Talk:Microsoft/Archive 5

message: I think it was me who thought this was a good idea, but really now I think its insanely redundant, so I just removed it:
:First conceived in 1975 by Bill Gates and Paul Allen, Microsoft has evolved through several stages throughout its history. By 1985, the company was selling the Microsoft Windows operating system and MS-DOS, and had collaborated with IBM to produce OS/2 Warp. By 1992, Microsoft had released an IPO in the stock market and discontinued OS/2 development to focus directly on Windows. By 1995, Windows was the most widely used graphical operating system in the world, and with the introduction of Windows 95, the company became a more consumer-driven company. Microsoft would proceed to enter other business markets, such as publishing and video games, would be sued more than once by the U.S. Justice Department and other governments and companies, and would continue to dominate the operating system market.
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 06:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Full agreement from me on this one, good call.  Warrens 06:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First paragraph from history removed 

message: For reference, I also removed this block from the product divisions section
----
Microsoft sells a wide range of products, many of them developed internally, such as Microsoft BASIC and Microsoft Word. Others were acquired and rebranded by Microsoft:
*Microsoft Project, a project management package;
*Visio, a charting package;
*Microsoft SQL Server, based on technology from Sybase;
*FoxPro, a database;
*Links, a golf game;
*Visual SourceSafe, a developer's tool;
*DoubleSpace, a compression tool;
*Virtual PC, software to emulate different version of Windows, which was acquired from Connectix; and
*MS-DOS itself, the basis for the company's success.
Many of these products have undergone continual development by the Company. Internet Explorer is based on code licensed from Spyglass, Inc.; the initial development of the software was performed outside Redmond in Spyglass headquarters.
-----
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 12:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet more removed stuff 

message: I have noticed a variety of vandalism on this article and i would suggest blocking it from editing from non-registered contributers.
The same has been done in the past few days on the Manchester United F.C and Chelsea F.C pages.
jstupple7 00:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article always has, and always will get vandals hitting it every now and then; a temporary protection won't solve any specific problem, and a permanent one isn't justified given how little vandalism occurs here compared to other significantly more contentious pages.  Warrens 04:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blocking 

message: It was added by an anon a while ago and we have put a bit of work into it - but when trying to to find a reference for it I am turning up blanks and google only reveals links to wikipedia and its mirrors. I looked around on Microsoft's fine and couldn't be anything like it, so for now I'm removing it until someone can verify it. Hopefully it isn't a prank or PR stunt of some kind - if it was, they failed miserably :).
=== Vision ===
Microsoft states their company vision as follows:
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 18:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for noticing that - fixed. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vision removed 

message: Microsoft states their company vision as follows:
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 18:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for noticing that - fixed. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vision 

message: I think we should remove the last 2 paragraphs of the beginning and put them somewhere in the back. I think the first paragraph is suffice for an introductionDavud363000 03:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beginnning 

message: Upon reading the criticism section, which by its very nature is not NPOV, I can't help but think that criticism of Microsoft products belongs on pages related to those products, other than in a very generic sense of there being criticism on those products.  Legitimate criticism in this article seems to me to be more related to Microsoft corporate criticism.  Anyone agree? 12.207.87.61 02:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the Criticism section is overblown. There is already a special article dedicated to it, so just a link to it should be enough. Just like there is simply a link to History of Microsoft under the History section. So unless somebody opposes it, I propose to make Criticism and History to be consistent. Wikiolap 07:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: see this diff.
There was a lot of stuff added, and some of it is good. Some of it is stuff we've already discussed at great, great lengths (i.e. M$ etc.). I've added back the additions to the intro cleaned up already (which are actually what this needed as I thought the intro was getting a little too pro-MS, so this was good) - so, I'll go paragraph by paragraph here -
The big problem here is that A) it is criticism in the product divisions section which is just meant to describe its products, and B) no references whatsoever. This is actually good stuff but should probably be in the criticism of microsoft article
This is in the logo section. I actually sort of like this myself, but I think we'd really need an example and some references.
I don't have any real strong objections to this myself, but previous consensus was a big NO on the M$. Also, a reference would help here as well, as none of the current ones back this up IIRC :\.
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first section is definitely most suited for the Criticism article; I'd be surprised if such a thing wasn't in there already.  The second section, I agree that a sentence or two about parody sites would be a good addition.  As for "M$" and the like, if we're going to add that, we might as well start adding sections on pejorative, juvenile alternate names to every article:  E$$o, "Big Dick" Cheney, and whatever other things people dream up.  Such things may have a place in criticism articles, but not in a main article. Warrens 00:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  edits by 70.159.21.50 

message: This link:
Arcon5 - 'Microsoft News' 
Keeps on getting added. It has a very poor alexa and google rating which seems to suggest spam. Should we have it here?
Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arcon5 

message: Sort of a slow-brewing change. I'm not sure which is better myself, but originally it was "bicapitalized" which I believe was an error and was then changed to CamelCased (because presumebly bicapitalized is not a word), then I changed it back to the (correct?) bi-capitalized, and perhaps CamelCase was changed because people thought it was too neoligism or something. Anyway, someone feel free to change it to what they think is best. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 17:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CamelCased vs. bi-capitalized 

message: How about mentioning the launch of the Xbox 360 when it mentions gaming.--iceman 18:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xbox 360 

message: Does anybody know if Internet Explorer is left out of this "Edition N"? I think the browser is just included, because I can nowhere find that it's not. I only find that Media player, Movie maker and some sample mp3's are left out.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-08XPNEuropePR.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jun05/06-06EUFactSheet.mspx
:I don't think so - I'm pretty sure the only thing left out was the media player (and possibly some DirectShow filters), but then I'm in America so I'm not entirely authoritative on the issue :). Just another star in the night T | @ | C 04:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edition N 

message: Wow - that is one KICKASS image. I say, with people coming in just dropping images/info like that I think it really illustrates the strengths of wikipedia. All you really need is one sane maintainer with some free time and a lot of determination and you can have a rather authoritative article. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 04:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubai image 

message: Somebody have written something that can't be tolerated. --Sundström 19:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What have they written that can't be tolerated? RN 19:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  My guess is some of the anti-Sony vandalism that some anon user put into the article earlier on.  Warrens 22:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ! 

message: It seems to me that people from microsoft are making microsoft look better
because every time there is something bad about microsoft there are double as many sentences about good things —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.109.79.136 (talk • contribs) .
:What parts in particular? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.254.21.164 (talk • contribs) .
:Most of the "bad things" are written about in greater detail in the Criticism of Microsoft article.   Having all that stuff in the Microsoft article would make it extremely large and difficult for a casual reader. The amount of criticism presented in this article is well-balanced relative to the scope of the entire subject of Microsoft, its history, its influence, and its products.  Warrens 20:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft 

message: I've noticed a lot of vandalism in the article's history. I think it might be necessary to protect this article. Targetter 03:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not enough to worry about. SchmuckyTheCat 03:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: As above, despite Gate's announcement the vandlism has been nice and surprisingly light here. RN 17:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Vandalism 

message: I caught the announcement Bill made yesterday regarding his retirement, and within a day all the appropriate articles are updated. This is a testament to the superiourity of a real-time encyclopedia - not even the online versions of any other encyclopedia see that kind of turnaround. Good job, all. Deco 11:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the excellence of Wikipedia. I wonder if Encarta has updated? Kilo-Lima|(talk) 12:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You guys are fast 

message: There are a lot of corporate shakeups going on here. Scoble, Gates, Taylor, the Xbox guy. Wikipedians are going to be on their toes  for a while - we'll need to carefully filter out this stuff. Once it is over maybe we can generalize this as a change in corporate direction, perhaps. RN 16:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shakeups 

message: This was turned into a HTML comment along time ago:
:The latest Who We Are page doesn't say that it is THE largest - merely one of the largest - http://www.microsoft.com/mac/macbu/default.aspx?pid=whoweare
:RN: This seems incorrect to me, the page states that they are on of the larget _groups_ but they are probably still the largest _producer_ of software outside of apple. Needs a reference though. 
RN 22:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  comments about mac business unit 

message: Just some non-references:
* 
*
* http://security-protocols.com/library/phreaking/ComputerHistory.txt
* 
*
* 
Some possible references:
*http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2004/03/25/96404.aspx - explanation of PC-DOS and MS-DOS differences (rather involved)
*http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/reach/435/dos.htm# - more dos history
*http://www.thocp.net/timeline/1981.htm#25 - more dos history
*http://www.bsu.edu/classes/west/cs276/module3.html - even more dos history
RN 01:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading 

message: Uncited:
#All three of these projects are currently in beta, and updates are expected at the winHEC (windows hardware and engineering conference).
#In 1989, Microsoft announced at Comdex that the 1991 release of Windows 3.0 would be the last version of Windows. Over the next few years, Microsoft continued to issue statements indicating that OS/2 was the future of computing.
#Unfortunately, the release of the Xbox 360 has been lackluster compared to other entertainment console releases and the console has yet to show real success. 
#Xenix was initially used by software maker 3Com (at that time) in order to provide support for the software which implemented the TCP/IP communication protocol.
Verging on trivia:
#In 1994, Microsoft created the Microsoft Plus! product support program for its customers, a service that offered cost savings on Microsoft products. The name of that program was later used for several expansion packs for Windows. 
RN 05:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed stuff 

message: Heh, I'm hogging the talk page - sorry :).
#Founding - nearly every part seems to go out of its way to not mention a specific day. I.E. the fast facts in googles archives and one part does, but current one does not.
#As of July 2006, some Microsoft websites conflict with the MSNBC launch date of July 15. The MSN history page states June 15, and the Key Events document states June 5.)
RN 11:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting stuff on Microsoft's website 

message: Someone changed Helvecta in the direct quotation there to Franklin Gothic with the edit summary "From memory, Bill Hill mentioned that the logo was done in Franklin Gothic" - I'm unsure which the magazine said, but the original edit with the quotation said Helvecta, so I've changed it back for now. RN 12:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo font 

message: A great article on a fantastic company. Great work. Bill Gates 07:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A great article 

message: The introduction to the article features the following: "In Microsoft Windows, the company was selling what would become the most widely used operating system in the world..."
Surely this isn't true. Windows may well be the most widely used Personal Computer operating system, but I very much doubt if it is the most widely used of all operating systems on all computers.Cymruisrael 10:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: following the strict definition of "computer", the above poster may be right! --62.1.132.112 11:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

text: What is more used?  Most appliances and cars use either a propreitary software or a Windows CE derived OS now adays.  Using the broad term of operationg system a Windows branded OS is probably still the most used.Sir hugo 12:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you sure? Check this article - TRON Project Cymruisrael 13:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That article is about as reliable as this one.  Neither has citations to prove their point.  The TRON OS appears to be used in alot of microprocessor designs this would give it a leg up it would seem but it doesnt specify what companies use it in their products.  So really neither article should be making a claim like this until some proof is given either way.Sir hugo 14:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  In which case, both articles should be corrected. Cymruisrael 14:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The most widely used operating system?