ml2mst wrote:
High Plains Thumper wrote:
Marti, appreciate your words of encouragement. You are
correct if these were the normal run of the mill independent
trolls. Sometimes it is satisfying to help some of these
industrial level shills earn their keep, until lay-off by
their masters. :-)
I doubt Microsoft will fire their Blog Technical Evangelists.
Due to the recession MS will have to fire 5000 of their
employees. Knowing MS they will probably fire the most skilled
ones (if they have any left), but will keep on employing their
evangelist, for the simple reason that MS can't compete with
quality products. There for they have to rely on lies and
misinformation (spewed by proxy).
Whether that will actually happen, I do not know. However, I
must agree with you on the shoddiness of MS products compared
with others and their historical acts toward competition as
recorded by on-line court records of monopoly maintenance. I
found this one document to be of interest:
Following describes an Microsoft anticompetitive act to inhibit
competition by preventing others from successfully integrating
their products with Windows:
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_tuncom/major/mtc-00029523.htm
[quote]
In contrast to the RPFJ, a meaningful remedy must account for the
fact that Microsoft manipulates interface information in a
variety of ways to preclude competition. Although too numerous to
recount, Microsoft's tactics include:
* "Secret Interfaces" - Microsoft does not publish all the
interfaces it uses and does not publish all the interface
information that others need to develop products that
interoperate with Microsoft software.
* "Crippled Interfaces" - For some functions, Microsoft
publishes information about an interface that is inferior to the
interface that Microsoft itself uses to accomplish a function, or
publishes incomplete information about an interface.
* "Kick Me Interfaces" - Sometimes, Microsoft publishes
information about an interface that Microsoft uses to perform a
function, but it "marks" non-Microsoft software in a way that
assures the interface will operate in an inferior way. Microsoft
can "mark" competitors software through tagging, signing,
encrypted passwords, or by noting the absence of such features.
* "Moving Interfaces" - If, by some means, a third party has
been able to obtain adequate interface information that Microsoft
doesn't want it to have, Microsoft will simply move the
interface. For example, Novell successfully figured out how to
enable its directory services software to interoperate with
Windows NT. To counter Novell's success, in Windows 2000
Microsoft broke up and moved the computer files containing the
interface information used by Novell and marked, or signed,
information required for the interfaces so that Novell could
neither use Microsoft's interface information nor replace it.
The typical result of such tactics is that Microsoft makes
competing products appear inferior to Microsoft's products.
Microsoft's actions may make a competing product appear slower,
require more memory, or perform with limited functionality. These
tactics also enable Microsoft to persuade customers to buy
Microsoft's inferior and/or more expensive products simply to
avoid Microsoft's roadblocks.(15)
[/quote]
With such uncompetitive tactics, I think it is time for a change
in the market place, with other operating systems having an
opportunity to fill its place.
Business as usual for MS.
I'm afraid the Wintrolls will even get louder and louder. Most
of them are desperate attention seekers thus the only thing we
can do to "punish" them is to ignore them.
They already have, after all, it is the eve of Windows 7, the
Windows to end all Windows.
'Use ... the Internet, etc. to heighten the impression that the
enemy is desperate, demoralized, defeated, ... associated with
mental deficiency, as in, "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter
Bunny". Just keep rubbing it in, via the ... newsgroups, ... make
the complete failure of the competition's technology part of the
mythology of the computer industry.'
(Comes vs Microsoft lawsuit, Microsoft Evangelism document, PDF
pages 45 & 55 on http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf )
They can whine all they want and by not responding to their
garbage, we simply let them rot in their own dirt. That is
IMHO the only thing they deserve.
Or a good LART. They are deserving of that, too. Remember TAB.
Also regarding LART's, they work more times than not. If more
advocates would take the time to write them, would help cleanse
this newsgroup like it did about 2 years ago.
Remember those nasty libelous links to a picture that the
Australian Clogwog (Rick Mather, who claims to live on a
Nederlander bird sanctuary, LOL!) keeps posting, of you and me on
a wedding cake? They are no more.
--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green
|
|
