Microsoft Antitrust Trial

[dapcgenius]

What are your opinions about the whole thing?

[Giancarlo]

Since Microsoft is the few and largest OS Provider, I hope they do not get broken up. My views are Pro-Business, but I am against the fact that they monopolize the Smaller-Medium Companies, but there is always a downside to the great system of Lassiez Faire.

[zazoo]

they should win ;)

heh heh thats all I was going to write but its because microsoft started out with nothing, they started when the pc wasn't expected to go anywhere and they made windows the most populare operating system

I dont really get why people dont like em just because they have gotton really big most of us use windows and I'm pretty sure that all of us have used windows one time or anouther so we have all supported them

bill gates does have billions of dollars and he reeeeally doesnt need any more but its not like it fell into his lap, he took a chance with the pc when it was nothing and turned it into what it is today so who are we to say when he should stop gaining money?

(although we can't forget the fact that he did all this with the help of ibm's macheans and the ideas from the mac of course)

[Giancarlo]

But in my opinion, I don't think Microsoft should skimp in its Operating Systems as is has done with Windows 98 and Windows ME, I am hoping Windows XP will be decent and have less errors.

[dapcgenius]

Originally posted by zazoo
they should win ;)

heh heh thats all I was going to write but its because microsoft started out with nothing, they started when the pc wasn't expected to go anywhere and they made windows the most populare operating system

I dont really get why people dont like em just because they have gotton really big most of us use windows and I'm pretty sure that all of us have used windows one time or anouther so we have all supported them

bill gates does have billions of dollars and he reeeeally doesnt need any more but its not like it fell into his lap, he took a chance with the pc when it was nothing and turned it into what it is today so who are we to say when he should stop gaining money?

(although we can't forget the fact that he did all this with the help of ibm's macheans and the ideas from the mac of course)


That's the same way I feel... I mean if i was bill i wouldn't want my company broken up...

[Coolin]

Perhaps the company being broken up would be a bit too drastic, but we need to somewhat limit this giant so it won't kill all the other companies trying their hand in the computer business. If Microsoft started the whole PC business, it doesn't give them the right to destroy it.

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Coolin
If Microsoft started the whole PC business, it doesn't give them the right to destroy it.

IBM I think - gates started with the OS ie software not hardware

the problem is microsoft has repeatedly abused it's position by not providing information on it's OS to rival software firms. So they can't provide us with top quality software. Also they are trying to stop people using the software of others by weaning people onto their own stuff ie IE, front page ----e. Once you are used to something it's hard to change.

Killing competition harm us all. It is about having a fair playing field.

[Webdude]

Regardless if the software is good or not, they spend $$millions$$ to make it. Programmers arent cheap. Yet you would have us believe they should GIVE that code away? If the software is crap, why does everyone want the source? Go build your own source and dont expect Microsoft to freely give you theirs when they have spent so much on it. Personally, I have had no problems with Win98 or IE. Course, being an advanced user, I can easily hack the registry to fix any probs I have and make it do what I want it to...I rarely, if ever, have a crash and speed is great.

The fact of the matter is that there is not really a good alternative out there. It is currently the best thing available.....and competitors prefer to legally steal Microsofts code than build their own. By "legally stealing" I mean by promoting the anti trust case against them to hopefully get the source. Besides, AOL is a much bigger monopoly. How much of the communication syestem do they now own. They literally drown out all other advertising with their own. Hell you cant even get gas nowdays without an AOL ad being in your face. Their stupid disks are all over all electronic stores, and forget ever having a comercial break in your favorite TV show without seeing a stupid AOL advertisement!

[atlas]

Originally posted by Webdude
Regardless if the software is good or not, they spend $$millions$$ to make it. Programmers arent cheap. Yet you would have us believe they should GIVE that code away? If the software is crap, why does everyone want the source? Go build your own source and dont expect Microsoft to freely give you theirs when they have spent so much on it. Personally, I have had no problems with Win98 or IE. Course, being an advanced user, I can easily hack the registry to fix any probs I have and make it do what I want it to...I rarely, if ever, have a crash and speed is great.


It's not necessarily that they want the source, they want access to all the APIs. Microsoft has advantages in software production because they use undocumented APIs in Windows that other vendors can't access.

-mk

[Toefur]

I dont really get why people dont like em just because they have gotton really big most of us use windows and I'm pretty sure that all of us have used windows one time or anouther so we have all supported them

I just dislike them, because i've never liked the actual OS.

The only reason I ever started using Windows was because I really had -no- choice in the matter. Once Win95 came out, most things were being made to only work with that. And prior to that, i didn't touch Win3 unless I absolutely had to.

I still prefer my lovely Dos 6.

[LastActionHero]

Originally posted by Toefur
I dont really get why people dont like em just because they have gotton really big most of us use windows and I'm pretty sure that all of us have used windows one time or anouther so we have all supported them[/b]

I just dislike them, because i've never liked the actual OS.

The only reason I ever started using Windows was because I really had -no- choice in the matter. Once Win95 came out, most things were being made to only work with that. And prior to that, i didn't touch Win3 unless I absolutely had to.

I still prefer my lovely Dos 6. [/B]

That is why I hate microsoft. The monopoly. They abuse their monopoly to promote MS products. Once they see that a small company is producing some software which might/is getting popular they just buy out the company or if the company resists they just put in trillions of dollars into a project and come with a similar product but with more bugs in it. Then comes the advertising bombarment. The small company is forced to shut down. A good case is powerpoint/word/excel none were original products of MS.

[red_zinc]

---bill gates does have billions of dollars and he reeeeally doesnt need any more

mostly in stocks that can be easily cut (1:10 Yahoo)

All like an integrated system (to do minimum clicks and extra movements) – it’s the advantage of MS.
Potentially Unix could go to the same integrated state (as a home OS), but its windows system works slower than MS’ one. I like the new KDE in Unix. Many things done better there, than in MS OS.
Remember that XP will need mandatory registration via Internet or phone. Compare it with free Linux, FreeBSD and others. The true point – the profit of MS will go down. As well as profit of the Audio, Video companies does.
So the last word will be said later.

[Todd]

Originally posted by red_zinc
Remember that XP will need mandatory registration via Internet or phone. Compare it with free Linux, FreeBSD and others. The true point – the profit of MS will go down. As well as profit of the Audio, Video companies does.
So the last word will be said later.
Talk about completely accurate. :) I can't stand Microsoft's move where you have to call them if you format your system just to get permission to install it again. I don't know the details on it but apparently it's already in Office XP. Not only do they charge an arm and a leg for the upgrade but also then they make it so I can't even install it again after formatting without permission. I can't stand this policy because the crackers I'm sure have already bypassed this as they always do and then the valid consumer who pays their outrageous price tags gets worse service then the person who illegally stole the software. Now that bugs me..

[LastActionHero]

That policy might work in the case of corporate users. But in the case of home users it will only promote piracy. This is the case where monopoly comes into play. MS knows that the they control the desktop OS market so they can have any kind of price structure they want. The corporated will be forced to adopt that price structure because they don't want to spend millions on making the shift from one OS to another and then training their staff to actually start using it. I don't think that MS will lose money. Infact it will more than recover all the cost and make profit from the corporate sector even if the home sector doesn't bring in that much profit. Remember, some of the best brains in marketing are in MS, it's a very shrewd marketing machine. Nothing else.

[bigperm]

I remember, when I was really young, getting up gradded from DOS 3.x to 6.x... That was a big deal. Dos was the ----.

[niv]

Originally posted by bigperm
I remember, when I was really young, getting up gradded from DOS 3.x to 6.x... That was a big deal. Dos was the ----.

please remember the history of DOS, Microsoft never invented it. It was a professor at a university, i forget which. If you look it up in an encyclopedia (maybe Microsoft Encarta might bend the truth about it), the professor was going to sell it to IBM, but instead sold it to microsoft. damn him.

[Giancarlo]

Well now Microsoft controls nearly everything...
At least this reversal of breaking up Microsoft could send a positive light from the Bush Adminstration on Big Business. Which so many liberals are afraid of, considering Business makes up nearly all of their pay.

[stu]

Originally posted by needcgispace


please remember the history of DOS, Microsoft never invented it. It was a professor at a university, i forget which. If you look it up in an encyclopedia (maybe Microsoft Encarta might bend the truth about it), the professor was going to sell it to IBM, but instead sold it to microsoft. damn him.

There was another version of DOS that IBM had used before, but it was completely different from the DOS that Bill Gates had invented. It later disappeared and was replaced by something else.

Bill Gates invented DOS and first developed it for IBM. At that time it was called PC-DOS. However, Bill was smart enough to retain the rights to DOS so he marketed it as MS-DOS.
Well you know the rest of the story $$$..

[Giancarlo]

There was another version of DOS that IBM had used before, but it was completely different from the DOS that Bill Gates had invented. It later disappeared and was replaced by something else.

I thought the story was that it was the same DOS Gates used and he changed it around. He bought it for like $50,000 or something from the Developers.

[stu]

Hmm.. for some reason I heard stuff about that to.. but I remember hearing what I said above from an A&E biography on bill gates a few years ago..

[Coolin]

DOS according to Microsoft Encarta:

DOS (Disk Operating System) and its successor, MS-DOS, are popular operating systems among users of personal computers. The file systems of DOS and MS-DOS are similar to that of UNIX, but they are single user and single-tasking because they were developed before personal computers became relatively powerful. A multitasking variation is OS/2, initially developed by Microsoft Corporation and International Business Machines (IBM).

Few computer users run MS-DOS or OS/2 directly. They prefer versions of UNIX or windowing systems with graphical interfaces, such as Windows 95 or the Macintosh OS, which make computer technology more accessible. However, graphical systems generally have the disadvantage of requiring more hardware-such as faster CPUs, more memory, and higher-quality monitors-than command-oriented operating systems.



MS-DOS according to Microsoft Encarta:

MS-DOS, acronym for Microsoft Disk Operating System. In computer science, MS-DOS-like other operating systems-oversees such operations as disk input and output, video support, keyboard control, and many internal functions related to program execution and file maintenance. MS-DOS is a single-tasking, single-user operating system with a command-line interface. See also Computer.


See how they try to take off the bias? ;)

[Giancarlo]

Well that is too bad that they tried to remove the bias from Encarta, maybe they should of done that with their business practices. ;)

[red_zinc]

---the history of DOS, Microsoft never invented it. It was a professor at a university, i forget which.

I have an article on the subject. The young professor Gary Kildall created CP/M for 8bit 8080.
IBM wanted to buy it for 200000$, but he refused expecting to get more. Tim Patterson for Seattle Computer Products company modified CP/M --> 16bit QDOS. SCP was a client of Microsoft.
Bill bought QDOS from Tim Patterson for 50000 and sold it to IBM for 50000. But IBM forgot wrote down own exclusive rights for distribution the OS. So MS become able to sell MS DOS.

[zazoo]

man, billions of computers everywhere created and programed a certin way because someone forgot to get rights on somthing :(

[Webdude]

You can get the story by watching the show "Pirates of Silicon Valley". They kinda need to remake and update it though...it goes throught the beginnings history of Apple and Microsoft. It's relatively boring, but it tells the story.

[Homeygwiz]

I don't think breaking up Microsoft is the answer.

I do think we need more quality competition in the Market to compete with Microsoft. Linix looks pretty strong but, lacks the numbers of users that back it. Most people are used to Windows and will stick with Windows.

I do believe Microsoft has brought PC's to where they are today. We will just have to see if any other company comes about to lead us into tommorrow.

That company may be Microsoft unless another company emerges.



HGW - ' Knowledge is power. ' :p :cool: :D

[zazoo]

I think that one day linux will be microsofts greatest competition because it is still better than microsoft and although not many people use it now, it's becomming alot more populare

the biggest problem with linux is that its for advanced users and most people just want a computer to get work done for em and dont expect anything else then that, there not going to sit around tinkering with the code and dont care if its open source or not

once they come out with a supper user freindly interface for linux that people can use who don't know there computer inside out (probably one that really resembles windows) and hide some of the things at startup that might scare newbies off they will start attracting a greater audiance

[red_zinc]

"""once they come out with a supper user freindly interface for linux"""

The kernel of new Mac OS X is based on FreeBSD 3.2. Recently Jordan Habbard, the main ideologist of FreeBSD, has gotten a job in Apple.
The IBM and Sun (last news - 25000 of copies of StarOffice 5.2 will be set up by Pentagon) also can potentially be successful on the home OS market. But it will need huge moneys and to be more attentive to users’ demands. As I think MS will be number 1 there still a lot of time.
On MS <-> Sun. One is able to find in the Helps not a word - Java in ME. MS IE 5.5 doesn't execute Java applets by default. Netscape does.