I think your argument is from ten years ago.

Post #385,120 by pwhysall 1/9/14 4:54:48 PM Reply	I think your argument is from ten years ago. For example, Exchange works great on Android and iOS devices. MS aren't interested in selling you hardware, unless it's a Surface. And Windows 8 runs better on the same hardware than Windows 7. You can do better than this, Scott.
Post #385,124 by Another Scott 1/9/14 5:57:59 PM 1/9/14 6:14:18 PM Reply	..__--oo000oo--__.. MS's good stuff is desperation and a poison apple to try to lock people in again. E.g. the always-net-connected Xbox One. http://www.ign.com/w...Online_Connection The Xbox One was originally marketed by Microsoft as requiring a constant connection to the internet, with offline intervals greater than 24 hours disabling key features. Games were intended to be continually connected to the cloud, and many would not function without an active link to the web. They have tried, many times, to introduce various toll-gates on the internet, in advertising, in on-line payments, and elsewhere. E.g. threatening people who are using FAT - http://www.neowin.ne...idates-fat-patent . E.g. attempting to lock-down the bootup sequence in new PCs in ways that Linux can effectively be shut out - http://www.wired.com...ows8-secure-boot/ Yes, WinPhone runs on ARM. Yes MS has some ARM tablets. Yes something called Win8 will run on ARM. All of them have tiny market shares on ARM. And them doing some things to open up their products and giving out some open source stuff doesn't mean that their management culture has changed very much. MS is very much interested in selling stuff other than "Surface" - Xbox One, Nokia phones, Nokia tablets, and probably Nokia/MS Watches/Glasses/etc. as soon as they figure out how to do it in a way that is sorta compelling in spite of being years late. They know that desktop PCs running Winders is an evolutionary dead end and they have to do something - they just are being slaughtered in the marketplace with their non-Intel offerings. MS could be a great company. They've got the money, they've got the knowledge, they've got the patents and IP. They've got lots of good people. But they're hamstrung by management that should have retired about 15 years ago - management that still wants to crush competitors using any hammer they can find. Fortunately for us, the hammers they have been able to find are rather smushy. They learned all the wrong lessons from their Win3 and killing OS/2 successes and didn't learn much of anything new until it was too late. It'll be interesting to see if things change when Ballmer finally leaves. KJust my $0.02. :-) Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott Jan. 9, 2014, 06:14:18 PM EST Expand All History
Post #385,126 by pwhysall 1/9/14 6:29:41 PM Reply	MS really, really don't care about Linux on PCs In line with the vast majority of people on Earth. They're far more bothered about getting certifications for secure platforms for lucrative gubmint contracts, I should imagine. As a business manager, why would you ever give a crap about expending any engineering effort on stymying the installation of an OS that's run by 1% (2% on a good day) of users? So they've exercised their patents? So what? Google do that, despite their "don't be evil" bollocks strapline. Apple do that all the time. As does every company with a patent lawyer. You assume they're not "doing something" when in fact for the past few years they've been considerably diversifying their boring invisible stuff, like the Exchange platform (there's nothing better for tedious corporate messaging), their Azure cloud wossname (right up there with Amazon S3) and making metric fucktons of money out of Office with the 365 subscription offering (millions of subs sold, very well received, excellent vee eff emm), not to mention that SQL server continues to be less annoying than Oracle to manage (even if Oracle does have an performance and flexibility edge, although I'm going to have to admit that I've studiously avoided databases of all kinds for the past five years or so), and Visual Studio is what a lot of programmers like to use. I'm going to cautiously say that SharePoint is a good thing, because they sell lots of it, but our work SharePoint site is a massive pain in the arse and I hate it. Acting as though MS are The Evil Empire when you've got a world that has Apple and Google in it - both of whom do a great deal to lock you into their ecosystems - is a bit weird tbh. And SAP. Jesus. SAP.
Post #385,131 by Another Scott 1/9/14 7:20:17 PM Reply	Linus probably doesn't care much about Linux on PCs either. ;-) http://www.linux.com...-on-theeverything Jim Zemlin of the Linux Foundation: In the Linux community we love predicting that this is the year of Linux in cars, or in gaming, or yes, even the desktop. But in fact, this was the year of Linux in everything. From smartphones, tablets, consumer appliances and cars, to the open cloud and high-performance computers, to gaming platforms and more, Linux was, and is, literally everywhere. ItÂs the software that is running our lives. Technology marches on. The Secure Boot stuff could have been a good idea but MS thought they could use it to protect Winders market share. It's not working. You may be right about the other stuff - I've got no special knowledge. But lots of people have made lots of money betting against MS since 2000 - https://www.google.c...zPUtjEJbC60AGt7gE (of course Apple has put them all to shame. ;-) Enjoy! :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #385,137 by pwhysall 1/10/14 1:14:55 AM Reply	Re: Linus probably doesn't care much about Linux on PCs eith It's pure speculation that the motivation for Secure Boot was to protect Windows market share. Given that the biggest threat to Windows is, well, (old versions of) Windows - i.e. inertia - and given that old versions of Windows don't really run too well, if at all, on modern PCs (finally, at last, thank fuck for that, driver support for XP is falling off a cliff) - protect it against what, precisely? Apple since 2000 is a once-in-a-lifetime company. You cannot help but be impressed - but I'm not sure that in the wider context it's healthy for the industry (or the economy) for a company to be sitting on that much cash.
Post #385,139 by Another Scott 1/10/14 8:08:14 AM Reply	Re: Linus probably doesn't care much about Linux on PCs eith 1) Agreed. I've got no special knowledge. 2) Dunno. MS (and Intel) could have used an open process for Secure Boot that Linux distros could have participated in as an equal (without paying huge fees or having a process that is prohibitively expensive - http://www.zdnet.com...-and-fedora/11187 ). It wouldn't have made it less secure (probably would have made it more secure). They didn't. 3) Agreed. Every company should be forbidden from having huge war chests like that. And their profits should be taxed sensibly. And management and director pay should be limited to some reasonable multiple of minimum/average employee pay. And... But those thing aren't going to happen with a Republican House. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.

Welcome to IWETHEY!