Stupid putz!Excellent opening. Inflammatory and churlish, but not outrageous. Introduces the reader to your intent very succinctly.
Microsoft is as evil as any other software company out there. Microsoft has done NOTHING DIFFERENT than any other software company that is dominant in their particular market - AppleBlah blah blah, Microsoft is maintaining the status quo, so we should embrace them for that, instead of knocking their world-domination schemes at every turn. I don't see the logic in it.
.vs Power Computing or ComputerAssociates being the prime examples. The only difference is that Microsoft is a much bigger target than Apple, ComputerAssociates or any other "market leader".
Rather, I see that if we hold the biggest and most abusive company accountable for its actions, then every other company will realize that nobody is above the law or the standards that their customers set. The result is that the marketplace will become less about control and more about producing a good product that people will buy.
But this would require knowledge and vigilance on the part of the consuming public, so I don't hold my breath for it to happen anytime soon. After all, the consumers maintain the status quo too, and become irate when anyone suggests that they should become more politically aware.
then you should perform a "sanity check" on your moralsNice straw man. Who said the original poster was a filthy immoral pirate?
And I don't see why a commercial operating system has to spy on its users (implied by "otherwise, stick with free/open source software"). If more people were aware of what was going on in their system, they might be more concerned about it. But with commercials on TV from MS Marketing being the only avenue from which the typical consumer receives information, how are they supposed to know? It would be much different if there was a competitor in town, because the competitor would be slinging mud all over these "features", and MS would be forced to get rid of this big brother crap or lose marketshare.
A simple solution to the DRM debacle is this:This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. If I'm not willing to give up control of my computer to a 3rd party, what makes you think I'm going to allow them to disable features I've already enjoyed for ages?
The answer is simple: make it illegal to have software that...Is that a new law? No thanks. We have enough already.
I don't know why anyone hasn't seen this issue from this angle before - it's not "rocket science".That's right, and it's also not political science -- it's an uninformed individual calling for more legislation to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Just because the MPAA and RIAA bleat on and on about how piracy will kill them, doesn't mean that it is true, or that we even have to listen to them. Their business is not to be propped up by legislation in the face of new technology.
Concerning RMS - he reminds me too much of the hippies that still hang-out at UC Berkeley and still protest for "free" love and "free" drugs - since you can't get either anymore, "free" software un-naturally fits the criteria for protest; "If THE MAN is keeping you from getting IT, Protest!"More typical "big government is good, and would never hurt me" advocacy. These "hippies" are doing more for your freedom than your stance will ever accomplish. You might reconsider your attitude towards them.