Slashdot Mirror


Assessing Media Bias: Microsoft Vs. Everyone Else

snydeq writes "J. Peter Bruzzese questions whether Microsoft receives unfair criticism in the media, while Apple, Facebook, and Google seem to get away from missteps unscathed. 'I've noticed an unfair, ongoing trend: If Microsoft does something a little off, it gets bashed into the ground for it. But if Google, Facebook, or Apple (all three of which can be categorized, like Microsoft, as The Man in their own rights) missteps, it generally gets mild reprimands and even support from the media and those drinking the Kool-Aid.' Do you feel any inherent media bias in its coverage of the tech industry?"

77 of 364 comments (clear)

  1. There is a huge positive bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    towards Apple.

    1. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd say they're polarizing. Having owned both an iPhone and (presently) a nice Android handset, I never understood why people get so up-in-arms over a cellphone.

      Facebook gets TONS of hate (and outright bullshit) over privacy issues. Yes, they make money by knowing everything about you. No, they don't sell your information.

      Google gets a bit of free pass everywhere, except for the odd privacy gripe. They seem to be the punching bag du jour in the courts though.

      Microsoft, we all just love to hate, even if they're not in a position to deserve it anymore. They certainly did though. We'd be years ahead of where we are with the web, if it weren't for them and their (former) antics.

    2. Re:There is a huge positive bias by sgrover · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Their former tactics are still at play. They've just learned to hide them better. Like getting surrogate companies to do their will (may I direct you towards the SCO vs IBM and Oracle vs Google cases? Form your own opinion of course...)

    3. Re:There is a huge positive bias by roc97007 · · Score: 2

      Not sure I agree. I'm not an Apple fan, but I observe that they took a lot of heat for the "grip of death", and for dropping calls frequently on earlier models. (And incidentally, deservedly so.) Moreover, I just yesterday read an article dissing the ipad 3 for a number of factors. I think there is perhaps a huge positive bias from certain sources, but it's by no means a blanket condition.

      Nor do I believe that there is a huge negative bias from the media against Windows. There are sources that will always rag on M$ and (admittedly fewer) sources for which Balmer can do no wrong. I think an argument can be made that the negative press they get, they deserve.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    4. Re:There is a huge positive bias by mystikkman · · Score: 2

      Because hating on MS is cool and fawning Google/Apple is the in thing.

    5. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Jeff+Hornby · · Score: 3, Informative

      Of course Facebook (and Google) sell your information. The only difference between them and other companies that are gathering and selling information about you is that Facebook and Google are selling your information retail instead of wholesale. The information is still being used to do the same thing: target advertising at you to convince you to act in ways that you would not have otherwise and might well be detrimental to your own interests.

      --
      Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
    6. Re:There is a huge positive bias by HermMunster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Embrace

      Extend

      Extinguish

      Do I need to say more?

      Convicted monopolist maybe?

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    7. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nevermind that Microsoft invented the basis of AJAX, XMLHttpRequest, which other browsers ended up copying to start the entire Web 2.0 era right? And they changed a web browser from something you had to buy to something that was free and shipped with every operating system.

      Other than that, Microsoft has done nothing but hold back the web.

    8. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Altrag · · Score: 3, Informative

      They've just learned to hide them better.

      Their rampant and sudden(ish) adoption of HTML5 + Javascript for Win8 kind of screams E&E to me. Maybe not yet, but I suspect it will come. They have plenty of home-grown technologies that could easily be extended to provide support for all the new Metro flashies, but have chosen to roll their ball down the HTML5 slope under the slogan of "openness".

      Which is great, until they decide to slam the door after a large portion of the user base has gone through it.

      Think how much strife web devs have gone through over the years trying to make their sites compatible with both IE and FF (and all of their various incompatible versions.. and nowadays Safari and Chrome as well)? Well take that, and consider how fun it will be when all of those same issues apply to standalone, local applications?

      And of course they've got no short history of explicitly adding proprietary extensions to open standards. They got slammed for trying to do that with Java, and hopefully that will set some precedent, but HTML5 and JS are, as far as I know, not yet legally protected from MS' tactics.

      Consider how this will play out. They take a truly open standard such as HTML5, implement it as perfectly as possible. And then add something.

      MS products will be able to accurately display web pages developed on Linux or OSX or any other system you care to name that follows the HTML5 standard. So it doesn't matter what the back-end is running, the front-end works beautifully.

      Now add something. Doesn't have to be much, and almost certainly will be based in the client side and transparent to the server. MS products are still compatible with 100% of all HTML5 websites out there, but non-MS browsers are no longer compatible with any website that happens to use MS' extension.

      Doesn't even have to be anything breaking or even terribly complex. Something like a fancier hook to the Metro UI for example -- add a start page link when IE is your default browser? Get realtime updates for.. whatever. With FF as your default browser? Get a static icon. In both cases and with both browsers, the website itself would work fine.

      But those little bits of flair can add up. Imagine the usability difference it would make for something like Twitter or Facebook (or heck, Slashdot) if you had a basic feed on the desktop and didn't need to ever load up the full page unless something caught your attention?

      Oh well. We can hope and pray that MS will avoid being evil this go-round, but my guess is that retrospect will eventually show a continuation of business as usual.

    9. Re:There is a huge positive bias by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uhm... I think you miss the context of the idea. Let's take a Monsanto spin on "embrace and extend" where they take ordinary food stuff and modify it then sue everyone who might have been cross pollenated or were otherwise unintentionally violating patents on living organisms. They are taking the food we all eat, embracing it, changing it and then controlling it.

      When we are talking about Microsoft, they are taking public standards which had enjoyed wide support and compatibility and really twisted things up to the point that the WWW only works well with their browsers. Standards are for the benefit of the community of businesses, governments and users out there. Microsoft has attempted and even been successful at removing those benefits from the community to enrich themselves at the expense of ALL others.

      Yeah, it's a bad thing.

    10. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 2

      Often enough, the "improvement" includes small but intentional changes that serves only one purpose:
      Make 3rd party products unable to interact with Microsoft products.

      Microsoft then relies on its ubiquity (as in, most businesses rely on Microsoft products and if your product cannot interact with those, it is a big disadvantage) to make those 3rd party products unattractive. And that is what people complain about.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    11. Re:There is a huge positive bias by hb253 · · Score: 2

      Another example of their drive to get their products entrenched:

      My company is looking to go away from our current antivirus product to Forefront. We don't use SCCM. According to Microsoft, you need SCCM to manage Forefront. So, we are expected to dump our current inventory/software deployment system and set up an SCCM infrastructure just to use their antivirus product.

      Brilliant.

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
    12. Re:There is a huge positive bias by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      target advertising at you to convince you to act in ways that you would not have otherwise and might well be detrimental to your own interests.

      I bought a TV recently. 20 years ago I would have been forced to go to various shops and try to view it in-store. I actually did that and most of the examples were badly set up and of course shop lighting is always terrible and not representative of home viewing, and you can't really evaluate the sound.

      20 years ago the only other source of information was magazine reviews, which of course were often biased. If you were lucky a friend might already own one. That was it.

      These days I can use Google to dig out vast amounts of information about any model, including people's experiences posted on forums and dozens of different professional reviews. So while it is true that Google subjects me to marketing as well, I am definitely better informed and less prone to marketing hype and paid reviews. In fact I see less advertising now because I don't have to wade through ad-laden magazines or watch so much TV.

      There is a trade going on but I think we came out much better than the advertisers. If your product sucks the internet is going to find out pretty quickly and a random person stood in a shop can access that knowledge from their phone to counter all your flashy displays and slimy salesmen.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Deviate_X · · Score: 2

      You the perfect example of error, you talk about microsoft implementing HTML5 perfectly while ignoring the fact that chrome, firefox, safari have implemented broken draft specification's of HTML5. It turns out that sites are breaking in IE because they are non-standard, but the same sites are "working" in other browsers. http://wmpoweruser.com/twitter-fix-mobile-twitter-css-bug-for-windows-phone/

    14. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Deviate_X · · Score: 3, Interesting

      AJAX was created for Outlook web access (~1998): *http://blogs.technet.com/b/exchange/archive/2005/06/21/406646.aspx *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlook_Web_App#Technology Outlook web access was later copied by Google tocreate Gmail (~2004). *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Gmail Media bias caused Gmail and Google to be regarded as an innovator when infact the whole Ajax became recommended by the w3c in 2006 *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming)#History

    15. Re:There is a huge positive bias by sootman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wrong and wrong.

      1) People were already doing AJAX-y stuff like make sequential menus (i.e., you pick your state from one menu, then another menu appears with a list of the cities in that state) with JavaScript and regular old CGIs for quite a while before MS put out XMLHttpRequest. All MS did was specify some things. Someone else invented the idea, and another someone else (Google) made it famous.

      2) Netscape was made free for "individual, academic and research users" in 1994. http://home.mcom.com/info/newsrelease.html
      Spyglass Mosaic--you know, the browser that MSIE was based on--was free for "non-commercial use" even before that. MSIE 1.0 didn't even come out until 1995. Companies tend to pay for things, so while making a browser free for commercial use certainly helped the web some, leaving it as something companies had to pay for wouldn't have held the web back much.

      I don't know if your last line is sarcastic or not, but yes, there is tons of evidence that Microsoft did indeed work very hard to hold back the web. That doesn't mean they never did anything that was pro-web but what little they did was more than offset by all the bad they've done.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    16. Re:There is a huge positive bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Embrace. Apple built itself back up by leaning hard on the F/OSS community.
      Extend. Apple polished the user experience. They made it shiny.
      Extinguish. Apple runs an entirely closed ecosystem. Also, the app store terms and conditions are incompatible with the L/GPL.

      Need I say more?
      Price fixing maybe? (to be determined, but smells bad)

  2. Microsoft Deserves It by wrightrocket · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Microsoft hadn't already alienated the world by trying to bully them, then I might care.

    1. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      May zombieTaco come back and mod this up to +1,000,000. MS has so thoroughly pissed me off with their offensive behavior that there is no way in hell that I would give a shit how much they are bashed in the media or anywhere else. They deserve it.

    2. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      During the 90's, Microsoft supporters were super-quick to bash, deride, and mock anything that Apple came out with, or anything in the open-source world, while corporate publications poured endless praise on Microsoft itself.

      Now the situation is reversed and Microsoft wants to complain about bad press? Maybe they should sit down, shut up, and watch as what goes around comes around.

      (Alternately, if you don't want bad press, don't ship bad products. If Microsoft wants to stop a flurry of articles about how awesome their competitors are, maybe they should ship products that are clearly, measurably better than their competitors.)

    3. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If Microsoft hadn't already alienated the world by trying to bully them, then I might care.

      Nobody cares anymore that we nerds get off on watching Microsoft begin pounded into the bedrock for even minor transgressions. Hating Microsoft is almost part of the definition of a Nerd these days. That article asks the much more interesting question: Why are you willing to let Google get away with monopolistic behavior that Microsoft gets crucified for? They have a 90% share of the search market and nobody is pounding them into the ground over it. Do people really think that Google are bunch of kindhearted philanthropists who only have the best interests of mankind at heart and don't care about profit? Yeah RIGHT! Of course they are... (sarcasm)...

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    4. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called "burning bridges". If other big co's burn enough bridges, the same fate will await them. Oracle's Java burning will subtract a big a chunk from their Karma, for example, such that another attack on open standards may push their reputation over the cliff and they will join Microsoft.

    5. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MS has so thoroughly pissed me off

      I think that is the crux of it right there, but for most people, perhaps not so much the /.'ers but rather mainstream media, they get snitchy with Microsoft because they are associated with "My Computer crashed again, damn Microsoft!". Microsoft does get a big bunch of bad press - or rather stories that they are involved with might get a bit more of a sour take due to their association with problems, lets face it, if a PC crashes right before the sales rep finishes putting that sales presentation together - and then has nothing to show, the sales rep will remember that and blame Microsoft. Google, Facebook and the likes don't have this problem. It might be argued that they offer a better service then, but that would be comparing apples to oranges.

      I am not taking the side of Microsoft here, they piss me off as much as the next guy, but more for the fact that they abused their power greatly, they acted in amazingly un-ethical ways, especially in the early days, their (in my opinion) abuse of their operating system to push out other inferior products (Hello IE, I'm looking at you!). When it comes to the Windows side of it, I have to say that I am both in awe and loathing over the product. It is terribly unstable, though getting better with Win 7, the security is poor compared to *nix - but when you look at just how much hardware they support, and how well it works, any techie will have to say that it is amazing that it works. Slap any old or new hardware together and you can load Windows. It might not be terribly efficient, and bloat up, but it fricken works.

      So, to sum up, I agree with They deserve it but not for the reasons that most people do.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    6. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      >>>Why are you willing to let Google get away with monopolistic behavior that Microsoft gets crucified for?

      no idea.

      But I definitely don't let them get away. They all suck. Google, Apple, etc might write better software than Microsoft but they still engage in similar behaviors I find objectionable. (And then I get modded down for saying it.)

      BTW I thought this article was interesting - Why Google is not the most-used browser. " Microsoft on Sunday posted an analysis of the web-browser usage-share measurement, noting that StatCounter's metrics are seriously skewed because of pre-rendering and other factors. As a result, Microsoft claims, StatCounter can't be trusted as a reliable source of information." http://www.winsupersite.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/microsoft-chrome-number-reports-142638

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    7. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google didn't spend decades ignoring security, stability, quality, and performance all while strong-arming providers into using their product. They didn't start a "software alliance" that focuses almost exclusively on piracy of MS products and provides incentives for people frame their employers for fun and profit. Apple didn't file lawsuits against open source projects trying to give people viable options.

      While MS is somewhat better behaved these days, and arguably focusing more on delivering a quality product than using questionable methods to achieve and maintain dominance, they still have a long and sordid history that doesn't just magically go away because they decided to start playing a bit nicer. Google has plenty of faults, but those who would compare it to MS in its heyday are either ignorant of the facts, or viewing history through rose colored glasses.

    8. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by cpu6502 · · Score: 4, Informative

      PAGE 2 of the FA

      "Why Microsoft is such a target for bashing"
      Microsoft is bashed so often (unfairly, in my opinion) because of past issues and the perceptions surrounding those issues, including:

      â-Microsoft was embroiled in antitrust matters. That's old news for Microsoft, but it may be novel for Apple, which is coming under government scrutiny, not that you hear much about it.
      â-Microsoft products are criticized for security holes -- that Vista filled in. Thanks to 10 years of its Trustworthy Computing effort, Microsoft is a leader in teaching the Secure Development Life Cycle methodology to other companies.
      â-Microsoft was criticized for not being innovative -- although the Xbox and the Kinect are two of the many areas showing just the opposite.
      â-Microsoft was criticized for being closed and guarded, and for not playing nice with other ecosystems -- despite, in recent years, the amazing amount of open information through MSDN blogs and an open source forum called Codeplex. The fact that Microsoft releases software for other platforms like Mac OS X and iOS should dispel this critique.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    9. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Informative

      Google's dominance in the search market is/was largely based upon technical merit. Also, Google has fairly limited lock-in to end users. You can switch to Bing, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, etc., very easily if you so choose.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    10. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Even IE 6 was good when it was released.

      So I see you're not a web developer. The problem with IE was not related to the user interface, or rendering speed, or security. The problem was proprietary extensions, which to some degree were intended to replace the standards. You coded your web page the standards-compliant way, or the microsoft way, or went to awful lengths to support both.

      Oh, and the user interface, rendering speed, and security were abysmal.

    11. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem was proprietary extensions, which to some degree were intended to replace the standards.

      At the time IE6 was released, yes, all browsers were pretty much "rubbish" when compared to the versions that are out there today. Having said that, I totally agree with the AC here. What Microsoft did was to make, and strongly push, their own products through somewhat insidious means. That horror called Sharepoint for example, ONLY worked with Internet Explorer. As Sharepoint was often sold to businesses who weren't that tech savvy, their users were forced into using IE. Sharepoint STILL does this today. While certain features do work cross browser these days, Sharepoint is still not by any means a web standards supporting CMS.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    12. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by nschubach · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Kinect was outright bought from another company if I remember correctly (PimeSense?). XBox I might give you but it's just a console running Microsoft Software... I would call it more evolution than innovation

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    13. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by celtic_hackr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps it can be explained this way.

      1) MS has been historically a bully and no one likes bullies.
      2) MS is still a bully, but now a bully with a gang of surrogates. Rather than doing the bullying out in the open they send their legions to do it.
      3) MS has been two-faced. "Do as I say, not as I do".
      4) MS is still two-faced.
      5) MS has been a thief, stealing other people's code. There are many lawsuits proving this. Stacker compression being just one case.
      6) MS has been petty to companies and yes the members of the press.
      7) Members of the press have long memories.
      8) This is getting to be a long list. you get the picture, I hope.
      9) There are lots of features in MS products that are there, because exactly one person asked for it. Making programs bulky, and error prone.
      10) MS products are millions of lines of code maintained with patch after patch over decades and reused, based on a design that lacked vision (which is admittedly a difficult thing to have, Steve Jobs was one of those few visionaries).

      The lesson we learn here is if you do evil, lack vision, are too greedy, and don't play nice with others, people won't like you. Hence MS is only reaping the rewards of decades of arduous planting of seeds they have sown. Or you reap what you sow.

    14. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by exomondo · · Score: 2

      The innovative part of kinect is the software, if you've tried the SDKs you'll find the one from microsoft is significantly better for gaming-related tasks than the OpenNI one, such as occluded joint estimation, head/hands/feet rotation, need for calibration, etc...

    15. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by mystikkman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Android was bought, so was multitouch technology in the iPhone and Siri and lots of other things. But you pick on MS, which is really proving the point of the article.

    16. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      While Google has a 90% share in the search market I don't really think they have a monopoly. They haven't locked people into their product and if it became inferior the market share would sink like a rock. Microsoft on the hand made sure that switching away from Windows, and Word was next to impossible, much to the detriment of the Industry as a whole in my opinion. You can see how they abandoned IE and still retained huge market share for years despite having an inferior browser. Apple does have a bit of lock in with iTunes and the App Store, but the fact is the are unambiguously making the best MP3 player and the best tablet, unlike Microsoft where many people though Windows was not the best OS and didn't deserve it's market share, people feel the it is right for Apple to have the market share it does.

    17. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 2

      In the 90s, MS didn't care about open source because it was a different market segment. You used Unix or (more rarely) BSD or Linux where you needed mainframes or Internet services (both of which were themselves rare during the 90s). In the 90s MS was focused on the goal of getting a desktop computer in every home and on every desk. They cared about ubiquitous computing for everybody (because they wanted to sell software to them), which is not at all what the open source community cared about (which cared about good software for computer experts and professionals that you could fix or improve on your own). Both MS and the open source community succeeded in their respective goals in the 90s, it should be noted.

      And it derided Apple because in the 90s Apple was shit. It only existed in art and publishing houses (thanks to Adobe) and schools (thanks to good marketing in the 80s and vendor lock-in). Why do you think the Internet Explorer/Office for Mac deal happened in 1997? Because Apple was shit.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    18. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by sjames · · Score: 2

      The answer to that question is that unlike MS, Google has never been caught using dirty tricks to kill a competing search engine or to leverage their dominance in search to lock out competition in other products. They don't (for example) make it impossible to use Hotmail if you use Google for searching.

      If they did anything like that, they *WOULD* become the IT presses favorite pinata.

    19. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      No the bugs in MS will not finalized in W3C. The box model was invented by MS and the W3C implemented differently.

      The pixel differences? Well is it stored as a double or float? That was not finalized either in 2001.

      The lockin was not enginered at all. Its just old and new. Netscape was so bad no web developer would dare use CSS unless it is for backgrounds or fonts or something very simple. Netscape was too flakey and IE did wonders.

      Go read slashdots hall of fame why do you still use Windows? Many readers who bash IE today say they use Windows becaue IE 6 is such a great browser! lol

      When IE 7 came out slashdot then bashed it for not supporting more standards. After IE 6 MS decided to wait until all standards were finalized first.

      Today Chrome is making the same mistakes at a record pace and so is Firefox! If W3C decides to have a different implemention for CSS 3 animations you will see a lot of pissed off webmasters and broken pages in all but IE. Corporate America is sticking with IE 9 for the reason its only updated once a year to avoid that mess.

      IE 6 is still a POS and a security nightmare. I am not defending it and IE 6 needed to die many many years ago. But it was a new technology and I hated the fact Netscape screwed up as I hated MS but started using IE 6 more and more until 2005 when Firefox started maturing. MS should not have been shit on because all the things that are old and non standard were experimental and bleeding edge back when mindspring.net and sites that resembled CraigsList with 1 pic dominated teh static web 1.0. The business users who keep forcing people to use it should be shit upon.

      I like Chrome, IE 9, FF 11, and Windows 7 in 2012. I would shoot myself if I were still using it in 2022. My God would my PC suck then with the same software. Same concept.

    20. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Shit one of my old Core2 desktops I retired just over a year ago still had an option for OS/2 Palete snopping and some Eisa settings. Keep in mind this was a 100% PCI board with just that and AGP 8x?

      XP as much as we hate it (some may love it) is not going away and the secure boot feature will be there to turn off for a very very long time for these reasons.

      I look forward to EFI and secureBoot. We can finally kill the 30 year old BIOS and get a less buggy system that can work in Linux and resume and hibernate better. I just wish there was a way to get other operating sytems like Linux to support it? Once the keys are let loose it becomes useless anyway. Perhaps a network way to get a PKI key?

      Rootkits are a HUGE problem and with secureboot I will finally not have to wipe my whole system in case I get an infection. :-)

    21. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Maestro4k · · Score: 2

      The article gives Kinect as an example of Microsoft's innovation. If it was bought, then it's not innovative from within MS. It may be innovative for the company they bought, but not for MS themselves. The same would (and does) go for Android, the iPhone, etc. (And the person you replied to didn't suggest otherwise, or even mention those products, that was your own suggestion.) Pointing this out is not "pick[ing] on MS", it's simply pointing out a problem with the facts of the article.

      On the other hand, holding Kinect out as an example of "innovation" shows a pro-MS bias because the Kinect wasn't actually invented internally at the company. MS may, or may not, be unfairly bashed. They may, or may not, be innovative. But this article's got issues and I don't think it proves anything other than the author's very pro-MS. The article should be taken with one very large grain of salt, as it's probably just shilling for ad views.

    22. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by starfishsystems · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why are you willing to let Google get away with monopolistic behavior that Microsoft gets crucified for?

      Google has market share because it provides services that people want to use. It's not above criticism, and it bears watching if only because it's got fingers in so many pies. But so far, I haven't seen compelling evidence that Google is evil. And neither have the courts.

      Microsoft has market share because it historically used every means, fair and foul, to lock customers into its products, intimidate vendors into incorporating its products, and crush, absorb, or threaten competitors to its products. Not only did Microsoft make crappy software, it did so strategically. Microsoft still threatens Linux with unspecified patent violations. Oh yeah, and stacking the ISO standards committee so it could get its bloated and patent-encumbered XML standard ratified. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist in both the US and the EU.

      What was your point again?

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    23. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by Fluffeh · · Score: 2

      Anything ActiveX for a start, but seriously, run a quick google, you might learn something.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    24. Re:Microsoft Deserves It by sootman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a link for you. Is "microsoft.com" a good enough source? http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263526.aspx

      "Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 supports several commonly used Web browsers. This article describes different levels of Web browser support [emphasis mine], browser compatibility for published sites, and how ActiveX controls affect features... SharePoint Server 2010 supports several commonly used Web browsers. However, certain Web browsers might cause some SharePoint Server 2010 functionality to be downgraded, limited, or available only through alternative steps."

      There's more to the world than just IE and Firefox on Windows. I work in a large publishing company (1,000s of employees) and we're close to 50% Mac overall. (And it's about 90% in design, production, etc.--you know, the departments that actually make what the company sells.) There is a LOT of key stuff in SP that doesn't work, or doesn't work well, on a Mac.

      And in other news, here's how MS thinks Wiki software (and HTML in general) should work.
      http://imgur.com/IaHTb
      1) The whole point of Wikis is that you can edit them WITHOUT knowing HTML -- just use *, #, etc.
      2) <strong> and <b> tags?!?!? <font> tags in 2012? Makes me want to shoot myself in the back of the head... twice.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  3. Witness the power of competent PR! by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What you're describing is the difference between a giant, scary company with a good PR department, and one that has no idea how to sell their brand. I think it's that simple.

    1. Re:Witness the power of competent PR! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And I remember that people used to say Microsoft was only big because they had good marketing.

      It's almost as if it's more than just PR, for long-term success you actually need to make a product that people want and can use.

      It's almost as if people have forgotten about Microsoft's antitrust conviction now that we're ten years out from the end of the trial.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  4. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are we really entertaining the topic of Facebook getting a free pass on PR? They get slammed every time a privacy issue comes up;

    Likewise Apple gets hammered every time there's an iphone glitch or IOS issue effecting battery life.

    Google? You mean the near universal punching bag for reasons why "do no evil" cannot be their motto?

  5. Are you kidding me? by dell623 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft has been left relatively alone while Google and Facebook and Apple have faced the most severe scrutiny of late. Also the fact that conversation about the patent wars is dominated by Florian Mueller and people quoting Florian Mueller has meant Microsoft has got off very lightly, even in its extremely dubious attempts to collect royalty for Android based on software patents, and attemps at bullying smaller companies like BArnes and Noble: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2011111122291296

    Or the fact that despite anti trust rulings, we still get Windows bundled with all non Apple laptops with no option to avoid paying for it, and IE is still bundled?

    No, they still get off too lightly.

  6. Did Fox News write this? by gatfirls · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This reads just like one of their whiny op-eds about the liberal media only focusing on republicans (and of course they're all lies or exaggerations).

    1. Re:Did Fox News write this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Did Fox News write this?

      J. Peter Bruzzese did. He's simply a

      Microsoft MVP, Triple-MCSE, MCT, MCITP: Messaging. J.P.B. is the Enterprise Windows columnist for InfoWorld and an avid Windows and Exchange advocate.

      Why wouldn't he be fair and balanced?

  7. Cry Me A River by fwarren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is the circle of life.

    Once upon a time, it was IBM who had every misstep reported as evil and Microsoft was the could-do-no-wrong company,.

    Twenty years from now, No one will talk about Microsoft at all, though they will still be in business. Everyone will jump on the evil that Google does, and no matter what they do, OCP (or the current new kid on the block) will do no wrong.

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
    1. Re:Cry Me A River by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      >>>Microsoft was the could-do-no-wrong company

      I don't remember that.
      I've thought PCs and their MS-OS have sucked for as long as I remember. There was Commodore, Atari, Apple..... and then that boring beast called the IBM/Microsoft PC that everyone associated with work (slow, no music, almost no color, and definitely not cutting-edge).

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  8. I Concur by deweyhewson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have my issues with Microsoft, and enough of them to preclude any possibility of me ever becoming a fanboy no matter how much I may like a certain number of their products, but I agree with the assessment in this article.

    Apple gets a pass because they have better marketing than God, and, as a result, a more loyal religion. Facebook gets a pass because they are everybody's favorite virtual hangout spot. Google gets a pass because they've long been thought of as almost an interchangeable term with "the internet" and they're constant, but undeserved, refrain of "don't be evil". But Microsoft? They're like the tech world's Yankees. They've dominated for so long, and in many ways so unfairly (at least in the past), that it doesn't matter how good of a show they put on because everybody is just showing up to boo them.

    I suppose every story needs a villain, though. IBM is too far removed from consumers' minds to fill that role, anymore. Perhaps it is the inevitable karma of their past monopolist actions catching up to them, but it certainly seems as though Microsoft have become the pariah at the party these days.

    1. Re:I Concur by tbannist · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't really see it. It looks to me like a Microsoft partisan is pulling the old "liberal media" trick of accusing everyone else to be biased so that he'll look less biased. The guy making the complaint is intricately tied to Microsoft (he's Microsoft VIP, and MSCE, a Microsoft Partner...), these are facts that he neglected to mention in the article because they might lead people to rightly believe that his reporting might have a pro-Microsoft bias.

      Also I've never heard of the controversy he claims gets "so much attention". It's biased reporting of the worst sort.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  9. That some serious myopia by IQGQNAU · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly how far back does your memory go? For decades while Microsoft held power over all computers that mattered the press was overwhelming pro-M$. A big part of that was of course because they poured an enormous amount of money into the publishers' coffers. Even whole publishers owed their existence to M$ and never would be heard a discouraging word (ever heard of Ziff-Davis?). Then there was this little thing of being convicted of illegal antitrust market manipulation and a few folks woke up to the idea that it is possible that not everything M$ puts out smells all that sweet.

  10. I think it's getting better in fact by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 2

    Slashdot finally got rid of the Borg Gates image after all and people who still type M$ are openly mocked.

  11. Microsoft earned their bad reputation the hard way by Omnifarious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And they haven't really done anything that dispells that reputation. Their recent attempt at bullying with patents is a case in point.

    But I still agree with the article. But that's because I don't think Apple or Google are appropriately taken to task for some things they do that are wrong. Particularly Apple.

  12. Selection Bais by jythie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It all depends on who you listen to and which negative coverage you 'notice'. Microsoft gets tons of praise and has an army of fanboys, just like Apple and Google and Facebook, each of which seems to feel that their brand is under constant attack while the 'others' get off easy.

  13. Media bias? by SpaceCracker · · Score: 2

    I don't know if the media is biased against MS or not . I know I am.

    --
    sigo ergo sum
  14. self biased resistor by anomaly256 · · Score: 2

    I think this article is itself media bias. Apparently the author forgot about the epic lawsuits and class actions both google and apple faced for their handling of wifi logging for location services, google's street view wrist-slaps, and the very recent '4G in Australia' issue apple is currently being litigated for.

    People don't 'bash microsoft into the ground' and more than they do the other 'The Man's. And to claim they do is itself dishonest, pro-microsoft bias.

  15. Bias thy name is Gartner by gelfling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gartner couldn't be any more insanely pro MS if they were branded a subsidiary of MS.

  16. Media vs tech media by MrEricSir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the media, sure. Apple is always launching new gizmos and the media eats it up like a child on Christmas morning. They can't help it if it's a slow news day.

    But do tech publications have the same bias? Seems unlikely to me; there's always stories on Slashdot criticising Apple (and Google, and Microsoft.) Same goes for any other tech news site I've seen, baring 9to5mac and such.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Media vs tech media by samkass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not even in the media. When is the last time you heard about the labor practices that go into making Android handsets? Despite the fact that Apple seems to be the only company willing to try to improve things, and that the Foxconn factory that made Microsoft Xbox parts was the subject of the threatened mass suicide recently, it was all reported as "Apple's supplier". Or environmentalists railing on Apple over their "disposable" culture when Apple's products are some of the most recyclable and their programs some of the best at doing so?

      Apple is definitely not getting a free pass lately. If anything, Microsoft's foray into cellphones is getting a free pass, as is Android's attempts at a tablet. They're treated with kid gloves because they're not Apple.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    2. Re:Media vs tech media by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The media always goes after the biggest target. For much of the last two decades that has been Microsoft, but now as they're browser share slips badly and their latest foray into the smartphone market still isn't lighting fireworks, well, Apple is the guy to beat on. Google and Facebook get a lot more heat in Europe than here, maybe because everyone here has already sold their souls to those particular privacy devils already.

      Frankly, I'm seeing a lot less negative MS stories on Slashdot these days. To some extent, I'm seeing a lot less Microsoft stories period. Desktops aren't sexy things any more, nobody really gives a crap about the next version of Windows. Windows 8 buzz lasts exactly as long as the space between the latest story on Google being bashed by German courts or Apple being nailed for the number of Chinese get buried for every thousand iPods produced. Microsoft is a middle aged company now, and it really isn't doing anything terribly interesting or even inflammatory, or at least nothing that's nearly as interesting as Apple getting nailed as part of an e-book cartel.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Media vs tech media by Benaiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Between 98 and windows xp Microsoft was probably at the height of their power. They were on everyone's PC, everyone's laptop. There wasn't a viable alternative because they had all the Apps! Fast forward to Vista and you see that Microsoft squandered their position. They lost touch with their market, fed them hype and shit and delivered a product that didn't work... then we had a failed phone, a failed zune and whatever else that never saw the light of day... Windows 7 is an improvement over Vista but really that's not a comparison that even Microsoft wants to make. With windows 8 and the tablet market heating up there really is potential for Microsoft to "innovate" and develop an O/S that runs the same application on a Arm tablet all the way up to an i7 desktop.

      So do they deserve the bashing they get? Damn right they do. Do evil was there motto there for a while, as well as charge more for less. Buy out a product just to destroy it, charge outrageous prices for licensing and just generally piss everyone off. On the other hand look at google maps. what a brilliant tool that we all rely on that got released for free... Google mail offering 1gb instead of 1mb at Hotmail. Facebook hasn't done anything of note yet, but Apple (which I do bash constantly) releases a new and evolutionary tool every year that is compatible with old. Playstation should be taking notes and following in their footsteps. So yeah, Microsoft is the herpes of the world.

    4. Re:Media vs tech media by tgeek · · Score: 2

      The media always goes after the biggest target. . . .

      Perfectly stated! Whether the target merits the negative attention or not matters little to the media. The leader in any industry is going to have a big bullseye painted on their back. Pick any industry: Fast food? McDonalds. Brick and mortar retail? Walmart. Online retail? Amazon. Desktop Software? Microsoft.

    5. Re:Media vs tech media by T-Bone-T · · Score: 4, Funny

      You've got that right about Microsoft cellphones. I never hear of them outside tech blogs.

    6. Re:Media vs tech media by minderaser · · Score: 2

      When is the last time you heard about the labor practices that go into making Android handsets?

      That's just dumb. Android is not a singular product made by a singular manufacturer. Sure, if you want to criticise one the the many companies who make products that us Android as the OS, then that's okay. And I might even agree with you. But to act like Android there's a singular entity behind making products that use Android is just silly.

      ...Microsoft's foray into cellphones is getting a free pass, as is Android's attempts at a tablet.

      There you go again. Android itself is not trying to do anything. It's just an OS that other people use.

    7. Re:Media vs tech media by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      The last M$ trigger for hate was them charging more for some truly off patent licences on Android phones than they were charging for Windows phone OS. Now that is about as anti-competitive as it gets.

      Apple is simply better at manipulating it's marketing dollar that M$. Note, positive Apple stories often appear with Apple advertising, this is not by accident, Apple has paid for those stories by buying the associated advertising space.

      Google is very subtle in it's advertising, your don't really see it but it's all about those good news Google stories. Googles simply aligns some of it's investment strategies to create good news stories.

      We've all seen the PR=B$ cycles of charity washing and, green washing, where corporations make huge announcements about the efforts in those areas to hide their gross misdeeds in other areas. Catch is the internet eats that stuff alive because the miss deeds are no longer forgotten in the next news cycle but they are keep alive on the internet for years and when a mass of them builds up they create a tsunami of bad news that wipes out the carefully fabricated PR=B$ facade.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:Media vs tech media by Xeranar · · Score: 2

      The problem I see with this argument facing labor issues is that Google has next to no authority over the third party corporations that produce the handsets. I'm an outspoken supporter of fair trade and better labor practices. I'm frustrated that all of our electronics are produced in near-slave conditions but Apple as a direct manufacturer (sub-contracted or not) has a much greater hand in the dealings of Foxconn than Google ever did. I give you once the Motorola acquisition is complete they'll be as responsible but that won't be for atleast some time still.

      Also, lets not lie about Apple "trying to improve things" since they shipped the last of their jobs overseas and make a profit of $575 on each iPhone sold. They could easily bring the entire production line home and pay excellent wages and still profit $200+ per phone. Apple has no interest in that so lets not get into that sort of "they're trying!" talk because it simply is not true.

      If anything the media is run by a surprisingly small circle of individuals. Much as we picture the media as these monolithic creatures with vast resources most of those resources are NOT spent on reporting or research. Mainstream media treat technology like they treat science, each new product is an awesome advancement in our society. In the tech media environment it becomes a bit of a value judgment rule where most products are built with commodity parts and thus who puts those parts to the best use for the price tends to get the highest praise. Even now Windows has the largest installation base by such a long shot on the Desktop market that even the slight dent in it made news for Apple shows that it isn't about showing the reality but painting the narrative. Especially as the media becomes consumed by the Apple-classism products that "just work" or rather "just make me look like I can afford to not work" they're going to garner more random support articles as they win the value judgment battles.

  17. Because no one want them to win by nzac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are no longer seen as tech leaders but as a company that forces you buy from them.
    While they get lucky with a few products their innovation generally appears as incompetent and poorly implemented (such as Win 8).
    Most people don't like having to buy an updated version of windows and office every few years and start to think another company might be able do a better job.

  18. Heinlein summed it up best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heinlein summed it up best: "Everybody hates the fat kid." Microsoft was a media darling in the early '90s when it was a growth company; the little scrappy newcomer fighting against big bad IBM and their bloated, overpriced systems. Once they were #1, press coverage gradually turned against them and they became the new IBM: big, bad M$ and their bloated, overpriced software.

    Some of you may have noticed the same thing happening to Google over the past few years. I see more and more negative news stories on them every year. Soon, they'll be hated too.

  19. Bullies by sgrover · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bullies have to work extremely hard to loose their reputation as a bully. Non-bullies who mess up are worthy of more lee-way.

  20. How quaint... by namgge · · Score: 2

    ...someone who expects 'the media' to be 'unbiased'. Here's a clue for you: there is no such thing as an unbiased news report.

  21. Re:The Official Slashdot Hate List by c0lo · · Score: 2

    7. Monster Cables

    I was with you up to "monster cables". Now, that's utterly BS: how can one hate monster cables? (I gotta love them, e.g. no geek would be able to blame superluminal neutrinos on Tuscan milk).

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  22. Re:One of these doesn't belong. by thestudio_bob · · Score: 2

    ...but I still get the opinion that they value the people that use their productions...

    With google, YOU are the product.

    (Assuming you meant products, instead of productions.)

    --
    The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
  23. The Cure For Media Bias by sk999 · · Score: 3, Funny

    If anyone thinks Microsoft is being criticized unfairly, the cure is easy. Just head over to Rob Enderle's website: www.enderlegroup.com. Here are some recent articles:

    "Is Google Facing the Beginning of the End?"
    "The New iPad: Apple lowers the bar"
    "Windows 8 vs. OS X Mountain Lion -- why Apple Suddenly Sucks"

    Your esteem for Microsoft will return to an all-time high.

  24. pop quiz, Mr. J. Peter Bruzzese by Phantom+Gremlin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which of the following four companies is a convicted monopolist?
    a) Microsoft
    b) Apple
    c) Facebook
    d) Google

    The correct answer is "a" (Microsoft). The leadership that festered that predatory behavior is still at Microsoft. Bill Gates is Chairman, Steve Ballmer is CEO. That's why Microsoft's actions warrant careful scrutiny.

    It's unfortunate that the "editors" allowed themselves to be trolled this way.

  25. Re:If software companies were spouses... by mykro76 · · Score: 2
    (fixed formatting, sorry!)

    Microsoft: You had to marry me, your parents gave you no other choice. Well, I cheated on you. Many times. And you can't do anything about it.

    Apple: If you wanna marry me, it's gonna cost you a huge dowry. It's your choice, but once you're in you have to do everything my way. I wear the pants here.

    Google: You can marry me if you want or not. It'll be an open relationship, we'll try lots of new things. You might not like some of the things I do, but you can leave any time.

    Is it any wonder that the Microsoft way breeds the most resentment?