Wednesday, September 14, 2005

windows Mista, they really dont get it, other than your $$$

True to form, MSFT takes a simple idea, and BLOWS it again. All the windows users of the world unite when saying how common it is in businesses, noting the interoperability. Thats all "well and good" except that the great corporate OS is the absolute BIGGEST RISK, to corporate and private users Worldwide, its a piece of Junk for web use. NO, MSFT missed the chance to do what they should have done from the start.

Bill Gates, unable to grasp the concept of "the road ahead" early in the game, got caught with his pants down by Netscape. So rather than give his customers something new, and REALLY improved, he just bastardized windows by mashing in IE. He did not care about his users, the corporations, or their data.....he wanted to cut off Netscape's air supply...period. In so doing,, IE opened ALL the great business software interoperability "hooks" and left us NONE of the security it sorely needed.

Customers be damned, full speed ahead....and the world has been paying for it ever since. Oh sure, you got a web browser in Windows, but why couldnt it be ON windows, not in it? Well because "smart Bill" hahaha couldnt see the web coming, and he couldnt see the risks of opening the OS to the web. Now you get to spend the next 10+ years, cleaning up after him, while he spends it counting "YOUR" money. He is worth $50 billion, that is about what the virus, spyware, and patch labor cost businesses last year.

So to make my point: they had a chance now to build a truly new, and secure OS, maybe they call it Vista; make it small, tight, useful, and tossing out the lame amalgamation of consumer garbage they keep bundling in.

Could they do this, think outside the box, give us what we need....a small, fast OS that "works" rather than a bloated code morass that keeps clogging the internet and emptying wallets. Nope, they just keep piling it on, and we know what they're piling up dont we? crap.

It wouldve been best to build a Windows "slim" so it had no IE, no MediaPlayer, no IM, no Passport, just the business essentials. Then fragment and cater to the market's tastes, offering Add-on packs to give users the functionality they want to merge onto windows.

They couldnt do that for 2 reasons:

1. they dont think like that, and would never admit their mistake of "bundling" the browser into the OS.

2. The merging of the business and consumer code base of Windows 2000, or XP, was their goal to reduce costs and disparate OS pieces, making it better for them, but worse for the users.

You see consumer and corporations have totally different needs, and security concerns. A Company cannot afford to allow their information to escape, whereas an unknowing consumer is less likely at risk, other things being equal. Instead, we still have IE, mashed into the OS, and now we have 7 versions of Vista, none of which is really the secure OS, that does NOT have the web framework open for hacking underneath.

It would serve the market and MSFT much better had they really innovated...simplified, improved the OS by adding stability. Putting more "cards" on top of the already shaky cards that are up, is no way to build a new OS. But my breath is wasted on the dim witted, unknowing mass of users who will "flock" or whatever lemmings do, when they run out to buy the next windows, only to find it is just as much a tossed salad as it ever was, and it needs a few more "bolt-on" security components made by other manufacturers to try to keep the pests out.

Nothing like building it for the long haul.

If MSFT had made bridges, airplanes, buildings, cars, or some sort of real, tangible product, many users would have long ago realized they bought a cheapo imitation, after seeing it fall apart on the web.

But since many cant begin to understand proper software coding, and security practices, you keep buying the Winblows OS that works like a Ford Pinto "fireball", or the Firestone "maypop", when what we really needed was the J&J Tylenol "tainted" product pull, and rethinking their strategy.

If you dont understand, I cant explain it to you any better....the OS was not built for the user, it was built for MSFT to make more $$ at your expense.....get used to paying for the true definition of "slack" ware... should be called MSFT Mista. They Missed-a chance to do the right thing and make it secure.


Post a Comment

<< Home