Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sends Linux Survey
GnrlFajita writes "According to Newsforge, Microsoft is sending Linux users a survey asking why they use Linux, and what can be done to make Windows better. The article suggests taking the survey (or surveys, one for business users and one for home users), then sharing your answers with others in the community." Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.
i'm not trolling,
... we all remember the 'viral GPL' attack
but i think this may be a way to find out the most popular 'features' of linux so MS knows where to attack next
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
Why don't you specify a protocol or format in current use@MS that isn't fully documented?
NTFS, for one.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
That would be interesting, but you do realize that the other applications that Microsoft produces would go up in cost, with the exception (iirc) of MS Office and MS Flight Simulator. Somewhere I read (about a year ago) that Microsoft's development and research are basically bankrolled by Windows and Office, and that a good portion of the rest of their products are sold at a loss.
Michael C. Hollinger
The Office file formats?
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
Maybe we should do a survey similar to this one so that we can learn from Windows users as well.
The replication protocol for WINS servers (which is why samba can't be a backup WINS server).
The Exchange Server protocol is another example.
void*x=(*((void*(*)())&(x=(void*)0xfdeb58)))();
Microsoft has these posters floating around with pictures of Tux on a milk carton "with a frown". It says "two down, three to go" Then it goes on to say if each MS employee converts 5 linux installs into Windows server installs, that MS could then "outsell" linux in the server market.
#include ihatemicrosoft.h
BUT
I don't think this disclaimer is saying anything outlandish. They HAVE to include it for the simple fact there are greedy douchebags who would sue Microsoft if they implemented a change to Windows that resembled something the person submitted via this form.
When you're a big target you need to keep your defenses up. So unless you really were planning on suing them for making a change you suggested, I don't think that NOT participating is accomplishing anything other than letting you feel righteously indignant.
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
Erm, there's plenty of technical issues that, yes, also suck. Users, by default, belong to the Administrators group? Unprivileged services like Print Spooler run under the LocalSystem account? The windowing system doesn't have any authentication mechanism and it's easy to elevate user privileges if any higher-level user is running a process with a window handle? Hundreds of stupid buffer overflow problems that aren't caught by shitty peer review processes? Patches released once per month?
I'm afraid my reasons for staying clear of Windows on the desktop are pretty varied.
Why? Because they don't want a free replacement available so no one can do to that like SAMBA did and is still doing to SMB/CIFS.
Want to see why they do this? Load up a Win2K/WinXP file server/domain controller. Measure its performance. Reformat the hard drives and install Linux/SAMBA. Measure the much better performance now.
I attempted to take the survey, and for one targeted toward Linux end-users, you think they'd make one that was functional with MozillaFirebird.
I tried clicking on all of the little radio buttons, which instead of being normal radio buttons, are stupid little images that are supposed to do something when clicked.
Well, I clicked and I clicked and none of them were selected. I submitted the survey anyway, and ended up with a blank page so I don't even know what will happen.
I used Firebird on Jaguar (my stupid KVM broke, so no Linux box for a few days). But, I don't think Firebird acts radically different on OS X than on Linux.
Guess they don't really want my feedback, eh?
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
... how about fully documenting all protocols and formats used (under a nice license) so that people can make products interoperable?
A tool set comparable to Linux, free. That is, compilers and interpreters for C, C++, Fortran, Ada, Pascal, Objective C, Prolog, Haskell, Lisp, Perl, Python, Awk, lex, yacc, Basic, etc., etc. Debuggers, libraries, editors, profilers. Libraries for test scaffolding like CppUnit and JUnit.
... every last one of those exists for windows. And it's free. gcc is native. Actually, the only glaring omission is a decent free common lisp (corman lisp is free for noncommercial use, but that's it, and clisp is cygwin, slow, and awful)
Funny
Like no way to change the screen resolution without editing xf86config in KDE
:)
:)
X 4.3 introduced a method for changing the screen resolution on the fly, without restarting X. GNOME 2.6 has a utility to do it, I don't know about KDE, though. At any rate, there's no longer a technical reason that KDE can't change the resolution itself, so expect that to get fixed in later versions. I've always seen this complaint as a non issue, though, since I chose my resolution at install time and I haven't needed to change it since.
no way to get a columned list view of files in Nautilus in GNOME.
Are you trolling? Seriously dude, View --> View As List, you're done. Two clicks.
package management is (now) painless
Unless Microsoft has radically changed the installation procedure since I last used windows (win98), their "package management" is pathetic. Every program has to write their own nonstandard installation wizard program that puts files all over your filesystem, and then to uninstall that program you have to hope that the wizard cleans up all it's files (most leave lots of crappy stupid files behind, and they leave their registry entries behind too, giving way for little "clean up" utilities that scan the harddrive for files to delete and registry entries to remove, that I used to be so fond of before I discovered linux.
I despise portage and apt-get.
apt-get rules! It's almost as good as yum (see below)
RPMs, IMO, would be far better if they didn't suck with their can't solve their own dependencies problem.
The problem with RPM dependencies is a problem with the tool you're using, not any inherent problem with RPMs. For example, I'm using Fedora Core, and I use yum to install stuff, everything works great, all dependencies are handled for you. Want to install a program? "yum install programname". Want to update all the software on your box? "yum update". Want to remove something? "yum remove programname". No hassles. Windows can only dream of being this easy. If you want a GUI program to point & drool, I'm sure something like that exists, but frankly I don't give a damn
Linux does have bigger problems that Windows. Difficult installers
Never installed windows, have you? Far more difficult then the streamlined install that most new linux distros have.
and obscure, overcomplicated package management systems are just the tip of the iceburg.
Apt (with a front end like synaptic, apt-get or aptitude) is far better than the windows way. Hunt around the internet for some installer executable that could be installshield, winzip, nullsoft, microsoft, vise, or hundreds of other types of installers. Uninstallation is a crapshoot, so much so that tons of software has been written to fix this problem (like Adaware.)
Then we get into all the bugs or missing features that KDE/GNOME have. Like no way to change the screen resolution
Like this?
without editing xf86config in KDE and no way to get a columned list view of files in Nautilus in GNOME.
Like this?
The next reason has to do with "Michael Surkan". Do a google search on the name and you will find it synonymous with FUD, insult and cluelessnes. The most damning quotes atributed to him are:
Additionally, he denied official backing from Microsoft in his letter to the gslug list maintainers, "P.S. This report is a skunkworks project of mine, and really doesn't have anything to do with my "day job". As if any Microsoft employee were free say what they think. Such typical Microsoft.
I have yet to look for Frank, but I imagine another blast of BS awaits anyone who does. Oh, hell, I'll look.
Don't waste much time on the survey. The answer is sure to be, "Remember to eat our dog food".
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
windows 2000 uses
I remember saying that... before I switched to Debian... Now I say it the other way... Simply because the apt-get does have a single point for which most dependancies come from... so anyone who adds repositories doesn't need to include "standard" dependancies which are incompatible with each other.
I use apt-get from rpm, and I can't go over how few choices I have, since only a few apt-rpm repository exist, most of them tied to one distro or another. With dpkg, you can have say, an alternate ftp or http daemon with its own apt repository, and that allows for easier updates etc...
I did notice, and that's purely a judgement on my part, that
Of course, both yum and apt-rpm blow
OSX isn't BSD.
Way to plagiarize this post.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
Please don't flame me for sounding pro-Microsoft until you think about what I've said for a few minutes.
Microsoft didn't get where they are today without having a few things going for them. They are a savvy competitor and ruthelss opponents. Like a good football team, they have a good offense, and a good defense. They have forward looking vision and they try like hell to react to the market place. They measure their success by both profit and marketshare. You can be sure that anything threatens either profit or marketshare they will try to beat it.
Linux alone has not been a real threat to Microsoft, it has been seen as too geeky, too limited, and too difficult to use. But other open-source projects have come along and helped fill in the voids (projects like KDE) and now, Linux and open source in general have risen to the level where they can no longer escape Microsoft's attention.
Product surveys are nothing new. Ford sends them to Chevy & Dodge owners. I don't really see much difference in Microsoft sending them out to Linux users. As a matter of fact, I think good things could come from them.
Most people who use Linux have used Windows, they know what they like about Linux and what they dislike about Windows. They know why they have changed and they know what it would take to make them change back to Microsoft's Windows.
Survey's cost money. Companys spend money on them to learn things about their products stengths and weaknesses. They use this data to make product and marketing changes.
What they are likely to hear from Linux users is that they like Linux's license, Linux's cost-to-performance ratio, and that they feel that Linux is getting close to Windows in the Look-and-Feel category.
They are going to also hear Microsoft Windows is too expensive, that the product has flaws that they find intolerable (security risks, crashes, and so on).
Then the marketing types will talk to the developer types and try to fix the product so that Linux users will consider returning to the fold.
This is a smart, good, and ethical business practice although I find it difficult to believe that they would take it far enough. I just can't see them writing extenstions for Windows that would run *nix compatible software. Nor can I see them giving away either Windows or Office.
Business history shows us that almost every company that has climbed to the top of the heap has lost its footing and slips. They usually fall because they are arrogent and ignore some basic solid business theory. In Microsoft's case, this is likely to be the case. They feel they have such a grip on the market that they can charge excessive license fees. By the time they finish milking this cash cow they will have dried her up.
> The Exchange Server protocol is another example.
Exchange server provides a heck of a lot of protocol interfaces, but I can only presume you're referring to MAPI? In any case, you can find LOTS of documented protocol interface information for Exchange on MSDN as part of the Exchange Development Kit.
I'll leave finding protocol information on the other standards used and supported by Exchange Server (SMTP, NNTP, IMAP4, POP3, LDAP, etc) as an exercise for the interested reader. (hint: http://www.google.com/ is a good place to start)
(I'm sure no one will read this comment because I'm about 3 hours too late, but whatever...)
First, IAAMR (I am a market researcher.) I wasn't able to get into the survey, but a Newsforge reader posted the questions here.
I've seen a lot of consumer surveys over the years, and this looks fairly typical. Most surveys of this nature are proprietary -- the research results will be for internal use only and will not be released to the public, mainly because most companies don't want their competitors or detractors to find out about their product development or marketing plans in advance. Whenever possible, companies will try to prevent anyone from even knowing that they're conducting a survey. [1] Obviously, in this case, there's no way that Microsoft can prevent the (Linux-using) world at large from finding out that they're doing a survey, but I guarantee you that they do not plan to release the results to anyone outside Microsoft.
This sort of questionnaire is designed to find out:
The questions that are of the most interest to Microsoft will be those asking for the respondent's opinions:
The rest of the questions require factual responses, and the responses gathered from them will be used to see if there are any patterns in the opinion data. In market research data analysis, we're not looking at the opinions of any specific individual; only those of various groups (Linux novices vs. experts, dual-booters vs. non, etc.), so you needn't worry about any personal retribution from Microsoft. They won't care that John Doe in Nebraska likes Linux for the home because it's "More secure than Windows", but they will be interested to learn that in general, the people who dual boot (Question 14) are more likely than those who don't to say that they like Linux for the home because it has "Better command line" (Question 11).
You may have noticed the italicized phrase "in our target market" in point (c) above. Microsoft isn't going to try to convince the hardcore Linux zealots(TM) to switch to Windows. They're going after people who aren't totally committed to either Linux or Windows yet. People who have a strong preference for Windows are already in the bag; and it would be a waste of time and money to try to convert the diehard Linux advocates. Any product development or advertising based on the results of this survey will have only 2 aims: to make the lukewarm Windows users feel that they've made the right decision, and to make the lukewarm Linux users feel that they're missing out on something better.
[1] Case in point: While I was typing this, my phone rang. It was a market research company (one of my company's competitors) conducting a survey. I agreed to participate, and lied when they asked, "Do you work for a market research company?" (People in my field do this all the time to find out what contracts our competitors have been awarded. We like to call it "gathering competitive intelligence".) Unfortunately, one of my responses to another question disqualified me from the survey. But now I know that our competitor has a contract to conduct research about tooth whitening for a manufacturer of dental care products. I'll be checking with our sales department on Monday to see if we recently lost out on a bid for this contract.
Yqy...K ecp'v dgnkgxg aqw cevwcnna vqqm vjg vkog vq vtcpuncvg oa uki. Kh aqw vjkpm vjku ku tkfkewnqwu, tgcf oa dkq.
Microsoft could have crushed the Open Source movement if it had given away one of it's development platforms for free.
.NET Framework (which includes everything you need to develop applications), their scripting languages, and vast amounts of documentations, case studies, examples, advice, and support (via newsgroups and community sites). All for free.
... would you? Many people say yes, many people say no.
.NET, which is still very new and already Microsoft is changing the game with the upcoming WinFX for Longhorn, which promises to change application development yet again. Sometimes, they'll just shitcan a technology alltogether because it didn't take off well with customers.
They give away the
If they had fostered a Java-esque or CPAN-esque software repository
This doesn't make sense? Java-esque? CPAN-esque?
if they had given free SDK's for windows out
Sigh. They do. http://msdn.microsoft.com
if they supported or encouraged the development of free servers, browsers, desktop systems, and support utilities...
They do. I've received tons of help and support from Microsoft employees via their Development-related newsgroups. They have staff that proactively help developers, even us evil developers who like to write free, open source software (Gasp! Open source Windows developers?!?). They have bee extremely helpful, as is their vast MSDN site(s).
THEN Microsoft could have crushed the Open Source movement when it was just beginning.
They kind of have, that's why they're an illegal monopoly and "normal" companies don't have Linux all over their desktops.
If anything, the open source community is starting to force Microsoft to stop being lazy once again and be innovative. Microsoft has a nasty habit of getting lazy when it has no competition, and fierce when it does have competition.
But, then... it wouldn't be "Microsoft" would it? If Microsoft does these things... will Microsoft keep "Microsoft-like" control over the software market?
See above. If you're old enough to remember, you might remember the days when IBM was the big evil, and Microsoft was the respectable underdog that everyone cheered for.
If you could do everything you do now on Linux without having to learn Linux
I don't use Linux much anymore, except for occasional tinkering. This is due to many reasons: Microsoft now makes top-notch server products. NT 4 was complete shit. Just complete fucking shit. Windows 2000 was really good. Active Directory was great. Servers didn't crash all the time. Workstations could finally be TRULY managed centrally (via GPOs).
Windows isn't just an OS that people who "can't figure out" Linux use. Some of us prefer Windows, because it does more of what we need, and is well-integrated. I could elaborate here if you wanted me to.
Are enough people that are lazy enough to "just stay with Microsoft" developers? Are they a large enough group that they'd cripple the OSS movement?
Your first sentence is a huge myth. While development tools and languages and libraries in the open source world stay fairly stagnant and sane, it seems Microsoft is CONSTANTLY changing shit around and adopting new technologies. To be a competent MS programmer (or system engineer) for long, you really need to keep up with the industry and what Microsoft is doing.
This is both good and bad. Good because things are always getting better and you're getting new capabilities. Bad because you've always, always got to keep up with the game. Sometimes it gets ridiculous: you'll have something like
This same phenomenom doesn't happen in the open source world (As much) because developers are not profit-motivated, they are passion-motivated, so projects stand a much better chance of surviving. See seemingly-deadend open source projects which continue to flourish against all odds, such as ReactOS and GNUstep.
I hope your were being ironic and I just didn't get it. Why would trying to impvove usability or woo users/developers of another platform (by asking them what they need to switch to your platform) be an admission of inferiority? Sounds like marketing 101 to me.
WRT fully documented APIs and open protocols - go to msdn, they have excellent documention on many APIs and protocols. The problem with most of their APIs and protocols is the licensing, not the access.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
I completed the survey and was very honest.
Sigh. They do. http://msdn.microsoft.com
I was very excited to read this. I remember learning programming and wanting to download a C/C++ compiler and I couldn't find a free one for Windows that was free and well documented. This was back in 1996 and I was a poor college student.
I would have had to pay $139 for Visual C++ if I wanted to do windows development. Even that was too much. I could barely afford a computer! The reason I learned GNU and OSS software was because I was poor. I stuck with it because I'm a cheapskate.
So now I hear that MS gives away this stuff! That's great! Where do I download my copy of Visual C++ for free? Where do I download my free windows SDK so I can write windows software?
I went to that website you put in the link and I couldn't find the free Visual C++ what gives?
Now if Microsoft had been giving away this stuff from the beginning (like I said) then they would have prevented droves of lazy programmers from getting lazy and learning Linux and then being lazy and staying with Linux. Today, for many Linux programmers, the path of Laziness is to "just stay with Linux" or unix or whatever.
Do you know what CPAN is? A microsoft CPAN would have tons of objects and C/C++ code that you could download for free. These objects would do things like SMTP, LDAP, PostScript, or TK for you. Microsoft has the MFC but last I checked I couldn't submit anything to the MFC. I couldn't modify my own version of DirectX and submit it to Microsoft for approval.
I can't learn from Microsoft without spending money. Brains I got... money I don't.
And, for the record, I don't think Microsoft is evil. I just think that they practice unfair monopolistic tactics against competitors. I'd do the same thing.
I do think Microsoft completely missed a boat that they should have seen coming. I don't think it's too late for Microsoft to put a stop to Open Source Software's drain on their marketshare. I do think that the OSS model will/has force(d) Microsoft to change it's tactics.
I do remember when IBM was evil and Mac would save us. I do remember when Microsoft was the bastion of shareware and GWBasic. I do remember when Mac screwed us and Microsoft was the good guy.
And, I do remember when you couldn't write software for Windows without buying hundreds of dollars in materials.
[signature]
Do some research. You'll be surprised just how little is actually disclosed.
Exchange has many little additions, none of them open, and if your admin uses only MS's propriatary protocols, you aren't connecting to the server for anything at all^ -- *unless* you use Microsoft's Outlook and only Outlook. This covers not only email, but calendar, scheduling, and others aren't open either. While I personally don't care about those things (minus email), my immediate boss does...so, it's a PITA.
If MS used all open protocols or opened the ones they currently DO NOT disclose, this would not be an issue.
Experiment: How many programs can connect to Exchange 5.x using MS's propriatory protocol? Later versions? Any of them open?
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
1. Stop moving admin shit around!
2. If I deinstall windows sharing (for security) I
do NOT expect XP to reinstall it for me when adding an adapter.
3. Tell me how I can turn off your moronic services safely ( for security ). I hosed a machine by turning too much off.
4. There should be a single interface to install stuff. There should be warnings that you are doing it. Adware should be impossible to sneak onto a machine.
5. Stop betraying your business partners you evil pricks. Nobody trusts you for good reason.
6. Ship media. We bought it and we should own it.
7. The registry is a frigging nightmare waiting to happen. Its insecure. Its unmanageable.
8. You have no taste.
9. You have no taste.
10. I cant tell what files belong to which package. I cant verify the contents of a package.
11. I want more UI flexibility
12. Stop trying to spy on your customers you evil fucking pricks.
13. Your terminal sucks
14. Inconsistant command line parameter handling
15. Give me a way to transfer files without running your damn insecure filesharing system. ssh.
16. Stop changing interfaces to murder your competition you evil fucking pricks!
17. Make file saves stay under Documents and Settings so I can backup easier.
18. Make c:\ unwriteable by lusers by default.
19. Your NT permissions system is completely incomprehensbile and dangerous. Misuse can force a resinstallation.
20. Dont put a button in an admin panel that takes you to a site to sell more software:
It shows you have no Taste!
Checking out the IP ownership where the survey is served, it is:
OrgName: Berbee Information Networks Corporation
OrgID: BINC
Address: 455 Science Drive
City: Madison
StateProv: WI
PostalCode: 53711
Country: US
Which seems to be a MS/Cisco partner with no survey business, with a sysadmin who is a minister who is on some Linux lists. Time to move this thread to the complete-waste-of-time (tm) trie.
Participating in this 'survey' will assure your perpetual receipt of a flood of pro-MS propoganda.
Hence giving them a hotmail email address. Let the monkey be on its own back for a while.
The survey asked:
"What two things would you suggest to make MS better?"
I said:
Open the source Bill, let us see your dirty secrets.
Stop writing constitutional violations into EULAs.
The survey asked:
"What two things would you suggest to make Linux better?"
I said:
Stop trying to compete with MSFT.
Stop fighting over KDE/Gnome.
Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
I Come Not to Praise Linux...
Claiming to be an "engineer", Mr. Surkan lures Linux people into responding either directly or to his survey. The information is then apparently used when discussing Microsoft products with companies that are using Linux or considering the use of Linux.
Mr. Surkan uses a similar technique for any market area for which Microsoft has a vested interest. Not just Linux.
You can read more: http://linuxtoday.com/news/1998111802110PS
The link I think is dead in the post... but look at the comments.
More...m l
http://slashdot.org/articles/98/11/23/2056205.sht
More... (guy really needs a psuedonym)a se/+0wo_qr+W_88Ks/zdisplay.html
http://cma.zdnet.com/texis/techinfobase/techinfob
(pay site link to original article)
Dig deeper and you find a lot more... a WHOLE LOT MORE. This guy has more titles than than the Library of Congress.
You can supposedly give input directly via email to lnq@microsoft.com or msurkan@microsoft.com
How about opening those documents in Office 95 or 98, does that work so flawlessly ?
Why is it that Windows 2000 Access cannot properly open and modify Windows 95 Access databases ( unless you let it upgrade them to Win 2000 ) ? That's a real pain when manufacturers of other equipment ( in my case ACD systems ) use older versions of Windows NT and Access 95, 98 databases to store configuration data in. Why they do that I have no clue but when you have to 'repair' the databases every 3 months or so and the rest of the company has upgraded to Access 2000 it's more or less impossible to sort out the database.
GCC is okay. Currently my main problem is that I've been having to use version 2.96 (The RedHat buggy version of 2.95) rather than the newer versions.
Yes, I use GDB, but normally with a frontend, kdbg or ddd. But it is slow compared the MSVC one and it often seems unable to understand or view some of the data structures and object in the code. Also, it's missing Edit-And-Continue, which is a boon when you're writing plugins for another program, which I do quite a lot of.
As for VIM/Emacs - feh. Gimme a GUI. The MSVC one is lovely - in Linux I use jEdit, which is nice, but not anywhere near MSVC levels. I miss stuff like the intellisense autocomplete stuff - although I hear there is something similar in Emacs, Maybe sometime I'll jst have to bend over and learn how to use it. As for the jibe about a crutch - whatever. You're welcome to feel macho with your non-GUI editor, but I'm not interested in feeling macho, I'm interested in working efficiently.
As for Make - I don't really like it but use it anyway. I had a look at various other systems like SCONS (which seems better), but stuck with make as at least everyone knows a little bit of it.
Where are there any undocumented protocols or protocols that you cannot get the documentation for, used in Linux?
How about the rt_sig family of syscalls? They look rather undocumented to me. Heh...Kan jeg få en pils, vær så snill?
And for the looks of it, people are falling on themselves like lemmings. Do you guys really need that much the attention of MS?
For once RTFA.
You will see that somebody replied to the given address
QUOTE
It was signed by "Michael Surkan," using the "Reply To" address lnq@microsoft.com
UNQUOTE
And what did they get as a reply? this:
QUOTE
From: frankwilliams291@hotmail.com (Frank Williams)
To: [name and email address removed]
UNQUOTE
So Frank Williams, via a Hotmail email address is helping out Mr Surkan from his hotmail account. Because arguably this Mr SUlkan is checking his own Inbox by hand? (look at the article, honest).
And the survey is carried out in webmonkey.com Mmmmmh?!?!?
It seems fake, it sounds fake, it must be fake and it seems like many people, on their eagernes (of what exactly?), felt for it.
Where is all that critical thinking so many people talk about around here?
I would not get involved with a survey I am not absolutely 100% sure it is what is says it is.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Office '98 was released for Macintosh. Office is not limited to the Windows world.
As for backward compatibility, I actually found that Office 97 could open up documents from Word 2000 pretty reliably.
Microsoft got a really bad rep for "incompatible formats" because you couldn't open Office 97 documents in Office 95. You had to explicitly save your Office 97 document as "Office 95 compatible", which was far from "incompatible".
But you can imagine, after people carted their disk across the office, or down to the computer lab, only to find it wouldn't open, that many people were not happy.
Microsoft also got a really bad rep with Office 97 because of troubles importing Office 95 documents. I can remember many times where importted documents had messed-up footnotes and page layouts, it was really inexcusable considering that they advertised backward compatibility.
AFAIK, this should no longer be a problem, as MS has been selling one standard file format since then.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.