Microsoft Hatred FAQ

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:02:00

java-programmer, Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc John Wingate <email***@***.com> wrote:
> Peter T. Breuer <email***@***.com> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc Jeroen Wenting <jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl> wrote:
>>> Without Microsoft 90% of us would never have seen a computer more powerful
>>> than a ZX-81 and 90% of the rest of us would never have used only dumb
>>> mainframe terminals.
>>
>> Uh - when microsoft produced dos 1.0, or whatever it was, I was sitting
>> at my Sun 360 workstation (with 4M of RAM, later upgraded to 8M),
>> running SunOS 3.8 or thereabouts.

> Peter, if you are serious, and not just pulling our legs, your memory is
> failing.

Well, it might be a bit off. I am talking about 1986.

> MS-DOS 1.0 came out in August 1981; SunOS 3.0 in February 1986.

Seems about right.

So what version of msdos was around at that time? Obviously I didn't
use it!

> Sun Microsystems was incorporated (with four employees) in February 1982.
> There never was a SunOS 3.8. (SunOS 3.5 was succeeded by 4.0.) And I'm

It seems to me that I was using 3.x. Maybe it was 3.1? I seem to
remember an earlier major ... was there a 2.8 or 2.9?

> not sure what you mean by "Sun 360"--a Sun 3/60, maybe?

Seems likely. I recall it as a Sun 360m. "Monica" by name, following
the cpu serial number, mncaxxx (or something close). "Sun 3" definitely
rings a bell.

Peter

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:02:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc John Wingate <email***@***.com> wrote:
> Peter T. Breuer <email***@***.com> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc Jeroen Wenting <jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl> wrote:
>>> Without Microsoft 90% of us would never have seen a computer more powerful
>>> than a ZX-81 and 90% of the rest of us would never have used only dumb
>>> mainframe terminals.
>>
>> Uh - when microsoft produced dos 1.0, or whatever it was, I was sitting
>> at my Sun 360 workstation (with 4M of RAM, later upgraded to 8M),
>> running SunOS 3.8 or thereabouts.

> Peter, if you are serious, and not just pulling our legs, your memory is
> failing.

Well, it might be a bit off. I am talking about 1986.

> MS-DOS 1.0 came out in August 1981; SunOS 3.0 in February 1986.

Seems about right.

So what version of msdos was around at that time? Obviously I didn't
use it!

> Sun Microsystems was incorporated (with four employees) in February 1982.
> There never was a SunOS 3.8. (SunOS 3.5 was succeeded by 4.0.) And I'm

It seems to me that I was using 3.x. Maybe it was 3.1? I seem to
remember an earlier major ... was there a 2.8 or 2.9?

> not sure what you mean by "Sun 360"--a Sun 3/60, maybe?

Seems likely. I recall it as a Sun 360m. "Monica" by name, following
the cpu serial number, mncaxxx (or something close). "Sun 3" definitely
rings a bell.

Peter

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:06:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ "Martin P. Hellwig" <email***@***.com> wrote:

> Jeroen Wenting wrote:
> <cut>
>>
>> Without Microsoft 90% of us would never have seen a computer more
>> powerful than a ZX-81 and 90% of the rest of us would never have used
>> only dumb mainframe terminals.
> <cut>
> At the time you "PC" guys where hacking around monochrome green and a
> bit lighter green screens I was doing multi-media editing on my Amiga
> 600. So perhaps we should state that we would have been a lot further
> if not an incredible amount of cool technologies where bought by MS
> and then simply put in the freezer to protect their future market
> share.

You mean like the lamp that keeps burning forever, like Philips has?

> Although Commodore where never serious competitors,

Because there programming skills were as worse as MS? I mean, their
BASIC had only 2 instuctions: PEEK and POKE?

> they had
> some "intern" difficulties, too bad but life goes on.

Yup, same for Acorn. Their RISC work station was the fastest computer
available for home users at that moment.

> To go on, stable version of truly free unix likes where released
> around 1994 that was in the same time MS was working on their super
> stable released windows 95 and a slightly better NT 3.5 and let me not
> forget OS/2 warp 3.0 .
>
> I'm not a MS basher,

Yet you call NT slightly better compared to Windows 95. So you have no
clue what you're talking about.

> hey I make money of them administrating them,
> however to state that if we didn't had MS we would been in the IT
> stone ages is blatantly wrong,

Now there is truth.

> I think we would have been a lot
> further

No, since companies are just companies, not little gods like some want
them to be.

> then where we are now. Perhaps we even had a other mainstream
> architecture like sparcs and powerpc's.

But "crippled" like Intel.

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:27:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:

>> The only thing positive about M$ entering the market, probably
>> due to their ineffective programming style they pushed Intel into
>> producing pretty fast while cheapo CPUs.

> Amazing, I thought Xah Lee was the only one able to fit so much BS in one
> sentence.

You them to have a talent to piss-off people with just a single
terse contribution. ;-)

>> Ironically exactly this
>> is the key to Linux/*BSD success in the unix server market. ;)

> Yeah, right.

Good riddance!

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo email***@***.com | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 146: Communications satellite used by the military
for star wars.

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:34:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <email***@***.com>:
> In comp.os.linux.misc John Wingate <email***@***.com> wrote:
>> Peter T. Breuer <email***@***.com> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Jeroen Wenting <jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl> wrote:
[..]

>> Sun Microsystems was incorporated (with four employees) in February 1982.
>> There never was a SunOS 3.8. (SunOS 3.5 was succeeded by 4.0.) And I'm

> It seems to me that I was using 3.x. Maybe it was 3.1? I seem to
> remember an earlier major ... was there a 2.8 or 2.9?

Looks like SunOS 1.0 came out February 1982, according to:

http://www.levenez.com/unix/history.html#05

Kudos to the one who did the work!

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo email***@***.com | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 44: bank holiday - system operating credits
not recharged^

Posted: 2005-10-16 2:48:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
>> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:
>
>>> The only thing positive about M$ entering the market, probably
>>> due to their ineffective programming style they pushed Intel into
>>> producing pretty fast while cheapo CPUs.
>
>> Amazing, I thought Xah Lee was the only one able to fit so much BS in
>> one sentence.
>
> You them to have a talent to piss-off people with just a single
> terse contribution. ;-)

Only if their contribution is utter BS and I point this out.

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 3:05:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:

>> In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
>>> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> The only thing positive about M$ entering the market, probably
>>>> due to their ineffective programming style they pushed Intel into
>>>> producing pretty fast while cheapo CPUs.
>>
>>> Amazing, I thought Xah Lee was the only one able to fit so much BS in
>>> one sentence.
>>
>> You them to have a talent to piss-off people with just a single
>> terse contribution. ;-)

> Only if their contribution is utter BS and I point this out.

Dunno what's so BS about the possibility that the wintel mafia
works hand in hand, M$ introduces a new OS and Intel faster CPU.
People need to use the first, luckily both come bundled with the
latest PC people just need to buy right now. Iirc this is called
marketing, you don't seem to have much clue about.

BTW
Thx for reminding me to actually kill-file you.

PLONK

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo email***@***.com | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 183: filesystem not big enough for Jumbo Kernel
Patch

Posted: 2005-10-16 3:55:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ John Bokma wrote:
<cut>
> You mean like the lamp that keeps burning forever, like Philips has?
>

No more like all the hydrogen technologies that shell has in their
possession for the last decades and only recently has begun to restart
those projects.

>> Although Commodore where never serious competitors,
>
> Because there programming skills were as worse as MS? I mean, their
> BASIC had only 2 instuctions: PEEK and POKE?

eehm Amiga?

<cut>
>
> Yet you call NT slightly better compared to Windows 95. So you have no
> clue what you're talking about.

So I see you never worked serious with 3.5 .

>
>> hey I make money of them administrating them,
>> however to state that if we didn't had MS we would been in the IT
>> stone ages is blatantly wrong,
>
> Now there is truth.
>
>> I think we would have been a lot
>> further
>
> No, since companies are just companies, not little gods like some want
> them to be.
>
>> then where we are now. Perhaps we even had a other mainstream
>> architecture like sparcs and powerpc's.
>
> But "crippled" like Intel.

Yeah right sparc is crippled...

Posted: 2005-10-16 5:12:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ
"Michael Heiming" <michael+email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...
> In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
>> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:
>
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc John Bokma <email***@***.com>:
>>>> Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The only thing positive about M$ entering the market, probably
>>>>> due to their ineffective programming style they pushed Intel into
>>>>> producing pretty fast while cheapo CPUs.
>>>
>>>> Amazing, I thought Xah Lee was the only one able to fit so much BS in
>>>> one sentence.
>>>
>>> You them to have a talent to piss-off people with just a single
>>> terse contribution. ;-)
>
>> Only if their contribution is utter BS and I point this out.
>
> Dunno what's so BS about the possibility that the wintel mafia
> works hand in hand, M$ introduces a new OS and Intel faster CPU.

Your presumption that poor coding has anything to do with CPU development is
absurd. There may be times that M$ has to wait on faster chips before
pushing new technologies or Intel has to wait on M$ before pushing new chips
(like their 64bit chips that probably won't be get over-hyped until the next
iteration of Winblows rolls around), but that's hardly evidence of the two
working hand-in-hand.

> People need to use the first, luckily both come bundled with the
> latest PC people just need to buy right now. Iirc this is called
> marketing, you don't seem to have much clue about.
>

Er, that's not called marketing but a software/hardware bundle. Marketing
would be the propaganda that tries to convince you that you need both. When
you have no option that's not marketing but a monopoly, which sort of brings
this all full-circle...

Matt

Posted: 2005-10-16 5:38:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ In comp.os.linux.misc Matt Garrish <email***@***.com>:
> "Michael Heiming" <michael+email***@***.com> wrote in message
[..]

>> Dunno what's so BS about the possibility that the wintel mafia
>> works hand in hand, M$ introduces a new OS and Intel faster CPU.

> Your presumption that poor coding has anything to do with CPU development is
> absurd. There may be times that M$ has to wait on faster chips before
> pushing new technologies or Intel has to wait on M$ before pushing new chips
> (like their 64bit chips that probably won't be get over-hyped until the next
> iteration of Winblows rolls around), but that's hardly evidence of the two
> working hand-in-hand.

Doesn't really matter who is providing faster something that'll
need or provide more power, the other will catch up soon, just to
keep the game going.

>> People need to use the first, luckily both come bundled with the
>> latest PC people just need to buy right now. Iirc this is called
>> marketing, you don't seem to have much clue about.
>>

> Er, that's not called marketing but a software/hardware bundle. Marketing
> would be the propaganda that tries to convince you that you need both. When
> you have no option that's not marketing but a monopoly, which sort of brings
> this all full-circle...

Ops, sorry. Having no option is M$ marketing (monopoly) for the
usual user. Glad to see you got my point. ;-)

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo email***@***.com | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 71: The file system is full of it

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:25:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ Michael Heiming <michael+email***@***.com> wrote:

> PLONK

So you think you can make points by PLONKing people? Grow up and get a
life. You can learn from listening. You'll learn nothing from ploinking.

Oh, and I am not amazed, since people who claim utter BS is right, plonk
people who don't agree.

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:28:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ "Martin P. Hellwig" <email***@***.com> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
> <cut>
>> You mean like the lamp that keeps burning forever, like Philips has?
>
> No more like all the hydrogen technologies that shell has in their
> possession for the last decades and only recently has begun to restart
> those projects.
>
>>> Although Commodore where never serious competitors,
>>
>> Because there programming skills were as worse as MS? I mean, their
>> BASIC had only 2 instuctions: PEEK and POKE?
>
> eehm Amiga?

Eehm: Acorn Archimedes?

> <cut>
>>
>> Yet you call NT slightly better compared to Windows 95. So you have
>> no clue what you're talking about.
>
> So I see you never worked serious with 3.5 .

Yeah, that's it, I am sure.

>>> then where we are now. Perhaps we even had a other mainstream
>>> architecture like sparcs and powerpc's.
>>
>> But "crippled" like Intel.
>
> Yeah right sparc is crippled...

Yeah, right: Sparc is the ultimate goal in processor design, the best of
the best. You think it would have been that good if it was a mainstream
processor?

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:31:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ "Jeroen Wenting" <jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl> wrote:
>
>Microsoft isn't evil, they're not a monopoly either.
>If they were a monopoly they'd have 100% of the market and there'd be no
>other software manufacturers at all.

This is wrong. The dictionary definition of a monopoly is when a
manufacturer has all or nearly all of a market. Microsoft DOES have a
monopoly on PC operating systems.

That, in itself, is not necessarily illegal. However, Microsoft then USED
that monopoly power to stifle their competition, and that IS illegal.

Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about browser
wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion dollar a year
market. Why would you risk anything to own it?

>Without Microsoft 90% of us would never have seen a computer more powerful
>than a ZX-81 and 90% of the rest of us would never have used only dumb
>mainframe terminals.

Utter hogwash. Computer hardware would still have followed the path it
did. I suspect we'd all be using WordPerfect or AbiWord on some kind of
Unix clone, and I also suspect application integration wouldn't be as
commonplace as it now is, but it's silly to credit Microsoft with the
ubiquity of powerful computers.
--
- Tim Roberts, email***@***.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:48:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ
"Mike Meyer" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...

> What you call "clever marketing" the DOJ calls "monopolistic
> practices". The courts agreed with the DOJ. Having had several large
> PC manufacturers refuse to sell me a system without some form of
> Windows because MS made it impossible for them to compete if they
> didn't agree to do so, I agree with the courts and the DOJ.

Go down to your local car dealer and see if you can buy a new car
without an engine.

DS

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:48:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ Tim Roberts <email***@***.com> wrote:

> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about
> browser wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion
> dollar a year market. Why would you risk anything to own it?

Opera seems to be making money with it. Also, Firefox gets money from
Google kickback. Maybe MS had a similar idea in mind, but it failed
(remember how they wanted to add ads to keywords in webpages?)

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 6:50:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ
"Tim Roberts" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...

> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about browser
> wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion dollar a year
> market. Why would you risk anything to own it?

It really isn't that hard to understand that web-based applications that
work in any browser on any OS threaten to make it irrelevent what OS you're
running. MS has a strong interest in making sure it's important to be
running on one of their OSes.

DS

Posted: 2005-10-16 7:03:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ "David Schwartz" <email***@***.com> wrote:

>
> "Tim Roberts" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
> news:email***@***.com...
>
>> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about
>> browser wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion
>> dollar a year market. Why would you risk anything to own it?
>
> It really isn't that hard to understand that web-based
> applications that
> work in any browser on any OS threaten to make it irrelevent what OS
> you're running.

And it's even easier to understand that your statement is nonsense.

It doesn't matter which Linux distribution you pick, all use the Linux
kernel. On all I can run OpenOffice, and get the same results. Yet people
seem to prefer one distribution over one other.

> MS has a strong interest in making sure it's important
> to be running on one of their OSes.

Maybe *they* do have a point :-).

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
I ploink googlegroups.com :-)

Posted: 2005-10-16 7:12:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ John Bokma <email***@***.com> writes:

> "David Schwartz" <email***@***.com> wrote:
> >
> > "Tim Roberts" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
> > news:email***@***.com...
> >
> >> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about
> >> browser wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion
> >> dollar a year market. Why would you risk anything to own it?
> >
> > It really isn't that hard to understand that web-based
> > applications that work in any browser on any OS threaten
> > to make it irrelevent what OS you're running.
>
> And it's even easier to understand that your statement is nonsense.
>
> It doesn't matter which Linux distribution you pick, all use the Linux
> kernel. On all I can run OpenOffice, and get the same results. Yet people
> seem to prefer one distribution over one other.

He was talking about the browser war, and gave a pretty good reason
why it was important. So you respond by pointing out that people
choose a linux distribution for personal (non-technical,
non-marketing) reasons. I think I missed the connection.

> > MS has a strong interest in making sure it's important
> > to be running on one of their OSes.
>
> Maybe *they* do have a point :-).

Which is?

Joe
--
Gort, klatu barada nikto

Posted: 2005-10-16 7:13:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ
"Tim Roberts" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...
> "Jeroen Wenting" <jwenting at hornet dot demon dot nl> wrote:
>>
>>Microsoft isn't evil, they're not a monopoly either.
>>If they were a monopoly they'd have 100% of the market and there'd be no
>>other software manufacturers at all.
>
> This is wrong. The dictionary definition of a monopoly is when a
> manufacturer has all or nearly all of a market. Microsoft DOES have a
> monopoly on PC operating systems.
>
> That, in itself, is not necessarily illegal. However, Microsoft then USED
> that monopoly power to stifle their competition, and that IS illegal.
>
> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about browser
> wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion dollar a year
> market. Why would you risk anything to own it?
>

It may not be worth loads of money in-and-of itself now (don't forget
Netscape wasn't always free, though), but if you control how people view the
Internet you can make a lot of money in other ways, especially if you build
your browser into your operating system and warp standards so that people
who design sites take advantage of the proprietary features. Eventually the
hope is that your OS and browser will become the only means of accessing the
internet. And if your OS and browser are the only way to access the
Internet, who in their right mind would use another system?

Matt

Posted: 2005-10-16 7:57:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ
"John Bokma" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...

> "David Schwartz" <email***@***.com> wrote:

>> "Tim Roberts" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
>> news:email***@***.com...

>>> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about
>>> browser wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion
>>> dollar a year market. Why would you risk anything to own it?

>> It really isn't that hard to understand that web-based
>> applications that
>> work in any browser on any OS threaten to make it irrelevent what OS
>> you're running.

> And it's even easier to understand that your statement is nonsense.

To you, if you don't understand it.

> It doesn't matter which Linux distribution you pick, all use the Linux
> kernel. On all I can run OpenOffice, and get the same results. Yet people
> seem to prefer one distribution over one other.

Right, and that's what Microsoft wants to avoid. They wants to make sure
people *have* to choose a Microsoft operating system to get their
applications to work. He doesn't want most applications to work the same on
all operating systems. MS was afraid the browser would replace the operating
system in the sense that it would be the target platform for applications.

>> MS has a strong interest in making sure it's important
>> to be running on one of their OSes.

> Maybe *they* do have a point :-).

Well, they have their vision of the future of computing, and you can bet
all things made by Microsoft are at the center of it.

DS

Posted: 2005-10-16 8:08:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ Mike Meyer wrote:
> You clearly weren't paying attention to what the rest
> of the microcomputer industry was doing while Gates was selling IBM
> non-existent software. While IBM was introducing 16-bit processors and
> DOS was doing a flat file system, Tandy was selliig systems - for a
> fraction of the price of any MS-DOS based system - that were
> multitasking, multiuser, had an optional windowing system that came
> with a complete (for the time) office suite. Of course, that was while
> Tandy still thought they could sell computers by selling better
> computers than you could get running MS software.

Was that the Color Computer III running OS9 Level II for an operating
system, that you're talking about? Motorola 6809 processor? HELLUVA
little computer! OS9 was a bit quirky, though, even for a UNIX clone.

Posted: 2005-10-16 8:18:00

java-programmer >> Microsoft Hatred FAQ "David Schwartz" <email***@***.com> writes:

> "Mike Meyer" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
> news:email***@***.com...
>
>> What you call "clever marketing" the DOJ calls "monopolistic
>> practices". The courts agreed with the DOJ. Having had several large
>> PC manufacturers refuse to sell me a system without some form of
>> Windows because MS made it impossible for them to compete if they
>> didn't agree to do so, I agree with the courts and the DOJ.
>
> Go down to your local car dealer and see if you can buy a new car
> without an engine.

That's more like buying a computer without a CPU, which I can in fact
do. Buying a computer without ms windows is more like buying a hifi
set without a Britney Spears CD. I can do that too.

--
M錸s Rullg錼d
email***@***.com