What Ms Does Right.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

At the time that Windows ME was introduced, Windows NT was struggling for acceptance. It was quite different from Windows 95 and 98, and had many detractors. The two architectures: Win 9x and NT, are very different, and Microsoft wanted to maintain cash flow from its customer base, so it needed a new version. Windows 2000 (the successor to Windows NT) was not ready, so they added more "features" to Windows 98, and marketed it as Windows ME.
I got a copy of Windows ME with a laptop I bought. After I realized its limitations, I bought a retail copy of Windows 2000, and tried to install it on the laptop. After about half an hour of spinning its wheels, the Windows 2000 installer reported (I paraphrase): "Ready to perform installation. By the way, I don't have a driver for this hard drive, so after I complete the installation, the computer will probably not run at all. Press "y" to proceed."

I aborted the installation, installed BootMagic (from PowerQuest, which no longer exists), and set the computer up for dual-boot between Windows ME and SuSE Linux. Needless to say, it spent over 95% of its time in Linux. In fact, it ran an Apache server hosting Wikipedia and phpBB services for 3 or 4 years until the hard drive died.

Basically, if you liked Windows 98, in Windows ME you get a similar, fancier, slower version with feature-heavy multimedia extensions that guaranteed you wouldn't have enough memory for what you wanted to do. However it did meet Microsoft's objectives: it kept the cash flowing.

It is true that Windows NT is indeed a huge jump from the Windows 9x series. One major difference was the inclusion of the concept of kernel space and userland which didn't exist in the Windows 9x era since DOS never had it in the beginning. However, you have to remember that Windows 2000 came out BEFORE Windows ME. The problem was that Microsoft didn't want to let go with their idea of keeping Windows NT for the professional market and Windows 9x for consumers. They then realized that it was a bad idea and released Windows XP, which is disputed the reigning champion in the Windows world with so many people still left on it.

So much to respond to, makes me happy.
I think Vista, rightly or not is a matter of debate, will be largely regarded as poorly as Windows ME. IF the next version of Windows happens to be better. The XKCD cartoon is funny.

MS does tend to give stuff to students, especially in the IT courses. I think it is kind of like some crack dealers though where the first hit is free. They want a teeming mass of computer science grads that have grown up familiar with MS and little else.

Obviously Microsoft would do that, so would many other companies. Heck, Apple give student discounts so it's easier for them to enter the Apple market and hopefully stay there. As for Windows Vista, the design concept they did quite right. However, it's the lack of optimization that bit them in the butt. Like it or not, but UAC is REQUIRED for computer security. People need to start learning that or they'll be left behind with Windows XP which will be the last UAC-less operating system. Apple has its own version of UAC, which was inherited from UNIX and was tweaked so it's easy for users. Heck, KDE/GNOME has their kdesu/gnomesu which is basically UAC but less annoying.

I don't like Microsoft, but they did things right this time around and you can't deny that there are both problems and "finally they put this in".

xboxrulz

[levimage 0]

Ha Ha Ha, the cartoon is funny. I went to a few Microsoft training sites when XP/2003 came out. I got some answers to many questions, literature, books, white papers, and free software. What I did notice was the trainers admit there were problems or 'issues' (ms rep), or 'feature set' (ms tech). Anyway a lot of fix up's and work a rounds were from 3rdd party companies. It was amazing what these other ms attendants were using from non ms companies. I liked the part about sharing resources and networking. I think the personal interaction with other users far exceed their ms support. Would I attend another ms training. Probably yes. Just to meet other people like me.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

Well, obviously other attendants of the training seminar is from other corporations ... why would it be from Microsoft ... unless it's employee training or something...xboxrulz

[TheFury 0]

One thing Microsoft did that was right was the fact that Windows does have the tools to have fine-grained security, but unfortunately most users don't understand or will use them at all. Thus, nulling the point of including these tools which are not to be found on UNIX systems.
However, for me, the biggest thing Microsoft did right this time around is the XBOX 360. Hell, they're outselling the PS3 like hotcakes. Unfortunately for them, the Wii is a better offer to most people.

I own both the Wii and XBOX 360, so it doesn't make a difference for me.

xboxrulz

I agree, the Xbox has been a very good product from start to finish and while i do not use any Microsoft products directly i will say that some of their development tools are pretty neat, .net has huge potential and being and open standard as long as MS plays nice the Mono project on Linux could make this an appealing development environment.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

I agree, the Xbox has been a very good product from start to finish and while i do not use any Microsoft products directly i will say that some of their development tools are pretty neat, .net has huge potential and being and open standard as long as MS plays nice the Mono project on Linux could make this an appealing development environment.

Indeed the C# is helping Microsoft's image. However, many developers still prefer Java over C#. Maybe in the future this may change.

I myself prefer Java.

System.out.println("I love Java =D");

xboxrulz

[FirefoxRocks 0]

Microsoft has introduced competition for software and operating systems, however this can also lead to antitrust issues that is famous with Microsoft, especially in Europe. Microsoft also has extensive documentation on support (KnowledgeBase and Technet documents).Also, Microsoft realizes that they need to implement ideas from other software/technologies. This includes the UAC from Linux (which is absolutely amazing!) and things like AJAX in Hotmail and stuff. Although it is fairly different in some areas (open document support, etc), the programs do include more features than free or open-source alternatives.Finally, the most important thing to most users is user-friendliness.With Linux, it is not user-friendly (even Debian isn't when compared to Windows or Mac). Windows and Office are very user friendly and thus appeal to many users.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

I can't really say competition for software and operating systems. They basically own a monopoly with Windows and their Office software, so Microsoft is the anti-thesis to competition. Also, user-friendly-ness is relative. vi in Linux although looks and works archaic, it is quite simple after you learn and get the hang of it. A lot of things in Linux is easier than it is on Windows. Plus, Macs are more "user-friendly" in your sense than Windows will ever be.I think user-friendly-ness has now become ... how much less effort it takes a user to learn the software.xboxrulz

[docduke 0]

MS does tend to give stuff to students, especially in the IT courses. I think it is kind of like some crack dealers though where the first hit is free. They want a teeming mass of computer science grads that have grown up familiar with MS and little else.

This strategy goes back a long way. I was in college at MIT from 1959 to 1963, and during that time IBM "gave" several generations of computers to the college. At the time, very few businesses used computers. IBM's strategy, which worked very well, was to teach the students to use IBM computers, and expect those students to recommend IBM to their employers when they got out of school.

 

At that time, the mainframe computers IBM sold were quite expensive, so giving them (actually loaning them) to the universities seemed like a big financial risk, but it paid off handsomely for IBM. If it hadn't been for the space program, and its funding of microprocessors, IBM might well be the dominant computer company at this time, and we would be using terminals at home connected to mainframes somewhere else.

 

Also, Microsoft realizes that they need to implement ideas from other software/technologies. This includes the UAC from Linux

Interesting how software folks like to use acronyms. I didn't recognize "UAC" so I did a search on it. Indeed, Microsoft is learning to give credit where it is due: Windows UAC compared to Linux Sudo. Now I know, finally, that UAC means User Access (or Account) Control. Actually, the general concept goes back to the 1970s, when remote access via terminals first became common. The thing that makes it more complex now is the very widespread access to the internet, which invites the introduction of malware.

 

If somebody around here can point me at a basic explanation of which UAC systems are really effective at preventing malware infections on any platform, I would like to see it. Thanks!

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

This strategy goes back a long way. I was in college at MIT from 1959 to 1963, and during that time IBM "gave" several generations of computers to the college. At the time, very few businesses used computers. IBM's strategy, which worked very well, was to teach the students to use IBM computers, and expect those students to recommend IBM to their employers when they got out of school.

 

At that time, the mainframe computers IBM sold were quite expensive, so giving them (actually loaning them) to the universities seemed like a big financial risk, but it paid off handsomely for IBM. If it hadn't been for the space program, and its funding of microprocessors, IBM might well be the dominant computer company at this time, and we would be using terminals at home connected to mainframes somewhere else.

Interesting how software folks like to use acronyms. I didn't recognize "UAC" so I did a search on it. Indeed, Microsoft is learning to give credit where it is due: Windows UAC compared to Linux Sudo. Now I know, finally, that UAC means User Access (or Account) Control. Actually, the general concept goes back to the 1970s, when remote access via terminals first became common. The thing that makes it more complex now is the very widespread access to the internet, which invites the introduction of malware.

 

If somebody around here can point me at a basic explanation of which UAC systems are really effective at preventing malware infections on any platform, I would like to see it. Thanks!

Well, the concept of UAC is just to elevate the user to have "administrator" rights to perform things that only administrators could do. Unfortunately for Windows users, unlike UNIX, Windows doesn't really have a real set boundary between "user" folders. Regular users can still write to anywhere on the disc as long as it's not the Program Files or WINDOWS folder. In UNIX, only the root can write to any folder except /home (or $HOME, depending on UNIX setup). Obviously, if the admin allows users to write to certain folders outside of their home directory, that is fine. The idea of UAC is basically like sudo, kdesu or gnomesu, where it allows temporary access to administrator tasks that allows the users to do anything they can as long as the sudo, kdesu or gnomesu is activated for that session.

 

Pre-Windows Vista era, in order to install programs or do any administrative tasks, you had to run yourself as an administrator. This poses a large security risk since the average user doesn't want to be bothered by constantly reminding themselves to right-click and then select "Run As". Heck, most users don't even know that exists, so they just automatically make themselves administrator.

 

This allows malware to easy infiltrate the computer. In order to lower the chances, all accounts are defaulted to become a regular user (like in UNIX) and require all administrator to press Continue to confirm all administrative tasks. Yes, it can get annoying since Microsoft loves to treat you as if you're actually dumb. That's why many users got fed up with UAC. This is supposed to be fixed for the next version of Windows, Windows 7. Windows 7 is suppose to allow you to control how many notifications you will receive (even the dumbest option to allow you to turn it off).

 

I run my Windows Server 2008 installation as a regular user and I don't mind typing the administrator password to install or to perform administrative tasks because I'm so used to that with UNIX. It's a great practice, it just amazes me how long it took Microsoft finally woke up to this minor solution to the bigger problem. UAC saves computers, more Windows XP-users should realize that. At first I criticized it before I started realizing that it's just a more annoying version to what MacOS X, KDE and GNOME had for their respective systems.

 

Also, as usual, Microsoft slanted that UAC vs. sudo comparison. Unlike their comparison, sudo usually REQUIRE users to type in their password and to answer their 100 users question, the easiest way is to assign those 100 users into a group and assign them to be able to access sudo and require the root password in order to commit root access.

 

Here's a sample of my sudoers file on my home server:

 

 

As you can see, instead of assigning people one by one, I can assign the whole pwrusers group, and must require them to enter their passwords to confirm their actions. Anyone in other groups will NOT be able to continue.

 

xboxrulz