Who owns your computer?

[computoman]

Microsoft wants to decide what you can and can not do with your computer. They are in effect going to hold your computer hostage for their own needs, It seems to looks like that if you do something with your computer that Microsoft does not get a piece of the pie, they will lock your computer down until they do. Adolph Hiltler would have loved Microsoft. This is the ultimate narcissism in corporate mentaility. Shame on them.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/05/microsoft-receives-patent-for-restricting-operating-systems.ars

[klitzy]

Solution (http://www.apple.com)

[kzap]

Solution (http://www.apple.com)
Apple is NOT the solution they are a proprietary vendor just like M$, what to stop them following quite and doing the same. Remember Apple own Itunes and they use DRM just like M$.
Solution (http://www.ubuntu.com/)

Story's like this make me glad I'm 100% M$ free I never have to put up with this again.... Ever!

[ArmpitOfDeath]

Microsoft wants to decide what you can and can not do with your computer. They are in effect going to hold your computer hostage for their own needs, It seems to looks like that if you do something with your computer that Microsoft does not get a piece of the pie, they will lock your computer down until they do. Adolph Hiltler would have loved Microsoft. This is the ultimate narcissism in corporate mentaility. Shame on them.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/05/microsoft-receives-patent-for-restricting-operating-systems.ars

I sometimes - no, frequently, wonder about you, computoman.

They're talking about doing the same as e.g. shipping Adobe CS4 Master to you on a machine or on a media, and only unlocking what you've paid for. They already do this with the Anytime upgrade - and W7 will extend on this. You own your computer, and you have a license to use what you've paid for, regardless of what additional code you might have on your computer. Is that so difficult to understand?

If it's actually implemented in full, deployment would be easier in many situations: You have one master install, and you just turn on what you're actually using - knowing Microsoft, probably implementable vis some sort of central management. This opens the way to easy management of dynamic licensing for corporates for one thing, and even small-scale PC building operations might benefit due to the simplified OEM processes.

e.g. new machines can come with a complete trial edition of Office 2010 - and then you can choose what to buy.

If you haven't paid for it, it's pretty simple - you don't get it, or you settle for an inferior experience in most cases with FOSS, which many spit-speckled fanboy morons don't realise is inferior due to the fact that they've never actually worked with pay-for options.

[kzap]

I sometimes - no, frequently, wonder about you, computoman.

They're talking about doing the same as e.g. shipping Adobe CS4 Master to you on a machine or on a media, and only unlocking what you've paid for. They already do this with the Anytime upgrade - and W7 will extend on this. You own your computer, and you have a license to use what you've paid for, regardless of what additional code you might have on your computer. Is that so difficult to understand?
But the files will be on your computer, they are taking up your hard drive space they are there they are on a drive which you own but M$ say you can't touch them unless you pay more.
And it's not just what they are doing it's what they can do, it gives M$ an awful amount of power, you are not controlling your computer the OS has more power than you, it decides whether you can access a program or not the computer is in charge not you.
How can that not scare you?

[ArmpitOfDeath]

I'm sure as in current cases you can remove it. How does putting inactive code on your machine give them more power? Yes they can switch off code rather than turn it on, but if you're paying for it then you'll be majorly pissed, in which case they lose a paying customer.

I dunno - Does being a Linux fanboy accelerate the destruction of neurons? The evidence is to the contrary from the FOSS guys I deal with - although they may not specifically be fanboys, but just almost comedically nerdy obsessives.

[kzap]

I'm sure as in current cases you can remove it. How does putting inactive code on your machine give them more power? Yes they can switch off code rather than turn it on, but if you're paying for it then you'll be majorly pissed, in which case they lose a paying customer.
But that code is taking up space, they control what code you can and can't use, it's all in the disc when you buy it you just have to pay more to use it.
It's slowing your PC down by being in the registry and you can't even use it.
I don't want M$ telling my what parts of my PC I can and can't use.
Imagen having a car which you brought and has air conditioning install but to use it you have to pay them more.
Why? It's installed it's on the on the disc or in the car? They just want more money for it, I think M$ have enough money already.

They have the power to shut down any part of your computer what's to say they won't one day and hold the whole world ransom for all there data?
I know that example is extreme but they now have the power to do that.

[tokenuser]

Microsoft wants to decide what you can and can not do with your computer. They are in effect going to hold your computer hostage for their own needs, It seems to looks like that if you do something with your computer that Microsoft does not get a piece of the pie, they will lock your computer down until they do. Adolph Hiltler would have loved Microsoft. This is the ultimate narcissism in corporate mentaility. Shame on them.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/05/microsoft-receives-patent-for-restricting-operating-systems.arsYou seem to have a hard time understanding Ars Technica articles.

Microsoft is not looking to control every aspect of your computer.
They have a patent in place that will allow to buy a single copy (distribution) of Windows. You dont need to choose Home, Pro, Media Server, Premier, Kitchensink.
You just buy Windows.

Now, once you have the distribution they are going to charge you for the features that you install. This lets you buy the Home licence, then decide that you need the Media Centre capability. Instead of being forced to buy an upgrade disc to Media Centre, you buy a licence for the media extensions, and the code base that is already on your disc is unlocked and available for installation.

This is not a unique idea. Even the software company I work for has been doing this for years - a single distribution, with additional capabilities unlocked via licenses.

MS got the patent not for the idea, but the mechanism they are planning on using.

It was precisely because of thread like this that I started the Is Linux Dead thread based the way Linux users seem intent upon taking a portion of a story out of context, then spinning it to make Microsoft sound evil, or that Linux is dominating the desktop market.

Who owns your computer? You do. You have the same level of control you always had, except now, if you are in a Windows based world you have an alternate means of getting there.

[kzap]

You seem to have a hard time understanding Ars Technica articles.

Microsoft is not looking to control every aspect of your computer.
They have a patent in place that will allow to buy a single copy (distribution) of Windows. You dont need to choose Home, Pro, Media Server, Premier, Kitchensink.
You just buy Windows.

Now, once you have the distribution they are going to charge you for the features that you install. This lets you buy the Home licence, then decide that you need the Media Centre capability. Instead of being forced to buy an upgrade disc to Media Centre, you buy a licence for the media extensions, and the code base that is already on your disc is unlocked and available for installation.
Maybe I did just understand it but from what I understand the programs are ALREADY INSTALLED.
So they are taking up your precious hard drive space and registry entries and you can't even use them. If they don't want to include them that fine but don't have them on there just disabled because that takes up space.

[kzap]

then spinning it to make Microsoft sound evil,
M$ are evil.
They are putting stuff on your computer you can't use that like buying a car with air conditioning but not being aloud to use it until you pay Ford.
Why it is already in your car, they have already installed they just won't let you use it.

[darknessgp]

COUNTER!

Every OS I have ever used had features and functions on in that I NEVER used. They are in effect, wasting space with those "stupid ass" features. Why? OS devs are you so horrible to take up my hdd space with stuff I won't use?!?

Yes. IF you choose to use Windows, the disc will have every VERSION. You get to use the version you pay for. It's important to realize that yes, the disc includes everything, but you are only paying for whatever version you want and you can choose not to use Windows at all on your machine. No one is forcing you to do anything with your PC. Also, the everything on one disc is great for disc production and distribution. Every disc can be used for any version, this is NOT a bad thing.

and stop with the "precious HDD space" BS. you can get a 1TB drive right now for $75 (Link (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152101)) Windows takes up what? max 10GB? How is it precious?

[computoman]

It would be naive to think that Microsoft only wants to control their own software. Especially after alleged dirty tricks in the odf vs ooxml fight. How much did the EU fine Microsoft for their practices again? The disk space issue is just an offshoot of the real issue of who owns your computer. It has been well documented in the past where Microsoft has in fact given less functionality to competing programs. If you read the actual patent application it seems to indicate exactly they want to decide what runs on a users machine. The document shows Microsoft's complete disregard for a user's preferences because Microsoft knows what a customer needs. They intend to allow the user to only use what comes from their distribution channels. To me it is an outright admission Microsoft allegedly intends to monopolize the market. I am surprised the DOJ is asleep on this. It sure is convenient that the FBI and other government agencies are all of a sudden dealing with viruses. The movie "The Net" is almost prophetic.

[quix]

Microsoft wants to decide what you can and can not do with your computer. They are in effect going to hold your computer hostage for their own needs, It seems to looks like that if you do something with your computer that Microsoft does not get a piece of the pie, they will lock your computer down until they do. Adolph Hiltler would have loved Microsoft. This is the ultimate narcissism in corporate mentaility. Shame on them.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ng-systems.ars


Seriously? You're paralleling Microsoft with Hitler?

[kzap]

Seriously? You're paralleling Microsoft with Hitler?
I agree with you there, although M$ and Hitler are similar they should be compared.
Someone once said Hitler would have used Linux, which is neither here nor there, Hitler would have used shoes that doesn't make them evil.
If anyone here has seen the old seasons of Stargate SG1 I think that Microsoft are like the Goa'uld but maybe that's just me.
The are a race of evil aliens that control half the galaxy by enslaving million with technology they claim as there own but actually stole from other alien races and cobbled together themselves.
I just think it's a perfect metaphor for M$ :D

Remember
"Computers don't crash, Windows does"

[ArmpitOfDeath]

It would be naive to think that Microsoft only wants to control their own software. Especially after alleged dirty tricks in the odf vs ooxml fight. How much did the EU fine Microsoft for their practices again? The disk space issue is just an offshoot of the real issue of who owns your computer. It has been well documented in the past where Microsoft has in fact given less functionality to competing programs. If you read the actual patent application it seems to indicate exactly they want to decide what runs on a users machine. The document shows Microsoft's complete disregard for a user's preferences because Microsoft knows what a customer needs. They intend to allow the user to only use what comes from their distribution channels. To me it is an outright admission Microsoft allegedly intends to monopolize the market. I am surprised the DOJ is asleep on this. It sure is convenient that the FBI and other government agencies are all of a sudden dealing with viruses. The movie "The Net" is almost prophetic.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/4915/smileyroflmao.gif

[quix]

I agree with you there, although M$ and Hitler are similar they should be compared.
Someone once said Hitler would have used Linux, which is neither here nor there, Hitler would have used shoes that doesn't make them evil.
If anyone here has seen the old seasons of Stargate SG1 I think that Microsoft are like the Goa'uld but maybe that's just me.
The are a race of evil aliens that control half the galaxy by enslaving million with technology they claim as there own but actually stole from other alien races and cobbled together themselves.
I just think it's a perfect metaphor for M$ :D

Remember
"Computers don't crash, Windows does"

I'm not a Stargate guy, but I can see some parallels based on your brief explanation of the Goa'uld. Of course, under that model I would be a slave given that I'm definitely a Windows guy so I'm not sure how happy I am with it. :p

[darknessgp]

Microsoft wants to decide what you can and can not do with your computer. They are in effect going to hold your computer hostage for their own needs, It seems to looks like that if you do something with your computer that Microsoft does not get a piece of the pie, they will lock your computer down until they do. Adolph Hiltler would have loved Microsoft. This is the ultimate narcissism in corporate mentaility. Shame on them.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/05/microsoft-receives-patent-for-restricting-operating-systems.ars

I'm enforcing Godwin's Law. You lose.

Godwin's Law at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law)

[kzap]

I'm enforcing Godwin's Law. You lose.

Godwin's Law at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law)
I thought that law was like Hooke's law I didn't think it was enforceable, otherwise there would be no politic section after 5 seconds :p

[gta_bmx]

Als,o that evil Microsoft BUNDLES Internet Exlporer with Windows! Where will they stop? I'd prefer having no web browser included with my OS, so I can go through the joy of burning Firefox to a DVD, instead of simply downloading it using IE.

And the evil MS even bundles a calculator with Windows! And it's a scientific one! That's unfair to Casio and Texas Instruments! The Casio home office in France is preparing antitrust lawsuits as I write this.

[computoman]

Reading the history of Microsoft and Netscape when Netscape was winning the browser wars might shed more light. I am glad MS has a caclulator. Why are there not any competing cacluator programs on the MS desktop? Technically the sale of caculators did decrease when operating systems included a calculator. NCR and major calculator companies (i.e. IBM) went into to building computers to cash in on the trend instead of bucking a dead horse. Please feel free to replace Hitler with the name of any strong arm entity you wish. Would using someone like Al Capone make anyone feel any better? From what I have been told, Richard Stallman as one of the creators of the freedom software movement traditionally has not even used a browser at all.

By the way, my stepfather now deceased had pictures of the death camps and burial sites in Germany after WWII. He used to vividly describe what he and others saw there. Saying it was just gruesome would be sugar coating it. If anyone wants to glorify or try to minimalize what happened then, I suggest the do some research. It is strange that Gary Kildall of Digital Research mysteriously died when Microsoft and Digital research were competing for domination of the os market. MIcrosoft has tried to buy off or sue any potention competition to them. It is also strange that several major developers of freedom software have died recently. It is the general consensus that Microsoft was allegedly behind the fiaSCO. See www.groklaw.net. What really bothers me is that Microsoft hired away from the government one of the lead proscecutors that working for the DOJ that was investigating Microsoft. Since then the investigation seems to have stalled. Why has the EU fined Microsoft so much money? Why is Microsoft now becoming the target of Patent lawsuits where they are losing? That is especially strange since they allegedly love to accuse everyone else of violating their supposed intellectual property. It was not long ago The Emballmer allegedly was accusing Linux users of using their intellectual property. Microsoft has yet to prove it. Now that Microsoft knows that their goose is cooked for trying to defame linux, they are now trying to act nice nice. What a pile of horse defacation. Why did it take so long for Microsoft to admit the problems with both the xbox360 and the original xbox among many other things?

According to news reports, Microsoft plans to jack up the price of w7. how much is not known yet. For systems that are using w7, as per reports MS will shut down your machine if you do not pay the ransom. As many years as I faithfully used and touted Microsoft, I would now not trust Microsoft aka FUD, Inc. with the back of my hand.

[gimpbully]

No one tell him about IBM mainframes...

M$ are evil.
They are putting stuff on your computer you can't use that like buying a car with air conditioning but not being aloud to use it until you pay Ford.
Why it is already in your car, they have already installed they just won't let you use it.

[computoman]

That is true IBM is the past has allegedly used arm twisting tactics. When they went to linux, I have not seen any of it. I am really upset that they are sending jobs overseas right and left. Till Sco is over with, I will hold my tongue.

[gimpbully]

That is true IBM is the past has allegedly used arm twisting tactics. When they went to linux, I have not seen any of it. I am really upset that they are sending jobs overseas right and left. Till Sco is over with, I will hold my tongue.

I was reffering to their mainframe business (the only viable mainframe company left). They ship their system-z's fully decked out with many times the processors, memory and disk that were ordered but disabled. Once the customer needs more, they simply flip a bit and bam, you've got double the processor, memory and disk. It's smart, it allows instant upgrades and has little to no effect on the end user.

Linux is not the answer to everything. It's a terrible OS from an admin's point of view. This open source idea just leads to code of varying quality and compatability.

Sure, I use linux, I probably know a good deal more that 98% of the users around these parts about linux. My employ is based almost solely on my knowledge of linux, linux clusters and linux filesystems but that just cements my loathing for it. Give me vendor lock-down any day, I prefer stability as long as the product does what I want. Look at AIX, there's a reason it's still around. It's runs circles around linux for stability and pure efficiency.

So what do you have left. Yes, GNU compilers, they're free. But... they're available on many platforms and perform like complete shit -- Intel, PGI, IBM XL all wipe the floor with gcc. Apache, yep, it's great, but again, available on all platforms. The kernel? Is that what you're pimping? Hint, it's trash. Getting a bug fixed is wonderful, if you can get the right person's attention and that person has the right machine available to them with the bug reproducable.. do you know how hard that can be? I'd rather have a corporate point of contact that I can press on.

beyond all that, damnit, linux just leads managers to expect that everything can be done for free (sans FTE time). That is damn foolish and just incorrect.

Yes, we were talking about microsoft (how clever, you found out '$' looks like 'S'!) and they have their problems, but... they run a vast majority of games right out of the box without middleware... I'd say that's a win.

And please, pray tell, what is wrong with macos?

[phatlip]

You know what I thinks funny? The people here that use Microsoft products (myself included) are perfectly fine with this. Those who don't use Microsoft products (Computoman and Kzap) are complaining.

I don't understand what the issue is. You guys don't use their products anyway. We're Microsoft customers, you're not. What's it matter?

Think of it this way:

I never eat at Taco Bell. I'm not a customer. If Taco Bell does something like raising the prices of their taco's I'm not going to complain. I don't eat at Taco Bell either way.

*I actually love Taco Bell. I avoid eating there though because I've had two bad allergic reactions after eating there. :( *

[phatlip]

Remember
"Computers don't crash, Windows does"

That's odd, because I've had Windows, OS X and Linux all crash on me at least once.

[computoman]

See what you mean about the mainframes. I was not aware they did that, but in some ways that makes good business sense. The only time I ever worked on a mainfraime was when I took cobol and rpgII years ago. If you edited your program while it was running, you could capture the jcl and etc.

Linux is not perfect, but it is easier for me to manage than MSwindows. There are a ton of excellant tools out there for system management if one takes the time to look. I was a MSwindows admin for a long time. We found the open source tools cheaper and more dependable than some of the commercial stuff. One thing I do know is either it was not set up correctly (most likely but someone else set it up) or the CA stuff is a piece of crap. The last time I played with an MSCluster (high availablilty) was years ago on winnt and win2k. It was pretty dependable despite the os shortcomings. The newer IT upper management did not want to deal with clusters and started using nas's and single server setups instead, so the dependability of the network storage went to trash. After I fought so hard to get the cluster setup, you wonder how the new management acquired their jobs. I do not work there anymore.

Many people think that with all the added amatuer developers that linux seems to have gone downhill a bit. I am to the point of not using ubuntu. Some of the changes they have made are ludicrous. It is destroying linux. but for a home desktop it is livable for a newbie. At least maybe bsd is a bit more professional. I am very particular about which linux distro I use.

Both osx and Messywindows still have security issues. Not that linux is perfect, but traditionally it has been better. The biggest gripe I have with OSX and MsWindows is you have to have a special version of the os to do anything. Basically you have a server, embedded, and a desktop line. With linux I can transverse from one to the other without reinventing the wheel by having to reload the os. It is just a matter of replacing files as needed. The second largest gripe is the hardware issue. I can run linux and or bsd on almost anything. I can almost put any hardware to work. One day I needed a quick dns tftp server to upgrade some routers. I grabbed a p2 box and put it to work with a pxeboot basic install. ( I did ot want to mess with a vm or server settings). Other gripes are having to do with licensing issues (worrying about having license keys), drm, and a phone home os. With linux I do not have to do so much system maintenance as I do on mswindows even with most of it automated. If Apple offered their os to test for free, I would do that. I do dpwnload and test the latest Microsoft operating systems to keep up. I did not like the original w7. Maybe w7rc will be betters. I still would use xp over the crappy ms windows home server. ironically I still like the Novell os for it's usage back in the days. NDS was awesome for the time. I built a few of those from scratch.

Surely aix is probably more scalable and has many more features than the personal linux Aix is meant to work on the big boxes. I have no qualms there. I have not done any clustering lately so you have the edge in that matter and I would suppose that you know ten times more than I do about linux. I just use what works for me. Microsoft and OSx no longer fit the bill. I plan start playing with clustering for both high performance and high availability. It is not good that you have become disappointed with linux. Familiarity breeds contempt they say. If I was not so near retirement, I would go back to school and get a degree in cs. Even with what little I know about computing. I still love it because there is always something new you can do. You never stop being amazed.

[samureye]

You know what I thinks funny? The people here that use Microsoft products (myself included) are perfectly fine with this. Those who don't use Microsoft products (Computoman and Kzap) are complaining.

I don't understand what the issue is. You guys don't use their products anyway. We're Microsoft customers, you're not. What's it matter?

Think of it this way:

I never eat at Taco Bell. I'm not a customer. If Taco Bell does something like raising the prices of their taco's I'm not going to complain. I don't eat at Taco Bell either way.

*I actually love Taco Bell. I avoid eating there though because I've had two bad allergic reactions after eating there. :( *

Oh shit, I'm agreeing with this man. Well put.

[computoman]

I fix mswindows computers in my spare time. I just finished redoing another Vista machine. I do use xp at home in a rare occation. I also download the latest mswindows os\s (winwk8 and w7rc) to check out. I did also recently dl and play with WHS. It did not last long. I do use Mswindows on other peoples machines. I was a mswindows admin for ten years. Anyone can use whatever os they want. I just want to get the real facts out and not let the usual MS and Apple FUD prevail. I even pick on linux, but people usually skim over that part.

[phatlip]

I fix mswindows computers in my spare time. I just finished redoing another Vista machine. I do use xp at home in a rare occation. I also download the latest mswindows os\s (winwk8 and w7rc) to check out. I did also recently dl and play with WHS. It did not last long. I do use Mswindows on other peoples machines. I was a mswindows admin for ten years. Anyone can use whatever os they want. I just want to get the real facts out and not let the usual MS and Apple FUD prevail. I even pick on linux, but people usually skim over that part.

So instead of having everything bundled on the one disc you'd rather them sell a bunch o different discs. That's basically the problem here?

[kzap]

Back
So instead of having everything bundled on the one disc you'd rather them sell a bunch o different discs. That's basically the problem here?
Yes but not only that they should be pre-installed on the hard drive, which I am sure they will be when you buy a PC. Maybe a grayed out option in the start menu or not there at all until you pay.

That's odd, because I've had Windows, OS X and Linux all crash on me at least once.
That's true but most problems people relate to being with the computer is actually with Windows. Someone thought all computers got the blue screen of death.
And I don't know why I'm so annoyed at this because you are right, I don't use Windows. Still I don't think this sort of pricing structure (paying for thing already taking up hard drive space) morally right, even if I don't use it.
I don't care anymore I just leave M$ users alone to let them rot and keeping handing M$. That's why I left this thread because it's just not worth it.

Bye again.

[tokenuser]

Yes but not only that they should be pre-installed on the hard drive, which I am sure they will be when you buy a PC. Maybe a grayed out option in the start menu or not there at all until you pay.Explain the patent to me.


Go ahead ... I'll give you some time to read it ...









OK, so you are done now? Great.
Show me the paragraph where they say EVERYTHING will be loaded onto your computer. Or things will be cripled until you buy them. Go ahead, I'll wait ...





Still waiting ...




What??? Those lines aren't in there?? You are postulating on a problem that doesn't exist??

This is like the "M$ R EVIL COS THEY USE DRM" debate when Vista came out, but heres the thing ... while Linux users were bitching and moaning that media with DRM was stopping them playing back on their computer, Microsoft and Apple (who had PAID the licenses to use said technology in their software) allowed us to keep playing our discs, including BluRay with HDMI monitors.

Linux users are basically full of crap. They jump on the bandwagon, latch onto a single line in a poorly written article, and suddenly the evil empire is stomping their jackboot of corporate suppression over your rights as a consumer.

Here's the thing (and because you build your own computers from whatever you can scrounge, you don't know this), when you buy a computer it comes with the OS preinstalled. That OS is the version of the Windows that you purchased. No surprises here. When you buy that computer you need to be supplied the media. THat resides in one of two places - either physical discs (DVD these days), or a "installation partitiion" on your hard drive. That installation partition on your harddrive can BE REMOVED ... but you will need to burn the OS distribution to disc first (but is that really any different to burning a Linux distro to disc for install??).

Under the windows control panel you have the ability to "Add/Remove" Windows components. When go to you add, you see a list of everything that is available, and are prompted for the media (disc) to copy (download) the files from.

The difference now is that you might have bought "Windows Home" and to add in the media capabilities you might need to buy the "Media Upgrade".

But you are missing something here (you are actually missing a lot) ...

You want the media extensions? You could just as readily load up a third party app to do that. Microsoft is not forcing you to run their upgrade.

[kzap]

Explain the patent to me.


Go ahead ... I'll give you some time to read it ...
Here it is:
The operating system restricts the functionality of the operating system, such as by making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable to the user or by limiting the user's ability to add software applications

OK, so you are done now? Great.
Show me the paragraph where they say EVERYTHING will be loaded onto your computer. Or things will be cripled until you buy them. Go ahead, I'll wait ...

Here you go again
The operating system restricts the functionality of the operating system, such as by making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable to the user or by limiting the user's ability to add software applications

Still waiting ...
And again (with bits in bold):
The operating system restricts the functionality of the operating system, such as by making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable to the user or by limiting the user's ability to add software applications
So it will be making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable But those part's of the OS will still be installed so taking up hard drive space.

This is like the "M$ R EVIL COS THEY USE DRM" debate when Vista came out, but heres the thing ... while Linux users were bitching and moaning that media with DRM was stopping them playing back on their computer, Microsoft and Apple (who had PAID the licenses to use said technology in their software) allowed us to keep playing our discs, including BluRay with HDMI monitors,
How nice of them to let you keep playing something you had already paid for.


You want the media extensions? You could just as readily load up a third party app to do that. Microsoft is not forcing you to run their upgrade.
No but we can all assume the default option when you try and a play a file you don't have the codec for will be to buy it from M$ and most stupid users will because the computer is telling them to play this file they need to buy the codec from M$, who do you think they will buy it from?

[tokenuser]

Don't quote the ARS article.

Go and read the patent. (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,536,726.PN.&OS=PN/7,536,726&RS=PN/7,536,726) Not just the abstract. The abstract does not explain the patent. What you have done is the equivalent of saying Star Wars is a movie "about a son who was abandoned by his father who hunts down the man that killed his father only to find out that the man was his father".

From the patent (not the ARS article):

Here is the WHY:

One problem inherent in open architecture systems is they are generally licensed with complete use rights and/or functionality that may be beyond the need or desire of the system purchaser. Consequentially, the purchase price of these systems being indifferent to usage scenarios means users with limited needs pay the same rate for these systems as those with universal needs.

Here is the HOW:

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

According to one aspect of the invention, a client computer runs an operating system that executes applications by loading them using an application loader and executes device drivers for peripheral devices by loading the drivers using a device loader. The client computer also includes a digest catalog that includes digital signatures for program files that can be executed by the client computer. When attempting to load an application or driver, the appropriate loader checks whether a digital signature for the corresponding program file(s) is included in the digest catalog. If no such digital signature is included, then the loader does not load the program file(s) corresponding to the application or driver.

According to another aspect of the invention, the digest catalog includes, for each program file corresponding to an application or driver that should be executable by the computer, a digitally signed hash value that is generated from a hash function based on the corresponding program file. When attempting to load a particular file, the loader generates a hash value and compares it to the decrypted hash values in the digest catalog. If the comparison results in no matches, then the corresponding program file (and thus the application or driver) is not loaded.

According to another aspect of the invention, a consumer initially purchases a computer with restricted functionality at a price that is less than the price that would be charged for a computer with full functionality. Subsequently, the user can, at an additional cost, acquire a digital key that allows the restrictions to be removed, upgrading the computer to full functionality.

According to another aspect of the invention, a consumer can execute additional applications or drivers on his or her computer by obtaining appropriate digital signatures for the additional applications or drivers to add to the digest catalog. In exchange for payment, a software or hardware vendor will acquire a digital signature(s) for the appropriate program files from the supplier of the program files. The digital signature(s) will then be transmitted to the consumer in exchange for payment to the vendor. The digital signature(s) can then be added to the digest catalog at the consumer's computer, so that the next time he or she attempts to execute the application or driver the appropriate signatures will be in the digest catalog and the program files will be loaded.

According to another aspect of the invention, a consumer can execute additional applications or drivers on his or her computer by obtaining the appropriate digital signatures for such applications or drivers from the same OEM (original equipment manufacturer) as manufactured the consumer's computer. The consumer's computer executes only applications that have in the digest catalog a digital signature of the OEM. Thus, the OEM can limit what additional applications are made available to the consumer.

According to another aspect of the invention, the OEM maintains a digest catalog that can be made available to the consumer's computer (either locally at the computer or remotely). The consumer, in exchange for payment, is given access to the digest catalog so that any applications for which a corresponding digital signature exists in the OEM's digest catalog can be executed at the client computer. The consumer can be given a limited amount of time (e.g., one month or one year) within which he or she can access the OEM's digest catalog.

Once again, try reading the patent and not the soundbite that you pulled out your ARS article.

How nice of them to let you keep playing something you had already paid for.BTW - yes it was nice of them, because if you were a Linux user, using a Linux media play, you were shit outta luck. There are work arounds now, but once again instead of being "so far more advanced than OSX and Windows Lusers", Linux users were behind the curve yet again. No surprise really - you get what you pay for.

[kzap]

BTW - yes it was nice of them, because if you were a Linux user, using a Linux media play, you were shit outta luck. There are work arounds now, but once again instead of being "so far more advanced than OSX and Windows Lusers", Linux users were behind the curve yet again. No surprise really - you get what you pay for.
Ouch.
All that matters is that you the Window user are fine with it, I'm above all this now. If you fine with it that's okay M$ will keep taking your money.
I have nothing to gain from you using Linux. People only wright these scare stories to get people to try Linux, to help them.
And for your information you can't play Blue-ray and DVD discs on M$ without the codec which you have to pay extra for, Windows Media Player cannot play a DVD unless there is another media player installed on the system that can, basically M$ is making it look like they are playing the disc when they are actually using someone else's codec.
I think M$ are evil I will continue telling people they are evil. Any bad publicity ageist them is a good thing in my book even if it's not all 100% true.
Most features from M$ are brought off or stolen from open souse developers, Micro$oft then polish them up a bit and sell them on as there invention with a huge mark up on, if you want to support that, then that's fine I won't stop you.

[tokenuser]

Ouch.
All that matters is that you the Window user are fine with it, I'm above all this now. If you fine with it that's okay M$ will keep taking your money.
I have nothing to gain from you using Linux. People only wright these scare stories to get people to try Linux, to help them.
And for your information you can't play Blueray and DVD discs on M$ without the codec which you have to pay extra for, Windows Media Player cannot play a DVD unless there is another media player installed on the system that can, basically M$ is making it look like they are playing the disc when they are actually using someone elses codec.
I think M$ are evil I will continue telling people they are evil. Any bad publicity ageist them is a good thing in my book even if it's not all 100% true.
Most features from M$ are brought off or stolen from open sourse devolpers, Micro$oft then polish them up a bit and sell them on as there invention with a huge mark up on, if you want to support that, then that's fine I won't stop you.So much misinformation. Its no wonder you are bitter.

You are listening to the wrong people about personal computers. It is as if you are getting your information about Christian from the likes of the Westboro Baptist Church. In a similar vein, you are listening to the zealots about Linux and Microsoft, and believing them, without really knowing why.

BTW - If Linux is so great, why can't you get a browser with a spell checker?

[kzap]

So much misinformation. Its no wonder you are bitter.

You are listening to the wrong people about personal computers. It is as if you are getting your information about Christian from the likes of the Westboro Baptist Church. In a similar vein, you are listening to the zealots about Linux and Microsoft, and believing them, without really knowing why.

BTW - If Linux is so great, why can't you get a browser with a spell checker?
Good analogy but not true in my case, everyone I know and got information about computers from was a Microsoft or Apple fanboy, I found out about Linux on my own and got my dad to get me a LiveCD of it (he knew what it was just didn't tell me), I only started looking up anti-M$ stories to have something to show my fanboy friends.
And Firefox does have a built-in spell checker, as far as I know only in Linux.
I just was in a hurry with that last post, fixing it now.

[tokenuser]

I only started looking up anti-M$ stories to have something to show my fanboy friends.And here lies the problem.

You "fanboy friends" ... they problably dont care. They are not the fanboys. By searching for the Anti-Microsoft stories you are not getting informaiton from balanced credible sources. You are getting your information from places that have an axe to grind.

You'll find that most people around here are not anti-Linux. Many of us use Linux in our daily lives. I talk to leaders in the FOSS community on a regular basis (sorry - lame as it sounds you'll need to trust me on this, I try to keep my online and personal/professional life seperate).

The difference is that a zealot sees that the only path to (computer) salvation is through a single way of life. A pragmatist knows that in life there are many choices, and applying the same choice to every decision will lead you to a life of compromises.

[kzap]

And here lies the problem.

You "fanboy friends" ... they problably dont care. They are not the fanboys. By searching for the Anti-Microsoft stories you are not getting informaiton from balanced credible sources. You are getting your information from places that have an axe to grind.

You'll find that most people around here are not anti-Linux. Many of us use Linux in our daily lives. I talk to leaders in the FOSS community on a regular basis (sorry - lame as it sounds you'll need to trust me on this, I try to keep my online and personal/professional life seperate).

The difference is that a zealot sees that the only path to (computer) salvation is through a single way of life. A pragmatist knows that in life there are many choices, and applying the same choice to every decision will lead you to a life of compromises.

Here's the thing, I have always dis-liked Microsoft, the way they do business, there product, and I was that guy how thought of any OS as a tool and I would use the best OS for a task, Windows, Linux or Mac.
Each with there own good and bad points, but now I'm 100% Linux I feel so much better. I do use M$ for work but don't like it.
The tipping point for me is that I actually like the open source philosophy. I am happy 100% Linux more so than if I was 100% Microsoft/Apple and more so than we I picked the a different OS for a different job.
I understand using a different tool for a different job but I've gone beyond that now, I like the fact that if there is a problem with the OS I can fix it myself were as with M$ that would be illegal, you can't modify the Windows operating system without breaking the law.
Basically I feel so much better now I use Linux for everything and am at the point were I don't care if others don't use it, it is shallow but if you don't use Linux, it's your loss.
I used to convince people to use it now I don't bother.

[tokenuser]

I understand using a different tool for a different job but I've gone beyond that now, I like the fact that if there is a problem with the OS I can fix it myself were as with M$ that would be illegal, you can't modify the Windows operating system without breaking the law.So, you are a software engineer that knows the depths of the Linux kernel and and the Windows Manager enough to rewrite the portions of code that are insufficient for your needs?

Do you mind if I ask what you are studying at college?

When was the last time you looked at the source code for Linux, made changes, and recompiled. I am not talking about compiling in something someone else has done, I am talking about modifying the source code - yourself, not copying and pasting in something you found online - and launching the compiler, and rebuilding the kernel.

I am thinking of a number. Lets see if they match.

[kzap]

So, you are a software engineer that knows the depths of the Linux kernel and and the Windows Manager enough to rewrite the portions of code that are insufficient for your needs?
No but I like the fact that someone can and that I am aloud to. The fact that if there is a problem anyone can fix it not the just the developer.
I'm not ageist paying for software I'm ageist not being allowed to do what I like with it.
To even make your own themes on a Windows XP computer you have to purchases extra software from Microsoft.
I also like that when a new version of Linux comes out I can get it instantly (for free) and suggest changes to be made in the next version.
It's not that I'm going to use the right to modify the software it's that I have the right.
I have freedom of speech and the right to say what I like about the Government, that doesn't mean I am going to use it (although I probably will).
There are many right a person wants to have even though they may not ever use them.

[ArmpitOfDeath]

@Tokenuser:


We need cheap, idealistic, deluded developers to end up working for profit-making enterprises. Please let young kzap think he's won the argument.

computoman - he's retired, pick on him.


Love and kisses,
ArmpitOfDeath

[tokenuser]

So you like that under Linux you can change the code, but in reality you can't because ... like 90% of Linux users who trot out the "I could change it if I wanted to" argument ... you really are clueless and can't code.

For the record, I AM a software engineer (Bachelor Computer Science majoring in Software Engineering) ... and depsite having the knowledge and skill to do it, I wouldn't. Why? Because Linux is not developed in a controlled manner. A fix I put in for one area could break something else - and once you have stopped "playing" with computers and want to do something useful, you value stability over everything else.

I can't tell you the last time I had my XP box crash. I haven't seen a BSOD in years. My Laptop had been sitting there docked, and constantly running for several weeks, until I shut it down to take with me last week - so uptime isn't an issue either.

Linux users are full of FUD and keep recycling the same tired arguments. If you need to work so hard to justify why you are using something non-mainstream, aren't you really just making excuses?

[kzap]

[quote=ArmpitOfDeath;523881We need cheap, idealistic, deluded developers to end up working for profit-making enterprises. Please let young kzap think he's won the argument. [/quote]
That would be a hard as:
A: There is no argument I'm happy with him using Windows and I assume he's happy with me using Linux, there is no better operating system unless you believe in the open source philosophy, they each have there own advantages and disadvantages.

and

B: I'm not a developer, I'm a film director and know I will use a proprietary OS for work because that's what all the editing software is on.

[kzap]

Last post on this
I can't tell you the last time I had my XP box crash
Mine (for work) crashes almost every day and I can't tell you the last time my Linux box crashed.
M$ always try to rush a product to the market place to maximize products, then try to fix it with service packs after it's released. Just look at the Xbox360 as an example they wanted to get it out 6 months (or however long it was) before the PS3 and I assume you have heard of the red ring of death, more so than whatever the PS3 equivalent is.

[esophagus]

against*

[computoman]

You really can not lump all the linux distributions all into one category. linux torvalds has been pretty particular about the kernel. What everyone else does is something else. Probably Redhat itself, Centos, Debian (almost), Mepis, Arch, Gentoo (maybe). and Slackware are the most stable. All the other linux distros are copycats and that includes Ubuntu whose changes are unfortunately are seeping into debian and fedora. I normally do not just load a distribution except for a desktop when I am in a hurry. I do a surgical install which you can not do on mswindows per se. I do not have a sheepskin in computing, but I can hold my own. You can get lfs (linux from scratch) and do your own distro if you like. Besides, no compiled code can stop a real assembly/machine language programmer from seeing how things work. Closed source software being much safer is a joke. Been there done that. Been there hacked that.

That being said, I have no trouble using multiple distros and or porting apps between them. I have not had problems writing apps for different distros no more than anyone trying to develop an app that will work on mswindows servers, xp, w7, or vista. In a way those are different distros for Microsoft There are a lot of issues to make apps run on all those platforms also. I do not buy the argument that Microsoft is so pure for programming. Most commercial web developers would prefer to program for firefox rather than i.e. Do not get me started on IIS.

There is a big argument in the linux community about how linux should be standardized. I am of the feeling that it should not. When there are competing distros it makes linux better as a whole. I also think that Microsoft Windows and Apple osx has grown because of linux and bsd. There is a bigger picture. There needs to be competition at all levels.

Operating systems as we know them will probably be obsolete soon enough. There will be a universal kernal where you can add your own modules as needed. I am told the vmware os is going in this direction. Apple will eventually have to let go of only running osx only on their own hardware if they want to survive.

Use what ever os and the applications you need to float your boat. I am open minded enough to use any os besides linux if you pay me enough. I can not afford to keep up with osx anymore, but I do download and experiment with Microsoft products from the Microsoft website download area as they are available. You have to know all the options, I have probably used more os's than most of you. If and I say only if Microsoft does come up with a decent and decently priced os i might convert. At this point, only linux and bsd meet my needs. I have converted so many people to linux to say that any os much less Microsoft is a panacea.

Microsoft and Apple want a bunch of blind sheep to use their particluar os. I dare linux and or real bsd to be included in the Apple vs Microsoft commericals. It will not happen. Both Apple and Microsoft do not want the truth to get out that there might be something better.

Microsoft and Apple has been trying to gobble open source apps to regain control. Apple bought Gutenberg and a few others. Microsoft paid off Novell (for control of suse linux aka Microsoft linux), Samba, Apache, and etc. Sun (which soon may be a part of Oracle) has Openoffice, mysql, and other projects. Oracle tried to make their own linux from Redhat source code. So far it has not caught on like wildfire as it was purported to do. There is proof that MS is using linux code in their products now. Has not seemed to help though, It is still a bloated monster.

If Microsoft is so good, why are they laying off so many people????

[phatlip]

If Microsoft is so good, why are they laying off so many people????

There's this little thing going on with the economy right now. Do you read the newspaper?

[computoman]

Actually, companies that give value for the dollar are growing. They can be found int he business section of the newspaper. Quite a few of them are open sourced based.

[phatlip]

Actually, companies that give value for the dollar are growing. They can be found int he business section of the newspaper. Quite a few of them are open sourced based.

Yes, but generally speaking, everyone is hurting.

[kzap]

Yes, but generally speaking, everyone is hurting.
You can't doubt that.
Now matter how big a company is they will all be trying to save money some how.

[tokenuser]

Actually, companies that give value for the dollar are growing. They can be found int he business section of the newspaper. Quite a few of them are open sourced based.Very true. A lot of former tech workers have picked up new professions:

"Would you like fries with that?"
"Is there anything else I can help you find?"
"Do you want sugar with your split shot Venti hi foam soy latte?"

[ariastar]

I'm not going to read six pages of comments.

But if I'm understanding correctly, then what Microsoft wants is fine. Users don't want to pay for features they don't use. So MS wants to lock the unpaid-for features. This should make the OS cheaper for the user.

Let's say A is the basic system, and there are features B and C and D that the user likely won't use Why make the user pay for them all? Now if the user decides that C is something that's needed, why shouldn't MS be able to charge for the use of that feature? It's paying for an upgrade.

This is a much better solution than telling someone, "You have to buy the entire package, even the things you won't use."

It's not like MS is talking about disabling Firefox on your system, or disabling AIM, or something. Only locking the parts of its own software that a user doesn't own and didn't pay for.

Now if I've completely misunderstood and they want to tell you you can't use whatever applications you want to download or programs you want to install without giving them a cut, please correct me.

[computoman]

Ironically, from past experience Microsoft has disabled or reduced features of non ms software that has nothing to do with the version of the os. Years back there was a joke that windows nt server and windows nt workstation wre the same thing. It just took a fix to make nt workstation into server. You could not pay a fee to enable the feature. if you wanted the server version, you would have to purchase the server separately. They do want to tell you what apps you can use. Most people do not know that Microsoft has been adjudicated a Monopoly and is allegedly still under investigation by the Department of Justice for their activities. The European Union (EU) has fined Microsoft around two billion dollars for their practices. You probably will not see this on network news because guess who has a big stake. Microsoft is the MS in MSnbc news. A definate conflict of interests to the American public.Oh that is right, this site is allegedly funded by nbc. Hmm..... Not only that. Microsoft has software in windows 7 that will shut down your machine every two hours if you do not pay their ranson to run it or they think you are running software they do not approve of. In fact they have it set up so if Microsoft wants to force you to upgrade, they will shut down your computer anytime they want. You are guilty until proven innocent and is equivalent to computer trespass and computer hacking and should be answerable under Computer Hacking and Unauthorized Access Laws. If a hacker shut down your machine, should not they become liable under the law. So why not Microsoft? Disabling software is one thing, but shutting down your computer is another. Even the threat of doing that should be punishable under law. (I am going to contact the Attorney General's office and send them a copy of the email I got from MS about threatening to shutdown my machine to see whether it is illegal./ The state of Texas has already banned Vista in Texas government per se.) That is like saying you bought an automobile and if the car company wanted you to buy a new car, they would remotely shut the car down anytime they wanted even in the middle of the freeway. It is ludicrous. In any other industry they would be out of business by now. I do not understand why Congress lets them get away with so much crap. Even Apple is not that bad.

-----------------------------------------------
quote:
US DOJ requests more time for Microsoft oversight
April 16th, 2009

The Justice Department asked a federal judge Thursday to extend its watch over some of Microsoft Corp.'s business practices for a second time, saying it needs an extra year and a half to make sure Microsoft's antitrust compliance passes muster.

[phatlip]

You probably will not see this on network news because guess who has a big stake. Microsoft is the MS in MSnbc news. A definate conflict of interests to the American public.Oh that is right, this site is allegedly funded by nbc.

Then why doesn't Fox News cover it? Fox News and MSNBC are mortal enemies. I think Fox News may hate MSNBC more than you hate Microsoft. :)



Hmm..... Not only that. Microsoft has software in windows 7 that will shut down your machine every two hours if you do not pay their ranson to run it or they think you are running software they do not approve of. In fact they have it set up so if Microsoft wants to force you to upgrade, they will shut down your computer anytime they want. That is like saying you bought an automobile and if the car company wanted you to buy a new car, they would remotely shut the car down anytime they wanted even in the middle of the freeway. It is ludicrous. In any other industry they would be out of business by now. I do not understand why Congress lets them get away with so much crap. Even Apple is not that bad.


Windows 7 hasn't been released yet. It's a RC. That means it's still in Beta. Beta means it's intended purpose is TESTING. That's why you didn't pay a dime to download it. Once the testing is no longer needed, of course they don't want you using a free product which was intended for TESTING.

[quix]

Most people do not know that Microsoft has been adjudicated a Monopoly and is allegedly still under investigation by the Department of Justice for their activities.

Most people might not, but it's common knowledge for those who come to Rev 3's forum. I don't think you're elucidating aspects of Microsoft's history for very many people here.

The European Union (EU) has fined Microsoft around two billion dollars for their practices. You probably will not see this on network news because guess who has a big stake. Microsoft is the MS in MSnbc news.

MSNBC is all of network news? Your argument fails to explain why ABC, CBS, CNN, and Fox News don't cover it.

A definate conflict of interests to the American public.Oh that is right, this site is allegedly funded by nbc.

I'm assuming you mean Rev3. Do you have any evidence?

[ArmpitOfDeath]

I'm not going to read six pages of comments.

But if I'm understanding correctly, then what Microsoft wants is fine. Users don't want to pay for features they don't use. So MS wants to lock the unpaid-for features. This should make the OS cheaper for the user.

Let's say A is the basic system, and there are features B and C and D that the user likely won't use Why make the user pay for them all? Now if the user decides that C is something that's needed, why shouldn't MS be able to charge for the use of that feature? It's paying for an upgrade.

This is a much better solution than telling someone, "You have to buy the entire package, even the things you won't use."

It's not like MS is talking about disabling Firefox on your system, or disabling AIM, or something. Only locking the parts of its own software that a user doesn't own and didn't pay for.

Now if I've completely misunderstood and they want to tell you you can't use whatever applications you want to download or programs you want to install without giving them a cut, please correct me.

Nope, you haven't.

[kzap]

Yes I know I'm back, I just couldn't stay away.
Most people might not, but it's common knowledge for those who come to Rev 3's forum. I don't think you're elucidating aspects of Microsoft's history for very many people here.
I'm sure there are some people on this forum who don't know about Microsoft's history.
Although I agree this site mainly appeals to geeks.

You know what the ultimate irony is: The people Linux is best for our those who just need something free to check e-mail, brows the web and write documents and the really geeky.
The thing is the people who just need an OS for simple things don't even know Linux exists and the really geeky people arn't that great at convincing people to try it.

The people Linux is worst suited for are the hard-core gamers and users of high end software, which unfortunately is most of this forum.

[computoman]

I disagree with you. I have no problem getting people into linux. My brother is a hard core gamer who used to spend a lot of time going to the "con"s. He and his gaming pals use more and more linux everyday. There are a lot of what is called geeky type that do a fine job of educating people about linux. Gaming companies are now beginning to put resources into linux. If you want to make money in programming, that is the way to go. Even Microsoft is dumping it's traditional staff that does gaming programming. The just bought a company that does internet gaming. Since most servers are linux, guess what king of programmers are needed.


MSNBC is all of network news? Your argument fails to explain why ABC, CBS, CNN, and Fox News don't cover it.

It is called the "good ol boys club". People want to be able to get a job at another venue if they need to. Remember also that MS spends a boatload of money on advertizing. No one wants to rock the boat. So far, IBM is the only real linux advertizer. the linux foundation does plan to do more advertizing and marketing. They just had a contest to see who could make the best linux commercial.

http://videos.linuxfoundation.org/category/video-category/-linux-foundation-video-contest
http://videos.linuxfoundation.org/

Until Microsoft bought off Novell, they had some pretty good open source commercials...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSky2Js5uFQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1D6rqvkQdA

[kzap]

I disagree with you. I have no problem getting people into linux. My brother is a hard core gamer who used to spend a lot of time going to the "con"s. He and his gaming pals use more and more linux everyday. There are a lot of what is called geeky type that do a fine job of educating people about linux. Gaming companies are now beginning to put resources into linux. If you want to make money in programming, that is the way to go. Even Microsoft is dumping it's traditional staff that does gaming programming. The just bought a company that does internet gaming. Since most servers are linux, guess what king of programmers are needed.
True and I'm am currently do a podcast on Linux gaming but in general, if you want to run heavy duty windows applications or games Linux isn't the best option.
I know someone who is planning on replacing there there duel boot; Ubuntu and XP computer with the duel boot; Ubuntu and Sony PS3. Using the latter for gaming in both cases. Not sure how that will work out, he may not do it when he thinks about it.
Sure you can use replacements for photoshop and video editing tools on Linux they are just not quite there yet, I think the main market for Linux at the moment is people who don't need M$ applications in there day to day life.
Gaming could change for Linux if Onlive is available for it, which is very possible as it is just a client and apparently just a 1MB browser plug in, so figures crossed for that bringing gaming to Linux.
That said I don't like Onlive for my own reason.

[tokenuser]

True and I'm am currently do a podcast on Linux gaming but in general, if you want to run heavy duty windows applications or games Linux isn't the best option.
I know someone who is planning on replacing there there duel boot; Ubuntu and XP computer with the duel boot; Ubuntu and Sony PS3. Using the latter for gaming in both cases. Not sure how that will work out, he may not do it when he thinks about it.
Sure you can use replacments for photoshop and video editing tools on Linux they are just not quite there yet, I think the main market for Linux at the moment is people who don't need M$ applications in there day to day life.
Gaming could change for Linux if Onlive is avlivble for it, which is very posible as it is just a clinet and aparantly just a 1MB browser plug in, so fingures crossed for that bringing gaming to Linux.
That said I don't like Onlive for my own reason.I am not an English major, and the last formal course I did in English was back in High School (3 Unit English for the HSC if anyone cares - it was a long time ago).

But kzap, geez ... get a browser with a dictionary please, and use it. It's not going to be perfect, and will still allow your persistent aloud (increased volume) vs allowed (permitted), duel (fight) vs dual (two), M$ (typist is an idiot) vs Microsoft (proper noun) type misuses to continue, but it will be a start.

If you want to communicate a message clearly ... speeling macks a difrens.

[computoman]

My brother is a college instructor/professor who teaches Microsoft software, hardware, and etc. He uses Openoffice instead of MSOffice.

[kzap]

But kzap, geez ... get a browser with a dictionary please,
Mine does, mine does, mine does, mine does, mine does.
Otherwise all my other posts would look like that one just did, I just sometimes walk off before I changed all the red lines and then forget to change them and just post the post when I get back,

[kzap]

He uses Openoffice instead of MSOffice.
Why wouldn't you? The latest version of Openoffice is as good M$office 2003 and I think most people agree that 2007 wasn't an improvement.
You have a lot of brothers,

[computoman]

I have just two brothers, One is an instructor/professor of computer science at a local college, but he has taught at some major universities also. My other brother works at a small town newspaper and moonlights as an insurance adjuster during hurricane season. He has done work at all the major hurricane devasted sites. Although he did not do my home after IKE.

[quix]

Yes I know I'm back, I just couldn't stay away.

I'm sure there are some people on this forum who don't know about Microsoft's history.
Although I agree this site mainly appeals to geeks.

I'll concede there are probably some.

It is called the "good ol boys club". People want to be able to get a job at another venue if they need to. Remember also that MS spends a boatload of money on advertizing. No one wants to rock the boat.

That still doesn't explain Fox. Bill O'Reilly has essentially accused Jeff Immelt of treason. MSNBC has run ads criticizing Fox for having an agenda and CNN for being out of touch. Olbermann has said Fox was trying to 'stir up racism against Barack Obama.' The old boys club exists, but the networks have a history of attacking each other.

[ArmpitOfDeath]

My brother is a college instructor/professor who teaches Microsoft software, hardware, and etc. He uses Openoffice instead of MSOffice.

I'd say he needs a different job, because whatever he teaches is going to be less than useful. Either that, or he's making so little from his endeavours that he can't even afford Office - which is equally ridiculous. Since the O2003 experience is at least the same, and at most considerably superior in experience and functionality as OO, there's little sense in him using it in preference as a supposed professional.

Openoffice is NOT Office 2003. If you actually use the packages it will be very apparent. Those who use them to handle their home spending or use Word as barely more than Wordpad - I don't dispute that OO / NO is definitely an equivalent.

[tokenuser]

Since the O2003 experience is at least the same, and at most considerably superior in experience and functionality as OO, there's little sense in him using it in preference as a supposed professional.

Openoffice is NOT Office 2003. If you actually use the packages it will be very apparent.And, once you get past the Ribbon Bar in MSO2007, it is superior again.

I use OO on my Mac - because I don't need a full office suite on that machine. When the time comes, I'll probably get iWorks (the presentation software is miles ahead of Powerpoint).

But saying OO and MSO2003 are basically the same (for professional use) is naive at best ... and highlights much of the delusional attitude of the FlOSS community. OO might be good, but its not that good.

[phatlip]

And, once you get past the Ribbon Bar in MSO2007, it is superior again.

I think I'm the only person in the world who thinks the Ribbon bar was an ingenious move on Microsoft's part. I really like it. It's different, but people often confuse change with negativity.

I use MS Office myself. OO is a great product, but in my opinion, it seems like a sucky version of Microsoft Office (but it IS free, so it's hard to complain). I'm thinking about trying iWork out.

[darknessgp]

I think I'm the only person in the world who thinks the Ribbon bar was an ingenious move on Microsoft's part. I really like it. It's different, but people often confuse change with negativity.
...

I'm with you on it. I really like it and once I got used to it, I've started seeing what I could actually do with Word, Excel, etc. because features are just so more accessible.

In a professional world, OO doesn't compare to Office.

[computoman]

I'd say he needs a different job, because whatever he teaches is going to be less than useful. Either that, or he's making so little from his endeavours that he can't even afford Office - which is equally ridiculous. Since the O2003 experience is at least the same, and at most considerably superior in experience and functionality as OO, there's little sense in him using it in preference as a supposed professional.

Openoffice is NOT Office 2003. If you actually use the packages it will be very apparent. Those who use them to handle their home spending or use Word as barely more than Wordpad - I don't dispute that OO / NO is definitely an equivalent.

He is well to do, but he is just an extreme miser. I have not used ms office in so long that, I can not speak to what is what. Actually Openoffice started out as a commercial program called Star Office from Sun. Those who I know that are Mouse certified and have both openoffice and msoffice prefer openoffice. They have said that most people who do not like openoffice do not know how to take advantage of OO. There are some differences, This reminds me of when people argued over whether WP or MSO was best, But for what most people do, oo and ms office are pretty much the same. I rarely use either one. You can run the intel version of msoffice on linux or osx with corresponding versions of Crossover ofice. Older versions of msoffice will run with the wine project on linux. Msoffice does have some major bugs.

[computoman]

That still doesn't explain Fox. Bill O'Reilly has essentially accused Jeff Immelt of treason. MSNBC has run ads criticizing Fox for having an agenda and CNN for being out of touch. Olbermann has said Fox was trying to 'stir up racism against Barack Obama.' The old boys club exists, but the networks have a history of attacking each other.


Trumped up controversy sells advertizing time. TV Wrestling proves it. We all know how real wrestling is....

[quix]

If you want to go with a needlessly complex contrivance to reinforce your own cynicism, sure.

[computoman]

I stopped wearing rose colored glasses years ago. Thirty dollars still pays your rent on Bleeker Street. I wish I could be young and naive again. If the history book only had the whole truth and all the power plays. Won't happen in our lifetime. I hardly listen to the news anymore, there is so much mis-information. I try to ignore it all. It is like all the sports heroes denying all the things the allegedly did such as not taking steroids. We want to believe them, but they allegedly are just plain guilty. If it is too good to be true it usually is. You might want to read about the stock market crash of 1929 and how it was allegedly orchestrated to make the rich richer. I think it has happened again. The old boys' club still controls America. Time to let this subjet go.

[quix]

I'm not saying the rich don't orchestrate things. I agreed with you a couple of posts ago that the Old Boys' Club exists.

This isn't the callow youth arguing against the wise old cynic. It's just a conspiracy being slit by Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is that they don't report it because they don't feel it's newsworthy as Americans won't care (unlike during the Anti-Trust trial in the 90s.) Apathy makes it useless in a fight (however trumped up it may or may not be) and poor as an attention grabbing story.

But yeah, we can drop the subject I guess.

[ArmpitOfDeath]

Thank god for that. Rebel without a clue and all that.

[computoman]

Did you know that GM is trying to send many US jobs to China? I only saw one blurb about it probably becuase Ralph Nader made a stink. That should be major news. All the news talks about is how the bond holders are having to take a lesser position for their rights in bankruptcy. If it were me Americans should be raising the roof over this. Who is filtering the news?

[tokenuser]

Did you know that GM is trying to send many US jobs to China? I only saw one blurb about it probably becuase Ralph Nader made a stink. That should be major news. All the news talks about is how the bond holders are having to take a lesser position for their rights in bankruptcy. If it were me Americans should be raising the roof over this. Who is filtering the news?It was on NPR, and even Katie Couric gave it some attention.

Some news sources are more concerned about the wellbeing of the people losing their jobs than the investors - its not all Fox out there.

Having said that, you forgot to mention that Buick is one of the areas where jobs are being outsourced to China. Why? Because Buick is a huge brand in China, in fact it is GMs largest brand in China and is associated with western luxury ... and who was the last person you know who bought a Buick in the US?