Copy protection ideas
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Airsaw
Rigger
Posts: 1840
3281 Gold -
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:09 pm Post subject: standardization |
 |
|
I've always felt the "how" of collecting fees and doling out "ownership" would be worked-out over time, much like the design of a turnstile in a stadium. The useage dictates the design, over time. I figured the folks who came up with PCs and OSs were good at that, but babes in the woods about high-finance. Whatever model they began with would be replaced, regardless.
What has always bugged me about this is how development of PCs and OSs hasn't followed the same lines as the development of other tools. Maybe that's why, the developers don't view this machine as a tool. Yet, it is a tool, at least I use it for one. I also use other kinds of tools.
If you do auto work, or do-it-yourself stuff around the crib, then you've probably taken advantage of, and taken for granted, tool standardization. If you talk to a historian who's into the anthropological angle of human behavior, like me, then you'd be told the one greatest "act" that allowed the U.S. to develop to what it is today IS standardization of parts and tools.
I have a nifty Stanley common screwdriver. I don't have to buy nifty Stanley screws to match my screwdriver. I have a good old Craftsman socket set. I don't have to buy Sears bolts for my sockets to work. There aren't an infinite amount of bolt sizes, therefore an infinite amount of sockets. Even standardization of thread twist, distance between threads, size of the screw head ... ALL has been worked out and standardized by manufacturers in cooperation with one another for one reason: Efficiency - for the user, not the seller.
This move allowed us to create a manufacturing base, develop the assembly line, and the use of spare parts to keep things in repair. IN short it gave us what we needed to win the Industrial Revolution.
If these computer weenies are all that smart, why haven't they used the most important philosophy with regard to toolmaking - standardization? Instead we have competing systems. Programs work on one, not the other. Vitriol and hatred, unfair competition....I mean, at the end of it all, I just wonder who the hell these people think they are? Do they think they're that good? Frankly, I've never seen it. All I've seen in the thirty years I've been dealing with these products is they don't come close to matching my Stanley screwdriver as a tool. Why don't they see this? Or, are they that unaware of the rest of the world, and just haven't realized what they overlooked - standardization? Or, are they trying to make an end-run around this time-honored and proven process to get the money up front, like all good yuppies should?
What tool is any good when you spend more time fooling with it, than using it? I don't think they deserve the money, no matter what idiotic way they choose to "collect", if they can't meet the most basic requirement of making a useable tool.
Sermon over, run out and sin.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bryce777
Gunner
Posts: 632
652 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dragoniv wrote: | You have to drive a car to get a job in most of the U.S. They don't give those away.
You have to wear clothes to get a job in pretty much all of the U.S. They don't give those away, either--at least not to most of us.
The argument that an OS must be free doesn't wash. While I think it makes the most sense for them to all be open-source, if MS wants to build a "better OS" and charge for it, so be it. Not that I've seen them build that better OS, mind you.
I've a question. How many www.fark.com Photoshop regulars do you believe have legit copies of Photoshop? I'm betting 2 of 10. Most of the rest use pirate copies day in and day out. Would they have the software if they had to pay $1500 for it? Probably not. Should they then pirate it to use it for free? Absolutely not. I don't have the money for a 2005 Corvette Z06 (yet)...should I just go lift one off the lot? I want it really badly, and I'd only drive it on Sundays. Does that make it right?
Oh, that's right--we're only talking about SOFTWARE--that's not a physical good, so it's not stealing, right?
And Airsaw--I know where you're coming from with licensing--what a joke of a economic model. Here's MS's take: we give you buggy code (which you pay for), then you pay more when you have questions or issues with it (you know, support fees--either by incident, or yearly support subscription). Cute. This day and age, most big vendors are emulating that same model. |
The whole idea is that it is a defacto monopoly. A company might say you need A tie, but they will not say "You need a tie made by julio armani, that costs at least 400 dollars." That would be simply ridiculous, but that is the position that people are being put in. Either that or pirate the software. I dont have word, and I will not ever buy it.
Products like windows and word are simply slightly updated in order to force you to upgrade and spend more money. there is usually little or no improvement between versions and the only good thing about XP over 2000 is that it has somewhat more recent drivers on the CD.
Word especially is a product that costs very, very little money to make. The programming is all very simple.
I am not saying that microsoft should give an OS for free if they do not want to, but all PC OSes should be regulated and kept both free and open source. That way one greedy company cannot wrap up the market and gain a monopoly and then hike their priced by a factor of ten, which is EXACTLY what microsoft has done.
The most difficult bit of an OS is really the myriad device drivers, which are taken care of already. The GUI in windows is very poor, and only due to things like installshield (available on unix) is installing software so easy on windows. The kernel stuff is available from open source sources, and is really done better. Linux has kind of a crappy kernel arrangement, though not as bad as windows, but BSD has a proper kernel (I think)and so does solaris.
The ferari argument is ridiculous. There is a *potential* loss in sales of software in general, but if only legal software were somehow possible, you can bet that photoshop's profits would rise but that it would be a much much smaller percentage than they claim it would. They might go up 10-15% but most people using photoshop illegally now would simply do without. int he case of the ferari, you are not reducing a potential sale, but you
In this case though, it is like everyone needs a car, and it HAS to be a ferari. Actually, it is not even a ferari, but you have to be able to SAY the word ferari, but the ferari corporation has the copyright on the word ferari so you have tto pay to be able to say ferari.
Now to make matters worse, we have the subscriptions stuff. Actually, that is nott oo bad in some ways. I would not mind paying a dollar an hour to use photoshop, since I use it maybe 3 hours a year. On the other hand for an OS, that model really sucks as you CONSTANTLY use it and then you would be FORCED to upgrade because you dont even own the software.
Again, since we have a de facto monopoly, if MS decides to do this, then too bad for you. You will have to go along. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airsaw
Rigger
Posts: 1840
3281 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:19 am Post subject: here yah go |
|
|
This was written by the team who developed Word Perfect. They were not happy with the corporate takeover of their domain. It's free. It's very good and it's not a shell program. Runs on Windows, I'm not sure about other OSs. Have a look.
http://www.yeahwrite.com/
It's one group of journeymen making a stand for the craft they practice.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dragoniv
Powder Monkey
Posts: 43
84 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bryce-- Monopoly? Please. Consumers made Microsoft king. Consumers are what will bring MS to its knees, too.
Monopolies like Microsquish are fantasies. MS is actually seeing their "monopoly" decrease of late--they are under serious attack on the OS (think linux) and browser (think Firefox) front. I've toyed with Open OFfice, too...MS could be in trouble there too, once that tool gets a bit more polish. Even if I don't agree about MS word being easy to program--open source projects like Open Office (or Yeah Write!) are proving to Microsoft that others can build tools just as good, and for a far better bargain.
From a gaming perspective--it's getting easier and easier to run games in Linux, even if they were a Windoze only release. I'm sooo close to dumping all things MS, it's downright thrilling!
From a business perspective, MS is licensing itself out of existence. I work a a very big credit bureau--MS would hate to realize that most of our cool new tools run on Linux clusters, not Windows web farms. Oh, we do have Win web farms--our crappy, low-quality, cheap to build stuff resides there. We do most of our real work in the unix, linux, and mainframe spaces. As does a great number of other large info businesses in the US. Why? We need to get work done, of course! MS makes a cute consumer toy--not a real business tool. Sorry all you .NET developers out there. 
MS had its glory days. They can continue to issue draconian licensing (as can companies like Adobe for things like Photoshop). If people don't mind dealing with it, MS will survive. If they dislike it enough, open source grows a bit more, and MS' market dominance weakens a bit more. Eventually, they put themselves out of business, or change their business practices.
Btw, it wasn't a Ferrari argument--it was a Corvette argument. Egads, mate!  There were two separate points being made with cars in my last post, but I think you mixed the two up, or I did.. Oh well--methinks the two of us are not likely to see eye to eye on these issues, anyhow. It's fun to banter, anyhow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airsaw
Rigger
Posts: 1840
3281 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:13 am Post subject: be that as it may |
|
|
I was under the impression MS was ditching its contact with the commoners as delicately as possible and focusing on its corporate contract business. I thought they were going to push NT and try to elaborate on that. Seems like they have. XP is a gussied up NT system. MSN was dumped for a webpage portal process and B-grade "community" facilities. Windows 2000 is likely to be their final dalliance with PC oriented things, other than just to keep a toe in.
The money is in landing contracts to outfit large corporations with gear they plan to use for as many years as possible, no frills - no whistles and bells. MS's Back Office and that group of stuff is where they've thrown down. As far as Internet Explorer, that's going to ship with NT no matter what, and be used by everyone using a corporation's system ... on the job. So this rise in Mozilla is relative only to the general public and their PC internet browsing habits. None of the problems those people face bother a closed, corporate system.
Corporations, of course, don't share the sentiments of the consumers. NT is a good enough system to fill their needs, so it's in there selling away with the best of them. Afterall, the PC market is miniscule compared to the corporate market. You buy into a system to administrate your business, you've got a few things you're interested in knowing...the first of which is: Will it work? Put Office 2k on an NT 4 build and what else do you really need?
Anyway, I thought they'd moved that way since '97 and XP is an attempt to tie a few loose ends. But, XP isn't an advance on the Windows 95/98/2000 string, it's NT formatted for a PC.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KingWilly
Rigger
Posts: 1351
9821 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sashanan wrote: | The original Pirates! game for the Commodore 64 had a fun - if equally ineffective - copy protection built in. The manual had a list of the Treasure Fleet's route and which port it visited during which month in a given year. In the background story of your pirate, as you started a game, you were at some point confronted with a trivia question on which month the Treasure Fleet would be in what port. Which you would then have to look up in the manual.
If you chose the wrong answer, the story would quickly turn against you and instead of becoming the proud captain of your first ship, you'd lose a battle and be put in a small, leaky ship with a small band of supporters. The game would be played on a hidden fifth difficulty level, where every battle was impossibly hard (maybe Swashbuckler as it is in this game was modelled after this?  ). You were given ten injuries right on the spot, making sure that the health of your starting pirate was already quite poor. And just to top it off, all four nations started hostile to you so that you would instantly be jumped by big pirate hunting Frigates and fired upon no matter which port you tried to visit. Basically, your game would be impossible and you'd soon be forced to retire as a beggar. |
This was a good protection devices...but nothing that a photo-copier couldn't fix.
_________________
Shiver me timbers!!!
"It's good to be the king" - Mel Brooks
AKA. Will Scarlett. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dragoniv
Powder Monkey
Posts: 43
84 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NT doesn't sit all that well with corporate america. It is pathetically costly to maintain. In fact, it's so costly that much of corporate america is outsourcing this support to 3rd parties.
Worse, PCs are just plain expensive to maintain. Too many failure components--too much system maintenance--too much exposure to info theft or damage. On average, the industry replaces machines on a three year cycle. Combined cost for support and replacement averages out to $2500 per computer per year in the Fortune 100. That's going to have to change.
I bet we see a push back to thin client workstations before long. Back to the 70s, here we go! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Striker
Gunner
Posts: 727
680 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:50 pm Post subject: Re: be that as it may |
|
|
| Airsaw wrote: | I was under the impression MS was ditching its contact with the commoners as delicately as possible and focusing on its corporate contract business. I thought they were going to push NT and try to elaborate on that. Seems like they have. XP is a gussied up NT system. MSN was dumped for a webpage portal process and B-grade "community" facilities. Windows 2000 is likely to be their final dalliance with PC oriented things, other than just to keep a toe in.
The money is in landing contracts to outfit large corporations with gear they plan to use for as many years as possible, no frills - no whistles and bells. MS's Back Office and that group of stuff is where they've thrown down. As far as Internet Explorer, that's going to ship with NT no matter what, and be used by everyone using a corporation's system ... on the job. So this rise in Mozilla is relative only to the general public and their PC internet browsing habits. None of the problems those people face bother a closed, corporate system.
Corporations, of course, don't share the sentiments of the consumers. NT is a good enough system to fill their needs, so it's in there selling away with the best of them. Afterall, the PC market is miniscule compared to the corporate market. You buy into a system to administrate your business, you've got a few things you're interested in knowing...the first of which is: Will it work? Put Office 2k on an NT 4 build and what else do you really need?
Anyway, I thought they'd moved that way since '97 and XP is an attempt to tie a few loose ends. But, XP isn't an advance on the Windows 95/98/2000 string, it's NT formatted for a PC. |
Windows 2000 is a remake of the Windows NT subsystem. It is not in the same line as Windows 3.1, 95, 98, or ME. The progression for the NT series is Windows 3.11 for Workgroups, NT 3.51, NT 4.0, Windows 2000 (or NT 5.0), and Windows XP. Windows XP Pro was designed as the client front-end for Windows 2003 Server. All of the NT series operating systems are based on the NTFS file structure intead of the FAT32 structure of the 95 series. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Striker
Gunner
Posts: 727
680 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dragoniv wrote: | NT doesn't sit all that well with corporate america. It is pathetically costly to maintain. In fact, it's so costly that much of corporate america is outsourcing this support to 3rd parties.
Worse, PCs are just plain expensive to maintain. Too many failure components--too much system maintenance--too much exposure to info theft or damage. On average, the industry replaces machines on a three year cycle. Combined cost for support and replacement averages out to $2500 per computer per year in the Fortune 100. That's going to have to change.
I bet we see a push back to thin client workstations before long. Back to the 70s, here we go! |
Microsoft is still the most popular domain and client structure used in corporate America. Unix and other back-end operating systems are just that, used for the back-end. Products such as Microsoft SQL server and Exchange server were developed because the Unix world could not produce the desire results. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bryce777
Gunner
Posts: 632
652 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dragoniv wrote: | Bryce-- Monopoly? Please. Consumers made Microsoft king. Consumers are what will bring MS to its knees, too.
Monopolies like Microsquish are fantasies. MS is actually seeing their "monopoly" decrease of late--they are under serious attack on the OS (think linux) and browser (think Firefox) front. I've toyed with Open OFfice, too...MS could be in trouble there too, once that tool gets a bit more polish. Even if I don't agree about MS word being easy to program--open source projects like Open Office (or Yeah Write!) are proving to Microsoft that others can build tools just as good, and for a far better bargain.
From a gaming perspective--it's getting easier and easier to run games in Linux, even if they were a Windoze only release. I'm sooo close to dumping all things MS, it's downright thrilling!
From a business perspective, MS is licensing itself out of existence. I work a a very big credit bureau--MS would hate to realize that most of our cool new tools run on Linux clusters, not Windows web farms. Oh, we do have Win web farms--our crappy, low-quality, cheap to build stuff resides there. We do most of our real work in the unix, linux, and mainframe spaces. As does a great number of other large info businesses in the US. Why? We need to get work done, of course! MS makes a cute consumer toy--not a real business tool. Sorry all you .NET developers out there.
MS had its glory days. They can continue to issue draconian licensing (as can companies like Adobe for things like Photoshop). If people don't mind dealing with it, MS will survive. If they dislike it enough, open source grows a bit more, and MS' market dominance weakens a bit more. Eventually, they put themselves out of business, or change their business practices.
Btw, it wasn't a Ferrari argument--it was a Corvette argument. Egads, mate! There were two separate points being made with cars in my last post, but I think you mixed the two up, or I did.. Oh well--methinks the two of us are not likely to see eye to eye on these issues, anyhow. It's fun to banter, anyhow. |
The consumer never made microsoft king...that is ridiculous. The problem with operating systems is that software written for one is not compatible with another one. It was inevitable that eventually there would be only one PC operating system that dominated the marketplace; cp/m was really a lot better han dos, whichw as crap, but it would have eventually been a monoploty by one of these companies.
Every edition forces backwards incompatibilities on you, which make it so eventually new software will no long work on your machine, which forces you to upgrade...they won't even let themselves be a copetitor. Not to mention it is impossible to buy a system from a major manufacturer without buying a windows license. Companies that have tried not to do this have been strongarmed by microsoft into doing so.
The reason there is a de facto monoply is that all the software people asre used to running runs on windows exclusively.
Linux people try very hard with wine and other tools, but it is a losing battle because microsoft actually intentionally changes things around to make tools like that not work. So, once directx 9 mostly works, MS will release 10 and completely throw everyone for a loop.
The same thing with the proprietary word formats...there is no reason on earth an old word file should pop up on a newer word program formated badly or even unrecognized...except to force you to upgrade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bryce777
Gunner
Posts: 632
652 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:04 pm Post subject: Re: be that as it may |
|
|
| Airsaw wrote: | I was under the impression MS was ditching its contact with the commoners as delicately as possible and focusing on its corporate contract business. I thought they were going to push NT and try to elaborate on that. Seems like they have. XP is a gussied up NT system. MSN was dumped for a webpage portal process and B-grade "community" facilities. Windows 2000 is likely to be their final dalliance with PC oriented things, other than just to keep a toe in.
The money is in landing contracts to outfit large corporations with gear they plan to use for as many years as possible, no frills - no whistles and bells. MS's Back Office and that group of stuff is where they've thrown down. As far as Internet Explorer, that's going to ship with NT no matter what, and be used by everyone using a corporation's system ... on the job. So this rise in Mozilla is relative only to the general public and their PC internet browsing habits. None of the problems those people face bother a closed, corporate system.
Corporations, of course, don't share the sentiments of the consumers. NT is a good enough system to fill their needs, so it's in there selling away with the best of them. Afterall, the PC market is miniscule compared to the corporate market. You buy into a system to administrate your business, you've got a few things you're interested in knowing...the first of which is: Will it work? Put Office 2k on an NT 4 build and what else do you really need?
Anyway, I thought they'd moved that way since '97 and XP is an attempt to tie a few loose ends. But, XP isn't an advance on the Windows 95/98/2000 string, it's NT formatted for a PC. |
Windows 2000 is NT based. XP is NT with more consumer idiotizing. It is a lot like the windows 98 CE edition except not really useful. It is better than 98, but it is just repackaged 2000.
Anyway, yeah their big focus is definitely the corporations and the government. The appeal being 'oh, well, we can do everything. We have a product for this and that and the other'. That and the fact that they do make their products so that an idiot can at least sort of use them. So, you can have IT people who dont really need to know much of anything and have an environment that sort of works most of the time. It will not run even nearly as well as one where people know what they are doing and largely use other products but it more or less works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Striker
Gunner
Posts: 727
680 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: Re: be that as it may |
|
|
| bryce777 wrote: | | Airsaw wrote: | I was under the impression MS was ditching its contact with the commoners as delicately as possible and focusing on its corporate contract business. I thought they were going to push NT and try to elaborate on that. Seems like they have. XP is a gussied up NT system. MSN was dumped for a webpage portal process and B-grade "community" facilities. Windows 2000 is likely to be their final dalliance with PC oriented things, other than just to keep a toe in.
The money is in landing contracts to outfit large corporations with gear they plan to use for as many years as possible, no frills - no whistles and bells. MS's Back Office and that group of stuff is where they've thrown down. As far as Internet Explorer, that's going to ship with NT no matter what, and be used by everyone using a corporation's system ... on the job. So this rise in Mozilla is relative only to the general public and their PC internet browsing habits. None of the problems those people face bother a closed, corporate system.
Corporations, of course, don't share the sentiments of the consumers. NT is a good enough system to fill their needs, so it's in there selling away with the best of them. Afterall, the PC market is miniscule compared to the corporate market. You buy into a system to administrate your business, you've got a few things you're interested in knowing...the first of which is: Will it work? Put Office 2k on an NT 4 build and what else do you really need?
Anyway, I thought they'd moved that way since '97 and XP is an attempt to tie a few loose ends. But, XP isn't an advance on the Windows 95/98/2000 string, it's NT formatted for a PC. |
Windows 2000 is NT based. XP is NT with more consumer idiotizing. It is a lot like the windows 98 CE edition except not really useful. It is better than 98, but it is just repackaged 2000.
Anyway, yeah their big focus is definitely the corporations and the government. The appeal being 'oh, well, we can do everything. We have a product for this and that and the other'. That and the fact that they do make their products so that an idiot can at least sort of use them. So, you can have IT people who dont really need to know much of anything and have an environment that sort of works most of the time. It will not run even nearly as well as one where people know what they are doing and largely use other products but it more or less works. |
On the back-end XP and Windows 2000 are totally different. However, a lot of the differences would be seen by the average home user. Most of it has to do with Security Policies and such, especially when connecting to a Windows 2003 domain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bryce777
Gunner
Posts: 632
652 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:18 pm Post subject: Re: be that as it may |
|
|
| Striker wrote: | | bryce777 wrote: | | Airsaw wrote: | I was under the impression MS was ditching its contact with the commoners as delicately as possible and focusing on its corporate contract business. I thought they were going to push NT and try to elaborate on that. Seems like they have. XP is a gussied up NT system. MSN was dumped for a webpage portal process and B-grade "community" facilities. Windows 2000 is likely to be their final dalliance with PC oriented things, other than just to keep a toe in.
The money is in landing contracts to outfit large corporations with gear they plan to use for as many years as possible, no frills - no whistles and bells. MS's Back Office and that group of stuff is where they've thrown down. As far as Internet Explorer, that's going to ship with NT no matter what, and be used by everyone using a corporation's system ... on the job. So this rise in Mozilla is relative only to the general public and their PC internet browsing habits. None of the problems those people face bother a closed, corporate system.
Corporations, of course, don't share the sentiments of the consumers. NT is a good enough system to fill their needs, so it's in there selling away with the best of them. Afterall, the PC market is miniscule compared to the corporate market. You buy into a system to administrate your business, you've got a few things you're interested in knowing...the first of which is: Will it work? Put Office 2k on an NT 4 build and what else do you really need?
Anyway, I thought they'd moved that way since '97 and XP is an attempt to tie a few loose ends. But, XP isn't an advance on the Windows 95/98/2000 string, it's NT formatted for a PC. |
Windows 2000 is NT based. XP is NT with more consumer idiotizing. It is a lot like the windows 98 CE edition except not really useful. It is better than 98, but it is just repackaged 2000.
Anyway, yeah their big focus is definitely the corporations and the government. The appeal being 'oh, well, we can do everything. We have a product for this and that and the other'. That and the fact that they do make their products so that an idiot can at least sort of use them. So, you can have IT people who dont really need to know much of anything and have an environment that sort of works most of the time. It will not run even nearly as well as one where people know what they are doing and largely use other products but it more or less works. |
On the back-end XP and Windows 2000 are totally different. However, a lot of the differences would be seen by the average home user. Most of it has to do with Security Policies and such, especially when connecting to a Windows 2003 domain. |
XP is based off of 2000. There are differences, but they are mostly just moronic ones such as constantly writing out the pc's state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bryce777
Gunner
Posts: 632
652 Gold -
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dragoniv wrote: | NT doesn't sit all that well with corporate america. It is pathetically costly to maintain. In fact, it's so costly that much of corporate america is outsourcing this support to 3rd parties.
Worse, PCs are just plain expensive to maintain. Too many failure components--too much system maintenance--too much exposure to info theft or damage. On average, the industry replaces machines on a three year cycle. Combined cost for support and replacement averages out to $2500 per computer per year in the Fortune 100. That's going to have to change.
I bet we see a push back to thin client workstations before long. Back to the 70s, here we go! |
That is pretty funny, because corporations just LOVE their NT. Windows 200 now, of course,a nd I guess 2003 advanced server or whatever.
Besides a few companies like google, most corporations love windows. It is an irrational kind of love at times, but they feel safe and secure using it and see it as something they can set as a standard. No joke, a lot of companies when you read their software 'standard' all it basically says is 'use microsoft products'.
Eh, it is so tiring sometimes. Like when some dope buys 200 copies of safesource for 600 dollars each when cvs is free...and then the monkeys it was bought for don't use ANY CM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group |
|
