5 ms·

Do these guys run integration tests of any kind? Makes it easy to assume malice in breaking fundamental features.

by grenoire 3y ago

campbel 3y ago
Random stuff breaking or things not working quite right is to be expected with Microsoft products.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  Office 365 Calendar broke for me a few weeks back and is still unusable. It forcibly leaps me weeks ahead whenever I try to scroll to today’s date. I literally cannot view my work calendar on my phone anymore. I often wonder if they’re even capable of knowing there’s an issue.
jiggawatts 3y ago
> integration tests of any kind No! Microsoft famously fired their entire QA team. Also… their technical writing team. And then they outsourced both support and the bulk of their development to India. You get what you pay for, and right now Microsoft is variously paying either zero or very little.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  I'd see Microsoft hiring contractors, but do they outsource product development to external companies ?
  - jiggawatts 3y ago
    Not sure about development, but Azure support is almost entire outsourced.
    - makeitdouble 3y ago
      At this point I think it's par for the course. There must be some support tiers where you'll get actual Microsoft employees deal with your issues (I don't think Apple's devs get a random contractor reading a script when they report server issues), but short of that I would feel lucky to even get a human to look at the question.
    - wkat4242 3y ago
      It's double outsourced even. They outsource to Accenture who then outsources it to small companies. It's really really annoying because these people get penalised for escalating and they don't know much more than what it says in the docs. I read those before contacting them and it's always a hassle to get my case through to real support. They'll stall forever asking for more logs and more tests. I feel like I'm on trial defending that I really have a problem. Not a valued customer. And mind you, this is already meant to be the "premium" support tier.
ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
Microsoft devs have a reputation of being quite sub par.
Rygian 3y ago
Now that you mention malice, here's a smoking gun, from the linked bug report: > (it's not an issue with Firefox's implementation. This can be demonstrated by spoofing the useragent as a Chromium-based browser and attempting the same login flow […]).
- swells34 3y ago
  How is that a smoking gun indicating malice?
  - DoctorOW 3y ago
    Because it is not a bug or mistake in the code but a deliberate loss in functionality based only on the name of the browser.
  - Rygian 3y ago
    Changing behavior based on user agent is necessarily intentional on the part of Microsoft. That check lies somewhere along the line between "having the direct goal of breaking authentication flow (pure malice)" and "is a completely legitimate programming error (pure incompetence)." I am not ready to assume pure incompetence (and here's where I might be wrong).
  - eNV25 3y ago
    It means that the website doesn't work in Firefox intentionally. The website was proframmed to not work with Firefox user agent string.
    - 13of40 3y ago
      Is firefox blacklisted or are chrome and edge whitelisted?
    - swells34 3y ago
      Ah I see, I thought the parent poster meant malice on the part of Mozilla, got confused by bouncing between comment threads. I could see malice, since it is Microsoft, but what's the "why" of it? I don't really see any motivation that M$ would have to block Mozilla, all it's going to do is piss off users. It's not like people are gonna get fed up and switch to Edge, they'll get fed up and switch to Chrome. If anything, M$ has a great incentive to improve Firefox adoption. The market that uses FF is the same market that is never going to choose Edge. FF and Edge both have a much better position if they can damage Chrome's market share.

Do these guys run integration tests of any kind? Makes it easy to assume malice in breaking fundamental features.

campbel 3y ago

Random stuff breaking or things not working quite right is to be expected with Microsoft products.

Waterluvian 3y ago
Office 365 Calendar broke for me a few weeks back and is still unusable. It forcibly leaps me weeks ahead whenever I try to scroll to today’s date. I literally cannot view my work calendar on my phone anymore. I often wonder if they’re even capable of knowing there’s an issue.

jiggawatts 3y ago

> integration tests of any kind No! Microsoft famously fired their entire QA team. Also… their technical writing team. And then they outsourced both support and the bulk of their development to India. You get what you pay for, and right now Microsoft is variously paying either zero or very little.

makeitdouble 3y ago
I'd see Microsoft hiring contractors, but do they outsource product development to external companies ?
- jiggawatts 3y ago
  Not sure about development, but Azure support is almost entire outsourced.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    At this point I think it's par for the course. There must be some support tiers where you'll get actual Microsoft employees deal with your issues (I don't think Apple's devs get a random contractor reading a script when they report server issues), but short of that I would feel lucky to even get a human to look at the question.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    It's double outsourced even. They outsource to Accenture who then outsources it to small companies. It's really really annoying because these people get penalised for escalating and they don't know much more than what it says in the docs. I read those before contacting them and it's always a hassle to get my case through to real support. They'll stall forever asking for more logs and more tests. I feel like I'm on trial defending that I really have a problem. Not a valued customer. And mind you, this is already meant to be the "premium" support tier.

ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago

Microsoft devs have a reputation of being quite sub par.

Rygian 3y ago

Now that you mention malice, here's a smoking gun, from the linked bug report: > (it's not an issue with Firefox's implementation. This can be demonstrated by spoofing the useragent as a Chromium-based browser and attempting the same login flow […]).

swells34 3y ago
How is that a smoking gun indicating malice?
- DoctorOW 3y ago
  Because it is not a bug or mistake in the code but a deliberate loss in functionality based only on the name of the browser.
- Rygian 3y ago
  Changing behavior based on user agent is necessarily intentional on the part of Microsoft. That check lies somewhere along the line between "having the direct goal of breaking authentication flow (pure malice)" and "is a completely legitimate programming error (pure incompetence)." I am not ready to assume pure incompetence (and here's where I might be wrong).
- eNV25 3y ago
  It means that the website doesn't work in Firefox intentionally. The website was proframmed to not work with Firefox user agent string.
  - 13of40 3y ago
    Is firefox blacklisted or are chrome and edge whitelisted?
  - swells34 3y ago
    Ah I see, I thought the parent poster meant malice on the part of Mozilla, got confused by bouncing between comment threads. I could see malice, since it is Microsoft, but what's the "why" of it? I don't really see any motivation that M$ would have to block Mozilla, all it's going to do is piss off users. It's not like people are gonna get fed up and switch to Edge, they'll get fed up and switch to Chrome. If anything, M$ has a great incentive to improve Firefox adoption. The market that uses FF is the same market that is never going to choose Edge. FF and Edge both have a much better position if they can damage Chrome's market share.