R
Rod Speed
ToolPackinMama said:
Stoppit at once.
Corse not. Its pure bluff.
You dont need to, its pure bluff.
Stoppit at once.
Corse not. Its pure bluff.
You dont need to, its pure bluff.
E
Ed Medlin
He is tossing around legal terms. "Monopoly power" is not in and of itselfRod Speed said:
illegal. The abuse of that said power is. The EU asses won't even tell MS if
they will sue again even after MS has released everything possible to try
and inform them of everything in Vista, including their antivirus status and
kernel security. IOW, they are saying to MS to release it and then we will
see what we can sue you for............. McAfee and Symantec are going
ballistic.........
Ed
J
J. Conners
Just an opinion. If you write an OS and *also* intend to write the
software that runs on it, then the OS should be totally open architecture.
Why?
a.. It is like the engine in a car. The owner of the machine may want to
use alternative 3rd party equipment. Therefore, in order to ensure that
the 3rd party modifications/equipment work properly with the car he owns,
he insists that a complete manual is available if he needs it (for a price).
b.. If you do not do this and you *do* write the software that runs on
your OS and to a very great extent you lock other software designers out,
then you have created a monopoly whereby you hinder/block equal
opportunity by 3rd party software designers.
If you are building and marketing an OS *only* then you do what you have
to in order to ensure nobody rips off your hard work. However in this
type if situation it would be utterly stupid the lock all others out
because you would never be able to sell your OS.
What Microsoft has done is to try and perform an end-run around the law as
it relates to monopolys. What they are doing is wrong morally if not
legally.
In my home there are 5 computers. If I follow the Microsoft mantra, I
must buy 5 copies of Windows in order to use all 5. To me that is just
plain wrong.
I have just one internet connection, I don't see my ISP insisting that I
pay for 5 connections or that only one computer at a time can be online.
I have just one cable connection but I have 4 TVs on it.
Nobody will ever convince me that what Microsoft is doing is right. Just
my opinion.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *IS* user friendly. It's just not Idiot-Friendly or Fool-Friendly!
VectorLinux 5
-When Choice Matters-
T
Tomcat (Tom)
John said:
LOL! I haven't heard this argument before. Trying to justify your
credibility and knowledge based on your historical experience debating
with chimpanzees on USENET?
Since you live in the USENET world, go do a search for "open source
software" around the time of the antitrust hearings and do a similiar
search within the last couple years.
Sure, Linux was around at that time but was not nearly the competitor
to MS as it is today.
It's not a stranglehold. It's called people making a choice to use
what best fits their needs.
T
Tomcat (Tom)
J. Conners said:
That manual is available. It's called MSDN.
In this day and age, with the power of VS.NET and other development
tools, there is nothing blocking 3rd party software designers from
designing just as good a software for Windows as MS can. If MS has a
tremendous advantage with inside knowledge of Windows architecture then
why are 3rd party software applications like Firefox doing so well?
I do agree that this is a stupid way to do things on MS's part.
However I don't consider it wrong or illegal, just a bad business
decision. Pure economic supply and demand will dictate if MS can
succeed at this practice. If people can't afford to buy 5 copies of
Windows then they will be forced to install Linux and do everything
they need to do at home using Linux (browse the web, word processing,
email, etc). There is a choice.
S
Same Guy
I gave SUSE Linux a shot at the end of last year as a business computer
and while installation was a relative breeze, I found it difficult to
(un)install applications that didn't come prepackaged with the OS files.
It was also confusing as to how to uninstall components that were
installed during the OS installation.
As someone that is used to M$, it wasn't obvious to me what was going on
during the my first installation of the OS and wound up installing the
command line version when all I wanted was the minimum graphical
version. That one little distinction alone will be a great hurdle for
most folks that may think of switching. I reformatted the drive and
then reinstalled using the graphical version without a hitch.
Also, there are way too many acronyms for the various elements of Linux
without proper descriptions of what they are and what they do when one
is interested in installing. Yes, I could spend the time looking it up,
and I did, but since that is not a requirement with M$ products, why
would someone switch if they need to research every other word found in
the Linux installation files as well as trying to decipher what is being
said in the user forums?
In the end, I went to a clean install of Win2K because I was spending
too much time manipulating and researching the OS which does not
generate revenue instead of running my business which does.
I liked what I saw, but the user experience (acronyms, support forums,
layout, installation of applications, etc.) needs to be greatly
simplified before it starts to develop any widespread acceptance in a
way that will dent M$'s market share.
--
Newsfeeds
The Safe Harbor of SPAMMERS
Gotta have SPAM:
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)
C
Conor
Really? A review of software from a leading AV company. With the
Windows version, all you have to do is click on the downloaded file..
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35264
"Once again, even the RPM installation is not a complete one, you have
to manually launch a "license update script" and a message tells you
after the RPM install to "please launch the avggui_update_licinfo.sh"
stored in /opt/grisoft/avggui/bin. I once again rolled my eyes and took
a deep breath in exasperation about the sad state of Linux application
installs."
"What followed was a clear example of the problem with Linux from a
user-friendly standpoint, because some must-have tools are often not
part of the default installation. I created a new launcher object for
"avggui" but this time changing the command from "avggui" to "sudo
avggui". It didn't work... sudo is a text-mode utility, so when
launched from a GUI the sudo password prompt asking for the root
password cannot be seen, and nothing happens. I had to find a GUI
equivalent to sudo. The Google God found me one, it's dubbed "gksu", of
course."
Really? No drivers for the top selling brands in PC World.
Unless you want to game, or encode.
--
Conor
I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.
Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
P
PWY
J. Conners said:
It seems to me the router you are using with your five computers is an "end
run" around the five connections your ISP would charge you for otherwise.
As to the four TV's, the cable Co. would be charging for them if they knew
about them.
At least this is the way it works where I live.
J
JAD
Great post! whats weird is I swear I read the same exact post by someone 9
years ago.....
years ago.....
S
Senex
PWY stunned us with this revelation on 10/26/2006 :
Right idiot, that's why most ISPs now provide Modem/router
combinations.
I don't know where you live, but in my world the cable company actually
ran the extra co-ax cables for my 4 extra TVs.
I think you need to move. You're getting screwed.
Right idiot, that's why most ISPs now provide Modem/router
combinations.
I don't know where you live, but in my world the cable company actually
ran the extra co-ax cables for my 4 extra TVs.
I think you need to move. You're getting screwed.
J
JAD
Ed Medlin said:
McAfee and Symantec are going
those two going out of buisness would be great
H
Hawkeye
Dont know if this has been posted yet since i did not read the 106
previous replies
Microsoft today talked to bit-tech in a bid to reassure the enthusiast
community about the licensing terms of Windows Vista.
We previously read that Vista could prove to be a nightmare for
enthusiasts who upgrade often, with only one transfer to a new machine
allowed and with the license tied to a particular system configuration
in a way that was far more limiting than Windows XP.
A Microsoft spokesman from the Licensing Dept told bit-tech that this
would not be the case. He told us that Windows Vista will not require
a system re-activation unless the hard drive and one other component
is changed. This means that enthusiasts will be able to swap CPUs,
memory and graphics cards out without any worry about having to
re-activate with MS, either on the internet or by phone.
Should you change the hard drive and another piece of hardware - for
example for a major upgrade such as a motherboard change that requires
a re-installation - Microsoft will allow you to re-activate up to 10
times. You will not, however, be able to have more than one machine
activated concurrently.
Should you wish to activate more than 10 times, you could be busted,
or Microsoft could choose to let you activate again at its discretion.
For hardcore system enthusiasts, keeping a ghosted, activated copy of
Vista with no drivers could be a good way of being able to swap around
components and machines with the minimum amount of hassle.
This would seem to clear up some of the confusion about Vista
activation. Let us know what you will be doing over in the forums!
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10/26/Microsoft_clarifies_Vista_activation_to_bit-tech/
previous replies
Microsoft today talked to bit-tech in a bid to reassure the enthusiast
community about the licensing terms of Windows Vista.
We previously read that Vista could prove to be a nightmare for
enthusiasts who upgrade often, with only one transfer to a new machine
allowed and with the license tied to a particular system configuration
in a way that was far more limiting than Windows XP.
A Microsoft spokesman from the Licensing Dept told bit-tech that this
would not be the case. He told us that Windows Vista will not require
a system re-activation unless the hard drive and one other component
is changed. This means that enthusiasts will be able to swap CPUs,
memory and graphics cards out without any worry about having to
re-activate with MS, either on the internet or by phone.
Should you change the hard drive and another piece of hardware - for
example for a major upgrade such as a motherboard change that requires
a re-installation - Microsoft will allow you to re-activate up to 10
times. You will not, however, be able to have more than one machine
activated concurrently.
Should you wish to activate more than 10 times, you could be busted,
or Microsoft could choose to let you activate again at its discretion.
For hardcore system enthusiasts, keeping a ghosted, activated copy of
Vista with no drivers could be a good way of being able to swap around
components and machines with the minimum amount of hassle.
This would seem to clear up some of the confusion about Vista
activation. Let us know what you will be doing over in the forums!
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10/26/Microsoft_clarifies_Vista_activation_to_bit-tech/
J
JAD
PWY said:
Communist China?
J
J. Conners
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 06:13:54 -0700, Tomcat (Tom) wrote:
True, and if you look at my sig below, you'll see that Linux is exactly my
answer to the problem.
I'm not necessarily a Linux hack, I just can't afford the likes of Bill
Gates and his bloatware and, not being a crook, I can't bring myself to
steal his product(s).
So, what his overpriced monopoly does, is keep the ordinary joe citizen
out of the Microsoft loop.
That still doesn't excuse what Microsoft is doing. I hope they make
another few billion on Vista. However, not one thin dime of it will come
from me.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *IS* user friendly. It's just not Idiot-Friendly or Fool-Friendly!
VectorLinux 5.8
-When Choice Matters-
True, and if you look at my sig below, you'll see that Linux is exactly my
answer to the problem.
I'm not necessarily a Linux hack, I just can't afford the likes of Bill
Gates and his bloatware and, not being a crook, I can't bring myself to
steal his product(s).
So, what his overpriced monopoly does, is keep the ordinary joe citizen
out of the Microsoft loop.
That still doesn't excuse what Microsoft is doing. I hope they make
another few billion on Vista. However, not one thin dime of it will come
from me.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *IS* user friendly. It's just not Idiot-Friendly or Fool-Friendly!
VectorLinux 5.8
-When Choice Matters-
R
Rod Speed
He used the term monopoly, not monopoly power.
There is no monopoly with PC OSs while ever linux is around.
There is no 'monopoly power' with MS, whatever some stupid judge claims.
Irrelevant to whether there is any monopoly or monopoly power.
Because it isnt clear until its released exactly what will happen with say
a motherboard change, just what the authorisation process will allow.
They have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.
J
JAD
"Linux! Attitude first..... OS second.....
W
WooHoo2You
John Doe said:
That has to be one of the most childish remarks I have seen in a long time.
That is a new low for you, showing a complete lack of maturity. Whatever
you real age may be.
Software packs? Big jump. We are going to have other companies make our
programs, but they will still be on our payroll. If you work for MS or are
commissioned by MS makes very little difference at all. If they are packs
from 3rd parties, it just makes the problem worse, 150 dollars for an o/s
and now I have to buy more just to get started. If the packs are free
according to your logic(another "post" of yours), writing programs for no
profit is a "waste of time." So these "utility packs" would not be very
useful.
No, my analogy is much closer. MS does not control the internet, that would
be more akin to the 'road.' You are saying that MS' programs that come
preinstalled and produced by them are controlling what we see and do with
our computers? As well as make it hard for other people to create similar
software that does the same thing better/faster? (Guess he has never heard
of the *free* browser Firefox, or the fast that IE JUST got tabs)
J
J. Conners
That may be true
But
Microsoft! Money first..... and lots of it.
I have no idea why folks can't understand. Those of us who do not have a
wad of cash have to find alternatives. Linux is *one* .
Call it what you wish, it works for me and, to be legal, I don't have to
fork over $1300.00 Cdn to load up 5 computers with Windows XP OS (Home
Edition more for Pro) and then worry about what to do for money to buy
applications. Don't give me the crap that machines come pre-loaded with
the OS because, I build my own machines and they come pre-loaded with SFA.
My belief?? I believe a very high percentage of the computer users out
there are simply thieves or else they have one hell of a lot more loot to
spread around than I do, if they can afford to load up multiple machines
with Microsoft 'stuff'. Even to put the Microsoft OS and Apps I would
need on one machine would cost in the neighborhood of $800.00 Cdn. Shit,
I can build a computer for that.
So, "Linux! Attitude first..... OS second..... ?? So be it.
It still gets the job done.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *IS* user friendly. It's just not Idiot-Friendly or Fool-Friendly!
VectorLinux 5
-When Choice Matters-
G
Ghostrider
Hawkeye said:
But where is this written, in black-and-white, from Microsoft?
T
Tomcat (Tom)
J. Conners said:
Well most people don't build their own machines like you and me. They
buy crap like an eMachine preloaded with XP and Works, and after
rebates they've spent less on their whole system than we spent just
putting the basic MS software on ours. For many users XP + MS Works is
all they need to get by.