Microsoft's Philosophy

[ashish123 0]

Hi Friends, philosophy of MICROSOFT over the years have been pretty nasty.
1. First wait for others to release their operating system.

2. Then copy the code and paste it.

3. Remove the comments from the same very code so that other can't understand it.

4. To be on safer side make some changes.

5. Unfortunately Microsoft lands itself in trouble and ends making the code full of bugs (poor programming).

6. Then release the patches and service packs to tell & make people feel how much it cares for its customers.

Pretty funny na. Such is the life and Such is the Microsoft.

Notice from saint-michael:

copied and paste although not this site it lists the same thing. http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/. Warning issued

[Tailson 0]

Is that all what they ACTUALLY do? They can be put out of business for that!

[Galahad 0]

I'm sure I saw this list, or similar to this, somewhere...But, sadly, it is quite true... I myself am a software developer, and I know it can be quite hard to make something that works flawlessly, and it takes a lot of tries, and a lot of fails, to get it right... But, Micro$oft has a ton of (supposedly) good developers, and one would think they would write better code, that works, if not flawlessly, then close to flawless...Micro$oft's biography could consist of following section, repeated constantly:Try to make something. If someone makes it before you, analyze what they made. Make same thing they did, name it slightly differently, and say you made it first. If you can buy the product, do it. If they won't sell, buy the whole company. If you can't buy the company, discredit them, any way you can. Once you DO have the product under your control, make it crappy... I kind of think that's what their employees have posted on their boards maybe like some kind of daily mantra

[richierich1m 0]

microdoft has money to buy any company or software rights they want they don't need to copy anyone,but definately need to improve their windows ,its so unsecure on the internet and even ie sucks compared to the firefox ,lets see now how the ie copies the tab system of the firefox

[darran 0]

A very harsh but sadly true indication of how Microsoft thinks. Till now, what have they come out with which really brings satisfaction to us customers? A screwed Windows XP, poor usage of RAM, an unsafe IE 6, and an upcoming Firefox duplicated IE 7, a need for 2 service packs ... etc, do I even need to go on. With regards to programming, I am sure Apple and Microsoft are almost on par, there should not be a disparity between them, but why is it that in the end products (Macintosh OS X and Windows XP), there is such a huge difference? Both in terms of design and performance. This small, short and sweet quote seriously delivers the truth out to the public.

[randomdood 0]

mirosoft is strange, they have money and yet they copy people make a sucky borwser (IE) which is full of holes and even though i like them better than mac should i really???

[Avalon 1]

Perhaps this is the philosphy that Microsoft operates under. But guess what? The philosphy has been hugely for them. They have been operating like this for years, and it seems to work. I don't know if the bugs they have in their programs are intentional or not, but either way, even with all the bugs their programs are very popular. It must be said that their marketing division must be worth it's gold. How else could such 'sloppy' programming be made acceptable to the general public so that they will part with their hard earned cash to have it?Say what you will, I don't think Microsoft really cares that their products have some huge flaws. People still buy them regardless. I think they must pray to the marketing gods on a daily basis!

[fffanatics 0]

First of all no matter how good of a developer you are, nothing will be flawless unless tested more thoroughly than anyone can imagine. since windows is used by soooo many people, many of the subtle bugs that a developer would not find under those small circumstances, users run into. That is what error reporting sends to the developers so they can fix it. Since Windows is used sooo much, there are many more people trying to break it than OSX, etc. which is why usthere are more viruses. I guarantee that if everyone went to OSX then it would be just as buggy.As for the strategy listed above, it is used by most development companies. You get the other software and have one group of people break down the object code into actual code. They then provide another group of developers specifications to write the software independently of the original code. This is completely legal under copywrite laws so there is nothing wrong with it. It is the way the business works and its not just microsoft doing it.

[SGCHS 0]

Lets not forget that MS software is on more computers than any other software. That does not excuse them releasing crappy software but it does mean their software is a bigger target. If you are going to hack and attack to cause trouble, you don't want to waste your time on a few machines but instead you go for the biggest impact.Wonder how many holes would be found in other software if there were a concerted effort to hack it like M$ gets hacked?Just my two cents.

Edited October 26, 2006 by SGCHS (see edit history)

[ziom666 0]

using google search you can find source code of Microsoft DOS 6. here are some of the comments:

dev/smartdrv/rtywrt.asm:
; *BLEEP*! Fatal error on write-behind! Ask user what to do with
; sleazy popup.

handle_fatal_write_error:
mov al,wrt_unmapped_unit ; get drive code
call warning_pop_up

***

FDisk.c
/* P.S. - To whoever winds up maintaining this, I will */
/* apoligize in advance. I had just learned ‘C’ when */
/* writing this, so out of ignorance of the finer points*/
/* of the langauge I did a lot of things by brute force.*/
/* Hope this doesn’t mess you up too much - MT 5/20/86 */

***

; *BLEEP*in’ sixteen-bit machine ought
; to be able to handle a SIXTEEN-BIT
; DISPLACEMENT!!

; I have to use DOS call int 21h/5f02h because DOS call int 21h/4409h
; is not reliable under DOS versions 4.00 and 4.01. (IBM *BLEEP*-up).

; BIOS is *BLEEP*ing with us - give up

; Is this a Set PSP call (50h) ?
; Yes, jmp directly to function
else
; *BLEEP*ing jump out of range by *two* bytes!

* The path can be in about a million *BLEEP*ed up forms depending on the level of stupidity in the user.

; Enable interrupts at the start of
; the dispatch code. Otherwise interrupts
; remain disabled through a whole
; shitload of code which is not good.

; Now we’ve got to copy all of that *BLEEP* into the cache

; *BLEEP*! read error. Better invalidate block & bomb!

; *BLEEP*! Fatal error on write-behind! Ask user what to do with
; sleazy popup.

; End of WIN386 2.xx compatibility *BLEEP*

***

* Function will add the szSetupPath to the users path statement in the
* autoexec.bat file. The szSetupPath will be the first location in the
* path statement. The path can be in about a million *BLEEP*ed up forms
* depending on the level of stupidity in the user. Here are a few to
* think about. DOS will accept any of these.
*
* PATH=C:foo;C:foobar;…
* SET PATH=C:foo;C:foobar;…
* PATH C:foo;C:foobar;…
* PATH =C:foo;C:foobar;…
* PATH= C:foo;C:foobar;…
* PATH = C:foo;C:foobar;…

microsoft philosophy ;]. the best are FDisk.c and

depending on the level of stupidity in the user

[cnetboss 0]

MS maybe the top software comp for now but Opensource softwares are now gaining. Linux's BEST OS (Ubuntu) is the best alternative to MS Windows OS