Ok, so I've gotten pretty used to all the bloatware and crap MS spews out, but I'm still too lazy to switch to linux because the idea of having to hack together drivers for a lot of my things is well annoying at best.

But this?! Are they fucking crazy?
http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9124459

Now would be a great time for another competitor to come out with a compatible OS and tell MS where to go.

We've already seen some software that works similar to this - when you buy it you get the complete package, but you can unlock advanced features by paying even more. The entertainment industry is plagued with this problem with our lighting consoles as well.

So, the computers at libraries and in educational centers and such are now going to require additional funding in the annual budgets, meaning the local and state governments are going to need to devote a larger portion of revenues to appeasing Microsoft's greed, leading to more calls for increased levies and/or higher property taxes to increase the revenues.

Hmmm, interesting snowball effect that this has the potential of starting.

Eh? So, they're thinking about providing a potentially cheaper, usage based plan for light users?

MS certainly isn't spearheading the SaaS movement. They'd prefer you keep buying fixed licenses forever. Outrage misplaced.

I'm not sure how I feel about being charged more for using my computer's O/S more. I'm pretty sure I'm against it.
And while they may not be spearheading the movement, adopting the plan will shift even more people into the "I Hate Microsoft!" camp. You can't deny that they have the market share of the desktop computing industry. This might put them out of the business if another company comes along and offers a 1 time price for the O/S's license, with no further fees for increased usage.

Or MS continues to offer both. Cheaper version for the masses that use the computer sparingly and another for power users. Sounds like they are meeting the consumers demands to me.

PS. For added effect they have to come up with a way to compete with Google's "Office" and soon will be Google's Linux.

I'm not sure what's driving everyone's assumption that they would offer only this licensing method. Businesses would never adopt it. It would drive a mass exodus to Linux/Mac on the desktop.

This, if even real or ever implemented, would clearly just be an optional license for light-weight users.

No different than how you can still license server products based on concurrent users or by processor, depending on which is best for you.

Come to think of it, it's probably more likely that they're trying to take the option off the table for any potential competitor. Licensing the patent rights would price any upstart SaaS OS provider out of their own market.

Our patent system is an absolute debacle when it comes to software. Software should never have been patentable at all.

Regardless of who is going to profit, it is clear that the impact will be felt by many who may not even use a computer, or be the owners of the computers affected.

Schools obviously will have to budget differently; and, libraries that are providing computer access to those that might otherwise not have the opportunity to use one will either have to cease the program, or cut expenses elsewhere, or seek new revenue sources.

This is simply a way to access a new revenue stream by capitalizing on the success of gaming companies like Blizzard. At the average of a couple hours per day spent gaming, and the average "gamer" engaging in MMO's for four or five years, that computer that can be bought today for $1000 will end up returning approximately $3650 over four years, using the $1.25 per hour figure.

(365 x 2 = 730 x 1.25 = 912.50 x 4 = 3650.)

If the gaming companies are not in fact the ones behind this, I would think they would be fighting it to prevent any loss of revenue from canceled subscriptions and a shrinking player base. Especially given the global economy and shrinking amount of recreational dollars.

No, that is incorrect.

After re-reading the article, it looks more like you'd buy a computer and the whole set-up as part of this; then pay per usage which I can kind of see. But where does that now leave the rest of us that like to build custom ones? I would assume that they'll offer both or hope so anyways. Otherwise MS might finally be going the way of the dodo.

In a situation where we have a mixture of fat clients, thin clients, and gobs of other windows based medical devices it would make sense. Most of our 9,000 PCs/destkops, etc do not even use advanced features of the OS and we spend millions per year in licensing to M$haft, it makes sense to me.

There's just no possible way they would ever try to push OS-as-a-Service as the only licensing model in the foreseeable future. It would be absolute suicide for them as long as Linux/Mac exist, and of course MS knows that.

Same for hardware vendors trying to push machines that would only run a metered OS. Never happen as an exclusive option.

So, if it's something that is offered as an option for those who it would benefit, where's the evil? Grandma checking her email could lower her TCO this way, if it's priced right (and if it's not, no one would buy it).

I could see for people who don't use their computers much it being a good thing, but at first read it looks a lot like they want to push all of them to that. and let's face it, MS has done some amazingly stupid things in the past.

They're not going to endanger their bread and butter. If anything, the only stupid moves MS has ever made have been tied to protecting that golden goose.

You guys are Chicken Little-ing. When phone companies began to offer "pay as you go" phones, they didn't get rid of their other plans. There will be a Windows Vista Version 2 Ultimate for $300 and then the Pay As You Go plan for LESS if you don't use all the features.

This is to combat so many people using / downloading OS software illegally, a problem MAC computers don't have to deal with as much since their the only makers of their MAC products and Windows serves many, many different versions of computers. If someone only wants to word process, they won't need to pay $300 for their OS. If they want to word process and game on the weekend, but not every day, they would maybe pay $200. Etc etc etc.

How would this affect someone like myself, who has two computers that have been built pretty much to my specs and which should not need to be replaced for the next 5 years at least? Would I need to shell out additional money for something I already bought?

How would this affect someone like myself, who has two computers that have been built pretty much to my specs and which should not need to be replaced for the next 5 years at least? Would I need to shell out additional money for something I already bought?

No. Ignore all the crazy-talk and don't worry. People just like to poo-poo MS for any imagined reason they can come up with.

Even if they do this, it's something going into Windows 8 or beyond (which is two versions in the future), and would be optional. There is no possible scenario in which they try to push this as the exclusive license in the foreseeable future. It simply isn't a possibility.

The licensing options are really not the big deal here. Microsoft has been pushing unsuccessfully towards more "pay as you go" type options for over a decade with minimal success. The really scary part is them aggressively embedding auditing and billing software into the operating system itself -- your billed credit card is going to follow every single thing you run or connect to in some fashion or another, and the entire system is going to have to include a mechanism to report usage to whatever is forwarding that along.

I doubt many of you ever used a time-sharing system that billed you for usage as those largely went the way of the dinosaur in the 1980s except for certain dedicated mainframe replacements from IBM, Unisys, etc, that you more or less never directly interfaced with; There is a reason the market completely abandoned this model in favor of buying their own systems instead of effectively leasing time on them from the manufacturer.

Of course, all things repeat themselves.

Isn't this the same thing that cox cable was trying to do? Offering "lower prices to users that barely surf and costing more for users that download a lot". Except that it basically started at normal prices and just went up, so no one saved any money at all.

I would be surprised if MS would cut their profits by offering "Cheaper" operating systems for those that barely use them. Since when have business's done this?

Isn't this the same thing that cox cable was trying to do? Offering "lower prices to users that barely surf and costing more for users that download a lot". Except that it basically started at normal prices and just went up, so no one saved any money at all.

I would be surprised if MS would cut their profits by offering "Cheaper" operating systems for those that barely use them. Since when have business's done this?

They have taken some serious drops in both the consumer and business markets. Any time a company starts to notice a drop in revenue they offer sales. Look at the sales all the consumer sales stores are offering after poor a Christmas showing.

Actually. There may be another angle to this. Governments have effectively been looking for a means to tax computer usage, such as internet surfing. By changing the OS from being a stand alone product to be being more of a subscription based service, there is probably enough legal structure in place for computer usage and bandwith usage to be taxed if the OS service bills you for how much usage you put on computer hardware. Microsoft become the world's biggest tax man since Microsoft would be taxed by the government for income derived from providing the services and in turn MS passes the expense of the tax on to the user. Also, this can levy in a "sin tax" for gamers or any high power draw application in addition to what you pay the electric company. As far as schools and businesses, thin net clients can probably solve alot of the problems. Also, from the intelligence gathering perspective: If the OS knows exactly what your computer is doing to the degree of being able to fairly bill you, its fairly easy to determine what people are doing with their computers and when. That is a double edged sword.

Also, any software that is a subscription like this is IMPOSSIBLE TO PIRATE. The client would live on your computer but the key to make it work is still based on a server under direct control of the company running the subscription. How often to you hear of World of Warcraft copies being pirated? Its because with the model in place, you can't have a pirated copy with a hacked serial and have the software do you any good. It really is a truly ingenious business model. If all software makers go this route, it would turn most everyone's PC into a client of whatever company offers the software you use. Too bad it takes all the freedom out of the use of the computer, since if the government can tax it, they can regulate it by proxy. Games like Everquest and WoW probably take alot of the kudos for this too. Microsoft has not had an original thought in a while. They just know how to package and market ideas well. Will it work? Not without alot of years of debates and alot of hours billed by law firms.

Ya'll have flat out lost your god damn minds.

Ya'll have flat out lost your god damn minds.

Okay ******** gets the quote of the year *just* before it is over.........

Sanchek, its shitty, but its still ingenious. The thing is the government will be 100% on board. Software makers will be 100% on board. The consumer will of course get fucked or could be. Also it doesn't work if the machine isn't on the Internet or a network with Internet access so its not 100% perfect. Learn Linux or buy a Mac if you don't like it. If Linux becomes main stream as a result, it will not be much cheaper and much more of headache to use. The thing is everyone will adopt a model that eliminates software piracy. It slams China's dick in the door pretty hard if all the stuff they counterfeit doesn't work. The billions lost by theft would be eliminated and perhaps passed on as a saving to consumers.

If understanding how this comes into play means means insanity than just lock me up in the rubber room.

Stick to the military stuff you know. You are not making a bit of sense on this thread.

Honestly, no offense. I understand that people like to be all paranoid about big bad Microsoft. This just isn't even in the realm of reality though.

They have taken some serious drops in both the consumer and business markets. Any time a company starts to notice a drop in revenue they offer sales. Look at the sales all the consumer sales stores are offering after poor a Christmas showing.

There actually was many news reports that the only items being offered up for a deal was Christmas stuff. Not much else. So i'm not sure what your point is.

There actually was many news reports that the only items being offered up for a deal was Christmas stuff. Not much else. So i'm not sure what your point is.

If you can't conceptualize people lowering their price to entice buyers to purchase their products, I don't know what to tell you.

Don't be stupid. I did not say I could not conceptualize it. I simply said it did not happen much this year with after Christmas sales. Able to follow it this time?

It's not crazy talk Sanchek when this is already in place in other business sectors. Fifteen years ago I would have called you crazy if you told me I would rent a license to play a game on a monthly basis, and look how major MMOs are now? Every game you run through Steam (Half Life 2) is essentially rented, they just don't charge you every time you play. Remember the early days of Prodigy and American Online? How many people bought two hour increments of time online? And specialized equipment and software is already sold under this sort of agreement.

My light console, for theatrical lighting, controls 1024 DMX channels. Doesn't matter what that is, just that the cap is 1024. For a little over a thousand dollars more, they'll unlock another 1024 for me. Same software, same hardware. Several lighting manufacturers and software based controllers work the exact same way.

Remember that the average user doesn't have a clue - most of the PCs on sale at Best Buy right now are completely inappropriate for the average user, but people keep buying more expensive devices. A plug like this might actually get somewhere.

None of those comparisons make sense. You're comparing content/service providers to a fixed piece of software which has open source competition. Just because two things both involve a computer doesn't mean they share any other similarities.

If MS tried to push a license with higher TCO, many companies would start migrating to Linux on the desktop overnight. They're already running *NIX in their data centers, and usually have proponents throughout their IT infrastructure. I don't even like Linux as a desktop OS myself, but I understand that it's viable if rolled out and supported correctly.

Similarly, Best Buy and Dell would make a fortune installing something like Ubuntu for casual users (the vast majority) who didn't want to be locked into the new license. We're already seeing that happening with NetBooks anyway. If MS tried to strongarm them with exclusivity agreements, which they have in the past, a third party would do it instead. The demand would be huge.

All this FUD is crazy-talk. I wouldn't be surprised if they do (try to) come out with this, especially for markets where piracy is high, but it won't be an exclusive choice.

Lighting consoles are a hardware based item limited by license.

Suppose MS offered a low end license that included Word, Excel, and Outlook, with just enough hardware functionality for them to work. You don't see businesses snapping that up to save money on the full version?

You can't download a free lighting console off the Internet, can you? You really can't compare an OS to many other things. It's a very unique beast.

If MS offered something that provided lower overall TCO, that would be great for everyone. Like I said before, I think it has great potential for low end users. If it helps granny get just what she needs to get emails with little Timmy's recital pictures, where's the evil?

If they tried to get people hooked on the pricing and then clobber them later, Linux and Apple would always be waiting. Linux will only become more and more viable as a mainstream desktop OS over the years.

Looking at this in the simple terms I deal best with, the manner in which it was presented in the article makes it look similar to the old AOL pricing setup; you get so much basic usage, and then anything over that you pay for the time used.

Seems to me that it was the pricing arrangements along with the intrusiveness that drove so many away from AOL; would not the same result for MS?

That's not really why AOL died, but no those aren't the same things.

This isn't really something that you can cram into the mold of another industry and understand correctly. It is different from anything else that there has ever been.

You can't download a free lighting console off the Internet, can you?Yes - there are free applications, which include licensing for more advanced options. There are also cheap applications which include payment for more channels. 1024 is very limiting in a modern lighting application.

As a side note, lighting equipment is all about software development. Thankfully new trends seem to be towards USB externals run off a laptop. The consoles themselves are simple computers with very, very expensive keyboards. The inside of my Strand 520i, about a $10k-$15k board once upon a time, is a small Intel mobo and 20gig hard drive. You pay through the nose for proprietary software. PCs aren't much different, which is why so many of us build our own boxes.

Just because something doesn't make sense, doesn't mean a business won't try to do it. Look for example at the record industry, and their refusal to get onboard with online markets. Unfortunately mainstream software - and I'm thinking games here - follow the big OS manufacturers. Free Office applications are great, but the development costs for a game tends to mean they want to find the largest possible target audience.

If we're going to lend credible apprehension to any stupid thing that a company might do, we might as well start worrying that the grocery store is going to charge us extra for each time we chew our food.

Microsoft isn't stupid enough to intentionally destroy their bread and butter. I know hating them is trendy, but keep in mind that the hate is rooted in the fact that MS comes out on top so often (even when not merited).

Online Office type apps are going to get damn close to parity with their desktop counterparts within the timeframe that MS could pull this off anyway. Even Adobe expects to have viable online versions of products like Photoshop in a few more years.

This won't be coming with Windows 7, so we're looking at 2011+ here. The potential for desktop OS lockin based on apps is going to be greatly diminished at that point. If you want to worry about something like this, worry about the companies that have a stranglehold on the Internet (not Google).

Sanchek, the only arguement you have presented is:

"These guys are fucking crazy".

Now, since I am just a knuckle dragging military jarhead with the lid screwed off and no brain inside, please enlighten me on your vast IT wisdom on how I am so lost in the woods on this.

The simple nuts and bolts of this that I see:

The OS becomes a service. Like your water or gas. The more you use the more MS charges and the more money MS makes and more governments collect in taxes. The service can be also turned off if there is no payment or there is evidence of abuse/tampering etc. Such as using a counterfeit or WAREZ copy. I don't give a rats rear end about the licensing or the other legal mumbo-jumbo. That for you smarty pants know it alls to figure out. Right up your alley, Sanchek. Since I got all my education from what is printed on an MRE box, its all greek to me. But I digress...

A guess is that this is a way to tame the wild west that is the PC environment online because it allows the publisher of software to stay in the loop and in control of their property because they keep what it takes to make it work 100% under their control. If they feel the user has violated their terms, they shut the user down. The end. Just as SoE does with EQ and Blizzard with WoW as well as Anti-Virus software etc.

The tech is all available now and MS is not offering anything revolutionary, so perhaps this one doesn't take a degree in IT and to be the Head Geek in the Ivory Frame Room to figure this one out.

Also, in terms of Linux, if it truely becomes Mainstream due to this, who is to say its not like any other underground cool hip thing that exploded to primetime? Right now, Linux for the desktop is just a toy for the uber geeks to brag about. A way for computer power users to "be a rebel" against the MS man. Well, if the great unwashed masses switch to Linux, they WILL have to charge (more)for it. Probably alot. Why? Liability. Service. Support. Etc Etc Etc. If you want some dumbass like me to be able to be productive with software, it better do everything I expect Windows to do, have someone to answer my questions by phone, email etc when it goes south while I am in East Kerplakistan, have a legal team ready to talk to me in court when it screws up and costs time/money/lives, gets hacked, crashes, riddled with worms, won't load my drivers etc etc the list goes on. AKA, When it becomes as big a money maker AND a target as Windows is now. AVG used to be free. Now you have to buy it. Why? Because it was a good product when it was free but it got too popular to maintain the infrastructure to keep it free and meet all the expectations of all the new users.

So thats my take on this. THAT is the potential I see in this. I would type more but I have to go clean my weapon.

You ain't no Jarhead boy....you a Squid!

You ain't no Jarhead boy....you a Squid!

True. Does Sanchek know or care about that? No. I wear cammy so that means to the lay person " I am in the Army" and since I wear an 8 point I "must be a Marine". My apologies to Marines out there. That was not the context I was looking to imply. Most IT people just assume I am a "Dumb jarhead" and I just call them "Douschebag IT weenie", when in reality I am in the Navy and the IT guy might actually be decent. Most arn't because they deal with us like we have Down's Syndrome and/or are 5 years old. Yup. We don't write code or manage networks. No sir.

We are just the assholes who have to pay for this stuff and use it every day, hoping that it works well enough to do its job.

You're mistaken if you think Linux isn't viable on the desktop.

Maybe you're envisioning granny sitting down at a command line? Something like Ubuntu is extremely similar to Windows. For that matter, the super user-friendly Mac OS is unix based too.

Granny wouldn't know she was running Linux, any more than she currently knows what version of the NT kernel she's running in XP or Vista.

In fact, many layman users are picking up Linux everyday with the popularity of NetBooks running it lately.

If you insist on some 90s view of Linux and its viability, then I don't think you're going to be able to understand the factors driving OS related decisions at MS.

I don't know if Linux on the desktop will ever happen, and don't really care much honestly. I'm writing this post on Windows 7 and am perfectly happy with that state of affairs. At the same time, I could just as easily write it on Ubuntu and there would be no difference in my experience doing so.

I don't use Netbooks. Heck I don't even know what Netbooks is. Should I?

At work, I use the standard Office stuff. Outlook. Excel, Word. Powerpoint etc etc. I use Acrobat Standard. AutoCAD. The machines are all on Windows XP. Also, if you are Beta testing Windows 7, you are NOT the typical computer user. And I have seen Umbuto. Looks pretty with the 3D desktop you can spin around like a Rubix cube. Its not worth a shit if there isn't the support behind it though. Would you go before Congress right now and pitch to them that we should use Umbuto on all government client systems? Even the classified ones???? Perhaps for servers it great. /shrug. The money isn't in that high eshelon type of market. I was looking at the lowest common denominator consumer who knows how to turn the computer on and surf the web/send e-mail, play a few games and thats about it.

But I might as well talk to a rock. You are "Douschebag IT Weenie" and I am "Downs Syndrome Jarhead".

Guess what.

Your "lowest common denominator consumer" is exactly who is buying these NetBooks running Linux. They probably don't even know they're running Linux, which is the point.

But seriously. You're bragging about your ignorance of what's going on in the market, while trying to claim the ability to talk about... what's going on in the market?

Whats going on in the market. Hmm lets see.

Well, I think the term lowest common denominator has to extend beyond what you might think.

For example people in Third World countries are very adept at getting Cyber Cafes up and running and cell phones before they seem able to get roads fixed, water running, and the lights to stay on. In Africa you can go past these places all the time. The building is a something barely standing, but they have a generator pounding away powering computers that are older but still can get you on the Internet.

There is a huge world out there, and they all want in on the online experience, and they vastly outnumber the populations of the Western world. They use stolen software and their governments want to regulate content and tax it. The only thing its not just a Third World problem plaguing software publishers and governments. Its everywhere.

Thats my take on the market. Thats the "lowest common denominator".

And those markets are exactly where Linux on the desktop is seeing the quickest uptake. You know those OLPC laptops, specifically targeted at those markets? The Sugar version is Linux...

Really, what's your point?

You think no one will switch to Linux if MS screws them with a monthly license because Linux isn't viable? You're simply wrong.

Linux on the desktop isn't some fringe thing anymore. It isn't unsupported (Dell supports it on those NetBooks, for crying out loud).

Hell, most of the Internet runs on flavors of unix, including Linux. You'd think the whole mess of tubes was about to collapse, listening to how you talk about Linux...

And MS should just let Linux dominate a market? Last time I checked they were a company trying to make money by offering things people can use. The few cyber cafes I visited in Africa, which were a business and I had to pay the local bongo bucks to use, had PCs with the Windows environment. It might have been 98, 2000 or XP. But it was a MS OS.

Look. I like Windows XP. I really don't care. You original theme was that MS was nuts to do this, but in reality there is nothing wrong about it from my limited angle. I am not a market insider. Thats not my job. But you posted this here where there is the potential that non-computer guys might read it.

Bottom line:

Its really attractive for people in these developing markets to get a legit OS, with support. Its good for the governments because there is potential for them to have some ability to regulate and earn tax money. Its good for the software makers because there is the potential it can kill off piracy. You can beat me over the head with Linux until I am the dead horse turned into glue but that is a theory on "What the F*** they are thinking." It doesn't matter to me much if the man behind the curtain is Linux. What I see on my screen when it boots up is "Welcome to Windows _insert version_ here_. Its almost an icon now. Like Coca Cola, which you can get anywhere in the world as well. Even the places where you can't drink the water.

Sure, like I've said over and over (is this thing on?), if MS provides a license that's a lower TCO then it's going to be great and see uptake.

The lunacy enters when people start assuming they're going to only offer that license and will punish heavier users. There is no credible reason, other than anti-MS FUD, to think they would ever even entertain the notion. When you couple that with the fact that Linux is sitting there preventing them from doing anything too overboard in the strong-arming department, you can see how absurd the notion really is.

Comparing an OS to a utility or MMO subscription is fundamentally flawed logic. It's similar to comparing a DVD purchase with a cable TV subscription.

Linux on the desktop isn't quite there yet. It's close, but still has a number of quirks.

One example I ran into recently: I installed kopete to use as my instant messaging program. For some bizarre reason, sound notifications would not work for incoming messages, even though they worked on all other events. The problem could be at any of several layers--kopete, knotify, gstreamer, or phonon--but none of them reported an issue, other than phonon which complained that a specific audio device wasn't working and so it was falling back on "default". (It did this whether or not the audio successfully played on an event.) My workaround was to create a one line shell script that played the sound I wanted, and to set kopete to run that script on incoming messages.

That said, it's good enough for an increasing number of "power users"; flexibility outweighs the quirks for them (not to mention the price tag of alternatives). I suppose it's also good enough for people that have limited use for a computer in the first place, as someone that only browses the web and uses email is unlikely to run into some of the less polished areas.

Right.

It's important to remember the timeframe we're talking about. Win7 isn't getting any large changes at this point, so it couldn't happen until Windows 2012 or so. At the rate Linux (especially Ubuntu) is maturing for desktop use, I can't imagine that it won't be perfectly viable for most users at that point. Especially when installed at the factory, like Dell and others are doing now.

Couple that with the mass migration of common productivity tasks to the Internet, and your common user doesn't really care about the tricky stuff that we might. 99.9% of their time will be spent online in 2012 anyway, outside of gaming.

Hey, whatever is clever. If this Linux version is that great, then I will use it if it offers the world on a silver platter. At the very least the competition might make MS products better. I am just going to give up on this. Clearly me trying to go against the herd by offering speculation on why MS might be trying this strategy is just going to further rub the computer snobs the wrong way.

It almost makes me what to say my next machine is going to be a Mac.

Or a goddamn typewriter. A mechanical one.

I'm pretty sure we agree about a low TCO leased Windows license being viable. In fact, I don't think anyone has said that's not a possibility, or even said that it's a bad thing.

The thing that's silly is this further step that some are taking, assuming that MS would then lock everyone into that license even if it were prohibitively expensive for heavier users.

assuming that MS would then lock everyone into that license even if it were prohibitively expensive for heavier users

Yah there is no way. People still have stand alone systems, either with embedded OS or just do not want them on the Internet. I use a few systems which are not on the Internet just due to the mitigation of risks associated with the Net. They don't need to be online, so they arn't. They tend to need the least amount of work, too. If they want alot of people to get this idea of theirs it would have to really offer a huge savings or have alot of value added features. Still from a global market standpoint, its big business even if only 30% of people who would want windows got in on this. The global population at launch would be how many?

For what most people use a computer for these days, a linux package like Xandros or Ubuntu would more than meet their needs. These software packages married to a $350-$500 PC would more than meet their needs This is why Microsoft will fail.

For what most people use a computer for these days, a linux package like Xandros or Ubuntu would more than meet their needs. These software packages married to a $350-$500 PC would more than meet their needs This is why Microsoft will fail.

If you look at in that light, today's full featured cell phone is all most people need. Just find a way to plug in a larger screen, more storage memory and more ergonomically designed keyboard and input device.

If you look at in that light, today's full featured cell phone is all most people need. Just find a way to plug in a larger screen, more storage memory and more ergonomically designed keyboard and input device.

So basically... buy a computer?

I think all most people really need those cheap 500 dollar mini lap tops or apple boxes. All most do is surf the internet, email, and troll booty on myspace.

So basically... buy a computer?

I can't make phone calls with a computer. At least not while driving, at the movies, while at a restaurant, while at meetings........

I can't make phone calls with a computer. At least not while driving, at the movies, while at a restaurant, while at meetings........

Ahh, so you are the guy that keeps pissing off the rest of us! :rolleyes:

Doh: http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/02/microsoft-pay-as-you-go-patent-application-rejected/

I can't make phone calls with a computer. At least not while driving, at the movies, while at a restaurant, while at meetings........


And you can't hook up a monitor, bigger keyboard, etc while driving either.

Hey now. MTV's "Pimp my Ride" seems to think people can watch movies, make cotton candy and lattes while driving. With a port replicator, it should be a snap to hook these peripherals up. It can't be any worse than people using their Doucheberries or Apple IdiotPhones while driving, at the movies, while at a restaurant, while at meetings........

Doh: http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/02/microsoft-pay-as-you-go-patent-application-rejected/

The patent rejection won't necessarily mean they won't do it. They could always rework the patent, or just go with the process unpatented. Friend of mine from college is a patent examiner, albeit he's in electronics instead of the software division, and we were talking about this the other night and he says most patents get rejected once or twice before they're accepted anymore.

Rockets fire from Gaza into Isreal. Hamas claims the rockets are not from Hamas so they do count as breaking the cease fire. Fuck that shit. No more games, no more tricks, Hamas is going to choke on their own blood.

Rockets fire from Gaza into Isreal. Hamas claims the rockets are not from Hamas so they do count as breaking the cease fire. Fuck that shit. No more games, no more tricks, Hamas is going to choke on their own blood.

First of all... wrong thread.

Second, come in the right thread and let me educate you with facts and articles again.

True. Does Sanchek know or care about that? No. I wear cammy so that means to the lay person " I am in the Army" and since I wear an 8 point I "must be a Marine". My apologies to Marines out there. That was not the context I was looking to imply. Most IT people just assume I am a "Dumb jarhead" and I just call them "Douschebag IT weenie", when in reality I am in the Navy and the IT guy might actually be decent. Most arn't because they deal with us like we have Down's Syndrome and/or are 5 years old. Yup. We don't write code or manage networks. No sir.

We are just the assholes who have to pay for this stuff and use it every day, hoping that it works well enough to do its job.


OMG I am an IT guy and I know you are in the Navy (who by the way signs the check for the Marines :P) and i do not treat you like you have Down's ... :P all I need i linux to play eq without having alot of issues and i am fine. I use linux for my file/print server at home I have a linux based media center, I have a hp "netbook" I won that has vista xp and linux loaded on it and I use to do security checks at work. oh and I love my iphone i just wish i could plug it into the 42" lcd i installed instead of a windshield!

Well SC, if there was a way to have you out here instead of some of the condescending turds they have to manage the networks on both the DoD and DoS end it would probably totally change my tune.