Slashdot Mirror
"Microsoft Killed My Pappy"
theodp writes "A conversation with an angry young developer prompts Microsoft Program Manager Scott Hanselman to blog about 'Microsoft Haters: The Next Generation.' 'The ones I find the most interesting,' says Hanselman, are the 'Microsoft killed my Pappy' people, angry with generational anger. My elders hated Microsoft so I hate them. Why? Because, you wronged me.' The U.S. and Japan managed to get over the whole World War II thing, Hanselman notes, so why can't people manage to get past the Microsoft antitrust thing, which was initiated in 1998 for actions in 1994? 'At some point you let go,' he suggests, 'and you start again with fresh eyes.' Despite the overall good-humored, why-can't-we-get-along tone of his post, Hanselman can't resist one dig that seems aimed at putting things into perspective for those who would still Slashdot like it's 1999: 'I wonder if I can swap out Chrome from Chrome OS or Mobile Safari in iOS.'"
People can't get past MS's sins because MS never really changed. They still bend the rules until they're warped and often just snap. They are still they same company in many ways.
The thing about not being able to swap out IE was, that Microsoft claimed it could not be done - and was a true monopoly at the time, where it basically affected everyone.
With Sarai/OSX, it's a whole different matter - OSX does not have 90% market penetration. And if it did, Apple could not claim you could not swap out WebKit from the system since it's open source that's well documented - in fact you CAN swap in more recent, or custom, builds of Webkit into OSX quite easily.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Developers need to feel safe. Nobody wants chair being thrown at them.
"People can't seem to get past the antitrust trial"? The one where Microsoft forged evidence and pissed off the first judge so bad that she was replaced on account of the bias they had created? The one that ultimately said, clearly, YES microsoft's business practices are bad for both the individual and the nation?
Yeah, poor Stalin! People never could get past those purge-things he got famous for.
Nobody actually cares about the anti-trust case.
The general public doesn't like Microsoft because their Windows decides to reboot their computer for updates with no warning while they are working or giving a presentation.
The user experience for Microsoft products is generally pretty terrible.
Seeing a pattern NOT change, doesn't exactly tell folks their opinion should change.
Go try OneDrive or SkyDrive.... from Linux, or BSD, or.... and.. oh yeah, a "cloud" service is platform agnostic... Uh huh. That there sets the BS flag.
I think that the m$ businesss model is responsible for much of the direction of the modern software industry. while profit maximising at the cost of the 'customer' is now considered acceptable, that doesn't mean it should be condoned.
reagardless of the state of the industry, frankly, slashdot was way better in 1999. even 2009.
I rarely comment, but the posting of so much crap to slashdot that is to my eyes disengenuos shill corporate apologist bullshit is making it less and less of a place I want to visit.
oh, and fuck beta.
*Fuck*. Why, after apparently 20 years, are we still having to explain this! So-called professional, intelligent people can't seem to grasp the fact that *bundling* is not problem. Bundling AND being in a monopoly position to enforce that bundle *is*. It's a logical AND. We're not talking mental gymnastics here, and you've had 20 years to understand, I would have thought a MS employee would especially be wanting to understand this. Jesus.
And don't think Google are somehow immune from this, Chrome on ChromeOS is fine since it's not in any way in a dominant position on operating systems, but using search monopoly to push their own products does have them currently in trouble with the EU.
MS did a wonderful job providing management tools for independent machines that could given to worker drones but centrally controlled. This was a critical feature for some customers. They provide a reasonable value in productivity tools for some customers. OTOH, their path to profit still seems to be based in crushing any innovative force that might weaken their market dominance.
MS provides, IMHO, no tools that are useful to anyone that is not a corporate hack. The one innovation they have come up with in the past decade, Kinect, does not seem to be moving forward after 4 years of development. I mean how hard would it be to incorporate it into Surface to provide gesture based input?
Which is my issue with MS. They different parts do not seem to play well together. There appears to a top level desire to place MS concerns for profit above all others, meaning there can be no real risks take to meet customer needs. And if this is just taken a a person with generational grudges, well that just proves my point that MS cannot provide useful product because they just think they are perfect and in no need of modifications.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I will admit that Microsoft's security is no longer the joke it was back in the 9x era, when they had only ineptly bolted multi-user support onto a single-user OS and suffered from their devotion to software backwards compatibility. But their business approach seems to have hardly altered. They still make heavy use of deliberate incompatibility, backroom deals and promotion via bundling. They are reluctant to support any technology they don't have the patents for (witness the h264 debacle, or the continued lack of native Vorbis support, or their pushing of the patent-encumbered exFAT filesystem, or IE's inability to handle animated PNG) and will support open standards only when they are so dominant as to leave no other option. The company is just very aggressive and underhanded in their approach to business.
Germany and Japan haven't invaded anybody in seventy years. Meanwhile, Microsoft is, even as we speak attempting to ram home an opaque, binary blob document format, OOXML (hilariously called "Open") as a standard over Open Document Format to cement MS Office's lock on office suite software.
Me: distrusting Microsoft since 1990.
Of all signs warning not to trust MS stands out for me the following.
I was at my first job, PC technician and we installed Macs for the graphical sector, and Compaq servers for Netware installation, also for the same.
For Apple and Compaq, I had to follow courses so that the company could get its preferenced dealer status.
In the income of the building, there hung a small plaque, Authorised Microsoft Dealer with Gates' signature. At first I thought that my boss had also done a course for MS to get this plaque.
However, in the course of time I saw that companies did not need to do much to get this plaque from MS. That's the day I realised the extent of Gates' snake oil dealership. Never trusted 'em from that day onward.
Windows 8 shows MS has not changed one bit.
They still try and stuff crap down the throats of consumers and break stuff for developers and call it great.
Hmm wonder is any ex-Microsoft execs work for Dice.
The important date is not when the actionable behavior took place (1994) or then the anti-trust action began (1998). The important question is "when was justice done?" and the only possible answer is NOT YET. Microsoft stole all it's online market share from the inventor of the browser, Netscape. The only reasonable justice would be to return their online market share to what it was in 1994. I think that was about 20%, if we are being charitable to M$. So M$ should have been banned from selling any product that accessed the internet until thier total market share returned to 20%. That has not happened... yet.
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
It seems like MS is trying to find ways not to blame Windows 8. I was a Windows user since 3.1 at the age of 5. I've used every version including XP Pro x64. I'm a pragmatist because I use computers for productivity. So when 8 came out with a consumption rather than production oriented UI it was time for a divorce. Yes I could have stuck with lovely 7 for a slow death but I wanted to hurt my Ex for ditching productivity. Productivity is the only place for my loyalty. Hate MS for trying to turn my work tool into a media consumption machine worse than a Mac? Yes, I think I will. Long live the Cinnamon / KDE.
Someone had to say it ;)
The US and Japan aren't still bombing each other. But Microsoft is still pulling the same stunts. In fact, they never stopped. They just kept doing it until it seemed normal and the government forgot why it was angry.
I don't know really. Soylent News is still stuck with D1 and it is a bit crusty. Moderating and replying takes you to another page, for example.
Is that the introduction to your new "computer architecture and virtual machines" book?
Nailing MS for bundling IE was like nailing an organized crime lord for tax evasion. Nobody with a clue actually cared about the browser bundling. They cared that Microsoft had been engaging in behavior which essentially amounts to bullying and corruption for the entire time they've existed. The Microsoft that exists now is not reformed; it's just a lot less powerful. It's still part of a very backwards tradition of corporate behavior where you get ahead not by making the best product but by setting up obstacles and shutting down everybody else who's trying to make something better. (See also: entertainment industry, fossil fuels industry, car industry, ...) Corporations which behave that way should be treated like the dinosaurs they are, and shown the door to extinction.
he was talking about Mobile Safari/iOS
You can swap it out if you've jailbroken, or simply write your own app with any engine you like (which works fine for personal or enterprise use).
AND Webkit is built by contributions from multiple companies - so it's not like Apple is bundling anything like the totally 100% proprietary IE.
IE was in at the level of browser features on top of what WebKit is. People can and do write other browsers, with other features, that go on the app store - only rendering and the javascript engine is the same.
But the monopoly point still stands regardless, iOS is not a monopoly so it's absurd to claim about a bundled browser.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It has become obvious over time which ecosystem is free, open, vibrant, and diverse and which puts corporate control, profits and lock-in first. Developers by in large want freedom to make what they want and proprietary software ecosystems have a feel of authoritarianism that is hated. Regardless if your Pappy was killed by Microsoft, or any oppressive regime, you fight for your own freedom, your children and the hope that no one will ever again be in a situation where their Pappy is killed (presumably because he was a threat to the regime). It is a complete rejection of an ideology that chooses control over liberty.
"The kids these days" that reject Microsoft and other proprietary regimes out of hand are an indication that the lessons from the sacrifices and hard fought non-violent struggle of the free software movement are starting to sink in. At some point we may be lucky enough to not have any of these authoritarian software companies around and instead enjoy a renaissance in software.
Complexity Happens
Because it just happened... Like... just now.... so... What is this "they did something a long time ago" nonsense? They're still doing it.
Stop dicking with the core operating system, causing our programs to not run, and radically altering the GUI so its practically unrecognizable.
Offer us choices and try to empower users. Stop springing things on people that they might not want and taking away features we enjoyed.
That makes us feel powerLESS. You change things and we have no control over it. That doesn't make your users feel good or in control of their devices.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
>The U.S. and Japan managed to get over the whole World War II thing,
As somebody who lived in japan for four years: That is an illusion. Japan did not get over "the whole World War II thing", and neither did the US.
> so why can't people manage to get past the Microsoft antitrust thing, which was initiated in 1998 for actions in 1994?
Because the antitrust thing is just the legally visible top of the iceberg?
Honestly, Microsoft would very much like to be like Apple or Google. They just dont manage it. And at the points where they still have the monopoly, i dont see a company acting because they are deeply convinced of the need to change business practices but somebody who just changes them far enough to be able to keep management decisions on their side.
.
As usual, a Microsoft manager is trying to blame its customers for the perception of Microsoft that Microsoft has earned and continues to earn.
Microsoft needs to look within to resolve its lack of public trust and amity.
Microsoft needs to learn how to compete on a level playing field without complaining that it is being wronged by what its customers think of Microsoft.
Microsoft needs to grow up.
I don't think that I know a single person who has mentioned the MS antitrust issue in maybe 5-10 years, except to mention that it might be happening to Google next. Tech people that I know generally hate MS for just abusing the crap out of their customers. Things like pushing out new operating systems to replace perfectly good operating systems. Things like rehashing Microsoft office over and over with their only "innovations" being things like the ribbon bar.
.net desktop/web applications that used IIS and MSSQL. But then slowly but surely I migrated product by product to something Open Source until I realized that I was only using Windows XP because of inertia so I then dumped even that.
.net were bloating as they tried to tie every stupid MS product together in an attempt to trap me in their high priced eco system.
But if anything it would be the cost of licensing and the licenses themselves. I separate those two because just managing the licenses is a pain. The general consensus is that they make it a pain so that you get the all encompassing licenses that are "easier" so that now you just pay MS a tax on being in business.
Nearly 100% of the people that I know who are serious programmers have entirely moved their deployed products to OS solutions such as Linux and MariaDB and their development is generally done on an Apple or Linux PC as those most resemble the deployment platform.
I don't actually hate Microsoft and at one point was using Windows and Visual Studio to program
But for me the Open Source switch wasn't out of some religeous love of Open Source but that each one of the products was just way better than the MS equivalent for my use. Clients were perfectly happy to pay for any license issues so money wasn't even an issue, just a huge bonus. So it wasn't just that Open Source was better but that MS was actively becoming worse. Things like
So I don't hate Microsoft (except for when they lie cheat and steal to prevent opensource from giving them the boot in large customers environment) I just don't have any interest in using any of their products. So even if all MS products were completely free and they stopped being bastards when places like Munich make the switch to OSS, I still wouldn't use them. In the same way that I wouldn't switch to a diet of low quality food even if it were free.
To forgive is foolish. Always be mindful of past actions, as history has proven its tendency to repeat.
I have not forgotten how MS came by its MS DOS, and how it tried to ensure incompatibility with DR-DOS. I haven't forgotten the stagnation and needless standards adoption of IE6 which stalled us on HTML4.01 for half the age of the Internet. I haven't forgotten UEFI, while Coreboot or a simple ability to flash the firmware with an OS loader stub would have sufficed and not required implementation of their patent encumbered FAT systems.
Speaking of which, I haven't forgotten their suits over FAT against companies employing Linux (with and without GNU). I haven't forgotten their extortionist patent threatening and pressuring Android device makers to pay MS for contributing nothing at all but "protection" from the MS threat. I haven't forgotten MS's part in the SCO debacle. I haven't forgotten the terrible anti-progress internal politics of MS which prevented us from having ClearType due to infighting from the MS Office team who wanted to be credited with it themselves -- despite sub-pixel rendering not being a novel thing, and yet MS applying for patents on it.
I haven't forgotten the long look down their noses at us users from MS W8 User Interface designers. I haven't forgotten the MS W8 app store who takes a 30% cut of application maker profits that they never needed before when they were focusing on their core competencies -- A cost which developers like myself will pass onto the users instead of eating ourselves, thus allowing MS to double dipping from their install base.
I haven't forgotten the needless inability for XBox Live games (Like Halo2) to not play online anymore, even though both XBoxes know we have the game in our consoles -- I could see it on the friends list of my peer whom I'm chatting with -- all to force players to move onto newer products and much later repurchase the artful games if they want to keep playing. A doubly needless cost since Hamachi or a VPN allows "system link" across the web without XBL fees, proving the XBL fees and game repurchasing are pointless forced obsolescence. I haven't forgotten the advertizements that showed up in the online non-services and in the OS that users PAY Microsoft for.
I haven't forgotten the bug riddled APIs and the less than helpful MSKB archives wherein users document said bugs themselves in the comments. I haven't forgotten the single constant byte value in Windows that needlessly limits the number of concurrent TCP connections so that MS can sell a Windows Server version. I haven't forgotten MS screwing over device partners over Surface. I haven't forgotten my MSDN subscription becoming worthless as I would not get early access to their OS for testing my products before release to end users -- the better to ensure MS's own software and distribution strategies become further entrenched vs competition.
I won't forgive humans that are actually remorseful, and you think that I'd forgive generations of abuse or that new generations would become instantly ignorant of reality? Go fuck yourself Microsoft, you're just feeling the tip of our ice berg. Have a nice death in obsolescence. Much in the same way the Internet you actively worked against by pushing your own business network protocol instead of supporting sees censorship as damage and routes around it, the market too sees oppressive non-features as damage and routes around such vendors given enough time. Even the most powerful of tyrants die, and when they do we tell tales of their evils ever after as a warning to any upstart of what end awaits evil.
Microsoft hasn't changed its standpoint on trying to take control of everyone's computing experience. I seen to recall the secure EFI mandate where only a signed OS could boot on a PC (e.g. Windows 8). There was plenty of Microsoft hate to go around as people thought that a Windows 8 PC/server could not boot an unsigned OS like Linux or BSD simply because it would be impractical for the open source communities to keep signing new kernels. And of course Windows 8 tried to force everyone to like MS tablets by making your desktop a clumsy tablet.
But here is my take. I have been using Windows since 3.1 on my 486DX 33MHz. Since Windows 2000 came out the stability has improved immensely and Windows 7 is probably the best yet. The bad windows days were the 95/98 and god help you if you had ..... ME. It does what it needs to do and most problems are bought about by bad hardware or bad drivers which, IMHO is the leading cause of Windows butt-hurt. Sure its a virus magnet because of security problems but I have never been infected simply because I know better than to open a random email attachment. Its the clueless folks who contribute to the bot nets. There is plenty of free and opensource software for windows, open office, gimp, Inkscape, kicad etc that enables most people to only have to pay for windows and use free software. If you need professional software then you pay for it. Simple. I mainly use windows for playing games though that is less and less of an issue as I don't play as many games. I also use it for a drafting CAD program, kicad and keeping track of my financials using open office. If I need to quickly work in Linux I can run my Linux VM using Virtual box (I never liked dual booting, last time I did it was in the 90's to play DOS games on 6.22 along side Windows 95).
Do I use operating systems besides Windows? You bet. I run Linux on almost every other system I own: media center PC, laptop, spare PC and development PC. My little home server runs FreeNAS, so that is FreeBSD and my router runs m0n0wall, also BSD based.
So Windows peacefully co-exists with opensource in my home.
People understand that corporations are amoral. The rational position towards a large, powerful corporation is distrust. That's the baseline from which a corporation has to work up from.
On top of that most people don't get a *choice* of Microsoft or something else; Microsoft is chosen *for them* by the corporate IT department or by the IT departments of people they have to work with. That's raises the bar for user experience, somethign MS is not particularly good at. It's like the food you get on a college meal plan. The fact you're forced to eat it means that if you're assigning it a letter grade you automatically deduct two letter grades: an A becomes a C and a B becomes a D.
Now consider Apple. There's a lot to dislike in their trying to position themselves as content gate keepers especially. But there are offsetting virtues: innovation, design, and build quality. On top of that most people who use Apple products choose to do so, which means they get a better evaluation.
Unfair? Maybe; but that's reality.
Now this is not to say that Microsoft has no virtues as a corporation, it's just that those virtues aren't experienced by *users*. Microsoft has consistently provided a mediocre user experience in its core products, and undermined the main value of their products to the user -- familiarity -- by pointless fiddling with user interfaces.
Microsoft's big sin was abusing its market position to achieve a monopoly with a mediocre product. To be forgiven of that sin, they've got to start producing products people love and look forward to, and don't feel let down by.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Better analogy. We've got them pushed back behind a DMZ and there hasn't been any shooting for three years now. But with every change in illustrious leaders, we all wonder what sort of belligerent crap they'll pull next.
There is a lot of software talent and good ideas at Microsoft. And like North Korea, they can't get out and will probably starve to death inside.
Have gnu, will travel.
Well, lets see how Microsoft insists on treating me:
-You are a dirty pirate, let us ransack your system and install our rootkits, hope all your software is legal
-Want that update? Let us check if you are 'genuine'
-Not genuine? it's probably our mistake, but lets disable your system anyway.
-I trusted Microsoft in the DOS days, and my trust was not broken. My system did not tattle on me, me software could not be revoked at any time.
-I trusted Microsoft in the early Windows days. Most of my software did not tattle on me. I had to type in keys and stuff, it was a small inconvenience.
-Come Windows XP, my software tattled on me, Microsoft decided not to trust me, Microsoft thought it knew what was best. Microsoft wanted control of my machine, and wanted me to pay for it.
-Its getting worse, not better, so I upgraded to Linux.
Trust can not be bought, it is earned. Break that trust, and it is very hard to get it back again.
Okay, I'll burn what's left of my karma and point out the reason why we can't get along...because Microsoft HAS NOT CHANGED. They are still the price-gouging, competition stifling, astro-turfing, anti open standards, monopolizing enterprise that they have always been. What HAS changed is the rise of Mac OS X, iPad, Google Chrome, etc. that have created some real alternatives to Microsoft.
The U.S. and Japan managed to get over the whole World War II thing
Try picking up a Texas or Japanese high school history textbook some time.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that comparisons to the Holocaust and world wars are in fact quite appropriate when discussing the magnitude of what Microsoft did to the history of computing, and by extension to human history overall.
The reason for this is simple. The effect of the Microsoft monopoly lasted so long and was so stultifying that it meant we will never know what a different word processor might be like. We will never know if spreadsheets or email might be more usable or efficient. We will never know (at least not in our lifetime) what an operating system or software might be like that doesn't use the conventions laid down by a company that had no incentive to make anything better, no need to design anything more than barely adequate, or to listen to its customers. Yet all these things are of fundamental importance to our lives - far, far too important to have suffered under a brutal, money-grubbing monopoly.
Despite (very) small innovations, Apple was not and is not a counter-balance because they were forced to ape the conventions that the Microsoft juggernaut had laid down with it's 95% market share. Jobs knew as well as anyone that it would be suicide to create anything that the market place was not already at least partially familiar with.
In the final analysis, the Microsoft era was a massive failure of free market capitalism that left us all driving Trabants while thinking they were the best that we could have. The blame lies of course with politicians and industry regulators who had no clue what an immense influence personal computing would have on society until it was too late. But it is too late. The die has been cast for personal computing for generations to come, and that is an utter and maddening tragedy for all of us.
The issue is of course far bigger than just one man, but holy mother of god do I hate what Bill Gates did to all of us.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
Let's not forget the ODF debacle where MS stacked committees around the world to pass their "standard".
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Antitrust case not even on my list
1. artificial price tiers for various levels of crippling the code
2. bug ridden bloated code with poor source control
3. malware friendly due to constantly repeating the same basic amateur coding mistakes
4. malware and spyware friendly due to design to accommodate marketers rather than end users, the large corporations and marketers are considered the true customers
5. lack of basic functionality that other operating systems have built, money must be spent
6. ignoring user needs while flying off on weird tangents and working in vacuum to produe rubbish UI (e.g. ribbon, metro)
7. ignoring industry standard API, protocols and inventing inferior incompatible alternatives
8. monopolistic and lock-in practices continue in the present
Are they really over it? Japan never had an issue with it. Never botherd them what they did in e.g. China. And the Americans still go on how I should be thankfull, because otherwise I would be speaking German.
I do speak German (and several other languages) and the other alies don't bother me about that. (Thanks to ALL who helped, including later enemies.)
So I would say that was the worst example as people being 'over it'.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I'll reconsider my perspective on MS when Microshills stop lying about MS's behavior. Like saying things like MS did the illegal things that got it in trouble in 1994.
As a matter of fact, the first antritrust violation that Microsoft engaged in was with DOS2.0. Remember "DOS isn't done till Lotus won't run."?
Microsoft had created a twenty year+ history of flaunting the law and screwing over their partners not to mention their competitors. The people running the company then are the same people pulling the strings now. I will be willing to reexamine my lack of faith in MS when those people are completely gone, and the new people running MS have demonstrated that they are not interested in the tactics used by the old regime.
For now, though, MS has to act nicer. It's in no position to do otherwise.
hands down, they won. They got absolutely everything they wanted. There was absolutely no material action taken against them whatsoever. This is especially bad when there were so many smoking guns, like the old "It's not done until Lotus 123 won't run" emails or the stuff they did to Beos. It doesn't help that the "Punishment" for killing Sun Java was giving their software to schools, something they'd been trying to do for decades. What kind of company gets a cherished reward as punishment?
:(.
Plus If you're into computers then you're frustrated because Microsoft tech has always been just barely good enough. If you remember the early days stuff like Novel and Wordperfect, the aforementioned Beos and even some of the Win 3.1 competitors were far superior to Microsoft's offerings, but backdoor deals killed a lot of that tech. Their "good enough" approach has held back a lot of real enhancements to computing
So yeah, there's a lot of ill will floating around...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
MS.. we dont hate you because you were a douchebag in the 90's. We hate you because youre still a douchebag. Stop being a douchbag and maybe we wont hate you.
Signed,
everyone on the planet except your employees and shills.
It's called a "Conditioned Response" and becomes automatic. Hence the term "knee-jerk reaction".
People tend to teach their kids to avoid something that they had to learn the hard way in an attempt to spare them the suffering they had to endure themselves.
"What have they done?", you ask? Pushed flawed OSes out, forced upgrades that slow or break older systems, actively discontinued support for decent hardware (like printers and scanners) to force more purchases, yank support for older OSes that have been working in the industry in some capacity for years in a vain attempt to generate revenue, forcibly downgrade or out-mode existing suites of software that at least work (now that people have been forced to use them for so long) so that they will have to retrain in something completely different so they can simply continue to work, "bundling" software together in ways that make it obscenely difficult to remove without knocking down their house of cards...
Wash
Rinse
Repeat
Windows ME was a seriously flawed OS.
Windows Vista was as well.
Windows 8 has so far shown many of the same trends as it's failed predecessors, but M$ still pushes it out as if everyone never had to break the bank for the last two serious failures on their part, and wonders why people are slow to adopt anything new from them.
Seriously? We need to look at this with fresh eyes?
I'll be checking mine for a M$ logo before I adopt anything like that wetware into my body.
Heck, I don't think I'd want a Google logo on it, either...
If Microsoft really wanted me to stop distrusting them, they'd ask the user which search provider they'd like to use (or just choose a random one) rather than make Bing the default. Instead, they are using their position in the market -- again -- to limit choice and tilt the field to their advantage. If they didn't have the ability to make Bing the default, there is no way it would have the position that it does today. Microsoft still has a monopoly power on the desktop. And they continue to abuse that power. When forced to compete on equal footing, we get real competition. Some, like XBox, are successful; some, like their mobile platforms, are not.
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
...there has been plenty of new ones to maintain the level of outrage and frustration. Remember PlaysForSure? How about the switch from Windows Phone 7 to Windows Phone 8, leaving its best loyal customers (and buyers of the relatively new Lumias) in the dust? The XBox One DRM fiasco?
"It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
is still a near-monopoly, and their platform still sucks and helps to fester malware and trojans.
I don't use MS software, I don't recommend MS software.
Its not (just) because of what they USED to do, its because of what they STILL DO and what they STILL ARE.
They stole the consumer PC by just happening to be in the right place at the right time. They had shrewd marketers and slick lawyers to make sure they got to keep it.
But they've never managed to dominate anything else. Zune is dead. Windows tablet will die. And the PC world is slowly (all-too-slowly) leaving them behind. I look forward to the day they are nothing but a bit player, relegated to the sidelines. Maybe all they will have left is heir gaming market, since that will the only thing helping them hold on to life when people mange to escape the lock-in elsewhere.
For the most part, the hatred directed towards Microsoft wasn't about the actual antitrust case. A lot of the hate was directed towards Microsoft locking other OS vendors out of the market. A lot of the hate was due to their stranglehold on the market even though there were huge concerns about the quality of Microsoft's products.
That said, I do wish that some of the haters would update their arguments. I still hear stuff that hasn't been valid since the days of Windows 3.1, never mind Windows XP, and IE6.
Yes... get over it, please. Will we have another 20 years of this crap on /.? The only difference between MS and Apple is that MS took the 800lb gorilla approach. Apple is just as much of a litigious, strongarmed, asshole of a company. They just manage to be smarter about it, and to hide behind the 'we're so cool, trust us' image they've cultivated.
/.. MS will be vilified for all eternity, while the flavor of the month companies will always get a pass because they take the time to lube up first.
Not that it matters on
At least he is getting attention. It is far worse to be ignored than to be feared or hated. I don't even encounter microsoft in my daily life any more -- I'm sure it's in that ATM or airport kiosk, but I don't notice it. Other than that, it's rare to even see a 'winders' machine at a coffee shop or around town. Even my kid's school is all mac & iPad.
They're still minting money. But think about it: they are still minting money even though everything they've tried to do post W&O has failed[*]. Their cash cow is on autopilot -- not only within the company but outside too. Which means it has no mindshare, any more than the company that makes the concrete in my house foundation has mindshare. That's a pretty sucky place to be.
[*] when I mean failed I mean accumulated profits/losses are in negative territory for all other meaningful segments (bing, xbox, azure, surface). Keyboards and mice are profitable but don't move the needle on a company the size of MS.
Its everyone now. Its every device, every OS except SOME versions of linux. I hate not just Microsoft, but Apple, Samsung, Sony and many many others. In todays software and hardware OVER 50% OF THE BUDGETS FOR EVERYTHING ELECTRONIC, is spent researching and implementing systems and technologies that keep me from being able to use my devices in any way other than a way that generates revenue., They are not even satisfied with one time revenue stream, but now even cripple THINGS so they can sell them back as a service to generate a continuous revenue stream. The days of geeks owning their devices/computers is over and I resent that beyond belief. There really isn't any single place that anyone can go and get rid of this completely, so I can't even truly vote with my pocketbook. I just simply have to buy the electronics that are LEAST riddled with any technology that exists for the sole purpose to limit my capability/creativity in some way. When Microsoft become less concerned about Metro walled gardens or killing the video stream if something looks fishy to THEM on MY computer then I'll go back to using Microsoft or other vendors.
Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
My high-speed paper tape reader jammed because of Billy's bloated BASIC!!11!!!
No software should take up more than sixty feet of paper tape!!!11!!
There is a certain MS "style" which I've seen in effect since the early nineties that persists to this day. It's what I like to call the "Clippy Syndrome": you're gonna do things our way or we're to going to annoy the shit out of you in a very patronizing fashion, because they obviously know what's best. From 640KB memory right up to Windows 8 Metro. Same thing holds for the stuff they later acquired: you know that you used to be able to opt out of updates with Skype? Well, since MS bought them no more. Now Skype will nag you and nag you and nag you until you just fucking give in (or start using Oovoo).
The issue is that many of us feel trapped into using Microsoft products that we hate and that don't work properly. I use Linux, but still continue to have to work on my wife's Windows machine to keep it marginally functional and keep it from imploding on itself. We're trapped because of Quicken. I actually have very little anger for them past that. They've become somewhat inconsequential in my life.
The perception has little to do with anything Microsoft actually did and everything to do with branding. To one extent or another all the major players in the tech industry have engaged in similar kinds of questionable activities. But Microsoft got associated with boring office drones and Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, are perceived as representing a hip counter culture. That makes the brand a lot more desirable, allowing consumers to be forgiving of shortcomings.
What surprises me is how Apple has been able to hold on to it's reputation this long. But people continue associating product design with innovation. So despite the fact that both Microsoft and Google do more real innovation, Apple is the one that continues to be perceived as the big innovator.
Increasingly, I find people grasping at straws to justify their dislike of Microsoft. There's nothing wrong with having your own preference but it gets to a point where it feels like you're discussing religion or politics.
Let's skip over the hilarious hyperbole of comparing a business story to the prosecution of aggressive war (yes, managers love to *talk* about "crushing" opposition and evisceration and all that...all of which is hilarious hyperbole, too).
Taking it at face value - Japan had its whole regime torn down, warmongers mostly shot for war crimes, replaced with a whole different government and became a whole different culture that now votes heavily against any significant degree of aggressive militarization. If MS had *lost* that antitrust case and been broken up, managers scattered, their whole corporate culture changed, that would have been equivalent.
It wasn't just one thing - attempting to monopolize web browsers and make MS products the default choice for any web application was only a part of it. It was MS wanting to see all your product designs under non-disclosure before they'd offer to buy your company...and then the offer would be comically low and if you didn't take it, your general ideas would appear (badly) in a new Microsoft product that automatically took all your market share because...it was Microsoft.
Columnist "Robert X. Cringely" had a good term for it: "sharp trading" - always on the edge of illegal, but hard and expensive to prove as such. Nobody does business with the sharp trader twice....unless they're over a barrel.
Microsoft's *power* to do this has been reduced, but not their business model and inclinations. I have no choice but to use Office at work, and so I'm an enthused Excel VBA programmer, you make the best of what you've got. (And besides, writing a large critical application as a glorified spreadsheet macro is rare; it's just great for one-shot solutions.) But the very idea of basing a larger business system around SharePoint, their various Visual programming languages, their C# ripoff of Java, strikes me as comical; I'd go with platforms they don't control every time. MS has a long and continuing history of using their most-deeply-engaged customers the way shepherds use sheep - by which I mean "keep shearing them every year" of course. Honest.
I'm glad to see that this shill article is being roundly criticized.
I will add that my first thought is that I'd **love** to hear more about the categories of types of "Microsoft Haters"
So this is what M$ people do: Drink expensive coffee & talk about the different categories of "haters"
I can think of a few of my own, but I think the most telling category of "Microsoft Haters" is also the largest.... ***ANYONE WHO HAS EVER USED A MICROSOFT PRODUCT***
Microsoft products are shit. We all know why. They are bad tools.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Why can't we put it behind us? Simple: it's not really behind us. Microsoft is still a corporation run by hyperambitious sociopaths who care only for themselves and their "circle" and nothing for the common good. (I'm not saying MS is unique in this.) That hasn't changed as a result of the antitrust action or anything more recent. Microsoft is still "evil", they just haven't been [i]caught[/i] being evil in a while. It's a natural effect of the human condition that sociopaths rise to the top of all hierarchies, and then the rest of us suffer to degrees.
Few examples:
MSDN lets you download software to develop and test against. I need to test some Microsoft software on various cloud providers. But before I do, I think I'll take a peek at my license agreements: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-u... ... "Deploy your licenses only with Windows Azure Platform Services or Qualified MSDN Cloud Partners."
"Qualified MSDN Cloud Partners. To run software on third party shared servers you must:"
Does your company / marketing dept. want to put a Windows Logo on your product? Check your license, you might have to dumb down your Android or iOS version to get it approved.
It goes on, and on... Yes, most companies ignore these, but they are still in the agreements. At its heart, Microsoft hasn't changed yet.
It realy goes back to the strategy of vendor lock in, Microsoft just can't pull it off like they used to because open source is so readily available and more viable than it's ever been.
The Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt propogated by Microsoft spans generations, and also can't make as strong a case as it used to because people know that there are alrternatives available.
Not so much about having a monooly on the desktop or bundling a browser, so much as it was about trying to leverage that to alter standards and control the source such that other browsers can't render what was made for IE 6, other office suites can't quite display a .DOC file like Office can. It was about making it so that things couldn't interact or be compatable.
Nothing has changed, MS just can't sell their FUD like they used to, and there's enough good open source alternatives that trying to extend something to control it just makes users loose interest. What's really sad is they still try to use this strategy even though it will no longer work, and this is why windows phone can gain no traction.
Best thing to do is use opensource, and let MS continue their downward decline into insignificance.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
When I can buy a PC without Windows, without my supplier feeling pressured to include Windows on it, and the machine costs less...
Then I'll believe that Microsoft are allowing me to do what I want on my computer.
Also, you're a commercial entity. I have no reason to have to forgive you. If you supply a service that I'm not happy with, I have no reason to buy from you again. This is the difference between forgiveness, and actual redemption. I might forgive a mistake, but I don't trust you not to make it again until you proved you've changed your ways.
Judging by things like: I cannot buy a Linux PC. Despite Steambox. Despite Android. I just cannot buy a PC without your junk on it.
You're trying to subvert an open standard in my country with your OOXML crap - that we STILL know is just a crappy writing-down of your crappy binary format without any gestures whatsoever towards an actual, open format.
Samba still hasn't got up to the standard that you can trust it to do simple things, like take over from your Windows server - DESPITE the fact that you have been required by law to help open your formats, open your protocols and you claim to be "helping" them.
When I see a change of actions, I'll think about beginning to "forgive".
"Hey, I only murdered ONE market, a few decades ago, and tried to pretend I wasn't doing that... why won't you forgive me?"
Because, I have absolutely no need to. You're the ones that need to *earn* the forgiveness, not just expect it.
Balmer: You want this, don't you? The hate is swelling in you now. Take your Jedi weapon. Use it. I am unarmed. Strike me down with it. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment you make yourself more my servant.
You: No !!!
Balmer: It is unavoidable. It is your destiny. You, like your father, are now mine.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
To me the problem never was with antitrust, but simply with how crappy Internet Explorer has been and continues to be. Two decades later, Microsoft is only just about to perhaps catch up to the standards with IE12 or so. One would expect more from the leading Desktop operating system. Here is hoping Nadella will finally turn over a new leaf.
The thing he is missing is that I don't hate Microsoft anymore. Today, I just don't think about them at all because they are totally irrelevant to me in every way. Hate gave way to forgetting.
In 1999, a publisher forced me to write in MS Word in order to use their template. Today, I can't remember the last time somebody even mentioned Microsoft to me.
respect is earned, not passed out like Halloween candy, and Microsoft has not not behaved well enough to earn any honor or respect from me, and that includes the bill & melinda gates foundation which is really an investment firm disguised as a charity
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
That's really, really reaching. Microsoft's current lineup is more than enough reason to hate them with a white hot hate. No nepotism involved. And this is speaking from the standpoint of thinking a few of their previous products are quite usable. Nope, sorry, blaming on culture or prejudice is at best disingenuous.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
'I wonder if I can swap out Chrome from Chrome OS or Mobile Safari in iOS.
The browser bundling argument was always the lamest attack on MS. No other computing vendor has been forced to bend over like MS to provide browser alternatives. Nobody ever complained that Notepad and Wordpad were anti-competetive either. Microsoft certainly engaged in monopolistic practices (forcing OEMs to buy Windows licences) but bundling IE was a complete red herring.
It's funny how today nobody is up in arms about the "lock in" with bundled Safari, or Chrome, or WAP browsers on dumb phones. Particularly with iOS, Apple has an official policy of prohibiting alternate browsers that don't use the Safari rendering engine. Why aren't they being investigated for such anti-competetive behavior?
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my operating system. Prepare to die!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I realize that you, Dear Reader, are a thoughtful and respectful lot, the Internet tends to be a bit of a motley crew. I fully expect the comments to be on fire later.
In flames they are.
so why can't people manage to get past the Microsoft antitrust thing,
Because Microsoft is still engaged in Anti-free-software, Anti-free-open-standards practices. See Microsoft Circles the Wagons To Defeat ODF In the UK
.aspx
They're still trying to do their own thing, regardless of where the rest of the world is going.
Now, is Microsoft a different company and more open to open source? Yes. I have an open source package to control Azure (and they support Linux on it). They've been supportive of the local OpenStack meetups. They're a bit less hostile to dual booting systems. The costs and licensing have come down a good amount. The Xbox 360 is a really nice gaming system. They have way better backwards compatibility than Apple.
But they're still at heart the same company. The UI they started in Windows phone made it to the Xbox, then to Windows 8. That kind of UI just doesn't work on laptops and they should have figured that out. The Xbox One was going to squash game resale and borrowing. Live is a pretty big disaster, and every update to Windows 7 tries to include some new version of Bing, hoping I'll install it.
Can I install different browsers in Chrome OS? Don't know, don't care. Chrome OS is a small fraction of the laptop market, and my Android devices have various choices for browsers and most importantly, I can set the default browser and have that service every http link I come across, same with most other apps.
Losses in man hours world wide, not to mention outages that get extended, while someone has to Google where their tools went, cost the world far more money than MS makes selling the OSs.
Why should MS care about how much money it costs the world? As long as they're profiting handsomely, that's all that counts.
It would be fun to see someone do the math and calculate how many trillion dollars "upgrading" to Windows 2012 will cost the world.
Yet people and companies continue to happily fork their money over to MS, despite all the pain and trouble it causes them.
It's weird how people will happily accept abuse and will even come back, asking for more.
Who wrote this article? I'm pissed because Vista and Windows 8 sucked. I could care less about the 90's.
The difference in standards compliance in modern browsers is a supermodel vs an air-brushed supermodel.
The difference between IE5/IE6 and other browsers of the era was a supermodel vs watching your own parents having sex.
One could say the same thing about Visual C++ as well.
The thing about Goldman Sachs is that you never get to ruin the economy twice in exactly the same way. There's relentless pressure to innovate concerning your grand malfeasance. It's so comforting to know that Goldman now goes to church on Sunday mornings and sings the sub-prime anthem.
Only a failed criminal tries the same scheme twice. The key is to make such obscene profits the first time that you can sit tight long enough for the apologists to paper over your track record before hatching your next plan.
Most people would find it difficult to find a job the remainder of their lives. Microsoft should be grateful for how easy it was for them.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
There's no need to "remember" Microsoft's anticompetitive actions.
They're still engaging in the very same behavior.
I don't hate Microsoft's behavior because of my "pappy" or because
of some judicial order from 20 years ago. I despise their current
behavior.
Microsoft continues to be worth despising. Their astroturf lobbying
and their blogs about how misunderstood they are fool nobody.
E
Hey Microsoft people don't like you coming up and demanding payment for FOSS code that they wrote that you have nothing to do with.
People don't like the fact that you spoke out against software patents when you had none yet you lobby to kill a bill reforming software-patents now that you have a ton of obvious software-patents. now you are one of the biggest supporters of software-patents.
Using the BSA in a draconian manner. See Ernie Ball.
Calling the hard work of people who write open source software a "cancer"
Corruption of standards committees in order to push a standard that not even you microsoft can honor
Constant lying and spreading FUD and misinformation in the marketplace.
Funding and aranging for additional funding for the SCO attack on Linux
Funding a book spreading lies that Linux was stolen from Minix
There is many many many more reasons.
Lack of Blink on Fx OS or Gecko on Chrome OS on is just the consequence of the operating systems' lack of native applications in the first place. The rendering engines are written in C++, and I'm still skeptical that Emscripten (C++ to JavaScript compiler) followed by a JavaScript JIT engine is anywhere near as efficient as actual native binary. But at least the publishers of these operating systems do their best to implement the entirety of HTML5. iOS, on the other hand, has native applications, and in fact native applications are the only way to access certain device features, such as 3D rendering or the camera and microphone. The complaint as I understand it is that Apple's App Store Review Guidelines privilege Apple's own native web browser component over third parties'. So it's impossible to make a web browser for iOS that offers HTML features (WebGL and Stream API) that Apple has deliberately left out of Safari.
I'm surprised this is (currently) marked as flamebait, this is essentially the sad truth of Gates, Jobs, Ellison, etc choosing to create a proprietary software industry rather than a free software economy (that has been proven to allow for successful businesses but without the horrible costs to the customers). Gates in particular may have had a choice to be remembered throughout human history as the great uplifter, the bringer of empowerment and freedom through software, a sort of software Ghandi / MLK, if he had run MS like Red Hat, etc.
Complexity Happens
If Japan to this day denied any wrongdoing and bombed a harbor every year or two, it wouldn't be forgiven either.
Sorry to reply to self, but the GP said: "The blame lies of course with politicians and industry regulators who had no clue what an immense influence personal computing would have on society until it was too late."
This isn't the case, the blame lies squarely on Gates, et al, who couldn't imagine how to run a successful software business using free software. They thought it was impossible, and perhaps for people of their ethical character it is. They have been proven wrong, ethically lacking and incredibly short sighted countless times.
Complexity Happens
A famious trial like say O.J. Simpson or Trayvon Martin ending with guilty verdict where they were CONVICTED but the judge then gave them a $1 fine and let them go free and they never had to admit wrong doing on their part...
People wouldn't get over it. they shouldn't either. Microsoft has been using their power to impose plenty of other horrible things onto us over the years and I frankly am not surprised they are not worse given how they can not be punished in the USA.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
We have excelent DOS emulators, excelent PS2, Wii, etc emulators, but Windows remains the one place we do not have a good emulator.
Of course you do. It's called VirtualBox. Just as you need a copy of iOS to run a Wii game,* you need a copy of Windows to run a Windows game. The difference is that since the Wii Menu 3 days, Nintendo has been shipping a copy of the Wii system software on every disc and on the Wii Shop servers, and Wii emulators for PC can use this copy to reconstruct an operating system for the game to use. Games for Windows, on the other hand, don't ship with a copy of Windows. It's as if you tried running a Wii game with Mini instead of iOS.
* Or for that matter an iPad game or a Cisco router, but that's beside the point.
They hired the political hatchetman, Mark Penn, in 2013. So they're spending money on political attack ads when they should be innovating. That has nothing to do with the past. It has much more to do with the laziness that has pervaded Microsoft since Ballmer took over. Maybe they can improve now that he's gone, but they're not likely to win fanboys until that happens.
The Microsoft Office Open XML. That was the mid-2000s. It was particularly galling because the shenanigans MS pulled to avoid having to support a non-MS standard literally resulted in an ISO technical committee being shut down, unable to get a quorum to get any work done, for a year or two afterwards. And technical gaffes like the "lay out document like Word95" flag that was proposed because, when the reasoning was finally pried out of the MS representative, MS didn't know how Word95 laid out documents and they needed a flag to tell them when to switch to the old layout library from Word95.
Windows Genuine Advantage, which caused genuine, legit copies of Windows to shut down because MS was having problems with their servers.
Windows 8. 'nuff said about the UI, but things like the BIOS trusted boot lockdown are even more disturbing.
The reason people don't trust MS isn't the "your pappy killed mah pa" thing. It's that MS keeps demonstrating over and over that they haven't changed their spots. To quote a Scotsman, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.".
There are those of us who are fairly free... My Dad was a Teacher so he used a Mac although He never got as far as OS X, It might have been fun setting it up for him. My Mom used a PC Running DOS and then Windows. When I discovered Linux in 1994 I went out and bought the Walnut Creek 6 CD Rom set with multiple Distros on it and Never turned back, I've tried all sorts of distros.
Wish I had some points for you. Apple's walled garden model scares me WAY more than MS ever did.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
In Microsoft's case, like in the Trust era, no government interference of any kind is required to ESTABLISH a monopoly, and only ordinary law enforcement is needed to KEEP one.
By way of other example, VHS did not become a monopoly because some government agent declared Beta to be dead. Rather, an exclusive distribution (mutual monopoly effort) between JVC and Paramount made a "winner" in the competition, forcing America into the single inferior standard.
Likewise, Microsoft fixed the browser market by coordinating market share with 'competitors', a black letter crime, and was UNPUNISHED exactly as they expected to be after the famous Dos6.02 theft of disc compression technology and the theft of the Windowing desktop.
So, to sum up, Microsoft is where it is, dictating to the worldwide community, by acts of crime.
It is the nature of Capitalists to seek immunity from competition, the means by which ultrafortunes are made and laws neutralized, usually to the detriment of the consumer.
Adam Smith said that men of the same trade do not meet for an evening's pleasure without joining in some conspiracy, but I think he was too big a fan of intergenerational wealth to see that the conspiracy happens in plain sight, just as Microsoft has done
Microsoft is the best candidate for a RICO seizure I know about but, as so often happens in Capitalism, has become too entrenched with the true rulers of the nation, the people who own 81% of all non-home wealth, that the law will never be enforced against them while they remain free to use the very same laws (copyright and patent) to squash any competitor. We get no more than we are willing to fight for, and no one is willing to fight Bill's Abortion
Going somewhat OT, it's not that Microsoft is evil, they are a corporation. A corporation is a machine, it has no conscious, no feelings, no empathy towards humans. This is why you can have lots of people with good intentions but they are in a machine that proceeds along its way. Of course there are those at the helm that can steer direction but I wonder if some of these corporations have become so big (i.e. those with one name but several different kinds of enterprises) that direction is dictated by stock markets and whatnot. Way back when these "machines" became so powerful it was necessary for The People through elected officials to create regulatory agencies such as FDA, SEC and the Fed. (though in reality their creations were not as simple as what I just wrote). Many of these govt agencies exist but fallen to regulatory capture, SEC and Fed are excellent examples of failing to prevent stock market abuses that have bankrupted US (both country and us commoners).
Communism was envisioned as a way to regulate corporations by creating a government where private businesses can exist, get rid of business that gets rid of problems big businesses create. This seems a good idea but only applicable for two-tier societies of very rich and very poor but difficult to implement when you have a middle class or trying put everyone on equal scales. And then there's the old joke of Capitalism is where man exploits man, Communism it's the other way around.
mfwright@batnet.com
Just because the disk formats and ACL semantics are similar between Microsoft and Digital OS designs doesn't mean the code was copied. Are *BSD, Minix, and Linux copies of one another despite having very similar system call semantics and despite Linux's native file system Ext2 having borrowed liberally from Berkeley FFS (source)?
This guy's blog post pretty much sums up what I've been thinking for a while now. I used to be an MS hater, but there's not much left to hate now. The antitrust thing is ancient history. Now you're looking at a Microsoft who will willingly roll over rather than get in a fight with anyone (Sky or Metro are examples). They certainly do some strange things, but they're no more strange than the competition. Also, when they were being 'evil' it was annoying to us all, but hardly world-ending stuff.
Yet here we have a trail of comments on Slashdot like it's still the 90's. Probably - just like the 90's - from people using a Windows PC to whine about Microsoft. Or a Mac, which is just hillarious (the MS hater taking refuge with Apple is absurd). You guys and gals need to move on, or grow up.... or both.
"How much truth can advertising buy?" - iNsuRge - AK47
The base problem for technologists is that the action perverted the course of future technology, and, having been altered, no amount of reparations will restore it to the course it would have taken had the event never happened.
We always ask ourselves where we would be today, if only...
-Gossip about TRUE events, is Good and Healthy.
I don't know about this. Microsoft (and other corporations) can afford to seed more positive gossip about themselves and negative about their competition than you or I could ever hope to. But when its based on authoritative sources, its a different matter.
I hold the DoJ personally responsible for letting Microsoft off the anti trust hook. Along with the CIA/NSA/FBI. Ever wonder why their consent decree had to be overseen by a FISA court judge? They were required to open their APIs and share documentation with their competition, but only right up to where that special encryption module resides. Then its all back doors, law enforcement exploits and trap doors.
Aside from that, the court's finding of facts was enough ammunition to provide grounds for legitimate "gossip". Short of that, there's a legitimate argument for "Why all the hate?" So we have to hold our judicial branch's feet to the fire and ensure that they don't get taken over by special interests. Its Microsoft's (and every other corporations) duty to push the envelope right up to the steps of the courthouse in the name of shareholder profits. Corporations are psychopaths. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Have gnu, will travel.
Copyright was a very minor factor in Microsoft's exclusion of effective competition and suppression of any real innovation in software design.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
If only Microsoft would stop doing things like using 'secure boot' to make life harder on Linux users -- rather than just competing on quality and features.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
Let's see, I had to pay for a copy of windows on a machine that never ran windows, and now we have the whole EFI thing. History is a great teacher.
'I wonder if I can swap out Chrome from Chrome OS or Mobile Safari in iOS.'
A more relevant comparison would've been, can you eliminate Paypal from eBay?
Ding ding ding! This is exactly why people who remember still hate Microsoft. Using their monopoly muscle to make vendors pay for their Windows product whether they use it on a machine or not was a despicable practice.
Only time will tell if things will be any different under Nadella. Right now it's too early to say that Microsoft has changed it's ways.
Microsoft has hurt the tech industry, repeatedly and badly
And much of their tech has been in place to prevent innovation, invention and change.
Their arrogance and low esteem of computer users seems to keep growing
particularly given how incredibly -bad- the interface is for windows 8. If it corrupted data slowly, it'd be comparable to ME + Bob.
OOXML and the FAT/exFAT patents are some of them. There is this HN comment thread BTW: https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
Here Here,
I'll forgive microsoft as they breathe their last breath. ... but only if I get to watch.
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
The pc train with M$ shuffling coal until it was spewing hellfire killed my beloved Amiga (oh yes, C= did plenty to suicide - not denying that).
For that they get my eternal hatred and I'll never give them an inch.
And then they panic and throw umpteen billions at the console market to stall SONY in the living room. You can hate on SONY as much as you like, but M$ has a very special place reserved for it in Hell.
And document "standards". And committee work. And Exchange restores. And embrace and extend. And breaking alternative DOSes. And modal windows blocking me working. And tarting up a retarded DOS little by little. And having an OS sacrificing stability for performance.
The evil and stupidity seems to be never ending. My grudges are old, but they really work hard to come up with some new ones so I wont forget.
Windows 8
Your Honor, I rest my case.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
A famious trial like say O.J. Simpson or Trayvon Martin ending with guilty verdict where they were CONVICTED but the judge then gave them a $1 fine and let them go free and they never had to admit wrong doing on their part...
O.J. Simpson and George Zimmerman were acquitted. Not guilty.
Their circumstances were really different. O.J. Simpson certainly acted very strangely, starting with the chase in the white Bronco, but he could afford very good lawyers. After a farcically broadcasted trial they managed to reach a not-guilty verdict. Then, in a much shorter trial, O.J. was found to be liable for his ex-wife's death. I think I don't want to understand that logic.
George Zimmerman was on the phone with 911 when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. There's no need to find Trayvon's real killer. The question was whether it could be proven that George was not acting in self-defense. They couldn't prove it, so he was found not guilty of murder.
I don't know whether George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin, but I haven't been convinced that he should be punished for it. I certainly don't like the mainstream media's attempts to bait the US into a race war.
Have a nice time.
How does his 'get over it and let it go' mentality gel with the current issue of Microsoft lobbying the UK government to not just go with the ODF standard, but to have a choice between it and its own OOXML? Office 2013 supports it, so whats the loss for them? If a department was going to buy MS Office for usability reason's it could still continue to do so. If the same department was not going to buy MS Office for usability or feature reasons, it will continue not to do so. Supporting the format is no skin off Microsoft's back as it does so already. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
Obtuse and dogmatic in the same breath. That takes talent.
Microsoft, your officers and directors and your senior managers,
I hate your fucking guts. Something about "cut off Netscape's air supply".
I have not used a Microsoft product since 2000. Nothing, nada.
I have converted more desktops to Linux since 2007 than you sold licenses for Windows ME.
I have converted one school district to Linux. Now there are several more school districts looking at that conversion: lower equipment costs (WinXP to Linux, same equipment), lower (zero) license costs, lower tech support costs, near zero malware remediation costs, ...
I hope to live long enough to see you in Chapter 7. Given your track record in recent years, I may get to see it.
FOAD!
That's why.
Stop making me develop a separate style sheet for your browser. Toe the fucking line. This is possibly the most visible problem that makes people hate M$. Try writing a website from scratch and then find out that something like the float tag sin't working yet in IE so you can use it but you'll have to write something else for M$ browsers.
The day that I can buy a computer, and have a choice on which operating system to have installed. I have bought many versions of Windows only to strip them off as soon as I get the machine (voiding the warranty in some cases). Why do I have to pay a company I never chose to use? They are fucking criminals at the heart of their revenue stream. If they ever decide to compete with software rather than licensing agreements, I'll reconsider my opinion.
I'm Pappy. I'm not dead, but my kids have been hearing me bitch about Microsoft as long as they can remember. At this point, they probably think of it like a fixture of the landscape: the old man doesn't like Microsoft.
So my oldest finally graduates college, and gets his first real job. He's an engineer; industrial controls. The vendors only write drivers for Windows, so everyone uses Windows, and no one cares. He's provisioning servers in plants, and doing Windows installs, and running VMs, and trying to automate things. And it's all done in Windows Power Shell.
After a few months, I start getting calls from him. He's astonished: "This thing really sucks!" he tells me. It kind of a broken, crippled, over-engineered, badly implemented shell. It's always in his way. Everything is a needless problem. He talks about what a relief it is to go home on weekends, and work on his own systems, in Linux, running bash, and being able to work on the actual problem, instead of spending all his time fighting with the system and the tools. And every time he calls, it's the same refrain with more exclamation points: "This thing really sucks!!!"
So, yeah, he learned it from me, but then he learned it for himself.
In the final analysis, the Microsoft era was a massive failure of free market capitalism that left us all driving Trabants while thinking they were the best that we could have.
Ah, yes. The government grants copyright monopolies to software companies, and that's a 'failure of free market capitalism'.
It's not the copyright monopoly that makes me especially upset about Microsoft. It's the OEM contracts that forbid alternative operating systems. Those are a failure of free-market capitalism because large OEMs needed Microsoft so they could sell PCs to a majority market, but then Microsoft used the secret contracts to force the OEMs to use Microsoft software for all PCs they sold. Technically, they're free to take Microsoft's contract or leave it, but economically it's suicide for a large PC vendor not to sell Windows. Long after alternative desktops have withered and died, besides MacOS, only now are we seeing timid development of alternatives, such as the Dell Ubuntu Developer Edition laptops and the HP Android desktops.
There are other free-market violations, too. Microsoft abuses the patent system with terrible patents and paid lobbying to prevent reforms. Microsoft abuses the standards system with terrible standards and paid patsies. Microsoft abuses the media with terrible publications and paid shills. Microsoft is fully in support of the DMCA and DRM, of totalitarianism and censorship. Microsoft is an evil company.
Have a nice time.
Most users had been taught how to use the Start menu and other elements of the desktop paradigm over the past two decades, three if you count classic Mac OS. When Apple added a full-screen application launcher to Mac OS 7 (At Ease, the predecessor to Launchpad), Apple wisely made it an option that users could turn on or off.
Legacy binary compatability is a non-issue for the average user. She/He doesn't bring any old software along with them from a Windows 98/2000/XP system.
Not even PC games? Or does the average user see Windows 3.1, Windows 9x, Windows XP, and Windows Vista/7/8 as one would see four console generations, where compatibility is not to be expected?
Because they still use the registry.
- real hackers don't have sigs -
Shoot, i seem to have mixed up the Slashdot and Paul Thurotts Winsupersite tabs in my browser.
In community relations, if you get a bad reputation for doing X, you need to make sure you STOP doing X in all forms, not just cutting down a bit. Otherwise, you are just reinforcing your bad reputation.
Table-ized A.I.
I read that piece when it came out... uh... last week or so?
My immediate thought was the subject line. Someone has signed up with the Evil Empire and is now miffed that his friends don't talk to him anymore or something like that.
Look: You can't jump in bed with the mafia and then say you're only the driver. Microsoft is evil and always has been evil and the damage it's done to the world of computing is still current. We would be 10 years in the future without Microsoft. The billions of monopoly rent it has extracted from the market are not paid back yet, and never will because it's in the nature of monopoly rent that the damage done is much higher than the profit gained.
No. You just can't come in, shoot the dog, rape the wife and harm the children, and then put your weapons away, put three books back on the shelf as a symbol of helpfulness and demand we love you.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Zune, once you got to firmware versions that supported "apps" at all (third-gen for the handheld media players, out-of-the-box for the Zune HD) and Windows RT both allow(ed, in Zune's case) sideloading for free. Of course, both were also supposed to lock you into a restricted sandbox, but that was easily bypassed on Zunes (which ran CE and thus had no proper ACLs / user accounts) and RT at least allows running built-in stuff (including scripting engines) as Admin, and also allows changing permissions on securable objects to enable apps to access them. iOS has nothing on either of those for user-in-control points (and that's before you get into the jailbreaking scene on RT, which is much better than on iOS and basically turns RT devices into standard Windows PCs that run ARM programs instead of x86 ones; there's a list of open-source desktop apps that have been recompiled over on xda-developers.com, and most .NET apps run completely unmodified).
Windows Phone, on the other hand... well, they made sideloading available for free a few months ago, but they limit it to two sideloaded apps at a time (even paid developer accounts only get that limit raised to ten, which was the original limit at release when the dev account cost $100 instead of the $20 it does now). All apps must be sandboxed, and they don't even allow (non-oem) developers to use very many of the let-my-sandbox-access-this-thing capabilities (for example, you can get access to the user's music library, but only through a restrictive API that retrieves media files and data from a higher-privileged out-of-process component instead of giving direct access to the Music folders, and there's no way to access the user's Documents at all). There's people working on breaking those restrictions, of course, but much like the iOS jailbreaks it's a game of cat and mouse where updating to the latest version can mean losing your increased access. On the other hand, WP7 explicitly allowed rolling back to earlier OS versions, and the tools to do this for WP8 are easily available even if not part of the standard distribution.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
They've done it again with the windows 8 tablets. My sister has a Windows 8 (RT) tablet and you can't even *install* 3rd party browsers, let alone replace IE.
Apple's laptops may have decent build quality, but from what I've seen, the screens on their iPhones can be broken with a funny look.
Let's see: Microsoft, by the Word corruption bug and actively denying it existed, stole $11000 from me in direct costs, and caused the loss of at least $25k in additional contracts.
That is money that my son WOULD have had access to. So by all means, if Microsoft contacts me, and strokes me a check for $35k plus interest at Microoft stock growth rates, and adjusted for price inflation, then the Microsoft hate needs to end there.
Until then, it isn't Microsoft killed my pappy, it's Microsoft stole $35000 from my pappy, and that means Microsoft stole $35000 from ME.
Make it good, Microsoft. If You aren't aboout rectifying your wrongs, then you're just a whiner. Annoying, too.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
We're trapped because of Quicken
Did you try GnuCash? If so, how did it fail?
People (real people, not devs or power users) hate microsoft because they can't get the stuff done on their pcs. They (used to) get blue screens all the time. They can't get their scanner to work because they don't know what a 'driver' is. They blame hardware problems on the OS (blue screen again). They can't get the photos out of their phones and send them through an email. They don't understand the concept of file and folders so they can never find the word documents they make. They don't understand backup and they lose all their data
THESE are the things that annoy people and if you compare to mobile OSs you will see that most of that stuff is just not a problem on the mobile world. Mobile OSs don't even come with a file manager!
If Mac OS was the dominant OS for that kind of people it would probably generate the same amount of hate.
"People are stupid."
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
My dislike of Microsoft has nothing to do with the antitrust case (although I will admit that I enjoyed it when they were convicted.)
I dislike Microsoft because they so dramatically lowered users expectations for software and computing. Prior to Microsoft windows and before that MS-DOS, users did not expect software to be a continual fail. In the 70s and early 80s users never expected us to have to reboot our mainframes or minicomputers many times a day and users certainly didn't expect to lose a lot of their work. Microsoft changed all that. By the mid 90s users were conditioned that software was flaky, operating systems were buggy and that they were going to lose their work several times a day. It actually took mobile apps to get users back on the side of computing and software and Microsoft clearly had nothing to do with that.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
1. Microsoft was *proud* of ignoring any achievements or lessons-learned from the mainframe era, and so - unlike Newton's "stand on the shoulders of giants" attitude - they re-made many of the mistakes in file and operating systems.
2. Then they did things in ways intended purely to break systems for anyone else. For example, in moving from DOS to Windows, Microsoft didn't just *allow* spaces in file names, they *enforced* the "My Programs" and other folder names with spaces in them - GUARANTEEING that all existing programs relying on spaces as delimiters would fail.
3. Through all of this, they ignored security issues, and added ways to hide their own garbage, thereby actively adding more security holes.
4. They spent more effort designing things to lock systems to hardware, making it hard-to-impossible for even the most legitimate and legal customers to migrate their applications and data from one computer to another purely for technology update. Then they have to forcibly break older systems to convince to leave what has been working for them (since migrating is such a pain).
Between passive-aggressive and willful ignorance, Microsoft helped keep the small computer system environment many years backward on its development path.
What I've noticed about this whole "corporate evil" thing is that many companies are alright before they go public, but once that happens the only thing everyone in the room can agree about is greed. It certainly was the turning point for Google.
I'm sure a more nuanced version of this argument exists, but for a ./ post, the above should suffice.
Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
Um, so, you're talking about me?
Lessee, Lose95, er, Windows 95. The illegal competition that broke WordPerfect (*far* better word processor that that piece of crap, Word). Lose Me, er, Windows Me.
But they've changed *so* much, right?
I have a two word response to that: Windows 8.
mark
According to the CERT notifications, problems never seem to get better. If the problem is about the OS, it is a vulnerability that allows user promotion and remote code execution. The list of affected operating system is always the entire list of Windows versions all the way back. If the problem is Office, it affects all previous versions. The recommended fix is always to disable some critical feature that is universally depended on by most business software. Their software is still junk.
I didn't say they were convicted, I said "like say" "where they were convicted." People were really upset about those acquittals and IF the judge just let them off after being found guilty people would have been many times more upset and the judge probably would have needed police protection for a decade. That was the point I was making and I don't think I was so unclear about it.
It was a perfectly valid hypothetical because the connection was how upset people would be about it; given they were already upset with the outcome. Microsoft was convicted and then let off almost completely during the sentencing and that should really piss the public off. What is the point of laws and millions of tax dollars spent enforcing them only to have it end up being for nothing in the end whenever we go up against a wealthy criminal?? At least Martha Stewart served time... like the only wealthy person who has for something that is common practice today; makes you wonder what was going on that she even was convicted at all...let alone sentenced to something...
As far as Zimmerman, I'd not have backed down, I don't care if the prosecutor was purposely doing a lousy job. There is no way you start a fight and get off with self defense in a sane world. Reality is that if the kid won and shot Zimmerman in self defense it wouldn't have come out the same way; race is still a problem. The media sucks, I gave up on them even for simple issues; race is beyond their IQ. Hell, I would make everybody serve minimum jail time for murder no matter what the circumstances are. If the murder was worth it then a few years in jail is a small price to pay for your life or your family's life or whatever. If it was temporary insanity, then you have to spend a few years at the funny farm... just to make sure you don't have something more than 1 time temporary insanity. Life sucks, sometimes you are unlucky but surviving instead of dying is good luck even if you have to serve a few years in jail.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I run, and like CentOS (directly equivalent to RHEL). I googled CentOS skype, and this was one of the first four hits....
mark
"Guys, I know we've been punching you in the face for 20+ years but we've *stopped* now !
Why don't you love us ?"
As someone who works very well with Microsoft these days and has many friends there, the lack of self-awareness in the posts on the article is staggering :-).
You have to do more than stopping being bad. Being *good* is required. :-).
I know you can do it ! Stop being a patent troll for starters.
How does one get past Dahmer or Gacy or Bundy? Ask Digital Research / Caldera (DR DOS) or Stac Electronics (STACKER) about getting past Microsoft's past slights. Oh yeah, THEY'RE DEAD, so you cannot ask them. How about BeOS? How about most techie's favorite multitasker software company: Quarterdeck with their DESQview and DESQview/X with so much X windows potential! DEAD. Along comes an antitrust court case with the US Dept. of Justice over Netscape. Outcome? The largest donations to President Bush's 1999 election campaign came from Microsoft. What was the FIRST action by Bush? Yep, he told the DOJ to stop the antitrust court case. IBM pulled some pretty under-handed slights vs. Microsoft, but I believe that only steeled Microsoft's resolve. The list goes on. I, for one, am GLAD to see Microsoft's Internet Explorer at a 9% use rating. ESAD, Microsoft.
I would like to add one more bit to all this...
I have seen countless companies die across dozens of software genres... Many of them NOT at the hands of Microsoft, amazingly. But I watched them and noted that they get humble and sincere before dying. Whether they drape their death certificate around another company's neck or not, they get sincere. After sincere comes righteousness. After that comes angst and a showing of their resolve. And then, they die.
Will Microsoft shake the stigma enough to, #GASP#, trust them again? Our trust was a long time ago, before Windows 3.1. But the slights were more than 'business as usual' because computing seemed to be corrupted in all the wrong oil company, train company, power company, and telephone company ways by Microsoft. Microsoft was not Quarterdeck making a great product (QEMM and DESQview) that everyone loved. Microsoft was a decent product that sleezed their way into everyone's hard drives.
We watched Microsoft and, despite many attempts at their life (BeOS, Linux, Google), they endured. But, we always knew that time, especially in this business, is the reaper of all - including you, Microsoft.
Right now, I see them suffering from too many Surface laptops (not enough sales), not enough innovation / market ownership of tablets and mobiles (with not enough tying to their other products despite trying). And they are speaking humbly and sincere.
Will a big, innovative, company in South Korea, Samsung namely, be the death, finally, of Microsoft? I am holding onto my seat as we, hopefully, watch the death of an icon. ESAD, Microsoft.
Forgive and forgetting is hard, when Microsoft never really changed their strategy of working you into proprietary technologies and vendor lock-in.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
Before Microsoft owned the world, back about 1974 (I think), they sold the best BASIC language software there was. It was a code image for the CP/M OS. But it needed more memory than most microcomputers had at the time, so they came up with an idea to make their own Dynamic Memory board and bundle it with the BASIC software.
Unfortunatly, the boards did not work. But they sold them anyway. In fact, Microsoft said that they would not sell Basic except with the Memory board. So people that needed the BASIC had to buy a board that everyone knew did not work, then buy expensive static memory boards from someone else.
We were in college at the time, and decided to find out what was wrong with the boards. The best we could determine (since dynamic memory was still experimental at that time) was that the skew in the strobe pulses had them out of timing when they got to the chips. So, we tried to redesign the board, cutting and jumpering runs and adding different control chips. But the memory chips themselves did not work in a way that could be made to operate on the S-100 bus protocol.
Either none were ever tested by Microsoft, or they failed and were sold anyway.
So far as I know, none of the Microsoft Dynamic Memory boards ever worked, for anyone. It would have been news in the industry!
But Microsoft continued to refuse to sell BASIC unless you bought one of the boards, until they were gone. Somewhere there are buried hundreds of Microsoft 4K Dynamic Memory boards, that never worked.
There were stories about it in copies of BYTE Magazine of the time, I think. (Or maybe it was an earlier magazine.)
I loved Microsoft in the early days; wanted to be like Bill Gates. DOS 3 through 6.11 and Windows 3.x made you feel like a partner. The OS depended on your ability to manage it correctly, in return, you could make it do some wild things.
Since then, with every new generation seemingly riding on Apple's coat-tails, the OS gave the average power user fewer and fewer options and less direct access to abstract hardware devices. It's still there, but just not as fun.
I began to despair that my idol had forsaken me.
I realised that I was a fallen wretch, beyond redemption.
Then one day, there came a knock at the door, and a well-dressed young man stood there with his Red Had Linux 5 Bible, and asked if I had heard the good news about our foul-mouthed lord and saviour Linus Torvalds. The rest was bliss... well, first I went to purgatory... Dependency Purgatory - because my transgressions were too great to allow me entry into the realm of independent open-sourced computing without first making atonement. But after I got out of hell by switching to SUSE and later Ubuntu, it was bliss because they don't believe in purgatory. There were miracles, too, when once I resurrected an old PC with Pocket Linux.
Now I'm starting my own religion: the Church of the Vulgar-Yet-Enlightened Kernel. Anyone know an organist?
Market share? Linux enjoys half the market share of Microsoft Vista...
Half of *what* ?
Which *market* are you talking about ?
If you define the market as in "we will only consider high-end gaming machines", yes indeed, that is almost twice the numbers of gaming machines reported by steam (Linux is in the 1-point-something range).
If you define the market as in "the fraction among all operating system, no matter what" you'll see an overwhelming amount of opensource Unixes (Linux or *BSD).
In the average household, you'll probably see 2 or 3 machines running Windows (laptop and workstation), but next to them, there will be a plethora of hardware running an opensource OS:
- including things like modem / wireless router
- non-Apple smartphones
- playstation 4 (some *BSD derivative)
- SOHO NAS server, home media player, etc.
Linux will also very likely be the OS running on the web server hosting the pages you're browsing.
Linux will also be found in your University's cluster.
etc.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]