| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
MSN 8 Asks Users to Pay for Some Online Services | |
|
||
| Time: 16:00 EST/21:00 GMT | News Source: Gartner | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft's decision to move MSN to a partial for-pay model reasonably extends the trend in which content and application providers seek financial legitimacy by countering the popular mid-1990s assertion that information ("content" is the more common term in 2002) "wants to be free." The precipitous decline in competition among Internet information and interaction hubs makes the for-pay business model more defensible than ever — the critical issue here. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 101 through 125 of 1324 Prev | First | Last | Next |
The time now is
8:40:09 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #101 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:08:35 AM |
| Congrats! It was only two weeks ago that I hit the 600 post mark. |
| #102 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:10:45 AM |
|
If you do any work with XML, I'd highly recommend it. When I started learning XSLT, I fell in love with it. The only thing I've seen so far that comes close is the ActiveState XSLT plugin for VisualStudio .NET. XML Spy, though, does a heck of a lot more than that plug in does. Well, at least more than the plugin did when I tested the beta of it last year.
Two thumbs up to XML Spy! |
| #103 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:11:53 AM |
| nom, if that wasn't flame bait, I don't know what is. Lol, great comment. I'll go fishing for a good response. I already wrote one somewhere yesterday. |
| #104 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:14:56 AM |
|
jedi, I think it'll be called something lame like
Office XP2 v11 v2002 .NET This post was edited by BobSmith on Monday, September 23, 2002 at 04:15. |
| #105 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:15:50 AM |
| I don't think it will be that long. |
| #106 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:18:06 AM |
| Office EP (Extended Productivity) .NET :-) |
| #107 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:18:19 AM |
|
Have you noticed the name of the current Microsoft desktop OS?
Windows XP versio 2002 and if you check the about box you'll learn it is 5.1 Or how 'bout development environment VisualStudio .NET version 7 version 2002 Or next gen server Windows .NET Server 2002 here of course we'll add the edition - standard, web server, data center, etc. I'll be the next Office will have a pretty long name Office .NET 2003 or something like that. |
| #108 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:18:55 AM |
| Reminds me of Eminem's first album - Slim Shady EP. |
| #109 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:20:21 AM |
| Yeah, but I thought we were talking about the common box name. |
| #110 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:20:36 AM |
|
nom,
Since AW already took friday off the homepage, I had to go searching via the querystring to find this. Surprisingly I got it on my first guess. http://www.activewin.com/awin/comments.asp?HeadlineIndex=11827&Group=1 So in response to your trumpetting OS X, I say: How many users are there that are "flooding over to Apple's operating system"? You've got to be joking. Both Apple and Microsoft have stated the low adoption rate of OS X. Also, Microsoft and third parties have stated that Windows XP is the best selling Microsoft operating system. If you want to compare numbers, I'd say that Microsoft's Windows XP is far, far ahead of Apple's OS X. Apple doesn't even seem too able to convince its own users to use OS X, much less current Windows users. If you are going to point me to the switch campaign, I'll just start laughing now. Anyone with half a clue about being a Windows user, would know the content of the switch ads is, well, inaccurate. It's FUD. Also, I've heard plenty of OS X problems, so I don't want to hear that it is the greatest of OSes either. As for XP, I've been using it since Whistler beta 1 in October 2000. It is a very solid OS and works with millions of devices. Apple can't touch the number of devices and applications that Windows XP supports. If you want to call OS X a good OS, I'm not against that. I am against the lie that is is superior to Windows XP. |
| #111 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:21:41 AM |
| n4cer, you might be right about the common box name. Still Windows .NET Server 2003 is a pretty long name. Office .NET 2003 would be my best guess as to the next name. |
| #112 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:24:30 AM |
| I've never tried it. It's Mac only isn't it? |
| #113 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:24:54 AM |
|
I, too, think Office.NET 2003 comes closest to what the final name will be.
It would be cool if they used the pre-beta reference and called it Office NGO (version 2003) |
| #114 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:25:17 AM |
| Slightly redundant though. |
| #115 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:26:02 AM |
| But name redundancy never stopped the tech industry before. |
| #116 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:27:20 AM |
| With Windows .NET getting released, it'll be kind of hard for them to not add the ".NET" moniker to Office's name. If Office doesn't support CLR stuff, though, it has no business having ".NET" in its name. That's just my opinion, of course. |
| #117 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:27:59 AM |
| Specifically, name redudancy has certainly not stopped Microsoft. |
| #118 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:28:47 AM |
|
jedi,
http://www.filemaker.com/products/fmd_home.html I see that I am wrong. File Maker is also a Windows program. |
| #119 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:29:49 AM |
|
Filemaker is apparently also available for Windows.
http://www.filemaker.com/products/fm_home.html |
| #120 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:30:18 AM |
| Beat me to it :-) |
| #121 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:31:57 AM |
| Tee hee! |
| #122 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:37:15 AM |
|
Did you read nom's latest post?
n4cer, You are correct that the NT kernel has come a long way. You are also correct with the evolution statement. I like to use the unbelievably clever analogy that the UNIX kernel is a homo sapien while the NT kernel is an Australopithecus. why is MS one of the few companies that can make their own OS from the kernel up? They choose the inefficient way at their own peril. You see that they only have around 95%, according to most estimates, of the desktop market. Why can't they clinch the rest? Perhaps it's the power of the Apple corporation with their Mac OS X which is suprise, surprise built on the UNIX kernel. |
| #123 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/23/2002 4:41:45 AM |
|
This discussion is getting a little wierd. Funny, but wierd. :-)
Reverse psychology? This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, September 23, 2002 at 04:42. |
| #124 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:44:21 AM |
|
"i feel no obligation to back my rhetoric with any fact". Well, you've done very well so far in not providing fact for your arguments.
Steve Jobs himself has published similar numbers as Microsoft has about OS X's adoption rate, so whatever a book publisher has to say is really meaningless. |
| #125 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/23/2002 4:45:03 AM |
| Reverse psychology? I didn't catch that one. Care to explain? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 101 through 125 of 1324 Prev | First | Last | Next |
The time now is
8:40:09 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
