Comments on: Is Microsoft ‘Buying-Off’ Linux Netbook Vendors? [Updated]

By: Les

Les — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 20:30:53 +0000

I strongly suspect that Microshaft is probably paying Asus & PC World to make such statements.

By: The Open Sourcerer » Taxing Times for Free Choice

The Open Sourcerer » Taxing Times for Free Choice — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:46:07 +0000

[...] to pay for software for which we have no need nor desire. Microsoft seem to have successfully closed down many of the earlier Linux bundled netbooks through downright bribery or co-coercion I assume. It is not [...]

By: Ladislav Kocbach

Ladislav Kocbach — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:42:49 +0000

Somebody should do more research on this: In the last big US trial Microsoft was explicitly forbidden to do exactly these things, i.e. threatening manufacturers not to install other systems (but only in some states? – has the court allowed them to be bad guys outside of the “unsettling states” and the rest of the world ?). Also, (this is all 1999-2001) it was ordered to split Microsoft (Clinton administration passed it to Bush). Apparently the first thing Bush did was to abolish all these things. So strangely enough, the problems mankind now has with Microsoft are directly caused by former president Bush. You Americans should do something about it. The court order to split Microsoft must still be somewhere, at least as a historical fact. Splitting Microsoft to about 20 small companies – is it a good or bad idea (I think split to two was ordered in 2000). The trouble is that there is apparently a large group of people who love Microsoft – I quote – it is pearl: “I install 3rd party programs because of that, i would appreciate if I didn’t have to do that because, i personally love Microsoft and hope that one day it will actually think more about customer satisfaction and less about profits (to a reasonable degree of course)”. This comes from the blog Engineering Windows 7 where many MS users discuss windows, worship (and some abuse) Microsoft. It should really be studied, I think it is called “Stockholm syndrome”, i.e. when hostages sort of start loving their jailers. The quoted reader is obviously a victim. But we all are. Our common resources are wasted by Microsoft. And they pollute our public space by inventing ugly words and concepts (“total cost of ownership” is invented to discredit open source, “windows genuine advantage” – what pearl, “low cost small notebook PC” etc etc ). An interesting reading is 1984 by George Orwell – Newspeak – it seams Microsoft marketing mistook 1984 for a manual of good advertising practices.
So back to my point: Dear Americans, look eight years back and look forward. Have Microsoft put under court administration again. The money they earn are not quite white and the activities of the Microsoft Corporation present a threat to many public and international interests.

By: andries

andries — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:59:55 +0000

Is it to “zealous” to expect Microsoft to stop from hijacking other vendors? Because that is exactly what they did: Adding closed-propriety extensions to open standards, and then holding the whole IT industry hostage to it (Kerberos is a good example). Unfortunately they gained this power not through good quality software and/or smart business sense, but through leveraging their desktop monopoly on the 1 hand and just downright unethical business practices on the other. Take note that the fact that Microsoft has been convicted on Europe and the US of this. This means that in the eyes of the law and their peers, on both continents they are guilty. And any discussion on this is really just academical: Were those courts also “Linux zealots?” Next MS-kiddies will probably start brewing some “anti-MS” conspiracy theories.

By: kaldral

kaldral — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:24:42 +0000

Haha you guys are some crazy Linux zealots.

Too funny~

By: Ladislav Kocbach

Ladislav Kocbach — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:06:43 +0000

kalidas asks: “What suprises me is that after all the bad press microsoft gets, no other OS comes close to MS Windows desktop market share. Why?”
There is a simple answer: all machines come with windows. Anything else is stopped, bought, threatened into the line. That is the first major reason. Then come the small details. During the last 20 years people have accumulated all those small programs which they believe in. I also still have some: a gif animator from 1997, disk monger or whatever showing the disk usage beautifully; a very nice shareware editor, and so on. Only, I do not need them. I have better open source versions on both Mac and Linux. But I am privileged. A person in normal working situation who have bought her windows machines over the years (changing the PC the year the car still lasts) simply copies this personal security from windows 3.11 to windows 95, 98, ME, XP and now Vista. It is all unnecessary in the real world, but so essential in the world of (prison) windows. And then they have this little program they use with their boat, and one MS-DOS database…..
Well, you know it all too. It is all garbage, lack of information, various hidden agendas. It is called Microsoft ecosystem. The country which first prohibits Microsoft activities by law will make a major leap forward. I hope it could be Norway, but then our prime minister admires Mr. Gates. Perhaps US? President Obama is a macbook user? Can he expropriate Microsoft and dismantle gently the “ecosystem”? The grip is too tight for sudden changes. Look what I googled: Obama, the first true 21st century President, and his staff have arrived at the White House to find themselves stuck with 20th century Microsoft software… and they’re not happy…..

By: Ladislav Kocbach

Ladislav Kocbach — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:36:06 +0000

It is quite clear: the Microsoft Corporation has gone mad. Look at this: BING; ZUNE; SONGSMITH; GATES+SEINFELD movies; WINDOWS VISTA failure; Windows 7 rush; Not to speak about so called charity by family Gates; destroying OLPC; wrecking the concept of netbooks.
This bunch of extremely rich people has gone mad. They have been a threat to humanity for years, but now it seems to escalate beyond reason. They must be stopped. They are hysterical and dangerous. They waste resources. They put themselves into a position where they control 90 per cent of personal computers. I see only one reasonable solution: expropriation. Declaring them threat to US and the rest of the world. Gradual dismantling of the “evil empire”. Just one question for the admirers of wealth: How can one man become the richest man on this planet by having basically only shares in the company we talk about? How is it possible? Fraud, cheat and petty crime are the answers.

By: Cozee

Cozee — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:41:37 +0000

You don’t know? You sure wrote as though you knew… I guess someone told you, right?

By: Alan Lord

Alan Lord — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 18:48:40 +0000

@kalidas,

I think you are missing some quite important issues:

1. Microsoft are a convicted (several times over) monopolist. They have been found guilty of many crimes such as using their market dominance to crush competitors, distorting market pricing and bribing their channel (a bit like Intel in that respect) to not sell other vendors’ products.
2. Your opinion maybe the UI is awful. Mine is not. I really can’t stand the Windows UI, it feels dated, old fashioned and child-like. Oh yes, btw, you can have any colour you like it is easy to change.
3. Your single unified choice is what has got us in this bloody mess in the first place. “Single” and “Choice” is an oxymoron. Think about it….
4. Marketing. Jeez, is the world really so full of gullible and malleable people? Please tell me I’m wrong here?

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 17:38:44 +0000

What suprises me is that after all the bad press microsoft gets, no other OS comes close to MS Windows desktop market share. Why? three reasons me thinks. 1. Awful interface (I don’t mean gimmicky stuff, just general UI. Ubuntu, can we have a different default colour please?) 2. Single unified choice – too many Linux brands – with proper support structure. 3. No marketing. Apple and Microsoft spend so much on 1 and 3. With these very reason if I was a vendor I would not choose Linux (My job title has the word senior, so I can). MS knows very well as long as there are no unified brand of Linux they can play ‘divide and conquer’ game. I think most companies would like to be in that position, even the last place I worked at which was a Linux shop. Now I make my living developing mainly with MS tech.