shabbir's Avatar, Join Date: Jul 2004
Go4Expert Founder
I only say that Microsoft is often given too much credit.
May be true but I think they deserve some.
Copying can be justified in certain manners, but i belive that MS did crossed the line many times.
I dont think its true because there is no line of fire in copying. I can copy what is not protected. What it hurts is when MS copies the final product is sometimes better than original and so it hurts the source person / organization.

Shabbir Bhimani
libervisco's Avatar
Go4Expert Member
Well, there are certainly some regulations to follow in regard to "copying", but i still believe that M$ actually has little or no of products that they made on their own, from the very basics, from scratch, at least not of their major products such as windows os. Windows was based on DOS and DOS was written in Basic. Basic is the improved version of another programming framework which Mr. Gates simply took because he could. It was free software in university's.

I agree we should give them a credit on popularizing the information technology, bringing it to every desktop. But i am sure it would have been done even if they didn't existed. Maybe it would have been done in a way of free software movement.

The founding basics on which all of todays including Microsofts information technology products were founded are the technology's evolved on university's. So, again, they are the ones to give credit for starting it all.

And here is another discusting thing i heard about M$ and their "fair" copying. According to this from linux today, they patented a prior art, the unix "sudo command". Not only that it is a clear of example of stealing innovation made by others and an example of how patents office functions (when they let something like this slip through), but it also shows the obvious intentions of Micro$oft. It may very well use that command agains linux community.
After all, software patents shouldn't exist at all.
And what can i finally say about all that, let the freekin' Microsoft goes to hell. It'll be a happy day when it falls apart. And WHO would really care.

Now, call me an stupid free software advocate hating M$, could you blame me? Could you blame us?

fsakalos's Avatar, Join Date: May 2007
Go4Expert Member
Originally Posted by alok
Hain buddy,
your Article is very very nice,but i am sorry i am follower of Windows.
i know one thing only the Computer User need easy,simple and good interface for working.
and that interface is provided by Windows only.
second, Linux s/w are not common as windows.
third, Intallation is much easier in windows.
fourth, Crash recovery in linux is worst
fifth, Display properties once set in Linux can't be changed,as you can change easily in windows.

soory buddy,pls don't mind i like to have Healthy discussion,and something in this reply hurt you i am really very sorry.
First-I have shown Linux to my friend and he had no problems to learn how to work with new interface.

Second-maybe, but take for example WORD. Open office is almost same and it is for free.

Third-You can install Linux also like clicking machine but then it is not very good. You have to think. And I hope thinking is not based on computer knowledge.

Fourth-I have never heard about such problem.

Fifth-It can be set up if you have root privileges. I like this, because many times I heard about how Window$ users destroyed graphical subsystem

That's all and I am not saying you have to agree