ilovecode has an interesting post about anti-microsoft ranting on the internet. I would be among those who thought that the name “Vista” was a stupid one, but then again I think the names of several prominent Linux distributions (cough*Linspire*cough) are less than ideal also.
I also really don’t care what they call it; unlike the blogger at ilovecode, I won’t be buying it no matter what they call it. Not because it’s a Microsoft product, but simply because I don’t need it for anything. In whatever capacity I might need to learn it’s new features (if there are any, other than eye-candy) for work, I can learn at work. The only way I can seeing coming by a copy is if I decided to buy a new pre-built PC, and it had Vista preloaded; I doubt that this will happen, mostly because I expect my next new computer purchase to be an Apple.
Where I do agree is that a lot (most? almost all?) anti-Microsoft ranting is just about as incoherent as any other highly dichotomized argument; lots of emotion, not very many reasons. I’ve commented on this before; I’m usually fairly platform-agnostic on an emotional level. On a practical level, I have my systems (Linux, Mac) that I prefer, but I don’t “hate” Microsoft, or anything like that. There’s certainly a lot of that out there, though.
Anyways, I mainly just linked to this because I thought it raised an interesting point; I tend to differ with most of the conclusions. In an economic sense, I can see where it is logically plausible to “thank Microsoft” for the competition which drives Macintosh OS and Linux to excel, but when it comes right down to it… I think that might be pushing matters just a bit. ;-)
