Comments for en-gb 30 Fri 11 Jul 2014 16:31:38 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at jacko101 So, you must be an MS fanboi then? You couldn't make it up if you tried!MS Windows has been famous for 'bloat' for years! 'Auto-sensing'? Auto-sensing what? Yes, you could image a PC and have a separate data partition / drive and then just re-image every 6 months, or you could get an Apple, or maybe even Linux, where you don't have to, actually, I have imaged my Mac, but for backup purposes, not because it's going to slow down and need a fresh image to keep going. Of course, in my corporate environment, we do image computers.As for my 'incompetence', well, I guess you know me best. I have many years of experience of dealing with issues that MS created, and of course issues that other publishers / manufacturers created.Apple isn't a company I think is great, it's a profit making company and will do what it needs to do to get there. However, for some reason it makes a much better OS than the other profit making OS publisher.Interesting. I bet you've never even tried OS X have you? I bet you just like to play games all day and poke people to death on facebook.I feel sorry for someone so opinionated, yet so deluded. You might want to check up on facts before you make yourself look dim.......... Thu 10 Jul 2008 09:07:00 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH This post has been Removed Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:13:11 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH "love to OS X available to all, think put M$ in real panic mode"Yeah I'd love to see that - BECAUSE it would mean the instant termination of such a greedy, sick,manipulatively deceitful and morally repugnant corporation as crApple.The only appeal Macs have to the shallow style over substance non-computer user/techno ignorant is the shiny "useless bells + whistles ALL SHOW NO GO" Mac OS itself, which gained its hardware compatibility advantage from only being exclusively used on Macs (though illegal in practice it is unsurprisingly possible to run OS X on a PC especially since Macs are now built with many of the same components as PCs only low end, poor spec/quality OVER priced ones - its the internal design of Macs that is so poor and out dated and makes them inferior machines to modern advanced design PCs and ATROCIOUS VALUE for MONEY!)The sale of Macs would collapse overnight as only the most DEMENTED of Mac fanbois would continue to buy such outdated poorly designed "CRACK FORMING FRIENDLY" heat traps with LIMMITED EXPANSION outdated technology, at best low end components for OVER INFLATED PRICES - as usual with Apple whether its the Mac or the IPHONE they take an technological inferiory products "brand it" than r*pe their ignorant gullable sheep customer base sensless of their cash - ITS THE MAIN way they make there money overcharging for something that does EXACTLY the same(or even less) as something elswhere on the market (accept that won't have apple symbol THATs the expensive bit in reality) ( or as their brainwashed sheep are programmed to say - "its all in the software" (the i prenaming makes all the difference - if you happen to have all the cognitive ability of a goldfish) " a superior streamlined user experience"(or being MORE technologically ignorant/handicapped than your Granny who never has a problem with XP being slow or needing to be reinstalled) ) and endless other objectivitely meaningless t*ss - you can brainwash someone gullable and ignorant enough to belief any subjective clap trap and looking above you can see Apple have done just than - call me when they quantify their "superior" experience in fair objective terms beacause thats the only time i'll take them seriously - i doubt we'll ever here from them again even Apple can't brainwash people to twist objective facts ! :D Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:12:41 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH As the non-ignorant in the thread were saying it Windows that has created the environment for the fastest technology growth due to the laws of CAPITALISM. The BIGGER the (OS) market the bigger the profit potential it has because you only have to design, make, produce market etc one or ONE set of products. (instead x # of successfull linked sytems which would split the market therefore less potential profit even if you just concentrated on one of these).So for hardware/add on software - Bigger profit, bigger pie to go around more competitors, more variety/choice to fit needs EXACTLY, more competative price. Also increased competition increases speed of technological progression as a way to beat competors/make more money, more money also allows greater chance for a company to progress eg great example PROCESSORS (wars ;) Intel + AMD. AMD won the first war with the Athelon revolutionizing comp speed and efficiency (typical of applefangais CLUELESS of hardware technology the irony that they claim HOW fast the OS works makes all the difference to the speed of computing LOLOLOL they certainly can't be doing the kind of stuff the majority of PC users do - considering JOBS a*ss lickers are ignorant of REAL computering (aswell as the real world) work/use this is of course no surprise). More recently Intel made the huge step in pcr power/efficiency with the Core2Duo!! HANG ON the C2D... wasn't that put into Macs OVER YEAR LATER after PCs!!!!. A pcr that was DESIGNED FOR PCs and came about due to the MASSIVE market/buisness landscape that was created by WINDOWS being used in Mac computers ROTFLMAO!!!!The irony gets worse without replacing the CRAPPY outdated G# prc in Macs with C2D the Mac would have become obsolete + EVEN MORE of a technological dinosaur than it is already!!!LOLOLOL! Mac NOW OWES its existence to WINDOWS - dam M$$$ they really do get everywhere they even OWN there own enemies (don't they have controlling stock in apple or smthg or is that just urban myth;) So it really is the pcr that makes a difference for computing that why us PCers get superior hardware kit for a fraction of the price of a poor clueless Mac user with the same specs - this is so important as THATS WHAT MAKES a SUPERIOR COMPUTER the the OS is merely a base/icing on the cake limmited by the power/efficiency of the hardware (and why Vista runs slow IF run on slower/insuficient/outdated hardware)OS X would run just as crap if you put it on a objectively comparible hardware (but seen as you as so hardware ignorant that is beyond your comprehension leaving you to make gross assumptions about the OS platform) Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:11:57 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH ROTFLMAO! whats that dead smell? i think its something near extinction especially as the desktop OS era is nearly over - OS -X had enough chances to become popular beyond MERE insignificant niche appeal there just isn't the time for anymore chances*FLUSH* - and what use is the MAC without OS-X complete usless valueless JUNK - some would say no change there then.) Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:11:41 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH And doesnt it show what an overall crap rip off product Mac/Os X are to the vast majority of opinions - crApple can market a the most hugely successfull MP3 player, even sell two paper cups (not attached by string but with flashing lights) for £100's YET STILL after all this time basically STILL NO-ONE ( except for the unlucky section of the population who are susceptible to brainwashing, heavy emotional investiture in a shallow pure subjectively valueable product and to weak and enfeebled minded to be able to make individual decisions(for individual products) and stand apart from the crowd AKA sheep)is even aware of ( what a Mac actually *is* or does ) let alone give a S*!t about(yeah you say good you say its your little secret BUT also included in not giving a t*ss about are the competative manufacturers of computer hardware and sofware ( even the few that do make Mac bits its a throwaway mkt compared to PCs )!!ROTFLMAO! Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:11:22 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH - no wonder such utter T*SS is more popular in USA culture than the 7% LOLOLOLOL!!! mkt share mac(raps) have here ) such is your UTTER incompitance to cause us to suffer all these windows URBAN myths that crApple inject into their victims (aka customers) subconcious. Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:10:33 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH NATURALLY the PC having the complete opposite set up(Multi Manufacturer competition = choice= lowered price - even self installation is easy with todays tooless PC chassis) to this $$$fleecing synthetic monopolistic DRACONIAN set up) its no wonder you prefer to use them, bet OS X even tells you when to go to the toilet and wipes your bum afterwards aswell (named the braindead friendly,'inspiring' and not at all HACKNEYED "iCRAP" no doubt Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:10:06 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH As Apple comps are renown for being the most suitable for people who know nothing about computers (thus will easilly believe and be brainwashed by all of crApple's Propaganda, and be Royally Rogered by (technologically handicapped/far behind PC power/advances of the day) hardware replacement and Reinstallation over which Greedy guts $$$$$obs has EXCLUSIVE control, (like the i'useless as a Phone' fixed battery rip off that everyone hates except except Jobs's lickers, on a BIGGER rip off SCALE) Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:09:35 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH Were you aware that a reinstalling XP due to bloat meant that eg more RAM was required and has nothing to do with the OS or fc!ked registry from chronic ignorant/incompitent removal of applications ie ALL spastic user ERROR problems NOT the OS. Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:08:07 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH - You claim to work in IT , yet typical of the Apple fanboi you clearly are regurgitating all the Apple propaganda about Windows (and worse let Jobs sycophant and Apple ad quoter word for SICK PROPAGANDA word "twelveightyone" posts go unchallenged) you show yourself to be COMPLETELY ignorant of Computer HARDWARE. Wed 09 Jul 2008 04:01:23 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH "I'm no Mac fan boy, but I love the user experience and I love the stability. I work in IT and have supported Windows for over 15 years, having used it at home along the way. I just got fed up with having to do another re-install of XP, because Windows was bloated again."ROTFLMAO! Could one quote contain more IRONY.- RE-INSTALL of XP - WTF were you doing to have to reinstall it COMPLETELY so often with basic management (and now fully automated (with automatic sensing) if you are so hopeless)HAVe you NEVER HEARd OF THE CONCEPT of IMAGING ([sarc]OH sorry i forgot U R an Apple FANBOI never would have guessed with such ignorance of computing[/sarc]) so rarely any need for such archaic practices as XP reinstall+ with PC common sense it should never have become bloated in the first place...even brain dead Windows users don't need to continually reinstall XP. Wed 09 Jul 2008 03:57:32 GMT+1 U_cant_STOPtheTRUTH uh? Wed 09 Jul 2008 03:34:40 GMT+1 jacko101 Linux can be an alternative, even in a corporate environment. That is what I am currently pursuing and hopefully implementing.It's getting even easier and will continue to do so, as a lot applications get to the web (or 'the cloud' as it's now being touted!). So if I need to write a letter, connect to a remote server I can just use a web browser. It doesn't matter what the OS is, as long as it's stable and secure; being free would be a real bonus too.And Rory, it still bugs me that your 'about me' page has that thing about you 'finding' the Internet in the mid 90's and yet you say you were 20 years late?What do you mean? The Internet was 'born' in 89-90, before that it wasn't the Internet. Thu 03 Jul 2008 12:14:30 GMT+1 Lem001 Great to here you've got Ubuntu. Its still got a way to go, but its really starting to get there.I'd love to see OSX available to all, I think you would see Microsoft in real panic mode. Wed 02 Jul 2008 14:35:24 GMT+1 jacko101 lem001;The Mac Pro is now 8 core, which is very cutting edge and whilst the ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT isn't the highest specced card, it is current tech and you can add other cards to the Mac Pro.But, the hardware is limited to what Apple authorise, so it does limit what you can add from the various manufacturers like ATI and Nvidia.I'm no Mac fan boy, but I love the user experience and I love the stability. I work in IT and have supported Windows for over 15 years, having used it at home along the way. I just got fed up with having to do another re-install of XP, because Windows was bloated again. You know how most applications install in OS X? You just drag and drop from install disc to application folder. Now, that isn't true for all applications, Office (funnily enough!) actually performs an installation and puts files all over the place, maybe it feels at home doing that!As for the other alternative, if you mean Linux, I've just downloaded Ubuntu 8.04 and will be trying it out at work to see what it's like. I've used many different versions of Linux over the years and just got bored with them. But Ubuntu looks like it might just be the one that gets to the desktop.I didn't mean for this discussion to become an MS v Apple debate, but the way the other guys were talking, it wasn't possible for anyone to do business if they didn't follow MS's rules!Did you never have a PC Emulator on your Amiga? Them were the days before all this visualisation!And anyway, soon the OS will just be the backbone of your computing experience. The way things are going, every thing will be in the 'cloud'. (It didn't take long for the 'cloud' to be the new buzzword did it? Strange.)I know one thing. I don't want MS to be my backbone. Maybe Linux, maybe Apple, just not MS, unless they change there software dramatically! Wed 02 Jul 2008 14:22:30 GMT+1 Lem001 and jack01o1, sorry about the Fan boy comment, it wasn't really aimed at you. Wed 02 Jul 2008 14:17:11 GMT+1 Lem001 As you said jacko101, mac control the hard ware. Example: A new Mac pro quad core, costing £1700 has a ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT, a low end card.These cards retail for about £50!Hardly on the cutting edge of technology.I agree with you, Microsofts user experience is generations behind apples, but the 2 companies have different goals. As said before, Microsoft are trying to accomodate every hardware manufacturers parts. Something Apple does not have to worry about.Im not saying without Microsoft we wouldn't have had the advancement, Im saying that without a company that offers open competition on hardware.The format wars would have been endless, (they can be bad enough as they are now) Yes, I remember transfering peripherals between Amigas and Microsoft, but running the same applications on the two?There is another alternative you know. Wed 02 Jul 2008 14:03:53 GMT+1 jacko101 Lem001; So where are my fan boy credentials?In post 15 I even say that something bad about Apple, wow, I am a fan boy. I was using Apple as an example of how a company can succeed and how much better the OS is compared to Windows.I also used the example of the Amiga and how it was doing things that took MS and Windows years to catch up on.You, like the others seem to believe that without MS we would have been stuck in some kind of dark age. What I am saying is that competition would have forced a better market place.Competition does that you know and it doesn't mean things wouldn't be compatible. I was able to swap files and use some peripherals back when I had my Amiga, a long time ago. Apple have many faults, but they also know how to innovate and how to provide a good operating system and user experience, something that MS have never been able to do.I think the reason OS X is more stable than Windows is because Apple control what hardware can run on it, as they build it! But forget all that, let's just have many more years of crashes, memory leaks, application failure, bloated registry, stubborn tasks that wont die even after telling them to 20 times and many more problems.Oh yes, welcome to the lemmings off a cliff........... Wed 02 Jul 2008 12:43:48 GMT+1 Lem001 Come on now guys, hypocrisy becoming rife from the apple fan boys. Calling someone a M$ employee for supporting Microsoft, whist never admitting Apple has any faults discredits your comments.Yes, Microsoft has its faults, some major, but listening to Mac fan boys go on drives neutrals like myself more to Microsofts defence.Mark_MFC’s comments about multiple operating systems is right on the money. For all Microsoft’s faults, I think technology would have been seriously held back had Apple won the largest market share. With the power to dictate which hardware we use you would have seen what a real monopoly can do!Microsoft, with all its faults has the better business model for advancement. Let hardware firms fight it out, and concentrate on getting the software to work on an almost infinite number of configurations.Why doesn’t Apple sell OSX to all? Wed 02 Jul 2008 12:29:22 GMT+1 Jimmy James Or maybe the PC lovers enjoy defragging, running regedit to tweak things, adware remover, spyware checker, anti-virus and 3rd party firewalls, because it makes them feel like they're doing something useful with their day.Me? I use my Mac to work;9:00:00am - open lid on MacBook Pro.9:00:02am, start work.In a world without borders, who needs Windows and Gates? Wed 02 Jul 2008 08:53:59 GMT+1 jacko101 Thanks twelveightyone, I did think I was banging my head against a wall.......Maybe they like clicking 'start' to shutdown, how intuitive! Tue 01 Jul 2008 19:04:15 GMT+1 Jimmy James jacko101, it's best to ignore Mark_MWFC, I think he's a paid up shill for M$, they can't do wrong in his (or hers) eyes.Mark_MWFC, wake up and smell the coffee, Micro$oft are convicted monopolists, un-innovative and downright bland.If that's your cup of tea, who am I to argue ;-) Tue 01 Jul 2008 17:44:03 GMT+1 jacko101 Mark_MWFC;And I can only re-iterate my comments about asking Steve Jobs and Apple about how they are doing?So basically what you are saying is, because there was no 'real' competition to MS and Windows, we got a really good deal and Windows became the standard and how good it's been too....And what I'm saying is that if we'd have had 'real' competition, maybe MS would have had to raise it's game, or other companies may have stepped up to the plate instead?You seem to think that if MS hadn't become successful, no one else would have dared attempt to go ahead instead.Maybe you guys need to take a look at yourselves and really have a think about what could have been.MS stifled a lot of competition and innovation. But hey, if you are happy with that then you keep on using out of date technology.I mean, fancy having a computer that can't boot if there's a floppy disk in the A: drive by mistake? Has Vista (and associated manufacturers) actually managed to 'get around' that yet? If so, it'll only be about 20 years behind the Amiga.Here's how the Amiga did it in 1990:If there's a disk in drive A: (actually DF0:), check if it's bootable, if bootable; boot from disk. If not, ignore and go to the next bootable device.Here's how Windows has done it for years : If there's a disk in drive A: then check if it boots, if so then boot. If not, halt until the user intelligent.Why PC's still stick with the current BIOS setup is beyond me, the model Apple uses is far superior and there are other different options out there too.But hey ho, you just sit there being told 'what's best' and enjoy your life. Tue 01 Jul 2008 13:50:52 GMT+1 Mark_MWFC jacko101I think hackerjack explained why your argument is pretty poor. AmigaOS was actually very good - although it didn't really get going until Workbench v2.0 was released in 1991 (I think).However, if you seriously think having multiple operating systems spread across multiple proprietary platforms would have allowed progression better than one standardised system available on multiple platforms, and therefore a common set of APIs to develop for, then I can only reiterate his advice that you never consider running a business. Tue 01 Jul 2008 13:03:24 GMT+1 jacko101 And let's just mention that MS took 6 years to release Vista after XP and look how well they did there. Now where's the 'rapid expansion of operating systems' there, hackerjack?Oh wait, yes. It looks much nicer. I'm overjoyed at that advancement!I'm so glad this is the future of computing.Oh wait, no. I'm glad I switched to Mac OS X last year, which is far superior for everything I need it for. Is Mac and OS X perfect? No, not at all. But it's so much more intuitive, stable and it's much quicker. The Mac model won't suit everyone, Linux may well be a better choice unless you're a gamer.I really do want MS to produce a great OS, maybe Windows 7 will be a start, but I wouldn't hold your breath, they just seem to struggle to innovate while giving the user an experience other than pulling their hair out. Tue 01 Jul 2008 10:37:53 GMT+1 jacko101 hackerjack : Maybe you should see Steve Jobs about running a business then? Right now they are doing excellent work on a 'closed' system.And who says they couldn't have been compatible? I could swap files with PC's on my Amiga, just as I can now with a Mac.Microsoft and IBM signed a deal which was basically a closed system, you had to have MS DOS shipped on an IBM PC, what's so open about that?What I'm saying is that I believe there would have been much more competition in OS design and availability than without Windows being the major player (for which Gates gates points for business acumen but not for software design.).The rapid expansion you talk about came about after Windows was 'mature', kinda. Who says that we wouldn't have had better and quicker expansion with multiple systems?The 'small' Amiga market had a huge number of companies developing ever better kit for it and that could have continued, but for Commodore and others bad management. Tue 01 Jul 2008 10:08:46 GMT+1 hackerjack The reason that the Amiga was a better package was because it was a hardware AND software solution in one.MS creating a decent non hardware-specific option is what opened computing up to the masses in a way that a tied in solution never could.Having an OS that runs on multiple platforms has allowed the rise of so many companies all competing to create better, faster, cheaper motherboards, memory and processors (AMD, Intel, Kingston, Seagate etc.).This in turn has allowed much more rapid expansion of operating systems, applications and functionality.Had we been stuck with a tied in solution you would have seen progress yes, but not at anywhere near the same development rate. You would have also seen several tied in solutions, none of them cross-compatible (i.e. like the console market).Anyone who really believes that this would have been a better solution should seriously consider never running a business. Tue 01 Jul 2008 09:57:09 GMT+1 jacko101 Mark_MWFCIn 1990 I was using an Amiga 500 and then I moved on to the Amiga 1200, the Workbench OS that shipped with the Amiga was fantastic, in terms of footprint, speed and intuitiveness.That was a far better home computer than any Windows 'box' at that time. I used it for everything from playing games to creating 3D renders in Imagine or real3D or generating landscapes in Vista (before Vista was Windows!), doing word processing in Wordsworth and even a little programming.It took Windows years to get the true multitasking capabilities that I had with Workbench. Stereo sound and excellent colour graphics were also way ahead of anything that MS had.If you can't envisage a different path for computing without MS, then that's your loss. I was using better way back when, it's just a shame Commodore were really bad at managing and marketing.So, when did Windows get pre-emptive multitasking? Tue 01 Jul 2008 08:28:19 GMT+1 Mark_MWFC Actually jacko101, being a man in his late 30's I've used a lot of operating systems and I remember the days before Windows. I also remember how Windows made mass market computing a reality and how - rightly or wrongly - a homogenous platform with standardised applications (something sadly lacking before DOS and especially Windows) hugely expanded the use of computers from the realm of academia into business and home use. Therefore to say that Microsoft has held progress back 10 years is, frankly, utter nonsense.The fact that you say you were using better options in 1990 - which unless you were using Unix on a mainframe - hardly a valid comparison to desktop based systems - you most certainly weren't just demonstrates why one shouldn't take your comments that seriously. Tue 01 Jul 2008 08:11:15 GMT+1 jacko101 Rory, when was the Internet created? I think in your profile 'bit' you may want to adjust that sentence? 1995 and you're 20 years late, what the hell?Anyway, as for Bill, do you think he can predict a time when MS can develop an Operating System that is reliable, fast and secure?I guess not.Windows is it's own worst enemy, the fact that it has to be compatible with 'every' piece of hardware on the planet* makes it less reliable not just because of MS but because of third parties too.....But that doesn't mean MS shouldn't do something about it, or maybe just have a set of core hardware that is tested to destruction.But that aside, Windows just isn't intuitive or friendly at any point. And it's so bloated, who really wants the registry? Anyway....I started using Windows in about 1990 and while it's been through some great changes, it just isn't anything other than OK. I switched to Mac last year and it's ten times better. It isn't perfect and I am no fan boy (both sides have fan boys and they are both annoying!) but it's just makes me want to be creative. OS X isn't for everyone, but for most users that use Internet, email, office, etc.... I think they'd find the change amazing.And that's not to say OS X can't handle other heavy duty stuff that Windows can because it can, it's just games where it struggles and that's getting better support now.*That's a slight exaggeration, just. Mon 30 Jun 2008 23:30:17 GMT+1 jacko101 Mark_MWFC ; Windows has been a great success, but that doesn't mean it was the best option going forward.It's a bloated, shaky and slow OS, I was using better in 1990 than what Windows 2000 provided, but for bad management and Microsoft stampeding it's way to the front using very bad practices to get where it is today, we could have a very different and better standard of computing.If you don't think we could be ahead of where we are then you obviously have never used anything other than Windows. Mon 30 Jun 2008 23:16:09 GMT+1 Charlie Did you just mention Alan Sugar in the same breath as Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Larry Ellison? You've got to be joking. Mon 30 Jun 2008 21:10:26 GMT+1 Rory Cellan-Jones Re comments 3 and 5.I have the hardback first edition - the interview in 1995 was given because Bill Gates was promoting the book.And it does mention the internet more than seven times - in fact, I've just found seven mentions on one page.Where it goes wrong is in seeing the internet as just a stage in the development of the "information super-highway" but you could see that as a matter of semantics. I'm not saying he got everything right - the net turned out to be a far more open and interactive space than he imagined - but the idea that he just didn't get the internet at all is a myth. But if you can point me at other 1995 texts that did a better job of predicting our internet future, go ahead. Mon 30 Jun 2008 17:00:44 GMT+1 Mark_MWFC Goodness, we have some picky people here! The Road Ahead was re-released as a paperback in October 1996 with more focus on the internet. I think you'll find that's still way ahead of the curve and it's probably the version Rory has.As for the industry being 10 years further forward if there was no Gates, I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that comment it's just so ridiculous.Finally, the comments on Apple were centred around one Apple product, the coverage on Gates is centred around a man who changed the world. I guess that's the difference.Good luck, Bill. You changed the world in good ways and bad. Mon 30 Jun 2008 16:20:07 GMT+1 jacko101 Rory, what version of Bills 'visionary' book do you have?It is well known that it was republished in a '2nd edition' and updated to include more info on the Internet.Bill and Microsoft were slow on the uptake of the Internet, indeed they still lag behind many competitors and I'm not just talking Google.People say, 'but without Gates, where would we be?'.Well, I think we'd actually be about another ten years forward, imagine that! Mon 30 Jun 2008 14:43:21 GMT+1 Paul Robert Lloyd With reference to an earlier post on the BBC Blog Network, about the BBC wanting to ensure it didn't over report Apple launching their new iPhone (and I believe the amount of coverage was about right), I can't help feel that the same level of restraint isn't being shown for this particular news story - it seems to me the the BBC has been reporting this departure for the entire month of June. Bill will be leaving at the end of this month. Bill we be leaving at the end of this week. Bill will be leaving tomorrow. Bill will be leaving in an hours time. Bill has left…I understand the importance of this event, for he is a pivotal figure in the world of technology, and arguably made the personal computer mainstream, but seriously, enough with all the Bill Gates reporting already. The BBC reached saturation point on this story weeks ago.I note also how the 'leaving video' is being reported as something new, but if I remember correctly, this was from his last keynote at E3 - earlier in the year - when we had a similar level coverage.So please please please, can we start to see reporting of other technology topics? Mon 30 Jun 2008 13:59:17 GMT+1 machineamnesiac "The road Ahead, a 1995 vision of the Internet future"That would be news to the rest of us who remember it differently. The first edition gives the Internet a mention a mere seven times. The later edition does make up for that, but predicting something that is currently happening isn't exactly visionary now is it. Mon 30 Jun 2008 12:36:13 GMT+1 Hamish Thompson I suspect history will treat him more kindly than his contemporaries do. My feeling is that there are certain points when a monopoly or near-monopoly is inevitable as a business makes a hitherto unimagined conduit for human needs or desires. I'd be interested to know what the nett efficiency gain has been from having a near-consistent software standard across the globe. It seems slightly odd - and more than a tad quaint - that less than 30 years ago the only windows in offices were the ones workers gazed out of, rather than into.Incidentally, it's probably one of those urban myths, but I heard somewhere that IBM executives (doubtless in a fit of pique) insisted late in the 80s that windows (ie, the glass variety) were no longer to be called windows. Instead they were to be called outdoor awareness panels. Mon 30 Jun 2008 12:16:26 GMT+1 Alec the Geek I started in IT in 1980 so I've seen the whole cycle of BIll's Microsoft career.BIll was a hero of mine, until the Stac debacle. Then it was downhill -- the quality of the software (Windows, Visual Studio, etc) declined and evidence of bad business practices increased.I'm now active in Open Source and UNIX and loving it, so thanks Bill. Mon 30 Jun 2008 11:22:36 GMT+1