Joe;

"Microsoft executives talk lots about being more transparent, but there's still an opaqueness that I see. IE 8 development has been surprisingly transparent and responsive..."

Mary Jane also said the exact same thing in one of her commentaries. I suspect this has been a trend with Microsoft for a very long time, that is, being opaque.

Like I've said, I've downloaded the new beta and found myself using the "IE 7 compatibility mode" more often than not viewing not only my websites that I've designed but others as well.

I'm done testing (for now) and I'll wait until the next version of Windows to worry about it. I'll stick with Firefox as my main browser.

And where is it exactly that you had to use the compatibility view mode on www.webstandards.org besides the Acid3 test page?

IE8 beta spent about ten unpleasant minutes on my machine before I re-imaged and got IE7 back. It has all the properties one does NOT want. Slow. Blurry. Annoying little icon thingies flashing and distracting. Oh and the usual incomprehensible options that meant nothing to me.

Good Lord I love VCSY! I eat, drink, breathe and poop VCSY! Want some nice long copy&pastes? I am dying to give you pages of them. But right now I am over at portonumbnut's mud hut for a slumber party. Good Night and pleasant dreams (about VCSY of course)!

Just set IE7 mode as default and use IE8 mode for the other 10% of websites that have viewing problems.

The fake I-Man poster can not change the fact that VCSY forced Microsoft to settle their lawsuit in 15 months. Sure the shareprice is dropping, that's only because it's controlled by crooks who are short VCSY stock because they were convinced that Microsoft was gonna eventually put VCSY out of business. That didn't happen, did it fake I-Man? So fake I-Man has to annoy the readers into ignoring VCSY while they drop the price and try to scare shareholders into selling, very clever.

Here's a copy of the 8-K that has the CONFIDENTIAL details

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/080801/vcsy.ob8-k.html

Pursuant to the confidential settlement agreement, the Company has granted to Microsoft a non-exclusive, fully paid-up license under the patent which was the subject of the legal proceeding.

To both the I-Mans, or is that I-Men?

Cease all VCSY postings or I will ban you both. I thought the settlement would settle all this VCSY nonsense.

Joe

"Transparency Works"

Ironically opacity does not!

Neither does border-radius, no canvas either. I suppose it is back to tables and slicing images... What fun.

I expect transparency and rounded borders will be out of fashion before they implement them. Canvas can be worked around.

I personally hope this is just a small step to a fully W3C compliant browser, lets all hope that they do not pull another IE6.

Third party cookies and all the privacy blocking seems to be a red herring, Accelerators allow just as much information as tracking cookies. Guess who's Accelerators are all installed by default?

Looking up a word, or finding a map should be possible without sending the url or page title to the third party. I don't understand why all that extra information is necessary.

No, No, NO! The fake I-man above has FORCED me to change my name, so now you will know when you are reading a post from the real I-Man. And as for me annoying. OF COURSE I AM ANNOYING! That is what I am all about. My purpose here is to try to clog up this site with my stupid boring drivel regarding the love of my life: VCSY. One of my favorite activities is to copy&paste long drawn out boring drool from my BFF portonumbnuts. I see the FAKE I-Man above didn't do the copy&paste thing. And notice how relatively short his post is. Proof positive he is a fake and a fraud.

But absolutely READ the fake I-Man's posts. I love them. At least he talks about my lovely poop-stock.

What? You say VCSY stock is starting to head down again? It closed at 4.7 cents per share? Are you trying to say that my poop-stock is pooping out? NO! NEVER! And I will go down with the ship if I have to! Come on, it's not over. VCSY will rebound. I am sure they have another lawsuit in the makes against Microsoft. Or some other tech giant for that matter. Maybe they can find something Google used that is a copyright infringement and they can prey on THOSE BIG pockets!

And I am SICK AND TIRED about hearing about the fact that VCSY does not produce a damn thing. Not one physical or digital product. That they are living off looking for lawsuits on their copyrights against huge tech giants with deep pockets. Oh, and that you cannot get ahold of a real live person at the company. Like there is no one working there or something. I am sure there is at LEAST a janitor sweeping the halls and cleaning the poop out of the toilets. Besides, SO WHAT?!?!?!?! SO f****ng what?!?!?! Look at this as the dream opportunity of a lifetime. Buy VCSY at the reduced price of less than a nickel a share and then you can sit back and watch them find a tech giant to attack! Watch as the tech giant with deep pockets finds it is easier to throw some money at the problem than to waste their time fighting VCSY.

It is kind of like a pesky bunch of flies. Do you want to swat at the flies or are you willing to break out some cold hard cash for a can of RAID? That is the tech giant's choice, and the easy road is the way to go. So expect something more to sizzle with VCSY. It will come back. We (those who buy the poop-stock at it's poopy price) will make out like bandits.

OK now friends, portonumbnuts is throwing pillows at me, so I need to get back to my pillow fight.

I LOVE VCSY!!!!! XOXOXOXOXO

Here is a thought. I never had even heard of VCSY until coming to this site. I have spoken to all my colleagues at work in the IT dept. and not a single one of them has ever even heard of VCSY. I spoke to my financial rep at the bank, and guess what? Never heard of VCSY. He looked them up for me and said, "It's some penny stock, like the kind you get spam emails about." I thought, "BINGO". That is all it is. It is not worthy of discussion here. It is only brought up because someone is flooding this site with posts extolling the greatness of VCSY. It shouldn't even be on here. Or anywhere for that matter, except in the SPAM filter boxes of our emails. It has no more credence than any other penny stock. I am just getting so sick and tired of it. And Joe, I was so disappointed in you for writing an article on it several weeks back. You just give fuel to the fire of the likes of I-Man. You make VCSY appear legitimate to some readers on your site, and that is a disservice. You have allowed your site to be a haven for pump-and-dump spammers and scammers. I really thought you were above that, but perhaps you have some interest in VCSY, and that would explain much.

Joe, you know who is who and you know that it wasn't me who wrote the first 3 comments on this link. There is such a concentrated effort to discredit me and what is taking place in the industry. Tom B suggests that VCSY is a pump and dump scam but yet Microsoft settled with VCSY the day before the Markman Hearing.

IF an OTCBB company bringing Microsoft to it's knees is not worthy of even a press release from either company, wouldn't you have to ask yourself,
WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING?

I installed the IE8 Beta 2 today. After some surfing the websites that appear in my Suggested Sites under the heading 'Top 5 websites that are similar to Microsoft Watch', 4 of the 5 suggested sites are Windows Vista crack sites. This is a bit ironical, isn't it?

How is it possible for anybody that has been trading in the stock for years not to see the situation with Mic ans vcsy. A penny stock sues a giant and wins and still stays a penny stock. No sense at all. vcsy has got to be in the dollars by now even without the news reports coming out. I can't figure this one out , but it is what it is. (i always hated that slogan)

Ive run MS since you needed a boot disk - But MS has beome much worse over the years. This year I switched to Apple. Now IE8 is just coming out with "Private Browsing". my mac already has it, and it works great.

MS has long since lost the lead on computers, noew they are just folowers.

Joe, does or does not "I-Man" constantly and consistently ramble on about VCSY? Joe, is or is not VCSY an OTC penny stock currently trading under a nickel a share? After the "secret" settlement, did not VCSY stock rise from 1.5 cents a share to 6 cents a share? Has VCSY stock sunk back to under 5 cents a share or not? Does VCSY sell ANY products whatsoever, physical or digital? Can you contact ANYONE working at VCSY?

Joe, if you continue to allow this garbage, then your site becomes garbage itself.

More on slicing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfHMbknJk8o

I don't like blogging, but I must say that Safari is being doing "internet private search" for a long time, so why we have that as headline CNN Technology?

I don't like blogging, but I must say that Safari is being doing "internet private search" for a long time, so why we have that as headline CNN Technology?

Joe;

Looks like you've created, not by purpose by any means, this VCSY fiasco here on your comments section.

We will not be stifled! On with our long drawn out diatribes of our affection for VCSY poop. Joe is such a great pawn. Love ya Joe!

We will not be stifled! On with our long drawn out diatribes of our affection for VCSY poop. Joe is such a great pawn. Love ya Joe!

Wasted an hour trying to remove this from my Vista laptop. It looked nice but very buggy. It slowed my computer to a crawl. Tried system restore, didnt work. Tried Uninstall, not there. Finally discovered you have to remove it from "Installed Updates" and now my laptop is back to normal. I will wait until a few months after the final version is released.

Hey mailbox01. Did you try running IE8 Beta 2 in IE7 compatibility mode? I haven't tried IE8 other than some tinkering with Beta 1, but if it looks good and you like the IE7 rendering, maybe you should try that. But for everyday use, FireFox 3 really does rock. I use it exclusively along with the IE tab add-on. That way I never open IE on its own.

@mailbox01;

I understand your frustration in testing this beta. I removed it and found that IE 7.0 began erroring out with scripting errors. I shut all the scripting debugging off and still, even on Joe's site here, I was still getting them.

Sux...

So I rolled back to my image and rebooted -- Problem gone.

FF is my main browser for myself. As a webmaster, I tested my sites with IE 7.0 and the beta to make sure my stuff currently works, it does, so the end of the testing cycle for me -- I had enough.

Some here may say I am a MS Shill -- Yeah, IE in most any flavor or version just flat sux in my opinion.

Microsoft could of done a hell of a lot better and it seems they are playing the greatest of the American games -- "Catch-Up"

Heck, MS should get the Gold in this category, instead, only silver by the looks of things.

Interesting Link:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2469
The Ubuntu XPS M1330 is $420 cheaper than the Vista Home Premium XPS M1330.
Quoting:
So with that “instant saving” (I’m assuming that Dell isn’t being charitable here and making a loss on every Ubuntu-powered XPS M1330 it sells) the Ubuntu XPS M1330 is $420 cheaper than the Vista Home Premium XPS M1330. If you want Windows Ultimate than that’ll set you back and extra $150, making the XPS M1330 $1,599. Based on those prices I could buy the Ubuntu-powered XPS M1330 and buy a copy of Vista Ultimate OEM from Newegg.com for $170 and save a whopping $400 (incidentally, the price difference on Newegg between OEM Home Premium and OEM Ultimate is $70, not $150).

Little warning
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;376857031;pp;1;fp;16;fpid;1
Microsoft warns of IE8 lock-in with XP SP3
Microsoft yesterday warned users of Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3) that they won't be able to uninstall either the service pack or Internet Explorer 8 (IE8)
------------
Well it's still beta(IE8).

If there is a case of safety though absurdity, then removing Internet Explorer and using an alternative browser like Opera or Firefox is the answer. It doesn't matter if Microsoft were able to somehow make Internet Explorer as good as Firefox 3 or Opera in the future, its still going be a viral magnet, as thus, should be avoided on windows systems.

Since Microsoft in all it's wisdom, decided to force IE on everyone's desktop with a windows machine, in order to destroy Netscape, then the malware writing were given Malware Target Number One, Internet Explorer. Like Outlook Express (target number 2) and windows media player, Internet Explorer is embedded in windows systems, and is therefore harder to completely uninstall. Since all windows systems have it, and the EU has not done anything about the bundling of IE with windows yet, its still a malware problem for Windows users.

If you don't want malware, its best to not always do what the herd does, it this case run Internet Exploder, it didn't get that nickname for nothing.

Since Microsoft isn't going to remove IE from Windows, and if you have to use Windows, it is up to you. You need to make sure Firefox or Opera is set up as your default browser. Remove every shortcut and reference to IE from your computer. Just avoid IE altogether and you are increasing your safety on Windows by leaps and bounds. Probably a better defense than an anti-virus.

The one (and only as far as I can see) advantage I have noticed with Vista is that you do not have to open an IE window to get your Windows updates. Microsoft says that Vista is the most secure version of Windows ever. Just removing the IE requirement for downloading updates made that statement true.

There is one poster who matches terms and phrases used in the fake I-Man posts on Microsoft Watch and that's the_original_al_coholic_2008 posting on the Yahoo MSFT and VCSY boards.

He's viciously anti-Microsoft but makes posts claiming he loves Microsoft and loves Vista only to lure posters into entering into debates with him. His previous posting history was deleted so you don't have the opportunity to see his rants and abuse during the 2007-2008 period before the settlement.

In actuality, he's an open-source apologist of the lowest order. His tactics are that of a poorly trained ten year old and his rude, abusive and outraqeous antics are typical of those who laugh at their own jokes while others can only shake their heads in disgust.

When impersonators are allowed to take over a board, everyone's credibility and useful information suffers.

It's up to Joe to decide how to deal with the guy. It should be quite evident the impersonator won't be using the same email address the original I-Man would be using.

I do not condone the real I-Man's constant reposts as folks have the right to be offered information once and then something else should be offered. If they haven't received the information once, there's little need for forcing it under their noses over and over.

But, his right to present as an honest and clearly identified poster should be fundamental to any forum protocol.

Each of you is vulnerable to impersonation. With impersonation, each of your posts becomes a urinal for every antagonist who can't handle a fair fight.

Those who can only attempt to drown out a conversation by using these kinds of tactics are little more than fascist bullies who depend on confusion and anarchy to get their way.

People like Al have good cause to be afraid of the Microsoft settlement with VCSY. Microsoft's new license for 6826744 (and we would assume the other VCSY patent 7076521 for a granular virtualization platform) puts Mono and many other open-source attempts at serious risk. The open-source effort to build into an agnostic web-platform for community software development in jeopardy. More importantly, Microsoft's securing of a VCSY license threatens hedge funds who bankroll those who like to burn the candle at both ends.

It also serves Al's purpose to ruin Joe Wilcox's forum. Whether that happens depends on Joe's actions.

@ Tom B

Did you consider Eolas or Burst valid companies worthy of discussion relative to MSFT?

Eolas and Burst technologies are the backbones of Silverlight 1.0. In fact, Microsoft did not release version 1.0 of SL until the first business day after Microsoft settled with Eolas last year.

The difference between Eolas and VCSY is VCSY has a group of longs who've been watching the situation with Microsoft for years and can name the dates and circumstances MSFT stumbled in their efforts to roll out products with appropriated claims.

MSFT is quite lucky most of them are willing to restrain their comments. But, believe me, they're like a kicked anthill when abused.

It's quite easy to simply dismiss a "penny stock" company, but should not that dismissal take into account the company is a penny stock because of efforts by those who would have profited greatly by stealing the intellectual property of those companies?

It would be quite convenient for the discussion to simply go away. I realize that's precisely what many folks want to happen. But, it won't happen because VCSY has a small army of long shareholders who are a presence on the socialized web... something neither Eolas or Burst had going for them during their struggles with a thieving giant.

In addition, the technology developed by Eolas and Burst are of limited importance relative to the usefulness of the VCSY patent claims. Silverlight is simply a Flash imitator without the robustness of patent 7076521 and that statemen is a very easy thing to demonstrate to anyone versed in software structures.

Just because you may be able to blithely dismiss a company for being small does not give you a right to ban discussion of the importance of that company's technological impact. That's exactly the attitude that landed Microsoft in a position of having to limp along after Longhorn was castrated in the first place in 2004.

Now that Microsoft has done the right thing (albeit they were dragged to that point kicking and screaming), MSFT have an opportunity to regain what they lost during their years of hoping VCSY would die and go away.

You're apparently an open-source supporter. It would be in your interest to have discussion about VCSY banned because you have Mono to worry about along with many other efforts developed over the past eight years (the period from the initial applications for the associated patents): eight years in which the VCSY patents were available to describe the kind of systems web platforming ambitions needed.

So, aside from the irritation of posts by both the real I-Man and the phony I-Man, the substance of the MSFT/VCSY situation is critical to the relevance of MSFT on the web and therefore deserves a place in the discussion. It's in the nature of giants to want to silence the small. It's also in the nature of the small and correct to have to forcefully assert their place in the conversation.

As such, the IP of the company is also critical to the subject of open-source and all other competitors and partners of Microsoft from now on.

I realize what a galling fact that may be, but, the subject of "relevance" demands all factors of a subject be discussed and confronted, not just those parts of the conversation that support or strengthen your standing. And "irritation" is not a sufficient reason for removing a subject from a discussion, unless we've suddenly become a fascist society.

And I do apologize for the number of posts here, but, I can't allow this to go unchallenged:

By Tom B

"Does VCSY sell ANY products whatsoever, physical or digital?

You apparently are desiring to rid yourself of an irritant without even bothering to explore the subject.

VCSY has products that have been snuffed by the industry giants with heavy marketing vapor.

In fact, VCSY's product which is a derivative of what would become the 7076521 patent was introduced two weeks before Microsoft's similar effort in Hailstorm in February 2001.

In fact, VCSY's product which is a derivative of what would become the 6826744 patent was prominently tested and deployed while Microsoft was struggling to get Longhorn on its feet.

Robert X. Cringely correctly notes VCSY is NOT a patent troll. You disagree, but I would bet Cringely has already done much more investigation into VCSY's past than you.

This cavalier rejection of VCSY for its low stock price is quite telling. It's a particularly nasty habit the software industry has of justifying purloining intellectual property because the larger company is able.

Is that your stand? That if a company is large enough to steal what belongs to a smaller company, it's justified?

Just curious how you would see it.

So the answer is "no", there are no products to purchase from VCSY. Thank you for clearing that up.

Does VCSY hold patents that may have been infringed on. Oh yes, sure.

Does VCSY deserve to be discussed on this forum? Absolutely.

Does virtually every article Joe writes about, a myriad of subjects, need to be turned into a discussion of how Microsoft has infringed on VCSY's patents and how VCSY is going to / has brought down the mighty Microsoft. Absolutely not.

It is crossing the line to use Joe's site as a personal space for your own mission.

This is what Tom Berber wrote:

"Tom B :
So the answer is "no", there are no products to purchase from VCSY. Thank you for clearing that up."

VCSY has products and they are for sale. You fail to accept that fact. Have you done any study at all on NOW Solutions? Apparently not.

"Does VCSY hold patents that may have been infringed on. Oh yes, sure."

So Microsoft has demonstrated with their wallet. Many others will as well. Tick Tick Tick.

For example, Adobe AIR is the spitting image of 707521 yet still stunted in major ways - in other words AIR is a partial implementation of 521. Just as Sharepoint was a partial implementation of 744 for years.

In fact, the codename and concept for Adobe AIR (Apollo) echoed the VCSY Apollo smartcard system. How very interesting Adobe recently said AIR technology was designed for mobile computing but AIR won't be used in mobile computing. Why not, Adobe? We (I speak for many VCSY longs) believe VCSY is holding mobile computing away from those who have not demonstrated a license for the technology.

Want to see a limited example of 744 in action? Look into developmentgateway.org and tell me how traditional software can knit together so many various legacy websites throughout so many widely scattered countries and do so with obviously small staffs and resources. If you can explain to me how the developmentgateway.org content management system can outdo every other CMS on earth, THEN you can bitch about being inundated with VCSY conversation.

With 744, functionality can be integrated into the content and format capabilites of the developmentgateway architecture and a full-blown development ecology for living software will be established among the nations of the third world... probably before the tech-conceited first world gets a chance to enjoy the benefits. (Sounds like an equitable way to level the playing field.)

Do a Google on developmentgateway.org and explain to me how so many various activities (human driven functionalities) can be infused into such a widely distributed system.

What you see is only the beginning of what a 744 system can achieve (developmentgateway doesn't integrate functionality with the content/format integration. content/format/functionality integration is a key advance within 744). A full 744 system (of which Sharepoint to date of settlement has been only a fractional ecology until they settled with VCSY July 25, 08 for a full license - what will Sharepoint do in the future, Microsoft? You're welcome) is capable of turning the developmentgateway ecology into a full operating system for the entire mass of interoperable websites attached... and then even larger scales.

Marry 521 into that and any legacy system may be modernized and integrated into the ecology at any granularity without ever touching one line of code in the legacy. Smart, ain't it? That's thanks to Misters McAuley (744) and Davison (521). I'm sure they would appreciate your thanks if you would deign to recognize their accomplishments instead of wanting to steal from them.

(You do want to steal those innovations from them, don't you, Mister Berber? We know your type.)

What you're looking at in developmentgateway is the base kernel to a semantic web platform of global proportions and all within countries that can't afford to buy new anything every time some self-important manufacturer decides to change the game rules.

There's a reason developmentgateway.org can do these things. There's a reason VCSY's CEO was hailed by the United Nations in 2001. If you had half a wit you would attempt to find out why instead of complaining. Perhaps then you could discern a path for open-source and stunted proprietary-land to redeem itself and join the human race.

To quote a Steely Dan song; "Son, you were mistaken. You are obsolete. Look at all the white men on the street."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylr2D4Pwn58

(By the way, Mister Fagen, fantastic concert in Berkeley. Thank you.)

So why were 744 and 521 infringed? Because they are useful. Why are the VCSY products derived from those patents buried? Because those who infringed and are still infringing use their market muscle to bury those products.

Fact: Sharepoint would not be what it is today without the usefulness of those patents.

New Fact: Sharepoint will not be what it can be without those patents.

THAT is what makes discussion here about VCSY relevant.

"Does VCSY deserve to be discussed on this forum? Absolutely."

Gee, thanks. I finally feel like I live in a free country.

"Does virtually every article Joe writes about, a myriad of subjects, need to be turned into a discussion of how Microsoft has infringed on VCSY's patents and how VCSY is going to / has brought down the mighty Microsoft. Absolutely not."

I agree. The responses should be relevant to article and comments.

"It is crossing the line to use Joe's site as a personal space for your own mission."

I agree. I don't use this space as a personal mission. I use it to comment on activities, articles, events and indications that have impacted my interests in the past, present and future. If that is not what I am doing then I suggest you are doing the same. So, quit using Joe's site as a personal space for your own open-source mission.

The future of software development is going to be radically different from now on. That change started years ago and it didn't start with Laszlo Systems as is the common wisdom. It started with VCSY.

Where did the designers get their ideas? The patent applications for both 6826744 and 7076521 were made in 1999. Both inventors are pioneers in network architecture. 744 being based on hive and distributed computing work by that inventor and 521 being based on distributed agent work in SNMP.

Microsoft did not touch any of those subjects to any degree until after 2000. In fact, very few did. And the areas the few did touch were limited to making computers work more efficiently together (rather than making computers work with people in a distributed fashion more effectively) and making networks run faster and more efficiently (rather than extending the network operations across widely distributed areas).

If you will bother to look at the technical background of those in VCSY who did invent these things that presaged the current development climate back in 1999 and further back, you will see they are in the who's who of software development long before the current crop of "experts" were a stain on the sheets.

So, please spare me the self righteous croaking of frogs dragging themselves from the swampy mire assuming they've discovered the new world. The foot above you is the foot of a team who've perfected the architecture for building web operating systems and web applications that build web operating systems and web applications.

When you can discuss how they do that rather than croak the same mating call of the open-source community "wewantitfree" "wewantitfree" "wewantitfree", THEN you can tell me what and what not to do with my personal space.

Keep up with the attitude and I can assure you your beloved infringing freedoms will be a convenient cavity in which to stick a very large tool for propagating a new species... and you'll pay for it "in the end" as it were just as any other species gets pregnant with new promise.

Some things will never change.

Joe:

You should ban all future I-man posts at this point.

And as an example to all other posters, I want you all to think what it would be like for a jackass to impersonate your posts and then lose the ability to communicate in the way you would like.

What's the matter, original_Al aka kalafella? You can't stand VCSY information out in the open so you have to destroy and bury it?

If you could debate the issues instead of fascism, perhaps you might be useful. As it is, you're nothing more than a rectal speedbump better known in the scriptural sense as an emerod.

It appears to me that well over 90% of portuno's posts are about VCSY. Why is that? Portuno can segue any of Joe's articles into being about VCSY. I am sure any one of us could do the same about any tech company. Someone could relate every article to Google. All the time. Every day. That does not make it pertinent.

@ Tom B

You invoke my name and up jumps the devil. What do you expect me to do?

Lesson 1: Don't talk about me and I won't have need to respond.

I post about VCSY because I've studied the company and its technology for quite some time AND I studied it in relation to Microsoft actions and projects. I believe that information is useful to some and a catharsis for others.

I post on a Microsoft forum because Microsoft apperas to have been a signature problem for VCSY in the area of muscled marketing and infringement.

I post on a Microsoft forum because Microsoft recently declared to "...push patent infringement cases to the end of the Court process when we know we are right..." and they did not push in the VCSY v MSFT case.

One would think they mean those cases in which they are accused of infringement as well as cases of infringement against their own properties.As they did not push, they tacitly acknowledge they built their .Net and Sharepoint franchises on an infringement basis while others, playing by the rules, now find themselves behind Microsoft's ill-gotten lead.

As for the connections between what Joe writes and whether or not I post; I try to limit what I write because I have no reason or desire to try to make connections where they aren't indicated.

If you find posts where I am not responding to someone invoking my posts or my posting name, or the post has no relevance to what Joe has written, I agree such a post is off the wall. Perhaps I had a bad day and needed to vent a couple spleens.

Please show me those comments and I will ask Joe to remove the comments.

However, I believe you will find in time Microsoft's work will involve one or the other or both patents in just about everything they will be doing.

Why? Because Microsoft products need to be operational and interoperational across the web and they've been conspicuous by their inability to do so until only very recently. The VCSY technologies center on an elegant architecture for web platforming of all kinds. Microsoft needs to bring forth a different model for their developers in order to make a quick adaptation and performance.

To that end, Oslo will be a milestone as it will provide developers with a platform and ecology within which to study and learn, develop, deploy, manage and govern... in other words, a living software model.

That being that case, it's been fairly easy to segue accurately so far and I expect that to only become easier should I choose to continue posting comments here.

I intend to be a good guest and not wear out my presence (I won't presume to use the word "welcome" as I know I am far from that anywhere.) but I will not shrink from calling out for a more factual declaration than what we've received in the past.

Like I said, the MSFT/VCSY confidentiality clause does not manage to silence shareholders and I think confession is good for the soul.

What's that you say? A corporation has no soul? Perhaps it's time to get one.

I believe Microsoft must be held accountable for their business strategies that they might earn a deserved credibility in the industry and among users rather than an imposed credibility due to their power to impose such.

@I-Man, portuno and rest of your split personalities

Go elsewhere to praise about your penny stock VCSY BS and let the rest of us comment Joe's articles. Nobody is interested in your pointless preaches.

Joe,

Just a little advice. I can tell you from experience that you are going to need to have your site moderated. I usually just read your posts and only occasionally scan through your comments section. It\'s gotten out of control. I am not a commenter here, I just felt I would give you a heads up that you may want to take action here, as I had to.

All in all, your posts are well written and informative. Keep up the good work Joe.

Tom, Tom, Tom...

What's the matter, sweety? Irritated? Are you an open-source advocate or a Microsoft advocate? Or are you an advocate for one of Microsoft's proprietary competitors?

Be honest now.

Let's find out who has a greater right to post here.

@everyone except portuno

I guess portuno gets under the false impression that I am talking to portuno just because of the mention. So he or she feels a response is necessary. So if you are reading portuno, don't respond.

I am not talking to portuno. I am talking to everybody but portuno. Who else feels portuno is excessive and long and constantly pumps VCSY? I do not argue that VCSY may have some weak vague patents that it has used to extort from big buck companies. And I do not doubt that these companies often settle even if they know they would win in court.

But little old penny-stock VCSY does not deserve mention on this site. It is too nothing. Just like any other tiny penny-stock company with no employees and no products for sale. Let's move away from turning every subject of Joe's articles into VCSY-related.

portuno is an angry soul and lashes out at the readers here calling them all sorts of names. portuno's style of writing is that of a teenager, yet seems to have a financial interest in VCSY, so I don't know.

Like I said, Tom... What kind of advocate are you?

Are you an open-source advocate? Or do you belong to some Microsoft competitor? It's a simple question, but, I've found the simple questions are the ones people who have an agenda don't want to answer.

@everyone EXCEPT portuno

I guess it didn't work. I thought portuno would get the hint. I am not addressing him or her. Typical of an angry soul who just cannot let something alone.

As I was saying to you readers of Joe's, why do you think portuno and I-Man (assuming they are separate individuals) blather on solely about VCSY? Must be a financial interest. Do you think they want you to buy their penny stock because they care so much about you and want you to get in on the action? Their posts read identical to the stock-tip spam you get in your email. I don't know about you, but I noticed that my spam filters are working well enough that I don't get those in my inbox anymore. No, I get them here on Joe's site. That is how they are getting their spam through.

If you are reading this portuno, no need to respond. I am not talking to you.

@ Tom

I know you're not talking to me. You shut up right after I asked you who you represent here: open-source or some proprietary competitor to Microsoft.

What you're doing is typical of the other operatives who post on forums like this to sway the discussion for the clients they represent.

I'm just trying to get you to tell us who you represent.

That you do represent someone is already clear by your avoidance of the question.

I think Microsoft supporters have a right to find out who's attacking their interests on a board ostensibly intended for discussion of Microsoft matters.

I suppose you love Microsoft so much you can't stay away from posting about it. Is that it? Just nod or wink. Say no more. Say no more.

Readers, I ask you, who posts incessantly about VCSY with praise for the no-employee, no-product company? Who do you think has a vested interest in VCSY? Who is representing VCSY? Who is pulling wool over people's eyes by creating positive discussion about a stock without a future that does not belong on this site? We all know it is portuno. Portuno is the poster who is doing major representation. Representation of lies and deceit. You buy VCSY and you are helping portuno by increasing the value of his or her VCSY stock. But you know that and obviously are not buying into it because VCSY stock is still less than 6 cents a share. I guess the Microsoft settlement wasn't enough to get the stock high enough for portuno to sell. But this site is not here for the personal use of portuno to prop up a penny stock. It is here for useful discussion about the subject at hand, IE 8: The Rough Cut. But portuno's mission is strictly to constantly segue into VCSY. The reason is to bring up the deceit and lies, rather than post on the actual subject. Personally, portuno is just wasting his or her time, because I give Joe's readers more credit and believe they see portuno for what he or she is: a stock pump-and-dump scammer. Someone who can be vile and degrading to you, even resorting to name-calling of you Joe's readers.

Joe Wilcox;

I guess, by the drastic looks of things that this VCSY interjected subject has gotten way out of hand.

Predictably speaking, I will get flamed for my comment here. Something needs to be done in equal measure to control this "take over" of your site by these driveling comments about VCSY. Out of all the other tech-sites on line, this comment section in comparison is raging out of control.

@Douglas S. Taylor

Thank you Douglas. I am sure the vast majority feel as you do. This is Microsoft Watch and it would be joy to see it become a site of varying opinions on the subjects at hand. As opposed to a free-for-all of spammers and jokesters.

@ Tom

Well, THAT was creepy. I ask you who you represent by posting and you not only completely circumvent the question but you begin an appeal to the readers to redirect the attention to me.

Wow. So YOU are an operative as well. That's the logical conclusion. OK. So you're an operative, Tom. So it would be illegal for you to deny that. OK. No big deal, but, is it so embarrassing you can't tell us WHO you represent?

Is it open-source? Apple? Do you work for Red Hat? Or maybe Sun? I guess I'll have to subject myself to the pain of going back through your past comments to find out who you're writing for.

How much do they pay you, if you don't mind my asking?

I wonder how many others "commenting" on Joe's boards are also operatives? Philosopher completely disregards my request to show his technical ability by refusing to address any aspects of Web OS... but he'll talk about Google's latest WebOS announcement... which has been buried ever since last February when Microsoft received a cease and desist letter for infringing with .Net.

So, let's take a guess: are 90% of the people who post on Joe's comment forum operatives of some company? Microsoft. Sun. Apple. HP. Red Hat. Novell. Heck, there are a whole lot of companies. Maybe you guys work for hedge funds that need to be able to regulate public opinions about their connected company paths in the financial world.

Wow. I could have made a whole lot of money if I had chosen to write for money eight years ago. I might even be your boss by now. I certainly know more than you. I certainly can describe more of the present web paradgim revolution than any of you. Wow. Operatives and agents.... right here on what everybody THINKS is an unbiased opinion board. LOL

What a farce.

Yeah, Joe. You really should ask them their opinions as to what you should do with your own site. Heck. They already OWN it. Literally.

So I suppose portuno believes that you readers should all be forced to read his spam. But as I said before, we are too intelligent for that. My suggestion: Keep doing what you are doing - Anything you see that is written by portuno or I-Man, just skip over. We all know there is absolutely nothing of value there. Reading any of their posts would be the same as going to your spam filtered mail and reading that! Waste of time.

You all notice how paranoid portuno is? Reading that post was worth it just for the laugh!

Tom, old chap, it looks like you've wedged yourself into a crack. The readers are wondering who pays you to post here and they are thinking that because of your dancing around the question.

I mean, it IS ok to ask questions here, isn't it?

The average guy would answer the question with an emphatic "NO, I don't receive any financial remuneration of any kind for posting here."

Instead, you do a frantic panic dance. Now, I would say folks would really like to know.

Joe - seems like your site has now well and truly been hijacked by the VCSY army. Ironic - as this is a good parody that demonstrates the longterm roadmap for open systems...

@everyone EXCEPT portuno

I am sure we all believe we know who portuno works for. But now I would say it's her dad. He is having her spend her time trolling sites to prop up his dead penny stock called VCSY. Originally I thought she was doing it for herself until I found out she is actually a teen (at best). That explains the outbursts and name calling. How do you, readers of Joe's site, like being called names? Don't feel bad, just consider the source. It is coming from some kid who was never taught manners or how to conduct herself in social situations. I do believe Joe does owe it to his readers to ban portuno, since she has become vile, bitter and now lashes out.

@ Everybody but Tom's ego...

Hey, Tom. It's quite obvious now you work for somebody by posting here. It doesn't matter who you work for, your credibility goes out the window with your employer.

All you had to do was say you don't post for pay. You couldn't even do that. That's a shame. If Joe wants to know who should be banned, it's people like you. You come on here acting like a "regular guy" and you spout stuff scripted out by the people who pay you to post.

So rant away at me. I know this is personal now because I unmasked your occupation. It's just really a shame readers can't trust what they read anymore.

And I think the readers are smart enough to know you're trying the old smokescreen. But it can't cover the fact you're a paid poster and your words are not your own.

I think you reader's understand and know that I have no obligation to answer someone I am not even acknowledging, (portuno). And we don't have to ask who portuno works for because we intelligent enough to figure that out for ourselves.

To you, the decent readers and posters here, I ask you: Do you believe I work for any company with an agenda only because I wish to see this site cleaned up of spam, rudeness and name-calling? And that it is coming consistently from portuno? Of course not.

I believe Joe needs to ban portuno for being belligerent and foul to the readers here. As someone else has stated, you cannot get away with the kind of spam and nasty name-calling portuno gets away with here on Microsoft Watch. The overwhelming majority of us would like not to have free speech taken away, but please, let's filter out the nonsense. Most of us would like to have portuno banned and let good discussion once again reign on Microsoft Watch. Thanks Joe.

Do you decent readers enjoy reading "opinions" written by somebody who's employed by a competitor of Microsoft?

Tom Berber (aka Tom B) says: "To you, the decent readers and posters here, I ask you: Do you believe I work for any company with an agenda only because I wish to see this site cleaned up of spam, rudeness and name-calling?"

I would think the answer is "No". Tom's employer isn't interested in "garbage" on this site. Tom is paid to post here to further his employer's agenda on this site. He's here to redirect your attention away from Microsoft and toward his employer's efforts.

Joe needs to clean up his site for sure. He needs to find some way to demonstrate to the readers they can get a fair and objective view on the technology world not bent to the whims and wishes of folks who have large budgets that include fuzzing up unsuspecting folks' minds with BS and phony balony.

"Filter out the nonsense". You mean like get rid of every poster who can tell when somebody is a paid poster?

"Most of us would like to have postuno banned..." That's very telling. How many are in contact with Tom and how many more are paid to post here.

You should be flattered, Joe. For some like Tom, your site is worth spending money to use as a forum.

Tom has gone from "don't ban anybody, just delete the garbage" to now "ban portuno" simply because I asked him who pays him to post here.

I should have been a dentist. I certainly know where the nerves are.

Hey Joe. I think we all pretty much agree that portuno, I-Man, fake I-Man, really should be banned. It has become ridiculous. I especially find the charge that I work for a Microsoft competitor absolute nonsense. portuno for some strange reason thinks that I owe her the courtesy of that information. No one owes portuno any information, especially when you consider her rudeness and unprofessionalism and juvenile behavior, even considering that she is a juvenile.

portuno works for no one but her dad. She is a nuisance and an obstruction on your site. We all feel to ban her would be a quality move on your part to this site. Thank you Joe. We appreciate you making Microsoft Watch a better place.

"Lashes out"?

My goodness what a sensitive young man you are.

Is it "lashing out" to ask somebody if they make a living posting on boards where the individual is trying to make it look like the posts are from a non-financially benefited reader?

Tom, you should be honest with all of us. Just because somebody asks you a question and expects an honest answer does not mean you are being "lashed". The stings you feel are not from me. Those stings are from your conscience.

This is a notice to all commenters:

This afternoon I deleted some comments about VCSY, and I unpublished 22 comments believed to be from the Fake I-Man (based on the IP address). I have not removed comments from portuno as some commenters requested. I did remove links in some portuno comments pointing to blogs he wrote about VCSY.

There is no censorship at Microsoft Watch, but spam is deleted. The posts on VCSY are endless, and they should have stopped when the settlement was reached. Any future VCSY comments will be treated as spam and deleted. If they persist, the poster will be banned.

Douglas Taylor and Tom Berber asked for some respite from portuno. Again, I don't censor comments. If it were my choice--and it's not--there would be no anonymous commenting at Microsoft Watch. Douglas and Tom both identify themselves through links. Portuno does not. The weak often hide and from their secrecy attack those in the open.

Portuno is right when he says that I have his e-mail address. But that doesn't really identify who he is, although the information wasn't that hard for me to get. I strongly suggest that portuno clearly identify himself and his associations if he wants to attack the integrity of others.

As for the others, like Douglas and Tom, don't let portuno's insinuations and accusations bother you. He's looking for reaction, methinks. Why feed his need to bleed you?

I found the VCSY posts to be mildly assuming and somewhat annoying. I watched the banter with other commenters and portuno, who clearly sought reaction. Neither he nor either of the I-Mans is getting a reaction from me. I've stepped in because plenty enough time has passed since the VCSY settlement and enough regular commenters have requested action for me to do something. So I'm taking action and will step in again and again until all this nonsense stops.

I am posting this comment on the 10 most recent Microsoft Watch blog posts.

My thanks to all the regular commenters,

Joe