Microsoft Tomfoolery
Andrew Cory
I really am a Microsoft supporter. I think they are, by and large, a provider of quality software-- software which is usually worth paying for. I honestly believe that WinXP is a better operating system than Mac OSX.3 (haven’t tried Tiger yet, want to!). Indeed, before I left for vacation, I got into a bit of an argument with Mr. Weidner, who holds a different opinion*. I should mention that arguments with Mr. Weidner tend to be rather civilized affairs, as he is one of the classiest men I know...
All of which is my way of prefacing this post: please don’t take it as random M$ bashing; I don’t do that sort of thing...
Take a look at This link. Apparently MS has decided to hurt users of Firefox by annoying them. See, there’s a bit of code running on MSN sites which stop Gecko-based browsers (Mozilla, Firefox, a couple others) from using the right-click in any meaningful way. Fortunately, there is a workaround. Installing the Firefox plugin Adblock will keep the bad code on MSN from doing it’s job. It will also stop ads from showing up on most sites, something that I have problems with (ads pay for bandwidth, after all). However, if Microsoft wants to be a bunch of dicks on this issue, it’s nice to know they’ll be hurting themselves...
UPDATE: Microsoft is claiming a Firefox bug is to blame. If that’s true, I hope to see it fixed in either the upcoming FF 1.05 update (within days), or the upcoming FF1.1 update (within weeks)...
*I’ve been planning for months now to make that argument here, complete with pictures. But haven’t had the time...
Microsoft does, indeed, have a decent product in its OS, one that may be technologically superior to Linux &Mac &Unix. But for me, it's an issue of reliability. It's not really MS's fault, but I like that I never have to worry about viruses or pay for updates on a Linux machine.
Also, I use openoffice.org as my word processor. Unlike MS Word, it allows me to generate .pdf files for free.
I've read the same thing, though, that the bug is from Firefox, not MS.
f
For example, your "Auction Ads by Jittery" are not blocked. I've never been tempted to buy anything there, but perhaps someday. (I also don't click on ads if I have no intention of buying anything, Jihad-supporting sites excepted. Click-click-click.)
As for your main point, it could well be either way. Fifteen years ago, Microsoft put in some "AARD" code to prevent Windows (beta) from running on DR-DOS. OTOP, they put in many, many patches specifically to support programs like Lotus and WordPerfect that used undocumented features or just plain did things wrongly.
I can tell you that everyone breaks the rules occasionally. We are making a product to simulate certain weapons systems so the airplane companies can shake down their software before the actual product is available. I designed it to the ICD, which has the signatures of the weapon manufacturer, airframe manufacturer, and the DoD. In a meeting, one of the airframe reps said "Oh, yeah, we don't do it that way. We use these other bits in a way completely different from how they are specified instead." No one (except Me) blinked an eye.
So if a multimillion dollar airplane, that can launch weapons and kill people, can violate specs and people find it OK, why not some web page or browser?
If Microsoft ever dumps the registry (which was a disastrously bad idea from day one) and implements a Unix-style security model, they'll be lightyears ahead of where they are. But their UI, while much better, is still more complicated than it needs to be.