| 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 |
 |
The Fall of Google, the Rebirth of Microsoft and the Changing Face of Apple and Linux | |
|
||
| Time: 05:41 EST/10:41 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Microsoft is evil and Google isn't, right? Maybe not, after recent events, writes columnist Rob Enderle. He also is revising his impression of Richard Stallman as an advocate of freedom, and Apple as a company that makes all the right marketing moves. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 173 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:08:08 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 8:03:03 AM |
|
Rob Enderle. All I needed to see. If Microsoft had an ass, Enderle's DNA would be all over it. He endlessly backed SCO in its disastrous lawsuit against Novell/Linux. How's that one going for you, Rob? But, no matter how wrong these analyst clowns are, the press keeps going back to them for more. I didn't get far into his spew, but by the second paragraph he's praising Microsoft (quelle surprise!) and calling Stallman un-American. Par for the Enderle course. His wiki bio even says he's a noted pro-MS, anti-Linux/FOSS shill.
|
| #2 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 8:15:47 AM |
|
#1, Enough! Anyone that finds a dang thing "right" with anything MS does is a "shill?"
Rob Enderle finds good things in products across the board. He finds and reports on bad things, too. Again, across the board and regardless of platform. Any chance that he's trying to be objective and fair? Not in your eyes, I guess. The "shill" crap is as tiring and inappropriate. |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 8:30:49 AM |
|
#2: Enough! Anyone that finds a dang thing "right" with anything MS does is a "shill?"
Rob Enderle finds good things in products across the board. He finds and reports on bad things, too. Again, across the board and regardless of platform. Well, by definition, anyone who promotes someone is a shill, but it has a negative connotation due to the habit of the promoter to misrepresent themselves as objective. Anyone who pumps something up without disclosing their interest is a shill. Enderle is a shill and has been for years. Until I visited his wiki page, I had no idea he had been caught shilling for Toshiba in the HDDVD/BluRay fight. I'm sorry if the reality of it disturbs you. If it makes you feel any better, I don't see you as a shill. Rabid fanboy, sure, but not a shill. Any chance that he's trying to be objective and fair? Sure, there's always the chance. Any chance the tiger chasing the elk just wants to play? Disregard the fact that every other time the tiger chases the elk, he eats the elk. This time might be different. The "shill" crap is as tiring and inappropriate. Agreed. I, too, am tired of talking heads like Enderle, Bott and others tirelessly beating the MS drum. |
| #4 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 9:39:06 AM |
|
@3, People who use MS SW and the platform it is have continually looked for and found value.
To me it is like a set of tools. People have turned to partners like ourselves for a long time - not with requests for specific software, but for well integrated solutions that work for them. We select the right tools and devise, implement and sustain a solution which delivers value. That does not make me a fanboy, much less a shill. By definition that makes me a professional - I use tools in the execution of my work. Microsoft makes good tools that work well together - be they clients, servers, and or specialty tools for developers. In Enderle's article, he wrote about value. The value being sought and that being delivered. There is obviously a ratio involved - real and perceived. Enderle rightly identified what the companies being examined "might" reflect in the way value and how that "might" be perceived. That makes him "thoughtful" - not a shill. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 9:48:47 AM |
|
#4: Lots of people use MS software & solutions. I am one of them. Lots of people make wonderful things with MS software. That doesn't make them fanboys. A fanboy, for example, would be a person who spends their time on forums like these trying to explain away, debunk or flatly dismiss anything that might be in any way critical of Microsoft. Isn't that what you do? You're like a more literate, less idiotic parkkker, but you are the same in that you will not let any slight against MS go unchallenged. That's a fanboy. You are a fanboy. Embrace it. Enderle is a shill with a long track record of supporting Microsoft and dissing FOSS/Linux or anything non-Microsoft. And once again he's doing his trick; the shill in action. Plus, as noted in the wiki entry, all you have to do is listen to Enderle and then believe the opposite of what he said since he's wrong most of the time.
|
| #6 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 10:43:46 AM |
|
#5, Huh... so the time and money I spend supporting hospitals in Nicaragua and the plane used by the American Medical Brigade makes me a fanboy of what exactly?
No. It's about supporting communities of people in various ways. Un, or underemployed teens in the U.K., food and fruit drives for shelters and some thirty others. Awin is only one and not even the only technical one. Awin is a lot about recognizing that digital technologies are central to our lives and that MS/Windows is so prevalent that the vast majority of people will be using it. Helping people get the most out of that is about helping a larger community of people. Devoting real time to it is about committing to what one says is valuable to them and setting an example. Fending off FUD is about just that and helping people see the reality in what they are likely to use each day. Do I admire and respect passionate engineers that build things like SW? You bet. and if you think I am never critical of MS SW, ask me what I think of WGA and how it is implemented. I'm just not going to be critical without offering a solution. For an apparently liberal guy, you sure label people a lot |
| #7 By 8556 (12.206.195.4) at 7/22/2008 10:44:29 AM |
|
Some people see value where others don't. Enderle writes about there being tremendous value in paying monthly for Equipt: "The product itself bundles Microsoft Office Home and Student (all most people really need), Windows Live OneCare (security, performance, help), Office Live Workspace (collaboration), and Windows Live Services (communications) under a $70 annual fee for up to 3 machines. That's under $6 a month for 3 machines or under $2 per machine per month. Hard to argue that isn't a good value."
I see Equipt as a very poor value. Office 2007 Home and Student is on sale often for $99, a decent value and one time payment for three PC's. One Care is ineffective on Windows XP compared to Avira AntiVir, NOD32, AVG, and many other low cost or free AV's. What is useful about Live is already free. I was at CES when Bill Gates introduced Office. I remember him saying that this will change the way people buy productivity software since the package was priced below what Word Perfect was selling for. He was dead on with his thinking. MS Office changed the way business used software and makes MS billions of US dollars. Equipt? Not gonna be the next big thing. |
| #8 By 3653 (65.80.181.153) at 7/22/2008 11:17:09 AM |
|
latch - "His wiki bio even says"
you're as funny as you are ignorant |
| #9 By 92283 (142.32.208.233) at 7/22/2008 11:44:20 AM |
|
#5 "Lots of people use MS software & solutions. I am one of them."
I have never seen a shred of evidence you have personal knowledge of the use of Microsoft software. All your bullsh*t is just MS hater talking points. Enderle isn't making up the Google/Daycare issue. It was huge on the web for days. Google has been exposed. It is a damaged brand among potential employees. Not fatally damaged ... but they have done nothing to fix the problem. |
| #10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 12:03:00 PM |
|
#6: Huh... so the time and money I spend supporting hospitals in Nicaragua and the plane used by the American Medical Brigade makes me a fanboy of what exactly?
Congrats on winning the Non-Sequitur of the Week award. I'm not sure what Nicaraguan hospitals have to do with your MS promotion here on AW. You bet. and if you think I am never critical of MS SW, ask me what I think of WGA and how it is implemented. I'm just not going to be critical without offering a solution. Yes, I've heard you say that before. It seems to be the only thing you can hang your hat on when accused of MS fanboyism -- "I don't like WGA!". Meanwhile, you see nothing wrong with MS gaming ISO, nothing wrong with MS bribing that Nigerian company to disrupt the Mandriva deal, nothing wrong with their empty words about interoperability while foot-dragging the required disclosure, their constant antitrust issues, etc etc etc ad infinitum. If something appears on AW that isn't two thumbs up for MS, you can be counted on to swoop in with a big bag of paragraph bombs to discredit the post. There is no equal to you here on AW as far as vigorous defense of MS goes. |
| #11 By 3653 (65.80.181.153) at 7/22/2008 12:14:40 PM |
| # of latch posts = 1/price of coffee bean futures |
| #12 By 92283 (142.32.208.233) at 7/22/2008 12:15:38 PM |
|
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/07/the-death-of-go.html
"The Patent and Trademark Office has now made clear that its newly developed position on patentable subject matter will invalidate many and perhaps most software patents, including pioneering patent claims to such innovators as Google, Inc." Yeah yeah ... Latch will claim the PTO is a shill for Microsoft. This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 at 12:30. |
| #13 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 12:21:49 PM |
|
#10, It's really rather simple, Latch. The same motivations that compel me to actively support the Awin community and devote time and resources to it, are the same motivations that compel me to support other, completely unique initiatives.
You're certainly smart enough to understand what I meant. foot-dragging the required disclosure Now this is telling... very telling <blast initiated> Look, and this is for possibly very young Awin'ers out there... this comment from Latch is very telling... it screams he's full of pond-water and has about zip experience in this field.... Here's why... any person who has engineered about anything in IT/MSSW Dev, knows three things: 1) Documentation takes as long, or longer than the actual work and 2) It is dang expensive and difficult to perform well and 3) It is almost always wrong in at least small ways. Having worked like a dog to document all we do, I can tell you how hard it is and how quickly all that work becomes dated. It's extremely tough, costly and time consuming. Hammering at MS, or any company over such things reflects ignorance. The question one has then is, "is that ignorance selective, or is Latch really that bad off...?" I want to be kind and suggest it is selective, but I am beginning to wonder if we have not found the bottom and the top and now recognize that it is neither deep, or high... |
| #14 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 1:33:19 PM |
|
#13: I'll say one thing: you shuck & jive as well as anyone. You are adept at dancing over what I've said and selectively framing the discussion in ways that avoid addressing what I said.
As for your latest MS apology, no I don't believe it for a second. I'm very familiar with several MS SDKs, so I'm aware that your argument is nonsense. MS keeps excellent documentation, as good as any I've seen. It's not perfect but nothing is. I also do some doc in my many-hat job, and am aware of how difficult it is to keep up with active development in real-time when things are constantly changing. However, in MS's case, everything that was asked of them had already been implemented and released. Considering how they release full SDKs when they release a major product (or shortly thereafter), are you trying to make me believe that MS releases its server OS software with no documentation of the interfaces and how everything works & fits together? Give me a break. |
| #15 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 2:39:00 PM |
|
#14, Yes, I am saying exactly that. However great MS's documentation is - and it most certainly is the best I have seen, yes, it is as incomplete (in relative terms), as ours is (owing to much greater complexity).
Further, I assess it is entirely reasonable to understand that it is incomplete - given active development and the number of dependencies involved. Still further, "interoperability" that MS has committed to makes it worse - more to interface with - making their position even more reasonable. As an example of "bad Microsoft" you're going to have to pick another one, or find some jurists with a larger capacity to reason. This is a big challenge and it isn't going to get any better. SDK's... make me laugh/cry... that is much more limited in scope. Besides... what if the reviewer of documentation continuously says it's not enough... I want to interface with my toaste... give me the instructions on how to do that, or I will take more of your money... what then? |
| #16 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 3:05:17 PM |
|
#15: Further, I assess it is entirely reasonable to understand that it is incomplete - given active development and the number of dependencies involved.
Sorry, that answer doesn't pass the smell test. Despite your assurances, I don't believe any of that for a second. Still further, "interoperability" that MS has committed to makes it worse - more to interface with - making their position even more reasonable. I believe you mean intraoperability in this case, as MS is interested in having everything work with Windows and not the other way around. And in any case, that's irrelevant to MS documenting its own protocols. If anything, MS's supposed (but we know better) new-found desire for interoperability would see them creating good doc during development and not years afterward because the EU ordered them to. But then I don't believe they didn't already have it in some internal form all the time. Besides... what if the reviewer of documentation continuously says it's not enough... As I recall, the special master in this case was picked by Microsoft. I want to interface with my toaste... You're turning this around. If MS provides API doc, then anyone (be it with a toaster or IBM's latest supercomputer) can properly communicate with Windows. It's not like MS has to make changes based on what's on the other end. At any rate, it is clear that it is you who have run out of apologia on this issue. Your argument holds no water. It doesn't make sense. I can't wait until a few years from now when various MS insiders start writing books about what went on behind the scenes back in the day. Should make for some interesting reading. |
| #17 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 3:17:18 PM |
|
what a difference a vowel makes, huh? one man's e is another man's a...
Right.... and all the others? Where is their platform and where is the ecosystem that MS is supposed to conform to? You see, that is the point here... in effect, you seem to agree with the EU on this - where they demonstrate that they simply wish corporations to surrender what they have EARNED. It's like this... I build muscle and strength for me to use. Seems fair and has come in plenty handy over the decades. You want one to build muscle and strength so that a line can be plugged into them and their blood drawn off according to the wishes and desires of another. When you do that you remove the incentive to build it in the first place - worse, when one does build access and shares it willfully, then the sincerity of that is drawn into question. I have always wondered what motivates a socialist. It isn't that they want to share - I think it is that they are afraid of failing, or trying to excell and can't stand for the bar being set high naturally. They are afraid and need others to be equally fearful... because otherwise it all might just be too hard. Just my thoughts and please note, I'm not defending MS - but I a defending ideals. |
| #18 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/22/2008 3:40:27 PM |
|
#17: Right.... and all the others? Where is their platform and where is the ecosystem that MS is supposed to conform to?
I don't know. Where is it? It must be there someone because you keep claiming that Microsoft desires interoperability. For them to desire that, there must be someone/something else for them to interoperate with, no? Geez Louise, you make it sound like you have to give up everything if you become successful. Nothing could be further from the truth, and as plain evidence you'll note that the EU isn't hassling anyone but Microsoft. I wonder why they hassle Microsoft? Is it because they're so awesome? Or is it because Microsoft is the only company with a monopoly position that is abusing its power to better itself, harming consumers all the time. Whether you like it or not, both the US and the EU have laws in place to try and prevent a commercial entity with a monopoly position from exploiting its monopoly to limit competition. See, they've managed to figure out that monopoly abuse is bad for competition, bad for consumers, bad for the industry. The only one it's good for is the monopoly holder and their shareholders. I know you know this because it makes sense to anyone with at least half a brain. |
| #19 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 7/22/2008 4:06:59 PM |
|
#17: "can't stand for the bar being set high naturally"
Well "Eugenetics" was first theorized and USED here in the US so I should not be surprised by these kind of comments. Btw when you use the word "Socialism" to which incarnation of socialism are you referring to? The way you speak seems to imply that in your mind exist only two kind of possible, monolithic societies: Capitalistic and Socialist Things are not so simple though; the world is not black and white, there is not good and evil only etc. The predominant is always the grey; in millions of gradients but still gray. This post was edited by Fritzly on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 at 16:08. |
| #20 By 11888 (65.95.1.164) at 7/22/2008 4:27:38 PM |
| I wish I understood what the hell you're all fighting about. |
| #21 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/22/2008 5:29:39 PM |
|
#19, Fritz, seriously, you think people are not meant to aspire? To seek out to be and do more than any other might have cast them to? Do you think that people do not seek out the very best mates they can?
Socialists as I see them prefer: a) enormous pevassive governments b) equally pervassive and hugh taxes c) social engineering which ignores real cultural and regional uniqueness and d) mediocrity e) assurances of the appearance of success - easy to do since no one is going to try anything hard to begin with - so there is no risk of failing. You're right... the world is not black and white. It is small and big - small government, or big government. I am for a very small central government with a limited charter. For example, government has no role whatever in telling anyone who to love, or who to marry. It should not have an opinion, or the power to express one. Nor should it have the power to take money from you, and give it to someone who sits on his backside all day. When a person is in need, the strong around him have the responsibility to reach out and care for him - and no government is needed for that. That is community. |
| #22 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 7/22/2008 9:26:23 PM |
|
I do not think that people are not meant to aspire. At the same time I believe that a modern society cannot be based on the law of the jungle where the stronger eat the weaker.
What you described is not a kind of socialism as well not capitalism; it is called burocracy. I agree that governement should not dictate who you are allowed to marry; last time I checked was the Republican party that was trying to block same sex marriage. Finally I am not a Socialist but I read Marx, Gramsci, Henry Levy etc. as well as Adam Smith and Keynes. Btw you culd find interesting some reading about Lenin' NEP, a further example that everything is grey... |
| #23 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 7/22/2008 9:27:02 PM |
| #20: you wrote the best post I have read in ages!!! |
| #24 By 92283 (70.66.78.103) at 7/22/2008 11:54:12 PM |
|
#19 Eugencis was a British idea at first.
"The modern field and term were first formulated by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his cousin Charles Darwin." "Galton invented the term eugenics in 1883 and set down many of his observations and conclusions in a book, Inquiries into human faculty and its development. He believed that a scheme of "marks" for family merit should be defined, and early marriage between families of high rank be encouraged by provision of monetary incentives. He pointed out some of the tendencies in British society, such as the late marriages of eminent people, and the paucity of their children, which he thought were dysgenic. He advocated encouraging eugenic marriages by supplying able couples with incentives to have children." The Nazi's did impliment it on large scale. |
| #25 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 7/23/2008 6:28:23 AM |
|
The concepts at the base of "Eugenetics" goes all the way back to the beginning of the human civilization, yes way before Sparta, where children with abnormities were killed immediately.
Sir Galton and others scientists in the late 19 Century theorized the improvement of human race through marriages of high profiles individuals. It was in the US that, at the beginning of the 20th Century and until the late 60', coercive sterilization and confinement of of people with mental hillnesses and other issues that made them "inferior" were widely used and sanctioned by law in many States. This post was edited by Fritzly on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 06:28. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 173 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:08:08 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
