Microsoft Disagrees With 'Clumsy' Criticisms

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]tomtompiper[/nom]What nonsense, That logic would make water and air the most innovative things in the world. There is also the fact that that same 93% use GNULinux software every day, but don't know it.[/citation]
Well considering that having air and water allowed life to exist and flourish to the point we are now I would say they are the most innovative things ever. Without those 2 things nothing else would be here period, that is supreme innovation.

 

[scryer_360]

Psssh, no one uses OneNote, its an afterthought.

And on innovation: The Zune was DOA, Zune HD IS DOA, Microsoft completely ceded the search market to Google before even knowing there was a market, and ClearType? Most people have never heard of it. And it hardly helps ship more Windows units: the only reason Windows ships at all is because its pre-installed on all shelf PCs. The reason its pre-installed is because most people use Windows, and most people use Windows because their software runs on it, and most software runs on Windows because everyone has Windows. Its a cycle that began in the late 90s, and monopolizing distribution channels that most effectively wrap up consumers doesn't make you an innovator. Had it been any other judge, it'd of made you a monopoly.

 

[doron]

[citation][nom]Sha7bot[/nom]Sorry!Ask yourself, "Would my favorite game or software be here were it not for MS."[/citation]

Lots of cool stuff don't exist thanks to MS monopoly policy to eliminate any small company who "threatens" them.

 

[Guest]

What else is Microsoft supposed to say publicly? "I'm a PC and Macs have been doing this for 7 years?" People who have to deal with Microsoft daily and provide services to users. As an Admin we deal with tons of MS issues, we even have a custom version of Vista that works some what the way it is supposed to work. More than half our public/student computers are Macs at the university. Our statistics clearly show us that our PCs give way more problems than Macs (350 PC problems to every 1 Mac problem). 90 percent of these problems are related to MS, 10 percent to Dell. While these factors are verifiable, 90 percent of the University business structure is Windows based computing.

When we upgraded our Labs to Vista a couple of years ago, all of our network engineers were and still are using Windows XP at home and their desks. When I asked the director, why even bother with Vista, he calmly replied, "Job Security".

After looking at the code of Windows 7 beta, we decided to hold off until Fall 2010? Why because we have to make significant changes to our infrastructure that will affect users. While Windows 7 appears to be what Vista has been. The enterprise version will be a pain for users, unless Microsoft customizes it again so we can manage user accounts instead of Windows Server trying to do it for us.

Conclusion:

From Office 2007 to Vista has been a negative experience for users. Because of that we have to support multiple versions of Windows and Office which causes constant problems in large Enterprise sites. The Microsoft code is aged, the patch work software work arounds and the millions of dollars we've had to spend or 3rd party software and hardware for security and other needs.

Microsoft is the cause for 90% of my "job security", if Microsoft did the right thing, I'd be out of work.

May Microsoft live forever!

 

[mitch074]

I found the answer article rather pathetic, while the original article is rather limited in scope. Still, a bit of perspective.

ClearType first shipped with Windows XP. However, the only setting you had was 'on' or 'off' - you couldn't define it per software nor could you refine it: you had default settings, that worked or not, or you didn't. For comparison, at the same time ClearType came out, Adobe shipped Adobe Reader with subpixel filtering on, and a complete setup for it - on which you could decide which looked smoother or sharper.

This was an add-on for WinXP, and only appeared as 'standard' on Vista. Meanwhile, in the FOSS world, you could (in countries where software patents aren't recognized) set up your font filtering depending on font size (filter on higher than 6pt, or another value, in any screen orientation possible, etc.).

So yes, ClearType was the bastard child of XP: it was there in 2001, but if you didn't have a common LCD screen (and these weren't common at the time), then it didn't work.

The stylus in Office: this one I can't really say. Still, if you look at Office's interface, it is true that a stylus on it would have sucked big time before MSO 2007, and still sucks with the ribbon (very small icons). That would be expected from a small office suite, not a market leader. Indeed, MS tablets are often awkward to pilot, if at all - most of the times, what makes them usable are third party tools and driver tweaks.

At least until 2006.

When Vista became such a huge success (/sarcasm), many people at MS started reconsidering: can we really afford to screw up so perfectly, eventhough we are market leaders? Why is it that our latest softwares have been so decried?

The answer was, 'security' isn't good in a sales pitch (does it mean all former products sucked at that? Well, yes - good one for prestige); 'performance' couldn't be taken seriously (I had a brush in with Vista on a reasonably powerful machine last week: ouch); and 'innovation', well, all those nice things found in Vista had:
- already been present in former Windows versions (ClearType, with an add-on)
- already been available from third parties (browser tabs, transluscent windows)
- already been found in other OSes (composited 3D desktop: Compiz)
- been completely screwed up (fast file copies, UAC)

On IIS, for example, what did it bring to the table that Apache didn't already have? Answer: nothing. At all.

No, the only "nice" things to come from Microsoft recently have been pushes for interoperability and better performance: Seven is NICE (but it should have come as a service pack for Vista, like SP2 for XP), .Net is open (see Mono), the OOXML format was finally reasonably cleaned up, native (if controversial) ODF support in Office, IE finally supporting the Internet like other browsers do (OK, we're still waiting for DOM2 support, but at least HTML, CSS and Javascript work)...

But, where do we see innovation here? In Xbox360? First console to bring 1080p to the living room? That's plain wrong:
- original model could only handle 1080i
- none can read HD media: you need to buy an HD-DVD drive for it, HD-DVD is pretty much extinct, and Blu-ray is still not available. On the other hand, PS3 did bring HD media to the living room, and Wii brought innovative controllers

As for the Zune, sorry: good joke. A portable media player that can't playback DRM content from the maker, that is more expensive and more difficult to use than any of its competitors... I remember reading an article once about a break-in in a hifi store: all MP3 players were stolen. iPods, Creative MP3s, etc. All but the Zune. That does give an idea of the marketability of the thing: it's worth less than dead weight.

 

[kelemvor4]

Just like an exec trying to defend against criticism that is spot on, avoid the issues.

 

[aford10]

If Microsoft was so innovative, they wouldn't need to infringe upon other manufacturer's patents so often.

 

[masterjaw]

Of course, it is HIS job to defend Microsoft at all times. Whether the allegations are true or not. We can't expect him to say "Yeah, you're right" to the former to Brass called Dick and happily receive his paycheck the next day.

Microsoft's innovation? If monopoly is part of it then yeah they do have it.

 

[masterjaw]

Correction: I mean "top Brass called Dick"

Could someone enlight me on how to view articles in the forums instead (so that I could use the edit function).

 

[necronic]

Microsoft isn't an innovator, but they aren't stubbornly refusing to accept change either. Any company the size of Microsoft will never be too much of an innovator, it would be against shareholder's desires. Innovation = risk. And microsoft doesn't need to take massive risks, it's simply not necessary. Case in point, ribbon system in Office '07.

They have done well with some products and what you can do with them, the XBox really is a great example of that, being able to run media center from your XBox or watch netflix on it. First to enable any strong/lasting online network. Somehow making people grow to like their ugly controller ( )

And say what you will of the Office suite, there is nothing out there that compares to it. A lot of people may point to open office, but anyone who has tried to use that for any really heavy lifting (sciency stuff people) knows it falls short.

That goes for all the linux distros too, their lack of interoperability due to innovation is a good example of why too much innovation can be bad for the mass market, unless you think people should be expected to write their own drivers.

However, there are definitely places Microsoft comes across as ridiculously stubborn. Internet Explorer is arguably their absolute worst product, and they have never seemed to show much interest in making it better.

Anyways, just getting tired of all the microsoft bashing that goes on here. They aren't the best, but they aren't the worst either.

 

[eccentric909]

[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]In Xbox360? First console to bring 1080p to the living room? That's plain wrong:- original model could only handle 1080i- none can read HD media: you need to buy an HD-DVD drive for it, HD-DVD is pretty much extinct, and Blu-ray is still not available. [/citation]

No, you're wrong. lol Sorry, just got a giggle out of "You're wrong, no you're wrong!"

Anyway, shortly after the 360 was released, MS released a software update which allowed all 360 consoles to display 1080p. Now the original one would also display 1080p, but it was done through the VGA cable, since it did not have an HDMI port. However, it was still capable of 1080p.

The 1080i statement would be wrong as well, though while it is definitely capable of 1080i, it was originally optimized for 720p.

It can definitely read downloaded HD media, but not physical HD media, too.

So yes, while the PS3 does indeed have the Blu-ray advantage, the guy was technically correct in the article above, depending on how you want to look at it. /shrug YMMV.

 

[badaxe2]

[citation][nom]Sha7bot[/nom]MS brought gamming into the 21st century, a feat that Sony, Mac, Nintendo, Sega, and the thousands of other competitors can't lay claim to. X-Box alone has created a gaming network far superior to any other console available. Quibble if you will about bugs and flaws, but ask yourself, "Would be here were it not for MS?"[/citation]

Microsoft would be far more innovative if they cared as much about PC gaming as they did Xbox. And on the console side, they haven't innovated much outside of expanding online gaming. Sony was first with all the storage mediums that people thought they would never need but are now common place (CD, DVD, and eventually Blu Ray).
I'd also take the as-of-yet free PSN and their dedicated, lag free servers supporting up to 256 players, downloading with no file size limits, and better quality control to what Xbox Live offers that can all be accessed much easier (and for free) on PC. Add to that a web browser (hell even the Wii has a web browser but not on 360, which is supposed to "bring your PC into the living room"?), built in wifi and being able to swap out any HDD of your choosing, unlike the proprietary solutions MS wants people to use.
Ironically enough, Microsoft and their Xbox 360 brand seem eerily reminiscent of that little company called Apple and their Mac.