• CONTEST ALERT - Experience the power of DDR5 memory with Kingston Click for details

So...WHY DO YOU HATE MICROSOFT !?

Do you hate microsoft ?

  • I love to HATE microsoft.

    Votes: 17 23.3%
  • I appreciate microsoft.

    Votes: 32 43.8%
  • I am neutral, mostly.

    Votes: 24 32.9%

  • Total voters
    73
Status
Not open for further replies.

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
all those wining abt hardware upgrades well ppl did upgrade their machines for dos to windows transition .... ppl hav to upgrade their machines to run softwares games thats y upgrades take place .... this is by far the most ridiculous comment tht softwares are developed which require ppl to upgrade and tht it is downfall for the software u cant be running xp on 486 monochrome monitor with edo ram (it can b done but onlyfor experimental purposes and the world knows doing tht wud b foolish for work purposes)

another part of ur comment tht it is a short sighted company .... well andy knows more abt MS than u do
 
G

gxsaurav

Guest
mav3, right said

OS hardly needs upgrading the hardware, lte me give u an example...Vista is relesing now..but it runs fine on a Pentium 4 /Athlon XP 2 GHz computer with 512 MB RAM, 7 onboard graphics...although u will miss features such as aero UI & better RAM management, but still for people running that old hardware from 2002/2003, atleast vista runs even at Windows Basic uI
 

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
Yeah, what is this crap about upgrading hardware? Obviously, as and when technology progresses, the hardware will have to keep pace with the software and vice-versa.

abhishekkulkarni said:
Mandriva 2006 runs in 128 MB of Ram on a standard onboard Graphics driver , for god's sake ..
Yes, but it does not even look remotely as cool as Vista does and BTW, even XP can run on that configuration. And Mandriva is SLOW on 128MB of RAM. No operating system released after 2000 can run well on 128MB of RAM and that's a fact.
And Microsoft is not forcing anyone to upgrade to Vista. In fact, they released the Vista upgrade advisor much before the launch of the OS so that people who don't have the requisite hardware do not waste money on the operating system only to find that it won't work on their PC. Moreover, MS is going to continue providing support for XP for another five years, at least. So, if you do not want to upgrade your hardware, their is no real need to upgrade the software either.
 

s18000rpm

ಠ_ಠ
i'm with you guys. :)

new HardWare means new Technology + Better Power Management(less consumption)....

& Microsoft hasn't said anything about COMPULSORY major Hardware upgrade.
If you want, then upgrade, its our choice. :)

even my Intel 915g + GMA900 can run Vista, but it'll be worthless to spend on Vista if i run it in this setup, coz i'll miss all the major goodies of Vista.

Vista is just taking the Advantage of the Technology the world has to offer. :D.
 

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
planetcall said:
You know what.... You talk of linux today only because Microsoft has revolutionized the meaning of computer and has made it possible for normal computer illetrates to use computer and be proud of their knowledge.
No, it is not so. Microsoft came in the business to earn money and they did an exceptional job of it, no more and no less. How has Microsoft 'revolutionised the meaning of computer and made it popular for normal computer illiterates to use computer and be proud of their knowledge"? It is said that an industry without competition is a dying one and Micrsoft did nothing more than bringing serious competition into the technology market. Yes, they won the competition and are the most successful conglomerates in the world, but does it make Microsoft a good company worth patronising? I don't think so. They are just doing their business and it is no hidden fact that Microsoft's operating systems aren't the best there is. So, accept it. And BTW, no computer illiterate can use a computer with Windows on it, nor can he use one with any other OS on it. I know many people who are literate and can sit in front of a PC for two days and cannot get anything done. Yes, Windows is a tad easier to operate than Linux is, but that is just due to the widespread popularity it enjoys, not because it is inherently easy to use.

planetcall said:
It doesnt matter whether their softwares are secured or not
Oh, it does. It IS what matters. In fact, whether the company is popular or not plays a very small and insignificant role when it comes to buying an operating system. What matters is things like whether it is secured or not.

planetcall said:
Certainly we all should salute Billy for being the commander of such a revolution.
Well, I patronise Bill Gates. He is a genius, but it does not mean his company shares the same trait.

planetcall said:
but we all will remember how Microsoft became a household name.
Two words: 'Bill Gates'!
 

sarandigit

Broken In
I think these are the two reasons why MS is hated, to b right apperas 2 b hated?
1. It is very user friendly that anyone can use it So, people who don't know much about computers also use them. If they are not able 2 acheive what they intend to do they put the blame on MS, not accepting the fact that it was their ignorance that caused the fault.
2. There is a notion that experts use unix while novice people use MS. To just show case that they are experts people tend 2 say that they hate MS.
 

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
Oh those are the two most ridiculous reasons I have ever seen and they are certainly not true, specially the second one. People do not use UNIX based operating systems because they want to show that they are experts. In fact, a Macintosh is a UNIX based operating system and it is much easier to use than Windows is. And Linux is also not too difficult, though it is more difficult than Windows (specially for people who are accustomed to the Windows way of getting things done). People who don't know how to use it tend to use it because it is the only option, not because it is easy to use. If someone does not know how to use a computer, he is obviously not going to buy a comparatively expensive Macintosh and he is definitely not going to try Linux becuase (1) it is not easily available for a person who is unfamiliar to the internet; (2) the general consensus is that it is VERY difficult to use (which it is not). So that leaves such people with the only option of Windows, which is very widely and freely available and is recommended by almost everyone. In fact, I can name fifty people I know right now who do not know what Linux or Macintosh is and they've been using Windows for years.
So please don't give such unacceptable reasons for people hating Microsoft. People do not like them because they make crap software, which is a truth and is not changing anytime soon.
 

busyanuj

In the zone
woah ! of a total of 45 ppl who voted till now, only 10 are anti-M$ ?

and it was taken for granted that digit forums were full of M$-haters !

equally interesting is to note that 20 ppl appreciate M$ while 15 are neutral.
 

Kiran.dks

Technomancer
abhishekkulkarni said:
Because it's an extremely short-sighted and stubborn company which takes it's so-called customers ( atleast in India , there are very few Microsoft 'customers' ) for granted .

They develop an operating system which requires people to upgrade their Ram and Graphics hardware to Microsoft's specifications !!

A minimum of 512 MB of Ram and a DirectX 9 compatible Graphics adapter ? Mandriva 2006 runs in 128 MB of Ram on a standard onboard Graphics driver , for god's sake ..

Who ever heard of major a H/W upgrade to install an OS ??
I didn't .. :x :x

Huh! Who said you to upgrade???? Stay with your configuration if you don't want to keep pace with latest technology trends. With time customer expectations from OS has become more and more demanding. You could very well stick to NFS I. Why are people opting for NFS Carbon, Crash, etc? Because gaming has taken a BIG leap forward. Gamers demand more realistic games, which implies more stable operating system needs and more compatibility.
 

tarey_g

Hanging, since 2004..
Well I like MS products and have been using them from a long time, currently the only thing that looks like crap out of the box is Zune, wtf were they thinking, no way its gonna affect ipod in any way :p . But i don't hate MS for this reason, coz i nither have ipod/zune and not going to get one soon.

BUT the reason I hate MS is that they delay the PC release of Halo games too much, grrrrrr . curse u . grrrr
 

subratabera

Just another linux lover.
OK. Let's assume two situations...

Suppose...
1) Linux does not exist.
2) MS softwares must be purchased to be used (can't be cracked).

Then what do you think the majority of people will do???

1) Leave the computer world!!!
2) Buy the software they can't afford by selling their assets!!!
3) (Tell me if you have any other option...)
(Now think what Linux can offer in such situations)

MS doesn't try to understand this situation in countries like India where majority of people are so poor that they can't afford buying their software. You already know when something becomes so popular, the price of that thing comes down to affordable range for common people (we can see this in the case of hardwares, services like telephony and various others) but that's not the case with MS products. Operating System is an unavoidable part of any computer system. So don't you think that MS should reduce the price of their OS to affordable range, so that everyone can use it? This can benefit common man as well as MS also. That, I think is the real cause for hatred.

Also don't forget to answer my questions...
 

planetcall

Indian by heart
There are many who like to criticize for the sake of it. Microsoft has been accepted to be more user friendly than mac or linux or any other OS and that is not me saying it. Yes, recently there have been many improvements in other Operating Systems which has made them more acceptable to the computer noobs and professionals equally. No matter what the popularity of windows is the ultimate proof to falsify any comment. Security does matter to you and me but there is a big number of noobs which outnumbers others, who dont know much about security and keep getting infected. They dont think of switching to linux because they are addicted to Microsoft and its availability of softwares. Indeed the architecture of Microsoft is inferior to Linux but it has to be accepted that it is numero uno because people have selected to use it.....be it pirated or legal. Linux is free yet they choose for windows for its wide popularity only. Even today a noob wont find help easily for linux but the same on windows is easily available. There are reasons to hate MS but certainly I am speaking of Windows. It indeed has revolutionized computing with its ultra popular Operating System. Ask those million users if they want to switch.
smiley-channel.de_technik014.gif
 

abhishekkulkarni

Journeyman
mAV3 said:
all those wining abt hardware upgrades well ppl did upgrade their machines for dos to windows transition .... ppl hav to upgrade their machines to run softwares games thats y upgrades take place .... this is by far the most ridiculous comment tht softwares are developed which require ppl to upgrade and tht it is downfall for the software u cant be running xp on 486 monochrome monitor with edo ram (it can b done but onlyfor experimental purposes and the world knows doing tht wud b foolish for work purposes)

Dos to Windows ??
Do you even understand what you're saying ? Dos was a command line based OS . Windows is a GUI !
There has to be a hardware upgrade to use a GUI !!
Your example is way out of context with the point I attempted to raise .

The same goes for your example of a game and the obvious hardware upgrade required !
I'll buy all that hardware for playing a particular game ONLY if I am a gamer .
I'll buy an OS because I want to USE the computer , not because I want to indulge in something extraordinary !!

I have 256 Mb of 333 Mhz Ram . The only thing I lack in terms of Vista's out-of-the world requirements is a DirectX 9 based graphics adapter/card and around 512 Mb more Ram ( to run Vista satisfactorily ) . Any current OS , be it Solaris 10 or Windows XP , or SimplyMepis 6 ; runs fine on my config .
Is there any special reason I'll buy a Graphics card and Ram for Vista ( and on top of it purchase the OS ? ) ?
None . I'll stick to my Windows XP/FC which suits me just fine .

I don't need to use Vista ; it's Microsoft which needs customers who'll buy the OS and use it . Unless they've developed Vista as a charitable endeavour , which I think of as highly un-likely . :)


mAV3 said:
another part of ur comment tht it is a short sighted company ....

Selling your OS is business . And you should make a product which should be universally usable , with minimum possible pain for the user in the transition from an older version of the product to the newer version ( in this case Windows XP to Vista ) .

In Vista , I think Microsoft has lost it's USP - an OS for the world .

I don't think it possible that in India ( where only 10% of the total population is barely computer literate ) , people will spend thousands on buying hardware to use a OS .. :) Do you ?


mAV3 said:
well andy knows more abt MS than u do

One doesn't rate people's opinions based on other's knowledge !
It's a certain factor called common sense , which has lead me to think what I do .
And , for the record , I don't hate Microsoft . I love Windows XP .
It's a certain OS called Windows Vista that evokes the hate and subsequently , the dislike for Microsoft as a company .. :)


kiran.rkk said:
Huh! Who said you to upgrade???? Stay with your configuration if you don't want to keep pace with latest technology trends.
We aren't talking about my hardware upgrade fetishes ( if any exist ! ) , here .
We're talking about the reasons for which we dislike/like Microsoft .
 

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
planetcall said:
Microsoft has been accepted to be more user friendly than mac or linux or any other OS and that is not me saying it.
OK mate, you show me TWO knowledgeable people who have used both Mac and Windows and did not find Mac easier and more intutive to use than Windows. I am not asking for many people (or even a few), I am just asking for two people. I would have asked for one, but it is easy to find one nutter somewhere.
It is a universally accepted truth that the Mac OS is easier to use than Windows (be it 98, XP or Vista) and given that you have not used a Macintosh, you can't honestly say that Windows is the easier one. Windows is easy to use, no doubt, but a Macintosh can give it a run for its money anyday. I can give you a few examples right here:
1) You install applications by dragging them into any folder on your hard drive on a Macintosh. You can even move them around after installing them and you can even move them around or rename them while they are in use. Uninstalling is as simple as deleting the application. Just try doing that in Windows. And BTW, one application means one file, just one. Not a whole folder full of DLLs and NFOs and what not.
2) Shortcuts (or 'aliases', as they are known on a Mac) are dynamic and intelligent. You make a shortcut to any file, folder, application, whatever and then move the original file to some other folder on Windows. Your shortcut will break, while it won't on a Macintosh. You click on the alias and it will still take you to whatever you had linked it to.
3) Can you see the desktop on Windows without clicking anything or pressing any key? No, you can't. Well, you can on a Macintosh. Just drag your mouse to a pre-assigned corner of the screen and all the windows are cleared away to show you the desktop - no clicks, no key presses. In windows, if you have ten windows open and you click on 'Show Desktop' and double-click on any icon on the desktop or perform any action in general and then click on 'Show Desktop' again, it won't restore your Windows. You have to manually restore all ten of them. On a Mac, you hit the corner again and all the windows slide gracefully back onto the screen in the background even after you have lauched ten applications and fifteen folders since invoking the 'Show Desktop' option.

... I could go on for at least fifty points but this post is already very off-topic. But I hope you get the general idea. Windows is not even close to a Macintosh in terms of user-friendliness. :)
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
OS is not supposed to make users upgrade their systems ... man this is by far the dumbest statement i heard in my 21 years of existence and u hav just set the threshold .....

a little advice though opinions are not based on knowledge or facts wen debating follow rule no.1 make sure of ur facts dont giv opinions they hamper ur stand on the issue

common sense has led u think tht MS who is headed by the world's richest person is a short sightd company ..... i hv heard tht for sustaining a business u cant be short sighted and MS has been numero uno in terms of wealth for soooooo long how can it be short sighted theres something wrong i think in most our senses

bhai mere dx 10 cards aa rahe hain aur tu idhar dx 9 cards ke baare mein ro raha hai .... OS's need to set benchmarks for other apps that are gonna be used on it .... y go for xp also

to run a game u will upgrade ur hardware but for an OS u wont y the hell did u buy the config u hv .... dos runs on 486 perfectly well windows 98 is a beauty on p2 ....
 
Last edited:

Kiran.dks

Technomancer
We aren't talking about my hardware upgrade fetishes ( if any exist ! ) , here . We're talking about the reasons for which we dislike/like Microsoft .

Things get more tougher when one don't remember what they said earlier and due to which we should show off our 1337 skills.

Anyways...Here it goes....Copy of what u said...

They develop an operating system which requires people to upgrade their Ram and Graphics hardware to Microsoft's specifications !!

A minimum of 512 MB of Ram and a DirectX 9 compatible Graphics adapter ? Mandriva 2006 runs in 128 MB of Ram on a standard onboard Graphics driver , for god's sake ..

My reply...

Huh! Who said you to upgrade???? Stay with your configuration if you don't want to keep pace with latest technology trends. With time customer expectations from OS has become more and more demanding. You could very well stick to NFS I. Why are people opting for NFS Carbon, Crash, etc? Because gaming has taken a BIG leap forward. Gamers demand more realistic games, which implies more stable operating system needs and more compatibility.

What made you to think that my reply was not related to your above earlier post? It is pretty clear cut that OS should ask for such compatibility upgrades because of people's demand for high-end games.
HIGH END GAMES===>HIGH END OS That's why you see upgrades to Direct X.
If you are pointing towards Vista compatibility issues, let me tell you...
Vista is made more Secure, more stable and includes Aero interface. Vista can run on a GMA950 Graphics Card (Basic Graphics Card), 512MB RAM which has become almost common these days and around 2.6GHz CPU. Where is the problem here? Hardware prices are dropping rapidly and one could get a Vista compatible system at normal rates. If you can recall, the same thing happened at the time of release of Windows XP. But today you will see it in almost all Windows based OS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom