But why is it possible to set Windows so that it crashes due to 'incorrect settings'? Why is it possible to write drivers that crash the OS? 2K was infinitely more stable in this regard and Microkernel-based OSs are immune from such driver-based problems.
I agree that Windows has improved immeasurably, but I also think that its wrong to blame users for incorrect settings or driver developers for dodgy code. The OS design should anticipate such abuses and do as much as possible to combat them.
I think that XP was a big step backwards from 2K in terms of stability (mainly because of the driver problem), but I hear that 2K3 server is super-stable, so good news.
I haven't read the OM, in fact I thought that William Whyte was the bad guy in "Diamond are Forever". Thanks for the tip. I shall add it to my swelling Amazon shopping cart.
I certainly agree that large companies are more facinating in their failings than their acheivements. If I can recommend a good read in return The Innovators Dilema convincingly explains the inability of companies to exploit new, disruptive technologies. In fact, R&D doesnt help companies faced with such a technological shift. Xerox perhaps faced this at PARC. Telcom is faciniating right now as a truely disruptive technology (VoIP) sweeps the telcos before it. What will be the disruptive silver bullet for MS I wonder? It was almost the Internet, except that against the odds MS survived it. Perhaps that is a tribute to Bill and Steve if nothing else is.
I wouldnt, however, underestimate the quality of the people who work at MS. I wouldnt describe them as "organization men" in the traditional 60s IBM sense of the world. MS hires the best and brightest and I think Redmond is consequently a positive and stimulating place to be. I think the "average" Redmond developer wants to build good stuff for other developers to use. Most techys are not politically motivated sociopaths after all. And I think MS hires and values Techys above all else. You dont get to be the worlds most successful technology company otherwise.
Of course these happy masses are being directed at a very high level by Bill and Steve, but to regard the entire organisation as a single minded entity is to missunderstand the nature of large corporations. All are muddling though. Some better than others certainly, some lead better, some luckier, some using good technology and some not. But all are hostages to their particular circumstance and all are fundamentally organised at a much lower, collective level (if at all) than it might seem from the outside looking in. Corporations are emergent entities, not hive minds.
I think that the conspiracy theorys, particularly those that think MS deliberately leaked the source, seriously overestimate MS as an entity. MS is like any other large organization or corporation: A vaguely organized collection of individuals who are muddling through their working day, certainly not hell bent on working towards some evil master plan. Nothing MS does besides Windows and Office makes any money. They are groping in the dark like everyone else. If you speak to MS employees or visit Redmond campus, you certainly get a sense of this.
Slashdot Mirror
But why is it possible to set Windows so that it crashes due to 'incorrect settings'? Why is it possible to write drivers that crash the OS? 2K was infinitely more stable in this regard and Microkernel-based OSs are immune from such driver-based problems. I agree that Windows has improved immeasurably, but I also think that its wrong to blame users for incorrect settings or driver developers for dodgy code. The OS design should anticipate such abuses and do as much as possible to combat them. I think that XP was a big step backwards from 2K in terms of stability (mainly because of the driver problem), but I hear that 2K3 server is super-stable, so good news.
I haven't read the OM, in fact I thought that William Whyte was the bad guy in "Diamond are Forever". Thanks for the tip. I shall add it to my swelling Amazon shopping cart.
I certainly agree that large companies are more facinating in their failings than their acheivements. If I can recommend a good read in return The Innovators Dilema convincingly explains the inability of companies to exploit new, disruptive technologies. In fact, R&D doesnt help companies faced with such a technological shift. Xerox perhaps faced this at PARC. Telcom is faciniating right now as a truely disruptive technology (VoIP) sweeps the telcos before it. What will be the disruptive silver bullet for MS I wonder? It was almost the Internet, except that against the odds MS survived it. Perhaps that is a tribute to Bill and Steve if nothing else is.
I wouldnt, however, underestimate the quality of the people who work at MS. I wouldnt describe them as "organization men" in the traditional 60s IBM sense of the world. MS hires the best and brightest and I think Redmond is consequently a positive and stimulating place to be. I think the "average" Redmond developer wants to build good stuff for other developers to use. Most techys are not politically motivated sociopaths after all. And I think MS hires and values Techys above all else. You dont get to be the worlds most successful technology company otherwise. Of course these happy masses are being directed at a very high level by Bill and Steve, but to regard the entire organisation as a single minded entity is to missunderstand the nature of large corporations. All are muddling though. Some better than others certainly, some lead better, some luckier, some using good technology and some not. But all are hostages to their particular circumstance and all are fundamentally organised at a much lower, collective level (if at all) than it might seem from the outside looking in. Corporations are emergent entities, not hive minds.
I think that the conspiracy theorys, particularly those that think MS deliberately leaked the source, seriously overestimate MS as an entity. MS is like any other large organization or corporation: A vaguely organized collection of individuals who are muddling through their working day, certainly not hell bent on working towards some evil master plan. Nothing MS does besides Windows and Office makes any money. They are groping in the dark like everyone else. If you speak to MS employees or visit Redmond campus, you certainly get a sense of this.