Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 15:03:52 10/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 2001 at 15:52:50, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>On October 27, 2001 at 23:31:12, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>We did not wait to hear about product activation to have big concerns about
>>Microsoft, you know.
>>
>>This stuff is like cherry on the cake, but I fear there will be some other
>>cherries on top of this one in the future.
>>
>>Where Microsoft is taking us all is quite clear. I can almost guess what their
>>next steps are going to be.
>
>You have been posting a lot about your concerns re: MS and I consider all of
>them unjustified.
>
>You keep writing, over and over, that MS produces bloatware to drive people to
>upgrade their hardware. What evidence do you have? Some FUD that WinXP requires
>256MB and a fast processor to run? Do you really think that MS quadrupled the
>memory requirement of Win2k in a year? What incentive does MS have to make
>software that does not run well on the customers' computers? Are you a
>conspiracy theorist who believes Intel slipped MS some money to put delay loops
>in the code? Moreover, you seem immune to the idea that other operating systems
>that provide similar functionality require just as much or more memory. OS X is
>the easy target, but it has been true in the past that it takes more memory to
>run Linux (with a window manager) than Windows.
>
>Next up is your concern about product activation and privacy. You still seem to
>think that it's an invasion of your privacy but have yet to explain exactly how.
>If you knew anything about the product activation process, you would know that
>it's anonymous. The install program only asks for your name and company when
>installing the OS, and it has no way to verify that this information is correct
>even if it did want to send it back to MS. You can activate the product right
>after installing it.
>
>Now you're complaining that MS drives you to use MS services with its OS, or the
>services of its partners. Where? Yeah, if you want to use Messenger, MSN Chat,
>or Hotmail, you will have to get a Passport. That's the only example I can think
>of, and I can hardly imagine that it's a concern to you, because you seem
>hellbent on not using software bundled with Windows. I just installed WinXP
>recently on my home PC and I was never once prompted to use MSN, Messenger, or
>anything else. Setting up my Earthlink dial-up connection was pathetically easy
>and didn't even require the Earthlink software. (Hmm, is Microsoft making things
>easier for its competition?) I also had _absolutely no problems_ downloading and
>installing ICQ and WinAmp and using them instead of Messenger and WMP.
>
>The last of your concerns that I can remember right now is about .NET and
>software subscription fees. I can't imagine how you're already getting so worked
>up about software that hasn't been released and a fee schedule that hasn't been
>implemented. For all you know, you'd think these things were great if you gave
>them a chance. Or they might not take off at all and you'll never be affected by
>them in the slightest.
>
>Which companies do you prefer over MS? Apple or Sun? Apple has been screwing its
>customers almost since day 1. OS X requires a recent Apple G3 computer and 128MB
>of RAM to run, and it doesn't have drivers for maybe half of the Mac hardware
>out there. Apple overprices their hardware by hundreds/thousands of dollars. A
>few months ago they released a firmware patch that disabled most peoples' 3rd
>party memory in the name of "system stability." The list goes on. If you want to
>be a Mac user, you have to jump through a million Apple hoops and hand over your
>retirement fund to Apple. Now that's a monopoly. How about Sun? They overcharge
>you for extra-slow processors and crap graphics. They went after MS legally for
>bundling a JVM with IE that passed Sun's own JVM compatibility tests when Sun's
>JVM didn't. Now they're going after MS for not bundling a JVM. And they had a
>bug in the L2 cache of their more expensive servers that would cause errors and
>data loss that they tried to _cover up_ for more than a year. All companies pull
>crap like this; you're just singling out MS because they're the biggest target.
>
>-Tom
You've learned your lessons well Tom. :)
Just ignore me. I have already explained what the problem is, but you and Eugene
keep on listing marketing points, keep on explaining how innocent every step
from Microsoft is.
I don't know if you keep missing the point on purpose or if you really believe
that commercial blah blah can fool people (well actually I must admit it works
quite well on most people), but you miss the point on and on.
Just keep believing that Microsoft is really working for the good of the human
kind and you should live long and happy. At least it should work for you.
Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.