It's always amazing how bold people are when they're not face to face... especially that know-it-all windbag who loves to listen to himself talk.
You know, the one who's favorite line is "you sir are an idiot"...
Everyone has an opinion, whether it's liked or not. There's nothing at all idiotic about taking an active part and voicing your opinion about what's important to you.

Anyhow... I've got a few opinions/comments of my own:

Everyone is complaining about corporations and their business tactics. One of those tactics being control of people and forcing them to use their product or whatever...
all businesses do it in one way or another. It's just that some are better and bolder at it... in this case it's AOL & MS.
We complain about such practices, but give in to them all the time.
It's everywhere.
We were all forced to give out specific demographic information about ourselves [bogus or not] just to be able to post opinions onthis very site we're on.
No one HAD TO... unless they wanted speak their mind. No big deal... most of us probably didn't think much of it.
It's a type/level of force that's become normal. A practice that's become accepted.

Control is used in some form by ALL corporations.

It's still simple... we all still have plenty of choices.

I didn't want to, I wouldn't have given information to come here and post a comment.
The same holds true for what run on my PC... if it doesn't suit my needs or I don't like it, I don't put it on my computer.

I didn't like Windows [any version]- so I don't use it. I didn't say I hate Microsoft... just don't like Windows.

Didn't care for the Mac OS- don't use it.

I don't use AOL because I worked for the bas****s and know how their dirty little minds work. Yes, they have lots of nasty tactics...
but aside from that I just don't like their product... so I don't use it.

As with anything, there are plenty of choices, and believe it or not, always will be.

If people cop out and don't bother to educate themselves to the choices out here... then I'm sorry, but they get what they get... and that's exactly why the giants continue to grow.

What is AOL Time Warner's core business? I don't recall application - much less OS - development being one of them. But what about the Netscape Browser? It's taken them an inordinate amount of time to release a decent non-beta of the browser (solid 2 years). Even the anti-Microsoft browser consortium begged Netscape to pull 4.5 because it was a step back from W3C standards. AOL will even tell you they didn't have an accurate picture of what they had signed up for. A deal will be struck - end of story. Which could be for the better because I still run into people who believe AOL is the entire Internet.

One note - I agree with the post on WMA (Spoony?) -- I could live without it. I'm a Winamp fool and I thought their Shoutcast network was genius.

I don't really understand why people allways rally to fight against Microsoft, yet they run windows, run Office, and use IE. Its simply because there product is better than anyone else's, nobody out there has come out with something better, its that simple. They have the money, and have the best people working for them, and they build great software. Lets compare quickly.

AOL ICQ/ AOL IM - Bloat full of features, ICQ has banners everywhere now, yes you can remove them, but im sure next versions will be even wors

VS

MSN Messanger - A VERY small, powerfull download. With hailstorm you will be able to send a message to anyone, on any device, get weather warnings, calander events, be told if your flights are delaayed... and at under a megabyte download... its awesome! integrates easily into Netmeeting... its great, and doesnt use up 10MB of ram like icq can get up to

AOL Netscape 6 - Ok, if any of you use this thing, I have to laugh... I wont say anything... but RUINED!

VS

Internet Explorer 6 - Nice small browser, that does everthing very well, and supports all the features a web designer needs. nice interface, unlike Netscape.

Word Processing Suites in general - Ok, they all are pretty bad, and are all trying to copy Microsoft because everyone loves Office.

VS

Office XP - Tight integration. This is great because i can flip to any one of there products and know what im doing... My mom, my dad, can all easily use powerpoint, frontpage, word, excel...

Other Programming Languages - Ok, they have all fallen WAY WAY behind, and have not inovated whatsoever.. Jave will crumble in the comming year to .NET simply because .NET is sooo much better! .NET will be the greatest thing to hit computers ever. Java is incredibly slow, bloat, does not allow you to program in any language, and never really took off.

VS

Visual Studio .NET - Program in any language! I can use a C++ component in my VB application! I can get a Cobol programmer to create a component and use it in my C# application! And my program can load seamlisly on a web browser, on a cell phone, on my desktop... no problem... People are in for a suprise!

In conclusion.. Microsoft may be big and powerfull, people tend to get upset at this... but they are big and powerfull simply because they have greate software! Hey if AOL makes something better... then ill jump abored... but you know what, just like what they did to ICQ, and Netscape... ITS NOT GONNA HAPPEN! :) I cant wait to use Windows XP... log into my computer anywhere.. use my files in any location... use my cell phone to check my email at home... check my flights... not have to have sign ins for a million diffrent websites... just one sign in... when i sign into windows... the way it should be.... Empower people through great software... Any place, anywhere, and on any device.

Really? Miguel, it seems that you have never worked with anything else than Microsoft products. Otherwise you wouldn't...

... say that they build great software
Sure not all form Microsoft is bad in terms of software design, especially the products they originally bought from another company.
But great software stands the test of time. Which MS product is up to that?

...compare their products to even worse ones
I haven't used AOL software ever, because I did not feel any need to. But from what I have read here, their software is not the spearhead of software design... Still this does not make a competitors product the non-plus-ultra anyway.

... state that IE is small
This one is real classic. What is small in your eyes? Just 80 megabytes for a browser that may load fast but still does not comply to W3C standards in Version 6 the way it should? What is Opera then - supertiny? What about iCab? Both products are not free but still a whole lot more compliant to standards, more flexible and much smaller.

... say that everyone loves Office
Your Mom and your Dad do. Okay. You do obviously. Okay. But there still are bugs in version 10 (?) that already existed in version 2 of MS Word (footnote bug). Word blows up with too many graphics in a document? This is not software that I will ever love.

... hope that Java crumbles
Java is not going to vanish. Your MS version of JRE may be bloat, slow and unstable. But in the real world - on big irons - Java is here to stay. How many companies are so unsatisfied with C, C++, Java that they will jump on the C#-train? I don't know... Most of the larger companies already have huge investments in Java. They are not going to throw money away.

... love a product you haver never seen in action
How .NET-platforms are there really today? Windows and CE. Any more? Does your mobile phone run CE? I can do online banking today, I can buy flight tickets today, check flights, book hotels today. All that with my mobile phone and without MS.NET. So where is the huge advantage?
What files do you want to use in any location? Office documents? Don't make me laugh? How many platforms support MS-Office. Really, only one. Now that's a lot. Still better than none, isn't it?

I have to agree with some of your points, and as I work with Microsoft, I see what they're good for, BUT :
1. IE is only small because 90% of it load with windows (did you notice how slowly windows load nowdays ? - I tried Win 3.11 on my K7-1000, it loads in less than a second, how odd...) - This is a use of their monopoly, for better ot worse.
2. Other programming languages are left in the dust ? Hardly... Just for one, take Borland Delphi... I use it most of the time, it has every feature that a programmer needs, aside from... A while ago I had to write a driver and a directshow filter. Now, here only MS can create tools that do the job... Believe me dude, creating this was GRUESOME ! Visual C++ 6.0 is about as evolved as Borland Pascal 7... And that was released in 1990. Visual Studio .NET WILL be better for sure, maybe as good as Delphi 1 was (1991).

Office is the best office Suite. IE is the best browser. WinXP is the Best OS. Intelli-eye is the best mouse. Windows Media Codec 8.0 is the best streaming media. All developed in house.

You are unable to name one office suite that even comes close. You just whine that you "hate it." How many offices use Star? None!

Java is dead. It was dead as soon as Sun pulled the plug on both Standards committees. Java is proprietary. .Net is an open standard that is not controlled by Microsoft. It is owned and copyrighted by ECMA. Wake up!

Hate to break it to you, but IE was originally bought and HP developed the Intelli-eye mouse optics.

Microsoft did develop BOB inhouse though.

Sorry folk, but I don't hate Office and I don't whine.

IE is NOT the best browser. Take a look at IE for Solaris. Aaaaaah, Solaris doesn't count?! Okay, IE is perhaps the best browser for Windows. iCab is by far the better browser for MacOS. It is faster, more compliant and lots smaller. It just costs money. If that makes a product inferior, then show me one superior form Microsoft they charge money for.

What makes Office the best suite? It still has lots of bugs, check the MS TechNet database for it. Of course they don't call it a 'bug', it's just an 'issue'. The usual euphemism...
Office is an industry standard, but the A20-gate is one as well. Does this make it automatically technically superior to Smartsuite, StarOffice, KOffice, etc.? NO.

I have used 'Intellieye' mice ten years ago on a SUN Sparc. It was invented by HP (and Xerox?) even longer ago. I have used optical mice ever since.

What makes XP the best OS? Can it do all the things AIX or Solaris or Linux or BSD or ... can? NO!

Concerning MS vs. AOL, none of them both deserve pity. Let them get at each other real hard. Has anyone ever seen one of these companies trying to compete with superior products? If they can't sue then they give away for free. Netscape is no a victim of the Open Source spirit, it is a victim of AOL. At least AOLServer is a stable and fast product...

Oh, Microsoft heads, will you EVER get your facts straight? Microsoft has NEVER innovated, they have stolen!
Word is simply the DOS Rich Text Format in a windows wrapper, with "features" copied from WordPerfect. Unfortunately, most of these "features" don't work in Word! They do work in WordPerfect. I am a professional writer, who is forced to use Word at the office. (I am now a certified Word Expert.) NONE of the 50+ writers here would even think of using Word at home, and most of us use WordPerfect.

For a professional document with headers, footers, custom page numbering, custom figure numbering, etc., we can create the document in half the time when using WordPerfect, Framemaker, Interleaf, or any true word processor/desktop publisher. Word is simply a bug-riddled, feature sparse, TEXT processor that could not compete with any one of a half-dozen superior programs. It is "the standard" only because the IT people forced it upon users in order to qualify for free Microsoft certifications. In other words, Microsoft bribed them.

Excel? A poor copy of Lotus 123, from which it was reverse engineered. It is slow, weak, difficult to use, and lacks features that have been in Quattro Pro, etc. for years.

PowerPoint? Copied. Featureless and useless. Try Corel Presentations for 30 minutes, and you will NEVER want to use "Powerless" again.

The original Windows was copied from another vendor's DOS multi windowing program, which is what windows remained through Win 95.

In short, Microsoft has copied - or stolen - from others to produce every product they have. This is not innovation. Microsoft's dominance is the result of bullying, stealing, and marketing lies -- and a flock of highly paud attorneys who can "win" a case simply by exhausting the other guy's financial resources. Justice that "ain't", folks!

AOL vs Microsoft. Sure it didn't seem all that important and big until I really sat down and thought about it, and read a few others opions. I believe that there are chiefly 4 different situations that could take place here.

1) Nothing changes...this whole thing about Microsoft excluding AOL from Windows XP is just hype and rumor, and AOL stuff works fine on the new M$ OS. This whole flame war is soon forgotten and the flag is once again raised up against M$ as if nothing has happened.

2) M$ exlcudes AOL...aol brings out patches so that AOL does work with XP....yada yada

3) M$ excludes AOL completey from the desktop...AOL launches its AOL OS...which could do what Apple did. Take some powerfull open source OS (BSDi) already in existance, bas****ize it, change it (slap Apple logo here, here, and here...more smiley faces....happy colours...happy, happy, happy...ect...) Close the source, call it proprietary, slap your logo on it (yeah! more happy colours, faces, ect...) and sell it. Charge OEMs less for it, making PCs cheaper. Launch ad campains to tell people that AOL OS is more userfriendly, more helpful, and (given apple's stand point) smiles back at you when it throws you errors. I doubt AOL OS would catch on...but it might cause some ripples. An AOL OS would definatly not work, and would cause the down fall of AOL.

I am going with AOL for this one for really one main reason. WMA (windows media). This is what we REALLY have to fear. Although .wma files offer high quality at a lower size than .mp3 files, .wma files have the ability to be more controlled than .mp3 files. Less file sharing, limited listening time (ie can only play file 3 times than it becomes corrupt, ect...) And .wma will not work from Linux...now that hurts me, and I'm sure alot of you. I have heard rumors (and a posting on slashdot a few months ago about this) of M$ having IE, Windows Media Player and (possibly) M$ Office ported to Linux. Which is something I'm all in favor of. Granted I don't like M$, but IE is a better product than Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, Netpositive(BeOS), ect... I welcome IE and office to Linux. I use Star Office on my Linux box at work, windows 2k pro Laptop, and windows 98se home computer. I'd like it better if Star Office didn't try to control the desktop, and just do individual programs losely binded together like M$ Office. Now getting back on topic...AOL has Winamp. Winamp is synonimous (spelling, I know...but its 1am, give me a break...no caffiene in a few hours...it sucks) with mp3 by the mass market. Keeping AOL in the game means keeping Winamp in the game, and windows media player out of the game. And keeping mp3 in the game, .wma files out...keeping music in linux...keeping file sharing available (the napster debate is another story...lets just keep it in the back of our minds for brevity sake).

Yeah I don't like this situation any more than any of you guys do. Hell, I'd rather have everyone just switch over to Linux and be done with it. Open Source benifits everyone else. But for open source to be profitable, we have to change the monetary business model that we have been using for the past umpteen years. We are doing it, slowly but surely. Thanks to the .com frenzy, and failure...investors realized you can't sell a dollar for 95 cents.

Yeah so I ranted...I rant alot. And yeah I got side tracked...I get side tracked alot (more often in differnt ways when I'm with women :-) but then again I'm a Net Admin that runs his stuff on Linux...we consume alot of caffiene, and play alot of ut/quake/frisbee football with the coders down the hall. The twitch factor (and 1:21am factor) certainly has alot to play right now.

--
Spoony

correction...cheifly 3 not 4 things that I believe will happen...please excuse me....I have more blood in my caffine stream than the norm right now.

Although in favour of open source, this is an interesting one for me:

Will Microsoft really be successful with their Hailstorm plans? I guess Linux and the success of open source scared the s... out of Bill and Steve. They are looking for new markets to dominate because the only way the have learned to sell their OSes is by domination. And there are fields where they have to struggle hard - this is everytime when it comes to highly engineered products, like supercomputing OSes and software for these big irons. Microsofts plans to harm Solaris, AIX etc. have plainly failed. So clearly, this is not where the future of M$ is.

Where is it then? They have to sell products that are turnkey-easy-to-use as long as you do not need anything else that goes beyond that what M$-delivered wizards can offer. And they have to sell in high volumes to keep the shareholders happy...

Okay, if they cannot win the software battle against unstoppable open source then they have to sell something that open source cannot deliver. Something that goes beyond pure software. Yeah, let's become an ASP! But how can M$ use sheer marketing power to dominate other independent ASPs? Let's define a strategy that uses the still existing software market power and transform the products so that they will only function with us M$ an ASP. No other company would survive this bold attempt, but hey, we're M$- we'll sell it, you see.

AOL has never really attempted to break into the M$ market. All they wanted was to protect their AOL/Compuserve monopoly from MSN and to share equally. This is true friendship among two thieves... AOL's future is not as bright as their shareholders would like it to be...

Anyway, if M$ fails with its hailstorm strategy, there still is noting to worry about. They have such an enourmous amount of cash that they can continue to look for new markets until ....

If people do not adopt Windows XP and the hailstorm strategy, then they just won't buy the products but keep using whatever have installed (98/ME/NT/2000). Microsoft is going to earn less money, but new PCs will always be sold and they will have XP preinstalled as no other OS will be available from M$.

What would be the next market? Will they start online banking? I still haven't found a single service that Microsoft offers that would be co exclusive or singular that I would use it or even pay for it!

I don't see how people can get so pissed about two companies who make terrible products. I mean, Windows? AOL? Come on. These are businesses geared towards people who aren't as technologically savvy as any computer type. How else can anyone justify Windows XP or any version of AOL?

Anyway, what Microsoft and AOL do is smart business. It is like the browser business. Noone gives a damn if Microsoft is a monopoly, or AOL doesn't open up its IM standards. All the average user wants is the ability to browse the net and chat up a storm, and check the mail. Obviously.

If you think that sucks, you're not the only one. But don't complain, and then be the a****** to go out and shell out all this money for Windows XP and all this other trash. Write AOL or your congressman and petition against AOL. Go try out Linux and learn it, or write Microsoft telling them how you feel, or boycott Windows. Don't use Office. If enough people did that, it wouldn' be a problem.

Just as a goodbye note, What AOL and MS do are the truest nature of capitalism.

Unfortunately the unsavvy masses are being catered to. Just as automobiles aren't marketed soley to mechanics but unmechanical masses. This is why Midas does so well. Changing your front disc brakes is easy as hell but it's scary because if you screw up your car won't stop. Likewise I might screw up my new computer I just bought for $2000. I don't have the money just to burn. That is why these products exist. They do the 'work' to bring the layperson technology. They should be compensated, just like your automechanic.

What AOL and Microsoft do isn't smart business. What are their business goals?
To make as much profit as possible.
To grow their business to capture the entire market.
To expand into others areas and ultimately become the government.

By the last statement I mean that given the opportunity that they will expand until MStores put Wal-Mart out of business. Until they control all aspects of your life. Providing total solutions for the human being that is convient and value added.

Let us take the scenario of Wal-Mart as a autonomous community. It has a cafeteria, clothing, entertainment, plants, pets, books, barber/beauty salon, eye doctor, dry cleaners and EMPLOYMENT OPPERTUNITIES. Build an apartment complex onto it to live in and Wal-Mart becomes your one stop source for life. The biggest thing offered by Wal-Mart is security. I can get everything I need and have my worries taken care of. Store policy is broadened and would transition into my government. After all I don't want to be expelled from the community.

Extreme? Yes. Can is happen? Yes.
Corporate management in place of the bulky bumbling goverment.
Show me the value.

What is smart business is what is good for the community. What is good for your children. Make the world a better place to live. We've seem to forgotten this. Would you want to live your life according business models? I think not. So why should you run a business that way?

You are correct when you say that the average joe-user only wants a few things. They are not going to take the time to learn Linux. Just like my brother won't do his own brakes. The difference is that what we spend our money on has changed.

We used to work to provide food and housing. In the 1920s we started working for luxury items (car, washing machine, refrigerator). Technology made it possible to obtain food cheaply and readily. In the 1960s we made another change. We started spending most of our money on entertainment. TV is a huge success and video games (Atari), VCRs are right around the corner. Now media/entertainment rules our industry. Enter the Information Age. I can now get all my entertainment from a computer. Music, video, games, human interaction (online chat) are now possible from my house. People as a whole are now very lazy not having to work very hard for the basics of life. Technology is now driving our economics. When auto makers don't make sales expectations the stock market doesn't die anymore. When Microsoft takes a loss, EVERYTHING takes a loss.

This in addition to the nature of the corporate business model evolving into the extremely controlling mechanism it is today equals a new breed of company.

They are setting up technology and more importantly the law to totally control the consumer.

It is not a matter of AOL and Microsoft squaring off against each other. It is the principle of a corporation driving out competition and forcing consumers to take what is offered.

This is something that is attacking our democracy and constitution.

Short term solution: Use Linux.

Long term solution: So some interest for law-making and get involved in YOUR government, before it's outsourced in a value-stream.

Interesting thoughts... I have seen many arguments as of late discussing globalization. The argument of corportations superseading government is perhaps the most interesting.
In the United States, a record amount of "soft money" was donated from corporations and unions to both parties during the last presidential election. Proponents of CFR have battled congress to pass McCain Feingold. The influence of soft money is huge - maybe even bigger than the influence of the people.
&nbsp Also, there has been talk of expanding NAFTA to include nations such as Chile, for example. Critics of these trade agreements point out that environmental and labor laws of a particular nation can be skirted under NAFTA. By feeling is that removing trade barriers is a good thing and that any flaws in trade agreements that do not best serve the needs of the people can easily be fixed. There are many alarmist theories out there at the moment regarding globalization.
&nbsp I fail to see how Linux is the answer to any of this. It is just an OS with strengths and weaknesses like Microsoft's own offerings. It is not a one way ticket to freedom, and Microsoft is not some evil force that needs to be stopped. I would like to see Linus's answer to .Net. I don't think there is one - that would take R&D. Also, if Redhat, etc were to gain considerably more marketshare - wouldn't they try to cash in?

Are you telling me that what AOL and MS do isn't smart? Catering to the lowest common denominator is great. MS and AOL don't give a damn if we don't use their stuff. They care if Joe Average quits for something easier. MS will keep rolling in the money as long as they keep making Windows and convincing everyone it is necessary. AOl will keep makingmoney as long as there is plenty of eye candy in their service.

Rememeber, it doesn't have to be moral, it just has to roll in cash.

This is yet another good reason to switch to an open source operating system like Linux.

... and that's just another reason why you're an idiot.
This article has nothing to do with Linux. You're not offering anything valuable to the conversation, you're just being stupid.

Go compile your kernel or something...

And you? Do you know how to compile a kernel? I don't think so! LOL

i'm of the opinion that while microsoft and aol duke it out, an on-the-rise os (linux) might just take right over. i've been using rehat since 5.2 and have seen the many improvements they have made to it. granted, it's not ready for home use (aol ppl would probably be mystified by it) but it is getting there. the biggest bonus is also that it is free. now i'm not a prophet or anything, but i forsee xp being a big mistake by ms. we'll see, i guess i'm hoping :).

You all forgot that AOL bought Netscape, why would AOL stand with Microsoft when they spend money with Netscape ?

But Microsoft will kick a** again, they got a powerfull support and publicity team, and they know how to put everything together to make things simpler.

If Microsoft was that good at integration, they wouldn't feel the need to lock everyone else out while they were at it. Locking other people out is extra effort for them, but worth it if they can continue to have a guaranteed tax on every PC sold. It is easier to engineer things when they are modular. I'm not saying the top layer the user sees has to be modular and overladen with choice or configurability, but underneath it is very important, to make things easier for the programmers. Modular is Good. The IE "integration" was decreed from the top and caused a lot of trouble internally. Microsoft specifically hurts its designs when aiming to lock out others.

Well, I don't think AOL was interested in Netscape because of it's browser... Netscape had some pretty powerful Enterprise software, and I think that's really what AOL was after...

You sir are an Idiot. What AOL is attempting to do here is stop microsoft from dictating (In a very simplistic sense) who can write and distribute applications on their OS. AOL May not be the best internet service provider in the world, but it is by far the easiest and has the biggest customer base, a customer base of who, a large number are in no way to be considered a "computer geek" (if you will. Meaning someone who has vast knowledge of computers). These people aren't going to want to switch to MSXP if it means Leaving their Buddy lists, their friends and what not. Now if MS's Products have full support for these things, that would make the process somewhat easier for most people. But why are they going to want to upgrade their computer they just spent 2,000 dollars on from Gateway to something that will actually run XP. AOL is trying to better the whole here. Microsoft is trying to make a alot of money and tighten their grasp on the world. You sir are an Idiot

everybody making a alot of money !!!!!!!!!!!!nothing iz 4 free!!!
(aol 2)

There is a distinct difference between Making money because you are offering a service, and making money because you can force people to pay for it. IF MS were to make it so that AOL could not work easily or well on their OS. Most of AOL's computer un-savvy Customer base would probably Switch to MS's Product. This is a forceful removal of a competetor. It would also in all likelyhood put a big hole in AOL's income meaning downsizing then eventually MS would kill them off. If AOL is making money, then atleast the customers are giving them money by choice. If they don't like AOL they could (if they wanted to) go to MSN or what ever they are callling it now. yes both are making money both are Buisnesses Buisnesses do that.(Unless your amazon *shrugh*) But would you rather have a choice of which company gets your money or be forced to give it to microsoft? Given, from your Excellent grasp of English and apparent intelligence (I can derive your vast genius from the way you so eloquently craft your words) You probably wouldn't be someone who would use AOL. So when I refeer to You I mean the large group of people who will run to either one of those two services.

It's not like AOL is on some crusade to save the world from Microsoft.. It's about $$$.

You are a twat. Who are AOL anyway? Have you seen the abortion they call a browser ? - It looks like something from Windows 31! - AOL installer (like NTL's) hogs your machine, as if that's the only damn thing you use it for! - My personal feeling are let M$ get on with it. They haven't got the nouse to overcome the like of Murdoch and the more traditional media super powers - let them solve the problem of offering services that really nedd broadband class comms when most people are either using 56k modems, 64kn ISDN with ADSL and Cable still 18months away from maturity and even then subject to loading constrictions. Your an ass. Who cares about this area of conputing anyway? - Do you us M$ stuff? - shame on you. Bottom line - change the laws about what a PC should ship with preinstalled and then maybe you get parity.

Everyone is aghast at the Evil Empire (Microsoft) taking over all software applications and ultimately controlling the universe.
What you fail to understand is that AOL wants to do the EXACT SAME THING. They want to be your total one stop solution for all online activity. They both are equally evil.

Make no mistake. AOL is not innocent and will rise up as an Evil Empire if given the opportunity. They might be a victim in this case but I feel no pity for them.

We'll probably see a lot of lawsuits akin to the whole "Netscape Fiasco" and nothing will come out of it. Microsoft IS a monopoly and SHOULD break up. I see this happening when the National Guard moves into Redmond forcing the issue.

The problem is the new American dream of dominating the marketplace instead of having a business and returning a 10% profit to live.
Corporate greed will make slaves of us all.

For readers from the UK (who have watched a bit of TV lately) - below is my take on the advert they could use.

Chris.

*** AOL, The XP advert script ***

Middle aged, middle class couple, with two teenage children about to hand over money for a Hewlett Packard computer in a well known computer shop chain. Sales assistant, late teens, pale, skinny, greasy hair, spots etc, puts hand out to accept cash.

Man customer: Yes, ok, if you think it's that important, I suppose I should take the 10 year extended warranty coverage with free yearly healthchecks to protect my shiny new computer from evil hackers.

Assistant: Great, that will be one thousand, two hundred and forty nine pounds then, please.

Suddenly, two men, scandinavian looking, early-mid thirties, of stocky build burst in to the store to save the day, wearing all black squat team style clothes, and balaclavas. Both have suspect dutch accents. Cut to lead hero.

Lead hero: Schtopp! Your computer is not ready for AOL yet. You see, Windows XP was made less slowly, for more bugs and a less usable experience.

Hands the couple an AOL disk. Everyone smiles inanely.

Cut to happy family chatting and laughing with the two heroes huddled around the computer in an perfect picture of suburban utopia. Sitting down at computer, the children are shown chatting in full video (far past the capabilities of the current systems) with people of various token ethnicities all around the world. All helpfully assisted by the omnipresent Condescending Connie.

Connie voice over: Remember, insist that your computer manufacturer bundles AOL instead of Microsoft, and recieve our exclusive zillion hour free trial*,

(Small print at bottom of screen: * valid for one month only. Subsequent months charged at an inflated fixed rate. Subject to a minimum contract lenght of forever.)

Cut to main logo screen - with caption "AOL: For a better Windows XPerience."
End.

***

Chris,
Hmmm, you should be in advertising - AOL ads could indeed read like this and would have just the right amount of chunder factor we know and loathe. Still, compare with Intel advertising....

PS - surely some IPR infringement from a certain Dutch beer advert?
PPS - is it me or is Connie looking a bit wrinkly nowadays?

Can anything that gets rid of AOL forever be all bad?

Both want to rule everyone's lives... They have to, else they'll go belly-up in this capitalistic world. Both MS and AOL are as bad as each other.

I havent used (and dont plan on using) aol, could someone tell me if AOL are actually inovating anything new and interesting within they're main client software? seems to me that they arent doing much, they just seem to be grabbing peoples money and running home with it.

Is everything still very proprietory? Do they offer standard mail protocol support for they're email service?

Microsoft are constantly inovating and improving their software significantly. look at MSN messenger, within months it was not far off the functionality of AIM. What the freak are AOL doing with aim? it hasnt changed a great amount in over a year. AIM still doesnt allow you to go invisible, still doesnt keep a message history. Same with IE, within months it was up to netscape 3s standards, and after that just left netscape programmers standing in a daze. lol like someone flying by in a fast car "where'd THAT come from?! no wait! blow where it came from! where's it going! FOLLOW IT!!!!"

I dont get it!

not to burst your bubble here fellas, but the only reason microsoft is able to get anywhere is because they have more money than GOD - $27 billion in cash (yes, CASH) last I recall. The only reason they have so much money is because they are a MONOPOLY. duh. AOL may suck, but they do have reason to be concerned. An operating system should be nothing more than an interface to hardware and file systems, but Microsoft believes it should "innovate" the OS and add everything from toasting your bagels, to managing your finances to it. Microsoft justifies this by saying "it's in the best interest to have clear standards that developers can develop for" ... they essentially remove all choice for the consumer. If you believe them, and you want Microsoft to decide which standards are good for you and which are bad for you, then so be it. One governing body deciding what's good and bad for the people is also known as communism. Communism works really well - just look at China and Russia. Remember this equation:
Microsoft junkie = Communist.
nough said.

Microsoft Junkies = Communists? No. I think not.

com.mu.nism \'ka:m-y*-.niz-*m\ n [F communisme, fr. commun common] 1a: a theory advocating elimination of private property

Let's try...

to.tal.i.tar.i.an \(.)to--.tal-*-'ter-e--*n\ \-e--*-.niz-*m\ \-.ni-z\ aj [total + -itarian (as in authoritarian)] 1a: of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy AUTHORITARIAN, DICTATORIAL; esp : DESPOTIC

Ahhh, that's better. Perhaps you meant

Microsoft Junkie = Totalitarian.

I would suggest you not call people morons, when you yourself are also subject to making mistakes.

First, the dictionary definition of Communism, or the description Marx gave it, is completely valid and is not to be dismissed.
BUT,
I am REALLY sick of people slamming other people for equating communism with command-and-control economies and totalitarianism when we all have a very good reason to equate them, which is 80 years (and counting) of use of the term by certain command-and-control economists and totalitarianists to describe their approach to government and the market.

Feel free to point out the dictionary definition, but DO NOT slam people for having their defintion clouded by 80 years of evil men abusing the ideal. You cannot erase all that. It's dangerous to try.

Communism is the foundation upon which other 'harsher' forms of government have been built on, i.e. dictatorship, totalitarian.

The reality is that any form of government works. It is the people in the government that determine if it is 'evil' or ineffective. Some of the best governments have been monarchies or other centrally controlled governments.

One benevolent dictator is massively more effective than hundreds of well-intentioned congressmen.

AOL sucks. Everything they seem to touch just falls to bits. Take a look at Netscape (no one cares anymore bout them) and ICQ (****ing ads galore, now numbers are in decline).

Now look at Microsoft. They make a new OS, new Office suite, new messenger, and keep on doing this stuff every year. updates for the software come out every few weeks.

What it boils down to is this: AOL are ruining the online experiece for everyone. Microsoft arnt. Sure HailStorm might cost $$$, but in the end, you got a much more interactive online experience and new options of what you want to get from the internet. So all in all, if I were Bill Gates, what I would do is simply buy out AOL, and then just send them under and make the company die.

No AOL = A better life for everyone.

communist

You know, you'd make Joe McCarthy proud with your patriotic remarks. Unless you can distinguish for me the fineries of dictatorial socialism versus communism, I suggest that you don't draw analogies between Microsoft and the governments of China and Russia.
I think what's most annoying about AOL-Time-WarnerBros-Netscape-CNN is that it's trying to play the underdog when it's just as greedy as Microsoft. It's a bigger company and treats most of its employees like crap (unlike MS) and it's one of the happiest members of the RIAA/MPAA.
Bill Gates is annoying, and Microsoft makes bad software (XP and ME are pieces of crap; Win2k would have been fine for the home with a few tweaks; Hailstorm is scary and should be torpedoed), but I'd rather have Gates and MS ruling the world rather than Oracle/AOL/IBM/Sony or any of the other IT contenders. Of course, it'd probably be better for the world to simply forcibly open source Windows as punishment for its monopoly :p

You are also an Idiot.
Netscape isn't dead because of AOL. Netscape is dead because of IE. Which is (in my opion) a better product (IE That is.) However, IE wouldn't have the choke hold on the market that it currently enjoys if it wasn't for Microsofts Monopolistic Power forcing this web browser (Or is it a core part of the OS now?) onto the desktop of everyone who is running Win95 B or greater.
As for ICQ. ICQ has always said. once they go un-beta they would start charging. But their customer base got so large that if it hwere to do this, it would piss alot of people off thus stopping usage. Now. How do you propose a company that develops software, make money with out selling that software? ICQ isn't a Free OS in which they could sell consultants to set it up or tech support for their product. Its a pretty straight forward very easy to use messaging client. They needed to make money some how.

I think he meant more like... North Korea.... and yeah, Russia is not communist anymore, dont know where have you been in past 10 yrs...

Microsoft treats its engineers well. Not all of it's employees. It would much rather hire a bunch of temps and treat them badly, but because it needs a large body of skilled engineers to keep Bill's ugly hairball of an operating system alive it treats them OK. Both are corperations.
Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1816
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws our country."

Microsoft treats its engineers well. Not all of it's employees. It would much rather hire a bunch of temps and treat them badly, but because it needs a large body of skilled engineers to keep Bill's ugly hairball of an operating system alive it treats them OK. Both are corperations.
Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1816
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws our country."

yes it will be included -there is a betatest for the aolclient for all theose people that participate in betatestingxp :
http://www.neowin.net/news/archive /00000303-shtm

"his email was sent in by Andrew Byers.

Microsoft is preparing to release a new operating system, Windows XP. We need your help testing the America Online software with Microsoft's upcoming operating system to insure the same great America Online product and level of service our members have come to expect.

If you are currently using Windows XP, please go to Keyword: WXPB as soon as possible and fill out our brief Windows XP survey. You will only see the survey if you are currently signed onto the America Online service using the Windows XP operating system, and the survey will only appear once.

After completing the survey, you will receive unique updates, surveys and focus test items, as well as news specific to AOL and Windows XP.

Thank you and happy testing!
The Windows Beta Team.

We now have been able to validate this news because our affiliate Intense Beta has posted a screenshot "

http://www.ibelite.com/images/aolxp.gif

AOL is indeed working on a Windows XP client. The test is public and open to anyone running Windows XP - the client is code-named Steppenwolf (version 6.0.2.x). However, merely because AOL is doing their best to make an XP-comaptible client, does not mean they will be included in the operating system. AOL is also having trouble hashing out getting IE6 embedded into the client and is having issues with the new XP UI, because Microsoft has not provided them correct documentation. At this point AOL is not included in XP and does not plan to be unless the companies can come to an agreement - and based on the document's noted above, chances are that won't happen.

Ummm..Yeah they are working on a client for Win XP...However who has verified that it is going to come preinstalled with XP?? They are just making a client so customers don't get ticked when they upgrade and find out the can't run AOL.

Why is it that people always hate companies that are doing well?

I think people should try to make up their own minds and consider what the two companies have achieved and where they came from rather than take the easy route and hate them because its 'the thing to do' or succumb to peer pressure.

Is it that they are American?
Is it a case of 'tall poppy' syndrome?

Doesnt make sense to me, I like both of the company's products and like where they are both trying to head.

I think it's because some people feel they got to where they are via dubios means. People don't hate companies that are doing really well, they hate companies that are doing really well and got their illegally or unethically. I'm not saying how I view the situation, but don't think that people simply don't like Microsoft just 'cause they're successful. It goes beyond that.

I don't think so, let's get real here, AOL has piggybanked like many other companies also on the MS OS's, how many m,illionares and billionares did MS create by giving them a plattform to sell their HW and software to millions?

What does AOL do, sell advertising, do they give anyone the popprotunity to enrich their service???

I for one would ask why is it that AOL is not being sued for the same thing as MS, AOL is the biggest spam and advertising seller there is, so is TimeWarner by now, they are trying to gain a monopoly, so why isnt the goverment getting inviolved here the same way ?

You sir are an idiot. AOL didn't piggy back off of MS. In fact if MS never existed a company like AOL would still exist. There are a few contributing FACTS to my theory.
1. Microsoft Did not invent the Internet.
2. Microsoft Did not invent the concept behind Windows. A windowing system would have existed to make computers easy to use with out them *Cough* Xerox *cough* If you want to argue with me you can't. Im right.
3. Microsoft sure as hell didn't start the Personal Computer revolution. Apple Did. Microsoft came in late and basically back stabbed their ways to the top.
Basically.
Since there is strong evidence to support the existance of the Internet, a Userfriendly Desktop, and the Personal computer in every house thing. AOL or a similiar if not identical company, could easily exist with out the presence of Microsoft.

Oh yea... I forgot.
AOL Existed on the C64 before windows existed. (Thats Commodore 64) Called QLink If I remember Correctly.

Oh yea... I forgot.
AOL Existed on the C64 before windows existed. (Thats Commodore 64) Called QLink If I remember Correctly.

Ewww. Why did that double post?
Anyways. AOL Also had an AppleII and Macintosh client. BEFORE they even had a DOS or Windows Client.
http://www.corp.aol.com/whoweare/who_timeline.html

Ok, AOL needs an OS. Not Windows, but an OS. Could have been OS2 if it had succeeded. Could have been a variety of OSes all using the same standards, as there used to be multiple DOSes, there could have been (and could be) multiple more advanced OSes all based on the same standards, with none having a huge market majority with which to kill the others whether they are better or not. That sentence was hairy, but you get my point. You can't say AOL wouldn't have existed without Windows. If there had been a different popular OS or set of OSes, AOL would have run on that (or those).

I am beginning to wonder if anyone here is not a troll. I don't anger, btw, I just keep arguing, so don't bother trolling me, I'll just have fun arguing. I don't see how people can get angry over text hehe.

That reply, is the typical answer of a person with complete lack in curtesy towards others, all stements have been falsified or taken truly out of context, I wont bother to engage any further in this unforgiving word souflet.

Where is Sven on the desktop??? You can't go anywhere without him and I think it is a mistake on both M$'s and AOL's parts to go without the Svenmeister.

C ya

I just love that Worthington guy, he knows his s***! Go Dave! Sigma Pi forever!!!

I don't know why you guys don't like AOL. They have been great to me..they only charge my cc $20 a month and I get to have all those great options you can't get anywhere else...like email and chatrooms...AOL is the internet? Right? You can't get on it with out it...can you? This is what most people think....you know...It's a marketing deal...AOL is to the net what BOSE is to speakers...they both tell you how great they are but they BOTH BLOW!!!!

thay was good but now the onley thing the do iz blow!!!!
i dont think that aol need to control the all net and thay think thay are when micrsoft was aint s*** ( 2 years ago) aol make good s*** but now microsoft making good s*** and aol sucks !!!! even the new netscape sucks!!! aol aint s*** !!!

I'll agree. AOL is good. I had them for a while until I got cable internet last month. Every time I had a problem with AOL, I e-mailed their support and got a reply within 12 hours or so. The reason people say AOL sucks is because everyone IMs you porn and crap like that. If you don't go in chats, you don't get IMed...

lol you're american arent u?
the guy was being sarcastic u idiot!

You sure proved him wrong, d00d!

dont ya just love americans? they're so cute and funny :)

HailStorm is definatly a move in the positive, and as long as they don't charge too much for it, most of you people will like it.

If AOL would just use their brains instead of whining like a little school child, they could figure out a way to benefit from this. For instance, instead of just having their big fruty intranet for there members, publish all of their resources as .net web services that only their members have access to. Just cause you use .net services doesn’t mean you HAVE to use the hailstorm user registry.

.net is going to make the internet a much cooler place.

2 remarks about this:
1. who has ever been in a hailstorm? did you like it????
2. Does anybody know how much this will cost the end-user?
1. Buy a overpriced Microsoft OS ($$ for M$)
2. Pay a subscription to the Passport and whatever other technology ($$ for M$)
3. A company (like e.g. Amazon) will have to pay Microsoft to use the Hailstorm/.Net/Passport "technology" which they will charge to, guess who... you ($$ for M$)
4. Finally, M$ will charge a connection/transaction fee for your purchase or whatever ($$ for M$)

So, in the end, you will pay M$ 4 times....

People are still silly enough to use the "$" in MS. When will they start using the "£" for AOL?

HEY BUSTA!

Well since the "£" is not AMERICAN ... and it is AmericaOnLine that would not make much sense now would it you freaking rocket scientist you! Plus if it was the "£" that means there's huge stupid, pointless commie TAXES on every portion of it lead by that GENIUS Tony Blare, who would probably think that M$ is great because everyone will be "equally" commie-pinko-sucky on the same asinine, idiotic, dim, O$, er OS. So "£" that into your thick head, jerk.

You are a idiot.. its people like you that give Americans a bad name.

hmm and I thought it was the genius Bush giving america a bad name! maybe its just AMERICANS in general giving america a bad name!

Yet its amazing how America has control on computer technology but we are yet just so ignorant or blind to the world as you would state it. Maybe its jealousy over america's massive power as "big brother" to most countries? Microsoft, AOL, IBM, DELL, CISCO ..Hmmm I wonder where the world of technology would be without those companies and many more. I will grant you Sony, Fujitsu, and all those wonderful Eastern companies no one can live without but why do you always have to hack on the american people? I for myself and state this as an opinion have no problems with ANY country except for china and there an exception because I do not understand their ethnics or their culture they differ becuase they are extreme communist and they act like a kid whenever a national dispute happens (ie.Spy Plane "We want you to say your sorry" ) ..Btw Microsoft basicly did create the internet and before you jump on your crapper and have a s*** hear me out. Early years of internet there was NetBEUI and for large corporations there was TCP/IP or IPX/XPS now if you didnt know TCP/IP is nearly 99% of the protocol used on the internet. Now since NETBEUI uses a naming protocol that has no standard "bob" "rob" "sam" you can give an address any name you want..This was the early internet standard..But since it would be impossible to do this because you can only name something once you would need a structured naming convention. Microsoft closed that gap between NetBeui and TCP/IP with windows when they included lmhosts within windows and supported tcp/ip by default. So in theory they did create the internet or at leat they caused it to be massly used throughout the world..BTW I am tired of you calling people stupid when indeed you are intelligent maybe you dont have to call people with a lower intelligence rating a name..BTW I tend to agree that Microsoft did Help AOL become a nationally used ISP by providing AOL as "Click Here" to install me in windows..Without that I believe AOL would not be even close to where it is now days..How could it? Im not saying it wouldnt have a large or dense customer DB but it would have no where near the Customer DB it has now..I just wanted to state a few opinions I have here..OH BTW microsoft did no backstab its way to the top like they exaggeratively did on that movie "Pirate of Silicon Valley" it was not like that at all and I encourage you to read the book "Pirates of Silcon Valley" as its no where near as hacked up as the movie was...

Please get your facts staight. Microsoft did not invent the internet. Netbuei has nothing to do with the internet. The internet was founded useing TCP/IP and it's ancestors. Netbuei was a simple networking protocol developed by IBM and Microsoft for simple filesharing. Netbuei has very few security functions and does not work in a large network. It is not very robust. Microsoft did not have a good TCP/IP until win95. Anybody remember trumpet winsock and other TCP utilities for 3.1. You could not access the internet without some version of winsock. No, I'm afraid Microsoft invented the same part of the internet as Al gore did.

You are a stupid idiot who has no idea of the internet! Microsoft invented the Internet?? Come on, don't make me laugh. The internet is built on tcp/ip, which in turn is built on a stack of protocols. NetBEUI is only one of those protocols, and is a crappy protocol, insecure and inefficient, so next time you come here to say your opinion you'd better know what you're talking about.

Damn you guys are dumber than I thought. I said "in a way" ...Did harley Davison invent the motorcycle ? No but many think they did and many well known history books also state that they did when indeed they were not the first to invent a motorized bicycle but they did the best at giving it to consumers as a product first and are much more well known. If you would actually read my article then you would know wtf I am talking about but its obviious you have no knowledge in the true history of the internet just some word of mouth floating around. NetBEUI has everything to do with it because microsoft was the first company to embed the ability to morph protocols together and bridge the gap between incompatible transmission protocols which greatly aided in the development of the internet. I do have my facts straight its idiots like you people that bother me...Btw just in case you doubt my Experience I have multiple certifications in the networking field so do not question my knowledge..I take back my word on that guy calling you people idiots cause you are idiots jesus christ..Wanna give something built into windows a try that is built into windows by default that was originally put there to bridge the gap between NetBEUI and TCP/IP then do a find on a file called lmhosts open it up and type in your own entry and give it a test in your browser wow amazing huh? You can make your own DNS entrys but not using IP addresses but using NETBEUI addresses..Microsoft revolutionized networking by embedding and bridging protocols like the one exampled above..If you still dont believe me I can even tell you more history on how microsoft revolutionized networking..

netbeui isnt even routable, how the freak can you say an unroutable protocol has anything to do with the internet?

Dude,
Some one needs to fax you a clue. I don't care what type of certs that you have. You can put them by the toliet.

Let's venture of some name Protocol references:
NetBEUI - NetBios Extended User Interface, which is a layer 3 protocol, isn't routable as someone else mentioned.

Microsoft's current implementation which is Netbios of TCP/IP still uses TCP/UDP 137; UDP 138; TCP 139.

Please reference MS Q-Artice Q119493 and Q142309 to find out the real reason why your LMHOSTS file works.

Enough thumping on magadass.

Here is why the the quotes are bogus for SOL.

________________
OEMs will no longer be able to monetize desktop real estate or decide how many applications they can add to the Start Menu, which means if AOL wants exposure, it must go through Redmond.
________________

This quote is bogus, you can choose between the new start menu format or the old one. If people had a clue, they could set the classic start menu as default..

____________________
A number of OEM's have expressed concern regarding MS's intention to modify the OS in a manner that eliminates the OEM's ability to effectively monitize the Desktop. MS's intention to remove all icons from the Desktop, to remove the system tray, to control the number of preinstalled applications on the top level of the Start menu, etc...are seen as examples of this strategy.
____________________

The systray has an Auto-Hide feature( nice feature), Remove all Icons from the Desktop, come on please. There is a Desktop Cleanup Wizard which you can disable.

These are completely bogus claims..

Doesn't anybody remember that for years AOL source code in the AOL dialer prevented any connections above 9600bps, although the software advertised 28.8 and 33.6? This was how they logged millions of additional hours in billing times to thousands of unsuspecting users.

Doesn't anybody remember how AOL whined, sniveled, moaned, groaned, belly-ached and complained to the FED FCC that broadband was unfair competition and the broadband provider should be FORCED to includeAOL software with their services?

Is veryone forgetting that AOL is NOT the Internet? They are the largest on-line commercial forum, but they are not the Internet. Just a colorful proprietary intranet. They have the public fooled just like Microshaft.

The appearance of user-friendliness while your personal information is sold up the river to thousands of marketing companies. Both companies deserve to be hacked, exposed, and tampered with beyond recovery and repair. I hope hackers around the world steal their source code, expose their corporate payrolls, crash their systems, and infect their networks with every virus, trojan horse and worm that's available!

The only thing more despicable than these two companies are the tobacco industry.

I understand your malice toward AOL but I don't understand why you feel the same way about Microsoft. I've been using a Microsoft OS since the days of DOS 2.0. I've been using The Windows OS since Windows 3.0. Yes, Win 3.0 up too Win 95 sucked, but since I've started using Windows 98 up too Windows XP I've been very happy with the level of perfomance and stabailty more so in Windows 2000 and XP then any other. But I guess thats what some people get when they have headachs with crashes and slow downs they blame the OS instead of looking at the hardware where most of the problems come from. (By the way do you use linux??)

I would like to point out that AOL also has a disregard for standards and decent ISP behavior on the net, as the recent K-lines for *!*@*.aol.com on certain IRC networks can attest. The reason for these, IIRC, was AOL would not take any action to prevent ban evasion.

If you haven't tried anything else... how can you know your OS is the best?

AOL wants to control the internet that's all....

"AOL SUCKS"

And Microsoft wants to control the universe. So who's the bigger evil of the 2?

So who's the bigger evil of the 2?...... AOL.

AOL is a closed monster that develops technology for their own advancement in the communications industry.

Microsoft on the other hand develops clients and servers that they use to create a good market for themselves as well as third parties that wish to compete. If you wanted to run your own isp service you could use MS-Win2k for access rights and webhosting, a custom IE/OE as a client, custom messenger, exchange server(for calander, email chat and newsgroups) and siteserver for e-commerce. All services you offer your customer.

Consider where 3rd party ISPs would be if AOL put MS out of business. 3rd party ISPs could however run as a happy alternative to MSN.

And yes - I will say it first. LINUX offers the best situation as its creators do not compete on a service level. It may even someday offer a front for ISPs to unite to compete on the same level as AOL and MS. Imagine what could be done if all 3rd party ISPs purchased LINUX on a subscripton basses and the resources created built a .Net type service into that OS. Each ISP owning a little piece and taking advantage of the marketing power within. However, the simplicity of LINUX (in terms of use and development) must grow the match Win2k and the .Net features without causing stability or security issues. It has come a long way in a short time.

"3rd parties that wish to compete"

haha...AOL was competing, now MS built replacement AOL into their Desktop... same thing that happened with Netscape before, after a while it will be better "AOL" than AOL... but dont forget, it will still be "AOL" (-like service)

"AOL is a closed monster that develops technology for their own advancement in the communications industry."

And Microsoft is THE example for open-ness. It's a closed as anything can be because it's their "intellectual property". If there is something open, be sure Microsoft will try to change it and not make it open (look at Kerberos in W2K). Why did the Samba people have to reverse engineer/hack the domain logon code etc....

"Microsoft on the other hand develops clients and servers that they use to create a good market for themselves as well as third parties that wish to compete."

Microsoft try to dominate the market with no room for competitors. If there is a competitor in one domain, be sure Microsoft will compete with them and just integrate it into the OS so those competitors don't stand a chance. Just look at the whole Java story. Big scare for Microsoft because you wouldn't need Windows anymore to run your software. Any OS with a JVM would be enough.

"If you wanted to run your own isp service you could use MS-Win2k for access rights and webhosting, a custom IE/OE as a client, custom messenger, exchange server(for calander, email chat and newsgroups) and siteserver for e-commerce. All services you offer your customer."

Yep, you could use all Microsoft products and thanks to there openness, there would be no room for competitors because they just wouldn't work together that well.

"And yes - I will say it first. LINUX offers the best situation as its creators do not compete on a service level. It may even someday offer a front for ISPs to unite to compete on the same level as AOL and MS. Imagine what could be done if all 3rd party ISPs purchased LINUX on a subscripton basses and the resources created built a .Net type service into that OS. Each ISP owning a little piece and taking advantage of the marketing power within."

I'm not thinking of Linux in any way but any OS is fine by me as long as it allows an open communication with all the other OS'ses. Microsofts .Net is closed; Microsoft will make sure it will only run (well) on their own OS. Compare this with Sun's ONE (Open Net Environment) which is an architecture build on open standards (XML, LDAP...) and technologies like Java (OS independent). In my ideal future, it doesn't matter what OS you run, thanks to open standards, you'll be able to communicate with whatever device to whatever other device. In Microsofts future, you will only be able to communicate with other Microsoft devices.

"However, the simplicity of LINUX (in terms of use and development) must grow the match Win2k and the .Net features without causing stability or security issues. It has come a long way in a short time."

I hope Linux will never grow to resemble Win2K. I would like to see the stability and security of .Net before making a judgement on that. Microsoft tends to consider security as a feature that stands in the way of ease of use and other "more important" features.

1)Third Parties innovate (netscape, aol IM) and create a new market...
2)Microsoft sees the successful market
3)Buys into that market by integrating a nearly identical product into their desktop
4)People use the product out of convenience rather than using the third party [admittedly, the only thing IE ever had on netscape in the beginning was that because half the prog loaded on start up, IE opened up more easily than netscape and used less ram]
5)Companies like Netscpae and AOL have to spend funds on legal battles explaining to computer illiterate judges that Microsoft is using its OS to monopolize the software markets.
6)Microsoft shuffles some OS money into the legal fund and can still spend the rest of the time working on making their copied products (ie and msn messenger) work better
7)Everyone says 2 years later: Look Microsoft is better!!!

It is only a matter of time before that period between innovation by third parties and idea theft by MS becomes so quick that there is no longer an incentive to innovate.

In the meanwhile, third party software developers and hardware devs are becoming more and more beholden to the Windows monopoly on the OS market, that it becomes near to impossible to give up using Windows without sacrificing the use of good software that was once developed by a third party but now is manhandled by MS. Moreover, those of us who have no interest in MSN or .NET bloating our OS are screwed because we have to either deal with it or sacrificing too much.

Anyway, XP looks to be the next step in bloatware. More useless stuff integrated into my OS - not to benefit the consumer, but to take over a competitors market.

Umm .. .Net is NOT closed. .Net uses XML, SOAP and HTTP - all open protocols.

If you wanna look at a CLOSED system, look at APPLE!!

But will they open the specs for the framework/architecture so everyone can build compatible servers and clients.... I think not. They want to bind you to them. There is no room for competitors. With the desktop monopoly, they will have a big advantage on all their competitors. And without competition, there will be no innovation (which seems to be the big Microsoft word these days. I haven't seen any real innovation done by them besides mass integration of existing products designed by competitors).

http://www.opensource.apple.com/

More closed the Microsoft? Where can I download Windows 2000's kernel then?

You don't know what you are writing about. Apple has never closed away any of its APIs to anyone. So what is the problem? You are mistaking their combination of hardware and software development as closedness. How open is Microsoft then? Does any M$ OS (I am not talking about the buried corpses) run on anything else than PC hardware? Don't say WinCE. Everytime somebody bought one these devices the came out with a completely new design that made your brandnew device a piece of brandnew trash. Engineering is not a M$ strength, but Apple has always been loyal to their developers and their customers. And now listen: The MacOS kernel (Darwin) has become Open Source! Will Windows XP be Open Source as well?

You ask if any of the MS operating systems run on non-pc equipment......what about NT on ALpha....I've got a server room full of them

Why hasn't AOL opened their Messenger? I thought that was the part of the deal for AOL and TM to join together. Let Microsoft sink them. The Government "Thought" they had a monopoly with Microsoft... LOL They haven't seen one yet... especially the one they just approved!

We certainly need to be as weary of AOL as of Microsoft. Up until now AOL may have seemed like one of the nice guys, but any person (consumer or businessman) would be fool to think that AOL is not very aggressive and successful because of it.

I think quite a lot of people have known for a LONG time that AOL are not nice guys, its just the number of people that realise this is starting to grow now.

Personally I think AOL are worse than microsoft, they're dodgy dealings just havent had the high publicity that microsofts has because microsoft were bigger, and everyone hates the biggest companies so the microsoft stories were more "interesting".

As for why havent aol opened up AIM yet, did you REALLY think that was ever going to happen? "Yes sir, of course we will work TOWARDS opening up AIM, now can we get on with this merger?" - now the merger has pretty much happened, they have no real reason to again. They can just keep coming out with the "we are working towards it" story over and over again.

AOL suck big time.

As for microsoft, Im a little concerned about the idea of needing passport authentication for everything, the majority of people dont have always on connections, so would prefer to be able to do things without needing to dial out first. Oh and the AOL in bed with OEMS thing, hmm microsoft will just hint that any OEMS doing that wont get such a good deal on buying windows if they try that. Yep anticompetitive again, but AOL claiming there software doesnt work on XP when it does and that XP doesnt work/has bugs/wont run your software etc... far worse than anything microsoft has done.

At least microsoft can hide behind the genuine excuse that they are excluding aol from the desktop/start panel space so that the user gets the best OOB experience. who needs an OOB experience where AOL has broken most of your other internet software?

At least when microsoft software breaks other software, they try to fix things, AOL just denys any possibility that the AOL software was the cause - even when its soooooo plainly obvious! (like the class action suits going on at the moment agaisnt AOL).

AOL sucks more than microsoft. Its just more people still hate microsoft before they NEED microsofts software to get work done and resent that fact :) AOL cd's arent needed and Icons can be deleted.

AOL has been quietly working on a Linux version of AOL since Microsoft doesn't make Internet Explorer for Linux. By integrating Mozilla/Netscape instead of IE with AOL, they can get on the Linux desktop.

Also, GNOME is integrating the Mozilla browser into the OS for file management, help services, etc., the same way Windows integrates Internet Explorer.

if i hear another "aol is working on linux" crap im gonna scream, if your so knowledgable about aol why dont you go write a book or something.

it seems everyone is letting opinion cloud over thought. Clear your mind and read the full article, then put yourself in aol's shoes, how would you respond? The biggest statement is where aol says "the boundry between the internet and the os is almost gone". When people send email, chat, etc it's through the OS now, why should someone pay money for aol when everything is already installed by ms? Also think about this: antitrust is just not faught out in court rooms between high priced lawyers, it's faught out in the real world. If you have any question about microsoft using the OS to **** everyone over, just look at this. Microsoft can't beat aol, so there giving everything away free, by default in there os. Now how the hell do you fight that? I feel bad for aol.

Well said!

Last time I checked, AOLIM was free.

AOL already has a LINUX version. The Gateway Internet appliance which only can connect to AOL runs on a modified verison of Mobile LINUX

Actually, MS is not giving away everything for free, it is redefining the way people use their computers. If you're scared of the future stick with Linux. That OS is not going anywhere until MS has laid out a clear path for it to follow.

This gave me a good chuckle, a microserf talking about microsoft leading anywhere :-)

keep it up, it's comments like this that make me believe nature created moron for a reason.

The AOL for linux is called gamera ......

Why would anyone competent enough to use Linux also use AOL?

the only thing microsoft is redefining in your computers is the size of the Reset button and the size of the Ctrl+Alt+Del keys, making them bigger. Very usefulwhen you have to reboot your computer after a BSoD.

You are right. I am not scared about the future of Linux. I am not scared about the future of AOL and M$ either. But that for a different reason: I just give a s*** about them. If they stall, a few thousand employees (and many of them with twisted minds) will be laid off. Nothing more, nothing less. The world would not be going to stop!Some businesses maybe, as always when a company takes the wrong decisions... Why should it be different here?

Open Source software is unstoppable! Open Source haters just make a fool of themselves when they brag about stability, privacy and so on. If someone likes to pay not too little money for software that does not work the way one would expect it, then go ahead. Of course, there is also open source software that never works the way you expect it (sendmail ;-) on my server...), but I have not had to pay for it and I do not have to pay for someone to fix the bug that maybe keeps the software from working correctly.

AOL would just like to share the market - Microsoft owns the OS monopoly, AOL owns the Online monopoly. They sure will never own the "internet" monopoly as they have no idea what the internet really is about. All they know is how to squeeze as much money out of their customers with as little effort as possible. This is the way the money world turns around.

Now - in every modern economy there are antitrust laws to prevent monopolies. And this is not for some obscure "communist" reason. The only reason for these laws to exist is that they keep comanies dominating people in a way that their personal freedom and freedom of choice will be diminished or even eliminated.

Open Source can be seen as a voluntary effort of many people to break the handcuffs that companies like M$, IBM, Oracle, Sun and others have attached to millions of computer users. If some of these companies embrace Linux, they probably do it for questionable reasons. But in the end - Open Source software is unstoppable and even more: GNU licensened software is contageous!

AOL has no chance of winning the Linux market because Linux users know what proprietary products mean to personal freedom. Let them spend their money on developing a Linux client anyway, they've got to much gravy anyway and they could do worse things with it than that :-)

Above statement about unstoppable Open Source is the reason why M$ wants to open completely new markets (to them) before Linux really hits their today's business. Bill Gates is everthing but a genius, but he is not an idiot either. The idiot's name is Ballmer ;-)

Let me first say that I have never been an AOL customer... but there are about 25 million people who are. If AOL took the extreme approach and encouraged an alternative operating system, maybe they could make a dent in MS over time. They made accessing the internet easy, maybe they could put a coat of polish on Linux so my dad could even use it. I can see where MS has made improvements over the years, but I still think more than one player in the market is better for everyone. If MS doesn't get any real competition soon, their company slogan will be...
Microsoft: We make everything you need. You need everything we make.

Thats got a great ring to it though, right? I can just hear it now...

I can't believe I am saying this but I actually feel some sympathy for Microsoft this time. Here is a company that is progressing to the FUTURE and improving on a product that, although widely used, still requires some work. AOL seems to be content with the way things are and wish not to move into the same forecasted future that Microsoft sees. I used AOL once (for a day because it was forcing it's updates on me all the time) and got rid of it as quickly as I got it. I don't use MSN either. I use local isp's these online services don't mean anything to me. I almost hope they run each other out of business because it seems I have to help more people in fixing their problems that are caused by MSN or AOL. Anyway, I am using XP and love everything about it (except that damn messenger service cannot be uninstalled). Anyway, if anything that was stated in the above article is true, I can only hope this hurts AOL will eventually bring down the company. Unfortunately, there are too many people out there with a computer who should not be allowed to have one and those are the people AOL tailors to. I hold deep empathy for AOL and can only hope that they fail in the future as a business.

Are you out of your ever-loving mind? Moving into the future? Both of these companies personify the ultimate in corporate greed, treachery and have the same moral fiber as the tobacco industry.

What future, what innovations? They both bite, beg, steal, misappropriate, jockey, maneuver and wrestle any decent piece of technology they can from talented companies/individuals. Both companies prime concern is controlling YOUR computer which controls YOUR information. I can't wait till the asians and the arabs catch up with technology and start terrorizing both AOL and Microshaft. I hope all of their source code is revealed for the sloppy garbage that it is.

Both are responsible for "dumming" down the technology industry with colorful icons and graphics and lemons under the hood. Ask any legitimate, bona-fide, certified, degreed, tech professional who is not biased and see if they don't agree--AOL and MS are to technology what Wal-Mart and K-Mart are to the fashion industry. Knock-offs and charlatans.

Long-Live:

UnixWare, Novell, BSD, Caldera, Red Hat, Solaris, SUN, Linux, even OS/2!

First, there ARE 2 versions of AOL that will run under WinXP quite nicely (or as nicely as any recent AOL sludgeware has run;). There's a 5.0 for NT as well as a 6.0 for XP beta. So much for whoever hallucinated the "it won't run under XP" business.

Second, someone said earlier that "...I am using XP and love everything about it (except that damn messenger service cannot be uninstalled)..." You can remove the MS Messenger. Download and install the latest version. Then simply remove it through Control Panel.

I just hope the versions for NT based don't turn all the dialer properties and wsocks to 16bit still! Pissed me off to no end when AOL told me AOL5 would NOT change anything in Win2K- then had to format, and reinstall because AOL downgraded everything@! Couldn't even publish my web site through FrontPage since it requires a 32bit dialer, not a 16bit!

Okay, I checked the control panel and it does not give the option of uninstalling that particular program. A fresh install only shows MSN Explorer installed. It is not an item listed under Windows components either so I stand by statement. So I still cannot uninstall it but that may be due to the fact that I am on build 2462 instead of 2465. Send me screen shots of where you saw it at. I would be appreciative.

I won't argue with you on what you stated except what your comment at the end of your post: "Ask any legitimate, bona-fide, certified, degreed, tech professional who is not biased and see if they don't agree--AOL and MS are to technology what Wal-Mart and K-Mart are to the fashion industry. Knock-offs and charlatans."
I am assuming you are taking a shot at my credentials which you do not know what they are. I do not need to explain that any further. As far as Microsoft and AOL go, all I can say to the above comment as well, is you don't have to like AOL or Microsoft but you have to respect them because if you, in your legitimate, bona-fide, certified, degreed, tech professional opinion believe that you could get by on daily basis with only UnixWare, Novell, BSD, Caldera, Red Hat, Solaris, SUN, Linux, even OS/2 without Microsoft then you setting yourself up for failure. So maybe I am out of my ever-loving mind but I am not out of a job nor am I narrow minded enough to believe that Microsoft or AOL RULE!!!! I believe that every product in good in what it was designed for.
Now that I have completely gotten away from AOL/Microsoft online services and IM services....*L*

I agree. Here we have two big evil monopolies:

Monopoly A (Microsoft): big, bloated, fat monopoly. Creates about 1/5 to 1/4 of their products that are actually meaningful, updates them 10 times too frequently, more often than not with zero beneficial features, exploits their ill-gotten OS monopoly to create further monopoly for their typically incredibly bloated, very poorly-designed applications. But they do at the end of the day have some usable products priced only about 10 times too high.

Within the luxury of their ill-gotten absurd wealth there are a few pockets of actual software development, and some of these produce some actually decent functional tools, for example MTS was a great idea (upon which EJB is based) and MS finally got around to supporting XML, almost, they at least produced a few tools that they hide at all costs from end users but make available developers (MSXML3).

Monopoly B (AOL): Monopoly for monopoly sake that creates Zero innovative or usable products but operates SOLELY by conning the gullible and stupid.

So I hope AOL dies a quick death and something comes along to kick Microsoft's butt, but I'm not holding my breath on the latter. Linux has alot of hype but what does it have over FreeBSD other than 400 "flavors"?, Mac OSX (BSD based) is actually interesting, but Apple has the same ripoff tendencies of every major corporation. Unfortunately Microsoft junk will be around for the foreseeable future in the real world. But at least they have some actual products that function, it is definitely an evil monopoly but they are less purely evil than AOL.

Yes, Microshaft, and AOL are lazy, monolithic, creatively challenged slugs (a lot like Madonna I'd say). But they all do one thing really good- create wealth. Personally, I don't use AOL, I have no need for it, but that doesn't mean others don't.

Call it what you will, but wealth creation, as opposed to what lawyers do- suck wealth, is what ensures many people's livelihoods. Do you invest for retirement? Do you own shares of Microshaft or GayOL/Time Warner? If you do, they generally provide a good product for their collective investors.

I just get a little tired of people bashing large corporations for being "greedy". What the hell are they supposed to be? Why take the risk if not for the profit incentive? I hold the opinion that NO ONE owes me any anything. Likewise, I don't think I owe anyone anything either.

The only thing I expect is a good product for my money. And while I generally don't like MS's products, they are the only real alternative at this point in terms of widescale compatibility. Yes, they are buggy, but for desktop apps, they're IT.

Like the AMD vs. Intel argument, I root for the underdog. I buy AMD's products because I feel they offer a competitive product at a better price- period. When Intel gets their heart right so to speak, then I'll consider them again and not until. As soon as someone can peddle an alternative OS that offers the integration and ease of use that MS offers, I'll switch in a heartbeat. I'm rooting for both Linux and Apple. I wish that Apple would initiate an x86 blitzkrieg, and knock Microshaft on their ass. (I'm not holding my breath.) Linux I think stands a much better chance as the alt.OS, but they just aren't there yet for me.

As for AOL vs. MS, I don't care who wins as long as I have a better product. Who knows, maybe this looming battle will further strengthen Linux's position.

Maybe we'll all get lucky and they both will go out of business!! Screw them all...open source for everyone....

I stand behind Open Source 100%, BUT not for a OS because I feel you're giving the "Key" away and this allows hackers to break into you systems. As Linsux has this issue. It's like giving your car keys to someone then they steal your care and you sit there wondering how they stole your car...

AMEN!!!!!!!!!

No, with Open Source you are giving away the functioning of the locking mechanism, you're not giving away the keys. Others can check if that locking mechanism is "secure" enough. People can take advantage of this but other people can find the same flaws and report them.
With closed software, you don't know how it works and you can't even check if there are backdoors built-in by the manufacturer. So where is the bigger threat? How are you going to check this? Believe them on their word that there aren't any?

What most of you Microsoft haters don't realize is that for true productivity in business, open source should be abandoned and let standards be created. Imagine a business who modifies a version of Linux for it own use, rewriting some of the internal code in order for it to function properly for every computer on their network. Now imagine thousands of companies doing this all over the world, rewriting the source code to their own liking. Now how are software manufacturers supposed to going to be able to keep up. Software like microsoft office, Wordperfect, anit-virus software, CAD software would definitely not be able to run perfectly on all these modified systems UNLESS software manufacuters release the source code. If they did that, they certainly would not be in business for long. ALl you people complain that prices for Microsoft products are outrageous but they are also the ones who have brought order and provided standards so that thousands of software companies have been able profit because of it. If there were no standards, I doubt highly that OS's and software would have come as far today as they have. Linux will be and should be for hobbyists but will never really make it big because they HAVE NO STANDARD and with software not wanting to write code for Linux, it will ultimately fail, just as, I hope, AOL will.

Spyntek, are you crazed??!? STANDARDS are things like TCP/IP (oops, the MS stack takes some liberties), HTTP, SMTP, XML, etc. where the community comes to a consensus. Things like NetBEUI (you know, the unroutable protocol), Windows APIs (the ones that MS didn't give Wordperfect or Lotus until AFTER the Win95 release so Office95 would be the only suite left standing...), or the proprietary formats used in ANY of the office suites are just that - PROPRIETARY!!

If MS had brought out a system that used the existing Internet standards for communications, and used some PUBLIC standard format for their documents, then I'd be one of their staunchest defenders. As it is, they had to be dragged by their corporate heels, kicking and screaming, into compatibility with the rest of the world. As appears to be the case given the surge in Linux's popularity, once MS is made to compete against open standards, they lose ground.

As for AOL [getting back on topic], they've been at odds w/ MS since Win95. MS was trying to get the world signed up for MSN (remember, back before Mr. Bill got religion about the 'Net?), and AOL was put there just so it didn't look too obvious that MS wanted to own your online life. Now they're at it again, and less interested in looking charitable (I guess now that they've been convicted, they're not even pretending to not be a monopoly anymore), and AOL (not much of an improvement in my book) is trying to keep their footing. Probably the best thing AOL could do is cut a deal with some Linux outfit like RedHat to make a Linux build with a Mozilla-based AOL client and offer it for $10. Blow Windoze off entirely, get better stability, AOL gets your online connection. Multiply that times a few million clients and take the existing Windows client off the IE base onto a Mozilla base and suddenly Windows has some real competition...

I don't see why everyone feels like Microsoft should have to open all of their technology and share with the world. You mention that they did not send their API's to their competitors so they could offer compatability. Well why should they? Of course they are going to try to make software better than everyone else, and they are not going to want their competitors to be able to keep up with them.

So what you are basically saying is that anytime someone develops a new technology that would put them ahead of their competition they should share it so the competition can play at the same level? Last I recalled America is a capitalist country, where the strong survive and those with the best ideas and innovations are successful.

There is nothing wrong with Microsoft. They started way back before most of us were born, and continued to grow and thrive because Bill Gates is a genius business man. I don't care what anyone says. He sold DOS before he even owned it, and that is pretty impressive. They came out with an OS (Win95) that like it or not, revolutionized the desktop. The improvement over Windows 3.1 was astounding, and they have continued to build upon that.

And just because they make an operating system they are expected not to offer users everything else they want? You have to remember that MS is a giant company, and they have to do something with all of those profits to keep the business moving forward and generating more revenue streams. It was a given that after their OS was widely accepted they would write online software, an office suite, and a thousand other things.

Plain and simple Microsoft writes good software. Sure it may have bugs, but all software does, regardless of what dilusions you may currently be having about everyone else's software. People are anti-MS just because it seems like the right thing to do. They make great software, and they have brought computing to where it is today.

MS is constantly innovating and bringing new things to the table. It would be idiotic to think that they are going to give away all their secrets just so the rest of the industry can make software that can compete. And don't come back by saying "when you have millions to hire the best programmers then you can afford to make the best software." That is a testament to the strength of the company and the good business sense it has had in the past, and will have in the future.

It's like the old saying "Don't hate me because I am beautiful." Don't hate Microsoft just because they make your operating system and a ton of other good software and make billions of dollars. That is the beauty of a free economy.

If you were writing software that revolutionized the way things are done would you want to share it? At least not until after you launched and made all the money you could. It's the way the world works. Money makes the world go 'round, and Microsoft has lots of it.

When companies adjust their Linux program to fit their needs they are not changing the basic functions set out in the Kernel. They are just changing the operation sequences or UI. The "Starndard" as you so called it is the 2.4 Kernel which if you knew anything about Linux you would know they do have their own Board that reviews all the changes that would effect the basic operating system that mainly relates to form, fit and function or would change the Kernel significantly.

Obviously, you weren't born when I was. That was before M$ even exsisted. MR Gates is not a Genius he stole the code which we know as MS Dos from IBM and the Government. They were the True ones to develope the first operating system. If you look back to you history books computers were big tube systems with just on and off functions. That system was built with the government, General electric, and IBM. IBM was stupid not to have any patents at the time on the Operating System and we know as the beginning of Dos. Bill Gates came along at that time and saw an opertunity to make money and squeeze IBM out by patenting the Operating system IBM had developed. In other words Bill isn't a Genius just and opertunist. A college drop out opertunist. I'm not defending either of these companies they are both opertunists which were sucessful on the backs of other peoples work.

Microsoft bought what became MSDOS from a private company (a single programmer, if I remember correctly, but I could be wrong about that). Also, in response to AaronD: APIs are related to the operating system, not MS Office. An API (Application Program[ming/mer] Interface) is the set of function calls that allows an application developer to interface with the operating system. Want to create a window on screen? Thats an API call (a few in Win32, actually). Want to put text inside that window? Thats another API call. Application developers can't write programs without knowledge of the underlying APIs.

but why should an OS developer HAVE to reveal ALL the APIs? Its there IP, why cant they decide who develops for it and what they can develop? If someone doesnt like it, they can go and develop they're program for a different OS!

Is nokia anticompetitive for not publishing a SDK and all the API calls in the software inside their cell phones? I want to develop a game thats better than Snake, but nokia isnt playing fair because they havent put any ram inside my phone or published the SDK for me to do it! *not fair! (stamping feet)*

(not sure if this is factually correct but... ) cisco, I want to develop tetris to run on ciscos IOS to run on a 2601 router, but cisco wont tell me how! *not fair!*

I dont believe microsoft should have had to publish every API there was available in windows, and certainly not in their other apps. Its their product, if they want to add to it themselves, fine, if they want to allow some people to know some of the APIs in windows so some people can develop programs for windows then fine! it should be up to THEM.

Open Source and Standards are compatible! The Open Source movement is doing more for the standards than microsoft has done in the last 10 years!
And if an enterprise wants to tweak linux for its purposes, this doesn't mean its version won't work with the rest of versions... Do you happen to know that Google is running a server farm of more than 8000 middle-class pc's running a self-modified version of Linux? Have you had any problem till now with google? I bet you haven't.

You really made me laugh! You stand behind Open Source a 100% but not when it comes to OSes. Rather let a company like M$ build in features that they better not reveal to the public like spying out the users computers via MSN and so on. Open Source is the only way to prevent exactly this. I just think you haven't fully understand what you stand behind a 100%!!!

Let's pretend for a moment. That there's no MS. Linux is the most widely used operating system, and it is about as useful, configurable, open, secure, user-friendly as it is now. Isn't that just sad? How can i teach my grandma to use a PC? Imagine the cost of training people to use PCs. We will have a lot less users, because to use a PC you would have to be VERY computer savvy.

Would you linux users stop shouting MS SUCKS, DIE MS? If Linux is as good as you want us to believe, there's NOTHING that anybody including MS can do to stop people(including me) from using it.

Until then that amateurly drawn penguin has no place on my Active Desktop :)

I haven't had problems with Barnes and Noble either and they are running on Windows 2000 servers. What's your point?

And hotmail is running on 5000 w2k servers (note how its less servers, yet hotmail probably gets more hits than google does). SO?? your point was what?

Poor Microsoft.

It's so darn unfair when these third party application providers expect their software to run at the same level as Microsoft's own software. Who does AOL think they are? It's not like we live in a democratic society where cometition is allowed.

Let us band together, comrades, we can fight the evil threat posed by competition.

When I was young I didn't know very much about the internet. We had a new laptop computer (A macintosh) and it had a built in 19200 kbps modem. Now I was stupid and really didn't understand things about computers very well at that time. So after seeing many commercials I installed AOL and signed up for an account (my primary screen name, not mst3k-rules, that i use for all my services is still the same one from when I singed up with aol). Now this was before AOL had working net access. All you could get to was their local stuff but I'd never used the net before so that was incredible by itself. We also briefly had e-world or whatever that ISP was. I didn't know anything about that one except that it was harder to use than aol but had genuine internet access. You could actually go to a webpage, though for the life of me I can't remember a single page I looked at.
So I stuck with aol for a while, but I got more and more sick of it. AOL gives you 5 (now 7) screen names but only one can be up at a time. We helped our less fortunate (financially) cousins get on the net by giving them screen names, but this meant that we had to battle them for time online; also aol's local numbers worked like poo. It would (and still does, since we still pay for my cousin's AOL while I stick to my own provider) take up to 6 tries to get an access number to work. I probably wouldn't have learned just what a sham aol was if aol's own shoddy programmers had just not screwed around with the options menu in IE. I installed a program that broke my internal aol IE access, but my external access was fine. The problem was that aol was so damned grubby about their settings that I couldn't fix the problem, which in IE only required unchecking use proxy. This forced me to connect with aol and use browsers outside of the program. I soon learned how every aol feature was not anything unique at all. I saw how the real web worked so much faster than the crap aol was serving me. Like millions around the world I was duped by aol during my inexperienced years. Once I was out of the program I saw how other ISP's had fast log-ons, how aol's friendliness features were pointless once you'd been on the net for over a week. Now that I've expressed why I dislike AOL I'm going to make a second post because this one is already way too long.

You would think by reading this that AOL might actually think of sending out a blitz of libelous statements, with the mass emailing of ".NET and XP will violate your privacy agreements" and such. If much of this is true, AOL is out to really try to hurt MS, in questionable ways.

James

AOL is looking for people who have Windows XP to test AOL. I doubt AOL would make the move to say that AOL wouldn’t work with XP, because people are going to want XP, people will buy new computers to have XP and AOL would be digging themselves a hole if they say AOL wont work with it because people will leave AOL to have XP and be happy using the built in functions of XP.(by force) If AOL just makes a version to work with the OS and allows people to install it, people will stay with it because humans are creatures of habit.

AOL is upset they will loose control of your PC. Can't Microsoft sue them for Slander if AOL sends that message out? I know they can do some legal action.

What's the difference between AOL and Microshaft? Nothing, only timing. It's like two gangsters warring over control of a neighborhood. They're both bad elements and let them kill each other off. They belong in the same category as tobacco companies.

I'm sorry but how can you say MS and AOL are like tobacco companies?? Last I check people aren't dying from using MS and AOL products. Well maybe a few techs had a heart attack. :)

Maybe everyone should wake up and see that there are far worse companies in the world to worry about.

i.e.: Insurance industry, Oil industry, Natural Gas Industry, Pharmaceutical Industry, Military (equipment) industry, etc..

Last I check in the last 3 years MS and AOL's prices didn't shoot up 200% like my gas bill has!!! These are the companies we need to go after!!!!

I'm sorry but how can you say MS and AOL are like tobacco companies?? Last I check people aren't dying from using MS and AOL products. Well maybe a few techs had a heart attack. :)

Maybe everyone should wake up and see that there are far worse companies in the world to worry about.

i.e.: Insurance industry, Oil industry, Natural Gas Industry, Pharmaceutical Industry, Military (equipment) industry, etc..

Last I check in the last 3 years MS and AOL's prices didn't shoot up 200% like my gas bill has!!! These are the companies we need to go after!!!!