Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Microsoft Is King!

0 helpful
79 replies

by yzowl

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Get Used To It!!!! Lets all stop bashing the system and focus our energies in a positive way! Microsoft has been King since it's beginning, and I would think it shall rein for many years to come. Funny how without Microsoft, most of you wouldn't even be able to be here!
Instead of all the whining and complaining, which will get you nowhere, why not use what you have to create something better? How would you make the system any better than it already is?
Is there any other operating system ready and capable of taking the rein from Microsoft? I think not, but I'm always open to new opinions... WHERE DO YOU WANT TO BE... TODAY?

79 replies

by generalist

Funny, I don't seem to recall that Microsoft had a very good word processor, spread sheet or database program back when it got a running start with the IBM PC.

Way back then WordStar, Visicalc and D-Base were THE big packages. And WordPerfect, afew years later, was king of the word processing world long before Word snuck in as part of the OS.

I will admit that MS is King of the IBM compatible PC world at the moment. But that may not last forever, especially if MS rests on its laurels.
The King is Dead. Long live the King.

by yzowl

That seems to be around the time Microsoft was pushing it's Windows version 3.1. I can remember using all 'The Big Packages', and must admit, all noble works, but was still more impressed with Windows. Although at the time they may not have had the best word processor, spreadsheet, or data base programs, (programs which I'd hardly call an operating system) it's hard not to compliment where they stand today!

by generalist

I'd say that you were impressed with the graphic user interface, which, for some, was a big improvement over the command line or even the DOSSHELL menu.

Of course, when you get down to it, Win 3.1 was basically a GUI laid over DOS. And Apple fans would say that the GUI was copied from the Apple environment. And computer historians would mention that Apple lifted the GUI concept from yet another organization.

From what I remember, Microsoft had an interesting edge over the competition because EVERYBODY needs an OS. They could then bundle programs with the OS so the computer buyer would be up and running without having to buy other software.

Those programs would get the casual computer user used to such things as Word as their primary word processor and Excel as their spread sheet. The 'first love' marketing system does wonders, especially if things are free.

Over time the 'Big Package' programs fade into the background for various reasons and Microsoft has a huge market share more or less by default.

It makes them King for the moment...

by annonymous

It's hard not to compliment where they stand today? Um... okay... if you think standing on a pile of sand, blasting yourself in the foot with a pump shotgun is a good way to stand.

'Microsoft is King!' Yeah, king at sticking their hands in the end user's pocket. King at making top quality software? Don't make me laugh. Linux is more than ready to take the reins from M$ as far as OS goes. You want an office suite? Ever hear of Lotus SmartSuite? How about StarOffice? Both are excellent productivity suites. M$ can stick it's XP series where the sun don't shine, for all I care. I won't miss it.

by salmonslayer

The only reason 3.1 (and MS) got a foothold is because they resorted to practices which were questionable, if not downright illegal. Making a computer manufacturer guarantee that DOS and Windows was installed on every single computer that went out the door or they would be penalized was really a questionable endeavor. They got away with it for many years because the consumer thought they were getting something for nothing.
It was around that time that I looked for any other option, and settled for OS/2 (which from a technical point of view is still superior to Windows 9x). Microsoft's biggest argument against OS/2 at the time was that it required at least 8 megs of memory to run. I could do more with those 8 megs on a 386-40 than I can do with Windows 9x or NT on a PIII 800. Try formatting a floppy while downloading and printing under Windows!! It can't be done, yet OS/2 could do it back in 1992.
Linux is powerful and usable, and in time will have the installed base that will attract the consumer audience.
I now use Linux for "work" and only use Windows for "play". Unfortunately, many of the games that I play only work under Windows, but that list is getting smaller as Wine advances.
MS is not a king, only a dictator (and dictators have a habit of being removed).

by timmitchell

Anyone will agree that, once Microsoft got rolling, their success snowballed. But, Yzowl, did you know that Microsoft bought their first version of DOS? That's right, the first version of DOS was NOT authored by a Microsoft programmer. Later, Microsoft partnered with IBM to bundle IBM boxes with Microsoft's OS, and even shared development expenses; however, when a bright programmer at MS came up with a new way to do it, they left IBM high-and-dry. Generalist has a point about the Apple-likeinterface of the original Windows... it's heavily speculated (and rightly so) that Microsoft intentionally withheld the release of Windows so that they could imitate the windowing system that Steve Jobs & Co. pioneered.

by yzowl

No... Governor, I didn't know that Microsoft bought their first version
of DOS, but I knew they worked with IBM. However, Isn't that the way of all Kings?
Divide and Conquer? I'll admit, perhaps they did intentionally withhold the
release of Windows for there own gain, which seems to be the norm in all walks
of life, although not entirely acceptable. I just wish to give credit where
credit is due! No matter how callus Microsoft may seem to be, I'm sure they have
lost some of their "pioneer idea's" as well. I'm not sayin' their
perfect... just King!

by jimbb

If you want to be seen as a leader, a forerunner, you should do more than just copy and reverse-engineer. Name one thing Microsoft has invented.

To most it may seem as if Microsoft is indeed ruling the Intel-world, but to rule there must be innovation, invention, you need pioneers, people willing to fall flat on their face while trying something. So far I've only seen copying, followed by claims that they haven't.

It's true, Microsoft is everywhere. And most likely they will be for awhile. But as long as they let the inventivity to others, there is the risk that one day they will be too late. Explorer and internet was already pretty close to a defeat, they needed to cross some legal borders to win it.

So... King? Yes. Ofmarketing. But a true king needs more.

by yzowl

Name one thing Microsoft has invented?... How bout a monopoly? So far they seem to rule at every thing they touch, which is enough to make them King in my books!

by khandubaba

no matter - what others say and what others believe - i know about myself and agreed that - MICROSOFT IS KING..... LION KING.

by syadm

Microsoft is King of bluescreens and FUD campaigns - Where do you want to wait today?
Xwindows rules..

by yzowl

Not in the dark! Funny, I never did get to see a blue screen till I loaded software other than Microsoft's... In fact, I can't even remember what they look like!

by generalist

I will admit that I haven't seen the Win 2000 equivalent of the blue screen of death that often on my work machine. The OS does appear to do a good job of shielding you from such unplesantries.

On the other hand, I have had to to multiple reboots on some days because Win 2000 choked on something. I've learned to keep things simple and not run as many applications as I used to under Win 98.

In effect the BSOD has been replaced by lockups that require restarting your computer.

by mckaytech

I can send you a photograph - I see them all the time. And only, I might add, on boxes running Microsoft software.

paul

by it tech

I have found that I don't get the blue screen either. Until I turn the machine on.
Then its like a bad dream, it just won't go away.

by salmonslayer

Gee, I never get a stall in my Ford car when I use Ford Oil and Ford Gas! The other oils and gases must be inferior.
Doesn't this just go and prove that MS must still have hooks in its products that allow its products to work better with its operating system than other people's?
Also, I find it extremely hard to believe that you never experienced the bsod. Every operating system will crash -- it is just a matter of time and circumstance. I can crash Linux and OS/2 if I try hard. Even Novell will crash from time to time. The problem is with Windows, it will crash without trying. I use NT Workstation and Linux in my job. I routinely have to reboot NT, sometimes twice a day, and will have a BSOD about once or twice a month. My Linuxbox is extremely stable and rarely requires a reboot. For a computer professional, stability is essential, and in my opinion, which is based on years of personal experience, Windows 9x does not have that stability, nor does NT. 2000 is better but still not great.

by yzowl

Quit chokin... Don't see Linux even coming close to Windows, then again, it's hard to see anything with all that smoke your blowin'...

by yzowl

Well Chief.... You're probably right on that point! It was great to see every thing under one roof you might say! I'm even more so impressed now with their latest version of Windows 2000 Pro, and soon to be released Windows XP! Not only do they havethe best operating system, and the best browser around, they do have that edge....

Long Live The King!

by mckaytech

I don't think so... the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was not directed against Microsoft because it was still decades in the future.

And they emphatically DON'T rule at everything they touch - the Microsoft history includes lots of failures including disk compression software (which were found in court to have stolen from Stac and were required to pay $120 million for), security breaches, that silly 'Bob' concept that failed so miserably and so on.

What Microsoft is very good at is making sure that others DON'T succeed. King, maybe... but history is full of bad kings whose final legacy was less than admirable.

paul

by yzowl

I've been running Windows 2000 Professional since it first became available, in February 2000. Although I did see the occasional BSOD in earlier versions, I have yet to see one in the latest release. Nor have I had to reboot my system due to system failure. My computer runs 24/7, and in my development of websites, work with many programs running at once. I'm very grateful to finally have an operating system that I can rely on day to day. Perhaps the problems you are having were due to upgradingto Windows 2000?

by generalist

My variation of Win 2000 came straight out of the box on a new machine. So your upgrade theory fails in my instance.

There might be a chance that my style of work could impact things. I will often start multiple programs so that they are loading at the same time.

In the Win 98 environment this would work more often than it failed. But when it failed, BSOD time.

In Win 2000 it also tended to work more often than it failed. But when it failed, no BSOD. Just lockup.

One ad I have claims that Windows 2000 Professional is thirteen times more reliable than Win 98. Using that statistic from a Microsoft ad, that means that my reboot frequency is only 7% of what it used to be.

So instead of rebooting ten times on a bad day, I only have to reboot about one time.

It isn't bad on a PC, relatively speaking. But it is not what I'd call reliable.

by yzowl

Wasn't DOS created by Microsoft? And if memory serves me correctly, BASIC which was the FIRST computer language for personal computers, shipped with the MITS Altair 8800, the FIRST commercially available personal computer!

by generalist

I think you'll find a couple of postings saying that DOS was bought by Microsoft and offered to IBM for the IBM PC. So using the phrase "written by" would be inaccurate.

And BASIC existed almost a decade before it was ported to the MITS Altair 8800. Microsoft 'just' made it more accessible to people. (I'll admit that you didn't claim that MS invented BASIC like some people do. But your phrasing could imply it.)

Of course, by providing MS-DOS for the IBM PC and BASIC for non-mini computers, MS gained a competitive advantage.

by ngcmos

IF I am not mistaken I think bill and his buddies saw dos on some computers at store, and bought it of the guy who owned the store. I dont think Microsoft created DOS. Although Im not 100% sure I have readt that and heard it. Any ONe know for sure?

by jkmchew

I agree with you that DOS is actually purchased by Bill Gates. When DOS was brough over by MS, it's not well developed yet. So, I think Bill Gate also worked hard on it even it is bought over...

by yzowl

Does it really matter? Microsoft made it better! And it was IBM (not Microsoft) who in 1981 decided to introduce it's personal computer running Microsoft Dos 1.0, Microsoft Basic, Microsoft COBOL, Microsoft Pascal, and other Microsoft products...

by the chalky

Interesting diatribe from Yzowl. Almost as interesting as your screen name.

Without MS we wouldn't be here. Possibly, but you certainly wouldn't be posting this without other OSes. Remember that MS is definitely not King of the internet. It is currently King of the desktop - but let's face it, who wants to be king of Accountants, Solicitors, Web designers (oops, a bit personal there) or other people that don't actually have the intelligence to set up a system themself.

As for inventing "Monopoly", I think that is credited to Parker Brothers, like all good games.

To be King of one domain is fine, but there are bigger Kings out there. They may not all be visible, but you need to remember Machiavelli who said that the Kingmaker is more important than the King. In the case of Microsoft, the Kingmaker is the general public, not the fools that slavishly believe the marketing blurb from Seattle.

Microsoft has a place. It may be at the modern day equivalent of King Arthur'sround table. But it is only a seat like others. The King is the public. They are trivial. When MS outlives its usefulness, it's seat at the table will be replaced by another pretender.

On the desktop I doubt if it will be Linux - although I personally use Linux at home - but there will be another pretender.

At least, like MS, you provide some entertainment. Not sure what else either MS or you provide though.

TTFN

by generalist

I appreciate your wise words.

When you get down to it, the customer is the Kingmaker who can be influenced by the King's PR staff.

Of course, if the King doesn't listen to his subjects and does things like raising taxes and trying to force people to buy 'King Approved' products, there will be a revolt.

For example, I am planning on setting up a network at home and have been investigating a Network Operating System. Being on a tight budget and not wanting to be a pirate of cyberspace, I'm leaning toward Linux as opposed to MS. For my situation it will work out well enough.

Call it a personal revolt with a minimal impact on MS. But if I do it, then my friends might consider doing it too, especially since I would be the local expert. Things could snowball and a new set of kingdoms could form.

by yzowl

A light at the end of the tunnel perhaps?

Think you're forgetting some important facts! It was Microsoft (1980) that introduced the Z-80 SoftCard, which allowed Apple II users to run CP/M applications with only minor modifications. It was Microsoft (1980) who introduced the XENIX OS, which allowed existing software written for UNIX OS to be compatible as well. It was Microsoft who in 1984 took a leading role in developing software for the Apple Macintosh, which shipped with Microsoft Basic and Microsoft Multiplan. It was Microsoft who in 1984 introduced a new Hardware and Peripherals dedicated to developing and marketing products to complement Microsoft's software product line. (A big plus for Hardware manufactures). It was IBM who in 1984 chose Microsoft XENIX and MS-DOS for The IBM PC AT, and again in 1987 as a result of a Joint Development between Microsoft and IBM, released the OS/2.

The list goes on and on, the point being the same! It's fair to say that many companies excelled in many ways with the presence of Microsoft and it's product line. To bad they, any countless others couldn't see it!

by rcsoar4fun

Can't say that M$ has been first in anything except for over charging for unstable, unsecure OS's. As I remember UNIX was released by ATT in 1968 or so. Xerox and Mac both beat M$ to the gui. Win 2000 is the best OS M$ has ever released. Still not the best OS out there.

by jaolson40

So, now we're supposed to be grateful that we *finally* have an operating system that doesn't crash nearly as often as before? That Windows 2000 finally lives up to the promises they made about Windows 95, five years later? This makes them King?

Or is it Microsoft forcing whatever they want to down my throat? Sure, if I don't want to use it, I don't have to, there's no gun to my head, but what if I don't want it there in the first place? What if I don't want Outlook Express, Internet Explorer, NetMeeting, the Accessibility options, etc, etc, on my hard drive, taking up space in the first place? Sure, hard drives may be cheap right now, but just because YOU have the money to buy a new one every few years to handle all the unnecessary shovelware doesn't mean we all do...or should have to.

In my view, the only thing they are King of is irritating their customer base.

by phillip taylor

Windows 2000 is arguably the best operating system to date - if not by performance alone, then by the fact there are more hardware drivers for it than Linux

Microsoft Word 2002 and Excel 2002 and probably the best (good design, good quality etc etc) for Word-Processing and spreadsheet applications

Microsoft Visual Basic is the most used and understood Programming Language (mainly used for teaching purposes)

This snowballs and means even with poorer applications like Access that:

Office XP - best office suite
Visual Studio - best development suite
Windows 2000 - cant run office on linux

So businesses are going to buy these packages - making Microsoft the best Software company around - at the moment

Dont knock them - we dont have enough money to choose our programs individually

by yzowl

^5 Perhaps when some of these other software developers learn to quit whinin' and do something about it, we'll have more choices. Don't count on it to happen any time soon though... seems they have lots of cheese on their plates at the moment!

by sa!!!

The credit goes to Microsoft and its employees who have made the greatest, most reliable, most affordable sofware products in this globe in the past 25 years and more. Microsoft is the SOFTWARE LEADER of the century. Why are the competitors getting jealous of MS when they could not compete with this GIANT and raising irrelevant issues? Once again MS is the KING of all in Computers!

by sujai.nath

If you're not "the M$ Man" himself they must
have put you up to it. No one in their right
mind would drivel on like you do- even a M$
stooge of which there are legions. Who cares
about M$ being king of this that or the other
thing. I use their "products" only when I
have to (and that is becoming less and less)-
otherwise, I have joined the ranks who have
left their oppressive land for a new world
just like the pilgrims left the British
Monarchy. Do you hear folks blather about
the British Royalty nowadays? They are as
irrelevant to Great Britain's politics as M$
will someday become irrelevant to computing.

by the chalky

There is clearly a lot of doubt. Even in your statement there are inaccuracies.

The most reliable OS I work with is OpenVMS, but I wouldn't want users near it as it would scare them half to death.

The most affordable software products are freeware. Strange, but I can't remember any MS freeware.

Microsoft became the software leader of desktop personal computing for last century. Now we are in the 21st, a new leader will take over.

Jealousy belongs to Microsoft, it's employees and users. Let's face it, if MS wasn't jealous of all the developments that have taken place in computing, it wouldn't have copied them!

The most worrying development for MS promoters is the very strange decision to remove Java from the next generation of OS. The web is Java - despite MS efforts - and will continue to be so because it is so easy to develop in and has cross sompany developer support.

In a few years, the OS will become irrelevant as users needs are more clearly understood. All most users want is for the job to be completed. They don't care if it is MS, Apple, OpenVMS or Tony Blair (although the last is apparently incapable of doing any job).

They don't care who is King. And the King is dead.

by generalist

Are you talking about the 20th century or the 21st century?

If you're talking about the 20th century, you'll have to qualify your statement by saying that it is the PC software leader.

If you're talking about the 21st century, you're sticking your neck out a lot and assuming that MS will maintain their lead. There are options out there and there are a lot of people who, in search of lower prices, are looking at alternatives to MS. I'm one of them.

And you really need to restrict yourcomments to the PC side of things. MS doesn't really have that much of an impact on mid-range and mainframes which are still used for lots of businesses that need a solid OS and hardware.

by mayuresh

it's quite amazing how the author of this thread and many others make such immature and not so intelligent comments:

Guess what hotmail runs on: FreeBsD and it uses qMail as their mail server.
No they do not use their own win2K DC nor do they use exchange. It simply is'nt good enough to support the huge traffic hotmail generates.

When M$ began touting it's new tcp/ip stack, guess where they got it from.
They ripped it straight out of FreeBsd.

i could go on and on..about how M$ sucks....it does my friend. They are a curse on the computing industry. THey maybe a king in your language, but in mine i preffer to call them a tryant. One which i would love to see getting squished like a bug..

Go reboot your windoze for the nth time for this day, while i go back to my linux box which has been running non stop for the past 2 months...

by e-fellow

We have a RS6000/UNIX/AIX it runs most of our manufacturing systems. It is on a routine reboot of 3 to 4 times a year, it never crashes, however, we are being very pressured to move to windows client for our MRP systems, we have tried it and it is so damn slow and has a stupid looking hard to understand GUI. I think UNIX is missing a lot of revenue by not getting into a more user friendly interface. We have UNIX/AIX and NT, where cost is concerned, windows products seem to rule. I still feel, that as a whole, the entire industry is way behind, just look at processors, isnt it amazing how they always seem to come out with just a little bit better technology 6 months after you by your "dream" machine? This is planned, Microsft plans it releases the same way. MONEY MONEY MONEY, Until the "big boys" are hit in the pocketbook you absolutely will not see a change, but you let these guys start taking big dollar hits then they will respond. You can talk to a person of another language all dayand you still have accomplished nothing, but it is amazing what just a small understanding of their language can do for you. If we as a society speak in the "big boys" language then they will hear and understand us, UNTIL THEN SUCK IT UP!!!!!!!

by yzowl

Your amazing insight leaves little to be said... perhaps just a quick reboot...

by csmith

Economics shows that all monopolies, dictatorships, and evil empires, collapse in the long run.
The question is not if, it is when.
I am sure Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and the rest of the MS leaders are aware of this problem. They are not stupid.
Why else would B.G. drill for oil in Kazakstan?

by csh5795

I, for one, hope to see the day when MS is overthrown and all the world's suffering comes to an end.

Yes, sometime between now and the end of the universe, Microsoft will go out of business. But before that happens, MS and it's products will change markedly to adapt to the market. The most recent adaptation? Subscription licensing and increasing emphasis on server software.

by csmith

Xerox did this by emphasising large copiers.
I suggest taking a course in the history of economics, at any university.
The increasing rate of change actually means that Microsoft will not dominate as long as some of the former large monopolies.

by kb4mil

Microsoft is in the same realm as Democracy, it is the worst form of goverment, but the only one that seems to work half way decent.
The thing I don't understand about their situation is they keep producing these so called fixit releases and they even have problems. I work for a software developer and the last thing we will do is release a product that has been slightly Beta tested and releasted to the public. "If it isn't right it won't go out the door".
As far as making it better than it already is. Well one thing they could do is allow the customer to make a choice. What if I want to use a browser other than Explorer. Allow their product to be compatable with other products on the market.

by qhcomputingny

I have felt the same way. None of us would be sitting here at our JOBS and be able to use the internet if it wasn't for Microsoft and Windows. Sure, there would be something else out there right now, but would it really be as good as Windows? I think not. If people hated Windows as much as they say they do, they would remove it off of their hard drive. Good point!

by the chalky

I am surprised that you think that we wouldn't be at our jobs or use the internet if it wasn't for MS.

MS have copied the good stuff - and implemented it nowhere near as well as the original - and then fooled a lot of people into believing this myth.

Where my pocket is concerned (i.e. not my employers), I use non Windows and non IE for browing the internet. They have been around a lot longer in browsing terms and don' use anywhere near the resources that IE or other bloatware does.

I don't hate Windows, but the MS defenders appear to hate everything else. Windos is perfect for users that have no ability to use computers and want something tha works "instantly". They will accept the blue screen occasionally if that is what it takes.

Incidentally, Windows has not been removed from my hard drive at home. It was never on it in the first place.

by yzowl

"Windos is perfect for users that have no ability to use computers"

Your Right! I'd say that makes up for the vast majority of people, who shall remain loyal to Microsoft simply for that sole reason. It's easy to use and most of us don't have thetime to play with un-developed software, which requires a certified tech each time you boot it up!

And another point.... Us so called MS deffenders don't hate everything else! We just like what works!

by yzowl

Where would they be today?

Wish I could see the stats on just how many people slamming and whinin' about Microsoft and their product line use anything but!

by syadm

The good thing is not the slamming and whini?n. Nor the amount of people freeing themselves. The good thing is that the number of people is rapidly increasing and also that it seems to scare the pants off people like Yzowl :-).

by e-fellow

We have a RS6000/UNIX/AIX it runs most of our manufacturing systems. It is on a routine reboot of 3 to 4 times a year, it never crashes, however, we are being very pressured to move to windows client for our MRP systems, we have tried it and it isso damn slow and has a stupid looking hard to understand GUI. I think UNIX is missing a lot of revenue by not getting into a more user friendly interface. We have UNIX/AIX and NT, where cost is concerned, windows products seem to rule. I still feel,that as a whole, the entire industry is way behind, just look at processors, isnt it amazing how they always seem to come out with just a little bit better technology 6 months after you by your "dream" machine? This is planned, Microsft plans it releases the same way. MONEY MONEY MONEY, Until the "big boys" are hit in the pocketbook you absolutely will not see a change, but you let these guys start taking big dollar hits then they will respond. You can talk to a person of another language all day and you still have accomplished nothing, but it is amazing what just a small understanding of their language can do for you. If we as a society speak in the "big boys" language then they will hear and understand us, UNTIL THEN SUCK IT UP!!!!!!!

by pyric

Funny how Microsoft would NOT exist without IBM and Xerox. And I hate to break it to you, but I was running punch card programs when you were in diapers. All Microsoft did was turn DOS into a GUI. I don't hear you praising AOL for doing the same for Telnet.
We'll see how Loving you are of Gates when you can't play Mp3's, can't view Java, and have to buy multiple $500 licences for XP.
Microsoft is taking EVERYONE for a ride, Where do yo want to go today?

by buffalobob

Microsoft got to be king by abusing its monopoly OS position to take over the applications market. They want to allow no choices, to make all decisions for computer users.

The Soviet Union is gone, and Microsoft will also go, but not without a fight.

by qomputek

that is exactaly correct. its almost strange as to the steps micorsoft has been taking lately. its as if they want to drive themselves out of business.

by loungin1

I have to agree... I am very proud to be an MCSE and always ready to take on recertifications, people whine and complain about every little thing. Why do we have to recertify again man? it's no fair... wah wah wah... If you want to choose to stickwith old technology that's fine with me, but I'm stayin on top.
They give us a great shot to holding strong certifications and even give us a free accelerated exam. What else do you want?
They get their feet wet in every area, exposing us to moreand more technologies.

I love Microsoft's products. Tell me where else you find products that are easy to install, configure without worrying about compatibility problems or difficulties. Just to install applications on Unix can be a project alone, nothing is configured for you automatically. I don't have a problem with any Microsoft bundles in their OS, as a matter of fact I have to say that it's so much better for the consumers, they get more for their money to be able to get basic tasksaccomplished without spending money on 3rd party software. There's just something about native applications bundled with the OS that is just clean!

by yzowl

I hear ya... and agree! Why shouldn't they be able to bundle their software? It doesn't belong to IBM, Intel or anyone else for that matter! If it says Microsoft, it's Microsoft, regardless if it was bought or sold! If companies want to sell their machines with Microsoft's software installed, then it should be the whole package and not just bits and pieces.

by tomsal

At work, I use what I must to get paid. We have Win NT servers and Linux servers, Windows 98 clients. At home I use Win 98 because I MUST - you see I'm a diehard PC Gamer. I'm into the Nvida GeForce cards, the A3D/Dolby/EAX sound effects cards and wide support of killer games. No other options exist. Sure Linux is just now support these things (you can run GeForce cards and Unreal Tournament and Tribes 2 on Linux, for example)..but the vasy bulk of games are still for Windows boxes.

Breaking down what I'm saying is - I have no loyality to Windows (or any OS), I use what I must (in the case of work) and I use what supports what I need to do (in the case at home). If Linux supports all my gaming peripherals and if major publishers start churning out hit after hit Linux versions - I'd leave Windows 98 for the much more efficient and stable Linux OS in a heart beat.

Oh btw, I know Windows backwards and sidewards so don't say something trite like "You just don't know the software..."..As a requirement for my work I even got my MCSE cert as a matter of fact. (Not that they carry any weight these days with all the "fake" MCSEs around).

Anyway, I predict Microsoft will last for years to come - but it's days as the end all be all mother monopoly of the computer world are numbered....shhhh...hear that...I just heard another day on their calendar get crossed off. ;)

by salmonslayer

This echos something that I have been saying for many years (even back when I was using OS/2 and was surrounded by the OS/2 zealots). A computer is nothing more than a tool, and an operating system is something that lets me use this tool to do a job. As such, I really don't care who makes it as long as it works and allows me to work.
I never see anyone who refuses to use a flat-blade screwdriver just because (as everyone knows) a torx is a superior tool. Torx may be great but it isn't rightfor every job. Why can't we carry this same attitude when it comes to computers?

by adamus

The entire discussion here on Windows vs Linux, Microsoft vs whatever, is based on pride and hype, and has nothing to do with solid fact. The Unix/Linux community strives to make Microsoft look like a big bad Empire, with Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer as virtual Emperor's and Darth Vaders. The Linux rebellion, led by heroic Linus Skyw-... ehh, Thorvalds, does its best to overcome the might of the evil Microsoft Empire.

And very few people are able to look past all the hype and focus on what it's all about. I'm glad to see at least a few techies here that concern themselves with the actual job that needs to be done, and use the right tool regardless of who manufactures it.

by legj1

The gaming software is getting smaller for MS??????? Not. Linux has a LONG way to go before it comes close to MS. And another thing, if you had the same opportunity to corner the industry, you would do the same thing. Anybody who denies that is lying. Billy saw an opportunity on DOS and jumped on it. Why make him sound like a criminal? Thank my buddy Bill. Don't judge him.

by salmonslayer

If you read, you will notice that I said the list of games that I play on Windows is getting smaller, not that the list of Windows games is getting smaller. Wine is getting better and better. Between Wine and ports to Linux, the list of games thatI am required to play under Windows is definitely shrinking.
Also, it is not me but the Justice department that is making him sound criminal. Take a look at some of the judgements against MS in the early 1990s. Also look at some of the lawsuits, some settled in court and many settled out of court.
Thank Bill??? Why -- for having one of the best marketing teams? True innovation demands more than just duplication, or buying up the competition. And before you start flaming me as anti-MS, I have been using MS products for close to 20 years. I still have a copy of Excel version 1, with the Windows runtime, and a copy of MS Word 5.0 for DOS. I use the best tool for the job, regardless of who creates it, and for my purposes at this time,Linux is the better tool. Until about three years ago, OS/2 was the better tool. I still have OS/2 installed on my system, but find that I boot into it less and less. I also have BeOS and QNX installed as well.
Final comment -- rather than just agreeing with what you have been told by Microsoft's phenomenal marketing team, explore. Try some alternatives. In a previous post, someone mentioned that StarOffice and SmartSuite are viable alternatives to MS products. So is WordPerfect Office and so is 602PC Suite (which like StarOffice is also free). As well, Opera is a wonderful web browser. Open your eyes, and you will see that all that is MS is not necessarily BS, but a large amount definitely is!

by legj1

on many of your points. We use other O/S and software as well. I just grow tired of the MS bashing on here. If it wasn't for MS, 90% of us would not have I.T. jobs. MS created a lot of good, along with some questionable business tactics. Yes. Personally, I feel there is no better client than Windows NT or 2000. Servers are debatable. I also think Office 97 was/is a superior product. We have not yet upgraded to Office 2000 or XP...so I cannot say whether I like that suite or not. I do agree with some of your points and they are in my head(vault) ready for download.

by qomputek

Did you know that your budy Bill is comming after all of us? And you know for what, MONEY. He wants even more of our money. Take a look at this:

http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/

Think about how many cd's in your inventory are copies? How many times did you install your Windows on deffrent machines? Well thanks to Bills greed that is comming to an end and so will Microsoft if they keep it up. Linux is free and most of the software that comes with it too. People will learn Linux to save money, they learned to use DOS commands instead of buying the expensive Apple Macs back in the early 80's didn't they? Even though Macs were nicer and easier to use. Think about it. Get linux and start to learn to use it because you will be using it on a regular basis before you know it.

by legj1

This is my question. I make sure that we have licenses for everything we buy. I lock down PC's so users cannot install pirated software. My network is legit. That website doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that it scares you. Perhaps MS wouldn't have to go to these extremes if companies had scruples. Play by the book and you won't get burned. We have never had an audit, but if we did....I wouldn't care. I am all for learning LINUX. I am sure I could incorporate it one day in the future. Linux has a long way to go to challenge Billy Boy. Linux servers are becoming more popular with consumers, but clients and clientside apps aren't even knocking on the door yet.

by legj1

This is my question. I make sure that we have licenses for everything we buy. I lock down PC's so users cannot install pirated software. My network is legit. That website doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that it scares you. Perhaps MS wouldn't have to go to these extremes if companies had scruples. Play by the book and you won't get burned. We have never had an audit, but if we did....I wouldn't care. I am all for learning LINUX. I am sure I could incorporate it one day in the future. Linux has a long way to go to challenge Billy Boy. Linux servers are becoming more popular with consumers, but clients and clientside apps aren't even knocking on the door yet.

by yzowl

Is anyone going to answer?
.... to bad up to this point, only Microsoft has picked up the ball!

by cscampbell23

In my opinion, the lack of technical skills of the typical end user helped create the Microsoft "Monopoly". Microsoft provides an easy to learn and easy to use OS that has the largest variety of software. More technical users are also aware of thevarious OS options. Until I started learning and supporting computers, I myself was not aware of the options. I like Linux, Unix, and OS2 but Windows is where I make my money. For me everything else is just a hobby.

by jcwolves

Star office works for me, and it claims to be compatable with Office prodicts. All I can confirm is what I have tried. I have tried and succeded with .doc

by qomputek

The point is that their are other alternatives that can get the job done and they can do it faster, better, and cheaper then the more popular microsoft products. but we don't see that because microsoft is king.

by khorsley

Having worked with small to mid-sized equiment for most of my career, and being a
X;.. Big Blue Fan.... ; I perfer the technical superioty of OS/2 and Unix to
Windows (which I consider to be mainly a
nice menuing system)....... I find that is
loved by the GP but not so much by techno's or maybe I need to join the new company.

by yzowl

I only stated I've never seen one since running Windows 2000 Pro, not that I've never seen one is a windows environment! And sure, anyone could crash a system if they try hard enough... just keep loading them with all that junk software you get for free!

by nash43

Try to run Windows safe mode.
Remove the display driver.
Restart ur computer.
If u did enter Windows, go download the lastest display driver from ur manufacturer.
Or go to www.windrivers.com
Once downloaded, install it and restart ur computer.
If it still don't work, remove all ur cards except ur display card. Try again.
If the blue screen continue try to use a PCI display card to test.

Good LUCK.

by nash43

Yeah u r right i went through these problems me too. I have to restart WinNT twice daily.
I prefer 2 use Win2K PRO, it's more stable.
I just hate WINDOWS ME, too many bugs in it.

This discussion is closed to new replies.