A number of people on this site tend to refer to Microsoft as just: MICROS~1, and while it's pretty petty, and often commented on by the pro-Microsoft crowd, It seems to me that the whole MICROS~1 compatibility-naming-scheme hack is a pretty good metaphor for much that is technically wrong with MS products today, and historically. For example: My main issue with Vista x64 is that every file operation is examined and potentially redirected at least twice. If a file is to be written to "%Program Files%/OldApp/test.txt". then there will be a redirection to "Program Files (x86)" and also a redirection to %PROFILEPATH%/AppData. When installing Visual Studio 2005, this behaviour changed half-way through the install resulting in files and registry entries irrevocably (the installer broke at this point) scattered across the system.
The MICROS~1 label is just a reminder of why this sort of over engineering is such a bad thing. [/rant]
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-06-29
Member since:2005-06-29
. 
Member since:2006-03-12
I find it quite ironic that you defend a company over something like that, and yet don't censor offensive words like zealot, fanatic etc.
I can't think why 
Seriously though I don't think it matters one way or the other, its harmless, pathetic at best. Now the fact that this is censored well that makes you scum.
:). I'd rather you stick to your Microc*nts defense articles. Like the Vista f--kwit that you are.
If I'm being too subtle. I can go into more detail if you want.
:)
Member since:2006-03-12
Member since:2005-07-24
Member since:2006-02-05
Member since:2007-02-22
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-24
I quite agree. If people want to use "creative" terms to refer to companies they dislike, I don't really see that it is proper for OSNews to inline-edit such. What purpose does it serve, other than to remove information which would otherwise provide a useful gauge to help assess the credibility of the posts in question? Short of actual, malicious, damaging, slander, I am strongly against modifying posts. Profanity *may* be a special case, though I personally would be in favor of publishing posts containing it, as is. (Most of the children who do visit this site are, unfortunately, over 21.)
I make it a point *not* to use these kinds of childish terms because I don't want to be dismissed as a kook. (If I am to be dismissed as a kook, let it be for better reasons!)
But people who *do* prefer to use these "creative" terms should be free to make fools of themselves. They should be free to damage their own credibility.
Member since:2007-10-18
I agree with you with people using M.$ do a lot of damage to their credibility, but MICROS~1 targets a design problem, rather than (economical) politics associated with the former, which ends up being a form of blunt constructive criticism. Microsoft could solve a lot of issues by simply cutting out some of the comically unnecessary backwards compatibility out of the OS; not to mention fewer testing requirements which could leave more time for reviewing for security holes and bugfixes (that or just quicker releases). By this point, if you need to use a 10+ year old application, use an OS from that era. Don't burden today's code with those requirements.
Member since:2005-07-06
Ever played Jenga ? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenga )
I think MS' tower would tumble pretty fast if they started messing around in the base. It's pretty wobbly with Vista as it is.
Member since:2007-10-18
