Andy Ful

Level 64
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
the user is responsible since when?!!!
you use a product because you need it and you don't have the choice, you don't have the skill to install anything else, and the said product keep failing, so it is the user fault?!!! come on, stop being hypocrite.

You buy a car with faulty breaks, you die, who is the responsible ? you? come on...
Please, do not think that I do not respect your point of view. You have the full right to it. It is justified from the ethical point of view. But @HarborFront has also the right to keep his position.
One could argue this way. Why the car corporations produce the fast cars, and do not care much about the drivers safety. It is the well known fact that many drivers died because of the traffic accidents. The car corporations try to fool the people by introducing seatbelts, airbags, and other security imitations, but everybody knows that the velocity can kill drivers easily.
Do people demand slow cars because some drivers are dying? Do car corporations proceed ethically?
Do the pharmaceutical corporations proceed ethically? Does anybody know the corporation that could proceed ethically? So, why Microsoft should be the only ethical corporation?
And the hard question. Who should be blamed for the fact that corporations are not ethical by default?
 
E

Eddie Morra

Who should be blamed for the fact that corporations are not ethical by default?
The company because it is their choice to not be ethical and it is their choice to follow other companies who are being unethical. No one makes them, they choose to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldschool

AtlBo

Level 27
Verified
Content Creator
Is that ethical? Of course it is not, but the corporations are not humans.

Under American law technically a corporation is a person. Just 2 cents for knowledge sake.

An aside about law that has bothered me for years. For all of you claiming MS owns each copy of Windows, under American law a company is responsible for the actions of company personnel when they are using company property. Companies are responsible under the law to deliver safe products too. Just to take the ownership issue a little bit further, however, if MS owns every copy of Windows, then the company could legally be found negligent for allowing risky behavior by distributing the product to potentially dangerous individuals or in a wanton fashion. IMO, MS should back off its claim to ownership of each copy of Windows. Digital rights to the programming and its capabilities and maybe even the style of progamming could be patented, but each copy of Windows? I think it's been a mistake for the company to buy into this thinking that they own each copy of Windows. Never had this argument about record albums years ago. Honestly, I agree with them about reproduction of their content. They should be in control of how their work is distributed, as MS should about the singularity of each digital license.

After 23 years of MS and working hand over foot the entire time to make the most of the experience 8 sometimes 10 hours a day (not IT but), I can say that MS is extraordinarily insensitive to the expectations of IT personnel and network managers. That's easy to see, contingencies or not. Ahead of the game support is NOT IN EXISTENCE. It's a mess for sure, and let's not forget (getting back to something basic), someone who purchases a Windows computer is free to be dissatisfied with the product. That's their right. Unfortunately, there aren't viable options for IT personnel. There isn't suitable organization and support in the Linux movement, and, good or bad, can't get everything from MS Office outside of a VM with Linux. VMs are inefficient in my experience, anyway->shouldn't even be on a network for anything but performing diagnositcs/repairs imo. All said, when users, owners/employees, etc. are pointing at a product and saying that it is not designed to a suitable standard, well, something has to give.

Defending MS can't be easy. It's not about home users. MS is the broken cog for home and IT alike unfortunately. All comes back to the product. It's under-engineered. I promise I won't budge off this one, but I won't debate it in a forum either. Too big and deep a topic.

@Lockdown, you ever feel like you could do a better job than the CEO at MS, since that was brought up? I am sure you actually probably do. Funny, until you realize that even I feel that way, without the IT experience. Just knowing to turn to IT would begin a healing process for the company. And so would begin the agony of shame for what has become of MS too. Not that the company was ever in a good position, honestly.

So now MS has placed itself in the position of borking the home user by forcing things on them. Yet, they have still managed to stay on the wrong side of IT at the same time. This after their excuses for ignoring IT concerns, claiming the home users have to be considered. Who will be left to do wrong when MS is finished? And all of those years of development without serious IT consultation will go down the tubes (where they should go) should MS decide to turn things around...because the OS is built on flawed principles and on a flawed base and with flawed ambitions.

Anyway, here in the U.S., we should at least partly blame ourselves for not alerting the government to the inevitablilities of MS' rambling and bumbling efforts. The entire concept of personal ownership of a PC should have been put under an electron microscope by the U.S. govt. Then they would been able to quantify what most of us feared was coming, and, guess what? They could have a plan. Yet, the current Windows kernel and foundation burns everything in its path while it "rages like a roaring lion" and "comes to steal to kill and to destroy"...AND there aren't any viable options for a professional working person other than Windows.

BTW, the Europeans have done more to help curb disaster at Rednobyl by far than the U.S. government. Congress needs an education on ethical programming I would say...and on EULA "law" LOLOLOLOL->MS EULA->the greatest practical joke of all time. One other thing. Let's hope for a real option. Not just Google Chrome OS. I mean something that conforms to standards and norms required by the business world. It's not yet in the MS EULA that hope for better is punishable by MS with oh maybe a frame-up/file plant job...who knows what. Such loveliness we have from MS...

I promise I am for you guys. If I seem over-opinionated about this, I don't mean to offend anyone. However, anyone who knows business knows something has to be done about MS. Noone wants to tell them how to succeed (or how to NOT fail...maybe that's the better way to explain things)...that's why they get paid who work at MS. However, I really believe something will happen sooner than later...don't know when sorry, but probably government issues around the world I suspect (even here in the U.S. likely)...
 
Last edited:
5

509322

Please, do not think that I do not respect your point of view. You have the full right to it. It is justified from the ethical point of view. But @HarborFront has also the right to keep his position.
One could argue this way. Why the car corporations produce the fast cars, and do not care much about the drivers safety. It is the well known fact that many drivers died because of the traffic accidents. The car corporations try to fool the people by introducing seatbelts, airbags, and other security imitations, but everybody knows that the velocity can kill drivers easily.
Do people demand slow cars because some drivers are dying? Do car corporations proceed ethically?
Do the pharmaceutical corporations proceed ethically? Does anybody know the corporation that could proceed ethically? So, why Microsoft should be the only ethical corporation?
And the hard question. Who should be blamed for the fact that corporations are not ethical by default?

The article was about Microsoft's ineptitude and negligence. Having users compensate for most of the problems that Microsoft creates is a ridiculous solution. The reality is that it isn't 50:50 split between Microsoft and users. Microsoft victimizes a lot of people and organizations. It might not intend to do that, but what and how it does things has that consequence. And people complaining bitterly about it is fully justified.

Sure, software has problems. However, the stuff that we are talking about extends well-beyond an annoyance for a home user. It has an actual financial cost attached to it. And that cost is deep within the billions of dollars range.


I've said it a million times. Microsoft is no ones friend. And I will complain about Windows until it is no more. A lot of the admins that I keep up with think Windows is garbage. The anti-Microsoft faction is not some tiny number of disgruntled and frustrated end-users. It is made up of people who know and could do it a lot better than Microsoft. However, we all know Microsoft is a giant and it isn't going to change. It essentially holds the world hostage with its OS. So it doesn't need to change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

overdivine

Level 2
Verified
Windows 10 is a big step towards helping disabled people. Their number is greater then the people who bitch about unneeded features. Some of those features are a life changer for them. Also there are tools like nLite people can use to install only what they need but instead they cry about it. And if i were MS i would make mandatory to send all error reports. Error report not sent ? Feel free to use your system offline.
Only a small number of people are affected by the bugs so maybe it's their tweaks or their old hardware. And when one can't take it anymore they are free to move to another os.
 
5

509322

Profanity, insults, personal attacks or purposeless inflammatory posts will not be tolerated.
Under American law technically a corporation is a person. Just 2 cents for knowledge sake.

An aside about law that has bothered me for years. For all of you claiming MS owns each copy of Windows, under American law a company is responsible for the actions of company personnel when they are using company property. Companies are responsible under the law to deliver safe products too. Just to take the ownership issue a little bit further, however, if MS owns every copy of Windows, then the company could legally be found negligent for allowing risky behavior by distributing the product to potentially dangerous individuals or in a wanton fashion. IMO, MS should back off its claim to ownership of each copy of Windows. Digital rights to the programming and its capabilities and maybe even the style of progamming could be patented, but each copy of Windows? I think it's been a mistake for the company to buy into this thinking that they own each copy of Windows. Never had this argument about record albums years ago. Honestly, I agree with them about reproduction of their content. They should be in control of how their work is distributed, as MS should about the singularity of each digital license.

After 23 years of MS and working hand over foot the entire time to make the most of the experience 8 sometimes 10 hours a day (not IT but), I can say that MS is extraordinarily insensitive to the expectations of IT personnel and network managers. That's easy to see, contingencies or not. Ahead of the game support is NOT IN EXISTENCE. It's a mess for sure, and let's not forget (getting back to something basic), someone who purchases a Windows computer is free to be dissatisfied with the product. That's their right. Unfortunately, there aren't viable options for IT personnel. There isn't suitable organization and support in the Linux movement, and, good or bad, can't get everything from MS Office outside of a VM with Linux. VMs are inefficient in my experience, anyway->shouldn't even be on a network for anything but performing diagnositcs/repairs imo. All said, when users, owners/employees, etc. are pointing at a product and saying that it is not designed to a suitable standard, well, something has to give.

Defending MS can't be easy. It's not about home users. MS is the broken cog for home and IT alike unfortunately. All comes back to the product. It's under-engineered. I promise I won't budge of this one, but I won't debate it in a forum either. Too big and deep a topic.

@Lockdown, you ever feel like you could do a better job than the CEO at MS, since that was brought up? I am sure you actually probably do. Funny, until you realize that even I feel that way, without the IT experience. Just knowing to turn to IT would begin a healing process for the company. And so would begin the agony of shame for what has become of MS too. Not that the company was ever in a good position, honestly.

So now MS has placed itself in the position of borking the home user by forcing things on them. Yet, they have still managed to stay on the wrong side of IT at the same time. This after their excuses for ignoring IT concerns, claiming the home users have to be considered. Who will be left to do wrong when MS is finished? And all of those years of development without serious IT consultation will go down the tubes (where they should go) should MS decide to turn things around...because the OS is built on flawed principles and on a flawed base and with flawed ambitions.

Anyway, here in the U.S., we should at least partly blame ourselves for not alerting the government to the inevitablilities of MS' rambling and bumbling efforts. The entire concept of personal ownership of a PC should have been put under an electron microscope by the U.S. govt. Then they would been able to quantify what most of us feared was coming, and, guess what? They could have a plan. Yet, the current Windows kernel and foundation burns everything in its path while it "rages like a roaring lion" and "comes to steal to kill and to destroy"...AND there aren't any viable options for a professional working person other than Windows.

BTW, the Europeans have done more to help curb disaster at Rednobyl by far than the U.S. government. Congress needs an education on ethical programming I would say...and on EULA "law" LOLOLOLOL->MS EULA->the greatest practical joke of all time. One other thing. Let's hope for a real option. Not just Google Chrome OS. I mean something that conforms to standards and norms required by the business world. It's not yet in the MS EULA that hope for better is punishable by MS with oh maybe a frame-up/file plant job...who knows what. Such loveliness we have from MS...

I promise I am for you guys. If I seem over-opinionated about this, I don't mean to offend anyone. However, anyone who knows business knows something has to be done about MS. Noone wants to tell them how to succeed (or how to NOT fail...maybe that's the better way to explain things)...that's why they get paid who work at MS. However, I really believe something will happen sooner than later...don't know when sorry, but probably government issues around the world I suspect (even here in the U.S. likely)...

Having product users constantly compensate for the product's blatant deficiencies is the most asinine solution of all. I am not talking about the difference between an axe and a chain saw analogy. The axe is not poorly designed nor deficient because it requires a person to put forth effort to use it. However, an axe with an inherently defective cutting head would land the manufacturer in huge trouble. There is a difference between a paper study and actually using a product and getting feedback directly from end-users.

It is widely known that Microsoft is not that great at execution. From the user community, Microsoft is not very well respected. And someone out there... please don't... please don't quote some business study that lists Microsoft as one of America's most respected companies. If you look at those studies they are of the makeup of the board of directors, the CEO, etc and not what customer actually think of the product and the company.

Windows is garbage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
5

509322

Only a small number of people are affected by the bugs so maybe it's their tweaks or their old hardware. And when one can't take it anymore they are free to move to another os.

The number of people affected is a huge number because a small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number.

Moving to another OS...it doesn't work that way. You don't know what you're talking about.

No one said anything about not including assistive features. That is not what this whole discussion is about. Read the article. You will learn something.
 

overdivine

Level 2
Verified
The number of people affected is a huge number because a small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number.
not really

Moving to another OS...it doesn't work that way. You don't know what you're talking about.
It is when the reasons are good enough. I guess it's not the case here.

No one said anything about not including assistive features. That is not what this whole discussion is about. Read the article. You will learn something.
i've read the article, so what their QA is not the best. It worked for them so far. Even if they get sued they win some they lose some. It's only money.

If there is a problem you can fix it, ignore it or make it worse. They can make it worse until they can't ignore it so they will have to fix it. Crying does not compute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burrito
5

509322

not really

It's basic mathematics. A small percentage of a few billion is still a big number. The percentages put it into the millions.

It is when the reasons are good enough. I guess it's not the case here.

Lots of people and companies would like nothing more than to get out from under Microsoft and Windows. However, Microsoft essentially holds the entire IT world hostage. The problem is there are no viable alternatives. And the fact that there is no viable alternative is not an argument that "Windows is as good as it gets. Deal with it." If that's the case, then mankind should pack it in.

Ask people what they really think of Windows. Listen to them What they have to say, if you know how to get it out of them, is not good.

i've read the article, so what their QA is not the best. It worked for them so far. Even if they get sued they win some they lose some. It's only money.

If there is a problem you can fix it, ignore it or make it worse. They can make it worse until they can't ignore it so they will have to fix it. Crying does not compute.

According to your argument, Microsoft should just continue to produce its Windows garbage and people should just take it. Afterall, "it's only money."

If people did not push companies to improve the reliability of their products, then we would all be stuck with low quality, defective products.
 

DeepWeb

Level 25
Verified
I agree with Lockdown. Windows 10 has been around for 3 years now and they still botch the upgrade process with no signs of improvement. With every upgrade I have to reconfigure my computer, link directories, patch the registry, and fix permissions in Component Services so that all the errors in Event Viewer disappear.

Apparently, page file on drives other than your boot drive are broken too. This just can't be happening anymore. With every build they spend the next 6 months just trying to patch the bugs they introduced and then a new build gets released and the same bugs come back again. And if a bug is too small, they won't even bother fixing it anymore and rather spend time on new features with more bugs. All of this is costing vendors, programmers and customers time and time is money. We don't even count in the amount of money lost due to this botched update as vendors and app developers are trying to release patches for their own drivers and programs because Microsoft is moving and shifting things around for no good reason and with zero notice. What adds to the chaos is that features that worked in insider builds are broken in the final builds so Microsoft is tweaking and changing things last minute for the sake of stability but in the process break everything even more so over at reddit, Windows insider users are confused because things are working for them while they are broken in the stable builds. What happened to QA you cheapskates at Redmond??? Windows 10 is anarchy.
 

Andy Ful

Level 64
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
The company because it is their choice to not be ethical and it is their choice to follow other companies who are being unethical. No one makes them, they choose to.
You probably do not know it, but I respect your point of view like I respect @Umbra, @Lockdown and other respectful MT members that share the similar thoughts.
That point of view is probably like the below (I added points 3 and 4 as an addition) :
  1. Microsoft is not especially ethical corporation, but it should be.
  2. Microsoft forces many solutions that people do not like and do not need.
  3. Microsoft is selling Windows Home product that has many unnecessary & dangerous features, because M$ guys was lazy and did not bother to remove those features from the system.
  4. Microsoft is partially responsible for creation of the complex malware world.
  5. Microsoft usually introduces the new features without the sufficient care about stability and security.
  6. Microsoft victimizes a lot of people and organizations.
  7. Microsoft is no ones friend and it is driven by earning money.
  8. There are a lot people that could make the more stable and more secure OS.
  9. Microsoft is the only one who should be responsible for Windows faults.
I think that you + most people + me and maybe @HarborFront too, will agree about points 2, 3 ... 8. I also do not like that M$ is not especially ethical.
We probably cannot check the point 1. for the corporations (that is not the same as companies). I believe that there is no ethical corporation in the world. As a corporation I mean the company which can invest a similar amount of money as M$.
I can also agree with the last point. So, what is the problem? The problem is that people are inclined to hate M$ more than other corporations. But, I think that there is reasonable to hate many corporations, more than M$. I posted the example with too fast cars. Are making too fast cars ethical?
The much slower cars can save hundreds of thousands lives per year. Do people blame the car corporations for the victims of the traffic accident? No. I do not blame them, too. And that is why I do not blame M$ for Windows (I still do not like the points 1 ... 8).
People like fast cars. People like Windows even when they can use more secure Apple, Linux, and ChromeBook. Why Apple is not as popular as Windows? Because Apple is more stable, solid and secure, but this is not the winning strategy.

Let's be safe, even when it is not possible.:giggle:
 
Last edited:
5

509322

You probably do not know it, but I respect your point of view like I respect @Umbra, @Lockdown and other respectful MT members that share the similar thoughts.
That point of view is probably like the below (I added points 3 and 4 as na addition) :
  1. Microsoft is not especially ethical corporation, but it should be.
  2. Microsoft forces many solutions that people do not like and do not need.
  3. Microsoft is selling Windows Home product that has many unnecessary & dangerous features, because M$ guys was lazy and did not bother to remove those features from the system.
  4. Microsoft is partially responsible for creation of the complex malware world.
  5. Microsoft usually introduces the new features without the sufficient care about stability and security.
  6. Microsoft victimizes a lot of people and organizations.
  7. Microsoft is no ones friend and it is driven by earning money.
  8. There are a lot people that could make the more stable and more secure OS.
  9. Microsoft is the only one who should be responsible for Windows faults.
I think that you + most people + me and maybe @HarborFront too, will agree about points 2, 3 ... 8.
We probably cannot check the point 1. for the corporations (that is not the same as companies). I belive that there is no ethical corporation in the world. As a corporation I mean the company which can invest similar amount of money as M$.
I can agree also with the last point. So, what is the problem? The problem is that people are inclined to hate M$ more than other corporations. But, I think that there is reasonable to hate many corporations, more than M$. I posted the example with too fast cars. Are making too fast cars ethical?
The much slower cars can save hundreds of thousands lifes per year. Do people blame the car corporations for the victims of the traffic accident? No. I do not blame them, too. And that is why I do not blame M$ for Windows.
People like fast cars. People like Windows even when they can use more secure Apple, Linux, ChromeBook. Why Apple is not as popular as Windows? Because Apple is more stable, solid and secure, but this is not the winning strategy.

Let's be safe, even when it is not possible.:giggle:

I respect others' position if it makes sense, but this discussion is just plain ignorant.

Microsoft is in the position it is because of legacy.

Microsoft is in the position it because it holds the world hostage with Windows and Microsoft Office. Adobe is in the hostage business too.

Companies that are in a monopoly position are going to take advantage of it. Why wouldn't they ? It's up to people and courts to break monopolies.

Apple is not as popular because it never pursued 3rd-party support for its OS; Microsoft shrewdly did exactly that. It is almost the same story as AMD versus Intel.

If Apple pursued the $250 PC market, then it would give Windows a real run for its money - but hey, why do they have to do that when they are the world's first trillion dollar company ?

People are generally not satisfied with Microsoft and Windows. However, Chrome OS and Chromebook are slowly but surely taking people away from Windows. In 100 years, because of legacy stuff, Microsoft will still be the dominant player, but not nearly as dominant as it is today.

Making a product with a lot of problems, but telling people "Deal with it..." is the most ignorant solution of all.

There is constant Microsoft backlash because people are tired of the decades of the same thing over and over.

Anyone who has had direct dealings with Microsoft's various levels and departments quickly realizes that it is no one's friend. Even if you are a high-dollar Microsoft client, you will get abused.

I'd like to see the smug smartass' face when the got a bill for something they had to have fixed that Microsoft caused... and no one could have planned for it ahead of time to prevent it from happening ? That don't happen ? Oh no ? You sure about that ? If a person thinks IT plans effectively cope with it all, then they are fools. They don't know IT reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: In2an3_PpG

Andy Ful

Level 64
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
That is right. It is sad, that the winner rarely can be liked.:alien:
M$ understood quickly that the average users do not prefer solidity & security & stability over fun & usability & diversity.
That is why Microsoft is the winner that we do not like for security & stability issues, but we like the computers in every home and tons of programs that can be run on them.
Who knows, maybe the world would be a better place if the Apple was a computer winner. But, the crowd wisdom chose the M$.

That is probably why M$ introduces at the same time the new security features and the new functions that introduces the new vulnerabilities. So in the end, the Windows 10 is not much more secure than Windows 7. Simply, most vulnerabilities have not been uncovered yet.
 
Last edited:

overdivine

Level 2
Verified
:)))) 10 million is nothing
even a lot of drugs have 1% chance of making you blind or even death.
and about windows, you accepted the user agreement. and now you cry about something that you accepted.
everybody is entitled to have an opinion and to moan as much they want.
Moaning doesn't change things, actions,laws and money do. Planet Earth 2018
 
5

509322

Profanity, insults, personal attacks or purposeless inflammatory posts will not be tolerated.
:)))) 10 million is nothing
even a lot of drugs have 1% chance of making you blind or even death.
and about windows, you accepted the user agreement. and now you cry about something that you accepted.
everybody is entitled to have an opinion and to moan as much they want.
Moaning doesn't change things, actions,laws and money do. Planet Earth 2018

It's easy enough for you to say when you aren't one of those 10 million people or organizations affected by Microsoft.

That's the point you aren't getting... people use Windows because they are more or less stuck with it. They use it, but they don't accept it. And saying "Deal with it. That's just the way it is", isn't going to make them accept it.

You're absolutely right. Change takes action. And a part of grassroots action is complaining. I am a short activist. You know what that is ? It's a person that calls out companies and other people on their bullshit. If the rest of us relied upon people like you and @HarborFront, then we'd be screwed. Planet Earth 2018.

I will keep calling Windows for what it is... garbage. And if I can convince others not to buy a Windows PC, then I've done my part. Actually, I've already dissuaded numerous people from buying Windows PCs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
5

509322

That is right. It is sad, that the winner rarely can be liked.:alien:

A monopoly can abuse its customer base, make defective products, make poor decisions that negatively affect its customer base, and get away with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burrito

HarborFront

Level 54
Verified
Content Creator
The article was about Microsoft's ineptitude and negligence. Having users compensate for most of the problems that Microsoft creates is a ridiculous solution. The reality is that it isn't 50:50 split between Microsoft and users. Microsoft victimizes a lot of people and organizations. It might not intend to do that, but what and how it does things has that consequence. And people complaining bitterly about it is fully justified.

Sure, software has problems. However, the stuff that we are talking about extends well-beyond an annoyance for a home user. It has an actual financial cost attached to it. And that cost is deep within the billions of dollars range.

@HarborFront is a smug person and he\she can sit at home behind the anonymity of a webpage and spout stuff not based in reality. However, those of us that know from actual first-hand experience aren't going to tolerate it.

I've said it a million times. Microsoft is no ones friend. And I will complain about Windows until it is no more. A lot of the admins that I keep up with think Windows is garbage. The anti-Microsoft faction is not some tiny number of disgruntled and frustrated end-users. It is made up of people who know and could do it a lot better than Microsoft. However, we all know Microsoft is a giant and it isn't going to change. It essentially holds the world hostage with its OS. So it doesn't need to change.
In reality you do have choices and the decision lies in your hand and those anti-MS faction friends of yours. Why be so frustrated when you can choose to change?

The refusal to change and the constant blaming of others is not going to help you and those anti-MS faction friends of yours.
 
Top