The best of 'Reader comments': Ringtone nightmares and Microsoft's message deconstructed

Each week silicon.com is inundated with comments from you, our readers.

Each week silicon.com is inundated with comments from you, our readers.

The past two weeks have seen a number of controversial stories that have prompted your feedback. Top of the list was an old favourite, the funding of the BBC. To read our array of comments on that subject, go to http://www.silicon.com/a45456 . Here, we'll briefly consider the great mobile ringtone debate (http://www.silicon.com/a45249 ), and feature some truly analytical feedback about the message Microsoft is really trying to convey. HELLO. I'M IN THE PUB
From: Anon I am reduced to carrying a football rattle and using it when someone starts shouting into their mobile phone. I have no objection to phone conversations held at a normal conversational level - I wish people would realise that phone technology has improved enough to allow this since the eighties! Ring free zones
From: Nicholas Wright I think we should treat mobile ringtones like we do 'smokeless zones'. As far as I'm concerned noise pollution is just as bad if not worse than smoke in public places. There`s nothing more invasive to my personal space than mobile ringtones and idiotic one-sided conversations you wish you didn't have to hear. Roll on legislation to ban rings and calls in public places. Bach becomes bytes
From: Anon. Funnily enough, silicon.com kicks up a stink when the Beatles' songs are marketed as mobile phone rings, condemning it as tasteless. What about the range of great classical and baroque pieces that have been just as defiled? They don't even rate a mention. They are older pieces of music, so it may be more like 'whoring your great-grandmother', but it's still just as nasty. And finally, here is one reader's interpretation of some core Microsoft messages. Not everyone will agree with what he says, but hear the man out... Deconstructing Microsoft
From: R. David Salinas
Here in America, although to some, Microsoft might be viewed as the pinnacle of capitalism, not all people view Bill Gates and his company as famous, but infamous. To some, his company represents the worst of capitalism. It represents the worst of what greed and the strive for power can do. Bill Gates is to computing what Michael Bay (director of the new movie Pearl Harbor) is to "war time" story-telling. Which is to "take" an idea, package it up, shrink-wrap it, and sell it to the masses. Is this 'innovation' or creativity'? No. In the future, if you ever get a chance to hear Bill Gates speak. Keep your ears open for three words that he uses quite often: Rich (as in "rich content" or "rich multimedia"), Customers (as in "our customers") and Innovation (Microsoft will continue to "innovate"). He will repeat those words because marketing teaches us from research that those words create a sense of imagery and emotion in people. ("Rich content" invokes an image or feeling, similar to the feeling you get when you think of chocolate milk.) As if somehow, the use of Microsoft Windows will give you the same experience as drinking chocolate milk. The words "for our Customers" invokes a feeling of "caring for the customer." And the word "innovation" invokes an idea of creativity. But in reality it's just the "embrace, extend, and extinguish" of technologies that Microsoft uses for integration. This is the same tactic that politicians use when they say the words: "Your tax dollars are being wasted." Or, hardware manufactures, when they use the word "obsolescence". They all persuade an emotional feeling of response. It's pure psychology at work. Of course these three words really mean something completely the opposite of what they were intended to convey.