I didn't want to divert the original XP thread any further from its true subject (e.g. are there any functional issues b/w Emplode and XP). OTOH, I wanted to offer some kind of response to Ruffles and CruzThs. So, a new thread. I agree with Rob Schofield, BTW, on the subject of an OT category. Some of the most interesting stuff on this BBS has been OT, and I have appreciated the exposure to other folks' interests and idiosyncrasies that some of those OT threads have provided.
On the subject of XP, I figure it should be possible to have a vigorous discussion/argument but one that stops short of acrimony. This BBS does a good job of that as well and I'll try to keep with that spirit. Having initially raised XP issues by reference to two Livingston articles, I'm now feeling a little dissatisfied that perhaps those articles have been made to stand alone for my opinions on Windows XP. Not like that's anybody's fault but my own, but I feel a need to fix that -- expand on some of my thinking. If anybody gets two paragraphs into this and decides not to read any further -- if this constitutes a one-post thread -- I won't take offense. It may mostly be "thinking out loud" for my own benefit. Apologies in advance for the approaching windbag!
Since about 1984, my employment has pretty much compelled me to use and support Microsoft (MSFT) products to varying degrees. I think I have worked with every MSFT OS since MS-DOS 3.0 including OS/2 1.2 and shared-code variants like WinView (and WinFrame and Metaframe). The exceptions are Windows ME and XP (Oh, and Bob). To lesser degrees I've also worked with MSFT productivity apps (Office) and things like SQL Server.
I moved to Seattle in 1988. One dramatic, but unsurprising, phenomenon that I have continued to notice since moving is the amount of hometown favoritism that MSFT enjoys here. Lots of folks work or contract there, have friends who work there, or own stock. I once had a neighbor on my dock -- a member of the NT 3.1 development team -- berate me for using the post-breakup OS/2 2.1 on a project (for an odd Oracle Forms application where no practical alternative existed at that time).
In conversations locally, I've had folks ask me "Why do you dislike Microsoft so much?" I am continually surprised by this reaction when I thought what preceded it was simply a discussion of pros and cons of various MSFT products. I think I *have* met folks who toss and turn fretting over MSFT and who frankly resent how big Bill Gates' mansion and fortune are. I don't toss and turn. Somebody will always have a bigger fortune than me. Even though I have accumulated some negative opinions WRT MSFT, I try not to let them leak out in discussions with clients and others. If you are trying to be coldly objective, I don't think using "Windoze" in a memo helps convey that!
Anyhow, my personal decision to take a pass on XP did not exactly spring full-formed from my head on the occasion of my reading Livingston's columns in InfoWorld. A fair amount came before. I'll list a few bullets here of random opinions and thoughts of mine. I won't, in some consideration of brevity, try to justify each and every assertion I include. Hey, they're just my opinions. YMMV. In the case where you detect some validity, I think you'll find that someone way smarter than me has made a particular point much more articulately.
1) MSFT continually bang a noisy drum of "the freedom to innovate", but MSFT has achieved its dominant market position primarily through marketing, FUD and opportunism, not through innovation or technical excellence. If ever I start to forget this I re-read "Accidental Empires". Yeah, it's dated but things really haven't changed.
2) The DOJ case continues to be upheld on findings of fact. I think conservative Republican judge Penfield-Jackson had it essentially right (in a pretty unprecedented, murky legal landscape). Even his comments WRT MSFT behavior in court seemed well-founded (But why did he tell a reporter?? Part of me wonders if he was looking for a way off the case!)
3) I have been the guy that had to drive through the snow at 4AM to push the Big Red Button (BRB) on the NT server because the folks in Pennsylvania can't get to their e-mail. Does XP yet have a truly reliable kill utility? From what I see, as late as Win2K, you are still stuck at times with the BRB and the occasional need to re-install the OS from scratch.
4) I have been the guy that got to tell 2 clients (after boring, laborious audits) that, due to an unnoticed, capricious change in MS-Office licensing (from concurrent user licensure to named user) that they needed to find some extra cash (~$200K in one case, over $300K in another) before the end of their fiscal year to ensure license compliance.
5) Businesses generally try to spread their exposure by making sure they have multiple sources for key business/product components. WRT to IT infrastructure, MSFT, like the IBM of old, would like to deny business customers this opportunity by occupying every software space in businesses to the exclusion of all competing products.
6) In great part due to #5 -- what I call the "Choice" issue -- I am a fan of interoperability and open standards. MSFT's interest in any standards process only extends so far as they are able to turn the process into a vehicle for their own business interests. In cases where the process can not be so turned, MSFT creates its own, competing, often inferior standard (example: DCOM vs. CORBA). Yes, MSFT wants its products to interoperate -- with other MSFT products.
7) MSFT works to achieve hegemony across multiple layers. Market dumping IE provides an interlocked avenue for proprietary MSFT application components -- ActiveX and ASPs -- and these back-end components further reinforce IE, further diluting the value of the original WWW proposition.
8) The MSFT track record on security is abysmal.
9) WRT MSFT Passport, my concern is not so much whether you absolutely have to activate Passport at a given point but rather what I am concerned Passport may represent overall. With its huge market presence and weight in the industry, a company with a very poor security track record has already convinced lots of partners to jump on the Passport bandwagon. You may say "Passport doesn't go that far". I say that Passport will go as far as we let it. I point to Livingston's prediction that at some point MSFT will start charging a monthly fee for Passport when it judges Passport has reached a critical captive mass. I'm not sure whether he's right -- I don't know what Passport uptake will be like -- but I would not bet against it. Here's an offer for Ruffles and CruzThs: if his prediction does not come true within 4 years, I'll buy you both some fish and chips and ESB some sunny day at Ray's.
10) To a degree I can't see with any other product set (computer or otherwise), business penetration of MSFT products in the 90s was driven by a "5th column" of home users. Budget analyst gets bundled MS-Office with new home PC, comes to work and advocates for Excel (or covertyly installs it!). Not a business-driven decision.
11) The transition to a Windows-based work environments, given the quality of Windows iterations, was of dubious benefit to businesses. The DOS/Automenu/Wordperfect5 network I supported in 1990 cost less and was more productive than the Windows/Word network it became in 1992. I think some of the cost-benefit analyses are *still* debatable!
12) At least in Seattle, much MSFT adoption was driven by not-very-cold-blooded middle management investment (both literal and figurative) in MSFT. A quote from a project meeting: "Jim, I don't know why you requested this budget for Oracle [for a client-server, WAN-based system]. Why aren't we using FoxPro? Microsoft just bought them!" (I am *NOT* making this up!)
OK, enough random musings of variable meaningfullness and quality! I should see if I can actually address some of the responses to my response....
Ruffles:
Let's look at some of his reasons...
1. Passport. YOU DON"T NEED ONE! If you don't trust it, don't put your credit card info in it. I opened a hotmail account so I could use messenger. It works great. I use the account for all the stupid sites on the net that require you to register. It didn't require any personal info to set up. You could always use AOL or any other type of messenger service.
Like I say, I'm more concerned about what I think MSFT would like it to become -- essentially that it become difficult or impossible to avoid for on-line purchases.
2. Spam mail?? To reject an OS because you *may* get spam from MS is rediculus. You get spam from *every* company out there. Heck, you buy a TV and register the warrenty and you get junk mail. I don't get any more spam on my hotmail account that I do on any other. Also, it's easy to delete.
I have *way* different feelings about this. Is Livingston wrong on the facts? If not, why is that part of the agreement/license?
3. The Java download? Big deal. We live in a world where *Lots* of people have broadband and 5 megs only takes a few min. Even with a modem it doesn't take that long and you only do it once.
While Sun's approach to Java is open to some criticism, I still see MSFT's actions as less defensible and as another attempt to force a "My way or the Highway" choice by consumers. Yeah, you can download it, but, while I think MSFT is attempting to walk a bit of a PR tightrope, their interest is in having you ignore it. Just my opinion.
4. IE plug in's...I've used it for the last year and I've not noticed problems with web pages not working. Do you have examples of pages that I can't get to with IE?
I don't have a strong opinion on this one -- in that direction. What I do get frustrated over is trying to access some MSFT-enabled pages with Opera, Konqueror, and Netscape.
5. The activation thing just pisses people off because they have to keep the license agreement now which is the same as it's always been. You weren't supposed to install win9x on multiple machines either but the technology wasn't around yet to make it easy to enforce.
This is an area where Livingston is going on at length but where the overall point is weakest. My impression from the media to this point is that MSFT is trying to transition to annual-renewal licensing/activation, but I haven't investigated where that stands lately. Anybody?
I don't work FOR Microsoft. I have worked AT Microsoft for the last 3 years with many of their engineers. I'm not quite sure how to respond to your last statement. Just because I work AT MS, you think I'm not a consumer?? I'm sure your needs aren't very different from mine. Working at MS doesn't make you blind
to what users want.
No, I absolutely believe that you are a consumer and that our needs overlap/intertwine. I will say that in some areas -- say spam -- they appear to be very different. I didn't mean to imply anything about you personally, but I honestly would expect anybody who works for/with MSFT -- whether employed, contract or partner -- to have a different spin on this than I do. If that weren't true, maybe I'd apply for a job! Yes, I have met folks who operate under Bill's 3rd Law of Cognitive Dissonance -- "everything we do is correct!" -- but I know that's not the rule. Still, I would expect some investment in a different perspective from folks on the inside.
I apologize for the tone of my previous post. I've just heard so many people trash MS and their products and 99% of them don't have a real reason. A lot of people spent a lot of hours working on XP. There are plenty of things wrong with it. There are plenty of problems with EVERY OS. Software is never finished. It's
an ongoing process. In my opinion, to dismiss XP for the reasons Livingston stated is a mistake.
Maybe I'm too thick-skinned or something, but I didn't find anything to get upset about in the tone of your post. I just was looking for the type of rationale that you went on to provide -- and I think it helps to note your affiliation up front. (I don't have an affiliation, I think. I don't own stock in and am not employed by anyone who could be considered a MSFT competitor or partner). I didn't want to consume more space, but I will say that when I "trash" a product it is usually with reason and in comparison to an alternative. A lot of my aggravation with MS products since 1988 has been due to having not-ready-for-prime-time products shoved done my throat based on middle-management mindshare -- in some cases displacing more reasonable alternatives or incumbents (We had WordPerfect Office 4.1 humming along wonderfully when we got the order from up top to install Exchange on a bunch of machines and an OS that just weren't up to it...two years of pain ensue...)
Yes, software is never finished. It really *is* ironic to me that I have come to the point that I will not endorse following the MSFT/XP track any further at the point that they really have produced their best effort yet. How much better? Well (sorry!!), here's another link from Infoworld
XP Article
CruzThs
OK.. Just one more thing after reading Livingston articles (which I think were a waste of time by a known Microsoft basher).
My spin is that the term "basher" is the usage when you are the one getting bashed; when you agree, the term employed is usually "critic"! Hmmm, I could see folks calling (late of InfoWorld) Nick Petreley a MSFT-basher (even though I would not and generally agreed with his criticisms), but, to the extent that I have read Livingston, he seemed like a guy with a long-standing investment in all things Windows (author of Windows 95 Secrets, Windows 98 Secrets, Windows 2000 Secrets, Windows ME Secrets). Looks like up to now Windows has been his bread-and-butter, yet that bloom is off at the XP juncture. Livingston is also hardly the only columnist editorializing on these points (I heard on OpEd on NPR about Passport last night, for instance).
Passport - Ruffles is correct, you don't have to sign-up for passport. The big thing is that Livingston claims Passport continuely sends out your password. THIS IS WRONG WRONG WRONG. Passport uses the authentication scheme called Kerberos which is a distributued network authenication scheme created at MIT.
I think other folks with more expert/intimate knowledge of that mean dog have done a better job of responding here.
Anyhow, a lot of what I have mulled over is the place of Windows variants in a business. To be responsible to clients, shareholders and all those folks, what I know is that there is an alternative to Windows in many of their IT/application spaces that represents a better, ever improving value proposition (Linux is what I'm talking about) and which leaves so many more interoperability doors open.
In the home consumer space the considerations are somewhat different, but a lot of issues simply aren't considered as Windows enters the home in "it came with the PC and my games run on it" fashion. Indeed, without my Win2K machine, I couldn't play Colin McRae unless I bought a Playstation, but that day may come.
Microsoft, the DOJ notwithstanding, remains pretty fixedly focused on their own interests at the expense, I believe, of mine. Any trust left? Not really.
Jim Hogan
). I haven't used the built-in burner. The programs I bought and used in Win2k work fine in XP for burning.
Previous Topic
Index