Why DO people hate Bill Gates?

[Ice]

Unbelievable

[MrLars]

I don't hate him...I just refuse to pay for any of MS's software. 'nuff said.



------------------
Lars
***MOL***
Men Of Leisure

[TheWobble]

 

I don't hate him...I just refuse to pay for any of MS's software. 'nuff said.

CC

.squelch Gates

[Lephturn]

Microsoft is the leader because they provide what the market demands.  The market demands, above all else, uniformity.  Standards.  That is why it is so hypocritical to complain about MS being a momopoly, when a monopoly is exactly what the market demands.  Microsoft figured out that standardization was the key a long time ago, and put themselves in a position to give the market what it demanded.

Don't delude yourselves into thinking things would be different if it was a complany other than Microsoft.  It wouldn't be.  Aside from some predatory contract practices, Microsoft has simply provided for the demands of the market, and been rewarded for it.  The fact that they are still the leaders in the market says that they continue to provide products that fill the customer's needs.  They have no competitors in the OS space that even realize what the #1 driving need of the market is.  Uniformity.

------------------
Lephturn - Aces High Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs  http://www.flyingpigs.com
 
Check out Lephturn's Aerodrome!

"Nothing is so firmly believed as that which we least know." - Michel Eyquem, seigneur de Montaigne. (1533–1592)

[nonoht]

Now for AH some guys crying about including MAC users... why not...

now imagine that you have 40 different OS , how do you play to AH ? AH would compatible with 5 or 6 of them, and the others not ...

I'm not please with the microsoft monopole , but i've to admit that microsoft had make a good work for the PC standardisation

[AcId]

 

Microsoft figured out that standardization was the key

You've really got to be kidding, "standardization" should be swapped with "proprietary" in that post. By the way everyone is proprietary, they only allow others to play when the pay for the license.

I don't like nor dislike the "man", I've never met him. However, because of my line of work I am exposed to many different OS's and Software. It has been my experience that if you want unpredictability and instability along with the ease-of-use that a pimply faced "point-and-click-admin" can maintain the System......well then you use M$ products.
However, If your a bit nutty and enjoy not having system failures and also enjoy the power of 64 bit computing then you will most likely go with a Unix based system, oh and the guy that maintains that system will actually need to know a thing or two about it. I'm tired of hearing about "Intuitive" interfaces and GUI's....It doesn't need to bo "Intuitive" if you know what the hell your doing. Note I sayed "Unix" not "Linux", yes, there is a difference.

Ahh but there I went ..... /rant

I hate when I do that.

------------------
XO, VMF-222
"The Flyin' Deuces"

[nonoht]

Acid  come play AH with your Unix...  

And who have pay for microsoft licence ?

[Zigrat]

i dont hate him, he was a smart and lucky businessman who did what he could to succeed.

[Lephturn]

I meant standardization in terms of a standard interface, not in regards to "open standards".

Uniformity is a better word.

LOL, the whole *nix geek "we are superior" thing is really very similar to the Luftwobblies denigrating their own rides in order to claim superior pilot skill.  

------------------
Lephturn - Aces High Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs  http://www.flyingpigs.com
 
Check out Lephturn's Aerodrome!

"Nothing is so firmly believed as that which we least know." - Michel Eyquem, seigneur de Montaigne. (1533–1592)

[AcId]

nonoht,
   you might not have payed for your copy of winblowz but how do you think HT got the source's and SDK's necessary to develop any game for winblowz.
   And overall, there is probably more than 40 different OS's, M$ alone has 7 without counting the "SE's" and Service Packs. It just so happens that the majority use M$, as it is tailored for individual ease of use.

   Oh and Lephty we *nix geeks don't all think it is ourselves that are superior but the OS itself and the Hardware that *nix is capable of running on is clearly superior to M$.  


(edit) Thats it....I'm done, I'm not reading the thread anymore. I get too emotional about the whole nix vs. M$ thing.  
------------------
XO, VMF-222
"The Flyin' Deuces"

[This message has been edited by AcId (edited 02-26-2001).]

[Skuzzy]

Hmmmm,...Lephturn...
I have had to work on the technical side of MS products and many Unix's over the years.

Technically,..Unix is a better OS than anything that MS has ever released.  This is mainly due to the long development cycle Unix has enjoyed.
I like the fact that I can do whatever I want, from a programming aspect, in Unix and not worry about crashing the OS.  I can't say that about MS operating systems.
Being a fully protected mode operating system does give Unix some advantages that a MS OS will not have until they can get rid of real-mode.
I also like open standards.  Unix has proven that you can have open standards and still evolve.
I have code I wrote 20 years ago that will run on any Unix that is available today.  It has to be recompiled, but that is all that it needs.  I can't say the same for MS OS's.

MS has a proven track record of taking open standards and changing them.  Look at what they did with PPP.  NT has extensions for PPP that will not work with anything other than a MS OS.  On that topic, they are still shipping a PPP driver that violates the latest standards and forces the rest of the world to maintain special code so it will work with MS products.

These are but a few simple facts.  Make of it what you will.

------------------
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
President, AppLink Corp.
http://www.applink.net
skuzzy@applink.net

[Wardog]

Rip..

Why do i hate him!

Well, its just a carry over from high school. I hate all geeks. Even if they have money.

[PakRat]

Leph - many things over the years damn Microsoft and it isn't because they have strived for uniformity. Skuzzy is right - they have actually bastardized standards to further their own interests and frustrate and derail competitors.

HTML - was a standard. Netscape supported the standard. Microsoft came in and changed the "standard" while giving away Internet Explorer and Front Page so there would be their own "competing" standard and to derail Netscape. You see, Netscape was damn close to having what amounted to an operating system and Microsoft just would not tolerate that. Applets could run in Netscape Navigator and therefore have functionality beyond that offered by Microsoft. In MS's view, Netscape had to die. It's now almost dead.

Java - was also a standard. Microsoft started selling their "development environment" which included a lot of non-standard stuff specifically to derail Sun. Java programmers using the MS development environment quickly found out their code wasn't portable - one of the features of Java. But is Microsoft helping the community by including all these "features" that conflict with those already in the standard?

How about standards? They create one and then refuse to tell competitors about OS hooks that effectively cripple the competing products. This was documented over and over. They enjoy the OS functionality they build in and then not tell others - and even build in tests designed to thwart competitor's software and slow it down or cripple functionality.

Microsoft used Internet Explorer 5 to derail Netscape by linking it into the operating system in ways that actuall slow down the OS. Anyone who removed IE5 was, in the words of one Microsoft employee, "We will bind the shell to the Internet Explorer, so that running any other browser is a jolting experience."

I had to help several friends rebuild their systems when they tried to "uninstall" IE5 and it totally and completly wrecked Windows. Cost me quite a few hours and them quite a bit of $$$ in long distance as I talked them through backups and the rebuild.

How about the threats to Intel to support rival AMD if Intel was to add processor instructions that would allow multimedia content enhancements Microsoft had already coded into their ActiveX crap?

Anyone who thinks Microsoft is getting the short end of the DOJ suit should examine the Findings of Fact.

It is very funny - the Findings are available in Acrobat, Word Perfect, and traditional HTML format. All three were in various ways victims of Microsoft's bullying. No Word format is offered  . Who says government employees don't have a sense of humor?

------------------
Rape, pillage, then burn...

[Swoop]

I dont hate Bill.   In fact ALL HAIL THE GOD THAT IS BILL.    

Bill Gates has made me very successful and moderately well off.  Without Bill I would probably be working at McDonalds.  Thanks to him (and his crappy O/S's) I've made serious money fixing things and explaining things to losers.....um.....I mean users.   To me it's all easy, understandable, logical.......to losers it all seems incomprehensible.  So I'll continue as a contractor as long as I can, I'm on the gravy train here.....and it's all thanks to Bill.

Um.....actually, it's not *all* thanks to Bill, especially as right now I'm a Unix consultant (they spelt it wrong, it should be spelt Eunuchs....cos it aint got the equipment and it aint capable), but it was M$ products that got me a foot in the door of the contracting world in the first place.


 

[This message has been edited by Swoop (edited 02-27-2001).]

[Skuzzy]

lol Swoop.  Reminds me of the bumper sticker an employee put on my wall one day..."Unix has no balls".
You are correct about how many people have made a living off of MS mess-ups.

My sales of E-Mail servers and support contracts went through the roof after MS released W2K.  Of course, I have an outrageous support policy.  I give a 100% refund if the server crashes/fails within 1 year of installation.
Never had to make that refund yet, but I have lost some support contracts because of it as well.  "Roy, why do we need a support contract,..the thing just works".

There are things that are easily accomplished on a Unix based server that simply cannot be done on a MS based server.  It also is significantly cheaper to accomplish those things in Unix versus MS.  Of course, you do give up the proprietary MS stuff when you choose Unix as your OS. Small price to pay for stability though, especially when your business depends on that server.
MS has done some good things for Unix, at large.  Prior to MS jumping into the server OS market, everyone complained about how complex and difficult Unix was/is.  It did not take long for MS to make Unix look good.

I can always tell when a client brings up a W2K server and enables DNS.  Our DNS servers get flooded with DNS update requests.  As a non-authoritative DNS server, it is illegal (by all standards) for it to update DNS records, but this is one of the many things MS violated in W2K.  I pity the ISP who has not put in the security measures to prevent this from happening.
They also ignore the SOA records in the DNS database, creating thier own proprietary record format.
What about IPv6?  This is scary.  Most Unixes have at least rudimentary support for IPv6.  MS still has a TCP/IP stack that does not conform to the current IPv4 standard.  I shudder to think what they are going to do to IPv6.  The reason it worries me?  MS has not participated in the IPv6 standards consortium.

Anyway,....most of what I talk about concerns the low level stuff, such as networking and development, which are primary concerns of mine.  From an application viewpoint, MS wins hands down.  You cannot argue with the fact there are more applications available for MS products than any other OS out there.  This is truly where MS's strength lies.
If a significant number of applications become available for another OS, MS might find themselves in trouble.  I can only hope.  

------------------
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
President, AppLink Corp.
http://www.applink.net
skuzzy@applink.net