[ale] OT Re: [ale] Microsoft now favors fair competition

[Geoffrey]

Christopher R. Curzio wrote:
  > Honestly, that's a little blind. You're almost saying the company
  > shouldn't have ever existed, and anyone who works for them is spawned
  > from the deepest nether regions of hell.

I don't believe I said that, but I would say that anyone that works for
Microsoft AND has a conscious, probably has some concern regarding how
the company operates.  Although I do believe Bill Gates is quite evil, 
and would sell his children to extend Microsoft's monopoly.

  >
  > Yes, I dislike Windows. Yes, I believe Microsoft's business practices
  > in the past have been questionable, with some being downright
  > illegal. No, I am not a Microsoft enthusiast or representative. I am,
  > however, someone who *can* see when good things are done, and not
  > overlook them in blind hatred.

It's not blind hatred.  It's based on research and experiences.  I've
been through all the variations of windows, except XP, and hope I never
see it.  It's not hatred, it's fear.  I saw a quote in the newspaper 
yesterday:

"If it's green it's Biology, if it smells, it's Chemestry, if it has 
numbers it's Math, if it doesn't work, it's technology."

This is the legacy Microsoft has lead us to.  Why is it that the average 
person, EXPECTS a computer to crash, lock up and/or lose data?  Because 
that's all they've known, courtesy of Microsoft.

You're saying I'm prejudice, which is not true.  I've not pre-judge this
company.  My comments are based on true experiences as well as extensive
research.

  >
  > I have never, *ever* seen a bad Microsoft mouse. All of my systems
  > have one, and I'm giddy with delight at having an Intellimouse with
  > Intelleye, which has worked splendidly for the past 3 years. While
  > Microsoft may not manufacture the hardware themselves (outsourcing
  > and rebranding), any hardware on which they have stamped their name
  > (ESPECIALLY mice) has been nearly top-notch.

This is really a non-issue.  My comments did not address the quality of
their products, although I do believe all of the OS's I've encountered
thoroughly suck.  I made one comment on the single M$ mouse I had
experience with, and it did in fact last about 6 months.  I do not buy
Microsoft products, with the exception of oem os's as I've found it a
necessity to permit my family to live within the realm of the M$ monopoly.

The issue is not the quality of their products, the issue is, their
intent with all they do.  They have none, aside from extending their
existing death grip on all technology.

  >
  > And my Microsoft mouse can do everything in Linux that it can do in
  > Windows. I don't see how it's engineered to leverage Windows. Sure,
  > things like the force feedback stuff (another excellent hardware
  > line) come with Windows-only stuff, but what do you expect? They make
  > DirectX, they're sure not going to ignore it.

As noted, this is a non-issue.  But this does bring up another issue. 
Why does Microsoft constantly create duplicate technologies that only 
work on Microsoft environments?

  >
  > As for Microsoft-related charity work, while it's less Microsoft and
  > more Bill and Melinda, maybe you should check out the Bill and
  > Melinda Gates foundation. They're throwing millions of dollars at not
  > only schools and libraries, but health programs as well. Over half of
  > their donations have been to Global Health organizations. Again, it's
  > not from Microsoft, but all of this cash is able to be given to good
  > causes as a direct result of Microsoft being here.

I'm fully aware of Billy and Melinda's charity.  I still maintain, this
effort is for no other purpose then to extend Microsoft's control over
the world's computers.  You check it out, they give far more hardware
and software then actual money.  Why?  Because it get's them in the
door and the control they want.  Yeah, yeah, I know about the 
Africa/AIDS thing, but check out the actual numbers for yourself.  The 
intent is not to help people, but to extend their monopoly.

Also, this charity is quite new.  Bill Gates has been the richest man in
the world for a very long time.  He's been coerced by other weathly
individuals (Ted Turner..) to be more charitable, yet it's just recently 
that he's begun this effort.

  >
  > There's more Good Things listed here:
  > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-946250.html

Do your research, this is mostly a crock.  This whole article is so much 
FUD, I can't believe you'd present it as reasonable data.  Do you not 
recognize the difference between information and advertisement?  I'll 
address each:

10.  Microsoft drives computing costs down

Right, every new version of M$ OS requires more memory, more hardware.
Microsoft has done nothing to drive the cost of hardware down, the
hardware market has done this.  Winmodem?  Bull, you get a cheap piece
of hardware because the work is pushed to the OS.  You've got to
consider the overall cost, not just the cost of the hardware.  Further, 
it's another effort in extending their monopoly.  Can you not see it all 
comes back to that?

.9 Microsoft has been instrumental in bringing computing to ordinary people

Only because M$ holds it's current monopoly on the market.  Apple has
  itdone just the same, it's just that they don't have the market share. 
  If hadn't been M$, it would have been something else.  Not to mention 
the fact that this has been M$'s intent all along.  Remember the quote?

Do you think that if Henry Ford had not built the car, we'd all still be 
riding horse and buggy?


8. Microsoft employees absolutely love  their company

I won't argue this, although there are certainly some who question M$'s
way of doing business.  So, they've made how many people rich, in
comparison to the rest of the world.  I don't necessarily think this is 
a reflection of value, although you still have to look at the overall 
picture.  They've got a lot of happy employees, at what cost?

7. Microsoft pays loads in taxes

I don't know enough about tax stuff, but I disagree with this reference 
and provide the following reference which indicates the contrary, that 
is, Microsoft did not pay ANY federal income taxes:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13852.html

6. Its founder has donated more money to charity than anyone in history

It's about time.  In comparison, it's very little % wise.  When compared
to his income, it's like me donating, roughly $32 a year.  I donate a
hell of a lot more then that....  Plus, it's all a write off, see item #7.

5. Microsoft creates a computing economy worth far greater than its own
net worth

You see this as value?  It's just evidence of the existing monopoly.  As 
noted, if it wasn't them it would have been someone else.  I firmly 
believe that personal computers would have come much further then they 
have if it had not been for Microsoft.  How many truly innovative 
companies have they stifled and destroyed?  Certainly you don't believe 
that a single company can make better progress then multiple companies?

4. One of the largest R&D budgets in the industry

Not percentage wise.  Compare this budget to their income.   Further,
there research efforts are if anything, misguided.  If they spend so
much on research, why haven't they fixed their vulnerabilities?  The 
latest of which is that no version of Windows from windows 95 through XP 
has secure ssl.  Put that in your pipe and smoke it.  If M$ was truly 
interested in, what do they call it?  Trusted computing?  Do you think 
they'd continue to have these holes in their systems?

3. Microsoft takes risks

All the examples sited fall back on one thing.  They have the funds to
burn in these efforts.  If they fail, which they have a number of times
(MSN??, Xbox), they write it off.  If they succeed, they've extended
their monopoly.

2. A beacon of profitability in a sea of red ink

Again, it's because they have a strangle hold on the computer desktop.
How is this not apparent?


1. No accounting scandals at Microsoft

Actually, the SEC was investigating M$ and they got by with a slap on
the hand and a promise "we'll quit doing that.'

Sorry, M$ has so much clout, you must understand it also affects
politics.  Still, the number of companies that don't have accounting
scandals far out number the ones that do, so I hardly see this as a
reflection of M$ as being a 'good citizen.'

  >
  > Again, don't mistake the above for Microsoft fanatacism or
  > open-source defection. I'm a Linux user, and I really dislike the
  > majority of Microsoft's software. But I'm not a zealot on any side of
  > the court.

As noted, I'm often seen as a zealot, but I back up what I've said with
facts.  This url you provided is nothing more then more marketing crap.
There's no real substance there.


-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric at 3times25.net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?



---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.