[citation][nom]jjtoson[/nom]I still believe bill gate is more talent leading microsoft than this guy. he look fat and greedy. sorry about that. does he really care about technology beside money?[/citation]
Now what do you have to be sorry about?
Who bought an OS people like my parents can use WITHOUT having to spend a rediculous amount of money, it sure was not apple. Microsoft may get knocked, but they did allow people to afford a computer. My parents don't need to spend $1000 on an apple laptop when a windows installed one for 400 will do the trick. All do to mass market of microsoft.
This all stinks of little kids shouting out 'My Dad's car is better than your Dad's car!'...
To be honest I don't give a crap about which company makes the most money. What I care about is who offers me the best products for the lower price to my own pocket.
Although now that Apple has surpassed MS I would like to see the DOJ even things up a bit and apply the same priciples that they have attacked MS with over the last decade. Lets see how Apple handles such negative and consistant press.
Its not surprising for a company that charges $100+ for a product every computer has to have. (if purchased separately from the PC, it is cheaper for lower priced retail PCs) Sure you could use Linux, but not if you want to actually use your computer to do things like play games and run popular software.
[citation][nom]lightbulbsocket[/nom]"there is no technology company in the planet"Anyone else think that's why it seems like some of them have their heads buried in the sand sometimes?[/citation]
No, it's perfectly reasonable. For quite a few years now that statement will hold true, even if Apple surpasses them in profits. Unless Jobs has a giant underground lair. Not quite a Bat Cave, an Apple Core? Well played, Ballmer, brilliant choice of words.
[citation][nom]averagejoe_1984[/nom]Its not surprising for a company that charges $100+ for a product every computer has to have.[/citation]
Are you suggesting that because every computer has to have it, it should be cheap or free? Sounds similar to the 'argument' people use when they try to justify stealing copyrighted media.
[citation][nom]lamorpa[/nom]Are you suggesting that because every computer has to have it, it should be cheap or free? Sounds similar to the 'argument' people use when they try to justify stealing copyrighted media.[/citation]
Do you justify the crippling of open formats where many money-earning companies can make a lot of money with? A platform is a platform. MS is removing features in Vista, Office 2007.
You tell me what's fair about that and why should we spend our money on such crooks.
They don't try to make a good product any more.
MS just tries to cement the IT-world with it's platform and API's.
Apple is now getting more worse than Microsoft.
What's so justful about having to buy new versions of Windows that does NOT work with older ones. MS removes support for INTERFACING for the sole reason that the competition over time integrates them. *sarcasm* Sounds like real hard working people to me. */sarcasm*
Throwing their stuff down the drain and trying to keep ahead of some crazy curve.
API's/descriptions of them and formats should be free. You make money by making software that does something remember. Not just sitting on your lazy ass collecting royalties from patents. You sit on your lazy ass collecting royalties from USEFUL SOFTWARE that the people buy because they need it.
For the record, I'm also a programmer and know the impact of free.
Thruth is, some basic, low-level stuff should be free.
You make money with doing something with it.
Hope you get it.
Linux is a goldmine now. No not selling linux!! Making programs that WORK on LINUX where there aren't commercial/quality-counterparts for.
Or make a tripple A game ALSO available on the Linux platform.
@SchizoFrob (and others with this sentiment): "Although now that Apple has surpassed MS I would like to see the DOJ even things up a bit and apply the same priciples that they have attacked MS with over the last decade."
OK, based on what? Apple isn't the market leader, they aren't stifling competition, and multitudes of options from other vendors are available for anything they offer. What, exactly, do you want the DOJ to get involved with?
@joytech22: I dunno, IBM? Digital? Xerox? MSFT? Your question doesn't have one answer. What's your take?
Here is an interesting link, although there may be better: