Better microsoft then Apple I say.

I used to work for an Apple reseller a while back and all of Apple's business tactics these days are questionable at best. Such as .Mac. They are charging a rediculous amount for a miniscule amount of space. If Apple takes over, they would probably quickly cap Flickr uploads or charge more. In fact, .Mac is so slow here in Aus, I found I could not even upload all my pictures without it constantly disconnecting.

Furthermore, Apple only really supports OSX, so you will discover that Apple will start to use yahoo as a tool to peddle its wares.

Finally, even to get Apple stuff serviced these days, u need to give them your email address, which Apple uses to spam you with special offers of refurbished goods later on (and yes, they will tell you Apple has a privacy policy in rebuttle, BUT, it says specifically Apple can spam you).

Whereas, you look at Microsoft, XP SP2 was probably as major an upgrade as OSX Panther to OSX Tiger. Except, Microsoft gave it away for free. If it was Apple, they would have charged for it.

Believe me, I don't think anyone in this group has thought through their brilliant plan. You only need to look as far as the locked iPhone's to see that if Microsoft takes over, things will probably still be the same (you'll note Windows Mobile lets you run any manufacturers apps), but if Apple take over, it really will be the end of Yahoo (Even though the iPhones run OSX, you cannot run your own apps without using cracked firmware).

I know many will disagree, but people need to start treating Apple the same way they treat every other company. And right now, that means treating their products as: Overpriced, crippled (you cant run the latest video cards on their Mac Pro, long term users need to buy leopard simply for Windows drivers, which Apple didn't even program) and finally, unstable and unreliable (OSX server is useless currently, nothing coded by Apple works in it, and who hasn't had issues with an Apple laptop yet?).

I'd be happy to see Sun or Google to gobble them up though, more then Microsoft though, because they keep their products open.

Joe, it's just 30 days till VCSY and Microsoft go before the Judge with the Mediator in East Texas. Maybe when it gets a little closer you'll topic one of your blogs about the lawsuit.

http://www.vcsy.com/press/releases.php?year=2007&month=04&day=20&num=00
FRIDAY, APRIL 20, 2007

Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Microsoft Corporation

Fort Worth, TX, April 20, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE)? Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (OTCBB: VCSY)(www.vcsy.com) announced today that on April 18, 2007, Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. filed suit for patent infringement against Microsoft Corp. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. VCSY claims that the Microsoft .Net System infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,826,744.

----------------------------------------------
I have this feeling...(By Portuno)

...and it derives from human nature, that at this point in the court ordered negotiations between Microsoft and VCSY in VCSY v Microsoft, Ballmer finally came to the Rubicon and said they would want a license for settling with VCSY.

I think VCSY's CEO Richard Wade said no.

Why would Microsoft pull such a desperate stunt as this bid for Yahoo if Microsoft has what it takes to work the web? If they had the goods, they would simply show what they have at the next display case conference (MIX 08) and then watch Yahoo whimper.

As it is, Microsoft has simply made Yahoo a much stronger entity (by showing Microsoft's weakness) and Microsoft has told the industry they won't be on the internet at all without help.

Game over, Ballmer. It's a shame you don't understand technology. Your ignorance has allowed you to show everyone who does know just where Microsoft's flaws are.

Ozzie, it's in your hands now. You're going to have to explain to the industry why anyone should believe any of the vaporware fumes you and you "engineering" team have been floating. All your "Live" efforts now sound as charming as farts at high tea.

Even those on Yahoo finance message boards are getting fed up with I-Menst SPAM. Here, read this: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1331313&mid=1331313&tof=16&so=R&frt=2

The following starts here: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1332014&mid=1332019&tof=17&so=R&rt=2&frt=2&off=1

\\\">

I don\\\'t see anybody here who\\\'s afraid of anything, least of all your pump-and-dump stock fraud.

>

That\\\'s fine. SCO vs. IBM had its court dates too. No big deal.

>

Sure the judge is going to consider it, just like a judge considered SCO\\\'s request for $5 billion of IBM\\\'s money. VCSY may well be out of business by the time the judge finishes laughing.

VCSY is currently defaulting on a variety of loans. If the people at MSFT ever think that VCSY has any chance of winning, it will just buy up VCSY\\\'s debts and call them due. That will force VCSY into bankrutpcy and MSFT will own the IP VCSY has put up as collateral on its debts.

Or it could always have someone else make the purchase on their behalf.

Either way, VCSY will be out of business soon.

Or he\\\'ll say that we\\\'re ineffective or nitwits or something similar. That would be standard for I-Menst. Whenever he loses the argument on facts, he resorts to name calling.

It\\\'s entertaining to watch him call us \\\"ineffective\\\" or accuse us of using multiple screen names. Pot, kettle, black.

I hear the current price increase is due to a couple of kids sending spam about VCSY.ob stock. It\\\'s funny to hear that a couple of kids succeeding in what I-Menst has desperately tried and failed to do over and over and over again.

It\\\'s also entertaining to realize that I-Menst has done more to harm VCSY\\\'s reputation and driven away more potential investors than any company action could. Of course, I-Menst is not smart enough to realize that. He\\\'s apparently been blinded by his desperation.

Thanks for the link. It\\\'s always wise to ask the VCSY longs for proof of their outlandish claims. I-Menst, in particular, is so desperate to save his moronic investment that he will say just about anything.

Next I suppose he\\\'s going to claim that a page hit counter actually indicates some kind of business activity. Someone may have started that counter at 560,000. Or maybe someone wrote a script that hits that page every few seconds just to run the count up. Who knows? Anyone who invests on the basis of I-Menst\\\'s moronic claims certainly deserves to lose all his money.

VCSY\\\'s financial statements clearly show a company that does not merit any investment.

I see I-Menst is being a little more honest in showing some doubts about VCSY. He now prefaces his more ludicrous statements with \\\"I believe.\\\" Maybe he thinks that makes him less of a liar or that it might help keep him out of jail for his failed pump-and-dump stock scam.

He claims \\\"I believe VCSY has a relationship with partners.\\\" And just who might those partners be? Is there even a single Web page that shows any partnership?

He claims \\\"I believe Microsoft does not have that right.\\\" Is there any legal basis for that belief?

He claims \\\"I also believe Microsoft will not receive that right.\\\" Again, is there any legal basis for that belief?

I-Menst is still trying to sucker people into investing in VCSY.ob stock. Too bad for him that the facts are against him and VCSY. For example:

1) VCSY has thousands of dollars in assets and millions of dollars in debt.

2) VCSY is defaulting on its loans.

3) The IRS is after VCSY for its failure to pay taxes.

4) VCSY executives have expressed \\\"going concern uncertainty.\\\"

These facts are from VCSY\\\'s recent SEC filings. The facts show what a losing investment VCSY.ob stock really is.

Who to believe? Who to believe? Let\\\'s see now. The choices:

1) information provided by VCSY executives, certified by the company\\\'s CFO, and filed with the SEC; or

2) unsubstantiated claims made by a VCSY bagholder and proven liar like I-Menst.

Gee, that\\\'s a tough one, isn\\\'t it?

Hey, I-Menst. What ever happened to your claim that the price of VCSY stock would never go under a dollar? It\\\'s down under 2 cents now, very probably to stay.

Since he has no answers to the issues at hand, I suppose I-Menst should be expected to ignore those issues and change the subject. That says more about him and about VCSY than any of his contrived answers ever could.

Do you mean the Raging BS board actually has people who are stupid enough to believe anything I-Menst writes? Wow! And I would have thought anyone that stupid wouldn\\\'t even know how to use a computer.

>

If we are willing to believe that VCSY has any IP of value, it would be even cheaper than that. Take a look at VCSY\\\'s latest questerly SEC filing. The company is up to its neck in debt. What little valuable IP it owns has been put up as collateral on loans. VCSY is defaulting on those loans. An even cheaper way for MSFT to own that IP would be for it to buy up those loans and call them due. VCSY would have to declare bankruptcy in no time.

Well, I-Menst, I will give you credit for a good imagination. Too bad for you that nobody here is stupid enough to believe your fantasies. We all know that dollfan is just another of your many screen names.

Besides, there\\\'s no reason why any businessman in his right mind would want a merger with a worthless/bankrupt company like VCSY.

>

We all know that\\\'s a lie. I suppose you\\\'re going to tell us that you\\\'re not brattygabby or vcsy_is_best either.

>

Not at all. The information I\\\'ve presented has come mainly from VCSY\\\'s SEC filings. All you ever link to are your own fantasies that you posted either here or elsewhere.

>

The only big news visible here is VCSY\\\'s impending bankruptcy. At least, that\\\'s the only news supported by any substantiated facts.\\\"

Our recommendation: Sell VCSY stock. Stock tip: VCSY is at a high sell recommendation. Warning: Do not purchase VCSY stock.

Why is there so much spam on this site?

Because someone is trying to sabotage my attempts to spread FUD in order to get the share price of my VCSY stock to go up before March 7. I will continue to freely voice my convoluted opinions in order to boost the price of my stock so that I can dump it before March 7.

Joe, please please!!! get rid of the spammers. it's spoiling the spirit altogether.

Joe, you know this wasn't me(below).

I-Man :
Because someone is trying to sabotage my attempts to spread FUD in order to get the share price of my VCSY stock to go up before March 7. I will continue to freely voice my convoluted opinions in order to boost the price of my stock so that I can dump it before March 7.

Posted by I-Man | February 5, 2008 9:36 AM

Joe, why couldn\'t it be me. It is the truth.

A crazy Idea
Why not Yahoo?

It could be to massive agreement among Yahoo's manpower and sell and leave massively Yahoo. Opening a new better Yahoo(other name) beginning from the scratch, using the money for the best planning, infrastructure and advertising,etc,etc.
The excuse?:hostile bid
Impossible? Well Mozilla-Firefox did something like that.
Yes it's NOT easy.

Marco:

They certainly would have the money. That actually sounds like a really great idea. And I am sure the minds of Yahoo! will want to continue working on something. I doubt they would assimilate to MS very well.

@Phil Kohl & cloudshine

I couldn't agree more! This should not be a haven for spammers.

@Tom Berber

I know what you are trying to do and I understand. But it is not working. I wish BOTH you and I-Man would stop this nonsense. This is a tech forum, not a place to try and manipulate stock prices. Please.

Eh, I-Man:
My last suggestion: control the number of your posts: they should be spaced out (especially the VCSY-related), short and sharp.

This is not about Ms and VCSY. This is about respect to all of us who are here. Please get this.

Tom Berber:
I understand your crusade, but the only one who could stop I-Man from posting is Joe, nobody else.

Developing the idea further.

If Yahoo sells and immediately opens with another name, with the advertisement it is possible that the majority of its clients return to it. This would be their response to Ms' hostility (the clients would not feel Yahoo has abandoned them, since it was a hostile bid.)

It is still possible that Google helps, since this could be a direct hit to Ms. (Remember that it is not advantageous to Google if Ms has a bigger percentage of the market since, if added to Ms' OS dominance, it would make Ms truly dangerous. It would not be good for Google to have a complete monopoly of the search engines, since that would make a Ms out of Google). It would be possible for Google to invest on Yahoo, giving it its engine search. Thus putting the "new Yahoo" in a better situation than that of the "old Yahoo", which would be owned by Ms.

In other words, if this is done quickly and well, it would be possible to leave Ms only the 'husk' of the business.

It should say:
If Yahoo sells and immediately opens with another name and with the adequate advertisement, it is possible...

Marco says:
I understand your crusade, but the only one who could stop I-Man from posting is Joe, nobody else.
@Marco:
Well, I heard from Vinnie, Tony, and Vito, and they don't think that Joe is the only one who can stop I-Man. As they related me:

Don't think us guys can't stop the pipsqueak? Here's an offer you can't refuse. It would be a shame if something bad happened to VCSY, now wouldn't it? Imagine th' t'ings we could do. Badda bing! Stock price under 2 cents. Bam! Their latest news is almost a year old and not a peep since then. *crunch* They're so scared that they refuse to honor inquires about their products, which will make people think that they don't have any products.

And what do you know? Vinnie, Tony, and Vito must have made good on their threats. Because all those things have happened!
Of course, shutting I-Man up is another thing. But at least he's stopped!

Andrew: Nice trolling, except for the bad spelling and grammar.

Nice way to take a blog post that has absolutely nothing to do with Apple and turn it into a screed against Apple. Unfortunately, since Mr. Wilcox isn't doing anything about the stock pump-and-dump scamming going on in these comments, I doubt he's going to do anything about you.

Not sure if "Aus" is supposed to be Australia or Austria, but here in the United States, Apple's business practices still seem better than those of the competition, or at the very least no worse. Personally, I don't see how anyone could make a big deal about .Mac the way you have. If you don't like the service, don't pay for it! I pay for it because my ISP (Qwest) does surreptitious spam filtering on their mail servers, which they don't normally admit to unless you catch them red-handed with a bounce message. I rely on .Mac for unfettered e-mail because my broadband provider can't be trusted with e-mail. Sad, really. The storage you get for $100 a year might seem small, but the amount of storage you get goes up periodically, and you don't have to deal with someone else's ads plastered all over your web pages just to pay for the hosting.

Similarly, if you don't like the hardware, or if you think it's too expensive, don't buy it. Simple. Quit your whining. Nobody put a gun to your head and made you buy a Mac Pro or .Mac or any other Apple product.

iPhone being a locked device? So don't buy one. Or wait until Apple releases the SDK for app development so you don't have to crack the firmware. Or don't for all we care. Obviously, you were more interested in presenting a slanted version of the facts (by omitting inconvenient facts from your screed) than in discussing the real topic at hand.

I could rebut just about every other point you made, but why should I continue to hijack someone else's blog the way you have? Nobody is talking about Apple buying out Yahoo except you. This is a straw man argument, pure and simple. So any talk about what Apple might do versus what Microsoft might do in this situation is pointless, because Apple didn't bid for Yahoo, and Microsoft did.