Why is Microsoft the favorite villain?

[Mallette]

I think I finally threw out my BeOS install CD, too.

 

That was a promising project.  However, without software an elegant OS is pretty worthless.  We only have Linux because it was such a great server alternative to MS and the guys built software for their own use.  However, with the entire economic establishment 99% Windows the days of building nice OS are done.

 

MS has no incentive to provide a cleaner, smaller Windows for home use.  What they sell as "Home" versions still have huge blocks of code never used by the home user.

 

Here's a fantasy:  MS taking their best coders and engineers and building a totally integrated architecture for the general user with drivers integrated into the OS.  It would be inexpensive and perform well beyond it's price...as well as being much less hackable and far more stable. 

 

Yeah, won't happen...doesn't fit the keep'em upgrading business model and would really irritate all the OEMs who profit by that system.

 

Dave

[Gilbert]

Why not Google?

 

You obviously don't own an Android device, or you'd know that Google takes a serious beating on their portable device OS's.

[muel]

You can strip Server 2012 down to 5-7 services and around 15-20 processes to use as a nice audio server.  Not near the clean code of the Apollo missions by any stretch but not too shabby by today's standards.  

[Marvel]

with drivers integrated into the OS

Only if they built and sold the hardware to go with it. The installer would be really large (although most new Linux distros seem to identify all the hardware and usually works quite well). I will say, though, that I have installed Window 8.x on some old (2005-2007) computers and it identified and installed drivers for everything.

 

The Haiku Project is doing a build that works/looks a lot like BeOS. It isn't based on any Linux code/kernel. They are working to code most things fresh for size and speed. Still in alpha stage, but it's pretty neat.

 

https://www.haiku-os.org/

 

Bruce

[Mallette]

Only if they built and sold the hardware to go with it.

 

Precisely what I said.  Closed architecture like the Apple, Amiga, and Atari.  It's the reason they were so stable and user friendly from the hardware side.  They could put slots in for OEM specialty cards like the others.   

 

Here is the problem:  While MS would make a lot of money, the vast industry that builds all the bits and pieces and software drivers, etc would SCREAM and fight tooth and nail.  A well designed general purpose home or business PC with fully integrated architecture would need no support.  Like your TV, it would work or not.  Take graphics cards.  Only hard core gamers, 3D modelers, video editors, etc really need the high end graphics cards.  That is, at best, 5% of the market.  On board audio is already as good as high end cards were 10 years ago. 

 

While many will say "What about choice???" I would submit that very, very few are really qualified to make the right price/performance choice and even then it takes a lot of research given the constant change.

 

Dave

[Jeff Matthews]

While many will say "What about choice???" I would submit that very, very few are really qualified to make the right price/performance choice and even then it takes a lot of research given the constant change.

 

There is far more to it than that.  Without an open architecture, progress would move so much more slowly.   You know those SSD's you like so much???  Not made by Microsoft.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Jeff Matthews

[Mallette]

progress would move so much more slowly. You know those SSD's you like so much??? Not made by Microsoft.

 

Jeff, please explain how that in any way is technically relevant to what I said?  I can't even begin to figure it out, and my first digital storage was on an audio cassette. 

 

Dave

[Jeff Matthews]

Closed architecture like the Apple, Amiga, and Atari.  It's the reason they were so stable and user friendly from the hardware side. 

 

Dave, you advocated the upside of closed architecture.  My response was to advocate for it by pointing out that open architecture has resulted in the rapid leaps in technology we all have enjoyed. 

[anarchist]

Dave's argument is largely the quite antiquated Minix vs Linux argument.  A fully integrated (ie monolithic) architecture is NOT the best solution or approach and was even recognized by Linus.  The proper architecture is component based and a kernel that does very little.  Microsoft developed an OS under the appropriate approach - the problem is entirely in implementation and no one yet has figured out how to implement it well.  Which is why Linux has catapulted to the forefront despite being a flawed architectural approach: lesser architecture design implemented well beats out good architecture implemented badly.

 

Jeff's argument - not said well, I guess - is that a closed architecture has so many dependencies that it responds quite slowly to technological progress.  Design decisions are made that cripple its ability to be flexible and respond rapidly to change.  While Dave likes that a closed system solves one problem, it introduces so many as to be unsustainable.

 

I worked with Apple back in the 80's.  I hated it despite programming on it.  People tend to think MacOS is still closed, and it does have a great many dependencies on hardware but pretty much any intel based system can run it today with minor difficulty.  Edit a few firmware settings here and there (interestingly doing so requires you have a Linux system) and your regular old hardware becomes a Mac.  Same for Linux.  Pray tell, where is Minix... or Atari?  Perhaps Dave remembers that Atari had to have its own version of Basic because the Atari couldn't just use regular old Basic.  I can't contribute to discussions on the Amiga - it had its pro's but I always thought it sucked.  Fortran was cool back in the day but I much prefer to code in Swift or use any of a dozen other programming or scripting languages.

 

Regardless of the value propositions of MS vs. Apple vs. Linux - Google, Facebook, and Twitter are still evil and their proponents mere simpletons who rush forward into servitude.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Autarchist

[Mallette]

My response was to advocate for it by pointing out that open architecture has resulted in the rapid leaps in technology we all have enjoyed.

 

What leaps?  The machines still struggle with tasks that are easy with architecture designed for efficiency.  It costs us 25,000.00 to put together a Wintel box that still doesn't perform any more rapidly or smoothly than a Video Toaster equipped machine of 1996.  Immersive VR is just around the corner again...finally, when it was simple 20 years ago.  My 3D guy requires a highly modified and souped up Dell 7910 workstation at about 12k and still complains that, while nearly as fast as his mid-90s machine, is much less stable and Windows less than fully preemptive multi-tasking makes continuing to work while rendering difficult.  He is the one who still uses the same program (Lightwave) he used on the Amiga back then that is barely different other than the clunky Windows mandated GUI.  And there are NO really usable 2D animation programs available that are really functional.  Vector doesn't do 2D anim without so many abstraction layers it gets nutty and the results are hardly worth it. 

 

In 1996 we had three architectures for three different tasks.   Windows already dominated the business market as spreadsheets, word processing, and database systems ran OK on it and Gates had leveraged his deal with IBM to take over that market.  Windows was cheap, and the IBM ad hoc open architecture also cheap and available to anybody who wanted to build and sell machines.  The Mac owned the printing and graphics business outright as the OS was much easier for artsy types to navigate than DOS (which was still around to some degree) or Windows over DOS (which it really still is, but is much more concealed).  The Amiga owned video and related areas outright and due to being able to handle full color when the Mac was still grayscale and the PC was still 256 colors it was making inroads into a number of other areas.  In fact, that year its installed base equaled the Mac.  Nobody in any of those professions at the time would have believed you if you said "Someday we will all use precisely the same wrench for every bolt." 

 

It makes no more sense today to build PC architecture in a "one size fits nobody" mode than it did back then. 

 

"Closed" architecture doesn't necessarily mean locking out other OEMs like Apple did for so many years.  Today's Macs have lost their performance advantages of their custom architecture from the 68000 chip days in a surrender to the IBM architecture made necessary for survival.  Savvy users groaned when it was announced, but the majority of Mac users didn't really know anything about the hardware (and didn't care, one of the reasons they were Mac heads in the first place) and only cared about their beloved Mac GUI.  Of course, the Mac now suffers the same performance hits and ills of the cobbled IBM architectures as Windows does but Apple doesn't much care as that is but a small segment of their business today. 

 

In programming, a couple of generations have been exposed to program architecture where most everything runs in a single thread.  Try to use your Acrobat while emailing a PDF from it, or go back to your Inbox to check something while you have a dialog box open to insert a file in an email.  "Doink, Doink."  Same for actually trying to follow help instructions in many programs...can't follow the instructions without closing help.  Nutty.  I've taught my programmers to build most components of an application as completely separate executables as a workaround for the poor excuse for multitasking we have today.  When you bring up help it's transparent to the user, but you've actually launched a separate application so you can use it efficiently.

 

I don't think many get it, but it is the very "Back to the Future" nature of the last 20 years of my career that has enable me to make a much better than average living by simply waiting until the Wintel platform catches up in a given area to repeat the stuff we did back in the day.  Some of the really neat things still remain beyond the reach of the "modern" PC, but it is gradually getting there.  But the hardware architecture remains a nightmare of thousands of drivers and other issues than often make it cheaper to scrap a machine than to troubleshoot it.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

One nice thing going on at MS is Win10 universal programs.  Having the same app for phone, Xbox, PC, tablet=good thing.  I am also quite impressed and excited about HoloLens.  This morning I read that MS will release a version of Windows 10 for Raspberry Pi later this year.  A 35.00 complete PC on a palm sized card is something we DEFINITELY didn't have back in the Camelot days and will open up a lot of fascinating potential for people in my business.  Cheap, ubiquitous digital signage will be one of those things, as well as rolling in computers to uses where they were too expensive and places that were too small.   

 

Dave

Edited March 6, 2015 by Mallette

[Marvel]

The machines still struggle with tasks that are easy with architecture designed for efficiency. It costs us 25,000.00 to put together a Wintel box that still doesn't perform any more rapidly or smoothly than a Video Toaster equipped machine of 1996. Immersive VR is just around the corner again...finally, when it was simple 20 years ago. My 3D guy requires a highly modified and souped up Dell 7910 workstation at about 12k and still complains that, while nearly as fast as his mid-90s machine, is much less stable and Windows less than fully preemptive multi-tasking makes continuing to work while rendering difficult. He is the one who still uses the same program (Lightwave) he used on the Amiga back then that is barely different other than the clunky Windows mandated GUI. And there are NO really usable 2D animation programs available that are really functional. Vector doesn't do 2D anim without so many abstraction layers it gets nutty and the results are hardly worth it.

 

My younger son bought Lightwave (He moved from trueSpace) when he was still in high school, but decided to go into music... I know that the version he had, was lightyears ahead of what you could do on the Amiga. The following review even point out failure of the past and present (or obvious places for improvement...). While I can agree with you on a certain level, I think you have selective memory about a lot of the things.

 

http://www.cgchannel.com/2013/11/review-lightwave-11-0-to-11-6/

 

Bruce

Edited March 6, 2015 by Marvel

[Jeff Matthews]

But the hardware architecture remains a nightmare of thousands of drivers and other issues than often make it cheaper to scrap a machine than to troubleshoot it.

 

 

That was more than I could read.  I stopped when it was obvious you were back to the old vector/raster issue.  I understand that for some people with certain needs, this could be a problem.  But that is such a limited, one-dimensional argument.  There is so much more to computing these days.  Wireless networking.  Cloud storage.  The internet.  Object-oriented programming.

 

I'll tell you what.  Take a look at what is going on in cancer research with genetic mapping.  Computer-assisted mapping has made the process go millions of times faster than before.

[Mallette]

Actually, I was just talking about Lightwave evolution with Norm, my 3D guy.  Of course, features have been added...as they would have been on the Amiga by this time...but many more that are not possible on Wintel OS and architecture are no longer there and others that would have been added as well to blitter, color cycling etc are not.

 

I learned it on the Amiga and the interface and most functions remain the same...thankfully. 

 

You could have this conversation with Norm and he'd tell you the same story of how he's made a good living in the 3D world while MS played catchup with functionality.  It's one of the reasons I hired him.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

In the "real" world we just completed a very expensive and completely unnecessary (with decent architecture and OS for it) day.  One of my video editors stalled in post.  Finally figured out that a striped RAID work drive had failed, hence the failure to complete post as, of course, the RAID isn't part of the OS and so it's "go fish" to figure out the problem.  We had to physically disable the RAID to get it to boot. 

 

I am sure they will get around to it.  After all, they eventually wrote in CD drivers to the OS after a decade or so. 

 

Dave

[anarchist]

When using physical raid arrays, there is application software that installs into the OS so you can view or modify the array.  At least... the raid cards I used provided the drivers and application software for Windows some 17 years ago.

 

Why use Windows 10 on the Pi.  Actually THAT is old tech now.  Three or four years ago the Pi was something else, Linux, Websphere, and you had a mobile server you could take anywhere or actually use it to move itself.  Now you can buy far more powerful cards or miniature servers.

[Mallette]

Three or four years ago the Pi was something else, Linux, Websphere, and you had a mobile server you could take anywhere or actually use it to move itself. Now you can buy far more powerful cards or miniature servers.

 

It's a new one.  Faster processor, twice the RAM, same price.  Flying off the shelves.  I am planning to use them for digital signage at my workplace and considering other uses as well.  For a bit over 200.00 you can get a small touchscreen monitor and a Pi and use it for an interactive map, person locator, room scheduling, etc. 

 

Dave

Edited March 7, 2015 by Mallette

[tigerwoodKhorns]

It's funny how almost everyone loves to take digs at Microsoft as being inferior, monopolistic, corrupt, etc., as if its existence is a stain on a decent society.  Why not Google?

 

Compared to Microsoft, Google is closer to the devil, yet people love Google like a new puppy.  Google is monitoring and storing your every activity.  If a bomb goes off in your neighborhood, won't it be something when they find that a few years ago, you did a search on fertilizer.  "How coincidental!"

 

Put it this way... Google has the actual potential to make anybody a convicted criminal.  They can stream a good number of coincidences and, "Bam!"  You're a psycho!  A murderer!  A pervert!  Whatever "they" want you to be.  

 

That is dangerous. If any big player deserves serious scrutiny and justifies criticism for its very existence, that would be Google.

 

I am late to this party, but this seems to coem from my hatred of Microsoft. 

 

I think that this can be summed up in a quote from Bill Gates from a very old 60 minutes episode where he stated to create a need for yourself where people must continually come back to you.  They have taken this to an extreme. 

 

I have to install Win 7, which I am somewhat indifferent to, as many say they like it.  But I also need to install a new version of word where the reviews are about 2 stars average. 

 

I have a perfectly good version right now that I am VERY efficient on.  But I must learn a new version where everythign is different and it will slow me down.  Jeff, you know that every "0.1" is money right out of my pocket.  Why do I need to endure this?  Because they are forcing me to do this to extract more money from me.  The sad fact is that I would rather pay to continue to iuse what I have than "upgrade" to the shit that they are making me upgrade to. 

 

Is this a good enough reason to hate MS? 

 

If I treated my clients like this I would have no reason to hate MS because I would be out of business.  I work for my clients and I am "the help" so it is my job to make their life easier and make them happy.  Funny way to view a business huh? 

[Marvel]

Microsoft development teams compete with each other to implement new features. The person/team that can convince higher ups that they have the better feature gets the promotion or pay increase. That is one of the reasons some of their own software doesn't integrate well within it's own product. It is a lot of small teams competing instead of one large team working together.

 

Chris - For years I have used a page layout program from a company in the UK. Does everything I need, and I always skip a couple of versions so they would email and offer the newest to me for $19. Now, the offer the next to the newest for that. The newest is $119 now, where is was about $50 when they started. 

 

They sent me an email for another product, that they don't make, but a nice discount. The list price for this companies office software is only $44.99. A full office suite, that has a great feature:

 

• Microsoft Office Ribbon style interface
• Switch interfaces between traditional toolbar mode and Microsoft Office 2010 or 2007 Ribbon style
• Much improved OOXML import/export - native support for docx, xlsx, pptx without using the Office Compatibility pack
• Open and save to the "cloud" with Dropbox

Compatible with MS Office 2003, 2007, 2010 and 2013.

 

It may be cr@p, but I am really tempted to get it to see how well it works on compatibility. I really like Libre Office, but some files don't convert very well

 

www.ability.com/

 

Bruce

[Mallette]

Tiger, see my comments on Visio above.  The ribbon is incomprehensible.  Just when most are using dual or more monitors (my database programmer uses 5) MS forces you to cram everything into your workspace and doubles or more the number of clicks to access a tool.  I simply cannot imagine what the logic was. 

 

Visio 2003 was the last where you could open all tools and position at will as ANY serious user is going to do.

 

Dave