Unfortunately, in posting this to linux-oriented lists, you are effectively preaching to the choir. I am in the slow and somewhat painful process of swapping my boxen entirely over to FreeBSD for anything important (games==Windows, sorry) for almost exactly these reasons. Do I have a theoretical problem with MSWindows? If you mean with an OS that is simple enough for any idiot to use, with plug-and-play compatibility, etc.? Not in the least. Great idea. It's sure to become the industry standard... Oh wait, it has. Do I have a problem with an integrated office suite? Not in the least. I've used PerfectOffice for years, and I'm figuring out StarOffice now. The only issue is that M$ has this monopolistic view of the industry. Personally, I think it's foolish of them, really. Early on, they stole innovations from the Mac left and right in the pursuit of a better OS. That's the way it goes. But without competition, any industry will fall prey to its own worst habits. Example: NetBSD has versions that'll run on a toaster oven [exaggeration]; Win2k won't run on the box I am using right this second. Admittedly, it's old, but it is still fully functional and I see no good reason to trash it (other than the fact that my husband and I now own... 5 computers I think). Most likely in a few weeks we will ship this box to my siblings who are in the 7-12 range and it will get another couple of years of use. However, M$ doesn't see this software bloat as a problem because Linux/*BSD is barely a threat to their market share. [sigh] Enough ranting. I only wish I had more missionary zeal, you know? Enough to get even a few people set up with Linux/*BSD (I'm a FreeBSDer myself, but I'm only picky in as much as I don't like M$, I'll happily install the OS of choice on anyone's box). Marci [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Dawn-Marie wrote: > > > I don't like the idea of a web where m$ choses to ammend websites > > I visit. I like it even less that m$ is setting itself up as an > > authority on what we need to know. > > <major rant> > > It's not just XP that squicks me. IE 5.5 is like E.T.; it "phones home". > What does it say to Microsoft? Oh, where you are geographically (derived > from registration info it it's available, your time zone, your IP address, > etc...), what language(s) you are browsing in, what software you are > running, and what sites you visit. All of this is so they can market more > Microsoft goods and services to you, and to protect themselves from > software piracy. If you use MSIE 5.5 or better you have absolutely > surrendered your privacy to Microsoft. Can you turn this off? No. Do > they need your permission? Yes, but *you* gave it to them the minute you > started using IE. Read the license agreement. Microsoft basically has > carte blanche to do anything they want with your computer any time they > feel like it. > > You know, really reputable sources like The Wall Street Journal, The New > York Times, The Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post keep reporting > this stuff, and people blithely ignore it and keep using MS software. > Heck, it's convenient and came with their computer. Besides, they probably > don't bother reading newspapers and don't mind trading their right to > privacy for a little convenience. Our current, pro-business, laissez-faire > administration in the US isn't going to do anything about it, either. > Microsoft is no longer feeling threatened by the DOJ, so it's back to > business as usual. What's the UK government take on this? I can't tell > you. Many UK government sites now require you to use IE 5.5 or higher to > visit them. Netscape, Mozilla, Konqueror, Opera, Arachne, etc... users are > just plain out of luck. > > Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates makes Microsoft's goals painfully clear if > you really read what he says. The Internet is to become yet another > proprietary Microsoft system. It's the Microsoft way or the highway, and > this, somehow, is supposed to be good for consumers. It will encourage > "innovation". That's Microsoft innovation, mind you. > > You know, I am really not a Linux zealot. I really don't care if you use > Linux or not. FreeBSD is fine by me. Heck, so are proprietary operating > systems like MacOS X and eCommStation 1.0 (basically, OS/2 5.0, but now > rechristened and marketed by someone other than IBM, a little late in the > game). I am not a Richard Stallman devotee and I really have no problem > with the concept of intellectual property. What I *DO* have a problem with > is one very monopolistic, very rich, very greedy company trying to control > the global exchange of information, and in effect, have tremendous power > over us all. Uncle Bill as Big Brother *bothers* me. If you care about > your freedom, your privacy, and real competition and innovation, PLEASE > boycott Microsoft any way you can. The corporate state has no attraction > for me at all. > > Most people are apathetic sheep, who will let those who would take their > rights away do as they will if things are convenient and safe and > comfortable. That isn't limited to this issue, either. It's so common in > the US and the EU it just sickens me. Just give them a beer and a nice, > big TV and they will be happy little sheep and cheerfully swallow whatever > the few corporations and/or governments who control the media will feed > them. > > </rant> > > OK, I feel better now. Errr... maybe I don't, really, but if just one > person who reads this DOESN'T take it as face value and also DOESN'T just > dismiss it... if one person starts questioning the world and the > authorities around them and starts looking for alternate sources of > information... if just one person fights for their right to some semblance > of privacy, then I am really happy I wrote this and then I do feel better. > > -Caity > (undoubtedly labeled as subversive somewhere) > > > > "Confusion will be my epitaph > As I crawl a cracked and broken path > If we make it we can all sit back and laugh > But I fear tomorrow I'll be crying > Yes I fear tomorrow I'll be crying" > --King Crimson (1969) > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Caitlyn M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Systems Analyst (919) 541-4441 > Lockheed Martin > (a contractor for the US EPA) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > the purple > poetry To: Caitlyn Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA > goddess cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <dmarie@drizz Subject: Re: [issues] WSJ article on >Microsoft XP "feature" > le.com> > > 06/08/01 > 05:54 PM > > > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > This is from the Wall Street Journal... and is downright scary. Uncle > Bill > > is going to redesign the web for us into his vision of what we need to > > know. > > > > http://public.wsj.com/sn/y/SB991862595554629527.html > > I just read this article in the new XP browswer. It is a very > annoying feature, and as I read further about the feature, I > became rather scared, yes. The author is absolutely correct, > there > will now be this competition to be "blessed" by m$, and people > will > start paying big money for this to happen. > > The only word highlighted in the entire article was "microsoft". > And the annoying purple squiggles appear regardless of your link > setting--mine is set to underline only on "hover". > > I don't like the idea of a web where m$ choses to ammend > websites > I visit. I like it even less that m$ is setting itself up as an > authority on what we need to know. > > Thank you for posting this link...I had no idea what this > annoying > feature was. At least now I know I can turn it off! > > Dawn-Marie > > "How much change is needed before something is no > longer the same?" > > _______________________________________________ > grrltalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/grrltalk _______________________________________________ issues mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
