Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 22nd Jun 2007 06:08 UTC
Windows ITWire: "Linux users can, at times, be the worst kind of ingrates, whining and complaining about what they perceive as missing features in a free operating system. My advice to all such whingers: spend 10 days using the latest version of Windows and you'll realise that you are living in a world of relative bliss."
Thread beginning with comment 249828
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
My question exactly
by markob on Fri 22nd Jun 2007 08:27 UTC
Member since:

I've been asking myself and arguing about this question since it came out. A huge company like Microsoft should have enough resources and better plan to develop faster and better, yet Vista still has that beta feeling: things don't work, it's slow, why it restarts twice for new nvidia driver install is beyond me, why it takes about a minute to connect to my router is also weird (no problems with any XP/linux/osx machine in the house), ... I also don't understand why it'll take another year for first pack of fixes, sometimes I wonder if there are only 3 people or so working on this OS? I wouldn't even find all this weird, but seeing the extremely fast development on linux and osx front, what's up with Microsoft? Maybe they should spend less resources and time on useless "inventions" and software we all know either won't succeed or will be abandoned again when they reach a certain market share? Microsoft still has a chance to fix their image and quality, but more and more I doubt in that. But that's just my 2 cents.

Reply Score: 4

RE: My question exactly
by twenex on Fri 22nd Jun 2007 08:52 in reply to "My question exactly"
twenex Member since:

What's surprising is how surprised people are by this.

Microsoft really isn't a company that should be in the operating systems business. People like that guy who left MS saying "If I didn't work for Microsoft, I'd buy a Mac" and "we lost our focus on the customer" may feel that way now, but I've always felt that way. If the majority of its products are up to the standard of Office, then it makes some decent products (although having problems when your document goes over 30 pages makes it look a bit silly, but maybe that has now been solved). Microsoft's problems have always been:

(a) It spends far too much time working out how to screw competitors and lock in customers (new file formats, alleged hidden API's, FUD) instead of working on (among other things) its favourite word - "innovation". To give it its due, this is historically how all computer companies have worked (otherwise we wouldn't have PDP-10s and -8s and -11s and goodness knows what else, alongside Novas and Eclipses and AS/400s and Suns and HP9000s and...), but customers hate it - witness the success of the open, Intel architecture despite its utter crapness in the early days, or of UNIX, despite the incompatibilities, and now Linux against proprietary systems. Imagine having to learn to drive "a Ford" or "a Honda" instead of "a car"!

(b) It crows far too much about Windows, which really (even if the rest of its products were not particularly good) isn't the best of its products. This makes people who come to it from other systems think of them as a pack of liars (and that's without counting any of the FUD) - especially when you factor in the fact, that a lot of highly technical people have personality quirks that put honesty perhaps higher on their list of desirable virtues than it is for people outside that commmunity (I mean, who points out BUGS in the manual, for crying out loud?).

And who wants to deal with a pack of liars?

(and despite claims to the effect that "Microsoft has changed", these problems still exist - it's the marketplace and legal environment that have changed, not Microsoft.)

I started this rant by saying that "MS shouldn't be in the operating systems business". MS only got into the OS business because IBM thought they were in it already. So Bill Gates said "I don't have one, but I know where I can get one", and the rest of history. But think about it - it's like the US going to Lithuania to make a deal on defence, and saying "oh, and we want to extend this deal to Latvia, too." And the Lithuanians say, "Well, we don't own Latvia, but we will soon". So Lithuania invades Latvia. Only, the Latvians don't much like being invaded by Lithuania, so they put up a fight. (Analogous to the problems a company that writes programming languages is going to have doing OSes.)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: My question exactly
by elsewhere on Sat 23rd Jun 2007 03:21 in reply to "My question exactly"
elsewhere Member since:

...why it takes about a minute to connect to my router is also weird (no problems with any XP/linux/osx machine in the house)

Good, so I'm not the only one ;)

Networking is just weird. I also don't like the fact that Vista calls an MS server everytime the connection goes up in order to verify connectivity, but that's a different story. I don't want to rag over Vista in general, I'm more or less ambivalent to it since I only use it when I need Windows, but I never understood why it takes so long to establish network connections, or why my connection cuts in an out. I can say with a straight face that I actually have stabler support for my broadcom wireless in linux than I do in Vista. The irony there is staggering.

Reply Parent Score: 4