Microsoft Hatred FAQ

[David Schwartz]

"John Bokma" <john at castleamber.com> wrote in message 
news:Xns96F16200ED24Acastleamber at 130.133.1.4...

> "David Schwartz" <davids at webmaster.com> wrote:

>>     You don't get it. The point is, you can pick any Linux
>>     distribution and
>> still use the same applications. This is exactly what Microsoft
>> *doesn't* want. They want applications to be locked to Microsoft OSes.
>> For then to do this, applications have to be as tied to the OS as
>> possible. The browser as a target platform threatened this Microsoft
>> vision, so Microsoft reacted by trying to corner the browser market
>> and balkanize Java.

> And when are we going to see this browser as a target platform?

    It may not happen, or it may. The future of computing is not known at 
this point.

>>     You can agree or disagree with the rationale and by sympathetic
>>     with or
>> antagonistic to Microsoft's motive. But these are historical facts.

> No: the historical fact is that MS whiped Netscape of the planet. That
> you come up with "They were afraid that everybody would be running NS
> Office online using Netscape" is just a guess.

    No, it's well-documented fact that Microsoft's entry into the browser 
war was precisely because they feared that browsers would become the new 
operating systems.

> MS just seems to ignore a certain development for some time, then state
> it's not significant, and next they are an important player. This is not
> limited to "MS missed the Internet, almost...". They don't miss
> anything, they just don't jump on every hype.

    What is your explanation for why MS decided it was so important to 
control the browser market? You think MS was too stupid to realize that 
web-based applications threatened to make desktop OSes interchangeable?

    DS