Xbox 360 aticle, good read, only 3 Million Gold Subs.......

MS is perfectly correct in charging for DLC.  Try going into a Walmart store, setting up your booth and selling your lemonade.  How long before you get thrown out? Do you think that MS should just let developers use their (MS's) Live service to distribute their wares (the devlopers wares) for free?  

SUD123456

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

MS is perfectly correct in charging for DLC.  Try going into a Walmart store, setting up your booth and selling your lemonade.  How long before you get thrown out? Do you think that MS should just let developers use their (MS's) Live service to distribute their wares (the devlopers wares) for free?  

Hewkii

What you mean is that since MS did pay them to develop the game on the 360.

It's the other way around son, when it happens.

What you mean is that since MS did pay them to develop the game on the 360.

It's the other way around son, when it happens.

SUD123456

Same thing, coming to a Playstation 3 near you.

 

Moral of the story is. The PC wins.  

TekkenMaster606

So the new maps for BF2142 are free? Oh and what about MMOs?

[QUOTE="TekkenMaster606"]

Same thing, coming to a Playstation 3 near you.

 

Moral of the story is. The PC wins.  

PS3_3DO

So the new maps for BF2142 are free? Oh and what about MMOs?

Because they can. It is called Capitalism. The price of goods and services in Capitalism is not determined by their costs. It is determined by the market...specifically what people are willing to pay. I suggest you brush up on Capitalism.SUD123456

When something has no cost, P2P, there is no justification. It doesn't matter what economical system you're under. You are also missing my point. MS included this as part of Gold for a reason, and is using this as a selling point. I am pointing out that it's BS. Very simple. I am only talking about P2P. I am not talking about all of Gold. If you look at Demand, 33%  of their user base is only paying for Gold, as the other 67% aren't paying for it. Not exactly a winner by any standards. I am merely saying that MS DOES need to make an adjustment.   

Last I checked MS is not a games monopoly. More importantly, games aren't exactly an essential service. Thus your points on regulated business are irrelevant. MS is NOT impedeing the free market in games....it is defining the free market. SUD123456

I was referring to the rest of their conglomerate which is guilty of monopolistic behavior, or at least the attempt of it. Google antitrust and Microsoft for more information.  

Your opinion is that Live is not worth it. Millions of subscribers say otherwise, since they are paying for it. Therefore, your opinion is irrelevant. If the price went up and people did not subscribe...well then MS would have to adjust. This is not the case where millions believe $4.17 or whatever a month is insignificant. If you disagree don't buy...no one is forcing you.SUD123456

This is a forum. Opinions are everywhere.

MS is perfectly correct in charging for DLC. Try going into a Walmart store, setting up your booth and selling your lemonade. How long before you get thrown out? Do you think that MS should just let developers use their (MS's) Live service to distribute their wares (the devlopers wares) for free? Exactly why do you think this is a God given roight for developers? If they want to distribute it for free then go ahead...on their servers, on their sites.

Sony has chosen a different route. They are desperate to distinguish themselves, somehow, anyhow. Howver, it is inevitable that this too will change.

If you don't want to pay for the DLC...then don't. Vote with your wallet. But don't cry if you are "overruled" in the marketplace.SUD123456

Way to miss the point. If a developer wants to distribute something for their game, they can use their servers to do it through Live. It's not a hard concept. Epic had every right to complain, as they have always taken care of their customers with extra content to draw more people in and make their game even better. You get a lot more with honey than you do with vinegar. Ever hear of that before?

Your Walmart analogy is terrible. Do I make a product that draws people into Walmart? The answer is no. If I did, I'm sure Walmart would let me sell lemonade, in some goofy alternate reality.

If you like the idea of microtransactions, good for you. Keep paying for 'em.

Or move to China or Cuba. I am sure they have great games there.

Capitalism>CommunismSUD123456

That's right, I forgot that we weren't allowed to disagree with corporate behavior. Thank God there's no First Amendment! Speaking freely is only what communists agree with, right?  

[QUOTE="projectpat2007"][QUOTE="zombiepigeon"]

[QUOTE="nnavidson"]Three million gold users... that's pretty small isn't it?Hewkii

No. Not considering it costs money, it's actually impressive.

Than what is WOW?

even less impressive. keep in mind how many PCs there are that can run Wow and how many copies were sold. I can guarantee it is a lower percentage then XBL.

You made me LOL there are more people that play WOW than there are Silver and Gold subscriptions for Xbox Live :shock: 

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

What you mean is that since MS did pay them to develop the game on the 360.

It's the other way around son, when it happens.

Hewkii

Not when the game is First Party....

x_x Really sickens me how greedy Microsoft is.The rake in 5 billion dollars in 3 months,but wont make Live free,and is telling devs to make,what would be free content,cost.Now aint that a :o.Eh,but I love live and my 360.:(I feel terrible about my addiction.

killab2oo5

Um MS is not a charity. Just because their other divisions are insanly profitable doesnt mean they can just keep losing oney on their games division.

I see.  So it costs MS nothing to offer their matchmaking service.  It costs them nothing to track achievements and the like.  Uh..huh.  Yah right.  See, you can't just separate one part of what you are paying for from the rest.  You are paying for the total service.  The market (people) will determine whether the total service is worth paying for.  Apparently multiple millions of people are willing to pay for MS service.

The rest of MS' business is irrelevant to the discussion.  Should we talk about all the terrible products and business practices Sony has in there other business units?  Or maybe just the good parts?  I thought not.  So Google...MS+Anti-Trust is irrelevant to this discussion of Live.  But thanks for nothing.

Yes opinions are everywhere.  Yours and mine are just 2.  But multiple millions of people have voted with their wallets.  And 3+ million out of 10 million is fantastic.  Pls provide any basis of comparison of any gaming system ever.  Fact is MS is doing very well with Live....any analyst will tell you that.

Sorry, but you miss the point.  Live is a service owned and operated by MS.  Epic and every other game developer cannot just use their servers to do it through Live.  You see THEY don't own and operate Live.  Like you say it really isn't that hard of a concept.

Regarding Walmart...sorry you lose.  Ever see a McDonald's or a photoshop or a hair cut outlet located in a Walmart?  They exist co-located to draw additional traffic into Walmart. They also exist to capitalize on the otherwise existing foot traffic in Walmart.  It is a symbiotic relationship.  Guess who pays rent to Walmart to be in their stores?  Yes you guessed it.  Again, it really isn't that hard of a concept.

So far I have been happy about my microtransactions.  They have extended my enjoyment of my games.  Thanks.

Finally, I don't care about your First Amendment...I am not American.  But thanks for being so national centric.  Agree or disagree with whatever you want....but at least be clear on the facts.  I am disagreeing with you.  I really don't care what your personal opinion is..that is not my point.  I am merely pointing out that the Capitalistic behaviour displayed by MS makes perfect sense and there are 3+ million people who seem to accept that.  The facts are that plenty of people are willing to accept the situation.  The fact is that 3+ million is a large number given the install base.  You may not LIKE it...which is fair enough.  But lets at least accept the facts..it is working. 

I see. So it costs MS nothing to offer their matchmaking service. It costs them nothing to track achievements and the like. Uh..huh. Yah right. See, you can't just separate one part of what you are paying for from the rest. You are paying for the total service. The market (people) will determine whether the total service is worth paying for. Apparently multiple millions of people are willing to pay for MS service.

The rest of MS' business is irrelevant to the discussion. Should we talk about all the terrible products and business practices Sony has in there other business units? Or maybe just the good parts? I thought not. So Google...MS+Anti-Trust is irrelevant to this discussion of Live. But thanks for nothing.

Yes opinions are everywhere. Yours and mine are just 2. But multiple millions of people have voted with their wallets. And 3+ million out of 10 million is fantastic. Pls provide any basis of comparison of any gaming system ever. Fact is MS is doing very well with Live....any analyst will tell you that.

Sorry, but you miss the point. Live is a service owned and operated by MS. Epic and every other game developer cannot just use their servers to do it through Live. You see THEY don't own and operate Live. Like you say it really isn't that hard of a concept.

Regarding Walmart...sorry you lose. Ever see a McDonald's or a photoshop or a hair cut outlet located in a Walmart? They exist co-located to draw additional traffic into Walmart. They also exist to capitalize on the otherwise existing foot traffic in Walmart. It is a symbiotic relationship. Guess who pays rent to Walmart to be in their stores? Yes you guessed it. Again, it really isn't that hard of a concept.

So far I have been happy about my microtransactions. They have extended my enjoyment of my games. Thanks.

Finally, I don't care about your First Amendment...I am not American. But thanks for being so national centric. Agree or disagree with whatever you want....but at least be clear on the facts. I am disagreeing with you. I really don't care what your personal opinion is..that is not my point. I am merely pointing out that the Capitalistic behaviour displayed by MS makes perfect sense and there are 3+ million people who seem to accept that. The facts are that plenty of people are willing to accept the situation. The fact is that 3+ million is a large number given the install base. You may not LIKE it...which is fair enough. But lets at least accept the facts..it is working.

 

 

 

SUD123456

Microsoft is Brilliant in my opininon.

They sell their console for cheaper and then after you buy it you need to pay $50 dollars a year, then thus making up the difference :)

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]

x_x Really sickens me how greedy Microsoft is.The rake in 5 billion dollars in 3 months,but wont make Live free,and is telling devs to make,what would be free content,cost.Now aint that a :o.Eh,but I love live and my 360.:(I feel terrible about my addiction.

TOAO_Cyrus1

Um MS is not a charity. Just because their other divisions are insanly profitable doesnt mean they can just keep losing oney on their games division.

This also backs up the fact that you never pay the asking price of the console, never. You are gonna get raked over the coals, whether it's a 20 dollar wireless adapter that they sell for $100 bucks, games that are $10 more expensive(even though the PC counterparts that have just as much work put in them, sometimes more in certain games are much cheaper), and all the cost just to play mulitplayer on the system. After 5 years, that's $250 bucks. 

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

What you mean is that since MS did pay them to develop the game on the 360.

It's the other way around son, when it happens.

Hewkii

Not true in all cases. Exclusive titles are paid from manufacturer to game maker. the gamemaker more than makes up for it with the sale of the game.

Microsoft is Brilliant in my opininon.

They sell their console for cheaper and then after you buy it you need to pay $50 dollars a year, then thus making up the difference :)

I agree...I think MS business model for this generation is very good.  The only thing I would disagree with is the notion that you "need" to pay $50 a year.  You don't need to do this.  I don't play MP...therefore I don't pay....most people I know don't play MP...thus they don't pay.  All of us enjoy the free aspects of Live.  And I suspect that all of us would pay the whopping $50 a year if we enjoyed MP.  Why?  Because the service is easy and good.  Yes, I do know...because yes I have checked it out...but meh, MP isn't for me.  In fact, if you add up the total number of PC, PS2, PS3, XBox, Xbox360, Gamecube, Wii and various handheld users.....it is prettyu obvious that the huge overwhelming majority of gamers do not play MP on line...anywhere.

Which is a major problem that the nerds on this site don't get...the vast majority of game players are NOT like them.

[QUOTE="TOAO_Cyrus1"][QUOTE="killab2oo5"]

x_x Really sickens me how greedy Microsoft is.The rake in 5 billion dollars in 3 months,but wont make Live free,and is telling devs to make,what would be free content,cost.Now aint that a :o.Eh,but I love live and my 360.:(I feel terrible about my addiction.

mismajor99

Um MS is not a charity. Just because their other divisions are insanly profitable doesnt mean they can just keep losing oney on their games division.

This also backs up the fact that you never pay the asking price of the console, never. You are gonna get raked over the coals, whether it's a 20 dollar wireless adapter that they sell for $100 bucks, games that are $10 more expensive(even though the PC counterparts that have just as much work put in them, sometimes more in certain games are much cheaper), and all the cost just to play mulitplayer on the system. After 5 years, that's $250 bucks. 

You need to understand the time value of money. Spending $250.00 over 5 years is not the same as spending $250.00 today. Come on man I am sure you are a working adult  so why the big fuss over $50.00? Do you have Live? If you don't why do you care so much?

Three million gold users... that's pretty small isn't it?nnavidson

Ya, it's pretty small.  It's the total user base of the PS3, so....ya, it's pretty small.:?

Three million gold users... that's pretty small isn't it?nnavidson

yes, even friend code thing has more users than tat 

I see. So it costs MS nothing to offer their matchmaking service. It costs them nothing to track achievements and the like. Uh..huh. Yah right. See, you can't just separate one part of what you are paying for from the rest. You are paying for the total service. The market (people) will determine whether the total service is worth paying for. Apparently multiple millions of people are willing to pay for MS service.

The rest of MS' business is irrelevant to the discussion. Should we talk about all the terrible products and business practices Sony has in there other business units? Or maybe just the good parts? I thought not. So Google...MS+Anti-Trust is irrelevant to this discussion of Live. But thanks for nothing.

Yes opinions are everywhere. Yours and mine are just 2. But multiple millions of people have voted with their wallets. And 3+ million out of 10 million is fantastic. Pls provide any basis of comparison of any gaming system ever. Fact is MS is doing very well with Live....any analyst will tell you that.

Sorry, but you miss the point. Live is a service owned and operated by MS. Epic and every other game developer cannot just use their servers to do it through Live. You see THEY don't own and operate Live. Like you say it really isn't that hard of a concept.

Regarding Walmart...sorry you lose. Ever see a McDonald's or a photoshop or a hair cut outlet located in a Walmart? They exist co-located to draw additional traffic into Walmart. They also exist to capitalize on the otherwise existing foot traffic in Walmart. It is a symbiotic relationship. Guess who pays rent to Walmart to be in their stores? Yes you guessed it. Again, it really isn't that hard of a concept.

So far I have been happy about my microtransactions. They have extended my enjoyment of my games. Thanks.

Finally, I don't care about your First Amendment...I am not American. But thanks for being so national centric. Agree or disagree with whatever you want....but at least be clear on the facts. I am disagreeing with you. I really don't care what your personal opinion is..that is not my point. I am merely pointing out that the Capitalistic behaviour displayed by MS makes perfect sense and there are 3+ million people who seem to accept that. The facts are that plenty of people are willing to accept the situation. The fact is that 3+ million is a large number given the install base. You may not LIKE it...which is fair enough. But lets at least accept the facts..it is working.

 SUD123456

Like they say, there's a SUCKER born every minute.

I see. So it costs MS nothing to offer their matchmaking service. It costs them nothing to track achievements and the like. Uh..huh. Yah right. See, you can't just separate one part of what you are paying for from the rest. You are paying for the total service. The market (people) will determine whether the total service is worth paying for. Apparently multiple millions of people are willing to pay for MS service.

The rest of MS' business is irrelevant to the discussion. Should we talk about all the terrible products and business practices Sony has in there other business units? Or maybe just the good parts? I thought not. So Google...MS+Anti-Trust is irrelevant to this discussion of Live. But thanks for nothing.

Yes opinions are everywhere. Yours and mine are just 2. But multiple millions of people have voted with their wallets. And 3+ million out of 10 million is fantastic. Pls provide any basis of comparison of any gaming system ever. Fact is MS is doing very well with Live....any analyst will tell you that.

Sorry, but you miss the point. Live is a service owned and operated by MS. Epic and every other game developer cannot just use their servers to do it through Live. You see THEY don't own and operate Live. Like you say it really isn't that hard of a concept.

Regarding Walmart...sorry you lose. Ever see a McDonald's or a photoshop or a hair cut outlet located in a Walmart? They exist co-located to draw additional traffic into Walmart. They also exist to capitalize on the otherwise existing foot traffic in Walmart. It is a symbiotic relationship. Guess who pays rent to Walmart to be in their stores? Yes you guessed it. Again, it really isn't that hard of a concept.

So far I have been happy about my microtransactions. They have extended my enjoyment of my games. Thanks.

Finally, I don't care about your First Amendment...I am not American. But thanks for being so national centric. Agree or disagree with whatever you want....but at least be clear on the facts. I am disagreeing with you. I really don't care what your personal opinion is..that is not my point. I am merely pointing out that the Capitalistic behaviour displayed by MS makes perfect sense and there are 3+ million people who seem to accept that. The facts are that plenty of people are willing to accept the situation. The fact is that 3+ million is a large number given the install base. You may not LIKE it...which is fair enough. But lets at least accept the facts..it is working.

 

 SUD123456

 Maybe I'm just used to superior online experiences, like the stat tracking in BF2 or BF2142. Stat tracking does not justify $50 dollars a shot. I don't see the benefit in paying for that. I can separate anything I want. Before you came in here, I was disagreeing with MS charging for P2P multiplayer. If you don't like, too bad. If all of that is a burden to MS, why is it free for Windows Live? Because MS knows they won't get away with charging PC Gamers.

Yes, people have voted with their wallets, like most of the idiots walking the earth, they haven't a clue what they're paying for. Using your own connection does not cost MS a penny. If there were dedicated servers, that's a different story. Using a few servers to track stats is nothing, especially to MS. 

When discussing MS, to ignore their current behavior would be foolish and naive. But, you seem like the chap that enjoys sticking your head in the sand.

Any analyst will tell you that if MS continues in the track they are in, there will not be an Xbox 3. They are not selling enough consoles. Period. All the microtransactions in the world, that you will happily pay for, are not going to change their bottom line.

Every developer that makes games for MS's systems has the right to speak out on any issue they deem. They can work out any deal they have to. MS's idea of doing business varies greatly with a lot of other companies. "You get a whole lot more with honey than you do with vinegar" and this has worked like charm for both Epic(SDK and Booster Kits) and Valve(SDK). Sony seems to be grasping this concept. This line of thinking isn't anti-capitalist. Your notion that any other business practice other than MS's is "anit-capitalist!!!",  is pure and utter nonsense.

Your walmart analogy is lame and weak once again. Epic made a game for MS that sold millions of their consoles. This is not the same as me or even a lemonade stand in walmart, as the lemonade stand hasn't provided Walmart with a clear market lead. Epic is a HUGE part in the 360's early success, and without them(Gears), I highly doubt that MS would have sold 10 million consoles. Still, Epic has the right to speak out against MS charging for content.  I doubt that something couldn't have been worked out. Hell, they released the first map pack for free to the MILLIONS of people that purchased the game for $60. 

Once again, Micro-transactions are something alien to me as a PC Gamer. I was shocked that people were that idiotic to pay for horse armor, and I'm shocked to see people pay 10 dollars for a couple of maps, it's insanity. You see this as a benefit because MS gives you no other choice. I see this as a blatant scam. Like they say, a SUCKER is born every minute.  

In conclusion, frankly I don't care what you think about the first amendment, you're on an American site, if that bothers you, too bad. Microsoft does NOT practice normal capitalistic behavior, they practice monopolistic behavior, a very important distinction. Not with their gaming division yet, but with their OS division. The main fear is that a power hungry corporation such as MS will carry this same behavior forward. THIS IS A VALID CONCERN. The same could be said about Sony. This is why so many people are uncomfortable with MS, but you obviously fail to see this. Unfortunately, if MS does become the only console choice in the future, mark my words, you will regret ever supporting them. Just take a look at Windows for a great example.   

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Just take a look at Windows for a great example.

mismajor99

I love when people say that. Thats right, windows you know the operating system that connected most of the world. yadda yadda linux is more powerful, more secure, yadda yadda..... Grandmas aren't going to run linux.... linux has made leaps and bounds over the last ten years in the user friendly department(hell even gentoo finally got a graphical installer!) but the average person 35+ isn't going / nor capable of running linux.(and that is becoming a larger and larger group.) MacOSX makes a good run but they just got beat to the punch, not to mention they wouldn't be any better than Microsoft if they were in the same position.

Microsoft is trying to balance a fine line between easy to use, function, and now hipness (with windows vista) its just became one of those "you can't please everyone" things. I just laugh that linux's and MacOSX main reasons people switch over isn't for features, its because people want to say "look at me, I'm tech saavy I'm not using microsoft the evil empire." I had the lovely pleasure of working help desk for 2 years before taking my current position and I must say if more people used linux or macosx I probably would of killed myself...

Also since when has a company NOT been power hungry.. Are you saying Sony or Nintendo isn't power hungry.. I'm not sure if you realize this or not but companies are in it to make money. Yeah can spout off all you want about P2P should be free (not to mention most P2P programs actually have paid services as well) Its not just the P2P multiplayer your paying for. You also are paying for voice chat, leaderboards, and a division that makes sure all xbox games have certain requirements for online play. Not to mention I haven't ran into as much cheating in xbox live as I have with counter-strike/counter-hack and battlefield 2. Both of those games were down right horrible.. Punk Buster was a joke system. Now I haven't played counterstrike in a few years so it may have finally changes. battlefield is up and down depending on how long its been since they patched last.

*shrugs* I don't really care, I don't own a 360, but if a 10 dollar addon makes you fall in love with a game all over again, and gives you more enjoyable hours in return, I can't really see it as something bad. Sure if it was free it would be nice. Quite frankly I think the... pay first, free later is the best strategy of all really.

 

 

 *leaves the thread before cows, sheep and hermits come in turning it into trash*

2FacedJanus

THANK YOU!!!!   I would have to agree     and if the rest of you cheep basterds  don't like it then go find somthing better  to do and let the rest of us with money to burn  have fun doing it

[QUOTE="mismajor99"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Just take a look at Windows for a great example.

bloodyclot

 love when people say that. Thats right, windows you know the operating system that connected most of the world. yadda yadda linux is more powerful, more secure, yadda yadda..... Grandmas aren't going to run linux.... linux has made leaps and bounds over the last ten years in the user friendly department(hell even gentoo finally got a graphical installer!) but the average person 35+ isn't going / nor capable of running linux.(and that is becoming a larger and larger group.) MacOSX makes a good run but they just got beat to the punch, not to mention they wouldn't be any better than Microsoft if they were in the same position.

Microsoft is trying to balance a fine line between easy to use, function, and now hipness (with windows vista) its just became one of those "you can't please everyone" things. I just laugh that linux's and MacOSX main reasons people switch over isn't for features, its because people want to say "look at me, I'm tech saavy I'm not using microsoft the evil empire." I had the lovely pleasure of working help desk for 2 years before taking my current position and I must say if more people used linux or macosx I probably would of killed myself...

Also since when has a company NOT been power hungry.. Are you saying Sony or Nintendo isn't power hungry.. I'm not sure if you realize this or not but companies are in it to make money. Yeah can spout off all you want about P2P should be free (not to mention most P2P programs actually have paid services as well) Its not just the P2P multiplayer your paying for. You also are paying for voice chat, leaderboards, and a division that makes sure all xbox games have certain requirements for online play. Not to mention I haven't ran into as much cheating in xbox live as I have with counter-strike/counter-hack and battlefield 2. Both of those games were down right horrible.. Punk Buster was a joke system. Now I haven't played counterstrike in a few years so it may have finally changes. battlefield is up and down depending on how long its been since they patched last.

GIve this man an award pleas.   I agree windows is mumber one becuse there is nothing out there better.  My freind says it gets spy ware and mac never dose.  well yea who would wast there time making a virus or spy ware when it has an istall base of like 5% compare to windows

[QUOTE="mismajor99"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Just take a look at Windows for a great example.

bloodyclot

I love when people say that. Thats right, windows you know the operating system that connected most of the world. yadda yadda linux is more powerful, more secure, yadda yadda..... Grandmas aren't going to run linux.... linux has made leaps and bounds over the last ten years in the user friendly department(hell even gentoo finally got a graphical installer!) but the average person 35+ isn't going / nor capable of running linux.(and that is becoming a larger and larger group.) MacOSX makes a good run but they just got beat to the punch, not to mention they wouldn't be any better than Microsoft if they were in the same position.

Microsoft is trying to balance a fine line between easy to use, function, and now hipness (with windows vista) its just became one of those "you can't please everyone" things. I just laugh that linux's and MacOSX main reasons people switch over isn't for features, its because people want to say "look at me, I'm tech saavy I'm not using microsoft the evil empire." I had the lovely pleasure of working help desk for 2 years before taking my current position and I must say if more people used linux or macosx I probably would of killed myself...

Also since when has a company NOT been power hungry.. Are you saying Sony or Nintendo isn't power hungry.. I'm not sure if you realize this or not but companies are in it to make money. Yeah can spout off all you want about P2P should be free (not to mention most P2P programs actually have paid services as well) Its not just the P2P multiplayer your paying for. You also are paying for voice chat, leaderboards, and a division that makes sure all xbox games have certain requirements for online play. Not to mention I haven't ran into as much cheating in xbox live as I have with counter-strike/counter-hack and battlefield 2. Both of those games were down right horrible.. Punk Buster was a joke system. Now I haven't played counterstrike in a few years so it may have finally changes. battlefield is up and down depending on how long its been since they patched last.

Linux is FAR better OS than Windows, and it makes for a far better server solution for business. Windows is has far too many problems, unfortunately MS dominates the market, so they have the best software library on planet earth. I wish MS would focus 100% of their attention fixing their OS, rather than going off on a tangent selling consoles and loosing money. 

Don't be so quick to dismiss OSX either, it's an amazing OS, but again, it' suffers from a weaker library of software.

Every company is eager for Market share, but MS is notorious for anti-competitive and unethical behavior. They use software patents all the time to shut down small business and force others to sell. It's terrible. On top of that, most people are completely unaware of their actions. I'm not going to go on a rant, you do your own reading. 

[QUOTE="chaos-SD"]yes that's very true, good facts right there. My question is: are you trying to make some sort of point?mismajor99

MS should offer Gold for free. It's clearly not working, with only 33% of users paying for Gold. How people can support one of the richest corporations in the world, all the while they are taking people to the cleaners, is beyond most people. Heck, even the majority of 360 owners. MS needs to take a page out of Valve's book, and fast. 

vaule would had made a vortune if all the counter strike maps ever made had all been downloaded for $10 each, m$ is nothing but a gready cow

[QUOTE="bloodyclot"][QUOTE="mismajor99"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Just take a look at Windows for a great example.

 

mismajor99

Linux is FAR better OS than Windows, and it makes for a far better server solution for business. Windows is has far too many problems, unfortunately MS dominates the market, so they have the best software library on planet earth. I wish MS would focus 100% of their attention fixing their OS, rather than going off on a tangent selling consoles and loosing money.

Don't be so quick to dismiss OSX either, it's an amazing OS, but again, it' suffers from a weaker library of software.

Every company is eager for Market share, but MS is notorious for anti-competitive and unethical behavior. They use software patents all the time to shut down small business and force others to sell. It's terrible. On top of that, most people are completely unaware of their actions. I'm not going to go on a rant, you do your own reading.

another uniformed statement imo.. We have 500 servers around 80 of them are linux based. Most of those are web servers. When it comes to enterprise servers windows is hands and fist better than anything linux has to offer. Prime example: Exchange Server, I.S.A server, and Shadow Copy(on of the best microsoft products period.) are products that linux really hasn't created anything to compete with. Not to mention We've had our web servers hacked before (damn unsecure Joomla portals) and we have never had a lick of trouble with the windows 2003 servers. Also have an issue with a server... you can call microsoft and the Gold support is TOP notch.. Ever call Red Hat support?? :-) is all I have to say about that.

Contrary to popular belief all tech people one time or another is probably going to have to call a dedicated support line on a product. To say you won't means you still have a ways to go in I.T. because weird stuff just happens. I used to be like LINUX was the bomb, zomg best servers... Then I've spent 5 years in I.T. 2 in help desk, and now as a C.S.S.A. (certified sonicwall systems administrator and System Administrator.) Linux has its niche (which I believe is web hosting... IIS is a horrible Microsoft Technology) but even in the server front there is a reason Microsoft is still 90% of the server market. Its functionality. Linux may RUN on lower hardware but that doesn't mean its near as functional in all other areas. As for security linux the os is fairy secure.. The problem is all the open source software for it. You always have to think not just the os but the programs on said os. That being said Open Source is Open Source and free, but the lack of support and the fact you don't know when they are just going to scrap the project. Microsoft gets a bad rap because they are the number 1 company, did I say they are innovative? Some of their side projects(ones most people don't even realize exists) yes, OS wise not so much.

As to the unethical behavior look at google the companies motto is "Do no evil" they are going through the same thing. When your top dog you are put under a microscope for everything. By what your saying in the last paragraph you must hate: Wal-mart, Target, Best Buy, Microsoft, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Google...etc..etc.. because those are ALL compaines that force others to sell and shut down.

That and when you have to manage 800+ users on one domain Active Directory is a god send.

**EDIT p.s. Mac OSX rocks, (yes I know its Unix based) but I think its a matter of too little, too late. They are still only up to around 2-5% market share and they are still limiting themselves with the pepriatary(sp? I know I butched that :-)) hardware. If they started to make it where you could install it on any x86 or amd64 pc then I think you would see there marketshare grow but Steve Jobs is stubborn and won't do it. We actually have a mac server as well at work for a local graphic company and they seem to love it. I don't have enough experience with the servers to make a judgement on them. **EDIT**

[QUOTE="mismajor99"][QUOTE="bloodyclot"][QUOTE="mismajor99"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Just take a look at Windows for a great example.

 

bloodyclot

Linux is FAR better OS than Windows, and it makes for a far better server solution for business. Windows is has far too many problems, unfortunately MS dominates the market, so they have the best software library on planet earth. I wish MS would focus 100% of their attention fixing their OS, rather than going off on a tangent selling consoles and loosing money.

Don't be so quick to dismiss OSX either, it's an amazing OS, but again, it' suffers from a weaker library of software.

Every company is eager for Market share, but MS is notorious for anti-competitive and unethical behavior. They use software patents all the time to shut down small business and force others to sell. It's terrible. On top of that, most people are completely unaware of their actions. I'm not going to go on a rant, you do your own reading.

another uniformed statement imo.. We have 500 servers around 80 of them are linux based. Most of those are web servers. When it comes to enterprise servers windows is hands and fist better than anything linux has to offer. Prime example: Exchange Server, I.S.A server, and Shadow Copy(on of the best microsoft products period.) are products that linux really hasn't created anything to compete with. Not to mention We've had our web servers hacked before (damn unsecure Joomla portals) and we have never had a lick of trouble with the windows 2003 servers. Also have an issue with a server... you can call microsoft and the Gold support is TOP notch.. Ever call Red Hat support?? :-) is all I have to say about that.

Contrary to popular belief all tech people one time or another is probably going to have to call a dedicated support line on a product. To say you won't means you still have a ways to go in I.T. because weird stuff just happens. I used to be like LINUX was the bomb, zomg best servers... Then I've spent 5 years in I.T. 2 in help desk, and now as a C.S.S.A. (certified sonicwall systems administrator and System Administrator.) Linux has its niche (which I believe is web hosting... IIS is a horrible Microsoft Technology) but even in the server front there is a reason Microsoft is still 90% of the server market. Its functionality. Linux may RUN on lower hardware but that doesn't mean its near as functional in all other areas. As for security linux the os is fairy secure.. The problem is all the open source software for it. You always have to think not just the os but the programs on said os. That being said Open Source is Open Source and free, but the lack of support and the fact you don't know when they are just going to scrap the project. Microsoft gets a bad rap because they are the number 1 company, did I say they are innovative? Some of their side projects(ones most people don't even realize exists) yes, OS wise not so much.

As to the unethical behavior look at google the companies motto is "Do no evil" they are going through the same thing. When your top dog you are put under a microscope for everything. By what your saying in the last paragraph you must hate: Wal-mart, Target, Best Buy, Microsoft, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Google...etc..etc.. because those are ALL compaines that force others to sell and shut down.

That and when you have to manage 800+ users on one domain Active Directory is a god send.  

Ding,Ding,Ding Fights over.

another uniformed statement imo.. We have 500 servers around 80 of them are linux based. Most of those are web servers. When it comes to enterprise servers windows is hands and fist better than anything linux has to offer. Prime example: Exchange Server, I.S.A server, and Shadow Copy(on of the best microsoft products period.) are products that linux really hasn't created anything to compete with. Not to mention We've had our web servers hacked before (damn unsecure Joomla portals) and we have never had a lick of trouble with the windows 2003 servers. Also have an issue with a server... you can call microsoft and the Gold support is TOP notch.. Ever call Red Hat support?? :-) is all I have to say about that.

Contrary to popular belief all tech people one time or another is probably going to have to call a dedicated support line on a product. To say you won't means you still have a ways to go in I.T. because weird stuff just happens. I used to be like LINUX was the bomb, zomg best servers... Then I've spent 5 years in I.T. 2 in help desk, and now as a C.S.S.A. (certified sonicwall systems administrator and System Administrator.) Linux has its niche (which I believe is web hosting... IIS is a horrible Microsoft Technology) but even in the server front there is a reason Microsoft is still 90% of the server market. Its functionality. Linux may RUN on lower hardware but that doesn't mean its near as functional in all other areas. As for security linux the os is fairy secure.. The problem is all the open source software for it. You always have to think not just the os but the programs on said os. That being said Open Source is Open Source and free, but the lack of support and the fact you don't know when they are just going to scrap the project. Microsoft gets a bad rap because they are the number 1 company, did I say they are innovative? Some of their side projects(ones most people don't even realize exists) yes, OS wise not so much.

As to the unethical behavior look at google the companies motto is "Do no evil" they are going through the same thing. When your top dog you are put under a microscope for everything. By what your saying in the last paragraph you must hate: Wal-mart, Target, Best Buy, Microsoft, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Google...etc..etc.. because those are ALL compaines that force others to sell and shut down.

That and when you have to manage 800+ users on one domain Active Directory is a god send.

 

**EDIT p.s. Mac OSX rocks, (yes I know its Unix based) but I think its a matter of too little, too late. They are still only up to around 2-5% market share and they are still limiting themselves with the pepriatary(sp? I know I butched that :-)) hardware. If they started to make it where you could install it on any x86 or amd64 pc then I think you would see there marketshare grow but Steve Jobs is stubborn and won't do it. We actually have a mac server as well at work for a local graphic company and they seem to love it. I don't have enough experience with the servers to make a judgement on them. **EDIT**

bloodyclot

"another uniformed statement imo"

I've been in the industry for 15 years, and I still wouldn't presume to call you ignorant,but your opinion is vastly different than most IT professionals I know. For every tech that prefers MS, I can find 2 that disagree. Linux is far more stable (manages resources on a superior basis than windows), Linux is far more secure(Viruses, Spyware, Trojans on Linux?), Linux is far more affordable, Linux has great customer service(Redhat has been great), Linux is gaining more and more popularity over the years, just take a look around the world. In the US MS dominates, it's what businesses feel comfortable with, but it is not a better solution for everyone, not by a long shot. MS has software and market manipulation going for it. Any IT drone that's worth his/her salt knows their Linux/Unix, and I've never had a crisis with Linux and their support . I'm not sure why you would say something like that, as that sounds more like spreading fear than anything else.

It doesn't matter how many servers you have, that doesn't make your opinion any more sound. MS has market domination, it's not a surprise.That doesn't in any way reinforce the idea the MS provides a better server solution. Quite the opposite imo. Furthermore, with the debacle better known as Vista, it shouldn't be surprising for Linux to garner more market share. Back in April, Dell started rolling out a Linux solution, from the overwhelming customer requests might I add. Look for both Mac and Linux to gain more popularity over the years, especially abroad.

All those other companies you have listed are nowhere near the level of unethical behavior as MS (HP etc..etc.). MS feels threatened by open-source and has always targeted the community with scare tactics and legal maneuvering. For this reason, I have always been critical of the company, which as an IT guy, you should understand more than anyone. Open source is the pinnacle of keeping computing from being owned by every multinational corporation in the world, and it's movement is extremely important.

I'll give you a prime example as to why everyone should be weary of MS and their actions. This should also make people a bit nervous that MS could eventually corner the console market, just as they have done in the OS biz. Read this article, not for me, for yourself.
Ballmer is making his rounds again, threatening lawsuits against any and all open source companies/users, as MS say it's in violation of their patents, and wants companies/users to pay royalties! These sorts of news items NEVER make the front page, but occur all the time. First off, you shouldn't be able to "patent" software! That's like patenting math! Copyright is one thing, for a certain program or whatnot like a book is, but patenting is something large corps started doing en mass in the late 80's. The stupidity of the US patents office is the reason this has gotten so out of hand, and furthermore, most of MS's patents for example, would most likely be thrown out in court. You can't patent the "triple click"!! But guess who did? Anyway, MS refuses to let anyone know which of the 200 patents it violate.

Read this article:

http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=052807_microsoft_takes_aim_open_source.htm

PS-

Following site shows Linux domination over MS in the Web Server category. Stable and Secure are probably reasons for using Linux over MS.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2007/01/05/january_2007_web_server_survey.html

[QUOTE="bloodyclot"]

another uniformed statement imo.. We have 500 servers around 80 of them are linux based. Most of those are web servers. When it comes to enterprise servers windows is hands and fist better than anything linux has to offer. Prime example: Exchange Server, I.S.A server, and Shadow Copy(on of the best microsoft products period.) are products that linux really hasn't created anything to compete with. Not to mention We've had our web servers hacked before (damn unsecure Joomla portals) and we have never had a lick of trouble with the windows 2003 servers. Also have an issue with a server... you can call microsoft and the Gold support is TOP notch.. Ever call Red Hat support?? :-) is all I have to say about that.

Contrary to popular belief all tech people one time or another is probably going to have to call a dedicated support line on a product. To say you won't means you still have a ways to go in I.T. because weird stuff just happens. I used to be like LINUX was the bomb, zomg best servers... Then I've spent 5 years in I.T. 2 in help desk, and now as a C.S.S.A. (certified sonicwall systems administrator and System Administrator.) Linux has its niche (which I believe is web hosting... IIS is a horrible Microsoft Technology) but even in the server front there is a reason Microsoft is still 90% of the server market. Its functionality. Linux may RUN on lower hardware but that doesn't mean its near as functional in all other areas. As for security linux the os is fairy secure.. The problem is all the open source software for it. You always have to think not just the os but the programs on said os. That being said Open Source is Open Source and free, but the lack of support and the fact you don't know when they are just going to scrap the project. Microsoft gets a bad rap because they are the number 1 company, did I say they are innovative? Some of their side projects(ones most people don't even realize exists) yes, OS wise not so much.

As to the unethical behavior look at google the companies motto is "Do no evil" they are going through the same thing. When your top dog you are put under a microscope for everything. By what your saying in the last paragraph you must hate: Wal-mart, Target, Best Buy, Microsoft, Dell, Hewlett Packard, Google...etc..etc.. because those are ALL compaines that force others to sell and shut down.

That and when you have to manage 800+ users on one domain Active Directory is a god send.

 

**EDIT p.s. Mac OSX rocks, (yes I know its Unix based) but I think its a matter of too little, too late. They are still only up to around 2-5% market share and they are still limiting themselves with the pepriatary(sp? I know I butched that :-)) hardware. If they started to make it where you could install it on any x86 or amd64 pc then I think you would see there marketshare grow but Steve Jobs is stubborn and won't do it. We actually have a mac server as well at work for a local graphic company and they seem to love it. I don't have enough experience with the servers to make a judgement on them. **EDIT**

mismajor99

"another uniformed statement imo"

I've been in the industry for 15 years, and I still wouldn't presume to call you ignorant,but your opinion is vastly different than most IT professionals I know. For every tech that prefers MS, I can find 2 that disagree. Linux is far more stable (manages resources on a superior basis than windows), Linux is far more secure(Viruses, Spyware, Trojans on Linux?), Linux is far more affordable, Linux has great customer service(Redhat has been great), Linux is gaining more and more popularity over the years, just take a look around the world. In the US MS dominates, it's what businesses feel comfortable with, but it is not a better solution for everyone, not by a long shot. MS has software and market manipulation going for it. Any IT drone that's worth his/her salt knows their Linux/Unix, and I've never had a crisis with Linux and their support . I'm not sure why you would say something like that, as that sounds more like spreading fear than anything else.

It doesn't matter how many servers you have, that doesn't make your opinion any more sound. MS has market domination, it's not a surprise.That doesn't in any way reinforce the idea the MS provides a better server solution. Quite the opposite imo. Furthermore, with the debacle better known as Vista, it shouldn't be surprising for Linux to garner more market share. Back in April, Dell started rolling out a Linux solution, from the overwhelming customer requests might I add. Look for both Mac and Linux to gain more popularity over the years, especially abroad.

All those other companies you have listed are nowhere near the level of unethical behavior as MS (HP etc..etc.). MS feels threatened by open-source and has always targeted the community with scare tactics and legal maneuvering. For this reason, I have always been critical of the company, which as an IT guy, you should understand more than anyone. Open source is the pinnacle of keeping computing from being owned by every multinational corporation in the world, and it's movement is extremely important.

I'll give you a prime example as to why everyone should be weary of MS and their actions. This should also make people a bit nervous that MS could eventually corner the console market, just as they have done in the OS biz. Read this article, not for me, for yourself.
Ballmer is making his rounds again, threatening lawsuits against any and all open source companies/users, as MS say it's in violation of their patents, and wants companies/users to pay royalties! These sorts of news items NEVER make the front page, but occur all the time. First off, you shouldn't be able to "patent" software! That's like patenting math! Copyright is one thing, for a certain program or whatnot like a book is, but patenting is something large corps started doing en mass in the late 80's. The stupidity of the US patents office is the reason this has gotten so out of hand, and furthermore, most of MS's patents for example, would most likely be thrown out in court. You can't patent the "triple click"!! But guess who did? Anyway, MS refuses to let anyone know which of the 200 patents it violate.

Read this article:

http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=052807_microsoft_takes_aim_open_source.htm

PS-

Following site shows Linux domination over MS in the Web Server category. Stable and Secure are probably reasons for using Linux over MS.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2007/01/05/january_2007_web_server_survey.html

I disagree with you, but I still agree with the webserver but I have had horrible time with redhat support. But that last graph is misleading. Its taking Apache vs IIS.. You can run apache on a windows server, its just more prevalant on linux and unix machines. I also disagree with linux being that more secure than windows(again because of the software installed on the server, not the os itself). Of course we still have several SCO servers and I actually like them so I'm probably the anti-christ to the linux community.