As MS continues to write software for Macs including the "new" G5s, how else are they going to test the stuff ???

Perhaps it was a little over-draconian, but in this case I think MS was probably right. Yes, it's obvious that MS need Macs to do their Mac development on; Yes, it was only a photo of the contents of a lorry, but... What if the lorry contained something that really was a secret? What if people started taking photos of everything and anything on the MS campus and posted those photos on the internet? Letting the guy get away with this might have set a dangerous precedent as far as Microsoft were concerned.

Shaun: Somehow I don't think that the fact MS, who as you rightly point out write software for Macs, are taking delivery of... Macs… was why they fired him. Mark may well be on to what the problem is from MS's viewpoint... it might just be that they do not want people putting the day to day behind the scenes operations at Redmond on the web for all matter of legitimate business and security reasons. Or they may just have fired the guy because they caught him performing un-natural acts with a cheese grater in the staff canteen or some such antics. Who knows?

The guy was a temp worker who specifically signed a contract not to disclose company info. I've done contract and consulting work and rule #1 is you NEVER disclose a client's info - not if you want to work there or anywhere else again.

Well if anon is correct, it was a righteous boot up the arse. Straightforward breach of contract.

Perry,
Could you update the graphic on this post to reflect your last comment ?
I don't know why people love to hate MS. Looks to me like an instance of the "hate-everything" crowd.

I agree with Anon. You can't just go around an employer's restricted area on company time with a digital camera and make photographs. He posted one on the internet in a fit of cleverness. What else might have been in that camera? A screenshot? A whiteboard after a meeting? Some of these cameras can hold hundreds of pictures.

I went to the link cited. There is a long string of comments about possible harm - - that the pictures might be used to facilitate a theft - - that sort of thing.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if Microsoft were to let him go on the "no harm done" arguments in the thread, then they would have to prove harmful intent in any future case of breach of contract. But a deal's a deal, and a contract is a contract.

I agree with Jacob. Why are Microsoft evil? I assume that was a tongue in cheek comment but it sounds as if has come straight from the Guardian!

It was indeed a poke at the Guardianistas actually.

That said... their 'trusted computing' initiatives have the making of a true dystopia for the future. Microsoft is not your friend any more than the Chinese government's best buddy Cisco is. Big companies love big governments.

"Big companies love big government."

MS loved the Clinton Administration - Department of Justice?

"Big companies love big governments"

That's a pinko phrase.

Big companies, like everybody else, love themselves.
And, everybody loves those that feed them. Big companies, small companies, even individual bureaucrats.
MS, though, probably hates big government more than most people, considering the trouble they had. It's more like Oracle and Sun, MS competitors, tried to use big government to fight MS, and not the other way round.

"Microsoft is not your friend..."
Feel free not to buy MS products, if that's what you think. You can't say the same about the other "not your friend" (the government).

Oh, I am wounded Jacob ... it is a realistic phrase... the whole 'trusted computing initiative' will rely on getting governments to compel other companies to play ball and you are deluding yourself if you cannot see how MS buddies up to states around the world. I do a pretty good job of avoiding MS products actually. Think different.

The problem isn't necessarily that MS buddies up to governments. Its that the governments are so pervasive that it is in MS's interest to do so. MS would have no interest in a night watchman state.

If you want big companies to stop loving big governments, get rid of the big governments.

I don't know why MS is hated by so many people either (unless they all bought Windows ME). I've asked more than a few people who've expressed strong dislike for MS why they feel the way they do and most don't have a valid answer, in fact some couldn't name two products made by the company. Their software is reliable for the most part and unlike big government, Microsoft responds to it's clients needs. I like the common interface too.

http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1067645731

According to some, Mr. Hanscom wasn't exactly a Microsoft employee but a temp. contractor.

Perry,
I knew nothing about the trusted computing initiative, so I read a couple of articles on it.
You can love it or hate it, I haven't yet made up my mind. I do love anarchy, but I can see how people doing business over the internet need some security and confidence. (I had my credit card data stolen recently.)
I just don't see what this has got to do with big government. It is not a government initiative, it was not started, encouraged or regulated by big G. The danger or potential for abuse by big G exists, but it exists everywhere, actually government has not yet got involved.
MS does not owe it's bigness, or it's success to government in any way. So I don't see what makes you associate MS with big G.

I work for a biotech/pharmaceutical company. Photography on-site is not allowed unless prior approval is given by the security department. In practice, nobody cares if you take a picture at an office birthday party (actually, employees generally police themselves by checking that whiteboards are erased before taking pictures), but I would fully expect to have my employment terminated if I started taking pictures around our warehouses or laboratories. It's a fact of life in any technology-driven company -- it can take years to develop an idea into something practical, and just a moment to deliver the fruits of that effort to a competitor. The chance of inadvertant disclosure is simply too great. Microsoft seems to have been acting in the rational self-interest of the company and its employees...

Many hate Microsoft because they have used illegal tactics to crush smaller companies. Worse still, they have been prosecuted for these activities and found guilty and got away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Here's a few names for you...

DR DOS,
Stac,
Netscape,
Internet Explorer,
Java

They've even managed to stick it to IBM.

Rich

By the way, preview is broken. I tried over and over in preview to get that list on separate lines and in the end gave up and just stuck commas in. Then I posted it and behold, there are the separate lines.

Rich

Richard: comment preview seems to work just fine for me in IE and Netscape on both Mac (OSX) and PC (WinXP)... what OS and browser are youn using?

Mozilla 1.4 on WinXP. Looking at the HTML, it displays as would be expected. The following list:

DR DOS,
Stac,
Netscape,
Internet Explorer,
Java

Looks like this in the preview:

DR DOS, Stac, Netscape, Internet Explorer, Java

But, err, like it does here here. That is, newlines look like newlines (converted to
s) in the real article but are just whitespace in the preview

Rich

Er, that is, converted to br tags.

FWIW, I tried adding br tags and it still looked wrong in the preview. I also tried an unordered list and the same thing. Not sure if they're valid in a real post. Here's a try

This is a
single line with a break tag in it.

Rich

The US Fed Gov has contributed significantly to making MS the monster it is simply by existing. The Fed Gov is a huge customer, and they have to use some software, so, regardless of what software they choose, they are going to distort the market. The Fed Gov chose Windows for their desktops, so the states then chose Windows because they have to interoperate with the Fed Gov, and then firms that have extensive dealings with any level of government chose Windows for the same reason.

Virginia,
What proportion of Windows machines sold were bought by government ? I have no data but my guess is - 5%, maybe 10% , not so significant. The gov. also buys cars, tables and spoons. They buy anything. They also bought all kinds of computers. They just weren't any factor in MS's success.

Welll, I never hate Microsoft and I don't have any problems with any Microsoft products. I never support Firefox; only Internet Explorer.

I'm heavily betting Microsoft on improving Microsoft products like Windows, Office, Visual Studio .net, etc. and I strongly support Microsoft by not using any third-party products on which Office are similar to OpenOffice, Internet Explorer similar to Firefox, etc.