of publicity, and no one owns more politicians than Bill Gates.
-
I'm not convinced, perhapps they've just had problems with the anti-Microsoft crowd vandalising the Microsoft sections and they're overeacting to it as a result.
That would still discredit them. I mean, who wants to consult an encyclopedia that responds to vandalism by overreacting?
On second thoughts, may be this isn't the best place to discuss this, perhapps Wiki is.
Oh, I've got much bigger plans than that...
-
Cheer up (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Bill_gates)! :p
Did you register on wikipedia DavidB? If you did, I think your contributions would be recorded.
-
It would be difficult to make a working PC for $100 that runs Window$ ... it would either have major stability problems or it wouldn't work at all.
Bill Gate$ ... always add the $ ... what an ass !
Don't you find it a little strange how Bill Gate$ and George W. Bu$h were Time's man of the year ... oh and Bono :D
-
Don't you find it a little strange how Bill Gate$ and George W. Bu$h were Time's man of the year ... oh and Bono :D
No, I don't find it strange at all. I'd simply like to know how much money Bill paid Time for that "advertisement."
As for corporate rock star Bonehead, screw him, too.
-
The screens can't be worse than the screens on old laptops, which people did put up with.
:fu: Bill
-
You might also check out their article on "Computer Zealotry" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry The author completely forgot to mention Microsoft zealots (popularly known as Microsofties, Microsoft whores and other choice names)
Hah. I edited Microsoft zealots and it's still there.
And you know why? Because I didn't overdo it.
-
The screens can't be worse than the screens on old laptops, which people did put up with.
:fu: Bill
Yeah, my craptop has a 640x480 which is fine for most things, and even though it's shit quality not one pixel has gone bad in over 13 years of use.
-
Hah. I edited Microsoft zealots and it's still there.
And you know why? Because I didn't overdo it.
Good job, Gomer. Now write the truth about Bill Gates' "philanthropy," and see if you can get that to stick to his bio.