Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Mozilla The Internet IT

Windows Advantage Validation Process On Firefox 283

Posted by Zonk
from the recognizing-a-worthy-competitor dept.
GraemeDonaldson writes "According to this IE Blog entry, Microsoft seems to be serious about supporting non-IE browsers. Mention is made of a Windows Media Player plugin for Firefox. The Windows Genuine Advantage validation process now works in Firefox too. From the article: 'Basically, customers said "We want to make sure our PCs are running genuine Windows and have access to all the content on the Microsoft Download Center; the experience when we're running a Mozilla browser is not great. Do something about it." Brad's team did. I think that's a good thing for customers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Advantage Validation Process On Firefox

Comments Filter:
  • But... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:55AM (#14052808)
    What happens if you are running a pirated copy of Firefox?
  • by ZiakII (829432) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:56AM (#14052812)
    If this isn't any proof that the end of the world is coming.... I don't know what is
  • by Killjoy_NL (719667) <`slashdot' `at' `remco.palli.nl'> on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:57AM (#14052825)
    And my good pal Satan didn't even get a call from Billy boy?

    Just kidding, I am glad that this is the first positive sign that MS is taking Mozilla seriously.
    Although they could have a trick up their sleeve.

    First impression of this is positive though :)

    Second impression is that they might break Firefox stuff on purpose to bring people back to IE, but that's the cynic in me.
    • am glad that this is the first positive sign that MS is taking Mozilla seriously.

      I think there have been other first positive signs that MS is taking Mozilla seriously...like you know, when MS did research reports to see if FF is a credible threat.
    • The first sign that MS was accepting mozilla was IE7 and the tabbed browsing.
    • by TubeSteak (669689) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:28AM (#14053208) Journal
      WindizUpdate: http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/ [62nds.com]
      They've been around for a while now and aren't shady.
      You use it just like the regular windows update site.
      Supports Mozilla, Opera, AOL & K-Meleon (?)

      AutoPatcher XP: http://www.autopatcher.com/ [autopatcher.com]
      They provide windows updates every month packaged in
      one big executable (Full and Lite versions available)
      Available through http, ftp, & bittorrent

      Alternatively, you can disrespect MS by using a cracked LegitCheckControl.DLL
    • My first thoughts were quite the opposite, to be honest.

      Before, when IE was the only browser that could be used to update, they didn't really know how many people were using Firefox. Well, I guess they did with microsoft.com and the other sites, so I take that back.

      Anywho, my point is this: now they don't have to worry about relying on other surveys to determine how many people are using Firefox. They can work it out themselves and from there, determine the actual threat to their browser base.

      Having said al
      • I'm an idiot.

        I was wondering how the update 'update' process would work from within Firefox, then realised that we were all talking about the 'Windows Genuine Advantage' code.

        Still, I think my point still stands: the more their sites support other browsers, the more they will begin to see exactly what their market share is like.
    • My opinion can be summed up in two words: Income Stream

      We know that Microsoft wants to get into the content distribution [audiogogo.com] business for some time now, to compete with iTunes and Tivo [microsoft.com]. Their current transport of choice is the "Windows Media Video" (WMV) format, which is optimized for streaming (RealVideo competition) while providing built-in copy protection (Apple M4P competition).

      So, you have an untapped market out in Linux world, running their crazy independent browsers, and because of that, you can't guara
  • Windows Updates? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:57AM (#14052828)
    Office Updates? Microsoft Updates? Slow link response in Outlook (and other Office apps) if non-IE browser is default? There still is a ways to go for Microsoft before they can claim they are supporting browsers other than their own.
    • Slow link response? Same time it takes the browser to start.
      • Nope, different problem. I can have Firefox open, launch a URL from the Windows Run menu and have FF open the new tab and begin loading the page nearly instantly. Click a URL in Outlook 2003, and it freezes for 5-6 seconds before actually launching the URL. If Firefox isn't already running, Outlook usually launches two instances of it, one empty, one with the URL AND throws an error message.

        I've seen the above on several systems with Outlook 2000-2003, regardless of what version of Windows you're running.
    • by spxero (782496)
      In my opinion, they are still far off from that claim. Sure, making Windows updates is a step in the right direction, but they still need to fix things like viewing their news video clips in firefox, as well as supporting tabbed browsing.

      My gf has to have her homepage set to MSN, and any time I see something interesting and scroll-wheel click to send it to a new tab, it loads that page in the current tab as well. I know that it's hard to provide support for everything, but MS is trying a little too hard to
    • by zootm (850416) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:25AM (#14053161)

      The slow link response seems to be because IE is generally memory-resident (and smaller) and takes less time to open than Firefox in general (certainly I notice no difference in times between opening a link from Outlook and opening from XChat or whatever), so I'm not convinced this is really an issue of their bias.

      The updates use controls that wouldn't go on Firefox because they'd be deemed unsafe (I believe there's a plugin to make them work, I wouldn't recommend it though). The best way for Microsoft to get around this would be to stop relying on a browser at all for Windows Updates, which is basically what they've done by "forcing" Automatic Updates (which isn't browser-based) on in XP SP2.

  • Yeah but... (Score:3, Informative)

    by xero9 (810991) * on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:57AM (#14052829)
    if you try and just go straight to the downloads page you still have to download GenguineCheck.exe and paste the code in. If I hadn't read the summary, I wouldn't have known about this plugin And somethign else that's interesting.. Even after installing the plugin and closing Firefox completely, when I return to the downloads page it STILL wants me to paste the validation code in
    • Re:Yeah but... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by LiquidCoooled (634315)
      If one was so inclined, could a ficticious person download and grab the code from a validated machine and paste it in from an unvalidated machine?

      Just out of curiosity you understand..
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:59AM (#14052848)
    Swine Air flight 666 is now boarding at gate 13.
  • Good news (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @10:59AM (#14052853)

    This can only be good news. Just last night, lack of ability to get downloads easily from Microsoft cost someone else (a small games publisher needing a recent DirectX version) money, as my other half and I gave up on the hassle of downloading from MS, and therefore didn't pay to download the puzzle game in question either. We both have 100% legal installations of Windows on our machines, and she was willing to pay the small asking price for a simple puzzle game she found enjoyable. Everyone lost.

    • ditto with the directx hassle.
      The windows site wouldn't let me at it, even after pasting the genuine code into their validation box.

      Soooo..
      1. I went to google
      2. Ended up at http://www.softpedia.com/ [softpedia.com]
      3. Recieved me a direct link to the file from download.microsoft.com

      I don't really see the point for MS to make people jump through hoops just to get a file that is widely mirrored across the intarweb.
  • by andrelix (873009) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:01AM (#14052877)
    this is a sad day, what is next, a media player that can be installed on Vista, CD burning software from a third party, what is this world coming to! Actually in all fairness, this is a good thing even if I dont run firefox. It is nice to see M$ acknowlege the use of other browsers by doing something besides trying to stomp them out...
  • Very usefull (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jurt1235 (834677) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:02AM (#14052891) Homepage
    This is very usefull. Suppose you have a system where IE is heavily infected with spyware, but you do have a firefox installed. At least you can leave IE unused to get some of the necessary service packs for your windows system by using this alternative browser. Everytime I use firefox on windows to help somebody out, I still have to start IE to use the Microsoft tools to update a part of the system. The rest of the Microsoft site always worked very good in mozilla anyway (at least, I never ran into any problems, then again I am running linux fulltime since 2000, and before that 50% of the time, so I am probably not the most representitive user of the Microsoft website)
    • Unfortunately it's only the Windows Genuine Advantage registration which has been updated to work with Firefox - Windows Update still needs IE.

      Still a way to go before MS's addiction to IE is gone . . .

      P
    • If you use Firefox normally, then how does IE become heavily infected with spyware? I can't say I've had any spyware on my system for a few years now.
      • If you use Firefox normally, then how does IE become heavily infected with spyware?
        I suspect it's the "free" downloads which have the spyware built in. There's a fair amount of them out there from MP3 ripping software to DVD playing. Many of them have achieved a high Google Pagerank for searches for things like "free dvd playing software" so people download them and don't carefully read the EULA for the notice of spyware^K^Kadvertising information collection software.
  • by dslauson (914147) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:02AM (#14052894) Journal
    They would think seriously about supporting openDocument.
  • Coming next... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jjeff1 (636051) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:02AM (#14052906)
    A firefox plugin that enables ActiveX. I'll be sure to download that!

    I use firefox as much to avoid the heavy-handed control Microsoft and other corporations are trying to exert over how my PC should operate. Just now I'm noticing that macromedia is poping up an icon in my system tray! Hello?, it's a browser plugin. It should only do stuff within the browser!
  • Y'know... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Colin Smith (2679) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:04AM (#14052924)
    'Basically, customers said "We want to make sure our PCs are running genuine Windows and have access to all the content on the Microsoft Download Center; the experience when we're running a Mozilla browser is not great. Do something about it."

    Nope. I'll bet no-one said anything of the kind. I think it probably went more like this "FFS! f*cking MS doesn't work!" maybe...

     
  • Development $ Fine $ (Score:2, Interesting)

    by joey_knisch (804995)
    I am sorry but this is not all that surprising given the amount of anti-monopoly litigation in Europe and in the States. It cost less money to develop the code than get slapped with another huge fine.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Dogs and cats, sleeping together...

    Hey! Is that Satan over there ice skating????

    j/k Actually, I think this is a really smart move on MSFTs part. They realize that while they have the dominant desktop, many people are beginning to become smarter and make personal choices about what applications they use instead of just accepting whatever MSFT has chosen to provide. If they can make the desktop experience for people who still need Windows, but prefer to use OSS when possible, then great.

  • by Entropius (188861) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:07AM (#14052956)
    ... until they start fixing some glaring bugs in Windows. I've got a legal copy of Windows XP, but the only reason I do is because it came with my laptop, and the only reason I got a laptop with Windows included is because it was crazy on sale. Were I buying a machine now, I'd get an Asus z70va and slap a pirate copy on it.

    This machine has 1.25 GiB of RAM. Most of the time when I try to hibernate it -- if I've ever run anything memory-intensive, whether or not it's still open -- I get an "Insufficient resources to complete the API" error, and it doesn't hibernate. (I have about 30 GB of disk free, so that is most certainly not the issue).

    There are all sorts of glaring flaws in Windows. Do I really care if I get access to the shit on Windows Update (Ooh, new version of Windows Media Player that probably still won't play oggs without me having to mess with codecs)? Not really. Security updates? Yay, I'll lose my install of Guild Wars, at worse, if someone gets past my firewall and "4dminist4t0r5" (doesn't quite sound like "r00ts", but whatever) it. All my *important* stuff is on the Linux half of this machine, and since Microsoft *still* doesn't have an ext3 filesystem driver, it's safe from the kiddies.

    When Windows Update works like emerge, I might consider using it.
    • Ooh, new version of Windows Media Player that probably still won't play oggs without me having to mess with codecs

      And I bet it won't play Quicktime files either without having to mess with codecs! Or a bazillion other formats! Your "point" is completely and utterly invalid.

      since Microsoft *still* doesn't have an ext3 filesystem driver, it's safe from the kiddies.

      That's not MS's job, and there's been an ext2 IFS [fs-driver.org] available for some time now. It's not their fault that you didn't install it.

      When Windows Update
    • All my *important* stuff is on the Linux half of this machine, and since Microsoft *still* doesn't have an ext3 filesystem driver, it's safe from the kiddies.

      It isn't Microsoft's responsibility to supply a ext3 file system driver. It's ours (the Linux geeks), and we did. Here it is: http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2fsd [sourceforge.net]

      If someone can root your box, they can install this driver, so your Linux stuff is not safe from kiddies, never was.
  • This just sounds like business as usual.

    Just your textbook "Embrace and extend"

    We really live in interesting times, but I want to be part of it.
    I thought I'd be in the front seat by now, but in that damn corporate ladder, I'm still just a step above the guy who sorts the photocopies.

    Contact me if you have an offer.

  • One of Microsoft's main business principles even from way back is "Embrace and Extend"...
    This would appear to be the "Embrace" part.
  • oblig (Score:3, Funny)

    by ChipMonk (711367) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:09AM (#14052978) Journal
    I'd like to see a Beowulf cluster of these things running Firefox on Windows.

    Wait a minute, what am I saying?!?

    NO NO BAD BAD BAD BAD THOUGHTS!!!!!!
  • Finally I can put midis on my webpages again! :)

    Boy, I missed those since Netscape 4.
    • Given that mozilla is open source , you'd have thought they'd have supported
      an open source OS. I can't see why it should be an issue porting to linux , after
      all , the only difference is in the draw-to-screen API. ANyone know why its
      not supported?
      • Given that mozilla is open source , you'd have thought they'd have supported an open source OS. I can't see why it should be an issue porting to linux , after all , the only difference is in the draw-to-screen API. ANyone know why its not supported?

        Probably for the same reason you can't play the 1080p HDTV samples on the WMP site using any other player than WMP10. Or the same reason stand-alone codecs for WMV always lagged WMP releases. Hint: It's not technical. If you want to play a movie, they want you us
      • There isn't a version of Windows Media Player for Linux. The plugin uses the components of the full player (as with most media plugins which aren't restricted to the browser). Basically, since MS haven't made a Windows Media port for Linux, embedding it in a browser is completely impossible. One wonders how hard it would be for them to make one, though (it can't be that far from the OSX version, other than — as you mention — the drawing to screen).

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Linux Windows Media Player?
      Windows Linux Media Player?
      Windows Media Player Linux?

      It just doesn't sound good.
      • They'd call it Windows Media Player for Linux, with the "for Linux" in a smaller font.

        Either that, or they'd just call it 'Windows Media Player', and put "RedHat/SuSE/Mandrake" version, and distibute it as an RPM only.

        If you want to figure out Microsoft branding for alternative OSs, you don't have to go further than the Mac.

        From Microsoft.com:
        Downloads for Windows Media Player 9 for Mac (OS X):

        Windows Media Player 9 for Mac OS X
        Sporting a new brushed steel skin for Apple's newest operating system, this new
    • Why would you want that? MPlayer already plays as many, if not more, formats than Windows Media Player and is available with your choice of non-horrible non-crazy-bloated frontends.

      Don't want to bother with MPlayer's issues? Xine is available as a package included in most distributions and plays everything that MPlayer does, with the exception of really weird formats. I can't say I've found something that Xine won't play.
    • An excellent alternative is to install mplayerplug-in [sourceforge.net] and mplayer [mplayerhq.hu] on your box. Supports Windows Media, Real Media, Quicktime, etc...
  • What?? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:13AM (#14053035)
    Do I really want ActiveX components running free in Firefox?
  • It's about time... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gasmonso (929871)

    Now if both browsers and programmers would adhere to the html standards we might actually get somewhere. I'm tired of testing my website in 3 browsers and seeing three different results :(

    gasmonso http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]
  • I still can't sign up for empower in Safari, Firefox, Opera or even IE 5 Mac. But I need the Empower program to get my WinXP license so I can run IE for win. MS Catch-22?
  • by HomerJ (11142) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:20AM (#14053118)
    'Basically, customers said "We want to make sure our PCs are running genuine Windows and have access to all the content on the Microsoft Download Center; the experience when we're running a Mozilla browser is not great. Do something about it." Brad's team did. I think that's a good thing for customers.'"

    Yeah, I installed this Windows the other day, had some sort of goofy foot for a start menu, Office didn't install, and I couldn't get any of my games to work. I'm glad now there is a way I can see if I actually have genuine Windows, and not that fake Windows going around.
    • Customer: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint.
      Owner: We're closin' for lunch.
      C: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this Windows what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very store.
      O: Oh yes, the, uh, the Redmondian Blue Screen... What's, uh... What's wrong with it?
      C: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. It's not Genuine, that's what's wrong with it!
      O: No, no. It's, uh... it's a different window manager!
      C: Look, matey, I know a non-Genuine Windows when I see one, an

  • by pubjames (468013) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:22AM (#14053134)

    I have read here [explorerdestroyer.com] that Google is paying a dollar for everyone you can get to switch from IE to Firefox. Is this true? Any Slashdotters acually made any money from this?

    I'll be interested to see what Microsoft is going to do in Vista to try to spoil things for Firefox. My guess is even further integration of IE into Windows, and lots of stuff that doesn't even feel like you're using IE will actually be through their browser. Also, they're going to try to get more lock-in on the corporate intranet rather than the public web.
    • by Jugalator (259273) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @12:06PM (#14053644) Journal
      I'll be interested to see what Microsoft is going to do in Vista to try to spoil things for Firefox. My guess is even further integration of IE into Windows, and lots of stuff that doesn't even feel like you're using IE will actually be through their browser. Also, they're going to try to get more lock-in on the corporate intranet rather than the public web.

      No signs so far of further IE integration in Vista so far, at least in the most recent public October build. The November one is supposed to be out tomorrow btw. However, beta 2 (due ~January 06) will be much more interesting as it's supposed to take a leap in features. But I still don't believe there's much to fear in this specific area as they have both the DOJ and EU's knife on their throat here since quite a while ago. And they have acted before, not only by forcing them to provide an accessible UI for default browser switching, but also on the Media Player bundle.
    • Yep. It is in there with adsense. I seem to average 1 convert a day. But that makes up for some days where adsense can have like 30 click throughs and my cut of it is only like $0.20..

      You're not going to get rich quick :)

    • I'm up a few bucks on it from my website [johnkoerner.net].

      If you are already running FireFox it will prompt you to install the Google toolbar into your current install. If you are running anything else, it will prompt you to download a version of FireFox 1.0.7 with the Google toolbar enabled. You make the money after the person has run Firefox with the google toolbar installed.
  • Microsoft actually listens to customers? Will wonders never cease...
  • by Frankie70 (803801) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:27AM (#14053193)
    It's about this site ==> https://pfs.mozilla.org/plugins/ [mozilla.org]

    I loaded it on both IE6 [nyud.net] & Firefox(1.0.2) [nyud.net]

    Strangely, it renders very differently on the 2 browsers.
    It renders much better on IE.

    What's the story?
  • by Andrew Tanenbaum (896883) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:28AM (#14053211)
    I feel a bit left out.
  • ...and already found a stupid bug. =p

    Try installing Firefox/Mozilla/Whatever Mozilla-compatible browser you use in a non-standard installation folder (i.e. NOT [root]:\[Program files folder]\Mozilla [Firefox]) and try installing the plugin; it won't even ask you to look for the damn correct directory and blow up in mid-installation. XD


    This is why I love Microsoft: Unsurpassable jokes every now and then. =p
  • Live Services (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Foofoobar (318279) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:32AM (#14053243)
    The reason they are suddenly changing their tune is because they believe that the industry may be switching to LIVE SERVICES. If your service (such as Excel Live) doesn't work in one browser because you chose not to follow industry standards, that will mean that people will use another service.

    Microsoft is afraid of people trying others services so they will want to make sure that they build code that is interoperable with other browsers especially now that Firefox has anywhere from 10-25% of the market share.

    They can't afford to ignore other browsers now.
  • Pretty smart. They probably just wrapped IE in a Mozilla plugin. ;)
  • by thepoch (698396) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:36AM (#14053289)
    Why is it that I always seem to read this phrase from Microsoft... and yet don't always see it in practice? If it's something that may eat their monopoly, they say it's bad for the customers. Example? Open Document Format, and Linux. OpenDocument gives people the option of choosing office suites without the worry of format troubles. That's good for the customer. Linux distributions give customers the choice of platform. That's also good for the customer. Simply these two things increases competition, possibly increasing quality and, hopefully, lowering prices. Isn't that good for customers as well?
  • by I.M.O.G. (811163) <spamisyummy@gmail.com> on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:46AM (#14053401) Homepage

    We already know validation can be turned off in IE as follows: Go to IE>Tools>Manage Add-ons, find Windows Genuine Validation listed there, and select disable. No more check required, and you can get all your updates.

    So how do we turn it off for Firefox? Ironic that I found it easier to turn off in IE, and I haven't yet found how to do it in firefox...

  • Microsoft has recently decided they need to move into providing internet services rather than just selling software. If They want to make money selling services over the internet, does it really matter who made the browser? You'll still be logging into their proprietary applications services and forking over your cash. Why limit the customer base to ONLY that 85-90% that run your browser?

  • by Phillyboy82 (135035) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @11:57AM (#14053530) Homepage
    You know, alot of the comments here show that the "groupthink tools" mentality has really sunk in here. For Christ sakes, they are changing something that people bitch about here, only for people to COMPLETELY SIDE STEP WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT and bitch about other things unrelated to it, just to fluff their epeen on anything anti-MS. I am glad to see that some people are actually saying something positive, ie that Microsoft is actually...um, you know...playing fair and recognizing they have competition. Thank you for helping support insightful discussions (which my post certainly is not! :))
    • IEBlog... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Spy der Mann (805235)
      Yes, I agree I did a bit of karma-whoring to post one or two comments in here according to the group-mentality. Yes, I'm sorry, I got carried on :(

      *ahem* Anyway, remember it's the IE7 team doing the Firefox WMP plugins and such. Yes, the same ones that fixed those nasty guillotine bugs that made web programmers' lifes become a nightmare.

      So, yes, I support their cross-browser compatibility effort. Now the only thing that worries me is that windows media DRM that can run remote code on your machine.
  • Why not build an XPI installer for the plugins? This is what Sun (Java) and Macromedia (Flash) do and it works very well.

    There "download this, then hit refresh" method is a bit wonkey.
  • So... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nougatmachine (445974) <johndagen&netscape,net> on Thursday November 17, 2005 @12:00PM (#14053572) Homepage
    Does this mean they'll also commit to a Mac version of WMP that doesn't absolutely suck? I'm not holding my breath.
  • This M$ program relies on spyware built into XP that keeps track of all the software on your machine. If you're fortunate enough to have an un-infected system (such as Win 2K) you can keep the Genuine (Dis)Advantage spyware off your machine when doing updates by following a simple procedure [boingboing.net].
  • On Linux? (Score:2, Informative)

    by icydog (923695)
    I went to the site with Firefox on Linux and it gave me a popup telling me that a page will load telling me I will need to download some file. So I push OK, and it redirects me to the same page so that popup happens again. Infinite loop. Anyone else get this?
  • by mAineAc (580334) <mAineAc_____@hotm a i l . com> on Thursday November 17, 2005 @12:10PM (#14053683) Homepage
    That microsoft is interested in how many people are actually using a different browser. How much more of a realistic view are they going to see if they don't force everyone to use IE. Or, perhaps this is research to use for more of their FUD.
  • by cwgmpls (853876) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @12:15PM (#14053753) Journal
    When are they going to fix the way Outlook Web Access runs on non-IE browsers? The current non-IE OWA is a 1990's-era frame-based piece of crap that lacks any ability to spell-check emails or search mailboxes. And they try to pass it off as a state-of-the-art web-based email client. What a joke.
  • by dpbsmith (263124) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @12:16PM (#14053758) Homepage
    ...isn't great, either. When will it occur to them to do something about that?

    I think Microsoft is suffering from terminal Big Company Disease, the situation in which a company loses focus on serving the customer and starts to obey the Three Laws of Necrotics:

    1) First Law: hurt the competition. This is more important than anything else.

    2) Second Law: don't cannibalize any of your own products, so long as this does not conflict with the First Law.

    3) Third Law: Serve the customer, so long as this does not conflict with the First or Second law, and can be done in any spare time left over after dealing with more important priorities
  • Sigh (Score:3, Funny)

    by andreyw (798182) on Thursday November 17, 2005 @01:33PM (#14054647) Homepage
    In other news, Microsoft is not the oppressive, overbearing monopolist tyrant everyone makes them out to be. Full story at 11.

    I mean common, there's got to be some hidden motive behind this move, right? M$ is trying to shove its software onto OSS platforms now. OMFG! [/sarcasm]

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein

Working...