Get the ECT News Network Editor's Pick Newsletter » View Sample | Subscribe
Welcome Guest | Sign In
ECTNews.com
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider
Discussions

LinuxInsider Talkback

 
ECT News Community   »   LinuxInsider Talkback   »   Re: Ballmer Argues Against Linux



Re: Ballmer Argues Against Linux
Posted by: Todd Bishop 2004-10-28 12:06:08
See Full Story

Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer reiterated the company's case against the open-source Linux operating system yesterday in an e-mail message to customers that was notable in part for its timing. The 2,600-word message cited research reports and case studies to support Microsoft's longstanding assertion that Windows is a better choice than Linux in such areas as security, total ownership cost and indemnification from intellectual-property claims.


Re: Ballmer Argues Against Linux
Posted by: Kagehi 2004-10-29 11:51:58 In reply to: Todd Bishop
Perhaps they can explain why their are still outstanding defects and bugs, like IE's false "download complete" response when files time out, that have been around since Windows 95? I mean this isn't, "occationally something in the UI looks goofy", it is a basic and critical design flaw. Or why it is that recently they seem more competent at disabling features or making it so security and network administration software won't work right, rather than fixing the actual bugs? Is it really so impossible to fix these things correctly? If so, it that impossible as in hard or impossible as in, "we can't decouple media player from the OS now that it is integrated, unless you sue us and then all the sudden it isn't impossible anymore..." lol Frankly, I have barely used Linux at all, but I have gotten so fed up with Microsoft's defective software, constant patches, frustration at modifying even basic things and their integration of everything but the kitchen sink, to the point you can't blow your nose without the OS deciding to do something behind your back in response. Not because it needed to, but just because everything is so damn interdependant that nothing works if anything goes wrong with something. Sure, XP is better, but some tweaks require you disable the safeguards and if you forget to re-enable them, you are right back to Windows 98, where things go wrong for no apparent reason and you can't fix anything, because the OS already things the last 90 patches are installed, there is no local copy of them and only MS has the source code, so simply downloading the latest patch or even the latest stable (and complete) iso version is impossible. Its like puting industrial grade locks on the doors to your mobel home in the local trailer park. If you are dumb enough to keep millions of dollars of stuff in there, you shouldn't be surprised when someone simply rips out the aluminum wall paneling and crawls in through the hole.
Jump to: