Re: Micro$oft Success Built On Sabotage And Bribery

Charlie Gibbs <[email protected]>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 2026-06-30, Jan Panteltje <[email protected]> wrote:

> Leroy H <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Micro$oft is such a great OS that they've always needed sabotage
>> and bribery to succeed:
>
> <https://www.makeuseof.com/microsofts-windows-fake-error-ended-in-a-280-million-settlement/>
>
> GNU/Linux, in sharp contrast, blazes forever forward ahead with superior
> quality.

In my Amiga days I got hold of an Amiga port of Samba, which
enabled me to access files on a Windows machine.  Part of a
software update for Windows 2000 was a patch which made Windows
boxes send an invalid command to SMB boxes to which it was
connecting, and checking the response.  If it wasn't exactly
what a Windows box would return, it would refuse to connect.
It took the Amiga gurus only two or three days to come up
with a fix for that one.

> I have read that these days Microsoft has shares in hardware
> companies and making ever more bloated software forces people
> to buy ever more powerful hardware...
>
> All about dollars..

Just the other day a friend threw out a perfectly functioning
HP LaserJet printer because Windows declared it to be too old.

> Who needs Microsoft? I do not need it, and with US listening
> in / having a say in it, it is probably a security risk.

Yup.  Ditto for Apple, Google...

To paraphrase Ted Nelson in _Computer Lib_:

    Microsoft is not a necessary evil.
    Microsoft is not necessary.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  No artificial
\ /  <[email protected]>      |  intelligence was
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  used in the creation
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  of this post.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.