[windows2000] Re: OT: I've Had it with Outlook

  • To: <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:08:36 -0500

Jim you need to learn a lesson from this guy, he knows how to rant.  The real 
lesson here is you can't make every body happy.  Come up with any scenario and 
there is always some flaw.  What you try to do is handle as many people as 
possible.  Look at Jesus example:  Matthew 10:34   "Do not think that I came to 
bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

He didn't try to make everybody happy, he wanted to save as many people as 
possible.  I use this metaphor to prove that you can't even use a metaphor 
without making some people upset. :-) I'll save my rants for things that matter.

Gunnar

-----Original Message-----
From: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 10:46 AM
To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [windows2000] Re: OT: I've Had it with Outlook


The below text is more open source vs. BEING PAID FOR YOUR WORK, but
I've decided that this is the quote of the year.  This was posted in a
private forum, so I'll let the person remain anonymous, I suppose.

Quote of the year: 

You seem to have been infected with the touchy feely good virus.
Microsoft
is a corporation whose principal goal is to maximize shareholder value,
period. It's really unfortunate that you and everyone in the open source
"community" have forgotten that IBM used to do exactly the same things
to
its competitors. Now apparently IBM is the darling of these people
because
they have embraced Linux. I'm sure they did that just to be "moral" and
"help" everyone.

In the alternate universe of
"free-as-in-whatever-actually-i'm-just-cheap"
I'm sure that morals and value systems are in high regard. In the real
world
however, they play second fiddle to profits. You are more than free to
disagree with this, but that's reality. If I were an MSFT shareholder
(which
I'm not) I'd be pissed if Bill Gates suddenly declared he was going to
"share" the Windows code with everyone, make a 1 billion grant to the
FSF
and retire to a cave to meditate with Richard Stallman.

As a developer, I have nothing but respect for the core group of people
who
churn out things like Apache, GNOME, KDE, Mozilla and Linux itself. And
like
you, I think that there *is* room for both Linux and Windows in the
world.
But their stupid promethean stance of "see? see how the Evil One attacks
us?
Poor us, we are sooo good and moral and wouldn't hurt a fly!" is at best
hypocritical and at worst cynical and evidential of deeper problems with
their world view. But to me, open source is not something I'd like to
get
into, it's something that will pressure Microsoft into being better. So
I'd
rather they just get on with it and try to take over the world. On the
basis
of quality alone they're 90% screwed. And having used Linux and BSD
extensively, I think I know what I'm talking about. Ever try to install
a
font on Linux? OS X is what Linux wants to be when it grows up, but
they're
too proud to change so they're screwed there too. They certainly seem
incapable of innovating anyway.

Open source has two very basic problems. One, they are way too full of
themselves. *They* think they do things better than anyone else
(especially
Microsoft), so I think it's funny that you'd accuse Microsoft of the
same
sin. They are *never* wrong. They hold the moral high-ground. This of
course
is a weakness in itself and a problem whenever a new vulnerability is
disclosed in their software. "What? No, that's unpossible! It must be M$
fault!!" Have you ever read LinuxSecurity.com? My god, these people
can't
hold a candle to everything that happens with Windows. Can you imagine
what
would happen if they went mainstream? If they held even 5% of the
desktop
market? Frankly, I'd rather not even think about it.

Second, no one has absolutely any interest in anything beyond "cool".
"Cool"
does not make the business world go round. This, coupled with the
unfortunate and stupid duplication of effort, forked projects, flame
wars,
their own massive doses of what they call "FUD" and so on proves to me
that
they are as bad if not worse then Microsoft, but at least Microsoft
doesn't
try to bullshit me other than by taking my money. Microsoft doesn't
pretend
they're nice, and I don't want them to be. I just want to make my apps
work
for my clients and get on with life. And for 10+ years that's been the
case.

Do you really want to sign up with a religion (because that's what the
look
like more and more) that half the time can't make up their minds whether
something is "more free" or "less free"? That somehow came to the
conclusion
that giving away software was a moral imperative instead of an
altruistic
gesture? That until before you wrote this post considered you part of an
"evil empire" because you create software that isn't given away? Or even
worse, whose charter members spend more time attacking each other and
pushing agendas that according to them are diametrically opposed yet for
the
average outside observer just seem like more of the same radical "join
us or
die" extremism?

Believe me, this is not a crowd I'd want to do business with, ever.

Oh, and I take offense at your assertion that Microsoft doesn't
innovate.
That is probably the single most parroted line that FOSS zealots like to
hold up as proof that they absolutely rule, right after "Microsoft BOB"
Har,
har. What do you consider innovation? GNOME and KDE (badly) copying the
Windows shell? XMMS copying Winamp? Evolution copying Outlook? KDevelop
copying Visual Studio? I mean, I think Eclipse is impressive, but so is
VS.NET, frankly. Microsoft has innovated *far* more than most open
source
projects put together. It's just that they don't come out with Napster
or
ICQ or The Next Big Thing, but then neither does GNU. I'll give you an
example: MS bought part of what eventually became Visual Studio from a
French company. Do you think it has gotten better since 1.0? "Booo-hoo,
Microsoft buys companies and repackages their innovations as their own"
Of
goddamn course they do. What the hell is wrong with that? Can you sit
there
and claim that SQL Server is not an innovation because it was based on
Sybase? Or IE6-Spyglass/Mosaic? FrontPage? Surely since Gates bought
BASIC
and MS-DOS then Longhorn is by definition a piece of crap, right? Of
course!
Then again, if Microsoft came out with a Photoshop killer they wouldn't
be
praised for their innovation, they'd be accused of monopolistic
strong-arming.

Software in the Windows platform is driven by commercial need, not the
need
to scratch an itch. Microsoft developers don't sit there listening to
Nirvana and code whatever the hell they want whenever the hell they want
to.
*Surely* that must make them inferior to all open source developers, and
by
extension their code must suck as well.

You are more than welcome to turn in your badge on the way out.
Honestly, I
have a relationship with Microsoft from which I have profited greatly
and I
intend to keep it that way, MVP or no. I have no interest in them
suddenly
turning to Mother SoftTeresa, I want them to make sure that the dominant
software platform is and continues to be Windows. Right now, I would be
perfectly capable of doing a 360 and starting to write applications in
Java
or Python on Linux or BSD. But you see, I don't want to. I'd rather take
my
chances with a company that at least is honest about being ruthless than
with the FOSS crowd, being gobbled up by Novell and the like. So *what*
if
they funded SCO? Given 1/2 the chance, everyone from Oracle to CA to IBM
to
Sun would have done exactly the same thing. If you think otherwise
you're
just delusional.


**********************************************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the 
personal and confidential use
of the recipient(s) named above.  Distribution, publication, or retransmission 
of this message is strictly 
prohibited.  This message may be a bank to client communication and as such is 
privileged and confidential.  
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent 
responsible for delivering it to the 
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
document in error and that any 
review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly 
prohibited.  If you have received 
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete 
the original message.

The sender of this e-mail specifically "opts-out" of the Electronic Signatures 
and Global and National 
Commerce Act (E-Sign) and any and all similar state and federal acts.  
Accordingly, but without limitation, 
any and all documents, contracts, and agreements must contain a handwritten 
signature of the sender to
be legal, valid, and enforceable.
**********************************************************************************************************

********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor StressedPuppy.com Games
Feeling stressed out? Check out our games to
relieve your stress.
http://www.StressedPuppy.com
********************************************************
To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
mode or view archives use the below link.

http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor StressedPuppy.com Games
Feeling stressed out? Check out our games to
relieve your stress.
http://www.StressedPuppy.com
********************************************************
To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
mode or view archives use the below link.

http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm

Other related posts: