Microsoft to release iPod rival

[al2n]

CNN Story (http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/21/technology/microsoft.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes)

A little late aren't they?

[al2i]

I watch TV shows I've recorded as well as full-length movies on my little Palm t|x for less money than the stupid iPod that only plays music. I had to install a lot of public domain software to do it, but it works well, and I get to play music, play games, surf the web wirelessly (I've made many posts here from my Palm) and have all of my notes, contacts, etc. in the palm of my hand.

iPods are for suckers.

[KA8NCR]

Microsoft is always late to the table.

This is a company that simply can not compete in a free-market environment unless they can walk in and create a monopoly or their competition becomes so sluggish and inept that it's handed to them (Sony comes to mind).

Aside from the Xbox, Microsoft is unable to produce any consumer products that stay on the market very long. Sony gave them entry into the game console market. But aside from that, they've had their hat handed to them each and every time.

Microsoft is able to make money where there is no reasonable alternative. Aside from that, they're lost. If it wasn't for DOS legacy and OS tax, they'd not be what is shipped on Dell computers or any other computer for that matter. Windows is arcane and so poorly programmed that Microsoft is about to be surpassed due to the need to keep people from having their systems taken-over by nefarious types.

[AG3Y]

NCR, nothing personal, but when I see a post like yours, I want to ask the question, "Well, do you think you could do any better? " I know I am opening a can of worms, here, but what is there about Microsoft programming that makes it so "arcane". Just exactly what do you think a computer should be able to do before it will no longer be considered an "arcane" piece of junk?

I am reminded of the Star Trek movie in which Scottie holds up a mouse and starts talking into it. "Hello Computer ? ? " Until he is reminded by the Captain that he is going to have to type on the keyboard. I always wondered, if the idea of typing on a keyboard was so "arcane" and/or "20th century", how in the world Scottie was able to do such a great job of entering the data that he had to do? And BTW, what programming language did he use. . . . "Visual Basic" ?

Well, I just hate to see so much Microsoft bashing taking place, when I hardly ever see any alternative, or someone saying, "I certainly could do it better!" If someone can, why don't they go and start their OWN Several Hundred Million Dollar Business, and prove it to the rest of the world http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif ?

73, and again, nothing personal. Jim

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ July 22 2006,16:30)]NCR, nothing personal, but when I see a post like yours, I want to ask the question, "Well, do you think you could do any better? " #I know I am opening a can of worms, here, but what is there about Microsoft programming that makes it so "arcane". #Just exactly what do you think a computer should be able to do before it will no longer be considered an "arcane" piece of junk? #

I am reminded of the Star Trek movie in which Scottie holds up a mouse and starts talking into it. #"Hello Computer ? ? " #Until he is reminded by the Captain that he is going to have to type on the keyboard. # I always wondered, if the idea of typing on a keyboard was so "arcane" and/or "20th century", how in the world Scottie was able to do such a great job of entering the data that he had to do? # And BTW, what programming language did he use. . . . "Visual Basic" ?

Well, I just hate to see so much Microsoft bashing taking place, when I hardly ever see any alternative, or someone saying, "I certainly could do it better!" # If someone can, why don't they go and start their OWN Several Hundred Million Dollar Business, and prove it to the rest of the world http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif #?

73, and nothing personal. # Jim
MS Windows has more than ninety percent of the PC market.

If it weren't for the professional graphics industry, which has a lot of money invested in Mac front-end technology, Apple would long ago have joined the Commodore 64 in the dustbin of history.

Linux is a joke for any use other than big network servers.

Seems to me ol' Bill ain't done too bad for a Harvard dropout. The man everyone loves to hate simply because they are all jealous that such a nerdy guy could be so wildly successful.

[K6UEY]

What is an "I POD" rival ?
A"U POD" ??
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KA8NCR]

Quote[/b] ]
NCR, nothing personal, but when I see a post like yours, I want to ask the question, "Well, do you think you could do any better? " I know I am opening a can of worms, here, but what is there about Microsoft programming that makes it so "arcane". Just exactly what do you think a computer should be able to do before it will no longer be considered an "arcane" piece of junk?


For starters, the Windows kernel does not hold onto handles for memory allocation. That means if a program you are running requests a malloc() from the kernal and doesn't release it due to poor programming (crash or otherwise), it's LOST until you reboot Windows. Unix has managed to gracefully manage this rudimentary garbage collection since 70's. Ditto for OS/2, BeOS, Minix, QNX and a host of other operating systems. So why hasn't Microsoft? It's 2006 and yet this problem persists. Oh, I know, just r-e-b-o-o-t.

Heard of the term "memory leak"? It wasn't a mainstream term until Windows because it normally was constrained to the time a program was in operation. Not until Microsoft's flawed kernel did it require further attention because now poor programming impacts the damned kernel -- shutting it down doesn't release the resources it requested.

WORSE for Microsoft is that this problem wasn't part of the original NT kernel. The original kernel was based on DEC code (reportedly "borrowed" when they hired the legendary Dave Cutler) and did not suffer this problem.

Here's another one for you. A re-entrant multi-user operating system with a graphical operating system needs to communicate states from the user interface, to the kernel and back again. These message loops are present in just about every OS that has a GUI -- Windows, X (OS X, Unix, Linux), OS/2 .. you name it. But Windows, in its infinite wisdom, permits messages to be injected into the kernel as a user and executed with administrative privilege. This is a fundamental flaw in the Windows OS that will forever make it vulnerable. Word is they've fixed this in Vista, but I remain unconvinced.

Windows NT takes the micro-kernel concept and bastardizes it to the point of irrelevancy. Minix is a famous micro-kernel that embodies security and sanity by running the drivers in user space, not kernel space. This means that bad drivers CAN'T BRING THE SYSTEM DOWN. Microsoft? Oh, let's create a micro kernel but we'll run everything in kernel space so bad network drivers will crash the system. We already know third-party drivers stink, so let's have them affect our core reliability.

Could *I* do any better? Don't know, but it's well documented that there are way better operating systems out there. And even if we are stuck with Windows, Microsoft steadfastly refuses to accept a sophomore year computer science mentality to security and system sanity. I realize there's a requirement for backward compatibilty, but c'mon!

Quote[/b] ]
I am reminded of the Star Trek movie in which Scottie holds up a mouse and starts talking into it. "Hello Computer ? ? " Until he is reminded by the Captain that he is going to have to type on the keyboard. I always wondered, if the idea of typing on a keyboard was so "arcane" and/or "20th century", how in the world Scottie was able to do such a great job of entering the data that he had to do? And BTW, what programming language did he use. . . . "Visual Basic" ?


Oh yeah, Visual Basic. Let's take Beginners All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code and beat it around into an object-oriented language that holds little in common with BASIC and little use as an object oriented language.

Okay, back to your question. It's a movie. I can suspend disbelief for entertainment just as well as the next Star Wars/Star Trek geek.

Quote[/b] ]
Well, I just hate to see so much Microsoft bashing taking place, when I hardly ever see any alternative, or someone saying, "I certainly could do it better!" If someone can, why don't they go and start their OWN Several Hundred Million Dollar Business, and prove it to the rest of the world http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif ?


I'm entitled to bash Microsoft.

For starters, I made a living writing NT system services and a few drivers. I've seen the lousy security model, the absolutely horrible resource management and the lackadaisical attitude toward repair of their own mistakes.

I applaud Microsoft for making the computer ubiquitious in the home and business. Their own profit motive made it all affordable and honestly, generated a lot of productivity and wealth for the country. But the fact remains that they did it through questionable business practices and not to mention, forced upgrades and licensing policies that screwed businesses the world over.

It is THOSE business practices that have concealed better operating systems. Unfortunately for MSFT, they're no longer concealed. While Linux will never stand a chance on the desktop, OS X does. And I really think that the OS X share of the market will be easily 30% in the next five years. It won't reach much more than that, but it'll be enough as the most profitable users will have migrated.

As far as critical applications, Microsoft is already out of that market. QNX is really popular in embedded and industrial applications. Linux does well in taking Microsoft-abandoned hardware and making it useful, extending hardware that's long-off the books.

Finally, Microsoft has given us the solution to every computer problem -- just reboot it. Sorry, I don't buy that. There's computer systems that are quite utilized that have uptimes of years.


http://en.uptime-project.net/page.ph....d=96956 (http://en.uptime-project.net/page.php?page=toplist&content=profile&uid=96956)

Just as bad as lousy software engineering is the continued theme that if you partner with Microsoft, you do so at your own peril.

http://gigaom.com/2006/07/22/zune/

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ July 22 2006,01:46)]CNN Story (http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/21/technology/microsoft.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes)

A little late aren't they?
sure, but internet exploder (and windows, and any number of other computing ideas from microsoft) weren't first out of the gate either. didn't stop them from becoming successful--the success came from marketing and not necessarily from the specific benefits of the technology.

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ July 22 2006,13:36)]MS Windows has more than ninety percent of the PC market.
sure, but this isn't because the technology was better--it is because the marketing of that technology was better.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (n6hcm @ July 23 2006,03:22)]Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ July 22 2006,13:36)]MS Windows has more than ninety percent of the PC market.
sure, but this isn't because the technology was better--it is because the marketing of that technology was better.
Interesting point, and important to remember that buyers "vote with their feet," so to speak.

Of the surviving "desktop" systems, Macintosh and Windows, there has been far more at work than simple marketing. Indeed, Apple Computer has offered some brilliant and successful marketing ploys, yet continues to lose market share.

I would wager that the move to Intel processors (which will bring an end to the exclusion Apple has been able to enforce for so long and result in Winkintoshes before too long as more and more hacks chip away at the citadel) may actually stop Apple's long slide into oblivion. I have often wondered if this might not be a more important, though unacknowledged, rationale that underlay that decision than the heat and energy issues that were "officially" stated.

[al2i]

Briefly,

In The Road Ahead, Bill Gates admits that the way to make a killing is to own the standard that everyone else has to use.

A standard OS was needed, Microsoft came to own that standard. Therefore, Microsoft makes a killing and closes the market to competition.

In an open market, the pressure to cut costs, innovate, and change is much greater.

All of the creative smart people that Microsoft snapped up would have been trying new innovations elsewhere rather than working for the owner of the platform.

[KA8NCR]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ July 23 2006,04:22)]
Quote[/b] ]
Interesting point, and important to remember that buyers "vote with their feet," so to speak.


The point is, they could not prior to the consent decree and even to this day, they can not. Ever try to order an Intel PC without an operating system? Microsoft used to have PC vendors install a sticker that stated "Turning on this PC implies agreement with the DOS licensing agreement". You were taxed for an OS even if you didn't want to run the OS.

That pretty much exists right through today, even though the stickers are long gone and outfits like Dell ostensibly sell systems without an OS. On a retail level, it's very difficult to do that. If you're a business, it's a little easier.

Quote[/b] ]
Of the surviving "desktop" systems, Macintosh and Windows, there has been far more at work than simple marketing. Indeed, Apple Computer has offered some brilliant and successful marketing ploys, yet continues to lose market share.


You would be wrong.

http://www.macworld.com/news/2002/07/03/marketshare/

This article talks about sales market share among the vendors. It assumes that Dell and Gateway are individual systems like Apple. But the numbers remain relevant; Apple's user base is growing and it's not just due to desktop systems. The Xserve and XSAN line of products are unbeatable.

Furthermore, Windows did not become dominant because of marketing. It became dominant because of the legacy DOS tax, backroom dealing with vendors and very shrewd business policies that used residential piracy to increase use.

Microsoft's sales team is very very smart. I just wish that extended to the OS itself.

Quote[/b] ]
I would wager that the move to Intel processors (which will bring an end to the exclusion Apple has been able to enforce for so long and result in Winkintoshes before too long as more and more hacks chip away at the citadel) may actually stop Apple's long slide into oblivion. I have often wondered if this might not be a more important, though unacknowledged, rationale that underlay that decision than the heat and energy issues that were "officially" stated.


The genius that is Apple is that they continue to take the hackers of the world and turn them into unpaid consultants. The number of people running OS X on non-Apple hardware continues to dwindle.

Apple's Macbook Pro line suffers from the typical Intel processor issues. They're power pigs and all that power is turned into heat. But they're not the only ones - Dell notebooks run just as hot with the added advantage of the lithium-ion batteries bursting into flame.

http://www.dell.com/content....&s=corp (http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_12_16_dc_000?c=us&l=en&s=corp)