In death, The Pirate Bay will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
Because Microsoft is not Oracle. Look at how they handled the thread of ODF to see how they think outside the box. I would be applauding the brilliance of their strategies if they weren't so utterly counter to the public good.
By 'exactly', I was referring to their MO, not specifics like licensing. I thought I had been clear. Sorry about that.
You mean, like Nokia?
I've read plenty of articles in the past about partners complaining that they showed Microsoft something, Microsoft temporarily working with them, and then showing them the door while coming out with their own product. I tried googling for such just now but there's so much noise I can't find the specific articles I was looking for.
They may well be trying to clean up their act, but they have a lot, and I mean a LOT of bad-will that they have generated over the years. If they think that people are going to accept these supposed changes at face value, they're mad.
Why is parent modded troll? This is *exactly* the kind of thing Microsoft has done in the past. Not just once, but repeatedly. The most obvious one was Java, and it took a lawsuit from Sun to get Microsoft to stop trying to commandeer the platform. Microsoft then dropped Java in a big public hissy fit, and came out with
I realize you're just a trolling AC, but I'm biting. Try looking up what "backward compatibility" actually means, then post again.
I don't think stability is the word you mean. Backward compatibility. Microsoft really did bend over backwards to make sure old stuff would still run on newer versions of OS, even when it was to Microsoft's detriment.
Stability, however, is exactly the word I *wouldn't* use for Windows.
Hey now... If politicians can do it, why can't everyone else?
They didn't open source all of
If Microsoft really wants to raise eyebrows, they should open source the ENTIRE stack, including all the APIs necessary to write desktop applications.
So far all they've been doing is playing a game of "Gee, maybe if we open up this one particular little tidbit, that'd be enough for people to bite and give our stuff a try." and hope that nobody is paying attention to the man behind the curtain.
When your abusive SO repeatedly offers you their hand, only to punch you in the nose when you take it, how long does it take before you stop putting any faith into their protestations about "having changed", etc?
You don't just wipe away a conniving corporate culture by replacing the CEO and adding a little more lipstick.
Microsoft has spent the last several *decades* screwing people, companies, and industries over, and they have yet to show they have changed. Just look at what happened to Nokia.
They have a well established history of offering people a carrot, and then sticking them in the back when they turn around.
Microsoft lost everyone's trust a long time ago, and it is THEIR responsibility to show that they've changed, and everyone else is under ZERO obligation to give them any benefit of the doubt whatsoever. They want to show they've changed? They have to demonstrate it, not just once, but repeatedly and consistently. If they do that for, oh, a few years, without falling back to their old ways, then maybe we can BEGIN to trust them again. Maybe.
That's because Windows and Office are still their big cash cows.
Want to use a PC? You use Windows. Want to write documents and spreadsheets? You use Office. They have a massive monopoly on those two things, and right now they are coasting on inertia. If people don't like Windows 8, what do they do? A few switch to Apple. Fewer still switch to Linux. The vast majority just stick to Windows 7. In other words, Microsoft still makes money even if they fuck up royally.
But as soon as you step outside that core, look what happens. Practically every single venture they have attempted, has flopped on it's face. XBox had a good run, but Microsoft did an excellent job of torpedoing that with the XBox One. Remember Zune? How many BILLIONS have they lost on surface now?
The *only* thing that is keeping Microsoft afloat right now is that core Windows/Office property, because it's not worth the effort to switch away from it. But for anything new, people are generally avoiding Microsoft like Typhoid Mary. As they should, given the number of entities (and I'm talking Partners, OEMs, and even international standards bodies) that Microsoft has screwed over, only a fool would trust Microsoft to so much as squeeze their raging blackheads.
They should have gotten help from Disney. Then they would have been able to extend copyright until our sun goes supernova.
I'm sorry, but there's no room for rational and well stated arguments in this debate. Now go home and come back when you have more froth coming out of your mouth.
I'll be very interested to see how the data plays out, comparing the old dummies with the new ones.
For example: Does the extra fat provide a sufficient additional layer of protection, resulting in less severe injuries?
Thank you for having the guts to try something new and different.
It's so tiresome to always have Apple be the one that experiments with design, followed by everyone else copying whatever Apple did whether or not it was a good idea. When Apple introduced their gumdrop iMacs, everything else went translucent. Microwaves. Clothes irons. It was absurd.
eg: We recently got a bunch of PCs, and they included mice copied from Apple's absurdly-flat mighty mouse or whatever they call it. Had to throw the damn things out cause they were unusable. Apple should be barred from designing mice.