I cant stand Microsoft bashing. Everyone here is using Windows, because it's better than any other OS. I have a Windows/Linux dual boot, and I only ever use Linux for programming in either Java, C or C++ because it comes with free programming tools. But seriously, no other OS is as fully-featured as Windows, and they have excellent customer support (whenever I email a question I get a reply the same day with a precise answer to whatever I asked). If only every other company was that good.
For a system being used by 90% of computer users, I dont see how people can say it's bad. If it was crap, people would migrate to Linux or MacOS (God forbid).
But hey, I dont want to start an OS war, so just ignore my post
Mike
"Now I guess we're... 'Path-E-Tech Management'" -Dilbert
Windows is good. Windows is great (excecpt ME, of course). I love windows. Microsoft are not so good. Most people who 'hate' microsoft are just idiots, and don't know what they're talking about. I don't like them on moral grounds, considering their business prectices, but I'm happy to use their software provided it's better than the competition (and, because they tie up rival programmers and leave them in ditches before a product launch, it's usually better).
I dont think they have poor business practices. I think they have business practices. Any company wants to be on top, and be better than any other company in the same market. No one aspires to be "not so good" at whatever they choose to do for a living, unless they're a dole bludger.
Microsoft made their way to the top like any other business would. Just because they make a lot of money doesnt mean they're doing anything overtly "dishonest".
But other than that one point, I agree with you ^__^
Mike
"Now I guess we're... 'Path-E-Tech Management'" -Dilbert
I agree with Radix and Shadowcaster sporadically. I agreew Microsoft have worked their way to the top, but now they're there they try to pointlessly monopolize the computer world. Microsoft could lose a billion tomorrow and still be miles ahead of the competition, but yet they don't seem to care. It's true Windows is the best and many Microsoft progs are, but Microsoft make it so we'll never have worthy comparison cos it's fixed that way.
I dislike MicroSoft and I hate them bloating their code with crap, I also hate them taking over every darn market that might have SOMETHING of a OS(Plam's, Cell Phones..), but without Microsoft and Windows, the world would collapse with such a big hole, everyone won't have a standard.
And if they knew about that bug why don't they work on it instead of pimping their image with other crap? It sounds like they need to spare some programmers on bugs.
I downloaded a plugin for windows media player, and windows started crashing every 2 minutes. <EGO>Good thing I'm so skilled, or I wouldn't have been able to remove it from the registry and hd. </EGO> Actually, it's surprisingly hard to figure out which dlls are used by a program(from all the dlls installed on your computer)...unless you monitor when they're loaded.
OMG DivX sucks... use XviD, it's a lot better ( www.xvid.org ). You get the source code, so you have to compile it yourself provided you have a C++ compiler (such as Visual C++). I might upload the binaries cos that's a lot better than trying to find a trustworthy build of the latest release.
Mike
"Now I guess we're... 'Path-E-Tech Management'" -Dilbert
I've always found Linux to be much more stable than windows. OF course, when nothing runs on it, nothing can crash it.
n/a
Pete Nattress Cheesy Bits img src/uploads/sccheesegif
Registered 23/09/2002
Points 4811
27th May, 2004 at 06:49:49 -
microsofts products in themselves are not bad. i have nothing against windows itself, it's the OS i've been using for 6 years without too much grief. what i disagree with is microsoft's marketing. they play dirty, and have done since day one, and they do hold a totally unfair monopoly. particular grievances i have are with the ridiculous prices they charge and their forcing people to use certain products like IE and WMP.
Most Linux users hate Windows because it's that expensive (and most Linux programs replacing Windows programs are free). But since most computers automatically come with Windows (at least it is over here), what can you do about it?
Most people that hate microsoft use the fact that they hate the company as an excuse/reason for creating viruses, hacking the site, or illegaly getting free copies of the newest OS. If you hate Microsoft so much get an iMac.
Their products do cost a ton, but they couldn't charge that much if they were bad programs.
As for shady buisnes dealling, Give me some proof! They have baught out companies, but you can't buy a company against their will.
You shouldn't go here, there are crazy swedes who mumble about cucumbers:
http://www.crobasoft.com
"I cant stand Microsoft bashing. Everyone here is using Windows, because it's better than any other OS. I have a Windows/Linux dual boot, and I only ever use Linux for programming in either Java, C or C++ because it comes with free programming tools. But seriously, no other OS is as fully-featured as Windows, and they have excellent customer support (whenever I email a question I get a reply the same day with a precise answer to whatever I asked). If only every other company was that good."
Couldn't agree with you more ^
"Say you're hanging from a huge cliff at the top of mt. everest and a guy comes along and says he'll save you, and proceeds to throw religious pamphlets at you while simultaniously giving a sermon." - Dustin G
"Everyone here is using Windows, because it's better than any other OS"
No. Because Microsoft has a monopoly and there is no alternative.
"Microsoft made their way to the top like any other business would"
Nope.
"Windows is still more stable than Unix/Linux"
I don't use Linux, but I'm sure lots of people would argue with you there. I still use Win98 because MMF runs on it. Win98 crashes a lot, I've ended up editing system.ini just to get decent performance (turning off virtual memory and stuff). Windows XP may be fairly stable, but it took them 14 years to get there. The rest of the time they had crappy software. And all the time they're building up off the old software, so XP is based off DOS-with-knobs-on.
Microsoft play dirty. They never even wrote DOS, they bought 'Quick-and-Dirty-Operating system' (QDOS) and made it their own, renaming it DOS. They faffed around with a few useless versions of windows before Windows 3.1 became usable. They went to third world countries and basically handed out their products for free to first establish a monopoly, and are only now introducing proper anti piracy methods (why do you think they had lame serials for ages and now suddenly require phone registration?). They were slow to notice the internet revolution, and when they realised they had to do something, Netscape was becoming a popular browser. So they buy someone else's browser (Mosaic), rename it Internet explorer, as usual plug some knobs and things on, and release it FOR FREE effectively putting Netscape out of business and creating a browser monopoly. 99% of people here probably use IE, I use Mozilla (tabbed browsing is cool plus other cool features). Microsoft security is also an oxymoron. Ever hear about linux worms storming the globe? Yet time after time Windows machines are brought down by globe spanning viruses, such as Sasser which could infect machines without any user action (a truly awful security hole). Good customer support? Businesses have a different view, they rarely hear anything useful from Microsoft, whilst they pay absolute fortunes for over priced Microsoft software. All the time you hear about Microsoft's monopoly causing trouble, hear about the European anti trust lawsuit? MS supplying Windows Media Player - for free again - with windows was creating a monopoly in the audio player software market. Recently MS was deliberately causing the MSN page to look incorrect for people using the Opera browser. Etc. etc. Tell me, are good, honest businesses getting to the top fairly always fighting antitrust lawsuits?
If I could use something other than Windows, I would. It's a very inefficient and awkward piece of crap and if I had any choice I wouldn't use it. I mean, you need more than a gigabyte for an operating system?! But considering all the software now is for Windows, it's hard to switch permanently. The only decent Windows operating systems are NT-based, and they're riddled with security holes... what's the point of downloading 'hotfix Q894167' (you can believe that they've released that many previously)? You're just going to get a worm infect your computer using YET ANOTHER security hole.
I wouldn't be surprised if most of the Microsoft defenders have never used another operating system...
The only reason im using windows is because im not spending 24 hours+ downloading all 3 Redhat isos, and spending a week monitoring their website to see if they have the bandwidth to let me download, and the fact that nothing works with linux, and VPC is overwhelmingly slow, and unreliable, plus im too lazy to reformat, and I usually end up screwing the HD anyway.
btw, mandrake linux is FAR more prettier, and can work on a 386..
Edit: In reply to SC's customer service rant, yes microsoft DOES have good customer service, in fact, when I compare something of a question to them, compared to ebay customer support, I get totally irrevelant, improper, proffesionality overcome answers that dont help my knowledge of the answer to my question.
But that whole Microsoft stealing os's by buying products when they enter the market and are incredibly cheap, renaming them, giving out free copies, then sueing them for piracy, is quite incredible of a thing to do in the business world.
Edited by the Author for the hundredth time.
Edited by the Author.
"Everytime you use Kazaa, a metallica band member dies a little."
Quote Jonathon Smeby.
In regards to Microsoft purchasing Mosaic, as I understand it it was bought from Spyglass for only a few thousand, plus a promise of a percentage of IE sales... then they released it for free.
The main reason I hate Microsoft is not only their dirty tactics, but mainly because the people I hang around are actually worshipping Microsoft for it. Microsoft's the richest simply coz they have a monopoly on practically everything.
They don't IMPROVE their products, they just make them more glamorous. Instead of wasting their time making them more powerful/useful, they just make them shinier, putting all those little worthless tidbits, while hiding the fact that XP's got almost no security and gobbles up more RAM than any decent O/S would.
Like most major electronics companies, like Sony or EA, they make money simply because they appeal to the ignorant populace who don't know a THING about electronics other than what they see on TV or heard from friends. Which is about 70% of the world's population, giving them a huge market share. They don't enlighten people, they brainwash them with ads and fancy words like "multimedia". In other words, they could sell defective products and people would say, "This is Sony, it can't be bad" (even though about 100% of my Sony products have less than half the life span of the other stuff)
Most of MS's products (besides Windows, MS Office, and those games made with the AoE engine) are truly inferior to all the other competition out there. I could spend all day typing my complaints on them, but I think you guys would be bored of reading by now.
Don't get me wrong, I hate people who hate Microsoft without reason and I hate those n00b hackers (or rather script kiddies) who like to show off that they can hack MS, even though any one of us with any iniative could do so. But I hate Microsoft for my own legitimate reasons.
But since there's anti-American sentiment brewing all over the world, MS could very well die sooner than we think. After all, isn't it bad enough that a lot of governments are replacing their WinXP with Linux, not to mention Opera/Mozilla winning the browser war?
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
daveyc, everything can copy files. Mac OS / *n?x are well known to be better for graphic work, and Windows 98 handles games better than XP.
In general, Windows doesn't do anything spectacular. It shines only because it has better hardware support, and it's much easier to find software for.
Microsoft has a monopoly because of their nasty tactics. There's plenty of competition, but MS propaganda would have you believe otherwise. For example, in 1999 MSNBC reported NT held 38.1% of the server market, Linux had 24.6%, UNIX 15.3%. Too bad Linux is a UNIX, so that's 38.1 versus 39.9.
"windows xp is extremely stable"
WTF? XP crashes all the time, and not just on my comp. I've seen people complain about it on practically every comp I've spent more than 3 hours with. Sure, it doesn't seem to crash when your multitasking with games, photoshop, winamp, etc... but when you do important stuff like writing stuff in Notepad, MS Word, SPSS, or even a long article in IE, it's got a MUCH higher crash rate than all the O/S's I've seen put together.
The reason MS has a monopoly is because they started first and thus, they have the capability and resources to bash out lots of propoganda and free samples. Nintendo sux too, so serves them right that they lost their monopoly (not that they really had one with sega, etc).
And in case you don't know, a lot of the important guys use Linux . Either way, I do NOT want to see Apple up at the top again. Sure, Mac's better, but I'd bet a lot of money that they'd charge about 50% more than MS if they had the same power MS does now.
Win98 4ever!
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Wow, there's like a million new posts after my last one... Sorry, I'm not in the mood to read pages of text today Have phun!
The only thing I'll reiterate is that unless your using MacOS or Linux then your opinion is invalid. Dont give me crap about how none of your software works on other OS's because that just goes towards my point that Microsoft Windows is better, since developers dont even both making software for other systems, even though they're free to make software for those systems which is entirely up to them, not Microsoft.
Thank you, and goodnight.
Mike
"Now I guess we're... 'Path-E-Tech Management'" -Dilbert
"though they're free to make software for those systems which is entirely up to them, not Microsoft."
Only if they have unlimited funding, otherwise they *don't* have a choice about aiming for the largest target market. Specialist programs are different, of course.
Again, my point exactly. They make it for Windows, not Unix or Linux or MacOS. Why? Because Windows is used by more people. Why? Because it's easy for beginners (can you imagine a beginner using Unix?) yet still has a lot of features and optimisations for advanced users, moreso than any other OS (yes, even Linux, except they dont give out the source code to the kernel... but then again, neither to many Linux distributions these days).
Mike
"Now I guess we're... 'Path-E-Tech Management'" -Dilbert
"XP crashes all the time" - WTF, ive hardly EVER had a crash on XP,and ive had my pc for about 6 months now.
in conclusion:
--------------------------------------------------------
OS: Microsoft are the king.
Consoles: Pffttt.... dont even get me started on X-flop.
--------------------------------------------------------
apart from on certain games, which is the fault of the developer, not the operating system (Prince of Persia doesn't like my graphics card very much. That's what happens when you port directly from a console to a PC)
Edited by the Author.
"Say you're hanging from a huge cliff at the top of mt. everest and a guy comes along and says he'll save you, and proceeds to throw religious pamphlets at you while simultaniously giving a sermon." - Dustin G
It shouldn't crash even at 35,000 pages. It should either tell you that your file is too big, you're out of memory, or some other message, then stop. It's an example of bad MS coding that it simply crashes.
From what I know, it crashes a lot while I'm typing stuff. I don't think it works that way by copying & pasting stuff. It's more on the important stuff ala Murphy's Law.
Games don't really crash it, it's those damn unstable edit boxes. Though I do get a lot of crashing from the good ol' games like Betrayal at Krondor and X-Com Apocalypse... games that really do matter, though the crappy new ones hardly ever do .
Stupid XP. I want my Win98 SE back! Only advantage I get from running XP over Win98SE is that it's got that voice-dictation thingy, tells me what stuff is better to uninstall, and lets me run Maya. Still not worth all that extra speed I'd get from Win98SE and over all, DOS programs working.
I hope Longhorn's gonna be better.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Linux is free. Linux wasn't made by Americans, it's a communist thing .
Most of the people who support Linux don't even have it though .
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Right. I loved my 98SE, and it never crashed provided I was the only user. At the moment I'm running win2k, which (after SP4) is probably the most stable windows, even if running DOS games is a dog, even with VDMS. However, I got One Must Fall to work last week, so my neighbor and I have been modem-fighting over the uni phone network.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Mike 
Edited by the Author.
.
.
