Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Why does MS Marketing Still Try To Mislead Everyone?


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#1
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Here we have, since April 8, the much anticipated "Update 1" aka "Spring Update".

It said it was going to be huge - over 800 MB. It didn't download anywhere near that much - more like 200 MB in actuality. I monitored it. So clearly even the size has been "Marketeered" into fantasy, presumably to make recipients think it's more than it really is.

Microsoft built it up to be the great hope of all desktop users. They "leaked" it to get the hype going.

In reality it's virtually NO different on the desktop side at all, and very little different on the Metro/Modern side. I don't give a rat's a** about Metro/Modern apps, and couldn't care less whether the Taskbar shows over there, or any thing else about those toys. I don't see 'em, I don't use 'em. There literally is NOTHING new or better on the desktop side.

Really, there's about enough functionality in this "Update 1" to justify a download of maybe 30 MB. And it took HOW long to prepare?

When will Microsoft learn that just continuing to pile on the BS deeper and deeper is NOT what Windows users want?!?

-Noel


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
Soukyuu

Soukyuu

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 183 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Replace every instance of "user" with "power user" and then your post makes sense.
Sadly, the majority of people I know that qualify as "users" (aka: "facebook, mail, A/V streaming and maybe some office" crowd) are quite happy with windows 8 and metro.
The ones being left out are the "power" users who use desktop applications to create content, something metro isn't made for. But we're not the ones who give Microsoft the bulk of their income, so is it that surprising?

Oh and my download was about 700MB. I do agree there are only few visible changes though. They probably had to rewrite a lot of code to be able to make them. If you ever coded a large project, you might know just how complicated it might be to change something when your code structure doesn't allow it.
AMD Phenom II X4 970BE | 12GB DDR3 | nVidia 260GTX | Windows 8.1u1 x64 Pro | Primary
Intel C2D T7250 | 4GB DDR2 | nVidia 8600m GT | Windows 7 x64 Pro | Secondary

#3
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,378 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

The queer thing is that what are actually "real" improvements are too intelligent to be marketed. :w00t:

 

Example, the newish WOF:

http://reboot.pro/to...ation/?p=183343

which might be (or become) a feature of incredible utility, was never AFAIK ever (or scarcely) mentioned.

 

I believe (and this is consistent with MS history) there are two sides of the company, the developers (that very often are quite good at writing software, but, understandably know very little about communication) and the designers/marketers (that know nothing about anything and just give people what they think people may want to hear).

The link between the two, which is - or should be - the management, is what lately has failed, and failed big (IMHO).

 

Now we have reached "pure folly" with the stupid decision that update 1 is compulsory to have future updates.

Even if, on the outcry of all the serious IT people they managed to enlarge the "window" from 1 month to almost 4:

http://arstechnica.c...ks-for-windows/

this timeline still does not meet the expectations (and actual needs) of companies where security and uptime is crucial (please read as all those that are in a field where "big money" is).

 

Given the issues that (historically) each and every "major" critical update has introduced in MS OS's the idea of the "new" model of "continuous updates" must be for IT professional a terrible nightmare.

The "one size fits for all", that I criticized also in the good ol' times when the user OS (Windows ME) was merged with the professional OS (Windows 2000) to create the Windows XP, had some sense (though forcing upon "home" users features and complexities of the "professional" world), but now forcing upon "professional" users features (and vulnerabilities) to have a "same" OS that can be appealing to the home user is suicidal. 

 

jaclaz


  • steven4554 and MrMaguire like this

#4
LeicaIIIf

LeicaIIIf
  • Member
  • 5 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

There were actually 2 updates with the same number released for the 8.1 update.  KB2919355 was the large update (over 800MB) released on 8 April.  Then on 17 April I noticed another KB2919355 (about 200MB) which I also installed.  I think the smaller one was offered only to those people who were able to install the large update released on 8 April.  According to the MS Community Forum there are still a lot of people who cannot install the large update.

 

In my case the update fixed all the problems I was having with my USB 3 external hard drives, so I am happy for that.  Don't know what else it fixed.

 

LeicaIIIf


Edited by LeicaIIIf, 19 April 2014 - 08:16 PM.


#5
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 6,022 posts
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

no, the other Updates offered under KB2919355 where Updates to fix bugs which where found later (WSUS issue for example).


Posted Image

#6
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
http://support.micro....com/kb/2919355

The update that keeps on giving.

-Noel

#7
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,378 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

OT :ph34r:, but not much ;), another good recent example is Intel.

 

They bragged a lot at CES2014 about their Edison and how good the Quark was and how tiny (SD card size) the whole thingy was, and in less than three months later:

http://www.bit-tech....l-edison-atom/1

they announced that everything is OK, but an Atom will be used instead, and the thingy will be bigger in size.

 

 

jaclaz



#8
Flasche

Flasche

    A bottled message!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 594 posts
  • OS:ME
  • Country: Country Flag

It's not that its M$ misleading people, but companies in general. People will do anything to get an extra couple bucks.


Seeker Of Truth by E. E. Cummings                                                                                           Quote (Me)

  • seeker of truth                                                 "If you want to reach and discover the true meaning of order; You must go through chaos first."            344d0f9.jpg
  • follow no path                                 
  • all paths lead where
  • truth is here
 

#9
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Yes but there used to be substance in addition to the Marketing BS. Now it's only hype left.

Who forgot that someone actually has to BUILD the better mousetrap?

-Noel

#10
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

is it just me

or they have more problems with this so called updates than with service pack-ing ? :)

 

is it just me

or everything that they plan, turns into pile of s*** ?


Edited by vinifera, 20 April 2014 - 05:22 PM.

If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#11
Flasche

Flasche

    A bottled message!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 594 posts
  • OS:ME
  • Country: Country Flag

is it just me

or they have more problems with this so called updates than with service pack-ing ? :)

 

is it just me

or everything that they plan, turns into pile of s*** ?

 

I thought windows 8.1 was a service pack originally. I thought really wrong. No its not just you. Every M$ thing latey is just a pig pile of... well you know.


Seeker Of Truth by E. E. Cummings                                                                                           Quote (Me)

  • seeker of truth                                                 "If you want to reach and discover the true meaning of order; You must go through chaos first."            344d0f9.jpg
  • follow no path                                 
  • all paths lead where
  • truth is here
 

#12
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

nope, these are more feature packs as they change the shell and functionality of OS

this was never been done in previous Win-OS-es, except people do b***h about XP SP2 which actually wasn't feature pack, it just reactivated things that were deactivated


Edited by vinifera, 21 April 2014 - 04:16 PM.

If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#13
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

It's not just you.  Microsoft seems to be populated by a bunch of noobs who prefer to do things a different way than the ways that worked in the past just because it's different.

 

I can't complain too much though...  My current setup is perfectly stable and I don't really have any reductions in functionality vs. Win 7.  I used hell out of it today doing insanely heavy software development and debugging and had nary a system hiccup.  It's not any better than Win 7, though - just about the same.  You'd think things would have improved in 5 years.

 

Only thing is that some kinds of disk I/O are slower in Win 8.1, but I have an insanely fast I/O subsystem so it's not noticeable in any real way except in comparative benchmarking/testing.

 

-Noel



#14
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,378 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

My current setup ...

Sure :).
But you have to ask yourself (and post here the answers) these questions:

  1. How much did it take in research, and applying tweaks, and *what not* to get to the current satisfying result?
  2. How much did it take in 2006 (or so) to have Vista :ph34r: run *as smooth* as the previous XP? <- Warning, this is a tricky question  ;)
  3. How much did it take in 2009 (or so) to have Seven run better/smoother than Vista and/or as smooth as (or better/smoother than) the previous XP?

Please add some considerations on how in the period between 2006 and 2014 the actual hardware has evolved and the possible effects of this evolution on performance.... :whistle:

 

jaclaz



#15
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I've said here and elsewhere that the effort it takes to make Windows 8 a productive system is unprecedented.

 

I used to set up engineering workstations on Windows since the beginning and we had people doing things you'd not think possible.  XP was good though it also advanced the move toward fluff.  Vista actually improved on XP - after the hardware and drivers caught up with its thirst for resources.  It took enough planning and sequencing and detailed knowledge to get Windows 7 tweaked/tuned up that I actually wrote a book on it.  I updated the book for WIndows 8 and yes, it got a good bit thicker.

 

A lot of folks have rose-colored memories of the great XP, but that system still did require regular reboots to keep working properly, and it wasn't as professional as we expect our current systems to be.  It could easily lose its way in the middle of a big copy.  It was great for its day but it is nothing special by today's standards.  I still boot it up in a VM fairly often, and it always surprises me how clunky it really is.

 

Thing is, it's possible for a computer operating system to be very, very good nowadays.  It's really not the time for Microsoft (or anyone) to be turning away from advancing the state of the art in the greedy pursuit of quick money.  We will not reach a "Star Trek" utopian future if we stop trying to improve computing.

 

-Noel


Edited by NoelC, 26 April 2014 - 11:44 PM.


#16
HarryTri

HarryTri

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 189 posts
  • OS:Windows 8 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Windows XP was and is great in terms of computing experience, it is totally worthy of it's name (xp derives from experience). Microsoft made the absolute OS and then... tried to make something better. They ignored two simple rules: 

1) You don't have to change a good GUI in order to improve an OS (you can change everything else instead).

2) You don't have to remove something every time you add something else!!!


Edited by HarryTri, 27 April 2014 - 02:20 PM.

I always love Windows XP!


#17
bphlpt

bphlpt

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,798 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag


Windows XP was and is great in terms of computing experience, it is totally worthy of it's name (xp derives from experience). Microsoft made the absolute OS and then... tried to make something better. They ignored two simple rules: 

1) You don't have to change a good GUI in order to improve an OS (you can change everything else instead).

2) You don't have to remove something every time you add something else!!!

 

XPclient would certainly agree with these statements, especially the second one.  I wonder how Win8.x would be today if MS had never removed any features or capabilities since Win2K, but only added everything they added and made sure all bugs were fixed and features were updated to work correctly with both older and newer hardware?  Well, it might have become an unwieldy mess, and the "average Joe" user would probably have been overwhelmed unless there were well defined presets to choose from, but if they had concentrated on making features as options that could be selected at install time it might have worked.  I guess we'll never know.

 

Cheers and Regards


Posted Image


#18
HarryTri

HarryTri

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 189 posts
  • OS:Windows 8 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

The option to choose is really important. In Windows XP you can choose between the new and the classic shell e.g. in the case of the Start Menu. In this way each individual chooses what he likes best and everyone is happy. Windows 8 still have many customization options (if you look for them you can find them e.g. taskbar icons with text like on Windows XP) but could and should have more. Why not somebody to be able to choose between the Start Screen and the Start Menu or have them both? I can't understand why it is the one or the other.


I always love Windows XP!


#19
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

maybe not relevant to any here

but I think they shot themself by changing UI elements all the time

 

up until Vista we had standard UI.. the classic one look, no matter if it was skinned or not

with Vista and 7 they changed it into fancy Aero (which granted was in development since late 2002)

 

but with 8 they try to force fullscreen UI crappy named "modern", ... and where did that led to... oh wait

they will bring back the _ [] X on it  :lol:

 

the one thing they will never learn that users  of Windows are not only new kids

but they have base users since 80-ies

 

thus UI must be modular and left for user to choose which one he/she/it likes/wants


If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#20
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I have to agree with you, Harry and all, that choice would be better than no choice.

 

Here's a good example of something having gotten worse after XP:

 

In XP you could set up Explorer to be quite dense - I mean you could have a lot of files/folders visible, because you could set up a small font and the lines could be made to display quite close together.

 

Now, everything's all spread apart and airy, with ever bigger fonts, and without a configuration option to counteract that trend.  Maybe that's simpler to look at, and Microsoft claims to be countering "cognitive overload", but I'm sorry - there are computer tasks that REQUIRE a lot of things to be visible at the same time, so that you can make sure you're dealing with them all.  I have a huge desktop because I do a lot of these kinds of tasks.

 

Another example is that ridiculous UAC.  I understand that for laypeople it may help them avoid malware, but as a computer professional I need to be an admin full-time.  Now I can't have that and run Metro/Modern apps.  Who thought up that stupid, arbitrary limitation?

 

Thank goodness there are 3rd party developers who have come to the rescue.  They have figured out what can be poked where in Windows to restore the more useful functionality.  They have also PROVEN that the system is capable of doing the things they have enabled, so my question is this:

 

Why make it necessary to hack to get the features some people want?  What does Microsoft save by oversimplifying the system?

 

If anything, Microsoft seems to be putting ever more effort into building a "walled garden" to try to close off the possibility of people "having it their way".  It's just the wrong direction.

 

-Noel


Edited by NoelC, 27 April 2014 - 04:07 PM.


#21
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

with UAC disabled and no ability to run Metro apps

just shows how devs are not able to make sandboxed IE, but have to do system wide restrictions

 

which just shows how still IE and NT shell are in danger of being exploited

 

its funny how everybody is praising whole NT 6 line to be so much safer than NT 5

while in fact if you disable UAC (annoyance), you get the same level of security that of NT 5

 

one should ask, will Windows NT ever be safe ? (I think not)


Edited by vinifera, 27 April 2014 - 08:28 PM.

If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#22
NoelC

NoelC

    Software Engineer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Praising security?  That's just more spin.  It seems like ALL there is is spin any more.   :thumbdown   People have as many problems with malware and viruses today with the latest systems as they ever had.  Perhaps more.

 

By the way, there are several easy things one can do that make a modern windows system FAR more secure, including disabling the default ability for Internet Explorer to run ActiveX from the Internet Zone, adding the MVPS hosts file to block parasite web sites, upgrading to a better 3rd party solution from the mediocre anti-malware software package Microsoft includes (and which is every malware writer's prime target), and adopting good computing practices.

 

-Noel



#23
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 6,022 posts
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Xp was never a good UI. I always hated it. The Vista/7 UI is 1000 times better.


Posted Image

#24
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,861 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Xp was never a good UI. I always hated it. The Vista/7 UI is 1000 times better.

 

In your opinion (as the great Judge Patrice Lessner would put it..)! :)
That's why you love Vista.
I don't. I love XP. So, IMO, the XP UI is the best one there is, hands down! :P
At most, we can agree to disagree...  ;)

 

@ NoelC:

Marketing is an euphemism for Propaganda... why would you expect them to act any different?



#25
xpclient

xpclient

    XP was my idea. 3rd party apps make NT6 my idea.

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Xp was never a good UI. I always hated it. The Vista/7 UI is 1000 times better.

I don't think it can generalized like that. There are areas where the NT6 UI is an improvement in terms of productivity and usability. In some areas, XP's UI is better. (The dreadful always-scatter-my-files-all-over-the-folder-to-make-my-life-difficult mode of NT6 Explorer comes to my mind.)

 

If there's one certain statement that can be made, it's that Microsoft no longer GETS UIs. :lol: That skill died after Sinofsky and his minions took over and started destroying classic UIs at Microsoft without any rational or logical benefit and without considering the all-round big picture (focusing on just one benefit of the UI redesign).


Edited by xpclient, 28 April 2014 - 09:18 AM.

Impossible to run NT6 without third party fixes.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN