A rant about Microsoft's new "direction"



  • Recent
    strategic decisions made by Microsoft regarding the direction of their
    future operating system and database platforms are really frustrating. They’ve announced that they’re shifting focus away
    from the traditional desktop, in pursuit of Apple in an attempt at
    recapturing the consumer market, with a heavy emphasis on the tablet
    space.


    Whilst
    this may seem like a sensible approach to their own business, it isn’t sensible for our business, which unfortunately relies on their platform.

    Just try and use the new server operating system. THE UI
    IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is
    there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!! This thing is only ever used
    remotely.... from a PC, not a tablet.


    Taking
    a step back, has anyone asked why there are those embarrassing pictures
    of signage in times-square showing the windows BSOD? Windows (as a
    general purpose consumer OS) hardly seems like the most appropriate
    platform to be using for signage. Why not an embedded system, or a more
    light-weight operating system, or maybe even a Mac? The answer is that
    those signs run windows because the platform was familiar to the people
    who built the application. This was Microsoft’s principal asset until
    they pissed it away with WPF, WWF and WCF... WTF. Hey, thats what they
    should call windows 8 (Windows Tablet Framework)


    No
    doubt Windows 8 will pave the way for the linux desktop’s wide-spread
    adoption in enterprise contexts. Most large corporates I deal with are
    still running WinXP as their SOE, and the cost of upgrading is high.
    They didn’t move to Vista because it sucked, and they didn’t move to 7
    because it cost too much, and they won't move to Win8 because it’s
    designed for a tablet, not a desktop and it still costs too much, and they still won’t
    move to Win7 because it costs too much... Hold on. These days,
    everything important is a web-app... Hmm...  what about Ubuntu? It’s
    free, It has a browser.... The driver support is getting better...
    Maybe... Just Maybe....


    As
    a related strategic screw-up, SQL Server 2012’s new licensing model has
    been enough to motivate our company to retarget our app to PostgreSQL,
    with plans to migrate all customers using SQL server to Postgress ASAP.
    SQL Server’s licensing model looks like a last-ditch grab for cash,
    trying to squeeze every last dollar out of the ‘pseudo enterprise’
    market before leaving it for dead. Lets face it, SQL server is a
    second-rate RDBMS anyway, it lacks the feature-set of Oracle, whilst
    being every bit as annoying to use. The installer is a joke, it’s
    high-availability features don’t work, and with the new “per core”
    licensing in 2012, it’s more expensive than Oracle for typical
    use-cases.


    PostgreSQL
    has proper support for multi-master replication FOR FREE... SQL Server
    does a crappy job (it doesn’t really work, it’s so complicated that even
    MS couldn’t set it up correctly at their TechED workshop and told those
    who attended to “pretend it worked”). If you think i’ll make my
    customers pay money for something that I pretended worked, you’ve lost
    the plot.

    But then again, you put a tablet oriented UI on a server. so WTF.



  • TRWTF is:


    @caffiend said:
    <p><span style="font-size:15px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;" id="internal-source-marker_0.5690773391970014">


  • SockDev

    @caffiend said:

    <MS hate rant wall o' text>

    Some points - up to the reader to put them in the right place.

    • Embedded OS like, say, Windows Embedded Compact?
    • Just because you can't use it, doesn't make it crap.
    • MS licensing has always been incomprehensible.
    • Stick with Win7/Server2008 then.

    As a comparison, I hate the new VS2012. Do I post a wall o' text blasting it without pause? Nah, I'm too busy using VS2010 to do so.



  • @caffiend said:

    Just try and use the new server operating system. THE UI
    IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is
    there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!! This thing is only ever used
    remotely.... from a PC, not a tablet.

    WTF are you talking about? I've been using Windows 8 for months on my primary gaming PC and on my old EXOPC tablet. On my gaming PC I'm always in desktop mode and on my tablet I'm always in metro mode. My HP Micro Server will go to the lastest version of Windows Server as soon as I have time to migrate and that one I will also use remotely in desktop mode.



  • and they won't move off Microsoft systems because "we're a Microsoft shop" and instead of creating applications in a portable language, we wrote stuff in C# that only runs on .NET and anything we wrote in C++ is full of COM.

    and when I was working for a certain company that is known for providing live market data, not the one whose name translates to Flower Hill but the other one, I got yelled at by a fat bloke for daring to write in documentation that my code was "portable" and then the grumpy bloke who thought I should just be able to know what to do without being given any spec appeared with a list of "use cases" and asked how many it supported which was none because I was writing framework stuff, but use cases were easy to implement with it.

    I was terminated after 11 weeks into a 6 month contract for writing "too many wrappers".

     



  • @caffiend said:

    Just try and use the new server operating system. THE UI
    IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is
    there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!! This thing is only ever used
    remotely.... from a PC, not a tablet.

    You really didn´t used it, did you?

    The Start Menu (And just the start menu!) is tablet-compatible, for sure, but is not tablet-only designed. The desktop interface is pretty much the same, and, really, way more cleaner and lighter. SQL Server DO its job really well, you just need to study its whata-do-whata-dont´s if you want it to obey you, just like any SQL Engine (Don´t belive me? See Oracle. See Mysql. Even postgre has its onw piece of dark sql magic).

    I am using win8 for some time now, and I really liked it. Just because the START MENU (and again, in truth, that´s the only major usability change) changed a lot, it does not mean that the whole system is trash. Please, use it for a while. Like one, two months, but without any prejudice. You will see that you dont have to hate MS for what they did to Windows.



  • @tsarczuk said:

    Just because the START MENU (and again, in truth, that´s the only major usability change) changed a lot, it does not mean that the whole system is trash
    And if you don't like the new start menu, just can just bring it back: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/



  • @Cbuttius said:

    I was terminated after 11 weeks into a 6 month contract for writing "too many wrappers".

    If you spent all your time making your code "portable" rather than function, then I'm not too surprised.



  • @Cbuttius said:

    and they won't move off Microsoft systems because "we're a Microsoft shop" and instead of creating applications in a portable language, we wrote stuff in C# that only runs on .NET and anything we wrote in C++ is full of COM.

    Why is writing platform-specific applications a bad thing?

    Very few programs are ever truly portable, and they tend to suck because of it.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @RaceProUK said:

    Just because you can't use it, doesn't make it crap.

    Try telling that to a certain user known for rants around here.



  • Also, this is not the year of the Linux desktop. Ubuntu's now-standard UI was lifted from the Tablet edition of the Netbook Remix.


  • SockDev

    @Cbuttius said:

    anything we wrote in C++ is full of COM

    Windows programs use COM! More at 11.

    In other news, water is wet, and blakey likes a rant :P



  • @bjolling said:

    @tsarczuk said:

    Just because the START MENU (and again, in truth, that´s the only major usability change) changed a lot, it does not mean that the whole system is trash
    And if you don't like the new start menu, just can just bring it back: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/

    We're talking about a server. Who's going to install some crappy software from some third party vendor just to replace some bug/feature in a freaking server? It's a S-E-R-V-E-R, what the hell do you need a GUI for? I thought MS would get rid of this by now that PowerBash (or whatever is called) is production ready (if you can ever say that about a piece of software, specially from MS).

    Thank GOD I don't have to touch any MS product ever!


  • SockDev

    @ubersoldat said:

    It's a S-E-R-V-E-R, what the hell do you need a GUI for?

    To manage it of course. Especially over Remote Desktop.



  • @TwelveBaud said:

    Also, this is not the year of the Linux desktop.
     

    OMG, how do you know? You're like psychic!



  • Why?

    Because when you write code you should always consider its scope, and not limit it unnecessarily.

    I implemented a version of my IOC/dependency injection system there which fitted very well into what they wanted to achieve for their automated testing applications, as it allowed you to put in hooks to different components as required

    The WTF was that they wanted a step-by-step function call within the XML that was used as the configuration for this system. Actually, the team leader's plan was to move away from it being step-by-step but he left about halfway through, and what I was doing was really his brainchild. I guess they drove him away too.

     



  • @RaceProUK said:

    @Cbuttius said:

    anything we wrote in C++ is full of COM

    Windows programs use COM! More at 11.

    In other news, water is wet, and blakey likes a rant :P

    COM has its uses, but also severe limitations, in particular that you have to "register" your DLLs to use them. That also means that it is hard to have more than one version installed at a time.

    Far better to load your DLLs dynamically either through Powershells (whereby you create a shell that specifies your path and where to pick up DLLs) or through dynamic LoadLibrary which is what my dependency injection system uses.

    For an automated testing system, you certainly want to be able to keep multiple versions active so you can test new components in an old environment, or have both fakes and the real system available at the same time, and especially as you can set off a series of tests that use different versions without having to go through an uninstall/install process.

    Also better for regular dev environments where you can build and install your components without having to worry so much if you break something because people will set their configs to use the old version even when the new one is there until the new one is known to be stable (unless they are testing the new one, or something that uses it).

    Using COM as a proxy thin-layer, maybe. But that's all.

     


  • SockDev

    @Cbuttius said:

    Why?

    Because when you write code you should always consider its scope, and not limit it unnecessarily.

    I implemented a version of my IOC/dependency injection system there which fitted very well into what they wanted to achieve for their automated testing applications, as it allowed you to put in hooks to different components as required

    The WTF was that they wanted a step-by-step function call within the XML that was used as the configuration for this system. Actually, the team leader's plan was to move away from it being step-by-step but he left about halfway through, and what I was doing was really his brainchild. I guess they drove him away too.

    So you ignored the requirements and did your own thing? No wonder they got rid of you.

    Also, I'm working on a product that must run on Windows and Mac, in-browser. We selected Silverlight as the platform. Does that mean the code I write has to be portable to a JVM? I wouldn't want to limit it unnecessarily after all.



  • @Cbuttius said:

    Why?

    Because when you write code you should always consider its scope, and not limit it unnecessarily.

     

    No. When considering a project, you should consider its scope and plan accordingly.

    When designing a system, you should consider requirements and meet those accordingly.

    When writing code, you should consider those designs and build what is needed.

    I think you may have fallen into the "gold-plating software" trap.

     



  • Sometimes those signs need a file system, and that is not always present on an embedded system.


  • SockDev

    @Cbuttius said:

    COM has its uses, but also severe limitations

    And that's why MS created .NET - it allows you to install as many versions of a DLL as you like side-by-side in the Global Assembly Cache.

    @Cbuttius said:

    through dynamic LoadLibrary

    Like .NET does (at the lowest level)?

    @Cbuttius said:

    you certainly want to be able to keep multiple versions active

    See first item.

    @Cbuttius said:

    Also better for regular dev environments where you can build and install your
    components without having to worry so much if you break something because people
    will set their configs to use the old version even when the new one is there
    until the new one is known to be stable

    Again, see first item.

    And, oh yes, .NET is built on top of COM.



  • @Cbuttius said:

    COM has its uses, but also severe limitations, in particular that you have to "register" your DLLs to use them. That also means that it is hard to have more than one version installed at a time.

    You don't understand COM versioning.



  • @ubersoldat said:

    It's a S-E-R-V-E-R, what the hell do you need a GUI for?

    You don't

    @ubersoldat said:

    I thought MS would get rid of this by now that PowerBash

    Powershell

    @ubersoldat said:

    is production ready

    Sure, installing the GUI is purely optional in  the server version and you even can hotswap between the two interfaces seamlessly, I for the world do not fucking know what the fuck are people complaining

    @ubersoldat said:

    if you can ever say that about a piece of software, specially from MS

    Most of the software that comes from MS is ok, not great but ok, but I haven't seen any other company produce much better software.

    @ubersoldat said:

    Thank GOD I don't have to touch any MS product ever!

    Do you dictate then?



  • @pauly said:

    Sometimes those signs need a file system, and that is not always present on an embedded system.
     

    So what you're saying is, this is common practice on embedded systems with no file system? :P



  • @caffiend said:

    THE UI
    IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is
    there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!!
     

    I think the proper question is: why aren't you using a tablet for your server? The PC is dead. Start ripping out those clunky boxes and slide a Surface into each rack slot like Bob intended. If you can't be bothered to use the right hardware for the job, maybe you shouldn't be in this business.

    @caffiend said:

    Taking
    a step back, has anyone asked why there are those embarrassing pictures
    of signage in times-square showing the windows BSOD? Windows (as a
    general purpose consumer OS) hardly seems like the most appropriate
    platform to be using for signage.

    This is Microsoft's fault how? If someone uses the wrong tool for the job, its their fault, not the toolmaker. So for the people who run Times Square, this falls somewhere between "It's a good enough tool" and "We don't give a fuck enough of a fuck to replace it. Next time it BSOD, the intern will hit reboot, and we'll get more free publicity I HEART NY SEE OUR ADS!"

     @caffiend said:

    linux desktop’s wide-spread
    adoption in enterprise contexts

    I don't think that ever, in my entire life, have I ever used a graphical emitocon. Never. Until now, so that I may demonstrate how utterful fucktardily stupid this statement is:

    [img]http://www.sympato.ch/smileys/Rolling.gif[/img]

    Hope you're happy.



  • @caffiend said:

    Just try and use the new server operating system. THE UI
    IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is
    there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!! This thing is only ever used
    remotely.... from a PC, not a tablet.

    So don't buy it if you don't like it. Why is this difficult?

    @caffiend said:

    Taking
    a step back, has anyone asked why there are those embarrassing pictures
    of signage in times-square showing the windows BSOD?

    What are you talking about? Is the answer, "because some idiot on 4chan Photoshopped it in there"?

    @caffiend said:

    Windows (as a
    general purpose consumer OS) hardly seems like the most appropriate
    platform to be using for signage. Why not an embedded system, or a more
    light-weight operating system, or maybe even a Mac?

    At the time Windows caught on in this market, Macs were the only other OS with decent multi-monitor support. But it had no memory protection and weren't stable enough to use to run signage 24/7 for years. By the time OS X came out, the market was already saturated.

    @caffiend said:

    The answer is that
    those signs run windows because the platform was familiar to the people
    who built the application.

    That's a theory. I think my theory (Windows was the only viable option at the time these signs were manufactured) is much more likely.

    @caffiend said:

    No
    doubt Windows 8 will pave the way for the linux desktop’s wide-spread
    adoption in enterprise contexts.

    Linux doesn't have Exchange, Active Directory (and its fun pal Group Policy), any equivalent to WSUS. Or shadow copy. Or a remote desktop feature that isn't shit. It's wholly unsuited for the enterprise environment.

    @caffiend said:

    Most large corporates I deal with are
    still running WinXP as their SOE, and the cost of upgrading is high.

    That's because they're bad at their jobs. If they were using Linux, they'd still be on Redhat 6.2 no doubt. It says nothing about the OS itself.

    @caffiend said:

    They didn’t move to Vista because it sucked,

    How?

    @caffiend said:

    and they didn’t move to 7
    because it cost too much, and they won't move to Win8 because it’s
    designed for a tablet, not a desktop and it still costs too much, and they still won’t
    move to Win7 because it costs too much... Hold on. These days,
    everything important is a web-app... Hmm... what about Ubuntu? It’s
    free, It has a browser.... The driver support is getting better...
    Maybe... Just Maybe....

    We've... already... established... they're... idiots... it... seems... like... a... waste... of... time... to... enumerate... exactly... how... many... dumb... decisions... they... made...

    The fact that your apps are web-based doesn't change the fact that Linux doesn't have any of the features I previously mentioned as being required for enterprise use.

    @caffiend said:

    As
    a related strategic screw-up, SQL Server 2012’s new licensing model has
    been enough to motivate our company to retarget our app to PostgreSQL,
    with plans to migrate all customers using SQL server to Postgress ASAP.
    SQL Server’s licensing model looks like a last-ditch grab for cash,
    trying to squeeze every last dollar out of the ‘pseudo enterprise’
    market before leaving it for dead.

    You won't get any arguments from me here. SQL Server licensing has always been ridiculous, it's been like 5 years and Microsoft still hasn't really acknowledged that all their pricing metrics are completely moot in a cloud computing environment, so if you're using AWS or Rackspace you have to pay through the nose for features that would be cheap on a physical server because poor AWS has to charge "worst-case" licensing costs. Fucking ridiculous.

    @caffiend said:

    Lets face it, SQL server is a
    second-rate RDBMS anyway,

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha! And now you're back into crazyville.

    @caffiend said:

    it lacks the feature-set of Oracle,

    Like what?

    @caffiend said:

    whilst

    <font color="red">WOOP WOOP WOOP DOUCHEBAG ALERT WOOP WOOP WOOP</font>

    @caffiend said:

    being every bit as annoying to use.

    You're telling me that SQL Server Management Studio is as annoying as Oracle's version of same? Bullshit. Flat-out bullshit and you know it.

    @caffiend said:

    The installer is a joke,

    We agree there, but... again, it's worse than Oracle's installer? Bullshit.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @caffiend said:
    No
    doubt Windows 8 will pave the way for the linux desktop’s wide-spread
    adoption in enterprise contexts.

    Linux doesn't have Exchange, Active Directory (and its fun pal Group Policy), any equivalent to WSUS. Or shadow copy. Or a remote desktop feature that isn't shit. It's wholly unsuited for the enterprise environment.

    Wait, ssh doesn't count?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Cbuttius said:

    COM has its uses, but also severe limitations, in particular that you have to "register" your DLLs to use them. That also means that it is hard to have more than one version installed at a time.

     

    First, what the other people said, altho COM versioning doesn't help when you've got different incompatible versions of, say, comctl32. However, your point here isn't true, because you can use registration-free COM.



  • @pkmnfrk said:

    Wait, ssh doesn't count?
     

    Remember you're talking to someone who's ranted at the lack of usability of command-line stuff over graphical point-and-clicky interfaces, and who's experience of Linux appears to be limited to frustrating episodes of struggling well out of his depth.

    A quick forum search should reveal Blakey's experiences/opinions of *nix.



  • @Cassidy said:

    @pkmnfrk said:

    Wait, ssh doesn't count?
     

    Remember you're talking to someone who's ranted at the lack of usability of command-line stuff over graphical point-and-clicky interfaces, and who's experience of Linux appears to be limited to frustrating episodes of struggling well out of his depth.

    A quick forum search should reveal Blakey's experiences/opinions of *nix.

    Sorry, I forgot the "troll" tag. My bad.

    Anyway, my Linux experience/opinion can be summed up as such: Linux is great, as long as you only ever ssh into it.



  • @pkmnfrk said:

    Linux is great, as long as you only ever ssh into it.
     

    But.. but... what about people that ftps into my servers? And I'm sure some even http into them, too - hell, I've witnessed some family members even https into them! I'm positive several other machines smtp in also - I've checked when I imaps into it, inbetween times at home when I smb (or cifs) into my filestore.I've a suspicion my router even snmp into it, but it hasn't confessed yet.

    And some evenings some friends even unreal tournament into my machines, too!



  • @RaceProUK said:

    To manage it of course. Especially over Remote Desktop.

    You mean Remote Tablet.


  • SockDev

    @Random832 said:

    @RaceProUK said:
    To manage it of course. Especially over Remote Desktop.

     

    You mean Remote Tablet.

     

    :P

     



  • <rant>What I Hate About WIndows 8</rant>

    It is really hard to use with a pen and digitiser tablet. Trying to move the "mouse" into a corner of the screen is difficult when your pen doesn't really have a "hover". It is made worse when the digitiser tablet has gutters at the edge of the screen.

    By the way, when did the definition of tablet change? I thought a tablet was something with a digitiser and a pen. If you use your finger or the back of a ballpoint to point then it is a "touchscreen" not a "tablet". Now Microsoft seem to use it to just mean "something smaller than 8″".

    As an aside, moving the mouse into the corners of the screen is also difficult in a virtual machine running in a window.

    All the keystrokes have changed. Logging off used to be "Ctrl+Alt+Del then L", now its "Ctrl+Alt+Del then O". Why "O"? Because "O" is for "Sign out". Really? Why isn't "S" for "Sign Out"? Creating a folder used to be "Alt+F then N" now it is something else, don't know. I used to be able to run things like Firewall by using "Flag-key f i r Enter" now I have to use "Flag key f i r tab down arrow enter" or something.

    I get the feeling that the people who wrote the new interface are all in lust with their mice or fingers or both. They have missed the point that there are people who want to use a computer fast and that "fast" for a computer means "never taking your hands off the keyboard".

    My biggest issue with Metro is that I think their core assumption is flawed. I don't think it is desirable or even possible to design one UI that works well across smartphones, gaming consoles, workstations, touchscreen devices, pen-based tablets, keyboards and mice.

    Windows 8 might look fine on a smartphone (whose video card is powered by an asthmatic hampster) but it looks stupid on a 1080p widescreen monitor.

    Of course, some of my issues are simply that Microsoft moved my cheese. Unfortunately, I've tied my career and one of my hobbies to their products so moving to Mac/*nix/whatever isn't an option.



  • @havokk said:

    I get the feeling that the people who wrote the new interface are all in lust with their mice or fingers or both. They have missed the point that there are people who want to use a computer fast and that "fast" for a computer means "never taking your hands off the keyboard".
     

    False.  While this is conventional wisom among some self-proclaimed power users, every time it's actually tested under controlled conditions they find that using the mouse does not actually slow you down, and frequently helps improve productivity in various ways.

     



  • @Mason Wheeler said:

    …every time it's actually tested under controlled conditions they find that using the mouse does not actually slow you down, and frequently helps improve productivity in various ways.

    Citations please, preferably something a little more recent than the Ask Tog column.

    From my experience, the keyboard is much faster. Using Flag+RightArrow to send a window to the right hand of the screen then Alt-Tab to switch to the one underneath it is much faster than going for the mouse, finding and clicking the title bar of the app then dragging to the right (making sure not to drag too far, otherwise the window moves on to the next monitor) and so on. Creating a folder with "Alt+F W F <name>". Running a control panel app with "Flag <first few letter of app> Enter". Activating items pinned to the Task Bar with "Flag+<number>". Using Ctrl+X/C/V for Cut/Copy/Paste, Ctrl+S for Save. These are all much faster than the pointer, especially (and this is my main point) since I have them all in muscle memory. These are keyboard shortcuts I've used for ten years or more.

    I imagine that Microsoft would never mess with "Ctrl+X" for Cut. I'd like the same care given to all keyboard shortcuts.

    As I said, though, this all may just be me being upset that someone moved my cheese. I'm keen to get other people's thoughts on this issue.



  • @havokk said:

    My biggest issue with Metro is that I think their core assumption is flawed. I don't think it is desirable or even possible to design one UI that works well across smartphones, gaming consoles, workstations, touchscreen devices, pen-based tablets, keyboards and mice.
    Then you have no issue at all since Windows 8 easily allows working in the Windows 7 style desktop. The thing you are complaining about is just a new start menu that allows running a new type of metro applications. But did you know it doesn't disallow running the old style desktop applications; you don't have to use the metro style applications. The only one I frequently use is the Windows Mail because it can talk to my hotmail, gmail and exchange accounts out of the box. The rest of my digital life I'm on the plain old desktop using the kind of applications as I always have.



  • @ubersoldat said:

    @bjolling said:

    @tsarczuk said:

    Just because the START MENU (and again, in truth, that´s the only major usability change) changed a lot, it does not mean that the whole system is trash
    And if you don't like the new start menu, just can just bring it back: http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/

    We're talking about a server. Who's going to install some crappy software from some third party vendor just to replace some bug/feature in a freaking server? It's a S-E-R-V-E-R, what the hell do you need a GUI for? I thought MS would get rid of this by now that PowerBash (or whatever is called) is production ready (if you can ever say that about a piece of software, specially from MS).

    Huh? You can just as easily run a GUI on a Linux server. What's the problem? You indeed don't NEED a GUI for a server, so why is it a bug if the Windows 8 Server GUI includes a new start menu that's is different from the previous version? Are you so attached to the old start menu? I thought you didn't care about GUIs on a server.

    Windows leaves the choice to the user just as your precious Linux does. Either you run with or without a GUI. If you are running with a GUI, you can use the new start menu or install a third-party menu like I did. StarDock hardly produces crappier software than your precious open source developers do. Linux is nothing but 3rd party add-ons to the Linux kernel but there you don't assume that it's crappy like you do for Windows.

    Hypocrite


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @havokk said:

    <rant>What I Hate About WIndows 8</rant>

    It is really hard to use with a pen and digitiser tablet. Trying to move the "mouse" into a corner of the screen is difficult when your pen doesn't really have a "hover". It is made worse when the digitiser tablet has gutters at the edge of the screen.

    By the way, when did the definition of tablet change?

    The term tablet refers to laptops without a keyboard, and it's only been in use for at least a decade.

    As for your use of "flag" for key combinations, do you spell it "Micro$oft" too? Because that's the Windows key.



  • @FrostCat said:

    @havokk said:

    <rant>What I Hate About WIndows 8</rant>

    It is really hard to use with a pen and digitiser tablet. Trying to move the "mouse" into a corner of the screen is difficult when your pen doesn't really have a "hover". It is made worse when the digitiser tablet has gutters at the edge of the screen.

    By the way, when did the definition of tablet change?

    The term tablet refers to laptops without a keyboard, and it's only been in use for at least a decade.

    As for your use of "flag" for key combinations, do you spell it "Micro$oft" too? Because that's the Windows key.


    You mean the turbo key?



  • @Ben L. said:

    @FrostCat said:
    Because that's the Windows key.

    You mean the turbo key?
     

    Should be one of "meta", "hyper" or "super". Turbo key is on the case!

     



  • No, the dependency injection framework was implemented very quickly. I wasn't given proper requirements, I was just expected to guess them, and after leaving me for weeks on my own, they then decided to "review" the code with no constructive comments except "ooh.. this is very over-engineered..."..

    which it wasn't compared to their horribly COM-thick codebase full of TLAs.

    I got the functionality they wanted running very quickly once given to me. But the system had to be written first to be properly extensible. Wrappers were there to provide encapsulation - proper encapsulation, separating the implementation from the interface, something they neglected to do in their "everything depends on everything else" codebase.

    Yes, I was in the wrong team. They said someone somewhere was writing the new COM-free, pure C++ framework. That should have been me.

    Not surprising their fairly young team leader abandoned them.

     



  • @havokk said:

    @Mason Wheeler said:

    …every time it's actually tested under controlled conditions they find that using the mouse does not actually slow you down, and frequently helps improve productivity in various ways.

    From my experience, the keyboard is much faster. ... lots of examples deleted ... These are all much faster than the pointer, especially (and this is my main point) since I have them all in muscle memory. These are keyboard shortcuts I've used for ten years or more.

    I'm with you 100% on this one.

    Muscle memory is why any code editor worth its salt has customizable keystrokes (and in fact, why many of them offer "emacs mode", "vi mode", etc).

    As for speed, I find it painful to (for example) sit and watch someone drag the mouse cursor from the text cursor to the end of the current word, go to the edit menu, select cut, move the mouse to the end of the line, go to the edit menu, and select paste, while all the while my fingers are making "ctrl-shift-right ctrl-x ctrl-end ctrl-v" motions 5 or 10 times in the time it takes them to do it.



  • @RobFreundlich said:

    I find it painful to (for example) sit and watch someone drag the mouse cursor from the text cursor to the end of the current word, go to the edit menu, select cut, move the mouse to the end of the line, go to the edit menu, and select paste, while all the while my fingers are making "ctrl-shift-right ctrl-x ctrl-end ctrl-v" motions 5 or 10 times in the time it takes them to do it.

    You should see a doctor about that



  • @serguey123 said:

    @RobFreundlich said:
    I find it painful to (for example) sit and watch someone drag the mouse cursor from the text cursor to the end of the current word, go to the edit menu, select cut, move the mouse to the end of the line, go to the edit menu, and select paste, while all the while my fingers are making "ctrl-shift-right ctrl-x ctrl-end ctrl-v" motions 5 or 10 times in the time it takes them to do it.

    You should see a doctor about that

    I have. It's Carping Tunnel Syndrome. The doctor sent me to physical therapy for it. The physical therapist recommended a very simple exercise: wrap your hands around the user's neck and squeeeeeze. Do 30 reps, rest a minute, and do it again. Supposedly if I do that every day for a week, it'll help my problem.



  • @pkmnfrk said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    Linux doesn't have Exchange, Active Directory (and its fun pal Group Policy), any equivalent to WSUS. Or shadow copy. Or a remote desktop feature that isn't shit. It's wholly unsuited for the enterprise environment.
    Wait, ssh doesn't count?
    Sendmail, LDAP or NIS or Kerberos (and their fun pal PolicyKit), locally-managed APT or YUM or RPM caches, LVM, and VNC or SSH don't count. Not because they don't have the same capabilities, but because their defaults are not sane, their remote management and enforcement is limited unless /etc is on a read-only NFS share (which is insecure without SSH tunneling or Kerberos), and their configuration is almost exclusively text-based, poorly documented, and fraught with peril.



  • @TwelveBaud said:

    @pkmnfrk said:
    @blakeyrat said:
    Linux doesn't have Exchange, Active Directory (and its fun pal Group Policy), any equivalent to WSUS. Or shadow copy. Or a remote desktop feature that isn't shit. It's wholly unsuited for the enterprise environment.
    Wait, ssh doesn't count?

    Sendmail, LDAP or NIS or Kerberos (and their fun pal PolicyKit), locally-managed APT or YUM or RPM caches, LVM, and VNC or SSH don't count. Not because they don't have the same capabilities, but because their defaults are not sane, their remote management and enforcement is limited unless /etc is on a read-only NFS share (which is insecure without SSH tunneling or Kerberos), and their configuration is almost exclusively text-based, poorly documented, and fraught with peril.

    Is any of that like running Exchange, RDP, Active Directory or WSUS without a virus scanner or 3rd party firewall?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Linux doesn't have Exchange, Active Directory (and its fun pal Group Policy), any equivalent to WSUS. Or shadow copy. Or a remote desktop feature that isn't shit. It's wholly unsuited for the enterprise environment.

    If you need Exchange on Linux desktop, you are doing something very wrong. It does have support for Outlook Web App which is quite enough for most of users (of course I'm talking about 2010 and up).

    I will admit Group Policy support is lacking (it's one of my favorite AD features), but it's not completely non-existent. There are tools like Puppet, ZenWorks etc. For centralized user management & SSO there are LDAP & Kerberos. I know there used to be some problems regarding credential caching (for login when there's no network connectivity), but I'm pretty sure fixing that would be pretty cheap if that feature is needed.

    Local package repository is the WSUS equivalent (initial configuration is more complex tho)

    If you that "time machine-like" thing in VSS, no, there isn't really an equivalent. I have never seen anyone using it tho. For snapshots, LVM/btrfs/Hot Copy.

    Remote management was already discussed, but as an addition for when you need to run some GUI, X11 tunneling & things like Xnest.



  • @Buzer said:

    If you need Exchange on Linux desktop, you are doing something very wrong. It does have support for Outlook Web App which is quite enough for most of users (of course I'm talking about 2010 and up).

    You don't know what Exchange is. Hint: it's not a client app.

    @Buzer said:

    I will admit Group Policy support is lacking (it's one of my favorite AD features), but it's not completely non-existent. There are tools like Puppet, ZenWorks etc. For centralized user management & SSO there are LDAP & Kerberos. I know there used to be some problems regarding credential caching (for login when there's no network connectivity), but I'm pretty sure fixing that would be pretty cheap if that feature is needed.

    The point is it's been decades since AD (and before that Novell Netware) has been firmly established, and the Linux community still hasn't fixed any of the flaws. None of them. It's completely stagnant. It might be a "pretty cheap" fix, but nobody's done it.

    @Buzer said:

    Local package repository is the WSUS equivalent (initial configuration is more complex tho)

    If you that "time machine-like" thing in VSS, no, there isn't really an equivalent. I have never seen anyone using it tho. For snapshots, LVM/btrfs/Hot Copy.

    Remote management was already discussed, but as an addition for when you need to run some GUI, X11 tunneling & things like Xnest.

    I'm not going to argue that Linux can do most things Windows can, but this is the entire point: sure it's technically possible, but it's complex, no feature is integrated with any other feature, the defaults aren't sane, the programs aren't stable in some cases. So a Linux admin needs to store 10 times the information about pointless technical minutiae that the Windows admin doesn't, and spend ten times long getting it all working and stable.

    The things that Windows can do and Linux can't are usually related to the Linux community's rabid hatred of the Registry and Registry-like concepts. Refusing to implement a Registry is fine if you have something better but they don't. (And neither does Apple, for the record. But at least Apple's config files are all in the same format and same disk location, so they're still heads and shoulders above what Linux has.)

    The most frustrating thing is that the Linux community is 90% to having this all working! All the basics are in place! They just refuse to go the last 10%.

    I think it's due to the whole "high priesthood of technology" bullshit that every other OS got over decades ago, but still seems to be prevalent in the Linux community. After all, if Linux enterprise networking was easy to do, they'll take our jerbs!!!



  • @caffiend said:

    Recent strategic decisions made by Microsoft regarding the direction of their future operating system and database platforms are really frustrating. They’ve announced that they’re shifting focus away from the traditional desktop, in pursuit of Apple in an attempt at recapturing the consumer market, with a heavy emphasis on the tablet space.

    Whilst this may seem like a sensible approach to their own business, it isn’t sensible for our business, which unfortunately relies on their platform.

    Just try and use the new server operating system. THE UI IS DESIGNED FOR A TABLET.... but this is a SERVER.... A SERVER... why is there a tablet oriented UI on A SERVER!!! This thing is only ever used remotely.... from a PC, not a tablet.

    Taking a step back, has anyone asked why there are those embarrassing pictures of signage in times-square showing the windows BSOD? Windows (as a general purpose consumer OS) hardly seems like the most appropriate platform to be using for signage. Why not an embedded system, or a more light-weight operating system, or maybe even a Mac? The answer is that those signs run windows because the platform was familiar to the people who built the application. This was Microsoft’s principal asset until they pissed it away with WPF, WWF and WCF... WTF. Hey, thats what they should call windows 8 (Windows Tablet Framework)

    No doubt Windows 8 will pave the way for the linux desktop’s wide-spread adoption in enterprise contexts. Most large corporates I deal with are still running WinXP as their SOE, and the cost of upgrading is high. They didn’t move to Vista because it sucked, and they didn’t move to 7 because it cost too much, and they won't move to Win8 because it’s designed for a tablet, not a desktop and it still costs too much, and they still won’t move to Win7 because it costs too much... Hold on. These days, everything important is a web-app... Hmm...  what about Ubuntu? It’s free, It has a browser.... The driver support is getting better... Maybe... Just Maybe....

    As a related strategic screw-up, SQL Server 2012’s new licensing model has been enough to motivate our company to retarget our app to PostgreSQL, with plans to migrate all customers using SQL server to Postgress ASAP. SQL Server’s licensing model looks like a last-ditch grab for cash, trying to squeeze every last dollar out of the ‘pseudo enterprise’ market before leaving it for dead. Lets face it, SQL server is a second-rate RDBMS anyway, it lacks the feature-set of Oracle, whilst being every bit as annoying to use. The installer is a joke, it’s high-availability features don’t work, and with the new “per core” licensing in 2012, it’s more expensive than Oracle for typical use-cases.

    PostgreSQL has proper support for multi-master replication FOR FREE... SQL Server does a crappy job (it doesn’t really work, it’s so complicated that even MS couldn’t set it up correctly at their TechED workshop and told those who attended to “pretend it worked”). If you think i’ll make my customers pay money for something that I pretended worked, you’ve lost the plot.
    But then again, you put a tablet oriented UI on a server. so WTF.

    Ignorance is not stupidity, and knowledge is not intelligenge.

    However, stupidity leads to lack of knowledge and long term ignorance.

    Your post is a big WTF, would read again.

     


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.