“Prejudices and misconceptions about Microsoft make it hard to evalute the company’s merits. The biggest myths about Microsoft are that its desktop products are overpriced, it doesn’t respect its customers, and reliability and security are poor. And some think the company is downright evil. In nearly two decades of studying Microsoft, I’ve been able to dig through the hype that the company generates, as well as the misconceptions its detractors create, to see more of the real company than most of you can ever experience.” Read the opinion-piece at InternetWeek, written by Rob Enderle.
Editorial on Microsoft: Hated Because It’s Misunderstood
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
MS has always given people what they want. Back when hardware was crap and networking was non-existent on the homeend, MS had MsDOS. Win 3.x was there for your graphical needs. Then as PCs got more powerful, but still not really networked, MS released Windows 95. In the background of it all, to entertain the more server marker, MS had windows NT. A GUI OS that ran on crappy hardware. Then as time grew, networking/stability became more of an issue, MS released windows 2000/XP. All the while, you can still run binary application written for windows 95 or even DOS.
Now, as security and easy deployment are becoming more of an issue, MS released Server 2003 and soon to be longhorn. Ms has always given people what they want.
This is contrary to the Unixy view that a single design from way back when was the perfect design. It views that hardware and the userbase should adapt to it. MS view that it should adapt to the current hardware and the userbase. So sure, that unixy style system design for networks is now the “natural” choice for the internet world, but that style ignored the desktop for the past 20 years.
I almost never comment here and threads like this are the reason. If this thread wasn’t already FUBARed beyond all hope I wouldn’t jump in now, but …
This is just idiotic.
Microsoft is a multinational megacorporation worth tens of billions of dollars. Microsoft has a PR department with a budget larger than a lot of relatively large companies are worth in total. MS is paying a small army of people to spin their products and image. They don’t need you, Windows zealots. They really, really don’t.
Poor little Apple, a niche player barely scraping by with only a few percent of market share. Surely Apple needs[/i] its loyal, rabid zealots … right? Until you stop to consider that this poor put-upon little niche player is worth somewhere between 1/8th and 1/10th of what MS is and when you’re talking about MS 1/8th to 1/10th ain’t exactly small potatoes. We’re talking BILLIONS OF DOLLARS here, Mac zealots. Steve doesn’t need you, he can afford plenty of PR staff all by himself.
Poor Linux … bleh. Linux is unstoppable, zealots or no. Thousands of people around the world devote themselves to it because they want to. IBM, Red Hat, SuSE, Novell/Ximian, Oracle, HP … they and lots of others make money off it. Linux ain’t going anywhere but up (at least in the server and embedded space) and it doesn’t need you either. Learn to code. Learn to write documentation. Visit forums and offer to actually HELP people with Linux. All the Linux hype is stupid. “It’s the greatest thing EVER! It’s BETTER than Windows!” Linux is great. Linux is fun. But it’s not for everyone and building up insanely high false expectations just puts people off in the event they do decide to try it hoping it’ll be a panacea for everything allegedly wrong with Windows. Proseleytizing on OSNews and all the other forums is worse than useless; it does more harm than good in the end.
Computers are just tools. Operating systems are just tools that facilitate the use of computers.
A carpenter might have a favorite hammer. Heck, he might even give it a name and sleep with it on the pillow next to him at night. But if that hammer is the only tool he ever uses he won’t be a very effective carpenter.
Choosing a tool for any task based on emotion and zealotry rather than real-world pragmatic concerns is just foolish. If IBM supported Linux for idealistic reasons rather than financial ones it’d be high time to divest yourself of IBM stock ASAP. If Microsoft decided to be “all good, all the time” its competitors would eat it for breakfast and be fighting over the scraps by lunch time.
Idealism is not rewarded in the corporate world, it’s exploited. That’s just the way things work, the way things have always worked, and short of the downfall of capitalism, the way it will always be.
Listen to yourselves:
“I use MS because Linux supports terrorists and Macs cost 9 times more than they should!”
“I use Linux because MS supports cannabalism and clubbing baby seals! And Macs are just expensive TOYS for snooty rich people who don’t know what a computer is!”
“I use Apple because using Macs makes me in some fundamental way better than EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WHOLE WORLD!”
There’s a lot of crap going on in the world. There are so many channels for zealotry. Maybe it’s good, in a way, that certain people devote themselves so wholeheartedly to something so inane and pointless instead of something that actually matters.
Do you think — do you honestly believe — for even a second that ANYTHING you write here will change anyone’s mind?
Do you think the Mac zealot is going to “see the light” and throw out his new G5?
Is the Linux user going to pause and say, “Gosh, what was I thinking? OMG, I’m an idiot, someone sell me a copy of Windows QUICK!”
Is the Windows zealot going to admit that Apple and Linux are anything more than trivial playthings?
I used to use Linux. It was fun. But then I built a new computer and, based on purely pragmatic reasons, configured it with an nForce2 motherboard and a Radeon 9700 Pro. That’s a combination for disaster (even to this day, half a year later) in Linux. Linux just doesn’t work the way I want it to work on this system. I could rant and rave against ATI and nVidia because of the driver situation. I could rant and rave against the kernel developers or whoever. Or I could just select a more appropriate tool, in the form of Windows XP (which I had two licenses for anyway).
At some point I’m sure the nForce2/Radeon 9xxx/video overlay/3D accel/multiple monitor/etc crap with Linux will get sorted. Maybe I’ll go back to Linux then, for a change from XP if nothing else. Something fresh can be a nice thing just because. When I left Linux to return to XP it was fun to rediscover all the things I liked about it. I suppose that makes me a bad person in the eyes of a lot of people here. Thankfully, I don’t give a damn. If I go back to Linux you can bet it won’t be because I waste my time and energy hating MS on principle and burning Bill Gates in effigy every night. Cuz, you know, that’s just stupid.
I saw a picture once that was terribly politically incorrect. It showed a young boy, obviously developmentally challenged, running down a track. The caption was (paraphrased):
Why is competing in the Special Olympics like arguing on the Internet? Because whether you win or lose … you’re still retarded.
So Sybase teamed up with Microsoft and Microsoft rebadged Sybase’s SQLServer. Then the 386 took off and Sybase lost out to Microsoft. It’s kinda like Microsoft and IBM with OS/2, which eventually wound up producing WinNT.
I knew the answer was out there somewhere. Thank-you.
Enough said.
Rob Enderle is a true fanboy.
Microsoft: Hated Because It’s Misunderstood (Opinion)
By Rob Enderle, the Enderle Group
If Microsoft’s lack of security really annoys you, you can fix it without migrating by doing some of the things you would do if you migrated. Learn from the sites that survived the virus and worm attacks:
# Limit the number of applications you put on the desktop.
# Deploy new operating systems on new hardware.
# Keep software up to date (including your firewalls).
# Do regular security audits (including trivial password checks).
# Consider smart cards for verified access.
# Don’t copy entire software images from old PCs to new ones; leave that to the hardware OEMs, who have testing and procedures in place to make sure the imaging is done right.
# Don’t upgrade memory on existing systems; even the slightest mismatch between memory chips can lead to instability.
You should find your reliability goes up, along with your resistance to attack.
Oh, and you may want to avoid products from vendors who taunt hackers (the word “bulletproof” comes to mind).
Windows product security will get a lot better in 2004, particularly if desktop blades and modular computers become as widespread as expected. But you don’t have to migrate unless you want to and, in 2005, your choices will get a lot more interesting. Fix what you’ve got, jump when you are ready.
Microsoft is Evil?
Many folks think Microsoft is just plain evil and should be stopped. Much of this perception is based on poorly founded beliefs from people who have never been on the Microsoft campus, nor have they ever tested their beliefs against what other companies do. I look at Enron and WorldCom and the executives who swindled those companies and I see evil. I look at the millionaires the .COM era created by ruining retirement funds and see evil. I see CEOs who increase their own compensation while laying off employees and cratering their company’s stock and see evil. I look at Oracle’s attempt to destroy PeopleSoft through hostile takeover and I see evil. I look at Sun Microsystems, which put in post 9/11 protection just for its executive staff, leaving most of the employees exposed, and I see evil.
Yeah, it’s all the OTHER companies that are evil — not poor, victimized, misunderstood Microsoft. Riiight. I suppose ol’ Rob could have mentioned things like Stacker, the current lawsuit with Burst, the fraud and lying in the anti-trust case, etc. But no….
And don’t tell my about all the different and wonderful installers there are for Linux, most of the time I’ve no idea what you guys are talking about. To simply install software do I need all that knowledge? Surely a simple setup.exe or install.exe would be sufficient?
Two-part answer:
a) So you refuse the friendly advice people give you? You know, in Mandrake, you can use the friendly menu to start a program called “Software Installer” that lets you download and install most software without dependency issues. It’s a graphical front-end to URPMI, a very powerful package manager. There is also Red Carpet from Ximian who does the same thing. There are all PHD (Push Here Dummy) apps, point-and-click all the way, so the only “knowledge” you need is knowing they exist and where to find them in the menu. But if you just want to complain without actually look for a solution, then I have to agree with others and conclude that, indeed, you are merely trolling.
b) There is such a thing as just a “install.exe” or “setup.exe”. It’s called Autopackage. It’s still under development, but it’s already working pretty well. Expect to see it become more prevalent over the next year. There was actually an article about it on OSNews this week, but in case you missed it, here’s the home page:
http://autopackage.org/
Once developers use this more, what seems to be your main gripe about Linux will have been solved. Of course, in the event where you’re just trolling, you’ll find a different gripe to complain about…
reliability and security on Microsoft products is not poor?
I guess they haven’t been given the job to patch all their windows systems every week because of new security vulnerabilities and virus alerts, huh?
Or am I mistaken? Are Windows 2000, XP and 2003 not Microsoft operating systems?
Then what gives?
My opinion is based not on a single story or anecdote but on
a long history of the company’s shady practices. I’m not saying they’re are unique is this respect but they certainly are determined and appear to be unrepentant even before the courts.
I think that before anyone in this forum makes up their mind on this particular aspect of Microsoft they should delve into the details of the things listed above, such as Stac, Sendo, AARD, the DOJ suit and it also wouldn’t hurt to read Barbarians led by Bill Gates, written by a Microsoft millionaire who was a lead developer with the company before there was a Windows 1.0 and worked there for over 13 years.