What can MS do right?

[skyman8081]

In your opinion, what can Microsoft do that you would not whine, moan and otherwise bitch about?

Do you guys actually have a beef with MS that they can fix, or are you just bitching about Microsoft for the sake of, bitching about Microsoft.

I am totally serious about about this question, so don't post stupid and non-serious answers.

[M51DPS]

microsoft goes open-source

An open letter is published to various project websites as well as microsoft.com. In it, they announce the following:

[Annorax]

They can go out of business.

[skyman8081]

ok, let me rephrase this.

what can Microsoft do, WITHIN REASON and that will not have a NEGATIVE impact on the rest of the world,  with you would be okay with.

[edenwaith]

Hmmm...I give up, what can Microsoft do right?  That was a tough question!  My turn next...how many licks does it take to get to the center of....nevermind.

MS Word isn't too bad, and it has certain features which AppleWorks doesn't have or doesn't perform very well.  BUT, Word still has its problems of trying to second guess the user, and I HATE that.  I was once writing a paper and I wanted to type "CNA", and it kept respelling it to "CAN".  Huge irritation.  One thing which Mac OS X does well, but MS Windows bugs the !@%# out of me is how the OS deals and interacts with the user.  Windows seems to keep trying to get in the user's face, popping up messages, and trying to "help" them along.  I DO NOT want help or being told what to do and when to do it.  OS X works for me, while it seems like I'm working against XP, ME, etc. to just get rid of all the !%@# pop-ups, whether they be alert dialogs, IE windows, or other messages.

But one (among many others) big beef about Microsoft is that they are trying to everything for everyone across way too many markets.  In the process, they have never been able to truly be the best-of-breed product (unless they KILLED all competition making them the only solution).   They have strung themselves out too thinly and have not fully concentrated properly on a few key products.  Sure, they most likely put more time and effort into Windows and Office, but the rest of their many products suffer in the end.

Several minutes ago I played the same video clip using WMP 9 (for Mac) and VLC.  WMP was still very choppy (but better than WMP 7), and VLC played the clip just fine, even with other things going on in the background.

This gripe does not just extend to Microsoft, though.  I am also concerned about Apple's exploration into other markets.  Some make sense and are OK, while others are secondary or tertiary on the list of things to do.  To what extent should an OS company "extend" its OS?  Where is the line between truly needed applications for an OS, and just bloat or specialty applications?  Does the world need another IM or web browser?  Maybe, maybe not.

[enjoijeff]

I don't think Microsoft really can do anything right.

I mean look at the xbox. They completely ruined gaming and the way controllers are supposed to be. You also have to subscribe to use XBox live which is complete bullshit, if you bought the console and it is able to go online you should be able to use your current ISP without any extra charges.

Now look at Windows. They have yet to put out a stable operating system. They now feel that users should have to pay to fix security holes. This is how I precieve this whole New Anti-Virus program coming out from Microsoft.

Microsoft just wants every little crumb of the pie they can get. They don't care about quality, stability, or anything. Just make it stable enough so they won't bitch for a month. That's how it is. Then charge them later to fix what they should be able to do or shouldn't of had to have do had we spent more time making our operating system. Yes, I would maybe support them if they weren't all about the money. I don't even know though. I'm really attached to Linux.  

[flap]

quote:Originally posted by Sauron: Troll Warrior:
ok, let me rephrase this.

what can Microsoft do, WITHIN REASON and that will not have a NEGATIVE impact on the rest of the world,  with you would be okay with.

They can die a quick death. That, or release all of their software under the GPL. Then I'd have little problem with their continuted existence.

It's like asking "what could Hitler do within reason that you'd be happy with?" I don't want Microsoft to "fix" anything - I want them to get progressively worse and worse, hopefully turning more and more people away.

[Fett101]

I'd be happy if IE was compliant.

[Aloone_Jonez]

M$ should make Winbloze and office more compatible with Linux and other free operating systems.

They could start of by releasing details of NTFS, as well as any other secret APIs and data structures.

Winbloze should be able to mount Linux file systems.

Microcock orifice should be able to import/export openoffice.org, star office and other competitor's  file formats.

Winbloze should be made more secure:
How about making it impossible for a normal user or any software their running to fuck around with the registry, configuration files, device drivers ect.
Perhaps one super user maybe called something like Root, should be given the ability to alter the system configuration?

Winbloze should not hang up lock up or fuck up in any shape or form, even if a normal user fucks up.
When I mean a normal user I mean someone not logged on as root, a good friend of mine said

[Xeen]

quote:Originally posted by Sauron: Troll Warrior:
ok, let me rephrase this.

what can Microsoft do, WITHIN REASON and that will not have a NEGATIVE impact on the rest of the world,  with you would be okay with.

I love this question. I do have a serious answer within reason.

Microsoft can toss its current operating system and restart Windows from absolute total scratch. That would be the first step. I don't care if its Unix based or not, just start rewriting the damn thing from scratch. It's long overdue.

In the newly re-written OS, no software should be integrated into the OS. Everything should be removable and customizable by the user.

The GUI of the new OS should be balanced out - it shouldn't have the "fisher-price" look to appeal to total retards. It should have a GUI that appeals to people who know what they're doing, and shouldn't be too hard for others to figure out (like Win2000 and prior).

IE should be compliant with international standards. Same goes for everything else. They should stop trying to force their own stuff onto us and comply with web, audio, video, etc standards. People would like them more if they did that.

The new OS shouldn't be as retarded as it is now. I'd like it to be like Linux and Mac in the sense that you don't have to "install" software - just run it from whereever you please.

Get rid of that Registry abomination.

Finally don't make everything so damn bloaty and slow. The OS should be installed with only the stuff that it needs to run - everything else the user should install optionally. Code should be optimized well for fast performance.

I think that stuff is well within reason.

What else I'd like MS to do:
Focus on one damn product. No company can produce everything without everything turning to crap. You can't make a world dominant OS, a dominant office suite, a bunch of games, some hardware, business software, video software, etc without everything becoming shit. The more you focus on one or two things, the better they'll be.

[solarismka]

The few things that M$ has done right is allow me to infect its computers with ease while they keep spuring Fan Boys into believing its  FUD and continue on with their ignorance.

Its funny isn't it.  I hate windowz fan boys as much as the next guy.  But if it wasn't those fan boys that keep pushing their 'ideas' onto more cluless people then such things as mass infection would not exist becuse everyone would be running linux.

   

[ June 19, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]

[solarismka]

Besides I find this question completely irrelevent.  Due to what they are doing now.  The whole purpose of Longhorn and winXp SP2 for that matter, is not to make windows more secure its not even to make windows more helpful and more stable but to follow on the same path that it always has been.  SP2 is ment to break the OS so that you would think XP is shit and gives you a reason to move to longorn.  Thats always been their staragity and always will.

Sure they say Longhorn was written from 'scratch.'  They say a whole bunch of shit all the time about their other windows os'es too, about hovw they 'innovate.'  Yet its always the same.  The only difference with the future compared to todays windows OS'es is that it will be anyone and Micor$oft that 0wn3z your OS and never you.  Its all about renting.  Never 0wning!

[M51DPS]

Oh yeah, something important I forgot: microsoft must declare all of their patents public domain.

[skyman8081]

Now would you have EVERY other computer company do this.

Apple(who has a VERY VERY VERY large patent portfolio)
IBM(Patent thing, strong legal team, has sued many smaller compnies out of existence)
Novell(VERY VERY secretive of the NetWare source code, hance an extreme lack of drivers and security holes, said to be more secure than even OpenBSD)
and EVERY other computer company.

and two of those three were convicted of anti-trust charges.

[flap]

Yes, I would.

[ June 21, 2004: Message edited by: flap ]