FSF make their case against Windows 7 with new website

The Free Software Foundation has sent 499 letters to the top Fortune 500 companies (with Microsoft being the exception), trying to persuade the decision makers in the companies not to use Microsoft software, according to an article by Techspot. The FSF has made a list of claims against Microsoft, aiming to get big corporations to look at alternative software in order to reduce their dependency on Microsoft.

The letter they sent is titled "Re: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation," and can be found on the website they set up, Windows7sins.org. The FSF accuse Microsoft of the following: poisoning education, invading privacy, monopoly behavior, lock-in (in regards to removing support for older versions), abusing standards, enforcing DRM and threatening user security.

The site encourages users and organisations to look away from Microsoft for their software, and instead look at free software alternatives such as Linux and OpenOffice. Why Apple was not mentioned (seeing as they create proprietary software too) remains a mystery, but it appears that the FSF are targeting Windows 7 specifically while it launches.

The group intends to send even more letters as they receive more donations, with a $25 donation paying for 50 more letters, and a $100 donation paying for 200 letters to organisations and companies suggested by the community. How successful they will be remains to be seen, but you can have a look at the site yourself over here, where you can find the letter and the list of companies that have received the memo.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

The Pirate Bay purchase approved by shareholders

Next Story

Bill could give Obama control of Internet during emergencies

180 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I think the FSF is doing well in its campaign. I only think it's too late - they should've done this back when Windows 98 was released. At least then people wouldn't be so hateful -everyone disliked 98 except for people with ****ty computers when XP was out.

I'm not surpised people don't like this - this site is full of retards who are so inept that they pay extra money for software that allows them to use their computer. They also pay for anti-virus and anti-spyware protection. Some of them own Macs and have no problem forking hundreds of dollars for useless software either. Windows idiots usually chant the same **** "well if people actually used linux it would see more viruses". Go to netcraft.com and see where Linux has been handing microsoft it's ass for years. What? They own over HALF the market? Pwned. No viruses? Yeah. Two reasons: 1) People hate Microsoft, thats why they are a target. 2) 12 year olds can get Visual Basic or C# Express for Free and it takes 5 minutes to write a virus with those products in windows. Anti-virus will not detect these until they are in the wild. That subscription covers only viruses dear Symantec knows about.

90% of the PC desktop market is windows. Isn't it odd that also - 90% of the world is stupid? (all those long lines ppl wait through at the grocery store are caused by this). Surprising how well those numbers fit. I have no issues with Microsoft making a product for stupid people. I just don't want that system forced upon me through the use of DRM to make sure nothing works in Linux.

Also about the DRM comments. People wouldn't be ****ed if Microsoft removed DRM. The companies that use DRM would be forced to reissue non drm products to their customers (who cant use them now). If Microsoft never let DRM in to begin with what would these evil media companies have to stand on? People would have their DRM free media.

Note: half of the people who read this comment are still confused in thinking free software means it doesn't cost anything when it just means freedom of code.

A major problem for their cause is that the software might be free but the cost of converting all existing infrastructure isn't and would ultimately take way too much time and resources to be even considered. They should be targeting smaller companies that don't already have massive infrastructures in place. They are the ones that are more interested in software that costs nothing to run their businesses on. The problem is, the software has to be user friendly and provide heaps of support as most of these companies don't or won't have strong IT knowledge... would open open source software be able to meet their needs and IT experience?

I agree with Free Software, but i don't agree sending a smear letter to 499 companies telling them how awful Microsoft is. Couldn't this be considered slander?

I think everyone complaining about FSF whining or complaining or anyone hating on Free software should take the time to watch this documentary, http://www.revolution-os.com/. It explains the birth of Free software (and please note the Free does not mean Free as in $ but Free as in Freeing the user) and how GNU came about and the place the Linux kernel has in FSF and GNU. The documentary is a little dry, but full of information.

There is always going to be a battle between Windows/GNU/Apple. It is just the nature of the beast. IMO I think that we as a community need to stop fighting about which one system is best and continue to work toward better systems. There will probably never be one system to rule us all, but as it is now a few major systems that do specific things well. For example if I was going to run a web server I'd go Apache, if I was going to setup a business network I'd probably go Windows Server/Client, if I was a casual home user I'd go Apple, if I was looking to put a system together for minimal cost I'd go GNU/Linux. Or, like I do now, run both Windows and GNU/Linux together.

To me in the end it is what the FSF and all the hardworking people who brought us FSF and GNU hold as a philosophy that really brings me to support them. Freeing users to work, modify and use software and hardware as they need and desire.

While I am supportive of the of the idea of free software, these bunch of idiots never fail to amuse.
They are plain childish, and the design of the website is horrible (perhaps they are using free software to do it)

samuraiKidz said,
While I am supportive of the of the idea of free software, these bunch of idiots never fail to amuse.
They are plain childish, and the design of the website is horrible (perhaps they are using free software to do it)

Sorry, it doesn't have anything to do with the software at all. It's something to do with their bad taste

Man, these idiots are accusing Microsoft of everything under the sun except sodomy of newborns. My favorite is "lock-ins".

Unless Microsoft grows continually, then they can't continue to indefinitely support older versions. It's a waste of money. You can't expect that of a company. And if microsoft grows, these linux geeks will complain that it's getting too big.

By only attack at Apple was the Snow Leopard comment, and this simply came from the perceptions out in the market place atm. Not necessarily my personal opinion.

Of course not, but i've been told by a lot of people that people going from Windows to Mac is an easier transition then vise versa. Also it's to cover students who probably aren't heading into an IT profession, and have trouble grasping a lot of concepts easily.

The Mac reference is simply to cover the lack of comments regarding Mac in the clearly biased letter by the FSF. You cannot come down on one company for certain practices and not mention another company for doing the exact same thing.

I do believe the perceived 'coolness' of apple with users has protected them, and the letter can give thanks to the general 'we hate Microsoft' sentiments for it's existence.

LOL are you saying that using a PC and mac is so massively different that they will need to learn how to use a PC from scratch, give me a break!

1. Poisoning education: Children in schools around the world, are learning on Macs being given the idea that Apple actually has a large market share. Unfortunately when joining the work force, they find out that their 'skills' no longer mean anything, and will now need to learn to use a PC correctly.

2. Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software such as Windows Genuine Advanced to try to make sure their software isn't pirated, due to the fact that unlike apple they do not have proprietary system to offset the cost and value of their operating systems.

3. Monopoly behaviour: Microsoft continues to offer people it's products, despite it's vigorous attempts to make itself go bankrupt. In other news, Apple Mac's come with all the software you could possible ever need. In addition, if you would like to use iTunes, which is now one of the #1 music distribution systems, you may now use; in addition to its already vast array of platforms; the Apple iPhone to get your music. Continuing their dedication to open systems.

4. Lock-in: Microsoft regally releases new version and updates to its operating system to try to give users a new and interesting way to use their personal computers. In addition, to fight the Linux based hackers attempting to breach their system, Microsoft releases security patches to lock them out. Thankfully for Apple, it has been seen that snow leopard is nothing but a service pack, and isn't a required updated.

5. Abusing standards: Microsoft has attempted to generate a business model, based on formats that it has spent money creating, researching and updating.

6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): Microsoft works in collusion with the same big media companies apple does to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their music players. For example, you can only use i* products to Sync with iTunes. In addition both Microsoft and Apple enjoyed DRM formats, until they worked out people didn't like them.

7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets due to the lack of anything better to do. Microsoft remains the DOMENANT marketing leader in operating systems, therefore is targeting much more viciously than any other system on the market.

crashguy said,
1. Poisoning education: Children in schools around the world, are learning on Macs being given the idea that Apple actually has a large market share. Unfortunately when joining the work force, they find out that their 'skills' no longer mean anything, and will now need to learn to use a PC correctly.

2. Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software such as Windows Genuine Advanced to try to make sure their software isn't pirated, due to the fact that unlike apple they do not have proprietary system to offset the cost and value of their operating systems.

3. Monopoly behaviour: Microsoft continues to offer people it's products, despite it's vigorous attempts to make itself go bankrupt. In other news, Apple Mac's come with all the software you could possible ever need. In addition, if you would like to use iTunes, which is now one of the #1 music distribution systems, you may now use; in addition to its already vast array of platforms; the Apple iPhone to get your music. Continuing their dedication to open systems.

4. Lock-in: Microsoft regally releases new version and updates to its operating system to try to give users a new and interesting way to use their personal computers. In addition, to fight the Linux based hackers attempting to breach their system, Microsoft releases security patches to lock them out. Thankfully for Apple, it has been seen that snow leopard is nothing but a service pack, and isn't a required updated.

5. Abusing standards: Microsoft has attempted to generate a business model, based on formats that it has spent money creating, researching and updating.

6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): Microsoft works in collusion with the same big media companies apple does to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their music players. For example, you can only use i* products to Sync with iTunes. In addition both Microsoft and Apple enjoyed DRM formats, until they worked out people didn't like them.

7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets due to the lack of anything better to do. Microsoft remains the DOMENANT marketing leader in operating systems, therefore is targeting much more viciously than any other system on the market.


Um why are we talking about MAC's all of the sudden when the topic is not about Apple or MAC so why bring it up in the first place? So what if Microsoft has the markets by the ba*** who cares. I don't as long as thye keep producing an OS then it's fine with me I have not got a problem with it. What is wrong with people...

In other news, FSF things everyone should be using linux, as no other system can nearly compair (other then apple i guess).

I can see it now....

9am: Linux becomes standard operating system world wide.
9:30am: Computer users around the world wonder how the hell they use their computers now
10:00am: Graphic design companies go out of business due to lack of requirement for good design anymore
10:30am: People realise linux really is for nerds only
11:00am: Windows is reinstalled onto all PC's. MacOSX onto Apples
11:30am: The world resumes

I just read the letter. What in the hell......? It looks like a child wrote this letter. It also screams 'jealousy' and tries to use scare tactics. I also noticed that in its ramblings on how 'its better', it doesn't mention more compatible/stable. I feel they can't. I've tried Linux. It doesn't work for me. I agree with other posters that you need Linux to operate as smoothly as windows in all areas for me and others to switch. I also have an issue with using scare tactics to get people not to use Microsoft. The FSF has a lot to learn if it wants to achieve its goals.

Why always Microsoft? Is it their fault that they have the largest market share in the world? Why don't they blame the billions of people who pay for MS software. If MS really violating our freedom, why billions of people buying their product? Why don't they try first not using MS products? Specially MS Word.

Ok first of all my comment might spart a row and/or cause some individuals to argue, if so then I apologise first hand. The FSF in my view are a bunch of tos**** because they have been complaining about Microsoft on just about everything they do. The "movement" which is all you can actually call it to be honest, moan on just about anything, if Microsoft was to wipe their ar** the wrong way the FSF would complain.

What is wrong with paying for software? I have paid for every OS that Microsoft have brought out, oh apart from Windows Vista, I was given a complimentary copy for my part in beta testing Vista. Every other OS I paid for. Office applications I paid for as well. So what is the problem... An organisation has to make money to sustain stability and profit by selling the products they develope. Open Source get their money from donations from subscribers and subsuderies. Whereas Microsoft make theirs on the sales of their software. If you like LINUX then use it, it's free, if you like Open Office then use it instead of bitching about paying for an operating system and other applications, get a life and get real and stop moaning about Microsoft.

I'm sorry if I come across as being bombastic but the FSF really get on my nerves and hack me off. Grow up.

Wow. The FSF is really killing their impact with crap like this. This is ridiculous. Yes, I am a Microsoft fan, but I use Linux and BSD as well. Nothing wrong with alternative OS's. But, targeting Microsoft just because it's MS is astounding.

Get a clue, FSF. You're going to get the analogy of being the Tom Cruise in the Scientology camp. Whoops. Too late.

Envy is nasty.. They sound butt hurt because their products just dont produce. Nobody forces us to purchase microsoft products, there are alternatives.

I thought this "Windows 7 Sins" site was so hilarious wrong that it prompted me to set up http://www.windows7wins.org. I just got the domain so I haven't done much with it, but I think its the perfect opportunity to parody (with a touch of seriousness in defense of MS) windows7sins.org.

Seriously.. whats with all the hate on microsoft.. these guys reINVENTED this industry.. if not for that, all these other so called alternatives wouldnt even exist. stupid loosers..

OH lolaful. Lets take all the Windows computers out and replace them with Ubuntu! Then when Linux has 90% of the computer market we'll send a letter out to all 499 companies asking them to switch over to MAC.

The letter makes some good points. One of these points is the following:

They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don't need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.

I personally would adopt open source software but unfortunately it doesn't do it for me. Inconsistent app look, inconsistent app behavior, illogical way of doing things are some of the things that drive me off open source software. Until the Linux desktop starts behaving like the Windows desktop and this includes everything from taskbar behavior, dragging icons, consistent and unified operation, sleek performance (resizing a window produces no sluggish effect), elegance and ecstatic, equally aligned icons, equally aligned icon spaces etc....I will keep using Windows.

rwx said,
The letter makes some good points. One of these points is the following:

They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes.


Considering that the "long term" for Microsoft is actually 13 years (2001 - 2014) of security support, and your Ubuntu long term support would expire nearly 3 times in that same period, I don't think that's a good point at all.

rwx said,
The letter makes some good points. One of these points is the following:

They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don't need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.

I personally would adopt open source software but unfortunately it doesn't do it for me. Inconsistent app look, inconsistent app behavior, illogical way of doing things are some of the things that drive me off open source software. Until the Linux desktop starts behaving like the Windows desktop and this includes everything from taskbar behavior, dragging icons, consistent and unified operation, sleek performance (resizing a window produces no sluggish effect), elegance and ecstatic, equally aligned icons, equally aligned icon spaces etc....I will keep using Windows.


So, how is supporting an OS for almost 13 years a bad thing? There are reasons why you should upgrade. The Vista/7 OS's have way better security standards and more stability. And doesn't Ubuntu have a set lifetime? Red Hat?
And there is no such thing as vendor lock-in. How many people have been switching to Mac or Linux? Something like that just doesn't happen over night... That takes time. Lots of time. And depending on your budget, might not even save you all that much money, so why bother making the switch?

billyea said,

Considering that the "long term" for Microsoft is actually 13 years (2001 - 2014) of security support, and your Ubuntu long term support would expire nearly 3 times in that same period, I don't think that's a good point at all.

I apologize I failed to get the picture but I agree with you. People have a choice and are free to leave the Windows world as they wish and go with something else. There is no vendor lock in. People can use whatever they desire. However based on the current choices open source software has, I would never 'seriously' consider anything else but Windows.

What this letter does however is asking people to use something else. If one isn't happy with what they have I am sure they'd go with something else. No need for letters. As a matter of fact I have been using Windows 7 and I would never go back to Windows XP. I would gladly purchase Windows 7 because it works better and it does the job better. I am happy with Windows 7 and I will pay for something that I like. Just because something is free it does not mean you have to settle with it (assuming you can afford a commercial product).

I have to stress though, if there was a free product that works as good as Windows, I'd choose the open source/free version over the commercial one.

[i]They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don't need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.

This just in: "Ford stops selling older models, want you to buy their new car!"

The FSF doesn't have a problem with MS, they have a problem with the system/economic model.

The truth of the matter is that they thought Windows 7 will fail.But after they saw all the positive response for 7 they are very scared and are acting like a bunch of crybabies....

EDIT: Sent a LONG e-mail to campaigns@fsf.org using Outlook 2010 running on Windows 7 outlining why THEY should switch to Windows 7 ....

goldenlotus said,
The truth of the matter is that they thought Windows 7 will fail.But after they saw all the positive response for 7 they are very scared and are acting like a bunch of crybabies....

EDIT: Sent a LONG e-mail to campaigns@fsf.org using Outlook 2010 running on Windows 7 outlining why THEY should switch to Windows 7 .... :)

Care to share?

if the FSF would actually build an OS and applications that would rival Windows, then they'd give windows a run for it's money. notice how when Vista came out, none of this took place. but with Windows7...everyone is whining.

So can I take this to mean they KNOW Windows7 is good?

ChrisJ1968 said,
if the FSF would actually build an OS and applications that would rival Windows, then they'd give windows a run for it's money. notice how when Vista came out, none of this took place. but with Windows7...everyone is whining.

So can I take this to mean they KNOW Windows7 is good?

No, you forgot about Badvista.org.

For some reason I feel more 'free' using Windows. I can download a solution to almost any problem, and have it work. I can run any media I want, because Windows helps me play DRM content. I can plug in nearly any piece of hardware and have it work, without guessing (I do have to guess with Ubuntu, more with Fedora... ughhh).

There's a Windows port for nearly everything, often times the only version of the software.

I love Open Source software, and in fact pride myself as a developer of such, but when I need a solution to problem in a limited timeframe, do I really care whether I can see the source code of the program I'm using? NO.

because Windows helps me play DRM content.
that is the definition of 'not free' , if there was no DRM in the first place, how would that change the way you think about free software and windows?

This is just ridiculous.

How can you promote freedom while enforcing the use of a given product (Linux ) and bashing another (Windows)?

The open source world has nothing to do with Windows or Linux, it exists for many operative systems, not only the free ones.
I also hate that when most people talk about free software or GNU liceses, they only refer to Linux and/or OpenOffice as with only that combination one can leave Windows behind. About 70% of the software I use is free.

I even wrote some programs and I offer them as freeware.

They talk about Microsoft ceasing to support older versions. Heck, even Ubuntu has a timetable for official support too. So you just have, like Windows, to migrate to a newer version.

At home, I choose (freely) Windows. At work, well, we depend on others sometime to make that choice. The FSF is way over its head here with this letter.

that logo of the guy throwing garbage in the basket is copyrighted. someone please report the fsf to the US department of patents and trademarks

I don't know about that, but the Windows logo he's throwing in the trash is definitely trademarked and I doubt they were given permission to use it.

You know, if a guy came on here and started spouting this, he'd get warned for being a troll. So, as far as I see it, there is no difference.

I'm sure they are fully aware of free and open source software - they just don't care about it.

Work for a fortune 25 company. People are free to use either Windows or Linux as both are supported.

Even then, most people here still use Windows.

toki said,
Ok, to continue the FSF comedy, check Ubuntu morons also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

"Microsoft has a majority market share in the new desktop PC marketplace.
This is a bug, which Ubuntu is designed to fix."


You guys, first SHOW SOMETHING better before attacking Microsoft.


What's funnier, is that on most of the status columns, it shows each Ubuntu release as 'Wont Fix' .

At least they know their place.

Psh, who needs enhanced ease of use and security. That stuff is so last year. Progression? No thanks, I prefer regression. Bring back Windows 95.

Seriously though, I didn't look through the entire website but do they not present any facts to their claims? I didn't see any anywhere. Especially on the front page where it lists all the "sins".

Removing support for older versions? My god, how long does MS need to have support for old versions to make people happy? No company supports software forever. They try to make it sound like MS is trying to force people into new versions.

I respect FSF, but this is absurd, even more that they're just complaining about Windows 7 and not Snow Leopard. If you're going to protest the "sins" of proprietary software, don't half-ass it. Way to go on credibility for your cause.

The fact that their website is ugly as **** doesn't help their cause either. If they want companies to embrace Open-Source software, shouldn't they have made the site nicer to show the capabilities of OSS?

Cut them slack on the website. They are working for free after all. You can't expect quality websites and software for free can you?

There's a lot of trash here. Both by FOSS advocates and MS fanboys. But it's Neowin nothing unusual here ...

LaP said,
There's a lot of trash here. Both by FOSS advocates and MS fanboys. But it's Neowin nothing unusual here ...

"MS fanboys"? Haha... Linux got funboys, zealots, MS got users... judge for yourself

Hmmm..

I work for a Fortune 50 company (yes, top 50) and we are an alliance partner with Microsoft.

So there was a waste of paper, ink, etc.

And whole thing is the stupidest thing I've heard for awhile.

I work for a fortune 500 company. I wonder who in the company they sent it to. I'd like to see what happens with it. Most high up executives are pretty hidden from the outside world, so they don't get their inboxes filled with crap like this.

Escalade_GT said,
I work for a fortune 500 company. I wonder who in the company they sent it to. I'd like to see what happens with it. Most high up executives are pretty hidden from the outside world, so they don't get their inboxes filled with crap like this.

That happens in all fortune companies my friend.

I wonder also where did they send the mails.. haha.. guess office@....

i got a win 7 Box, a OSX Laptop and a Linux Box, i rarely use the Linux box as hard to find a use and its a pain in the a** to do anything other then browse the net/email. and i cant use wireless as every Wireless card i have found ( PCI/USB ) doesnt work on it so i have to run a 50Ft Ethernet cable just for the linux Box. Its also ALOT slower with Linux compared to when i had XP on it.

FSF should use more of their time toward the OS instead of complaining

It’s not wrong to use Closed Source (non-free) software, ifâ€Â¦
You understand the consequences and nature of closed software AND
You make a reasonable attempt to find a free speech alternative AND
You fund or put time into a free project, whilst using the closed version OR
You put money into a bounty to start a replacement project whilst using the closed version.


On behalf of all users , Ill use whatever the hell i like. You wont force me or anyone else to use inferior open source software with garbage like this.

"free speech alternative" what does that even MEAN?! DId they pick arbitrary code words because they thought "People like that term...we should steal it and try to apply it to what we do" ?

Free Speech would apply to those who produce locked content too....

Where he mentions nvidia...is he suggesting I should use 3rd party drivers or something? So I shouldn't use drivers that are created for my video card and optimized for it as well? Because why exactly?

What a load of crap. Why the hell should I be forced to put time, and / or money into FOSS just because I like to use proprietary alternatives. That is a load of bull****.

And making a reasonable effort to find a 'free speech alternative'... Why the hell should I have to justify to anyone how and why I arrive at my software choices, that would be like having to go into McDonalds, and explain why I would rather eat in KFC.

I don't know who the hell these people are, but they need to have a long hard look at their own philosophies if that is what they really think.

tiagosilva29 said,

Absolutely retarded. I have nothing against using open source software, but to tell people they are wrong to use closed software unless you follow the ideals listed is just plain stupid.

I use software like Firefox, GIMP, and ImgBurn, but I also use MS Visual Studio, Windows 7, Steam, etc. I use what works well for me, and if I find an alternative that suits my needs and is an improvement over my current software in my own opinion, I'll use it. Am I wrong for doing that? Is it wrong that I'm not looking for an open source alternative to all the games that I'm playing? Or that I use ATI drivers without looking for alternatives? bull**** it is.

Like anyone provides good open source implementations of hardware drivers for Windows anyway. I mean ATI even open sourced their Linux drivers and they still blow chunks

So I guess if FSF was going to have it their way, everyone would be using one OS right, Linux? Not really promoting competition then i suppose... (yeah I know there are different linux flavors).

daddy_spank said,
So I guess if FSF was going to have it their way, everyone would be using one OS right, Linux? Not really promoting competition then i suppose... (yeah I know there are different linux flavors).

Yep, in their world, freedom sure is conditional. Free to use OSS, but use anything else, we'll bug the crap out of you.

Mega Goatlord said,
Yep, in their world, freedom sure is conditional. Free to use OSS, but use anything else, we'll bug the crap out of you.


at least the worst that they do is bug you ... they arent in a position to really harm anyone... but when you have stuff like microsoft's licensing, standards manipulation, etc etc you have to start to watch out

I feel that people who keep pushing the various flavors of unix keep missing a keep point: Many corp grown applications (front and/or back end) require Windows and will require many billions of dollars to port them off that platform.

There is nothing bad about Linux or Apple or... but the time and expense to move an app to another platform just to save the money of the OS is but a small part of the cost.

I believe that in time more applications will move to the cloud, but it's going to take decades for all of this to change.

Peace,
James

jameswjrose said,
I feel that people who keep pushing the various flavors of unix keep missing a keep point: Many corp grown applications (front and/or back end) require Windows and will require many billions of dollars to port them off that platform.

There is nothing bad about Linux or Apple or... but the time and expense to move an app to another platform just to save the money of the OS is but a small part of the cost.

I believe that in time more applications will move to the cloud, but it's going to take decades for all of this to change.

Peace,
James

You are wrong.

Corporation can chance faster that you can imagine IF THEY HAVE A BETTER alternative. Remember, BETTER does not necesary means FREE.

And yeah, Linux is bad.

toki said,
You are wrong.

Corporation can chance faster that you can imagine IF THEY HAVE A BETTER alternative. Remember, BETTER does not necesary means FREE.

And yeah, Linux is bad.



Ok, well I've been a app developer for corp america for the past 20 years, and rarely do I see quick movement or change. But hey, that's only my perspective, not a complete picture.

I do know for a fact that rewriting an application can take months or years depending on the app and the team. So no matter what it takes some time. But again, if you've been involved in teams that migrate apps to the cloud or *nix quickly then I hope to be lucky enough to work with your teams (no sarcasm at all)

Peace,
James

If we received this, our CIO would bring it up in a meeting, our IT managers would basically spell out how this is all garbage. It's happened in the past when the topic was brought up.

Like others have said - if Windows is so bad, why do so many people trip over themselves to always download the latest copy from Torrent sites?

Also, the "Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)" sin is pretty retarded. DRM files play in Windows, but not in Linux.
With Windows, you at least have the option of playing DRM. Not so in Linux. In this regard, Windows can do everything Linux can, but Linux can't do what Windows can.
It's not like using Windows suddenly means you're FORCED into using DRM.

How is giving me the freedom to choose what type of media I can enjoy a SIN?

Xenomorph said,
Like others have said - if Windows is so bad, why do so many people trip over themselves to always download the latest copy from Torrent sites?

Also, the "Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)" sin is pretty retarded. DRM files play in Windows, but not in Linux.
With Windows, you at least have the option of playing DRM. Not so in Linux. In this regard, Windows can do everything Linux can, but Linux can't do what Windows can.
It's not like using Windows suddenly means you're FORCED into using DRM.

How is giving me the freedom to choose what type of media I can enjoy a SIN?


Isn't it obvious? MS is making them download torrents to be first to see it!

I agree this is stupid, and fails on many levels.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with your comment. DRM, in any form, on any platform, is BAD.
It hurts consumers, hurts distributors, costs more money, and is overall a pain to deal with.

There are forms of DRM that play on Linux, mostly by being circumvented.

Saying you'd rather have Windows because it gives you the option of playing DRMed content is like saying you'd rather take an electric razor over a manual one, because it gives you the option of electrocuting yourself in the bathtub.

You missed the point of that "sin" entirely.
The site said "Enforcing Digital Rights Management". Enforcing being the key word here.
MS is basically supporting the use of DRM, where as Linux does not. There are cases (such as with protected media and HDCP) where MS is forcing you to use DRM.

Any side that supports DRM is bad in my books.

cyberdrone2000 said,
I agree this is stupid, and fails on many levels.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with your comment. DRM, in any form, on any platform, is BAD.
It hurts consumers, hurts distributors, costs more money, and is overall a pain to deal with.

There are forms of DRM that play on Linux, mostly by being circumvented.

Saying you'd rather have Windows because it gives you the option of playing DRMed content is like saying you'd rather take an electric razor over a manual one, because it gives you the option of electrocuting yourself in the bathtub.

You missed the point of that "sin" entirely.
The site said "Enforcing Digital Rights Management". Enforcing being the key word here.
MS is basically supporting the use of DRM, where as Linux does not. There are cases (such as with protected media and HDCP) where MS is forcing you to use DRM.

Any side that supports DRM is bad in my books.


So you'd seriously rather lose the option to play DRM protected content altogether? Microsoft aren't supporting or going against anything, they are expanding the capability of Windows to suit their customer base. If the ability to play back DRM protected content was completely removed from Windows, there would be absolute uproar, and rightly so.

DRM technology may be a bit crappy, but as long as it remains in use, Microsoft are doing the right thing by providing support for it.

Frank Fontaine said,
So you'd seriously rather lose the option to play DRM protected content altogether? Microsoft aren't supporting or going against anything, they are expanding the capability of Windows to suit their customer base. If the ability to play back DRM protected content was completely removed from Windows, there would be absolute uproar, and rightly so.

DRM technology may be a bit crappy, but as long as it remains in use, Microsoft are doing the right thing by providing support for it.

i think the point that these FSF guys are trying to make is that they want DRM gone altogether... well for one thing, based on what i use, i kind of agree with them, paying for a song that i cant play on a piece of hardware i also paid for is kind of frustrating...

Yes, but that isn't the point I am making, I want DRM gone, but the fact is that as long as DRM is used, you are crippling an OS by not supporting it.

Um what's the point of sending the letter to Apple? and Lowe's? they already use Linux as their backend in all their stores and HQ

the more I read this site the more I think WTF is wrong with these people..

" Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software with backward names like Windows Genuine Advantage to inspect the contents of users' hard drives. The licensing agreement users are required to accept before using Windows warns that Microsoft claims the right to do this without warning."

inspect hard drive content? um please, prove to me it does this..... no go on I wont stop you... the only thing it does is read the cd key and validate its valid and check hardware id's to compute a hardware checksum to tie to that key.... nothing it touches is not part of windows

"6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): With Windows Media Player, Microsoft works in collusion with the big media companies to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their operating system. For example, at the request of NBC, Microsoft was able to prevent Windows users from recording television shows that they have the legal right to record." I never saw windows media player with a record option, let alone the option to record from TV..... and windows media center if they ment that, supports record flags... which um SO DOES EVERY CABLE BOX OUT THERE THAT HAS A DVR IN IT!

and the whole poisioning education argument? um lots of schools are still Mac... heck remember in the 80's and 90's Apple was almost 100% of the school market? they GAVE! systems away to schools in the USA at least under a program called "Apples for Students"

next up the video game industry... send letters to teens saying dont buy an xbox! its a locked system you cant do anything with and you have to pay for it! gasp!

neufuse said,
next up the video game industry... send letters to teens saying dont buy an xbox! its a locked system you cant do anything with and you have to pay for it! gasp!

Actually people maybe should not buy the XBox as in most of the case it will break in less than one year.

If MS doesn't improve the reliabilty next generation it will quickly discover that the video game market is A LOT more competitive than the OS market. People wont keep buying 2-3 times the same console each generation because of hardware failure.

The flop that is the PS3 help MS a lot. But Sony aint FOSS they will get things right one day or another like they did with the PS1 and PS2 and MS better have realiable hardware when it happens.

Actually, the build quality of newer systems has been steadily improving. I've had the RROD once, and the level of service I received was second to none. I had my XBox 360 back in two weeks, and it was a newer-revision refurbished system to boot.

I would honestly re-purchase the XBox 360 if I had to, simply because I can see how MS is committed to fixing their mistakes... They've proven to me they want my business, simply by providing such excellent support, and commitment to their customers and platform.

My only gripe is the fact that hard drive and WiFi adapters are expensive to the point of absurdity.

If you donate $25 dollars, we'll send 50 more letters, donate $100 we'll send 200 letters and so on.

No thanks, I'm putting that towards my copy of Windows 7....

Leave Microsoft alone! They make a great product worth every penny.

M_Lyons10:
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...

Same here... ahahahah!!!!!!!!!

Frankenberrie said,
Leave Microsoft alone! They make a great product worth every penny.

M_Lyons10:
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...

Same here... ahahahah!!!!!!!!!

Great products for the most part yeah. But worth the money not really. Vista was not worth 300$ CAD not even close to it. Office Standard is way too much expensive too.

LaP said,

Great products for the most part yeah. But worth the money not really. Vista was not worth 300$ CAD not even close to it. Office Standard is way too much expensive too.

What? Vista Ultimate OEM was $170 CAD when I bought it in December 2007 It's even cheaper now.

see that just makes me spew 64 bucks for Vista Ultimate damn you wanna here how much it cost here ........ $999.95NZD when first out on shop shelves now its still over 5 hundy

How successful they will be remains to be seen...

Really? The author of this article thinks we need to wait and see how successful this childish attempt to patronise major companies will be?

Way to go guys, tell major corporations what an awful major corporation Microsoft is. That should do the trick. Halfwits...

they have to look into reasons why people are going through lengths to pirate Windows even when they can't afford the OS.

mocax said,
they have to look into reasons why people are going through lengths to pirate Windows even when they can't afford the OS.



good point,
Linux available for free to download all legit and ...
but many choose Windows, even tho they have to pirate it and go thro bypassing the activation (talking about those who does).

doesn't that show maybe windows offers something a bit more than linux to average user that convince them to do so. this advantage might not be technical, but in the most basic level it at UI level and the basic general knowledge of people about microsoft products.

FSF people instead of whining and bashing Microsoft, and help people be more familiar with open source programs.

mocax said,
they have to look into reasons why people are going through lengths to pirate Windows even when they can't afford the OS.

Not only that, but what can you say about a product, when no one wants it even when you give it away freely? FSF is really lucky that Microsoft has been as passive about this as they are, and not come out with a campaign asking "If OSS is so great, why do people go to such great lengths to steal our product, instead of using something free?".

Every year for the past 10+ years has been the 'year of Linux'...still waiting. I'm posting this on a almost-fresh install of Ubuntu 9.04, and it feels like a tinker-toy hobby built mess. There have been improvements since I first tried it years ago, but I'd put this on about the level of a Windows ME.

mocax said,
they have to look into reasons why people are going through lengths to pirate Windows even when they can't afford the OS.

So TRUE.

Mega Goatlord said,
I'm posting this on a almost-fresh install of Ubuntu 9.04, and it feels like a tinker-toy hobby built mess. There have been improvements since I first tried it years ago, but I'd put this on about the level of a Windows ME.

Rofl

I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.

LaP said,
Rofl

I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.

Want me to post a screenshot? I can, although it looks stock right now, so I'd have to do something special. One diaper-mess brown-and-orange Ubuntu desktop looks the same as another. I think ME is actually being generous, as far as desktop usability goes. Given a choice, I'd be using slackware, but I just wanted to see how far this failboat has gotten from port. Sorry you got butt-hurt by my comment. =(

LaP said,
butt-hurt rofl

Seriously Windows ME ... you can't be serious.

Well, considering I didn't have much of a problem with ME, that's not that horrible of a comment, really. It's definitely not as good as XP or anything past that. I just do not like Ubuntu. It tries too hard to be like Windows, and fails far too often. Linux needs to be unique, because it is, and accent that, not try to make it into a half-ass Windows clone for people that hate Windows. As it is, it looks free, and it looks cheap.

LaP said,
Rofl

I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.


Driver problems/reverse engineering required with some obscure devices
Innovative technologies, half-realized

Sounds like Windows ME to me.

billyea said,

Driver problems/reverse engineering required with some obscure devices
Innovative technologies, half-realized

Sounds like Windows ME to me.



While Linux *has* gotten better about hardware support (specifically for the X-Fi, which now has native ALSA support built in to the latest kernels), it still has to catch up to Windows there (unfortunately for Linux, Windows 7 has raised the bar *yet again* as far as driver support goes).

Yes; Windows 7 (like Vista and XP) still requires you to download or dig out a CD to install drivers for the X-Fi (as I just pointed out, the latest kernels of most Linux distros don't, as those kernels now support it directly), it's all those other peripherals that help Windows 7 keep (and actually extend) Microsoft's lead over Linux distributions in terms of out-of-the-box desktop hardware support.

I have nit against Linux per se (as I run it as a secondary operating system); however, the key word is *secondary*, because day in and day out, it's *Windows* that helps me get things done easier (work-wise and play-wise), and that doesn't even consider closed-source or proprietary applications or games (I'm talking strictly about free/open-source software available for both Windows and Linux, such as Firefox and OpenOffice, or games such as Alien Arena).

How terribly embarassing for the Free Software Foundation.

If I received a letter which stated "Re: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation" I would mark it as SPAM imemdiately and not insult my intelligence by reading it.

Maybe it is time for these people to look for real jobs? McDonald's is hiring.

The letter they sent is titled "Re: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation,"

Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...

I don't feel that proprietary software is always a bad thing. Why would a company invest all the time and money if they can't protect their investment? Sounds like a bunch of crazies to me...

Actually, now that I read the letter again, it sounds almost like a kid wrote it... It's very belabored and not only does it ramble, but it actually reads like a children's report... Pathetic...

It's way too long to send unsolicited to someone in business and expect them to read it either...

M_Lyons10 said,
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...

I don't feel that proprietary software is always a bad thing. Why would a company invest all the time and money if they can't protect their investment? Sounds like a bunch of crazies to me...

Actually, now that I read the letter again, it sounds almost like a kid wrote it... It's very belabored and not only does it ramble, but it actually reads like a children's report... Pathetic...

It's way too long to send unsolicited to someone in business and expect them to read it either...

Everything they said is true, so rather than actually argue some of the points, which noone here can do, you just talk a load of rubbish instead. You have actually not said anything in your post, relating to the issues they address.

Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software with backward names like Windows Genuine Advantage to inspect the contents of users' hard drives. The licensing agreement users are required to accept before using Windows warns that Microsoft claims the right to do this without warning.


You expect us to take THAT seriously ? Again less time on politics , More time making your software suck less .

Telling users that theyre a slave isnt going to make them switch when all they care about is the core functionality of the software .

And ATM most FOSS applications are barely above freeware (GIMP) and well below low end shareware (Paint Shop Pro) . Which is all that users like myself who reject Anti-Capitalism care about . As Richard Stallman said himself "If you give freedom low priority, then proprietary software may continue playing a role in your life."

I think that speaks volumes about the failure of FOSS.

I love it when people whine and cry without knowing all the facts they are whining about. Good luck wi fsf, although I can see 499 companies returning their letter and mocking them for trying.

Anarkii said,
I love it when people whine and cry without knowing all the facts they are whining about. Good luck wi fsf, although I can see 499 companies returning their letter and mocking them for trying.



Unrelated but similar datapoint:

I was in a local MicroCenter browsing when a local bureaucrat (likely FDA, as their HQ is practically across the street) was ****ing/moaning about not being able to save documents in Word (2007) as anything other than DOCX and rich-text format. Now I knew that Uncle frowns on DOCX (in fact, OMB issued an ultimatum back in the second Clinton Administration term forbidding any government agency from using DOCX for archival documents); however, every version of Word that supports DOCX *also* supports the old-fashioned Word 97 format (which is the preferred format, according to OMB), which I proceeded to demonstrate on one of the demo PCs in the shop (which was running Office 2007 Home and Student, by the by). "Flabbergasted" doesn't even begin to describe the expression on his face. (Oh; Word 2010 retains that option.)

Open mouth; insert foot (up to knee)!

The corporate world doesn't care about any of those things. They are all one the same boat and they all pretty much stick to the same profit maximization strategies...which can be unethical.

As long as Microsoft's software works and the corporate employees know how to use it, they will stick to it. The costs to train workers to use new software is incalculable.

If Linux and FOSS was any better than Windows and the software available on Windows, more companies would be using it.

Linux is great for servers, but is honestly horrible in a desktop/corporate environment.

Xilo said,
If Linux and FOSS was any better than Windows and the software available on Windows, more companies would be using it.

Linux is great for servers, but is honestly horrible in a desktop/corporate environment.

Just to note -- Firefox is Open Source , though I don't feel FSF should be putting Win7 down -- even though I have not used it... Though things like this hinder the Open Source Comunity-- after all -- support for older systems is stopped after a time in Linux. (Just look at Ubuntu-- older ones support has stopped for them)

Though I hate to tell them that the open xml standard given some time will have support in Linux (I bet even MS if asked would even open up the vault and allow the source to be used to allow implementation in Linux)-

It is companies like this that actually hinder the open source community instead of helping them.

I might have agreed with what they are doing before Windows 7. However, with the changes in Windows 7 makes me think they are bunch of babies who don't have all the facts. The fact that they didn't even mention apple is pretty poor on their part.

Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and use it for everything other than games and writing articles (wouldn't use anything less than Office 2007) but I find myself wanting to tell them to just shut up.

And I'm sure those companies would love to listen to them.

Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.

Merv Burger said,
And I'm sure those companies would love to listen to them.

Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.


That is if they can read that email in Outlook 2007, to quote Microsoft themselves:
Read this issue online if you can't see the images or are using Outlook 2007

-- Xbox LIVE Newsletter

Merv Burger said,
And I'm sure those companies would love to listen to them.

Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.

Hmm... I work for a FTSE100 company in the UK, so not in the US Fortune 500, but easily bigger than some of the names I see in the Fortune list. Our desktops run Windows XP Pro with Office 2000. Perfectly adequate for the task. Backend involves a lot of non-MS stuff, Oracle, SAP, Red Hat. Vista was briefly considered, right up until the time the IT drone mentioned the upgrading of every desktop computer to run it, since the current desktops, which run XP happily, had insufficient RAM to run Vista... there's the door, don't slam it on your way out. Corporate software decisions, especially nowadays, are largely made on the basis of cost, not "OMG it's got Aero", or "wow lookit that ribbon!".

The FSF letter is lobbying, no more, no less. It probably won't achieve much, because Microsoft genuinely do produce some software which is good in the corporate environment. Also, IT departments are top heavy with Windows-centric people, who aren't going to cut their own throats. I do think it will make some of those companies stop and think about their software costs.

If you go here; http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/08/28/mic...eetings-in-d-c/ you will see another example of lobbying, but since this involves your favourite company trying to smear others I suppose that's acceptable.

These people make me lough.

both type of softwares are out there and available for all. The IT department of all those company will look at the cons and pros for each scenario. by keeping the cost factor in mind they make their final decision based on their needs, abilities, user friendly, support,....

I'm more than happy to pay for something that serves me great and satisfies all my needs within my budget.

This became the new "cool thing", to be against corps and specially Microsoft.

ManiD said,
The IT department of all those company will look at the cons and pros for each scenario.

This is hilarious. I have worked at Microsoft shops who will only get Microsoft, not matter they don't have a tool for the job. Getting that heaping pile that is sourcesafe working, when a simple free open source wiki would do. Not even Microsoft use sourcesafe, but somehow these people think it is good.

Other places we make out decision, create a report, then because the CIO has been wined and dined, and heard all the new buzzwords, we have to use Linq and net 3.0. So we have to rewrite out application just because he is an idiot.

This is how big business is run, intelligent decisions have no place. Overwise everoyone would be running Apache a proven better server, postgresql good enough for most sites. What do you think google, ebay, craigslist, amazon all run on... not a windows server in site.

ManiD said,
These people make me lough.

both type of softwares are out there and available for all. The IT department of all those company will look at the cons and pros for each scenario. by keeping the cost factor in mind they make their final decision based on their needs, abilities, user friendly, support,....

I'm more than happy to pay for something that serves me great and satisfies all my needs within my budget.

This became the new "cool thing", to be against corps and specially Microsoft
.


its not new. its always been the big companies are "the man" trying to take down the little guy. Only now in this society the losers get to sue and cry thier way up against the big dogs. Its almost a bad thing to work hard and be #1 because all it takes is a stupid lawsuit and you now have to include options for the crap products to be included into yours.

yes, because we've seen such strides in freedom and privacy from companies that embrace open, free software platforms...


how many political prisoners are never going to see their families again, because of you Google?

Rolith said,
yes, because we've seen such strides in freedom and privacy from companies that embrace open, free software platforms...


how many political prisoners are never going to see their families again, because of you Google?


and sure those political prisoners have alot in common in choosing w7 as your operating system.

uh... they have to do with companies that embrace open source development and their commitment to privacy and freedom...

in that, their choice of operating environments and way they handle purchase-decisions does not actually impact either of those things.

a1ien said,
FSF is full of fail, whining like Apple.

Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/



And has the FSF considered the amount of free and open-soirce software available for Windows (some of it, in fact, Windows-exclusive)? How many of the developers they are supporting (supposedly) would be crushed by an anti-7 initiative?

Consider ImgBurn as an example. It's not the only free ISO-burning software available for Windows 7 (which actually includes an ISO burning utility itself); however, it is one of the better ones. It's free, and it's open-source.

Also, has the FSF considered what *else* Microsoft does to advance free and open-source software besides opening up (and in some cases, actually sending) code? Consider the Visual Studio Express Editions - commercial-quality IDEs for all the languages that the FSF supports, and freely available and downloadable. (You generally don't have to worry about runtime distribution with your finished product, as Microsoft itself handles that.)


Talk about biting the hands that feed you.

a1ien said,
FSF is full of fail, whining like Apple.

Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/


What does Apple whine about exactly? Having their best non-holiday quarter ever while MS took another hit at the same time?

bob_c_b said,

What does Apple whine about exactly? Having their best non-holiday quarter ever while MS took another hit at the same time?


So you don't watch the Apple commercials where they whine instead of prove they offer a superior product.

Doesn't the FSF support the GNU tool-chain which has portions of it written specifically for Windows? Isn't the FSF's position a bit hypocritical?

A.B.L.N.N. said,


So you don't watch the Apple commercials where they whine instead of prove they offer a superior product.

Not much to prove, Windows is more prone to failure and suffers from more virus problems, not whining when it's fact.

bob_c_b said,
Not much to prove, Windows is more prone to failure and suffers from more virus problems, not whining when it's fact.

Don't you know, anybody who is against Microsoft is whining, and when Microsoft lobbies congress that is innovation. Our beloved Microsoft can do no wrong.

Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.

cakesy said,
Don't you know, anybody who is against Microsoft is whining, and when Microsoft lobbies congress that is innovation. Our beloved Microsoft can do no wrong.

Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.

+1

cakesy said,
Don't you know, anybody who is against Microsoft is whining, and when Microsoft lobbies congress that is innovation. Our beloved Microsoft can do no wrong.

Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.


So I take it you have your ticket for the boat trip to the island already then? Hope you're packed and everything.

bob_c_b said,
Not much to prove, Windows is more prone to failure and suffers from more virus problems, not whining when it's fact.

And yet, they seem to want to prove it either way. If there's nothing to prove, that would be even more reason to focus on the qualities of their products instead of pointing out the (totally exaggerated and often false) flaws of your competitor's problems.

cakesy said,
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.

You kind of put yourself in that category right there.

GP007 said,


So I take it you have your ticket for the boat trip to the island already then? Hope you're packed and everything.

So simply for not praising everything that Microsoft does, I am somehow a fanboy? Really? You know you can disagree with a lot of what Microsoft does, and a lot of sensible people do, and still not be an Apple fanboy?

bob_c_b said,
Not much to prove, Windows is more prone to failure and suffers from more virus problems, not whining when it's fact.


Windows is only more prone to problems due to market share. If you're a hacker you want to target the greatest audience and that happens to be Windows. Apple is starting to be prone to more and more failures and virus attacks as their market share increases and will ultimately be in the same position as Microsoft if they ever overtake or get within the same level.

cakesy said,
Don't you know, anybody who is against Microsoft is whining, and when Microsoft lobbies congress that is innovation. Our beloved Microsoft can do no wrong.

Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.


no linux users are whiney by nature. proven fact for anyone that goes to a linux forum or a linux theme site. I have used linux (gentoo) for a long time now and i use windows as well and by far the biggest trash talkers / whiney kids are on the linux side. You cant even say you like windows or make a theme that resembles windows without being called all sorts of words.