Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's "New Coke" Moment?
theodp writes "Remember New Coke? Twenty-eight years ago, Coca-Cola replaced the secret formula of its flagship brand, only to announce the return of the "classic" formula just 79 days later. Had it launched in 2013, Coke's Jay Moye suspects a social media backlash would have prompted it to reverse itself even sooner. In a timely follow-up, ZDNet's Steven Vaughan-Nichols points out that Microsoft is facing its own New Coke moment with Windows 8. 'Does Ballmer have the guts to admit he made a mistake and give users what they clearly want?' Vaughan-Nichols asks. 'While it's too late for Windows 8, Blue might give us back our Start button and an Aero-like interface. We don't know.'"
Seems like Microsoft already had their 'New Coke' moment with Vista.
Two failures in three OS launches is going to be a lot more difficult for the shareholders to get over.
Rarely ever will a CEO admit a mistake. It's the user's fault for not loving it.
I'll debate that while New Coke didn't work out, the aftermath resulted in Coke classic dominating the cola wars with a solid lead for decades now.
If it wasn't for new Coke, Pepsi would have overtaken Coke in the mid 80's and never looked back.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Bob
Me
Vista
Clippy
Zune
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Windows 8 doesn't suck because of the lack of a start button.
It doesn't suck because of a lack of an Aero like interface
The Metro interface doesn't suck
Windows 8 sucks because it flips between the classic and the metro interface seemingly at random. Yes, we computer folks know that it depends on whether the program has been written as a metro program or a classic one, but from the start screen there is no way to tell what interface you'll end up in when you click on a program. And I'm pretty sure that consistency is one of the central tenets of good UI design.
Here's your cheque.
I switched to OSX about a year ago, and while it has its shiny moments, it also has lots of blunders and I wouldn't really say that it's a better desktop than Windows 7. Besides, calling "standard desktop OS" something that has ~10% market share is ... funny.
The problem with Microsoft is after they got to a certain size they started taking on characteristics of IBM. It does seem that the attitude is "they'll take what we give them." Their decisions about their products always seem to be based on what is good for THEM and what they want reality to be rather than what is good for users and what actual reality is.
The problem with the "LOW MARKET SHARE!!1!!" comments is that you're talking about a company having a 10% of a market worth billions of dollars. I will take 10% of a billion dollars any day of the week.
Apple *is* getting converts in key sectors and if Microsoft continues to blunder and do whatever the fuck they want they will get more. Microsoft won't go anywhere - there are too many Microsoft zombies in upper management - but to roll out the "low market share" argument is absurd here when Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
The whole point of the Metro interface is to be inconsistent with the old UI.
How else can you charge developers for writing an application they could have just as easily have written using the old interface for free?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
What these critics all miss is that Microsoft is now betting on the tablet market, and doesn't give a damn what its PC users think.
I loved the flavor of new Coke. The Edsel was an innovative automobile. I still have Vista installed on my PC. I plan to upgrade to the Windows 8 experience. I am insane.
Apple *is* getting converts in key sectors
No its not...and it won't Apple will never be a serious contender for the Desktop, it simply costs too much. Sales dropped 22% last quarter...and shrunk a more manageable 2% this, but any pretence of world domination, or mass exodus to Apple simply aren't happening.
The reality is Apple could buy Dell (about 22 times), or they could License their OS, but if anything they have got used to relying on Microsoft being so awful..they get to roll around on wads of cash...and even though the salesman is dead, Cooky seems indent on second guessing what a dead man will do.
I love the idea of Apple going for Microsofts throat, but they Love the incredibly profitable Duopoly. It looks like companies are putting bets on Android...and Linux is sneaking market share.
OS X may be "much better than both Windows and Linux desktops" but it will never be the "standard desktop OS". Apple's business model presents itself as the premium option, not the standard one, and Apple would just as soon see OS X die in favor of iOS.
A desktop line consisting of gimmicky miniature, an all-in-one, and and overpriced, functionally obsolete deskside doesn't make for standard even if it makes for the standard for you.
^^ It's more of a company tradition.
You can't be serious. Windows 8 makes it damn near impossible to run a multi-windowed environment - which is what the OS was named for. It is pretty clear that Microsoft panicked with the tablet boom and forced a tablet onto a desktop. Yes, tablets are probably going to be used for a single app at a time, but I still need a desktop that let's me access multiple windows at once since I normally run about 13 applications at once.
Windows 8 sucks at every single level. Even the Metro interface, while the design is interesting and unique, ultimately isn't all that use friendly. Very few applications have actually done something useful with live tiles, and the whole pastel colour thing goes to hell when other apps choose to make multi colour logos instead of the style Microsoft uses. Install a few apps and the whole metro screen looks dreadful and unwieldy and unusable. It's like Android widgets, clever idea but I haven't seen anything beyond weather widgets that you would really want on your home screen. And it's now so quick and simple to get to much used apps or Google Now, and sharing is so easy in Android, widgets seem pretty superfluous except as shortcuts to apps.
That is on top of the other issues. The one reason I haven't switched to Macs until now is that the easy familiarity and efficiency with using Windows will take some time to learn on a Mac. Windows 8 kills that argument, a few minutes with it and I realize if I am learning something new I might as well move to Mac. And maybe if Windows 8 followed Vista we would be more open to it. The problem is Windows 7 is so amazingly good at staying out of the way and letting you get things done, it makes Win 8 even more jarring.
Windows 8 is also being pushed out on the same cheap laptops with low res screens and awful touchpads, where a gesture based interface is no fun to use. I got one for my mother, and I regret not just getting a chromebook. As soon as Google get proper offline editing of MSOffice files, chrome will become a better option for so many people.
I've been in the business since DOS4 and Windows 3.0 were the currently shipping versions. Windows 8 is the only version I have seen where people around you will spontaneously chime in and tell you how much they hate it. Even WinME wasn't like that.
I switched to OSX about a year ago, and while it has its shiny moments, it also has lots of blunders and I wouldn't really say that it's a better desktop than Windows 7. Besides, calling "standard desktop OS" something that has ~10% market share is ... funny.
I don't think he meant it like that, i.e. in terms of market share. You are too stuck in the MS fanboy idea of Windows, Excel, Word etc. and their market share making them 'Industry Standards'. He probably meant more like that OS X is becoming more of a benchmark/reference point to measure your own Desktop OSes usability against than Windows is, i.e. that people are more likely to steal ideas from OS X than Windows 8. Of course you may disagree on whether OS X is the best UI ever made. Having used both I'd say it's better than Windows if only because OS X has a lower UI friction factor, although Windows 7 made major strides in that department so it's less of a factor than it was in the time of XP and Vista. I don't think anybody will be using Windows 8 as a usability reference UI any time soon. If OS X was discontinued tomorrow my next choice would probably be Gnome 3, bugs and all rather than either Windows 7 or 8.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
That is a fairly low bar, I have more cash on hand than the federal government as I don't run a deficit.
Time to offend someone
Aw hell, you didn't even include the REALLY costly fuckups, like 1.-Pushing out the X360 with a 2 billion dollar hardware flaw, 2.-Killing playsforsure (that was not only gaining against iTunes but had created a whole new media rental model that would have given them a better foothold in the living room) for the DOA Zune market, 3.-8 billion for Skype, 4.-6 billion for that ad company they had to write down, 4.- I can't remember how much Ballmer pissed away buying the Kin and Sidekick but they weren't cheap...is there any more I'm missing?
What SJVN is missing is the big picture which is thus...the SECOND that it was reported that Apple was the largest company the ballmernator totally flipped his shit and since then has been in total panic mode. What you see happening with MSFT is NOT a company trying to innovate, because if that were the case they would LISTEN to all the feedback they are getting and use that info to make their products better,what we are seeing instead is "ZOMFG teh press says teh phone and tablet is teh hotness and we ain't got no hotness! Quick, no matter what it costs get us teh hotness!" while ignoring the facts which are that MSFT has NEVER been the cool and trendy company and its X86 software that has given them a monopoly and its the reason people buy Windows NOT because they feel fuzzy about the WinFlag or give a rat's ass about the "Microsoft ecosystem" that Win 8 tries so pathetically to shove onto users.
I think the next release will be the turning point, I really do, either they listen to their customers or everyone is gonna start looking at exit strategies. I honestly never thought I'd see the day but look at the evidence, you got the OEMs on the phone with Google and putting out Chromebooks. This is a bad indicator for MSFT right here as you haven't been able to get non Windows X86 from the mainstream OEMs since OS/2 was canceled because to do so was the kiss of death. Then you have Valve, which has doubled their profits 7 years in a row and the biggest gaming service by far not only publicly saying Win 8 is shit but actually releasing a client for Linux, Finally you got no less than chipzilla itself talking about its $200 ANDROID laptops. Intel and MSFT was bestest of friends, remember? when even Intel doesn't have their backs you know MSFT is in deep shit.
So Ballmer better be ready and willing to suck it up and listen to the customers because i don't think they can survive two bombs in a row, i really don't. After all the OEMs have to have an OS that will move hardware and Win 8 is a giant DO NOT WANT when it comes to consumers. i mean for fucks sake they spent more than 2 BILLION on ads for Win 8 and got less than 4 million sales, and that was with them practically giving it away at a lousy $40! It should be obvious to everyone that his idea of turning Windows into a premium brand has failed, the Ultrabooks didn't sell for squat and the touchscreen laptops sold even less, so this is it, sink or swim time.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
"I am altering the OS, pray I don't alter it any further."
— Darth Ballmer.
At least Intel spends about 25% of its revenue on R&D. That kind of justifies the 70% margins. Actually, Intel shows 58% gross margins in Q2 2012, but that is still really high. http://www.intc.com/financials.cfm
Every single level? That's a bit over the top. I hit Windows-D to see the standard desktop and suddenly things are more familiar. When I want to launch something that I don't have a link for already on the traditional desktop, I hit windows and start to type the name of the program. It quickly finds it, I hit Enter and it launches. Maybe I'm more keyboard-centric than the average user, but I've found Win8 to be non-issue. If users are simply shown how to get away from the metro interface, it's really not so different.
If you have web software that requires IE on Windows to work, the problem is on your end.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
My laptop started chugging on Windows 7. I noticed a performance increase on my netbook when I previously tested Windows 8, so I thought I would give it another try,
I have to admit, it works wonderfully. The system definitely performs better and the interface on Windows 8 is nice.
Here comes the obvious: Metro is pretty shit.
The full screen apps are useless and the main interface has no appeal. You know what my biggest problem is? The thing that bothers me the most? When I search for a program, there is no default "Show All". First it only shows programs installed, and then "Settings". Often I'm using it to find windows components like Device Manager, and it requires additional mouse clicks and movements to get there. Likewise on a tablet, it would require more touches. It's the simplest, most obvious thing, and if they overlook little things like this I don't have much hope for the rest of Metro.
The OS itself it pretty nice though.
Also, they seem to have the "good 10%". The part of the computer market that actually doesn't mind spending a little extra money to get a well built product. They are making lots of money in profits. They have ignored the $300 laptop market for a reason. There is very little profit to be made in that sector. Their cheapest laptop is around $1000 for the Mac Book Air. Saying that 10% market share is doing badly while still making tons of profits is just stupid.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Metro would be ok as a concept at least if it was a Windows component you could choose to install.
Look at Windows Media Centre for example - outside of a media PC there will be many Vista and 7 owners who never use it, and aren't affected by it even being installed. There are others, such as myself, who use WMC daily in the lounge, on a PC that is sat inside a AV cabinet operated by a remote control.
This is critical to understanding why Metro is such a failure. People with desktop computers will likely be sitting some distance from their monitor, and it would be uncomfortable in most cases for them to operate its touchscreen when it sits vertical on the desk. Notwithstanding that usability issue I would assume that it is still the case today that the vast majority of Vista/7 users do not have touchscreens, and in my experience Metro is pretty underwhelming without one. The use of a touchscreen is antithetical to using a desktop computer for the most part, yet MS seemed to think that the transition would be fluid and that the marketplace was just crying out for someone to fill this void.
This would all be just a misstep if it were possible to get to the main Windows desktop and stay there and retain all of the functionality you had in Windows 7 (Start button, etc). Instead Metro apps and utilities drop you to the old desktop seemingly on a whim and without warning, which is quite jarring, and you can't even really choose to stay there if you wanted to with ease (at least not without third party utilities to help you recreate the old UX). It is quite a shock to drop from Metro to the old desktop, the UX is completely different - which is fine for a seasoned user but is it really the experience MS wanted people to have?
That W8 drops you to desktop with a totally different UI smacks of MS really not having a clear direction or dedication to Metro, which is something you can't really say of Apple for example. Apple are notorious for having a walled garden approach to their software, and the OSX UX is very much "they'll take what we give them", but Apples customer base is used to that UX, they are familiar with it, and it is not change for changes sake.
Metro would've imo made a great Windows component in the same vein as Windows Media Centre - something you can choose to install or even boot to IF you want to, as it is it's an affront.
I don't care for Windows 8 as much as the next guy, but they're not going to reverse field; Microsoft is all in on this.
I'm sure if you had asked Coke executives in May-June 1985, all of them would have said they were "all in" on New Coke. People generally don't attain high-level executive positions by being indecisive or publicly showing doubt. But when customers don't want to buy the product you're selling now, and they want to buy the product you used to sell but don't any more, then it doesn't take a marketing genius to figure out what you should do. And if you don't make that decision on your own, then eventually someone higher up will do it for you. If not the leader of the Windows team, then Ballmer. If not Ballmer, then the Board of Directors. And if not the Board, then ultimately Wall Street.
Still doesn't make OS X the standard. And Microsoft is in the enterprise not because of "Windows Zombies" but because they offer the enterprise tools. OS X server is a joke, especially since the further dumbing down in 10.8.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
It took me 15 minutes to figure out how to shut down my computer in Window 8. Windows 7, you press the windows button and there's a shut down option.
This industry can turn on you in an instant (Well a decade-long instant, you really have to not be paying attention.) Look at Sun, no one ever thought anything would take them down. A decade before Sun went under, I attended a Linux con in Denver and had some SGI rep try to convince me that his company was crapping daisies and unicorns. I asked him point blank why I should buy a storage solution from him when I knew for a fact that IBM would be here two decades from now. He then tried to blow some marking smoke up my ass, but their company sank shortly thereafter. I started seeing the same writing on the wall for Sun later on, and they were gone a couple years later. I really feel like these guys believed their marketing and thought nothing could take them down. Well these days Microsoft's competitors are VERY quick on their feet and can take over emerging markets before Microsoft's lumbering behemoth even realizes there's something to take over. So they're coming in against already-established and VERY popular players. So unless Microsoft loses the complacency and learns how to compete in this new era, the gutted remains of their company will join Sun and all the others in the "Also-Ran" bin of history. This is not an anti-Microsoft rant. This is a warning.
My guess is the future will be pretty robust competition between an Android-based Google OS and OSX. Though I'm still not sure about Apple without Steve Jobs' vision to keep them rolling. Plus, once they exhaust the world's supply of brushed aluminum, things will get difficult for them, too.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
http://www.classicshell.net/ I recommend this to everyone who's complained to me about Metro. For a bonus it customizes the Start Menu and Explorer. No Windows 8 isn't bad, just the forced mobile GUI was a bad choice. You lost the mobile war M$. Foisting your mobile GUI on desktop users isn't going to increase the love.
FTFY.
The other 2 central principles of Discoverability and Visibility, Metro fails at both of these as well. I accidentally opened a PDF in metro and after 5 minutes had to google how to close the app.
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. I'm head IT manager so let's use my company as an example. I checked when our bosses wanted to get a mac for media editing (which is comical by itself). It works with exactly zero of our software suites. ZERO. No CRM, no office, no database apps, nothing. In fact, Firefox and Safari don't work with our ASP software either. Macs are toys for clueless rich people and have no place whatsoever in a professional environment. Forget compatibility, just go with cost. It's an idiotic choice.
Dude, you need to calm down. Every single one of your complaints is about cross platform issues If you designed your infrastructure with only Windows in mind and didn't factor in portability needs you have only yourself to blame. You might as well be complaining that pickup trucks are crappy pieces of equipment because they have zero parts commonality with your companies bulldozers.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
That is a fairly low bar, I have more cash on hand than the federal government as I don't run a deficit.
No... In reality you don't have more cash than the government, because you are the government. People forget that anything that is done by the government is done in their names, whether they like it or not. So that deficit... yeah, it's your deficit too... Maybe if more people understood this we would have better government.
It took me 15 minutes to figure out how to shut down my computer in Window 8. Windows 7, you press the windows button and there's a shut down option.
And, as I've posted previously, there's a good chance you didn't really shut down the computer - instead you just logged out and hibernated. (Which is what "shutdown" does now.)
Actually shutting down the computer all the way involves a hidden setting somewhere in the power options - you have to "change what the power buttons do" and then uncheck "fast startup." Only then will shutting down the computer allow you to do a clean boot at a later point in time.
As an additional exercise, figure out how to log out. Remember how it always used to be an option in the shutdown menu? It's not any more.
The answer: turns out your account name on the start screen can be clicked on. I never noticed it was even there until it was pointed out to me, because my use of the Windows 8 start menu was almost exclusively "press start key, type search terms" - which makes the username vanish.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
It really is amazing how long that train wreck has been going on without anyone driving the engine realizing they are in fact wrecking. With most of the passengers telling them they're wrecking. And people standing by the side of the track. And the guys shoveling coal into the... uh... fireplace? Trains have conductors, right? I guess the conductor would be Balmer. Or the engineer, which I think are on the train itself for some reason.
I... I don't really know how trains work, but I'm refusing to admit I've made a mistake with this metaphor. Which I feel is probably a better metaphor for the MS situation.
Oh there was more wrong with Vista than just UAC and a few flaky drivers and SP1 didn't fix jack shit on that OS, in fact IME it caused at least 1 problem for every 2 that it fixed. And I wasn't running a machine that should have ANY trouble with it, while it wasn't the cutting edge a 3.6GHz P4 with HT, 3GB of RAM and a 7600GS was a pretty nice system in 07 and Vista still ran like shit.
That is why I'm quick to call bullshit on those that try to claim that Win 7 is just Vista SE, if you had actually ran Vista you would know that is NOT the case. I ran Vista and even after the SPs they just couldn't fix the issues with that OS, the "senior moments" where the UI would just hang up for a second or two, the way it would just "forget" about network shares and refuse to see them until a restart, its lousy file transfers, its just a bad OS no matter how you slice it. Contrast this with Win 7 which was the first OS from MSFT since Win2K where I could say without hesitation "This upgrade is worth it, no hesitation or reservation", those two OSes are like night and day and trying to say win 7 is Vista SE is like saying XP is WinME SE since they both have desktops.
But Win 8 is a puzzler, how they could go from such a solid release with Win 7 to such a clusterfuck is beyond me. You'd think that the point of having public alpha and beta builds would be to get feedback and fix the problems but not on Ballmer's watch, MSFT didn't have a single positive metric, not one, the beta testers hated it, the tech reviewers hated it, and these aren't haters, we're talking about guys like Bott and Thurott that can usually be counted on for a good review so when even the "go to" guys hate it? You'd think that would have sent up a red flag.
If Ballmer doesn't pull his head out of his ass (or the board fire his sweaty behind) and actually listen to their customers? Well i have a feeling that the EOL of Win 7 in 2020 will only be a footnote, a "Hey, remember when we used Windows?" story that nobody but a few legacy customers gives a crap about.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I think you are wrong and here is why...While MSFT has enough cash to survive 2, hell maybe even 3 Vistabombs the OEMs can't and they can't afford to just sit on the sidelines for another year without shit to sell.
So either the OEMs have a living shitfit and get Win 7 licenses to sell, like they did with XP when Vista cratered, or they will have no choice but to go with another OS, probably a mix of ChromeOS and Android. They really don't have a choice and as much as Ballmer would like to pretend he works in Cupertino and that MSFT can just ditch the OEMs and sell MSFT hardware with MSFT OSes tied into a MSFT ecosystem the reality is its the OEMs and their cutthroat pricing that has kept Windows in the mainstream, no way in hell folks are gonna start paying a grand a pop for a MSFT branded PC, not gonna happen.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Yeah I been making some nice money wiping Win 8 for 7, just like I did Vista for XP, but in this case i really wish i wasn't. Oh don't get me wrong, Win 8 is still a POS and I can totally understand why folks want me to put win 7 on these laptops, and I still think that "refresh my PC" added "feature" was put in to keep people from noticing they had a show stopping corruption bug they couldn't get a handle on before RTM, nope its the fact that I'm seeing a shitload of Worst Buy and Wally world "specials" which are AMD E1800 laptops.
Now this is coming from somebody that has built AMD exclusively for over 5 years and has his whole family on AMD but putting Win 8 on an E1800? Let me put it this way...if you thought Vista capable was bad, you ain't seen shit until you see how Win 8 "performs" on a Bobcat dual core. You wanna talk about painful, the poor things just whine and whirr and drag and drag and draaaag along. If you want to put an end to the "Win 8 is faster" bullshit just hand them one of those E1800 laptops and say "here ya go Sparky, have fun". take that exact same system and put on Win 7? its quite nice. oh it won't win any speed records but it makes a good netbook whereas Win 8 on one of those is in permanent slo-mo.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
OP is not at all wrong, and it's bullish of you to suggest that a business should simply change its entire operating strategy to account for the limitations of the install base of the operating system. I worked as a CTO for a niche retail business (wine) which had certain custom measures to track in order to maintain basic levels of inventory management (e.g. multiple vintages and sizes use the same SKU). The stores had already deployed Macs for their POS due to the business decisions of my predecessor. I spent months trying to find a POS system that could handle anything beyond the "my first retail system" level. I found three retail POS systems at all. One of them we were already using -- and it didn't work, one of them was similarly barebones and locked down all of the database material so I couldn't export to something like Quickbooks, and then there's Lightspeed, which is big, costly, and spends more time and energy on advertising "It Works on Mac!" than it does providing any utilitarian function whatsoever. I gave up and installed Windows 7 on the systems through BootCamp, opening up at least 30 wine-retail specific POS systems for my pleasure.
Nearly all cross-platform software suites don't talk to one another. Quickbooks won't talk between Mac and PC. More specialized office applications and database applications won't talk to one another. There might be a FEW that will provide interoperability, though it's often buggy beyond belief, and most don't provide critical features necessary to certain businesses. Try and find an actually usable service-based POS (QSRs and restaurants). There are none. I'm sure that's because the Mac hardware is not touchscreen, which makes the OSX unusable to an entire industry.
If the general topic is about replacing your fleet of bulldozers with pickup trucks, parts commonality between the trucks and bulldozers is a pretty important metric.
The problem with Zune wasn't that it was a bad product. When it was released it was probably the best MP3 player if you ignore the ugly brown color.
The Zune was not a success for multiple reasons. First of all was MS execution. MS really botched the marketing and advertising on it. MS thought that being obscure and mysterious would make them seem cool. MS just doesn't know cool. Looking at the commercials for the Zune you had no idea it was a music player from MS. It could have been gum.
Contrast this with the first iPhone commercials. They were 30 second demos and actually very minimalist. Each of them covered the basic information the consumer would want to know: What is it? (A new smartphone). Who makes it? (Apple) Where do I get it (Apple or AT&T stores). How does it work? (A simple hand using fingers is used to operate it).
The other issue with the Zune was that the main feature, squirting was so crippled by DRM that it was not a feature. Without it, Zunes had a very power hungry alternative to syncing with a cable. Later Zunes even omitted squirting as a featire.
Mostly the main issue with the Zune was it was designed to beat Apple's last generation iPod not the next generation. When Apple released the iPod Touch, it was game over for the Zune. Unlike the Zune, the Touch had the interface/design to be a portable computing device. Wireless wasn't a useless feature as users could surf or email with OOTB applications. It also had a strong 3rd party app ecosystem which Zune never had.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.