Nuke Redmond!

From: Peter Pachla <>
Date: Sat Apr 8 10:12:08 2000


> I really can't understand what all the hostility toward Microsoft
>is about....

I can't speak for anyone else, but my hostility towards them stems mainly
from a couple of years of having to support systems running their so called
operating systems.

In 22 years of learning about, and working with, computers I've NEVER come
across software which is as unreliable, buggy, slow and bloated as that
being produced by M$ since Win'9x came along. Moreover, the level of
documentation available for M$ operating systems is, quite simply, a JOKE!

I can only conclude that M$ are so ashamed of the mess they've made that
they're deliberately making detailed documentation as hard as possible to
come by....I know I'd be ashamed if I'd come up with software as unstable as

>....which is enabled by the fact that Microsoft made computers simple
>enough to use that the masses could and would use them.

I'm sorry, but that is patently untrue.

Both Apple and DR got there WAY before M$ did; GEM in particular (before M$
had it crippled) was a real boon, it was compact, simple and FAST. But then
again it wasn't pretending to be anything more than a GUI which ran on top
of a host OS like CP/M-68K.

Here is yet another reason for a lot of the hostility towards M$ - have you
not followed events in the industry? M$ have over the years clobbered every
competitor in sight with massive lawsuits, claiming copyright and
"look/feel" infringements on a concept which they themselves STOLE from

How many other times have they litigated themselves into the position of
"owning" a technology or idea which they've blatantly stolen....and you
wonder why they're so hated amongst people in the know?

Don't get me wrong, it's good that we have a standard interface to todays
desktop machines. It encourages both users and software developers.

BUT, M$ near monopoly on the desktop market has stifled competition and
innovation. M$ has very little incentive to improve or even release properly
debugged software, leaving us with the situation we have now....a bloated,
slow, unstable OS and applications - which require ever more ridiculous
amounts of RAM, hard drive space and processor speed to even run let alone
do anything useful. :-(

Also, M$ are getting ever more indulgent and adding crap to the user
interface (like "Active Desktop") which simply serves to get in the way and
slow the system down further. The fact that they're doing such things is a
sure sign that Windows development has stagnated and they're just looking
for something to do....

If, for example, IBM hadn't given in so easily with OS/2 we'd have had a
much leaner, faster, RELIABLE OS running on our desktop systems years ago -
not necessarily OS/2, but then it wouldn't be the crap we're stuck with now

  TTFN - Pete.

Hardware & Software Engineer. Sound Engineer.
Collector of Arcade Machines, Games Consoles & Obsolete Computers (esp DEC)            |
Received on Sat Apr 08 2000 - 10:12:08 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:40 BST