MS fined yet again

[Thorn]

I honestly don't want this to come acoss like a flame, but you hope that board members, people hell-bent on profit, become more powerful and ultimately become unanswerable to people that are there to at least try and serve the public and best interest?

I'd have to say at least 75% of politicians aren't in it for the public's best interest. Those same board members, are hell bent on turning a profit, still have to put out a good product. Otherwise no one will buy it.

Barry said it quite well. I couldn't have said it better myself, although I would say the percentage is closer to 90%. Most politicians that I've encountered are in it for power over other people and none are ever there "for the public good." That may be cynical, but I've dealt with too many pols over the years.

You dont call this ignorance?

No. I call it living within your means. A person may not be able to afford a car and may be forced to ride on a bus, yet by your logic, the government should apparently force automakers to give the plans and toolings to the local mechanic, who can then create said cars and give them away for free. That is ludicrous.

If the mechanic wants to make and give away cars that's his prerogative, but Ford or GM shouldn't have to give away their work product to make life easier for the mechanic.

@Thorn: For the record I never stated specific details on who created the disk operating system or who created the graphical user interface (originally known as the parc user interface). I never stated specific facts that would allow you to call my post ficticious. I take offense to what you said simply because your calling me ignorant and stupid for not knowing my facts when simply enough I never stated specifics.

No, you never posted any specifics, and that was the problem. You made a malicious statements and innuendos, and provided no facts to back them up. In response to your posting lines such as "where they were by stealing from other people" I merely showed from the facts that statement and similar statements were wrong.

Why would apple try to sue ms over the gui design from lisa and other apple OS's following that design if there was no foul play involved?

See, here you go again. Once more, you might want check your facts. There was no "foul play". Look up "Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, 35 F.3d 1435." The claims by Apple were for copyright infringement for using similar elements (i.e. icons, etc.), and not based on any allegations of theft. It has even been suggested by some legal experts that due to the broad nature of the claims that Apple may have been making an attempt to control all future intellectual property rights over PC GUIs. In any event, Apple lost all claims in the lawsuit against MS. Apple had also named Hewlett Packard as a co-defendant in the suit, and did win a minor point against HP that some icons (e.g. the Trash Can) were deemed to be property of Apple, and that HP could no longer use them. Those icons had been used by HP in a GUI of their own design.

And you want to credit ms and ibm for creating dos over the fact that they developed fat, about 10 years after a disk operating system has already been in place in many different formats.

In addition to learning to check facts, you might want to learn reading comprehension. What I said was this:
-IBM and MS invented PC-DOS/MS-DOS.
-PC/MS-DOS was similar to CP/M-86 (which was similar to other operating systems at the time, including some that had disk based operations)
-A major difference between PC-DOS/MS-DOS and CP/M-86 was the FAT.

The fact of the matter is that IBM and MS did invent a product called PC-DOS and MS-DOS. That is a are simple fact, verifiable from many sources. That directly counters your allegation that MS "stole and turned into a profit" and "You think anyone at m$ wrote the disk operating system?" in making PC/MS-DOS.

All you have done so far is prove my point that ms didn't invent any of those things and insult me.
I have to go to a meeting so my time is limited to reply.

Well, your point may have been to show that MS didn't invent those things (although the facts show they did invent some of them), but you clearly asserted that some of those things were stolen. The response was not indented to be an insult. The intent was to show that you were wrong in those declarations, and that there are ample facts to prove that such allegations were groundless. Groundless statements are otherwise known as fiction using polite terms. If you take offense at being proven wrong based on something that you wrote, then I would suggest that you re-examine your own words.

[.lonewolf]

I don't mean to offend anyone but this is turning into a "Who knows the most?" topic... opposed to a friendly debate.

All the facts are on the net so I don't see the point of these "lefts, rights and uppercuts" anymore.

CLOSED

[imported_wyze]

I don't mean to offend anyone but this is turning into a "Who knows the most?" topic... opposed to a friendly debate.

All the facts are on the net so I don't see the point of these "lefts, rights and uppercuts" anymore.

CLOSED

That's for sure. One gets the sense that some of the forum members are M$ lawyers / PR reps

[balding_parrot]

I don't mean to offend anyone but this is turning into a "Who knows the most?" topic... opposed to a friendly debate.

All the facts are on the net so I don't see the point of these "lefts, rights and uppercuts" anymore.

Exactly.

I said this earlier and was told that I jump the gun.

OK it's time to get this back to the healthy discussion it started out with, rather than the usual MS bashing, my distro is better than yours, speculation and politics. None of which is needed here.

Any more, and I will put an end to it.

Rather than it getting back to the healthy discussion, it has just descended even further into the usual MS bashing, my distro is better than yours, speculation and politics.

So it turns out I wasn't jumping the gun at all.

There is no hope for this thread.