To those that hate Microsoft

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-10-03 05:10pm

Imagine a computer world run on Linux, or Sun, or Oracle or IBM. Microsoft is an enlightened empire compared to them. At least with M$, they try to make things as useful as possible to the average user.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-03 05:16pm

Azeron wrote:Imagine a computer world run on Linux, or Sun, or Oracle or IBM. Microsoft is an enlightened empire compared to them. At least with M$, they try to make things as useful as possible to the average user.

Strawman. What we want is a world which is NOT run by any one platform or company.

Imagine a world where the dominant word-processing format is fully documented, so that you can choose your word processor for price and features rather than file format compatibility. Imagine a world where software developers don't have to spend more time checking for patent violations than coding. Imagine a world where major API's are open and cross-platform, so that cross-platform coding is easier. Imagine a world where the networking protocols are fully documented, so that you don't have to buy a certain company's client in order to connect to that company's servers, or vice versa. That's more like what anti-Microsoft people envision.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-03 05:21pm

As long as it runs Quake 3, Medieval, Shogun, WC3, Civ2, and Counter-Strike, I am a happy man.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-10-03 05:30pm

Wong what you are rally talking about is world in where there are many vendors, but really only 1 technology. Thats the world of linux today. I like linux, I don't like the culture and hassles it brings. I may think linux is good at many things from a compatibility stand point, but I also appreciate a technology base like M$ has thats geared towards being really useful instead of being architectually/conceptually sound in every respect.

I don't think technology by its nature should be driven by a central committee somewhere, though its helpful in many respects when it has been. I kinda like it when technology it is primiarly user/driven, and they actively seek out to do what people want. If a standard does not give peopel the power to do what they want, what good is it compared to a non-standard that does do what they want?

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2002-10-03 05:31pm

Even though I make a living on Microsoft OS's I would LOVE to see more operating systems in the market.

Not many days ago i did a new install for a new customer. Their choice was W2K server for an webserver with an sql database.

The number of fixes after installing the os.

Sp3
~8 Hotfixes
IIS Lockdown
Urlscan 2.5

IE6sp1
IE6 hotfix

SQL2K Sp2
Cumulative patch 8.00.0667

Today I had to call the customer and tell them that Microsoft have released a new sql hotfix 8.00.0679 q316333.

The customer got pissed and asked my why I did’t install it last week, and I had to answer this is a new one.

Even when I did mail the page with the relevant info from Microsoft they still insisted that I was just attempting to earn more cash from a simple install

My point is this. MS should really stop releasing this buggy crap!

This is the info i mailed:
Microsoft

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-10-03 05:35pm

It would be nice if apple ported to the x86 family.

there are some uses I could find for it. espeically if they did embeded software for it too.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-10-03 05:35pm

The problem iwth Microsoft is that they have faulty, glitchy software, and if they get control of the PC industry, they can raise prices all they want. And then, they can take over the video game industry, with lots of money to get all the good devopers to their platform.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-10-03 05:41pm

Wong what you are rally talking about is world in where there are many vendors, but really only 1 technology. Thats the world of linux today. I like linux, I don't like the culture and hassles it brings. I may think linux is good at many things from a compatibility stand point, but I also appreciate a technology base like M$ has thats geared towards being really useful instead of being architectually/conceptually sound in every respect.

Imagine if TV's ran like that. What if Microsoft made TV's and they concentrated on "being really useful instead of being architecturally/conceptually sound in every respect"? Sure, you'd have a nice TV, but it wouldn't work with any channels that work on NTSC! That's the whole fucking point of standards, to let people choose products based on price and features rather than being strongarmed into choosing an inferior, expensive product only for compatibility purposes.

I don't think technology by its nature should be driven by a central committee somewhere, though its helpful in many respects when it has been. I kinda like it when technology it is primiarly user/driven, and they actively seek out to do what people want. If a standard does not give peopel the power to do what they want, what good is it compared to a non-standard that does do what they want?

What's an example of a standard that doesn't give people what they want? Well, OK, MPEG, but the MPEG group is a bunch of fucking morons, as far as I'm concerned. Just about every other standard is royalty-free. Besides, an open standard gives consumers a choice, which is something they want.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-10-03 06:01pm

It would be nice if apple ported to the x86 family.

We've been over that many a time on the Mac Addict and Ars Technica forums. The general consensus is that it'd be a bad idea. Although, Darwin has been ported to x86, but Aqua and Quartz remain closed. There are rumors abound that Apple does keep an up-to-date version of OS X running on x86 "just in case." However, with x86's undoubtedly rough transition to 64-bit coming up, now would not be an especially good time to adopt it as an architecture.

Besides, you're a programmer (I think). How would you like it if Microsoft said that all your applications had to be recompiled and reoptimized for a completely different chip architecture? After going to a completely new operating system, no less! You probably wouldn't be too happy, and it wouldn't get done over night, for sure.

And, Apple have their problems. They are notorious for shitting on developers by closing off a number of system API's ever since Steve Jobs returned. OS X is almost completely uncustomizable by any official API's, and Apple make it more difficult with each successive release. But, at least they plug for open standards.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-03 06:30pm

EV: Nova is being ported to Windows! My last reason for getting a Mac has been destroyed!

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-10-03 07:56pm

Cyril wrote:EV: Nova is being ported to Windows! My last reason for getting a Mac has been destroyed!

For the longest time I had Basilisk II installed on my Athlon XP so I could run Escape Velocity. Most of my friends thought I was crazy.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-03 07:58pm

What? What to run escape velocity on a PC?

Tell!

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-10-05 08:50pm

To run EV on a Mac, you need to get an emulator (Basilisk II will do), a ROM image (find an old 040 mac or hunt for hours looking for a ROM) and the system software off of Apple's FTP site.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

To those that hate Microsoft

To those that hate Microsoft

Re: To those that hate Microsoft