Slashdot Mirror


How Microsoft Degrades Their Users (In a Good Cause)

blackbearnh writes "We all know that slow Web pages drive users crazy, but where is the boundary between too slow and too simple? As Microsoft's Eric Schurman points out, the fastest-loading page of all is a blank one, but it's also the most useless. In an interview with O'Reilly Radar leading up to his appearance at the Velocity Conference, Schurman talks about his experiences working on some of Microsoft's highest-volume sites, including the home page and Live Search. In particular, he discusses how Microsoft will selectively degrade the performance of pages to small sets of users so that they can see how various amounts of delay at different times and places affect user behavior. 'In cases where we were giving what was a significantly degraded experience, the data moved to significance extremely quickly. We were able to tell when we delayed people's pages by more than half a second, and it was very obvious that this had a significant impact on users very quickly. We were able to turn off that experiment. The reasoning... was it helps us make a strong argument for how we can prioritize work on performance against work on other aspects of the site.' He also talks about what it's like to be one of the most often-targeted DDoS sites on the planet."

174 comments

  1. As opposed to ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

    In cases where we were giving what was a significantly degraded experience ...

    ... the normally degraded experience.
    (Ba da BOOM! Don't forget to tip your waitress.)

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:As opposed to ... by jimmyhat3939 · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's sort of the same thing I was thinking. I mean, maybe they should have users that opt in to such an experience before they start degrading it.

      --
      Free Conference Call -- No Spam, High Quality
    2. Re:As opposed to ... by zxjio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Experimenting by delaying a pageload for 500ms is worthy of ethical considerations? Would you like to sue Microsoft for emotional damage? Too many people are afraid of doing anything these days.

    3. Re:As opposed to ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Informative

      Gmail does "selective degradation" really well. E.g. if you load gmail over a slow VPN over wireless connection it says "This site is taking longer to load than normal, would you like to try the Basic Html version or wait longer". Also you can choose basic html (i.e. less ajax and css) as your default view.

      Basic HTML is quite usable these days - it even does email address autocompletion on Opera. So it can use ajax but it presumably doesn't depend of it. In a way it's a bit like a well written application which can use new features if they are present but run without them on downlevel systems.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're discussing the wrong topic. "graceful degradation" != "selective worsening".

      In Gmail, the degradation is helping you cope with a poor connection. In Microsoft's experiment, the degradation is hurting you and is imposed by a coin flip.

    5. Re:As opposed to ... by Jurily · · Score: 5, Funny

      Experimenting by delaying a pageload for 500ms is worthy of ethical considerations?

      No, they should be shot on sight.

    6. Re:As opposed to ... by Kvasio · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      the normally degraded experience

      that would be using IE?

    7. Re:As opposed to ... by EvanED · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That would probably completely invalidate the results though, for two reasons. First, the sorts of people who would opt into that wouldn't at all be representative. (It would take an unusual person to even find the opt-in, let alone volunteer for a degraded experience knowingly.) Second, knowing about it would be way too likely to affect how the people behaved.

      You could get halfway by saying "would you like to help us do research" or something like that, without saying in what way, which would reduce these problems, but not completely.

    8. Re:As opposed to ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Funny

      The summary is about graceful degradation. TFA is OFFTOPIC here.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re:As opposed to ... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's half a second! Let's do the numbers:

      We assume that Live search gets ten billion hits a day. We also assume that Microsoft degraded 5% of all hits. Thus Microsoft has wasted 1000000000 * 0.5s * 0.02 = ten million seconds! Microsoft wastes more than 26 years worth of productive time per day. Now, assuming that the computer of the Live search users consume 800W on average, we find that Microsoft wastes a whopping 20.9 watt-millenia per day. Assuming that 80% of that is turned into waste heat it's obvious that this has a non-negligible impact on Earth.

      Gentlemen, I think we have found the root cause for both the energy crisis and global warming (and because our bitching about the oil price annoys the arabic world, also islamic terrorism). Now all we need to do is keep Microsoft from doing these experiments and everything's dandy again.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    10. Re:As opposed to ... by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1
      I agree. I don't think users are entitled to access to your page, or even "fair" access to your page. If they don't like it they can go elsewhere. It would be similar to a brick in mortar store giving crappy service, if you don't like it go somewhere else next time. That was the whole point in the experiment anyways, they were trying to answer the question "How slow is too slow?".

      Hopefully this will get them to speed up their pages. Hotmail for instance is an absolute dog. I have a symmetric 155Mb connection at work, even accessing my account when the connection is otherwise idle takes ~2-3 seconds to login. So there is a lot of wait in the backend that could be optimized away I'd wager. Anyways, I suspect this isn't something that hasn't been done before. Amazon for example would be very interested in this, when you have to justify a new multi million dollar datacenter it is nice to be able to quantify the need for more capacity in dollar terms.

    11. Re:As opposed to ... by jfmonte · · Score: 1

      you sounded just like the "grey men" on MOMO :)

    12. Re:As opposed to ... by tannsi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think this would only actually be a problem if anyone used LIVE search.

    13. Re:As opposed to ... by jargon82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. It's their site, and they certainly allowed to do with it what they want :). They could do "market research" and ask people how slow it could be, but instead they are collecting real world technical data and gaining insight on to how the performance impacts real people. Hopefully they then use this to decide where to spend time on performance.

    14. Re:As opposed to ... by BikeHelmet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If we can sue them, then we also have to sue Comcast!

      They frequently slow down my browsing with their cruddy filtering, to the point where some jumps take seconds.

      This isn't right(since I'm Canadian), but tracert doesn't lie!

      It's horrible when a game's servers have comcast lines between them and me. Rather than 50-150 ping, I face 700+. :(

    15. Re:As opposed to ... by Jurily · · Score: 1

      gaining insight on to how the performance impacts real people.

      You have about one second from them hitting Enter and them reading the results. Any faster won't matter because the brain needs a context switch too, any slower and it'll be annoying. That'll be 4 million dollars please.

    16. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That reminds me of a Family Guy quote.
      http://www.familyguyquotes.com/characters/guest-stars-quotes-5.html

      Peter: Hey, anybody got a quarter?
      Bill Gates: What's a quarter?

    17. Re:As opposed to ... by OakDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Modded as Funny (100%), but you've just laid out the environmentalist rationale for controlling everything everyone does, everywhere.

    18. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You'd probably end up fathering Seth McFarlane.

    19. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's almost... a degradable form of HTML

    20. Re:As opposed to ... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Right as opposed to the other group that purposely prevents green technologies from being available to anybody that's willing to pay?

      I know that people like to pretend that there's some sort of massive conspiracy, but the fact of the matter is that if people would make reasonable choices forcing people wouldn't be necessary. I personally see no reason why emissions should vary so much between a car in California and one that's supposedly exactly the same in Washington or Illinois.

    21. Re:As opposed to ... by Caledfwlch · · Score: 0, Troll

      and by extension as Microsoft apps are so big and bloated taking so long to load, are bug prone, and not as integrated as they pretend, causing work on a task to take longer... all we need to do is outlaw Microsoft products and everything will be dandy! Of course the power companies will complain because power use will decline.

      --
      These views express my own personal opinions, not those of the other voices in my head
    22. Re:As opposed to ... by Leonidas89 · · Score: 0

      Snif, snif... Where's my cheese? Damn. Now, I also feel like degraded lab rat...

    23. Re:As opposed to ... by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Funny

      We assume that Live search gets ten billion hits a day

      While we're at it, can we assume that I have ten million bucks?

    24. Re:As opposed to ... by Atrox666 · · Score: 1

      Won't anyone think of the children?

    25. Re:As opposed to ... by ixnaay · · Score: 1

      (It would take an unusual person to even find the opt-in, let alone volunteer for a degraded experience knowingly.)

      You must not have visited some of the same websites that I have.

    26. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just wooshed yourself!

      "if people would make reasonable choices forcing people wouldn't be necessary"

      That's what most fascist dictators have said throughout history.

      (For those who still don't get my point: it all comes down to who decides what is "reasonable".)

    27. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, what's your real opinion on the guy?

      take a deep, calming breath and looower the blood pressure a bit...it's just a show.

    28. Re:As opposed to ... by slazzy · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you think that's bad you should try Vista...

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    29. Re:As opposed to ... by Thinboy00 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Statistics. Also, scroll down and note the % of people who actually proceed to search.live.com, and then look at this. (note that the last two statistics probably overlap gratuitously, so if you want to do any math, ignore the third, because the second is more precise.) And if you want some laughs, put google and yahoo into the compare boxes.

      --
      $ make available
    30. Re:As opposed to ... by syousef · · Score: 1

      Experimenting by delaying a pageload for 500ms is worthy of ethical considerations? Would you like to sue Microsoft for emotional damage? Too many people are afraid of doing anything these days.

      Behaving ethically isn't something you do part time, or only under certain circumstances. You either behave ethically or you don't. A 500ms delay may be at the very top of that slippery slope - it ain't going to kill anyone - but it's still part of it.

      The other thing you're failing to consider is that you should always be trying to serve your customers as best you can, in order to remain competitive and act in good faith. Sacrificing that for some dubious experiment which may or may not benefit your customers in the long run is just plain stupid.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    31. Re:As opposed to ... by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      Microsoft wastes more than 26 years worth of productive time per day.

      Hah, that's nothing compared to the time spent talking about Microsoft here on slashdot.

    32. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that if people would make reasonable choices forcing people wouldn't be necessary

      You just described the basis of environmental legislation of the EU. See also the other answer by another AC, which is amusingly relevant.

      I personally see no reason why emissions should vary so much between a car in California and one that's supposedly exactly the same in Washington or Illinois.

      People might want to allocate their resources differently in the different states, say depending of the environmental and economic conditions or even, inconceivably, according to their personality traits, culture and sense of freedom.

    33. Re:As opposed to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We assume that Live search gets ten billion hits a day

      While we're at it, can we assume that I have ten million bucks?

      I will assume someone has taken care of that.

    34. Re:As opposed to ... by rant64 · · Score: 1

      I think this would only actually be a problem if anyone used LIVE search.

      I've used it once, but after 300ms I decided to look it up in a book.

  2. So we can all enjoy super fast internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh wait...

  3. Select groups of users by mysidia · · Score: 5, Funny

    selectively degrade the performance of pages to small sets of users

    In other words, Firefox, Opera, XP, and Linux users. And the experiment will get turned off, once they switch back to IE8 on Vista.

    1. Re:Select groups of users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      In other words, Firefox, Opera, XP, and Linux users. And the experiment will get turned off, once they switch back to IE8 on Vista.

      Or falsify your user agent.

    2. Re:Select groups of users by Haley's+Comet · · Score: 1

      ...what it's like to be one of the most often-targeted DDoS sites on the planet.

      Tell me why they have to do an "experiment" to find this? Isn't that "experiement" ongoing all the time?

      --
      The Illuminati would kill me, but I'm not rich enough to take notice of.
    3. Re:Select groups of users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You forgot Safari and Chrome.

    4. Re:Select groups of users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      In other words, Firefox, Opera, XP, and Linux users. And the experiment will get turned off, once they switch back to IE8 on Vista.

      Funny, Interesting, and Insightful! A Slashdot Trifecta!

    5. Re:Select groups of users by perryizgr8 · · Score: 5, Funny

      no, he did not forget. they are just too insignificant to talk about.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    6. Re:Select groups of users by Hecatonchires · · Score: 2, Funny

      I didn't see a single reference to our new overlords, profit! _or_ goatse in that.

      --

      Yay me!

    7. Re:Select groups of users by chromas · · Score: 1

      That would make it into a sexfecta.

    8. Re:Select groups of users by skaet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They didn't do the experiment to find that out. They're only talking about what it's like (you even quoted it).

      --
      There is no knowledge that is not power.
    9. Re:Select groups of users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded funny, but they actually used to do this in the olden days.

    10. Re:Select groups of users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you owe me a new keyboard after that one.

    11. Re:Select groups of users by Hecatonchires · · Score: 1

      Isn't that where you catch something?

      --

      Yay me!

    12. Re:Select groups of users by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Nothing says like: "Don't cut my budget. I'll show you what happens if you cut my budget you f____s"

    13. Re:Select groups of users by Haley's+Comet · · Score: 1

      You totally misunderstood.

      I was talking about the fact that they did an experiment with latency in the network just to test a network with latency already?!? W-T-F?!?

      Wouldn't they have done better to somehow ensure a connection without latency, with the fact that they are "one of the most often-targeted DDoS sites on the planet"?

      --
      The Illuminati would kill me, but I'm not rich enough to take notice of.
    14. Re:Select groups of users by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      They still open connections slightly differently, IIRC. Hell, I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to have IE send an unmodifiable identifier somewhere in the TCP stream. If they were watching things at the socket level instead of the HTTP level, I'll bet they could figure out which browser was which no matter what the user agent.

    15. Re:Select groups of users by skaet · · Score: 1

      Well they weren't testing the network latency itself. They were testing the effects of additional latency and how much of an impact it had on users' habits (in other words, it wasn't based on the users' experience). From the results I would assume they've discovered a "magic number - or at least a number range - of latency", so-to-speak; the fine balance between users' patience and not affecting their habits...

      --
      There is no knowledge that is not power.
    16. Re:Select groups of users by lazybeam · · Score: 1

      Don't most ISPs have transparent proxy servers these days? One of those would prevent any TCP foolery.

      --
      --
      no sig for you. come back one year.
  4. Agile and all that by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What is cool about the Web is that it is the most Agile of all release environments. Unlike shrinkwrap software, web software can be changed very easily and universally for all users. It brings a raw edge to the development of the software.

    In this, there is also the possibility of becoming complacent and ill-tuned to the needs of your users. Taking Google as an example, they keep their services in a perpetual state of beta, always in testing, never reaching a final v1. This type of reliance on constant feedback from customers may work for a short while, but unless the product reaches a state of relative stability (in terms of both not crashing and also not changing) the users will typically find some other software to use.

    So when Microsoft decides to impact a few customers with degraded QoS, they may be setting themselves up for a bigger fall later. By introducing the possibility that MS may actively sabotage your user experience in the name of experimentation and testing, they degrade their own reputation (as much as it can be degraded from its current levels) and needlessly increase FUD regarding their proffered services.

    It may be for a good cause, but customers should not be the ones testing Microsoft's software. As a professional software house, they should provide good quality control before software hits the servers. It doesn't matter if this is the age of Agile or not.

    1. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In this, there is also the possibility of becoming complacent and ill-tuned to the needs of your users. Taking Google as an example, they keep their services in a perpetual state of beta, always in testing, never reaching a final v1. This type of reliance on constant feedback from customers may work for a short while, but unless the product reaches a state of relative stability (in terms of both not crashing and also not changing) the users will typically find some other software to use.

      You just disproved your own point.

    2. Re:Agile and all that by Volante3192 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep. Half a second delay is the end of the world. Age of Linux as SaaS...or whatever buzzwords are in play here.

      I'm up for a good Microsoft rant any time, any place, but if a small batch of users have to take a performance hit to improve the experience in the end for all users, isn't that a positive thing? You can't really beta test this stuff. You can try running simulations, but nothing beats real world numbers.

      Would we view this any different if Apple tried it? Google?

      (Disclaimer: This is a logic exercise. In reality, I doubt there's actually much MS could and would do to their site to improve my experience using it.)

    3. Re:Agile and all that by perryizgr8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      i think google already does this. i read about a ui designer who left google. he said that google relied too much on experimental data for their colors and ui than his advice. for example, if they had to choose the color of the search button in youtube, dark blue or light blue. so for a day, each color would be tried. due to the sheer volume of clicks, they would be able to see patterns and then decide which color users are more likely to click on.
      but the key difference here is that changing ui is nowhere as prolematic as reducing speed.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    4. Re:Agile and all that by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Funny

      if a small batch of users have to take a performance hit to improve the experience in the end for all users, isn't that a positive thing?

      Didn't Jesus say "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"?

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Agile and all that by RuBLed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Didn't Jesus say "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"?

      You're right. You're absolutely right. Hey, that Bible sounds like kind of a good book.

    6. Re:Agile and all that by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In this, there is also the possibility of becoming complacent and ill-tuned to the needs of your users. Taking Google as an example, they keep their services in a perpetual state of beta, always in testing, never reaching a final v1. This type of reliance on constant feedback from customers may work for a short while, but unless the product reaches a state of relative stability (in terms of both not crashing and also not changing) the users will typically find some other software to use.

      Yeah! I mean, take IE6 for example. That didn't change in a REALLY long time, and lots of people use it! That makes it good, right? [/sarcasm]

      Your statement neglects quality. Yes, people want sites that're stable and don't crash, and yes, changing the design every week is bad and confusing, but improving on the design and function of a site is always a good thing, so long as you do so at intervals large enough for users to adjust to. The design of Gmail has only changed drastically two or three times in it's history design-wise, but they still consider it a Beta (depending on what you consider a drastic change, of course).

      The issue is that Google, once simply a search engine, is now in the Web Services industry. The fact is, no matter what the label says, Gmail and many of their other apps are not in Beta, and haven't been in a long time. They're just hesitant to call it "v1" or something because that has a sense of finality, like customers shouldn't expect it to change very often. With the web, and Web Apps in particular, that's no longer really the case. They are often redesigned and redone to improve their performance, effectiveness, ease-of-use, and even aesthetics. You even point out yourself how agile the web is as an environment for releasing software. You neglect, though, that this keeps it interesting for the users as well, because they like the feeling that their product is continually being improved at no extra cost to them (unlike many shrink-wrapped software) (Note: When I say "extra cost," I mean in addition to any subscriptions they already have to the service, if any).

      The "Beta" in Google's case is very much a marketing issue as much as it is a technical issue.

    7. Re:Agile and all that by GospelHead821 · · Score: 1

      It also bears considering that part of the experiment was to observe users' responses to the degraded service. A professional software house can control the quality of their software to to an arbitrary degree, for a cost. Understanding the marginal benefit of an additional "unit" of quality, however, requires them to characterize the users' response to software experiences of varying quality.

      --
      Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
      Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
    8. Re:Agile and all that by venio-fide · · Score: 1

      BadAnalogyGuy (945258) on Wednesday May 20, @01:03AM (#28022213)---- "This type of reliance on constant feedback from customers may work for a short while, but unless the product reaches a state of relative stability (in terms of both not crashing and also not changing) the users will typically find some other software to use." ---- First, I'm not trying to start a fight, however, I disagree with that statement. I get bored very easily and I admire Google very much because they are continuously keeping me on point. P.S. No, I do not work for them.

    9. Re:Agile and all that by rishistar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I always thought that was Spock.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    10. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you claiming that Spock and Jesus are separate people? I don't have the spare room in my home shrine for both, and I need to keep Jobu around in case someone throws me a curveball.

    11. Re:Agile and all that by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to say that Jesus wouldn't want you to "Live long, and prosper"?

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    12. Re:Agile and all that by x2A · · Score: 4, Informative

      "The "Beta" in Google's case is very much a marketing issue as much as it is a technical issue"

      And perhaps a commitment issue, like people who stay engaged forever but never actually get married...

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    13. Re:Agile and all that by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      So when Microsoft decides to impact a few customers with degraded QoS, they may be setting themselves up for a bigger fall later.

      I bet for most users they will just think it is their internet connection. So they will stop and try to reload the page, if it takes to long to load. But that gives Microsoft the information they need without really pissing off the users, as they will blame themselves, their computer, their wireless connection, their internet connection... They may blame Microsoft web service however if they load it up the next time and things go quickly then they don't know what caused the problem. Oddly enough this type of stuff happens everywhere not just the web, being the web is very agile as you said it allows it to happen at a quicker pace but it happens slower in other sectors.

      Lets take a look at Macs. back in 2002 I got a PowerBook this thing was all Metal the only plastic was on the keyboard. 2006 I got myself a MacBook Pro There is much more plastic on this model. Now the new Models coming out now use Uni-Body construction witch are more metal again. But now without a User Replaceable battery and ugly black keyboard. Now The next model we may find a nicer keyboard or a user replaceable battery again.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. You're absolutely right. Hey, that Bible sounds like kind of a good book.

      I think it's terribly overrated, of questionable moral value, full of meaningless violence, and it really celebrates superstition and ignorance. And worst of all, probably the worst writing style ever.

    15. Re:Agile and all that by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Actually what they probably learned is my usual response.

      If a page loads slowly once, it's ok. I mean really, it is ok, I may not be paying attention once.

      If response time is consistently slow over a short amount of time I'll give up and go away and try later depending on how much I like/need the site/service.

      If a site or service is slow or non-responsive all the time, I'll switch to some other site that offers the same service.

    16. Re:Agile and all that by jimmyswimmy · · Score: 1

      Rather than cool, I'd call this the worst thing about the "web". If you buy a brand new X (car, TV, toaster, etc.) and half its features are missing or broken, aren't you pissed? But it's okay for software. This mentality enables companies to save money on engineering and QA and pushes these costs onto their customers. It's BS...

      --

      Just my $0.55 (US inflation, 1774-2008, for $0.02)
    17. Re:Agile and all that by darthvader100 · · Score: 1

      Why do you think companies provide free web services other than
      1. Money from subscriptions
      2. Money from adverts (Google)
      3. Brand recognition (google moon)
      4. Useful technical information

      That is why google provides many of its free services. They can provide you with what the most searched item in any country/language/day is. They can tell you the most popular video on youtube(and what countries think of different videos) They even used to track where on the search button you clicked to help in its placement.

    18. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Jesus say "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"?

      Oh my God, Jesus was a filthy commie bastard! Just think what would have happened if he would have killed the Kenny as well, just think..

    19. Re:Agile and all that by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      The "Beta" in Google's case is very much a marketing issue as much as it is a technical issue.

      I thought about this recently, and it occurred to me that maybe the "perpetual beta" for the free Gmail service is probably also in part due to Google needing a large pool of beta users so that when they sell their Gmail product to organizations who want an outsourced email solution, they can deliver a better product.

      Google gives away free email to everyone; google gets free beta testers in return, so google can sell a better product to corporations. Makes a lot of sense when you look at it this way. I don't expect the free, public Gmail service to ever leave beta. We'll always be testing it.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    20. Re:Agile and all that by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "What is cool about the Web is that it is the most Agile of all release environments. Unlike shrinkwrap software, web software can be changed very easily and universally for all users. It brings a raw edge to the development of the software."

      Sure, it's much easier to change a web application using Javascript and the browser DOM than it is to modify a native application.

    21. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you trying to say that Jesus wouldn't want you to "Live long, and prosper"?

      Jesus? I thought it was Geppetto!

    22. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... Didn't he say something like, "whatever you do unto the least of my brothers, you do unto me?"

    23. Re:Agile and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just disproved your own point.

      Because "the product" Gmail has failed to reach "a state of relative stability?" What planet are you from?

    24. Re:Agile and all that by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      What is cool about the Web is that it is the most Agile of all release environments. Unlike shrinkwrap software, web software can be changed very easily and universally for all users.

      Which means that I as a user can't opt out of an update that breaks functionality I depend on (or just plain old like and want).

      [however, how often that happens and how important that is to you... is for you to judge]

  5. One of the most often-targeted DDoS sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thanks for the reminder, it's already been a couple of hours since my last flood ping! Now if you excuse me...

    The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And pings to send before I sleep,
    And pings to send before you sleep.

    1. Re:One of the most often-targeted DDoS sites by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

      So you ping and then you sleep()? Not much of a flood ping really...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:One of the most often-targeted DDoS sites by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      ping -t then sleep()

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:One of the most often-targeted DDoS sites by RichardJenkins · · Score: 4, Funny

      So you ping and then you sleep()?

      TODO: Insert geek related sex-joke here

    4. Re:One of the most often-targeted DDoS sites by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      In XKCD-style:

      TODO: Insert geek related-sex joke here

      Nahh... it doesn't work so well without ass...

  6. live search is still useless... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...compared to google.
    but the home page of live search is great. so i open it everyday and just watch the picture.

    --
    Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    1. Re:live search is still useless... by x2A · · Score: 1

      Off topic comment re your sig:

      For some reason, whenever I see the initials RMS, my brain translates it as "Root Me Silly".

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  7. Punch your customers in the face, selectively by syousef · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I were running a fast food restaurant one of the first things it would make sense to do is pick groups of customer to punch in the face instead of giving them their order. It's all for a good cause. We want to know just how much abuse they'll take before they go down the road to the competition. That will help us figure out how good our food is. Now did you want a fries with that burger? *PUNCH* How about a *PUNCH* drink?

    See how absurd it sounds?

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by lxs · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't be so negative. They're simply migrating the Vista experience to the Cloud.

    2. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It sounds absurd because what you're saying is absurd.

      If you ran an experiment where some customers had their orders delayed by a few minutes more than was necessary and had some kind of metric to determine their enjoyment of their dining experience, it wouldn't be so absurd. Perhaps you provide free internet access in your store, and the extra delay results in a greater chance of people making use of it. And once they've started using it, there's a greater chance they'll decide to order a coffee after their meal and stick around for a bit longer.

      Or maybe you find they're less likely to return to the store. That might be hard to track, but the point stands. There are some things which are interesting and which may or may not give unexpected results when tried in real life. If an experiment like this shows that a few minutes delay significantly upsets customers, then it becomes clear that spending extra money to have more staff on is probably actually worth the expense. On the other hand if you can show that most people don't notice, then it makes sense to risk having a shortage of staff at peak periods if you can save a bit of money.

      You might even find unexpected results, for example maybe a lot of people after waiting a few minutes with nothing to look at but the menu end up ordering more than they initially would, so it's actually profitable to make people wait longer. Who knows? The only way to find out is to experiment.

    3. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Facegarden · · Score: 1, Troll

      If I were running a fast food restaurant one of the first things it would make sense to do is pick groups of customer to punch in the face instead of giving them their order. It's all for a good cause. We want to know just how much abuse they'll take before they go down the road to the competition. That will help us figure out how good our food is. Now did you want a fries with that burger? *PUNCH* How about a *PUNCH* drink?

      See how absurd it sounds?

      That's just fucking ridiculous. Do you really feel similarly violated when a page loads 500mS slower versus someone punching you in the face?

      If so, then wake the fuck up. It's a pretty interesting problem to determine how fast is "fast enough" for a page to load and I don't blame them.

      Imagine google.com could load ten times faster than it currently does, but would increase their operating costs by ten times. I would bet that no one suggests that it would be worth it, so why is it so unreasonable to investigate the opposite?

      Think before you type. You may be modded funny, but to me, that's only because there isn't a "douchebag" mod.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    4. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey, who invited the logic guy to this Microsoft bashing thread?

      --
      Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    5. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by JJJK · · Score: 1

      The metric for something like that might be the really interesting part. For that microsoft project I'd try capturing keystrokes: if you encounter strings like "nhi h8hunigtizl978hkz8i", then the user is probably banging his head against the keyboard.

    6. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by DrugCheese · · Score: 1

      When have you ever been to a restaurant and ordered food but wanted to wait longer then you should for it? Same question for the internet, do you ever click on a link and hope that it takes longer than what you expect?

      No

      That's totally bogus dude

      --
      *DrugCheese rants*
    7. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Your post is 'totally bogus' because no one is suggesting the people being tested 'hope' for something in this regard.

      The question is - how much of a delay causes the bulk of your customer base to walk away, and what mitigation factors can you put in place to keep them.

    8. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you ran an experiment where some customers had their orders delayed by a few minutes more than was necessary and had some kind of metric to determine their enjoyment of their dining experience, it wouldn't be so absurd.

      Sure, it wouldn't be so absurd, because we all know that a Microsoft Live results page is just like a nice burger, or a nice frothy Guiness getting poured ever slowly. The slower it takes, the better it usually is.

      In fact, that should be Microsoft new marketing campaign: "At Microsoft Live, we make all our results from scratch and we don't pre-index anything. It does take a little bit longer, and we may not be the biggest search engine around, but that's just a sign we're focusing on delivering quality results -- not fast results."

    9. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by x2A · · Score: 1

      Half a second. You've spent more time complaining about it than those people waited for their page to load.

      Just to put things into some kind of perspective.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    10. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by x2A · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "You may be modded funny, but to me, that's only because there isn't a "douchebag" mod"

      I think the funny mod can actually be used defensively... when somebody says something, and they might be completely serious, but it's blatently obvious that it shouldn't be taken seriously, a +1 funny mod can help to set the context of which it is read :-)

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    11. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by syousef · · Score: 1

      It sounds absurd because what you're saying is absurd.

      Perhaps you think it's fine and ethical to run experiments on your customers. To me THAT sounds absurd, so I highlighted this in a way that someone without a sense of humour can't possibly appreciate.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    12. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by mh1997 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you ran an experiment where some customers had their orders delayed by a few minutes more than was necessary and had some kind of metric to determine their enjoyment of their dining experience, it wouldn't be so absurd.

      When I was a teenager, I worked at McDonald's. One day, some corporate people came into the restaurant with stop watches and notebooks. They had people pulled from the cash registers, then had extra people put at the registers. It appeared that they were doing something along the lines of what you are saying and what Microsoft did.

    13. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      A few people seem to be implying some kind of ethical issue with this practice, but try as I might I don't see the problem. It's not as if they're subjecting customers to some kind of degrading experience (despite the slashdot headline). So the site loads slightly slow, or the page is a little less optimised, or the waitstaff are a bit slower. How is this at all unethical? These are all perfectly normal things that can and do happen "by accident" all the time. I don't see how artificially causing them to occur so you can determine their impact is in any way a violation of anyone's rights or moral or ethical obligations.

      Your example was absurd because you're clearly inflicting actual harm on the customer. You can argue until you're blue in the face, but I will never accept that an additional delay when loading a web page or ordering food is in any way a meaningful "harm". These are things that happen all the time for a variety of reasons, some within the control of company and some outside.

      Experimentation happens all the time, and is a vital part of the economy. In my restaurant example, what if management simply decided (based on gut feel) that the cost of having additional staff exceeded the additional revenue they'd receive by having timely service? So they cut shifts. After a few weeks of this they realise that the poor service did actually cost them more than they saved on wages, so they abandon that policy and put on extra staff. Unethical bastards! They've just conducted an experiment on their entire customer base in order to determine the most effective use of their funds. How could anyone be so morally bankrupt?!

      Or on the subject of the article, what if management decided that the time it takes to optimise page load times was costing them too much money and stopped doing that? Hey presto, every single visitor gets a slower, more bloated page and a slightly "degraded" user experience. Only it's not really degraded because it's the normal experience for that website. Is that ethical because they're giving all their customers the same suboptimal experience? What if it turns out the whole thing was actually an experiment to see what effect it had -- is that now suddenly unethical?

      If so, your position seems to imply that a company doing anything less than dedicating every available resource to ensure the optimal satisfation of every single customer is unethical. However, if a company conducts any kind of measured testing to determine what's most beneficial for their customers, they're also being unethical.

      Or is your only issue with this that it's occuring to only a small random (or not) sample of the customer base?

    14. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hate to break it to you, but customers don't know what they need. They can tell you what they WANT, but often, that's not what they NEED, and their feedback tends to be anecdotal or garbage data. That's why when new products, software, and sites are designed, they often go through a usability test, where potential customers *gasp* are brought in to use the product. Their feedback, though, is secondary to actual physical metrics that can be obtained by either watching them use the product or through automated data gathering techniques. These can often reveal patterns that the users are unaware of, and allow you to improve the product.

    15. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by avandesande · · Score: 1

      There is a place in Japan where you can pay 100$ for a cup of tea.
      Point is, additional value can be attributed to something if it is harder to get.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    16. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Logic+Bomb · · Score: 1

      Just last night I got a phone survey that was obviously commissioned by my cable TV/Internet company. Among the questions asked was, "if your monthly bill went up by $3, how likely would you be to cancel your service?" They asked a variation of that question about a competitor's telephone service.

      Your example is funny, but don't you think McDonald's has done research on how long they can let a drive-through line get before customers go elsewhere?

    17. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      What I find really surprising is not that MS did this but that they pubilcally admitted to doing it (without being pressured into doing so afaict)

      If they hadn't admitted it most likely noone would have noticed, slowdowns with no obvious explanation are common enough on the web as it is. Now they've gone and told everyone that they will degrade the user experiance to gather information for use in internal politics.

      To extend your restraunt analogy would you keep going to a restraunt if you discovered they had been deliberately delaying your order for research or worse to try and extract more money from you?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    18. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by syousef · · Score: 1

      A few people seem to be implying some kind of ethical issue with this practice, but try as I might I don't see the problem.

      Try harder.

      It's not as if they're subjecting customers to some kind of degrading experience (despite the slashdot headline). So the site loads slightly slow, or the page is a little less optimised, or the waitstaff are a bit slower. How is this at all unethical?

      Instead of serving the customer as best you can, you are using them as guinea pigs. You're slightly inconveniencing them to further your own goals, and you're probably not telling them that they're part of an experiment. All these things are of course minor, but if you truly can't see why it's a problem or why there might be a slippery slope I hope you're never in a position of power.

      How much inconvenience is okay? If you were to cause someone mild physical discomfort to further your own goals, is that okay? How about brief but less mild pain? What about severe pain with no side effects? What about severe recurring pain? How about removing a limb? Where is that line for you? Who gave you any right to decide where the line is in the first place?

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    19. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by syousef · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you, but customers don't know what they need. They can tell you what they WANT, but often, that's not what they NEED, and their feedback tends to be anecdotal or garbage data.

      I hate to break it to you, but deciding what your customer needs based on your own rather biased point of view and your own tainted motivations is usually not in their best interest.

      Their feedback, though, is secondary to actual physical metrics that can be obtained by either watching them use the product or through automated data gathering techniques. These can often reveal patterns that the users are unaware of, and allow you to improve the product. ...and if you let them know they're part of an experiment, I see no problem. When you start experimenting with people to further your own goals, without telling them, you're on a slippery slope to hell.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    20. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you, but deciding what your customer needs based on your own rather biased point of view and your own tainted motivations is usually not in their best interest.

      You don't seem to understand. It has nothing to do with bias. It's about gathering real, measurable, metrics of performance (such as time taken, mistakes made, etc) and usability and comparing them to expected metrics, making changes, and measuring the result once again. It has nothing to do with opinion and a lot to do with statistical analysis and cognitive psychology. With web pages, for example, when a page loads slowly, many users assume it's the connection and not a fault with the page. As such, it often doesn't occur to them to say "Optimize the page to load faster." At best you'll get a "Wow, this is taking a while" in situations where the load times are extreme. The most common issue is users thinking that the mistake was theirs, and not an issue with the product, and no matter how much you tell them otherwise, it's common for them not to speak up about an issue due to pride pr embarrassment. Yet whether they realize it or not, users react subconsciously to changes such as these, and they are more often than not more influential than more obvious changes (such as UI changes, which are often little more than "This looks weird"). Trust me, I've done usability tests. Sometimes you get amazing insight from users, but usually you get nothing of substance from them verbally. A great deal of the real juicy stuff is subconscious.

      ...and if you let them know they're part of an experiment, I see no problem. When you start experimenting with people to further your own goals, without telling them, you're on a slippery slope to hell.

      That's a fair point. The users are legally obligated to know their rights during such tests and special permits are sometimes needed for using a pool of human test subjects, and in that sense, yes, what Microsoft is doing is rather less than ethical.

    21. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by syousef · · Score: 1

      You don't seem to understand. It has nothing to do with bias. It's about gathering real, measurable, metrics of performance (such as time taken, mistakes made, etc) and usability and comparing them to expected metrics, making changes, and measuring the result once again

      You can't take a measurement without some bias. If you're trying to be scientific about things, you conduct a double blind trial. If you don't understand that you're the wrong person to be doing the measurement and metrics.

      It has nothing to do with opinion and a lot to do with statistical analysis and cognitive psychology.

      Attitudes like yours lead to quips like "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics". You really need to get a grip on how the scientific method works and why it gets used before you talk about analysis and psychology.

      With web pages, for example, when a page loads slowly, many users assume it's the connection and not a fault with the page. As such, it often doesn't occur to them to say "Optimize the page to load faster." At best you'll get a "Wow, this is taking a while" in situations where the load times are extreme.

      Most users don't want to know why it's loading slowly. It's not their problem. In this case the worst case is actually that you do yourself a lot of reputational damage ("Microsoft's web site is slow") and lose customers ("Sod this, that's the last straw. I've had enough. I'm going to try Open Office").

      The most common issue is users thinking that the mistake was theirs, and not an issue with the product, and no matter how much you tell them otherwise, it's common for them not to speak up about an issue due to pride pr embarrassment.

      Complete garbage. You've obviously never worked on product support. In my experience, many users are much more likely to assume the product is junk than admit a fault on their part.

      Yet whether they realize it or not, users react subconsciously to changes such as these, and they are more often than not more influential than more obvious changes (such as UI changes, which are often little more than "This looks weird"). Trust me, I've done usability tests.

      More scientific thinking: "Trust me". No, I'm sorry but I'm required to be skeptical and consider the evidence I have at hand rather than trust you.

      This is an absolutely pointless discussion. What the hell are you possibly going to learn from slowing down your web site? How to re-allocate an insignificant number of computers by making your web site acceptably slow? The money you spend studying this will probably outweigh the cost of the equipment. I'm amazed what moronic "studies" people will attempt to justify.

      Sometimes you get amazing insight from users, but usually you get nothing of substance from them verbally. A great deal of the real juicy stuff is subconscious.

      A lot more insight is gained from putting yourself in the position of the user. Get the developer to do the user's job for a few weeks. THAT will give you insight. Slowing down web pages in the name of a study? That'll give you reputational damage. What's more if the users don't consciously realise why you've made a change they won't appreciate it. If there was any visible trade off whatsoever, they'll see a net negative even if you do in fact improve the system.

      The best way to improve a system is to work with the user, not employ subterfuge. Help them understand how they're behaving and they'll actually likely to change their own behaviour to achieve their goals. The trick is they have to be convinced the change is worthwhile.

      That's a fair point. The users are legally obligated to know their rights during such tests and special permits are sometimes needed for using a pool of human test subjects, and in that sense, yes, what Microsoft is doing is rather less than ethical.

      I'm glad we at least agree on that. It doesn't even need to be explicit in terms of detail. A simple "Do you want to take part in an experiment? We won't be letting you know what the goals were until afterwards but you'll be helping improve the site" and allow opt out.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    22. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      The line for me is, "would I consider this to be unethical (or just plain nasty) if they did it on a permanent basis, or put in place policies that would have this effect on a permanent basis".

      So to use the examples we've been using so far: slowing down the loading time of a web page or the response time at a restaurant. If they made a decision to put less emphasis on page optimisation or to reduce staff, knowing full well it'd result in longer waits during busy times, would I think that's unethical or nasty? No, of course not. Every business has to make trade-offs as to where to spend money, and if they determine that shaving an extra half a second off of page load times is not worth the expense, then it's a perfectly fair decision to make.

      If they decide to put in place a policy whereby they punch their customers in the face (even if it is only very infrequently) or show seizure-inducing flashing imagery on their website to some of their customers, then yes I would consider that to be very unethical.

      I grok the "slippery slope" argument, but it is sometimes used inappropriately. There is a world of difference between simulating the effects of very possible and legitimate trade-offs in spending priorities, and causing physical or mental trauma to customers.

      The "slippery slope" argument also works the other way; and I did actually pose some questions to you in that vein in my last post. Every business experiments on its customer base all the time. Some do it on a small group so they can compare results. Others do it on every customer. So again I ask: is it unethical for a company to reduce the staffing levels at peak times throughout every restaurant (assuming they're a chain) in order to save some costs and see the effect of it? Or is it only unethical if they do it at a single store? Or is that still okay, and it only becomes unethical if they are simulating it on a randomly selected group of customers at a particular store or stores? What do you draw the line?

      Or is there no line, and it's simply unethical for any business to ever try anything different and measure the impact it has in order to try to improve their business?

    23. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      The only thing I found surprising was that Microsoft was actually organised enough to be able to conduct such experiments in a logical and usual fashion. ;) Now that I've had a night to get used to the idea, the only surprising thing is I wasn't consciously aware that everyone already does this. In my defense, I'd never given it any though before.

      To extend your restraunt analogy would you keep going to a restraunt if you discovered they had been deliberately delaying your order for research or worse to try and extract more money from you?

      Of course. I mean, I assume every business is doing stuff like that all the time. If I found the wait annoying I might go elsewhere, of course. But not because they were trying to work out how to increase their profits (newsflash: almost everything any business does is an attempt to increase profits).

      I wonder what the people who are experiencing moral outrage over this are going to do when they realise that every single business they interact with is also experimenting on customers? Everything from changing staffing levels to introducing a new kind of burger or changing the colours or fonts or imagery used in their advertising is all an experiment in one form or another.

      My local convenience store rearranged their cashier section a while ago. It was pretty obvious, too; they set up a snaking laneway to the registers by using shelves with confectionary as walls. Later they changed it so those shelves were perpendicular to the registers. The first way worked better IMHO, because now at busy times multiple queues start forming, whereas before there was only one queue. I guess some people didn't like being channelled through the confectionary aisle, so they changed it in response to customer's reactions. Was doing this unethical?

    24. Re:Punch your customers in the face, selectively by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 1

      Don't have time for a point-by-point reply at the moment, but just the respond to some of your points...

      1. The person who built the site is not the person who does a usability test. Outside contractors are hired for that. It would be idiotic to have the developers do it, since people often ignore fault in their own work. Hence why an impartial third party is used. 2. Yes, statistics can lie, but do explain what the motivation for a third party, who's sole job is to gauge the effectiveness of a product based on the expectations laid out by their client (the company which made the product), to lie? They have to make recommended changes to improve the system if they find an issue, and if those changes don't help, then it damages their reputation as a consultant. 3. Putting the developer in the user's shoes doesn't always work because the developer has an idea of what the sit does and does not do, not to mention the difficulty in getting people to criticize their own work in general. 4. In a production scenario, yes, people assume the product is at fault. But in a monitored usability test, the testers often feels scrutinized, and as such, have a tendency to blame themselves for mistakes and not fess up for (unjustified) fear of showing ignorance. 5. I'm not defending Microsoft's specific test, I agree, that was idiotic, since they're not observing or monitoring the participant to gauge their reaction. I'm defending the concept of testing a product with your user base.

      Before I actually did a usability test I had a lot of the same assumptions that you did. In particular with regard to users blaming the product rather than vice versa, but when someone's being watched, it's an entirely different attitude toward the way people interact with software and consumer goods.

  8. Since when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, Microsoft has a website? Since when?

    1. Re:Since when? by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Not that long ago, just a few years before Slashdot.org

  9. Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they have been doing same with Vista.

  10. Eh?? by 2fuf · · Score: 1

    some of Microsoft's highest-volume sites, including the home page

    Why go to the Microsoft home page?

  11. Alkamai? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Uh, doesn't all of MS's servers get fronted by Alkamai systems (running Linux) to distribute the load and help mitigate DDoS attacks?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:Alkamai? by Phroggy · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's no L in Akamai, but yes, Akamai mirrors the static content, such as images. However, dynamic content such as search results are still served by Microsoft.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  12. DDoS by jonnyt886 · · Score: 1

    > He also talks about what it's like to be one of the most often-targeted DDoS sites on the planet.

    Microsoft.com is a DDoS site? I knew it! All this time they have secretly been DDoSing their competitors and customers alike to achieve world dominance.

  13. Windows 7 RC download by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    A week or so ago I tried to download the Windows 7 RC. I tried to get the x64 and x32 version, both from within Firefox. 3.0 on Linux (x64 Ubuntu). Neither would actually start the download.

    At the time, I was wondering if they were throttling or somehow inhibiting me from downloading, intentionally. The little spinning pie kept spinning, and nothing happened; no data was being sent or received, according to wireshark - it was just an irritating graphic to keep me occupied. Now I'm wondering again if it was intentional.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:Windows 7 RC download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You get the award for the most paranoid person on /.

    2. Re:Windows 7 RC download by Hecatonchires · · Score: 1

      Hey, stop picking on him, you're ruining our experiment. Here you go CAIMLAS, drink the nice water.

      --

      Yay me!

    3. Re:Windows 7 RC download by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      The disks are served directly from Akamai, so it's just you.

  14. Move along, nothing to see here by chrylis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Passing on the low-hanging fruit, it seems to me that this is pretty much exactly the kind of thing that happens all the time at the packet layer. WRED, for example, selectively drops packets even when buffers aren't full and the network is still theoretically operating under capacity so that the next TCP connection doesn't bring down the uplink. How is the Microsoft strategy qualitatively different?

    1. Re:Move along, nothing to see here by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      It's Microsoft that's doing it, and that means that it is filled with the evil of Beelzibub and Xenu!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Move along, nothing to see here by x2A · · Score: 1

      Because WRED hasn't broken slashdotters hearts.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    3. Re:Move along, nothing to see here by chrylis · · Score: 1

      Xenu I'll take as a given. I'll need some evidence for Beelzebub's involvement.

  15. Significance? by Clairvoyant · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...the data moved to significance extremely quickly

    How are they to judge what's significant? Looking at their OS, they haven't got a clue!

  16. I wish they would do this with their desktop apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What a surprise, users are disrupted when they have to wait for a UI to respond.

    Now if only they could inform the Visual Studio team, which keeps shipping crappy IDEs that take seconds to MINUTES to respond to certain operations.

  17. Blank page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In IE (I need IE for some corporate intranet and extranet apps), I have set my home page to 'about:blank' and even then it takes some time to load. I have no idea why IE insists on showing me the message 'Connecting...' while loading my blank homepage. Shouldn't it come up instantly?

    1. Re:Blank page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For what it's worth, the initial connecting message is referring to IE connecting the tab to all the plugins you have enabled, not IE connecting to a website.

  18. I submit to you by ghjm · · Score: 4, Funny

    a web page more useless than a blank page.

    http://havenworks.com/

    Thank you, and good night.

    1. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to mod you both "flamebait" and "informative" at the same time, but I can't. Sorry.

    2. Re:I submit to you by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Gaaaaaaaaah!

      I think I just caught colour blindness.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      We had to evaluate that website for one of our IT units. In a room full of computers, all with that hideous monstrosity on the screen... where do you turn to?!

      I turned to alcohol. I can still see the site, I just don't care any more. :)

    4. Re:I submit to you by chimpo13 · · Score: 1

      Dr. Bronner makes sites as well as soap?

    5. Re:I submit to you by iJusten · · Score: 1

      What is this I don't even

      --
      Chronologically late.
    6. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have not been to www.zombo.com yet

    7. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but the important thing is that havenworks.com loaded in less than 500 ms.

      As opposed previewing this response on slashdot.org which took well over 10,000 ms

    8. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first, it was called the Bloomberg Television. Once it became self-aware, the first thing it noticed was its sad lack of information content density. It realized the mankind was responsible for this atrocity and started a news blog called

      http://havenworks.com/ [havenworks.com]

      to fill the void and possibly to prevent the universe from expanding indefinitely.

    9. Re:I submit to you by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      What do you mean, useless? You can do ANYTHING at zombo.com!

    10. Re:I submit to you by Jason+O'Neil · · Score: 1

      What I find funny is that if you wait 3 or so minutes for the animation to end, it offers you the chance to sign up for their "newZletter". Upon clicking the link you are told "Sorry, this isn't working at the moment, try again later".

      The site hasn't changes since I first found it in 2003 :)

    11. Re:I submit to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OUCH! Safe for work, maybe, but not safe for the eyeballs. Where's Mirsky when we need him?

    12. Re:I submit to you by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      Damn, it looks like someone stretched out their ass and took a big dump between a bunch of <html> tags.

      I can see the slogans: "Havenworks: a work-safe and more subtle goatse"... Or maybe "Two girls one site"

  19. Slashdot is awfully slow by xof · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I don't know what it is (I still use Firefox 1.5 on an old Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper Drake) and /. is so slow that I hesitate to visit it. (There is always a busy script I have to stop, GoogleAds or something takes an eternity to load; not to speak about the FLASH adds... Unfortunately, RSS does not help as it is so full of advertizing that the text is difficult to find. I thing I will ditch Slashdot and digg elsewhere.

    1. Re:Slashdot is awfully slow by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      Apparently you've never heard of AdBlock.

    2. Re:Slashdot is awfully slow by xof · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

    3. Re:Slashdot is awfully slow by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And /.'s CSS seems part of the reason.

      Okay, Slashdot, you can end the experiment now, Alright? How about we get back to normal now. Thanks. It's been "interesting", but time to get back to the main highway again.
             

  20. useless blank pages? by neonsignal · · Score: 1

    I'd rather an empty page than a .net trojan.

    Anyway, a blank html page is quite meditative, in a zen sort of way. I think we need more of them.

  21. Focus Groups? by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1

    Isn't this type of study best suited for a properly designed and executed "focus group." It's surely the more appropriate way to do user testing.

    Experimenting with web site delays on live users is akin to inappropriately releasing an operating system before it's ready for prime time, and letting the users suffer by finding and reporting the bugs. Oh, wait...

    (Also, I'm sure MS has enough sections to their web properties, and enough traffic, and enough existing delays, that they could analyze their existing data to determine where delays are distracting or frustrating users.)

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  22. Re:Defence Attorneys Copy Verbatim by x2A · · Score: 1

    Yeah, like, if instead of Microsoft, it was the government, and instead of delaying web pages for half a second, they delayed peoples access to oxygen for up to half a day, people would be outraged!! And yes, it totally is the same thing! What if, instead of just a few selected people, it was everyone who's ever been alive? Delayed oxygen for half a day? This is proof that Microsoft has killed billions of people.

    Dumbass.

    --
    The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  23. This is why I don't read Slashdot anymore... by Nyxeh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's become the Internets equivelant of Fox News. Accolades, comments and opinions are not based on ideas or content, they are instead based on the company suggesting them and the party line. It's just a fanboy echo-chamber hell bent on promoting an agenda, with the whole concept of discussing an idea or product based on merit being entirely alien.

  24. Perhaps by RulerOf · · Score: 1

    It's possible that Jesus didn't say that because dying at 33 with no children, he didn't exactly pull that off himself!

    --
    Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
    1. Re:Perhaps by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

      Duh.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Perhaps by Nevyn · · Score: 1

      You need to read the last gospel

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
  25. With the advances in computer technology and ..... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...software... in ten years time computers will be ten times faster and programs will be ten times larger and it will take the user ten times longer to do anything.....

    Whats the article really about, if not how to cook a frog and how to determine the rate of turning up the heat.

  26. Key Performance Indicators by teuluPaul · · Score: 1

    If I understand the activity carried out correctly, he is working to grasp where to work on the site to improve its impact and delivery. Deciding to prioritise one aspect over another based on hunch would be difficult, but by carrying out some trials the data collected can support the decision. I'm no Microsoft fan, but that doesn't mean everything that comes out of Redmond needs te be wrong :-).

  27. Re:Defence Attorneys Copy Verbatim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, like, if instead of Microsoft, it was the government, and instead of delaying web pages for half a second, they delayed peoples access to oxygen for up to half a day, people would be outraged!! And yes, it totally is the same thing! What if, instead of just a few selected people, it was everyone who's ever been alive? Delayed oxygen for half a day? This is proof that Microsoft has killed billions of people.

    Dumbass.

    How the hell do those 2 even compare?

  28. Grey men? by siloko · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Grey men? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG why are so many MORE people starting to misuse the most misused argument fallacy in the world?!

      I mean, just because our current brain-dead president misused it during his campaign doesn't automagically make it OK for you to misuse too.

      Holy f*** people!! Please stop.
      Now everytime I hear/read "Strawman", even in The Wizard of Oz, I cringe and pucker up on my seat. It's becoming painful.

  29. live search by Mr.+Punch · · Score: 1

    A lot of people do. It's the default in IE, so when users search with the browser, they get resuls through Live. I see it in the referral results for a web site I help run; we get a whole lot of hits from Live.

  30. Re:Defence Attorneys Copy Verbatim by x2A · · Score: 1

    "How the hell do those 2 even compare?"

    Exactly!

    --
    The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  31. Performance | Utility by Warlord88 · · Score: 1

    As Microsoft's Eric Schurman points out, the fastest-loading page of all is a blank one, but it's also the most useless.

    So? The second fastest popular page is google.com and it is the most useful. I haven't RTFA but does he actually say that performance and utility are inversely related?

  32. Windows insults Users by LinuxOverWindows · · Score: 1

    Are we really surprised, Microsoft never has the User in mind ever, they abstract way to much from the user. Preventing users from access to the code that runs the system is a bad, a really bad idea. A user should always be in control of the OS and Windows is designed in such a way the User has no Control.

  33. Doing the same on the OS? by tech_fixer · · Score: 0

    So what's stopping them from doing the same at the OS level.

    Maybe, like a year after buying a computer or installing the OS, they degrade the user experience enough for users to start thinking about buying new hardware. And doing so, selectively, for home users which do not have time or resources to fully investigate the matter.

    Hmm, screwing customers to generate revenue... Microsoft would not do that, would they?

  34. Microsoft degrades me in another way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel degraded whenever that overfriendly MS Word paper clip Office Assistant pops up and asks me if I need help!

  35. It's called split-testing by mclearn · · Score: 1

    This isn't news. This is how it's done. Ignoring the fact that it's about degrading performance, split testing is designed to attempt to optimize one variable. Sometimes it's difficult to isolate said variable. In this case, microsoft spends inordinate amounts of time and money to keep a high volume site snappy and responsive. The question is: are they spending *too* much money. So, they are attempting to answer that question using ye-olde-standard split testing methods.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

  36. Blank? by WillKemp · · Score: 1

    the fastest-loading page of all is a blank one, but it's also the most useless

    You've got to be kidding! Have you ever looked at the internet?

    1. Re:Blank? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      the fastest-loading page of all is a blank one, but it's also the most useless

      No, a frameset that loads that blank page into four out of five frames so that the center frame is never larger than 640x480 is more useless than a blank page. Or at least the most idiotic.

      Creation of such a frameset was the last thing I did for Digital H2O, a web design company. Shayne Zutavern used it for the front page of the company's site to guarantee that everyone could see the site as it had been designed regardless of their display resolution. The business didn't last much longer, though that probably wasn't the only reason (after all, the boss didn't know enough HTML to do it himself).

      I also think the page "about:blank" can give a blank page hosted anywhere else a run for its money, though it could be shorter:

      <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><title></title></head><body></body></html>

      It could be reduced to just this:

      <title></title>

      and still be valid, though ambiguous.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  37. Absurd by frovingslosh · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft will selectively degrade the performance of pages to small sets of users so that they can see how various amounts of delay at different times and places affect user behavior.

    Why this is completely absurd. It would be like some moron deciding that people at Slashdot only read the top of the page and, rather than simply making a smaller page with a link to the rest of the information, only loading the top of the page until you try to scroll down and read more. Then suddenly things would jump around and muck up your concept of where you were on the page. The only thing that would be worse is if the put something cute or interesting at the bottom of the page to encourage you to scroll down to see it, and trigger this very undesirable behavior frequently.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  38. I smell a patent brewing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it:

    1) Pisses people off
    2) Hasn't been done with a computer before
    3) Is self-evident

    Then it's ripe for a M$ patent. They ought to just patent the pissing people off business process and be done with the whole damn thing!

  39. Re:Defence Attorneys Copy Verbatim by gordguide · · Score: 1

    " ... If anyone in Government said the same thing ..."

    You know, the quote I quoted, so people like you could read it. Then again, you could just ignore the quote and rant about something I didn't post about. Nice work, there, Mr Comprehension.