| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 54999 | 2005-02-28 07:10:00 | Bill Gates ain't so bad, at least in this instance | Strommer (42) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 328957 | 2005-02-28 23:15:00 | If something is to expensive. I would look for cheaper alternative. As there are plenty what are you moaning about. If I was BG and sales were going fine and making plenty of profit, I wouldnt give a stuff what anyone thought about my money. *Tall Poppy Syndrome* |
Rob99 (151) | ||
| 328958 | 2005-03-01 00:39:00 | Why is it that Microsoft are the ones that are targeted for bad publicity? 1 . They never supplied arms to Nigerians like Shell did . 2 . They aren't trying to control the food supply of the world like Monsanto have with their "terminating seeds . " 3 . They haven't had the baby food scandals like Nestle . I mean honestly . . . these are the sorts of corporations who deserve bad publicity . Microsoft don't have the best business practices, but don't have skeletons like those 3 companies . If it's not tall poppy syndrome to critique Microsoft over the above 3 companies, then what is it? Lo . |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 328959 | 2005-03-01 00:40:00 | Personally I think XP is dirt cheap, Office is a bit expensive,but the price is easily justified in a commercial enviorment . Bill Gates owes his success in bringing to the market an OS that was perfect for the home user, great timing, All they have done since is polish it into a turd . The code is too flawed to continue as the OS of choice for the home user, Longhorn may just break the company . MS have not only enjoyed massive wealth from their software, they have suffered massive losses in every other department, The only 2 divisions that make any money are Office and XP,everything else they have applied bills "genius" to has been a complete and utter failure, and this is after killing off all the competion,buying the work off others and propaganda campaigns . The Xbox is a perfect example, the biggest flop of any console ever, an unworkable stratergy only kept afloat (at the cost of billion . . . . . . far more then Bill's charity gift) by the money generated from Office and XP . Now MS have limited options, The last few versions of office have bought nothing to the table worth upgrading for so MS tried and in many cases succeded in locking there customers into forced upgrade deals,which aren't relient on MS even proving an updates . Then we have XP, Its getting tired,its one massive pile of trouble to a huge amount of people, and sales data points to many people upgrading comps or replacing then outright and using their exsisting XP code, Recent figures suggest twice as many comps were sold in the last month as copies of XP . This means a pretty hefty drop in money for Bill,the tightining down of exsisting customers,the complete abondonmant of all W98users , Bogus subscirption deals . And we are still laboured with a poor excuse for a modern OS, and Longhorn isn't the answer . What are the doing about it? Longhorn? . . . . IE7? . . . . . . my god thats weak . Where is this "genius"? Lets see what happens when Longhorn flops, XP ceases to ship in large numbers and business balk at puying out for a new Office suite consisting of window-dressing . Bye Bye MS . |
Metla (12) | ||
| 328960 | 2005-03-01 01:25:00 | hello Linux!!! thats what we like to hear Metla... cept you have put all my views into a structured argument... I agree totally... :D friends? :lol: |
hamstar (4) | ||
| 328961 | 2005-03-01 01:32:00 | Why is it that Microsoft are the ones that are targeted for bad publicity? 1. They never supplied arms to Nigerians like Shell did. 2. They aren't trying to control the food supply of the world like Monsanto have with their "terminating seeds." 3. They haven't had the baby food scandals like Nestle. I mean honestly... these are the sorts of corporations who deserve bad publicity. Microsoft don't have the best business practices, but don't have skeletons like those 3 companies. If it's not tall poppy syndrome to critique Microsoft over the above 3 companies, then what is it? Lo. Do a quick google or go to the appropriate website to find out what people say about the companies you mention and many more. Their quota of critisism is is well documented and abundant. It is no abberation that this forum would concentrate on a computer related topic although discussion has been known to stray far and wide from time to time. Also, I have the feeling that MS and Bill Gates get critised interchangeably, ie; there is no distinction between the man and the commercial entity, So someone may say BG this or that when they really mean MS and visa versa, I've never read or heard of either complaining of this though. Do you think TPS can't apply to corporations? Has the world now become so PC, weak kneed and undiscerning that having a dig at a very public figure or a large corporation is seen as being somehow less than upstanding behaviour, or is it just that the PR/marketing/propaganda machine is doing it's work well? Met's anything that has turd as the basis of it's makeup shouldn't be valued at more than a bag of chook manure ;) |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 328962 | 2005-03-01 01:37:00 | hello Linux!!! thats what we like to hear Metla... cept you have put all my views into a structured argument... I agree totally... :D friends? :lol: Er, hamstar... you might want to read this (pressf1.pcworld.co.nz). :D |
FoxyMX (5) | ||
| 328963 | 2005-03-01 01:55:00 | I estimate I have another 15+ years in the computer industry. I thank "Bill Gates" for that. I will almost have a job for life. | KiwiTT_NZ (233) | ||
| 328964 | 2005-03-01 03:18:00 | BTW, I get a little sick and tired of critisism being labled "tall poppy syndrom". It makes no difference as to the background or capabilities of the target, either critisism is justified or it is not. If you analysed it a bit more, might you find that those most critisised are in the public eye more than most, and generally say and do things that enhance that? Interesting points Murray. I consider that TPS exists as part of Kiwi culture and at all levels. There seems to be an envious grudging mentality in our society whereby we knock and criticise anyone who does better than average. This becomes vehement when money or wealth is involved. If a person has money, they must have cheated or been rotten. Contrast this view with optimistic societies such as Australia, India, and the USA. There, succesful people (in the financial sense) are admired and held up as role models. But not in New Zealand. Why is that? |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 328965 | 2005-03-01 03:20:00 | perhaps because making people into role models purely because they are rich is amazingly shallow? | Metla (12) | ||
| 328966 | 2005-03-01 03:22:00 | Analyse it a bit for goodness sake - where did the money come from? (my answer - you and me and suckers like us across the globe); how come he has such a surplus? (my answer - over-priced products you and I etc paid for); where is the money going to? (my answer - in this instance it was being siphoned in from all over the world, third world countries included, to subsidise schools in the richest country in the world). I am also deeply suspicious of any Rich Man deciding which "charities" he will support - as a public figure, they are most likely to favour the fashionable rather than the unpopular (American schools rather than Rights for Gay Whales); the conservative rather than the liberal (Boy Scouts rather than rehabilitation schemes for unemployed street kids); the religiously acceptable; etc etc. They have enough power in the market place already without us accepting the power of their choices unquestioningly, and going all gooey because they have drip fed some of their usurous profits. . Thanks for the illustrating my point John. See above. ;) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||