Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Web Development India — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 02:21:37 -0000

I think Microsoft technologies are costly in compression to other technologies that's why Web 2.0 entrepreneurs like Linux supported technologies or may be open source is not available in Microsoft product.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

JjYw3DyE5l — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:11:02 -0000

Hi! Very nice site! Thanks you very much! XMY8c0DK4c

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Steve Koch — Fri, 24 Nov 2006 03:18:21 -0000

2 things for me: 1. Java antipathy. 2. Horrible threading compared to Linux.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Rodrigo Fuentealba — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:57:02 -0000

Yes, you missed that by default, Rails has support for more than one database, like PostgreSQL which is a good (if not perfect) choice when you develop applications for medium-to-big enterprises (in my experience, our enterprise manage about 1~2 Tb of data).

In fact, .NET allows to do it so, the framework isn't expensive (it's free) but how does it cost to get a good component like CoreLab PostgreSQL?

I don't find MySQL a good choice, but it's a looong story.

Another stuff is that some features like partial rendering and ajax work with Rails is easier than with Microsoft Atlas (which is a community preview at this point)... What else?

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Jeff Dickey — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:56:42 -0000

I can't believe nobody hit this one....

1a. Auditability.

I've done a lot of work with financial and other organisations that are required to be able to prove that they know where all data coming in to a system comes from, exactly what pieces of the system can read and/or modify that data, and how it gets shipped out of the system (to storage or to other systems). For each of THOSE pieces, repeat the process, until you have a fully-defined (and -documented and at least in theory -understood) system, where everything that matters is known and pieces that aren't relevant to the system in question simply don't exist.

Now, try that exercise in an all-Microsoft environment. Prove that there are no hidden pieces that can trash your data, or drop the network connection because of a driver failure, or which write data in a proprietary format that you can't guarantee you'll be able to open in 29 years 11 months' time, just before your data escapes over the sunset horizon.

Now try that same exercise with open-source systems. From the operating system to the Web server to the database system to all the other bells, whistles and blinkenlights, I can make sure that everything I need is in the system, and nothing I don't need is. DVD player on a database server? Who needs it? What I DO need is to be able (or have the consultants my auditors retain able) to prove with legal and fiduciary certainty that the system as deployed introduces no possible errors into the data stream. I can preserve the entire definition of that system so that, in June 2036 or whenever, those auditors can build a real or (certified) virtual system that exactly reproduces what I'm doing today, run the same audits and tests, and prove once again that the system I and others long since retired ran against the data (then apparently in dispute) and all is, again, correct.

I've been developing using Microsoft tools for nearly thirty years. I've got half a dozen computers stuck in storage back in the States dating from the Carter Administration. I've developed in assembler and FORTRAN and C++ and VB and Lisp and Python and PHP and 20 or so other languages on 30 or so different platforms, and there is no way I would recommend a Microsoft system in a regulated or fiduciary environment. I've seen too many examples of hidden defects in a system, or undocumented/unknowable interactions between systems, FUBAHORing systems with Heisenbugs.

1b. Clean design.

If you think about it, this is a handmaiden of 1a (and of the 'scalability' comments earlier). I should be able to take any component of the system I build, yank it and replace it with another component that satisfies the same interfaces and functionality, with no changes to the data or control flow of the system. I can't do that in a Microsoft environment; too many of the "pieces" are tied together in mysterious and undocumented and unnecessary (from the standpoint of stated purpose) ways. And unless I can do that, I'm locked in; I no longer have control of my business or its processes; my vendor does. I have no desire - and my clients have no desire - to be the dog that's wagged by the tail that's tossed about by the flea at the tip.

Other than that, Robert, I thiink you've hit the proverbial nail a good whack. Apologies if I've beaten it out the other side of the box, but closed boxes aren't a good place to be in at all.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Robert Scoble — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:27:45 -0000

Paul: I use the default font YOU set in your browser. Just set it to something else that you like better.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Paul — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:21:46 -0000

This may seem petty, but you have got to update the fonts on your site. Times New Roman reminds me of the first mid-nineties sites (since TNR is the default font) and is not the most readable (or good looking) font. Try Georgia, Garamond, Verdana...

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Kanhai — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 07:00:33 -0000

Hi,
This site is very nice. Add your link here to get good results for SEO.
Link exchange, search engine ranking
Best Regards,
Kanhai Patel

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

skin — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:05:30 -0000

sorry, bade typo. that should read NOW considering... not NOT considering.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

skin — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:04:01 -0000

a very interesting post with many interesting replies. to me, it all comes down to hosting. it's not that i cannot afford the web and db server here in my home, it's that i can NEVER find a reliable host that will host MS for a reasonable price. i use ASP, ASP.NET and SQL Server daily for some of the largest automotive companies in the world but it's all hosted on their own servers.

i simply cannot do much freelance work for small to medium companies, because no host seems to offer RELIABLE SQL Server at a reasonable rate. Typically it's $100s per month, and what start-up can afford it.

having not touched PHP/mySQL for 5+ years I'm not considering going back to it just for work outside my 9-5. that kind of sucks with me though, i can knock up a decent, reliable database & website in a few hours on MS but where to host it!

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Stephen Cucura — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 06:25:28 -0000

Help needed....I am trying to find web sites (both electronic and paper/ people/ organizations if necessary)that advocates the use of United States Standards and Methodologies vice the UK's ITIL/ Microsoft MOF methodology. For example IEEE, SEI-CMM/I, NIST STandards, Military and DOD Standards, Etc. Etc....

For over 35 years, I have been using U. S. Standards and Methodologies to do Configuration Management, which "includes" Release Management and Change Management, and it has worked just fine for all of that time. An example of this is the U.S. Navy's Ships and planes weapons systems, the U.S.Air Forces planes, and the U.S. Army's Tatical Systems.

Microsoft MOF (Microsoft Operating Framework) through their PR advocates using their MOF product/methodology, which is riding piggyback off of the UK's ITIL methodology.

Most of the contractors in the Washington D.C. area are now pushing the use of MOF to their U.S. Government clients. It is sad to say that our Governement clients are being fooled by Microsoft and MOF.MOF does not even come near to the Standards and Methodologies that are home grown here in the U. S.

If anyone has any information on sites/ programs or personnel that are trying to fight this intrusion by Microsofts MOF please email me.

Thank You

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Ministeyr — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 08:27:50 -0000

Hello,
About interoperability, I think it is a shame that you actually have to BUY Microsoft products to read files made with them.
For example, many people publish .doc files, thinking that everyone can read them, but that is simply not true. If I want to read any of these files (for example, a file that a client gave me), I would have to buy Word, or Office or whatever, while I actually don't NEED it for anything else that reading that file. There are some "Save to HTML" commands and such, but this not only give incomplete documents, you also need to have the program to read the original file and convert it. There are of course open-source alternatives, but these will not give the document exactly as it was, and are not really "Microsoft solutions", are they?
Maybe MS could publish some free-of-cost "demo versions", that would only allow reading of these files, and saving them to other non-MS formats?

Another example: web developpers need to create sites that work with every browser. What about the standard support in IE? (although it seems you are slowly improving with IE7, but still, there is a long way to go).
Also, web developpers need to test their sites with many browsers, including but not limited to: IE5, IE5.5, IE6, IE7, Firefox (many versions), Opera (many versions as well), etc.
Still, any IE installation overrides older ones. You cannot use different versions of IE on the same computer without some complex manipulations, wich are not really safe (because not supported by Microsoft).
While it would be so easy for MS to allow standalone IEs to work together.
BTW, if a web developper is to test his sites for IE7, he will have to buy Windows XP, even if he doesn't need it for anything else. That is more like "forcing people to buy your products" instead of "letting people buy your products if they need them, because these are very good products". Definitely not a "good business model".

On a sidenote, it is still nice to see that Microsoft's employees feel free to tell things like "why some people don't trust Microsoft for this or that", without fear of being fired. It proves that Microsoft respect their employees, and somehow cares about their rights to express their own opinions. MS can also create very good software, it's just a matter of how you try to force your customers to buy them or not.

Good luck.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Jack — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 00:37:36 -0000

To me it's simple. Linux and MySQL - FREE.
Why pay anyone anything if you don't have to?

And if I did want to use windows server and ASP.net or SQL Server, I'd just run unlicensed software. I'm not giving the damn billionaires any of my money!

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Zach — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:23:21 -0000

To the comment at 137 (probably right above this)

So, what you are saying is, it would be dumb for some kids to drop out of college before they are even halfway through, and start their own business?

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

HM — Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:39:27 -0000

MS SQL Server can take a pounding like no other database management system. MySQL is perfect for smaller sites. Business' that start-up with no money shouldn't even start-up. If you've never secured the cash and capital upfront, then you have absolutely no business doing business. That sounds mean, but I speak the truth.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Rupak Ganguly — Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:59:32 -0000

Well, I am an ardent .NET fan and have been developing usng .NET since it's advent. Only problem is that I use all the tools a.k.a VS and MSDN Universal at my work (my company has the licenses and the money to buy it).
Sad to say that I cannot afford these softwares and I am slowly turning away towards opensource tools (MySQL, PHP, Apache etc.) and software - although they are much cumbersome to use.
I know one day I will leave my current job and with it I will lose my abilities to use the expensive MS tools. (:
VS 2005, SQL 2005, VSTS and MSDN Universal are some of the coolest tools to develop .NET apps today. MS should really open up SKUs like the Express Editions for cheap (I know they are free for a year...) although they are devoid of many important features. Something is better than nothing...
MS should really think about the single developer and the one man development shops that can't afford these excellent tools. Proof is on the internet - except for MSDN bloggers (MS employees), how many bloggers do you find talking about MS tools - very very few. The average guy (not working for a big corporation) cannot afford MS tools. But, for opensource tools - a very big community is out there interacting and sharing.
Sorry about the rant, but I love .NET and the nice MS tools - wish I had them for personal use...

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Flownder — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:07:13 -0000

1. Do you remember how MS has grown? Loose license of DOS (or ignorance of license). If MS tood a really strong action on DOS, they might not be successful.
2. Fortunately, Bill wants to make program easier to use for end-users. So, even though MS Word was a really bad program, they succeeded in taking market.
3. Unfortunately, after getting majority people as its customers, it began to start strict licence policy.

--> I've loved MS more than 10 years now. It's been pretty friendly to end-user. Easy to use OSs and easy to use programs even though they're not good.

These are views of a program user not a programmer. Then what does the programmer select as their platform? MS. I know that Windows is not good. I know that there are a lot better programs out there. I know that Mac is prettier. But I choose MS. Why? Because I'm accustomed to the environment.

This is not a problem of which is good or which is bad. It is a problem of habits, momentum, or peer-pressure (whatever) thing.

I don't care about the server side because I'm an end-user. So, for developers, it might not matter which OS they should use. But if developers do not have good experience of MS, how can they make better programs than those in MS?

On the other hand: I recently started to learn Ruby, and found that it is interesting and I'll continue to study that as a hobby. I'm also thinking about learning Rails too. But I'm not thinking about learning MS develping tools like VS. It comes to me that it just looks too difficult to learn. I don't want to learn how to use tools in VS. It is not necessary. You know what? HTML grammer was enough for me to make my simple homepage. Now I need only a small amount of DB. I heard about the starter kit of VS Express but it requires 1GB on my poor small computer, on the other hand, RoR requires only 30MB and tiny text editors. As a hobbiest, RoR is enough and I found that I don't have to study really headaching concepts of .NET and ASP. Ruby is pretty fun to use. :)

So, in my opinion, I'll use Windows as my desktop, and I'll use Ruby and RoR as my hobby language to make a small desktop applications (using Ruby/Tk library), a small homepage for my own blog. I'm really happy to know that I don't have to study gigantic stuffs of MS development environment to make simple things.

For professional developers??? I don't know and I don't care. They might have some issues on other bigger problems. :) But if it is not a joy to programming in MS, but there is a joy in other, why do you stay in a MS develping environment? If it is a joy in MS, I don't oppose to you at all. I'm just happy that I fianlly found an environment that I've wanted to find, which is an easy environment.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Tom — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 04:41:43 -0000

Re. 31, vanderwal.

Where does this myth that Ruby doesn't scale come from? It's absurd! It's how you code not what you code in. It how you organise your database not what db or how you access it that make the difference to whether you can scale or not.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

icon — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 17:15:06 -0000

Per-CPU licensing.

I'm a developer, not a consumer. I want a tool I can use to engineer a solution for my clients -- I don't want to partner with MS or enroll in programs or worry about licensing etc etc. I don't care about MS and they aren't my business -- my client is.

Instead, I have the tools I need which are replicable and available on-demand on any number of platforms. Any tricky problems mostly cost in man-power -- and if I am going to pay out the nose for something, I'd rather give it to consultants than licensing + support etc.

As for MS on the web -- forget about it. Developing sites for IE already forces me to develop invalid pages.

MS runs on too many assumptions.

I'm an engineer not unlike any other out there -- the only difference is that other engineers don't license the tools they need to support the solutions they build. Well.. OSS engineers already know this, and that's what I like about OSS.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

scrambled — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 08:59:04 -0000

p.p.s oops going into rant mode obviously made me keyboard happy
“And, IE was developed to match the standards that were popular in the late 1990s.” - Don’t you read Ms’ own... this was obv meant to read
"Or, you can wait for IE 7 to come here. That’ll follow the standards." - Don’t you read Ms’ own... this was obv meant to read
Another point though you do realise DHTML is dead right? it's not the way forward or even way now? to emphasise look up "unobtrusive Javascript" and you'll see why. I'm worried that after one little comment you flame so easily after saying "Thanks Ross, though, for bringing your distrust out into the open. That’s helpful cause at least we can work on it now"
I understand your probably frustated since a lot of the feedback is negative; but comments like that just don't help and make it look like you're not serious about this "See, I don’t want uninformed customers. That doesn’t help me. It doesn’t help Microsoft. It doesn’t help the customers."

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

scrambled — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 07:41:26 -0000

p.s. "Now that about 9/10ths of all computer users" - Computer users or "Windows users" they are NOT the same thing are unix, Linux or Apple systems not computers? Also have you seen the stats for Germany (25% Firefox use)? or other countries? so is that 9/10 Worldwide?
Please, I started reading the article with an element of hope thinking may'be they will sort themselves out so I don't have to reskill but no obviously not, wheres that Linux distro.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

scrambled — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 07:35:45 -0000

"WHo developed CSS" - well it wasn't Microsoft you work with the W3C but so do a lot of other people, if you made css then why don't you comply with css 1, 2 or 3
"And, IE was developed to match the standards that were popular in the late 1990s." - Isn't that the problem even if it did match the standards of its time it hasn't moved forward.
"And, IE was developed to match the standards that were popular in the late 1990s." - Don't you read Ms' own blogs it isn't going to completely fix everything stds related so it isn't going to follow the standards unless by that you mean be be behind them.
I'm a Windows-centric Developer I use it for my Desktop, I use asp and asp.net but comments like that are exactly why I and no-one else really trust Microsoft. It is the World Wide Web not the Microsoft narrow web.
"IE, maybe you should develop for it first and be bothered that the other browsers force you to do more work" - the fact is no-one is going to or wants to do that the world's moving forward, designing for a broken system then fixing it for a correct one makes no sense, and if it did what would you do if IE7 did make the site you designed for IE 4,5 and 6 break?

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

scobleizer — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 08:59:40 -0000

Fish mouth: to say we "never" follow standards is pure and simple FUD. Come on, can't you do better than that? Geesh. You do realize who developed DHTML, right? WHo developed CSS, right? And if we never followed standards you wouldn't be able to hook your Windows computer up to the Internet.

And, IE was developed to match the standards that were popular in the late 1990s. Now that about 9/10ths of all computer users use IE, maybe you should develop for it first and be bothered that the other browsers force you to do more work.

Or, you can wait for IE 7 to come here. That'll follow the standards.

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

fish mouth — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 08:37:02 -0000

how can it be good the M$ produts, when they never follow standards?

i am tired of redeveloping my code just because IE wants to show it in a different way..

for gods....

Re: Ross doesn’t trust Microsoft’s approach to Web

Andrew h — Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:33:39 -0000

A few years back I was big MS partisan and the fact that I'm not so much anymore I think says something about what's gone wrong.

First, I agree that MS has inadvertantly really shot itself in the foot by tightening licensing during the last couple of years. I've often used unlicensed or improperly licensed versions of MS software for years (by sharing CD's, or volume license or MSDN subscription software). That meant that Microsoft lost some revenue while I fooled around with super expensive products on my laptop. In exchange, they got lots of revenue later when what I built for free got deployed. If I didn't have access to this basically free stuff I wouldn't have explored and built using MS products. Even $50 for VS Express would potentially be a barrier to me, out of laziness or rebellious disregard for IP law (that's right, and I haven't bought a CD in 6 years either, RIAA).

Second, in 2000-01, MS hyped .NET development and made it seem very cool in their demos (I attended several and was excited). And .NET is conceptually great. But the reality is that way too many features were the kind that only look good in demos or make simple apps for the whole conference and magazine crowd to throw together. When it got time to write real world stuff, I found myself writing a bunch of redundant crap and never using the drag and drop stuff or the wizards because they didn't generate real world useful code and/or took away too much control from me. Recently I went to an MSDN presentation on ASP.NET 2 and was disappointed that the presenter showed the same silly wizard generated "select * from authors" stuff for 2.0 but couldn't answer my questions as to whether certain annoying gaps in 1.1 had been closed in 2.0. If happiness equals reality divided by expectations, MS has done badly by emphasizing the sale rather than the ongoing experience.

So I left that MSDN presentation very disappointed with MS. I was also struck by the fact that at age 37, I was (unbelieveably) one of the youngest 5 people in a room of 80. I can't say I'm excited enough by OSS to bother going over to the other side (maybe it's time to head to a second career outside programming). But whatever MS is doing, it's failing to inspire a new generation of programmers.

Being a longtime MS fan who has never bought the line that OSS is cheaper, faster, more secure or more reliable in the long run, I feel very sad about where things are. MS, why don't you listen to your wayward fans?

-- Andrew