DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Microsoft Arrogance XP

  1. #1
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Microsoft Arrogance XP


    Time to stand up to Microsoft

    By Rupert Goodwins

    COMMENTARY--Microsoft's upgrade policy is nothing if not predictable. Just
    when you've got used to the old version, along comes a new one that substantially
    outperforms what went before, leaving the user gasping and wondering how
    on earth the company managed to pull it off again. And this time, it's a
    biggie--Microsoft Arrogance XP is so far ahead of Microsoft Arrogance 98
    that it'll take the competition years to even get close.

    As usual, the product can be broken down into consumer and business variants.
    Arrogance XP Home Edition says that your computing experience will be made
    less pleasant because the operating system will turn itself off if you change
    your computer too much, at which point you'll have to go begging to Microsoft
    to be allowed to use it some more. This is because us users have been wicked
    children for many years, denying Microsoft its just rewards by pirating its
    software--why, the company's been at death's door from our leeching. Now
    we can't do that, but by way of recompense and to celebrate its enhanced
    revenues Microsoft will charge us a bit more than last time. And if we don't
    like that? Microsoft acts in a way that suggests it couldn't care less.

    But that's nothing compared to Microsoft Arrogance XP Professional Edition--a
    full-strength version, and then some. From October 1st, corporate licence
    holders will upgrade when Microsoft tells them to, not when they want. They
    either pay an annual fee for a two-year maintenance contract, or pay list
    price for upgrades. Or they don't have a license--and don't think that Microsoft
    has any compunction about letting people know about the consequences there.
    Just to make it an offer you can't refuse, existing options, which included
    a four-year upgrade cycle, have been withdrawn--people who were on that will
    pay between 68 and 107 percent more than before, according to the Gartner
    Group.

    Of course, businesses are furious. But the company is unmoved, saying that
    everyone has choice and that the changes help people get "the latest and
    greatest from Microsoft in a predictable way." Perhaps people didn't find
    it difficult in the past to get upgrades when they wanted them, but Microsoft
    isn't listening. It doesn't have to listen.

    Microsoft's relationship to its users is that of the blue whale to krill.
    Our only purpose is to breed, feed and get squeezed against its giant tongue
    until every last drop of money is released. There was a slight diminution
    in the aggressive, monopolistic feeding frenzy last year when, let us not
    forget, the company was found guilty of abusing its position. Now that Bush
    is in power, Microsoft is right back in those fertile Antarctic waters. Not
    only does it act in a way that suggests it doesn't care about the cries of
    pain from its customers, it barely registers that such cries exist. Now it
    has 90 percent of the corporate market, it will hunt its users to extinction
    before it notices anything wrong.

    There are alternatives, which in a healthy capitalistic marketplace deserve
    exploration. A consortium of companies who pay most to Microsoft could fund
    an open-source development project to take Linux and turn it and its applications
    into a true replacement for Windows and Office. They know what they want,
    it would cost less to make such a package than it does to subscribe to Uncle
    Bill's club, and they'd end up having control of their own business-critical
    software for a change. The lock-in factor, where the pain of changing software
    is greater than the pain of paying the Microsoft ransom, would be reduced
    because the people writing the alternative would have the migration uppermost
    from design day one.

    But there is another option. Companies, like individuals, have the power
    to disobey. An embargo of Microsoft products, of buying them, licensing them,
    paying fees due or any other action that puts money in Microsoft's bank account,
    would do the trick. Of course, Microsoft would withdraw support--as if anyone
    would notice--and could take some people to law, but even the mighty behemoth
    couldn't drag everyone through the courts. And what if the US Justice Department
    was in on the boycott? Unthinkable--until you think it. Of course, once .Net
    is in place MS will potentially have to tools to turn off your software at
    a moment's notice. Nice idea, huh?

    People don't like being held hostage. They don't like being treated like
    bulk foodstuff. They don't like having their costs doubled during hard times,
    and they don't like a key and monopoly supplier acting in a way that suggests
    it is being economical with the truth. Microsoft will remain the invincible
    bully for just as long as we continue to let ourselves believe it. But time
    is running out.

    http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/co...815189,00.html

  2. #2
    Steve Dee Guest

    Re: Microsoft Arrogance XP

    You're about 10 bricks short of a stack, aren't you? Go away.

    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote in message
    news:3bb47b67$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Time to stand up to Microsoft
    >
    > By Rupert Goodwins
    >
    > COMMENTARY--Microsoft's upgrade policy is nothing if not predictable. Just
    > when you've got used to the old version, along comes a new one that

    substantially
    > outperforms what went before, leaving the user gasping and wondering how
    > on earth the company managed to pull it off again. And this time, it's a
    > biggie--Microsoft Arrogance XP is so far ahead of Microsoft Arrogance 98
    > that it'll take the competition years to even get close.
    >
    > As usual, the product can be broken down into consumer and business

    variants.
    > Arrogance XP Home Edition says that your computing experience will be made
    > less pleasant because the operating system will turn itself off if you

    change
    > your computer too much, at which point you'll have to go begging to

    Microsoft
    > to be allowed to use it some more. This is because us users have been

    wicked
    > children for many years, denying Microsoft its just rewards by pirating

    its
    > software--why, the company's been at death's door from our leeching. Now
    > we can't do that, but by way of recompense and to celebrate its enhanced
    > revenues Microsoft will charge us a bit more than last time. And if we

    don't
    > like that? Microsoft acts in a way that suggests it couldn't care less.
    >
    > But that's nothing compared to Microsoft Arrogance XP Professional

    Edition--a
    > full-strength version, and then some. From October 1st, corporate licence
    > holders will upgrade when Microsoft tells them to, not when they want.

    They
    > either pay an annual fee for a two-year maintenance contract, or pay list
    > price for upgrades. Or they don't have a license--and don't think that

    Microsoft
    > has any compunction about letting people know about the consequences

    there.
    > Just to make it an offer you can't refuse, existing options, which

    included
    > a four-year upgrade cycle, have been withdrawn--people who were on that

    will
    > pay between 68 and 107 percent more than before, according to the Gartner
    > Group.
    >
    > Of course, businesses are furious. But the company is unmoved, saying that
    > everyone has choice and that the changes help people get "the latest and
    > greatest from Microsoft in a predictable way." Perhaps people didn't find
    > it difficult in the past to get upgrades when they wanted them, but

    Microsoft
    > isn't listening. It doesn't have to listen.
    >
    > Microsoft's relationship to its users is that of the blue whale to krill.
    > Our only purpose is to breed, feed and get squeezed against its giant

    tongue
    > until every last drop of money is released. There was a slight diminution
    > in the aggressive, monopolistic feeding frenzy last year when, let us not
    > forget, the company was found guilty of abusing its position. Now that

    Bush
    > is in power, Microsoft is right back in those fertile Antarctic waters.

    Not
    > only does it act in a way that suggests it doesn't care about the cries of
    > pain from its customers, it barely registers that such cries exist. Now it
    > has 90 percent of the corporate market, it will hunt its users to

    extinction
    > before it notices anything wrong.
    >
    > There are alternatives, which in a healthy capitalistic marketplace

    deserve
    > exploration. A consortium of companies who pay most to Microsoft could

    fund
    > an open-source development project to take Linux and turn it and its

    applications
    > into a true replacement for Windows and Office. They know what they want,
    > it would cost less to make such a package than it does to subscribe to

    Uncle
    > Bill's club, and they'd end up having control of their own

    business-critical
    > software for a change. The lock-in factor, where the pain of changing

    software
    > is greater than the pain of paying the Microsoft ransom, would be reduced
    > because the people writing the alternative would have the migration

    uppermost
    > from design day one.
    >
    > But there is another option. Companies, like individuals, have the power
    > to disobey. An embargo of Microsoft products, of buying them, licensing

    them,
    > paying fees due or any other action that puts money in Microsoft's bank

    account,
    > would do the trick. Of course, Microsoft would withdraw support--as if

    anyone
    > would notice--and could take some people to law, but even the mighty

    behemoth
    > couldn't drag everyone through the courts. And what if the US Justice

    Department
    > was in on the boycott? Unthinkable--until you think it. Of course, once

    ..Net
    > is in place MS will potentially have to tools to turn off your software at
    > a moment's notice. Nice idea, huh?
    >
    > People don't like being held hostage. They don't like being treated like
    > bulk foodstuff. They don't like having their costs doubled during hard

    times,
    > and they don't like a key and monopoly supplier acting in a way that

    suggests
    > it is being economical with the truth. Microsoft will remain the

    invincible
    > bully for just as long as we continue to let ourselves believe it. But

    time
    > is running out.
    >
    > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/co...815189,00.html




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center