Printable View
Contrary to others opinions, I have no problem with microsoft, I have always used a version of windows and don't want to move to another less supported platform.
I like their web browser, their email client and everything else.
Rebel against these persistant moaners and post your support below.
yea... no problems here.
And to add, my usual reply to these types of threads (no need to reply):
whats the point of this thread.
;)
the point is that I'm fed up with the constant *****ing and moaning about Microsoft. A company so big in a market so wide are bound to slip up here and there.Quote:
Originally posted by gSOLO_01
yea... no problems here.
And to add, my usual reply to these types of threads (no need to reply):
whats the point of this thread.
;)
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned ;)
Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
the point is that I'm fed up with the constant *****ing and moaning about Microsoft. A company so big in a market so wide are bound to slip up here and there.
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned ;)
common let's get those posts comming :D
the reason MS suck is not because they make mistakes but because they deliberately lead the market to their own standards while pretending to support oipen standards for web design and other industries. It's a pain in the ass.
Look at Apple's application for editing DV, iMovie, it's simple to use and exports in a variety of ways, to quicktime, to a dvd burner, back to your camcorder, etc. MS's moviemaker, apart from being an (poor quality) obvious rip of the apple app's interface only allows you to export to a stupid windows media format. You can't even export your edited movie back to your camcorder so you can record it to VHS for example.
MS are delibertely restricting the user's options, it's ridiculous to have a dv editing program that doesn't allow you to export your movie back to the camera, or even to a dvd recorder! There's no good reason for it, MS just aren't in the business of producing software for consumers, they take every opportunity to manipulate and spoof the unsuspecting user.
yes I know it's a business and they're trying to promote their own products blah blah blah. But where's the harm in allowing a DV movie to be exported to the camera it came from!?! MS are a monopoly and they're constantly abusing that position, trying to make every standard a microsoft standard, taking open source software and changing it so it's proprietary (ask Sun). IE is a very competent browser, but if MS had stuck to the W3c standards it would be compatible with netscape 6+. Instead netscape has the standards compliant browser but of course designers can't make use of those standards because IE needs different code, so every one says 'netscape sucks*' and bill gates rubs his hands with glee as the sheep go marching into the pen.
they suck
:crazy:
*there are other reasons to dislike the netscape browser though, it's bloated, so use mozilla : )
I agree with you bruce. I'm sick of all those moaning kids trying to be "different" by hating microsoft. Of course their software has bugs and glitches, but believe me you linux lovers - linux is king of glitches.
If it weren't for Microsoft the whole computer revolution wouldn't have set off. If it weren't for Microsoft the internet would still be in its roots. If it weren't for Microsoft lots of great software'd never be developed.
amen to that son.Quote:
Originally posted by wouter999
I agree with you bruce. I'm sick of all those moaning kids trying to be "different" by hating microsoft. Of course their software has bugs and glitches, but believe me you linux lovers - linux is king of glitches.
If it weren't for Microsoft the whole computer revolution wouldn't have set off. If it weren't for Microsoft the internet would still be in its roots. If it weren't for Microsoft lots of great software'd never be developed.
and all this call for open source, whats all that about? A business's aim is to make money, if Microsoft released their source code, a portion of their money making would vanish forever.
who said they should be open source?Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
and all this call for open source, whats all that about? A business's aim is to make money, if Microsoft released their source code, a portion of their money making would vanish forever.
a whole myriad of linux supporters
Of course people are going to moan about Microsoft, and I know you know that but it's to be expected.Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
the point is that I'm fed up with the constant *****ing and moaning about Microsoft. A company so big in a market so wide are bound to slip up here and there.
If one company builds 1 million robot dogs that can change their color, bark, personality, etc; and another company builds a company builds 100 robot dogs that arent all that personalizable you'll probably pay more, get a better product but your dog won't be able to play with the other dogs so it will get old and lonely. People in the 1 million group are going to complain more than the ones in the 100 group even if the 100 are having problems their voice won't be loud enough for anyone to care. And well, I was trying to be clever with that little senario but my juces just ran out...
So like I said, no problems here and I agree with what your saying but, whats the point of this thread. It's been done to death. ;)
Nevermind, that makes the whole thread worth it ;)Quote:
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned ;)
asking MS to release the source code to their software is pretty dumb imho. They are a business, even if they act more like genghis khan.
Though they have might think about releasing it to their technology partners; their foray into mobile phones (probably the most important future market) was cut short when the phone makers working with them quit and used the rival OS instead because MS wouldn't allow the phone maker access to its code to test the phones.
bang, ouch, my foot.
:D
Actually all Linux supporters since the OS itself is open-source.Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
a whole myriad of linux supporters
Which brings me to another point - RedHat or SuSE. They do EXACTLY thesame as you say here aversion:
Quote:
[...]trying to make every standard a microsoft standard, taking open source software and changing it so it's proprietary (ask Sun). [...]
It's not just a Microsoft thing.
Always hear sb says that how suck MS is!But,never see sb can stand out and lead people to make a revolution!Why? cause we can not live withou MS! just like drug!
i totally agree with this, i hate it when all people can do is put down MS, i mean come on, their the ones in support of P2P and all that stuff right now...
Reason enough for me :DQuote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned
I thought it was a success -- SVP by Orange and Motorola (I think). The phone is powered by MS code.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
asking MS to release the source code to their software is pretty dumb imho. They are a business, even if they act more like genghis khan.
Though they have might think about releasing it to their technology partners; their foray into mobile phones (probably the most important future market) was cut short when the phone makers working with them quit and used the rival OS instead because MS wouldn't allow the phone maker access to its code to test the phones.
bang, ouch, my foot.
:D
Whether I use Microballs or not is immaterial (I do, just for the record - XP hasn't crashed yet and IE6 is better/easier for development than the tempramental NS) - but I'm in, just for this!Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned ;)
:D
You know we love you Nerdie. In a none-physical way, that is.
no, that's a different one, MS planned to produce a whole range of phones that used an OS designed for mobile phones from the ground up.Quote:
Originally posted by tonytryout
I thought it was a success -- SVP by Orange and Motorola (I think). The phone is powered by MS code.
microsoft are going to get creamed by mobile computing. It's predicted that within 10 years only 10-20% of the time people will use traditional desktops computers, the vast majority of use will be mobile. SYmbian is currently the market leader in this area and aside from that one orange phone MS has nothing, they shot themselves in the foot by refusing to cooperate with their technology partner.
symbian is, by the way, open source amongst its licencees.
edit - the manufacturer was sendo;
the orange SPV is now the only MS smartphone on the market or in development.Quote:
Sendo chief executive Hugh Brogan said one reason for the switch was that Sendo could get access to the source codes for Nokia software, and therefore customise products.
The move comes as a severe blow to Microsoft's Smartphone ambitions, which now rest on slender foundations.
This is hard to say!
cough...I..cough..like..MSN..cough...Messenger & W2K Pro!..cough
:eek:
Go on, make my day.Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
If I get more than 50 replies, I'll get NerdInside banned ;)
If Microsoft would start to play by the rules, start to turn out some quality software that's not a rip off of something else, if they would allow you to remove any piece of software from there OS, if they would remove there spyware from there OS, I wouldn't have a problem with them. But they won't, because some people (like you guys) just cannot live without Microsoft. You have software which is only for Windows, you will be stuck with a shotty OS for your life. You will never see that there are other, better, free (as in free speech) OSes out there that don't attempt to lock you into any software, licenses, or spyware.
If Netscape had never released there browsers source code, Microsoft's browser would of been the only browser used. Then Microsoft could of manipulated the HTML standards (which they still do in there browser) and the HTTP standards. Microsoft would have "owned" the Internet. But, thank God, Netscape released there source code and the world was saved once again from the evil-doer Microsoft.
Linux is the king of glitches? Haha, no. Sure, it has bugs, but not nearly as many as Windows and they do not make you a security risk like lots of Windows bugs. Linux doesn't attempt to hide it's bugs, the source code for the kernel is open. It's easy to debug compared to Windows. Where as Windows ships with tons of bugs lying in there closed code. You are paying a large amount of money for bugs.
There are so many reasons not to use Microsoft. Not including there crappy OS, there are tons of bad things they have done morally in the past. But, thanks to a group of rebel programmers, most of there plans were foiled. Yet Microsoft and Windows still remain popular. There are a few people out there that will never change, never see the better solutions, you will be Windows Weenies forever. If you were to start an anti-Microsoft thread, I bet you would get a lot more replies then this pro-Microsoft one.
everyone boo NerdInsideQuote:
Originally posted by NerdInside
Go on, make my day.
If Microsoft would start to play by the rules, start to turn out some quality software that's not a rip off of something else, if they would allow you to remove any piece of software from there OS, if they would remove there spyware from there OS, I wouldn't have a problem with them. But they won't, because some people (like you guys) just cannot live without Microsoft. You have software which is only for Windows, you will be stuck with a shotty OS for your life. You will never see that there are other, better, free (as in free speech) OSes out there that don't attempt to lock you into any software, licenses, or spyware.
If Netscape had never released there browsers source code, Microsoft's browser would of been the only browser used. Then Microsoft could of manipulated the HTML standards (which they still do in there browser) and the HTTP standards. Microsoft would have "owned" the Internet. But, thank God, Netscape released there source code and the world was saved once again from the evil-doer Microsoft.
Linux is the king of glitches? Haha, no. Sure, it has bugs, but not nearly as many as Windows and they do not make you a security risk like lots of Windows bugs. Linux doesn't attempt to hide it's bugs, the source code for the kernel is open. It's easy to debug compared to Windows. Where as Windows ships with tons of bugs lying in there closed code. You are paying a large amount of money for bugs.
There are so many reasons not to use Microsoft. Not including there crappy OS, there are tons of bad things they have done morally in the past. But, thanks to a group of rebel programmers, most of there plans were foiled. Yet Microsoft and Windows still remain popular. There are a few people out there that will never change, never see the better solutions, you will be Windows Weenies forever. If you were to start an anti-Microsoft thread, I bet you would get a lot more replies then this pro-Microsoft one.
boooooooooooooo
boooooooooo
Booo! ;)
Uhhuh, just what I though would happen. *dodges tomato*
I don't have to defend Linux, BSD, UNIX, or Mac. They defend themselves enough with the outstanding software quality and helpful user groups. I am just wasting my time with you guys (and people like Cliffy).
Goodbye. *throws a pumpkin*
admit it, all you knuckleheads want to switch.
Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
everyone boo NerdInside
boooooooooooooo
boooooooooo
Don't get trashy my friend. :p
The software market isn't Star Wars, son. :rolleyes:Quote:
But, thanks to a group of rebel programmers, most of there plans were foiled.
What, let every household change to Linux? People with low computer knowledge can most definately not use Linux as it's far too complicated.Quote:
Yet Microsoft and Windows still remain popular. There are a few people out there that will never change, never see the better solutions, you will be Windows Weenies forever.
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. :rolleyes:Quote:
If you were to start an anti-Microsoft thread, I bet you would get a lot more replies then this pro-Microsoft one.
Well that's just not true. Mandrake does a fine job at holding your hand through your Linux use. Then you move up to another distro once you get a hang of it.Quote:
Originally posted by wouter999
What, let every household change to Linux? People with low computer knowledge can most definately not use Linux as it's far too complicated.
And if you don't want to use Linux, don't. Mac is just as user-friendly as Windows, if not more (only difference is Mac is quality).
(And the software market is war)
I've had numerous attempts installing Linux to see what it's all about, and none of the versions I tried got anywhere near the ease of installing Windows XP. Not even Mandrake.
If everyone used mac, lunix or whatever they'd be having the same problems. The more people there are to complain the more complaints you'll get.
[edit]ok, not the same problems but you get what i'm trying to say.[/edit]
I'm not getting trashy wouter, this thread has been here since the dawn of computers, I am being light-hearted coz I couldn't be arsed argueing.
I believe a wise man (me) once said (just now):Quote:
Originally posted by RazoRmedia
I'm not getting trashy wouter, this thread has been here since the dawn of computers, I am being light-hearted coz I couldn't be arsed argueing.
"He who starts a controversial thread must be willing to argue"
:D
true, but he who starts a stupid thread as a mockery of other threads must be willing to boooo
boooo
Can't argue with that one.
Booooo
:D
we installed mandrake on a file server and it was a pain in the ass, but it worked well once up. But even mandrake is not for someone without computer skills. Mac and windows are still the only realistic options for normal people. Though I haven't tried Lindows.
I use win2k pro more than anything else, it does the job just fine and has never crashed on me. The only thing I hate about microsoft is that they could produce much better software and they could produce software that's more rewarding to use, but bill gates thinks he's napolean and seems to think he has to controll everything and everyone.
Lindows is even more of a b*tch to install then Mandrake.
If there would be no open source, my actual project would be impossible for me to finance.
PHP -> Fast, powerful, stable, free, great community development
mySQL -> Fast, powerful, stable, free, great community development
Apache -> Fast, powerful, stable, free, great community development
Linux (Server) -> Fast, powerful, stable, free, great community development
Web Applications (GPL) -> Fast, powerful, stable, free, great community development
If there would be no rebels, open source, scripting community, free software ... you could add this description for the tools Slow, unstable and very expensive
In that case, my site would be expensive as hell. (If I had the money to pay all those MS products)
I'm a Mac user, I have all the software I need. I really don't need MS products (Only the MS office cause clients are using PCs)
Fredi
I like you but I disagree. :) Linux does not have many security holes because they are not as popular as Windows.Quote:
Originally posted by NerdInside
Go on, make my day.
If Microsoft would start to play by the rules, start to turn out some quality software that's not a rip off of something else, if they would allow you to remove any piece of software from there OS, if they would remove there spyware from there OS, I wouldn't have a problem with them. But they won't, because some people (like you guys) just cannot live without Microsoft. You have software which is only for Windows, you will be stuck with a shotty OS for your life. You will never see that there are other, better, free (as in free speech) OSes out there that don't attempt to lock you into any software, licenses, or spyware.
If Netscape had never released there browsers source code, Microsoft's browser would of been the only browser used. Then Microsoft could of manipulated the HTML standards (which they still do in there browser) and the HTTP standards. Microsoft would have "owned" the Internet. But, thank God, Netscape released there source code and the world was saved once again from the evil-doer Microsoft.
Linux is the king of glitches? Haha, no. Sure, it has bugs, but not nearly as many as Windows and they do not make you a security risk like lots of Windows bugs. Linux doesn't attempt to hide it's bugs, the source code for the kernel is open. It's easy to debug compared to Windows. Where as Windows ships with tons of bugs lying in there closed code. You are paying a large amount of money for bugs.
There are so many reasons not to use Microsoft. Not including there crappy OS, there are tons of bad things they have done morally in the past. But, thanks to a group of rebel programmers, most of there plans were foiled. Yet Microsoft and Windows still remain popular. There are a few people out there that will never change, never see the better solutions, you will be Windows Weenies forever. If you were to start an anti-Microsoft thread, I bet you would get a lot more replies then this pro-Microsoft one.
Personally, I am not too bothered on the type of software or OS -- the problem is industry itself. Thanks to Microsoft, we have Word, Access, Excel and other software companies that produced for Windows like Photoshop, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc.
I use these applications and unfortunately they are not available for Linux.
I did install Linux once (Mandrake) and as much as I like it, I didn't use it much because there was a serious lack of availability of necessary software.
Yes, there are bugs but there is no such thing as a bug-free software. It would take years and years (and millions of people using it for million hours) to iron out the bugs. By then, it is not so feasible and won't make anybody profits.
I own two copies of Windows XP, I have a Microsoft Wireless InteliMouse Explorer, I have Office XP, I have Train Sim, Flight Sim, Midtown Madness, I am about to buy a Xbox, I use Internet Explorer 6.
I program in PHP, not ASP, I prefer UNIX servers. I try my best to follow the W3C rules at all times.
I would say I am a Microsoft user of stuff that is decent, but stuff that gets on my nerves I don't use.
Kind of 50/50 - that's me.
TE
If it weren't for Microsoft copying Apple, who'd got the idea from Xerox, then using their market share to bully everyone else out then the computer revolution might have gone a different way.Quote:
Originally posted by wouter999
If it weren't for Microsoft the whole computer revolution wouldn't have set off. If it weren't for Microsoft the internet would still be in its roots. If it weren't for Microsoft lots of great software'd never be developed.
Mosaic then Netscape were the things that made the web take off; without them the web would still be in its roots.
It was only after MS saw that Netscape was making a lot of money and was extremely popular in an emerging market that they then released IE for free and completely destroyed Netscape; once again using their market share to bully people out of business.
Subway: Once Nisus Writer X comes out you can open up .doc file with that instead and save yourself £300 or so...:)
Thx. I already don't update any MS products on my machine. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by SJT
Subway: Once Nisus Writer X comes out you can open up .doc file with that instead and save yourself £300 or so...:)
Fredi
PS: Just saw the new sales numbers of Consoles and games. The X-Box sells well, but the PS2 still sales three times more. I wonder why MS thinks now that based on their actual numbers, they will be the conole leaders soon. LOL. I know why they give out that statement, but no official numbers. Marketing is great. :D
bill gates is the devil..... so you're really saying that you love satan and his products.