Microsoft Calls Dibs On "Infinity Times Infinity" Features.

Based on a brilliant trick of temporal causality discovered by Paul Thurrott and detailed on his SuperSite for Windows, Microsoft announced today that it has claimed all features to “infinity times infinity.”

According to Thurrott’s thesis, because Microsoft has announced that advanced file meta-data search features will be a part of Longhorn (now slated to be delivered when a race of intelligent apes rules the world), Apple is in fact copying Microsoft with its Spotlight search feature which will be introduced in the Tiger update.

Which will be released in the first half of 2005.



Thurrott, knowingly or unknowingly, shattered several of the basic tenets of causality that have been in place since first being discovered by the Greeks over two thousand years ago.

And Microsoft couldn’t be happier.

“After reading Thurrott’s column, we realized that by simply saying that we are going to included all possible features in some upcoming release sometime, we can lay claim that Apple is copying us in anything they do,” Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said.

The best part of this for Microsoft, experts say, is that the company need never actually introduce these features ever.

“It’s a complete win for Microsoft,” said the New York Times’ David Pogue. “By ‘calling’ the superior ground in feature sets, in this case ‘infinity times infinity’, the company never again has to worry about the charge that they’ve stolen ideas from Apple. Indeed, they have turned the tables and now, ironically, Apple is stealing from them!

“Ha-ha! It’s really all quite amusing!” Pogue laughed.

“Uh, unless you still subscribe to more traditional notions of causality in which case it’s just kind of pathetic.”

When reached for comment Apple chuckled mordantly.

63 thoughts on “Microsoft Calls Dibs On "Infinity Times Infinity" Features.”

  1. Psyko, after your disgraceful Shiv post, all you’re going to get is a restraining order ( you must remain at least 500 ft from Shiv, may not communication with Shiv in any way, and receive psychological counselling.)

  2. Maybe I am wrong about this but I think that coloumbus died under the impression that he had discovered a new rout to india. He thought the world was a lot smaller than it was (despite that fact that the greeks had already calculated the size of the world very acurately) and coincidentily the distance he predicted for the size of the world was remarkably simmiler to the distance between spain and the americas. He had no reason to think he hadnt landed in india.

  3. All this nonsense about infinity. We all know that the word ultimate is exlusive. It transcends all other conecpts, and itself cannot be transcended. If one is infinite, then one is ultimate. There are no sets of ultimates. To claim such is nonsense, because it is in itself evidence of something being less than the whole, the infinite, the top.

    Cole Porter wrote a song about it. “You’re the top! You’re the tower of Pisa, you’re the top, you’re th Mona Lisa…”

    You get the drift.

    So, to recap: Cole Porter, Top, infinite, ultimate, Cheeze Whiz.

  4. MrMe, I am sorry I wasn’t clear. You’re right. But since he had not located any of the Indian trading ports he hoped to find, it like he was wandering around looking for his keys saying, “I know they’re here somewhere. They have to be in this room!”

    He may have believed he reached India, but since he could not establish the Indian trade he was really looking for, he died poor and in disgrace. His initial honors were lost as the Spanish royality realized he had failed to discover a trading route to India. His memory was honored only as people began to realize what an incredible bonanza he had discovered.

    And Paul Tillich. claiming infinite x infinity superiority over an opponent is one thing, singing I’m the top, I’m the Mona Lisa, …. I can’t see doing that.

    Wait, I can image Steve Ballmer dancing around a stage singing he was the Tower of Pisa or Mona Lisa.

  5. Wait, Wait, first imagine him getting really sweaty and taking off his shirt.

    Then as he sings, the spit starts flying out into the audience.

  6. I claim Aleph sub zero raised to the power of Aleph sub zero plus three and a half in the name of Leif Erikson!!! HA! TAKE *THAT* YOU POSERS!!!!

    Oh CRAP! I wet ’em.

  7. I am your friend Bellidancer, why such harsh words?

    P.S. Did you actually read everything I wrote? If you did, then that is just plain wrong. I mean isn’t it a rule that you are not actually supposed to read the posts, just comment on stupid stuff?

  8. I claim the cardinality of an n-dimensional vector space where n is the cardinality of the complex numbers.

  9. Whoa you guys are the stupid. Has anybody heard of patents? Thats where if you have an invention or idea and then you call that your own and if anybody else copies it then they’re breaking the law not to mention also copying it. Nice try at being obstreperously retarted.

    I’m guessing that seeing just your side of the story makes lots of problems in your life.

  10. Is is just me, or is this entire discussion (the MS Vs Apple discussion, not the infinity discussion) absolutely ridiculous? One side is saying that the people who come up with the idea of something have the rights to it, and the other is saying that those who implement it first have the right to it (or some approximation thereof).

    This might be sensible, even appropriate, if the idea in question was new, groundbreaking, or original.

    But it’s not.

    It’s, and I paraphrase, “Searching really fast”.

    And even, when Apple and MS’s innovators are working at their limit, “Searching inside things”.

    It is an inevitable evolution of the search function. As computers evolve, searching WILL get faster, and it WILL look inside more things, such as PIM applications.

    It reaaly makes NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER who either:

    a) Says in a press release, “We’re going to make our searches a bit better!” first, or

    b) Actually releases the software first.

    They’re both going to do it anyway.

    It’s called PROGRESS.

    Could Intel announce that they were going to make a 5GHz processor and then claim AMD was copying them when they released one first?


    Could AMD release a 5GHz processor and then claim Intel was copying them when they released one later?


    Apple and Microsoft can’t either.

Comments are closed.