In article <[log in to unmask]>,
David Swanson  <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It's not that I'm particularly fond of Microsoft or their products or their
> practices, but that I can understand them and see the reason they feel that
> some particular desicion or product is the direction for their company.

OK, I can see Microsoft's point of view. I can understand why they make
the decisions they do. It's even rational, if you accept their premises.

That doesn't change the fact that those decisions cause endless amounts of
wasted make-work for millions of people, because Microsofts goals are only
indirectly related to theirs.

When someone has spent Thanksgiving rebuilding a laptop because there is no
way to boot NT into a "repair" mode, nor any documentation on what's supposed
to be where in the filesystem (except in the most general terms) so there's
no way TO repair it once you do manage to scrounge up a bootable Linux floppy
with an NTFS module... and you can see that this apalling state of affairs
is due entirely to Microsoft's rational strategic plan...

Well, pardon me, but just because I can understand why Microsoft or Al Quaida
or the IRA behave the way they do, and can see the sources of their current
activities, I don't see why the heck I should have to cut any of them any slack
for it. Do you?

Look, I *use* Microsoft products. I've even recommended them when they have
been the best fit for the job. That doesn't mean that they aren't deserving
of the occasional rubbishing because their (cold, rational, strategic) actions
have caused so much pointless, frustrating, and utterly wasted time.

--
 `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
  'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
                                                       -- [log in to unmask]
         Disclaimer: WWFD?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *