Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Aug 2011 22:27 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 487675
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Tue 30th Aug 2011 20:24
in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by ilovebeer on Wed 31st Aug 2011 08:17
in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
Microsoft isn't doing science. They are creating a retail product. They are not following the scientific method. They don't have a control group and a test group. They don't have double-blind test cases. They gathered data on usage patterns of their current product and are attempting to improve their next product based on trends found within that data.
The last half is correct, the first half is not. Microsoft uses control & test groups (groups, plural) in virtually every department. Additionally, they use a mix of both employees and non-employees.
Microsoft knows their products and customer base better than anyone else. To suggest they don't know what they're doing is absurd. They're one of the most successful global companies, software and in general, for a reason. Sane and reasonable people have no problem acknowledging that fact. Only the moronic 'evil empire' types have difficulty with the reality.




Member since:
2006-02-01
Microsoft isn't doing science. They are creating a retail product. They are not following the scientific method. They don't have a control group and a test group. They don't have double-blind test cases. They gathered data on usage patterns of their current product and are attempting to improve their next product based on trends found within that data.
If your entire line of reasoning is predicated on you expecting Microsoft to be doing hard science on something like how random users interact with Windows Explorer then every single word you have written is worthless.