why is microsoft so bad?

SCRUB

Linux sucks ass .. there i said it ok
now can i get some sleep.

*there has got to be a morning afterrrrr so i can hold on throught the nigghhhttttt*

Excelsior

The way I see it is:
MS are leading because
They had a huge head start
They have the finest marketing in the world
They recruit the best ppl, coders and business guys
They have a fu.ck off clever owner
They want to succeed
They are young
And finally: Their programs satisfy

But how can I say such a thing?
The truth is, not everyone out there is an amd using quake-nerd obsessed about cooling fans for their cpus. Not everyone understands inheiritance in c++. over 95% of ppl use windows. of those i'd say 0ver 95% are perfectly happy using windows.
engineers and coders are valid users of unix. it suits technical things better.

unfortunately for linux, computer science is going to be about user-friendlieness for the next generation. wni9x is a perfect example of this at best. it is a standard (1st requirement for the spread of a technology) it is easy and when not pushed, it works just fine. sorry kids, most people dont push it.
linux will never defeat it even if it is some day better, because win9x has brand credibility. before linux gets brand credibility, and widespread perception of its qualities can occur, linux nerds who cant see past their fat, sci-fi obbsessed bellies will have made it incredibly uncool. that might not be pretty, but its true. meanwhile windows will become more and more pretty.
paladin's quote about talking to VERY good computer programmers on this cracks me up. i'm putting that away somewhere on my harddrive so i can reel it out again someday somewhere else. classic example of the arrogance of computer talented ppl.

some day you'll have no advantage over my dad because his programs will be super-easy to use, and all your knowledge of obscure inanities will fade.

and maybe someday i'll have macs.
sorry for the rant.

(i'm not really andy, am i?)

deRanged

it might be an idea to separate the thread into two - one debating microsofts business strategy and one debating their products.
As far as business is concerned - they have a great marketing company. it works really well. business is a back-stabbing cutthroat world. they recognise this and are great at it.just ask Bill Gates' bank manager.
as far as their products are concerned, I'm not particularly anti microsoft - I prefer not to use them (I prefer solaris) but they're not as bad as people make them out to be. I've had a 95 machine for 3 years and never seen a blue screen.
Linux is a great os for developers - but not really for home users. win is good for games and non-professional computer users.
I think it boils down to the purpose you plan to put your machine to.
some os's are better for certain things.

Gengarx

Ah yes Chiaran has finally posted a reply - only a matter of time I thought
As far as I'm concerned with the browsers, I started off with IE so I've just decided to stick with it - it would have been the exact same with Netscape if I had loaded it up first. They are both good working browsers with little or nothing in between them as far as performance or reliability. I have tried both but just preferred IE.

As far as whether Linux is better than Windows I'm afraid for me the loser has to be Linux. I agree with Acous and his point that there are far too many little apps involved in it, far to much hassle installing it and really as far as support goes it doesn't really have much. I use my computer most for playing games and Windows is THE platform for doing that at the moment. I'm in no way loyal to Microsoft - if there ever is a better version of Linux than Windows I'll use it but its just that at the moment the disadvantages of Linux far out weigh the advantages of it - plain and simple. I have NEVER had big problems with Windows so why change when there is no better alternative?

The way Microsoft products take up more disk drive space than its competitors really in my opinion isn't an issue and certainly not when you consider the size difference - its small change for gods sake compared to the size of say some games, taking up close to half a GIG. Anyhow the sizes of harddrives are massive too.

I agree with Chrome on the matter of reliability too. Windows has very few bugs in comparison to other programs out there and Quake2 is one good example though there are plenty of others

In the end the only real reason that people hate Microsoft has to be their corporate flexing for sure and the way the have consistently cornered the markets they have entered and crushed quietly any competition along the way. Business is war but Microsoft have gone a bit too far……..

samresh

i cant see past my fat SCI-FI OBSESSED belly

Excelsior

Hail Cummins.
Nice to see you round my friend. Excellent post- pleasure to read.

ButcherOfNog

now that i've got a mo

Netscape is technologically lagging so far behind IE at this stage that its a total pain to code applications for both browsers. The farce of Netscape 5 is the main problem, are we ever gonna get it? XML was included sa an afterthought in it. like hello.

Netscape is a dumb browser, if it gets a HTML page with a non closed tag, it can't handle it. Yes it forces you to develop clean HTML, but then i move on to its javascript support *groan*. on second thoughts i'll not depress myself. Oh and why did they think it was a good idea to have navigator & communicator telling webservers they were different browsers? and you notice the very poor way the app resize code works? and its bookmark system is crap.

IE is a nice browser to develop for, Netscape is not. I'd love to know what real world developers told you otherwise.

Maximilian

Hobbes? just what exactly is it you do?
Do you get paid for surfing the net or what?
just curious....
I know Eamo is bad for dossing off and playing with the internet, but......

Shinji

Agreed completely with Nog. I've developed most things that you can push through a browser window; html, javascript, java applets; and in all cases, IE was the better browser to develop for. The technology behind the Netscape browser just doesn't hack it.

As a desktop environment, all flavours of Linux STILL suck, not only for newbies, but even for those of us with a fair bit of PC experience. I started using computers seriously when the height in user-friendliness was having a built-in BASIC interpreter, and you plain couldn't use a computer without knowing how to program. But I still find Linux to be a pain in the a$$ to use as a desktop OS, and NT is catching up quick on serverside as well, for my money.

If I were asked to implement a full solution, ground up, I'm sorry, but I'd go for Microsoft stuff all the way. It works well together, and they have a product every step on the way up. Server OS? Windows 2000. Mail system? Exchange and Outlook. Webserver? IIS. Desktop OS? Windows 2000 again. Browser? IE. Applications package? Office 2000.

I have to say, though, that Microsoft development tools DO suck hard compared to the Borland/Inprise counterparts. Delphi/C++ Builder **** all over VB and VC++, for my money (calling MSVC "Visual" should be banned by the advertising standards commmittee!) and its interesting to note that Corel just bought Borland... Corel who are trying to make Linux into a proper desktop OS in the form of Corel Linux.... Hmmmmmmmmm.

Ja,
Rob

deRanged

hmm. lots of people are saying linux sucks - why ?
I found it easy to install (20 minutes) and I find the interface much better than windows. more freeware, I can customise it the way I want it, more memory free for runing apps.
what are your complaints about linux ?

and I agree about netscape and IE - IE is now better than netscape.

ButcherOfNog

i've nothing against linux, as i spent a good few yrs working with unix, so its not exactly all new to me, but

redhat linux 6.1 - the getting started manual, 351 pages? I rest my case

SantaHoe

Well "deRanged", (if that is your real name), I like Linux too.
It's the only OS that hasn't crashed on me (yet), but to get my sound and internet working, I'll have to replace my soundcard and modem, which I couldn't be botherd doing if they work fine in windows.
Well, that and the fact that my UNIX-FU isn't up to scratch.

deRanged

oddly enough deRanged isn't my real name.
I can't say I read the manual for RedHat. Just installed it. I agree though, getting graphics cards and sound cards working can be a serious hassle.
That said I've had hassle like that on windows as well. (probably cos I don't know much about wintel).

SantaHoe

Well I know Windows and DOS, but I don't find any of that **** usefull in Linux.
I also emailed Zoom and they told me that my modem won't run under Linux.
Redhat has my sound card on the "Unsupported" list.
So all I can do is buy new gear.

amp

I've installed Red hat linux 5.1, Caldera Open Linux Lite, and Slackware Linux. Took me ages even after buying Que's excellent Using Linux.
Eventually I got Redhat installed and just couldn't for the life of me get my modem or other hardware working with it. Win98 just picked it up on boot, installed the driver and hey presto I was on the net. So I use win98 and yeah I use Ie5 and Office2k.
That said when Linux has full plug and play and is easier to install I'm going to switch (or at least dual boot), because Linux has got momentum. Most linux developers seem to see it's limitations and are making improvements.
I don't like Linux at the moment but I love the principle behind it. An OS by the people for the people.
There's a lot of reasons I don't like Microsoft. Early versions of their modem registration scanned your harddisk for programs by other companies. That's the equivilant of buying a car and having the dealer park secretly outside your house and see what other cars you might have bought.

Business is war but even in war there's susposed to be rules like the Geneva convention. Microsoft have crossed the line far to often for my liking.

True, I have a career thanks to my knowledge of MS products but that doesn't mean I have to like the company. I'm trying out other operating systems like Linux and soon BeOS. Why? Because I feel that being locked into one companies products is dangerous. If free operating systems become dominant then companies are going to look at their bottom line and make the switch. I switched from Intel to AMD K7 because I got a better CPU for a cheaper price.

To paraphrase:
A computer on every desktop - Micrsoft
A viewscreen in every room - 1984

---

Play GLminesweeper! Lunacy Abounds!