More Like Micro$oft Winblows August 24, 2012 7:10 AM   Subscribe

This Windows 8 post seems to me to be editorializing via omission.

Its title and content suggest a very negative stance on Windows 8, and it only links to extremely negative reviews, when in fact there are plenty of other reviews from reputable sources which range from positive to measured. Why not link to a variety of opinions? Why not take a neutral stance in the post itself, at least?
posted by gilrain to MetaFilter-Related at 7:10 AM (92 comments total)

So now we're politicizing software reviews?
posted by dfriedman at 7:10 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


The topic of the post was not "Windows 8." The topic of the post was "negative reviews of Windows 8."
posted by muddgirl at 7:11 AM on August 24, 2012 [15 favorites]


There is nothing that says that posts need to look at both sides of any particular issue. The basic prosciption about editorializing is so that a thread doesn't get pre-fucked with some sort of GRAR-y presentation in a topic where people are likely to holler at each other and make things toxic on the site. A post about how people don't like Windows 8 is not that sort of post, it just may also not be a thread where people have an open discussion about W8.

That said, we spoke to a few people in that thread who seem to be using it as their personal soapbox and told them not to do that.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:12 AM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


I guess my reaction is "meh."

FPP writers link what they want to link.

If you want to link to more neutral or positive reactions to Win8, round 'em up and put 'em in a comment. I probably wouldn't post your own FPP about it at this point.
posted by kavasa at 7:12 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Hm, okay. That makes sense. It seems to me that a post on the topic of "everyone seems to hate Windows 8" is a bit disengenuous when it fails to address, "however, here are also a bunch of people who actually don't hate Windows 8".

But okay, I can understand that a post about Windows 8 would be held to a more neutral standard than a post about negative reactions to Windows 8.

Question: would a post about positive reactions to Windows 8 be deleted as a double?
posted by gilrain at 7:14 AM on August 24, 2012


(I don't actually intend to make such a post regardless of the answer, just curious.)
posted by gilrain at 7:16 AM on August 24, 2012


(Actually, the thrust of the post is probably this link, which is about way more than "Windows 8 suxors". But it's pretty hard to miss that because it's the last link in the post, under the fold.)
posted by muddgirl at 7:19 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Question: would a post about positive reactions to Windows 8 be deleted as a double?

The very next or the very same day? Historically those have been deleted as stunt posts, though I'm sure a mod will be along shortly to confirm/deny.
posted by librarylis at 7:21 AM on August 24, 2012


Why wouldn't you just post links to positive reactions to Win8 right there in the thread where the discussion is already taking place?
posted by elizardbits at 7:21 AM on August 24, 2012 [3 favorites]


elizardbits: Why wouldn't you just post links to positive reactions to Win8 right there in the thread where the discussion is already taking place?

I consider that thread to be toxic, or at least very unpleasant, for any positive discussion of Win 8, to be honest. In just the way that jessamyn describes the anti-editorializing guidelines as preventing.

However, I understand and accept the ruling, here. I'm moving on beginning now.
posted by gilrain at 7:23 AM on August 24, 2012


Looks fine to me on my Macbook Pro. What browser are you using?
posted by special-k at 7:23 AM on August 24, 2012 [5 favorites]


Yeah a post on exactly the opposite perspective within the same day would look stunty though we really can't say if we'd delete something like that or not. But there is a long history of people displeased with one thread's treatment of a topic who channel that frustration into a "competing" thread and those are rarely good threads on their own. Wait a bit until there's something neat you've found on the topic that you'd like to post about is usually a better approach.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:26 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


So now we're politicizing software reviews?

Now? Always. As long as nerds have a place to gather, always.
posted by bonehead at 7:27 AM on August 24, 2012 [4 favorites]


gilrain: I consider that thread to be toxic, or at least very unpleasant, for any positive discussion...

Yeah, I totally hate threads that make people with a minority opinion feel unwelcome. You express something that the mob doesn't agree with, and boom, a dozen users jump on you. Pointless, really.
posted by gman at 7:29 AM on August 24, 2012 [11 favorites]


Microsoft is not going to sit back any longer and let itself be silenced!
posted by octobersurprise at 7:34 AM on August 24, 2012


Eh. Not my best work. Let's try that again.

so that a thread doesn't get pre-fucked

I like to think of that as "pre-installed."
posted by octobersurprise at 7:38 AM on August 24, 2012 [5 favorites]


bonehead: "Now? Always. As long as nerds have a place to gather, always."

Some nerds pre-date software
posted by exogenous at 7:44 AM on August 24, 2012


The topic of the post was not "Windows 8." The topic of the post was "negative reviews of Windows 8."

That probably makes it a double or triple.
posted by Artw at 8:00 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Double post doesn't mean 'two posts on the same topic." Otherwise any links to sports topics would be verboten.
posted by muddgirl at 8:04 AM on August 24, 2012


It doesn't bring anything new to the table to distinguish itself from the previous posts.
posted by Artw at 8:07 AM on August 24, 2012


But a double post is a specific stabdard - two posts about the same link/same article.

"Two posts on the same or similar topics" seems to be a different standard only enforced when there is a current, active discussion ongoing.
posted by muddgirl at 8:12 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


There's an open Microsoft sucks post by the same user. At least that one has some stronger links though.
posted by Artw at 8:21 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


I think we can all agree that all OSs suck.
posted by crunchland at 8:30 AM on August 24, 2012 [5 favorites]


On the plus side, the Windows 8 stuff was popping up in Apple/Samsung - on the grounds, I guess, that it's sort of a mobile OS. If that unfouls those rotors, that's probably a good thing - in fact, it might be early enough to clean out the derail...
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:31 AM on August 24, 2012


If we're going to be Fair and Balanced the counterpart thread should be about how everyone hates Mountain Lion.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:37 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


I've made these kinds of product review threads before and I prefer to make them a bit more even handed than this one was. A link dump of negative reviews isn't terrible interesting; it's like the opposite of Pepsi Blue and I fear we're going to get a bunch of "27 Helens agree, ______ sux" posts. That said it's not my thread.
posted by 2bucksplus at 8:41 AM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


There's an open Microsoft sucks post by the same user. At least that one has some stronger links though.

This is the crux of the problem for me. Not only is it editorialized, but the poster has an existing microsoft sux soapbox thread.
posted by Big_B at 9:11 AM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


everyone hates Mountain Lion

*sniffle* Poor kitty. I liked it better than regular Lion, which was a pretty crappy rev.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:12 AM on August 24, 2012


I wish we could go back to using sequential numbers. I can never remember which cat is which.
posted by ook at 9:22 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Windows 8? Ha, I've Windows 98 losers.
posted by Elmore at 9:25 AM on August 24, 2012 [4 favorites]


Say what you will about Ubuntu's latest direction, at least it's easy to tell how their versions work. Unlike Apple's unordered cats and whatever the fuck Microsoft feels like at any particular time. I mean, 3 -> 95 -> 98 -> ME -> XP -> Vista -> 7 -> 8. The fuck?
posted by kmz at 9:34 AM on August 24, 2012 [3 favorites]


Apple's unordered cats

Well, you know how difficult it is to herd cats.
posted by Egg Shen at 9:35 AM on August 24, 2012 [8 favorites]


The fuck? -- I really can't see working up much juice over what they name an OS. It's like fixating on what color they paint the handle on a hammer.
posted by crunchland at 9:46 AM on August 24, 2012


3 -> 95 -> 98 -> ME -> XP -> Vista -> 7 -> 8

It's like when my 4-year-old did a countdown that went "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Thursday, 14, 16...blast-off!"
posted by not that girl at 9:50 AM on August 24, 2012 [11 favorites]


There's a whole bifurcation with NT and 2000 that's missing there.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:51 AM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


Not to mention you included the OS THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED.
posted by Big_B at 9:54 AM on August 24, 2012


I think we can all agree that all OSs suck.

Yeah, but some OSes suck less than others and then we're off to the races again...

everyone hates Mountain Lion

Don't listen to the haters, Mountain Lion! I love you!
posted by Zed at 9:55 AM on August 24, 2012


I think the official Windows numbering scheme goes:
3 = 3
4 = 95/98
Hey, look at that XBox! = ME
5 = XP
6 = Vista
7 = 7
8 = 8
posted by Rock Steady at 9:57 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


I don't really care about OS wars, but obviously some people do.

It's weird that Egg Shen pre-polled Metatalk to make sure that a goodly percentage of us are Apple users. He posted his passle of negative reviews right after that MetaTalk and that looks a little stunty or something.

That said, he's had some really great posts this month so I don't mind this one clunker much.
posted by anotherpanacea at 10:04 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rocksteady: I think the official Windows numbering scheme goes:
Oddly enough, the official internal version system is:
Windows 2000  == v5.0
Windows XP    == v5.1
Windows Vista == v6.0
Windows 7     == v6.1
Windows 8     == v6.2
Which makes sense once you realize XP was based on 2000's guts, with most of the work north of the kernel. Likewise with Vista to Win7, which were largely UI and subsystem changes, etc.
posted by introp at 10:13 AM on August 24, 2012 [3 favorites]


@introp: makes even more sense when you realize 2000 is based off NT, which has versions 3.1, 3.5, 3.51, and 4.0.

The Windows 3.1, 95, 98, et al series doesn't actually have much to do with current Windows except look and feel.
posted by sbutler at 10:25 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Windows Vista Team Blog: Why 7?
We learned a lot about using 5.1 for XP and how that helped developers with version checking for API compatibility. We also had the lesson reinforced when we applied the version number in the Windows Vista code as Windows 6.0-- that changing basic version numbers can cause application compatibility issues.

So we decided to ship the Windows 7 code as Windows 6.1 - which is what you will see in the actual version of the product in cmd.exe or computer properties.
posted by zamboni at 10:26 AM on August 24, 2012


The fuck? -- I really can't see working up much juice over what they name an OS. It's like fixating on what color they paint the handle on a hammer.

As someone that manages code versioning and code lines and deals with people that think the same way with regards to internal versioning and code line organization all I can do is tell you what I told them,

"No, we shouldn't name build servers after Muppets or wildlife (specifically birds) native toyour home country, it's confusing and very much sub-par."

*facepalm* Do what you want to with regards to external names and marketing but ffs leave it at the door when you enter into the dev-space/SCM side of things. /rant
posted by RolandOfEld at 10:32 AM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Oh, and the Dev code lines were also named in the same fashion, that was even worse to sort out and follow logically, forgot to mention that one. Eat that product managers!
posted by RolandOfEld at 10:33 AM on August 24, 2012


It's like fixating on what color they paint the handle on a hammer.

You scoff now, but wait until you drop your green-handled hammer from the roof into a wide and verdant swath of ivy.
posted by oneirodynia at 10:34 AM on August 24, 2012 [6 favorites]


I think we can all agree that all OSs suck.

I'm still carrying a very tiny, very low-latency torch for BeOS, though.
posted by davejay at 10:48 AM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


See, we always code-name internal releases because you never know what version they'll be labeled at release. You merge a bugfix to the "zelda" and "mario" lines, and those might be 7.0, or 7.1, or 8.0, or 7.0 Xtreme Super Batman Edition. What do we, as devs, care? It's rev 9813, merged to zelda and mario, not back-ported to peach. There's a trivial dot file generated from the SCM tool that, run through graphviz, shows the relationship between branches, revisions, and dates. (Only the new guys need it, and then only for a few weeks.)

</sidetrack>
posted by introp at 10:49 AM on August 24, 2012


It's like fixating on what color they paint the handle on a hammer.

How else do coordinate your hammer with your overalls?
posted by octobersurprise at 11:07 AM on August 24, 2012


Yea but why not name the feature branch for, ya'know, the feature it was created for?

They did it for release lines too and I guess I didn't mention that above. That was the absolute worst.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:10 AM on August 24, 2012


I love Snow Leopard and am still resisting Lion and Mountain Lion tooth and nail.

This, despite my favorite word puzzle game only being available through the Mac app store for Lion+ users (why hast thou forsaken me, SpellTower?).

With my iPad gone, I have to smuggle my spouse's away from him just to get my word fix now. :(
posted by misha at 12:19 PM on August 24, 2012


I'm still carrying a very tiny, very low-latency torch for BeOS, though.

I have one for AmigaOS, at least back in the day, it was pretty impressive. Both it and BeOS had a lot of foundation in them that has been carried out by other OSs.
posted by juiceCake at 12:39 PM on August 24, 2012


The only problem with pouring one out for AmigaOS as it comes back from the grave again, each time in more putrid zombie form, and requires putting down with a shotgun.

But yes, back in the day...
posted by Artw at 12:42 PM on August 24, 2012


Why not take a neutral stance in the post itself, at least?

Because this isn't Wikipedia?
posted by MartinWisse at 12:49 PM on August 24, 2012 [6 favorites]


Yeah, I saw that thread and avoided it like the plague. Given the framing it was pretty clearly going to be a one-sided discussion, given that most people haven't used Win8 yet and unless they've been reading a wide variety of reviews their perception would be strongly colored by the articles chosen.

That said, not a big deal. Plenty of other threads to read...
posted by wildcrdj at 1:47 PM on August 24, 2012


SpellTower

Oh no. Now I've downloaded this and I'm never going to do anything else ever again.

Another victim of the OS wars!
posted by grapesaresour at 1:56 PM on August 24, 2012 [3 favorites]


... because everything must be fair + balanced.
posted by philip-random at 2:05 PM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's like when my 4-year-old did a countdown that went "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Thursday, 14, 16...blast-off!"

That's a countup. Also, your kid forgot purple comes after 3.
posted by cjorgensen at 2:58 PM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


I missed the Snow Leopard thing (it was when I thought I was going to get a different computer, so I didn't bother) and now I want it and Apple doesn't seem to have it on their site anymore as a download.

Also: "Question: would a post about positive reactions to Windows 8 be deleted as a double?"

The best thing to do is generally to just post that in thread and realize that you're not going to take any extraordinary lumps for liking Win8. It's not like being a Republican or anything.
posted by klangklangston at 3:24 PM on August 24, 2012


We learned a lot about using 5.1 for XP and how that helped developers with version checking for API compatibility. We also had the lesson reinforced when we applied the version number in the Windows Vista code as Windows 6.0-- that changing basic version numbers can cause application compatibility issues.

I am genuinely confused by this. How does a version number cause a compatibility issue, exactly?
posted by ook at 3:36 PM on August 24, 2012


Some software installers (drivers, particularly) use version numbering to decide whether to run or not.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:43 PM on August 24, 2012


I love Snow Leopard and am still resisting Lion and Mountain Lion tooth and nail.

Preach it, sister. We should start a group.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:43 PM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


That said, he's had some really great posts this month so I don't mind this one clunker much.

Actually, he's posted a FPP every single day since he joined 31 days ago. Very odd.
posted by smackfu at 4:07 PM on August 24, 2012


That's a terrible post. I'm sure I could go on Amazon and cherrypick negative reviews of "Hamlet," "The Great Gatsby," and probably an actual loaf of sliced bread.
posted by drjimmy11 at 4:41 PM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Actually, he's posted a FPP every single day since he joined 31 days ago. Very odd.

The user name and profile hint at the fact that this may be a new day rather than a new user. I don't care one way or the other as long as it's in good faith and I'm not going to dig, but should we care if a new user posts regularly? I don't post FPPs (aside from one so far), but I lurked for years before I had an account, so I knew the atmosphere and what made a good post long before I joined, so I don't think that this by itself is so odd.
posted by Clinging to the Wreckage at 4:56 PM on August 24, 2012


I am definitely going to hold out until Microsoft releases Windows The Fuck.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:48 PM on August 24, 2012 [2 favorites]


I think we can all agree that all OSs suck.

From Microsoft to Macintosh
To Lin-Line-Lin-Lie... nux...
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:57 PM on August 24, 2012


Windows The Fuck

The huge fuck? The something terrible?
posted by XMLicious at 7:24 PM on August 24, 2012


Tsk.
posted by Artw at 8:25 PM on August 24, 2012


Hammer handles should be painted red.
posted by panaceanot at 8:48 PM on August 24, 2012 [1 favorite]


Yeah that is a pretty brutal post. Of course it doesn't matter if 8 succeeds or not. Code isn't like wheat, it won't rot in the fields if nobody buys it this time around, you'll be getting the same code when you buy windows 9

I don't really use version numbers anymore. I just use iteration numbers.
posted by Ad hominem at 9:45 PM on August 24, 2012


So the takeaway is: if you have a strong opinion on anything current and tech-related, post as soon as possible with as many links as you can find which support your viewpoint. You get to set the initial parameters of discussion, and anyone with a different opinion is relegated to rebutting in comments because posts on the same topic from a different perspective will be deleted.

This sounds like the plot of a West Wing episode after the series started to peter out.
posted by SakuraK at 12:25 AM on August 25, 2012 [3 favorites]


If that was the case, there would've only been one cute cat link here ever. I'm sure it would be possible to create a Win8 = WinGr8! post, just not as a direct rebuttal to another recent post.

And you'd still get a lot of negative feedback, because a lot of people just don't like it no matter how much you think they're wrong...
posted by MartinWisse at 12:39 AM on August 25, 2012


While I normally respect the mods opinion on most issues, this sets a bad presidence from my point of view.

The post is negative and inflammatory in its framing by omission. The contents are toxic. The mods have clearly stated that it is probably not the best place for a positive discussion on reviews of the product, and that such posts would have to extremely well written to not be deleted from the front page as stunt posts.

I can't wait for some discussions on religion, gender roles, racism and other hotbed topics that can highlight exactly why that is a bad stance.

By its design, the first post was a stunt post in its own right. The
posted by Nanukthedog at 5:14 AM on August 25, 2012


I can't wait for some discussions on religion, gender roles, racism and other hotbed topics that can highlight exactly why that is a bad stance.


I don't want to speak for the mods, but I'm sort of assuming that they'll see religion, gender roles, racism and other hotbed topics as more worthy of scrutiny than operating systems, which - it must be said - are pretty much outrage-voluntary. Nobody ever got Windows-bashed, to my knowledge, and - although people behave very badly in Windows/Mac, Apple/Google, Android/iOS threads et cet - one reason they get to do so is probably because the stakes are really very low.
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:27 AM on August 25, 2012 [1 favorite]


anyone with a different opinion is relegated to rebutting in comments because posts on the same topic from a different perspective will be deleted.

We did not say that.

The mods have clearly stated that it is probably not the best place for a positive discussion on reviews of the product, and that such posts would have to extremely well written to not be deleted from the front page as stunt posts.


We also did not say that.

We said don't make one the same day because you're annoyed at the post that exists, wait a while and make one a little later. That's fine. Making a single-link-Gawker post about "the other side" also being jerks is not really an equivalent situation. And yeah if this one user makes another "Windows 8 sucks" post we will talk to him about not being an axe grinding user, but there's nothing inherently wrong with "Boy people really don't like this OS" except that generally negatively toned posts tend to bring out more ill will and bad feeling than "Here is a neat/cool thing on the internet."
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:38 AM on August 25, 2012


Some software installers (drivers, particularly) use version numbering to decide whether to run or not.

Ah, thanks. So it's not so much a compatibility problem as a "lazily written installer" problem.
posted by ook at 9:17 AM on August 25, 2012


Okay, so lets look at what we've actually got in the meat of the articles and discuss the merit of each author.

First: Tim Edwards. Tim Edwards is an editor for PC Games, so one could view him as an authority in all things PC - except no, not on a radical change in OSes. For starters, The Win8 OS is designed for the mobile platform. This is Microsoft's effort to adapt to a changing market place. The desktop PC market (even the Laptop market) has reached its zenith and until there is a compelling reason to go back, the market is no longer focused on retaining the same experience that users have had. In effect, the OS is not designed for him, and he has - like others before him - become an old man in a hat on the information super highway (doing 45 in the fast lane, and probably knocking over a trash can when he turns into his driveway - just before he tells those kids to get off his lawn.) Like Microsoft, he is looking at this from a position of failure to adapt. Microsoft has now begun their adaptation to the new paradigm. Clearly he hasn't.

Next: Igor Ljubuncic. Igor is a Linux expert. He is in fact an OS expert and also has many valid points, but I think I'd wager that he may have an axe to grind against Microsoft and would view anything the company put out in perhaps the worst possible light. If I have to really spell out how this would jade his opinion - well then, go read fifteen or twenty years of Slashdot archives and get back to me on why Linux users have an axe to grind with Microsoft.

Third: Farhad Manjoo. Farhad is a staff writer for Slate on Technology. Certainly a journalist doesn't have a bias right? Fox News tells me their fair and balanced and clearly all other Journalists are as well. If you've read him in the past - he would qualify as an apple Zealot. Yes, he reviews android devices, but he is extremely willing to point out how and where they copy apple, that maybe google shouldn't be trusted anymore, that people should design their websites around his iPad and iPhone, and that the latest Mac Book Pro is the best MacBook Pro ever... which is an interesting perspective.

Fourth: Woody Leonhard. Here's an interesting choice. He is, in fact, an expert in Windows and Office. He's also specifically an expert in bitching about it. Yes it is his principal OS, but he intentionally works in the spaces where it fails to work. He is, what I would consider, a driving force for positive change through negativity. (Metafilter: a driving for positive change through negativity.) His reviews and take on things are focused on showing the inherent problems and sticking points with Microsoft products. Its an interesting space. While he does badmouth the product, he'll be shilling a few books on how to make your life easier by buying his book on Win8 in no time.

Next: John C. Dvorak. This is actually a very good article on how it doesn't meet the business client's needs from today's perspective. Once again though, this assumes that businesses are continuing about the same paradigm as they have for the past twenty years and will be operating in the desktop mode. Look around at your place of employment. Tablets are everywhere, meetings are everywhere and your ability to bring your PC with you is now brought to a reality. This wasn't designed for what he is used to and yes, businesses will stick with Win7 for probably the next few years - until either a business skin is developed or the business world goes ga-ga for tablets completely. It is coming. He's behind the curve.

Next: Preston Gralla. Here's an interesting article. He's pro-Microsoft himself, but interviewing an ex-Microsoft employee. There are a ton of valid points in it; however, the PC market being up only fractions of a point though is lazy journalism and conversation. The PC market is saturated, and no - as of yet, this isn't the OS that will convert apple fanatics back to the PC. Yes, the new paradigm potentially is in direct competition with Valve's business model of pushing software onto your machine via the web. With it going far more 'Microsoft' controlled, like Apple, this is something that probably pisses off Valve quite a bit.

Skipping the only Microsoft press statement we get to our last person...

Last on the commentators: Michael Mace. Here's a former exec at Palm and Apple. It benefits him to grind an axe, probably financially as well as emotionally.

And the cherry-picked dig from the OP at the end: Yes! DOOM AND GLOOM! If this forces Dell and HP to abandon their PC lines #1 I'll be amazed, but #2 - it isn't the only thing. (As stated above, the workplace is increasing in the tablet paradigm.)

So, while yes, these articles could be used to launch a constructive conversation as either part of a larger conversation on it, these are the only articles on it. Sure the previously is semi-positive... But really, We've got a collection of experts that - eh ... are really cherry picked for their ability to be ticked off by the OS to begin with.

Also, as a side note - I dislike Win8, and yes, I AM already back to Win7 as well, but I freely admit that I'm not at a point yet where I can make the paradigm shift. Give me a bit more time to integrate my life into the tablet, and I bet I'll be back.
posted by Nanukthedog at 9:53 AM on August 25, 2012 [6 favorites]


So it's not so much a compatibility problem as a "lazily written installer" problem.

Partially, yes. Another reason is that a driver that works in XP won't be validated by the validation process API that exists in Vista/7/8, and will not, therefore, actually work when installed in Vista/7/8. As one example, say.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:41 AM on August 25, 2012


So it's not so much a compatibility problem as a "lazily written installer" problem.

Not lazy, just hierarchical. The code has to have a way to figure out whether it will work, and using the logic of "if version >= 6 then it's ok" is easier than maintaining a hard coded list of valid OSs. Especially if you want to avoid things like having to release patches when MS comes out with 6.12 and your list only had 6.1.
posted by gjc at 10:51 AM on August 25, 2012


but I'm sort of assuming that they'll see religion, gender roles, racism and other hotbed topics as more worthy of scrutiny than operating systems,

"in operating systems we trust"

I'm pretty sure this on the hundred dollar bill somewhere, in Latin, of course, spelled backward, because it is in fact a Satanic incantation.
posted by philip-random at 11:04 AM on August 25, 2012


Not lazy, just hierarchical. The code has to have a way to figure out whether it will work, and using the logic of "if version >= 6 then it's ok" is easier than maintaining a hard coded list of valid OSs.

Except that they were saying switching from 5 to 6 caused problems, but 5 to 5.1 would not have. Implies that a lot of developers were doing a sort of compromise checking for == current major release but >= current minor release... I guess in theory that sort of makes sense, in that a major release is more likely to have major changes that may inflict with your software... But it's still guesswork, and in practice doesn't seem to have worked out very well given that MS had to alter their own release numbering to work around it...
posted by ook at 11:26 AM on August 25, 2012


Well, here I am writing my program, it's 2008. Oh, look, Vista is out! It handles Subsystem X differently from Windows XP, and my program uses Subsystem X! No problem. Vista is version 6, and Windows XP is version 5.

IF operatingsystem = 6 THEN
(Use my special Vista code)
ELSE
(Use my Windows XP code)

Works great! Until Windows 7 ships, which has the same Subsystem X as Vista, of course, not XP. So I need to use the Vista code. But the check I wrote for operatingsystem only checks for V6. If Windows 7 is version 7, it doesn't work.

So if instead Microsoft leaves the version number of Windows 7 as 6, countless dumb programmers like me will find the code continues to work. If they don't, it'll be all Microsoft's fault, this stupid new unstable Windows 7.

Quite naturally they leave it as version 6.
posted by alasdair at 4:32 PM on August 25, 2012 [1 favorite]


WIN6-4EVA
posted by ook at 4:52 PM on August 25, 2012


Making a single-link-Gawker post about "the other side" also being jerks is not really an equivalent situation

Thought it was a pretty interesting article myself, more from a retail gone bad angle than, "the other side" being this or that. And a single link post is better than any lazy pandering mess of a post made out of whatever nothingy links tootle throws up up - strip those out and it's basically a zero link post intended as a soapbox.
posted by Artw at 9:53 PM on August 25, 2012 [1 favorite]


Not to mention you included the OS THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED.
posted by Big_B at 17:54 on August 24 [+] [!]


If I ever create an OS I am absolutely naming it "Voldemort".
posted by jonnyploy at 2:50 AM on August 26, 2012 [2 favorites]


I thought that the linked articles came of as hysterical and silly "The classic Start Menu is gone, and you can no longer disable Metro and use the normal desktop interface as you should."

Should I? Thanks fuckface

and

OK, let me be blunt. No one is going to write their business PowerPoint presentations on a smartphone. No one is going to design a new car on a tablet. No one will run protein folding on their smartphone. No one will play ArmA II on a smartphone.

No, no one will because you're talking about an operating system you wanker - people use the apps that run on the operating system to do those things.
posted by mattoxic at 7:03 AM on August 26, 2012


any lazy pandering mess of a post made out of whatever nothingy links tootle throws up up

This reminded me of the part in C.S. Lewis's The Screwtape Letters where the letter breaks off in the middle of lambasting Wormwood and then resumes: "In the heat of composition I find that I have inadvertently allowed myself to assume the form of a large centipede".
posted by Egg Shen at 8:10 AM on August 26, 2012 [1 favorite]


Centipede or not, you have reached your limit of ranty anti-Windows posts for the foreseeable future without becoming That Guy about them.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:32 AM on August 26, 2012 [2 favorites]


Although to be completely objective and fair, Windows 8 does blow goats.
posted by flabdablet at 9:43 AM on August 26, 2012


I think a Congressional investigation is warranted. Why is Microsoft so invested in making goats happy?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 6:09 PM on August 26, 2012


I'm going to leave this in both threads: Windows 8 productivity: Who moved my cheese? Oh, there it is. - looks to be a very useful guide to getting things on Win8. Bit keyboard heavy, but definatly some stuff I'll be using.
posted by Artw at 7:31 PM on August 26, 2012


For starters, The Win8 OS is designed for the mobile platform.

But that's kind of the point: most of the real criticism of the OS is in one way or another related to Microsoft's (IMHO) bizarre decision to deploy an OS interface designed for the mobile platform on non-mobile devices.

Mobile probably is the future, but the future isn't here yet.
posted by ook at 6:48 AM on August 27, 2012


« Older Trying to find an AskMe answer about what to do if...   |   You Found My Bubbleship! Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments