laconic1

I'm not a big fan of MS but they did a good job of taking an opportunity that was presented to them and capitalizing on it. Unfortunately they then took their actions too far and used their power to crush competitors and bully partners which is the main reason I don't like them.

Konichiwaneko

"If you think about it, what big company do you absolultely LOVE without any malice? Doubt you can find one."

American Express

__________________

DaKnife

Just One problem with that analogy Konicwaneko. When I buy my Car I get 2000 lbs of steel and other solid materials that I can call my own. M$ and most the rest of the software industry never sell you their software, they are selling you the privildge of using it, but you do not own the software. If I so choose, I can open the hood of my car, pull out the engine, and mount that engine in a different chassis or vise versa. And I can use that car as collateral on a loan, and even sell the car to another user.
<p>Plus, in most cases the Auto industry has been quick (at least the last few decades) to recall hazardous vehicles and replace or repair them. <p>M$ has only recently learned that the concept of security is of importance. And even then you have to wonder. When one servicepack re-opens a hole they had managed to close before.<p>Now I mostly Utilize M$ products, It's primarily because I am a gamer and not many of the better games get Linux ports. However that is beginning to change. Also the Linux I would use would be Debian unstable and really needs greater than the current dial-up access I have right now to keep up to date. But at my last apt where I had DSL access, I used it and loved it. <p>ps I will admit to being a total fan of Microsoft Mice. One piece of tech that they have gotten totally right.

DaKnife

Konichiwaneko

A car is also 100x the cost.

__________________

funk

microsoft isnt really a monopoly. they make os's and a few descent games. they dont deal with hardware or any of that stuff.
but the mac people make os's, processors,hardware ect..........
they may not be the juggurnaut that microsoft is but they have all
the makings for true world domination in the cpu market. but i will say that microsoft needs to spend more time on their os programing proccess and beta testing ,other than that i aint got no beef son.

Phaenx

Ooo, passport, for this they will never be forgiven. NEVAR!

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

itchy93

Oh, man, I am such a rabid supporter of Microsoft. I'm glad to see a few opinions posted so far that also understand the intricacies of capitalism. Every company strives to be number one; that is the whole point of having a company; if Netscape or Apple had the leading market share, do you think they'd be complaining about Microsoft's business ethic? No. Bill Gates is my hero, and I'm not even driven by capitalistic urges, I just understand that society is.

As for their products: I know I can't speak for everyone here, but I have never had a problem with a Microsoft product, and I do everything with my systems: gaming, programming, 3d modeling, graphic design, audio manipulation, web serving, everything. The few problems I have had were due to poorly-written third party software, and I'm sure someone could rebut this with, "well, if they released their source code, better programs could be written." Fuck that.

It is every company's prerogative whether to release their code. Information is meant to be free, but code isn't information, it's a product of information, and products are (typically) meant to be sold.

Their security flaws are only so prevalent because everyone focuses on them. With (if I recall correctly) 75% of servers and 80% of workstations running Windows, why would you really bother to exploit flaws in other OSes?

I have used Linux many times; I actually have it installed on a secondary machine right now, and I agree that its security and stablility are nice, but I absolutely hate the OS itself; it's way too complicated to install anything not wrapped in a tidy little RPM package or run anything not installed by default, and it took over four hours for me to install the drivers for my two-year-old hardware on the newest release... and I still don't have audio! In order to get the sound to work, I have to patch the source code, rebuild the kernel with the sound module, and build the driver for the sound card... wtf? Aurgh!!!!! Sorry for the rant.

To conclude, I love Bill Gates.

Nooze2k

I think this thread has gotten a bit off track. It's turned into the differences between MS Windows, and other OS's such as Linux, OS X, etc. I think Microsoft is a ruthless corporation in the purest sense, but like others have said, thats what it takes to make it in the industry. In my personal opinion, they don't get enough credit in one critical aspect of the IT industry, and thats keeping things uniform. This applies to most of the IT industry, and in the end only benefits almost all users and developers alike.

APIs like DirectX ensure cross-compatibility between PCs, also making development easier, faster, and more efficient. Of related note is how this effects console gaming as well. It is common knowledge that the X-Box was developed using DirectX compatible hardware. As such, future versions of the X-Box hardware (XBox2, X-Box Next, etc etc), if so desired could be designed for backwards compatibility with the old X-Box, and quite easily so, unlike the PS2 which has a multitude of processors to handle both PS2 and PSX games. This benefits not only the developer, but also the user as older games can benefit greatly in the enhanced hardware, much like upgrading hardware on a PC helps. (so you can argue that the X-Box is really just a PC in a small box, but in many ways thats not a bad thing)

Microsoft has always tried to get PC's into the mainstream market, and they have done that tenfold. Yes, they are a monopoly in many ways. However, one can argue that this isn't always a bad thing, as it make things easier for the consumer (one of the main reasons that Linux isn't picking up at lightspeed like many of us would like.)

Getting off-track once again myself, yes I do use Linux on a regular basis, and I love it. I love how customizable it is, how I can change any setting without worrying about the MS and RIAA police knocking on my door. But thats what Linux is for. However because Linux is Opensource, it may never become as wide spread as Windows is. There are too many different versions out there, and elements such as drivers and software/hardware compatibilty isn't up to par as Windows is... plus, Linux simply isn't as easy to use as Windows for the common user..... yet. Some day, it may be, but that time isn't now. Like stated before, most of the developers contributing to it and the open-source movement are doing it just to get recognized and get a paying job in the industry. Just trying to make a living and start out somewhere... like Microsoft did years ago.

__________________
" Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies, Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit, I "

yun fa china

bill gates must die lol before he rules the world

Sion

I have a love-hate relationship with Microsoft. I love what Windows/IE did to open up the world of computing to non-geeks. No matter how much we may hate MS, we have to recognize that the home computer/internet explosion of the late 90s was directly attributable to Microsoft.

On the other hand, there are many reasons to despise MS. I refer you to www.fuckmicrosoft.com if you want to know all of them. For me, the two primary reasons are bloat-ware and the privacy issues. Secondary issues are their business practices and the way they have monopolized the industry with regard to home/office computing. They created a vicious cycle: they created for themselves a dominant position in the industry by making the easiest (for non compusavy users) OS. As a result, most software is designed to work (first and foremost) on their OS's, which leads to a more dominant position for them, which leads to more software being written primarily for windows, etc, etc.

I do admire Bill Gates for one thing, though. I dont think anyone can deny that he is the epitome of the American capitalist success story. I have no doubt that he and his company will be studied by generations and generations of business students. He is, after all, THE most successful entreprenuer of all time.

__________________
He's the best, of course, of all the worst.
Some wrong been done, he done it first. -fz

I jus' want ta thank you...falettinme...be mice elf...agin...

yotta

A packet sniffer can tell you EXACTLY what's going over the wire. Some stuff is encrypted, but people have used debuggers to see what it is. Doesn't currently tell them anything more then some of your hardware info.

__________________
I am Jack's signature.

hulk

After he started out by buying then illegally using DOS =)

M$ was founded with dodgy business, and it hasn't improved. The bloated software mainly gets the job done, but if you use any alternatives you see just how inefficient most M$ software is. AppleWorks eats Microsoft Works, iTunes beats the crap the Windows Media Player, OSX is a better operating system than Windows.