Posted on 02/23/2005 3:10:53 AM PST by r5boston
Even if there's a newer IE 7 coming before the next Windows release, I won't trust what [its company] says. Nothing says that Microsoft will really secure its browser against silent and malicious ActiveX installations, and nothing says that IE 7 will support the many users who still have Windows 98 and 98 SE (and the few users still using Me who bought a "new" OS, which was really so deceptive that they won't even try to upgrade to XP...).
What is consistently frightening is that Bill tries to convince everybody that the only way to browse the Internet is to use the latest version of Windows, in order to be allowed to get security updates on a free browser. Just think about it: IE 6 is no more secure on Windows 98, and Bill decided to stop all developments for Windows 98. Those who didn't want IE on Windows 98 have long since chosen another browser. And IE 7 will not work on Windows 98.
So it's time to really think about what Bill has wanted: to create a captive market where users are constantly required to update their OS every three years, just to be allowed to get decent updates for the tools they need every day, like a browser.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnet.com ...
In case you didn't notice, it wasn't MS that I was bashing.
And I'm supposed to believe someone who can't even find the shift key?
If I misinterpreted your post I apologize
Yes Microsoft is on top because the produced a better product, namely office. They used office to leverage the desktop with an average (at best) operating system. They have used the operating system to push (in no particular order) a crap database, a crap browser, and a crap web server. Other than office MS has done nothing better than anyone else other than business decisions (and I dont fault them for that). Sometimes a better product loses because of poor management decisions not because another product is better.
Your analogy is flawed, ms has such a poorly designed operating system (car) that something when something breaks the radio (browser) it can bring down your car.
That's a perty picture, but it's very misleading.
What one man can make, another man can break.
Is Safari and firefox free?
Oui.
I have no problems with XP.
If I were having problems with XP I would consider using it.
My motto is: 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.
I'll bookmark this. (just in case) :-)
I still don't trust Gates, though, and I'm rooting for Linux to get quasi-established just to keep a check on him (and Jobs, who is also not someone to trust)
And Firefox rocks.
I guess you prefer Windows...
Never had; Never will.
Far from it, as you'd find if you checked my posting history.
I'm simply pointing out that your being so brickwall safe is a myth.
But you deep down really knew that, right?
I have no idea what you are talking about...
No, I suppose you don't.
Baloney. Market share is not indicative of quality. According to your logic, Dan Rather (7.3 million viewers) is superior to Shepard Smith (5.6 million viewers).
persons having problems with internet explorer do so because of a lack of knowledge. it is equal to blaming your car because you drive into a telephone pole. i tried firefox and was not impressed.
This is Microsoft's typical 'piss-on-the-customer' attitude - the user is always wrong. Apparently, Mac users are superior drivers because they never "drive into a telephone pole" like Windows users.
BTTT
Gates' praise for communism has me kind of freaked, so I'm thinking of getting a MAC as next computer - they are only liberals or socialists or something. OTOH, I'll want to run MS Office on it, which is still Gates.
For the time being, though, my computer with windows 98 is doing just fine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.