I hate microsoft, but I must admit...

[psychono2]

bleh!!! sega ever since that new dude started runnin the company all there sonic games totally suck

 

[Wolvey]

I agree but with games like Monkey Ball and F - Zero. They're still pulling out some classics!

 

[psychono2]

yes,monkey ball is a good,sorta has a arcade feel to it.

 

[Wolvey]

Been impressed with their multiplayer games, Monkey target, Boxing and the wii one's are mind blowing. Hurdles is my fav, wiggle those pads!

 

[psychono2]

is it better on the wii or the same as the last....iam still on the wii hunt yaa know.

 

[vagrant]

You know the funny thing about everyone that hates Microsoft, most people have no real reason to hate them. There are a select few that have legitimate reasons for disliking MS and things they have done, but a majority of the haters are some type of fanboy.

Windows is more flexible and open then the Mac OS, yet everyone complains how MS forces you to use there software. The reason Apples do not get viruses is because it is so lock down and linear, where the flexibility of window is so open, people with write software to take advantage of the non computer savvy.

I like Apple, even though I don’t use Macs much, but like a lot of there products, and I like Microsoft and a lot of the products it makes. The xbox360 is awesome, Windows Vista is cool, but the Zune kind of sucks. The Zune it self is nice, but the overall strategy and use of DRM is a deal killer for me.

As for Bill Gates, he is one of the most noble men around, for a man worth several billion dollars, donating 40% of his money to charities and stepping down as CEO from one of the largest companies in the world to help run the day to day operation for said charity is unheard of.

I gurantee any of my college professors who have been working in the computer tech/networking fields since before most of us have been alive, could put up every good arguments as to why microsoft blows.

Such as that closed source monopolizing leads to slow advancements and crappier product results.

And Active Directory is still slow and underdeveloped.

 

[punkfan]

I gurantee any of my college professors who have been working in the computer tech/networking fields since before most of us have been alive, could put up every good arguments as to why microsoft blows.

Such as that closed source monopolizing leads to slow advancements and crappier product results.

And Active Directory is still slow and underdeveloped.

Those same professors could also put up every good argument as to why microsoft is good aslo. I have some time in with networking and programming, I am just saying it is easier to program with Window then Apple. There or a lot of other OS out there that make it even easier then Window, but most of the home PC user aren't CPU savvy enough to use then on a regular basis. Linux for example is a great open source OS, but there are not enough people computer literate enough to be comfortable using it every day.

I agree the monopolizing is a bad thing in any market, especially in software design, but they have done a lot to bring computer from the work environment to our homes.

 

[vagrant]

Those same professors could also put up every good argument as to why microsoft is good aslo. I have some time in with networking and programming, I am just saying it is easier to program with Window then Apple. There or a lot of other OS out there that make it even easier then Window, but most of the home PC user aren't CPU savvy enough to use then on a regular basis. Linux for example is a great open source OS, but there are not enough people computer literate enough to be comfortable using it every day.

I agree the monopolizing is a bad thing in any market, especially in software design, but they have done a lot to bring computer from the work environment to our homes.

...The reason why people are only use to windows is because of monopolizing.

So you can't really use that as a reason for microsoft.

And IBM probably would have became today's Microsoft.

 

[Cabe]

Not mentioning how they started out by stealing WYSIWYG from Mac and call it Windows.

WYSIWYG stands for What You See Is What You Get - A type of editing program. Notepad can be used to edit HTML but in its code form whereas there are other editors that lets you actually edit what you will get. Hense the name, Notepad you have to open the HTML file in a browser where as a WYSIWIG editor will let you see the results itself. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG )

I believe what you ment to say was that Micro$oft stole a WIMP interface (Windows Icons Menus Pointers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) ). Well fact of the matter is Apple didn't come up with that either. The stole it off Xerox( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto ). Apple made it popular then Micro$oft came along and refined it. The early Windows where better than the early Mac OS's imo and still are, but Apple are catching up

 

[didibus]

Hum... Well, maybe what I'm talking about is WIMP. The story I was told is that at first, Apple were designing a new OS which was codenamed WYSIWYG, because it would be their first GUI OS, hence why they chose the acronym what you see is what you get. Bill Gates was part of the development team and stole the code by patenting the idea behind the technology before Apple did. Which is basically why people attributes Microsoft rise to power to the patent laws frenzy. So Apple had to find an alternative way to do the same thing, which they finally did and that was Lisa, which is the ancestor of Mac OS before they switched it to Next OS.

 

[Sovieto]

hmm, well, first off, the xbox live service costs them money to, to run the servers and buy the movies and features they have. Pay designers so you can customize it, and pay people to match it whenever something is wrong. Thats why you pay...
and besides that, i dont care, im hella happy, 360 is pumping out hella good games that im having more fun with that games on other systems, so why should i care?
and your article is extremely bias ><

p.s. didibus, cant i have a link for that story? and i didnt even look at your post till after i posted that ^ cause we both started off with hmm, well

okay, this pretty much clears everything up about bill gates and apple
http://www.jmusheneaux.com/39c.htm

 

[didibus]

Sovieto, I can't really give you a link because I got this from my English Teacher. Who seem to be very educated on the subject since he had us read 3 essays on Bill Gates during the whole semester. The site you found kinda clears some things up and blurs other.

Well, I know it cost money to develop Xbox Live, but they are making money out of Xbox, good money. If they weren't they would stop doing Xbox. When you have a product, it's just normal you reinvest some of your profit into making your product better and more attractive to the consumers. By making us pay for Live, they negate any loss. So it's kind of making the product attractive without having to ship in cash for it. Let the consumers pay. So we're just paying extra when we were already paying enough. Look at Sony, they kept the online free and they are even losing 255$ on every console. M$ makes 50 dollar of the consoles and still had us pay for Live. As consumers, it's our job to react and condemned this practice so we don't get screwed. If you always settle, you'll never get what you deserve.

P.S.: I admit that right now, 360 has the greatest games. That's why I own one

 

[Sovieto]

Sovieto, I can't really give you a link because I got this from my English Teacher. Who seem to be very educated on the subject since he had us read 3 essays on Bill Gates during the whole semester. The site you found kinda clears some things up and blurs other.

Well, I know it cost money to develop Xbox Live, but they are making money out of Xbox, good money. If they weren't they would stop doing Xbox. When you have a product, it's just normal you reinvest some of your profit into making your product better and more attractive to the consumers. By making us pay for Live, they negate any loss. So it's kind of making the product attractive without having to ship in cash for it. Let the consumers pay. So we're just paying extra when we were already paying enough. Look at Sony, they kept the online free and they are even losing 255$ on every console. M$ makes 50 dollar of the consoles and still had us pay for Live. As consumers, it's our job to react and condemned this practice so we don't get screwed. If you always settle, you'll never get what you deserve.

P.S.: I admit that right now, 360 has the greatest games. That's why I own one

btw, i wasnt trying to like disprove you about the bill gates thing, i was seriously interested in it, but what happened was bill gates had microsoft while apple was making then they announced pre windows (apple + window) then i guess bill gates broke off and created Windows 1 but to this day we still writes software for apple, and there was a patent fight, atleast, this is what happened according to the website that had a timeline and all
okay, anyways, ps3s online, from what i hear, still is very basic.

 

[didibus]

Yea I know you were not trying to prove me wrong and anyways, point is the whole windows apple thing is fishy. I think we at least got the basic idea of what happened.

I guess the PS3 has a basic online right now. I doubt it's because it's free thought. It's just younger, Microsoft started his beginning with Xbox. Plus, Microsoft being a software company got more experience with the whole online mess. Anyways, 4$ per month considering it's 50$ for 12+1 month isn't so much. What I'd be worried is if they all start charging they could all raise prices. Also, I hate that both me and my bro has to buy the stupid thing if we both want to play online, it should be console specific not account specific. This way my friends and everyone could play online when they come at my house without having to guest or play with my account.

 

[Sovieto]

Yea I know you were not trying to prove me wrong and anyways, point is the whole windows apple thing is fishy. I think we at least got the basic idea of what happened.

I guess the PS3 has a basic online right now. I doubt it's because it's free thought. It's just younger, Microsoft started his beginning with Xbox. Plus, Microsoft being a software company got more experience with the whole online mess. Anyways, 4$ per month considering it's 50$ for 12+1 month isn't so much. What I'd be worried is if they all start charging they could all raise prices. Also, I hate that both me and my bro has to buy the stupid thing if we both want to play online, it should be console specific not account specific. This way my friends and everyone could play online when they come at my house without having to guest or play with my account.

Oh, you could like recover your gamertag though, i think..but I'm sure they M$ wont change online prices, and if they do it'll probably be for the next console. If you think about it, for XBOX it was 12 months for 50 bucks now its 13 months for 50 bucks for the 360.