Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's OneDrive Web App Crippled With Performance Issues On Linux and Chrome OS (theregister.co.uk)
Iain Thomson, reporting for The Register: Plenty of Linux users are up in arms about the performance of the OneDrive web app. They say that when accessing Microsoft's cloudy storage system in a browser on a non-Windows system -- such as on Linux or ChromeOS -- the service grinds to a barely usable crawl. But when they use a Windows machine on the same internet connection, speedy access resumes. Crucially, when they change their browser's user-agent string -- a snippet of text the browser sends to websites describing itself -- to Internet Explorer or Edge, magically their OneDrive access speeds up to normal on their non-Windows PCs. In other words, Microsoft's OneDrive web app slows down seemingly deliberately when it appears you're using Linux or some other Windows rival. This has been going on for months, and complaints flared up again this week after netizens decided enough is enough. When gripes about this suspicious slowdown have cropped up previously, Microsoft has coldly reminded people that OneDrive for Business is not supported on Linux, thus the crap performance is to be expected. But when you change the user-agent string of your browser on Linux to match IE or Edge, suddenly OneDrive's web code runs fine. The original headline of the story is, "Microsoft loves Linux so much, its OneDrive web app runs like a dog on Windows OS rivals".
Everyone on Windows change your user agent to say Linux.
Interestingly, after the "oversight" was made public the issue is "fixed" by Microsoft.
See the first comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13932226
The next step qill be that it becomes deadlow if you're still using XP or windows 7, and show a popup that for a decent performance you ned to downgrade to winspam 10.
I don't know much about this cloud stuff, but there must be a shitload of these online storage services, and for some reason Linux users had to choose Microsoft.
Same old Microsoft, same old thugs, nobody should forget that.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Not to say MS aren't often malicious ( or "competitive"), but having used a pile of their software today I can certainly say there's much that's badly written.
I think the same ting happens when using Google Drive on Windows.
.... same as the old MS.
Drop OneDrive and use something that doesn't disrespect your choices.
More likely the Program Manager is saying "Good work guys! It works perfectly."
There isn't any legitimate reason for the useragent to be screwing it up like this.
The job ain't done until Linux won't run
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
This issue was discussed on /r/linux two days ago and it was fixed yesterday.
Well if you were a schlub, it could make sense that you do just the opposite instead. So it the case you mention, slow windows machine down instead and pretend it was a mistake if found out.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Microsoft have plenty of experience at being subject to judicial oversight and investigation, so the chances of any smoking gun being found in this specific case seems completely unlikely.
However, if anyone actually captured reliable evidence that a change in the User Agent string could generate such remarkably different outcomes, then there is a question to answer here. Adjusting the performance of one product [their Cloud offering] to favour another Product [the combination of Windows and Edge] would appear to fall pretty close to the definition of "tying", something that Microsoft have direct experience of - they were fined, for example, for tying Windows Media Player to Windows - so it would be interesting to see what could have happened had the outage been more widespread or prolonged.
I think this sort of activity is becoming more widespread with time, not less. Despite the protections apparently afforded us by the law, we see far more bending of the laws than ever before. It's as though we've entered the "Scooby Doo Era" - "Yes, and I would've gotten away with it, too, if it wasn't for you pesky kids!!!"
To which I'd add, "Nice work, kids..."
Because it's not a bug to fix, if they're checking the user agent string and explicitly throttling performance then this clearly must be intentional sabotage to try and make competing platforms look bad.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
What else were you expecting from an ill-bred company?
Why in the world would you be using a 3rd party service? Putting together a Synology box is trivial, and it can back up to most cloud services with client-side encryption. You get storage space that's limited only by your hard drive space and the freedom and security of your own cloud service.
and to Microsoft what is Microsoft's.
This should not be a surprise and is nothing new.
Don't expect Microsoft to look at anyone's interests but their own.
Microsoft LOVES Linux!
... specifically, M$ loves to have it disappear.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Actually OneDrive is a PoS in general. We have it at work, and when it comes to the sync client, I have to go around to each computer for every user and do this to get it working the first time (Relevant post here):
1. Kill all instances of any Office application.
2. Clear out any office related credentials saved in the Credential Manager.
3. Go to %USERPROFILE%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Office\ and delete the "Spw" and "16.0\OfficeFileCache" subdirectories.
4. Launch some other office program (Word / Excel / etc.) and have the user sign in.
5. Open OneFrive (Office365) in the browser, and start the sync process from it.
Then it works, even after a reboot. What's worse, it's the recommended method for fixing this issue: as seen here and here. By a Microsoft mod of all people, in 2015!!!!
That's really fun to have to do over and over. But of course they can't fix a problem that prevents the damn sync client from working. Oh no, apparently they are too busy breaking it on purpose to have a working product.
Well at least I know why it's broken now.....
I also have weird problems with outlook.com on non-Windows machines.
lucm, indeed.
Yeah, I tested. Suddenly my laptop battery life became comparable between MS Edge and competing OS/browser combinations, thus breaking compatibility with MS benchmarks. When I contacted MS about the issue, Steve Ballmer became mad and threw a chair at me. That cause hardware problems, from which I am still recovering. Then their lawyers sued me for defamation, violating their EULA, assault with intent to kill, and lost profits resulting in the layoff of thousands of workers. Posting AC for obvious reasons. Long story short, use Edge on Windows.
Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
This isn't the first instance of this. Look at any OWA instance or ASP(.net) site. Limited functionality when being honest about the browser, enhanced (working) functionality when you claim to be a Microsoft browser. So they reused old code...
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
You haven't been watching the news lately, have you? Basically here's what happened a couple weeks ago when they tried to stop it: We found out that the only force less stoppable than Trump is Microsoft.
If you are a professional programmer and were asked to do this, what would you do?
I wouldn't do it.
You do what Mel did. Read the story of Mel.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
People have no long term memory, or believe the marketing drones?
Everything Microsoft puts out is made to give an advantage to Windows, even if it seems alternative OS friendly.
Do you think the Linux subsystem is available out of friendliness? On the contrary, it's there so people can migrate their Linux stuff to Windows. I bet there are minor subtle incompatibilities that are easily fixed but then make your stuff windows specific too.
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
> So if you have say 100 users and 3 use linux then would
> you devote 50% of your resources to service those 3 users?
I know this is Slashdot, but please RTFA. Microsoft *DELIBERATELY* *WENT* *OUT* *OF* *THEIR* *WAY* to add UA-parsing code which then slowed down non-MS users. They actually expended additional effort to sabotage non-MS users.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Microsoft greatly improved the smb protocol between Server 2008r2 and Server 2012. Increased performance of smb and encryption are also selling points Microsoft hammers to encourage upgrading from Windows 7 to Windows 10.
BUT now that I've shown my "Microsoft certified professional" bias, I actually read the article: this was within a web browser, and most damning = "But when you change the user-agent string of your browser on Linux to match IE or Edge, suddenly OneDrive's web code runs fine. "
So this really is as bad as it sounds - ...
It ain't what they call you. It's what you answer to. http://mylyceum.us/
It seems it's not active throttling, just fallback to failsafe set of features; it's not the issue of specifically "Firefox+Linux", it's the general "Other".
Instead of feature detection, they sniff the UA string and upon failing to find a "supported browser" serve code for "unsupported" which is woefully unoptimal.
So, not evil, just lazy and incompetent.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
"Ordnung ist Ordnung" ceased to be a valid devence since Nuremberg.
Professional doesn't take an unethical job.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
If you were using windows you would get it not throttled, but covered in ads. The "choice" is yours.
this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
So, not evil, just lazy and incompetent.
Typical Microsoft then. Why do it right when you don't have to?
This is an ex-parrot!