http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1645
Microsoft is perhaps the most hated company in the history of business. Anointed with names such as the Redmond Giant, Microshaft, Microsloth, so on and so forth, the nicknames and jokes are perhaps exceeded only by the vengeance with which people hate it.
The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what?s more, I hate Linux. I think it?s the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn?t work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
I understand the criticisms about the security of the software, the critical flaws and what not but again, we must look at things in the proper perspective. More than 95 pecent computers in the world use one form of Windows OS or another. The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world? It doesn?t, therefore you don?t have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!
In a nutshell, it?s not so much as that the software is secure; it?s simply that no one is interested in spending sleepless nights writing a virus that won?t give them the satisfaction they get from causing havoc. Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job.
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
This reminds me of the bundled issues with the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it. It?s just sad, unfair and uncompetitive. Basically what the stupid courts in Europe said was, hey, you?re doing a great job, and you must pay for it! This coming from a bunch of people who couldn?t even agree on a constitution!
And of course, the long list of lawsuits that Microsoft is straddled with. I am sure it is a business model for companies such as Sun and Oracle to just sue Microsoft whenever their profits are down due to insanely stupid and useless products that no one is buying.
Every year, just before the FY results are out, Mr. McNealy sits with his board and shakes his head, guys, we are in the red, what do we do? How do we turn it around? Suddenly a bright face says, I know, let?s sue Microsoft for a billion odd! Bill can afford it, after all, he makes such smashing products that everyone buys them, making him rich! That ought to be a crime in SOME court!
Microsoft made some products which it would like to ship together with its OS, no where in the EULA does it say that "you are not authorized to install other software" If Mr. John Doe thinks media player is the worst piece of software he has ever used, he is free to go and download Winamp or Musicmatch Jukebox (neither of these offer free full versions).
Lets be fair and honest about this. Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touches. From tablet PCs to handhelds to media centers but he didn?t do it for free and wants to protect it?s own interests. What is wrong with that? After all, the people who are suing Microsoft, aren?t they looking after their interests as well? Why do we think or believe that if they were in the position Microsoft is in, they would do things differently.
I do not for a moment think or believe they would be philanthropic and give away years of toil away for free or act in the best interests of everyone but themselves. It is about time we stopped being hypocritical and appreciated a job really well done.
Microsoft is perhaps the most hated company in the history of business. Anointed with names such as the Redmond Giant, Microshaft, Microsloth, so on and so forth, the nicknames and jokes are perhaps exceeded only by the vengeance with which people hate it.
The question is why do they? I love Microsoft. Absolutely adore it and what?s more, I hate Linux. I think it?s the most over rated piece of software ever built and survives simply out of spite and not because it is terribly good at doing something because it is not!
What has Microsoft given us? It has given us Windows, sure, it was buggy earlier and a lot of things didn?t work like they were supposed to (plug and play springs to mind) but it was a pioneering effort. No one was even close to the ease of use that Windows offered. Sure, Mac OS was a lot prettier but then it cost the moon and the stars along with both your arms and legs.
I understand the criticisms about the security of the software, the critical flaws and what not but again, we must look at things in the proper perspective. More than 95 pecent computers in the world use one form of Windows OS or another. The remaining being divided between Linux, MAC etc. now lets say MAC has 1 percent, does it make sense for a hacker to create a virus that can at best infect just 1 percent of the computers in the world? It doesn?t, therefore you don?t have as many security threats for other software as most of the people developing Linux probably sit at night writing up malicious code for windows!
In a nutshell, it?s not so much as that the software is secure; it?s simply that no one is interested in spending sleepless nights writing a virus that won?t give them the satisfaction they get from causing havoc. Considering the fact that everyone who knows how to write two bits of code dreams of hitting windows with a virus, the guys at the "Redmond Giant" are doing a spectacular job.
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
This reminds me of the bundled issues with the antitrust lawsuits being slammed on it. It?s just sad, unfair and uncompetitive. Basically what the stupid courts in Europe said was, hey, you?re doing a great job, and you must pay for it! This coming from a bunch of people who couldn?t even agree on a constitution!
And of course, the long list of lawsuits that Microsoft is straddled with. I am sure it is a business model for companies such as Sun and Oracle to just sue Microsoft whenever their profits are down due to insanely stupid and useless products that no one is buying.
Every year, just before the FY results are out, Mr. McNealy sits with his board and shakes his head, guys, we are in the red, what do we do? How do we turn it around? Suddenly a bright face says, I know, let?s sue Microsoft for a billion odd! Bill can afford it, after all, he makes such smashing products that everyone buys them, making him rich! That ought to be a crime in SOME court!
Microsoft made some products which it would like to ship together with its OS, no where in the EULA does it say that "you are not authorized to install other software" If Mr. John Doe thinks media player is the worst piece of software he has ever used, he is free to go and download Winamp or Musicmatch Jukebox (neither of these offer free full versions).
Lets be fair and honest about this. Here is a company that single handedly created the market for Personal Computers, brought computing to ordinary folks like you and me, made it affordable by encouraging mass acceptance and constantly strives to provide us ease of use in every sphere it touches. From tablet PCs to handhelds to media centers but he didn?t do it for free and wants to protect it?s own interests. What is wrong with that? After all, the people who are suing Microsoft, aren?t they looking after their interests as well? Why do we think or believe that if they were in the position Microsoft is in, they would do things differently.
I do not for a moment think or believe they would be philanthropic and give away years of toil away for free or act in the best interests of everyone but themselves. It is about time we stopped being hypocritical and appreciated a job really well done.
They are the industry standard.
Facebook
Twitter