On Jul 31, 9:05 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> http://image.bayimg.com/naeofaabo.jpg
>
> Next version of Microsoft Works will be free but ad-driven
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | With all the hype being gathered up by Microsoft Office 2007, there is a
> | tendency to forget about Microsoft's other office suite known as Microsoft
> | Works.
> `----
>
> http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2007/07/30/microsoft-wo...
Open Office is free, and offers much more of the functionality
comparable to Office. Works is a lobotomized version that barely
supports the most basic functionality.
Businesses are more likely to hang on to their Office 2000 and Office
XP licenses as long as possible, and transition to OO if Microsoft
tries to force an upgrade. There are a few backward compatibility
problems with Office 2007, and this is making it an "unwelcome"
addition to most corporate desktops.
There is no compelling business reason to upgrade to Office 2007, and
there are many compelling business reasons not to do so. No
significant increase in productivity, no significant decrease cost,
and no standardized support for published and public standards such as
Open Document.
Many businesses are already "feeling the pain" of trying to
interface .NET SOA with Java based or OSS based SOA. Microsoft's
little "enhancements" create LOTS of little security risks.
Microsoft Office 2007 is a choice, but so is Open Office, which does
support published and public standards, and is even the standard by
which compliance with the standards is measured. Open Office does
support tools which make documents easier to archive, easier to
locate, and easier to manage.
Each choice has benefits, risks and consequences. Those making an
informed choice will probably choose NOT to obtain new licenses of
Works or Office 2007.
Microsoft is beginning to have a very hard time preventing people from
making an informed choice.
Vista Is still good at playing movies and music though (except for
Business Edition, of course).
> Related:
>
> Microsoft patents the mother of all adware systems
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The adware framework would leave almost no data untouched in its quest to
> | sell you stuff. It would inspect "user document files, user e-mail files,
> | user music files, downloaded podcasts, computer settings, computer status
> | messages (e.g., a low memory status or low printer ink)," and more. How could
> | we have been so blind as to not see the marketing value in computer status
> | messages?
> `----
>
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070717-microsoft-patents-the-m...
>
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/Forget-about-the-WGA-20-Windows-Vista-...
>
> http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/jy13tkjasn.html
The irony is that the patent, and the required disclosure, may
actually work against Microsoft. Allowing such a "let me study your
PC for a few hours so that I can have someone figure out what
advertizing you would like to see" approach creates some huge
liability risks. In effect you are permitting a piece of software to
access company confidential files that could include medical records,
business transactions, contracts and trade secrets of customers and
vendors, and even classified government information.
Having published the "snooper", and published the license terms which
mandate that users not attempt to disable the "snooper" (written into
all versions of the Vista license), there is no assurance that
Microsoft, a rogue employee of Microsoft, or a rogue hacker emulating
the Microsoft service, could not collect this very confidential
information and disclose it in a manner that would leave the "Victim"
liable for huge amounts of damages. Or has somebody at Microsoft
figured out a way to make sure they don't accidentally hack into - and
publish on a list, information such as people with AIDS, people's
credit cards, social security numbers, Microsoft UUID values in the
registries, or other information which could be combined to identify
specific confidential information with specific individuals.
It's a choice, and I'm sure that some people won't even bother to read
the patent, or the license, and will quite willingly make their
financial records, medical records, and other confidential and
sensitive information made available. The sad thing is that there is
now the risk that an end user, using a company laptop, could
accidentally expose company confidential information about other
companies, without even knowing they were guilty of disclosure.
Personally, given the dubious benefits (having porno ads pop up on my
browser when I am trying to search for a business related document
with a client or supervisor looking over my shoulder) just don't seem
to be worth the risks and possible consequences.
I think I would chose NOT to experience this service.
I did note, however, that some companies, like HP, already have the
ability to automatically sense when your printer is low, and make sure
that, when you open your browser, an offer to buy more ink appears.
Seems to me that Microsoft might be trying to patent "prior art"
again. In fact, this is remarkably similar to the update services
that have been used by Linux distributors since the mid 1990s. But
then again, I might be missing something.
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Vista-Microsoft's latest operating system-may prove to be most
> | appropriately named, especially for those seeking evidence of how a
> | computer was used.
> `----
>
> Will Microsoft Put The Colonel in the Kernel?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "The kernel meets The Colonel in a just-published Microsoft patent
> | application for an Advertising Services Architecture, which delivers targeted
> | advertising as 'part of the OS.'
> `----
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/14/043200
I could be wrong, but I think this might be an easily challenged
patent. Keep in mind that SUSE, Mandrake, and Red Hat have been using
automated update systems for almost 10 years, and this includes
"Advertizing" in the form of evaluation copies of everything from DB2
and WebSphere to Applix and WordPerfect.
Maybe the "patent" is that they have hard-linked the libraries to
perform these functions into that already bloated library that seems
to need almost a gigabyte of RAM just to load without going into
Paging mode.
|
|
