To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Actually, I don't think XP or Win2k sucked at all, and Win2k3 is a very stable, fast OS.
"Microsoft could decide to suck less, but that would make the situation suck more in the long run, because Microsoft probably won't ever release a platform that doesn't suck. If they did, it would probably blow."
WTF does that mean, basically, you seem to be saying whatever MS does, even if they manage to suck less, it would still be a bad situation. Perhaps there is no pleasing you. If MS released an OS that didn't suck, it would blow? are you 13? Come on, be reasonable.
There is lots of things to not like about MS and Windows, just like there is lots of things to dislike about Linux. All OSs suck, they all just suck in different ways.






Member since:
2005-07-08
I'm saying that Microsoft sucks, but they don't suck hard enough for most consumers to care. Alternatives that suck much less are being held back by the fact that people put up with Microsoft's suckiness. It Microsoft sucked just a bit more, the market would move to solutions that don't suck as much, and mostly likely those platforms will begin to suck much less because of the greater marketshare. Ultimately we might end up with one or more platforms that don't suck.
Microsoft could decide to suck less, but that would make the situation suck more in the long run, because Microsoft probably won't ever release a platform that doesn't suck. If they did, it would probably blow.
I hope that clears things up.