Anti-Microsoft-ism

[bootz]

So I thought it would be fun to make a game and put it on my website.

When you try to download it, warnings pop up it says unknown publisher may contain viruses.
in ie9 it wont let me download it.

To get rid of that message I have to verify myself.

That costs $500 a year to get rid of that message.

Thats why I hate microsoft thats a crappy scam.

 

[Rack]

When it comes to games Nintendo and Sony pay people to make games, Microsoft pay people not to make them. When it comes to OS they bully any competition out of the marketplace, add in standards to throttle any competition then deliberately make appalling releases so you'll be more encouraged to upgrade.

 

[ElNeroDiablo]

Ok, so the monopoly card seems to keep coming into this discussion, but like I said, Is their monopoly really such a bad thing??

Considering that Apple is the only largest competitor in the pre-built Desktop Computer OS division (Apple also makes their own systems, so they also are technically competitors with DELL, HP & the like, but that's a different story) who make money, M$ tries to keep a tight reign over their infestation network of Dell, HP and the like to try and prevent Linux, Unix (basically the grandaddy of the modern OS), BeOS, SuSe and a whole myriad of non-M$/non-Apple OSes from getting even a fraction of a percent as OSes on pre-built machines.

Of course, that doesn't stop those who build their computers from the chassis up from installing Linux or any of the other OSes out there, but a fair portion of those who do that are Gamers who want a top-notch rig that can "handle" the games they'll throw at it, generally that's where a good portion of the retail/OTS sales of Windows goes as most major Computer Gaming companies code for Windows as a Primary aim with Mac and *nix as Secondary and Tertiary aims at best, since M$ provides incentives that'd be otherwise getting them in hot water over trying to monopolize the desktop gaming world (which they've basically done anyway).

TLR - Basically, Microsoft wants to screw you over and they do so by making you pay for the lube, for them to use it on your bunghole AND for the whole experience.

 

[CarlMin]

Everyone that likes to think they know something about computers tend to jump on the critisize Microsoft bandwagon. It really doesn't matter though. They will keep using Windows and buying Office. They just like to criticize things because, well, its fun.

 

[JezebelinHell]

Ok, so the monopoly card seems to keep coming into this discussion, but like I said, Is their monopoly really such a bad thing??

A monopoly is good for THEM but it takes away competition and choice for us. As consumers spending money for products we pretty much have to have we are allowed to hate monopolies and the companies that have used shady business practices to get them.

Yay, for Microsoft's monopoly!
Did you really just start the thread to try to get consumers to see that a monopoly was a good thing? Your repeated posting of this makes me question your motives in starting the thread.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I think it's mostly that people have to have something to ***** about. Sure, there are undoubtedly people out there who just don't care for their products, but that's no reason to hate the company.

Not liking a companies products and business practices is exactly the reason to hate a company. Maybe it is because some of us have worked closer to and had to see more of their bullshit than an average user. Maybe working in tech support for the past 15 years has allowed me to witness things you haven't been around for or paid much attention to. I am sure there are things you dislike that I have little knowledge of but I am not going to discount your hatred of it.

It's a perfectly valid reason to dislike a company, not to go on about how Bill Gates is the anti-Christ and Microsoft is Satan here to destroy the world with it's Nazi army like some people would have you believe. I don't care for Apple, the one iPod I owned broke after about six months, Mac OS is the worst operating system I've ever seen, and I find the userbase to be incredibly pretentious, but I've got no reason to personally hate Apple.

And while I don't pretend to be a technical genius, I've been deeper into Windows than most people know exists, and I've seen very little in the way of bullshit in Vista. Sure, there are things I'd have done differently, things that could have been better optimized or have a better interface, but I've seen nothing to cause me the deep, undying, personal hatred of Microsoft some people seem to feel.

 

[Double A]

I'm still pissed at them for disbanding Ensemble. Not much else though, but if I was a Kinect owner, I'd be pretty pissed about NUADS.

 

[solidstatemind]

First things first:
In re: 'M$' [http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/7/22/]

Now, on to the show...

Considering it came from DirectX which covers DirectDraw, DirectSound, Direct3D... Basically it's a whole bunch of M$-specifically made Sound/Video API's made to compete against Open Source opponents such as OpenGL and M$ generally does what amounts to corporate blackmail to keep all Desktop gaming (aka: Windows Gaming) locked into DX with kickbacks and threats of no future kickbacks if a gaming company doesn't use M$'s code in the game (even if the game servers such as Blizzard's WoW servers run fucking LINUX)...

That's funny. Last I checked, OpenGL still existed and is still used. Is DirectX easier to program for? Many times, yes. But please explain to me how, exactly, it is 'evil' to design a suite of tools that makes it easier to work with your product. Please cite examples of 'corporate blackmail' before you go tossing the accusation out there.

Also, guess what? Host servers have nothing to do with client servers at Blizzard: Blizzard offers and supports an OSX client for World of Warcraft, so your argument is specious.

Wait a fucking minute! That sounds awful like the under-table antics of M$ when dealing with DELL & HP to try and prevent the OEM's from installing Linux on the systems instead of Windows, by threatening to stop selling them the OEM licenses at such low prices (a fifth to even a tenth of the Off-The-Shelf price for the "complete" version which you pay out the nose for a different CD key to unlock stuff hidden on EVERY FUCKING DISC PRESSED).

'Under the table antics'? What, did nobody notice that every single Dell, HP, Compaq, etc. computer was shipping with Windows installed? If it was illegal, wouldn't the government have stepped in? (Remember, the anti-trust lawsuit was over the browser, not the operating system.) And why, exactly, did Dell, HP, etc agree to this if it was such a bad deal for them? Did they really have no choice, or did Microsoft just present them with a compelling- and legal- offer?

In regards to the 'hidden stuff', the inclusion of a full code-base only started happening as of Vista, when it was discovered that it was a more efficient (and even more eco-friendly) production method than printing out seperate DVDs for each SKU. I'm going to assume that your outrage is feigned, given that you basically just said "OMG! MICROSOFT IS EVIL FOR CHARGING MORE MONEY FOR MORE FEATURES!!!1!" I don't believe that you expect to get a fully loaded car for the price of the base model, so I'm guessing you have to be kidding about that. Oh, the outrage: I have to pay more to get more. Imagine that.

Is it any WONDER the geek/techie community hates Microsoft's guts, and the marketing weasel that is Bill Gates (Paul Allen was the TRUE tech behind Microsoft, Gates was the marketing head).

Actually, Nathan Myhrvold was the tech genius. Gates was the business mind (so yes, he was still responsible for many of your accusations), and Allen bridged the gap between the two houses.

OT: People hate on Microsoft because nobody likes Goliath. Now, admittedly, Microsoft probably engaged in some shady, borderline-illegal activities early on; this is not very different in other 'new industries' in previous eras of American history, however. Consider, say, the Oil barons such as Rockefeller, or the Rail barons, or Pulitzer, Hearst et al., Morgan and Schwab, Carnegie in the steel industry... I could go on.

Does that make what Microsoft may or may not have done right? No, but neither does it make them some sort of Empire of Evil. Microsoft was and is a company trying not only to be successful but to be the most successful in its industry.

Ultimately, the answer is just that: success breeds jealousy, and jealousy motivates hate. Every big company has its detractors; you just need to educate yourself and make your own decisions.

 

[ScourgeOfHell]

Ok granted Microsoft has a pretty questionable CV, but still, you dont see that kind of hatred for other monopolistic companies, like EXON or Wall-mart, what makes Microsoft the spoilt apple of everyone's eyes.

 

[Duruznik]

Anti-Microsoft-ism?

also known as: Bill-Gates-Bank-Account-Envy.

You have to hate everything he is a part of because he takes your money with glee, but that hate allows you to reluctantly fork over your money and still be the bigger man.

The money he "takes with glee" is then put into one of the largest charities in the world. Hasn't he innoculated all of India from Measles, and is making massive progress in Africa?

Give the guy some credit, he's saved more lives than many of us ever will.

 

[Xman490]

The Kinect and a slow OS. I doubt the Kinect really works, and even Windows 7 takes a minute to start up.

 

[ScourgeOfHell]

Oh and another thing I gather is that people seem to hate vista. So basically were condemning an entire company because they released one shitty product.

 

[mad825]

Create Halo game>console exclusive>No Pc version>hate

Make a half-decent OS>Make new OS with unnecessary, hogging features>Make DX10/11,IPv6 OS exclusive>make new OS from old OS build then sell at full price>Make newer OS designed for children>geeks get angry

...Halo may not be perfect (far from it) but I would still like to play it. Well that's my grind so far.

Halo 1 & 2 are available for PC.

True...but it seems to be missing a few games you know like; Halo Wars(<an RTS not on the PC, wtf?!) , Halo 3: ODST, Halo: Reach and the rest of the future games.

 

[CBanana]

The AAA PC gaming industry is nowhere near what it was a decade ago thanks to Microsoft. When Microsoft started up the Xbox, they managed to take a whole bunch of PC (and Mac) specific studios and convinced them to develop primarily for the Xbox which started the whole slippery slope.

 

[Vakz]

I must say though that I'm starting to like microsoft more since Windows 7. When they released Vista, it felt very much like they were catering ONLY to the every-day people, any everyone who actually had knowledge of how to stay secure yourself, and liked having at least some freedom in your own computer (yes, it's still restricted, but it's better than it used to be, at least). I think the major reason I'm starting to like them, is because the others (read: Apple) are becoming the new tards of the industry. With apple, many game-companies and several others that are of interest to me getting more "evil", microsoft just doesn't seem that bad in comparison.

 

[mikev7.0]

Ok, let's see. Anti-Competitive practices, Bugged software, permanent security holes, forced UI choices, Vista, Marketing that deliberately lies, Anti-Trust violations, GFWL, No free DLC, dog food, Vendor lock-ins, the Halloween documents, hostile acquisitions, monoculture, public relations, blacklists, censorship, faulty products, FUD, Appeal to Fear...

In short, take a look at this 17 point document

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft

*waving hands frantically* Yeahyeahyeahyeahyeah.... Other than that he means....

 

[JezebelinHell]

I think it's mostly that people have to have something to ***** about. Sure, there are undoubtedly people out there who just don't care for their products, but that's no reason to hate the company.

Not liking a companies products and business practices is exactly the reason to hate a company. Maybe it is because some of us have worked closer to and had to see more of their bullshit than an average user. Maybe working in tech support for the past 15 years has allowed me to witness things you haven't been around for or paid much attention to. I am sure there are things you dislike that I have little knowledge of but I am not going to discount your hatred of it.

It's a perfectly valid reason to dislike a company, not to go on about how Bill Gates is the anti-Christ and Microsoft is Satan here to destroy the world with it's Nazi army like some people would have you believe. I don't care for Apple, the one iPod I owned broke after about six months, Mac OS is the worst operating system I've ever seen, and I find the userbase to be incredibly pretentious, but I've got no reason to personally hate Apple.

And while I don't pretend to be a technical genius, I've been deeper into Windows than most people know exists, and I've seen very little in the way of bullshit in Vista. Sure, there are things I'd have done differently, things that could have been better optimized or have a better interface, but I've seen nothing to cause me the deep, undying, personal hatred of Microsoft some people seem to feel.

At what point did I attack Bill Gates? At what point did I use anything other than a reason I do not like them? You need to calm down and not assume that just because someone doesn't like something you see as perfectly fine it isn't a personal or outrageous attack.

This isn't a post about your crappy experience with Apple. Which is another company that cherishes their attempted monopolies as well.

This isn't about Vista. I have used and supported every one of their OSs back to DOS. I happen to like Windows 7. That doesn't mean I like the company. I have no choice but to use their product to do the things I need to do on my PC. That is the main reason I hate them. They have made sure I have no CHOICE. You have a choice of another MP3 player, yay! Try finding another OS to run that will play nice with programs I must have to work.

My point with you was not about Microsoft. My point was your dismissal of anyone that does not like the company and you cannot even figure that out. You can't even figure out that I didn't make comparisons of the company or the creator as being Nazis or the Antichrist. I have years of experience with their numerous products and practices to form my opinion on. You have your own experiences, they do not make mine invalid. If I had stated that Microsoft was Nazis or Bill Gates was the Antichrist I could see your points as being valid however all I see is a lashing out over something that has nothing to do with me. You need to reevaluate your reactions. People are allowed to hate things based on personal experience and it has nothing to do with you or calling names. Telling them that their hatred is invalid is being dismissive and unrealistic.
This post has further verified the level of your debate to me, enjoy.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

Well, let's look at the options. I could either go Mac, and pay way more than I'd ever need to for a similarly capable PC, or stick with what I got. I'll stick with what I got.

As for OS. Vista has some annoying habits, but windows always allows for more customization than a Mac os which lets you do cosmetic changes and little else. I could go to Linux, but there's always that mixture of fear of fucking things up with can't be arsed laziness. So, I'll stick with windows and just run PC decrapifier every time I get a new one.

 

[TheSchaef]

The whole thing about "what if we had to program for different OS's" doesn't really hold water because a lot of companies (including Microsoft) build software for Windows and Mac, and now also for mobile OS. And for at least the last decade, many third parties have been building games to be played on platforms designed by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, each with different SDKs and capabilities. So it can be done.

It seems the two biggest groups of haters are those who use Apple products and love them, and those who use Microsoft products and have to deal with the endless frustrations. Apple cashed in on the latter with their "I'm a Mac/PC" commercials, poking fun at the exact things that frustrate Windows users the most.

But I think it's not so much that they control so much of the market as they have squandered their status as the de facto standard. People continue to tear their hair out dealing with the antiquated concepts of registries and libraries, but even with Win7 MS did not move away from them. I guess they had to stop using their IE engine to render HTML email in Outlook for legal reasons, but with Office 2007 they started using the Word engine instead, which is crap at rendering HTML. And despite it being one of the chief complaints of that version of Office, they kept it around in 2010. WTF!

So now people designing HTML email have to account for how crappy their email could look in Outlook 2007/10 in addition to normal design concerns. It mirrors the frustration of having to deal with the 8-10% of the world who STILL is stuck on IE6, and the small percentage still using IE7. So this rant kind of transitioned over to IE and their utter slowness to comply with HTML standards despite having a lot of pull with the W3C. I often have to design web pages twice: once for regular browsers, and then go back and tweak it to work in IE, sometimes even IE8!

Their UX is atrocious. As old as the menu bar was, the ribbon just made a bad thing worse. The story goes that, when designing Office 2007, they asked consumers what they would improve about 2003. A large number of the responses they received baffled them, for these were features already found in 2003! But people didn't know how to take advantage of the power of the program. That's one example but it's a pretty universal complaint that getting to the things you need just seems unintuitive all the way around.

On a side note, have you ever used Microsoft Expression? It's a mess, especially compared to Adobe Creative Suite, and they have all kinds of weird rendering issues. So not only is their software difficult to use, but it frequently acts funky and crashes... on their own OS!

Software editions are ridiculous. I know Adobe does it, but I can almost forgive them for trying to break down a $2500 program into smaller, more relevant chunks. And that's a SUITE of software: Windows is just one OS. There are no fewer than SIX different editions of Windows 7! And I can't speak for the differences in the modern versions, but I know that in XP, the key difference between Home and Pro was that networking was nerfed in Home, making it almost useless in nearly every environment in which I tried to utilize it. We had to use a null modem cable just to play Dungeon Siege back in the day, and we had no ability to share files at all. And whatever networking they got right in XP they broke afterwards; making VPN connections using my old boss' Vista laptop was an exercise in futility half the time, and the only thing the diagnostics would tell you is that your hardware wasn't broken. Thanks.

So yeah, other than their outdated software methodology, dragging web designers down by not applying the standards they help to write, charging way more for their software than competing products and not working nearly as well most of the time, nerfing their OS to sell in different "editions" that can just be unlocked by paying them more money, having crummy user interfaces and some of the worst marketing in recent memory among major corporations, no, there's not much wrong with them.

 

[Belated]

Ok, let's see. Anti-Competitive practices, Bugged software, permanent security holes, forced UI choices, Vista, Marketing that deliberately lies, Anti-Trust violations, GFWL, No free DLC, dog food, Vendor lock-ins, the Halloween documents, hostile acquisitions, monoculture, public relations, blacklists, censorship, faulty products, FUD, Appeal to Fear...

In short, take a look at this 17 point document

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft

Also, anybody who reads pages on the Xbox support forums knows that Microsoft tech support is about as reliable as a bridge made out of marshmallows. Some of the support mods are useful and nice, but usually they just quote policy and never end up being able to do anything for you. And that time I posted a topic on there, a mod came in, immediately told me what the policy was regarding an issue that was SIMILAR to mine but very clearly not the same, and arrogantly marked his answer as the right one even though that's my decision to make, not his. And yes, he did indeed lock my topic as soon as he answered. At least I was able to un-mark his answer as "correct" and change the topic to "Not answered." That was my last move in protest. No, you did not adequately answer my question, you arrogant selfish lazy prick who can't even be bothered to read the opening post. And then when I wrote him directly about it, he said nothing.

The online is the best part of their support though. It only goes downhill when you get on the phone. Check the Xbox forums for issues with Xboxes updating. You'll find tons of threads about Xboxes being bricked by updates. And in almost every thread, the people tell you about Microsoft phone support either flat-out refusing to fix the console because it's out-of-warranty, or demanding a large amount of money to fix it, even though Microsoft IS THE ENTITY THAT BROKE THE CONSOLE IN THE FIRST PLACE WITH THEIR UPDATES. By the way, when you, the company, break your customer's product, you ARE responsible to fix it. Even if the warranty is expired. If YOU caused the damages, YOU have to fix it. That is the LAW. So not only is Microsoft unreliable, they actually break the law.

Remember that News article on The Escapist about Microsoft giving out free new-model Xboxes with a 250-gig hard drive to anybody who's Xbox disc reader was bricked by a recent update? Hahaha... right. And then they engineered bacon that's good for you. And developed a breast-enlargement procedure that doesn't result in back pain. Here's the thing: Even if your Xbox was rendered unable to read discs by that update, Microsoft support does everything in its power to deny there's a problem. They try to blame you for every glitch that occurs, and if you read the topics on the forum, you'll even find accounts of people being blamed for modding their consoles in spite of the consoles never ever being modded. Did anybody in here actually receive a new-model replacement for a console that was bricked by the update? Anybody? Yeah, that's what I thought.

They'll also release anything even if it's shit. The first release of the 360 literally eviscerated discs if you left them in after turning the console off and turning it back on. Also, Red Ring of Death. Oh, and releasing a console without wireless internet only to release a peripheral that costs 100-freakin-dollars. And releasing the Play N' Charge kit, which is plagued with issues too. And releasing Windows Vista, rather than burying it a mile deep underground in a locked chest just underneath a snake nest where it belongs. Then they even started a marketing campaign to make Vista look like it was better than it was.

Also, license transferring. Enough said. But I'm gonna say more anyway. If you want to play your DLC that you paid for and own, while offline, you better be using the same console you bought it with. It doesn't work on other consoles unless you're online because it's "licensed" to the console you bought it with, even though you're using your same account. But if you don't like that answer, you can go to Microsoft's website and transfer the licenses to your new console using their special "License Transfer Tool". Oh, and you can only do this ONCE A YEAR. The answer they give for this? "The license transfer tool was not designed to transfer more than once a year." No shit Sherlock. We know THAT it wasn't. What we want to know is WHY it wasn't. We want to know WHY you didn't fire the guy who designed it and get somebody else to code one that actually accounts for the fact that Xboxes sometimes need replacing more than once in a year because they're so faulty! Why wouldn't you provide a license transfer process that allows more than one use in a year, or more than one console at a time? Sony did. And any decent company would.

Why? Because Microsoft never does anything a decent company would.

And yet I'm probably still going to give them my money in the future, because I have such a strong, completely platonic love for Master Chief.