If microsoft go OS then Bill Gates will no longer be the Richest man of the world, and He wants to be Richest FOREVER I don't think he would like to step down from the top richest man of the world, do YOU?
He actually told media that he didn't enjoy being the richest man in the world. And, he has given a lot of his money away to charity. I really don't think he would care too much if he wasn't the richest man in the world.
Just bought Vista a couple days ago. Haven't installed it, but it's been on my laptop for nearly 3 months now. Love it. I agree that a lot of people are waiting for the bugs to be sorted out; it'll take time eventually for it to be wide-spread.
No way will Microsoft go open source as long as it is publicly traded. A news release stating that it is now open source would plummet the stock price of Microsoft. I do not think investors let alone the board would let that happen.
That's true but if whey would open source a lot of microsoft bugs could be fixed. It's a pity MS makes business not on fixing old bugs but on making new.
Microsoft open to open source Company says it wants to release more programs to software developers By TODD BISHOP SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Microsoft Corp. says it is looking to turn over more of its programs to open-source software developers, playing a greater role in a process that the Redmond company has criticized strongly at times in the past. Money-makers like the company's Windows operating system and Office productivity suite aren't on the table -- or anywhere near it. But the company has so far released two software-development tools to the open-source community, and it wants to continue the practice, a Microsoft platform manager told an industry group this week. "There's more of that on the way," said Microsoft's Stephen Walli, who oversaw the process of releasing those tools under open-source licenses. "And it's not just about developer tools. There's other things that we can be looking at when you actually look at the breadth of source code that we have, the breadth of software that we have that isn't actually core (to Microsoft's) revenue stream." You can read the rest of the story here: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/179256_msftopen25.html
Go to this web site and see for yourself that Open Source is the future for Micorsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/default.mspx
Apple is about as open source as Microsoft is. Actually Microsoft has open sourced many of its older projects. Apple doesn't always contribute back to the community what they create anyhow, so it's a moot point. Open source doesn't really mean anything. What you really want is for Microsoft's products to be free of charge. In most open source projects less than 1% of users actually contribute to the project in the first place. It's likely that you aren't in that 1% that contributes, you are in the 99% of freeloaders who use the product and do nothing to make it better.
They've built there empire on the fact that they aren't open source. They will never switch to open source unless the government forces them to, which imo, won't happen.
Here's a post about the details of Microsoft the so called opensource: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=2793430&postcount=14 Also guys Microsoft will never turn opensource. They do opensource projects first and then change to paid ones. The Main example of this is Windows Vista which was Windows Longhorn ( Longhorn was the name of the project manager I guess)... They turned it into Vista... read the above link I placed. Its stupid to think that Microsoft will ever change to open source. ... Also talking about Bill Gates doing charity .... that's all for publicity .... If he's so generous to world ... then why dont microsoft sends Free Service Pack cds to its registered users... Simple coz they are Fu*king rude. Charity is for publicity. Even Linux people send free install Cds to common users. Linux project people are not as rich as Microsoft still they send free cds to everyone. I have over 35 Cds of Ubuntu. And Bill gates cant send service pack upgrade Cds to its registered user who have paid for the windows. That's the final truth of Microsoft based on corruption.
I could see why MS doesn't send service pack cds out. To get a SP you have to verify windows. If your running a cracked copy no upgrades for you. Now if they charge for a CD at least they get some money from the people who didn't buy windows in the first place. Kind of like a few people ruined it for everyone. Just like one poster has already said, most of the people complaining about MS going open source would be just as satisfied with MS going free. Theres only a small amount of people that contribute. Open source is a double edged sword. On one hand bugs get fixed and the software is made better. On the other some coders may not be as good as they think and cause more bugs or problems. Yet on another hand you have that small group of people that won't fix the bugs or contribute but would just scan the source for ways to exploit users. So there is good and bad. I personally like commercial software but not the price. However I do use some open source stuff.
Man I guess you didnt read my post. This is no excuse for Microsoft to not send Service Packs Cds to registered users. I am talking about legal version of Windows. Do you even understand what you mean by They can put up authentication for the serial keys and other things on each CD they send. Microsoft says they donate to charity and on the other hand they ask for money from even registered users with a valid windows version. Its like a hidden knife. And by the way I am talking about registered users. Well I dont want to do personal discussion with you on hacking and cracking of windows. I am talking about legal version and registered Microsoft users. So, try to be on topic. I am talking about stingy ness of Microsoft. Even Linux people send 10 to 20 Cds for free then why cant Microsft send a single service pack ( updates cd which doesnt contains Windows itself) for free to its registered users. Though we see Microsoft boosting about its charity alot. ... We are having a good discussion.
Come on that's nonesense. If you didn't know billions of dollars flow out of this charity. You're telling me Bill needs to give away billions of dollars for publicity? lmao
Seconded. He really is a generous man, and isn't the shrewd business man you make him out to be. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm Check it out,Yfcadmin, you might learn a thing or two. Good nature is a common emotion among humans, it isn't for show, or for personal gain, in most cases. Look at the vast organization he has setup to help the unfortunate, it is quite amazing.
ha ha ha .... guys its all in the name of gates ... I'd still says all in for publicity. Why did the open a foundation in their own name why not donate or support any other organization. You dont understand the reason. More they display their Kindness the better goes their name as a positive company and better goes the sale. Its publicity stunt. You cant understand it easily.
What else would they name it? Donating to another cause means possible money laundering, and plus, the money isn't going to your best interests. And actually, they have given a lot of money to other charities. Microsoft doesn't need a publicity stunt, honestly. I think you are wrong on this one, to be honestly. Publicity stunts are reserved for businesses who would actually benefit from the publicity.
what about supporting WHO red Cross American Red Cross bgca Boys & Girls Clubs of America naf National AIDS Fund mssoc National Multiple Sclerosis Society 9mil ninemillion.org sierra Sierra Club help StopGlobalWarming.org komen Susan G. Komen for the Cure unicef The US fund for UNICEF Guys you dont understand it. I'd still say its just a big time publicity stunt. There are tons of organizations why dont they support them ... why starting a new organization. Its simply a stunt.
I think you're having trouble understanding Yfcadmin. If I have billions of dollars in my bank account and I want to donate somewhere I sure as hell won't be giving it away to some other charity but will definately want to overlook myself where my billions are going. This isn't Paris Hilton or Britney Spears were talking about here. It's pretty logical. He doesn't need a publicity stunt.