Linked by snydeq on Mon 14th Jan 2013 18:46 UTC
Windows DOS 4.0, Zune, and Windows 8 are but a few of the landmarks among 25 years of failures Redmond-style, writes InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard in a round-up of Microsoft's 13 worst missteps of all time. 'Over the years, Microsoft's made some incredibly good moves, even if they felt like mistakes at the time: mashing Word and Excel into Office; offering Sabeer Bhatia and cohorts $400 million for a year-old startup; blending Windows 98 and NT to form Windows 2000; sticking a weird Israeli motion sensor on a game box; buying Skype for an unconscionable amount of money. (The jury's still out on the last one.) Along the way, Microsoft has had more than its fair share of bad mistakes; 2012 alone was among the most tumultuous years in Microsoft history I can recall. This year you can bet that Redmond will do everything in its power to prove 2012 naysayers wrong. To do so, Microsoft must learn from the following dirty baker's dozen of its most dreck-laden decisions, the ones that have had the very worst consequences, from a customer's point of view.'
Thread beginning with comment 548839
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

What specific issues do you have with .NET that could back up your claim that it is a misstep?


I think the perception that .NET is a "bad" platform comes from the same place as Java's bad rep: It attracts substandard coders because it's an easy and fun language to jump into. I've seen some stellar .NET apps that were fast, functional and beautiful. And I've seen some real stinkers too.

I've always felt that a program can be functional and elegant no matter the language it was written in, given a coder who knows her stuff.

Reply Parent Score: 4

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I used to think like that as well.

But when you see how bad off-shoring C projects can be, you see that the language really does not matter.

On the other hand there are a few off-shoring companies doing cool Scala projects.

Bad developers are easy to get everywhere in the world, regardless of the programming language.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Bad developers are easy to get everywhere in the world, regardless of the programming language.


Isn't that what I was saying? yet it seems like you are contradicting me.

Not trying to argue, just really confused...

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

.NET gets a bad reputation from version 1.0 and 1.1 which were both quite awful. Also WebForms is pretty evil for Web Development especially if you haven't come from a Swing/WinForms/VB6 background.

VS 2003 isn't much better it takes about a day to install (I am not joking).
I also remember that on a particular CMS project, that attaching the debugger usually required surrounding your workstation in a pentagram made of red biros, while chanting demonic passages out of the Necronomicon Ex-Mortis. If it wouldn't attach, only a reboot seemed to do the trick.

Anything after .NET 2.0 is quite nice to work with in comparison.

Edited 2013-01-15 20:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I also remember that on a particular CMS project, that attaching the debugger usually required surrounding your workstation in a pentagram made of red biros, while chanting demonic passages out of the Necronomicon Ex-Mortis. If it wouldn't attach, only a reboot seemed to do the trick.


Sounds like some of the stuff I had to do to tame VB6 back in the day! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2