5 ms·

Microsoft has destroyed their brand so completely that I don't even consider this a viable product. I don't trust Microsoft.

by dcurtis 18y ago

fallentimes 18y ago
So true. I won't even buy a computer if it comes pre-installed with Vista. Linux and/or Mac please.
dejb 18y ago
When did you actually trust Microsoft with online computing? Before Vista? I don't see a huge relationship between Vista and their online efforts. Sounds like a bit of MS bashing propaganda from somebody who has never liked or trusted them.
- axod 18y ago
  Microsoft has never "gotten" the internet. They still don't. I don't see any reason to suppose they have suddenly "gotten" it here.
  - DenisM 18y ago
    How about discussing the proposition on its merits, rather than pedigree? It's not like there are ten new cloud platform come in every day and we have to make a snap decision. We can, in fact, afford to look at the offer itself.
    - axod 18y ago
      Sorry, but if I want to buy a laptop, I wouldn't buy one from Pepsi. Similarly, if I want something Internet related, I wouldn't get it from Microsoft. I just don't see any evidence they understand it. They have done an absolutely awful job in the last 10+ years.
      - deleted 18y ago
        [deleted]
      - grantc 18y ago
        If I want to buy something development and execution architecture based, I'm happy to buy that from MSFT since they've done exceedingly well there. How many sites out there have been running on google and amzn's dev/exec arch's the past 10 years? A lot less than Microsoft's. As far as them getting the internet or not, who cares. There's more to life than the internet. Java and .NET run the enterprise, not sure who among MSFT, IBM and Sun really "gets the internet" in the sense you're probably working to define.
        TweedHeads 18y ago
        I recognize they've done exceedingly well at marketing. Oh, and extorsioning, strongarming, deceiving, FUDing, bribing, monopolizing, etc.
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    Not entirely true. They've really gotten it where console gaming is concerned, moreso than anyone else. The Xbox has been consistently better than its rivals at that. They're now serving up millions of dollars worth of games per month (allegedly 70% of Xbox owners have used Live Arcade) and are moving into streaming video too. I can now watch MSNBC through it. They've achieved the dream an internet-connected box on millions of people's TVs. Apple tried and failed miserably with their TV product. There clearly are people at the company that get it.
    - dcurtis 18y ago
      The Xbox is not the internet. It is a dedicated internet-powered appliance. And while they may have done a good job there, they have failed in every other internet initiative. Microsoft does not understand the internet and has never made any notable internet service. Silverlight? Live? MSN? Hotmail? All knockoffs. And they have "failed miserably" every time. Why would I trust their new internet cloud system when it directly, extricably integrates into all of these other failed initiatives as a feature?
      - mattmaroon 18y ago
        I don't get what you mean. They've failed at search, clearly, but so has everyone but Google. Hotmail is most definitely not a failure, and was a pretty smart acquisition. Silverlight is too new to call a failure, though it's clearly not going to be taking much market share from Flash any time soon. If by MSN you mean their instant messenger, it's the largest by far. Some huge sites (Myspace, MS's stuff, PlentyofFish) run on their servers and programming languages. Their browser still has the majority of the market share (though arguably not for quality reasons.) I don't understand this "they're failing at the internet" sentiment. It seems to just be normal anti-Microsoft stuff. They're failing at search, not the internet as a whole.
        dcurtis 18y ago
        Everything they do is a knockoff of something else, and it's usually not better (I actually cannot think of a single case where it is better). I am not just randomly anti-Microsoft for religious reasons. They make terrible products that have horrendous user experiences. They do not innovate. In general, I have heard they hire sub-par programmers. All of this is exaggerated in their internet initiatives. Who uses Hotmail anymore? Who used MSN, which they abandoned for Live? Who uses Live? Why would they try to compete against Flash with Silverlight? What gives them the authority or experience to do such a thing? And if you asked me which were the two most horrendous monstrosities of popular websites on the internet, I would say PlentyOfFish and MySpace. They are the two sites which have the least sense of design, ergonomics, usability, and general respect. Why, then, should I trust that they would make good decisions on their backend code and server software?

Microsoft has destroyed their brand so completely that I don't even consider this a viable product. I don't trust Microsoft.

by dcurtis 18y ago

Microsoft has destroyed their brand so completely that I don't even consider this a viable product. I don't trust Microsoft.

fallentimes 18y ago

So true. I won't even buy a computer if it comes pre-installed with Vista. Linux and/or Mac please.

dejb 18y ago

When did you actually trust Microsoft with online computing? Before Vista? I don't see a huge relationship between Vista and their online efforts. Sounds like a bit of MS bashing propaganda from somebody who has never liked or trusted them.

axod 18y ago
Microsoft has never "gotten" the internet. They still don't. I don't see any reason to suppose they have suddenly "gotten" it here.
- DenisM 18y ago
  How about discussing the proposition on its merits, rather than pedigree? It's not like there are ten new cloud platform come in every day and we have to make a snap decision. We can, in fact, afford to look at the offer itself.
  - axod 18y ago
    Sorry, but if I want to buy a laptop, I wouldn't buy one from Pepsi. Similarly, if I want something Internet related, I wouldn't get it from Microsoft. I just don't see any evidence they understand it. They have done an absolutely awful job in the last 10+ years.
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
    - grantc 18y ago
      If I want to buy something development and execution architecture based, I'm happy to buy that from MSFT since they've done exceedingly well there. How many sites out there have been running on google and amzn's dev/exec arch's the past 10 years? A lot less than Microsoft's. As far as them getting the internet or not, who cares. There's more to life than the internet. Java and .NET run the enterprise, not sure who among MSFT, IBM and Sun really "gets the internet" in the sense you're probably working to define.
      - TweedHeads 18y ago
        I recognize they've done exceedingly well at marketing. Oh, and extorsioning, strongarming, deceiving, FUDing, bribing, monopolizing, etc.
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  Not entirely true. They've really gotten it where console gaming is concerned, moreso than anyone else. The Xbox has been consistently better than its rivals at that. They're now serving up millions of dollars worth of games per month (allegedly 70% of Xbox owners have used Live Arcade) and are moving into streaming video too. I can now watch MSNBC through it. They've achieved the dream an internet-connected box on millions of people's TVs. Apple tried and failed miserably with their TV product. There clearly are people at the company that get it.
  - dcurtis 18y ago
    The Xbox is not the internet. It is a dedicated internet-powered appliance. And while they may have done a good job there, they have failed in every other internet initiative. Microsoft does not understand the internet and has never made any notable internet service. Silverlight? Live? MSN? Hotmail? All knockoffs. And they have "failed miserably" every time. Why would I trust their new internet cloud system when it directly, extricably integrates into all of these other failed initiatives as a feature?
    - mattmaroon 18y ago
      I don't get what you mean. They've failed at search, clearly, but so has everyone but Google. Hotmail is most definitely not a failure, and was a pretty smart acquisition. Silverlight is too new to call a failure, though it's clearly not going to be taking much market share from Flash any time soon. If by MSN you mean their instant messenger, it's the largest by far. Some huge sites (Myspace, MS's stuff, PlentyofFish) run on their servers and programming languages. Their browser still has the majority of the market share (though arguably not for quality reasons.) I don't understand this "they're failing at the internet" sentiment. It seems to just be normal anti-Microsoft stuff. They're failing at search, not the internet as a whole.
      - dcurtis 18y ago
        Everything they do is a knockoff of something else, and it's usually not better (I actually cannot think of a single case where it is better). I am not just randomly anti-Microsoft for religious reasons. They make terrible products that have horrendous user experiences. They do not innovate. In general, I have heard they hire sub-par programmers. All of this is exaggerated in their internet initiatives. Who uses Hotmail anymore? Who used MSN, which they abandoned for Live? Who uses Live? Why would they try to compete against Flash with Silverlight? What gives them the authority or experience to do such a thing? And if you asked me which were the two most horrendous monstrosities of popular websites on the internet, I would say PlentyOfFish and MySpace. They are the two sites which have the least sense of design, ergonomics, usability, and general respect. Why, then, should I trust that they would make good decisions on their backend code and server software?