I've read all these comments about the free competition of OSes and I keep seeing the names Linux and BeOS popup in almost all of them and how comsumers will still pick Windows over the competition because it's soooo easy to use. Well does anyone remember MacOS??? I know that it's only sold on Macintosh systems, but the core and interface of the MacOS has not changed in almost 10 years. 10 YEARS!!!! Microsoft has had to do major changes with Windows to make it the OS it is today. The MacOS is still the easiest to use, and it has all those nifty features that anyone can tweak to their heart's content. Now those people at Apple knew what they were doing when they designed the MacOS (I.E. it always was Y2K compliant without any patches). So let's give credit where credit is due. Microsoft ripped-off the design for their Windows from the Apple MacOS and it pisses me off that Microsoft now owns a good chunk of Apple.

The MacOS had changed drastically in the past 10 years, unfortunately it was mostly towards fruit filled buttons and candy coated menu bars. Maybe MacOSX will be worth a look. MacOS might seem simple at first but when you try to copy or move files across thes system you have to figure out which combination of the apple, control and command keys to press. You are stuck with one mouse button and you have to dig through numerous folders to find the aliases to your apps unless you spend the time to build your own and litter the desktop with them.

Micosoft has had to make major changes in their OS, granted. Not only have they improved their UI greatly, they have made major changes in the "pluming." Their OS is far better than MacOS because they paid attention to how the OS works, not how it looks.

MacOS was not completely y2k compliant, but if you want to start that argument then all the UNIX and Linux clients were not y2k compliant either. This was not just a Microsoft problem.

Please keep your happy iMac personality behind closed doors. You come off as looking ignorant, especially when speaking about windows, which you have probably never used beyond clicking through a couple folders and opening an app ro two from the start menu. I don;t completely dislike MacOS, and as a graphic designer I have to use them from time to time. At home, however, I use Windows 2000 and I can run all the graphic apps I need better than on Mac.

realting?

echoes of the subject header: just to get a few things clear!

lol

Why should Microsoft have to give out their source code?? Its the secret to their success. People I don't know if you haven't realized, but we do not live in a communist state. It is survival of the fittest in a Capitalist Society. I work as an IT Professional and I like knowing that no matter what computer I sit down at, there is a standard to the operating system. I don't want to see a day where I have a problem with a windows system, then a Beos system, then a Linux system, then a FreeBSD system. It makes life so much easier to be able to know what I'm dealing with. I am also not afraid of learning new things. I have a linux box at home, I stay up with the times, but Microsoft has a good thing, and the government has no right to invade on that. By the way, coca cola is now the only soft drink to be offered in China, no Pepsi, should Coke open the "source code" to their drink so others stand a chance?? Get Real people.

Microsoft shouldn't of course, but their competitors know that MS does have the superior products.

You evidently have information that a lot of people don't have. Many fail to grasp the state of computing pre-MS and pre-Windows dominance, when there were multiple platforms to code for.

I for one, hated it when I was a kid and found games on "other" computing platforms that I hoped would be developed for mine, but I guess that there are people who would rather have developers take greater gambles and struggle to support all platforms.

This rant was totally moronic... Fortunately most of us actually understand what we say when we say it.

Yeah! It'll be great once competitors get other operating systems out there! I can't wait having to go through getting good drivers for 10 OS's rather than one or two.

I cant wait to see all the new "Microsoft Applications Plc's Office 2001 for linux", etc etc be released....... I mean, the government says thats what will be allowed to happen now! They will obviously start developing all their apps for other OS's because of this outcome....... wont they? ........ lol......

I only want to say one thing. The US Government has punished Bill Gates for being smart. Yes, that's right. If you're smart enough to build a massive empire out of nothing, you get punished.

If you're smart, and living in America, may I suggest you move to another country before you are punished?

Well, what it comes down to is the government, and how much control they have. Just like the deregulation act that allowed long distance to be marketed and sold by other vendors, the government is yet again excersising their 'power', to show America that "We are still on top of every little thing you do. We have the final word"... even when they're wrong. In this case with Microsoft, the government is worried to death that one man (Bill Gates) will become so powerful, that his word (in some cases) will be more powerful than the governments. So... they try and put a stop to it now. I don't get it. It upsets me to see that a strong (yes, very agressive) person is allowed to build a company to be as powerful as Bill Gates has done, and is looked at as a villan. Just because he has the business smarts, the go-getivness, and the desire to be the best does not allow the government to crush what he has built. This isn't about what OS is better, this isnt' about what Product or Hardware is better.. this is politics... It's about who has more control. (Period)

I hope to make things a little clearer: Bill gates did not get pubished for being smart, he get punished because he is using his dominant OS to make their browser more popular as well. Although I didn't say this is bad, infact integrating the browser with the OS is common sense and will happend anyway sooner or later. But how about other browser? What about Netscape? Got defeated. What about Opera? Still chrages, not very popular...
The bottom line is that something have to be done to encourage competition.

Ok, why should Microsoft put someone else's browser in their OS? It's like Ford putting a Chevy engine in their own cars, just to "help competition". That's dumb. Why on earth should MS HAVE to put anyone else's product in Windows? I sure am not going to sell my competitor's computers in MY store.

haa?? Did i tell M$ to put netscape into his os? Would you do it if you were Microsoft? Next time, read carefully before you submit any opinion.

Now, listen to me carefully for few minutes:
I'm pro-microsoft, and I support Microsoft because they produce better quality software (Though it's not always the case). But, now, I no longer support MS. Why? Simple. Their business practices which harms competitors. They crush their competitors using their hugely popular Windows OS + their supperior product. So, tell, me, how the hell a startup with a more innovative ideas are going to compete with MS? Think about this, if MS was ever releases the next major release of Windows (not Windows Me), with a new revamped desktop that was based on a msn.com portal, how do other portal players going to compete with Microsoft? Although I do understand that spliiting the software giant off with be a tough decision, cause if MS is spliited into two, it harm consumers, not benefited consumer as the DOJ have said. Why? The reason is that if MS remains untouched, developers will not need to write hundreds of versions of their software to suit different incompatible version of Windows, that creates great inconveniences. But if MS is spliited, it encourages competition, more startups with more innovative ideas and creative products/services will emerged cause they don't need to worry about competing head-to-head with MS, which almost always brings bad luck to the smaller company, just like Netscape being defeated by MS. Anddon't forget about MS's NGWS (Next-Generation Windows Services). If it were realises, Internet will be "powered by Windows", which is something that should't be relise, cause The Internet is just a platform whereby companies compete fairly with each other. No single company are alowed to control it, not even AOL.

And there is only one solution: break up Microsoft, then make Windows a standard and operate by a non-profit organization or a non-profit company that is going to manage the standards on the Internet. Then, MS will only be able to earn profit through their softwares. I think this is fair, cause a software company doesn't need a OS in order to survive, giving a dominant OS to a software company is overkill and sonner or later the company will grow so large that they will start killing its competitors one-by-one. MS is a very very aggressive company, a smart people will know what will happen if such company is given the opportunity to almost dominate the OS martket and the Internet as a whole. I don't think I need to teach you what will happen, you are smart enough to think for yourself.

splitting the software giant into three companies is overkill. afterall, if there are other ways to create more competitions while preserving s standard OS for everone to use, why split MS? Remember, the botomline is that MS is abusing its position as a dominant OS maker and try to make their browser dominant as well, by integrating them. Even if you are not a lawyer, I think 5 years-old boy will know that it's wrong. It's common sense. Comeon people, if yu're still pro-MS or anti-MS, wake up, its not time to argue to see who will win, but what is the consequences to our future if nothing is done to stop MS from continue doing so.

I don't believe any software should be taken from MS. THEY made it, they spent millions of $$$ on it, and the people that worked on it, it is THEIRS. You don't like it, use something else. I am using no less than *3* different OSes myself, just for kicks. Soon as I get BeOS 5 Pro version, I may be using 4. Where is the monopoly??

you missed my point. i didn't say that MS should open his Windows source code, nor I tell them to give it away. I just say that a standard OS should exist somewhere, jointly created by all OSes, like BeOS + Windows 2000 + Linux... you get my point. I just want to see a standard OS so that no company can take control of it or integrate their applications with the OS. Is this wrong??!!

p/s: you guys has lots of time, so go on and argue with me. I just really got fed up of this people who likes to disagree with a person that write a long opinion. So, are you there? Go disagree with me. I won't listen to you anyway.

since some people sort of lost track on my post about the government's ruling.

It's not about being anti-MS or pro-MS that I was trying to get across, but the s***ing of control away from the software developer to the governmental bodies. Since I made the mistake of creating an analogy of sorts by creating a sides issue (pro vs. anti) that lead to some people voicing their opinions against MS.

Take a step back, disregard taking sides and look deeper into the consequences of the case. This case has allowed the government invasive control and decision in regards to the operation of a software company (and most likely inclusive to hardware).
There is much more to the case at hand then just the DOJ vs. Microsoft.

In case some may still not see where I'm going, take into account the politicians and their lobbying for taxation of the internet. Taxation, if adopted, will apply to purchases and bit transfers where applicable (if any bounds at all).

As an example: Take BetaNews, we could be charged rates on the BETAs we download (most likely we will be charged when the moratorium on this issue expires, if it's still a considered practice and no more appeals for moratoriums).

This goes much more deeper than a government dictating the terms for a
software company. It's more deeper than companies complaining about too many health, labor, safety, or environmental laws they need to follow to maintian compliance. It all boils down to how much the government is able to dictate the terms of business of a law written in 1890 to affect businesses in the 21st century. The ruling also plays a significant demostration of the government's role on the economy. As a matter of fact we only need to look at Standard Oil as an example that government intervention upon a private business isn't a new concpet. Thanks PS (and others) for not restating the obvious facts of this case and examining the wider implications of this ruling. And I hope the CEO's of AOL-Time Warner are watching this case (with their trays in the upright position :) as it unfolds because they're also treading on thin ice.

If both companies produce superior products it will become a non-issue and not hurt consumers one bit. If one happens to crash and burn they did it to themselfs and it will be proven that rightful there product was inferior to the competition.

Just beacuse there non-os devisions have less funding dosen't mean there will be unfair competition, it's more on the contrary - there will be eaqual competition (A change from there OS supplying funds to the Office devision).

*/Rambelings*

If you cut a blood worm in two, after a little while you dont have two half worms, but two full worms. I know all about methods of asexual reproduction.

Worms and asexuality have 'what' to do with this DOJ vs. MS case?

Basically he's trying to say that when MS splits, one day each company will return to it's original size (just like worms) (and maybe they might go through another confrontation with the DOJ)

I believe that'll happen. It happened with AT&T. They were split up into 6 companies (if i'm not mistaken), and now each of those compnaies are bigger than the original AT&T company.

"just e-mail it to me as a word document" says a customer on day

"sorry - we don't even have MS windows on our PC's, we only run 'bozo' and 'bozo office 2002' on our PCs - I'll send it as a 'bozo word' file"

"but that doesn't run on word does it?"

"no, you'll need to download the 'bozo word reader for MS Windows' and install that first"

-- Get real people - at least at the moment you can rely on most people having the ablilty to read an MS word file, or something simple like that... Imagine the fun without that sort of standard!

Also... I'm going to be annoyed if I have to open an IE window to surf the net, and a different window to explore local files etc...

"-- Get real people - at least at the moment you can rely on most people having the ablilty to read an MS word file, or something simple
like that... Imagine the fun without that sort of standard! "

A standard is great as long as everyone can use it. Word is NOT a standard (can you tell me which standards commitee has declared it a standard?). As long as MS keeps changing it (even making it incompatible with itself), you can't call it a standard. How can other companies develop a competing software if they can't implement your "standard".
Same thing for windows. I always keep hearing that Windows is a "de facto standard". If it is, how can other companies develop a competing OS that uses your "standard" if they don't get the API's and stuff.

I agree, breaking up MS won't help a thing; it'll turn into a legal battlefield for the next couple of years and by the time the final word is spoken, it won't aven matter because everything will have changed.

Force MS to use/create/implement standards in stead of the BS they are pulling out with IE5.5 (great standard compliant browser, NOT).

Ohh, that sounds a lot like Java. another 'Standard'

You must have a lot of a spare time........

LOL, did anyone actually read all of that? I sure as hell didn't, but I'm sure it was probably pretty good... :P

since ataferner has proven himself blindly anti-MS, I didn't bother but I'm sure it was amusing.

Excuse me? YOU are lying, or at least extremely stupid and uninformed.

IE DOES NOT RUN WHEN YOU START YOUR COMPUTER, unless you double-click the Internet Explorer icon. Just because it comes with the OS, and it has the option to integrate with Explorer, does NOT mean it is running all the time.

Take a lesson in how DLLs are loaded, and how OS paging works especially...

*cough cough* explorer is loaded with windows, the shell explorer.exe calls shdocvw.dll (The rendering lib of IE)... Therefore IE is loaded with windows! Think i'm lieing? Type explorer.exe http://www.yahoo.com/

Tisk Tisk

Sheesh, you're gonna force me to explain this. Again, take a lesson in OS paging.

In a Win32 executable, code is stored in 4KB pages. Only whenever an attempt is made at calling code inside a particular page is it read in from disk.

Just because explorer.exe may load shdocvw.dll does not mean the entire DLL is loaded and stored in memory -- probably very small bits and pieces of it, since it does not use the full HTML rendering features available in IE.

Bits and pieces of shdocvw.dll do not come close equating "IE loading".

I'm actually amazed how much effort some people put in their senseless rants and fud! =)

I'm sure he copied that text directly from some anti-MS "essay". There was another thread where he did nothing by spit out links to anti-MS sites.

huuh uh.. hu hu... he said 'Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land'

Microsoft can't lose here. Even if computer companies have to start offering a choice of OS's, how many of your average users do you think can even PRONOUNCE "Linux"?
I'm glad to see our government has "pounced" on the "evil monopoly" of Microsoft. Way to go guys. I'm sure Bill Gates didn't sleep at all last night :-)

Quick question...how many of the 40,000+ Microsoft employees are "evil"? Oh were's my holy water...lol.

"Even if computer companies have to start offering a choice of OS's"

What do you mean, "have to"? I have my own computer store, and I can offer what ever the heck I want on my computers. I build them, I install whatever OS the person wants. Linux, Win98, Win2k...doesn't matter. And I offer MSWorks 4.5, Corel Office 2000, Lotus, or anything else on it. So if *I* can do it, why can't others?

Welp, I've had enough of reading all this mess about "Linux is more stable" and propaganmda like that on either side of the arguement. The true point here is - did MS perform illegal acts when promoting (, etc.....) it's software/OS/etc.
Anyways, I think the fact of the matter is that this whole case started out as a few companies, etc angered with MS (it was more like jealousy) because MS writes and produces better software than the majority of the world. BY BETTER I mean that it's better for the consumer. Face it - any average Joe off the street can't use Linux or BeOS, etc. It's almost like going back to DOS. Windows is the best overall GUI ever made for the PC (any version, really). It's easy to use, relatively self-explanatory, upgrading is easy (compared to other OS's), and just about anyone can use it. The reason why everyone uses Windows is not because MS "Forced" them to do so (as most anti-MS people here make it sound), but because way back when computers were just getting started, MS came up with "Windows" - a new (and MUCH more user-friendly) OS that wasn't based on a DOS interface (typing in commands, etc). So, OEM's back in the day decided to use this new software on their machines - because it was the best OS at the time. No-one else had come up with a viable alternative to Win 3.1. After MS got a foothold on the market, they brainstormed, came up with new ideas and innovated their way to the top with Win95/98/etc. So here we are today - Windows is the most popular operating system in the world. It does most of what it's operators want it to do. No coding or compiling involved; no major hassles on upgrades or updates; no new version releases every day (like some OS's, ahem...). And integration of IE into Windows (actually I shouldn't call it "integration", more like "bundling") is just another example. MS saw the future in the internet, and rather than sit back and wait for the future to come, MS took the advantage and now we have possibly the world's best browser - IE5. For all the companies that claim they were "hurt" by MS - face it. If not for MS, you wouldn't be here today. This is just a case of one software company (whoever it may be - AOL, whatever, it doesn't matter) seeing what a good job MS is doing on it's OS and how popular it is among the people, and having the lack of imagination and determination to push their products into the market, they cry "monopoly". Then everyone else hops on the bandwagon, from other companies to even States themselves - they see a very wealthy and prosperous company ready to be plundered.
Not many people have thought of the true impact of this decision. It seems like the majority of "pro-Linux" posts here just say something to the effect of "Down with MS - Yay for Linux". I think the judge in the case had the same mentality - he failed to realize what might happen if this goes through - IE goes from free software to something you see in a box on the shelf at EB - Windows (and the internet, or Office, whatever App.) go from working great together, with almost seamless integration to 2 different pieces of software that don't have all the bells and whistles of integration that they once had. Only then will people begin to realize how significant this decision really is.

Maybe some of you can now see through your little OS bragging clouds and let your common sense and logic weigh in. "Linux Rules, down with MS".... la la la "MS is best". WHATEVER.

Fin

(PS - I know people are going to take my words and twist them around to defeat my arguement. So rather than reply to them, I will just say: Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.)

Okay, I know this is slightly off-topic, but have any of you guys actually _used_ BeOS before? It is amazingly easy to learn and use and I am fully confident that my mother could pick it up very quickly. BeOS includes a text interface for the same reasons as MacOS X (because its cool, dammit).

My point is that Linux and BeOS are on two different levels in terms of ease-of-use right now. BeOS is fairly simple, and Linux still requires a bit of knowledge. Please stop using BeOS as an example of a crappy UI. It's quite polished, just sorely lacks applications.

Yeah, BeOS is fairly simple. Just wish I didn't have to get a particular brand of modem for it, though. I like staying with my Phoebe ISA and PCI modems for my systems, which don't seem to work under BeOS.

no... the BeOS UI is crap... respectivley.

It's unorganized, and clunky. Not even close to polished.

Well maybee not quite yet.

While most people seem to be coming down on one side or the other, the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Bill Gates has been a bad boy in some cases, but he's not really the monopoly monster the government has made him out to be. Microsoft may deserve a deserve a strict spanking, but not an operation to split its brain in half.

The Justice Department thinks Microsoft's dominance in the OS market is fundamentally the same as the monopolies once help by AT&T and Standard Oil. These companies built vast distribution networks for their products, put their competitor's out of business, eventually causing stagnation and eleminitating consumer choice within their industries. So the government's basic contention is that Windows is not only an OS but also an infrastructure through which other products are delivered to the consumer. The question of IE integration is only the example the JD decided to prosecute on.

But does the goverment's premise really hold up? I don't think so. Microsoft deserves to profit from the work they put into the Windows
OSes, but only as long as they do not do so at the cost of the public's wellfare. No one can argue that Windows has silenced all other invovation in the software industry, which would would consistitute a Microsoft Monopoly. But the oposite is true, software industry is becoming larger and more diverse all the time. Its impossible to say what the world would be like now without Bill Gates. Maybee it would be better, maybee it would be worse. But as it is, the software industry is a very healthy and very competitive.

However, some of Microsofts business practices do suggest that they are trying to create just the kind of monopoly the government has accused them of. They need to be reminded that the people of the United States will not allow them leverage their OS dominance into total market control. If the free market fails to control Microsoft, the government will have the right to step in. But we have not come to that point yet, nor will we ever in my opinion. Free market competition is alive and well in the software industry, and it remains to be seen if Microsoft will be able to hold on to their position, with or without government intervention.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Microsoft Windows 9x may not be as stable as linux, we all know that linux is solid, however Microsoft has a very strong user base and for the average and the new users Linux is just to damn hard to use. I have been using a computer for most of my life starting with GeoWorks, and I have found no other opperating system that can do what Windows does. Face it, Linux is a COMMAND LINE interface no matter what Window Manager that you use weather it be KDE, Gnome or Window Maker or what every else there is you still ne to use the Xterm or the Console to execute programs, Moreover the installation process for applications, software drivers and System files under linux is extremely hard to do, I was lucky to get Xf86 4.0 to sucessfully upgrade over 3.6. With Windows all you need to do to update a driver for a spacific piece of hardware is find it on the net, go to the device manager and click on the hardware that is listed and then click on update driver also if I want to update to new revisions of main system files, i don't need to recompile a kernel and I don't need to make symbolic links to files, all i need to do is for windows is get an update patch and double click on the icon and bam.. my system is up to date. Also the average user don't want to figure out how to use a command line, they want to be able to turn on their pc and use the internet or type a doccument, with out haveing to worry about compiling and debugging, they want to put the keys in the ignitiion and drive, with linux you can not do that. Also, you really can't compare Windows 9x to Linux because Linux is not designed to take the place of an average user on the desktop, it is designed to be a web server which it does really well.. I am sick of all you loyalist hypocrits, you MUST admit that without microsoft, the computer would NOT be able to do what it does today with the speed that it does it and the computer would NOT be as versatile as it is now with out microsoft and NOBODY can deny that. Now the ONLY way to s*** the power of the opperating system game is to GET UP OFF YOUR a** and make a product that is intuitive, efficient, easy to use and is either compatable with a vast majority of hardware or it is easy to write hardware drivers for. If you want to be the big shark, first you gotta beat the big shark and unfortunatly with linux in its current state, it will never do it. Also remember that the average joe don't give a **** about compiling and s*** that makes linux so compelling to nerds, they just want to go online.

Chris

Linux will get there, don't worry. Remember Window 3.11 video drivers? Dealing with that is almost as bad as dealing with XF86Setup.

Have you seen the stuff on KDE 2.0? Or GNOME? Have you used Corel Linux? My parents/sister/co-worker could use that without incident (they could even install it).

Personally I think that the press attention and expectations on Linux are way too high right now to be healthy. Red Hat is now WAY too focused on making money, and it shows (their web site is now a shopping page for crying out loud). It is true Linux is about four years out, but that time could be significantly reduced with people pitching in and helping the movment.

With the new "anti-piracy" (read: "anti-user-freedom/privacy"/"pro-obscene-profits") licensing methods, I'm leaning toward (possibly less capable) free, open alternatives. Many of them will want money someday, but to them a $60 application and a $100 OS would be high-priced (not a $500 application and a $200 OS, neither of which are actually yours and by using you consent to having your PC scanned because you might be acting criminally).

Just a quick comment I'd like to make about all of this without getting pro or anti MS, since what your personal opinions are about MS don't count for peanuts.

Is it just MS and a few other people like myself who have very quickly worked out that the internet now in the year 2000 is a key part of the computer? Don't mean to point out anything too obvious here, but I haven't seen many computers being sold lately that don't come with at least a modem and quite a lot of them with XXhours/days of free net access. Now since the internet is a key part of every day computing, why wouldn't you include it as part of the os? This is after all the year 2000, not 1980. It makes great business sense to include internet applications with your operating system...and that's what microsoft is...a business...i don't think that they're out to win popularity contests....they're out to be profitable....just like any other business, e.g. financial banks.

Hence, MS obviously did their work in the R&D department a while back and realised that every man/woman/child and their pets would be connecting to the internet. So they decided to intergrate IE into their OS. Should they have done it? Obviously it makes great business sense to do so. And that is what they did.

As someone pointed out in yet another MS vs. the world (i.e. every other os on the planet), 'consumers will choose the product they require for their needs'. If IE doesn't suit them, and it may not for various reasons, then they have a choice of other great browsers. It's their choice. Should they whinge that MS MADE them use IE? Probably not, I'm yet to see someone complain that they are forced to use Paint for example, the majority download a more descent package wether it be commercial such as Adobe Photoshop or something free. Are these people complaining that it's unfair for MS to include Paint? What I am trying to get at is that you average OS package in the year 2000 doesn't just come with the basic kernel. Wether it be a distribution of Linux, BeOS, MacOS etc, they all come with additional programs and packages, and the majority of these come with a web browser. And as years go on, your OS package will come bundled with more and more programs, why...because they're all competing for your business, the more enticing they make the whole package the more likely you are to buy it. Is that illegal? I sure as hell hope not else businesses are going to be in real trouble. And remember, you the consumer will always use the programs that suit you not necessarily the ones that come bundled up for free in soem package you bought (i.e. I've only ever used Paint for very quick saves of screen grabs).

My 2c.

It's there product! Microsoft made it, they should be able to change it and add to it however they wish, and if the costimer doesn't like it, they don't have to buy it, they can use and older version or go to another brand, if Microsoft makes any mistakes in there busness to the consumer, they'll fix it, or they'll loose busness. and if something the consumer doesn't like comes with it, they don't have to use it!!

If your worried about 1 Microsoft, then what gonna happen with 2 of them???

a) microsoft can move somewhere else
b) microsoft can still keep most of their code..
c) microsoft can still send back and forth the code between two companies and still make IE part of the OS.
d) it reduces the functionality of the programs...
the only REAL solution is for microsoft to release the WHOLE source code to both the windows 9x based OS and the Windows NT based OS.

Thats my input

DaNi SarFatI

a) microsoft can move somewhere else
b) microsoft can still keep most of their code..
c) microsoft can still send back and forth the code between two companies and still make IE part of the OS.
d) it reduces the functionality of the programs...
the only REAL solution is for microsoft to release the WHOLE source code to both the windows 9x based OS and the Windows NT based OS.

Thats my input

DaNi SarFatI

Why do you want MS to have to release ALL of its OS source? Just because NO ONE ELSE makes anything as good? Heck, let's just get rid of the whole patent system while we are at it, and release to all other countries that "can't do it" the whole info on how to build nuclear weapons. Good grief, people, Windows OSes are property of MS, so it should STAY that way. Otherwise, let's have ALL operating systems give up EVERY detail about them, plus all other software. Then, as soon as one person/company makes something better, they have to turn THAT over to the world. Sounds like something Really Smart, right? That way no one can make any money on software, everything would be "open source".
Yeah right.

Good Plan - cracks, Key Gens etc would be a lot easier for people to write if all software was open source...
(I agree with you...) I think it's stupid asking a company to give away what they have been working at!

OK - so some of the programmers around here say 'yer open source man' - how would they feel about giving away their best program for people to modify just enough to be different?

You have to stop thinking within the box... IE is not the OS. IE is just like notepad. its a module within the OS. that only runs when you run it. (I.E. When you type in a URL in one of those nifty address bars located in many programs and press enter), other then that the main program is not running, some modules from IE are probably running waiting for you to access it, but the main IE is definitley not running.

What ever operating system is in most computers
it will be a monopoly.

Just sell computers with NO operating system
and NO internet browser.

and then you wont get it in the ass

Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and SHOULD BE BREAKUP
1- I Think the that they are being breakup into 1 Software Company and 1 hardware Company

2- Making Microsoft Windows a Open Source Is a good Idea
Because It has a Lot of error in the software like for Example The Blue Screen of Death and The Program Error Close the Program(Explorer.exe) or other Witch makes the opertaining System A Failer in Stable In FACT LINUX is more Stable then Windows could ever be!!
BUT Both Operating Systems Have their errors but only Linux is making progress in getting Error gone and Windows is DEAD in the WATER.

3- Linux Has made at lot of Progress with Operating software updates and Windows has Software updates only Ever what is like 3 or 4 Years!

4 - Linux does not eat memory like Windows does .Windows becomes unstable the more Memory in uses and then you get the BLue Screen of Death and if you Computer does not have a Reboot buttion then you have to turn it off in windows and then turn the computer back on then you get to yet it start Windows again
(Plus) Then You get a lot of error in Software and more unstable Programs that kill the program when it trys to run or in the program when it trys to load something and your hard Drive Because unstable and you Files get unstable and will not load windows and locks up on the windows desktop and when you run scandisk it can delete directory's or remove operating systems files if they are mark as bad or unsable and MY QUESTION TOO YOU IS DOES THESE THING HAPPEN IN LINUX OR IS IT JUST THE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM and its bad FORMAT FOR THE DRIVE?

Linux only has more problems because when you get stuff unstable on windows hard drive , Windows is a bad Virus for Linux in the hard drive if your hard drive is like mine then your spit the hard drive into 2 PArts 2 for Linux and One for Windows and Windows can cause damage to the Linux part , just with hard drive error.

5- Windows 98 is not even a REAL OPERATING SYSTEM BECAUSE it RUNS on TOP of THAT OLD DOS, Witch they only update my puting a pic on the startup with a new version on it , there was no improvements with windows 98 dos to the old 6.30 witch runs about the same

6 - Windows is so bad that its interfact sucks and only way to get windows other better interfacts for windows is to use some shareware need to pay software , and Linux comes with a bunch of freeware Interfacts in its X-Windows and can get more and update online and you can find newer ones for linux online witch are freeware

7- Windows is like a bad Shareware program and Linux is like a cool freeware software witch out does windows in ever way!!
Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

You do know this artical is about the Microsoft Breakup and not the wonders of Linux. I suggest you point your browser to www.linux.com. ;)

Having some software problems? =) You posted your message about 5 times. lol

Well, that was almost readable. Keep trying, maybe one of these days you'll learn that pesky grammer and spelling!

Sheesh, did they even stop the "short bus" for you to get out after school johnny l33t 'rediscool'? Or did they throw you out the window when they could see your house? This is a troll for sure, but I'll bite....

1: MS#1 as a hardware company and MS#2 as software? Is your bong USB or Serial? The best option would be to create at least two companies each with all of the products, they would have to compete with each other.

2: Yeah, thousands of software engineers with more years of coding experience than you have in acid trips obviously are clueless. Windows 9x is a 16 bit OS they hacked to even run 32bit apps, that in an of iteslf is a miracle. Linux is similar to Unix, which is what 40 years old now? Unix was 32 bit before there was even DOS. The problem is if you build your house (OS) on jello (DOS) in L.A. (M$) you are asking for trouble. If DOS was intended to be ported to anything other than a 386, windows would be much more stable (look at Win NT/Win 2k).

3: Eh? Yeah I agee Linux does get better when updated (?) -- and M$ doesn't I suppose? (whatever)

4: M$ is the only company in the universe that gets memory leaks. It's true... as for the rest of this section... hmmm, I don't think Windows 98 was built to run with a record player as a hard drive, or are you using your Commodore Vic 20 tape drive?

5: Yeah, and Linux is based on a 40 year old OS, ok? Point? Once Windows 98 is up it uses it's own drivers and reaches through DOS to get at the hardware (which is what made DOS unstable, but makes Windows 9x possible). I assure you that Windows 98's DOS is different than DOS 6, DOS 6 can't boot without a MSDOS.SYS file, but MSDOS.SYS is just another config file to Windows 9x.

6: Litestep, geoshell, window blinds, eFX, etc.. they are all free and work very well as shell replacements. Couple them with the cygwin libraries (you get a bash that runs like a DOS prompt), and you'd never know you weren't running *nix. And the themes are free too....

7: In this section we find out that rediscool is actually a spurned MSN user. I had a tear in my eye when I found out that Microsoft Network was a ISP that had no.. *sniff* linux config documentation.

(drivel about memory leaks ignored because as we all secretly know M$ is the only software company that gets memory leaks in their proqucts)

And of course Windows sucks because it does things he can't comprehend, yet Linux does not suck even though he can't:
-get the ELSA Synergy II 3D card to work.
-and get a home network to work (even though the purpose of *nix is networking).

If a moron like this can champion Linux, then anyone can run it. Ignorance in all forms pisses me off. I don't know what is worse, the grammar, the spelling (although no one is perfect but "interfacts", try "interface"), or the fact that _this_ person is making an attempt to convince the users of a basically MS-centric forum to use Linux. They obviously spent more time pressing "Submit Query" than they did proofreading.

Get your facts straight!!! Have you ever heard of WindowsUpdate? You get updates to Windows there, and not only every 3 or 4 years. If Linix is stable enough or good enough, it will be as popular as Windows. A reason Linix has so many updates is because there are too many bugs! I guess you are using Linix right now because it appears you don't have decent spelling correction software.

Sorry, Linix=Linux

(It appears that Linux is so unpopular most spell checking programs don't know how to spell it.)

Oh yes... MS is a monopoly...

There is only Linux, BeOS, QNX, Unix, MacOS, and AtheOS to compete with it (and a few others). That's only 6 OS's that are pretty well known... yeah tehy are a monopoly.

The reason that there is a short release cycle for linux (and other open-source projects) has nothing do with the amount of bugs in the software -- it's their development strategy. You may have heard the phrase "release early, release often". This is an open-source motto(I believe this came from a famous essay called "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"), and it facilitates their style of development very well. Another common open-source quote is "we'll release it when it's done". One of the advantages that open-source development has is that, for the most part, it's not bound by any deadlines set by a marketing department. This lends itself to more stable software. (The stability of Linux and other open-source software is another discussion).

For your info, the versioning system for most open-source products goes something like this: x.y.z, where x is the major version number, y is the minor version number, and z is the patchlevel. Also an odd y means that that series is "in development" and almost garaunteed to be buggy. So something like 2.2.1 will probably be more stable than 2.3.1.

Sorry this is a little off-topic, but I felt it needed to be addressed.

I don't know where you live, but where I live it doesn't rain Microsoft...

Try spelling... a lot of people like it.

Your correct subject line should read "The Evil REIGN OF WINDOWS IS OVER YES YES YES... NOW WHERE DID MY CRACK PIPE GO...?"

Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and SHOULD BE BREAKUP
1- I Think the that they are being breakup into 1 Software Company and 1 hardware Company

2- Making Microsoft Windows a Open Source Is a good Idea
Because It has a Lot of error in the software like for Example The Blue Screen of Death and The Program Error Close the Program(Explorer.exe) or other Witch makes the opertaining System A Failer in Stable In FACT LINUX is more Stable then Windows could ever be!!
BUT Both Operating Systems Have their errors but only Linux is making progress in getting Error gone and Windows is DEAD in the WATER.

3- Linux Has made at lot of Progress with Operating software updates and Windows has Software updates only Ever what is like 3 or 4 Years!

4 - Linux does not eat memory like Windows does .Windows becomes unstable the more Memory in uses and then you get the BLue Screen of Death and if you Computer does not have a Reboot buttion then you have to turn it off in windows and then turn the computer back on then you get to yet it start Windows again
(Plus) Then You get a lot of error in Software and more unstable Programs that kill the program when it trys to run or in the program when it trys to load something and your hard Drive Because unstable and you Files get unstable and will not load windows and locks up on the windows desktop and when you run scandisk it can delete directory's or remove operating systems files if they are mark as bad or unsable and MY QUESTION TOO YOU IS DOES THESE THING HAPPEN IN LINUX OR IS IT JUST THE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM and its bad FORMAT FOR THE DRIVE?

Linux only has more problems because when you get stuff unstable on windows hard drive , Windows is a bad Virus for Linux in the hard drive if your hard drive is like mine then your spit the hard drive into 2 PArts 2 for Linux and One for Windows and Windows can cause damage to the Linux part , just with hard drive error.

5- Windows 98 is not even a REAL OPERATING SYSTEM BECAUSE it RUNS on TOP of THAT OLD DOS, Witch they only update my puting a pic on the startup with a new version on it , there was no improvements with windows 98 dos to the old 6.30 witch runs about the same

6 - Windows is so bad that its interfact sucks and only way to get windows other better interfacts for windows is to use some shareware need to pay software , and Linux comes with a bunch of freeware Interfacts in its X-Windows and can get more and update online and you can find newer ones for linux online witch are freeware

7- Windows is like a bad Shareware program and Linux is like a cool freeware software witch out does windows in ever way!!
Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

ok, you're a moron.

Ha! Ha! Ha! You can't even spell "which" right!!! Try to stay in ESL class, (or maybe the mental institution.)

Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and SHOULD BE BREAKUP
1- I Think the that they are being breakup into 1 Software Company and 1 hardware Company

2- Making Microsoft Windows a Open Source Is a good Idea
Because It has a Lot of error in the software like for Example The Blue Screen of Death and The Program Error Close the Program(Explorer.exe) or other Witch makes the opertaining System A Failer in Stable In FACT LINUX is more Stable then Windows could ever be!!
BUT Both Operating Systems Have their errors but only Linux is making progress in getting Error gone and Windows is DEAD in the WATER.

3- Linux Has made at lot of Progress with Operating software updates and Windows has Software updates only Ever what is like 3 or 4 Years!

4 - Linux does not eat memory like Windows does .Windows becomes unstable the more Memory in uses and then you get the BLue Screen of Death and if you Computer does not have a Reboot buttion then you have to turn it off in windows and then turn the computer back on then you get to yet it start Windows again
(Plus) Then You get a lot of error in Software and more unstable Programs that kill the program when it trys to run or in the program when it trys to load something and your hard Drive Because unstable and you Files get unstable and will not load windows and locks up on the windows desktop and when you run scandisk it can delete directory's or remove operating systems files if they are mark as bad or unsable and MY QUESTION TOO YOU IS DOES THESE THING HAPPEN IN LINUX OR IS IT JUST THE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM and its bad FORMAT FOR THE DRIVE?

Linux only has more problems because when you get stuff unstable on windows hard drive , Windows is a bad Virus for Linux in the hard drive if your hard drive is like mine then your spit the hard drive into 2 PArts 2 for Linux and One for Windows and Windows can cause damage to the Linux part , just with hard drive error.

5- Windows 98 is not even a REAL OPERATING SYSTEM BECAUSE it RUNS on TOP of THAT OLD DOS, Witch they only update my puting a pic on the startup with a new version on it , there was no improvements with windows 98 dos to the old 6.30 witch runs about the same

6 - Windows is so bad that its interfact sucks and only way to get windows other better interfacts for windows is to use some shareware need to pay software , and Linux comes with a bunch of freeware Interfacts in its X-Windows and can get more and update online and you can find newer ones for linux online witch are freeware

7- Windows is like a bad Shareware program and Linux is like a cool freeware software witch out does windows in ever way!!
Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and SHOULD BE BREAKUP
1- I Think the that they are being breakup into 1 Software Company and 1 hardware Company

2- Making Microsoft Windows a Open Source Is a good Idea
Because It has a Lot of error in the software like for Example The Blue Screen of Death and The Program Error Close the Program(Explorer.exe) or other Witch makes the opertaining System A Failer in Stable In FACT LINUX is more Stable then Windows could ever be!!
BUT Both Operating Systems Have their errors but only Linux is making progress in getting Error gone and Windows is DEAD in the WATER.

3- Linux Has made at lot of Progress with Operating software updates and Windows has Software updates only Ever what is like 3 or 4 Years!

4 - Linux does not eat memory like Windows does .Windows becomes unstable the more Memory in uses and then you get the BLue Screen of Death and if you Computer does not have a Reboot buttion then you have to turn it off in windows and then turn the computer back on then you get to yet it start Windows again
(Plus) Then You get a lot of error in Software and more unstable Programs that kill the program when it trys to run or in the program when it trys to load something and your hard Drive Because unstable and you Files get unstable and will not load windows and locks up on the windows desktop and when you run scandisk it can delete directory's or remove operating systems files if they are mark as bad or unsable and MY QUESTION TOO YOU IS DOES THESE THING HAPPEN IN LINUX OR IS IT JUST THE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM and its bad FORMAT FOR THE DRIVE?

Linux only has more problems because when you get stuff unstable on windows hard drive , Windows is a bad Virus for Linux in the hard drive if your hard drive is like mine then your spit the hard drive into 2 PArts 2 for Linux and One for Windows and Windows can cause damage to the Linux part , just with hard drive error.

5- Windows 98 is not even a REAL OPERATING SYSTEM BECAUSE it RUNS on TOP of THAT OLD DOS, Witch they only update my puting a pic on the startup with a new version on it , there was no improvements with windows 98 dos to the old 6.30 witch runs about the same

6 - Windows is so bad that its interfact sucks and only way to get windows other better interfacts for windows is to use some shareware need to pay software , and Linux comes with a bunch of freeware Interfacts in its X-Windows and can get more and update online and you can find newer ones for linux online witch are freeware

7- Windows is like a bad Shareware program and Linux is like a cool freeware software witch out does windows in ever way!!
Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and SHOULD BE BREAKUP
1- I Think the that they are being breakup into 1 Software Company and 1 hardware Company

2- Making Microsoft Windows a Open Source Is a good Idea
Because It has a Lot of error in the software like for Example The Blue Screen of Death and The Program Error Close the Program(Explorer.exe) or other Witch makes the opertaining System A Failer in Stable In FACT LINUX is more Stable then Windows could ever be!!
BUT Both Operating Systems Have their errors but only Linux is making progress in getting Error gone and Windows is DEAD in the WATER.

3- Linux Has made at lot of Progress with Operating software updates and Windows has Software updates only Ever what is like 3 or 4 Years!

4 - Linux does not eat memory like Windows does .Windows becomes unstable the more Memory in uses and then you get the BLue Screen of Death and if you Computer does not have a Reboot buttion then you have to turn it off in windows and then turn the computer back on then you get to yet it start Windows again
(Plus) Then You get a lot of error in Software and more unstable Programs that kill the program when it trys to run or in the program when it trys to load something and your hard Drive Because unstable and you Files get unstable and will not load windows and locks up on the windows desktop and when you run scandisk it can delete directory's or remove operating systems files if they are mark as bad or unsable and MY QUESTION TOO YOU IS DOES THESE THING HAPPEN IN LINUX OR IS IT JUST THE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM and its bad FORMAT FOR THE DRIVE?

Linux only has more problems because when you get stuff unstable on windows hard drive , Windows is a bad Virus for Linux in the hard drive if your hard drive is like mine then your spit the hard drive into 2 PArts 2 for Linux and One for Windows and Windows can cause damage to the Linux part , just with hard drive error.

5- Windows 98 is not even a REAL OPERATING SYSTEM BECAUSE it RUNS on TOP of THAT OLD DOS, Witch they only update my puting a pic on the startup with a new version on it , there was no improvements with windows 98 dos to the old 6.30 witch runs about the same

6 - Windows is so bad that its interfact sucks and only way to get windows other better interfacts for windows is to use some shareware need to pay software , and Linux comes with a bunch of freeware Interfacts in its X-Windows and can get more and update online and you can find newer ones for linux online witch are freeware

7- Windows is like a bad Shareware program and Linux is like a cool freeware software witch out does windows in ever way!!
Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

First of all, lets look at the big picture. Microsoft breaks into 2 different companies...one for the OS, and one for software. Now, different companies pay to have their software included with Windows. Just look at a Compaq or a Hewlett Packard and look at all the pre-installed software. Who's to say that MS "OS" woun't sill put their sister company MS "Software" into the OS. Nothing will change. Oh and the whole intrigation of IE into the kernel. Well, simple go to internet options and click the button "Browse in Seperate Process". Ta Da. IE runs seperately from the kernel. So what if the Windows Explorer can browse the PC you are on or just type an internet address and it becomes a browser. I think thats genious. If Netscape wants to b****, well, have them code an OS with Netscape intrigated. Quit crying.
Now, for you idiots who think Linux will take over, think again. The reason MS became so popular and "addicting" is ease-of-use. Plain and simple. Linux will never take over until they close the source. See, don't get me wrong, I love to use Linux, but it just doesn't have the support yet for it. I mean, you have to basicaly re-compile the source every time you add a driver for your hardware. You think 8 yr old Jimmy will know how to do that?? No. Its hard enough to get Mac support for hardware, let alone an open source OS. All OSs do the exact same thing with a different interface. MS are genious for having the ability to write a kernel that is so user friendly to use. It is amazing. Now, the monopoly is ruled because of IE, not the os, so quit b****ing about that. Now that AOL aquired Netscape, we will probably see AOL with an intrigated Navigator browser. So every shmuck who uses AOL will be forced to use Netscape. Therefore, Netscape isn't losing money, as long as they are with AOL. So who will actually triumph over this?? And what does opening up the source of windows have to do with anything? And for you Linux buffs out there who say that Linux is more stable than Linux, well, yes and no. Yes it is more stable than the Win9x kernel. No it just as stable as the new NT/2000 kernel. MS did a wonderful job of cleaning up the NT os and its ability to save memory as well as it does a great job of recompiling itself after a crash, which does not happen often. the only reason Linux is so stable is because there is no software to run on it. The more software that becomes available for Linux the more bugs they will have to deal with. Thats how all software works. I think I have went on enough, and I believe my point was made.

if the government is supposed to be based on the people in it and most would disagree with the breakup if you told them about the issue's with developers this would cause such as highercost, longer development time and so on.... so the people say no the gov't say yes ... does that make sence to you ? i hope they move to canada personally

The whole world is mad at Microsoft. Why because they are the only company to come up with inexpensive, user-friendly (if your not a lamer) software. Because no one else knows how to twist code like they? All software code still is based on one original idea. So everyone is guilty of stealing code. It's not that everyone is mad cause they stole it. They are mad cause they perfected it. Out of all the software available it seems still that they are all the same, do the same thing, and have different GUI's. Ever played the same game for like 10 years straight. If you think not, then think again. wolfenstein 3d = Doom = duke nukem = Quake = Quake 3 etc...... IT's STILL THE SAME GAME. So all you people who think that Microsoft is getting what they deserve. Well you just made them more powerfull. I work for a monopoloy inforced company. We are more powerfull now than we were when we were forced to split. People say history repeats itself. Damn that's the only real statement anyone can make.. Remember AT&T before they went long distance? Know who SBC is? Mr Bell my hat's off to you....................And Mr Gates I thank. For making Microsoft what it is today. If not for you many of us would not have jobs. If not for you I doubt there would be a home computer. To everyone else Be mad at who you should be mad at YOURSELF......For not working as hard as Microsoft.

If the appeals court doesnt over turn this decision I promise right when I get out of collage im leaving this god dam country. This is complete bull and im tired of the us government controling the american business man.

I hate the fact that our govt is regulating the tech industry but one fact is clear: as a software developer, I am basically prohibited from creating a new, competing operating system because of Microsoft.

No investor would invest money in an effort to create a competing OS because for it to be successful, you need to have an basic office suite of products and since Window and Office are already out there, no one would invest in me to create something that would compete.

That argument does NOT mean that Windows and Office are the best they can be. There's no proof that I, or anyone else, could NOT create a BETTER product than Windows and Office but you'll never know. I honestly believe that a better OS and office suite is yet to be written, but because of this fundamental belief of the investors, we would have to WAIT for Microsoft to write it. How many version of Windows have we gone through? How many more until they get it "right"? How many other software applications would you put up with if you had to wait until the 4th or 5th version before it became even semi-stable?

I think the focus of this whole issue has been lost for sometime. I thouht MS was being investigated for using unfair business tactics in the marketplace by using the power of their "empire" in the industry. That said, it limits a lot of other potential development houses from creating anything new and innovative. I know, we started developing a product several years back, then MS started doing something similar. All funding stopped on our version simply because the investors believed you could not compete with Microsoft. Is it MS's fault the invetors won't invest? On the surface, you'd say no. But look at their practice, they put out so many products for free which other people try to make a living off of. IE is the perfect example. When asked, they then say its part of the OS. How long until Office becomes part of the OS knocking Corel and Lotus completely off the map?

I don't know if there's a bottom line all this ranting is leading to, but breaking up the company is probably not the best solution. I don't know what is, if I did, or anyone of us, then WE'D be the judge in this case.

MS wants to fight over APIs. Ever think that maybe its just a ploy to confuse the real issues such as unfair business practices? Do you think AT&T couldn't afford to GIVE away long distance or at least totally undercut all the other guys? I THINK that's why govt stepped in and said they couldn't. MS is giving almost everything away which makes it DAMN hard for other people to make a living, even if their products are better. No one argues with FREE.

Snipit:

no one would invest in me to create something that would compete.

Hmm..I wonder what this could be? =) http://www.sun.com/staroffice

No company has a 'right' to stay in business. There is no such law that says "if you produce a better product than a competitor, and that competitor goes out of business, then you have broken the law."

By the way, Corel Office is a standard part of the high-end Corel Linux distribution. So it's perfectly okay for Corel to include an office suite with their OS, but god forbid MS to ever do the same thing?

Think about it.

OK, think of it this way. If everyone and their mother (assuming their mother was also a software engineer) wrote an operating system, what do you think the computing industry would be like right now? There would be millions of different OSes to choose from, all of which would, no doubt, be inherently incompatible with each other. Each one would probably have about 5 people that love it, and everyone else on the planet wouldn't know how to pronounce the name correctly. And, along with that, most of those OSes would SUCK!!! It would be a milestone when they support 100 whole different pieces of hardware, not to mention, when they actually have software to run on them (and don't give me that s***e about open-source, and compile-your-own. Nobody who uses a computer for anything more than a hobby/obsession is interested in compiling software).
Because of the incompatibilities, and therefore, the difficulty involved in using a computer, who the hell would want to. I'll tell you who. The die-hard nerds who never leave the wiring closet, and get laid less than we do, if at all. Not offices. Not schools. Not the government (which could actually be a selling point for your idea...).

The computing industy would be *nothing* in a situation like that, and this country, and probably even this PLANET would still be lusting after the light-up buttons in the original Star Trek.

Microsoft may have done some underhanded things, but their OS is the popular for a reason. People use it, people like it, people can learn it, there's software for it, and it supports an immencely (sp?) wide array of hardware.

If you want to write an OS, fine. There should be nothing stopping you from doing that if you want to, but make it worthwhile. If it doesn't bring anything new (AND USEFUL TO A WIDE ARRAY OF PEOPLE) to the table, then why bother. You'd just be adding to the piles and piles of essentially worthless software already floating around out there.

You DON'T KNOW what the computing industry would be like BECAUSE of what MS has done. Here's a line for ya, people don't drink that sand because they want to, they drink it cause they don't know the difference!

Give them a choice and see who wins. We wouldn't have 100 different OSes, we'd have a choice of several good ones.

Windows for all its faults has one thing that has really hampered it and kept it from being the "Great OS" that everyone thinks it is, that IS the wide array of hardware it "supports" and I use that term REAL loosely. I remember a joke about "If Microsoft made cars, you'd be driving down the highway and the engine would die. You'd have to pull over, roll down all the windows, roll them back up and start the car again. And everyone would think this was normal." -Yea, great support.

I've seen 7MHz Amigas outperform Windows at many functions and run rock stable. Windows is flawed by the 3rd party drivers everyone writes. Creative Labs can make great sound cards, but can they write drivers? Just like the 100's of other sound card, NIC, modem, video card manufacturers. The Amiga was stable because it ran on a set platform. If Windows could do that, it would also be just as stable I imagine.

If a company competing against MS goes out of business, then MS hasn't broken the law. How about if that company's sole source of revenues is based on a superior product, but MS offers a "similar" but not as good product for free. Again, can't argue with free. Now, is that against the law? Judge Jackson seems to think so.

This doesn't apply to everything, just a few points. Namely the browser wars. Up to version 4, Netscape was kicking MS's butt and MS saw that the world was going to the internet desktop and saw Netscape possibly ousting them as the internet desktop of choice. A direct threat, so MS gives away their browser to hurt Netscape. I'd say, up until Netscape starting talking about their own internet OS, they were pretty safe, BUT, leak out the fact that you're working on a competing OS and MS is right there trying to keep you down or knock you out.

Corel offering their Office Suite with Corel Linux is wrong? Hmm, worked for MS. Or did it?

"... they drink it because they don't know the difference ..."
I don't think it's that people don't know the difference, it's that they could care less. All people care about is "does it work? No? Then screw it. get rid of it, I don't want to hear about it."
People think that if there was something better, the IT department would have installed it.

I agree with your statement that the major problem for Windows is the crappy device drivers that other people write, but I would hardly say that the fact that Windows supports a wide variety of hardware is a shortcoming. It's not Microsoft's fault that device manufacturers have no idea how to write a driver that won't blue screen.

And no, there's nothing wrong with Corel including it's Office distro with Linux... just let everyone else, including MS do it too, if they want to.

The hardware manufacturers would make better drivers for windows if Microsoft opened up the API and the DLL interfaces that the hardware drivers had to access, instead of getting handed a bunch of routines that are "supposed" to work and interface properly with the cards... but they dont and the programmers who write the drivers have to make hit and miss decisions on whether the code they are writing will be compatible with windows...

Then to get MS approval for the drivers, they have to submit the code to MS to get it certified that it is Windows compatible... and then WOW.. Microsoft releases a OS update that have Microsoft drivers for the hardware concerned... Geez.. I wonder where they got that code from...

That makes to sense whatsoever. How does MS profit from that? It doesn't. There's no money in it for MS, because MS doesn't make the hardware. And what if they did use that code? It just means that CardX is supported out of the box, which makes things easier on consumers.
I don't think that either of us are experts on Windows Drivers, the DDK, or the legal agreements between MS and the Driver creators, so there's little point in discussing this further.

The thing is.... Office SHOULD BE integrated into the OS...
My idea of a perfect OS is one that will allow you to do all tasks with ease, and speed. Adding Office would eliminate 1.5 of those requirements (the .5 is because Windows can be annoying sometimes, in it's current state), and speed isn't bad at all in Windows, although, I wish it were faster.

IE has always been free.
Heck, look inside an installation of Win95 Gold, and you find IE 2.
They've always been free, and have always been shipped with the OS since Windows95.

This "Judge" has been overturned TWICE before while giving his biased rulings against MS. So, I am looking for it to happen again. Plus, why on earth is he going to FORCE MS to open the OS? Just because noone else can make their OS as good? Damn people! It is just like Me making something better than anyone else, but since my "competitors" Can't, or Won't, make something just as good, they can take me to court and make me give up my secrets, my rights to my own stuff?
Only MS competitors pushed for this mess, because they can't put out as good. NO CONSUMER was talked to about any of this, so it is a fraudulant ruling against MS, in my opinion.
And no, I am not a "Microsoft stooge". I just can't stand the whiney babies that cry "I can't do it, yours is better than mine, and I DON'T LIKE IT"!! Get over it, and try to make yours better!!

Is it because of the Internet explorer bundeling? If so let me compair this to, say, tv's and remote controls.

The Universal remote control guys should sue all the tv and vcr makers for bundeling remote controls with there product. do you have any idea how much money they are not making because tv's and vcr's come with remotes???!!!!! they should stop this! why go out and buy a universal if you already have a working remote?!

im open to comments :)

A "Universal" Remote is one that usually controls the TV, VCR, DVD, et al. You get a universal remote so you can use one remote for all those devices. That's a big difference than MS including IE in the OS. You don't have to use the remote they give you, in fact you can leave it packed in the box if you want. MS forces you to use IE, unless you completely avoid using My Computer and Explorer. You can't leave IE in the box.

Besides, TV and VCR companies bundled remotes with their devices long before Universal remotes existed. And in a matter of theory Universal remote companies have stolen the signals required for a remote to run a certain device. But again, your remote theory doesn't hold water.

Acutally My Computer and Explorer were around way before the IE integration into the system, and useing them would not constitute the use of the web browser. while you *Can* access the web browser from them, they are wholly independent modules in the windows OS. so if you wanted you could avoid the web browser *module* of the OS. just like you could avoid useing the Notepad *Module*

I guess what kind of gets to me is that pertty much every other operating system (MacOS, OS/2 Warp, Linux, etc) comes with a web browser. Granted, it's not integrated into the OS like IE and Windows are, but it still comes with the OS. Corel Linux commonly comes with Corel Office... uh... hello? Isn't that "bundling" software? Or is it ok because you're nowhere near as successful as MS, and deserve an unfair advantage (which could be restated to say that MS has been give an unfair DISadvantage)

To start off, most opponents of Microsoft stand by a conviction that the power (power derived from consumer support, not monopoly) of MS stifles competition and consumer choices. That's all fine and dandy if you carry that belief with you 100% and not just use it when it suits you.

All these anti-MS people don't realize that what you falsely argue of Microsoft and its practices is what the government has done in turn. What has happened here is that the government has made a precedent for controlling how software is developed. The US government now has the jurisdiction to determine the course of development for computer software.

I hope for all the anti-MS people out there who are led by some hatred of the company for some unknown reason, doesn't let this sentiment blind you. Be against Microsoft all you want, but please don't whine to us AGAIN when the government exacts it's precedent upon a company you favor.

Don't just think of this case in the commercial sense (the break-up of MS) but of the judicial sense (the new found jurisdiction of the government in computing) as well. Know the consequences of what will be the resultant factor if a higher court agrees with Jackson, and be hopeful that it doesn't.

But for all you Pro-MS people out there...

ask yourselves this...

do you like having a single company tell you how much you are going to pay for your software or what software you are able to use with your operating system...

Would you rather have the choice of other operating systems that do the job you want to do reliably and quickly without needing to get updates and addon's to the operating system...

Yes I prefer other operating systems, but I use MS products for work and for playing games... but for connecting to the internet, I use Linux, for doing graphics work, I prefer to either use BeOS or my Mac...

I would prefer to use Os/2 for it's reliability rather than using Windows which is notoriously unreliable and loaded with bugs...

And the US government isn't setting itself up to govern the software development industry... it is preventing a bloated monopolistic company from continuing to dictate to the world what software it is going to use...

Consider the options if Microsoft isnt broken up to promote competition in the OS industry... what would happen if Microsoft decided to release Whistler or ME in a crippled version where you had to pay for it's use by the month or it locked you out and you couldnt use it... or if you couldnt load and run your latest and greatest 3d game on your computer because it is made by a company that isnt associated with Microsoft... what sort of world would that be... can you honestly answer that it would be a good world?

Snipit:

do you like having a single company tell you how much you are going to pay for your software or what software you are able to use with your operating system...

Hey, lets sue car companies! I'm tired of them telling me how much I have to pay. Grrr! Anyways, there's tons and I mean tons of free and/or cheap shareware/freeware/demos avaliable on the windows platform. If you don't want to pay for something, there's usually another similiar prog that's free.

"do you like having a single company tell you how much you are going to pay for your software"

Uh, that makes no sense at all. Since when does the consumer have a say in the price of software? I've never heard of any company with a "you haggle the price!" philosophy.

"or what software you are able to use with your operating system..."

What does this have to do with the topic? MS is certainly not deciding for me what software I run on my PC.

"Would you rather have the choice of other operating systems that do the job you want to do reliably and quickly without needing to get updates and addon's to the operating system..."

More nonsense... All OSes have updates and add-ons. In fact, Windows does far more than OSes like BeOS do out of the box, so I'd have to say "yes", I do want the OS that does the job reliably and quickly.

"I would prefer to use Os/2 for it's reliability rather than using Windows which is notoriously unreliable and loaded with bugs..."

Notoriously unreliable compared to what? All OSes have a long history of bugs, including OS/2, Linux. Bugs are a part of all software -- it doesn't matter who makes it.

"And the US government isn't setting itself up to govern the software development industry... it is preventing a bloated monopolistic company from continuing to dictate to the world what software it is going to use..."

Dictate? Where do you come up with this stuff? If MS dictated that people only run its software, then there would be no Linux. No BeOS. No BSD...

Okay, I've read enough. I think I've made my point.

I'm laughing because I agree with both pluralsingularity and dramoth right now.

The DOJ is way wrong on this one, their nose does not belong up M$'s butt. Would it be _ANY_ different if Sun, IBM or AOL (that day is coming) were running things? Pluralsingularity is right, now the governemnt has established that lawyers and judges know more than programmers and other computer industry members. What next? The Linux advocates will not be laughing when the gunsights of the DOJ are upon Red Hat someday.

And I agree with dramoth, M$ _has_not_ acted in OUR best interest, but in THEIRS. I, as a MCSE on a NT network, benefit from M$'s ambition. But anyone run Novell out there? How about Banyan Vines? Life is not so good for them.

But most important of all, M$ will stop selling copies of it's OS. When you buy a PC in the future it will be pre-installed and you won't get a CD (and therefore not be able to pirate the OS), you will have a "restoral" CD that is machine specific, and if you upgrade hardware you are SOL. Scared yet? You should be, cause it's not just M$, ADOBE, Autodesk and others have the same idea. According to
them someday you will have music that will play in just one walkman and software that can only run on one machine... *shudder*

In stark contrast is FreeBSD and OpenBSD (the are not linux compdoc). You download 2 floppy images (only one for OpenBSD) and you install the OS from FTP over the internet. If you want to install an application, go to the /usr/ports/ directory, choose the dir for the app you want and type "make install". It downloads the latest source code and compiles and installs it. This is the future (unless you like to hack at "restoral" CDs or hidden "restoral" partitions). Besides ABIword does everything I need Word to do, and GNUMERIC is almost Excell, GIMP is better than Photoshop, why buy?

Finally, Linux not ready for the desktop? It is as close as Windows 3.11 was, but KDE and GNOME are like Windows95 and will behave better. Don't believe me? Just try Corel linux, the install is *MUCH* smoother than a Win 9x install (even faster) and when the machine boots back up you can even do file/printer sharing with Windows machines. The next KDE will be even better.

I hate long posts....

"Snipit:

do you like having a single company tell you how much you are going to pay for your software or what software you are able to use with your operating system...

Hey, lets sue car companies! I'm tired of them telling me how much I have to pay. Grrr! Anyways, there's tons and I mean tons of free and/or cheap shareware/freeware/demos avaliable on the windows platform. If you don't want to pay for something, there's usually another similiar prog that's free."

You obviously missed the point of that post - Yes there are other products avable on the net, but the idea is if MS diddent make it, it will not work on the windows platforms.

First, for the record, I still believe the judge made the right decission; MS needs to realize it cannot operate above the law. The breakup is something else; I doubt it will have a positive effect...

The whole problem is your legal system which is based on precedents. I live in Europe. As far as I know (I'm no lawyer), our legal system does not use precedents. The law is the law and if some judge has to make a "bad" ruling because of some faults in the law, the law is changed so this will not happen in the future.
In the USA, if some lawyer can find some ruling that is usefull to him, even if it's a bad ruling, it stands in court.

In short, imho the ruling is correct, MS needs to realize it has to be fair to it's competitors but the goverment has no right to interfere with the way software is created.

Change your legal system!!

I would like to point out the outrageous spelling errors by the LinSux fanatics here. No wonder it is so unstable with these morons coding it, if thats what you want to call it..........

Ooops... sounds like someone has taken away your prozac... not all linux supporters are morons, and I would like to see your qualifications on that regard. I use both operating systems and I find that linux is a lot more stable that anything that Microsoft has ever managed to produce.

Considering that a lot of the ISP's around the world use linux or some other *nix based operating system as their main operating systems and have uptimes measured in years and not weeks or months...

As for Microsoft being the good guy here, **** that... they tell all the hardware manufacturers how to write the drivers for the specific pieces of hardware going into a computer and if the hardware vendors try and write drivers for other operating systems, Microsoft penalises them by writing the drivers themselves and dropping support for external drivers for things like my Riva TNT2 video card... I went to install the drivers and got this nice warning message saying "you are about to install a third party driver that might cause windows to crash. do you want to continue?" ****, if the guys who make the card cant write drivers that work with Windows... why should I trust Microsoft who says that my card is a generic VGA video card and tries to set it to run in 640*480 * 256 colors... that might be ok for the average gumby.. but I am a IT professional and I want the best possible performance out of my system...

If that sort of attitude isn't a monopoly... then I am the president of the United States... which is obviously a lie and so is Microsofts comments saying that this will hurt the consumer... Since when has competition ever hurt anyone or anything... if anything competition is more beneficial to the consumer because it drives down prices (why should anyone have to pay over $400.00 for a copy of a bug ridden operating system) and gives a wider range of options to choose from...

Why does everyone use Microsoft, because Microsoft has ruthlessly ridden the opposition who tries to break into the market into the ground using their operating monopoly and their superior marketing division... unfortunately for them... Linux is free... you know... nothing... and it is a superior product... why... because some of the worlds best software engineers are working on it... because it is a stable operating system

and the best thing of all about it... it is rapidly heading towards the desktop to provide a good cheap reliable alternative to the monolith that windows has become...

If you can't handle the law being enforced against someone who has blatently broken it... go out, buy yourself some rope and hang yourself... because if someone commits a crime against you and is given a slap on the wrist... you would be screaming like a raped virgin on the injustice of it all... wouldnt you...

and as for suggesting that the Judge is biased against Microsoft... after all the lies and bulls*** that Microsoft has tried to pass off as truth.. who the **** wouldnt be... and as for suggesting that he was paid off... try saying that in a newspaper and see how long it is before a suite for slander is slapped on you

Anyone who thinks that Microsoft is good... needs to see a shrink... get a life you morons

Bud, get a life, drink decaf, and settle down. Since Microsoft so obviously HURT you, I guess the entire case was based on you, right? Especially since it was found the MS "hurt the consumer" in vague and uncertain ways.

dont drink any caffeine based substances there mate...

As I have said... I do use MS products... but I do like to have a choice... it is your choice to support MS... it is my choice to either bag them or support them... I choose not to support them...

MS has done a lot of good for the end users, but when they start taking open source protocols or middleware and start to make them proprietary, if it makes it incompatible with other products that use that protocol or middleware... doesnt that sort of mean that they are trying to kill the product that now doesnt work with their proprietary protocols or middleware???

makes me kind of confused as to whether this is a good or bad thing... I think that morally, this is a bad thing, because it means that companies that are running different operating systems have to drop one so that they have to exclusively use the one that works with everything else... or they have to drop the one that works with everything else and exclusively use Windows... thats a monopoly at work.... and if I remember the anti-trust laws correctly, it is against the law...

ummm... That has to do with digital signitures.... It's to prevent fake drivers being written and destroying your computer.
It just means that MS hasn't reviewed it yet and said that it won't screw up anything.

YEs, The Evil MICROSOFT HAS FinAL Failed in Taking Over The World or
The Operating Systems
Freedom To Linux and Open Source code STuff for Computer , NO MORE WILL MICRSOFT BE OVER THEIR HEADS!!
Yes, Long Live Linux!!!
I am so happy about This
Linux Operating System will be able to put DOs or Windows in it with the Source Code ,
Long LIve Linux
Windows is NO MORE !!!YES YES YES

Duh, BRAKE is spelled BREAK. Moron LinSux fanatic........

Yes, Linux can know really take over ,
I think it is a good idea for Microsoft to be broke in'up
and I like that Windows Open Source code idea , Linux will be able to put the program code in it and make the drivers for Linux hardware better and make 56 modems(Windows only(type)) maby work in Linux
and put MSN stuff Source code in Linux too so people that use MSN Connect to go online will be able to do it with Linux too , I think for Unreal 2 , or UT , Quake 3 games there run better in Linux and There is just something I like about linux more , maybe its because it does not have the Program cause a errror CLose only Option or the BLue Screen of Death , Or the fact that Linux is not a PIG like Windows with Memory , The Fact is that Linux is also better then Windows beacuse In does not Eat as Much Memory runing Programs , Locks up less , Plus when Linux runs a program and exits it It gives some memory back to the system , the other Windows 98 , 95 , NT , (NT5 {Windows 2000}) when it runs a program and exits it does not give memory back to the system at all plus , just running Windows eats up at lot of Memory , I only reason I have not REMOVE Windows 98 From my System is the FACT that I can not get MSN ONLINE IN LINUX and I can not get the UNReal Turnament or Quake 3 or Quake to work with my ELSA Synergy II 3D Card in Linux plus getting a HOme Network Setup in Linux is not easy to do right know , But with linux on going Progress I sure its just a matter of Time before These things will not be a problem , I had no problem making Linux use my old Blaster Voodoo 2 card with quake but I remove The Voodoo 2 card from my computer when I put the ELSA card in , and The Voodoo 2 card is in my dads computer . Also I would like about there being a Source Compater NEtwork between Windows 98 and Linux because my dads does not want to put Linux on his computer but If I could play Unreal UT from Linux in my computer throuth a home Network to my dads computer runing Unreal UT in Windows 98 that would be cool , That Is one reason why I think that a Open Source Windows would be a good idea , plus ,I am sure that Windows will have less error If more of the Linux and other people make Windows better Because It could be a lot better than it is the only thing that stands in their Way of Progress is !MICROSOFT!

Maybe the judge got one too many BSOD's... :)

It looks like a lot of you are trying to blame the judge for this. What you have to keep in mind is that 17 of the 19 states and the DOJ urged him to do this. So even if he is bias (which can be debated), this is not as arbitrary as many of you are making it out to be.

17 of 19 states. but how many states are there in the us ?
my point has been made

the states are representatives of the companies that pleaded with them to petition for the prosecution of Microsoft. Although those companies actually didn't want a break-up, if MS chooses to break-up into 2 instead of appealing, these companies will surely kick themselves.

Huh? 17 of 19 states??? LOL I know my state (WV) is a part of the case but our attorney general is the biggest dumba** in the world who knows nothing about technology (I called and asked for his email address to verify this--of course, they said he didn't have one!). He's just looking to get our state a little money to help with other problems. He doesn't care if Microsoft is a monopoly or not. I'm sure plenty of the other states are doing the same thing. Besides, only a minority of states jumped in on this case, which tells us the majority don't believe it is a worthy cause.

Come on people,

I think most of you are judging thing way way to fast. This is a very very complex matter, you can't just after reading a few bits here and there say; "the judge is one sided" or "Microsoft is not doing anything wrong".

Fact were presented for months, lawyers did their stuff for days and days. There must have been lots of politic going on from both side.

Anyone entitle to an opinion, but no one should argue that he/she has the truth...

Don't make this into what it is not.

The real truth is that Windows IS a monopoly. Over 90% of the world's computers would turn into paper weights without it. MS dictates to all the hardware and software developers of the world, and they are powerless to argue with MS. Windows is a monopoly as certainly as your electric and water services. They have you by the balls, because there are no VIABLE alternatives to Windows. Sure, there are a few geeks like us that use Linux, but geeks like us are a tiny minority of computer users. Grandma and Uncle Ned don't want to fiddle with Linux or other works-in-progress. They want their scanners, cameras, TV cards, 3D games, fancy keyboards, and cheap sound cards to work INSTANTLY. They want a HUGE VARIETY of CHEAP but very good software to do every little chore imaginable. They want to use what their friends and family use, so they can learn together, help, and be helped with popular hardware and software. Windows is a monopoly for sure, but I'm not so sure this breakup is good for the average user. Time will tell...

Over 90% of the world's computers would turn into paper weights without it.

So your blaming Microsoft because some people don't know how to install an alternate OS such as Linux on their computers? It's hard for people to blame themselves...but hey, it's the easy way out.

the judge in this case has personally stated that he is an opponent of Microsoft before the proceedings began.

Personal prejudices are not a concern regarding the prosecution, defense or the judge. Although I think full objectivity needs to be implemented into the court system.

Maybe the people are, maybe they aren't capable of learning to install Linux on their machines. That's not the point. They don't WANT to use Linux. Linux doesn't run the software they have been collecting since 1994, and are familiar with. They don't WANT to throw away 6 years of learning Windows for a half-done OS that doesn't support their hardware and software. MS has the people addicted to Windows, plain and simple. MS knows it, and can manipulate things and capitalize on that addiction in an unfair way. Some day, this will not be the case, as Linux and perhaps Be OS will more usable and mainstream. But right now, Windows has no competition save for Linux used by a few of us.

Maybe Microsoft outta add a health warning label on each box saying it'll cause serious addiction issues? lolol

By the very definition of the word, MS is NOT a monopoly. A "monopoly" is when one company has exclusive control over a particular market. If MS were a monopoly, there would not be a Linux or any other x86 OSes.

And you have made it clear yourself why Linux isn't a true competitor to Windows -- it is a "work-in-progress". Whose fault is that? The Linux community's, and no one else's.

"They don't WANT to use Linux. Linux doesn't run the software they have been collecting since 1994, and are familiar with. They don't WANT to throw away 6 years of learning Windows for a half-done OS that doesn't support their hardware and software"

VERY compelling arguement as to why Microsoft has a "monopoly". Thanks!

Microsoft can almost join the ranks of US Steel, Standard Oil, and AT&T.

Well, today, Judge Jackson made it ever so evident that there is some behind-the-doors stuff going on here.
Lets take a look at the plan. Break MS up and basically rip them to shreds before the action can be taken place, possibly during the appeals process. Although, IMHO, Microsoft will win on appeal, lets consider what might happen before then.
Since Windows is basically driven into the ground and can't do anything, MS isn't going to release Millennium or any new software during this time because basically the source (or the APIs) will have to be revealed... giving Netscape, Sun, whomever to release new, better versions of their software with not having to worry about MS match or exceeding what they put in. And, this could last for 2 or 3 years. So, lets say MS wins on appeal in 2 years, but they haven't released anything. Where are they now? The computer industry just doesn't sit around and wait, it'll be 100 miles down the road and MS will be left in the dust, with shareholders frustrated and gone. Then, Bill Gates will need a miracle to regain what they had lost.

Now, who here thinks that the plan structured by the DOJ and issued by the Judge resembles somethign that would come fromt he dreamland of Larry Ellison or Steve Case? I'm sure the employees of Oracle, AOL, Sun, etc, etc, etc are partying right now. This is EXACTLY how they want this to work? I personally think that there has been some illegal activity in this. Perhaps the DOJ needs to be investigated and our federal court system needs to be checked over?

Just think about it!
Gazateer

UGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH THIS IS PISSING THE HELL OUT OF ME. GOD OUR GOVERNMENT SUCKS SO BAD RIGHT NOW! How can anyone justify breaking up Microsoft.. The only reason it is in this case is because it was pushed by companies that want them broken up so they can't defend themselves when they take over their terrotory. This is really a war and the Federal government is the pawn with some massive weapons. They have the power to pick and choose who will be able to suceed in the future.. When the people should CHOOSE DAMMIT. We are a Democratic Republic... not a Communist country. I swear does no one see what this Administration is trying to do. It's exactly what every form of Dictator or Dictatorish group has tried to do. They try to find a common enemy to blame everything on. In America, first it was Big Tobacco. Now it's Microsoft. When will Americans stand up in one voice and say SHUT THE HELL F*CKIN UP.
Oh and you people that think this Judge is Bias... of course he is he's a Federal Judge.. He serve's the Federal government.

Why does our government suck right now? Governments always have too much power, whether communist, dictatorship, or a even a democracy.
Besides, this isn't the first time our government has used the Sherman Act to break up companies like Microsoft so why should this case be any special?

whatever happened to being judged by a jury of our PEERS. Is this case wouldn't MS peers be the users ? SO WHAT if IE is coded into the OS. If you want to use something as screwed up as Netscape then thats your choice, no one is going to stop you from screwing up your machine. Why was this judge even allowed to sit in judgement on this case? Its obvious that he is prejudical AGAINST MS, he should have had the balls to excuse himself from this at the beginning. Does this judge even know how to use a computer or is he still sucking on the eraser of a #2 pencil in between the court sessions ? Being judged by PEERS means exactly that, being judged by the people who use and depend on the software EVERY single day, not to balance our checkbook with or play the latest game thats out but for our LIVELY-hood. This is not a game, this is for real. Pencil sucking desk-jockey's should not have the rights to sit in judgement and put MY job in danger just because they can't understand how a company can make something that no one can match.

So Microsoft are going to appeal... how longs that going to take? Couple of years if they play their cards right. Add on to that the year the judge gave them to prepare - we're not going to see any changes for a good few years yet!

As for if it's a good thing for innovation - well, only time will tell!

Mr.Gates
Canada is waiting...COME ON DOWN
We will gladly take the JOBS that are going to be lost to the people in the U.S. Hell from what iv'e been reading in Canadian news papers the Govenment is willing to give you a MAJOR tax breaks...Hmmm wounder what would happen if a couple of billion dollars was taken out of the U.S (maybe are dollar would get stonger)Don't get me wrong I love the people in the United States (love the pride in your country you have)well thats my 2 cents,In U.S. that only worth a quarter of a cent....but hey that may all CHANGE when your government loses all the tax dollars Microsoft people paid to them that USED to work at Microsoft :)

It's not like that. All Microsoft has to do is buy an ace of land in Canada and build a little shack and call it headquarters of the whole company. Then, the US has no jurisdiction over them at all, and they can still have their "branch" office in Seattle.

ha ha ha
maybe microsoft should fire their lawyers and hire you?!

Ya move to Canada, its the greatest, just get a shack and call it Headquarters, and your set. Its that easy.

Move to Australia

:D
:D

... then you'd be worth almost twice as much

Right... it's all that easy... and the US Government has no control over companies that SELL products in the US? It's not really that easy at all...

Is this a good move on the part of the United States? Will this really stimulate more competition in the computing industry or will this only hurt the consumers as Gates so repeatedly states? Tell us what you think.

Not only do I think this is a mistake on the part of the US government, but I think that Judge Jackson is bias and not giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. If you go back and read everything regarding this case, Jackson seems to have a personal grudge against Microsoft! I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know, can MS ask for a different judge?

The guy OBVIOUSLY hates Microsoft. I was watching CNBC and they said the ruling was "basically a mirror image of the Government's breakup suggestions." He also said that Microsoft's suggestions were "radical." Come on, what kind of judge takes ALL of one side's suggestions while basically telling the other side to go to hell? It's like if I wanted to sue someone and asked for 100 billion dollars, the judge actually gave it to me. This is basically what the judge has done for the governement, they asked for 100 billion dollars (everything) and they got every bit of it. Not once in this whole trial has the judge actually made a ruling in favor of Microsoft, and in his findings of facts long ago, it was supposed to be just that, "facts." However, throughout that report, he shredded Microsoft apart instead of being objective.

I've also been told that this judge had previously served in a case between Microsoft and Sun over some kind of java issue. He ruled in favor of Sun during the case, but Microsoft won the appeal citing "Judge Jackson" as being bias and the ruling was overturned. Anyone have any more information on this? Maybe it would be a good editorial for BetaNews to research and write up....

Seems like a the judge is swatting a fly with a baseball bat...

It would not be possible to split up the smallest multinational company half in four months, so how could it be just to ask a company the size of microsoft to do so, seems unrealistic......

its quite simple, he has been paid off by someone, its plain to see that. Why do you think he didn't ever do anything good for MS.

So... have we lost our heads in this "discussion"? One writer would claim that soon, we'll be using computers as paperweights... I'm not sure about you, but I'd rather not lift up my computer just to put paper under it. That's not a stretch at all. Another writer suggests that a judge that breaks up a company for the purposes of encouraging capitalistic competition is a communist sitting in somebody else's back pocket. Another writer would equate Microsoft, the most powerful company this side of the solar system, with a helpless insect about to be crushed with a bat. We have a writer who says that it's mighty scary when the government gets power over a company. Ok, if the situation is reversed and an individual company has power over the government, that's less scary? And we have our writers who support a move to Canada, maybe to join all the other incredibly successful computer companies which reside there. Uh huh. sure.

I'm one of those guys that doesn't use Linux, barely knows Unix, can't get BeOS to work with my system (surprise! although I'd really like to be able to use it), hasn't used a Mac since 6th grade, and basically uses Microsoft to do just about everything. I have Win95 on one computer, Win98 on another, and I use NT at work. Is this personal choice?

Well what the hell else was I going to buy? What else runs all the programs I use? And do you know what the learning curve does to your time? Like I have that much free time. Everything I want to do, Microsoft does for me. Is that great? Sure! Sure it is. Are there other companies that also do what I want? Probably. Microsoft is not exactly original, nor do they offer something that nobody else has. Have I heard of these other companies? Possibly. Am I likely to buy their product? Not bloody likely.

Think back to where the government got all these laws in the first place. The Sherman anti-trust law was put in place to put down the Railroad monopolies. Now, just try for one second to put yourself in the industrial revolution (I know, it's hard). The Railroads were the computers of their time; they were all that technology had to offer. They were cutting edge. And yet their business practices were less than fair, to the point where some companies were getting unfair shares of the railroad industry- they owned the land, they weren't selling, and ticket prices were going up. They offered a great service, but it wasn't exactly at a "competitive rate".

Flash back to today. Microsoft gives a number of great services. IE5 kicks NN4 any day of the week (although Netscape 6 is superior in a number of different ways, barring the fact that it's just a preview release), and Microsoft Office (especially Word) really does make things easy for me. Call me ignorant, but I just don't have time to go out and learn something from Corel or Adobe. But Microsoft owns the land- they've got their hooks in deep. If somebody crosses their path, it's going to hurt, and Microsoft can outlast most companies in a standoff. And should an upgrade from Windows95 to Windows98 really cost $90?

Microsoft really has the power to determine some smaller companies' fate. What startup is going to last long enough just to be a competitor? And what current OS is going to run up against Microsoft in the mainstream market? Sure, BeOS might make a run for the multimedia market (don't expect any award-winning spreadsheet programs for BeOS any time soon), and Unix/Sun machines will hopefully corner the server market (FrontPage, I'm sorry, is not worth my time), but these markets are not where all of the money is. Microsoft is used in big business. They've got a monopoly. Where is their competitor, and what percent of the market share do they have? *nix, Mac, who? None of these companies can compete.

The government has the duty to make companies play nice to a certain extent. Granted, government can not decide which companies should get the axe altogether (I think that making MS release source code is an atrocious, uninformed, ignorant, incredulous decision and look forward to getting that thrown out in appeals), nor do they- Microsoft is hardly being crippled here (just think, they can have two monopolies now). This is not a laissez faire kind of situation- our government does not, nor has it ever, play like that. When a company goes too far, the government has to step in somewhere; and Microsoft has definitely gone too far.

Ok, I've spoken one too many volumes... happy reading.

To stop having one operating system on most computers
just sell those computers with no operating system or
internet browser installed on them .....

Then you wont get broke up by UNCLE ****A ........

And what about AOL/TIME WARNER. now, thats a real
monopoly !

or, better yet blame it on Canada......hehe

hmm no, I dont think he has been paid off by anyone........ BUT it IS pretty obvious he hates microsoft... this just demonstrates how crazy the american legal system has become. It just follows everything else in american law....... if u dont like someone, for what they have said or done, whether it directly relatest to you or not, what do you do?! take them to court obviously! and the chances are you will win, because all you have to do is convince ONE person (who generally has a bias on the case even before it begins!) - oh and the way they use precidence to justify conclusions is also pretty rediculous as far as Im concerned, no two cases are the same, so why use one to judge the outcome of another? Using the AT&T and Oil cases from LONG ago as the precidence to the conclusions of this case....... lol..... please.

What I REALLY dont like about this case is how it isnt just ONE MAN deciding the fate of an american company, its ONE MAN forcing his personal dislike on not only Microsoft in america.... but hey! lets take out Microsoft UK etc etc etc... Im starting to see distinct simularities between the wonderful Mr Jackson and world dictators from the past and present - only difference is its coming from within america so they cant shoot first + think later about this one!