Slashdot Mirror


Why Does Everyone Hate Microsoft?

MrSplog asks: "I'm doing a short project on Microsoft and its impact on society. A considerable part of this project has been looking into people's perceptions of Microsoft and the heavily negative bias of that perception. Since Slashdot is one of the world's forefront leaders on Microsoft hatred, I wanted to know: just why do you hate Microsoft? Please be as descriptive and as thorough as you like. Counter arguments and positive comments are also appreciated."

13 of 1,540 comments (clear)

  1. Simple by complete+loony · · Score: 4, Informative
    It's MY Computer. It's MY Data.

    Microsoft's goal is to own and control everything on my computer, in the server room, eventually perhaps in my lounge room and anywhere else they can imagine. And they try to keep it that way by deliberately avoiding existing open standards and interoperability with existing applications. They adopt new standards with reluctance, and even then they break them.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  2. Re:I dont *hate* Microsoft..... by BWJones · · Score: 5, Informative

    Perfect example... I had a friend at a little company called Bungie. Bungie was developing this really cool little application called Halo that they were planning on releasing for MacOS, Linux and Windows. Microsoft came along, made them an offer they could not refuse and they bought the company so Halo could be a "halo" game for the Xbox platform. This of course meant that all development of Halo for the Macintosh and Linux were cancelled and Windows development was significantly delayed. It was almost a couple of years before I was asked to help with the development of the Macintosh port of Halo. So, I and many, many other users of the Macintosh and Linux (and Windows for that matter) were negatively impacted by this very common business practice of Microsoft.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  3. Re:Three Words by EtherMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why do people hate Microsoft? In a word: Greed. Microsoft is consumed by a rampant, unrepentant, no-holds-barred corporate ravenousness for consumer dollars. At least this is how it looks to individual consumers, small businesses, and even most other large enterprises.

    Some examples:

    • Microsoft was among the first major, mainstream software publishers to charge paying customers for technical support on legally-owned Microsoft products.
    • Microsoft was one of the first major, mainstream software companies to increase upgrade fees from what was a standard 20% of the original software price to what is now 50%, if you are allowed to upgrade at all.
    • Microsoft was the first major, mainstream software company to deny upgrades to customers who don't pre-pay the 50% upgrade fee up-front when the original software purchase is made, with no refund if an upgrade isn't released within two years.
    • Microsoft bemoans the cost of software piracy, but each time Microsoft has implemented technology to reduce piracy, it has doubled the price of the better protected software.
    • Microsoft adds features to its software that puts competitors out of business, then removes those features and sells them as add-ons or upgraded versions.
    • Microsoft talks reduced enterprise TCO benefits on the one hand while making each new release significantly more difficult to deploy, maintain and support.
    • Microsoft claims that it's not predatory or monopolistic, while using its overwhelmingly dominant position in the OS market to drive out competitors to its application and development tools marketplaces.
    • And yes, Embrace, Extend and Exterminate.
    I could give more specifics, but I'm under non-disclosure.
    --
    --- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
  4. Why? by ktakki · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, I've been using Microsoft products for the last 15 years, and for the last three years I've been working for a company that does support for small- to medium-sized businesses that use Microsoft products. At my office we use a mix of Windows and Linux and at home there are Windows, Mac, and Linux boxes under my desk. I have issues with all of them, to be sure, but here's my Microsoft litany:

    • The Registry. Number One pain in the ass. Easily corrupted, hard to edit and restore.
    • Every point covered in the Findings of Fact released during the anti-trust litigation, including vendor lock-in, strong-arming the OEMs, and anti-competitive practices.
    • Windows Genuine Advantage, which is buggy as all hell. I added a DVD burner to my system at work and had to re-activate, which meant a call to their Bangalore call center ("Good gracious no, kind sir! I have not installed this on another computer!)
    • Lame disk management tools like scandisk and chkdsk that haven't progressed since the late '90s.
    • Word: I find myself fighting Word's formatting tools and eventually give up and end up using InDesign instead for something as simple as a letterhead template. I've been using Word since version 2.0. It has always sucked sweaty balls.
    • SBS2003: crippleware, what with its domain controller and non-workgroup restrictions (and yes, I know about that Registry hack. See #1).
    • Security: Arguments about being a big target aside, there are some security holes that just should not exist. That big 2002 code audit did nothing.
    • Patches that break things: The first that comes to mind is the verclsid.exe patch from earlier this year that broke Explorer for users with HP printers. Word and IE were also collateral damage. That patch needed more testing before release. Workaround was to rename verclsid.exe to verclsid.exx. That allowed the client to open Word documents and enter URLs in IE's address bar.
    • Let's go back in time: Windows ME. Worst. OS. Evar.
    • Back to the present day: logging and error reporting on XP (and the Server products) leave much to be desired. Tell me more. Give me more google-fodder. Don't tell me that "the data is in the packet" in the error message. That packet is long gone.
    • Heisenbugs. User settings that revert to something other than what you set. Bugs that can only be resolved by changing permissions on a single Registry key. See #1.
    • XP/2000 default settings: Let's mount every shared printer and folder by default. Let's hide extensions. Let's hide "hidden" and system files. Dumb.
    • Trivial shit, like that stupid animated dog in the Search function. Not professional, but I understand that this and Clippy are holdovers from Microsoft "Bob", which was Melinda Gates's project before she married Bill. Kill Clippy, kill the puppy.


    Now, a list of what I like about Microsoft products:

    • Excel: It's done everything I've thrown at it, including some fairly hairy VBA scripts. I have zero problems with Excel. Im my opinion, it's their best product.
    • XP's (and ME's) System Restore. This actually works on occasion, but only if the problem is minor.
    • Server 2003 (full version, not SBS): I think MSFT finally got something right. Every Server 2003 install I've done has been behind a NAT router, so I haven't had security problems so far. Easy setup, fairly easy to configure, dead easy to integrate with an office full of XP boxes.
    • VPN and RDP. As long as you're connecting from Windows to Windows, these work pretty damned good. I depend on these and haven't been let down.


    I could probably go on all night but I've had a few drinks and need to crash.

    Welcome to my world.

    k.
    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
  5. Re:My .02 cents by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 3, Informative

    Waaaaait a fucking second there.
    A guy called JarJarJedi comes to slashdot and bitches about Apple and "Linix", while at the same time glorifying Microsoft's product which he thinks is as good as should be expected, while at the same time he looks at those (Win) computers and sees how often they crash, how virus prone they are and he gets a +4 insightful?

    WTF mods?
    Asleep at the wheel?

    On the offchance that I am wrong, I would then like to say Issa for onessa welcomessa our bizarro-worldssa overlordssa!

    And, to stay on the topic, I think tech help "hates" MS because we get stuck fixing their mistakes on our weekends, afterhours and so on. All while the bosses are superhappy about getting the next round of MS licenses for cheap, and delegating the problems to the tech help. This of course leaves nothing for tech help to do but to constantly put out fires while listening to bitchy users.
    Sure, script kiddies and CS players of east europe LOOOOVE their microsoft, but they don't have to support 100s of bitchy users whose machines are running slow, because microsoft decided to leave the OS completely vulnerable to spyware.

    But I rant. I work for a large Mac shop, so I no longer have the headache of microsoft, and my days are filled with planning for future and improving the network, as opposed to putting out fires. But my hatred for MS is still strong from my previous jobs, and fixing relatives' PCs. Luckily I've got them all switched to Macs, so I no longer spend my holidays cleaning the crap off their machines:) Thank you OS X:)

    And oh yeah, lest I forget, Ballmer is a cretin, and I can't get the image of him squirting on the stage, yelling "developers, developers, developers."

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  6. Re:I think Microsoft's pretty neat by MobyTurbo · · Score: 3, Informative
    The parent got modded up, somehow. I think /. mods must be swinging in the other direction just to be "fair and ballanced."

    They created a platform that commoditized the underlying computer and jump-started a PC revolution. An independent developer can reach a market of half a billion desktops with a single binary. How neat is that?
    A developer can also reach many, many operating systems and hardware, including Mac OS X (and even Windows if you add cygwin), by writing POSIX compatable software, with one set of source code. (And even binaries to some extent - many Unixes have binary compatability with negligable overhead, especially with Linux.) I find that much more exciting than Microsoft's monopoly-won success. Why? Because POSIX is a *standard*, even one mandated by the government for purchasing (hence WinNT comes with a horribly crippled POSIX mode from MS included - this can be remedied though by third party products such as the open-source Cygwin). Because of these standards, your software *can* reach a lot of people - internet servers, which are accessed by a billion both users and non-users of Windows.

    What Microsoft did with PC hardware is similiar to what open source does with essential digital infrastructure: it commoditizes them by becoming the one standard reference implementation.
    No, it was a function of IBM making their PC out of off-the-shelf parts and picking Microsoft to make an OS (MS-DOS) after the CEO of Digital Research (CP/M), their first choice (since it was a multi-platform business operating system de-facto standard at the time), didn't arrive at a meeting; legend has it while piloting his private airplane.

    Microsoft told IBM that they had an operating system ready for the 8088, so not to worry. They actually didn't, they bought one from a local business for a few tens of thousands of dollars, then a few years later sued them out of existence for trying to ad multitasking when Microsoft had other plans for MS-DOS at the time.

    Plus open source, though I'm a big fan of it, is not the creator of the standard reference of the internet. That would be Unix, and at one time also TOPS-20. Though I guess Berkeley Unix (BSD), back when it was mostly encumbered, could be counted as open source although you couldn't look at their source unless you had a source license from AT&T for the encumbered bits.

    So far your batting average is pretty poor, but that doesn't surprise me; someone crediting the IBM-PC commodizing hardware to Microsoft could only be refering to statements made by Windows marketing (I hear so often this claim that I think it comes from MS or their journalist lap-dogs and is not independently arived at.)

  7. Re:One could argue this only by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Informative
    I doubt the same can be said of Linux or MacOS, especially with the latter so efficient at cutting off support of applications with major release.

    Mac OS X does the smart thing. Rather than screw up the OS with legacy support, it provides an emulator for the "classic" Mac OS to run applications inside of. Thus you get the best of both worlds.

    To put it another way, Super Wing Commander works fine on my Mac. The DOS WC games either fail miserably or need tweaking to get working. (Obviously, both require a slowdown utility.) IMHO, the Mac ends up having superior backward compatibility.
  8. Re:One could argue this only by CJSpil · · Score: 5, Informative

    The reason Paintbrush is the best application they've ever written is because Microsoft didn't write it.

    I've got installation media for Windows 2.03 kicking around somewhere which came with my first Microsoft mouse and it's actually ZSoft PC Paintbrush which was bundled with the mouse.

    The mention of ZSoft was dropped in Windows 3.0 and apart from support for things like GIF and JPG now, the application has changed very little since Windows 2 (Well if it ain't broke...)

    --
    For people who like peace and quiet. A phoneless cord!
  9. Re:One could argue this only by ultranova · · Score: 4, Informative

    Part of the reason why their job is mind-numbingly complicated is because they need to support legasy software. A whole lot of 16-bit DOS apps written 15 years ago still run on current versions of Windows. These are not ports, or recompilations, but the same binaries. I doubt the same can be said of Linux or MacOS, especially with the latter so efficient at cutting off support of applications with major release.

    I guess you've never heard of DOSEMU, a program that uses the Linux kernel call "vm86" to run 16-bit DOS programs in the vm86 mode of 386-compatible processors ? Most 16-bit DOS applications I've tried on it have worked just fine.

    Or you could use DOSBox, which is a complete emulator (meaning it emulates the processor too, unlike DOSEMU). The odd DOS app that didn't work under DOSEMU works fine under DOSBox.

    It's the support for Windows applications (via Wine) that is less than perfect under Linux, but it is improving. Then again, it could hardly be getting worse ;).

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  10. Re:Three Words by EtherMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative
    Do you have proof? Did you pay for windows before XP.

    I am a live dinosaur. I have owned and used every MS OS version since MS-DOS 2.1. I beta tested Windows 1.0.

    • MS-DOS 5.0 was $29.
    • MS-Windows 2.0 was $49.00
    • MS-Windows 3.0 introduced CD key. Price went up to $89.
    • Windows 98 introduced new 25-digit CD key. Price went up to $129.
    • Windows XP introduced Product Activation. Full version (XP Pro) is $299.
    • Windows Vista introduced more stringent Activiation. Full version is $399 for Ultimate, but the full set of features will only be available to Enterprise customers who sign volume purchase agreements and pre-pay for 2 years of upgrades, (Software Assurance), whether or not these upgrades materialize.

    Ok, granted it is not doubling every time, but this IS Slashdot, and I am allowed poetic license.

    Like what products [have been added then removed, and then sometimes sold as add-ons[

    How about Microsoft Windows Antivirus: Included free in 3.0/3.1 versions, removed from 3.11. Now sold as Microsoft OneCare. How about a calendar application, which later was integrated with an Email application and became the first version of MS-Outlook in Windows 3.11, removed from Windows 98, and now sold separately? How about backup, which has been in and out in so many different ways that I lost track?

    >>I could give more specifics, but I'm under non-disclosure.
    Really, you didn't even get specific about the ones you mentioned.
    Well, it's a really old and broad non-disclosure. ;^)
    --
    --- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
  11. Re:One could argue this only by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 5, Informative

    Windows does use emulation for legacy apps. It uses the NTVDM (NT Virtual DOS Machine) for DOS apps and WoWExec (Windows-on-Windows) for 16-bit Windows apps. Their 64-bit OSs have WoW64, which emulates a 32-bit machine.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  12. Re:Keep It Simple Stupid by Riverman5 · · Score: 3, Informative

    My main gripe right now is that IE7 was forced onto many people's computers as an automatic update, and it has broken nearly every single website I have put into production, and now I have to go back and fix rendering/scripting issues that only affect IE7, and the more of these I fix, the more obvious to me how lousy this browser is, but hell what can you do? 25% of the visitors are using it now. It also has one of the most ridiculous interfaces of any browser ever. I was actually looking forward to it, i figured (for some reason) that it would improve upon IE6, but it hasn't.

  13. Re:Keep It Simple Stupid by IIsMeYouIsNot · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just a Few:

    1. As a college student I paid under $20 for my copy of WinXP, but would have had to pay ~$45 for MacOS X. Although this doesn't tend to defeat your argument, it sure does lower one of the reasons not to use Windows and makes OS X the one which needs to prove itself.

    2. I know how to use Windows. These were skills I built up before ever owning my own PC, mostly when I was living at home using my parents PC, and my Dad used Windows because it was built on DOS, the earliest OS he knew. What you say above is right once you get to know how to use Windows you don't want to anymore, but alas I've already paid for it and have a box which does pretty much everything I call on it to do, so there isn't any reason to need another PC or to switch.

    3. I have very rarely been called on to know/learn a piece of software that doesn't run on Windows. I have on the other hand been called on to know/learn Power Point, Word, Excel, InDesign, and many others. This is excluding text editors run on Linux machines for my CS classes, but then they haven't cared which one I use so on WinXP at home I use Notepad++, and in lab on Linux I use nedit.

    4. If I want a Linux box I'll build one and will be able to do it on the cheap. So I'm not worried about getting one right now, when I'm college style poor, I'd rather have steak once in a while.

    5. My friends/relatives/co-workers/group-members know how to use Windows and thus I don't have to try and explain Linux everytime they want to do something on my computer; this happens quite frequently I might add.

    6. The games, I know you tried to blow this off with consoles but thats not a valid argument, because as a cheap/poor college student I can't afford to buy an XBox 360 or a PS3 or a Wii or whatever. And I don't enjoy console gaming as much either so atleast let me have my own preferences in that realm, without just telling me that my preference doesn't matter. I don't own any consoles and don't really plan on buying one for a good while.

    As a note I would not consider myself a Windows "fanboi" but I do feel Windows is right for me, right now, and I feel anyone telling me I'm wrong is really in no place to say so. Your choice of OS really boils down to circumstances and that is all there really is to it.