Survey Results

Navin9-Sep-02 6:43

9-Sep-02 6:43

One thing in particular I am talking about is Windows filesharing. In NT 4.0 (and 9X, etc.), you could easily use Samba, which is a file sharing system that can run on other platforms (e.g., Linux.) With 2000, they tried to add more prorpietary stuff, and wrapped an end-user licence agreement around the necessary info. I think the Samba people figured it out anyway, but I am talking about stuff like that.

And what about Windows Media Player? Can you read a Windows Media stream with anything else? (I doubt it, but maybe I am wrong here and you can.)

Visual Studio really doesn't have those kind of problems, a C++ (or C# or VB) file is in text, and as you said I think you can develop for .NET with other platforms, so I am not taking about Visual Studio so much as other products.

There are three types of people in this world: those who can count, and those who can't.

Anonymous9-Sep-02 7:35

9-Sep-02 7:35

Whats wrong with microsoft is that all the the programs are closed source. A UNIX or a LINUX server and even workstation setup is entirely consisting of open-source.
The open-source allows you to modify it to your liking and also sharing modifications to further strengthon the security it provides provides;P

Russell Morris9-Sep-02 9:02

Russell Morris

9-Sep-02 9:02

????

Open Source?. You have to pay out the wazoo for the Solaris code, as I suspect you have to do the same for any other big *NIX vendor. Not to mention the NDA's required...

--
Russell Morris

"Have you gone mad Frink? Put down that science pole!"

Michael P Butler9-Sep-02 10:13

Michael P Butler

9-Sep-02 10:13

Anonymous wrote:
The open-source allows you to modify it to your liking and also sharing modifications to further strengthon the security it provides provides

Who has the time to fix and update somebody else's software. I barely have the time to do my own code. At least MS provides easy to use development tools for writing my own code.

Michael

Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.

Ed K9-Sep-02 12:07

9-Sep-02 12:07

Anonymous wrote:
open-source

And then we could write different versions of all those tools to integrate with other tools each of a different version and then we could try and maintain all those versions, while keeping which platform the version matched and ...

I don't have time to rewrite the OS or teach my father-in-law how to use a command line to compile his OS...I'll stick with windows.

ed

Every time I walk into a singles bar I can hear Mom's wise words: "Don't pick that up, you don't know where it's been!"

Tim Smith10-Sep-02 4:13

Tim Smith

10-Sep-02 4:13

Hell, Apache can't even keep their own software working with each other.

PHP 4.2.2 with Apache 2.x?

Nope, doesn't work.

You have to pull the source out of the CSV and rebuilt.

Oh gee, thanks... Yeah, going to do that.

WTF | :WTF:

Tim Smith

"Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution."
Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture

Michael P Butler9-Sep-02 10:10

Michael P Butler

9-Sep-02 10:10

Anonymous wrote:
Microsoft is making it more and more difficult to do any kind of combination like this - it is becoming an all-or-nothing choice.

I'm using Windows 2000 running VS 6 to talk to a Sun Solaris box running Oracle. Don't see much lock in to MS tools their. The only thing that makes me wish for more MS is the poor crap that Oracle supply for client tools.

Michael

Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.

Ed K9-Sep-02 12:01

9-Sep-02 12:01

Michael P Butler wrote:
poor crap that Oracle supply for client tools

They went from good stuff to java...that should be a textbook example of why not to use java! Cool | :cool:

ed

Every time I walk into a singles bar I can hear Mom's wise words: "Don't pick that up, you don't know where it's been!"

Ed K9-Sep-02 11:59

9-Sep-02 11:59

Anonymous wrote:
any kind of combination like this

That is called a 'Marketing Plan'! Laugh | :laugh:

And they do it very well...I agree that they try to inhibit the competition from integrating, but Ford doesn't make their engine compartments accomodate Chrysler engines either. They don't prohibit you from doing the customizations/integrations, but to make it part of their business plan???? I don't think so.

ed

Every time I walk into a singles bar I can hear Mom's wise words: "Don't pick that up, you don't know where it's been!"

Paul Watson9-Sep-02 4:25

Paul Watson

9-Sep-02 4:25

Navin wrote:
This doesn't matter much if you are confindent that MS will always be the best, until the end of time, but if something better, faster, or cheaper comes along, you won't be able to take advantage of it without a big initial expense.

(Of course, I realize MS is not the only company that tries to lock customers into their products...)

Even though you acknowledge knowing that MS are not the only ones practising it, I still boggle at the thought that you bring this up as a valid point against MS.

Should I stop using Adobe Photoshop because it outputs PSD files? What about Macromedia Flash? Man that is just evil stuff, I will go uninstall it right now!

Yes it would be nice if companies did not use proprietary file formats, but that is not going to happen for awhile.

This is what I keep asking: Are there valid reasons not to use MS which do not apply to other companies?

To me MS is just another company doing what every company strives to do, make profit. If you don't like what they do, use someone else, but don't make them out as the devil while everyone else is a saint, they aren't.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Anonymous9-Sep-02 5:47

9-Sep-02 5:47

Paul Watson wrote:
To me MS is just another company doing what every company strives to do, make profit. If you don't like what they do, use someone else, but don't make them out as the devil while everyone else is a saint, they aren't.

Interestingly, you yourself gave the best reason not to use MS right there - perhaps you simply don't like their tools. But that aside...

I never said "evil", "devil", or anything like that in my post. MY point was that MS often does use proprietary formats and protocols to lock in customers. And it is simply untrue that *all* vendors use proprietary formats. (Anything open-source, by definition, uses open formats. And even MS itself occasionally publishes its formats and protocols.)

Being too locked in to one vendor, whoever it may be, is almost always bad, for the reasons I stated before. For me, given a choice, I'll pick the vendor that is the most open unless there is a compelling reason not to.

Navin9-Sep-02 5:50

9-Sep-02 5:50

(again, that was really my post, but I forgot to log on... Blush | :O

)

There are three types of people in this world: those who can count, and those who can't.

Paul Watson9-Sep-02 6:03

Paul Watson

9-Sep-02 6:03

Anonymous wrote:
For me, given a choice, I'll pick the vendor that is the most open unless there is a compelling reason not to.

Wonderful! Then do so and stop bashing MS around. Get on with your life.

Anonymous wrote:
Interestingly, you yourself gave the best reason not to use MS right there - perhaps you simply don't like their tools. But that aside...

Even more wonderful! I am pro-choice all the way. Our world is full of choices, more reason why all this MS bashing is just totally daft.

My question which still has not been answered is still the same: Are there valid reasons not to use MS which do not apply to other companies?

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Navin9-Sep-02 6:46

9-Sep-02 6:46

Paul Watson wrote:
My question which still has not been answered is still the same: Are there valid reasons not to use MS which do not apply to other companies?

I thought that not locking yourself into a proprietary format was a valid reason? Not sure why you think this is not a valid reason and that I am just bashing MS - you have not made your point clear. If your point is that other companies also lock into proprietary formats, yes it's true, but there are companies that don't. So I consider this a valid reason.

There are three types of people in this world: those who can count, and those who can't.

Paul Watson9-Sep-02 6:59

Paul Watson

9-Sep-02 6:59

Navin wrote:
If your point is that other companies also lock into proprietary formats, yes it's true, but there are companies that don't. So I consider this a valid reason.

LOL no. That is my whole point with the question. What MS does is what a lot of companies do, so either bash all the companies that do and not just MS, or don't bash anybody and get on with life.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Navin9-Sep-02 7:03

9-Sep-02 7:03

Paul Watson wrote:
LOL no. That is my whole point with the question. What MS does is what a lot of companies do, so either bash all the companies that do and not just MS, or don't bash anybody and get on with life.

Okay, then. If your point is that most of the "evil" things that MS does, many other companies do as well so why single out MS, then I agree with that. But then that makes the question rhetorical... you would be hard pressed to come up with *anything* that MS (or any other company does) that at least some other company somewhere also isn't guilt of.

There are three types of people in this world: those who can count, and those who can't.

Anonymous9-Sep-02 10:52

9-Sep-02 10:52

Your analogy of thieves -vs- coding practices is even dumber.

And considering proprietary formats as a bad practice is almost as dumb.

Anonymous10-Sep-02 13:59

10-Sep-02 13:59

Netscape released their browser for free so why is it bad for Microsoft to do the same???

Ed K11-Sep-02 3:59

11-Sep-02 3:59

Yawar Maajed wrote:
they are eating all the small fish out there

Could you please elaborate on how MS slaughters other companies? I would like to know all the tactics they are using that slaughters the competition.

Please exclude buying the competition, offering a better product, or bundling their own lesser offering in the OS as they are not illegal in the free enterprise.

Honestly, I'd like to know what they are doing that makes them a 'slaughterer'...you have your chance persuade.

Thanks,

ed

Every time I walk into a singles bar I can hear Mom's wise words: "Don't pick that up, you don't know where it's been!"

Ed K12-Sep-02 11:56

12-Sep-02 11:56

This is a good one to work over. I agree with the virus problem to the extent that there are areas where security and collaboration had to fight it out and the collaboration guys won. Well, later on we discover that the security guys should have won. MS made a big mistake!! (In reality users were partly to blame for not paying attention, as were IT for not keeping updates and security wonks who make public holes before telling the company.) But I think MS has learned quite a bit from that...I hope!!

I would not say they wiped off the competition. Outlook Express is included with the OS but is nowhere as good as Outlook that comes with Office. You pay big bucks for that. Outlook Express is ok, but I would use another program which I would pay for over Outlook Express. I used to use Eudora.

Now the full Outlook is head and shoulders over the competition. Eudora did not keep up, they didn't offer the bells, whistles, or anything like Outlook. Same think with Notes. I would bet that most people only use Notes because they are locked into it. Some bigwig doesn't want to use anything else and they are stuck. (Me for example!) I hate Notes! I'd risk the security problems for something that works nearly all the time, is highly configurable and usable. Notes crashes or locks up too much, is barely confugurable and is not usable. I don't call that killing off competition, I just call it a better product.

Thanks for a good response! I'd rather have a difference in opinion with good discussion. Thanks!

ed

Every time I walk into a singles bar I can hear Mom's wise words: "Don't pick that up, you don't know where it's been!"

TheFrogPrince9-Sep-02 11:09

TheFrogPrince

9-Sep-02 11:09

ok.

You will use multiple vendors, primarily because they are all "open", but, using MS tools, I'm gonna finish my project before you do. Wink | ;)

"Dammit Jim! I'm a developer, Not a doctor!" =)

9-Sep-02 7:25

I've used MS products for a long time, I've been on beta products as well, etc.

Overall, I think MS has been improving majorly in the past few years.
Yes, there are many things I am not happy about, but at the same time I don't think Linux can offer as many tools, etc. I may be a great system, it doesn't have all the tools needed right now.
(As a side note, I think Unix users are a very good reason not to move to Unix systems; Have you ever asked a question to one ? besides pointing you to the manual and telling you that you suck if you don't know that you need rev 294.49 of package A if you want package B to work, unless you have rev 489.2 of package C, etc. The 'we're using Linux, we're better' attitude is a complete disservice to their cause.)

In the meantime, MS is improving their products...

Spyware is an interesting topic; Yes, I like my freedom and I don't like to be spied. However, what is really spying ? Are they prying in your private files ? no. Are they tracking what you're doing on the web ? anybody around you with a packet sniffer can do it. Net accesses have never been private. As long as it's not disruptive, I think it's useful for companies to monitor how people are using their products.
It's like an automated feedback on thousands of people. It's cheap and efficient.
The tool that reports errors is a great idea for example. As a software developper I think it is wonderful to have a way to get infos from crashes on as many different machines as possible.

The windows activation is not new either. I remember all expensive software on Unix system had similar schemes. It's just a way to curb piracy.

What I would worry more is the tendency to go toward renting computers and software rather than buying them. Some Intel people told me about that in 1998 or 1999, the industry is slowly moving there. I think this is the real issue, not really if it's Microsoft or Red Hat that will dominate.

brianwelsch13-Sep-02 8:23

brianwelsch

13-Sep-02 8:23

Paul Watson wrote:
Are there valid reasons not to use MS which do not apply to other companies?

Nope.

What other industries out there, have competing companies agree on using a standard anything? How often have to tried to fix something only to find company ABC used the XYZ wingdingy on that model. Sorry, no they don't really have standards for that stuff.

So why does it come as such a big surprise this thinking has carried over to software??

BW
{insert witty/thought-provoking saying here}

Stephane Rodriguez.9-Sep-02 9:02

Stephane Rodriguez.

9-Sep-02 9:02

MS tools are good, especially when you have the time to tweak them, read a lot of articles, go to hundreds of sites, and cycle again.

What makes me furious about MS is their .NET strategy. In short,

- they are relying on developers for .NET evangelization. What do you think developers are going to do when they start distributing .NET-base sharewares or freewares. They're will be a strong issue, because users are forced to download and install a shitload of run-times just to launch a simple .exe. Your program'd better be great, otherwise I am pretty sure you'll be flamed. That's about it, I believe users and customers are going to resent a lot individual developers about .NET if the user experience is worse than before.
That said, everyone must remember that launching a .NET-based application requires a few seconds just to let the CLR compile the IL code.

- they are faking the entire dev community with their multi-language CLR strategy. The only reason why the CLR, in marketing words, accepts more than one language, is that MS want Java implementations be translated as seamlessly as possible to C# or the like. Hence the goal is only to gain the lost business and comfort their monopol.

- the latest MS standards are locking customers and developers. Whenever (for instance) Xml namespaces changes in the future, individual developers are forced to upgrade their products so it keeps working. In other words, you can not develop a program and figure that it will work during 2 years without any change.
This means that, although MS runtimes are at the basis of everything, they not only take your time for you to figure out all the workarounds needed so your program works neatly, the MS runtimes infact lock you into a full-time job just to follow what MS is doing in their service packs and so on. You are glued!!! While you should be freeed!!!!!!!!!!!!

- and finally, last but not least, MS is applying scheduled obsolescence. I fear the day MS tells the world that W2K is legacy, no support for it, and everyone should buy XP licences. That day, that will be a major final f*** for the entire community, (developers, users, customers).

MS quote (http://www.microsoft.com/ddk) : As of September 30, 2002, the Microsoft® Windows® 2000 DDK, the Microsoft Windows 98 DDK, and the Microsoft Windows NT® 4.0 DDK will no longer be available for purchase or download on this site. Support for development will ship at the same time as the Windows XP Service Pack 1 (SP1) release.