CGTalk - Microsofts Dark Future.

KayosIII

03-03-2003, 11:20 PM

I think the article is a little far fetched....

However -- it is quite conceivable that Microsoft will drop backwards compatibility... The reason being security. Microsoft may argue that older programs are inherently insecure.
Part of the initiative formerly known as paladium would have only signed and verified software run on a Windows Box.
Even so They will want to get as many 3rd party developers on board as possible...

It is not in Microsofts interest to kill off 3rd party developers unless they are in direct competition with services or products offered by Microsoft.

I have still to read the EULA's for Win2K SP3 (I haven't updated yet). So I will get back to you on that after I do so.

Software vendors will support the platforms where there users are. You can get plenty of good software for the Mac and the list for linux is growing all the time (particularly in the CG Feild) If you want a platform supported - support the platform yourself, ask your favorite software vendor to support the platform and support products that do port over which are useful to you by purchasing them.

As for my personal opinion MS can do what they like - this horse bolted the stable a long time ago.

cooldev

03-04-2003, 04:42 AM

That article is nothing but a heavily biased piece of uninformed crap. Unfortunately, everybody who read it is now stupider for having done so.

It's astounding how trash like this gets a monad of attention just because it's anti-Microsoft.

:annoyed:

gmask

03-04-2003, 04:59 AM

One result of this could be a new operating system that is free of legacy problems that windows has had. I sounds much like the transition of Apple to MacOSX. I would gladly switch to Linux if Adobe for example were to port it apps to it..that's all I would need but the number of those users versus the number of office users for example is staggering I owuld imagine.

I have heard other tidbits that reveal that Microsoft is planning to get tough on software protection and licensing some of which truly sounds like big brother...except it's called remote administration.

dark_lotus

03-04-2003, 05:41 AM

I'll admit that the article is threaded things to suit his own interest. But for the most part, this guy has very good insight. Especially into Telco's.

Also note the top paragraph:Warning: very little of the following is speculation. Most of it has already been announced and is being implemented.

Most of this article, i have read from other parties, most of them reputable.

So for me at least, despite the self interest, it is a fasinating article.

dark_lotus

03-04-2003, 05:45 AM

Please note that celebguy_dv has been reported to a moderator

gnarlycranium

03-04-2003, 07:12 AM

Sounds like Palladium to me... :curious:

gruvsyco

03-04-2003, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by bentllama
text manure.

that is what that article is...smelly.

Man... that is good. I may have to use that myself in the future. One of the best lines ever :thumbsup:

Sieb

03-04-2003, 07:26 AM

Blah Blah Blah.. Its all hogwash. If its two years away from release, how can you say anything about it? As of now, its Alpha is just an updated XP... By the time it comes out, I will be on Mac or Linux. Or else I will just stick to XP. Its not worth my time to worry about what Microsoft is doing, or reading off my harddrive, or know how my computer is configured. Its even worth less of my time to listen to people preach the end of the world due to Microsoft. The more rules they put into play (Claiming its for our own good), the more enemies they make, and the better the community gets for us end users. I say bring it on!

If someone REALLY wants my word documents or something, they will get it. If they REALLY have the urge to whipe my system, then by all means, takes me 10 mins to reload it, saves me the hassle of cleaning the drives myself. Microsofts stuff will always have holes as well as all other software, whether they know about them or not. Its the nature of how things work. Nothing is "fool proof" or secure. If it is, there are always ways to make holes. If its programed by man, its inherently flawed..

As for legacy support, that was already done away with 2k/XP when they finally used the same Kernel and dumped the god awfull 9x code. I don't know what they mean by not compatible with current hardware. If that were the case, the Alpha wouldn't be useable unless they are talking about the people still running 95.... Yes, they are out there, I have to reload their computers all the time...

cooldev

03-04-2003, 07:47 AM

dark_lotus, the problem with this is that it purports to be an authoritive article aimed at small businesses, but in reality it's just a speculative editorial based on rumors and heresay. The author mixes in some buzzwords and technical information to make it appear credible, but the entire goal is to drag Microsoft though the mud and it's not remotely grounded in reality.

I have nothing against negative news or editorials about Microsoft or any other company, but when articles as bad as this grace the pages of several of my favorite sites, I do get annoyed. :shrug:

Anyway, continue on. Nothing to see here.

(Disclaimer: I'm a developer at Microsoft working on Longhorn, but I don’t speak for them here.)

dark_lotus

03-04-2003, 09:17 AM

cooldev - Most of the stuff here isn't new. It all went downhill when MS tries to control the consumers. I for one do not trust Microsoft.

While this article is heavily opinionated, it makes some very good points. All the ideas in that article are not original, I have seen them before - on RESPECTABLE websites.

Now while you may be a developer for MS, you obviously have an insiders persepective. I think that Microsoft, as an entity is morally wrong.

You or anyone at microsoft do not have the right, to know anything about me unless I volunteer the information.

Stealing it, and labelling it as 'Product Activation' is just wrong.

That is why I write this in Safari on Mac OS X.

Thats my opinion, I'd love to be told that I am wrong, but after the dozens of articles I've read, i doubt this.

KayosIII

03-04-2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by gmask
One result of this could be a new operating system that is free of legacy problems that windows has had. I sounds much like the transition of Apple to MacOSX. I would gladly switch to Linux if Adobe for example were to port it apps to it..that's all I would need but the number of those users versus the number of office users for example is staggering I owuld imagine.

I have heard other tidbits that reveal that Microsoft is planning to get tough on software protection and licensing some of which truly sounds like big brother...except it's called remote administration.

Have you let Adobe know this fact.... Seriously the only reason that Adobe is going to port there products to linux is if they believe there is a market for them. Of course your letter probably wont make a difference but a couple thousand of people might...

bentllama

03-04-2003, 04:47 PM

christ, if Microsoft made the freekin MATRIX, you guys would still say you hate it...

...you guys are full of pretension.

gmask

03-04-2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Sieb
As for legacy support, that was already done away with 2k/XP when they finally used the same Kernel and dumped the god awfull 9x code. I don't know what they mean by not compatible with current hardware.

They mean previous CPU's won't be supported much like the Macintosh and it's operating system.

So you wouldn't mind if a virus hacked it's way into your computer through Microsofts remote administration channels and started deleting files.. you welcome that? Basically that's what happens to Outlook express users all the time but from what I understand this would give whoever access to anything on you harddrive. You can't reload your projects if they aren't backed up.. It is unlikely to happen to most people but still..what they are talking about doing IS an invasion of privacy.

I agree.. that if they are planning to do some of these thign sthen hopefully more people with move to Linux out of fear of Bill Gates.

Thalaxis

03-04-2003, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by cooldev

(Disclaimer: I'm a developer at Microsoft working on Longhorn, but I don’t speak for them here.)

That's probably a very good thing. It means that at least one Longhorn developer is here to see some of the complaints that the graphics people have with Windows... some of them actually have some merit.

(The biggest one being bloat, IMO.)

Thalaxis

03-04-2003, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by dark_lotus

While this article is heavily opinionated, it makes some very good points. All the ideas in that article are not original, I have seen them before - on RESPECTABLE websites.

You need higher standards.

Saurus

03-04-2003, 06:29 PM

Dark Lotus....give it up. Its obvious you hate MS and love your Mac. For all I care, they are both evil. Given a chance, they will both burn you and squeeze you out of every penny they can get. ie: Shake and .mac email

Saurus

dark_lotus

03-04-2003, 09:03 PM

christ, if Microsoft made the freekin MATRIX, you guys would still say you hate it...

Dark Lotus....give it up. Its obvious you hate MS and love your Mac.

Well I applaud Microsoft for their efforts in trying to stop hotmail being spammed. That is something that is good about MS.

Its not so much that I hate MS (i've been using windows since 3.1 - through to XP) I just think their business tactics left alot to be desired.

I like my privacy. Oh yes, and I love my new mac.

EricChadwick

03-04-2003, 09:33 PM

There really is no privacy anymore.

Sure, we can limit the dissemination of some things, but computerized and linked databases are already in widespread use, and they aren't going away.

Not that I neccesarily agree with Larry Ellison.

gmask

03-04-2003, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by posm
There really is no privacy anymore.

Sure, we can limit the dissemination of some things, but computerized and linked databases are already in widespread use, and they aren't going away.

Not that I neccesarily agree with Larry Ellison.

True but do you really want to Microsoft to beable to delete files from your computer at will and for that matter view anything you have on your computer?

The main issue that is if they develop the technologies that they have proposed to remote administrate your computer that it could easily be comprimised and like Outlook Express easily abused. Of course if you are the paranoid type you can just unplug yourself from the network and stopping spending time online.. revolt and buy your products in brick and mortar stores!

Use linux and give up the addiction to Microsoft products and any developer's products who won't port! We can do it ;-)

FreeQ

03-04-2003, 10:20 PM

If the M$ just a commercial firm then all haters just freak!

But I'm freeQ

PS: Still few Country exist, have their privacy!

gmask

03-04-2003, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by freeq
If the M$ just a commercial firm then all haters just freak!

But I'm freeQ

PS: Still few Country exist, have their privacy!

Me no understand

FreeQ

03-04-2003, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by gmask
Me no understand

No surprise, have no 'courage' to explaine!

... just try free the Q. :airguitar

gmask

03-04-2003, 10:45 PM

Originally posted by freeq
No surprise, have no 'courage' to explaine!

... just try free the Q. :airguitar

Well your 2 cents worth is about as cryptic as it gets.. I suppose being misunderstood is your thing???

gruvsyco

03-04-2003, 11:09 PM

I think all the Linux advocates need to stop pushing their false propaganda around. I doubt seriously that Microsoft has any interest in what software you run on your computer (except for maybe gmask's computer) other than if the versions of their software you are running are legal. And if they did, so what, I will openly declare that I go to CGTalk, use Lightwave and look at titties.

I joined the Linux bandwagon at one time. I for one am glad I got off. Microsoft seriously improved their product and, I can walk into just about any software store and pick up an app that works with my OS. I don't need to worry about makefiles, install scripts or compiling. It's wonderful.

As far as Microsofts "tactics". Hey, It's corporate America. There's a lot of stuff I can specualte that goes on that I don't really want to know about. I can say this, Microsoft did a hell of a job going from a small nothingness to being the giant it is today. Hmmm isn't that pretty much the American dream? To take you're little dream and turn it into the most successful form of reality you can.

I personally can't understand why any company would port software to Linux. I don't really see much money to be made there. Most of the Linux people I've talked to, are more interested in all of their stuff being "free as in speech not as in beer" or whatever the hell their popular catch phrase of the week is. Why would I as the developer of Adobe, Macromedia, or any other app, want to port to a platform that people wouldn't even pay for the OS? OK renderfarms and the like I can understand... but seriously, put yur own views of why you run your OS down and take a look at the surrounding community.

FreeQ

03-04-2003, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by gmask
Well your 2 cents worth is about as cryptic as it gets.. I suppose being misunderstood is your thing???

Some cryptics keeps naked Q&A. If you need money you have work for it. What is the cryptic here? How much do you need and What for it?

If you think like me you're right too. This not a cryptic, this is fascism!

Every country will need to LINUX in the near future.
Just like, In the history. Irony is the cryptic here :]

-naked of blindness-

gmask

03-04-2003, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by gruvsyco
I can say this, Microsoft did a hell of a job going from a small nothingness to being the giant it is today. Hmmm isn't that pretty much the American dream? To take you're little dream and turn it into the most successful form of reality you can.

I personally can't understand why any company would port software to Linux.

Don't you think you are contradicting yourself.. Linux is the little guy and so far they have managed to come up from below and compete with the bigger companies and acheive the American Dream. Microsoft wants to dominate and control the market and squeeze out the competition. They'd been sued for this allready and if they are not carefull they will be sued again.

If you think privacy is not issue then perhaps you should post you credit card numbers and personal passwords here for use to just look at.

>>(except for maybe gmask's computer)

I don't appreciate that remark so let's not resort to making false accusations because you have totally missed my point.. If you haven't noticed that one of the most damaging applications to peoples privacy and personal computer files on the market today is Outlook Express. Seeing as how this one program has spawned hundreds of viruses.. can you really trust the developer who now wants to make your entire computer open to such an invasion.

I'm not for warez and I'm definately against cracked software but it is a bit ham handed to give the corporate meglomaniac like Bill Gates the ability to enter your computer.. would you let anyone you do business with have the ability and right to come and inspect your personal property whenever they feel the need to?

For programs like Maya and such you pretty much have to use qualified versions of Linux like Redhat which is not for free but it is less expensive than Windows.

Personally I'm not talking about free applications or free speech but rather the option to choose your platform. From my POV the only thing that has really improved windows is faster CPU's.

Now perhaps if they rebuilt from scratch it would be even faster but it also sounds like that MS is manuevering to control the market even more agressively than ever.

Think of this way as well.. it used to be that you could only do highend graphics on SGI's but that was too expensive.. MS is on the move to raise their prices and you won't have much of a choice about it unless you wish to switch platforms. This pretty much destroyed SGI on the desktop but MS can see that they have business by the balls and with an attitude of "Hey, It's corporate America." I can see why they feel comfortable grabbing at them.

Seeing as how Apple is now unix based I see no reason why Linux cannot be perceived as being user friendly.. however I agree Linux is more cryptic than MacOSX. It's not for everyone.

gmask

03-04-2003, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by freeq
Some cryptics keeps naked Q&A. If you need money you have work for it. What is the cryptic here? How much do you need and What for it?

If you think like me you're right too. This not a cryptic, this is fascism!

Every country will need to LINUX in the near future.
Just like, In the history. Irony is the cryptic here :]

-naked of blindness-

Okay .. I see from your past posts that we may not be speaking the same native language here. What do you mean by Q&A? Question and answer?

The irony here IMO is that instead of the government being the entity that becomes big brother that the consumeristic mentality of americans would invite or even pay for a corporation to enter their home electronically and spy on them.

You can easily say well if you have nothing to hide from then why is privacy a concern? Then why is it that people wear clothes and pull their shades down.. why? Just because you want privacy does not mean that you have something to hide or that you are doing something illegal. For one thing.. who is to say that microsoft of former employees of microsoft could not use remote administration to steal or thwart the ideas of their competition. I realise that this is speculation but that does not mean that it is not possible or inconceivable.

I will grant that in last 5 years windows did change the way I work and I would not switch to Apple due to any high ideals that they may or may not share with me. The breaking point will be when the maker of my software and hardware try to dictate how I do business.. that is unacceptable. I would prefer to work in a more open platform and if that also comes cheaper but requires a little more effort on my part I am fine with that.

gmask

03-04-2003, 11:56 PM

Originally posted by gruvsyco
I will openly declare that I go to CGTalk, use Lightwave and look at titties.

Oh and I suppose if by accident that you got some picture of titties on your hardrive that was of a person underage that you would not mind if the police showed up at your door because M$ is keeping track of illegal images.. It could happen and this is something that their proposed future technology could do although it's primary purpose is to prevent software and media copyright infringement.

gruvsyco

03-05-2003, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by gmask
Don't you think you are contradicting yourself.. Linux is the little guy and so far they have managed to come up from below and compete with the bigger companies and acheive the American Dream. Microsoft wants to dominate and control the market and squeeze out the competition. They'd been sued for this allready and if they are not carefull they will be sued again.

No I don't think I'm contradicting myself. Micorosft has made the dream a reality.

Originally posted by gmask
If you think privacy is not issue then perhaps you should post you credit card numbers and personal passwords here for use to just look at.

Don't you think you are exagerating the facts here.

Originally posted by gmask
>>(except for maybe gmask's computer)

I don't appreciate that remark so let's not resort to making false accusations because you have totally missed my point.. If you haven't noticed that one of the most damaging applications to peoples privacy and personal computer files on the market today is Outlook Express. Seeing as how this one program has spawned hundreds of viruses.. can you really trust the developer who now wants to make your entire computer open to such an invasion.

Take a chill pill man. It was far from a personal attack. More like an observation of how paranoid people seem to be Microsoft opening up everything on your computer to the whole world. Oh and an apparently failed attempt at humor... That must be why I'm not a comedian.

Originally posted by gmask
I'm not for warez and I'm definately against cracked software but it is a bit ham handed to give the corporate meglomaniac like Bill Gates the ability to enter your computer.. would you let anyone you do business with have the ability and right to come and inspect your personal property whenever they feel the need to?....

Geez, 2 posts and I'm already worn out...

You go ahead and keep believeing all your propaganda and I'll just keep right on keepin on living in denial. I have no probs with that.

gruvsyco

03-05-2003, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by gmask
Oh and I suppose if by accident that you got some picture of titties on your hardrive that was of a person underage that you would not mind if the police showed up at your door because M$ is keeping track of illegal images.. It could happen and this is something that their proposed future technology could do although it's primary purpose is to prevent software and media copyright infringement.

OK, I happen to work with a guy that use to be on the force. They don't AT ALL go for anyone that may have accidentally downloaded an image or 2. Now if you accidentally downloaded 500 images that's a different story but, I wouldn't think 500 would so much be an accident.

gmask

03-05-2003, 12:23 AM

>>>No I don't think I'm contradicting myself. Micorosft has made the dream a reality.

But you could care less if Redhat or any other small company can afford to do business aside mega corporations like Microsoft.

>>>Don't you think you are exagerating the facts here.

Do you understand the concept of privacy?

>>>Take a chill pill man. It was far from a personal attack. More like an observation of how paranoid people seem to be Microsoft opening up everything on your computer to the whole world. Oh and an apparently failed attempt at humor... That must be why I'm not a comedian.

Look.. seriously.. I'd like to talk about this.. humor can be a subtle thing but I don't think this thread is a joke nor should you. My concerns here are not motivated by paranoia. I'm simply trying to make observations about the information I have and what the past behaviours are of the companies involved at the subject at hand. Microsoft is anything but benevolent but I can't prove that to you..if you think my POV is a crock ..fine but don't categorize my views of being something like a belief in UFO cults or the secret global secret handshake or whatever.. I don't buy that stuff.. I agree more with the thoughts of Chomsky along the lines of it appears to be a consipracy because all the rich corporations tend to do the same things... it's a shared mentalilty but they are not in league with one another.. far from it.. they are each other's competition.

>>Geez, 2 posts and I'm already worn out...
You got me started and I have a queue of renders going..whaddya expect?

>>>You go ahead and keep believeing all your propaganda and I'll just keep right on keepin on living in denial. I have no probs with that.

Yeah and you keep looking at your pictures of titties and whistling dixie while M$ uses unfair business practices to destroy small business.. You could care less.. I guess you got it made in the shade.

Anyway here's some links for you to read.. tell me what you make of all of this propaganda

http://www.educause.edu/issues/dmca.html

http://www.trustedcomputing.org

http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html

http://anti-dmca.org/

http://www.petitiononline.com/nixdmca/petition.html

http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbd...048.032102.html

FreeQ

03-05-2003, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by gmask
Okay .. I see from your past posts that we may not be speaking the same native language here. What do you mean by Q&A? Question and answer?

Yes you're totally right :]

The irony here IMO is that instead of the government being the entity that becomes big brother that the consumeristic mentality of americans would invite or even pay for a corporation to enter their home electronically and spy on them.

Home user is not very important.

You can easily say well if you have nothing to hide from then why is privacy a concern? Then why is it that people wear clothes and pull their shades down.. why? Just because you want privacy does not mean that you have something to hide or that you are doing something illegal. For one thing.. who is to say that microsoft of former employees of microsoft could not use remote administration to steal or thwart the ideas of their competition. I realise that this is speculation but that does not mean that it is not possible or inconceivable.

M$ employees not realize seller of 't-o-p__se-c-re-ts'
This is very natural.
All is about the Countries, not your CG material nor ideas!

I will grant that in last 5 years windows did change the way I work and I would not switch to Apple due to any high ideals that they may or may not share with me. The breaking point will be when the maker of my software and hardware try to dictate how I do business.. that is unacceptable. I would prefer to work in a more open platform and if that also comes cheaper but requires a little more effort on my part I am fine with that.

This is why I love common sense, humanity and you :]

----
Info means real power, money is just shield.

dark_lotus

03-05-2003, 12:49 AM

Imagine if you had a document on your computer outlining new software that you wanted to build.

Whats stopping MS from entering your computer and taking that information, patenting it and building a new software based on your idea.

Nothing.

It not so much linux advocacy, but privacy advocacy.

Check my other post "Windows Longhorn Preview" if you want to have a look at the new OS.

dark_lotus

03-05-2003, 12:50 AM

Oh and don't get personal on these forums, it just leads to closure of threads, and people cannot discuss the issue or idea.

gmask

03-05-2003, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by dark_lotus
Whats stopping MS from entering your computer and taking that information, patenting it and building a new software based on your idea.

Nothing.

Well the LAW for one thing but the problem is that you'd have to beat their lawyers to prove that they did steal your idea. But then again when they do try to put these products on the market there probably will be class action lawsuits file immediately.

To paraphrase a quote from one of the links I listed "the military define a secure system as being one that can be broken". It's an oxymoron.. So while M$ says that they would remote administrate for security reasons it comes to question whose security is it that they are protecting? It's not yours to be sure. Again let me repeat that if they make it easy for themseleves to remote administrate then you can be absolutely sure that it can be broken and used for naught. How likely is it to happen? Who knows? .. Why would anybody use a product that has a long and current problem with viruses "Outlook Express".. why would you continue to ship such a product or allow it on your system? It's a mystery to me?

>>.It not so much linux advocacy, but privacy advocacy.
Absolutely!

Saurus

03-05-2003, 01:54 AM

This being a CG forum, I think Microsoft was a blessing to this industry. If Microsoft hadn't ported Softimage into NT, the 3D industry wouldn't be as big or as affordable that is today. If weren't for competition, SGI would had left Maya as an Irix only machine. Imagine, your software and hardware being controlled by one company...setting their own standard and price!!! Mmmm...similar to what Mac user went through years ago. To think of it, Mac user should be happy there is a Microsoft because if it hadn't been for their competition, Mac user would have been paying through their nose for Apple merchandise.

Saurus

gmask

03-05-2003, 02:09 AM

>>>Imagine, your software and hardware being controlled by one company...setting their own standard and price!!!

Yeah... I can imagine it being called Microsoft.

>>Mac user should be happy there is a Microsoft because if it hadn't been for their competition, Mac user would have been paying through their nose for Apple merchandise.

I feel the same about Linux and Windows.. I think Linux does have alot to offer CG community but I guess our community is still small enough that major developers don't feel compelled to port but hopefully one day they will and I personally won't be missing out on anything if Microsoft is never one of them.

I don't care if M$ stays in business but I'm sure they will as they have the money and the user base to keep rolling indefinately.

KayosIII

03-05-2003, 03:08 AM

I personally can't understand why any company would port software to Linux. I don't really see much money to be made there. Most of the Linux people I've talked to, are more interested in all of their stuff being "free as in speech not as in beer" or whatever the hell their popular catch phrase of the week is. Why would I as the developer of Adobe, Macromedia, or any other app, want to port to a platform that people wouldn't even pay for the OS? OK renderfarms and the like I can understand... but seriously, put yur own views of why you run your OS down and take a look at the surrounding community.

I am a Full time Linux User... I pay for my operating system and I pay for Commercial Software to run on it. I prefer software that is open-source not because of the price but because it is not bound to the same pressures as commercial software is. There is less chance of it dieing so to speak.

I object to paying more than I originially forked out for an OS that does roughly what it did before just because I need to stay compatible...
And I object in having to pay twice as much for an OS than everybody else just because I put together my own hardware.

Microsoft does what is in their best interests and good luck to them. For me it is bad business sense in the long run to deal with those who control the thin edge of the wedge as you have little or no bargaining power.... (ie There is one Microsoft, Many companies that sell Computers, Software etc etc that depend on Microsoft).
This for me is a long term disadvantage that outweighs the short term difficulties surrounding the current Linux platform.

KayosIII

03-05-2003, 03:11 AM

I personally can't understand why any company would port software to Linux. I don't really see much money to be made there. Most of the Linux people I've talked to, are more interested in all of their stuff being "free as in speech not as in beer" or whatever the hell their popular catch phrase of the week is. Why would I as the developer of Adobe, Macromedia, or any other app, want to port to a platform that people wouldn't even pay for the OS? OK renderfarms and the like I can understand... but seriously, put yur own views of why you run your OS down and take a look at the surrounding community.

I am a Full time Linux User... I pay for my operating system and I pay for Commercial Software to run on it. I prefer software that is open-source not because of the price but because it is not bound to the same pressures as commercial software is. There is less chance of it dieing so to speak.

I object to paying more than I originially forked out for an OS that does roughly what it did before just because I need to stay compatible...
And I object in having to pay twice as much for an OS than everybody else just because I put together my own hardware. I object to needing $500-$1000 worth of software that I never use just so I can read Other peoples Office documents when Perfectly good portable formats exist (pdf).

Microsoft does what is in their best interests and good luck to them. For me it is bad business sense in the long run to deal with those who control the thin edge of the wedge as you have little or no bargaining power.... (ie There is one Microsoft, Many companies that sell Computers, Software etc etc that depend on Microsoft).
This for me is a long term disadvantage that outweighs the short term difficulties surrounding the current Linux platform.

BiTMAP

03-05-2003, 06:20 PM

Question, I bought a PC with XP home on it, does that mean I've agreed to the EULA??? I never accepted it or anything.

Thalaxis

03-05-2003, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by BiTMAP
Question, I bought a PC with XP home on it, does that mean I've agreed to the EULA??? I never accepted it or anything.

Most licence agreements, like the MS EULA, require that if you've installed the software, you agree to the EULA.

All it really amounts to is that you agreed to not pirate it.

gmask

03-05-2003, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Thalaxis
Most licence agreements, like the MS EULA, require that if you've installed the software, you agree to the EULA.

All it really amounts to is that you agreed to not pirate it.

The way I understand it .. if you have the software in any form wether on a disc or preinstalled on the computer that if you do not have a EULA then you do not have a legal verison of the software. There are paper EULA's and digital EULA's . So somewhere on your computer there shoudl be a copy of the EULA.

The EULA is more than a agreement that you won't pirate it.. for example you cannot legally sell an install disc of windows unless you include the EULA. So even though that is usually not what people think of when talking about pirating it is still not a legal transfer of ownership per MS's EULA.

KayosIII

03-05-2003, 10:10 PM

You implicitly agree to the EULA the first time you run the software....
Actually go and Read the EULA for your software for instance with Windows XP I believe you will find that you cannot resell the software....

gmask

03-05-2003, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by KayosIII
You implicitly agree to the EULA the first time you run the software....
Actually go and Read the EULA for your software for instance with Windows XP I believe you will find that you cannot resell the software....

I don't have XP but I have read the EULA that comes with 2000 and I have had conversations with licensing people at MS over the phone and they say that you cannot sell their software without the EULA period. If you have been given the software and never inatalled it but if you sell it without the printed EULA that is not a legal transfer of ownership. It seems dumb but that is how they explain it. You can resell windows 2000 if it is not OEM, educational and has the printed EULA that it came with I dunno about XP.

BiTMAP

03-05-2003, 10:54 PM

well they have it preinstalled (XP) and they gave me a disk as well as the microsoft book, may I prolly DO have the EULA on here .. just havn't really looked. I remeber seeing it though while installing Pro versions of XP.

gmask

03-05-2003, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by BiTMAP
well they have it preinstalled (XP) and they gave me a disk as well as the microsoft book, may I prolly DO have the EULA on here .. just havn't really looked. I remeber seeing it though while installing Pro versions of XP.

I don't know the specifics of that scenario but I recall months ago there was a big stir because MS wanted to retro actively bill numerous computer resellers for selling OEM version of the software that was preinstalled and also included install discs. They wanted to charge teh resellers for two licenses but this got shot down.

Sieb

03-05-2003, 11:40 PM

As far as I see the EULA, the software (code) is MS's.. You don't actually OWN the software, you just own the right to use it (licensed). MS has the right to take that away from you if they don't like how you are using it, this includes reselling it. Once you buy an OEM copy for a system and install it (and now, activate it), only that machine can use it. This includes the OEM license the PC builder (ie. Dell) paid to put that copy on that new PC joe schmo just bought. And in most cases, or was with Dell, you couldn't install that OS on another computer. It would only work on the Dell it came with.

Most new systems I have come across, have you ack the EULA when you first boot up (but its been a while since I bought a real computer, that being my laptop a year ago). Also, if you open up an OEM copy (say you ordered it from 'Egg), you agree to the EULA.

I send out the original OEM disk and book with all new systems I build, and stick the MS sticker on the side of the case. When a customer buys one of our systems, they are agreeing to the EULA, otherwise they can specify that they don't want an OS and deal with it themselves.. OEM's give you the OS disk or at least a restore disk so you can.. restore... Not sell the copy off to friends.

gmask

03-05-2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by Sieb
As far as I see the EULA, the software (code) is MS's.. You don't actually OWN the software, you just own the right to use it (licensed). ... OEM's give you the OS disk or at least a restore disk so you can.. restore... Not sell the copy off to friends.

I'm not really sure what we are debating because personally I allready stated that you cannot resell OEM versions of Windows.

I think the reason why it was shot down that MS cannot charge resellers for two copies of the OS when they sell a copy preisntalled and with an installer disc is because the user is only supposed to use the installer/restore disc on the licensed computer.

On the other hand if you buy a version of windows from a store you can resell it as long as it has the EULA. Legally you may not beable to do this if you still have it installed on the computer but the licensing folks didn't really seem to care too much about it. As far as they were concerned if has the EULA it is a good transaction.

Has this changed with XP? I dunno.. why should you not beable to resell something you bought retail especially if it was never installed or even opened. You can buy Maya but after you have licensed it to a computer you cannot resell it but I guess according to their policies only authorized resellers can sell their products period so no matter wether you have open the shrinkwrap or not you have been licensed.

cooldev

03-06-2003, 06:04 AM

All - expect to see much more action and clarification with respect to privacy from Microsoft. There's been a lot of hoopla and slippery-slope over-analysis of the EULAs and privacy statements lately that don't really reflect the actual practices. Admittedly it's primarily MS's fault for not communicating clearly in the first place, but a lot of advocates just love to blow the ambiguity out of proportion.

Thalaxis - yeah, besides being genuinely interested in 3D one of the reasons I read this forum (and many others) is to try to relay the concerns. On the whole I think Microsoft mostly understands the issues, and it's a matter of balancing conflicting requirements (which is a hard problem when you're trying to satisfy so many users).

I push for the "technical users" (i.e. not average users, but not necessarily programmers either) when I can, since I think they've been historically underrepresented when we're considering features and trade-offs. There's some progress being made on that front.

(Disclaimer: I'm a developer at Microsoft working on Longhorn, but I don’t speak for them here.)

Thalaxis

03-06-2003, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by cooldev
All - expect to see much more action and clarification with respect to privacy from Microsoft. There's been a lot of hoopla and slippery-slope over-analysis of the EULAs and privacy statements lately that don't really reflect the actual practices. Admittedly it's primarily MS's fault for not communicating clearly in the first place, but a lot of advocates just love to blow the ambiguity out of proportion.

That's good news.

I also hope that MS decides to thumb their noses at the asswipes behind DMCA and SDMI, largely because they're attempting to screw the customers under the pretense of protecting themelves. They're also shown that they're nothing but a bunch of brainless fools; of they weren't, they'd have jumped on the opportunity to turn the MP3 craze into a great revenue stream.

Thalaxis - yeah, besides being genuinely interested in 3D one of the reasons I read this forum (and many others) is to try to relay the concerns. On the whole I think Microsoft mostly understands the issues, and it's a matter of balancing conflicting requirements (which is a hard problem when you're trying to satisfy so many users).

I can understand that... as much as I dislike many of the things that MS has done in the past, it seems like competition is finally forcing you guys to start competing again. XP was a step in the right direction... now let's see MS put their money where their mouth is and show the world some of that UI stuff you've had in your R&D divisions for all these years ;)

And let's hope that the trend in the future is toward streamlining instead of bloating... I don't mind having a bizillion and a half optional add-ons tossed into the package, but I do dislike giving up memory and CPU cycles for nothing. XP is the least inefficient NT version on the market since NT 3.51, and I'd really like to see that efficiency return... because I know that IBM isn't smart enough to ressurrect OS/2, and even if they were, they couldn't even sell it when it was orders of magnitude better than the MS offerings of the time.

IBM has a lot of talent in their shops, but their execs leave a lot to be desired.

I push for the "technical users" (i.e. not average users, but not necessarily programmers either) when I can, since I think they've been historically underrepresented when we're considering features and trade-offs. There's some progress being made on that front.

Glad to hear it. It's going to be particularly interesting to see what value Longhorn derives from DirectX9, too.

Of course, it isn't entirely without skepticism that I'm saying all of this... I've seen enough MS products that suck such ass that I can't in all honesty claim to have any real faith here. I was genuinely shocked when winXP was not only painless to install, but also rock-solid in practice. It was a pleasant shock, though.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

gmask

03-06-2003, 05:14 PM

>>>>There's been a lot of hoopla and slippery-slope over-analysis of the EULAs and privacy statements lately that don't really reflect the actual practices. Admittedly it's primarily MS's fault for not communicating clearly in the first place, but a lot of advocates just love to blow the ambiguity out of proportion.

And what are their actual practices that are being blown out of proportion.. how about some real information?

gmask

03-06-2003, 05:16 PM

>>>I also hope that MS decides to thumb their noses at the asswipes behind DMCA and SDMI, largely because they're attempting to screw the customers under the pretense of protecting themelves.

LOL.. MS would then be thumbing their noses at themselves wouldn't they?

Thalaxis

03-06-2003, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by gmask
LOL.. MS would then be thumbing their noses at themselves wouldn't they?

Well, sort of. They aren't one of the idiot record or movie publishers, so in that regard no, but since they're implementing the anti-customer crap that the RIAA is trying to push on the public, they're joining them.

I think that the more that MS supports those asswipes, the more they will push people to Linux.

cooldev

03-08-2003, 07:25 AM

gmask, although I'm knowledgeable in this area there's no way I could sum up all of Microsoft's privacy policies in one post. Besides, I'm not even a lawyer (thank goodness!). I said what I can say.. yeah it sucks to have to be careful with words. :shrug:

If Microsoft has done things to betray your trust, fine. Perhaps one day they can regain your trust, or perhaps not. However, if things other people said caused the distrust I hope you recognize that they may have an ulterior motive and may be feeding you a load of BS (intentionally or not).

As for DMCA, DRM, etc., I'm personally against abuses and I often wish MS would drop DRM entirely, but I'm also against intellectual property violation (how would you like it if people stole your work?). I hope we eventually reach a compromise that will enable freedom and fair use while still allowing the creators of IP to be appropriately compensated.

These are very tough problems, and there are more intricacies than many people realize. For example, the RIAA, MPAA, etc. are fighting to introduce legislation (i.e. Hollings bill) that would require all consumer devices to have government mandated DRM technology. Tech firms like Microsoft are actually fighting this, saying that they can find a less extreme middle ground and solve the problem technologically. Microsoft and others are also fighting inane proposals to require sizable "taxes" on computers and digital media to be given to those organizations.

It's not all black and white.

leigh

03-08-2003, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by bentllama
christ, if Microsoft made the freekin MATRIX, you guys would still say you hate it...

...you guys are full of pretension.

I totally agree.

Quite frankly, I have practically no problems with Windows (been using since 3.1), and I am currently running one Windows 2000 Professional machine, and one Windows 98 SE machine, and I am perfectly happy with their performance.

I think that all too often people just jump on the bash-microsoft bandwagon simply because they think that is the trendy thing to do.

Quite frankly, I couldn't really care less about most of the stuff people bitch about concerning Windows.

gmask

03-08-2003, 07:08 PM

>>there's no way I could sum up all of Microsoft's privacy policies in one post

So far you have only offered your opinion I have no expectations that you could explain or know anything and so far you have lived up to my lack of expectation.

My concern is that any convienient technology that would allow MS to remote administrate a computer could easily be abused by hackers and IMO is unneccessary. Furthermore that you cannot assume that the buyers are allowing or acknowledging such incroachments simply because they purchased the software. Anyway.. I will not own an pooperating system that allows the manufacturer of to enter without my express concent.

BTW .. do you think Outlook Express is a stunning example of how MS makes great software?? :surprised They should burn that program at the stake.

>>if things other people said caused the distrust I hope you recognize that they may have an ulterior motive and may be feeding you a load of BS (intentionally or not).

Dude.. don't play that card.. I don't know you from adam.. so your word is as good as anybody else's.

This is more than a get on the bash windows bandwagon. I'm all for protection of IP. However I'd like to see proof or mention somewhere that Microsoft is not for DRM. " For example, the RIAA, MPAA, etc. are fighting to introduce legislation (i.e. Hollings bill) that would require all consumer devices to have government mandated DRM technology. Tech firms like Microsoft are actually fighting this"

Are they? If anything I'm starting to feel the urge to bash Adobe as well as they are one of the supporters of Trusted Computing which as I understand it could make it hard for small developers to get their software registered to run on newer CPU's. Adobe's support fo this is also theorized to be one of the reasons why they don't port their products to Linux.

Sure we could all tow the line of the status quo and stay with two party system of Windows or MacOSX and I'm pretty sure that MS wants to keep it that way.

chris411

03-08-2003, 07:24 PM

You want to see some screenshots? (I didn't take them).
http://www.etplanet.com/windows/longhorn/screenshots/2_oct02.jpg
http://www.etplanet.com/windows/longhorn/screenshots/5_oct02.jpg
http://www.etplanet.com/windows/longhorn/screenshots/James_desktop.jpg
http://www.etplanet.com/windows/longhorn/screenshots/9-2_oct02.jpg

cooldev

03-08-2003, 08:35 PM

gmask, I'm trying to avoid a debate, but let me offer up a couple things:

As for the XPSP1 eula "remote administration" implication, I believe (but not 100% certain) that it was added to cover MSN Explorer autoupdating. Whopteedo. The eula was unfortunately extremely vague, which is a bad thing, and this is being addressed.

As for your concern, do you think Windows Update is a bad thing? What about Red Hat and other vendor's autoupdate services? I agree you should have complete control over them (including turning them off), but they're not inherently evil. Recently there was hoopla about the info sent up during Windows Update, but like most things that turned out to be benign.

Another recent incident is the Search Assistant "privacy issue". All that was happening is SA was downloading some XSL files (and, ironically, a P3P privacy statement), but it started a bunch of myths.

Speaking of Outlook Express, remember the Blue Mountain fiasco? Microsoft was accused of intentionally blocking their greeting cards. Again, this is frequently misconstrued by people who seek to gain from it, but the facts are far different (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/bluemt/)

I could go on an on. As for my credibility, I'm not asking you to trust me on any of this. My message is:
- MS is trying to address some of these issues, so stay tuned and they might earn back your trust over time. If they don't, fine. That's capitalism.
- Pay attention to the ulterior motive of people who write things like the junk article that started this thread. I disclose my biases up front because I believe it's dishonest not to.

I never said MS was against DRM. I wish it were, but unfortunately it's probably inevitable given the amount of intellectual property violation. For what I did say:

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-981882.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed
http://idg.net/ic_1021890_9676_1-5123.html

One last thing re: your Adobe comment. I am unaware of anything that would restrict your ability to run any software you want on newer CPUs or OSs (including Longhorn). Yeah, that's how Palladium has been spun by the advocates, but it's really about stuff like giving you the ability to view content in a "protected space". Content that otherwise wouldn't be released for use on PCs because of piracy fears.

gmask

03-08-2003, 09:06 PM

>>I'm trying to avoid a debate, but let me offer up a couple things:

There's no reason to avoid a debate if you are going to actually give up some information as you have done here. Thanks I appreciate that.. I think a deabte and a argument ar etow different things.. debates are not to be avoided.

>>>I agree you should have complete control over them (including turning them off), but they're not inherently evil. Recently there was hoopla about the info sent up during Windows Update, but like most things that turned out to be benign.

Perhaps it is not true but the capabilities of such features sound like they may beable to do more than this in the future. Personally I don't use XP.. especially after this guy I know lost 1500 files to a virus because outlook express installed on his computer and he was using it..what an idiot. I'm just thakful the viruses did not get spread to my machine which happned to be on his network at the time. I have no use for XP.

>>Speaking of Outlook Express, remember the Blue Mountain fiasco? Microsoft was accused of intentionally blocking their greeting cards. Again, this is frequently misconstrued by people who seek to gain from it, but the facts are far different (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/bluemt/)

I had not heard of that so it really mean nothing to me.. the problem is that Outlook Express facilitates viruses putting up filters is a bandaid at best. I dunno if they have change the default settings for OE but it should not enable macros by default.
I cannot for thelife of me see any reason to have this feature as a default.. it should be hard to turn it on especially when most users don't even know what it means.

>>- MS is trying to address some of these issues, so stay tuned and they might earn back your trust over time. If they don't, fine. That's capitalism.

I'm saying graphic artists don't need them... what's to trust?

>>>- Pay attention to the ulterior motive of people who write things like the junk article that started this thread. I disclose my biases up front because I believe it's dishonest not to.

What would be an example of their motives and why?

>>>One last thing re: your Adobe comment. I am unaware of anything that would restrict your ability to run any software you want on newer CPUs or OSs (including Longhorn).
The concept behind trusted computing is that every CPU will have a chip in that registers a given piece of software. What advocates are saying is that the cost of getting certified wis too much for small developers especially the developers of free software. Thus this is a stab at opensource and linux. There is no debating that MS is not for opensource or Linux. This issue of debate here and somehting I have not read the proof is wether or not it will become law that these chips be in every new CPU manufactured.

I would all for this kind of technology but the cost of licensing for it needs to be on a sliding scale so that mega corps like MS cannot gain an upper hand simply by having more money.

>>Yeah, that's how Palladium has been spun by the advocates, but it's really about stuff like giving you the ability to view content in a "protected space". Content that otherwise wouldn't be released for use on PCs because of piracy fears.

Th eproblem with content is that if it can be ddisplayed analogue it can and will be copied. There really is nothing to prevent it. If somebpody can use a cam corder to make a crappy copy of a dvd by rescanning off the monitor people will watch it. What really needs to happen is to slam Kazaa and any other P to P file sharing services for facilitating such illegal file sharing. You could easily say that the whole internet facilitates this but programs like Kazaa give those who share files an anonymous face. I don't know how the industry could change the attitudes of viewers to make them more responsible about paying for their entertainment.

One area that I expect to see develop more as a form of advertising is sponsored content.. the advertisers logs ar embeded in the content which is freely distributed.

On the subject of software and piracy it is more complicated and it is allready acknowledged that paladium is not impossible to crack so I think there still is a better solution and one of them is a marketplace where there is fair competition between developers and OS makers. MS has been sued for anit-trust so you cannot say it's all just capitalism.. there are laws governing these businesses. Unfortunately for MS China is a country who does not abide by such laws.. I really can't think of a solution but the proposed ones sound to me like the countires who pirate the least will be inconvienced the most by the attempts to stem the flood in specific parts of the world.

KayosIII

03-09-2003, 03:19 AM

cooldev - It is good to hear that the license issues surrounding the update service will be fixed. People are suspicious of Microsoft with these soughts of things - I would be too if hotmail had opted me in for junkmail after I expressly asked them not to.... (I know Yahoo has done this too).

Purhaps I might even use a future version of Windows in my studio - I doubt it though.... While windows might be the technically superior platform (Actually all platforms have there techical strengths and weaknesses) the linux world will eventually replicate MS's Innovations but there is one thing that I can't see MS replicating from the Linux world. That is that in the linux world if a vendor does not live up to my standards or does something to really piss me off (like triple the cost of my licensing deal) I can migrate to another vendor at minimal cost. I don't have to switch apps for the most part just the system... Migrating from MS Windows to anything else is a much more costly exersize than this (though not as costly as MacOS or the UNIX world where I would have to shell out for new hardware costs as well). And while Microsoft may be just fine now there is no guarentee that they will continue to do so in the future...

Anyways not to be arguementative - I would love to see if microsoft will have anything to answer my needs (ultimately I need less vendor lock in to consider the platform then good service and value for money to continue using it).

As for DRM - the problem is that in the real world many companies have found ways of expoiting the current system. At one end of the scale there are single artists such as my self who would never have the money to contest IP in the courts therefor some companies know they can walk all over me. At the other end of the scale are large companies that collect libraries of IP often just to stop others from using the material and developing competing technology. I think the current IP system could work a lot better and so I don't particularly agree with either side on the DRM debate.

cooldev

03-09-2003, 03:31 AM

gmask, I've pretty much said what I wanted to say. In closing:

OE had security problems, fine. It didn't automatically execute attachments as a feature as some people claim, but it was insecure nonetheless because of other problems. I don't use it and I don't really track it, so I don't have much to offer here.

As for "trusted computing", I have no idea what you're saying about software vendors having to be certified or whatever to run their software. That is a terrible idea. Nothing in Palladium I've heard of from legitimate sources (and I'm fairly well looped in here, at least at MS) requires this. Linux, open source, freeware, etc. would be totally unaffected. If this is not the case, believe that I will be fighting it, as will most other Microsoft employees, because like most people I know I strongly believe that the power of the PC is that it's a general purpose device. (Whether I would be allowed to play my DRM protected HDTVDVD of October Sky in an insecure process is another matter.)

gmask

03-09-2003, 04:11 AM

>>>OE had security problems, fine. It didn't automatically execute attachments as a feature as some people claim, but it was insecure nonetheless because of other problems. I don't use it and I don't really track it, so I don't have much to offer here.

I don't use it either but I just think it is whack that such a program that is so weak is still being distributed. If this is an example of how MS treats security then it is clearly their weakest link.

>>>As for "trusted computing", I have no idea what you're saying about software vendors having to be certified or whatever to run their software. That is a terrible idea. Nothing in Palladium I've heard of from legitimate sources (and I'm fairly well looped in here, at least at MS) requires this. Linux, open source, freeware, etc. would be totally unaffected. If this is not the case, believe that I will be fighting it, as will most other Microsoft employees, because like most people I know I strongly believe that the power of the PC is that it's a general purpose device.

Well I do find it hard to believe that something like that would fly..that consumers would buy it.
I certainly wouldn't.

In the meantime I do feel like trying the out the otherside. I miss being on a unix system and seeing as how MacOSX doesn't run on pentium or AMD then it'll be redhat for me. I'll in the end still end up with several platforms under my roof.

iBlue

03-09-2003, 05:23 AM

ummm. wow, alot of opinions clashing here, i almost dont want to get involved but i felt i should just say something about it all.

For those of you who know how microsoft came to be (if not, go rent "pirates of silicon valley (http://alt.tnt.tv/movies/tntoriginals/pirates/)")You see that microsoft was founded with clever tactical business practices, not all legal but it got the job done. Bill gates, the founder, was a very smart business man, and he continues to show this in his ulitimate domination of the market.

Now i am not bias, actually i am pretty neutral about which OS is better, but one thing i do know, using a less popular OS can be very relaxing. To give example, i never needed a firewall on my mac, but i have one on my PC, and i am still attacked hourly. mainly because more people use windows so by percentage, more hackers have apossibility to exist. Which is true, they do.

Now in some ways, windows was poorly built, but this is mainly because of how it all started, windows was built off a beta of the first mac os. ever since mac OS 1, windows has been its mirror.

For those of you who use both system, you should have notice the fact your menu in the top on mac os, and on the bottom with win os. Icons on the left with win os, right on mac os. Pointer, black outline, white inside on win os and white outline and black inside on mac os.

Now the future "copying" of the competing corporations is irrelevant even though it is common practice. (i could list sooo many times this happened, but thats far from the point).

So when we look at Apple and Microsoft, well you see alot in common. Micrsoft owns the market yes? well, why cant i buy a alienware hardware and run mac os x? well mac has prevented other corporations from facilitating there OS, in fact, its illegal.

So microsoft isnt the only one controlling there market. But this doesnt make them both bad, nor good, just tools and companies selling them.

Honestly i use both, happily, but i never went up to mac os x and win XP (heh, both have the X in it, not a cooincedence mind you) because the best running mac os was 9.2 and windows 98/2000 was the best win os(from my expirence).

Now the point remains, if 100 people get into a room, someone will be pick pocketed by statistic. So we can say at least 1 out of 100 people has a possiobility of being a thief. Statically. Out of these 100 people, none will be extrodenary business man, but when we bring in another 900, 1 of the thousand will be. Now if we get enough people, and enough rooms, what are the odds of the thief also being that businessman?

Bill gates i see as this man, he built his business by copying a beta of mac os. This is just the man, the company, being as massive as it is, has many rooms, many hundreds of thousands of people, what are the odds of another excellent businessman who is also a thief, in a room in control of marketing?

Well the two companies are deep rooted in business practices that are less then intellegent. But one thing stands firm. If we go back to our room of 100 people, 50 of them use computers, 49 use windows and 1 uses mac, what are the odds out of those 50 people, one will be a hacker? probably not alot, but again, add 900 people, half use computers, out of 500 people, 1 is a full brown hacker, h/she loves it. So now we have 1 out of 500, out of those 500 people, (490 using PCs and 10 using macs) what are the odds the hacker is a mac user? pretty poor.

Well my point is, that its always safer to use the less popular os because less people try to attack it.

Keep in mind, by "hating" one or the other, you've been manipulated. Your the loser because one company has trained you well, like a pet to do a trick. You hate macs, well microsoft trained you well enough to ensure you always buy there products in the future (clever) or if you hate PCs, its the same way (again, clever marketing)

So, now that all of you raging on about how much better yours in compared to the others, try to keep in mind your using a tool. Just like a hammer or nail, many companies make it. So would you flame about how much better craftsman is compared to black and decker? Its the same team for sports teams, the only difference is that these companies you root for, are taking your money

So if your flaming one product over the other, you've already lost the battle because you joined it, the real winners will always be microsoft and apple.

gmask

03-09-2003, 05:37 AM

Actually they both owe alot to Xerox parc for showing them a new idea.

I appreciate what you are saying about the smaller platform as that is par tof my reasosn to want to migrate it. This decision would be simple if one vendor in particular ported their apps to linux.. I'd be on linux and I think alot more CG artists would as well.

I'm not really making judgements about the overall quality of these OS's .. I went from the Mac and SGI to Windows and got used to it.. if I can switch it's not because I'd like to see windows go down as I know that'll never happen.

FreeQ

03-10-2003, 01:14 AM

Nowadays, common counts are growing eventually of that MS is legal or not!

I don't want Trojan OS.

Only who are the persons has knowledge to think of it.
Otherwise you can chat even personal secret on any chat software in any OS.

- Use the Force. Think.
...
- He went in there to hide, not to run.

simple but masterclass.

gmask

03-10-2003, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by freeq
Nowadays, common counts are growing eventually of that MS is legal or not!

I don't want Trojan OS.

Only who are the persons has knowledge to think of it.
Otherwise you can chat even personal secret on any chat software in any OS.

- Use the Force. Think.
...
- He went in there to hide, not to run.

simple but masterclass.

FreeQ you are like some kinda beatnick poet ;-)

FreeQ

03-10-2003, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by gmask
FreeQ you are like some kinda beatnick poet ;-)

;-)

BiTMAP

03-10-2003, 06:34 AM

hmmm same person? could be :D you know its a great way to cover your butt :D ... but XP isn't exactly a trojan OS, when you run behind a firewall moniter your traffic and such... but there isn't TOO much you should be expecting to hide from people anymore these days... might as well just tell them, you feel less hurt when you've told them instead of them telling you.

BoydLake

03-10-2003, 07:05 AM

Hmmm

Use what you want to use and get a life! Nuff said.

KayosIII

03-10-2003, 11:09 AM

The question is whether the company in question can deal responcibly with that information or whether there might be a 'mistake'.... As users of popular web based email accounts may be aware of.

I have to agree with the above statement :)

matsbt

03-10-2003, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by gruvsyco

I personally can't understand why any company would port software to Linux. I don't really see much money to be made there. Most of the Linux people I've talked to, are more interested in all of their stuff being "free as in speech not as in beer" or whatever the hell their popular catch phrase of the week is. Why would I as the developer of Adobe, Macromedia, or any other app, want to port to a platform that people wouldn't even pay for the OS? OK renderfarms and the like I can understand... but seriously, put yur own views of why you run your OS down and take a look at the surrounding community.

The Linux versions of Maya, XSI and Houdini cost exactly the same as the Windows versions. The reason someone would make a Linux version of their softtware could be something like this: One big customer that uses SGI boxes wants to upgrade its workstations and since Intel boxes are cheaper than SGI MIPS boxes I see no reason NOT to make Linux versions.

Like KayosIII I'm also a full time Linux user and the reason I picked Linux in favour of Windows on my workstation is that I happen to like to tinker with the system.

Mats

Flog

03-10-2003, 08:25 PM

Microsoft is evil as well as all the other corporations listed. They are just a necessary evil.

Like Iraq, USA, France, Russia, Britain, etc. They are all evil. Necessary but evil nonetheless.

Corporations and governments..

The fact of the matter is Corps will do whatever it takes to make a buck. Same mentality a drug lord has. They will put people out of work, hurt their livelyhood and fire their workforce and hire people for 1 dollar an hour to save a buck, whether they had to cut people or not. Corps are no differant than drug dealers, pimps, or mercaniries. They will do anything for a buck.

Microsoft is evil and will create a real living Matrix one day and Bill Gates will be some big super computer controlling everything.

The U.W.G.O.G Unite World Government of Gates. IBM and Dell will be his Eastern and Western rulers, kinda like hte governors. And all will be ruled.

I"m telling you Bill and the Govt will merge, everything you do say and think will be recorded and held against you in the court of law

FreeQ

03-10-2003, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by BiTMAP
hmmm same person? could be :D you know its a great way to cover your butt :D ... but XP isn't exactly a trojan OS, when you run behind a firewall moniter your traffic and such... but there isn't TOO much you should be expecting to hide from people anymore these days... might as well just tell them, you feel less hurt when you've told them instead of them telling you.

What? I don't know gmask personally if you talk about me. I don't mean XP is trojan OS. You did it!
How could you trust to XP in the name of "firewall"?
Is the firewall cover your butt?

Again, I say that for only who has point of view.

"Only who are the persons has knowledge to think of it."

Think. In name of common sense!

gmask

03-10-2003, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by BiTMAP
hmmm same person? could be :D you know its a great way to cover your butt :D ... but XP isn't exactly a trojan OS, when you run behind a firewall moniter your traffic and such... but there isn't TOO much you should be expecting to hide from people anymore these days... might as well just tell them, you feel less hurt when you've told them instead of them telling you.

There are many many users out there who have no idea what a firewall is or why they need one. I think the point is that out of the box if you put XP or any of the other windows on the internet via DSL, modem or Cable that it can easily be taken advantage of by port sniffers etc and then on the Outlook Express front you can sneak a trojan application in and then make the computer a zombie and do whatever you want with it and the owner of the computer may never know this is happening.

Has MS really done anything to prevent this with XP?

FreeQ I kind of like you beatnick writings but your meanings get lost in translation ;-)

iBlue

03-10-2003, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by Flog
Microsoft is evil as well as all the other corporations listed. They are just a necessary evil.

Like Iraq, USA, France, Russia, Britain, etc. They are all evil. Necessary but evil nonetheless.

Corporations and governments..

The fact of the matter is Corps will do whatever it takes to make a buck. Same mentality a drug lord has. They will put people out of work, hurt their livelyhood and fire their workforce and hire people for 1 dollar an hour to save a buck, whether they had to cut people or not. Corps are no differant than drug dealers, pimps, or mercaniries. They will do anything for a buck.

Microsoft is evil and will create a real living Matrix one day and Bill Gates will be some big super computer controlling everything.

The U.W.G.O.G Unite World Government of Gates. IBM and Dell will be his Eastern and Western rulers, kinda like hte governors. And all will be ruled.

I"m telling you Bill and the Govt will merge, everything you do say and think will be recorded and held against you in the court of law

lol, thats silly. :)