Member Avatar for Hiroshe

>can someone give me a single example of an OS which doesn't bundle a browser
Yeah, Windows Seven EU release. :P
Sorry, I just had to. :D

Member Avatar for goldeagle2005

My personal worst horror story regarding bundling, and it's a very common horror story, is the bundling of my laptop with Vista Home when I bought it two or three years ago. Vista was new, I didn't want it and I definitely didn't want Vista HOME, but I had absolutely no choice in the matter. Everything in the store had Vista on it so it wasn't like I could buy a different laptop. Vista, at that time, hadn't worked out the kinks yet to say the least. I couldn't install XP since there were and I think still are no drivers for it for this laptop. You don't get a Vista Home disk with the laptop. You get a System Restore disk, which is bundled with all of the Microsoft special offers, stuff like that, so you have to uninstall all that junk. You CAN'T uninstall Internet Explorer even if it's corrupted, I don't think, which mine is. Ditto with Windows Exlorer and Windows Media Player, I believe, which is constantly crashing. Etc., etc. I don't know if it's the fact that I don't have the plain old Vista disk but instead have the System Restore disk. End result is the laptop came bundled with a (at that time) new OS that I don't want to use and which was constantly crashing and I had no way to change to XP. I suppose I could have changed it to Linux. And I can't simply completely uninstall the programs I don't want.

I know I am not the only one who has had this bad experience. If I had wanted to volunteer to be a Vista beta tester, I would have done so.

Your example was more of an OEM bundling A LOT of other apps with Vista which you seem to be biased against (like a lot of people). What if your system had been bundled with XP instead? I'm sure you would have been satisfied with the product and performance despite the OEM bundling it's own software. Indeed, XP also would have been bundled with IE and WMP and you would simply have chosen to install FF/Opera/Safari and use that instead. How is that Microsoft's fault?

Member Avatar for goldeagle2005

My personal worst horror story regarding bundling, and it's a very common horror story, is the bundling of my laptop with Vista Home when I bought it two or three years ago. Vista was new, I didn't want it and I definitely didn't want Vista HOME, but I had absolutely no choice in the matter. Everything in the store had Vista on it so it wasn't like I could buy a different laptop. Vista, at that time, hadn't worked out the kinks yet to say the least. I couldn't install XP since there were and I think still are no drivers for it for this laptop. You don't get a Vista Home disk with the laptop. You get a System Restore disk, which is bundled with all of the Microsoft special offers, stuff like that, so you have to uninstall all that junk. You CAN'T uninstall Internet Explorer even if it's corrupted, I don't think, which mine is. Ditto with Windows Exlorer and Windows Media Player, I believe, which is constantly crashing. Etc., etc. I don't know if it's the fact that I don't have the plain old Vista disk but instead have the System Restore disk. End result is the laptop came bundled with a (at that time) new OS that I don't want to use and which was constantly crashing and I had no way to change to XP. I suppose I could have changed it to Linux. And I can't simply completely uninstall the programs I don't want.


I know I am not the only one who has had this bad experience. If I had wanted to volunteer to be a Vista beta tester, I would have done so.

Your example was more of an OEM bundling A LOT of other apps with Vista which you seem to be biased against (like a lot of people). What if your system had been bundled with XP instead? I'm sure you would have been satisfied with the product and performance despite the OEM bundling it's own software. Indeed, XP also would have been bundled with IE and WMP and you would simply have chosen to install FF/Opera/Safari and use that instead. How is that Microsoft's fault?

(Apologies for the double post)

Member Avatar for VernonDozier

Your example was more of an OEM bundling A LOT of other apps with Vista which you seem to be biased against (like a lot of people). What if your system had been bundled with XP instead? I'm sure you would have been satisfied with the product and performance despite the OEM bundling it's own software. Indeed, XP also would have been bundled with IE and WMP and you would simply have chosen to install FF/Opera/Safari and use that instead. How is that Microsoft's fault?

It's the lack of choice that bugs me. It takes a few Service Packs before an Operating System gets the kinks out, and it takes time. Vista was pretty new at the time, so it was buggy, and some of the software that worked just fine with XP had problems on Vista, largely with the UAC Control stuff. But there was other stuff too. I'm thinking particularly of programs that used MySQL. I remember having nothing but headaches doing stuff that worked just fine with XP.

XP was probably the exact same way when it first came out. Vista's probably stabilized much better by now. The point is that I think I should have been given a choice, and yes, I would have picked XP if given the choice and the bundled stuff wouldn't have bugged me as much. It's all about given the choice of Operating System and being given an actual Operating System disk so I can just install the Operating System if I want, with no Microsoft Money trials, etc., rather than Microsoft or anyone else making the choice FOR me. It's like buying a car and everyone being forced to have the same options. You get to pick and choose there. Why not when you buy a computer?

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

Everyone (kaninelupus) seems to getting quite annoyed at the fact that google looks at your personal information to get you the most relevant search results. But really i dont see a problem with that. Its not like there is a google employee that is sitting there checking out your personal information and writing it down to blackmail you with it later.

The issue is the poor security protocols in place to KEEP that data private. Given that they have already had leaks, what would stop the determined hacker went for that data in a serious fashion?

The other issue I have is that there is no "opt out" option. For example, when you sign up on almost any forum, or sign up for Hotmail, you get the option NOT to get newsletters, company adverts etc. When it comes to Google, there is no opt out option... if you use their products, consent is automatically given, not only to accept the adverts, but also for them to mine and store any personal stats and info they can so they can specifically tailor what ads they hit you with.

I'm sorry, but I find that completely unacceptable. If I get a private/personal email, I don't like the thought that ANYONE (either a real person or some automated application) can just sift through that email.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

>can someone give me a single example of an OS which doesn't bundle a browser
Yeah, Windows Seven EU release. :P
Sorry, I just had to. :D

Not anymore. Now the "pick-a-browser" panel just lets you choose which browser you get. And the OEM can bundle any browser in the "E" builds anyhow (funny how the OEM can, but MS can't!).

Member Avatar for tomtetlaw

Wow already 4 pages! And I'm glad that a large majority of the people replying have voted against MS. Keep it up!

commented: If the only justification you can provide is "geez, I hate MS, glad you agree" type comments, then buzz off and stop being so juvenile! +0
commented: What satisfaction do you get from other people disliking MS? dumb post. -2
Member Avatar for Hiroshe

>The issue is the poor security protocols in place to KEEP that data private.
I don't see how Google is less secure than other online services. Not to mention the privacy data is processed offline, so protection is alot easer. How do you even know the privacy security protocols are unsecure?

>if you use their products, consent is automatically given, not only to accept the adverts
So your saying Google should stop their entire advertising campaign? How would they make money? What about the companies that advertize?

>I don't like the thought that ANYONE (either a real person or some automated application) can just sift through that email.
So, you don't like it when an email service has a built in antivirus which scan's through your mail? If you don't want a program to process your mail, I'd sugest snail mail. Even than, packages you send maybe put through x-ray machines, and looked at by real people, who also see your name and address.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

Wow already 4 pages! And I'm glad that a large majority of the people replying have voted against MS. Keep it up!

Now this just sounds like the typical anitMS-bandwagoner tripe I come across in all the usual places. It's old-hat and am personally getting sick of it!

>The issue is the poor security protocols in place to KEEP that data private.
I don't see how Google is less secure than other online services. Not to mention the privacy data is processed offline, so protection is alot easer. How do you even know the privacy security protocols are unsecure?

Well given that recent slips were not even the result of a hack attempt, but a fault at Google's end, that one seems pretty obvious!

>if you use their products, consent is automatically given, not only to accept the adverts
So your saying Google should stop their entire advertising campaign? How would they make money? What about the companies that advertize?

Advertising is one thing... using ppl's private info to "tailor" said-advertising is another matter all together.

>I don't like the thought that ANYONE (either a real person or some automated application) can just sift through that email.
So, you don't like it when an email service has a built in antivirus which scan's through your mail? If you don't want a program to process your mail, I'd sugest snail mail. Even than, packages you send maybe put through x-ray machines, and looked at by real people, who also see your name and address.

Now you are just being pedantic for the sake of being pedantic! AV scanning - fine. Scanning for details to then spam me with... F#CK OFF!

Let me put it this way. When it was shown that MS had built into Vista methods to scan any Vista installation to verify authenticity and to possibly shut-down pirated builds (I say possibly as never heard of an example where it actually happened), people screamed loudly over "privacy violations". But when Google scans people's private info with no more justification than customising their ad-ware spam on a user-by-user basis, you're like "hey, Google needs to make money"! WTF??

commented: Well said. +13
Member Avatar for DangerDev

Nop,
I believe in GOD. (Google Oriented Development) :)

Member Avatar for SuperMetroid

Who the hell answers a yes or no question with an essay?

lmao! That made me smile.

Anyway, Google is dominating the search engine market as it is. Yahoo and Microsoft consolidating is a good move. I like Microsoft's affiliate policy better, so one of these days I guess I should try out Bing just to see if I like the search algorithm. Whichever search engine is superior is what I'd judge by (as well as how well they treat their affiliates, of course).

Member Avatar for matthewl

The only reason I would use bing is for SEO stuff. I am google junky that would delete any windows partition on the computer he uses when he has not been forced to use windows like for school as a lame excuse.

Member Avatar for lllllIllIlllI

You know, i would love to put half the people here who are all "I HATE WINDOWS/MICROSOFT" and put them on a linux system for a while. I know some of them would make it, but then there would be the other people who run to the safety and warmth of a system where you install something just by having to double click an exe.

It seems like its cooler to say i hate windows then it is to say, wow, look how well it works. I mean it has to interface with a huge amount of hardware and also make it easy enough to use so that the computer-illiterate can use it without a sweat. So really, i dont hate microsoft. I tried bing the other day, its not bad. I really like the video search, i think its very nice. But on the other hand, i just really like google for its sheer simplicity.

So i guess what im saying, is i am making my choice not by just who i love/hate the most but rather on the actual pros and cons of them. Also i love my iGoogle page, there is no way i am giving that up :P

Member Avatar for William Hemsworth

Bing images I like too, it displays endless amounts of pictures on one page, a big improvement from google's image search IMO.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

Bing images I like too, it displays endless amounts of pictures on one page, a big improvement from google's image search IMO.

This was where both Lycos and AltaVista search engines both held their own, until Google run them into the almost unknown. I always loved AlltheWeb (which still exists by the way), but since Yahoo acquired it, has really been left under-developed much to the chagrin of long time users! Yahoo at one point tried to pull the plug on it, but copped a bucket-load of back-lash (as was the BEST alternative to Google). Then they trialled out their LiveSearch on AlltheWeb (which actually completely blew away anything Google had to offer), but then they pulled it out and rolled into their own bloated search-engine. The one decent feature still left in AlltheWeb is the ability to set (via preferences) the ability to have up too 100 search results (even image search results) permanently.

Honestly, if Yahoo had had half a brain, they would have permanently established LiveSearch features (similar to smart search seen in Amazon, but on speed - also, smart results were given in a side-panel format, not through a drop-down box on the searchbar), added Video search, and marketed the hell out of it (like Mozilla did for Firefox). Honestly, they had the capability 4-5yrs ago to SQUASH Google.... but in typical Yahoo! fashion, they F*#KED IT UP, and Google skated on by.

Member Avatar for lllllIllIlllI

woah, people, people. No need to get so passionate. Really think about it, they are Just Search Engines use whatever you want. Really, some people are getting waay to aggro about it

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

woah, people, people. No need to get so passionate. Really think about it, they are Just Search Engines use whatever you want. Really, some people are getting waay to aggro about it

Nah, just bugged that Yahoo had in their position a really good package, and bungled it up through an inability to see beyond their own small horizon.

Given that most of us make use of a search engine umpteen dozen times a day, is a tool that should be the best it can possibly be to make our lives a whole lot easier.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

U guys wanna check this site to see the difference between the G and B, http://www.google-vs-bing.com/
very funny!

Problem with that is, that most simply say "but Google gives me more results". That really is one of the bigger flaws with Google, at it throws in a tonne of irrelevant search results which the user then has to wade though. If Bing proves more precise in terms of search results, then I'm in

Member Avatar for lllllIllIlllI

But see i dont agree. With most of the searches i tried i didnt get what i wanted at all in bing. It couldnt find the site i own. It couldn't get to some of the sites i like. It just didnt quite work quite as nicely as google.

And i like having lots of results. I know some people may not, but i like the choice it gives me when it comes to it.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

But see i dont agree. With most of the searches i tried i didnt get what i wanted at all in bing. It couldnt find the site i own. It couldn't get to some of the sites i like. It just didnt quite work quite as nicely as google.

And i like having lots of results. I know some people may not, but i like the choice it gives me when it comes to it.

Look, it may not be perfect, but you have to remember Bing is in early stages. I s'pose too, being a little old-school, I tend to use advanced search techniques in the manual fashion. An example of this being along the lines of:

+"Three days grace" -religion -christianity +"one x" +megaupload -rapidshare

This is how I commonly use a search engine, and gets me the results I am after much more efficiently. Bing seems to adapt to the +, -, speech-marks better than Google, which often gives me results that are s'posed to be excluded by use of the "-" symbol.

commented: that's how i like to search as well. Pretty efficient. +6
Member Avatar for dinair

I am using bing for my searching. I am very much impressed with it. I think it has the ability to compete google.

Member Avatar for printrobin

There are so many who fiercely oppose Microsoft but they should know that Bing has left Yahoo behind in the race for the top position in search engines. I think Bing will give tough competition to google.

Member Avatar for edhardy

Yes, why not, i am willing to give new things a try and more love for it to grow bigger!

Member Avatar for sneekula

To do well in the search engine market you have to be quick, nimble and innovative. I don't think Google has much to fear from Microsoft.

Member Avatar for cwarn23

Don't use Bing! Microsoft has put a word sensor on Bing and made deals with different goverments for what results should come first. That is where Bing got a lot of it's money from for setting up - the goverments decision to sensor what they want where they want.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

Don't use Bing! Microsoft has put a word sensor on Bing[...]

Not bagging you out, but you actually provide any evidence to the fact? Also, bear in mind even Google had to provide censorship in certain countries to be allowed to do business there (China especially). The fact that MS has added this is far from anything new.

[...] and made deals with different goverments for what results should come first.

And just how is this anything different from Google? You do realise that many of those first-page results are there because sites have paid good money to get on those first few pages; either to Google directly, or more commonly though a middle-man company. That is why the most relevant results can be as much as several pages in. As much as you or I may not like it, it has become an important revenue stream (along with advertising), which in turn funds further development.

That is where Bing got a lot of it's money from for setting up - the goverments decision to sensor what they want where they want.

Again, how is this any different from Google?? Truly, I wonder if all this hoo-ha is simply because the specific company behind Bing, and nothing more. What if one of the many search-engine developers Google pretty much wiped out, or some new company developed Bing (with all the same quirks and factors listed above). Would people still be screaming from one side of the fence or the other?

Yes MS has a pretty colourful history; so does Google (along with many large and successful IT-based companies!) If you want to investigate Bing as a viable alternative (or not), then try doing so without all the blind animosity, and weigh it on it own merits... though sadly it seems many are just incapable of doing so.

Member Avatar for cwarn23

ok then. But that is just what I read on google news when bing first came out.

Member Avatar for kaninelupus

ok then. But that is just what I read on google news when bing first came out.

That's where one needs to consider the source of said "news". I mean, would you trust MS to provide all the latest details on OS X (or Apple to provide accurate info on Win7)?? You never trust any corporation to provide accurate coverage of their key rivals.

Member Avatar for lllllIllIlllI

That's where one needs to consider the source of said "news". I mean, would you trust MS to provide all the latest details on OS X (or Apple to provide accurate info on Win7)?? You never trust any corporation to provide accurate coverage of their key rivals.

You really dont understand google news do you? Google dosent write the news, no, it just grabs all of the headlines from around the world and puts them up.

Now im not sure why, but it seems that you have a bit of a vendetta about google, would it be okay that instead of just getting angry and asking "How is this different to google?" all of the time, if you do support bing, maybe you could talk about it in a good sense rather than just bagging google.

I like google, its simple, just like chrome its browser, i like that as well. I know we are comparing two seach engines but it is almost like we are just comparing two cars. One a smart car, the other a Honda Oddesy, its not the same. Sure they both drive you places, but the smart car will just drive you, it wont have flashy bluetooth, 6 airbags or anything like that, but it does the job. While the oddesy can carry 8 people and has bluetooth, removable seats, and stuff like that.

Sure they are both cars, yet they are in completely different categories. Guess which one i think is google? :P

Hooray for analogies!
:)

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.