WHY Microsoft is bad

The place to chat round the fire, share a tale, and just about anything else you'd like to do

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:04 pm

<blockquote> <br>Is it? Then you must not know what you're talking about. There is evidence everywhere, and if you look at Microsoft's actions, you'll see that it's true.<br>Why do you think they removed most of DOS in WinXP? To block smartasses from finding easy ways to fix something, like deleting a file that you can't delete in Windows, despite it not being in use or a system file.<br>Longhorn will monitor everything you do on your PC, and send it to Microsoft. You will have to pay for your Microsoft programs according to how you use them. Only programs licensed by Microsoft can run on the system - which makes free programs unable to run. Longhorn will register all the hardware you have on your PC.<br>If you fail to abide to this, or remove/replace hardware, your system locks up. The last bit is made so that you will have to ask shop staff or Microsoft staff to place hardware, resulting in more money.<br>There's other restrictions as well.</blockquote><p>All the facts against Microsft are nothing more than rumors, bullshit and beligerant lies. And you the sucker that believes tem. First Microsoft will not include spyware on longhorn. In america that is a breach of the rights to privacy amendments. If they did that Microsoft would be dissolved insantly. And that lockup crap is just what it is. Microsoft doesn't have the right to tell you who can and can't use their pc because somebody doesn't register their hardware. Besides, almost everybody registers their hardware anyway, mainly becauseof contest, news about upgrades and the like. As for the licensing programs. HELLO! wake up and smell the lies! Unless ms has to urge to be sued by tons of litle companies for this act, MS will lose tons of money on it weiterh its by losign to a valid case or by losing money that they used IN court.
HuBBsDoctor
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:05 pm

<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Benoit</i><p>There is something like that in XP already.<br>Every time it asks you if you want to send particular info (like a program chrash report) to Microsoft, whatever you choose, it always sends the info. Always. Check your connection or firewall.<br></blockquote><p>No it doesn't benoit. You're just paranoid.
HuBBsDoctor
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Prince Noah » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:06 pm

<blockquote>There is something like that in XP already. <br>Every time it asks you if you want to send particular info (like a program chrash report) to Microsoft, whatever you choose, it always sends the info. Always. Check your connection or firewall.</blockquote> <p>Ahem. Bash an OS that actually IS bad. Besides, you never even USED XP, so how would you know? <p><blockquote><i>Originally posted by PhanGarrett</i><p>Yes, let's bash Microsoft, the company that got as large as it did by being generous with software rights, and being willing to work with businesses to give them what they want at an affordable price.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they donated millions of dollars to Apple when they found themselves in a financial crisis.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they make an attempt to give users the features they ask for.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they're in the limelight, and therefore a target of abuse.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because smaller companies like Apple are in the position their in because they got greedy in the early days of computing, by requiring royalties to develop software for their platform.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because their software runs on 32-bit platforms that keep up with Apple's "Superior" 64-bit platforms.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they donate millions of dollars to various charities every year.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they recently gave away several hundred thousand high-end computers to families that otherwise couldn't afford them.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they're a company made up of humans that make mistakes when creating a sophisticated high-end Operating System, and are constantly working to fix their oversights to provide free patches to problems as they're discovered.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they develop new software technologies, and otherwise push the computing world to further advance the general level of technology in use.<p>Let's bash Microsoft because they provide the single most popular operating system on the planet, and therefore they must be evil because people evidently like what they've created.<p>But most importantly, let's bash Microsoft because it's damned popular, and will inevitably cause us to make friends!<p>And Benoit, this is Microsoft's explanation of why Windows XP is superior to Windows 95. I'm sure you'll find that list of features quite informative. Bear in mind, that list only covers the technical issues, not even touching the point that Windows XP is the single most customizable version of Windows to date.<p>Beyond that, if you REALLY hate Microsoft so much, then stop contributing to their dominancy by using one of their operating systems, and start using Linux or FreeBSD. If you don't want to use a different operating system, then STOP COMPLAINING because you're CONTRIBUTING to the thing you HATE!<p>Geez, if you want a certain standard to change, then you have to make the switch yourself.<p>What the hell is this childishness, anyway? Each type of operating system has certain advantages and disadvantages; there's no damned reason to be prejudgiced against one or another.<p>Do you want everything handed to you on a silver platter, and never have to worry about a command line? More interested in aesthetics than functionality? Use a Mac.<p>Do you want something slightly more sophisticated? Are you a conformist? Use some variety of Windows.<p>Broke? Try FreeBSD.<p>Love command lines? Want to have extremely detailed control over what your computer's doing? Odds are, there's a Linux distribution that's perfect for you.<p>Have some sort of industrial network purpose? Invest in Unix.<p>A little eccentric? Set up a network in your home with one or two of EVERYTHING.<p>Personally, I'm a little eccentric-- my goal is to have everything going at once.<br></blockquote><p>THANK you, Phan Garrett, for taking the time to type all that, and for telling the TRUTH about Microsoft. Proof that Microsoft is better than Mac. :p<p>[size=small][Edit by Prince Noah on [TIME]1087187661[/TIME]][/size]
Prince Noah
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Amwhere » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:13 pm

Yeah, bash Windows ME. Now that was horrid.
Amwhere
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Prince Noah » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:17 pm

If ANY OS sucks, it's Windows 2000. The ONLY thing I found it good for was playing PC games. That's all it can do.
Prince Noah
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Amwhere » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:18 pm

ME couldn't do that right. :)
Amwhere
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Prince Noah » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:19 pm

So, ME can't do it either, huh? Why am I not surprised?
Prince Noah
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:51 pm

ME was nothing more than a cheaper waterdowned version of XP. ME worked perfectly for me.
HuBBsDoctor
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Benoit » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:57 pm

<blockquote>No it doesn't benoit. You're just paranoid.</blockquote> <br>You dare to question my computer science teacher, who has used XP, saw this with himself, a man who has been busy with computer since the 70s?<br>Give me a break.<br> <blockquote>All the facts against Microsft are nothing more than rumors, bullshit and beligerant lies.</blockquote> <br>You never know, dude. Microsoft has loads of money. And the one who has money, makes the rules.<br> <blockquote>ME was nothing more than a cheaper waterdowned version of XP. ME worked perfectly for me.</blockquote> <br>No it wasn't. It was Win98 with some new fancy 'features' which were mostly eye-candy. Just something they quickly brought out for the new millenium.
Benoit
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:38 pm

<blockquote>You dare to question my computer science teacher, who has used XP, saw this with himself, a man who has been busy with computer since the 70s?<br>Give me a break.</blockquote><p>Yes I do as a matter of fact. Your teacher definitely hasn't work with computers as long as my videogame dev teacher or any of the other Professors at my college. Most of which have been using computers since the early to mid 60's.<br><p>[size=small][Edit by HuBBsDoctor on [TIME]1082763578[/TIME]][/size]
HuBBsDoctor
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby PhanGarrett » Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:44 pm

Benoit is correct about ME, HuBBs, though you aren't entirely off the ball, yourself. ME is basically Windows 98SE's design with a few half-baked bells and whistles that we see more thoroughly thought-out in Windows XP. Quite frankly, ME was a minor release that even Microsoft didn't seem to make a big deal out of. I'm thinking that its release was more or less just a farewell to the MS-DOS environment, in conjunction with a popularly expected release of another new version of Windows. Some of the features included may've been included just to test the waters to see how consumers react to them. Overall though, as Benoit said, it was just Windows 98SE with a few added features to pretty it up.<p>On Windows XP, however, yes, Windows XP does send information about your computer to Microsoft. There are two examples of this. First, Product Activation requires your computer to send Microsoft an identification code that is generated based on your Display adapter, SCSI adapter, IDE adapter, Network adapter media access control address, RAM amount range, Processor type, Processor serial number, Hard disk device, Hard disk volume serial number, and CD-ROM/CD-RW/DVD-ROM drive.<p>Using this information, Windows XP creates a hash; that is, it takes this information, and runs it through an algorythm that generates a series of numbers. This hash is sent to Microsoft and is then associated with your CD key on Microsoft's servers. This is probably what your Computer Science teacher was refering to, and I suspect that despite his background in computers, he didn't entirely understand how this process works, and therefore believed the hype about Windows XP sending personal information to Microsoft. Keep in mind that a hash doesn't necessarily involve encryption; a hash is only a means of identification because the same combination of information will always result in the same hash.<p>This method is used for storing passwords on servers, because a hash cannot be reverse-engineered. Upon receiving a password, a server will generate a hash from it, and compare it to the stored hash, to see if it is correct.<p>The second instance of Windows XP sending information to Microsoft from your computer is when a program has a crash. In these cases, Windows will save the memory state from the crash, and pending the user's permission, will send the memory state to Microsoft along with your hardware information. In these cases, first of all it doesn't send ANYTHING unless you permit it to, and second, the information is an anonymous submission used for the express purpose of debugging the Windows XP software for future automatic updates. The dialog even gives you an opportunity to review precisely what information is being sent.<p>And finally Benoit, I do dare to question your Computer Science teacher, a person who has been busy with computers since the 70's, because Windows OS development is not his field of expertise. Unless he has purchased the source code from Microsoft and gone through it to specifically identify the string of code that sends Microsoft any personal information that you've stored on your computer, or personally found a way to decrypt the Product Activation hash (which even people at Microsoft are unable to do; seeing that it's possible for two different hardware combinations to produce the same hash), then he's only going by the rumor that was started by the same kind of paranoid fool that started the hype about the Y2k bug.<p>Furthermore, Prince Noah, Windows 2000 was never intended for home use. It's a professional platform developed along the NT line of Windows Operating Systems, which have always used a totally separate design concept from the normal Windows line. Basically, you were playing games on an operating system designed to organize and operate network applications. The two variations of it are optimized for Workstations and Servers.<p>And HuBBs... If that's the stupidest thing you've ever read, then you need to this absurd argument insisting that we're gradually coming to the 1984 scenario.
PhanGarrett
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:51 am

<blockquote><i>Originally posted by PhanGarrett</i><br>And HuBBs... If that's the stupidest thing you've ever read, then you need to this absurd argument insisting that we're gradually coming to the 1984 scenario.<br></blockquote><p>Well, while I do know what the concept of the book 1984 is all about. I have not read the book itself. So me reading that would be kinda pointless I guess.<p>EDIT* actually I take taht back. THIS is the stupidest thing I have ever read.<br> ~0 <p>[size=small][Edit by HuBBsDoctor on [TIME]1082767999[/TIME]][/size]
HuBBsDoctor
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Lord Khyron » Sat Apr 24, 2004 5:13 am

LMAO This is hilarious, IBM Is far more guilty than microsoft could ever be. Hell, they even have their own hierarchy and you BEND to it to have anything on a system of theirs.<p>But no, we can't bash IBM now can we? It's only MICROSOFT! Which is the thing to bash right now.<p>IBM will be here long after microsoft :D<p>Yes lets continue to bash Microsoft because everyone else does...<p>Poor IBM, they are so being UNBASHED! OMG! What a tragedy.. HAHA
Lord Khyron
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby Benoit » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:30 pm

No, my teacher doesn't refer to that hype. He has gone through this stuff, and if you check your firewall, you'll see that it sends the info anyway if you choose not to.<p>As for the info about Longhorn and stuff, that comes from my brother who's on the net a lot. There's a chance that his info is wrong, but I believe him.<p> <blockquote>Yes I do as a matter of fact. Your teacher definitely hasn't work with computers as long as my videogame dev teacher or any of the other Professors at my college. Most of which have been using computers since the early to mid 60's. </blockquote> <br>And exactly what does that mean? That because they have been with computers since the 60s, not the 70s, that they are more correct? Both dates are still long enough in the past to have much knowledge.<br>And just to irk you, here's a grammar correction:<br>it's 80s, not 80's. Check the dictionary. For such indication of years it's 80s.<br>Furthermore, you're talking about a teacher here who teaches you how to make games; not someone who teaches you about computer themselves. So you get less info, that's possibly less accurate and not so thorough, since you are busy with games and not with the internal workings of a computer.
Benoit
 

WHY Microsoft is bad

Postby HuBBsDoctor » Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:27 pm

<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Benoit</i><p>Furthermore, you're talking about a teacher here who teaches you how to make games; not someone who teaches you about computer themselves. So you get less info, that's possibly less accurate and not so thorough, since you are busy with games and not with the internal workings of a computer.<br></blockquote><p>Actually my gaming dev teachers also teachers programming language classes(visual c, java, c++, etc), intro to computers(mainly WINDOWS), and then the game development.<p>Oh and as for the 80's, 80s. It dosn't matter cause both are acceptable. And the dictionary is not the place to go for grammar.
HuBBsDoctor
 

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest