Some days ago we received Microsoft at school: they were recruiting students for internships and full time jobs. I decided to apply, and get an interview. I was a little skeptic about what the jobs were about and the process itself.
I've said bad things about Microsoft in the past. I must confess, when one is inexpert and biased by other people, giving partial opinions is easy (That's the good or bad thing about strong opinions weakly held). But now, after a few more years of experience using computers, and inevitably, its products, I feel obligated to give an opinion.
I use [other OS] for almost all my needs. Every time I boot into Windows, my friends and teammates won't let me lie, I spend the next thirty minutes ranting about how much I hate Windows. I stop ranting when Windows stops booting (including services and who the hell knows what else), and becomes almost fully usable. Thirty freaking minutes, you can't tell me that is not a waste of time. My [OS] boots in 5 minutes, 10 at most when I hadn't done any maintenance.
Is that really a problem of the software? Maybe. Do I have to hate Microsoft for that? Definitely not. Windows consumes resources like a monster, but definitely the computer I use isn't suited for that matter (BTW, I am talking of Win XP, my computer would commit suicide if I installed Vista). I am a software developer, and have .NET, VS, SQL Server and a hell lot more of services that are essential to my day-by-day work. My computer is a somewhat old Thinkpad T41 that I have pulled to its limits; Windows may be a good platform but surely requires a more robust equipment. I am not discussing here if that's actually good or bad for the common user, I'm just saying the cause of my frustration is that I have a small bad suited computer for all the work I have to do as developer.
Having said that, my main point: I still dislike Microsoft. To be more specific, I dislike monopolistic and uncompetitive behaviors. Yes, I am a big fan (in the good sense) of Open Source. I really believe in it as another way of doing software. I understand it's motivations and benefits, and respect them. What I really dislike is that, based on strength of market and current capabilities, one company can get all the cake and keep it out of reach of the rest of the world. That is what Microsoft does in many ways, some more evident than others.
I would give some examples, but for the brevity and partiality of this post I will just limit to say that there are many you can find discussions about around the web. Fortunately, not everything in Microsoft is that way. The bad thing about it is that the same inertia driving the software industry around the giant Microsoft has made that other platforms and products don't get as much attention -again, I understand, but not condone, the economical rationale-. Hard work has been done to push things in the other direction, and slowly but hardly getting results.
Would I want to work for Microsoft? Definitely. Would I do something to tie up the competence's freedom? No way, and I want to state this clearly from the beginning. Now, speaking from the other side of the coin, I really believe in Open Source, but I don't see it necessarily as antagonist. Is just that both approaches excel in one part or another -beware, because both have the potential to excel on the other's strengths-.
I've said bad things about Microsoft in the past. I must confess, when one is inexpert and biased by other people, giving partial opinions is easy (That's the good or bad thing about strong opinions weakly held). But now, after a few more years of experience using computers, and inevitably, its products, I feel obligated to give an opinion.
I use [other OS] for almost all my needs. Every time I boot into Windows, my friends and teammates won't let me lie, I spend the next thirty minutes ranting about how much I hate Windows. I stop ranting when Windows stops booting (including services and who the hell knows what else), and becomes almost fully usable. Thirty freaking minutes, you can't tell me that is not a waste of time. My [OS] boots in 5 minutes, 10 at most when I hadn't done any maintenance.
Is that really a problem of the software? Maybe. Do I have to hate Microsoft for that? Definitely not. Windows consumes resources like a monster, but definitely the computer I use isn't suited for that matter (BTW, I am talking of Win XP, my computer would commit suicide if I installed Vista). I am a software developer, and have .NET, VS, SQL Server and a hell lot more of services that are essential to my day-by-day work. My computer is a somewhat old Thinkpad T41 that I have pulled to its limits; Windows may be a good platform but surely requires a more robust equipment. I am not discussing here if that's actually good or bad for the common user, I'm just saying the cause of my frustration is that I have a small bad suited computer for all the work I have to do as developer.
Having said that, my main point: I still dislike Microsoft. To be more specific, I dislike monopolistic and uncompetitive behaviors. Yes, I am a big fan (in the good sense) of Open Source. I really believe in it as another way of doing software. I understand it's motivations and benefits, and respect them. What I really dislike is that, based on strength of market and current capabilities, one company can get all the cake and keep it out of reach of the rest of the world. That is what Microsoft does in many ways, some more evident than others.
I would give some examples, but for the brevity and partiality of this post I will just limit to say that there are many you can find discussions about around the web. Fortunately, not everything in Microsoft is that way. The bad thing about it is that the same inertia driving the software industry around the giant Microsoft has made that other platforms and products don't get as much attention -again, I understand, but not condone, the economical rationale-. Hard work has been done to push things in the other direction, and slowly but hardly getting results.
Would I want to work for Microsoft? Definitely. Would I do something to tie up the competence's freedom? No way, and I want to state this clearly from the beginning. Now, speaking from the other side of the coin, I really believe in Open Source, but I don't see it necessarily as antagonist. Is just that both approaches excel in one part or another -beware, because both have the potential to excel on the other's strengths-.
2 comments:
Awesome, you quote Bob Sutton! He's also been a tremendous inspiration for me. Once I took a bright green book titled "Weird Ideas that Work". The book offerd a tremendous apporach on innovation and business management. Afterwards, I realized Bod is a professor at Stanford, bieng involved in the Technology Ventures program. If you can get it, try to read that material. Otherwise, "The No Asshole Rule" also looks nice.
Woah, you only keep my to-read list growing @_@. well, I read his blog some time ago, and I liked his ideas. Actually, I realized that unknowingly I shared some of his thinking. "Strong ideas weakly held" is something I try to go for everyday.
Thanks for the recommendations.
Post a Comment