Microsoft claims Linux violates 235 patents

Free software is great, and corporate America loves it. It's often high-quality stuff that can be downloaded free off the Internet and then copied at will. It's versatile - it can be customized to perform almost any large-scale computing task - and it's blessedly crash-resistant. A broad community of developers, from individuals to large companies like IBM, is constantly working to improve it and introduce new features. No wonder the business world has embraced it so enthusiastically: More than half the companies in the Fortune 500 are thought to be using the free operating system Linux in their data centers.

But now there's a shadow hanging over Linux and other free software, and it's being cast by Microsoft. The Redmond behemoth asserts that one reason free software is of such high quality is that it violates more than 200 of Microsoft's patents. And as a mature company facing unfavorable market trends and fearsome competitors like Google (Charts, Fortune 500), Microsoft is pulling no punches: It wants royalties. If the company gets its way, free software won't be free anymore. The conflict pits Microsoft and its dogged CEO, Steve Ballmer, against the "free world" - people who believe software is pure knowledge. The leader of that faction is Richard Matthew Stallman, a computer visionary with the look and the intransigence of an Old Testament prophet.

View: Full Story
News source: CNN

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Auslogics Disk Defrag 1.1.4.217

Next Story

Web 2.0 'distracts good design'

114 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I get so tired of Microsoft bullying their competition, its just pathetic. Then people stick up for Microsoft as if they are so honest and clean and how awful for someone to pirate their software.

This is the very company that deserves to have their software pirated. They steal in the form of overpriced software, they literally bully their competition into submission so that they have no competition.

This is a pure monopoly working at its best. Its the definition of a monopoly.

I wonder when something's actually going to "happen". I'm getting pretty tired of reading the news every other week and seeing the same headline.

I wish Microsoft would either specify exactly what the violations are, so they could be rewritten, redesigned, "fixed", so to speak, and/or they could just start focusing more on their own operating systems so people wouldn't feel the need to switch over to an open source one.

I think MS is trying to fight back against the "free" community that constantly tells them how evil they are and how they should not pay its programmers to make software, etc.

I am a Free Software (F/LOSS) advocate, but I don't believe in anyone abusing someone else's patents, copyrights or trademarks (often lumped together under the market-speak term Intellectual Property).

A patent/copyright holder may allow such use in their licensing terms, but it should not be that "free" software developers are allowed to infringe on things just because they are coding free software.

markjensen said,
I am a Free Software (F/LOSS) advocate, but I don't believe in anyone abusing someone else's patents, copyrights or trademarks (often lumped together under the market-speak term Intellectual Property).

A patent/copyright holder may allow such use in their licensing terms, but it should not be that "free" software developers are allowed to infringe on things just because they are coding free software.

I believe marks right. What if apple decided to make OS X free and just increase hardware costs a bit to cover that cost. Could they then say because OS X is free that they are free to copy whatever they like? I mean it would work for them as they could use the OS to leverage hardware sales.

Same goes for any device really that utilises software(/firmware) as a part of its operation be it an mp3 player, games console or a microwave. All they need to do is give the firmware out free and suddenly you have people selling hardware and releasing "free" software to utilise it but in the end they're still making money off the other guys idea.

Just because Linux is free, that doesnt mean Linus or any of the companies that make distros arent making money either I'll note.

Another complication is that while the linux kernel is free certain distros do come with associated costs such as redhat for the support. Again, this would be a case of a company profiting off someone elses patent if Linux was allowed to use other peoples patents freely.

Am I going to be the ONLY comment here that'll point out how horribly this Neowin post was written? It's dripping with Linux worship. Not even dripping, it's pouring, to the point of flat out making biblical comparisons to members of its community. I'm surprised the words glorious and majestic weren't used anywhere. And then onward to the evil omnipresent satanic figure (Microsoft) casting a shadow over a world that only wishes to be free and happy and colorful.

This is about as fair and balanced as Fox News, and I'm using all the self-control I can muster to avoid going ad hominem here on the submitter of this article.

Joshie said,
Am I going to be the ONLY comment here that'll point out how horribly this Neowin post was written? It's dripping with Linux worship. Not even dripping, it's pouring, to the point of flat out making biblical comparisons to members of its community. I'm surprised the words glorious and majestic weren't used anywhere. And then onward to the evil omnipresent satanic figure (Microsoft) casting a shadow over a world that only wishes to be free and happy and colorful.

This is about as fair and balanced as Fox News, and I'm using all the self-control I can muster to avoid going ad hominem here on the submitter of this article.

Did you click the source link? It's directly copied. Blame CNN/Fortune, not the Neowin poster

Kreuger said,
Did you click the source link? It's directly copied. Blame CNN/Fortune, not the Neowin poster

Oh lord, it was. Well, my apologies then. I just couldn't bring myself to click the actual link after reading that. Just the same, when did CNN become...meh. What happened to integrity as a journalist? How did that guy get a degree? -_-


Lets have fun with this....

Have the Linux/OS sanctioning bodies turn around and sue MrSoftie for any code and ideas stollen by MS....

yeah but if your going to sue as opposed to just throwing words out there then you'll need some pretty solid proof.

Besides if what MS says is even remotely true then you probably wouldnt want to be sueing them and a settlement would be your best choice. If even only 10% of the patenet claims MS says linux infringes is true thats still a HELL of alot of money that you could be looking at losing.

Why is it people call out standardization in Linux and complain about the different distros? The MAJORITY of distros differ in very few things;

-customization (badging and branding their own name, which DE and WM to use and which applications to include by default)
-package management (APT, RPMs, etc)
-localization (different languages for different countries)

They all use the same basic structure and code, they all use essentially the same kernel. Most differences are visual which is why different packages are made for the same program. KDE and Gnome use different libraries to make things work because they rely on different toolkits to draw up their GUI. The same for all the *box variants. Not everyone is using 64 bit setups so again the variety is needed. You can take any RPM based distro and use APT on it if you so wish as they are interchangeable. The different package managers just provide alternate ways of doing things. Why do people complain so much about choice? If you don't like it stick to Microsoft's products. I really couldn't care much less. I'll continue to use Linux because I can.

Take notes that Patent are only applied in specific countries not worldwide.

So a absurd patent granted in USA can or cannot be applied in the rest of the world.


Anyways, in the worst case it's can open the door to BSD take the advantage. I cannot flamebaiting but BSD > linux.


Magallanes said,
...
Anyways, in the worst case it's can open the door to BSD take the advantage.
Microsoft doesn't just want to kill "Linux". They want to kill anything that is a threat to their continued profits. In this case, it is "Open Source" as a whole.
Magallanes said,
...
I cannot flamebaiting but BSD > linux.
Yeah, whatever. Offtopic/flamebait/pointless/thoughtless.

it's actually the other way aroung, US patents are indeed worldwide patents due to the Delas the US made with all the patent offices around the world, this is however different for patents from anywhere else in the world are not accepted inthe US

ohhhh plzzz stop us from using windows for free first then worry about others -_- and people tell me why u dont buy windows ? lol lets see because am hating M$ everyday more ?

I recently read that Microsoft patented sudo a few years back. This must one of those 235 patents. Ha, funny thing is that sudo was used long before MS stole the idea, err I mean, implemented it in Vista with the UAC feature.

I dont have any knowledge of the case but just bare in mind that under the current laws you can patent ideas without actually having implemented the idea. MS could have thought this up 20 years ago and not patented it.

Not saying this is the case, but just be wary that just because Vista may only now be using some of these ideas, it doesnt mean the ideas or patents behind them are new and as you said other OS's were likely doing something similar already too.

Same sabre-rattling we have heard from them in the past 6 months or so. Nothing new. They don't supply the specifics needed for "Linux" to remove the infringments, and they don't take anyone to court. They want this cloud of doubt over Linux, as it benefits Microsoft.

Always annoying to see the kids on Neowin trolling back and forth, though.

Agreed MJ. More FUD to attempt to scare the corporate IT decision makers away from F/OSS and into the warm (and very large) bosoms of Ballmer.

IMHO, MS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they acted on these threats. With the federal gov't slowly shifting to the left, MS isn't going to have the powerful friends they had in the last USDOJ anti-trust fiasco.

Honestly, like 80% of the posts on this page are just fluff, it seems people degenerate to the mentality of young children in situations like this.

Why can't people just discuss it civilly?

And I agree with you, is Microsoft honestly wanted "Linux" (what a wide net that is BTW) to stop using their patents, they need to state which ones are being violated, and where they are being violated, at the moment they are keeping the list a secret ("You're violating our patents!" "Which ones?" "Not telling." ) and going after customers (and only the big ones).

The_Decryptor said,
Honestly, like 80% of the posts on this page are just fluff, it seems people degenerate to the mentality of young children in situations like this.

Why can't people just discuss it civilly?

And I agree with you, is Microsoft honestly wanted "Linux" (what a wide net that is BTW) to stop using their patents, they need to state which ones are being violated, and where they are being violated, at the moment they are keeping the list a secret ("You're violating our patents!" "Which ones?" "Not telling." ) and going after customers (and only the big ones).


I'm wondering if they never show them which patents are being infringed upon if linux could counter-sue for slander and libel. Seeing as how theyre spreading rumors about linux that cant be validated.

Robgig1088 said,
I'm wondering if they never show them which patents are being infringed upon if linux could counter-sue for slander and libel. Seeing as how theyre spreading rumors about linux that cant be validated.
There is no legal requirement for them to show specific examples of each. And it works to their advantage to keep those cards hidden. Finally, who do they sue? Ballmer? Or the Open Source Risk Management group that originally did the analysis?

The point is many software patents are incredibly vague, and may not be prominently found in searching. Many companies have run afoul of this. Microsoft included. Ballmer's position is more of a pot calling the kettle "potentially black", but not doing anything about it - other than threatening to demand royalties under the threat of litigation. They have even thoughtfully entered into "Linux patent" protection deals with various companies in an attempt to build up "evidence" to present to a court, should the time for litigation come around.

It's a big chess match, with Microsoft (the overwhelming dominator in desktop OSes) trying to flex its muscle to keep competition out.

markjensen said,
There is no legal requirement for them to show specific examples of each.
That's the part I find the most astonishing. It's unbelievable that a company can give such wild claims without ever needing to validate them.

The_Decryptor said,
Honestly, like 80% of the posts on this page are just fluff, it seems people degenerate to the mentality of young children in situations like this.

Why can't people just discuss it civilly?

Emotions speak louder than reason. It's only on the Internet where "suck my (organ) X and Y" can be mixed with technology.

Posts on why MS are hypocritical in their claims are fine. Posts on Bill Gates (I guess until the Internet collapses people will continue to use him as MS's scapegoat) sucking on anything... come on. Some more cleanup in this article will be nice.

LUNIX ALL THE WAY! WHOOHOO!

microsoft can go suck my *** !
microsoft are such bad losers..they dont get their way..and hey!==spoilt brat fit again!


microsoft ...drop dead!

Just more FUD until someone actually comes up with a legitimate claim. It's possible that it's true but nobody has been able to prove it yet.

If what Microsoft claims is true, then of course something has to be done. Be it royalties or whatever. Personally I would'nt be sad if they abandonded software patents, but I guess it's not that easy.

Patents expire right. Shouldn't they really put people off patenting?

Say you discover magic potion X. You find it can feed you for a month and costs 20 cents to make.

You patent it, and company Z sells it for $12000 for 25 years. They sell a few hundred million, demand outstrips this by many 10000s of % but people are getting too peeved to buy it at Company Z's price.

Then suddenly after 25 years, world poverty is gone.

If you were thinking about this objectively, you would want company X and Y to also sell it for those 25 years, and the competition would help the consumers - your customers. And the price would hover around one people would pay.

therefore, patents = bad

good ideas = good

good ideas you can't do anything about = bad

Thats one way to look at it but theres another.

In order to derive the content that company X wanted to patent it employed 100's of employees and spent lterally millions if not tens of millions developing the idea over many years and in some rare cases this could stretch out to so far as a decade for fields such as medication due to the testing and all that required.

Company X has invested all this time and money into product Y and all this time hasnt been able to actually make any money off it. Then the day comes to release it and it hits the market. Next day company Z has coppied the idea at a fraction of the R&D costs and can sell the product for half the price as a result.

Patents aren't a bad thing IMHO as they protect companies. If it wasnt for patents many companies might not even bother carrying out the amount of R&D they do because if they cant protect their investment they are probably better recycling ideas and waiting for someone else to spill out the cash and just copy the other company when they release something newer.

That said, while I like patents theres some flaws. Firstly is the whole backdating of them. I think if a company is going to apply for a patent they should monitor it from day one. They shouldnt be able to sue another company five years after they initially made an infringement. In that time the other company has grown dependent on the technology themselves and have grown. Really this is just a means for the original company to sue for alot more than had they sued initially where they could have carred less initially when the infringing company wasnt actually profiting of the IP.

Secondly I don't agree with holding patents that arent being used. I think that to hold a patent, at least in software, a deadline should be set where by the initial filer of the patent has either implemented the idea, shown unrefutable proof they are actively persueing funding/resources to implement the idea or has licensed the idea to someone else. It's rediculous that people can file a patent for an idea they have never and will never use and use it as a cash grab in the future while not allowing anyone access to the idea.

I think patents have a place just like trademarks and copyright but they need to be monitored in a more appropriate manner.

IMHO, Naveen, that's a fairly myopic view on how things actually happen. It might have taken $10,000,000.00 to find this "magic potion X?. Things that are this revolutionary rarely happen in a vaccuum. Look at the money that is spent to curing HIV, when the absolute best cure for HIV is never getting it in the first place.

If Company Z spent $10,000,000.00 to find this "magic potion X", doesn't that company have the right to pay all of the people that work for them with the proceeds of the sales of the "magic potion X" at market prices, as well as recouping all of the investment money to repay investors?

Patents protect the product from being made by others - at usually an inferior quality. In the scenario you suggested, if the "magic potion X" wasn't patented and Company W tried to copy "magic potion X" and market a dangerously-inferior "magic potion X-Plus", who would be responsible for the dangerous product? What would that do to the reputation of Company Z?

wtf! Microsoft are sore losers, it is FreeWare how do microsoft except "royalties" ?

Bill gates can kiss my ass if im paying for ANY software that was considered "freeware" in the past

[/rant]

Wow...it's like being 3 years old all over again. Don't any of you realise that comments like 'b**ls**t' and M$ are only detrimental to Neowin and it's public appearance. Why not have a healthy conversation where you sit back and maybe research an argument before going full throttle, belting out the classics 'microsoft copied apple', 'xp sucks, vista sucks'. I skipped over most of the comments because half of you are repeating what the first idiot wrote. If you have something you want to say, or you want to reaffirm what someone else has said, at least try and maintain a level of professionalism and don't result to blanked-cursing, because the picture your painting of Neowin's community is steadily getting worse and worse.

this is absolutly bs nothing more....
and what about the oposite??? how many patents as m$ infringed???
cut the cr** ballmer....

"Microsoft is Dead"----> Good joke..will never happen

"Ballmer an idiot"---> Again a good joke..one of the reputed CEO's in the world.

"Paten violation"---> Microsoft is just telling wat are the patents that Linux uses...nothing other than tat..they arent going to Sue the Linux :-)

Novell + Microsoft, next is on the way "Redhat+ microsoft"...so what elese.."ubuntu+microsoft"? lol

Microsoft is just telling wat are the patents that Linux uses...nothing other than tat..they arent going to Sue the Linux :-)

Actually they aren't really telling anything, hence why all this can still be considered FUD.

Of course they aren't going to sue anyone, they would not only lose about every case but also see their patents invalidated. No, they just want to keep companies in doubt, hoping that will prevent them from switching.

guruparan said,
"Microsoft is Dead"----> Good joke..will never happen

"Ballmer an idiot"---> Again a good joke..one of the reputed CEO's in the world.

"Paten violation"---> Microsoft is just telling wat are the patents that Linux uses...nothing other than tat..they arent going to Sue the Linux :-)

Novell + Microsoft, next is on the way "Redhat+ microsoft"...so what elese.."ubuntu+microsoft"? lol


1. All companies die or at least wane. Look at the all-powerful IBM monopoly.
2. Ballmer really IS an idiot.
3. Microsoft infringed upon MANY Linux patents as well but we just cant see their code.
4. Redhat said they would only agree if Microsoft became completely Open-source.

Robgig1088 said,
1. All companies die or at least wane. Look at the all-powerful IBM monopoly.
2. Ballmer really IS an idiot.
3. Microsoft infringed upon MANY Linux patents as well but we just cant see their code.
4. Redhat said they would only agree if Microsoft became completely Open-source.

1. True.
2. Do you know the man in person?
3. Err... Linux has patents? I didn't know Linux was a company. I'm guessing you mean companies like IBM, RedHat and Novell, who support Linux.
4. Didn't they say they'd only make an agreement if that agreement was based on open standards? Requiring Microsoft to open source everything... I doubt it.

Robgig1088 said,

1. All companies die or at least wane. Look at the all-powerful IBM monopoly.
2. Ballmer really IS an idiot.
3. Microsoft infringed upon MANY Linux patents as well but we just cant see their code.
4. Redhat said they would only agree if Microsoft became completely Open-source.

"All companies die", are you stupid, i think there are a few comapies that woudl tend to disagree with that, e.g. walmart, Ford, General Motors, Sony, etc etc

whocares78 said,

"All companies die", are you stupid, i think there are a few comapies that woudl tend to disagree with that, e.g. walmart, Ford, General Motors, Sony, etc etc

Let's tone it down a bit.

He said 'die or at least wane'. No one can disagree with this. Ford, GM, Sony, Walmart have all had their ups and downs.

didn't we all expect that bs coming out of that big fat mouth . the shadow isn't over linux , its over the redmont headquarter .

If you ask me this is microsoft, having been hit with 7 high profile "patent violation" lawsuits, is trying to start a nice little patent cold war of sorts... Talking about linux allows them to not accuse any ONE company behind the violations, but reminds everyone that Microsoft has a fair few patents of it's own, and if someone wants to play that game they've got their own ball to play.

As far as i'm aware, Microsft didn't actually sue or file any formal complaints or anything, but just made the announcement.

its a Monday morning , i'm drinking a coffee and checking up on some sites and then i read this, you have more issue's than playboy

<snip>
SO, you rant and rave about Linux users trolling and hating.... In a post that you are loudly trolling and hating.

Way to make a point!

A lot of companies seem to take great joy in suing MS or in seeing them be sued for "patent violations" yet when MS turn the tables around everyone throws their rattles out of the pram. If you get caught violating patents you have to pay the price..... ask MS lol

I hate the "third party drivers" excuse.

Why is it that it seems like the Linux drivers written by basement developers (who can, at best, say "It worked on my machine, or a handful I have access to) seem to have fewer issues than a lot of the drivers produced by manufacturers with intimate product knowledge, the ability to buy or rent dozens of different machines to simulate configurations, and fairly significant budgets?

First off, I don't agree with you on any of the points you made but I understand where you are coming from on a few of them.

Have you ever tried to get hold of Microsoft Technical Assistance? The cost is ridiculous, and generally it takes weeks to get a solution. Second, most of the apps we use are Microsoft apps so if they crash or go down (which happens often) it's just very poor coding on MS's part.

I would pit MS support against the Linux community any day of the week. The one great boon to Linux is its community and they are there trust me on this when you have issues.

As for security, agreed Microsoft is a much bigger target, but there are security loop holes that still have yet to be addressed, and Microsoft makes it so much easier for viruses and malware to enter.

Of course I can write for Linux, that's the greatest part of the whole deal. If I need a custom app, I can find one, If I need to change some code I can do it. With Microsoft it's proprietary, no touchy.

I'm glad you've read alot about Linux and Mac...but now how about actually jumping in and trying it out. Ubuntu is a great place to start, download the livecd and give it a whirl. You'll find out very quickly why Linux users hate MS so much.

Fade68 said,
First off, I don't agree with you on any of the points you made but I understand where you are coming from on a few of them.

Have you ever tried to get hold of Microsoft Technical Assistance? The cost is ridiculous, and generally it takes weeks to get a solution. Second, most of the apps we use are Microsoft apps so if they crash or go down (which happens often) it's just very poor coding on MS's part.

I would pit MS support against the Linux community any day of the week. The one great boon to Linux is its community and they are there trust me on this when you have issues.

As for security, agreed Microsoft is a much bigger target, but there are security loop holes that still have yet to be addressed, and Microsoft makes it so much easier for viruses and malware to enter.

Of course I can write for Linux, that's the greatest part of the whole deal. If I need a custom app, I can find one, If I need to change some code I can do it. With Microsoft it's proprietary, no touchy.

I'm glad you've read alot about Linux and Mac...but now how about actually jumping in and trying it out. Ubuntu is a great place to start, download the livecd and give it a whirl. You'll find out very quickly why Linux users hate MS so much.

Fade68 said,
First off, I don't agree with you on any of the points you made but I understand where you are coming from on a few of them.

Have you ever tried to get hold of Microsoft Technical Assistance? The cost is ridiculous, and generally it takes weeks to get a solution. Second, most of the apps we use are Microsoft apps so if they crash or go down (which happens often) it's just very poor coding on MS's part.

I would pit MS support against the Linux community any day of the week. The one great boon to Linux is its community and they are there trust me on this when you have issues.

As for security, agreed Microsoft is a much bigger target, but there are security loop holes that still have yet to be addressed, and Microsoft makes it so much easier for viruses and malware to enter.

Of course I can write for Linux, that's the greatest part of the whole deal. If I need a custom app, I can find one, If I need to change some code I can do it. With Microsoft it's proprietary, no touchy.

I'm glad you've read alot about Linux and Mac...but now how about actually jumping in and trying it out. Ubuntu is a great place to start, download the livecd and give it a whirl. You'll find out very quickly why Linux users hate MS so much.

I can get ahold of people at microsoft fine between 7am-9pm but I do have many of their numbers on my skype and I am a microsoft partner as for cost there is no cost and most of the people I know are genuinely interested in solving your problems and theirs they have less people than an online linux community tho

many of those holes are caused by third party apps and drivers and code....well in vista at least

if you see a hole shouldn't you report it I'm sure thats what they do with linux but when it comes to windows users they do not help themselves.....

and microsoft dose have programs to help you write and edit for windows and they have places to send in bug reports and report security problems but its not as open as linux.....

the linux community dose some things well
the windows community is better at other things
and I guess the osx community is good at what they do
none of the 3 are perfect but it seems like everyone targets microsoft even when much of the time its not their fault and no one seems to help them.....unlike in the linux community

MvT Cracker said,
I can get ahold of people at microsoft fine between 7am-9pm but I do have many of their numbers on my skype and I am a microsoft partner as for cost there is no cost and most of the people I know are genuinely interested in solving your problems and theirs they have less people than an online linux community tho


many of those holes are caused by third party apps and drivers and code....well in vista at least

if you see a hole shouldn't you report it I'm sure thats what they do with linux but when it comes to windows users they do not help themselves.....

and microsoft dose have programs to help you write and edit for windows and they have places to send in bug reports and report security problems but its not as open as linux.....

the linux community dose some things well
the windows community is better at other things
and I guess the osx community is good at what they do
none of the 3 are perfect but it seems like everyone targets microsoft even when much of the time its not their fault and no one seems to help them.....unlike in the linux community


So you have their direct personal numbers, well that makes it a little easier, how did you get these, i very much doubt every user has access to these peoples direct numbers, oh and your a partner, well that must be why you get free support, trust me the normal user does not have access to free support in any form or do they have MS engineers direct phone numbers, i do however via my MSDN subscription have like 2 freee calls or someting, but then again who has MSDN, I can't believe you do not realise tech support form MS is not free for the average user.

it's not MS'd fault their programmers write dodgy code. whos fault is it???

whocares78 said,


So you have their direct personal numbers, well that makes it a little easier, how did you get these, i very much doubt every user has access to these peoples direct numbers, oh and your a partner, well that must be why you get free support, trust me the normal user does not have access to free support in any form or do they have MS engineers direct phone numbers, i do however via my MSDN subscription have like 2 freee calls or someting, but then again who has MSDN, I can't believe you do not realise tech support form MS is not free for the average user.

it's not MS'd fault their programmers write dodgy code. whos fault is it???

There are many people around your physical community (not the virtual one) who are Microsoft Registered Partners or Microsoft Certified Partners. They have the kind of access to technical issues that users deal with on a daily basis. Sometimes, based on the issue, there is little or no fee to get assistance from an MRP or MCP.

Complaints about Microsoft's code-writing abilities are just silly. They test their products on tens of THOUSANDS of computers at Microsoft, including systems in their Test Labs as well as on employee desktops - not to mention the additional tens of thousands who are Beta Testers for Microsoft. The fact that you suspect Microsoft's code-writing talents is pure conjecture on your part. Simply because a program crashes does not mean that the software was written poorly, but that your system probably has other, much deeper issues that are causing the software to crash. I'm sure that there are dozens of people on this very website who would be more than happy to help you solve that software problem that you are claiming to be caused by "poor coding" on Microsoft's part. Please feel free to PM me so I can help....oh, wait...I can't do that, because the F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software) community has a copyright on "users helping users" - doesn't it?

There are many people around your physical community (not the virtual one) who are Microsoft Registered Partners or Microsoft Certified Partners. They have the kind of access to technical issues that users deal with on a daily basis. Sometimes, based on the issue, there is little or no fee to get assistance from an MRP or MCP.

Complaints about Microsoft's code-writing abilities are just silly. They test their products on tens of THOUSANDS of computers at Microsoft, including systems in their Test Labs as well as on employee desktops - not to mention the additional tens of thousands who are Beta Testers for Microsoft. The fact that you suspect Microsoft's code-writing talents is pure conjecture on your part. Simply because a program crashes does not mean that the software was written poorly, but that your system probably has other, much deeper issues that are causing the software to crash. I'm sure that there are dozens of people on this very website who would be more than happy to help you solve that software problem that you are claiming to be caused by "poor coding" on Microsoft's part. Please feel free to PM me so I can help....oh, wait...I can't do that, because the F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software) community has a copyright on "users helping users" - doesn't it?

all i have to say is ring MS support and tell them you are a regular user and have a problem, they will charge you.

don't start with partners and all that becasue we know they get treated differently.

I do not have any problems that i need help with as i am a fairly competant tech that can't spell, but can fix most things myself, and for stuff i can't i have people i call.

In regards to the last bit unfortunatey the coders are human and are the ones that write the bugs, i don't know if you code, it definately doesn't sound like it, bugs do not write themselves, it's not just MS all coders write bugs, i know all the bugs in all the code i have written were caused by me, or some dodgy api written by another programmer. I work with a number of absolutely brilliant developers and even though they write good code, bugs always show up where you least expect them. ALl i am trying to say is, coders write bugs, its a matter of course, it would be really nice if they didn't but hey we live in reality.

If you thingk MS' code writing ability is so great then why is it that half of there own code examples don't even comile

If a program crashes it is definately because somethign was written poorly, not necesarily that app, could be drivers, could be another app, if it's a hardware issue then it's different but everythign else on oyour PC is software, so these deeper issues you mention are they software or hardware?

(whocares78 said @ #19.5)

all i have to say is ring MS support and tell them you are a regular user and have a problem, they will charge you.

don't start with partners and all that becasue we know they get treated differently.

I do not have any problems that i need help with as i am a fairly competant tech that can't spell, but can fix most things myself, and for stuff i can't i have people i call.

In regards to the last bit unfortunatey the coders are human and are the ones that write the bugs, i don't know if you code, it definately doesn't sound like it, bugs do not write themselves, it's not just MS all coders write bugs, i know all the bugs in all the code i have written were caused by me, or some dodgy api written by another programmer. I work with a number of absolutely brilliant developers and even though they write good code, bugs always show up where you least expect them. ALl i am trying to say is, coders write bugs, its a matter of course, it would be really nice if they didn't but hey we live in reality.

If you thingk MS' code writing ability is so great then why is it that half of there own code examples don't even comile

If a program crashes it is definately because somethign was written poorly, not necesarily that app, could be drivers, could be another app, if it's a hardware issue then it's different but everythign else on oyour PC is software, so these deeper issues you mention are they software or hardware?

You're nearly making it sound like the coders at Microsoft intentionally place bugs in their code. Do you have any idea how many lines of code there are in Vista, or XP, or Win2k? with codebases as large as that, it's a statistical fact that there *will* be bugs. There has never been any "large codebase" software written that is bug-free. There are probably THOUSANDS of bugs in Vista as there were in XP, etc, etc, etc; It's just that those bugs that still remain are not showstoppers or of a critical nature that will not cause the OS to crash. The rest of the bugs are fixed when a solution for them is found - but you should know all of this already if you are a coder.

Microsoft is dead... :nuts:
http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html

One of the comments to this story...

It was when I first read about that and researched it that I realized just how bad it was. It's like the customer isn't even #2 or 3 anymore. It goes something like:

1. Money

2. Killing competition (including open source)

3. Hollywood

4. Locking out hobbyists and increasing licensing restrictions

...I'm sure I'm missing some...

n. Serving the customer

most problems are not even caused by microsoft but they are caused by thrid party apps drivers devices and end users and yet every time "we" blame microsoft

"we" you blame microsoft for security problems but its this (internet)community and its members that cause many of the security problems

and instead of helping microsoft you decide to critisize microsoft and write for linux.......

I am not brainwashed I have read alot about linux and mac os and windows and I never claimed it was perfect but you could at least report the problems to microsoft so they can work on them......or better yet invite them over to take a look at your "windows problems" and then let them find a solution or if you think your smart enough then send an e-mail saying how you think they should handle the "problem"

-anyway you have no future with linux because the world uses money
-you hear on the news 500 people loose their jobs and you think about how hard that would be for them now think about how many jobs were not created all because you use linux
-the us and eu go after microsoft all the time for patents its only fair that microsoft can destroy something that makes no money for stealing their patents their employees hard work

anyway its 2 am time for sleep

so all the security risks from internet explorer, explorer, wmp, msn, fonts dll holes are all 3rd party? no they are not these are microsofts

3rd party apps are not the cuase of a majority of the problems.

microsoft does not listen to its beta testers. vista and office 2007 have many problems we told them about and they refused to listen. we tried they refused.

please don't tell us we haven't tried , to believe otherwise is to be surely brainwashed.

werejag said,
so all the security risks from internet explorer, explorer, wmp, msn, fonts dll holes are all 3rd party? no they are not these are microsofts

3rd party apps are not the cuase of a majority of the problems.

microsoft does not listen to its beta testers. vista and office 2007 have many problems we told them about and they refused to listen. we tried they refused.

please don't tell us we haven't tried , to believe otherwise is to be surely brainwashed.

So, werejag - which bugs were the ones you submitted? I'm sure that you won't mind telling me what your username on the beta newsgroups was so I can count the number of bugs you submitted - you're more than welcome to PM me here and not post that info in public.

I believe that MvT Cracker was commenting on system stability - and in regards to that, he is spot-on. In regards to vulnerabilities in OS's, you should check the current list of security vulnerabilities of all OS's - you'll find some interesting info on all of this F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software) that you apparently think is "perfect"

Nice try - no cigar!

"or better yet invite them over to take a look at your "windows problems" and then let them find a solution or if you think your smart enough then send an e-mail saying how you think they should handle the "problem""

This is absolute total crap. If you don't havea support agreement you can't send them an email, if you do it will cost you around $200. it does not matter if you have found a bug or not, They do not provide free support in any form, and even when you do pay for support wthey will not come to your place to look at your problem, Unless you pay them lots adn lots of money, and if your smart enough to fix the problem yourself why would you tell MS how, they will probably just make you pay to tell them. I have heard of a paid support incident reported to MS due to a coding issue which got no response for a year before the job was closed by MS, without the issue ever being fixed.

If the world uses money why does that mean that people won't use linux, i don't get it, they save lots of money, whciih is what the world is all about.


OK just to add MS policy on free support

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/services/?ln=en-au

Customers who purchase full packaged products (consumer products, desktop applications, desktop operating systems) will receive assisted support provided free of charge for bugs, documentation errors and certain installation problems. A support credit will be required in advance of receiving support for issues outside those previously listed.

90 days support from product activation for Windows Vista (excluding Office Mac)
90 days support from first incident for the 2007 Microsoft Office system (excluding Office Mac)
Assisted support provided free of charge for bugs, documentation errors and certain installation problems for consumer products excluding Office 2007 and Windows Vista

whocares78 said,
"or better yet invite them over to take a look at your "windows problems" and then let them find a solution or if you think your smart enough then send an e-mail saying how you think they should handle the "problem""

This is absolute total crap. If you don't havea support agreement you can't send them an email, if you do it will cost you around $200. it does not matter if you have found a bug or not, They do not provide free support in any form, and even when you do pay for support wthey will not come to your place to look at your problem, Unless you pay them lots adn lots of money, and if your smart enough to fix the problem yourself why would you tell MS how, they will probably just make you pay to tell them. I have heard of a paid support incident reported to MS due to a coding issue which got no response for a year before the job was closed by MS, without the issue ever being fixed.

If the world uses money why does that mean that people won't use linux, i don't get it, they save lots of money, whciih is what the world is all about.

Hmmmm...

What about the forums right here for Windows users? They're pretty good at heading someone in the right direction for fixes.....

....or, how about the numerous Microsoft newsgroups? Or people like me who have their own business, and whom will actually make house-calls? Or local User's Groups?

Microsoft has always offered free support for users needing help with installation issues. If the problem is serious enough, Product Support Services (PSS) at Microsoft will handle the call.

It sounds to me like you're expecting to have a Microsoft Support Engineer around to fix whatever problem is on a given system. Can I call one of the kernel developers / coders for Red Hat to take my phone call to help me deal with Samba networking issues whenever I need it? I can tell you that it won't happen. Yes, there are many people who are very knowedgeable with Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc - but there are even more people who are just as knowledgeable about Windows who are at least as helpfull to the users needing help - and it happens every day.

ScottKin said,

Hmmmm...

What about the forums right here for Windows users? They're pretty good at heading someone in the right direction for fixes.....

....or, how about the numerous Microsoft newsgroups? Or people like me who have their own business, and whom will actually make house-calls? Or local User's Groups?

Microsoft has always offered free support for users needing help with installation issues. If the problem is serious enough, Product Support Services (PSS) at Microsoft will handle the call.

It sounds to me like you're expecting to have a Microsoft Support Engineer around to fix whatever problem is on a given system. Can I call one of the kernel developers / coders for Red Hat to take my phone call to help me deal with Samba networking issues whenever I need it? I can tell you that it won't happen. Yes, there are many people who are very knowedgeable with Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc - but there are even more people who are just as knowledgeable about Windows who are at least as helpfull to the users needing help - and it happens every day.

Um no i do not expect free support for any of my issues, i am statying the facts, and was replying to a user that stated he got free support from MS (not any forums or newsgroups he is stating he gets free support from MS directly), however he did have engineers direct numbers and also was MS partner.

I do not expect a MS engineer on site for any problems i have nor would i even bother trying to contact them becasue i have a problem, i would rather pay a contractor to come out and fix it a lot cheaper and easier, thats if i can't fix it myself.

MS offers free support on activation issues and thats about it, never have they for installation issues, unless somethign has changed that i don't know of. Can you please defie what you mean by support.

The whole point was he claimed he got free support from MS and acted as if everyone can get free support from MS, my whole point was this is just not true.

You totally missed my point on that one.

whocares78 said,

Um no i do not expect free support for any of my issues, i am statying the facts, and was replying to a user that stated he got free support from MS (not any forums or newsgroups he is stating he gets free support from MS directly), however he did have engineers direct numbers and also was MS partner.

I do not expect a MS engineer on site for any problems i have nor would i even bother trying to contact them becasue i have a problem, i would rather pay a contractor to come out and fix it a lot cheaper and easier, thats if i can't fix it myself.

MS offers free support on activation issues and thats about it, never have they for installation issues, unless somethign has changed that i don't know of. Can you please defie what you mean by support.

The whole point was he claimed he got free support from MS and acted as if everyone can get free support from MS, my whole point was this is just not true.

You totally missed my point on that one.

Apparently you are revising your own comments:

Last edited by whocares78 on 15 May 2007 - 00:25 -

OK just to add MS policy on free support

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/services/?ln=en-au

Customers who purchase full packaged products (consumer products, desktop applications, desktop operating systems) will receive assisted support provided free of charge for bugs, documentation errors and certain installation problems. A support credit will be required in advance of receiving support for issues outside those previously listed.

90 days support from product activation for Windows Vista (excluding Office Mac)
90 days support from first incident for the 2007 Microsoft Office system (excluding Office Mac)
Assisted support provided free of charge for bugs, documentation errors and certain installation problems for consumer products excluding Office 2007 and Windows Vista


Last edited by whocares78 on 15 May 2007 - 00:25

So, will there be a retraction from you?

Your own edit to your own post confirms that you have apparently been ill-informed - which is sadly the same case as the bulk of the "F/OSS Community" when it comes to these issues.

There IS free support from Microsoft - it may be only 90 days after the product is activated, but it's still FREE SUPPORT; hence, we can therefore state that the support from Microsoft is at least as good as from the "F/OSS Community", and is probably as timely as from "The Community".

'nuf said!

--ScottKin

It would be interesting if Microsoft allowed an independent auditor access to source code to determine how many GPL/GNU and BSD code snippets have been integrated by their employees. Unfortunately for open source, it's a one way street and Microsoft and their legal dogs can dig through our sources all day.

this is ridiculus you people need to grow up and get your facts staight before you start making posts

1.ballmer seems like an idiot to me he may not be but thats the way I see him
2.the ui in linux and osx looks very similar to the ui in windows the code may be different but the look and layout....
3.everyone sees a good idea and copies it (if you wanted the best you would look around and maybe get some ideas)
4.vista is better than xp and you can still run xp even without sp3 you can even do it on a virtual machine in vista
5.show us the code is stupid no one would willingly post code if they plan to sell it
6Microsoft is not pathetic its the microsoft haters that are
-microsoft provides alot of jobs
-microsoft gives away alot of stuff
-microsoft spent millions to make windows and sells it at a good price (under $500) it may seem like alot to some but compared to the work and money that it took to make windows its nothing
-even tho people at microsoft work hard and are great nice people you have people in forums saying bad things about them
-microsoft donates alot of money and helps small companys
(that sell ms products and services and 3rd party stuff for ms)

1. Agree.

2. If MS are going after the "look and feel" then I think they're screwed. Apple tried going after MS for that and the courts ruled against Apple. There are only so many ways something can be expressed.

3. Getting ideas is ok, but on more than one occasion MS outright stole those ideas and were found guilty of code theft and piracy.

4.

5. If they have a leg to stand on then MS needs to show the code to disinterrested parties for evaluation.

6. Microsoft are not what they once were. They will never be again. There was a time MS used to put out excellent software that they made. Now all they do is buy up companies and claim they innovate.
- true
- they only provide free stuff to further lock people into Windows
- they spent 5+ billion and got crap to show for it
- MS is not a nice company. They kill or try to kill the competition at any cost. Netscape ring a bell, or the company Be?
- Gates donates his personal wealth.

Well, I beg to differ. Every Microsoft OS created has been a buggy, security hole riddle, pile of crap. The only reason anyone uses it is because they were forced to use it. IE: it came with their computers. Thus people like you become brainwashed because you have no idea about other options. I'm not talking just about Linux either. MacOSx and BSD are other fine OS's.

And surely you can't defend Vista? The amount of problems with that OS are huge and varied. Microsoft stole just about everything they incorporated from somewhere else. Active Directory from Novell, anyone remember that little theft of ideas.

I'm a Network Engineer and I work with both, and I can tell you right now that our Unix, Linux, and BSD boxes rarely go down. Our Microsoft boxes are down all the time, patches are frequent, and security is a HUGE issue. So get off your soap box and your head out of MS's butt, and try something different, you may find that there is something out there, and that us "Linux folks" just might be onto something here.

do not attack us then claim your just trying to be an adult. getting our facts right is what this is about so i corrected your ill thought out post

1. ballmer is not an idiot he just plays his role well
2. a gui is a gui. as we see that microsoft did with apple when they took the idea.
3. agreed and microsoft claims they did it first which is wrong
4. vista is a steamy pile of cow dropings and most of the pc industry sees this
5. microsoft is pathetic if they ever try to pull a sco.
-who cares who many indians tech suport workers they employ
-so what. that micros give away some
-so microsoft spent millions to make windows and sells it at a price of under $500. if they payed for some of the infringment it took to make windows i would agree its worth the price.
-this one made nosense.

MrCobra said,
1. Agree.

2. If MS are going after the "look and feel" then I think they're screwed. Apple tried going after MS for that and the courts ruled against Apple. There are only so many ways something can be expressed.

3. Getting ideas is ok, but on more than one occasion MS outright stole those ideas and were found guilty of code theft and piracy.

4.

5. If they have a leg to stand on then MS needs to show the code to disinterrested parties for evaluation.

6. Microsoft are not what they once were. They will never be again. There was a time MS used to put out excellent software that they made. Now all they do is buy up companies and claim they innovate.
- true
- they only provide free stuff to further lock people into Windows
- they spent 5+ billion and got crap to show for it
- MS is not a nice company. They kill or try to kill the competition at any cost. Netscape ring a bell, or the company Be?
- Gates donates his personal wealth.

well netscape had lots of time to continue to improve
if I gave you a linux hat that you liked would that change your mind if the product was junk?
well they have lots to show for it but they did start over half way through.....
a company is not good or bad its the people that work their and I have been to microsoft canada's hq and the people there are really nice
gates may donate alot more money than microsoft but microsoft donates alot as well........

MvT Cracker said,
well netscape had lots of time to continue to improve
if I gave you a linux hat that you liked would that change your mind if the product was junk?
well they have lots to show for it but they did start over half way through.....
a company is not good or bad its the people that work their and I have been to microsoft canada's hq and the people there are really nice
gates may donate alot more money than microsoft but microsoft donates alot as well........

Netscape was the best browser at the time. MS killed them plain and simple. Go watch the archive footage of the court DOJ trials.

I don't wear *nix. The only use I have for it is a server sitting in the closet. Quite nice too.

MrCobra said,
5. If they have a leg to stand on then MS needs to show the code to disinterrested parties for evaluation.

edit: sorry mrCobra, if by "show the code" you mean the linux code and not the Windows code then yes you are right and what I wrote next is irrelevant. I wrote it under the impression you meant windows code.

MS must do no such thing. All the information they need should have been filed with the patent and this information is readily available. All they need to do is show where in the Linux code this patent is violated.

Whether MS even uses this patent or not is quite irrelevant I'm affraid. Its a bit of a rediculous law that you can patent things you don't use but you can. In any event MS releasing code will not help the case what so ever as they need to prove how Linux infringes on their patent. They arent claiming copyright (ie copying) violations of their code, lets get that clear, its about patents and those patents are available already.


Well, I beg to differ. Every Microsoft OS created has been a buggy, security hole riddle, pile of crap. The only reason anyone uses it is because they were forced to use it. IE: it came with their computers. Thus people like you become brainwashed because you have no idea about other options. I'm not talking just about Linux either. MacOSx and BSD are other fine OS's.
I beg to differ. MS was the first company to offer an OS that met consumers demands in the mid 90's. Apples OS wasnt that great at all, I mean how long was it until multi tasking was available. Sure apple cought up in many peoples eyes with OS X but until then they were lagging behind and even the initial OS X release wasnt that impressive, it came into its own with the updated 10.1 or whatever shortly after.

And linux too has the same issue. For home users IMHO it's still not a viable option. You can say how easy it is to use ect but until the OS becomes streamlined between releases at least at a consumer level so packages dont have to be rebuilt for different distros then linux is going to struggle. True some OS offer repositories online for the software which helps but I do think that linux will struggle to ever become mainstream due to the very fact that with hundreds of distros its going to be too hard to standardise anything which is quite important when dealing with often innept users. It's a great system for choice but when it comes to gaining a market I always feel your better to hit hard with one or two options than cover the field with many, all of which differ somewhat.

Windows has its issues granted but I do think it bloomed about half a decade before the competition and its this that drove it to the forefront of the market. People werent forced into it they adopted it because that was the viable choice at the time. And in many ways windows is a pig of an OS but it also excells at other things where other OS's are pigs in that area. Really theres nothing close to a perfect system out there and due to personal preferences never will be.

Fade68 said,
Well, I beg to differ. Every Microsoft OS created has been a buggy, security hole riddle, pile of crap. The only reason anyone uses it is because they were forced to use it. IE: it came with their computers. Thus people like you become brainwashed because you have no idea about other options. I'm not talking just about Linux either. MacOSx and BSD are other fine OS's.

And surely you can't defend Vista? The amount of problems with that OS are huge and varied. Microsoft stole just about everything they incorporated from somewhere else. Active Directory from Novell, anyone remember that little theft of ideas.

I'm a Network Engineer and I work with both, and I can tell you right now that our Unix, Linux, and BSD boxes rarely go down. Our Microsoft boxes are down all the time, patches are frequent, and security is a HUGE issue. So get off your soap box and your head out of MS's butt, and try something different, you may find that there is something out there, and that us "Linux folks" just might be onto something here.

Again, spoken by a true linux-o-phile!

I can make the same claim you're making about Microsoft OS's for Linux, any BSD variant or anything else that is F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software). If those were perfect, Linux would still be at version 1.0 and never moved beyond that. What's the latest version of FreeBSD and OpenBSD? Why are there kernel patches from Sir Linus?

As a former Novell Admin, as well as being on the NT 3.1 DevTeam I can categorically state that Active Directory was NOT stolen from Novell - the features might be similar (actually, more similar to Banyan Vines) but there never was any code-theft or loss of IP from Novell.

I find it odd that you're not mentioning the frequent kernel patches you have to install for your *nix boxes - slightly disingenuous, wouldn't you say? When a Microsoft Server OS is configured properly, they are at least as bullet-proof as any *nix system, including OpenBSD. I cut my "server" teeth on BSD in 1979 (before it was actually released - one of the benefits I had of working as a Computer Operator at Lawrence Berkeley Lab in 1979), so you ARE talking to someone who HAS been around the block too many times to count. So, if your Windows Servers are going down constantly, it looks like either someone really doesn't know what they're talking about, utterly inept and doesn't know Windows Server OS's from Log Cabin Syrup (don't try the low-cal stuff - tastes nasty), or the spin you're putting here is a farce.

ScottKin said,

Again, spoken by a true linux-o-phile!

I can make the same claim you're making about Microsoft OS's for Linux, any BSD variant or anything else that is F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software). If those were perfect, Linux would still be at version 1.0 and never moved beyond that. What's the latest version of FreeBSD and OpenBSD? Why are there kernel patches from Sir Linus?

As a former Novell Admin, as well as being on the NT 3.1 DevTeam I can categorically state that Active Directory was NOT stolen from Novell - the features might be similar (actually, more similar to Banyan Vines) but there never was any code-theft or loss of IP from Novell.

I find it odd that you're not mentioning the frequent kernel patches you have to install for your *nix boxes - slightly disingenuous, wouldn't you say? When a Microsoft Server OS is configured properly, they are at least as bullet-proof as any *nix system, including OpenBSD. I cut my "server" teeth on BSD in 1979 (before it was actually released - one of the benefits I had of working as a Computer Operator at Lawrence Berkeley Lab in 1979), so you ARE talking to someone who HAS been around the block too many times to count. So, if your Windows Servers are going down constantly, it looks like either someone really doesn't know what they're talking about, utterly inept and doesn't know Windows Server OS's from Log Cabin Syrup (don't try the low-cal stuff - tastes nasty), or the spin you're putting here is a farce.

I agree 100% with you. Why is it any time someone on here tries to stick up for or defend Windows, they're automatically a brainwashed fanboy? You have to remember that many people HAVE used other OSs, the fact they use Windows now or like it is because it works for them and not everyone has loads of problems with everything MS related. Nothing is perfect, linux, BSD and so on are always updated/patched, if you think you can just install some *nix version and be done with it, then you're dead wrong.

I've used lots of different OSs, yet I always find myself back on Windows because I get my work done just fine, and don't run into any sorta problems with bugs/malware and so on. Everyone uses whatever he/she likes, if you don't like it, fine, then use whatever you do. But don't go around like a fanatic bashing everyone who doesn't agree with your opinion and calling whatever they use or what they like as ****ty and crap.

GP007 said,
I agree 100% with you. Why is it any time someone on here tries to stick up for or defend Windows, they're automatically a brainwashed fanboy?

Because everybody and their mama knows that Microsoft lies, cheats and stifles competition and doesn't give a rats ass about their customers.

Every few years they release rehashed garbage and cram it down your throat by telling you the previous OS (Which there was NOTHING wrong with) will no longer be supported and that you need the "new thing" in order to run new programs.

It's bull* and I hope somebody comes along and spanks that ass. Period.

Mike Frett said,
Every few years they release rehashed garbage and cram it down your throat by telling you the previous OS (Which there was NOTHING wrong with) will no longer be supported and that you need the "new thing" in order to run new programs.

It's bull* and I hope somebody comes along and spanks that ass. Period.

Which is unlike Mac OS X dropping support for legacy apps apon its release? I also doubt you'll get much official support from most linux distros for distributions 5, 8, hell 10 years old either. As it is, for a commercial product MS do support their products for a very long time. Windows 98 only ceased getting support about 12, maybe 24, months ago.

Again the issues being highlighted are ones facing all OS distrobutions that see radical new releases every other year or 6 months or whatever. No company be it for freeware or opensource will likely want to support OS releases dating back almost 10 years when about 3 more releases have been made then to address the issues the older versions had.

Besides MS isnt the one telling you your software needs X,Y,Z. It's the software developers who are utilising features from newer OS releases that are telling you you need X,Y,Z from the latest windows.

Smigit said,

edit: sorry mrCobra, if by "show the code" you mean the linux code and not the Windows code then yes you are right and what I wrote next is irrelevant. I wrote it under the impression you meant windows code.


No biggie. Sometimes I'm in a hurry to write something and it comes out a bit wrong. At the end of the day it's just words.

You can't be serious

1.ballmer seems like an idiot to me he may not be but thats the way I see him
who really cares.

2.the ui in linux and osx looks very similar to the ui in windows the code may be different but the look and layout....
who relly cares, and anyway MAC had that look and feel first

3.everyone sees a good idea and copies it (if you wanted the best you would look around and maybe get some ideas)
this is reaility unfortunately only a few people are good enogh to have orginal ideas, and then someone else has probably already had it

4.vista is better than xp and you can still run xp even without sp3 you can even do it on a virtual machine in vista
LMAO, really funny, i like your jokes. Vista at present sux, try write code for it, or better still try use it.

5.show us the code is stupid no one would willingly post code if they plan to sell it
not really, it's hard to say they copied my code but not show them your code. but i do agree most companies will not ever in any way show you their code

6Microsoft is not pathetic its the microsoft haters that are
Disagree, they both are, and lets chuck in the Vista fan boys too

-microsoft provides alot of jobs
so does the North Korean government

-microsoft gives away alot of stuff
Nice in theory but in reality it is all just a big tax scam

-microsoft spent millions to make windows and sells it at a good price (under $500) it may seem like alot to some but compared to the work and money that it took to make windows its nothing
LMAO, You cann not be serious, when the OS is almost as expensive as the whole computer they are making way too much money, which is why the Xbox can loose 6 billion dollars and MS still makes billions of dollars in profit. if your goign to have your software on almost every PC in the world you do not need to charge as much as MS does

-even tho people at microsoft work hard and are great nice people you have people in forums saying bad things about them
whocares if the people that work there are nice, people say bad things about MS nothign about the particular employees, i am sure some of Hitlers best friends were nice, doesn't make him nice

-microsoft donates alot of money and helps small companys
(that sell ms products and services and 3rd party stuff for ms)
once again Nice in theory but in reality it is all just a big tax scam

GP007 said,

I agree 100% with you. Why is it any time someone on here tries to stick up for or defend Windows, they're automatically a brainwashed fanboy? You have to remember that many people HAVE used other OSs, the fact they use Windows now or like it is because it works for them and not everyone has loads of problems with everything MS related. Nothing is perfect, linux, BSD and so on are always updated/patched, if you think you can just install some *nix version and be done with it, then you're dead wrong.

I've used lots of different OSs, yet I always find myself back on Windows because I get my work done just fine, and don't run into any sorta problems with bugs/malware and so on. Everyone uses whatever he/she likes, if you don't like it, fine, then use whatever you do. But don't go around like a fanatic bashing everyone who doesn't agree with your opinion and calling whatever they use or what they like as ****ty and crap.

First-off, I'd like to appolgize to anyone in this thread that I had been unkind to, especially to "n_K" - the mistake was my own and I accept that I was a bit more surley than usual. Please accept my humblest appologies.

I think the thing that people need to be aware of is that there is a fairly diverse membership here and in other forums like this across The Net. I also gather that the membership of most of these forums is usually made-up of individuals in age from late-teens to early twenties, and a rapid drop in those aged from their 30's and beyond; consequently, there are just a few of us here who remember that "Computer Technicians" wore white or blue lab coats (and some of us even had to wear Radiation Dosimeter badges) and worked on computers that were in Air-Conditioned rooms that equaled the total square footage of a modest home today - and that we've forgotten more of the OS'es than we'd care to remember. It's scarry to think that the computer sitting next to me (and a rather pedestrian one at that) is at least 10 times more powerfull than the Supercomputers I used to help run in the late 70's.

I've used, at one time or another, the following OSes: Unix, BSD, Cyber7 / BKY, RSTS/E, RSX-11M+, VaxVMS, UCSD p-System, MS-DOS, the first version of the Mac OS, and on from there. We've seen and used Operating Systems that have come and gone. The only thing that I can come away with is this: There is and will never be an OS that everyone will like. Some like Windows, others prefer Mac OS X, and still others prefer the multitude of *nix systems. Everyone has their reasons for likes and dislikes of a given OS - but to sit and think that the OS that you use is absolutely superior to any other OS is the epitome of self-centeredness and naivete. I'm absolutely certain that creating a pro-quality DVD is easier on OS X than Windows. I can certainly create a professional-level DVD under Windows, but the OS X tools make the process much easier. I also know that I'm able to do professional-level audio productions on my Windows system with less effort than on an OS X system only because of the fact that I do not know how to fully use or am not as proficient on OS X software as I am on a Windows OS. Does that make Windows "better" than OS X? I would have to say "no", because my observations are purely subjective. Simply stating that "It works for me" should be sufficient for most people - the sad truth is that some people feel the need to wage a "holy war" against one software company and it's products. Some even resort to making blanket statements about one company or the other just to feel that they are helping to "teach the masses" why the OS or software that they use is superior.

Remember: One size does NOT fit all.

Well, as soon as Microsoft monies up for the patents it stole, such as IP, they can start talking about other patents that may or may not have been stolen from them.

And Agreed, Balmer is an idiot. Wasn't more than a week ago he was stating how open source is good for the industry.

Seth

I find it extremely funny and ironic that MS is complaining about others infringing on thier patents when microsoft was started using someone elses work - not to mention the fact that they have been found guilty on more than one occasion of outright theft and using pirated software.

Balmer in court ...
"Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, Patents, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS, PATENTS ..."

Balmer is an idiot. I wont try and pretend to understand exactly what Microsoft believes linux 'stole' from them, i want to find out because i really can't see where linux violates these patents ... has anyone at Microsoft even used linux ?

Man. I remember in 2005 I loved Microsoft - they made pretty good software, and they were still respecting XP. Now, they shelled out Vista and is trying to push it on the consumers, they're considering halting XP SP3, and now this? Microsoft is really beginning to go downhill... just the way I see it.

I agree. The potential halting of XP SP3 is the straw that broke the camel's back for me. XP SP2 is a perfectly reliable OS. Besides, it's in MS's best interest to keep XP going. According to Wikipedia, support for XP SP2 will end 4 years after its general availability, meaning August 6th, 2008.

MajinDark said,
According to Wikipedia, support for XP SP2 will end 4 years after its general availability, meaning August 6th, 2008.
Yeah about right..."according to wikipedia". If MS's track record is anything to go by instead you will see that deadline being extended. Win 98 only fully lost its support I believe some time last year after having its length extended.

MSFT, Gates and company become increasingly more pathetic each week. Their financial backing of SCO in its lawsuit didn't get the results they hoped for, so now they turn to their normal tactics of scaring and threatening others to maintain their failing dominance. If Linux does violate MSFT patents they have been publicly asked to prove it... www.showusthecode.com

That will never happen though. Exposing the code that they claim is infringed will invalidate their patents quickly - especially in light of recent US Supreme Court decisions.

It's all more of the same until they start naming patents.

And "the linux gui"? Exactly what's he talking about here, X11, gnome, kde, fluxbox, etc.?

Oh Please!, Monkey Boy Steve Ballmer and his organ grinder Bill Gates, are not happy until Micro$oft owns all or at least a piece of the licencing rights to every single Computer Operating System out there.

yeah i agree... patenting software is pretty much BS... it's just code. i mean, as long as someone dont come out and flat out steal your code enough to where it's noticeable then these claims from microsoft are just bs.

p.s. i know nothing about coding ill admit that much though.

i just dont like people like microsoft bullying around the small guy... there just doing it cause there sweating it out and want to get paid for some bs crap.

I bet they got all the source from linux, put it in ms to make it decent and put patents on it claiming they made it, I say we sue ms:
1) for being absolute w...kers
2) for falsely accusing people
3) for breaking over 5 billion laws
4) for stealing copyrighted material they do not have a license to use and putting it in public use

lets hope ms goes bankrupt

n_K said,
I bet they got all the source from linux, put it in ms to make it decent and put patents on it claiming they made it, I say we sue ms:
1) for being absolute w...kers
2) for falsely accusing people
3) for breaking over 5 billion laws
4) for stealing copyrighted material they do not have a license to use and putting it in public use

lets hope ms goes bankrupt

You could easily switch MS and Linux around... it'll sound the same.