In-Depth

Dealing with Microsoft Haters

Microsoft may be the world's best-known brand, but it's not necessarily the best-loved. Here are ways to overcome deal-busting objections.

When it comes to Microsoft bashing, partners have heard it all.

They've heard prospects gripe that Microsoft products cost too much. They've heard customers complain about frequent bug and security patches. They've heard tirades denouncing the company as Byzantine or a behemoth, difficult to navigate and glacially slow to respond to complaints and calls for help. They're well aware that some people view Microsoft as the biggest monopoly since Standard Oil. And they occasionally still hear snide remarks about Microsoft's founder, who, despite his generous donations to charity, remains the world's wealthiest individual.

Of course, some of those sentiments are unfounded, unfair or outdated, and channel partners whose companies depend upon Microsoft's success do their best to counter them. At the same time, even executives whose companies deal solely in Microsoft solutions understand what's behind the negativity. As one veteran partner puts it: "Sometimes I hate Microsoft myself."

Therein lies one of the biggest challenges of representing the world's most famous corporate name.

From Hate to Respect
True, Microsoft has come a long way since the mid- to late-1990s, when it battled antitrust allegations and crushed Netscape in the browser wars. Back then, the Web was littered with sites with names like Microsoftsucks.com, Boycott Microsoft and The Official Microsoft Hate Page. A particularly virulent subset targeted Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, depicting him as a dictator, a devil or the Antichrist and inviting visitors to punch out, blow up or behead an animated effigy. Technology magazines ran editorials with titles like "Time to Break Up Microsoft" and quoted spokespeople from organizations such as The Committee to Fight Microsoft (which, at one point, announced plans to open a national headquarters in Washington, D.C.). The phrase "evil empire," which, during the Reagan era, referred to the Soviet Union, became a synonym for Microsoft. Relentlessly forwarded e-mail messages spread anti-Redmond humor all over the planet. (Remember this one? Q: How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a light bulb? A: None. Bill Gates will just declare Darkness the new industry standard). In 1998, author Po Bronson told The New Republic that Microsoft bashing was so prevalent in Silicon Valley "that it's like talking about the weather in Minnesota."

Fast forward a decade. As Microsoft has matured and gained respectability, many of those vehement detractors have shut up or disappeared. True, the blogosphere remains rich with Redmond-related chatter, but today, it's typically more focused commentary about, say, a postponed product release or the latest round of restructuring rather than generic sniping and griping. And when was the last time you opened an e-mail with another batch of Microsoft jokes? Meanwhile, Gates—now a respectable 50-year-old father of three—is widely perceived as a force for good. In addition to his philanthropic work, he's currently leading a campaign to curtail intellectual property theft in China, an effort likely to benefit the entire U.S. software industry—including some Microsoft competitors.

It's All in the Packaging

It's a gift, mostly, but also a responsibility. Microsoft hands its partners what experts call the most valuable brand in the world. In this package of articles, Redmond Channel Partner magazine editors explore what makes the Microsoft brand so strong, what responsibilities Microsoft places on its partners to protect that brand value, and how partners handle cases where the brand's baggage outweighs its benefits. Also read:

Probably for all those reasons, many partners say that they seldom hear flat-out "I hate Microsoft" sentiments anymore. In a recent survey of about 500 Redmond Channel Partner readers, many indicated that they still hear plenty of grumbling about specific issues—some legitimate, some from left field—ranging from costs to customer service to security concerns. But overall, partners told us, clients' big-picture attitudes toward the Microsoft brand typically fall somewhere between resignation and respect. And while that might initially seem like faint praise—wouldn't it be better to be admired or adored?—experts say respect is the single most critical attribute for market leadership.

"You don't have to love a leader, but you do have to respect a leader," says marketing strategist Jack Trout, president of the Trout & Partners Ltd. consulting firm in Old Greenwich, Conn. "Nobody ever loved IBM, but they still had enormous respect."

In Microsoft's younger days, its reputation for ruthlessness created a major hurdle to earning that level of respect, says Trout, author and co-author of several books on brand management (see "Books About Branding," this page)."Microsoft's problem is that [it's] been a little difficult, a little aggressive, a little muscular," Trout says. "[It] used a two-by-four instead of a scalpel on some of those markets. [It] needed to offset those perceptions that [it's] too rough." Today, Microsoft remains a fearsome contender, but balances its competitiveness with leadership activities, such as initiatives using technology to improve education.

As a result, Trout says, Microsoft now commands the high regard that accrues to a market leader. Even if sometimes given grudgingly, that respect is a boon to partners who might have once avoided discussing Microsoft's market dominance for fear of feeding customers' views of the company as a competition-crushing monopoly. In fact, Trout recommends that partners promote Microsoft's No. 1 position as a genuine customer benefit: "Who wants to run with No. 2?"

Microsoft's ubiquity does make it easier to sell, says Bob Prince, founder of NetSys+, a systems consulting firm and Gold Certified Partner based in Sioux City, Iowa. "There are a lot of repeatable, predictable solutions in the Microsoft world," he says. "Ninety-nine percent of the time, we can walk in and say, 'Here are systems that can do exactly what you want them to do. I can even show you how it works on my own system because we use it, too.'"

Books About Branding
Following are some recommended marketing and brand-management guides:

Brand Portfolio Strategy: Creating Relevance, Differentiation, Energy, Leverage and Clarity, by David A. Aaker (Free Press, 2004)

Brand Sense: Build Powerful Brands Through Touch, Taste, Smell, Sight and Sound, by Martin Lindstrom (Free Press, 2005)

Designing Brand Identity: A Complete Guide to Creating, Building and Maintaining Strong Brands, by Alina Wheeler (Wiley, 2003)

Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, 3rd edition, by Al Ries & Jack Trout (McGraw-Hill, 2000)

Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity, 2nd edition, by Kevin Lane Keller (Prentice Hall, 2002)

The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding: How to Build a Product or Service into a World-Class Brand, by Al Ries and Laura Ries (HarperCollins, 1998)

Getting the Word Out
Even respect won't convert every skeptic into a fan, but that's no problem, another expert says. "Every brand has supporters and detractors," says Tim Calkins, an associate professor of marketing and co-director of the branding curriculum at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management in Evanston, Ill. If detractors seriously dislike your brand, you're unlikely to change their minds: "Brands are based on associations, [which] are hard to debate," says Calkins. "It's much easier to debate the ins and outs of a particular product. You need to go beyond the brand to the product features."

Microsoft itself has made a major push to help partners do exactly that by making a seemingly limitless supply of relevant, up-to-date information easily available, says Geoff Nyheim, vice president for Microsoft's Central Region Enterprise business. The best-known example: The "Get the Facts" campaign, an ongoing effort to quantify Windows' benefits over the open source Linux platform. The campaign's centerpiece is a growing online collection of white papers, third-party analyst reports and case studies about high-profile customers who ultimately opted for Windows (recent examples include Royal Caribbean Cruises, 7-Eleven and fashion designer Tommy Hilfiger). Says Nyheim: "Our approach was simply to drive the conversation back to a very rational assessment of the facts and a clear decision framework for evaluating Microsoft against competing alternatives."

That's exactly how David Wertz, founder of PC Works Plus, a Gold Certified Partner based in Bellwood, Pa., responded to a hard-core Microsoft-hater at one customer site, an educational institution. The school executive insisted that Linux was more functional, more reliable and more secure than Windows. "We showed him the functionality that Microsoft provides out of the box for SharePoint or Exchange," comparing features point by point, Wertz recalls. "That pretty much ended the argument."

Microsoft now uses a Get-the-Facts-style approach to address potential customer questions or confusion about many o f its product lines. "There's so much information that's available to help in the conversation, the moment of truth when a partner is eye to eye with a customer," says Nyheim, noting that material is available both on partner portals and the company's public Web sites.

If, for instance, a customer asks you to stop by to answer some security questions about a product, you can grab the most relevant information online—perhaps something like the number of critical patches issued by Microsoft and its closest competitors over the previous year. "That way, you walk in the door as knowledgeable as you can be, and you have information you can leave with the customer," Nyheim says. And by providing hard numbers rather than mere brand evangelism, "you take the customer conversation away from perceptions and emotions and move it toward a fact-based decision approach."

Common Complaints and Counterarguments
Partners say that today's Microsoft bashing varies from company to company and day to day, depending on news developments and Microsoft announcements. For example, Microsoft's decision to postpone the release of Windows Vista was among the biggest lightning rods of recent months.
Ongoing grousing tends to focus on several key areas: costs (both for initial licenses and upgrades), security threats and bugs. In all three cases, partners must deal with both perceptions and reality.

"With most of the systems we sell, such as Outlook and Exchange, the customers have a perception that the product is worth maybe $120 to $180," says Prince, of NetSys+. "In reality, it costs $400 and up. Even with discounting, it winds up somewhere in the middle, maybe at $350 or $375." That discrepancy makes it particularly tough to convince customers that they need upgrades: "Usually, there's very little motivation on their part to say, 'We need new Office products because we have 52 new things we want to do,'" Prince says. Instead, they insist that what they've got works well enough, thank you very much.

So how does he overcome cost-based resistance? By demonstrating to decision makers that new versions of the solutions in question probably offer far more capability than they realize. "Most of the companies we deal with are not that tuned into Microsoft," Prince says. Sometimes simply raising awareness about the latest new features is enough to do the trick.

Wertz, of PC Works Plus, defends Microsoft against price-related complaints. "We do software and application development ourselves, so I know the cost of that," he says. "I haven't the foggiest clue what the costs are in developing [Microsoft] operating systems, but it must be incredible." He tries to help customers understand that that $400 software package is the en d result of billions of dollars in research and development, "not just more money in Bill Gates' pocket."

As for security issues, Wertz expects customers to contact him when Microsoft issues new security bulletins. What surprises him is when they we get in touch about problems that were addressed months or even years earlier, such as old vulnerabilities in Microsoft Outlook. He simply spells out how Microsoft has resolved the issues in question, concluding by noting that "Microsoft is not perfect and never will be—but at least what you're hearing in this case is old news.'"

Your Two Cents Worth


We recently asked RCP readers whether they encounter prospects who, for any reason, simply hate Microsoft. Following is a sampling of responses:

  • Yes, but not as often as in the past.
  • Some people are just brand-centric, and that's not easy to change.
  • No, not really. They just hate keeping up with upgrades.
  • Rarely. We explain that Microsoft has changed over the years and that many [former] issues are now non-issues.
  • Yes, Novell and Unix and Mac users.
  • Yes, but the rate has steadily declined [to] two or three per year.
  • Yes, at least monthly.
  • Yes, one or two a month.
  • Yes, weekly. They complain but use the products anyway.
  • Yes, weekly. I steer around them and work with folks who understand business value.
  • Yes, every day. I just let them rant.
  • Yes, 40 percent of the time.
  • Yes, 20 percent of the time.
  • Yes, 10 percent of the time. Their objections are usually irrational and uninformed.
  • [Yes, but] not often. A clear explanation of ROI is the best way to win them over.
  • Yes. I don't bother [trying to overcome their objections]. They are in the "Microsoft is evil" camp—and they generally don't have any money to spend to boot

J.B. Fields, an independent Microsoft trainer and Registered Member, tries to put customers' security fears in context with a big-picture explanation: "We had pretty good security on our old mainframes, but we didn't have agility in accessing [outside] information. Then we chose agility over security. We hooked our PCs to networks, then hooked our networks to the Internet"—and Microsoft, like every other technology vendor, has been fighting off Internet-borne security threats ever since. In other words, he says he tells them, "security is a problem, but it's an industry problem, not just a Microsoft problem."

Realistically, though, people will still complain. For that reason, experts say the No. 1 brand-management best practice to keep in mind is to resist the temptation to join in the Microsoft bashing. "Never apologize for the brand," says Calkins, the Northwestern marketing professor. "You always have to defend it. After all, if the people associated with the brand don't support it, who will?"



About the Author

Anne Stuart, the former executive editor of Redmond Channel Partner, is a business technology freelance writer based in Boston, Mass.

Reader Comments

Mon, Sep 22, 2008 Anonymous Anonymous

She doesn't hear it anymore? I hear it all the time, and I agree with them!

Sun, Jan 13, 2008 Krom597 Anonymous

Although Microsoft has made some excellent products lately, such as Windows XP, and their response to security issues inside of their products have improved, they still maintain an air of argosy that baffles the rest of the industry. They also maintain a dubious business practice that many in the industry don’t want to have a part of. Like all companies they have had their successes and failures (In Microsoft’s case the difference between Windows XP and Vista) however most companies will work with their customers to rectify the issues as soon as possible, instead of waiting until they have no choice. As much as some reviewers like to tout that Microsoft have changed its ways, they couldn’t be more wrong. I worked for MS for some years and never seen the changes in Microsoft everyone is talking. The board room in Microsoft hasn’t changed one bit. Even though I can’t prove it, Microsoft was definitely behind the SCO lawsuit. I know, when I tried to inform them of the seriousness of this action, I was told to shut up. Blamer wants to put a stake through the hearts of several projects in the real world outside of Microsoft itself, (FireFox, and more importantly Linux), because they pose competition to Microsoft. When it comes right down to it, I don’t hate Microsoft, just their business practices.

Fri, Jul 20, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous

microsoft stinks

Tue, Feb 27, 2007 Sprocket Toronto

Wow. Reading this was like being in the middle of the USSR during the cold war and listening to the propoganda straight and uncut out of TASS. What an experience.

Mon, Feb 5, 2007 OldSkool Michigan

Sweet. MS haters should really get a life or learn more about lawyers and politicians. I hate to see all that hate misdirected.

Sun, Dec 10, 2006 HG Anonymous

Sorry, but the MS haters haven't gone away. I know so many people who resent having to work with Windows.

No doubt this author will tout the innovations Microsoft will be bringing to the public with Vista and pointing to it as further evidence of deserved respect. Unfortunately, Vista is a rip-off of Mac OS X and it serves as another reason to hate Microsoft: they don't innovate anything.

Microsoft simply dominates things and maintains their OEMs over a barrel with the threat to increase their licensing costs, if they get out of line. So I don't see that anything has changed since Microsoft illegally drove Netscape out of business.

Fri, Aug 18, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Author must be bribed by Microsoft....

Sun, Aug 13, 2006 Ford Anonymous

I recently dropped an external harddrive. When I attempt to copy files, I get a device I\O error... so I know there's something wrong with the actual harddrive itself. And yet when I run scan disk, it either tells me there's no problem or shuts itself down.

That's just a recent error slash problem(I can't even type a regular slash here, jeez). I've never used a Linux operating system before, but after being frustrated trying to fix a 3rd party disc and reading this article, as well as the one discussing their business practices in Seattle, I'm gonna give Linux a whirl.

That said, I'm not a Microsoft hater. I honestly don't think about it on a day to day basis. But they do frustrate me on a day to day basis, and I'd imagine they frustrated just as many regular users out there. The only thing is most of those people don't know who to direct their anger at because they don't know all the kinks and tricks involved in the functionality of an operating system along with third party protocols.

I've had systems that randomly restarted themselves. I've had repetitive error messages hound my system. And I've had the actual GUI of Windows refuse to run for me... how is that functionality?

Thu, Jul 27, 2006 John Larkin San Francisco

But their code is crap. I spent 6 hours yesterday in Dante's Microsoft ring of hell, stuck in endless CHKDSK boot loops, holding down the Microsoft-mandated PC power button until my finger cramped, trying get the damned thing to restart, watching cryptic and useless error messages. And all they talk about is "great experiences" and Microsoft Advantage.

Oh, did I mention that their code is crap?

Tue, Jul 18, 2006 Ralphb Washington

Is there room in business for any kind of zealotry? I have spoken with Linux zelots that are eager to tell me that MS is broken, bad, etc. My question to them is,"If someone walked in your office with $10000 and said, "I want a MS solution." are you going to argue with them or send them out the door?" Specialization is for insects. Business requires agility.

Wed, Jul 12, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Big business is primarily responsible for all the ills of the world. Oil, tobacco, and Microsoft are not in business to better mankind.

You need to be. We need to be.

Speak up. Use Linux.

Tue, Jul 11, 2006 paul central jersey

I work for a chain tech shop by day and run a small IT buisness by night. The machines i fix all day run MS. The machines that make me money at night all run Slackware. I don't hate windows, but any software who's "critical security updates" can a) totally brick an OS install (anyone who has had to pull a messed up update using KNOPPIX or MORPHIX knows what I mean), or b) install something very close to a trojan (WGA) really doesn't seem to have my best interest at heart. As far as interoperability of my systems, I use Lacie network disk arrays for data storage. My slackware workstations play nicer with the drive arrays than my MS boxes do, and the Lacie arrays use XP Embedded! As for the comment about the sandal wearing linux-commies, I do wear sandals thank you very much, and I make darn good money on linux's stability and featureset. Heck, I also make good money fixing MS's screwups by day! So, in a way, I love MS for keeping my cashflow going....keep up the good work MS! ;)

Mon, Jul 10, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Just look at what happend to the anti Microsoft sites one even won there lawsuite only to have Misrosoft strong arm the providers and the name servers into blocking MicrosoftWindows.com.

Fri, Jul 7, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I love it! Microsoft will sell me a antispam, antivirus softare to protect my Microsoft OS...just love it!

Tue, Jul 4, 2006 tbone belgium

I want my 5 minutes back!

Tue, Jul 4, 2006 G Morgan Anonymous

Windows doesn't have any more features than OSS equivalents for the most part (bar 3rd party software of course). Both Linux and Windows are feature complete but generally Linux insists on OSS drivers which helps immensly with stability and security. A lot of hardware companies unfortunately put minimum effort into writing drivers and that causes a large amount of Windows problems. Unfortunately closed source gives the opportunity to hide bad work while in the OSS world bad work is obvious because it is there for all to see. Certainly MS have made it so Vista will only run signed drivers which will increase stability provided they do give them a proper look and act in good faith on the issue (i.e. don't sign off a big partners drivers just because they're a big partner, sign them off because they meet the required standard).

Security certainly isn't completely a complexity issue, Firefox is more feature complete than IE6 but even with ActiveX disabled IE6 still has more security flaws according to all the major security companies. No my issue was Windows has unnecessary complexity, to render a simple HTML page in Windows requires 3 times the system calls it does in Linux. The same action but 3 times the security risk.

As for my comments about good practices naturally leading to smaller margins. That is fair and accurate. Industry has already decided that open standards are the way forward. It's how MS react to that which will decide their future. People will pick a product that suits them and clearing up the mismatching .docs out there is a huge consideration for industry. The question isn't whether MS should stop this trend, they can't, it's how they respond to this necessary and fair requirement from industry in a way that keeps their margins as high as they can be maintained.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 marcelo brazil

OS companies does not need high margins ?! must be kidding ! So might be for parts' and medical industries and agricols... must restaurants have a low marging because they sell simply food ? Why people would invest their economies in such a enterprise which would promise 'low margins' for their ROI ?
And about "better industry standards support"... try to plug a Siemens and a Philips (or whatever you like) big PABXes in a demand-techno use (conference, DDR etc) even in a unique building and you will know what is a big problem, despite thousands and old-long-run ITU standards... or try to use distinct-vendor equipments in a "solution" for a computer-based diagnostic unit in a hospital...
About security, would some organization ditribute its investments among several brokers so risk would be dimminished ? So what is wrong about a Microsoft-centric network ? It is better - from a security administration view - to track a single site (microsoftupdate) than dozens of sites reporting bugs and updates for pieces of software from who-knows. Just wait a few months ahead for earing about Starbasic viroses, buffer overflows in Open Source e freewares, as MS products get more and more robust... criminals' focus will just change from easy old Windowses/Offices (x also inexistent open source software at those times) to a plenty of widespreaded free/open will-remain-unpatched software
Really, who argues for low margins and total quality does not know ANY about having to 'sell' something to survive - maybe neither their self-marketing at least... would be public clercks, hyppies or religion organization members, who earns their salaries not having to meet any kind of monthly or yearly goals, or not having measurements of their job-existence results, or going job to job routinely never compromised with results. just loosers.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Zeke Colorado

Hate is *not* too strong a word for Microsoft.

I rate this article a one for facts, but it is absolutely stunning and off the scale for propoganda. I hope MS pays well for such complicity of immorality.

MS has shown no reason for trust., past or present I'm a bit older and remember a bit too well. For the newer generation, you only need to examine ODF.

Three words:

Open Document Format

I'll leave you to Google for - Mosaic, Spyglass, Sun Java, OS2, Dr DOS.. etc

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Question: Why are more and more businesses implementing Microsoft solutions, despite the advise of their own IT departments.
Answer: Because whilst open source solutions are more flexible this ‘flexibility’ makes them so complicated as to leave any business using them entirely dependent on the good will of its IT staff. A Microsoft solution meanwhile can be administered by hiring and firing any of the small army of cheap, expendable duffers with an MCSE certificate. Now there’s a type of ‘flexibility’ bosses really value.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Question: Why do blogs or articles on Microsoft such as this, only ever elicit a negative response.
Answer: Because whilst the pasty, bearded, success hating, anti capitalist, sandal wearing, Labour voting, internet freaks and geeks are sat hunched over their keyboards typing page long illiterate speeches and willy waving about the latest features of their favourite ‘alternative’ OS. The rest of us are too busy making money to give a crap.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Microsoft? What's "Microsoft"? (Just kidding) I don't hate Microsoft but I am training myself to ignore them. When that habit of thought begins to spread (virally?) then Microsoft will begin to occupy their appropriate place in history: /dev/null

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

It's not that I hate Microsoft, but by their actions they have proven themselves to be utterly despicable. They have shown time and time again that they want to own and control the world's data and knowledge and they have no regard for freedom, rights, or the greater good. I rank their ethical behaviour along with that of psychiatrists and other depraved criminals.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Admin Germany

What's this article suposed to be?
A howto-manual to sell more Microsoft crap to companies which are already fed up by bug riddled software which gets worse with each patch?
Or the self assuring mantra of a bozo which happened to earn his major income by bringing self delusion to those who already jumped the gun and payed through the nose for the "All-Microsoft"-Experience?
As you English speakers say: tingle or get off the potty. None of the problems Microsoft has with his software as well as approach to it's customers as potential thieves (or how else would you explain a nagging program that reinstates itself and is so badly programmed that it triggers itself on perfectly legal installations).
I don't know which drugs you took before writing this article, but you better get off it and get a glimpse of realtity.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

USB drives on Linux? Been working the same as on Windows and Mac for about 3-4 years now.

Microsoft not a monopoly? You somehow managed to miss a rather large court case in the US, a second, rather large court case in the US, a third, rather large court case in the EU, and a fourth investigation in Korea. I'm pretty certain there is at least one more that I'm forgetting at the moment. Suffice it to say, Microsoft has been found to have illegally maintained its monopoly in most of the world at this point. Claiming it does not have a monopoly is a bit disingenious at this point. (Oh, that one I was forgetting is Japan.)

This article is poor journalism. It makes many assertions, but provides no supporting facts.

Hate Microsoft? No. I used to, but now I've finished sliding to the end of that scale. I simply don't care about them any more. The opposite of love isn't hate, it's apathy. Once you've pushed someone that far, you don't generally get them back.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I'll just comment that I don't hate Microsoft, but neither do I respect Microsoft for its leadership position. It gained, and maintained, that leadership position through illegal actions (not even Microsoft can honestly dispute that, given the findings of the most recent anti-trust trials against it). I simply don't care one way or the other about Microsoft. I certainly don't care enough to use or support its products, except where required for work.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

M$ has never been a leader - thats why things like Vista always run late, because they haven't been able to buy it from another company. When it appears, you can bet your life that every 'new' feature will already have been seen on either the Mac or Linux

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Stoobie Anonymous

I used to hate Microsoft Windows when it auto-installed malware, causing me endless headaches trying to salvage the data I needed to run my home business. I used to curse it when I had to buy anti-whatever software I didn't want, because some 12 year old Script Kiddie tinker-toyed together another new virus. I used to revile Windows when my friends and family pleaded with me to help them rescue their BSOD'd computers that were already beyond help. Now, I just hand them a live distro of Linux, TELL them how to save their OWN data, then reformat and reload their precious Windows, If they still really want it that badly - I refuse to waste my time facilitating their co-dependency on a fundamentally broken OS, and I see no point in hating something that I see becoming increasingly insignificant to myself and my fellow Linux users.
This article, IMHO, is little more than pointless palaver from someone who was paid to write it, but many of the comments were worth reading.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 JB Fields Takoma Park, MD

Yes, Microsoft's products have many vulnerabilities. Every feature is a new attack surface. Powerful, user enabling features, like macro's, proved to be powerful when turned against us. As similar features are added to Linux, we see vulnerabilities being discovered there as well. With power comes responsibility, and Microsoft for years was responding to customers who wanted more powerful products, not more secure products. The Internet became connected to the PC in the mid-nineties, we had a security problem then, but we did not discover it until after the year-2000 exercise. That's an industry problem (maybe one of co-dependency) not simply a Microsoft problem.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Tim England

Politics and ideology aside, I think it's the user experience that turns many people of
MS products, especially the battalions of errors that often attend upon a single difficulty.

For an example, I come back from vacation and my computer offers me this in return.

Windows Could Not Start Because the Following File Is Missing or Corrupt: \Winnt\System32\Config\System.ced

Now happily, I've seen this before. The SYSTEM file has grown inexplicably
TOO BIG - it happens, the knowlege base knows it happens (albeit mysteriously and with no apparent means of prevention).


I dig out the appropriate CD, attach a DVD to the system and tell the computer to boot from USB. The computer can cope with this, but the windows installer finds it all TOO MUCH EFFORT and blue screens me before I can get to the recovery prompt.

No problem. It occurs to me that I have a Vista beta on another drive in the same computer (looks very nice, thankyou). I boot into Vista and wait. Ha Ha, Vista wants to be activated now. I click for online activation. And wait. Vista enters that fugue state where the mouse cursor moves, but the desktop is otherwise utterly unresponsive - a state familiar to Windows users all the way back to 3.1 and
beyond (thereby maintaining perfect backwards compatibility). Minutes pass. My patience is rewarded with a hex error, this time neatly folded in its own dialog. There's progress.

So I replace the 2nd IDE drive with the DVD writer, boot from the Windows disk again and this time I can get to
the recovery prompt, copy a near empty SYSTEM file from REPAIR to CONFIG and reboot to a nice plain VGA style desktop (Oh dear, this SYSTEM file is TOO SMALL). From then on, it's a simple matter of launching Ghost Explorer, copying the middle-sized SYSTEM file from the backup I took before my (now but a distant memory) vacation to somewhere on c:(not only is it NAUGHTY to copy over a SYSTEM file while windows is running, which one can kind of understand, it's even
VERBOTEN to make a copy of it yourself), then rebooting again and everything is JUST RIGHT.

The WHOLE PROCESS has taken less than 90 minutes - hardly time enough to type SYS C:.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 M$ Hater somewhere

This is how Microsoft whores use their cult to mentally rape everyone. They can't argue logically, so they label any rational, intelligent person a "hater" and attack them.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

A fantastic example of just how desperate, jaded, and behind Microsoft really are.

This article was hilarious.

Though I strongly suspect it wasn't actualy supposed to be.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Quote:
Try plugging a USB memory stick and see if it works out of the box. Good luck wasting time trying to move files from a USB drive to your Linux OS.

When was the last time you saw/used linux, 1994?

Ever tried plugging an iPod, formatted HFS+ (Mac) into a linux system, hey SUSE linux reads/writes to it just fine like an external Hard drive and windows, hm, nope - as HFS+ is not M$ technology, they do not support it!

This article is propaganda for the M$ sales guys, nobody can defend its contents. Anybody who tries is "not very bright", get the fact is BLLSHT, read serious press and get on with your work.

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

LOL

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

ROFL

Thu, Jun 29, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Reads like a commercial. Argumentation sounds biased. Bad Jounalism

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 I Buy MS somewhere in asia

"Oh how naive! When you have a monopoly you can ship any old rubbish and charge what you want"

Last I checked, there is NO monopoly. You have FreeDOS, MacOS, Linux distros, Smartsuite, Websphere, Firefox etc..etc. MS DOES have great market share for some of its products, and gained it by demand and consumption of all the Windows, and Office users in the world. No one forced the world to run Windows and Office, just that the alternatives just wasn't as compelling one way or another. MS products are not perfect, but in comparison to the options out there, I'll happilly run Windows and Office instead of Linux, StarOffice, Smartsuite, MacOS etc... The general public shares my sentiments.... If you Hate MS and is products for whatever reason, its your right. MS helped me and my company turnover ~$6 million with net profit of ~$1.7 million in 2005. Thanks for your support MS!

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

"Linux outperforms MS OSs in every way except usability"

... so why deal with lousy usability for an OS? OSes are tools for you to be productive in doing a unit of work. If the tools dont work well, find the right tools! The plug and play of Linux is as good as umm Windows 95 if not worse. Try plugging a USB memory stick and see if it works out of the box. Good luck wasting time trying to move files from a USB drive to your Linux OS.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Mark Uk

If anyone reading this has not worked it out yet, this lot are the thankfully the small noisy minority in our IT industry. Those of us in the real word, helping company’s build better IT to grow there business will consider there needs and work to give them competitive advantage using the best available talent and solutions, which are quite often Microsoft solutions. If you want your company to be competitive, do not give these people jobs in your IT. In there interview if they use the "hate" when talking about Software Company’s does don’t employ them!

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 realtime ops California

For me it comes down to this; I'm sure any IT worker has a sad tale or two of woe to tell about getting Microsoft software to play nicely with pretty much anything else out there. This has to be by design. Any company with the financial resources and human talent that Microsoft commands, but that nevertheless continues to ship crap like Windows, IIS, etc. is worthy of contempt. There is no other way to spin this.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Linux outperforms MS OSs in every way except usability, where they are rapidly catching up. (And of course Apple, which uses a Unix-based OS, has always been way ahead of MS in the interface market.) The cost and performance gains Linux gives you over MS are enough by themselves to make the choice easy, and that's just the tip of the advantage iceberg.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I think the Author will find the reason we dont get those emails full of Microsoft jokes is because they're old and tired, and everyones heard them already, not because they're software has gotten any better. I think its a case of we've all gotten used to its unreliability and "quirks", and accept them as a fact of life, like lying politicans and untrustworthy salesmen.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

All I can say is that M$ keeps me in a high-paying job so I can live the Good Life (tm). Oh, and some of you need to work on your spelling and grammar; it would make your comments carry a little more weight than just seeming like rants.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

In the '2 cents' poll, where's the "Yes most hate microsoft and their products and never use them, including myself." becuase that's what I would have picked.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

cmon guys.. the writer is only sucking up to the boss upstairs.. ass-kissing is a M$ sponsored (tm) activity!

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Buy linux, save the world,
copy wildly and distrubute freely,
change it, enhance it, sure what the fuck,
we're not an ologpy....

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Rob London UK

"you cannot be successful shipping lousy products in todays global economy with educated buyers. Its a free open market out there"
Oh how naive! When you have a monopoly you can ship any old rubbish and charge what you want. And look... M$ do!

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Is it April Fools Day already?

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Microsoft do not have much respect so this argument is fallacious

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 svu Anonymous

The main point the entire article misses is values. The only thing MS values is money (or business as something which brings money). There is no value in the customer freedom. There is no value in beauty. And MS never discusses values because it is the ground where it would loose immediately.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

It is articles like this that make me hate Microsoft.

The best way to "offset those perceptions that [it's] too rough" is to stop being too rough, not spin Microsoft's roughness with gobbledegook about respecting leaders.

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 Anonymous mars

let me see how can MS justify the OS and office and email costing more than the hardwaere people use... surely you jest when you say it cost billions to write such crap code.. MS buys software companies

Wed, Jun 28, 2006 I Buy MS somewhere in asia

Wow, so many hate comments. Say what you want, you cannot be successful shipping lousy products in todays global economy with educated buyers. Its a free open market out there, your money your choice. How many of you are writing hate comments using a Windows based PC, and have MS office installed on your PC? Reminds me of a Linux conference I once attended, only to see the keynote being presented on Windows XP and Powerpoint. Anyway, I own and run a successful IT company in the apac region, and have been running the business for over 10 years. We have partnered with IBM, MS, Cisco, Compuware among some of the technology providers, and I have to say that no other company invests so much into their partners and the ecosystem. MS always says for every $1 of MS software sold, the ecosystem of hardware, services, 3rd party add-ons gets $7 in return, and based on what I have seen in my business growth, MS business is growing and growing well across this region. Fact is lousy products cannot sustain and grow marketshare in todays economy so all the talk about lousy products and technology HAS to be compared to whats commercially available out there and MS products do hold its own, often bettering the competition in reviews and market pentration. I made a lot of $$ partnering with MS. As greedy as it sounds, don't be jealous. I am just making a living and a good one just like how everyone else posting here aspires to do.

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

When you look at the number of Microsoft related articles in the media over time, you will find that the articles dropped off percipituously nearly to the day that George W. Bush took office.

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 helios Austin Tx

MS did what it was supposed to do. It pursued profit by meeting need. Case in Point...DRM

MS is scouring the halls of congress and the senate to call in favors at a breakneck pace. Trusted computing in concert with DRM will relegate every other system as nonmedia ready and push it into the classification of "big expensive typewriter". They have browbeat Intel into creating the viiv chip so that the circle will be complete. Microsoft will dictate when, how and how often you play your media on your computer and if you can even make a copy via the fair use law.

MS has accomplished two things in doing this. They have sealed the fate of the entertainment industry and almost certainly insured the proliferation and development of Linux.

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Erik Madsen Chicago

"You don't need to defend me from MS or Apple and nobody asked you to. If what you have is so much better in your opinion, then use it and be happy with yourselves. I'm happy for you. We know you exist but if you have not figured it out yet, we don't really care. We use what we want freely and without coercion. It's our choice."

I could not agree more Mr. Vee! What is the source of all this anger? You people treat this as a religious subject. Why do you care what OS I use? I'm happy to develop on Windows. You're happy with Unix or Linux or Java. Why are you so obsessed that the whole world develop on the "correct" OS? That's religious fanaticism, not a rationale.

Like Larry David said in Curb Your Enthusiasm, "What is everything so personal with you Christians? Me, I like lobster. But I don't go around saying 'Try the lobster. You must have the lobster.'"

Substitute Unix or Linux or Java for lobster. That's how absurb you are!

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 MrVee Las Vegas

Why do you Linux users care what OS I use? You don't need to defend me from MS or Apple and nobody asked you to. If what you have is so much better in your opinion, then use it and be happy with yourselves. I'm happy for you.

We know you exist but if you have not figured it out yet, we don't really care. We use what we want freely and without coercion.

It's our choice. But keep developing Linux until it is as user friendly as Windows and when it is, we'll notice it. Can't beat the price and we've already notice that but price isn't enough. I've already checked several distros of Linux and find that Suse 10.1 kicks all versions of Linux in the be-hind for ease of use, look and feel and it's out-the-box feature set. Not to mention it comes closest to Windows than all distros, Ubuntu and Xandros included.

But it still isn't Windows.

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Penguin Pete Des Moines, Iowa

Well, I'm not about to hide behind anonymity. I run http:www.penguinpetes.com , and to be honest I don't outright bash Microsoft but rather optimistically look forward to the day when they'll improve.

My concern is the flood of Microsoft shills (paid posters who post flames) on Slashdot, Digg, and various other news sites. Specifically, I resent being called a liar by these shills when I merely state the DOCUMENTED PROVEN FACT that Microsoft products have crashes and security flaws, are regularly both the target and tool of attacks, or have any problem at all for that matter. Though I run Linux/BSD/OpenSolaris exclusively at home, I use MS as recently as whenever I visit my local library or internet cafe, and STILL see every problem on every kind of Windows that I've been seeing since 1995.

Yet rather than do something to solve these problems, you just have this army of blabbermouths paid to flame and spread FUD, rather like this article and it's beating on the famous "Get-the-Facts" misinformation campaign. I mean, the guy who started that just got sacked; could this be a clue to it's effectiveness?

No, IBM and Sun Microsystems repented from their past evil and today work together with the technology world to make computers better for everyone; a shining example for Microsoft to follow. But consistently, we see from actions such as this article that Microsoft wants to head as far in the other direction as it possibly can.

Well, you're cooking your own goose! The rest of the neighborhood is Google, Novell, Sun, IBM, MacIntosh's own OS X Darwin, BSD, Bell Labs, ReactOS... into infinity! Every other technology company from megacorporations to rival the size of your own to mom-n-pop startups are playing nicely together...and then there's Microsoft being assinine as always. Evolve or perish!

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

You know what's funny...Microsoft defenders don't have a legit argument to the negative feedback this article is getting!

Take for example, the above comment with 4 star rating. :)

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Oooh, I see the Groklaw kiddies have come out to play! To be followed by slashdot know-it-alls.

As the Emperor said to Luke, "Let the hate flow through you!"

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

LOL

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 AussieBear Australia

The article is of obvious Microsoft bias. But what do you expect from a Pro-Microsoft site? Its not like your don't expect this folks!

I have no respect for Microsoft in general, but their engineers and programmers are OK. Although, they are, for some reason, led to believe they are doing good...But management will abuse and destroy this, when they delibrately post and announce utter lies of competiting products.

Nowhere, in this article, does it mention Microsoft's obsessive ability to attempt to compete and publically undermine the competition with nonsense. Linux, open-source, Sony, Blu-ray, OLPC, etc, etc have all been public criticisms of Mr Gates and other reps of Microsoft.

Have you heard of Martin Taylor? He was the MS person responsible in MS's Anti-Linux campaign, "Get the Facts" (ironically, there's nothing factual about the material it represents, as its all delibrately skewed studies to favour Microsoft).

Linux people are not idiots you know. We look at every case, and we know those studies delibrately use factors that will skew the results in favour of Windows.

How about the person in charge of MS's open-source lab? Bill Hilf. They (Bill and Martin) initially said it wasn't about "Windows vs Linux" (that was 2005)...And now, 2006, Martin was fired, and Bill throws up nonsense like this: "...Most open-source code is terribly inferior to commercial software code."

And yet, how do you explain the US Navy using Linux based solutions in their AEGIS air defence ships? Why aren't they using Windows, eh? If Linux is good enough to defend America's Navy, why is Microsoft publically putting down? How do you explain well known organisations like NASA, Pixar, and Dreamworks Animation Studios using Linux?

Its clear that Mr Hilf is the new Anti-Linux man. He is perfect for this role, as he runs MS's open-source lab.

Look at Port 25, the MS open-source lab website. The people that work there say they want to work with open-source community, and then, the next minute, the man in charge of that place will delibrately throw negativity against open-source! He undoes what his employees work hard to mend!

So which is it Microsoft? Are you FOR or AGAINST open-source? Because you have sent nothing but mixed messages! To the open-source community, Microsoft has confirmed our suspicion. Nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The problem with this article, is that its completely oblivious to the REAL world. The author has next to no clue that Microsoft does anything and everything to undermine the competition.

Ethics, honesty, and trust are not part of Microsoft. This is why people are more likely to favour open-source, when given the chance. We have nothing to hide, Microsoft does...It has heaps of skeletons in its closets.

We don't hate Microsoft, we just don't trust it. In fact, since some of us don't trust it, we don't use it.

Honestly, Ms Stuart , would you trust a guy who has a history of womanizing?

Tue, Jun 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

poor research, obvious bias. suspect intentional bias without disclosure - dishonest.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Mark Uk

In Business Microsoft is focusing on customer needs. Using there technologies makes company more profitable. I have seen company’s try to use Linux and it have cost them more and given them less. The desktop is only a very small bit of the puzzle and the cost of the software even less so. I just don't understand where you guys are coming from; do any of you work with a large number of client installing non-ms solutions? How many users do you have, if you include all you clients? Are you qualified to talk about this stuff? You can't be seeing the same business world as me. Your focus seems very narrow.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Wesley Parish Kiwiland

May I interject a note of reason here? One of the most common perceptions appears to be that Microsoft doesn't play fair with other companies, as seen by BillG and SteveB's infamous rants about open source (not itself a company, merely a source of competition) being pacmanlike, a cancer, and other highly "fact"-based arguments. And of course, the long-standing sagas of the Kerberos authentification of the Active Directory being embraced, extended and diverted from the expected public standard to a Microsoft-only "standard", and the difficulties the Samba team have in interoperability with Microsoft's supposed "standard".

Even Microsofties are catching on to the core problem now:

Honesty, is such a lonely word,
Everyone is so untrue,
Honesty, is hardly ever heard,
And mostly what we need from you!

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 JuggerNaut Anonymous

I doubt that the dislike for Microsoft has changed all that much. Those sites still exist, Microsoft is still the same Microsoft and people are tired of proprietary standards and want open standards to dominate the computing landscape so we're not locked into Microsoft solutions forever. IT nazis like Microsoft because of job security and nothing more, it certainly isn't that MS products are great, they're mediocre at best.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 JuggerNaut Anonymous

I doubt that the dislike for Microsoft has changed all that much. Those sites still exist, Microsoft is still the same Microsoft and people are tired of proprietary standards and want open standards to dominate the computing landscape so we're not locked into Microsoft solutions forever. IT nazis like Microsoft because of job security and nothing more, it certainly isn't MS products are great, they're mediocre at best.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Mike Washington State

I too find this article skewed a bit too pro-microsoft. I use both linux and XP routinely, and they're both good workstations with their strengths and weaknesses. I struggle with the constant security problems of MS. But mostly I too struggle with the interoperability part. I'm of the mindset that I don't care what client my customers are using, but I want them to play nice. I like standards and the like for interoperatbility reasons. And I don't like when MS products deliberately break that interoperability (like Frontpage for example). Anyway, just my two cents...

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Rick Stockton NV

Microsoft has been convicted of using illegal means to extend and preserve their Monopoly. They are allowed to continue using a loophole in the "final judgement" as a tool to create different prices among different OEM vendors, effectively destroying any chance for 'competitive' Operating Systems to be distributed.
"Microsoft's problem is that [it's] been a little difficult, a little aggressive, a little muscular," Trout says.
No, stealing Stack Electronics code is not merely "a little muscular". Cutting of Netscape's air supply with criminal bundling is not merely "a little muscular". Ashcroft, to whom MS gave $10,000 in campaign money (he lost to a dead man), "magically" allowed this loophole.
And the Cheney DOJ opposes all attempts to in correct it. That doesn't make it legal; that just means the prosecutors aren't interested in pursuing it. (Gee, I wonder why.)
Some of us prefer not to do business with criminals: it's a MORAL thing. not a technical or monetary thing. And if you think that having morals == 'religious fanatic', well then, YOU can support Microsoft and it's so-called "business" practices. (Or, carrying your lack of moral standards a bit further, join the violent MS-13 gang: sell drugs, extort, and kill people.) That's a big problem which isn't so easy for the Author to address, so she instead points at these other things and says, "Look at all those Wookies!"

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

No facts to bac up his claims of the market seeing MS as having changed in the last decade. They are a convicted monopolist abusing their power and continue to do so. I have no more respect for BG than I have for Al Capone, they are on the same level to me.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 nephesh Anonymous

All I can do is laugh at the utter naivety in this article.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I became a little lost while reading the article.

>Of course, some of those sentiments are unfounded, unfair or outdated

Really? Which ones and why?

>Microsoft has come a long way since the mid- to late-1990s, when it battled antitrust allegations and crushed Netscape in the browser wars.

It has? Below you state that MS has gained "respectability", yet you don't provide any examples as to how. Microsoft software (from the OS, to the middleware, to the applications) has consistently failed to meet the expectations of it's customers for over a decade now. Many experienced tech workers have "given up" on MS (both the company, and it's products) altogether. The last time I used MS products was when I worked there.

>Probably for all those reasons, many partners say that they seldom hear flat-out "I hate Microsoft" sentiments anymore.

Not that you gave us any reasons other then some babbling above anout name calling... The reason that people no longer hate MS is because we have alternatives now. People only "bitch" about the software they use day to day, and for many of us, it has nothing to do with MS or the crap they feed to their users (who still seem to hate them incidentally).

On a lighter note, Bob's netsys+ quote was the funniest thing I read all day. I have all the respect in the world for guys in a 10 person SysIntegrator shop, but that's all they are. A 10 person shop.

All in all, a sad atricle with little actule content.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Mike Florida

Still looks like plenty of "Microsoft Haters" but few "Microsoft Lovers"--and none who can refute the points being made here. And I was just reminded of one point (again from a Groklaw news pick--from ZDNET) about Bill Gates' "philanthropy". Does it strike you funny that a LOT of the places he gives his money to are places where Microsoft has a vested interest in growing or defending market share? Most recently, I refer to the grants going to Massachusetts which "just happens" to be taking the U.S. lead in adopting the Open Document Format (which is now an ISO standard). And it just so happens that MS is not willing to add support for the format--not because it's not technically feasible or because it's a bad format (MS supports all kinds of document formats--are all of them all that hot? And how many of them are ISO standards?) but most apparently because it would puncture their "lock-in" balloon. I wish you MCPs well in learning to regear to support other platforms. It may take 5, 10, even 15 years, but the demise of Microsoft is coming.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

You dont hear complaints because they've all switched to Ubuntu!

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Midi-Man New York

I guess from all of this feed back that M$ Cr$%* bashing has stopped his point is null.

Anyone who is good with computers and is not a id10t hates M$.

I used to love windows but then I learned about computers and what they really should do.


\|||/
(o o)
-----ooO-(_)-Ooo--------

Windows says where to you want to go today and Linux goes there !

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Funny, I hear plenty of microsoft hate...Its worse than it used to be, since its now coming from Microsoft's own employees!

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

You still have not understood the problem. Try to listen them and address all issues instead only the ones that are easily dealt with. And for once differentiate between frustrated users blaming their operating system and users that have valid concerns, regardless whether they are politically, economically or technically.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Being a Microsoft user for about 20 years, I can say that this article sucks! It seems like a propaganda that don't reflect the real life. Yeah right! this is a Microsoft oriented maganize!

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Hey, on $400 dollar software, it is too expensive, and further, it IS putting money in Bill's pocket, and the rest of the primate house what passes for a board over there...

As for taking on China, sure it will benefit Microsoft's competitors, and of course the only reason Micorosft is involved is for their competitors, not their own interests.

Personally, I still hate Microsoft, but not as much as the apologists who shout the lies so often in hopes they become the truth.

Old tactic guys, and it don't work so well no more, better communications, or freer communications tend to make demagoguery look like, well demagoguery.

If you apologists want to practice casuistry, please take it to the Microsoft boardroom, where the problem lies.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Raymond Koekemoer Jhb, South Africa

Microsoft are doomed by natural law that what goes around comes around and that knowledge belongs to all of mankind, not just those who patent it! May they receive their full due with interest!

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 David Skoll Ottawa, Canada

Hate? Nah. Microsoft merely produces mediocre, expensive, closed software. Why would I bet my business on it?

So come on, MCP's, sell me on Microsoft. We're a Linux shop (technical and non-technical people). Our phone system runs on Asterisk. Our CRM is SugarCRM. Our database is PostgreSQL. Our e-mail client is Thunderbird. Our Web browser is Firefox. Our office suite is OpenOffice.

Our annual software licensing budget is $0.00.

Come on. Give me a compelling reason to switch to MSFT.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Flak Magnet Michigan

Part of the reason why they aren't hearing it with the frequency they used to is because the noisier gripers about MS have finally woken up that there are alternatives to being MS slaves.

MS isn't getting the hate that it used to because they are decreasinly relevent to the lives of those that hated it so very much. It is NOT because they've matured and gained respect, quite the opposite, IMO.

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 mekc8aa@search.com US

ringtones free

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Eric Maryland

Wow. I'm speachless. This read like a how-to for a Microsoft salesman. Could she be any more out of touch?

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

No matter which way you turn it, a monopoly is wrong...But enforcing a monopoly with means from a market you already monopolized is just terrible and they therefore should deserve all the hatred anyone can give them !

Mon, Jun 26, 2006 Martin Durban

What a load of rubbish, no matter how hard you try you cannot convince me that MS has all of a sudden become this benevolent force for good. All the bad stuff is in the past? Unbelievable! Check out what's happening in Europe, Japan, Korea and with ODF in Massahusetts. And in the recent past where they got a thrashing in court from Burst which they had to settle because if it went to court they would have been in seriously hot water. There was evidence of documentevidence destruction. This was recent, not some long lost issue from the eighties.
Get a grip, you obviously have vested interests in casting MS in a positive light you are after all "executive editor of Redmond Channel Partner magazine" why don't you put that as a disclaimer in the beginning of the article instead of right at the end? When I started reading I thought it was the work of an independant journalist, I very quickly rethought that. Then I jumped to the end of the article to see who wrote it and it all made sense. I just hope that not too many people got taken in by this rubbish. It is irresponsible of you to write such patently untrue rubbish.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Mike Florida

Maybe I don't have enough to do, but I've been having fun watching the progression of these comments. First, I notice that most of the comments are "Microsoft-hating" if you want to call them that, but worse yet, many of them are reasonably written, including documentable facts that would be a challenge to refute. Second, I notice that there are a number of Microsofties WHO DO NOT LIKE MICROSOFT. To paraphrase the closing sentence of the article, "If those associated with the brand aren't sold on it, why should anyone else be?" Third, the only two who did respond with a strong positive view of Microsoft weren't able to argue their way out of a wet paper bag. "Spanky From The Moon" mixes apples (OSs) and oranges (apps) in his chip-on-the-shoulder attempt, which is a false argument. I'll grant for the sake of argument that it may be easier to migrate TO Microsoft products, but is "easy" the only criteria that's important? How about security? How about stability? How about being able to migrate FROM Microsoft products to something else if the customer so desires? I didn't see any substantive responses to those concerns. "Arthur from Midland Michigan" made a brief comment, to which I'll give a brief reply. He stated that the other commenters should be ignored because we were "in the minority". My brief reply: since when does a majority (presuming for the sake of argument that he's right about being in the majority) determine truth? And to everybody else: isn't there anybody who reads this who is informed, can think, express themselves effectively in writing and believes that today's Microsoft is the greatest thing since sliced bread and can refute the "Microsoft -haters"' points? If there isn't, I feel even sorrier for you guys and gals. I hope you're reading the writing on the wall. I also hope you're reading independently-thinking journals like CRN. I don't agree with everything they say or cover, but at least one can read the good, the bad and the ugly on the different platforms in there.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Mike Florida

(start quote)In fact, Trout recommends that partners promote Microsoft's No. 1 position as a genuine customer benefit: "Who wants to run with No. 2?" (end quote) I couldn't resist posting again after that one. Why would someone run with No. 2? No. 2 tries harder. Remember the AVIS Rent-a-Car commercials?

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

reads like MS PR documentation. Truth is all real decent innovations MS was planning keep ending up on the cutting room floor (winfs being the latest) They have no "value add" and all the features they are bring out are all but worthless to 95% of us. With this in mind it is much more cost effective for me to use OS X and Linux systems.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 William Nett Florida

Microsoft is irresponsible. They continously make products that are weak in security, blast and take over those who do sucumb to their lawyers, and disavow the existance of others who do not play along. They stifle independant development, call names (Steve Ballmer, "Linux people are communists") and they do not idemnify their own products... don't believe me? Read a Microsoft EULA. Nuff said, they're irresponsible. End of story.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

>In fact, Trout recommends that partners
>promote Microsoft's No. 1 position as a
>genuine customer benefit: "Who wants to run
>with No. 2?"

LOL, I'll be sure to remember that next time I even hear somebody suggest a .Net solution for something rather than Java.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I only bothered to read the first page of the comments but they all seem to share my opinion. Microsoft, while not "evil" per-se, IS the definitive desktop operating system solution, not because it's a superior product, but simply because microsoft uses its muscle to crush the competition, I recently switched to Ubuntu Linux because of my utter disgust with Windows Vista, which, despite all of it's claims, is not revolutionary at all. It attempted to stamp out OpenGL development (to be replaced with Direct3D) which thankfully was stopped, it pushes an interpreted language over native languages (.NET vs native compiled code) which, while it does promote portability, often implies considerably steeper system requirements. And on top of that they are promoting their new Aero GUI as though its the best thing since sliced bread. Of course, the idea behind Aero is that it draws the GUI using Direct3D, well, nevermind OSX has been drawing its GUI with OpenGL since its release, and on top of that, it doesn't really provide any sorely needed functionality. Eh, This is too long already... Dan out.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Astroturfing Stuart :/

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 cyber_rigger Anonymous

In my business we LISTEN to customers. I find that customer complaints usually have a reason.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 anonymous Phoenix Arizona

This article is simply protecting its interests. Microsoft showed their true colors years ago. I make money supporting it, and I use the opportunity to demonstrate to each and every customer the viability of Linux, giving each and every one of them a copy of KNOPPIX, and watching their eyes shine--they truly find it interesting and impressive--even the techno-fearful. These people find it amazing that so many things can be programmed by a mix of corporate and individual volunteers. The conversation inevitably turns to a more general discussion of the difference of the open-source collaborative method of dev and how many industry giants are taking part in the future, while Micosoft abusively protects its past. People who care about philosophy and ethics--and this is most people--are disgusted by Microsoft once you give them the facts. I never use harsh words or histrionics to tear down microsoft. I don't need to. People are frustrated with the slowness of their machines after 3 weeks online and when I explain to them what is happening with the scumware accumulation they just look at me and even these non-tech people know enough to ask "why do they program it to let all that stuff happen?" ...you don't need to attack Microsoft, you just need to be the conversational antidote to marketing. All they ever hear is advertising, they don't 'get the facts' even from Get-The-Facts. Microsoft is digging its own pit. Two close friends of mine who work there describe a culture totally out of touch with the outside world of what real people need and want, and a corporate philosophy that is repugnant to the local population of Washington. For more understanding of this aspect, read the article titled "Citizen Microsoft" from the Seattle Weekly from about a year ago, writetn by a former Microsoft manager. That is enough to make anyone disgusted with Microsoft. Get The Fact, indeed.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

I sell and service Microsoft products for a living. I can't imagine ever respecting Microsoft. They are underhanded bullies. This article gets one star, becuase there's no option to give fewer.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 RC Anonymous

Some companies deserve to be hated.

The market that counts for Microsoft's owners -- the stock market -- has spoken about Microsoft's prospects as a company, and boy, has the stock price fallen: at 22.50, it's less than half the value it had at the peak in 2000.

Looks like MS and its promoters will have to do a lot of talking to keep customers docile.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

This article is pretty much a Microsoft apologist and pretty much ignores Linux - like Trout, the business guru of the late 1980's - it's out of touch with reality of 2006. Everyone who loathed MS has moved onto Linux/Unix and don't really care all that much about Microsft anymore - only those who learned MS and treasure their MS certificate as if it were bestowed by BG himself - only they are with them come high water, hell or whatever - unlike 10 years ago, people have MANY choices now so it's NOT respect for them still being 1, it's the fact they are irrevelvant and can be safety ignore ... and speaking of security, YES, it is a MS problem ONLY. For those using other platforms, it's a concern and and a daily challenge but it's NOT an ongoing flaw in the original machina issue.

MS is the DMV. You do have to deal with them but only on a voluntary basis.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 G Morgan Anonymous

Security is an issue generally but its more so an issue with MS systems. Compare Linux to Windows, Windows has about 20 times the market share but according to Kapersky more than 10,000 times the wild exploits. To say that Windows doesn't have real issues with security to a greater extent than comparitive systems is just digging your head in the sand and has nothing to do with reality. There are serious issues with over complexity and rehashing old code not designed with the current practices of networking in mind. There are also problems with the default of giving users Admin accounts. The result of this is that a lot of third party applications only run in administrator mode. This may all be solved in Vista but we are yet to see, I'm certainly not impressed with UAP currently but will at least give a beta product the grace of avoiding making early judgements.

It's true that most of the issues are dated (security is still a big problem which requires constant vigilance and support for Windows users) but there are also a lot of new issues that MS fail to deal with and actively work against. Most of industry wants to move towards commoditised standards, companies are simply fed up of new Office releases unnecessarily changing standards, web developers are annoyed by lack of W3C support in IE6 and users are annoyed by security (solved partially by IE7 though its standard support is still behind competitors and its not wild yet so security is at best unproven). They continually change the SMB standard which breaks interoperability between Unix based servers and Windows workstations. Little is added to SMB in doing this and as a technical user I know that you very rarely have to change a standard completely, the same rule applies with Office, if a document is made in Office XP which only uses features available in Office 2000 then that document should be able to open in Office 2000 by default.

Anyway I have made my opinions to MS directly in the past but doubt there will ever be serious action on this front. Unfortunately good computing practice means smaller profit margins in most of these areas which is why OSS markets are taking a strong foothold. Companies developing OSS do not need such large profit margins so can focus on the things industry wants which are well developed open standards and interoperability between systems.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 dan redmond

I worked as a contractor for 3 years at Microsoft until this past April. I can say wholeheartedly, without hyperbole, that I HATE MICROSOFT. I hate their products. I hate their arrogance. I hate the way they work. I hate most of the people that work there. The employees are a bunch of arrogant snots (coders and designers, mostly) who like to think they're in some special place in the world because they have a badge that lets them into fabulous world of Bill F@$&%NG Gates. A place where people can pretend they're still in college forever! Complete with crappy cafeterias and giddy pep-rallies. In the three years that I worked there, nothing I worked on was shipped. They would drag it out, having the same stupid, boring meeting over and over, with most of the over-dressed, self-absorbed participants showing up late and spending half the meeting zoned out in their (company issued) laptop typing inane and productiveless emails. Then, after about 3 or 4 other companies would release their versions, they would just shelve the whole damn thing. They paid me over $250,000 to do absolutely nothing for 3 years. It nearly destroyed my soul. It was such a joy to see the look of shock and confusion on my dolt-of-a-manager's face when I gave my 2 weeks notice, right in the middle of them trying to produce a demo for Bill G himself. Of course, a great example of how long it takes MS to do anything (besides Vista) is just look how long it will take Bill Gates to quit, 2 YEARS! It only took me two weeks. No, I hate Microsoft. I used to merely dislike them strongly, but not really care, because I use Macs, but after seeing it from the inside, it's a deep loathing that will last longer than the company itself.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 arthur midland michigan

very true article and if you read these comments they are the minority so just ignore them

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Aaron Anonymous

I'm sorry, but you were obviously paid off by Microsoft. Of course, the fact that all the ads on the page are from Microsoft doesn't surprise me.

Get a clue, or stop writing your filth on the Internet.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Gman Anonymous

Microsoft's monopolistic practices have earned it all the bad reputation possible. Those that don't see what havoc Microsoft has wrought on the personal computer industry, simply have a lack of appreciation for the history of the industry.

The best thing that can be said about Microsoft products is they don't crash as often as they used to. Anything else is revisionist history.

Anyone that pays $400 for a minor product revisions on a word processing software program for example, that essentially doesn't do anything better than it did in Office 95, is a fool.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Bob Roberts BC, Canada

Spanky from the Moon obviously has some bitter Linux experiences in his past, but that's generally what happens when someone that isn't a Unix admin (and has no aptitude for it) is thrown to the wolves with a newbie-unfriendly distribution like Slackware or Gentoo.

His comments regarding OS X also show his naivete outside of the Microsoft sphere of influence. I've done large migrations of Windows, OS X, and Linux systems and they all have their downsides. These days, I'd have to say OS X is the operating system that gets most things "right". Apple certainly seems to be learning from Microsoft's mistakes in both home and corporate environments.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Bob Roberts BC, Canada

Interesting. I'd have to disagree with the blanket statement: "You don't have to love a leader, but you do have to respect a leader". As I recall, there was a particular leader of Germany at one point in history who garnered neither love nor respect.

(please note: not making a comparison between Hitler and Microsoft, just pointing out that not all leaders deserve respect!)

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Spanky The Moon

I'm not going to back to the nonsense we had to put up with before. During the late 80's and early 90's there would be places I would contract too that started counting the amount of their OSes in the 30's. PC-DOS, MS-DOS, F-DOS, unix variants, some IBM junk, VMS. All at different version levels, no documentation, no support, in short nobody had a clue. Microsoft came in and said, here's our product and how you use it, how you can manage it and how you can, here it comes, MIGRATE it.

Even today the idea of a mass Sun migration on workstations or servers is extremely risky unless the service in particular doesn't need backups committed and nothing has to be restored. Same goes for linux and Mac (same Sh!t different planet). Don't even get me started on large apps like mail and database systems.

Microsoft may have brought c and b grade product tot he table, but without them could you even begin to imagine what the framework would look like with linux, which should be renamed to LDTKA "little details that kill administrators".

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Here's a thought MCP = Master Control Program, as in: "Forget it Mr high and mighty Master Control, you're not making me talk" :)

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

"I have no problem with Microsoft Success, The problem is they don't bring much culture to their products. They just don't think about the original ideas, and they keep making third rate products..."
SJ from 199x...

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

This article seems a bit trollish to me. Can't say i agree with anything said in the article...

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 John Germany

I think Microsoft's problem is the baggage, that and it's past behaviour. It's been the 800lb Gorilla for so long, and a company that played competive hardball of the sort many small companies never recover from, that it has earned the hate the hard way. That, and Steve Balmer doing monkey impressions on stage, have not helped it's cause.

Props to MS for XP, it is for the most part stable, it still benefits from being rebooted every week or so, and then there are the security issues, which like SPAM, will never go away. But they've spent the past 6 years building a replacement which still isn't ready yet, and one of the winFS bloggers has said said that WinFs is dead as a standalone product, etc. Alos to be lauded is MS's attempts at transparency, what with blogs, and Scoble, etc. They're really trying to humanise themselves.

But my Xbox is chipped, and I've just installed the wga-patch that stops it phoneing home etc. The fact is that MS is "post cool" it's no longer the place the cool people want to work. Also, in the age of the web, preeviously dismissed by the company as a fad, MS is increasingly irrelevant, and increasingly invisible. The OS is now a comodity, you could just as easily replace it with anything else, and people would be happy if they could surf, read email and play with thier photos and music, etc. The company has lost the one thing it really needs now, more than ever, mindshare. Yes there are less MS haters, these days but the technically savvy have moved on, and though familial tech support are taking thier friends and family with them.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Swithched back to Linux in order to avoid ever having to put Vista on my computer. Vista might be secure but I simply don't trust Microsoft to do anything at all that might be in my interests as a customer or a human being.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 CaseMauder NY

I need Microsoft Insurance. Haveing lost more time and money to Microsoft than any other company on the planet,
I hate Microsoft. We are all unpaid Microsft workers, trying to fix what they sell. Your investment on equipment goes down the drain, not because it does not work, but because Microsoft wants more money. It is the biggest robber barron scam of our time. Who protects the consumer? Seperate from normal computer training, how many hours hve you worked as a unpaid worker for Microsoft? How many nights and weekends? They make money BECAUSE the product is broken. Next thing you know, they will sell us products to help fix it, like, antivirus.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Steve Jobs One Infinite Loop

So?

Who in their right mind would read such a long, lingering, and ultimately senseless article?

I sure didn't.

You see, after all those meaningless words, you still suck.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Rob NY

I'm sorry, what is this microsoft company people are talking about? I use solaris and linux...

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 no.tellin joisey

I can't escape the feeling this is a 'rah rah rally the troops article. It strongly reminds me of the Wall Street Journal article last year expounding how Microsoft started re-developing Longhorn/Vista from scratch using 'new' tools and procedures. Yet, for all the hoopla of that article, the Vista beta experience is turning out to be the least stable beta compared to all other comparable betas according to people who've extensively tested each past beta. As for a leopard changing it's spots, I see no signs of a 'kinder and gentler' Microsoft. Using an EULA and 'critical security update' staus to secretly ram down software which phones home, "spyware" tells me Microsoft is still "The Evil Empire". The above article completely ignores lockin. Many, if not most of the people I know who continue to buy and use Microsoft feel they have no choice. They are angry with Microsoft, but resigned. Saying Microsoft bashing has decreased because MS has started earning respect as a 'market leader' simply boggles the mind. Resignation is not respect. Perhaps Ms. Anne Stuart might want to consider talking with people outside the Microsoft ecosystem.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Larry Vance Waco, TX

I hate microsoft because of their crappy products and their deceptive ways of doing business. Microsoft has caused me more work as a professional by their buggy software than any other avenue of work through corrupted data and inconsistent interfaces between packages. Even though microsoft has a plethora of packages, they do not interoperate, there is not a well defined exchange between their packages, and then they charge you more than what they could possibly have earned from just stealing and buying others products.

Misinformation is the basis of this article.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

This article is utter tripe

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Pure advertising shill.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Can't expect anything less from a Microsoft Certified Professional Magazine! :D

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 buuuh bah

M$ sux!

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Pete UK

Microsoft haters would slowly disappear of their own accord if Microsoft fixed a few problems which are entirely of their own making. Above all, adopt honest trading policies and thereby keep out of the world's lawcourts. Use industry standards without subverting them. And deliver software written with security as a cardinal requirement.

This message was given to you from a PC based on entirely free, legal software and free from both viruses and Microsoft software. I don't hate Microsoft, but I do try to avoid using their products where possible.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Jim Virginia

Microsoft is a marketing company that happens to sell software.

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Cary Fairfax

MCSE - Microsoft Certified Sales Expert

Sun, Jun 25, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Here's a story I tell my students which sums up Microsoft perfectly...

Sun, when they invented Java, realised at once how incredibly dangerous a web-based programming language would be and took great pains to ensure it's security. As such, it's impossible to get a virus in Java.

Microsoft, on the other hand, when they added VBA to Outlook, slapped it on any old how without any consideration towards security at all. And they're *still* patching it in order to control the massive influx of Outlook-specific viruses still chomping through the myriad of security holes.

*That's* Microsoft.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

It is quite easy to write about a point of view from the "other side" when we have a bias towards the hand that butters our side of the bread.

In this way we dismiss contrary opinions and experiences from people we have labeled as "Haters". However, when we view facts and events with rational objectivity, we can see that the popular opinions against Microsoft are not without basis and that they continue to propagate as time passes, and in reality, there is no evidence that this is slowing down.

And it is doubtful that there will ever be a change in popular anti-Microsoft sentiment.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

The entire focus of this article is on how to squeaze more money out of those poor duped suckers who are ignorant of all the better software that is out there - software that is superior to anything being hawked by Microsoft.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 CrazyEnginner Australia

I have money to spend and over the years I have spent a lot of it dealing with problems and costs generated by the poor quality of Microsofts earlier products.

XP is a good operating system if combined with Linux/Unix servers, as was windows NT. Windows 95 was rubbish and they are doing the right thing killing it off.

The problem with Microsoft is the want to use what is now an excellent client OS to take over the server room. There efforts to limit XP's use in a heterogeneous environment is creating more work for me and costing me more money. Thats why I dislike Microsoft ( Hate is too strong a word).

I just wish they would stop the rot and aim to produce the best client software they can.

In they long term the real question is will Vista actually ship, and what will it bring. Extra layers of complexity and incomparability with the rest of the industry is the last thing I need. If thats all Vista gives then dislike will turn to despair. However the pain I suffer will be suffered because I'm replacing what I consider an excellent client with Linux.

In short this article is a waste of electrons. Microsoft should focus on customer's needs and skip the crap.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Frank Daley Sydney

As noted by a number of earlier commentators, the author has ignored lots of examples of Microsoft's ongoing campaigns of deception. She mentions the "Get the Facts" campaign, but fails to note that numerous of these "Get the Facts" studies have been carefully analyzed and shown to be totally deceptive.

Furthermore, she ignores one of the fundamental ongoing problems for technical staff, that interoperability with Microsoft products is a nightmare. Microsoft does everything it can to lock-in a customer and is scared to compete based on truly open standards.

However, major customers are starting to realize they have become a victim of Microsoft's snares and that truly open standards will help them break free.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Microsoft will be hated as long as they continue their policies of Embrace, Extend and Extinguish, their FUD attacks against anyone they see as a rival, their monopolistic bundling practices, their vapourware announcements designed to starve out the competion, and their complete refusal to play nice with anybody else.

As usual, nothing has changed with this company, except the spin.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Curt Florida

Well, the next time I need a dose of pro-microsloth propoganda I can read this article again. I will also add that I to hate microsoft. There that is at least twice in the replies to this article. I enjoy innovation and microsoft's only innovation is in coming up with new ways to convince people like me that they are an innovative company with innovative products. If they want to be innovative how about forging ahead with real security fixes but as the past has shown that is highly unlikely. Technology has made the world a smaller place but microsoft's technology has also, in my opinion, made that smaller place much more dangerous for the average computer users.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Mike Florida

I, too, found this article from a Groklaw link, and cannot figure out whether the author is naive, uninformed, paid off, intimidated, a psychopathic liar or something else. "Informed" and "thinks" is not part of "something else". The author must not be aware of; 1) the number of long-standing unresolved critical security issues in Microsoft products and the continuing flood of new security problems, 2) Microsoft's far more serious antitrust woes in Europe and Korea, 3) Microsoft's continued "ruthlessness" in continuing to seek to undermine anything perceived as competition (read carefully the story of Massachusetts and the battles there over Open Document Format), 4) Microsoft's "Get The Facts" claims seem generally only to be reproducable by Microsoft itself--not by truly independent sources, 5) more other skullduggery than I have time to list. I have been a Microsoft watcher for about 16 years now, and my view of Microsoft has only gone down, not up. I feel sorry for you guys and gals who have to schlepp this stuff to make a living.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Mike Florida

I, too, found this article from a Groklaw link, and cannot figure out whether the author is naive, uninformed, paid off, intimidated, a psychopathic liar or something else. "Informed" and "thinks" is not part of "something else". The author must not be aware of; 1) the number of long-standing unresolved critical security issues in Microsoft products and the continuing flood of new security problems, 2) Microsoft's far more serious antitrust woes in Europe and Korea, 3) Microsoft's continued "ruthlessness" in continuing to seek to undermine anything perceived as competition (read carefully the story of Massachusetts and the battles there over Open Document Format), 4) Microsoft's "Get The Facts" claims seem generally only to be reproducable by Microsoft itself--not by truly independent sources, 5) more other skullduggery than I have time to list. I have been a Microsoft watcher for about 16 years now, and my view of Microsoft has only gone down, not up. I feel sorry for you guys and gals who have to schlepp this stuff to make a living.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Chris England

Trouble is, Microsoft has this habit of trying to exclude everyone else; and sending in lawyers as enforcers.
I wish Microsoft well in their endeavours with XBoxes in the future ... not to the exclusion of Nintendo and Sony, but as equals in a competitive market.
But I think the Windows and Word market is saturated and over.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 John Melbourne Oz

Well since you say you don't hear it anymore, here it is again:

"I hate Microsoft! Billy G is just a two bit programmer and an egotistical maniac! And M$ is undoubtedly a leader, but I neither love it nor respect it"

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

Complete and utter bovine excreta!

It is unbelievable to me, that some people would actually believe a word of this. There must be a lot more PHB's and computer illiterate suckers out there than even Ol' P.T. Barnum himself could imagine.

Had the article not been linked from Groklaw, I'd never have become aware of the publication, let alone the level of mis-direction, untruths and hubris published her. I've taken the liberty of copying the URL, to post to all my customers and friends. That last, 'friends' is something you probably not familiar with up there in Redmond.
My favorite quote? "Yes. I don't bother [trying to overcome their objections]. They are in the "Microsoft is evil" camp—and they generally don't have any money to spend to boot" That one line sums up the entire article.

Sat, Jun 24, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous

A bit too pro-Microsoft for my taste. Reads like a sales brochure.

Add Your Comments Now:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above