By warez fiends who would hack it anyway. It won't be casually copied anymore, that's what M$ was aiming for.
Do you think your average user knows where to get hacked copies?</strong><hr></blockquote>
And the average user WONT be using this. The average user buys Windows. The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy. The pirates wont be effected by it. Therefore it's BS.
<strong>Umm windows combatbilty has a much easier time then mac. Classic and carbon must require a recode, while windows only means a few missing supports. Think about that~Kuku</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is because Windows hasn't changed THAT drastically since 95.
<strong>About WPA... Think about MP3 utilities such as Kaazaa or Morpheus. I dont know one person, even 'dumb' users, who dont have a warez'ed XP copy. The dumb idea of WPA failed. Company employees warez, as most humans do... F. It was a good try, but it was a crappy way of invading people's privacy. Just because you need 250+ copes doesnt mean one of those 250 people doesnt rip it... Search a P2P file sharing utility. XP is everywhere.
[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: Fred Bear ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Someone should let mortal know that Windows NT, 2k, and XP aren't built on top of DOS. Thats what differentiates them from Windows 3.1, 95, 98 and ME.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are correct sir. NT is most certainly not based on MSDOS. A closer relative would be IBM's OS/2. The extensions are jsut a good way to determine who is responsible for the files as they do not use (metadata?) to determine that like the MacOS does. As OS X uses extensions as well by that logic you would be saying that OS X is based on DOS which we know to be false.
However, there is a DOS thunk layer (NTVDM) in NT for many DOS programs to work in and the WOW layer for 16 bit application compatibility for 3.x and early 95 apps. It is these layers (alond with other bells and whistles in MS programs) that start undermining the stability of the OS, as Classic does in X.
OS X and XP, both have the same idea, but I think that OS X will go further when all is said and done. XP is just an MS speedbump on the way to the BBT (bigger better thing).
[quote]If You might not be using Nuclear Secrets, but have you heard about the cookie bug in IE6? Go to <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com"; target="_blank">www.securityfocus.com</a> Microsoft cannot figure out how to patch it, and it eventually allows one to rip information from any sub directory in the /Windows folder and allows one to get all cookies.<hr></blockquote>
How convenient, you go from talking about the supposed security problems with Terminal Services to a cookie bug in IE6.
[quote]I think its pathetic that Microsoft scorned the company who released the information for this exploit 2 weeks after Microsoft failed to even mention the problem to anyone. <hr></blockquote>
Whether I agree with MS about this particular issue or not, they didn't scorn the company for releasing information about an exploint, they scorned the company for releasing step by step instructions on how to abuse the exploit that any script kiddie can follow.
I can see their point, and to them it's probably a good one. Suddenly you have a bunch of people that don't update their software vulnerable to an exploit with Fool Proof® instructions.
[quote]I laugh at all the dumb Windows users who think that Microsoft isn?t controlling them from behind... think about the 'Microsoft Virtual machine' e.g. rip off of Java... If nine US states along with the European Union think Microsoft is a bad company, in terms of their business practices, then um, is any Mac user out of line for saying that too?<hr></blockquote>
You've jumped subjects again. The Microsoft Virtual Machine is MS's Java runtime that was licensed from Sun. I fail to see how licensing something constitutes a ripoff.
I also fail to see how Microsoft's business practices have anything to do with the subject at hand; the quality of WinXP.
[quote]I think its so dumb that the Windows users gloat about a improved 'task manager'... so what? you have a good utility to make sure Windows isn?t messing w/ your PC or when your PC crashes? <hr></blockquote>
Windows has a good utility to make sure it's easy to kill a hung program. Surely you don't live in a perfect world with perfect programmers where their perfect code never crashes, or leaks memory, or steals your lunch money.
My PC doesn't crash.
[quote]Oh, and if you are too ignorant to know what Adobe products are being railroaded, then sorry, that really does say something about you. Even though paint and the internal viewer aren?t close to Adobe, at all, they are still aimed at the same market.<hr></blockquote>
Paint is designed to take market share from Photoshop. I do all my graphics in paint because it's l33t. Paint r0x0rs my b0x0rs.
Ironically, you posted this a few posts ago:
[quote]look at the built-in zip decompression and photo editing tool (which I must say do suck for their lack of ability to do anything), <hr></blockquote>
You're comparing full featured Archive and Photo Editing software with the basic convenience tools built into XP? That's ridiculous. You yourself state that the tools in XP can't compete with what's already out there, so why would you even try and compare them? They serve completely different purposes.
[quote]Think about Digital cameras... They distribute software which is now not needed by XP, yet that software company just got screwed... <hr></blockquote>
I bought a Sony Digicam in July. Sony made money from my digicam purchase. They didn't make any money off their bundled software. I bought the camera even though I didn't need the bundled tools. Where did Sony lose money?
[quote]Karl Marx belied that capitalism was, in its self, destructive.<hr></blockquote>
Ironically, Socialism on a broad scale is destructive. Ask all the residents of the former Soviet Union.
[quote] PC users are always too dumb to actually know that an Intel and PPC processor cannot be compared, (different architectures maybe?).<hr></blockquote>
Sure they can. How much faster will a 2GHZ P4 render a scene in Maya than a similarly expensive PPC processor?
[quote]Oh-well. I use XP when I have to, otherwise long live OSX. <hr></blockquote>
I find it hard to believe you've used XP for any extensive amount of time. Dinking around on a computer at CompUSA hardly counts as usage.
[quote]But truth be told any form of woindows is nothing but DOS with an interface. If you dont believe me take a look in your sys32 folder. Notice the file extensions, .com .bat .ini these are dos extensions.<hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... .bat is a batch scripting file, useful for many purposes. I suppose AppleScript files make OSX nothing more than a pretty front end on top of OS8 code?
.ini files are configuration files...
I've forgotten what exactly com files are.. then again, I haven't seen one in ~5 years.
[quote]And the average user WONT be using this. The average user buys Windows. The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy.<hr></blockquote>
The average user sees no problem with borrowing their neighbor's WinME disk to install on their computer.
[quote]That is because Windows hasn't changed THAT drastically since 95.<hr></blockquote>
The WinXP code base is as far from the Win95 Code Base is as OSX is from System 7
[quote]<snip> ...these layers (alond with other bells and whistles in MS programs) that start undermining the stability of the OS, as Classic does in X.<hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure what Classic does to undermine the stability of OSX, but the compatability layers in XP are run just like any other program. They get their own memory space (each instance does) and if they crash, they don't touch anything else.
Flaws are flaws. My point is that Microsoft failed to do anything, even notify users that they were at risk, a really crappy thing to do.
five Microsoft's licensed version of JAVA violated the license agreement, hence the lawsuit which Sun is filing in the 5th District Federal Court... It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.
One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example. While all Microsoft programs really do suck to some extent, they do things to take away from companies. Look at the X-Box. How does one go from Windows (computer code) to the X-Box? Especially since Nintendo is based in Seattle??? Hrrm, weird to me... Especially since MS owns all the software companies for X-Box software.
As for the digital camera.. I bought my Sony Digital DV camcorder and HP digital camera last month, they both came with their software which is produced by SMALLER software companies. which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them.
Oh, and for a history class?, the USSR never was a socialist republic... Marx was a socialist, good job on that one, but the USSR was founded on Leninism. There are many fundamental differences which divides the two, one of the biggest being Marx never called for a dictator and Lenin wanted one because he didn?t trust the Petrograd Soviets. So all-in-all although you try and be witty...
As for my use of XP sure I use it at CompUSA, good job, how did you ever know? idot...
The average user sees no problem with borrowing their neighbor's WinME disk to install on their computer.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. But I agree. MS wants to stop people from installing WinME before they pay for it and find out how really horrible it is.
<strong> [quote]
The WinXP code base is as far from the Win95 Code Base is as OSX is from System 7
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 --> OS 9
And it's even closer to Win2k than MS wants to tell it's customer base. That is why most Windows users that are using 2k now aren't switching over.
[quote]five Microsoft's licensed version of JAVA violated the license agreement, hence the lawsuit <hr></blockquote>
1) Microsoft is licensed to distribute a Java VM based on Java 1.1 (I believe)
2) The lawsuit had nothing to do with distributing the Virtual Machine. The lawsuit came about because MS added options into Visual J++ to allow coders extra flexibility on the Windows platform. This extra functionality was completely optional, however when programmers used it, it effectively made their programs single platform. This offended Sun greatly.
[quote]It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.<hr></blockquote>
Once again, Microsoft has always been allowed to distribute a VM based off Java 1.1. This license expires in the next year or so.
[quote]One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example.<hr></blockquote>
God forbid... Microsoft actually competes. That's what they're there to do.
NS4.x is what killed Netscape. Not IE. IE has been bundled since version 2, and Netscape was the dominant browser for two full product cycles until IE4 was released. Why did IE4 dominate? It was the better browser...
[quote]How does one go from Windows (computer code) to the X-Box? Especially since Nintendo is based in Seattle??? Hrrm, weird to me... quote]
I've never seen any laws limiting companies from entering new markets. Microsoft's kickass gaming API's (DirectX) are what makes them able to create the XBox.
[quote]As for the digital camera.. I bought my Sony Digital DV camcorder and HP digital camera last month, they both came with their software which is produced by SMALLER software companies. which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them. <hr></blockquote>
Oh? So do you use iMovie for your DV editing? What about the programs that came with it?
[quote]Oh, and for a history class?, the USSR never was a socialist republic... Marx was a socialist, good job on that one, but the USSR was founded on Leninism. There are many fundamental differences which divides the two, one of the biggest being Marx never called for a dictator and Lenin wanted one because he didn?t trust the Petrograd Soviets. <hr></blockquote>
I could just as vaguely argue that the US isn't a "true" capitalistic economy since we have things like Anti-trust laws, environmental regulation, and other decidedly non-capitalist institutions governing many of the actions of our industries.
I would be just as wrong.
[quote]Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. <hr></blockquote>
Yes, the average user already owns a copy of Win98, but they don't own XP. Given the slow down in purchase of OEM systems, do you really expect MS to try and rely on OEM sales as much as they have in the past? Most people only purchased an OS with a new system. 4 years ago, the need to upgrade once every two years was much greater.
Computer performance has reached a plateau where people aren't upgrading nearly as often. 3 year old technology suites their needs just fine. WPA is designed to prevent the typical consumer from walking across the street and copying their neighbor's CD.
[quote]Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 --> OS 9<hr></blockquote>
Ugh. You're muddling the issue. Most Win95 apps run on XP because they use the same API (Win32). The foundation for the OS is not the API. Microsoft is very good about not ditching their developers by switching API's midstream. That's why you'll find a Win16 emulator in XP.
Although the API's are the same, the jump from Win95 to XP is tremendous, on the same scale as the jump to OSX.
[quote]It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.<hr></blockquote>
Sun took Microsoft to court for using Sun's Java Runtime. The court ordered that Microsoft stop bundling Sun's Java Runtime as per Sun's request.
It was Sun's decision not to have Java bundled with Windows.
[quote]One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example.<hr></blockquote>
"Hey hey, look over here away from the subject that I obviously know little to nothing about! Over here, hey hey hey, over here!"
No one is arguing this but you. It has nothing to do with the quality or structure of WindowsXP.
[quote]which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them.<hr></blockquote>
[quote]As for my use of XP sure I use it at CompUSA, good job, how did you ever know? idot...<hr></blockquote>
Yeah Ducky, he's just read the anti-XP articles at anti-MS sites and boards.
Duh.
Sinewave:
[quote]Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. But I agree.<hr></blockquote>
A copy of Windows, yes, but not always the latest one which they promptly get. . . from a friend. This is how I got all my pre-XP operating systems and how I get basically all my pay software. It's how my grandmother has Win2k now instead of WinME (bundled with her machine). It's how my mother has WinME instead of Win95. It's how my roomate. . .
[quote]Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 -> OS 9<hr></blockquote>
I would explain the difference between DOS and Win32 instruction sets but it's obvious you're a moron and it would do no good.
Be happy with your Mac, that's fine. I dig Macs, too, but I manage to like OSX without being ignorant to everything else. Go figure.
[quote]And it's even closer to Win2k than MS wants to tell it's customer base. That is why most Windows users that are using 2k now aren't switching over.<hr></blockquote>
I don't think there's any secret in that it's a Win2k derivative.
Oh, and I was a very satisfied Windows 2000 user and now I am a very satisfied Windows XP user.
First off I want to say I want either AI to stop with the qb tags or user start using them. If you don't use them the quote feature doesn't work right. And it makes it a PITA to reply. Thank you.
[quote]Originally posted by RubberDucky:
<strong>
Yes, the average user already owns a copy of Win98, but they don't own XP. Given the slow down in purchase of OEM systems, do you really expect MS to try and rely on OEM sales as much as they have in the past? Most people only purchased an OS with a new system. 4 years ago, the need to upgrade once every two years was much greater.
</strong><hr></blockquote> Maybe MS needs to start giving people a REASON to upgrade? I know people running 95 that still sees no reason to upgrade. Again if some one wants to get windows illegally they can And they wont have to get past the WPA
<strong> [quote]
Computer performance has reached a plateau where people aren't upgrading nearly as often. 3 year old technology suites their needs just fine. WPA is designed to prevent the typical consumer from walking across the street and copying their neighbor's CD.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Guess what they will STILL be able to. There are tons of ways WPA can be cracked now. Again.. the only people that will be effected by this is the ones that payed for it.
[quote]<strong>
Ugh. You're muddling the issue. Most Win95 apps run on XP because they use the same API (Win32). The foundation for the OS is not the API. Microsoft is very good about not ditching their developers by switching API's midstream. That's why you'll find a Win16 emulator in XP.
Although the API's are the same, the jump from Win95 to XP is tremendous, on the same scale as the jump to OSX.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok let me rephrase my comment. XP isn't THAT much different than NT 4 that was put out around 94/95 It really isn't. And no NT 4 or 95 to XP isn't as big a difference as OS 9 to OS X. Not nearly. The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.
[quote]Ok let me rephrase my comment. XP isn't THAT much different than NT 4 that was put out around 94/95 It really isn't. And no NT 4 or 95 to XP isn't as big a difference as OS 9 to OS X. Not nearly. The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.<hr></blockquote>
So, if I install the .NET runtimes on my XP box, it's that different? The .NET runtimes are a whole new set of API's.
A copy of Windows, yes, but not always the latest one which they promptly get. . . from a friend. This is how I got all my pre-XP operating systems and how I get basically all my pay software. It's how my grandmother has Win2k now instead of WinME (bundled with her machine). It's how my mother has WinME instead of Win95. It's how my roomate. . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And they will still do it with XP.. just use a WPA cracking program or warez a version that doesn't have WPA. No change here.
<strong> [quote]
I would explain the difference between DOS and Win32 instruction sets but it's obvious you're a moron and it would do no good.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Obviously explaining that would require you to take the cock out of your mouth so I understand . And guess what 95 had Win32 instructions too. It just hardly EVER ran anything that used them.
<strong> [quote]
Be happy with your Mac, that's fine. I dig Macs, too, but I manage to like OSX without being ignorant to everything else. Go figure.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yah good for gover lets all clap for him!.. you know most people do too son
<strong>Let's drop WPA, we're just arguing in circles.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
mhmmm
<strong> [quote]
So, if I install the .NET runtimes on my XP box, it's that different? The .NET runtimes are a whole new set of API's.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah that is where it is different. .NET will only run on XP. There has to be a reason to make people want to buy it. It surely wont be the WPA . From what I hear .NET wont be running for awhile now. Just like how iTunes runs on 9.1 but not 9.0. That doesn't make it a big difference between the two does it?
[quote]Maybe MS needs to start giving people a REASON to upgrade? I know people running 95 that still sees no reason to upgrade.<hr></blockquote>
I know people still using 7.5.5
You know what we call these people? Morons.
That is akin to me saying, "These idiots are proof that the MacOS hasn't improved from 7.5.5 to OSX."
[quote]Guess what they will STILL be able to. There are tons of ways WPA can be cracked now. Again.. the only people that will be effected by this is the ones that payed for it.<hr></blockquote>
You've failed to answer, how in the hell will WPA affect a legal user?
[quote]The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.<hr></blockquote>
I think it just tells everyone else that you don't know what the hell an API is.
[quote]And they will still do it with XP.. just use a WPA cracking program or warez a version that doesn't have WPA. No change here.<hr></blockquote>
I just got finished telling you that warezed versions, while common to file sharing people, are not easily accessed by Ma and Pa Kettle. I realize that you're wrapped up in a selfish little self-world, but understand that there is a word outside your house and there are people not like you (thank God).
[quote]And guess what 95 had Win32 instructions too. It just hardly EVER ran anything that used them.<hr></blockquote>
When did I say it didn't?
You said it was DOS with a new interface, I call you a simp. The first is false, the second is true.
[quote]Ah that is where it is different. .NET will only run on XP.<hr></blockquote>
Hey everyone, it's Sinewave, the I Don't Know What The **** I'm Talking About Clown again!
.NET will run on your beloved OSX sparky. It will run on Linux.
[quote]From what I hear .NET wont be running for awhile now.<hr></blockquote>
Microsoft's roadmap says 2004 for Blackcomb, I guess that is a while. Of course, they aren't making promises they can't keep (a foriegn concept to a Maclot, I'm sure).
FYI, not that it will go through your thick skull, Windows.NET != .NET
As Do I.. if that is all they need to do what they need to do.. why should they change?
[quote]<strong>
You know what we call these people? Morons.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Why are they morons? Why should they pay for a OS they don't need? I call that smart.
[quote]<strong>
That is akin to me saying, "These idiots are proof that the MacOS hasn't improved from 7.5.5 to OSX."
<hr></blockquote></strong>
The big difference is.. you can't run OS X applications in 7.5 You can run most XP apps in Win95 still.
[quote]<strong>
You've failed to answer, how in the hell will WPA affect a legal user?
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Well lets take my roomate. He has a Hard drive and he takes to and from work all the time. Now I KNOW there have been people that have had to call MS cause they have swapped HD's too often to reactivate their WPA. This is a PTA. Lets not get into the horror stories of actually GETTING your WPA license over the phone. I know a gal that took XP back cause she had been waiting 1/2 a hour on hold to get her number. What kind of service is that? Again the only people that have to deal with this are the ones that pay legally.
[quote]<strong>
I think it just tells everyone else that you don't know what the hell an API is.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Other than the fact you didn't use the answer I gave you.. but another answer to another thread.. and the fact you quoted me out of context doesn't help your cause grover They both used basically the same Win32 API (Or application programming interface, yes I do know what a API is grover)
[quote]<strong>
I just got finished telling you that warezed versions, while common to file sharing people, are not easily accessed by Ma and Pa Kettle.<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ma and Pa Kettle are still using the OS their computer came with. They wont upgrade to a new OS unless they buy a new computer.. which it will come on. Or their grandson hooks them up with the latest version of XP without the WMP
[quote]<strong>
I realize that you're wrapped up in a selfish little self-world, but understand that there is a word outside your house and there are people not like you (thank God).
<hr></blockquote></strong>
And what does this have to do with anything? heh come on grover don't start sinking into the lowly depths of the "personal attack" syndrome son
[quote]<strong>
When did I say it didn't?
You said it was DOS with a new interface, I call you a simp. The first is false, the second is true.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Now I never once said it was DOS with a new interface. Not once. Please show me where you read me saying this.
[quote]<strong>
Hey everyone, it's Sinewave, the I Don't Know What The **** I'm Talking About Clown again!
.NET will run on your beloved OSX sparky. It will run on Linux.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes groverat I know this.. again my point flew over your head.. or your trying to dodge it. It will work on XP, OS X, Linux.. etc.. But NOT Win95, 98, etc.
[quote]<strong>
Microsoft's roadmap says 2004 for Blackcomb, I guess that is a while. Of course, they aren't making promises they can't keep (a foriegn concept to a Maclot, I'm sure).
FYI, not that it will go through your thick skull, Windows.NET != .NET
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ah more personal attacks that have no merit. Nice debating style there grover
Your making assumptions all over the place that is making you look silly. Now please stop
Comments
<strong>
By warez fiends who would hack it anyway. It won't be casually copied anymore, that's what M$ was aiming for.
Do you think your average user knows where to get hacked copies?</strong><hr></blockquote>
And the average user WONT be using this. The average user buys Windows. The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy. The pirates wont be effected by it. Therefore it's BS.
<strong>Umm windows combatbilty has a much easier time then mac. Classic and carbon must require a recode, while windows only means a few missing supports. Think about that~Kuku</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is because Windows hasn't changed THAT drastically since 95.
<strong>About WPA... Think about MP3 utilities such as Kaazaa or Morpheus. I dont know one person, even 'dumb' users, who dont have a warez'ed XP copy. The dumb idea of WPA failed. Company employees warez, as most humans do... F. It was a good try, but it was a crappy way of invading people's privacy. Just because you need 250+ copes doesnt mean one of those 250 people doesnt rip it... Search a P2P file sharing utility. XP is everywhere.
[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: Fred Bear ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly
<strong>Someone should let mortal know that Windows NT, 2k, and XP aren't built on top of DOS. Thats what differentiates them from Windows 3.1, 95, 98 and ME.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are correct sir. NT is most certainly not based on MSDOS. A closer relative would be IBM's OS/2. The extensions are jsut a good way to determine who is responsible for the files as they do not use (metadata?) to determine that like the MacOS does. As OS X uses extensions as well by that logic you would be saying that OS X is based on DOS which we know to be false.
However, there is a DOS thunk layer (NTVDM) in NT for many DOS programs to work in and the WOW layer for 16 bit application compatibility for 3.x and early 95 apps. It is these layers (alond with other bells and whistles in MS programs) that start undermining the stability of the OS, as Classic does in X.
OS X and XP, both have the same idea, but I think that OS X will go further when all is said and done. XP is just an MS speedbump on the way to the BBT (bigger better thing).
How convenient, you go from talking about the supposed security problems with Terminal Services to a cookie bug in IE6.
[quote]I think its pathetic that Microsoft scorned the company who released the information for this exploit 2 weeks after Microsoft failed to even mention the problem to anyone. <hr></blockquote>
Whether I agree with MS about this particular issue or not, they didn't scorn the company for releasing information about an exploint, they scorned the company for releasing step by step instructions on how to abuse the exploit that any script kiddie can follow.
I can see their point, and to them it's probably a good one. Suddenly you have a bunch of people that don't update their software vulnerable to an exploit with Fool Proof® instructions.
[quote]I laugh at all the dumb Windows users who think that Microsoft isn?t controlling them from behind... think about the 'Microsoft Virtual machine' e.g. rip off of Java... If nine US states along with the European Union think Microsoft is a bad company, in terms of their business practices, then um, is any Mac user out of line for saying that too?<hr></blockquote>
You've jumped subjects again. The Microsoft Virtual Machine is MS's Java runtime that was licensed from Sun. I fail to see how licensing something constitutes a ripoff.
I also fail to see how Microsoft's business practices have anything to do with the subject at hand; the quality of WinXP.
[quote]I think its so dumb that the Windows users gloat about a improved 'task manager'... so what? you have a good utility to make sure Windows isn?t messing w/ your PC or when your PC crashes? <hr></blockquote>
Windows has a good utility to make sure it's easy to kill a hung program. Surely you don't live in a perfect world with perfect programmers where their perfect code never crashes, or leaks memory, or steals your lunch money.
My PC doesn't crash.
[quote]Oh, and if you are too ignorant to know what Adobe products are being railroaded, then sorry, that really does say something about you. Even though paint and the internal viewer aren?t close to Adobe, at all, they are still aimed at the same market.<hr></blockquote>
Paint is designed to take market share from Photoshop. I do all my graphics in paint because it's l33t. Paint r0x0rs my b0x0rs.
Ironically, you posted this a few posts ago:
[quote]look at the built-in zip decompression and photo editing tool (which I must say do suck for their lack of ability to do anything), <hr></blockquote>
You're comparing full featured Archive and Photo Editing software with the basic convenience tools built into XP? That's ridiculous. You yourself state that the tools in XP can't compete with what's already out there, so why would you even try and compare them? They serve completely different purposes.
[quote]Think about Digital cameras... They distribute software which is now not needed by XP, yet that software company just got screwed... <hr></blockquote>
I bought a Sony Digicam in July. Sony made money from my digicam purchase. They didn't make any money off their bundled software. I bought the camera even though I didn't need the bundled tools. Where did Sony lose money?
[quote]Karl Marx belied that capitalism was, in its self, destructive.<hr></blockquote>
Ironically, Socialism on a broad scale is destructive. Ask all the residents of the former Soviet Union.
[quote] PC users are always too dumb to actually know that an Intel and PPC processor cannot be compared, (different architectures maybe?).<hr></blockquote>
Sure they can. How much faster will a 2GHZ P4 render a scene in Maya than a similarly expensive PPC processor?
[quote]Oh-well. I use XP when I have to, otherwise long live OSX. <hr></blockquote>
I find it hard to believe you've used XP for any extensive amount of time. Dinking around on a computer at CompUSA hardly counts as usage.
[quote]But truth be told any form of woindows is nothing but DOS with an interface. If you dont believe me take a look in your sys32 folder. Notice the file extensions, .com .bat .ini these are dos extensions.<hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... .bat is a batch scripting file, useful for many purposes. I suppose AppleScript files make OSX nothing more than a pretty front end on top of OS8 code?
.ini files are configuration files...
I've forgotten what exactly com files are.. then again, I haven't seen one in ~5 years.
[quote]And the average user WONT be using this. The average user buys Windows. The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy.<hr></blockquote>
The average user sees no problem with borrowing their neighbor's WinME disk to install on their computer.
[quote]That is because Windows hasn't changed THAT drastically since 95.<hr></blockquote>
The WinXP code base is as far from the Win95 Code Base is as OSX is from System 7
[quote]<snip> ...these layers (alond with other bells and whistles in MS programs) that start undermining the stability of the OS, as Classic does in X.<hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure what Classic does to undermine the stability of OSX, but the compatability layers in XP are run just like any other program. They get their own memory space (each instance does) and if they crash, they don't touch anything else.
five Microsoft's licensed version of JAVA violated the license agreement, hence the lawsuit which Sun is filing in the 5th District Federal Court... It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.
One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example. While all Microsoft programs really do suck to some extent, they do things to take away from companies. Look at the X-Box. How does one go from Windows (computer code) to the X-Box? Especially since Nintendo is based in Seattle??? Hrrm, weird to me... Especially since MS owns all the software companies for X-Box software.
As for the digital camera.. I bought my Sony Digital DV camcorder and HP digital camera last month, they both came with their software which is produced by SMALLER software companies. which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them.
Oh, and for a history class?, the USSR never was a socialist republic... Marx was a socialist, good job on that one, but the USSR was founded on Leninism. There are many fundamental differences which divides the two, one of the biggest being Marx never called for a dictator and Lenin wanted one because he didn?t trust the Petrograd Soviets. So all-in-all although you try and be witty...
As for my use of XP sure I use it at CompUSA, good job, how did you ever know? idot...
Fred Bear Doesn?t Care........
for Windows users
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Fred Bear ]</p>
<strong>
The average user sees no problem with borrowing their neighbor's WinME disk to install on their computer.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. But I agree. MS wants to stop people from installing WinME before they pay for it and find out how really horrible it is.
<strong> [quote]
The WinXP code base is as far from the Win95 Code Base is as OSX is from System 7
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 --> OS 9
And it's even closer to Win2k than MS wants to tell it's customer base. That is why most Windows users that are using 2k now aren't switching over.
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
1) Microsoft is licensed to distribute a Java VM based on Java 1.1 (I believe)
2) The lawsuit had nothing to do with distributing the Virtual Machine. The lawsuit came about because MS added options into Visual J++ to allow coders extra flexibility on the Windows platform. This extra functionality was completely optional, however when programmers used it, it effectively made their programs single platform. This offended Sun greatly.
[quote]It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.<hr></blockquote>
Once again, Microsoft has always been allowed to distribute a VM based off Java 1.1. This license expires in the next year or so.
[quote]One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example.<hr></blockquote>
God forbid... Microsoft actually competes. That's what they're there to do.
NS4.x is what killed Netscape. Not IE. IE has been bundled since version 2, and Netscape was the dominant browser for two full product cycles until IE4 was released. Why did IE4 dominate? It was the better browser...
[quote]How does one go from Windows (computer code) to the X-Box? Especially since Nintendo is based in Seattle??? Hrrm, weird to me... quote]
I've never seen any laws limiting companies from entering new markets. Microsoft's kickass gaming API's (DirectX) are what makes them able to create the XBox.
[quote]As for the digital camera.. I bought my Sony Digital DV camcorder and HP digital camera last month, they both came with their software which is produced by SMALLER software companies. which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them. <hr></blockquote>
Oh? So do you use iMovie for your DV editing? What about the programs that came with it?
[quote]Oh, and for a history class?, the USSR never was a socialist republic... Marx was a socialist, good job on that one, but the USSR was founded on Leninism. There are many fundamental differences which divides the two, one of the biggest being Marx never called for a dictator and Lenin wanted one because he didn?t trust the Petrograd Soviets. <hr></blockquote>
I could just as vaguely argue that the US isn't a "true" capitalistic economy since we have things like Anti-trust laws, environmental regulation, and other decidedly non-capitalist institutions governing many of the actions of our industries.
I would be just as wrong.
[quote]Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. <hr></blockquote>
Yes, the average user already owns a copy of Win98, but they don't own XP. Given the slow down in purchase of OEM systems, do you really expect MS to try and rely on OEM sales as much as they have in the past? Most people only purchased an OS with a new system. 4 years ago, the need to upgrade once every two years was much greater.
Computer performance has reached a plateau where people aren't upgrading nearly as often. 3 year old technology suites their needs just fine. WPA is designed to prevent the typical consumer from walking across the street and copying their neighbor's CD.
[quote]Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 --> OS 9<hr></blockquote>
Ugh. You're muddling the issue. Most Win95 apps run on XP because they use the same API (Win32). The foundation for the OS is not the API. Microsoft is very good about not ditching their developers by switching API's midstream. That's why you'll find a Win16 emulator in XP.
Although the API's are the same, the jump from Win95 to XP is tremendous, on the same scale as the jump to OSX.
Fredbear:
[quote]It is the fact that they were never entitled to distribute it with Windows and they did, to purposely make it so people didn?t have a need to try the Jun JAVA.<hr></blockquote>
Sun took Microsoft to court for using Sun's Java Runtime. The court ordered that Microsoft stop bundling Sun's Java Runtime as per Sun's request.
It was Sun's decision not to have Java bundled with Windows.
[quote]One cannot honestly say that Microsoft doesn?t do stuff to take away market share from small(er) companies. Look at IE and Netscape... perfect example.<hr></blockquote>
"Hey hey, look over here away from the subject that I obviously know little to nothing about! Over here, hey hey hey, over here!"
No one is arguing this but you. It has nothing to do with the quality or structure of WindowsXP.
[quote]which in the end get screwed because they are now not needed and Sony and HP will stop bundling them.<hr></blockquote>
I guess Apple is evil too.
<a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/whatyoucando/applications/imagecapture.html"; target="_blank">"Image Capture. Download pictures from virtually any digital camera."</a>
[quote]As for my use of XP sure I use it at CompUSA, good job, how did you ever know? idot...<hr></blockquote>
Yeah Ducky, he's just read the anti-XP articles at anti-MS sites and boards.
Duh.
Sinewave:
[quote]Actually the average user All ready OWNS a copy of Windows. But I agree.<hr></blockquote>
A copy of Windows, yes, but not always the latest one which they promptly get. . . from a friend. This is how I got all my pre-XP operating systems and how I get basically all my pay software. It's how my grandmother has Win2k now instead of WinME (bundled with her machine). It's how my mother has WinME instead of Win95. It's how my roomate. . .
[quote]Is that why most Win95 apps still run on XP? ANd no it's not cause "MS just coded it THAT well"
No 95 -> XP is more like OS 7.5 -> OS 9<hr></blockquote>
I would explain the difference between DOS and Win32 instruction sets but it's obvious you're a moron and it would do no good.
Be happy with your Mac, that's fine. I dig Macs, too, but I manage to like OSX without being ignorant to everything else. Go figure.
[quote]And it's even closer to Win2k than MS wants to tell it's customer base. That is why most Windows users that are using 2k now aren't switching over.<hr></blockquote>
I don't think there's any secret in that it's a Win2k derivative.
Oh, and I was a very satisfied Windows 2000 user and now I am a very satisfied Windows XP user.
[quote]Originally posted by RubberDucky:
<strong>
Yes, the average user already owns a copy of Win98, but they don't own XP. Given the slow down in purchase of OEM systems, do you really expect MS to try and rely on OEM sales as much as they have in the past? Most people only purchased an OS with a new system. 4 years ago, the need to upgrade once every two years was much greater.
</strong><hr></blockquote> Maybe MS needs to start giving people a REASON to upgrade? I know people running 95 that still sees no reason to upgrade. Again if some one wants to get windows illegally they can And they wont have to get past the WPA
<strong> [quote]
Computer performance has reached a plateau where people aren't upgrading nearly as often. 3 year old technology suites their needs just fine. WPA is designed to prevent the typical consumer from walking across the street and copying their neighbor's CD.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Guess what they will STILL be able to. There are tons of ways WPA can be cracked now. Again.. the only people that will be effected by this is the ones that payed for it.
[quote]<strong>
Ugh. You're muddling the issue. Most Win95 apps run on XP because they use the same API (Win32). The foundation for the OS is not the API. Microsoft is very good about not ditching their developers by switching API's midstream. That's why you'll find a Win16 emulator in XP.
Although the API's are the same, the jump from Win95 to XP is tremendous, on the same scale as the jump to OSX.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok let me rephrase my comment. XP isn't THAT much different than NT 4 that was put out around 94/95 It really isn't. And no NT 4 or 95 to XP isn't as big a difference as OS 9 to OS X. Not nearly. The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
[quote]Ok let me rephrase my comment. XP isn't THAT much different than NT 4 that was put out around 94/95 It really isn't. And no NT 4 or 95 to XP isn't as big a difference as OS 9 to OS X. Not nearly. The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.<hr></blockquote>
So, if I install the .NET runtimes on my XP box, it's that different? The .NET runtimes are a whole new set of API's.
<strong>
A copy of Windows, yes, but not always the latest one which they promptly get. . . from a friend. This is how I got all my pre-XP operating systems and how I get basically all my pay software. It's how my grandmother has Win2k now instead of WinME (bundled with her machine). It's how my mother has WinME instead of Win95. It's how my roomate. . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And they will still do it with XP.. just use a WPA cracking program or warez a version that doesn't have WPA. No change here.
<strong> [quote]
I would explain the difference between DOS and Win32 instruction sets but it's obvious you're a moron and it would do no good.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Obviously explaining that would require you to take the cock out of your mouth so I understand
<strong> [quote]
Be happy with your Mac, that's fine. I dig Macs, too, but I manage to like OSX without being ignorant to everything else. Go figure.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yah good for gover lets all clap for him!.. you know most people do too son
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
<strong>Let's drop WPA, we're just arguing in circles.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
mhmmm
<strong> [quote]
So, if I install the .NET runtimes on my XP box, it's that different? The .NET runtimes are a whole new set of API's.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah that is where it is different. .NET will only run on XP. There has to be a reason to make people want to buy it. It surely wont be the WPA
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
Oh yeah? !! OH YEAH!?!?
damn I guess I have no retort.
OU SUCKS!
Sinewave:
[quote]Maybe MS needs to start giving people a REASON to upgrade? I know people running 95 that still sees no reason to upgrade.<hr></blockquote>
I know people still using 7.5.5
You know what we call these people? Morons.
That is akin to me saying, "These idiots are proof that the MacOS hasn't improved from 7.5.5 to OSX."
[quote]Guess what they will STILL be able to. There are tons of ways WPA can be cracked now. Again.. the only people that will be effected by this is the ones that payed for it.<hr></blockquote>
You've failed to answer, how in the hell will WPA affect a legal user?
[quote]The very fact that they use the same APIs tells me this.<hr></blockquote>
I think it just tells everyone else that you don't know what the hell an API is.
[quote]And they will still do it with XP.. just use a WPA cracking program or warez a version that doesn't have WPA. No change here.<hr></blockquote>
I just got finished telling you that warezed versions, while common to file sharing people, are not easily accessed by Ma and Pa Kettle. I realize that you're wrapped up in a selfish little self-world, but understand that there is a word outside your house and there are people not like you (thank God).
[quote]And guess what 95 had Win32 instructions too. It just hardly EVER ran anything that used them.<hr></blockquote>
When did I say it didn't?
You said it was DOS with a new interface, I call you a simp. The first is false, the second is true.
[quote]Ah that is where it is different. .NET will only run on XP.<hr></blockquote>
Hey everyone, it's Sinewave, the I Don't Know What The **** I'm Talking About Clown again!
.NET will run on your beloved OSX sparky. It will run on Linux.
[quote]From what I hear .NET wont be running for awhile now.<hr></blockquote>
Microsoft's roadmap says 2004 for Blackcomb, I guess that is a while. Of course, they aren't making promises they can't keep (a foriegn concept to a Maclot, I'm sure).
FYI, not that it will go through your thick skull, Windows.NET != .NET
<strong>
I know people still using 7.5.5
<hr></blockquote></strong>
As Do I.. if that is all they need to do what they need to do.. why should they change?
[quote]<strong>
You know what we call these people? Morons.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Why are they morons? Why should they pay for a OS they don't need? I call that smart.
[quote]<strong>
That is akin to me saying, "These idiots are proof that the MacOS hasn't improved from 7.5.5 to OSX."
<hr></blockquote></strong>
The big difference is.. you can't run OS X applications in 7.5 You can run most XP apps in Win95 still.
[quote]<strong>
You've failed to answer, how in the hell will WPA affect a legal user?
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Well lets take my roomate. He has a Hard drive and he takes to and from work all the time. Now I KNOW there have been people that have had to call MS cause they have swapped HD's too often to reactivate their WPA. This is a PTA. Lets not get into the horror stories of actually GETTING your WPA license over the phone. I know a gal that took XP back cause she had been waiting 1/2 a hour on hold to get her number. What kind of service is that? Again the only people that have to deal with this are the ones that pay legally.
[quote]<strong>
I think it just tells everyone else that you don't know what the hell an API is.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Other than the fact you didn't use the answer I gave you.. but another answer to another thread.. and the fact you quoted me out of context doesn't help your cause grover
[quote]<strong>
I just got finished telling you that warezed versions, while common to file sharing people, are not easily accessed by Ma and Pa Kettle.<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ma and Pa Kettle are still using the OS their computer came with. They wont upgrade to a new OS unless they buy a new computer.. which it will come on. Or their grandson hooks them up with the latest version of XP without the WMP
[quote]<strong>
I realize that you're wrapped up in a selfish little self-world, but understand that there is a word outside your house and there are people not like you (thank God).
<hr></blockquote></strong>
And what does this have to do with anything? heh come on grover don't start sinking into the lowly depths of the "personal attack" syndrome son
[quote]<strong>
When did I say it didn't?
You said it was DOS with a new interface, I call you a simp. The first is false, the second is true.
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Now I never once said it was DOS with a new interface. Not once. Please show me where you read me saying this.
[quote]<strong>
Hey everyone, it's Sinewave, the I Don't Know What The **** I'm Talking About Clown again!
.NET will run on your beloved OSX sparky. It will run on Linux.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes groverat I know this.. again my point flew over your head.. or your trying to dodge it. It will work on XP, OS X, Linux.. etc.. But NOT Win95, 98, etc.
[quote]<strong>
Microsoft's roadmap says 2004 for Blackcomb, I guess that is a while. Of course, they aren't making promises they can't keep (a foriegn concept to a Maclot, I'm sure).
FYI, not that it will go through your thick skull, Windows.NET != .NET
<hr></blockquote></strong>
Ah more personal attacks that have no merit. Nice debating style there grover
Your making assumptions all over the place that is making you look silly. Now please stop
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>