It's perfectly fair. In a war, you don't let the grunts make battle strategy decisions, that what the Generals and officers are for
you appeal to the technology elites and let them disseminate knowledge down the ranks, like it used to be.
??? Ummm, you consider yourself a general? And it never used to be where tech companies appealed to the elites. And "elites"? That's a disconcerting choice of words.
Tech companies appealed to corporations and big businesses (and universities) who
hopefully could afford their products. But those companies didn't disseminate knowledge, except as needed for their employees to use those tools to do their jobs. Only after more and more units were sold, did the technologies "trickle down" to those with less deep pockets. That's exactly how it works today too.
How did my family, friends, and clients learn to use their computers? I taught them. How did I learn? Through trial and errors, schools, and many [often costly
] mistakes.
And yes, in the early days, MS consulted outside experts. They still do. But even back then, they added features they
thought ("thought" because it was all new territory) the majority of users needed. Over time, they learned what the majority of users really needed.
No, it would be wise and prudent.
Then, sorry, but you don't understand business then. There's no profit (or even breaking even) if you only cater to the "elite" niche markets - not if you want your products to be affordable to the mass markets.
Do you think Lexus could exist if there was no Toyota? Cadillac if no Chevy?
If they'd quit making moronic choices and decisions, they'd have all the right people supporting them
While I agree to a point, too many people don't understand giant corporations like Microsoft. You talk about choices and decisions and I agree. But those that cause problems are "
marketing" and "
executive" policy choices and decisions - many of which I have vehemently complained about myself over the years - to the point, more than once, it even jeopardized my MS-MVP status.
But the "
developers" at Microsoft are a different breed of people than the marketing weenies and "C" level execs. The developers are top-notch dedicated people who have the true desire to make the best product possible. This is why I get defensive over Windows Defender, for example, when I hear excuses for bashing it being justified by claiming Microsoft makes "moronic choices and decisions" - choices and decisions made by marketing weenies and C-level execs, not the developers.
Here's an example of what I said above about
"unscrupulous wannabe journalists in the IT press, blowing something WAY WAY out of proportion with exaggerated or totally fictional headlines sensationalized just to get attention for the author." Note this
ZD-Net article headline from yesterday,
Vulnerability in Microsoft CTF protocol goes back to Windows XP
Insecure CTF protocol allows hackers to hijack any Windows app, escape sandboxes, get admin rights.
Then the first line says (my
bold underline added to illustrate my point),
CTF, a little-known Microsoft protocol used by all Windows operating system versions since Windows XP, is insecure and can be exploited with ease.
All Windows versions??? Can be exploited with ease??? !!!
With ease???? That's really scary! But what's the truth? Read a little bit further and we learn it can
only be exploited
IF the hackers or malware
already have a foothold on a user's computer. That's a pretty big IF if you ask me. Yet ZD-Net and that author would have every Windows user out there who reads that headline think their system can be compromised "with ease".
You are not offending me. I hope I am not you.
a) based up circle I travel in ... at home or in the office... it's an extreme rarity that a box has multiple users.
Maybe in your circles, but not mine. I know of many home computers with more than one user. Each adult may have their own, but even then, the other adult may have an account on it. And in many homes, the children share a computer but have separate accounts. And many many business can't afford a separate computer for every employee. Businesses that are open for more than 8 - 9 hours per day (workers come in shifts) often have multiple accounts on a single computer.
b) Who has a single drive in their system ?
Most computers,
by far, only have a single drive.
Beware of anything you get for free ... the cost is always more than if you paid for it. Why did MS implement all those invasive tricks and subterfuge to force people into upgrading ?
Two points here. First, those invasive tricks and subterfuge tactics were
dictated by marketing weenies and misguided C-Level execs. Not the developers. And note Microsoft knows very well (in hindsight) that was a huge mistake.
And second, why did they want everyone to upgrade? That is just simple and good business sense to be able to concentrate its resources on 1 product than it is on many. This is in almost any industry. Ford is discontinuing making cars (except the Mustang) to concentrate on SUVs and F-series pickup trucks. The best restaurants have the smallest menus.
Windows works hard to stifle flexibility for one reason only, it hurts their bottom line.
I don't get this. Any business manager who is not constantly thinking of the bottom line is sure to fail. Period. So to criticize for this seems absurd to me. Yes, absolutely, flexibility hurts its bottom line. And I already explained why. Because users will abuse it, break it, then blame Windows and Microsoft for it. History proved, over and over again, that is the case. But it does not stop there, those unscrupulous journalists, bloggers and MS bashers then go on the rampage spewing exaggerated tales of MS wrong doing. And that inaccurate bad publicity is what really hurts the bottom line.
So Microsoft would much rather get blamed for less flexibility (but a working Windows), than more flexibility (and broken Windows - broken by users who have no clue what they are doing and should get 10 feet from any computer). While I
personally wish for more flexibility, as a tech who has made a lot of money off those inept user mess ups, I sure see Microsoft's position on this. And as a business owner, I agree with it.
I'm comparing Windows to Windows.
, bloggers and undeserved bad publicity.
