• Home
• Reviews
• News
• Downloads
• CNET TV

About me

My posting summary

1 to 10 of 26

My comments

• Yeah, what's up Krazit?
  
  " ...brings more search options to the fore amid brighter colors that nod at recent changes made by its rivals" .
  
  How many credible "rivals" does Google really have? Why not just say "bing".
  
  Seriously, you're like the biggest Google sycophant ever. I get kind of embarrased when I read your articles. Someone at google could shart, and you would have an article on CNet all "OMG!! It's a gShart! This is going to change the way the world of defecates! Come to CNet for continuing up-to-date coverage on this juicy new offering from Google". In reply to: "New Google search UI brings color, search options"

  November 25, 2009

  2 replies

• The conclusion in this article, namely, that Microsoft needs to open source its software to effectively compete with open source, is so friggin illogical, I'm not even sure where to begin. If Microsoft can beat open source on user productivity & TCO (not license fees), they will win. Currently, for "LAMP-class" apps, LAMP is winning. If Microsoft comes out with a better solution, devs will use Microsoft's solutions. The fact that LAMP is "open-source" is completely irrelevant.
  
  Matt - the phrase "To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail" fits you to a T. Practically everything you write is a poorly thought-out argument on how "Open Source" will cure all ailments. In reply to: "Microsoft and the open sourcing of the Web"

  October 2, 2009

  0 replies

• You're not going to read a pdf?!?!? Wow. An electronic document format snob. In reply to: "Google's Varian: Search scale is 'bogus'"

  August 14, 2009

  0 replies

• This article is terrible. The author sounds like a google sycophant.
  
  The web has been around for just about as long as linux. The author tries to make some claim that the difference between ChromeOS and other linux distros is that ChromeOS has the web as the app platform??? That really is BS.
  
  The reality is that the only advantage ChromeOS has over other linux distros is that it will be backed by the Google resources. End of story. In reply to: "What Chrome OS has on Windows that Linux doesn't"

  July 9, 2009

  0 replies

• +1. I get the impression that the author has posters of Sergey & Larry in his bedroom with hearts drawn around their faces. Given his public writings, I'm uncomfortable thinking about what is in his private diary. In reply to: "What Chrome OS has on Windows that Linux doesn't"

  July 9, 2009

  0 replies

• Yeah, the new slogan is going to be "Google: putting the number 2 in web 2.0".
  
  Brought back memories of this old gem: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29225 In reply to: "Why Chrome OS doesn't matter--or does it?"

  July 9, 2009

  0 replies

• Ummmm, ChromeOS is linux. In fact, it will be another linux distribution with yet another windowing system (not that gnome, kde & ubuntu aren't enough already). In reply to: "Why Chrome OS doesn't matter--or does it?"

  July 8, 2009

  0 replies

• OMG - the most rational thing I've read yet on the the Chrome OS. And it's on CNet!
  
  Someone at google could blog about a web-based turd, and everyone would start raving about how the world will never crap the same way again. It's actually pretty funny.
  
  The thing that I don't understand about the move to "cloud-based services" is that it seems at odds with Moore's Law. Specifically, devices are going to have more & more processing power, disk space & memory - why would you want to offload processing to the cloud? Doesn't make any sense to me. Seems like microsoft's "Software + services" thing is actually the right way to think about this - some things are done on the cloud, some things are done on the client.
  
  Now the big question is whether or not the things done on the client are written to target a host OS (eg, windows or mac), or written to target a browser (eg, flash or ff or IE). Unfortunately, I think you're going to have to see some advances in the languages/SDKs/runtimes that browsers support to successfully write large-scale, efficient apps running inside the browser. In reply to: "Why Chrome OS doesn't matter--or does it?"

  July 8, 2009

  3 replies

• Random_Walk -
  
  You're confusing cash flow with profit and loss. I recommend reading "How to Use Financial Statements" by Bandler. Or take a basic accounting class at the community college.
  
  Microsoft is not "losing" money by buying back shares. While they may spend more money on share repurchases than their quarterly cash flows bring in, this money isn't "lost". The shares purchased are retired. The net result is each remaining share has claim on a larger percentage of the company "pie", and the size of the company "pie" is reduced by the amount spent repurchasing shares.
  
  This has nothing to do with the "profit & loss" of the company. Microsoft is earning something like 4B a quarter in profits.
  
  Moreover, while a company is authorized by their board of directors to repurchase shares, they are by no means obligated to do so. In reply to: "Awaiting Microsoft's cuts"

  January 21, 2009

  0 replies

• There's a difference between cash flow from operations (ie, cash from making & selling products), cash flow from financing (issuing and/or retiring stock, bonds, etc) & cash flow from investments (eg, selling land or a factory).
  
  While microsoft may have been cash-flow negative in some quarters, it is because they are returning cash to share holders via special dividends or share repurchasing. Their cash-flow from operations (ie "the business") is very positive,
  
  Microsoft is most certainly not "losing money". Although, it is popular to think that way right now. In reply to: "Awaiting Microsoft's cuts"

  January 21, 2009

  4 replies