Microsoft does, indeed, have a decent product in its OS, one that may be technologically superior to Linux &Mac &Unix. But for me, it's an issue of reliability. It's not really MS's fault, but I like that I never have to worry about viruses or pay for updates on a Linux machine.
Also, I use openoffice.org as my word processor. Unlike MS Word, it allows me to generate .pdf files for free.
I've read the same thing, though, that the bug is from Firefox, not MS.
On your side point, I don't use Adblock to kill every ad, just the ones that get past the pop-up blocker, or float over the page, or seem to pumping massive amounts of bytes to constantly update themselves.
For example, your "Auction Ads by Jittery" are not blocked. I've never been tempted to buy anything there, but perhaps someday. (I also don't click on ads if I have no intention of buying anything, Jihad-supporting sites excepted. Click-click-click.)
As for your main point, it could well be either way. Fifteen years ago, Microsoft put in some "AARD" code to prevent Windows (beta) from running on DR-DOS. OTOP, they put in many, many patches specifically to support programs like Lotus and WordPerfect that used undocumented features or just plain did things wrongly.
I can tell you that everyone breaks the rules occasionally. We are making a product to simulate certain weapons systems so the airplane companies can shake down their software before the actual product is available. I designed it to the ICD, which has the signatures of the weapon manufacturer, airframe manufacturer, and the DoD. In a meeting, one of the airframe reps said "Oh, yeah, we don't do it that way. We use these other bits in a way completely different from how they are specified instead." No one (except Me) blinked an eye.
So if a multimillion dollar airplane, that can launch weapons and kill people, can violate specs and people find it OK, why not some web page or browser?
When Radio Shack brought out the Color Computer III, with significantly upgraded hardware, they swore that all old CoCo software which had been written per their guidelines would run on it. The only exception I heard about was their own most popular game cartridge, which used some undocumented video trick that no longer worked.
I use both Macs and XP and I can tell you that from a tech support perspective, there is simply no question: the Mac is easier to troubleshoot and support and, like all *nix based operating systems, is all but completely virus-free.
If Microsoft ever dumps the registry (which was a disastrously bad idea from day one) and implements a Unix-style security model, they'll be lightyears ahead of where they are. But their UI, while much better, is still more complicated than it needs to be.
Microsoft does, indeed, have a decent product in its OS, one that may be technologically superior to Linux &Mac &Unix. But for me, it's an issue of reliability. It's not really MS's fault, but I like that I never have to worry about viruses or pay for updates on a Linux machine.
Also, I use openoffice.org as my word processor. Unlike MS Word, it allows me to generate .pdf files for free.
I've read the same thing, though, that the bug is from Firefox, not MS.
f
For example, your "Auction Ads by Jittery" are not blocked. I've never been tempted to buy anything there, but perhaps someday. (I also don't click on ads if I have no intention of buying anything, Jihad-supporting sites excepted. Click-click-click.)
As for your main point, it could well be either way. Fifteen years ago, Microsoft put in some "AARD" code to prevent Windows (beta) from running on DR-DOS. OTOP, they put in many, many patches specifically to support programs like Lotus and WordPerfect that used undocumented features or just plain did things wrongly.
I can tell you that everyone breaks the rules occasionally. We are making a product to simulate certain weapons systems so the airplane companies can shake down their software before the actual product is available. I designed it to the ICD, which has the signatures of the weapon manufacturer, airframe manufacturer, and the DoD. In a meeting, one of the airframe reps said "Oh, yeah, we don't do it that way. We use these other bits in a way completely different from how they are specified instead." No one (except Me) blinked an eye.
So if a multimillion dollar airplane, that can launch weapons and kill people, can violate specs and people find it OK, why not some web page or browser?
If Microsoft ever dumps the registry (which was a disastrously bad idea from day one) and implements a Unix-style security model, they'll be lightyears ahead of where they are. But their UI, while much better, is still more complicated than it needs to be.