OOXML backwards compatibility led Microsoft to ODF

TalkBack 8 of 70:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Is your rude display of name calling really necessary?

I think not. If you disagree, then so be it, but the term "troll" is more fitting to someone who goes around calling others "ignorant" and "hot air astroturfing".


I mean, for what I'm getting paid, there should be a more noble name attached to it.

don't you see how silly saying I'm "astroturfing" is? I have no agenda, no stock in MSFT, no interest in you changing your mind on *anything, period*. I am interested in getting this place to be less of a microsoft spanking machine into something that is usable by professionals seeking peer advice and insights.

But with the majority still being so hung up on hating Microsoft, that is not going to happen any time soon.




For one thing decades would mean more than one and, perhaps a half, given that Windows didn't arrive till the early 90s.


Microsoft had products before the 90s.




For another things monopoly does not equal capitalism. If anything it's analog is mercantilism which is what Microsoft seems to practise a lot of.


I never meant to say that? I don't believe I did. I don't think Microsoft was/is a monopoly. Not even close. It requires total control of a market. AT&T was the most recent example of a very large monopoly that had 100% market and customes physically locked to them.




By all means let the people speak without Microsoft pawning off copies of Windows on OEMs at at tiny fraction of the price that they expect the rest of us to pay. That isn't government that Microsoft distorting the market. I know you think that's some kinds of competitive market advantage but the rest of us would think of that as lock-in at the expense of choice for us.


Ah, this is where you are confused. Microsoft had/has the right to make exclusive deals, like *any* other company with anyone. Since when is a company not allowed to make an exclusive deal?
If VCs and money in general were interested in Linux, if it thought their was a large potential there, and the market is very good at doing what it does, their would be other OEMs now for Linux. Distribution channles the works. The market makes things like that happen for something they see as creating a return. Due to the "free" nature of Open source, VCs shy away from it cause there is not a good monetary investment. Listen, if the distros can give the darn OS away, don't you think that telss the market something? You and every other ABMer act like Dell, HP, Toshiba et al, existed forever and Microsoft somehow roped them into an exclusive deal to "lock-in" the world to Windows.

No such thing, They were built on top of windows popularity. they owe their existence to Microsoft. Linux can do the same thing, they just need to go retail and advertise. I bet if they advertised Ubuntu, for example and made the general public aquainted with Linux, it would be no time at all. I don't understand the "principals" of free software. They sed to stand for *no corporate involvement*. All corps. were evil and the original communities were not funded by the IBMs of the world. Well between the communities moving away from that and saying, yeah we'll take every dime the IBMs and Googles will give us, and the fact that IBM and Google and others saw open source as way to get at Microsoft, the money came. But you still don't see the huge money needed to make it fly. Don't be fooled either. If Linux breaks open and starts to take hold, those companies tha "seemed" to care will suddenly be going after their share of the linux pie, which means it will eventually go proprietary as the war of distros taks off, the copyright wars will follow and Linux will be doomed.




And please tell me where the US or any other government has funded open source be it Linux or the BSDs. Time, place and government if you don't mind. Otherwise that is just more of your well known astroturfing hot air.


I don't know what you took that from, but SUN was part of what came out of the DARPA projects, that turned Unix of that time into the secure OS it is. Billions of taxpayer dollars went into PARC, Berkeley, Stanford (where McNeally attended) and other private research facilities such as the one that brought us TCP/IP. Vint Cerf was on the government payroll, he and his team. Berkeley did not want to integrate tcp/ip into Unix as part of the OS, but money talks, bS walks and they did it or lose their funding. In the end McNeally's project, Stanford University Network, was asked to privitize the research they had done. He worked, i'm not saying he didn't put in time, but most of it ws funded and spread out over many facilities and universities. He was given the risc processor technology and all Unix technology etc. and given exemption from anti trust laws and the gave him a ready made business. My guess is, it was setup with government/taxpayer money. It was a time the U.S. was pushing hard to get their technology up to date and get ahead of Japan and other nations.

If McNeally had been a natural leader, they could be the bigget name in IT today. As it turned out, he would have his comedy hour once a year to bash MS who bested him even coming from a tiny operation in the beginning.



Samba, a command line program is duplicating any kind of look and feel? Since when?



You misunderstood. I listed 3 examples. Mono, Samba and a distro ( i can't recall their name) that tried to make their UI look like Vista. See how quick you are to jump to conclusions about anything related to Microsoft. That's way too much emotion for an OS buddy. You need to chill out. We all know what Samba reverse engineered. I find that unethical.




Actually the less said about Mono the better. Gimmme PHP any day of the week over C# and the other .NET rotten idiot bastard son of Java.



Another of your lovely arrogant and misguided statements.


I think PHP is great. I also think .NET is great. See, i can have more than one opinion at a time. That must be very foreign to you.




I'd really, really like to know what Linux distro would want to duplicate the interface on Vista. Not SuSE, not Fedora, not Ubuntu, not Mandriva, not PCLinuxOS...I could go on.



It's called Vixta. The name speaks for itself, probably not the sharpest knives in the drawer.



And yes, I will tell you that Linux server systems are better and faster not to mention more secure than any Microsoft back office solution. Flat out. There. You won't believe me cause you're drowning in the Microsoft kool-aid.



They may have some advantages, but professionally speaking, Windows wins on more of the metrics SMBs and large companies, care about the most. And really, since server 2003, the objective professional crowd is saying there is little difference in how solid the OSes are in comparison now. Server 2003 and now 2008 offer 99.99% uptime.
Active directory domains with the power of group policy make for a very powerful set of adminstration tools. Unbelievable how fast you can set up your directory structure with some planning of how you want to partition it, so to speak, and you are off to the races.
ldap is a standard and there is much automation you can use to further enhance active directory. ADAM directories can be added for directory-enabled applications and provide a ton of infrastructure and functionality with no work.



About innovation just what is innovative about Vista anyway? Hackneyed 3D interface swiped directly from Apple? UAC? Crashitis? Please, tell me where it all is, I'm really curious to find some and I do use it far more that I wish I had to.


Why does Vista behave SO badly for those that use it the least. I'd guess most of the abm crowd on this site have never actually touched it.


The inteface is great. I love it. If some techniques are from Apple, I don't know but it's well beyond Tiger's interface so MS did a lot of coding on it. In fact, if you go back to WWDC 2007 and look at the screen shots of Leopard, it looks remarkably like Vista in those shots. And if you've not seen Leopard, my Unlce has it on a new MBP, which died from heat exhaustion and had to be replaced, but i don't see where the Mac has anything on Vista whatsoever, especially for that exhorbanatn price. The Apple crowd will tell you can get them cheaper now blah blah, but if you want something equal to the machine I'm using right now, you are looking at a 17" MBP starting...that's right STARTING at 2800.00. To get even close to my specs, which you can't, you are way over 3000.00. Can you believe that a 2800.00 machine comes with only 2GB of RAM and to top it off, they put in 2, 1GB modules. That is low....very low for that kind of money. But I'll never see you or any other linux user upset over how Apple rips people off blind. yeah, that 2800.00 machine, last time i priced it, only came with one 5400 RPM Drive. Mine came with dual 7200 rpm drives and 4GB of 800Mhz high end RAM. It flies man. Vista ultimate x64 is so fast on this machine I just love it. 2.5Ghz penryn core 2 duo, half a GB of discrete video RAM. High end GPU. It does everything well, for 1400.00 bucks. Coupon included.

I'm not sure why you have problems or what you don't lke, but i think the UI is SO much better than XP or Ubuntu or Leopard for that matter. It has a lot of new features and teh development environment for it is the best. WPF, WCF apps are great and powerful Rich internet applications are within even a non master programmer's reach. visual studio 2008 is packed full of everything a developer wants.

I don't know what to tell you, what is so great about Ubuntu or Leopard?? All desktop OSes are essentially all cut from the same cloth nowadays, they are very close to each other in overall performance, quality, stablility. None are perfect in any category, but to ask Why? about Vista is the same for any OS. It's the latest, much more secure, which is worth it right there for many, has a uch larger and richer development environment and requires you write much safer and better code than in the past. I foiund it exceptionally stable w/o SP1 and now it's still very stable. I've not had a crash of any kind yet. I installed SQL server 2005 x64 on it, which was adventurous but it runs great. I had a small issue getting reporing services configured and turns out it was in the web handler mappings for the reportserver virtual directories, the path of the custom handler had an extra "/" in it. That was the extent of *all* problems i've had with Vista. It's been great.

The memory usage everyone bit8hes about is simply how Vista does it. You can set it so memory is not used in this manner. It creates space in Ram for your most used programs and loads them so they are very fast. I have 4GB and after a very fast bootup, maybe 20 seconds, I have 1.25 GB of RAM used. Now i might feel that is bad, until I open all of my Office 2007 applications, like 10 of them a few visual studio sessions, one 2005, one 2008 and a number of IE sessions (they all open, even the very last one, lightening fast) and then i check RAM usage and it's only gone up a fraction. So you can see how it deals with memory. I love it cause I use the same set of large programs in my daily use.





Not that you're in any way a religious zealot yourself, of course. You may talk like one, walk like one, quack like one but oh no! not you!


No, you are correct, I am not.


Ignorant to be sure. But in no way a zealot.


That is an unfortunate thing to say. I won't return the favor, but i'll tell you I graduated from a very fine United States University with high honors in Computer Science. My wife, who is psychology major tells me I'm very well adjusted and mentally sound. Our Son is exceling in preschool and the teachers tell us he is a normal and very bright little boy.

So, for what it's worth, I respectively disagree with your opinion of me. But alas, you
will believe what you want to, no matter the facts.




Now, I need to go slap myself for troll feeding.


Ah, now you needn't annouce how you relieve yourself of any stress on here.

I'm sure you "slap" yourself very frequently anyway. Afterall, you must get lonely down in Mum's basement all day.

Posted by: xuniL_z   Posted on: 05/26/08 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Effective Performance Testing in Java Environments Quest Software When applications perform poorly so does your business. With performance ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Busting the myths about QuickBooks Enterprise Solutions and IBM Smart Business IBM So you already know there aren't actually any alligators in the New York ... Download Now