| 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 |
 |
Beating Bill Gates: Part 2 | |
|
||
| Time: 07:32 EST/12:32 GMT | News Source: CNN | Posted By: Bill Roach | ||
|
They're tech's equivalent of John Cleese's hilarious Gallic (since French appears to be a dirty word in Congress' cafeterias these days ... glad to see the government has its priorities in order) taunter in "Monty Python and The Holy Grail." "You don't frighten us...I blow my nose on you!" Last month, I took a look at Intuit, the personal finance software developer that is thriving even though Microsoft tried to buy it nine years ago. In this column, the focus is on Adobe Systems, which makes graphic software Photoshop and Illustrator and the ubiquitous document reader, Acrobat. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 344 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:27:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 3/14/2003 11:31:15 AM |
|
Adobe, Real, and Intuit have held off Microsoft for a couple of very simple reasons.
1.) They haven't rested with their market share leads, unlike Netscape, Apple in education, WordPerfect, and Novell 2.) They don't "thumb their noses" at Microsoft. Its not very smart to wave a red flag at the bull. Just look at Sun and now Oracle's declines as evidence of this. |
| #2 By 10896 (65.213.122.66) at 3/14/2003 1:51:57 PM |
|
I say Vive La France
Anybody who tries to stop the court-appointed , ex-drunk, moron in the white house deserves support of intelligent people everywhere. |
| #3 By 20 (67.9.179.51) at 3/14/2003 5:44:39 PM |
|
#4: *sigh* It's sad to know there are such dellusional people like you running around claiming to be intelligent.
Just for the record, the people voted, he wasn't court-appointed, the court just stopped Al Gore and Co. from violating the law (well, from violating it worse than they already had, at least). |
| #4 By 1896 (66.20.203.210) at 3/14/2003 7:22:42 PM |
| Daz as you surely know the elected President of the United States must be approved by Senate; the candidates win States and each State represent a certain number of "electoral votes". What this means is that a President is not elected purely on the base of the number of people who voted for him. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the system is right or wrong, just pointing out some peculiarities of the system. |
| #5 By 10896 (24.25.182.11) at 3/15/2003 6:29:27 AM |
|
#6 Typical daz - A comment about my intelligence and you cant even spell correctly. The people in this country did vote and about 3/4 million more voted for Al Gore than Bush. The vote in Florida was stolen by the B brothers and finally confirmed by the Supreme Court.
|
| #6 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/15/2003 10:49:00 AM |
|
I don't know that it matters. This Bush is making his father look like a good President, which honestly was a hard trick to pull off.
There's no hope for America, at least not for the next two years. :( |
| #7 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/15/2003 7:57:11 PM |
|
parker - "I do believe after all the counts were in even the media had to acknowledge that Bush had legitimately won Florida, no matter how many lies the Democrats told. "
I think you miss the point, which is not surprising given your propensity for ignorance when it comes to matters political. The problem that occured in Florida was one that was really quite easy to solve. It's called a recount. Had this occured in a proper fashion, there would have been no doubt as to who was the winner of the election. But it did not occur, and the election is therefore still in doubt. Gore's team screwed up, they read the Florida law which apparently was only written for local elections, and tried to abide by it. Bush's team stamped their feet and cried like babies, and Gore let him. The end result was a SCOTUS decision which intervened in what is absolutely and without a doubt identified as a State's Right by the Constitution. Whether or not a recount performed by the newspaper showed Bush did win is irrelevant. The problem is the attitude and actions taken by the parties, and quite clearly Bush's team intervened in manner which was damaging to the long term interests of our Nation, solely for short term gain. This is what we call the Rule of Law. It's called doing what's right, even though you potentially risk not getting your way. It's the same problem Bush now has with the United Nations and why he is now looking to circumvent International Law because he can't get his way through legal channels. These are the qualities of Adults... something Bush clearly is not. As for your nonsense about weapons and such. The Iraqi war has nothing to do with weapons. I don't know that it has anything to do with oil either. It's actually not clear what the reasons were, or are. But what it's evolved into is a childish game of "I want my way!" "But just maybe I'll be a little happier when the US, UK and Australia invades Iraq and finishes off the mass murdering Baathists. " I'd have more sympathy for your position if you didn't act so much like a Child. Iraq was mass murdering back in the 1980's, and it's quite clear from your thought patterns that if we were having this discussion 15 years ago you would be defending that genocide. I am not a big fan of people who use fake Moral Outrage purely for politican gain, as you yourself are doing. It's just another sign of the moral depravity this nation suffers from, a depravity which has been encouraged by the Right-Wing media. |
| #8 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 3/15/2003 9:37:28 PM |
|
soda:
I hate to tell you this, but I actually LIVE in Florida and everything that went on is quite the opposite to what you said.... but anything to make the democrats look good, Bush look bad, and to make your position, right? The facts: It took Gore 4 recounts until he gave up on the election. When the counts were done, they were done the way democratic party wanted it, and Bush came out to winning in each one of those ways (a couple of which were a bit shady). Bush didn't even say a thing during the whole turmoil.... in fact instead of going around crying over something, he actually started prepairing his administration. Bush won Florida fairly no ifs, ands, or buts. So let me get this straight, the war with Iraq isn't about disarming, and about a regime change? Then what is it about? Again, the facts are that Iraq has continued to stockpile weapons even though one the terms for peace in the 90's was that Iraq disarmed. Saddam uses violence to hold his position in Iraq. There was a joke on Jay Leno one night where they had a Saddam impersonater the TV and they were talking about how Saddam had won 100% of the vote, and he responded with "It's all about the campaign.... I say, You like your arm? Vote for Saddam." or something to that effect... unfortunately, it's not far from the truth. Saddam's regime uses torture, mass murder, anything it can in order to stay in power. Finally, I am sick and tired of your slandering of the republican party just for the reason that you somehow think that you, as a democrat, are always right, and republicans are always wrong.... and yes, some republicans do the same thing, I can't stand that either. |
| #9 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 12:37:46 AM |
|
CPUGUy - "Finally, I am sick and tired of your slandering of the republican party just for the reason that you somehow think that you, as a democrat, are always right, and republicans are always wrong.... and yes, some republicans do the same thing, I can't stand that either. "
Well first of all I'm not a Democrat. Second of all it's not slander. Lastly, I'll tell you what. I'll take your complaint seriously when you direct it at daz, mooresa56 and parker. Until then, I will continue to correct them on their idiocy. |
| #10 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 12:44:43 AM |
|
parker - "What makes me want to puke is people like you"
Oh great, some more fake moral outrage. "I have no doubt you sided with the Carter/CLinton appeasement policies, that were interpreted by the enemies of the US as weakness and led directly to 9/11. " And here comes the political agenda, right from the puke of the fake moral outrage. |
| #11 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 1:03:06 AM |
|
parker - "As for your ignoranct comment about the 80's, I would never have approved of the torture and mass murder policies of Saddam. I am saddened that it doesn't bother you. "
Ahh, weird. When I found out about it I stopped being a supporter of President Reagan. That in conjunction with the Iran-Contra weapons deals, where it was clear he was playing both sides of a brutal conflict at the cost of innocent lives. Apparently it didn't bother you as much as you say it did because you then go on to defend it... And you wonder why I scoff at your fake moral outrage. Especially your "Blame the Victim" mentality. |
| #12 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 3:12:06 AM |
|
parker - "No really. You make me literally want to puke. Nothing fake about the urge at all. "
Well I'm not surprised, but this sensation you are feeling now isn't moral outrage, it's what you feel when you've been bested in an argument and can't think of an easy escape path. "Anyway, I can see all you want to do is change the subject and avoid explaining why you hate Bush for going after Saddam and Iraq -- other than the lame excuse of Iran-Contra. " Oh no, you don't seem to understand. I hate Bush because he's destroying the economic future of our children, not because he wants to go after Saddam. You see, I don't like Saddam and would like nothing better for him to be out of power. I would have thought that was apparent by now, especially when I pointed out that I had abandoned the Republican party precisely because they condoned his genocide back in the 80's. Now what I don't like is the way President Bush is going about this, because in his short-sighted rush for Pax Americana he is destroying decades of trust we had developed with our allies. You know come to think of it, I have a really good quote here that I think will sum up exactly why I think what President Bush is doing is wrong... "If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that's why we've got to be humble, and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. " I'll leave it as an excercise to you to find out who uttered the quote and when. Trained him well, they did. "Victim? You see Saddam as a victim? " In one of your recent messages you blamed President Clinton for 9/11. That was one of the most patently offensive things I've ever seen you say. Oh, and this isn't fake moral outrage. Just so you understand the difference, if you had blamed President Bush for 9/11 I would have felt exactly the same way. It seems you will stoop to any low in your quest for political agenda, including blaming a rape victim for wearing a skimpy red dress. "What a loon. " Ahh, and now we are resorting to insults. Is this your exit strategy to the debate? This post was edited by sodablue on Sunday, March 16, 2003 at 03:13. |
| #13 By 1896 (66.20.203.210) at 3/16/2003 9:16:17 AM |
| Parker for your information Jews and Palestinians are both of Semitic origin; actually most of the populations living in the Arabic Peninsula are of Semitic origin but the Iranians who are of Indo-European origin. |
| #14 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 2:14:04 PM |
|
parker - You're a coward. You're scared. It's apparent now, the more you talk, the more ridiculous your arguments become, and you really have no idea what it is you are defending. In your blind fear you just want to lash out at anything that remotely questions your existence or even perception of reality.
Amazing. I'm done talking with you parker. You are dismissed. |
| #15 By 10896 (24.25.182.11) at 3/16/2003 2:49:06 PM |
|
Agree Soda
I think he has been watching Faux news too much. It is not only the "Axis of Weasels" but every country in the world except USA and Israel, where the populations are overwhelming against the US policy. It is even extremely unpopular in England(see Churchill quotes above) where Tony Blair will probably be replaced as leader of Parliment if he moves without a second UN resolution. Is he conveniently overlooking all the deals the US had with Iraq in the 80s, the time when they acquired and used the chem/bio weapons. He also forgets that the USA gave Saddam battlefield satellite photos everyday so he could have better success with his artillery weapons(including chem/bio warheads). It was also convenient that the Bush administration ripped out 9000 of the 12000 pages of Iraq's weapons report, before it was given to the public. All in all I give Bush an Oscar for the worst Diplomatic performance in the history of the world. |
| #16 By 10896 (24.25.182.11) at 3/16/2003 3:55:27 PM |
|
No lie
I was speaking about popular opinion in countries not the opinions of the Government. Are you going to tell me seriously that the populations of Spain, Portugal, and Australia support their government's policies. I think if you look at opinion polls in those countries about 80% or more dont support these policies. I didn't blame anybody just pointing out the increasingly isolated US position. In general I find Mr Buchanan's opinions and politics totally unacceptable. So is there anything you would not support, assuming that in the future some totally unrelated and unexpected benefit would result. How come in 1989 the US failed to support a UN Resolution on a investigation into Human Right Abuses and War Crimes in Saddam Hussein's Iraq? Now 14 years later these same War Crimes are a reason for war. Republican hypocrisy??? |
| #17 By 10896 (24.25.182.11) at 3/16/2003 4:00:29 PM |
|
There will be no second Resolution.
And Resolution 1441 clearly requires one before any military action. |
| #18 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/16/2003 5:44:20 PM |
|
billmac - There is definately more to this. I cannot believe even the Bush administration would be so simplistic in their planning. But, the recent discussion of Hussein launching a preemptive strike seems to indicate they intend on using a Tonkin Gulf strategy to start the war.
I guess we'll see. It sounds like Bush plans to start the war this week. |
| #19 By 1896 (66.20.203.210) at 3/16/2003 6:45:19 PM |
| I think the invasion will start wednesday night. It will be interesting to see when the media will realize that the local populations see as as christian invaders and not "liberators". Too many people have already forgotten what happened in Somalia. |
| #20 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/17/2003 1:39:13 AM |
|
Notice parker's line of attack... He can't respond to the issues raised, he can only blindly support whatever policy the GOP takes, whether it be implicit support of genocide in Iraq or now imperialist colonialism.
So because he cannot defend his positions he resorts to manipulative questioning, such as: "Why do you not wish them to be liberated? Why do you want them to be ruled by Saddam and his sons for the next 30-40 years?" Yet at no time have either myself or billmac ever suggested that we do not wish Iraq liberated. So why this question? The discussion here is rather the means by which this is to occur. But parker cannot fathom that, his world is completely black and white. Parker's problem is unfortunately not unique. It's like any yellow bellied coward, you give them a gun in the dark and they are more likely to shoot someone friendly than enemy. |
| #21 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 3/17/2003 10:03:52 AM |
|
blue - for someone who claims to value the "other" opinion... your "yellow bellied coward" remark makes you look bad.
You'll notice I'm not commenting on the war itself. I don't find it reasonable to speak against my friends in uniform at such a late date. They have an awful ordeal in front of them, and I resort to praying for them... rather than debating politics on a technology web board. |
| #22 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 3/17/2003 10:44:54 AM |
|
Oh look... mooresa56 is playing the fake moral outrage card.
How typical. Oh, and I love the hidden insult that somehow speaking out against President Bush's egomaniacal war mongering is a statement against our soldiers. Fascinating, but again it's manipulative language just like the fake moral outrage. |
| #23 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 3/20/2003 2:54:39 PM |
|
another quick, baseless judgement blue. Its "fake" for me? Exactly how do you know that?
Bush is egomaniacal? And what adjective would you use to quickly assess Hussain? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 344 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:27:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
