Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Blasted and Sued in China for Hijacking PCs

After takin' a swig o' grog, Roy Schestowitz belched out
this bit o' wisdom:
[color=blue]
> Chinese fume at Microsoft anti-piracy
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| China's vocal bloggers seemed stunned that their computers seemed to have
>| phoned Microsoft for the anti-piracy tool without asking.
>|
>| "The computer is mine", one angry blogger penned, "Microsoft has no right to
>| control my hardware without my agreement", the poor fool thought.
> `----
>
> [url]http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/22/chinese-fume-microsoft-anti[/url][/color]

Let them eat cake. (Linux)

--
Do not worry about which side your bread is buttered on: you eat BOTH sides.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Thursday 23 October 2008 02:22 : \____
[color=blue]
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Roy Schestowitz belched out
> this bit o' wisdom:
>[color=green]
>> Chinese fume at Microsoft anti-piracy
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| China's vocal bloggers seemed stunned that their computers seemed to have
>>| phoned Microsoft for the anti-piracy tool without asking.
>>|
>>| "The computer is mine", one angry blogger penned, "Microsoft has no right
>>| to control my hardware without my agreement", the poor fool thought.
>> `----
>>
>>[/color][/color]
[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/22/chinese-fume-microsoft-anti[/url][color=blue]
>
> Let them eat cake. (Linux)[/color]

Let them eat sabayon and mint.

- --
~~ Best of wishes

"We should dedicate a cross-group team to come up with ways to leverage Windows
technically more."
--Jim Allchin, Microsoft
[url]http://Schestowitz.com[/url] | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 140 total, 1 running, 139 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
[url]http://iuron.com[/url] - knowledge engine, not a search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkj/6LoACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5WTwCgsRPZOKXCm3BbZgfbrngo9nRN
42MAmQFvrQpPd7pIOuqKJu8uh3V76Ywm
=mctj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Oct 22, 10:22 pm, Chris Ahlstrom <lino...@bollsouth.nut> wrote:[color=blue]
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Roy Schestowitz belched out
> this bit o' wisdom:[color=green]
> > Chinese fume at Microsoft anti-piracy[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> >| China's vocal bloggers seemed stunned that their computers seemed to have
> >| phoned Microsoft for the anti-piracy tool without asking.[/color][/color]

Microsoft has the legal right to enforce their copyright. If their
tactics are too draconian, and people don't like how Microsoft is
treating them, they should switch to something else, like Linux or
FreeBSD.

Microsoft charges what they think their product is worth. If you
don't agree, you should use Linux.
[color=blue][color=green]
> >| "The computer is mine", one angry blogger penned,[/color][/color]

The HARDWARE is yours, but the software is Microsoft's.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > "Microsoft has no right to
> >| control my hardware without my agreement", the poor fool thought.[/color][/color]

So long as you are using Microsoft's software - illegally, they have
every right to stop you from using it, and forcing you to either stop
using the illegal copy, or get it properly licensed by paying
Microsoft for it. The other alternative is to use other software,
like Linux.

I have no sympathy for someone who deliberately purchases a machine
with "No OS" then installs a pirated copy of Windows, and then gets
upset because Microsoft is enforcing their copyright.

The problem is that not everybody knows that they aren't getting
"Genuine Vista". There are retailers and vendors who will purchase
quantities of PCs with no OS, add some memory, and install a pirated
copy of Vista on it, which allows them to almost double the price of
the computer.

The customers don't find out until the screen turns black that their
copy was pirated. But they paid for what they thought was a machine
with a legitimate copy of Windows. Often, a phone call to Microsoft,
providing details about the vendor will net you a free "legitimized"
copy, and will send Microsoft "agents" to raid the store, often
accompanied by law enforcement authorities. Of course, vendors who
get caught are pretty much given the choice of licensing windows for
every PC they sell, or going to jail, because they've given up their
negotiating leverage of claiming that not everybody wants Windows.

On the other hand, there are more and more retailers selling "No OS"
systems AS "No OS" systems. Often, you can pick up a copy of Linux in
the magazine section of the same store, or a nearby store in the
mall. I was recently at an airport where I could pick up a "No OS"
laptop for about $400, and the magazine containing Linux (SUSE 11) for
about $15. A similar computer running Vista was available for about
$1200, though it had 3 Gig of RAM instead of 1 gig, and a 200 Gig hard
drive instead of a 160 gig hard drive.

This is important. A Linux system with 1/4 the memory and 1/2 the
storage can do twice as much as the fully loaded Vista system.

Microsoft's first design principle is "Memory is cheap, CPU is cheap,
and hard drives are cheap, use as much as you can". Part of that is
because Microsoft's REAL customers are the OEMs, who are trying to
sell lots of new computers at premium prices. HP, Dell, and Sony WANT
Microsoft to use so much of these resources that people HAVE to
purchase new computers to get the new OS.

The problem is that this time, it backfired. When people and
corporations evaluated Vista, they were looking at systems that were
huge with memory and hard drive and CPU. These machines should have
been blindingly fast. Instead, they were even slower than their
predecessors on machines with 1/4 of the resources. As a result, many
corporations are sticking with XP, and many individuals are simply
putting off PC purchases, causing pain for Dell, HP, Sony, and Lenovo.

What has been really interesting is the sub-notebooks from ASUS and
ACER, which seem to work substantially faster and seem to have plenty
of extra head-room even with 4 gig of solid-state drive and 512 meg of
RAM and seem to run twice as fast as XP. The same PCs running Windows
XP require 160 gig hard drives and 1 gigabyte of RAM (which adds
50-80% to the price). The same PCs running Vista seem to need 3-4
gigabytes of RAM, 200 gigabyte 7200 RPM hard drive and Dual Core CPUs,
each running 50% faster than the Linux CPUs, and STILL run slower than
XP.
[color=blue][color=green]
> >[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/22/chinese-fume-m[/url]...[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> Let them eat cake. (Linux)[/color]

Many companies are looking much more seriously at Linux. The biggest
problem with trying to run XP on new hardware is that there often
aren't XP drivers for the peripherals, because Microsoft only wanted
the vendors to support Vista. On the other hand, the PCs can run
Linux quite easily, and this lets them run under VMWare. The overhead
is not that bad, so XP running as a VM on a Linux machine runs as fast
as it would in native mode, but you also have the ability to run
browsers, media players, and even Open Office or Lotus Symphony in the
native Linux machine. As a result, XP is only needed for those
special "Windows Only" applications, and they can't tell the
difference between XP native and XP as a Linux VM.

Ironically, the GOAL is just to get XP running on machines that were
designed to run Vista, and the SIDE EFFECT is that the end users get
the speed, performance, and flexibility of Linux.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

____/ Rex Ballard on Saturday 25 October 2008 21:49 : \____
[color=blue]
> I have no sympathy for someone who deliberately purchases a machine
> with "No OS" then installs a pirated copy of Windows, and then gets
> upset because Microsoft is enforcing their copyright.[/color]

It's very good that Microsoft flexed its muscles. Chinese Linux advocates will
have plenty of ammunition's and many Chinese bloggers are furious. They pass
on the knowledge.

Microsoft has already issues a 'damage control'-esque formal response.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkkDovYACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5tGACdGqseMsoF5R9f3oK0Pfptk2pC
MiYAn19pX/+QM7jUhejc7K88Q+xNcGHq
=GLVk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Rex Ballard wrote:
[color=blue]
> Microsoft has the legal right to enforce their copyright. If their
> tactics are too draconian, and people don't like how Microsoft is
> treating them, they should switch to something else, like Linux or
> FreeBSD.[/color]

Be realistic.


[color=blue]
> Microsoft charges what they think their product is worth. If you
> don't agree, you should use Linux.[/color]

That's right. But according to Homer and a dozen other cola idiots, MS
forces Windows on everyone. Lately this Robin T. Cox moron accuses MS of
violating the human rights of Chinese by offering Windows for sale at a
price he doesn't like.

[color=blue]
> The problem is that not everybody knows that they aren't getting
> "Genuine Vista". There are retailers and vendors who will purchase
> quantities of PCs with no OS, add some memory, and install a pirated
> copy of Vista on it, which allows them to almost double the price of
> the computer.[/color]

Bull****. Vista adds maybe $50 to $100 to the price of a PC.


[color=blue]
> Often, a phone call to Microsoft,
> providing details about the vendor will net you a free "legitimized"
> copy, and will send Microsoft "agents" to raid the store, often
> accompanied by law enforcement authorities.[/color]

Often, huh? Then you shouldn't have a problem finding just one single
report of MS raiding a store along with authorities. Just one will do, Rex.


[color=blue]
> On the other hand, there are more and more retailers selling "No OS"
> systems AS "No OS" systems.[/color]

Dell has sold systems with FreeDOS for years. But how can that be, as cola
and Linux idiots never tire of telling us that MS controls the OEMs?



[color=blue]
> Often, you can pick up a copy of Linux in
> the magazine section of the same store, or a nearby store in the
> mall. I was recently at an airport where I could pick up a "No OS"
> laptop for about $400, and the magazine containing Linux (SUSE 11) for
> about $15. A similar computer running Vista was available for about
> $1200, though it had 3 Gig of RAM instead of 1 gig, and a 200 Gig hard
> drive instead of a 160 gig hard drive.[/color]

hmmm... Dell has 2gb RAM, 250gb hard drive, Vista Home Premium desktop
systems (no monitor) for $310

[url]http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=ddcwfa1&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&link_number=17970705&kc=productdetails~inspndt_530s[/url]


[color=blue]
> This is important. A Linux system with 1/4 the memory and 1/2 the
> storage can do twice as much as the fully loaded Vista system.[/color]

Sez you. The rest of the world says "bull****".


[color=blue]
> Microsoft's first design principle is "Memory is cheap, CPU is cheap,
> and hard drives are cheap, use as much as you can". Part of that is
> because Microsoft's REAL customers are the OEMs, who are trying to
> sell lots of new computers at premium prices. HP, Dell, and Sony WANT
> Microsoft to use so much of these resources that people HAVE to
> purchase new computers to get the new OS.[/color]

Why would they have to do that. Any old P4 from 800mhz/512 RAM and up will
run Vista just fine.

[color=blue]
> The problem is that this time, it backfired. When people and
> corporations evaluated Vista, they were looking at systems that were
> huge with memory and hard drive and CPU. These machines should have
> been blindingly fast. Instead, they were even slower than their
> predecessors on machines with 1/4 of the resources.[/color]

Bull****.

[color=blue]
> As a result, many
> corporations are sticking with XP, and many individuals are simply
> putting off PC purchases, causing pain for Dell, HP, Sony, and Lenovo.[/color]



[color=blue]
> What has been really interesting is the sub-notebooks from ASUS and
> ACER, which seem to work substantially faster and seem to have plenty
> of extra head-room even with 4 gig of solid-state drive and 512 meg of
> RAM and seem to run twice as fast as XP.[/color]

You'll be sure to show us some 3rd party benchmarks real soon, right?

[color=blue]
> The same PCs running Windows
> XP require 160 gig hard drives and 1 gigabyte of RAM (which adds
> 50-80% to the price). The same PCs running Vista seem to need 3-4
> gigabytes of RAM, 200 gigabyte 7200 RPM hard drive and Dual Core CPUs,
> each running 50% faster than the Linux CPUs, and STILL run slower than
> XP.[/color]


[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> [url]http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/22/chinese-fume-m[/url]...[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
>> Let them eat cake. (Linux)[/color]
>
> Many companies are looking much more seriously at Linux.[/color]

You've been saying this for 7 or 8 years.


[color=blue]
> The biggest
> problem with trying to run XP on new hardware is that there often
> aren't XP drivers for the peripherals, because Microsoft only wanted
> the vendors to support Vista.[/color]

MS doesn't control what hardware vendors do.

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:59:05 -0400, DFS wrote:
[color=blue]
> Rex Ballard wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Microsoft has the legal right to enforce their copyright. If their
>> tactics are too draconian, and people don't like how Microsoft is
>> treating them, they should switch to something else, like Linux or
>> FreeBSD.[/color]
>
> Be realistic.[/color]

Rex realistic?
Never gonna happen.

[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> Microsoft charges what they think their product is worth. If you
>> don't agree, you should use Linux.[/color]
>
> That's right. But according to Homer and a dozen other cola idiots, MS
> forces Windows on everyone. Lately this Robin T. Cox moron accuses MS of
> violating the human rights of Chinese by offering Windows for sale at a
> price he doesn't like.[/color]

I've been trying to drill this simple concept into Robin T Cox's skull for
2 days now.
I've broken at least 10 drill bits.

[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> The problem is that not everybody knows that they aren't getting
>> "Genuine Vista". There are retailers and vendors who will purchase
>> quantities of PCs with no OS, add some memory, and install a pirated
>> copy of Vista on it, which allows them to almost double the price of
>> the computer.[/color]
>
> Bull****. Vista adds maybe $50 to $100 to the price of a PC.[/color]

True.
I think it might even be less.

[color=blue]
>
>[color=green]
>> Often, a phone call to Microsoft,
>> providing details about the vendor will net you a free "legitimized"
>> copy, and will send Microsoft "agents" to raid the store, often
>> accompanied by law enforcement authorities.[/color]
>
> Often, huh? Then you shouldn't have a problem finding just one single
> report of MS raiding a store along with authorities. Just one will do, Rex.[/color]

Well Microsoft did used to show up at the Computer Shows like KGP and
others checking out the various vendors selling OEM copies of Windows
bundled with a dead disk drive or something to make it legal.
I saw it myself once.
There was nothing they could do however because it was completely legal.

[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> On the other hand, there are more and more retailers selling "No OS"
>> systems AS "No OS" systems.[/color]
>
> Dell has sold systems with FreeDOS for years. But how can that be, as cola
> and Linux idiots never tire of telling us that MS controls the OEMs?[/color]

COLA Linux loons prefer to blame others for Linux's failure on the desktop.
[color=blue]
>
>
>[color=green]
>> Often, you can pick up a copy of Linux in
>> the magazine section of the same store, or a nearby store in the
>> mall. I was recently at an airport where I could pick up a "No OS"
>> laptop for about $400, and the magazine containing Linux (SUSE 11) for
>> about $15. A similar computer running Vista was available for about
>> $1200, though it had 3 Gig of RAM instead of 1 gig, and a 200 Gig hard
>> drive instead of a 160 gig hard drive.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> hmmm... Dell has 2gb RAM, 250gb hard drive, Vista Home Premium desktop
> systems (no monitor) for $310
>
> [url]http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=ddcwfa1&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&link_number=17970705&kc=productdetails~inspndt_530s[/url][/color]

Another Rex fantasy.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> This is important. A Linux system with 1/4 the memory and 1/2 the
>> storage can do twice as much as the fully loaded Vista system.[/color]
>
> Sez you. The rest of the world says "bull****".[/color]

It can't.
I run Ubuntu and Windows XP and my daughter's Gateway runs Vista.
All are on par with each other in terms of speed.
The same machine runs Windows XP and Ubuntu and it's a toss as to which is
quicker.

If you load up Linux with eye candy it gets slow just like any other OS.
[color=blue]
>
>[color=green]
>> Microsoft's first design principle is "Memory is cheap, CPU is cheap,
>> and hard drives are cheap, use as much as you can". Part of that is
>> because Microsoft's REAL customers are the OEMs, who are trying to
>> sell lots of new computers at premium prices. HP, Dell, and Sony WANT
>> Microsoft to use so much of these resources that people HAVE to
>> purchase new computers to get the new OS.[/color]
>
> Why would they have to do that. Any old P4 from 800mhz/512 RAM and up will
> run Vista just fine.[/color]

My 3ghz P4 ran it fine. I just didn't like Vista.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> The problem is that this time, it backfired. When people and
>> corporations evaluated Vista, they were looking at systems that were
>> huge with memory and hard drive and CPU. These machines should have
>> been blindingly fast. Instead, they were even slower than their
>> predecessors on machines with 1/4 of the resources.[/color]
>
> Bull****.[/color]

Newer versions of Linux require more horsepower as well.
Linux does have an advantage that you can use a light version like DSL if
you want though.


[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> As a result, many
>> corporations are sticking with XP, and many individuals are simply
>> putting off PC purchases, causing pain for Dell, HP, Sony, and Lenovo.[/color]
>
>
>
>[color=green]
>> What has been really interesting is the sub-notebooks from ASUS and
>> ACER, which seem to work substantially faster and seem to have plenty
>> of extra head-room even with 4 gig of solid-state drive and 512 meg of
>> RAM and seem to run twice as fast as XP.[/color]
>
> You'll be sure to show us some 3rd party benchmarks real soon, right?[/color]

Corporations are always behind the curve in terms of desktops especially.
They usually have pre-planned technology refresh time frames and rarely if
ever jump on the latest and greatest.

Rex should know that.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> The same PCs running Windows
>> XP require 160 gig hard drives and 1 gigabyte of RAM (which adds
>> 50-80% to the price). The same PCs running Vista seem to need 3-4
>> gigabytes of RAM, 200 gigabyte 7200 RPM hard drive and Dual Core CPUs,
>> each running 50% faster than the Linux CPUs, and STILL run slower than
>> XP.[/color]
>
>
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> [url]http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/22/chinese-fume-m[/url]...[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Let them eat cake. (Linux)[/color]
>>
>> Many companies are looking much more seriously at Linux.[/color]
>
> You've been saying this for 7 or 8 years.[/color]

It's been longer than that.

[color=blue]
>
>[color=green]
>> The biggest
>> problem with trying to run XP on new hardware is that there often
>> aren't XP drivers for the peripherals, because Microsoft only wanted
>> the vendors to support Vista.[/color]
>
> MS doesn't control what hardware vendors do.[/color]

Driver development is expensive.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
[url]http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/[/url]
Please Visit [url]www.linsux.org[/url]