Talk:Microsoft/Archive 4

message: If your coding special things into it like html comments and using special code for ampersands and such at least take the time to do it right, I just had to go through and fix quite a bit of broken coding which included removing entirely a couple of malformed html comments.  JtkieferT | C | @ ---- 20:59, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  coding 

message: Man, has this article become ugly since the day it was a featured article. It's become a mess - what happened to it? Most notably, the 'Criticism' section? I'm going to go back through the edit log and see if I can figure out what happened. - Brian Kendig 14:43, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Turns out that the 'Criticism' section was subverted by an anon three days ago who pasted what appears to be unformatted copy from some web page. I reverted the part he messed with. I am shocked that statements such as Microsoft is one of the most corrupt corporations in the world survived without having been reverted sooner. - Brian Kendig 14:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I deleted a duplicate paragraph about "velvet sweatshops" in the criticism section. 70.66.48.96 20:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My edit has been reverted, by mistake I suspect. I received this message: "Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Tεxτurε 20:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: 70.66.48.96 20:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm gonna try deleting that duplicate paragraph again. If it gets reverted again I'll let someone else handle it. 70.66.48.96 21:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that.  Anon IPs deleting criticisms is quite common.  Although, I couldn't figure out who would be defending Microsoft... - Tεxτurε 21:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Sure, when I have a chance. The cleanup tag exists for a reason. - Brian Kendig 18:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Who criticizes Microsoft for DRM? You may not like the idea of DRM, but that's not Microsoft's fault. They (like Apple and Real) make DRM technology that is only as restrictive as the content provider chooses to make it. If Geffen records wanted to release a WMA CD that let you burn it, rip it, re-encode it, etc, they could.
By providing a DRM option, digital content that would otherwise not be offered at all is now possible. I don't think the DRM debate has anything to do with Microsoft.
*The fact that microsoft use it themselves for activation, they seem to be using it as a way to force incompatibility much like apple but that doesnt mean what apple does is a good thing. It is the whole trusted computing thing that should be criticised, they want to be able to throw client-side restrictions of any sort onto anyones machine. They actively encourage the use of DRM as they know people need then need their proprietary tools to use the 'content'. "Would otherwise not be offered" is a bully tactic the 'content' providers use, "if you dont give us DRM we wont make anymore stuff" but lets say they dont get their way, do they just randomly wind up the business in the fear that someone might send a few more copies than they would like to their friends? -159.134.52.82 18:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticize MS for DRM? 

message: What would be wrong with reverting to 01:54, 20 October 2005, the time when Raul654 marked the article as Featured. That comes out to approximately 3:00 20 October 2005 --Ancheta Wis 03:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing except that you lose all the changes people have made - a lot of which were good. The problem is that the article tanked too much so I just reverted it. My specific comments are in the above section. WhiteNight T | @ | C 21:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  01:54, 20 October 2005 

message: Despite once claiming that neither he nor Steve Jobs “will merit an entry in a history book,” Gates has never suffered from a lack of self-regard. As far back as 1993, after Bill Clinton’s election, he informed a friend at a dinner party, “I have as much power as the president.” (Melinda, evidently aghast, kicked him under the table.) 
:I'm quite sceptical of this claim. Clinton was elected in November 1992 IIRC (I'm not an American) so if it was not long after he was elected it would be at the end of 1992. Perhaps it was after he ascended took office in the beginning of 1993. However B&M got married Jan 1 1994. I know very little about the history of their relationship but from what I do know, I'm sceptical they would have been going to dinner with friends at the beginning of 1993... Nil Einne 17:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  humour - did he actually say that or was it meant to be a joke 

message: Hi folks,
While I've been on wikibreak for a couple of months this article just accumilated a lot of issues :\ - the criticism section was terrible and a lot of the NPOV I worked so hard to get in there was killed (there was even an edit war by anons over whether DRM was either "much hated" or "much loved" :\). I also agree with Brian's criticisms - but a lot of those also exist in the featured version. Anyway, I've reverted it back to the version at the time at which the article was tagged featured - I know a lot of edits will get temporarily lost and I'm sorry about that - I am definately going to incorporate those but for now I think we are doing a better service to our readers by providing the featured version of the page while I incorporate the changes over the coming days. 
WhiteNight T | @ | C 21:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, it is got the new version mostly with the criticism cleaned up. I'll finish copyediting the following days :). Thanks to everyone for waiting! WhiteNight T | @ | C 08:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted to featured version 

message: Why is there no mention of them? I'm sorry, but I'm not sure why this is a featured article — no offense to the people who did a lot of hard work on this. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please explain? The reason why the halloween documents are not here is because we are only dealing with general criticisms on this page due to length... if you have any other criticisms etc. please share WhiteNight T | @ | C 07:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure... the problem is that Microsoft have had a considerable number of legal troubles, none of which I can see in the article. Just one that comes off the top of my head is the trouble they had with Go Corporation - this was big news at the time. Also seem to remember problems with a dispute with Apple about the use of a Windowing system: this was a big one for them and they eventually won, but yet this is not mentioned here (unless I've missed it). - Ta bu shi da yu 07:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I would like to note that I am well aware of most of the legal troubles etc. and if something is not here it is more than likely by choice in order to keep the article pithy. Anyway, I think me and you could fix this thing up easily in a matter of hours to address your concerns (I can just do it myself too if you'd like :)). WhiteNight T | @ | C 07:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, I have a source, when I get home I'll dig it up and add it. While we are about it, are we able to start use the new <ref> system? To see how it works see the article I wrote: Windows 2000. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halloween documents 

message: Is there any truth in the suggestion that Microsoft is named after a part of Bill Gates's anatomy? 83.71.37.250 19:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there is not. Rhobite 20:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for confirming that. It's an amazing coincidence though. 83.71.61.164 15:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've seen Bill Gates's penis? (I guess this is what part of his anatomy you're talking about.) You're one sick human! Nil Einne 17:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the name 

message: Should something be included about Microsft Works?
Foxjwill 18:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe there should, especially since Works is the predecessor to Office, and the latest version of Works is still bundled with some new computers. Wesmills 22:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft Works 

message: In the article it says that Microsoft Publisher was first released with Office 2003; however, I have a previous version of Microsoft Publisher.
Foxjwill 18:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is stating that the Publisher product was brought under the Office brand as of 2003, i.e. Microsoft Office Publisher.  What they'd done with 2003 was roll Publisher into the Office Professional package as standard, not as an add-on.  There were "Office XP Professional with Publisher" and "Office XP Small Business" editions (available only from OEMs) which had Publisher included.  That said, the Publisher 2002 box had the Office styling and logo on it.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Publisher and those other applications were added to the Office suite as of 2003, not the office brand. Warrens 18:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft Publisher 

message: Microsoft, as I like to call it, Mircrasoft, is the coolerst company in the universe, except for Coca Cola. --QDJ Keeping it real. 00:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uhm, are you on medication? ;) - Brian Kendig 19:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft is for Sheezy 

message: Terrific work, all - the article's looking a whole lot better now than it was in December! - Brian Kendig 19:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I EMPHATICALLY SECOND THAT!!!! WhiteNight T | @ | C 06:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good work 

message: Pages about MS products refrain from using the MS abbreviation, as in MS Windows.  As an effect, they tend to call products just Windows, Word etc which is quite ugly.  They justify this saying that 'MS isn't an encyclopedic abbreviation for Microsoft'.  I propose changing this by mentioning that MS is indeed a common abbreviation for Microsoft, as this self same pages attests.
-- 
Leandro GFC Dutra 20:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MS Abbreviation 

message: Is it really neccessary to have both the xbox and xbox 360 pictures on this article? There many more pictures of anything other devices Microsoft sells. So is it safe to say there are too many pictures of the Xbox 360?
--Mushroom King 02:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TWO XBOX Pictures? 

message: William Gibson in Neuromancer coined the neologism 'microsoft' to refer to a hardwired chip that is plugged directly into the brain. i think this article should have some kind of mention about this use of the word, but a dissambinguation stub seemed a bit too much. ideas? Yaco 23:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neuromancer and microsoft 

message: Since when did Criticisms maintain the neutrality of an article? Aren't criticisms BIASED by definition. Why is there a section, in essence, bashing Microsoft in a page thats supposed to just describe what microsoft is and what it does? I dont think it's about what people THINK of Microsoft. 
I suggest the removal of this section. Pvt Mahoney 13:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The criticisms section is factually accurate, verifiable, and presents a NPOV of the criticisms that are lodged at Microsoft by various people.  There's nothing at all wrong with it being there, especially considering how prevalent criticising Microsoft is in modern culture. Warrens 16:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But how many of those criticisms are by Microsoft supporters? Pvt Mahoney 19:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you need an answer to that, I encourage you to review the rather lengthy history of the article, and the talk page archives, so you can get a sense of the work that's been done to bring the article to where it is now.  Reviewing the Criticism of Microsoft article is also a good idea.  Note that the length of that article is almost on par with this article, which makes it pretty clear that criticisms of Microsoft is an important aspect of any fairly complete article about the company itself.  Most importantly, however, you need to review Wikipedia:Article size, where it is specifically stated that "In most cases, it is a violation of the neutral point of view to specifically break out a controversial section without leaving an adequate summary."  Warrens 20:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Vision statements should be included verbatim as they are quoted/statements from the company itself. It would be inappropriate to try and interpret the vision statement Nil Einne 16:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You're right. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 15:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: The image in the criticism section was removed by Robust Physique 11 March 2006, 06:42 without any reason. I have now added back the image to this section. Off! 03:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call.  A review of that user's recent edit history and talk page suggests that they've been making a number of disruptive edits elsewhere on Wikipedia as well.  Warrens 03:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image in Criticism section 

message: Microsoft is very commonly referred to as M$ by users on various forums and critics. I'm sure this should be mentioned in the article.
Wikipedia's NPOV states that we should include all important points of view. I believe this is an important point of view, and that M$ should stay in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hildanknight (talk • contribs) 2006-03-14 05:20:25  (UTC)
:There is plenty of space for criticism of Microsoft in the appropriately titled section and article.  The current state of the Microsoft article represents a large amount of effort to present the company in an NPOV manner, and what you're doing is decreasing the quality of the article by throwing politically-motivated terminology into the headline of the article, where it clearly does not belong.  I'm going to revert this againIt's been reverted, and you're going to find that I and other editors will do the same, for the same reason -- to preserve overall article quality.  Please, PLEASE review the history of the article, and this talk page, before you go making arbitrary decisions about whether or not such a thing belongs in the introductory paragraphs of an article about a publicly traded corporation.  Also, don't put yourself in a position where someone needs to waggle a finger at you for violating the three revert rule. Warrens 05:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *M$ is not an important view, it's low-brow ad-hominen attack.  If every article on a major company featured nicknames and abbreviations that juveniles thought were important nicknames it'd be a joke.  SchmuckyTheCat 05:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  M$ 

message: Originally I just commented this stuff out but the references thing in wikipedia actually tags commented out stuff so unused references show up the footnotes if I would left it in - 
#Photon is the next major revision to the Windows Mobile platform. In December 2005, Microsoft announced that the Smartphone and Pocket PC platforms will be merged for this release. Microsoft has also indicated that this release is still fairly far off in the future. Nothing much is known about this OS yet, apart from special design improvements and greatly improved battery life.
#*This appears to be mostly rumor from a forum post from http://bink.nu/Article5559.bink
#Microsoft will also release its Windows Live products, a set of online services that do not require installation in individual computers, and are thus available to users anywhere they access the Internet. As many as 30-50 Windows Live services are rumored to be in the works. These services are said to be able to interoperate with one another.
#*Appears to be more speculation and really overkill on what we should cover here for future topics
#The successor to Windows Vista will be Windows "Vienna", set to release sometime from 2009-2012.The successor to Orcas is code-named Hawaii.
#*Now this is REAL speculation - unless we can get some reliable sources here this has got to go!
WhiteNight T | @ | C 05:10, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with the removal of the last one. As long as an article remains for Windows "Vienna", there should be some mention of it here. If you feel there is insufficient evidence that Windows "Vienna" is currently intended by Microsoft to be the replacement for Windows Vista then go ahead and dispute it there. Note that Vienna is the code name (ala Longhorn) not the name for the final product. Also note things may change, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't include it if it's true at the current time. As for the date, I don't know if we should mention that, it depends whether there is any source to back it up. But clearly the reference to Windows "Vienna" should remain as long as this information remains correct (if Microsoft renames it to something else then go ahead and change it accordingly) Nil Einne 16:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed stuff from "2006 and beyond"