Mircosoft

[SIP YEK NOD]

BOOOOOO! MICROSOFT SUCKS!

 

 

SIP_YEK_NOD looks at his microsoft keyboard, microsoft mouse, microsoft wireless internet adapter and microsoft windows

 

 

1 guess i am a slave to the corporation.

[Bond996]

There have been times when I could've thrown Windows in the bin, but most of the time it behaves well. Same with all other Microsoft products, excluding Word.

In short: I don't like Microsoft, but I don't dislike them.

 

So i'd like to extend something Segosa mentioned: Open Source

If Microsoft were to convert to Open Source (at least some addons), then I think the general community wouldn't be so negative toward them.

Why?

Becuase if Microsoft products (or addons) were Open Source, any bugs or issues that arose would be taken care of swiftly by the general programming community, dramatically decreasing the amount of haters.

 

There are two severe cons to Open Source too (all I can think of anyway), which is why Microsoft isn't likely to switch any time soon:

• Decreased profit.
• Copying of code/idea/etc (this is a good reason for OS normally, but probably not for Microsoft)

Maybe there is another software license that Microsoft could switch to?

I stand by my theory longhorn should be based upon an open-source layer. Look at OS X: Everyone likes Apple and OSX, because not only is it an awesome OS, but it's based upon open-source. Microsoft should open-source the very root level of their code for Longhorn, and like apple, have the layer on top be their own code.

[Sarin]

 

Here's an example. Their format for .doc files is not open source. They don't tell anybody the format of the file so people can create software for Linux, or even Windows, that can read it. The people who made OpenOffice.org had to reverse engineer Microsoft Word which is a very, very tedious process. This is obviously because Microsoft don't want other companies creating software which could be better than theirs causing them to lose profits.. but there's a time when you need to think about the user and not only your profits.

Er..... It's not open source, but it's not closed source either. I forget how, but it is possible to sign up and get information about/licence the file format. Interoperability aside, why would Microsoft help a competitor work with their file formats? For the business model that MS operates on, that makes no sense.

 

There's a LOT of mis-guided and incorrect comments and observations in this topic. I'm too lazy to write an essay on the whole thing; I use many Microsoft products, and develop .Net (primarily) software too. The reason being the unbeatable support - not just for developers (MSDN) but for consumers and businesses too - guaranteed for 5 years minimum, plus ongoing updates; not that many, if any, Open Source businesses offer the same.

 

Lots of people knock Microsoft for crappy reasons, but there aren't really that many valid ones. The only two I can think of off hand are: 1, when they purposefully stopped Netscape Navigator working, and two their at-times questionable business practises. However, all the anti-trust crap that the EU are suing them for is severely misguided - as someone has pointed out, Apple bundle QuickTime and iTunes with OSX, but no-one's suing them, for example.

People whine that Microsoft has a lot of security flaws. Fair enough, they release updates often, but at least updating is [now] automatic. And there's a hell of a lot less than there are for applications such as Apache. Microsoft are, for once, just more open about it. Linux advocates will counter with "yeah but no but yeah they're more of an issue with MS products" - yeah, maybe, but that's because MS is much more common and well known. Another thing with MS, they might delay in bringing out updates, but that's because they *test* them, before releasing them, to try and ensure they won't break anything else, compared to the Open Source idea of release many, release often. I dunno about you, but I'd rather wait a bit longer for a fix, and know it's not going to f*ck anything else up [edit] rather than having to repeatedly update and risk stuff buggering up[/edit].

 

That's all I can be bothered to write. Each to their own.

[BobTheHob]

imo none of you who have not used UNIX/Linux (or who are total noobcakes) are qualified to support microsoft. True there are alot of people who try to be cool by hating microsoft, but this is just another example of one f*cking noob messing up the rest of our credibility. As a person whose first computer ran UNIX, I am very well versed with the OS. This credits me with the knowledge and ability to say "f*ck microsoft, I have used better".

 

There are many valid reasons to hate microsoft most of which are outlined at the site I posted earlier. I would have to say the main reason that I hate winblows is the way its easy to use. Most people would say "Wait, Isn't that a good thing?", and the answer is "f*ck no, unless your a noob". The reason for this is that the only reason windows is easy to use is that microsoft hides and guesses configuration options whose functions arent immediatly apparent to drunk, mentally disabled raccoons and squirrels. This results in an OS that serves no purpose for custom enviroments. Now I fully understand that some people arent knowledgeble enough to use UNIX/Linux, but no offense, you people werent ever meant to use computers. It just wasent meant to happen, If bill gates didnt steal and market DOS then all of you nooblets using windows wouldent be f*cking bitching at me to fix your computers 24/7. If your using windows right now, do the world a favor and either switch to UNIX/Linux. If your too stupid to use UNIX/Linux then do the inevitable and shoot your self in the head right now. SURVIVAL OF THE FITEST BISHES!!!!!

[BobTheHob]

Edit: sorry the post was sent twice, please delete this one

[PresidentKiller]

imo none of you who have not used UNIX/Linux (or who are total noobcakes) are qualified to support microsoft. True there are alot of people who try to be cool by hating microsoft, but this is just another example of one f*cking noob messing up the rest of our credibility. As a person whose first computer ran UNIX, I am very well versed with the OS. This credits me with the knowledge and ability to say "f*ck microsoft, I have used better".

 

There are many valid reasons to hate microsoft most of which are outlined at the site I posted earlier. I would have to say the main reason that I hate winblows is the way its easy to use. Most people would say "Wait, Isn't that a good thing?", and the answer is "f*ck no, unless your a noob". The reason for this is that the only reason windows is easy to use is that microsoft hides and guesses configuration options whose functions arent immediatly apparent to drunk, mentally disabled raccoons and squirrels. This results in an OS that serves no purpose for custom enviroments. Now I fully understand that some people arent knowledgeble enough to use UNIX/Linux, but no offense, you people werent ever meant to use computers. It just wasent meant to happen, If bill gates didnt steal and market DOS then all of you nooblets using windows wouldent be f*cking bitching at me to fix your computers 24/7. If your using windows right now, do the world a favor and either switch to UNIX/Linux. If your too stupid to use UNIX/Linux then do the inevitable and shoot your self in the head right now. SURVIVAL OF THE FITEST BISHES!!!!!

Go home and lock yourself in your room, nobody wants your bullsh*t.

 

I agree there must be better OSes around, but I won't switch just because you "all mighty computer guru" is telling me to try something else. I'm happy using Windows, I've always been. But if I ever switch, I'll go with the MacOS just because I know it better, not because the "oh so hardcore and sexy" UNIX that lies beneath it.

[MsNobody]

Not everyone buys nerdy books about how to use complicated machines. Computers weren't made to piss people off because they can't even figure out how to get on the internet. Think about it, if word went around that Windows XP was as hard as shit to use, people wouldn't buy it.

[Enano]

I'm 14 right now, I was born in a Mac users family, my parents bought the first Macintosh released, way back in 1984. I learned to use Macintosh, that's what I have alway been used to, I didn't know anything about Windows. Then Microsoft started getting into our lives, there was no way I could stop it. In 2 or 3 years there were 2 desktops and 1 laptop in my house, all with Window, but I kept using that old rusty Power Mac G3. But when it got to old I was forced to use Windows. Of course, I started noticing a huge difference compared with Mac OS. So I started thinking about Macs again, but they are very expensive in my country.

 

Now that I moved to the U.S. for one year, the hopes for a Mac appeared again, so I bought the low-price Mac Mini. Since I don't play much videogames anymore, that Mac has been perfect for me, I just added a bit of RAM, and Mac OS X is so great. The only Microsoft-made things that I use are my Hotmail account that I made 5 years ago, Windows Media Player for Mac OS X (it sucks), and Microsoft's servers to check my e-mail. I don't even use Microsoft's MSN Messenger, the one for Mac sucks, so I use Adium X and Mercury, which let me chat with my MSN Messenger friends that still have PCs. Office sucks, I use iWork, my mother (a university professor) has lost many .ppt becuase sometimes Power Point crashes during the saving process. So Apple's Keynote works great, and if I have to play a presentation on a PC, I just export it as a .ppt file (or a .doc in Pages). I don't have to worry anymore about spyware, adware, or virus. My Mac's OS even tells me what programs will open during start up.

 

Macs are not perfect, but they are way better than PCs. Apple makes both the harware and the OS, so the software-harware interaction is great. You may have reasons to use PCs, most of the videogame come first on Windows, and some times there're not even releases on Macs, but I don't play much videogames anymore, so I prefer Macs. I'm addicted to stability.

[BobTheHob]

Macs are not perfect, but they are way better than PCs.

 

This statement is completly false. The PC isn't the thing that sucks, its the most common OS for the platform, that doesnt mean you can't put UNIX/Linux on it. Don't get me wrong, x86 is not my favorite platform, but I'm stuck with it seeing as I can't afford a $13,000 SGI, MIPS platform workstation.

[Enano]

Macs are not perfect, but they are way better than PCs.

 

This statement is completly false. The PC isn't the thing that sucks, its the most common OS for the platform, that doesnt mean you can't put UNIX/Linux on it. Don't get me wrong, x86 is not my favorite platform, but I'm stuck with it seeing as I can't afford a $13,000 SGI, MIPS platform workstation.

You're right in some way. When I say PCs it's just a general name for Windows computers. Of course you can install Red Hat and some other UNIX based OS on a x86 computer, but Mac OS X can't be installed on a Intel processor PC.

[riccbhard]

Because if you read the story about how Microsoft and Apple got started you will find that Microsoft stole Macintosh from Apple and made Windows. Ever since then Microsoft has been stealing ideas from other compaines probably because they aren't smart enough to come up with their own. You'll see that the "dock" in windows longhorn is, for some reason, almost exactly the same as Apple's Dock.

[PresidentKiller]

Because if you read the story about how Microsoft and Apple got started you will find that Microsoft stole Macintosh from Apple and made Windows. Ever since then Microsoft has been stealing ideas from other compaines probably because they aren't smart enough to come up with their own. You'll see that the "dock" in windows longhorn is, for some reason, almost exactly the same as Apple's Dock.

And Jobs stole the Macintosh interface from Xerox, what's your point?

[BobTheHob]

Because if you read the story about how Microsoft and Apple got started you will find that Microsoft stole Macintosh from Apple and made Windows. Ever since then Microsoft has been stealing ideas from other compaines probably because they aren't smart enough to come up with their own. You'll see that the "dock" in windows longhorn is, for some reason, almost exactly the same as Apple's Dock. 

And Jobs stole the Macintosh interface from Xerox, what's your point?

You like windows way to much. I here by appoint you president of /dev/null, now go shoot yourself.

[PresidentKiller]

 

You like windows way to much. I here by appoint you president of /dev/null, now go shoot yourself. 

I'm just saying there's no need for the "who stole what from who" discussion as both sides are equally "responsible".

 

And thanks for your compliment, Mr. L33t Uber Haxxor Unix user.

Edited May 3, 2005 by PresidentKiller

[BroDan]

I don't hate them, I just hate some of the things they make, like sh*tty mice, I switched to Logitech this week because yet another Microsoft mouse gave up.

[Sarin]

I don't hate them, I just hate some of the things they make, like sh*tty mice, I switched to Logitech this week because yet another Microsoft mouse gave up.

Funny, I think the hardware they make is great. My pre-wireless keyboard took an immense amount of beating - literally - and never failed me, as did the mouse. The wireless desktop I've got now, while not beaten, is also holding up well and the battery life is astounding.

[The Miker]

I had a Microsoft IntelliMouse for a couple of years, but then it finally started to die. My guess is some of the little fibers inside the wire started to sever, because the mouse would always disconnect/reconnect over and over again for no reason. I switched to a Logitech MX500 and haven't had a single problem since.

 

Now, about everyone hating Microsoft....I didn't really know they were doing anything wrong until someone at an ezboard community told me they were. All I heard was "omg Windoze is so insecure lololrofl" and "hahhahrhahrahrhhaarehhr teh windoze r ghey cuz is too e-z". So you can imagine my skepticism. It was about a month or two later that I installed my first Linux distro on my computer, and I was repeatedly annoyed over and over again. Now let's get one thing straight, I'm no dumbass, but Linux sorely tested my patience and my knowledge of computers time and time again. Now it's about 3 years later and I still use Windows as my primary OS. Why? Probably because my first computer had Windows 98 on it. There's no doubt that if my first PC had a Linux distro or even some flavor of BSD/UNIX on it, that would be my primary OS today. As of this moment I have a dual boot setup with Windows XP and SuSE 9.1. Linux is great, it's faster than Windows most of the time and a hell of a lot prettier if you install the right sh*t...but I just can't stop using Windows. Its ease of use and the fact that you can play DX games on it will always bring me back to it at the end of the day.

[BobTheHob]

I had a Microsoft IntelliMouse for a couple of years, but then it finally started to die. My guess is some of the little fibers inside the wire started to sever, because the mouse would always disconnect/reconnect over and over again for no reason. I switched to a Logitech MX500 and haven't had a single problem since.

 

Now, about everyone hating Microsoft....I didn't really know they were doing anything wrong until someone at an ezboard community told me they were. All I heard was "omg Windoze is so insecure lololrofl" and "hahhahrhahrahrhhaarehhr teh windoze r ghey cuz is too e-z". So you can imagine my skepticism. It was about a month or two later that I installed my first Linux distro on my computer, and I was repeatedly annoyed over and over again. Now let's get one thing straight, I'm no dumbass, but Linux sorely tested my patience and my knowledge of computers time and time again. Now it's about 3 years later and I still use Windows as my primary OS. Why? Probably because my first computer had Windows 98 on it. There's no doubt that if my first PC had a Linux distro or even some flavor of BSD/UNIX on it, that would be my primary OS today. As of this moment I have a dual boot setup with Windows XP and SuSE 9.1. Linux is great, it's faster than Windows most of the time and a hell of a lot prettier if you install the right sh*t...but I just can't stop using Windows. Its ease of use and the fact that you can play DX games on it will always bring me back to it at the end of the day.

I used to play things called "Games" but not anymore. A couple of months ago I just said f*ck it, I don't need winblows. That may mean I can't play games, but I'm still happier on UNIX. I started on UNIX at a very young age, and to go back to it permanatly is a great feeling. Windoze made me depressed and angry, I don't need that sh*t.

[Rocketkiller]

The only reason I don't have Linux is I'm a gamer. Windows does a lot of random crashing, it crashed once and wiped one of my hard drives and completely disabled the other one. I couldn't install Windows because the installer kept crashing I used a LiveCD version of SUSE Linux until I got a new hard drive, then Windows installation worked perfectly.

 

Also, recently I got a virus that used IE to access my computer, I couldn't unistall IE, so it took a few days to fix it.

 

I have more reasons, but I'm too lazy to write them all out.

 

BTW: I found a site that lets you used Windows upadte trough Firefox, I'm not sure if it works. http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/

[Svip]

lol

 

Would be bad news for Microsoft when game makers starts making them for Linux too.

 

Sales would go this way for Microsoft:

 

.|.

.|.

.|.

\,/

[Enano]

 

Because if you read the story about how Microsoft and Apple got started you will find that Microsoft stole Macintosh from Apple and made Windows. Ever since then Microsoft has been stealing ideas from other compaines probably because they aren't smart enough to come up with their own. You'll see that the "dock" in windows longhorn is, for some reason, almost exactly the same as Apple's Dock. 

And Jobs stole the Macintosh interface from Xerox, what's your point?

Apple didn't steal it from Xerox, it's true that Apple didn't make it, but the guys in Xerox Palo Alto moved to Apple and worked together in the Lisa project, so they gave the GUI to Apple.

Edit: Spelling

Edited May 5, 2005 by enano275

[BobTheHob]

You like windows way to much. I here by appoint you president of /dev/null, now go shoot yourself. 

I'm just saying there's no need for the "who stole what from who" discussion as both sides are equally "responsible".

 

And thanks for your compliment, Mr. L33t Uber Haxxor Unix user.

That wasent really a compliment, and I was counting on you not knowing what /dev/null was. Because saying I made you president of /dev/null means in effect you are president of nothing (see below qoute). Thus I was hoping you didnt know what it was so you would still shoot yourself and falsly justify your title. The whole thing was cleverly calculated and fully intentional.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

/dev/null

In Unix-like operating systems, /dev/null or the null device is a virtual device that discards all data written to it, and provides no data to any process that reads from it. In Unix programmer jargon, it may also be called the bit bucket or black hole.

 

The null device is typically used for disposing of unwanted output streams of a process, or as a convenient empty file for input streams. This is usually done by redirection.

[ilikensrs]

You like windows way to much. I here by appoint you president of /dev/null, now go shoot yourself. 

I'm just saying there's no need for the "who stole what from who" discussion as both sides are equally "responsible".

 

And thanks for your compliment, Mr. L33t Uber Haxxor Unix user.

That wasent really a compliment, and I was counting on you not knowing what /dev/null was. Because saying I made you president of /dev/null means in effect you are president of nothing (see below qoute). Thus I was hoping you didnt know what it was so you would still shoot yourself and falsly justify your title. The whole thing was cleverly calculated and fully intentional.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

/dev/null

In Unix-like operating systems, /dev/null or the null device is a virtual device that discards all data written to it, and provides no data to any process that reads from it. In Unix programmer jargon, it may also be called the bit bucket or black hole.

 

The null device is typically used for disposing of unwanted output streams of a process, or as a convenient empty file for input streams. This is usually done by redirection.

Wow, you really are a smart guy. It's not like anyone who has used linux, freebsd, or any similar systems for more than a minute would have known about that!

Anyway, each os has its place and purpose. Windows is great within its intended use, as is OS X, linux, and possibly even os/2. The people that piss and moan about Micro$hit, Micro$haft, and Internot Exploder are usually those who have seen a lovely old bandwagon trundling by, and decided that if they hopped on it then people would assume they actually knew something.

[PresidentKiller]

That wasent really a compliment, and I was counting on you not knowing what /dev/null was. Because saying I made you president of /dev/null means in effect you are president of nothing (see below qoute). Thus I was hoping you didnt know what it was so you would still shoot yourself and falsly justify your title. The whole thing was cleverly calculated and fully intentional.

Do you even know what means?

 

And yes, as ilikensrs said, someone using infantile terms like "Microsucks", "Winblows", "Windoze", etc. is just some bandwagon freak.

 

I'm done with this discussion, people like BobTheHob are just annoying little anti-social morons. He should get a life or at least let everybody else enjoy theirs!

[The Miker]

I just think that the bottom line is this:

 

Windows has one distinct advantage over Linux, and that is its ease of use. Let's face it, it is a slow and painful process to get anything done in Linux, whether it be watching a DVD or taking a picture with your webcam. I remember the only program I could get to take a picture from my webcam required about 5 switches, and overall about 40 characters in one command...just to take a simple 320x240 picture. These are things that most people would just want to be able to do quickly and painlessly, so people stay with Windows. Most people don't have the time/intelligence to learn Linux so they stay with Windows. Hell, I would bet that there are tons of people that would just love to switch to Linux, but can't because they need something that Windows offers but Linux does not, or does offer but needs a lot of work. I should know, I'm one of them. If it weren't for the fact that I love to play games (D3D accelerated games) and have an ATi card, I would switch to Linux.

 

Say what you'd like, but Windows > Linux in terms of overall usability. However, Linux > Windows in terms of overall stability and even speed. I think most people (read: idiots) would prefer usability over stability and speed. Simple as that.

[FiShMaStEr]

Apple didn't stole it from Xerox

Yay for english! Anyway lets begin. First off ive used *nix and Windows plenty of times over the last couple of years and actually found both quite good, basically its a matter of self opinion, one OS might better suite your needs but it doesnt mean that it will work for everyone.

 

Take *nix for example, yes great service, ease of upates, strong stability and greater configuration. Then you look at windows, we have a simple os, simple functions and simple features, its made for a person who only wants a few things out of his computer including chat, internet, media and word processing. Windows can do alot more though, go deeper into the system and you can find yourself messing with the hex files of the notepad functions, changing skins microsoft doesnt want you to run and editing files you should never touch unless you know what your doing. These are hidden to protect users from the problems of screwing up their computers, someone new to *nix would have one hell of a time installing it, especially something such as gentoo, and getting it up and running perfectly.

 

As for the issue of *nix is more secure then windows? no chance. When a new virus hits the internet targeting windows microsoft will usually have it fixed within a day at most, within the hour is the usual time. The reason there are so many virus's out for windows is simply because most of the internet population use windows, making it an easier target and a greater way to get your worm spread.

 

With the other comment made earlier concerning programs from windows accessing the internet without having to? thats false. Most virus's will use what is called a buffer overflow exploit, basically a program is crashed through its code and while it is crashing, it has complete access to run anything on the computer which is when the virus is executed, or in some cases a callback is done to the computer which ran this exploit.

 

As for the ability to get into a linux system? Piece of cake if you know your commands and your internet protocols. The main hole in which hackers use to get into a linux system is through weak passwords, backdoors setup within the os itself for patching, and unfortunately many free distros are still yet to fix these problems.

 

Well that is my 2 cents worth. I havent ever had problems with windows, I hate them because of their pricing, but since 3.1 they have gone a long way to improve.

[BobTheHob]

Anyway, each os has its place and purpose. Windows is great within its intended use, as is OS X, linux, and possibly even os/2. The people that piss and moan about Micro$hit, Micro$haft, and Internot Exploder are usually those who have seen a lovely old bandwagon trundling by, and decided that if they hopped on it then people would assume they actually knew something.

"Usually" is the key word here. I have been using UNIX since before it was fashionable to do so, back when it earned you a title of "nerd".

[Svip]

 

I just think that the bottom line is this:

 

Windows has one distinct advantage over Linux, and that is its ease of use. Let's face it, it is a slow and painful process to get anything done in Linux, whether it be watching a DVD or taking a picture with your webcam. I remember the only program I could get to take a picture from my webcam required about 5 switches, and overall about 40 characters in one command...just to take a simple 320x240 picture. These are things that most people would just want to be able to do quickly and painlessly, so people stay with Windows. Most people don't have the time/intelligence to learn Linux so they stay with Windows. Hell, I would bet that there are tons of people that would just love to switch to Linux, but can't because they need something that Windows offers but Linux does not, or does offer but needs a lot of work. I should know, I'm one of them. If it weren't for the fact that I love to play games (D3D accelerated games) and have an ATi card, I would switch to Linux.

 

Say what you'd like, but Windows > Linux in terms of overall usability. However, Linux > Windows in terms of overall stability and even speed. I think most people (read: idiots) would prefer usability over stability and speed. Simple as that.

Fact not, Linux is about as easy as Windows. It just takes a little time to get used to the new way of using the OS, but really it is much more simple.

 

Want a new application?

 

No need to rush out on the Internet and find it, just start a shell and type;

 

 

$ sudo apt-get install <program> [<program>,...]

 

 

You can get applications within seconds.

 

I updated my entire system within 2 and half hour ( because of my slow connection speed. ) and then I just had to reboot. But while it was updating my entire system, I could do anything as I was used to, only difference was the Internet was a bit slower.

 

NOTE: apt-get is only avaible in Debian like Linux distros.

[The Miker]

NOTE: apt-get is only avaible in Debian like Linux distros.

This makes your entire post null as far as I'm concerned. Not every distro is like Debian..and in fact there are tons that aren't, including most of the major ones. Plus there are literally hundreds of packages that apt-get cannot find.

[Waste]

Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) has urpmi, but it's still not as easy as double clicking a executable.

 

Me personally, I use both Windows and Linux.

They both suit my needs well and have no true hate.

But, since I am a web designer, I have an extreme deep hatred for the program they call IE.

It is a bitch and a half to make web pages for that retarded web browser.

Windows is a great os for it's ease of use, but not for it's control.

Linux is great for me because it allows me to control more of the os, but that comes at a price of it being difficult to do.

Not to mention the fact that it's not exactly easy to install some hardware. (i.e. video cards)

Even after three weeks I still can't get my damn 6600GT drivers installed to save my life.

Edited May 5, 2005 by Waste