No Info Rights Management for Office:Mac says M$!?

hulkaros

hulkaros

The Incredible...
Here is a piece:
"Information Rights Management (IRM) — the elements of RMS that will be embedded in Microsoft Office 2003 — will be available for Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook once Office 2003 ships commercially this summer. IRM will be included as part of all the SKUs of Office 2003. But Microsoft has no plans to add IRM to its Mac Office product, officials said."

Here is the whole story about stupid M$ (for me) wanting badly to combine IRM with everything Wintel... :mad:
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,995638,00.asp
 
Well this is a problem isn't it? Not that M$ is going to put drm into Office, but that they are not going to do it for the Mac version. The problem is that then Mac Office users will not be able to use documents that utilize these drm features! I see this as being a bad thing if Windoze Office users start using these features day to day, this could really have a negative impact for those trying to get their Mac use accepted in the corp world.
 
Well, that's the question. Maybe Office v.X will just OPEN these documents? We'll see, I guess...
 
they're embedding elements of Richard Michael Stallman in MS Office? I never thought I'd see the day...
 
I see this digital rights management thing in M$ Office just causing eventually a lot of users to migrate from Windoze to Linux and Macs ...
 
Won't happen, Gia... Sadly, a lot of people swallow a lot of MS b*llsh*t. They've done it before, they'll do it again. MS is continually driving people on other platforms insane by introducing new incompatibilities to Office... :/
 
Well - converting them will be easier. If they have no $$ to get a new computer (read: a mac) I can always show how to install Linux... O_0
 
Originally posted by fryke
Well, that's the question. Maybe Office v.X will just OPEN these documents? We'll see, I guess...
Click to expand...

That would defeat the whole purpose of drm to allow them to be opened. The documents will be encrypted and if the OSX version of office isn't smart enough to apply the correct keys to decrypt it, then you won't have any access to the document (unless of course it was saved without any drm info).
 
Originally posted by fryke
Won't happen, Gia... Sadly, a lot of people swallow a lot of MS b*llsh*t. They've done it before, they'll do it again. MS is continually driving people on other platforms insane by introducing new incompatibilities to Office... :/
Click to expand...

DRM is NOT inherintly evil. There could be MANY business uses for DRM in Office. Companies produce reams of documents that they'd love to have a way of restricting access to (and yes I know, if someone REALLY wanted to re-distribute a document, they could always print screen, yada, yada).

Heck look at Apple's recent pulling of Safari betas. Imagine if they had a way of applying DRM to the beta so that only those who are authorized could run it. That's not an evil use right?

How about bank statements that could only be opened by the account holder. How about digitally signed documents that only your lawyer could open and he could only file, not make copies of? How about newsletters that can "only" be opened by subscribers. There are MANY quite legitimate uses for drm that ANY user can apply. After all if _you_ don't like it, then don't produce any documents that have it and don't accept any documents that have it, right?

It's fine if DRM doesn't fit into your world view, but to claim that it's some bs JUST because it's being lofted by M$ is having a very narrow view of the world.
 
...reasons and of course for helping their customers... like their built-in Internet Explorer, MP3, Windows Media Content, Java, HTML, etc. incompatibilities and of course not patching their "old" SERIOUS OSes because they "cannot" or because they care about their customers... http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/21199.html

Answer this: Does anyone honestly believe that M$ want this IRM thing to protect their customers or to lock them in their products cycle? Methinks EASILY that they go for another future lock-in...

To me this is not different than the copy-protected CDs and DVDs which are truly other ways to control your customers and not to help them... Instead of punish your customers, educate them Mr. Gates but then again you, yourself are uneducated about RPRM (Real Peoples Rights Management).

Oh, and in another news report from M$ Monopoly: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1000451,00.asp

Am I the only one who sees this M$ truly to become the one and only Evil Empire? Oh, I keep forgetting that they are doing this for our own good like Mr. Bush and Blair are doing now for Iraq's people...

Until Apple keeps us free from M$ BS I would be more than happy to support them... The same with Linux and other truly freedom OSes out there... Dark Side sax...
 
But honstly, I think that this feature could be put into Office 11 for Mac when that (hopefully) comes out in 2004. I mean every major Office upgrade for Windows has been followed by one for mac - Office 97 Win - Office 98 Mac, Office 2000 Win, Office 2001 Mac, Office XP Win , Office v.X Mac. I'm sure it will be in our next built and we'll have to wait patiently until then.
 
Originally posted by hulkaros
...
Answer this: Does anyone honestly believe that M$ want this IRM thing to protect their customers or to lock them in their products cycle? Methinks EASILY that they go for another future lock-in...

To me this is not different than the copy-protected CDs and DVDs which are truly other ways to control your customers and not to help them... ...
Click to expand...

Does this mean that _any_ new feature that M$ introduces is only designed to "lock them in"?

You are missing the whole point. Their office suite ALLOWS YOU to place DRM restricitions on documents YOU produce. This is NOTHING like copy protection, it's not designed for ISV's, it's designed for US. If you don't need the feature, fine, don't use it, but don't presume to speak for "the rest of us" who actually might have a need to use something like it.

Can we drop the whole "evil empire" stuff, PLEASE. There other threads on this board about Apple "screwing" their independant retailers. People whine about Apple crushing the clone market. If Apple owned 90%+ of the OS market everyone would be saying the same junk about them.

Not that M$ doesn't do some crappy stuff (and produce some crappy stuff), but please proffer some intelligent reasons, and not drag out this M$ is evil, anything M$ does is to further their own cause, yadda, yadda. You can replace M$ in this last sentence with just about any company. DRM in the proper context IS useful, like it or not.
 
In the best of all worlds, yes, it's a feature. The actual problem, though, would be an image thing for Apple. A bad one. So you're using Macs. And your client thinks it's hip to send you Word files with digital rights management, because of 'security'. So, what, will you buy a PC for that purpose? Or tell him that "Macs can't do that..."?
 
Originally posted by binaryDigit
Does this mean that _any_ new feature that M$ introduces is only designed to "lock them in"?

You are missing the whole point. Their office suite ALLOWS YOU to place DRM restricitions on documents YOU produce. This is NOTHING like copy protection, it's not designed for ISV's, it's designed for US. If you don't need the feature, fine, don't use it, but don't presume to speak for "the rest of us" who actually might have a need to use something like it.

Can we drop the whole "evil empire" stuff, PLEASE. There other threads on this board about Apple "screwing" their independant retailers. People whine about Apple crushing the clone market. If Apple owned 90%+ of the OS market everyone would be saying the same junk about them.

Not that M$ doesn't do some crappy stuff (and produce some crappy stuff), but please proffer some intelligent reasons, and not drag out this M$ is evil, anything M$ does is to further their own cause, yadda, yadda. You can replace M$ in this last sentence with just about any company. DRM in the proper context IS useful, like it or not.
Click to expand...

You know what? You can say whatever you like about M$ but that doesn't change the fact that with every product they release they go ahead and "disable" their previous ones... That's why years after years people keep buying those Office and Windows products even if they don't actually use/need them but because they have that new feature which other people/companies may actually use thus they HAVE TO HAVE the new versiona... If this isn't lock in what is? And YES M$ is evil at its best... And YES I think that sometimes Apple is a puppet of M$... Let me ask you this: If they were actually a nice bunch of people how come and they never: Open Source anything? Lower their prices? Try to be more backward compatible? Support other platforms the same way with their own Windows? Try to improve their products even after they win their opponents? Support other hardware platforms than just Intel/AMD? Mess less with others standards? Do this and that?

And don't give me that if Apple or this and that company would be in the same position they would do the same thing! Or that they don't have the resources! Or that they are company and if they do this and that they will not earn that much! Big freaking deal! Right now M$ is in that position and they act evil and they have no excuse because out there, others offer loads more with NO money at all... And even if other companies are acting evil (Apple for example) they should show them otherwise! You aren't fighting evil by doing evil, you only raise the bar of evil! And for that M$ have no equal right now.

As for DRM we all know that there is no secure digital system that cannot be broken even by an individual!!! This DRM isn't a system to protect anything! Is another lock-in from M$... And if you feel otherwise let me remind you of XP infamous Activation method, DVDs, Copy-Protected CDs, Firewalls, "insert ANY protection system here", which in everyday computer life it gets broken with the speed of light... Before even companies give to the market that locked product! The worst part of M$ being just evil, is that people actually think that M$ cares for them by offering them great technology whereareas it is actually another way to succeed M$ moto: Each house and office with a PC running Windows only! And they fell for it! BIG time! Also, if you think that M$ isn't evil how come during their big trial some "nice" notes got out? Or how they feel about their big enemy now, Linux, which if they were able they would pay people not to use it! Gimme a break! M$ is PURE evil and they actually like it this way because it pays them best! Oh, and yes Intel are evil too! :D

It takes two to tango the ::evil:: way! ;)
 
Originally posted by hulkaros
Let me ask you this: If they were actually a nice bunch of people how come and they never: Open Source anything? Lower their prices? Try to be more backward compatible? Support other platforms the same way with their own Windows? Try to improve their products even after they win their opponents? Support other hardware platforms than just Intel/AMD? Mess less with others standards? Do this and that?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm perfectly with you otherwise, but those are not definitions of 'being nice', and a company that wants to be as profitable as possible isn't exactly _asked_ to be nice, either. Releasing software under open source licenses erases profit and helps the competition, at least if you're Microsoft, and that's exactly what they don't want.

It's not that I don't _understand_ why Microsoft does it, it's just that, yes, it's evil. ;)
 
Originally posted by fryke
In the best of all worlds, yes, it's a feature. The actual problem, though, would be an image thing for Apple. A bad one. So you're using Macs. And your client thinks it's hip to send you Word files with digital rights management, because of 'security'. So, what, will you buy a PC for that purpose? Or tell him that "Macs can't do that..."?
Click to expand...
I will send that customer to a URL of software that will inevitably exist that cracks DRM in these docs, and opens them anyway. And I will send them this URL in a secure email from Mac OS X using SSL/SSH whatever security we use for em@il.:)
 
Originally posted by hulkaros
... the fact that with every product they release they go ahead and "disable" their previous ones...

...
Click to expand...

What? Disable? How on earth do they do that? There are still a ton of people out there using Office 4.2. Do you actually have any examples of this behaviour? Heck, I ran IE 4.0 on my machine at home (Win2K, I use Mozilla so I never bothered to upgrade, BUT I still kept IE around for that occasional website that just wouldn't act correctly) until just this last xmas.


That's why years after years people keep buying those Office and Windows products even if they don't actually use/need them but because they have that new feature which other people/companies may actually use thus they HAVE TO HAVE the new versiona... If this isn't lock in what is?
Click to expand...

Wait, are we talking about M$ being evil or users being dumb. If people insist on upgrading to "have the latest and greatest" how on earth is this M$'s fault and how is it any different than ANYONE else?


And YES M$ is evil at its best... And YES I think that sometimes Apple is a puppet of M$... Let me ask you this: If they were actually a nice bunch of people how come and they never: Open Source anything?
Click to expand...

TONS of companies don't open source there code, to say that this is a stretch would be granting it too much leeway.

Lower their prices?
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like Apple lowered theirs for iLife. Like how Apple lowered theirs for Jaguar? How much cheaper is Photoshop now than 5 years ago?

Try to be more backward compatible?
Click to expand...

How far back are you referring to. I've already talked above about this whole leaving previous versions behind thing. I'm not saying that they are completely perfect in this area, but there is also the case of leaving behind that which should be left behind. Show me an example of them dropping support for something that wasn't a "natural" evolution for that product.

Support other platforms the same way with their own Windows?
Click to expand...

Oh, I guess any Mac software doesn't count? And besides the Mac, what other platforms matter? Linux? Why would they support an OS that they considered competitors? How does this make any sense.

Try to improve their products even after they win their opponents?
Click to expand...

IE hasen't improved (not that its perfect of course, far from it, but to say that it hasen't improved is just silly). Ditto for Windows in general, Office. All products where they basically have a lock on the market. If by improve you have something else more specific in mind, then we might have an agreement.

Support other hardware platforms than just Intel/AMD?
Click to expand...

I have NT4 running on a PowerPC right now (email server). I have several Alphas that will run NT (though I don't). And do you know why this support didn't live beyond Win2K, NOBODY wanted it. NT3.51 supported PPC, Alpha, and MIPS. Windows CE supports ARM, MIPS, Hitachi SHx, x86 and used to support PPC.

Mess less with others standards?
Click to expand...

Got a point here. This is one of the most annoying things about M$, the whole concept of them "embracing" a standard. Basically the embrace of death.

And don't give me that if Apple or this and that company would be in the same position they would do the same thing! ...
Click to expand...

That is in response to you defining evil by it's acts, but yet these acts when done by other companies aren't evil? BTW, I don't define evil as the lack of good, as you seem to be leaning towards.


As for DRM we all know that there is no secure digital system that cannot be broken even by an individual!!!
Click to expand...

True. Do you have a lock on your door (car or home)? Do you use it? You do know that anyone with the right motivation can break into your house despite the locks, right? Do you brush your teeth, even people who brush their teeth religously get cavities. You miss the point, the point is to provide a system to make it MORE secure, not an impossible attempt to make it ABSOLUTELY secure. Plus there is an entire legal aspect. If the act of breaking the copyright involves the use of an explicit program whose only (or primary) purpose is the cracking of the documents DRM protections, then it is obvious that that is your intention. You can't say, "oh I didn't know I wasn't supposed to forward this on to everybody", since the only way you could have done so was to explicitly run an app to defeat this protection. In the business world, this is important when it's time to sick the legal dogs on them.


This DRM isn't a system to protect anything! Is another lock-in from M$...
Click to expand...

Once again, just because YOU don't see a useful purpose, please don't pretend that no one else can. This is your mis-informed opinion. I've given you examples of how this can be a very useful feature to many (esp in the corp. world). If you choose to still ignore it, fine, but you are doing just that, ignoring realities.


And if you feel otherwise let me remind you of XP infamous Activation method, DVDs, Copy-Protected CDs, Firewalls,
Click to expand...

XP activation was never intended to be anything other than copy protection. AND once again, DRM is NOT A FORM OF SOFTWARE COPY PROTECTION. It can surely be used as such (probably not very well) since an application is just a bunch of files, but this is not it's focus. BTW, what on earth does a firewall have to do with copy protection/DRM. Firewalls work extremely well. Just try getting into my computers at home from the internet (you can't since I have NO incoming ports that are available).

Also, if you think that M$ isn't evil how come during their big trial some "nice" notes got out?
Click to expand...

Ahhh, thank you for bringing this up as this will be a good way to finish this whole thread off (at least as far as I'm concerned).

I NEVER said that M$ wasn't "evil". You would be hard pressed to find ANYONE who dislikes M$ more than me. HOWEVER, the reasons I have are based on something more than a simple belief (M$ BAD) or these notions of their actions that are either not real, or not any different than anyone else. I've been in this industry for a long time and have seen M$ go from this dinky little outfit in rainy Washington to what they are now and have had years of actual observation and context to get to the opinion I have now (which has nothing to do with "evil", but more to do with "advancing the market"). Your reasons for sticking this "evil" label are misguided and hold very little water.

It's funny now this whole "your either for us, or against us" attitude permeates. Just because I didn't accept your arguments, you automatically assumed that I was some M$ worshipper. It was your ARGUMENTS that I didn't accept. If you go back and read everything I've posted (both here and on the thread about Intel) I NEVER make any statements that apply a label of good or bad about either company (as a whole). You come up with these statements, I disagree with the statements and I tell you why, hopefully with facts and information to back me up. I try not to put out blanket statements that can not be verified or are based purely on baseless opinion. Simple as that.

You obviously have your mind in the camp you like to be in. You are of course free to have your opinions, I merely ask that if you profer some evidence to support that opinion, that this evidence be factual and provable and sensible in the proper context.
 
Holy crud that last reply was long. Sorry about that. I'm pretty much tapped out on this topic, plus it's getting a bit off topic (not for the thread per se, but definitely for this section). If anyone wants to talk more about Microsoft and how they fit into the world, feel free to start a thread in the Cafe and we can drone on endlessly there. I would love to have a chance to be on the anti-M$ (or Intel) side of things for a change.
 
Originally posted by binaryDigit
What? Disable? How on earth do they do that? There are still a ton of people out there using Office 4.2. Do you actually have any examples of this behaviour? Heck, I ran IE 4.0 on my machine at home (Win2K, I use Mozilla so I never bothered to upgrade, BUT I still kept IE around for that occasional website that just wouldn't act correctly) until just this last xmas.

You mean that you didn't know that they do not support both in software and hardware Win9x and NT products? For a company of such scale they should have, you know! Especially for a nice company as M$...

Wait, are we talking about M$ being evil or users being dumb. If people insist on upgrading to "have the latest and greatest" how on earth is this M$'s fault and how is it any different than ANYONE else?

It is not always of having the latest and the greatest except if that's a base opinion to built up in order to call M$ customers dumb... It is the case of not being able to open Office 2000 docs in Office 97 and not just vise versa... Or Upgrade your NT network without rebuilding its structure from the beginning in order to "upgrade" to Windows 2003 Server...

TONS of companies don't open source there code, to say that this is a stretch would be granting it too much leeway.

Actually, TONS of companies open their Source Code... Only the Capitalistic ones like Adobe, Apple (although Apple gives something back), M$, et al aren't...

Oh, you mean like Apple lowered theirs for iLife. Like how Apple lowered theirs for Jaguar? How much cheaper is Photoshop now than 5 years ago?

Guh, ahem... Actually, Apple gives away their products if you ask me...
-$50 ONLY for iLife!?!?!?!
-$130 for an OS that is if not better than XP PRO is close in features and capabilities? AND it comes preinstalled in ALL new Macs for FREE!???
-$200 for OS X 5-pack for families!?! A steal by all means... How much would you pay for 5 family computers even for XP Home? I didn't hear ya... Can you repeat?
-$1000 for OS X Server Unlimited license? That's not even a steal! The only thing that can compete this is for a company to give you this for free... Then again can you tell me the price for Windows 2000(or 03) Server for 100 users? I can't hear you now... What gives? AND you get this for free when you buy a XServe!
AWESOME pricing and I hope that others will follow with the quality and pricing scheme that Apple does... Then again, we are talking about the Evil Empire which does not care about giving away only taking away by its customers...

How far back are you referring to. I've already talked above about this whole leaving previous versions behind thing. I'm not saying that they are completely perfect in this area, but there is also the case of leaving behind that which should be left behind. Show me an example of them dropping support for something that wasn't a "natural" evolution for that product.

If I'm not mistaken... Can I open an Access 97 DB under Access XP without problems? NO WAY... Not even under Access 2000... Gimme a break... This isn't hardly a "natural" evolution! This is simply another lock-in... And the worst part, I repeat, is that M$ has supposedly both money and army of programmers to do it EASILY... But they do not want to do it... They don't care...

Oh, I guess any Mac software doesn't count? And besides the Mac, what other platforms matter? Linux? Why would they support an OS that they considered competitors? How does this make any sense.

What? Mac support? They are making fun of the Mac platform... Everything is too late too little... Gimme a break... And although Linux is competitor as an OS how come and is competitor with say Office, IE, Outlook, etc? If they were in their right minds they should have AT LEAST Office NEW version products for all major OSes out there... They could have more money because they could have more customers...

IE hasen't improved (not that its perfect of course, far from it, but to say that it hasen't improved is just silly). Ditto for Windows in general, Office. All products where they basically have a lock on the market. If by improve you have something else more specific in mind, then we might have an agreement.

Silly is to believe that IE holds a candle against Mozilla, Opera, Phoenix, et al. Not even in features other of course of crashing always... Or that M$ products are the best out there... Only on the bloat department!

I have NT4 running on a PowerPC right now (email server). I have several Alphas that will run NT (though I don't). And do you know why this support didn't live beyond Win2K, NOBODY wanted it. NT3.51 supported PPC, Alpha, and MIPS. Windows CE supports ARM, MIPS, Hitachi SHx, x86 and used to support PPC.

Gimme a break... They stop supporting NT even on Wintels... Yeah... Me too, have that Spectrum loading Commando via tape... And of course nobody wanted it because the implementation of that time and because they didn't want to improve it was FUBAR compared to i386... As for CE: I cannot exactly use it for PhotoShop, can I? What's next? You gonna tell me that M$ Watches are the next big thing for computers?

Got a point here. This is one of the most annoying things about M$, the whole concept of them "embracing" a standard. Basically the embrace of death.

If I read you ok, my reply is: Since when Evil doesn't like Death? They are one and the same...

That is in response to you defining evil by it's acts, but yet these acts when done by other companies aren't evil? BTW, I don't define evil as the lack of good, as you seem to be leaning towards.

Who said that most of nowadays companies, governments, et al aren't evil? Of course they are! They are democratic monarchs :rolleyes: And yes the lack of good is gain of evil which M$ and Intel truly are... Are you sure that you aren't a Sith Lord?

True. Do you have a lock on your door (car or home)? Do you use it? You do know that anyone with the right motivation can break into your house despite the locks, right? Do you brush your teeth, even people who brush their teeth religously get cavities. You miss the point, the point is to provide a system to make it MORE secure, not an impossible attempt to make it ABSOLUTELY secure. Plus there is an entire legal aspect. If the act of breaking the copyright involves the use of an explicit program whose only (or primary) purpose is the cracking of the documents DRM protections, then it is obvious that that is your intention. You can't say, "oh I didn't know I wasn't supposed to forward this on to everybody", since the only way you could have done so was to explicitly run an app to defeat this protection. In the business world, this is important when it's time to sick the legal dogs on them.

So, you like leaving under locks and restrictions... Power to you... But it was a time that digital things weren't locked and still M$ made money... Loads of it... Back then they didn't know of legal stuff, etc? Gimme a break... If you have something to hide or fear about, you keep it in a safe or something... I think most people don't have safes, alarms, etc. at their houses... How come Wintel wants us to use more locks in a digital world than the real one? Because they afraid to let people be truly free at that digital world they create as an ongoing process... They want people to be locked in a digital world... And no I'm not a technophobian one, I'm just a Dark Side opponent :D

Once again, just because YOU don't see a useful purpose, please don't pretend that no one else can. This is your mis-informed opinion. I've given you examples of how this can be a very useful feature to many (esp in the corp. world). If you choose to still ignore it, fine, but you are doing just that, ignoring realities.

What about PGP? Password protected zipped files? Scrumbled files? Etc? These aren't enough? Give yourself a break... YOU are trying to mis-inform us: A feature? Yes! A lock-in feature that is... Because for the average Joe out there he/she will read that the new M$ product has this awesome feature and because other products do not have it (even the older ones from M$) he/she would go ahead and buy it even if he/she will NEVER use it...

XP activation was never intended to be anything other than copy protection. AND once again, DRM is NOT A FORM OF SOFTWARE COPY PROTECTION. It can surely be used as such (probably not very well) since an application is just a bunch of files, but this is not it's focus. BTW, what on earth does a firewall have to do with copy protection/DRM. Firewalls work extremely well. Just try getting into my computers at home from the internet (you can't since I have NO incoming ports that are available).

You didn't read my exact words, did you? Because I had a full line which included this: " "insert ANY protection system here", which in everyday computer life it gets broken with the speed of light... " I was talking about all those protection things in our digital lives... Damn! We have more locks and protections in computers than a family who lives by having safe sex and their house is full of alarms, safes, unbreakable doors, windows bars, etc... If they want to protect companies they should do so by releasing a Windows DRM version or Office DRM version, etc. and give us a break...

Ahhh, thank you for bringing this up as this will be a good way to finish this whole thread off (at least as far as I'm concerned).

I NEVER said that M$ wasn't "evil". You would be hard pressed to find ANYONE who dislikes M$ more than me. HOWEVER, the reasons I have are based on something more than a simple belief (M$ BAD) or these notions of their actions that are either not real, or not any different than anyone else. I've been in this industry for a long time and have seen M$ go from this dinky little outfit in rainy Washington to what they are now and have had years of actual observation and context to get to the opinion I have now (which has nothing to do with "evil", but more to do with "advancing the market"). Your reasons for sticking this "evil" label are misguided and hold very little water.

It's funny now this whole "your either for us, or against us" attitude permeates. Just because I didn't accept your arguments, you automatically assumed that I was some M$ worshipper. It was your ARGUMENTS that I didn't accept. If you go back and read everything I've posted (both here and on the thread about Intel) I NEVER make any statements that apply a label of good or bad about either company (as a whole). You come up with these statements, I disagree with the statements and I tell you why, hopefully with facts and information to back me up. I try not to put out blanket statements that can not be verified or are based purely on baseless opinion. Simple as that.

You obviously have your mind in the camp you like to be in. You are of course free to have your opinions, I merely ask that if you profer some evidence to support that opinion, that this evidence be factual and provable and sensible in the proper context.

Nice speech! ;) But if a company which has BILLIONS of dollars and thousands of employees says this is the best that can offer it can only be pure EVIL... Simple as that... People out there help other people without them having not even the basics of every day life and this HUGE corporation would like us to believe that they created computers and the Internet... If this isn't evil, what is? DeCaprio? Well, maybe! :rolleyes: :D

PS.Damn even Apple which has A LOT LESS than M$ tries to give back by Open Sourcing and holding prices down for their software... M$ could even go ahead and give more products for free and not just IE and OE... And yes, Apple is in some extent, M$ and Intel puppet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top