Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: The Problem with Microsoft

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
You have missed one further point. If developers of software have to develop different versions for 10 different operating systems on 10 different processor types then you will end up paying far more for your software and, also, it will not provide extra functionality as quickly as too much time will be spent keeping up with all of the 100 different versions.

Microsoft and Intel, despite some failings, have provided a single backwardly compatible platform for developers and users. What is happening now to both Intel and Microsoft, combined all the negative whingers, who have nothing better to do with their time and mostly do not know what they are talking about,  will ruin this for us.

So what if Windows is not technically the best OS around. It is the most compatible and user friendly for us, the users of software. Intel processors are not the best technically either. If we wanted the best we would be using Alpha's but how many of us do. They are not compatible with anything else, have very little useful (to us) software availavble and, like all Unix boxes, are extremely expensive to buy and maintain compared to WinTel machines. Autocad is not the best CAD system but how many of you use it.



At 06:13 21/10/98 -0700, you wrote:
>The DoJ is using the incident where MS offered to buy or JV with Netscape
>and Netscape rejected MS's proposal. Subsequently MS was alledged to attempt
>to put Netscape out of business by coercing OEMs to ship only IE and not
>Netscape. I am not certain about the exact business tactics used and I
>certainly don't know if any of them were illegal.
>
>However, IMO:
>Even with all its faults, MS has done more good than bad for the computing
>industry.
>No one has any problem running whatever browser they want on their computer.
>Any DoJ action will hurt computer users (i.e., the taxpayers). The
>integration MS is trying to achieve is a feature I like very much.
>The DoJ, IMO, is being hypocritical attacking the power of MS. The DoJ is
>itself flexing its muscles, much like Waco and Ruby Ridge. The public may
>soon become even more cynical of the Federal Government than it already is.
>If Netscape, Sun Microsystems, et. al. can provide better OSs and software I
>say "Bring it on. Let the customer base decide what is best and don't go
>crying to your mommie (i.e., DoJ)". How long have we been hearing about
>JavaOS? Why did Corel yank their Java based Office Suite?
>
>With regards to being "boxed into a corner", you still have a lot of
>choices. There are several browsers available, several office suites
>available, I think there still is a Mac OS and I believe there is one guy
>out in Arizona still using DOS (whatever that is).
>
>We don't need the Feds to protect us from ourselves. The consumers should
>decide what they want on their computer. In the end, we will be the victims
>of any DoJ action.
>
>With regards to your notion that buying companies is immoral: what drugs are
>you on, Bill? It happens all the time. If you feel that way and own any
>stock in any company, you better sell it because that company (any company)
>has either bought, sold, merged or acquired another company. Get real.
>
>Regards,
>Bill Allen
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:poly(--nospam--at)flash.net]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 5:31 AM
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>Subject: Re: The Problem with Microsoft
>
>
>Bill Allen, S.E. wrote:
>
>> There is nothing immoral or illegal about buying companies. It happens
>> everyday.
>
>Illegal, perhaps not.  But immoral, yes it is.
>
>But beyond that:  We as users of services and products need to signify that
>we
>don't like being boxed into a corner, where only one provider is available
>(or
>even TWO, for that matter).  I have always been surprised that business
>users
>have put up with this.
>
>> And no, this is NOT the reason the DoJ has MS in court.
>
>Yes it is.  No, not this incident, but the anti-competitive tactics that MS
>has always used, is the "excuse" that DoJ has used to justify punishing MS
>(for not contributing enough money to the Democratic Party--MS has only
>THREE
>lobbyists in Washington, far, far fewer than any company its size).
>
>
>
***
>*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
>*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
>*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to
>*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type
>*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email
>*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message
>*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send
>*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
>*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
>*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
>*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
********
>
>
>
>*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
>*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
>*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to
>*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type
>*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email
>*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message
>*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send
>*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
>*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
>*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
>*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
>
Regards Gil Brock
Prestressed Concrete Design Consultants Pty. Ltd.
5 Cameron St.,  Beenleigh Qld. 4207 Australia
Ph  +61  7 3807 8022 Fax  +61  7 3807 8422
gil(--nospam--at)rapt.pcdc.com.au