Please direct us to the court cases involved.
Oh please... Microsoft is sued for all sorts of reasons. 99% of those cases you personally have never heard about.
Starting off with the condecention doesn't help your case any, so please refrain from using comments like "Oh please" in the public forum.
I am sure Microsoft get sued for many things, but you stated that the reason the Outlook Express spell checker didn't work was because Microsoft was sued. You have shown no specific evidence for this. The application of the general to the specific without evidence is a fallacy of logic.
You know why their firewall only stops incoming traffic and not outgoing traffic?? Because they are forced by law to ensure there's a reason for other vendors to sell firewalls. How do I know this? Because it's the part that isn't mentioned in the news paper, but it's the part mentioned in the backrooms at the Developers Conferences by people that actually work in the industry. I'd estimate 95% (or more) of what goes on in the software industry happens behind closed doors or between two lawyers and well out of earshot of any reporter.
Are we talking about firewalls or spell checkers?
There is still a functional spell checker in Office 2007; it just breaks their old stuff.
Microsoft is sued because they use the monopoly power granted by market share to illegally bundle software, cripple competitor's software, and extort fees to get the updates so that other software will work with the OS.
They don't cripple anyone's software.
Microsoft has long crippled competitors' software. This is well know and documented in several court cases.
Did you read why Microsoft was being fined by the EU? Microsoft was denying companies access to updates by using large fees as an impediment. In the past, they just didn't allow access at all.
Do you recall the Caldera vs Microsoft case (2000) or the Novell vs Microsoft case (2004)?
I have been using microsoft products since the 1980's. I have yet to see a single piece of software that wouldn't work 100% as the developer intended because microsoft has some "hidden code some place that turns off features". What they do do, is make 3rd party software redundant. They make it redundant because nobody needs to go out and buy a spell checking package because it's already installed. Nobody needs to go out and buy a web browser because it's already installed. Nobody needs to go out and buy an email client because it's already installed. Nobody needs to buy a media player because it's already installed. Nobody needs to buy a DVD player because it's already installed. Nobody needs to buy a Bluetooth stack because it's already installed.
Yes, that is called bundling, and it is illegal. You have just made my case.
What illegal bundles? Their web browser? It's their operating system, it's there web browser. Anyone that thinks they shouldn't be allowed to include it is fooling themselves.
There is what you believe to be true, and there is the law. The law states that bundling is illegal.
Microsoft also forced computer manufacturing companies to purchase other Microsoft products (Word, Office, Works, ...) with Windows. They tried to get around this by saying that the manufacturers didn't actually have to install this software, but how many companies are going to pay for the stuff and not put it on their machines - especially since the other companies were going to do it because they were forced to purchase bundled software as well.
This is old news and well documented. Your case loses credibility if you ignore the court rulings in the two major DOJ cases against Microsoft regarding these issues.
Apple does exactly the same thing only more so. What browser is on Macs??? Oh..that's right.. only Safari. Mac's don't ship with IE.
Apple can do as they please because the OS is for their own hardware just as Microsoft has its own OS for the XBox 360.
On a side note, one of the reasons that Microsoft wanted to get into the gaming industry with the XBOX was because they wanted it to become a set-top box that would do much more than play games. This was an area they had looked into since purchasing WebTV.
I know you don't like microsoft. I think you're reasons are unfounded. You simply don't like to have to pay for new software. I know you don't like the fact you have to "register software via the internet"..well.. that's how it works now.
If you want to bring up items from the private forums, I would have to ask if it is alright for me to post items you have posted to the private forums that prove my case.
I know you don't like microsoft. I think you're reasons are unfounded. You simply don't like to have to pay for new software.
Oh really? I literally have a wall of software in my home. Did you think I stole all of those products or received them as gifts?
Do you think the list of software that I posted to the private forum was not paid for in some way?
I don't mind paying for software. I just don't like having to be forced to pay for software I don't need or want and having to pay twice as much for it because a corporation is using its market share to control the price. I also am generally against corporations that consistantly use unethical and illegal practices.
I know you don't like the fact you have to "register software via the internet"..well.. that's how it works now.
I don't think you want to take that issue out of the private forum, as you will not like the outcome.
What I will say is that I do not like to have my children's computer linked to the Internet, and I do not like any software that forces the connection for a software title to be updated. I also do not like software that will break without the latest Direct X update from Microsoft. There has to be a spot where the developer says, "This is what we will require, and we will provide it," and goes on from there.
I also don't need an OS that runs my games slower, is full of bloatware, and actually has spyware built into it.
You have other options if you don't like microsoft. I hear Ubuntu is not bad.
I agree. It is great for my HTPC, but I can't really run games on it. There is a defacto standard.
I'll put it plainly. If it were not for microsoft the computing world would not exist. Simple. Like it or not, Microsoft standardized operating systems.
You do know that Bill Gates purchased DOS after he made the deal with IBM to use it on their computers. I suspect that you may know that Caldera's DR-DOS was as good if not better than MS-DOS, but Microsoft crippled it by adding code to make sure it didn't work with Windows 3.1.
Perhaps you never heard of Xerox PARC, which Apple copied for the LISA (which became the Macintosh) or the Amiga, or OS/2 Warp, or GEOS, or other software that could easily have been as popular as Windows.
The computing world did need a standard for an OS. They did not need a corporation taking advantage of the market share granted by that OS to do illegal activities, overburden competitors, and stifle innovation.
Everyone on earth knows that clicking the little floppy disk on the tool bar means 'save document'. If it weren't for them, we'd likely all have to be draging our disks to the trash-bin to eject them or other ubsurd nonsense like that.
These were standardized by the Macintosh and Commodore Amiga and were based on the Xerox PARC GUI. The courts have ruled that Xerox PARC could not patent the look and feel of the GUI, so Steve Jobs was allowed to use it. This also allowed Microsoft to use it.
Or we'd have to be sure we're installing the right version of software x that matches whatever one of the 100 different kernels of the same OS we happen to be using.
That doesn't happen now? Are software developers allowed to make their games backward compatable with Windows 98se any more? I am not asking if they would want to; I am asking if they are allowed to by the letter of the Microsoft licensing agreements.
Also, doesn't Microsoft have update after update? Don't graphics card makers have to respond by creating driver update after driver update? If there was such a great standard, how come developers ask customers to make sure the OS and graphics card drivers are up to date?
From a developer standpoint they have a heavily standardized set of tools and suites for developers to work with. That's the kind of standardization microsoft brought to the masses. Without it, you'd have 500 different operating systems out there, no standards, and no productivity.
As I have stated above, I have no problem with a standard OS as long as that standard is not used to force defacto standards in other areas. Again, this is a matter of both ethics and law.
Microsoft still provides the spell checker with Office 2007, it just messed up older versions of Outlook Express. Microsoft often forces incompatability with its older software to help push upgrades.
Please name another software company (that makes money) that doesn't do this. Does Apple still support OS9?? nope.. all that software is now dead. Of course microsoft pushes people to new versions. Of course they discontinue support of old products when they release new ones. It's how the software world works.
This is a spell checker we are discussing. How much upgraded could it be?
Outlook Express was released with Internet Explorer 4.0 for Windows95. that was13 years ago!!! It's an obsolete client for an obsolete operating system. Why should microsoft keep supporting it? Why shouldn't they be allowed to start pushing people towards their new version. All software companies do this. It's how companies make money.
Windows was released with Windows 3.1. What does the original release date have to do with it?
Again, we are talking about a spell checker. Are there really that many more English words in 2007 that would force a change?
Microsoft went out if it's way at the time to tell people it was a simple email client for basic home use. However people used it like Outlook with databases of hundreds of MBs over what it was designed to do. Then people complained about "crappy microsoft software".. when in fact, they were told it wasn't supposed to be used they way they're using it.
It boils down to this. If it were not for microsoft, 99% of the games available on this website would likly not exist.
That is an invalid argument as it ignores the market dynamic. Without Microsoft, these games would likely be running on GEOS or OS/2 Warp with the OpenGL 3D graphics API.
< Message edited by Marauders -- 3/3/2008 9:41:48 PM >