3 ms·

> they get stigmatized for that way more than average. If a Rubyist never sticks nose outside their beloved technology stack, noone makes such a big deal out o

> they get stigmatized for that way more than average. If a Rubyist never sticks nose outside their beloved technology stack, noone makes such a big deal out of it. Yes, exactly right. > to vitriolic anti-M$ hater mentality Right on - this isn't what OP was demonstrating, I think, but general reactions to Microsoft technologies are pretty bizarre. Use it or don't, but I don't get all the hate.

V-2 11y ago
To be clear, I certainly wouldn't put OP in hater category, I disagree with some of his statements but his article is balanced and substantive. Unfortunately this is not the standard
digler999 11y ago
The hate comes from the iron-fist mentality MS has and had toward its users, and their lack of reliability and lack of responsibility for their part in delivering an unreliable product. Why don't you "get" that ?
- aggieben 11y ago
  Because I don't agree? What I don't "get" is why people like you assume that your opinion is completely undebateable, or that it's any more than what it is: an opinion.
- untog 11y ago
  their lack of reliability and lack of responsibility for their part in delivering an unreliable product What part of .NET is unreliable?
melling 11y ago
At one point, not so not so very long ago, Microsoft had 96% desktop market share. I believe that has dropped to 89%, which is still a monopoly. The Internet made that less important but there was a time when Internet Explorer was all developers cared about. If you mentioned Mozilla, they just laughed. Fortunately, Google released Chrome and after several years developers fell in love with it. Unfortunately, IE still has half the browser market because it ships default on that 89% desktop monopoly. But we have made great progress. Microsoft has open sourced .Net but it doesn't really work well on other platforms. Performance lags, for example. F#, what I'd love to use, isn't production ready on Mac or Linux. Anyway, Microsoft has always been relevant and dangerous. Now that they are starting to release cool products they could definitely be a problem. Apple self-regulates because their products are expensive. Microsoft on the other hand, was never afraid of taking it all.
- organsnyder 11y ago
  You're severely downplaying the importance of Firefox. It had a 30% market share before Chrome even existed.
  - melling 11y ago
    It was ignored by many developers, especially in the corporate world. Pages did not render well
    - organsnyder 11y ago
      That is true. However, by the time Chrome rolled along, most sites rendered fine in Firefox, and Safari had also been around for quite some time already. Chrome certainly helped to accelerate the pace of standards-compliant site design, but the trend was already underway before it existed.
      - melling 11y ago
        Yes, Apple had 4% market share. Anyway, read what I wrote the first time. I nailed it. The fact that you were so far off on your estimate really makes me think you are misremembering.
  - melling 11y ago
    By the way, I fact checked you and you're incorrect. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-shrinking-firefox-faces-endangered-species-status.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-s... http://kuwaitiful.com/tag/ie-market-share/ http://kuwaitiful.com/tag/ie-market-share/
    - organsnyder 11y ago
      Depends on which metrics you look at. Regardless, 25% vs. 30% doesn't change the substance of the argument.
parasubvert 11y ago
"Use it or don't, but I don't get all the hate." At this point, MS hate is rather pointless, but the closest analogue is today's Apple hate (and to a lesser extent, Oracle/Java hate, and today's small but growing Amazon cloud hate). Microsoft was the king of the hill in the 90's through early 2000's, squashed small companies everywhere when they released competing products, threatening to sue IT shops (by NDA, no less!) that used Linux for questionable patent infringement, and the economics of the software biz led to many fine platforms (OS/2, Mac System 7+) getting second-class citizen status. Today, the equivalent is Apple squashing certain web standards by ignoring them, Amazon squashing competition by building a competing version on AWS, large employers only wanting Java or .NET experience, while Oracle successfully sues Google over Java copyrights, etc. These are all manifestations of the authoritarian tech paradigms and the herd mentality which enables them, both of which many people really dislike. It unfortunately devolves into identity politics quickly ("I can't believe you use that platform" / "I can't believe you program in that language") instead of objectively looking at the good/bad sides of the dominant player. On the other hand, riding the bandwagon side can reap many benefits. These days with mobile and cloud dominance it seems there is enough of a customer base for a few solid ecosystems rather than a single one.

V-2 11y ago

To be clear, I certainly wouldn't put OP in hater category, I disagree with some of his statements but his article is balanced and substantive. Unfortunately this is not the standard

digler999 11y ago

The hate comes from the iron-fist mentality MS has and had toward its users, and their lack of reliability and lack of responsibility for their part in delivering an unreliable product. Why don't you "get" that ?

aggieben 11y ago
Because I don't agree? What I don't "get" is why people like you assume that your opinion is completely undebateable, or that it's any more than what it is: an opinion.
untog 11y ago
their lack of reliability and lack of responsibility for their part in delivering an unreliable product What part of .NET is unreliable?

melling 11y ago

At one point, not so not so very long ago, Microsoft had 96% desktop market share. I believe that has dropped to 89%, which is still a monopoly. The Internet made that less important but there was a time when Internet Explorer was all developers cared about. If you mentioned Mozilla, they just laughed. Fortunately, Google released Chrome and after several years developers fell in love with it. Unfortunately, IE still has half the browser market because it ships default on that 89% desktop monopoly. But we have made great progress. Microsoft has open sourced .Net but it doesn't really work well on other platforms. Performance lags, for example. F#, what I'd love to use, isn't production ready on Mac or Linux. Anyway, Microsoft has always been relevant and dangerous. Now that they are starting to release cool products they could definitely be a problem. Apple self-regulates because their products are expensive. Microsoft on the other hand, was never afraid of taking it all.

organsnyder 11y ago
You're severely downplaying the importance of Firefox. It had a 30% market share before Chrome even existed.
- melling 11y ago
  It was ignored by many developers, especially in the corporate world. Pages did not render well
  - organsnyder 11y ago
    That is true. However, by the time Chrome rolled along, most sites rendered fine in Firefox, and Safari had also been around for quite some time already. Chrome certainly helped to accelerate the pace of standards-compliant site design, but the trend was already underway before it existed.
    - melling 11y ago
      Yes, Apple had 4% market share. Anyway, read what I wrote the first time. I nailed it. The fact that you were so far off on your estimate really makes me think you are misremembering.
- melling 11y ago
  By the way, I fact checked you and you're incorrect. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-shrinking-firefox-faces-endangered-species-status.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-s... http://kuwaitiful.com/tag/ie-market-share/ http://kuwaitiful.com/tag/ie-market-share/
  - organsnyder 11y ago
    Depends on which metrics you look at. Regardless, 25% vs. 30% doesn't change the substance of the argument.

parasubvert 11y ago

"Use it or don't, but I don't get all the hate." At this point, MS hate is rather pointless, but the closest analogue is today's Apple hate (and to a lesser extent, Oracle/Java hate, and today's small but growing Amazon cloud hate). Microsoft was the king of the hill in the 90's through early 2000's, squashed small companies everywhere when they released competing products, threatening to sue IT shops (by NDA, no less!) that used Linux for questionable patent infringement, and the economics of the software biz led to many fine platforms (OS/2, Mac System 7+) getting second-class citizen status. Today, the equivalent is Apple squashing certain web standards by ignoring them, Amazon squashing competition by building a competing version on AWS, large employers only wanting Java or .NET experience, while Oracle successfully sues Google over Java copyrights, etc. These are all manifestations of the authoritarian tech paradigms and the herd mentality which enables them, both of which many people really dislike. It unfortunately devolves into identity politics quickly ("I can't believe you use that platform" / "I can't believe you program in that language") instead of objectively looking at the good/bad sides of the dominant player. On the other hand, riding the bandwagon side can reap many benefits. These days with mobile and cloud dominance it seems there is enough of a customer base for a few solid ecosystems rather than a single one.