
What is the worst thing about working at Microsoft? - anirudhgarg
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/10/09/what-is-the-worst-thing-about-working-at-microsoft/
======
RyanZAG
The author seems to revolve his article around MS software running
manufacturing, ambulances, etc. This is only true in the most literal sense
possible. The software that runs these industries just happens to be written
upon an MS platform due to a number of unfortunate market incidences that
forced other OS players out of the game for less than technical reasons. This
trend is now rapidly reversing and new software being written for these
industries today is now moving towards Linux instead.

Microsoft never did any of these industries any favors - they just managed to
capture the market and extract a tax for a number of years. That is why the
public does not like them. When they have to fight with Windows to log into
their laptop and wait 20 minutes while it does so (Windows Vista?), they blame
Microsoft. Microsoft's technical inabilities and millions of man hours wasted
patching and rebooting their OS comes at the cost of most of the world's
population being less than impressed by Microsoft and those who work there.

This whole post is written merely as a rebuttal to the widely publicized
article about how Microsoft is telling lies about Bing. The rebuttal itself
comes down to "he's lying, not us!" and "we don't track the results from the
Bing It On challenge". Both positions are pathetic as the Yale article has no
reason to lie, and the only reason a company would not track results is
because the results are obviously unfavorable and so they cooked up their own
favorable ones.

You want to know why nobody respects Microsoft? Because Microsoft employees
post articles like this which are so far from reality it leaves you wondering
how they drive to work.

~~~
mattwallaert
First, nobody at Microsoft posted an article. I answered a question on Quora,
before the Yale incident even occurred. Quora reached out and asked if they
could publish on Forbes, which I said was fine. I updated to add the Yale
example, which has already been discussed on HN, so I don't rehash, but please
note nobody has ever suggested Yale lied. I've suggested they did not great
science, which is very much not the same thing.

The statement "Microsoft never did any of these industries any favors" seems
to be exactly what I'm talking about. Can you honestly say that you think, in
the many years that Microsoft have been producing some incredibly popular
software that powers much of what makes modern business productive, that the
company has done absolutely no good for anyone? If that's your actual belief,
I don't even know how to discuss this with you, as it just seems transparently
to be untrue. What is the alternative that you think would have powered this
revolution? Nobody is going "damn, that cotton gin forced out all those sickle
makers, they really hurt society". Bringing advancements to market has helped
human society immensely; how do you see the enhancements Microsoft has brought
differently?

~~~
RyanZAG
Again, Microsoft never brought any advances to those industries. They provided
a platform (closely identical to those offered by numerous alternatives) on
which the real software that made these advancements was hosted on. Your
argument is the same as saying that Ford is responsible for nuclear power
because their trucks deliver the fuel to the plants. If there was no Ford,
then Toyota trucks could deliver the same fuel with no noticeable differences
to anyone or the industry. Same for Windows and plant controller software that
runs on it.

So if you agree that Ford did not do the nuclear industry any favours, you
must accept that Microsoft did not do the manufacturing industry any favours.
Both companies simply got a nice income for providing a necessary but widely
available resource. Saying Microsoft is the one bringing the advancements is
just silly.

~~~
mattwallaert
I honestly don't know how to reply to that kind of argument, in that it feels
like the evidence both overwhelming and widely available that Microsoft has,
in fact, provided innovation. Look at the sheer number of patents the company
holds; we can debate patent law until the end of days, but in the meantime, it
is worth looking at the things that Microsoft brought to market. And then look
at Microsoft Research, which produces literally thousands of peer-reviewed
academic papers every year, dealing with numerous advancements in technology.

Ford is an interesting example. Arguably, without Ford's advancements in
manufacturing, automation, and mass industrialization, we don't get the modern
car, which unquestionably has made nuclear power possible. In a very
Civilization way, you can't get to nuclear power without modern
transportation.

So what you seem to be suggesting is a counterfactual world where some other
software (let's say Apples, for argument's sake) rose to prominence instead of
Microsoft. It is possible that they might also have done an amazing job of
putting a PC on every desk. But we have no way of knowing that and what we do
know, in the reality in which we currently live, that Microsoft did an
excellent job of pushing computing out of the lab and into the home.

And there seems to me to be decent evidence that we'll continue to make those
sort of innovations that push technology forward. While you're welcome to call
me "silly", I think saying that Microsoft has introduced absolutely no
advancements to the marketplace is silly. So maybe we simply can't come to a
place of agreement because we're not working from the same set of facts?

------
frenger
> _Wait, Microsoft makes chairs? No, not directly. But the part of that chair?
> Manufactured in facilities running on, you guess it, Microsoft software.
> Transported in trucks built by Microsoft software, on roads built by
> Microsoft software, sold by companies running Microsoft software._

The whole premise of this paragraph is wrong. Yes, most big businesses run
Microsoft Windows, but most people hate and struggle with it. They run it not
because it's the best, because it's not. They run it because monopolistic
business practises forced out the competition. If he's trying to argue that
Microsoft are misunderstood, that they do deserve respect after all, then
maybe respect the hard-nosed business practises which have forced Microsoft
products into every nook and cranny despite consistently having a shittier
product than the competition.

~~~
chris_wot
So in other words, they make chairs, despite being forced to use awful,
expensive software? I, too, thought this.

Actually, this puts a whole new perspective on the "Microsoft tax". Everything
we do in life has been "taxed" by Microsoft. The argument is specious: you
could be sitting on a chair that was sold for less money. You might be working
in a more spacious building if better software was in use. You'd probably be
paid more money if the costs for IT weren't so high.

Note I don't actually believe any of those things, but they could be valid
counter arguments, depending on your own perspective.

The reasoning used in the article is pretty badly flawed. If Microsoft
employees are disheartened by the general public's view of their company,
that's probably something their management should fix.

~~~
lloeki
> You'd probably be paid more money if the costs for IT weren't so high. Note
> I don't actually believe any of those things...

I do, from first hand experience: we're developing insurance pro software, and
also have an all in one hosted solution, where we handle everything for the
customer (from storage to configuration to backup), we set up an IPsec link
and they just connect via TS. The product, which has a codebase that
organically evolved during 10 years (resulting in DWTF worthy stuff), solves a
number of real problems for our customers and in spite of the warts and bugs,
they _do_ like the product. It's hosted on Windows machines, including Office
and whatnot. The growing MS license costs are currently driving the hosting
solution out of business. We know first hand that alternative solutions (like
a hypothetic port to Linux) would have cleared enough money to hire two
developers, and get rid of a dedicated MS sysadmin (so that makes three full-
time engineer jobs). And we're not even talking about moving to a web-based
solution, which would cost a fraction of that again (and we know that because
we're developing and hosting web stuff too).

~~~
tracker1
I think if it were a web based solution your argument wouldn't be as sound..
MS server licensing isn't really so bad if you aren't also doing larger
deployments of SQL and/or Exchange.

As it is, have you checked into porting your software to Mono (assuming it's
.Net based), which may or may not work for what you have... if it's COM or ATL
based, you're really SOL. That said, if you're mostly winforms, and don't have
too many dependencies on third party gui controls, you have a shot there.

That would really lower your costs... and as you mention, a web based solution
could make a lot more sense, if you can support that model, depending on your
software.

------
aaronbrethorst

        That’s right. The worst part of working
        at Microsoft has nothing to do with our
        internal culture (that’s not quite true;
        more on that in a bit). It isn’t stack
        ranking or ship cycles or trying to get
        things done. It is working at a company
        that people don’t believe in, despite
        the immense importance it plays in
        their daily life.
    

Uh, no. It's the politics, and the stack ranking, and the interminably long
ship cycles, and the typical unwillingness to even consider a market unless
someone else has proven that it's a billion dollar business. And especially
the politics and the stack ranking. They're absolutely toxic.

n.b. I haven't worked there in six years (and in fact the ten year anniversary
of my FTE interview was this week!), but my feelings on the matter have been
confirmed in every conversation I've ever had with an ex-MSFT FTE. Call it
survivorship bias if you want, but this has been consistent in every
conversation I've had, regardless if the person left a year ago or five.

edit: and the in-fighting. and the backbiting... but I guess those are just
politics by another name.

~~~
jongalloway2
Really depends on the group you're working in.

------
alrs
1970s-style PR. This mirrors the oil company messaging: "pay no attention to
the oil spills and CIA-sponsored coups de etat, we're the swell people that
make the petrochemicals in that ziploc baggie in your little girl's lunchbox."
"We power the trucks that bring organic vegetables to your dinner table."

Microsoft: For the Children.

~~~
jlgreco
Ziploc baggies? That is PR amatuer hour. You've got to talk about making the
plastic that premature baby incubators are made out of.

Remember, it can't just be _for_ kids, it has to be _saving_ kids.

~~~
sliverstorm
How about the plastics used in pacemakers (cue story about four-year-old Jimmy
and his pacemaker)

~~~
sneak
Wanna see that done masterfully?

[http://www.apple.com/ios/videos/#developers](http://www.apple.com/ios/videos/#developers)

Think for a minute what these helicopter shots cost in these places, and
getting the crews and 4k cameras and such out there....

~~~
sliverstorm
Oooo, that almost makes me angry. For the prosthesis, it's not like the "app"
couldn't be replaced by a single switch on the foot. From what I can tell the
"app" is literally the most superficial, least important part of the whole
system.

Good example.

------
Anechoic
_But the part of that chair? Manufactured in facilities running on, you guess
it, Microsoft software. Transported in trucks built by Microsoft software, on
roads built by Microsoft software, sold by companies running Microsoft
software._

 _Imagine you got out of that chair for a second. Walked across the street to
get a cup of coffee. Got hit by a bus. The ambulance that picks you up?
Microsoft. The hospital that saves you? Microsoft. The doctor? Trained at a
school running Microsoft, using delicate instruments running Microsoft. If you
prefer not getting hit by a bus, think about the role that Microsoft has had
in making sure your baby was born healthy._

 _All_ of those things existed before Microsoft! Certainly the ubiquity of MS
software has resulted in efficiencies over the years, but does anyone really
doubt that another platform (Classic Mac, GNU, *BSD, VAX, etc) would not have
filled the void in a World Without Microsoft?

~~~
covox
"You said you wanted to live in a world without Microsoft, Jimmy. Well, now
your car has no battery!"

~~~
panicslowly
[http://s993.photobucket.com/user/nataliasc/media/MrParksWebs...](http://s993.photobucket.com/user/nataliasc/media/MrParksWebsite-
TheSimpsonsZincFilm.mp4.html)

------
jlgreco
This is believable. It certainly mirrors my experience of the worst thing
about being friends with people who work at Microsoft: the constant sense of
insecurity and desire to be be trusted. I've been told countless times in the
past 2 or 3 years that I should put all my money in MSFT because they're
Coming Back in a Big Way(tm).

The story is always _" this shit we have in the pipeline is going to blow
everyone away! why are you snickering!?"_ or _" the consumers just don't
understand us / never gave us a chance. we could have never anticipated
this."_

I do feel sorry for them, it can't feel good. I mean, obviously they are
making cash hand over fist, but I really get the sense that they aren't
getting any _gratification_.

------
joe_the_user
What's worse than working for Microsoft is ... being a shill for Microsoft.

In a weird way, minus the "but really we're great" part, it must be hell to
spend your life touting Microsoft when they are so hated. Because in these
networked days, a PR person can't go home and tell their friends "they suck, I
just work there" because things get around much more quickly.

~~~
mattwallaert
This was an honest answer on Quora to a question that I think is interesting.
It is how I actually feel. Quora reached out to ask me if they could publish
it on Forbes, and I said it was fine, because it was already public and out
there.

You seem to be suggesting that the only way someone could want to work at
Microsoft and feel this way is if they are a shill. Isn't that exactly what I
just wrote about, as basic lack of respect for the people who choose to build
at Microsoft?

~~~
joe_the_user
No and Yes,

No, I don't think everyone who works at MS is a shill. I think the average MS
engineer goes home and can put their Microsoft boosting away. It's only the
people who professionally represent MS, who's job it might to say sell Bing to
schools or similar stuff, who have to be always on, always convinced that MS
is good.

And Yes, I agree I'm demonstrating some of your point. I think you were honest
on the basic point. There's basic lack of respect. It must be hard. I don't
know how to help you there. I try to focus my anger on the people with
decision making power.

------
dmourati
Pure rubbish. MSFT should have been split up for blatant violations of the
Sherman Anti Trust Act but got a last minute pass by Bush. The company is
nothing more than a drain on the technology industry in this country.

The worst thing about working for Microsoft? You have to run Windows.

~~~
curiousDog
You seem to have some special hatred towards Microsoft (looking at your
twitter stream). But considering you work in devops, I'd understand why ;)

------
loser777
The part about Microsoft being ubiquitous begs the question: is it actually
good that Microsoft software is everywhere? The part that really gets me is
schools.

I can't see pushing Surface/Windows 8/Office/insert MS product here on
students (especially young ones) being beneficial to anyone other than
Microsoft. As a student who was expected to format essays according to Word
and to use (Excel, Powerpoint, even FRONTPAGE) extensively in K-12 education,
I really can't see a way to put this strategy in a positive light. "ad-free"
bing for schools? Really? What's more poisonous--getting students dependent on
a stack of proprietary software, or a search engine with ads?

~~~
mattwallaert
Well, as the guy behind Bing for Schools, let me suggest an alternate world.
Let's pretend Microsoft simply blinked out of existence. Can you name any
software package as well integrated, as powerful, and as empowering for
students as Office? You said that putting Office in the hands of students
can't possibly be beneficial to anyone but Microsoft. But that's EXACTLY what
I'm writing about. Let's pretend it was free and you took off the Microsoft
brand; Office absolutely creates huge efficiencies in the ability of students
to create, to learn, and to share. But because it has MSFT on it, you seem to
be suggesting that it must necessarily be bad for kids.

~~~
tracker1
Most of the world, and even the people in the US aren't using desktop
computers daily... using any tool that ties them mostly to a desktop platform,
or an also-ran mobile platform is not doing them any favors.

IMHO, if the Office division were actually able to run as a separated business
unit from the whims of Windows, they would be _MUCH_ better off.

I think that as office suites go, MS Office is absolutely the best of breed.
However, there isn't much of anything that it offers that gives an elementary
student an advantage over a pre-configured linux convertible tablet with Libre
Office.

I like windows.. it's a consistent platform that isn't subject to an
incredibly fragmented desktop/application space. IMHO IIS is an incredibly
good web server. VS is a great IDE, with a wonderful level of integration for
devops environments.

That said, I don't feel that Windows has much of a life left in it, and that
10 years from now, it will be relegated to the same role that Solaris or AIX
workstations were in the early-mid 90's, a developer platform for server
deployments. There's money to be made there in the long run, sure... but if MS
really wants to succeed, it needs to allow the windows core os to develop
apart from the desktop, server and mobile spaces.. and for the VS and Office
teams to operate apart from that. It would also do well to let competitive
products rise from within. Both in terms of support, as well as vision.

~~~
jongalloway2
Go to skydrive.live.com, create an Office document, edit it. Note that the
experience is significantly better than any other online office suite. Do the
moonwalk.

------
mynameishere
_The ambulance that picks you up? Microsoft._

What a larf. Why did Forbes print this? No, man, Alcoa picked me up. And US
Steel. And Con-Ed. And Exxon. And Starbucks! Oh, wait, the driver had Dunkin'
Donuts. Whatever.

------
cfinke
How about "People who answer legitimate questions with two non-answers"?

------
devilsenigma
_> > It is working at a company that people don’t believe in, despite the
immense importance it plays in their daily life._

Very true, Microsoft's business level software does not have as much
visibility IMHO. People underestimate the role their software plays.

 _> > Imagine you got out of that chair for a second. Walked across the street
to get a cup of coffee. Got hit by a bus. The ambulance that picks you up?
Microsoft. The hospital that saves you? Microsoft. The doctor? Trained at a
school running Microsoft, using delicate instruments running Microsoft. If you
prefer not getting hit by a bus, think about the role that Microsoft has had
in making sure your baby was born healthy._

What role, Windows, SQL Server, Azure? Microsoft may have helped there but so
has the janitor who keeps the hospital clean, the barista who makes coffee for
the doctors. Doesn't mean I'm going to thank Microsoft for saving my life when
I get hit by a bus. This is a valid argument, but a very weak one because
Microsoft is one cog in so many that keeps a hospital running.

Rest of the arguments in the article are quite valid, but when some tells me
my ambulance is running Microsoft software I have a horrible flashback with a
BSOD.

~~~
mattwallaert
You are absolutely right that the janitor has a role, as does the barista, and
I afford both of those people immense amounts of respect in my daily life. I
don't look at the things they do and say "simply because you are a barista, I
am going to dislike this."

And yet there are many people, especially in tech, who are willing to take pot
shots at something just because it was produced by Microsoft. My answer was an
attempt to look at that critically.

~~~
kaze
I know that Microsoft Engineers have pulled off a large number of complex
technical feats over the decades, and this is admirable.

Unfortunately, all this doesn’t translate into a smooth day-to-day experience
for the end user, which is why all the hate builds up. People contrast this
with the relatively smooth and fluid experience on say, Apple products. They
then conclude Microsoft is garbage. I understand that in some (note, some)
cases, MS isn’t even directly responsible for the issues. For example,
Enterprise IT departments tend to cram massive amounts of software into boxes
with moderate specs, leading to a slowdown in performance.

I can’t think of any practical solution for all this. Some radical re-
engineering without regard for backwards compatibility, accompanied by strict
specifications for minimum hardware requirements maybe? Will take too much of
Management willpower to fly. So I’m sorry to say, Microsoft and its employees
will continue to be ridiculed for some more time to come.

------
curiousDog
The worst part about the stack ranking implementation at MSFT is that there
will always be a bottom 10-20% who'll get fired in a couple of review cycles.
If you're in a stellar team, you're pretty screwed (which is sad because now
we'll eventually have rock stars looking for shitty teams or leaving). Stack
ranking should rather be used to identify the top 10%

------
maxmcd
Can you really credit Microsoft with software running on production lines, and
in hospitals, ambulances, etc..? Isn't that more of a result of market share?

~~~
radioact1ve
Exactly what I was thinking. It might just be me tired and not thinking
clearly, but where do we draw the line? Tire manufactures for the ambulance?
Tools manufactures that built the hospital?

Other than this, everything else made sense. Microsoft does play an important
part.

~~~
mattwallaert
I actually don't think we should draw the line: it takes many, many people
working together to create the world we live in. My point was that we should
operate on a basic level of respect for those people, rather than simply
taking pot shots at them based on branding.

~~~
radioact1ve
My fault. It was a rhetorical question. I completely agree. Respect all
involved.

------
toddwick
Endless patronizing condescension to outsiders?

------
noisy_boy
After years of bugs/viruses/bloat and what not, Microsoft finally got the OS
right with Windows 7. I personally know many people (including myself) who
were/are quite impressed with it. Then it goes ahead and inflicts Windows 8 on
the users.

Just when you got something right, after over a decade, and had a chance to
build goodwill/positive response from your users, you go ahead and royally
screw it up. I won't even go in their predatory/arm-twisting business
practices.

The worst thing about Microsoft is that they never seem to learn from their
mistakes or, more importantly, care.

------
Mustafabei
The question was "What is the most innovative company?" Innovation is
different than market penetration. And this article seems to aim to fend off a
self conscious thought. Nobody thinks that people who work for MS are jerks.
That is the author's own thoughts about himself. People just don't respect MS
because of the lack of efficiency. Nobody argues about penetration, I am
wrting this comment on a computer that runs MS. That does not take away my
right to criticze the product.

------
mcot2
Stack ranking sounds a lot worse than other people doubting you.

~~~
jongalloway2
I think Matt's discussion was spot on - it only bothers you if you pay
attention to it. Microsoft offers an opportunity to positively impact a lot of
people, both developers and end users. It takes pretty good care (benefits and
pay) of its employees, too. If that's enough to motivate you, you only need to
worry about stack ranking if you're worried about ending up low on the stack.
If you're doing good work, that's extremely unlikely.

------
cestep
You mean the worst thing about working at Microsoft isn't Steve Ballmer?!

~~~
orware
Not anymore ;-).

------
stratosvoukel
No matter how good or bad Microsoft is, the workers there dont have a magic
privilege that should force anyone to respect and feel grateful to their
company and them...

~~~
mattwallaert
I'm not asking for a magic privilege. I'm asking people to step back and
evaluate what Microsoft is actually doing. Take Bing, for example; you strip
the brand off and people actually prefer our results. Take an honest look at
the products we produce and still don't choose to use them? Totally fine. But
it is important that people do take that step back - we can't let tech be
ruled by branding only.

~~~
tracker1
I personally don't like the haters.. and of all tech companies, Sony is
probably the only one I won't use because of politics against their
brand/management decisions. They've done some cool things, and BluRay was a
better format than HD-DVD, but the market was leaning towards HD-DVD when
backroom deals killed that. (not to mention rootkits, etc)

Many people feel the same about MS. What I find issue with is that people will
completely dislike a solution for the brand alone. I've seen this for years
when I've suggested/supported Mono in Linux. .Net is a pretty damned good
platform/runtime.

I think it's a perfectly valid choice to not run something because of the
company that makes it. Lambasting something for the same reasons, in a non-
technical fashion isn't so great.

Many of the haters will poo-poo on anything. In my household I have Android on
my phone and tablet, an osx macbook pro for my laptop, a windows desktop, an
htpc now running ubuntu/xbmc (was running win7 before). A NAS running FreeNAS
(BSD), and a handful of other devices.

I'm not tied to any one platform, and like most people don't care too much
about what I run, as long as it works. I develop software for a living, and
most of that has run on Windows. I appreciate that there are great, brilliant,
and wonderful people at MS. I also recognize that many of it's management
decisions have been bad for the larger community. Not to mention the damage
being done to some what could be better divisions at MS.

~~~
PyErr_SetString
_" What I find issue with is that people will completely dislike a solution
for the brand alone. I've seen this for years when I've suggested/supported
Mono in Linux."_

To be fair, Mono never delivered on its promises. There must be tonnes of .Net
applications that Linux users would have been thrilled to get on their
platform. Yet the only ones I have seen running on Mono were the ones that
were specifically targeting Mono, not ones that were running on windows and
just happened to find their way to Linux.

So, either most .Net applications are crap that no one really cares about or
they were tied to the windows platform. Of course, it could just be blind,
unmotivated hatred, but that's not how I've perceived it.

~~~
tracker1
IMHO Mono offers nicer constructs for a higher level runtime that can utilize
lower level system libraries with less friction. Compared to Java+JNI, C# is a
dream.

Most of the applications that don't work tend to either utilize windows
specific features, or use components that do likewise. With XAML, the fate is
somewhat sealed in terms of cross-platform applications.

ASP.Net apps tend to run with little/minor modification, however are usually
written towards MS-SQL server, so they are tethered there. You're right that
most cross-platform Mono apps are written as such.

Personally, I don't care if a Mono app doesn't run in Windows, or ties to
libraries that aren't or are difficult to bundle for windows. I still really
like C# as a language, and prefer Mono to a lot of alternative higher level
systems.

That said, if Node gets some good UI integration for Gnome, all bets are off
imho. I really love node.js + npm, and if I can write desktop UI with it, that
will be what I use for just about everything. (There are a few
libraries/bindings, but most are incomplete, and some are tethered to a
browser-based UI, which I don't mind too much, but are forks from node proper)

------
jaseemabid
Read the 100s of comments here, nothing positive! The hacker community hates
microsoft, which is the biggest reason why you should not work for them.

~~~
jongalloway2
The Hacker News community takes a break from creating the current wave of
internet fart-apps-as-as-service-with-photo-sharing to voice its displeasure.

------
nate_martin
What is the worst thing about working at Microsoft? My first guess is being
forced to spend at least 8 hours a day developing on a windows machine.

------
jmduke
Pretty funny to contrast responses to this with responses to the "Designed by
Apple in California" video.

------
mrmondo
Classic PR stunt...

~~~
mattwallaert
Actually, I just wrote this as an honest Quora answer. Quora then reached out
and asked if they could publish to Forbes.

------
patg
Thanks for building the bus that hit me!

------
Tmmrn
Ok, many people here said it, but still.

"Asked to name the most innovative tech company, they’ll say Apple or Google.
And they’ll do it with a straight face, while sitting in a chair made by
Microsoft. Wait, Microsoft makes chairs? No, not directly. But the part of
that chair? Manufactured in facilities running on, you guess it, Microsoft
software."

Let's look at this statement. "sitting in a chair made by Microsoft". It's
pretty clear what "made by Microsoft" should mean, shouldn't it? What do you
think when I say "a smartphone made by nokia"? You surely think that the
smartphone was manufactured in a facility that may or may not used some
software from nokia, right?

So my issue with that article is very misleading language. Can I call it
newspeak?

So "made by microsoft" means neither made by microsoft nor does it mean made
with sotware made by microsoft. It means it was made in a facility that may or
may not uses an operating system made by microsoft. Who actually made the
chair is an ingenieur using software not made by microsoft but that for
_reasons_ decided to target the microsoft operating system.

And these _reasons_ are not something anyone at microsoft should be proud
about. They worked really hard at disabling their competition with unethical
methods. It's not exactly secret, anyone can read about their history:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation)
[http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2005010107...](http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2005010107100653)

"Transported in trucks built by Microsoft software, on roads built by
Microsoft software,"

Microsoft produces software for building trucks and roads?

"Trained at a school running Microsoft,"

Said as if it wasn't a bad thing microsoft is pushing educational institutions
to use proprietary software.

"If you prefer not getting hit by a bus, think about the role that Microsoft
has had in making sure your baby was born healthy."

Ok, do people _really_ think that it's not a bad thing that (according to the
article) the whole manufacturing chain is dependent on proprietary software
made by one vendor? Is it not bad that fucking hospitals and their instruments
"run on" proprietary closed source microsoft software? Again, this was
achieved by becoming a (quasi-) monopolist by methods described in the links
above.

"we’re only able to do so because of generations of Microsoft leadership in
technology."

What gets me is the casual tone that (as I read it) sounds like microsoft had
"generations of leadership in technology" on their own merits instead of
because they disabled their competition by their business behavior.

"I run our Bing for Schools program. It gets hardware in the hands of kids,
teaches them digital literacy skills, and creates a safe environment for them
to practice in. And when we launched, the haters emerged from the woodwork
with pitchforks and torches, growling “Google! Google!” Just for fun, see the
comment stream on The Verge story: Microsoft offers classrooms free Surface RT
tablets with ad-free Bing for Schools"

Again, as others have said. It's cool that children are introduced to
technology. It's bad that it's proprietary technology. Especially at
educational institutions. When I advocate that they get android tablets
instead it's not because it's from google but because it is (mostly) free and
open source. Meego/Sailfish OS/Firefox OS would be fine too. But getting
taught proprietary microsoft software, possibly with their first contact to
this technology? No.

"But think about the number of young people who make a face when you say
Microsoft. That’s an entirely different problem."

Why is that a problem? Sounds totally healthy to me.

"Because even if you know that you are working on something that will help
save lives"

Actually you don't do that. You are working on something that others will
build something for that will save lives. And because you work for someone who
has become a quasi monopolist with unethical behavior those others will have
to give a lot of money to your employer even though without you we may or may
not had a world running on free and open software by now.

"or make things better for humanity"

Again, look at the list of lawsuits microsoft was in and lost. And that's only
the stuff that is actually illegal, there is a lot you can do that is not
illegal but still unethical. There's everything from their faked "get the
facts" studies to the plan to pressure hardware manufacturers to cripple
absolute basic standard functionality just to make their competitors look
worse
[http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/...](http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf)

"I’ve pushed through a program that does good things for kids."

You mean the program that is designed to make children already dependent on
microsoft software? It's called vendor lock-in
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-
in#Microsoft](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in#Microsoft)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_l...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-
in)

Tl dr; I personally don't see how anyone that thinks stuff like "know that you
are working on something that will help save lives or make things better for
humanity,", i.e. who has a heart and a conscience can work for Microsoft. I'm
sure the working conditions aren't as bad as some people say and the products
aren't as bad as people say either. For example the metro interface: I don't
really see why microsoft thought it was a good idea, but I could certainly
work with it with no problems if I wanted to. It'd be only a little bit
annoying but as someone who has no problems with fluxbox/openbox, xfce4,
gnome2, gnome3, kde4 etc. it'd be no big deal.

The thing is that it's not just microsoft, they "support" a whole industry
intentionally or coincidentally designed to lock you in: Adobe Flash DRM,
while atrocious, did work on linux. But it wasn't "good enough" or something.
The media industry had to choose microsoft technology with silverlight.
Result: netflix, lovefilm, ... only (officially) work on either microsoft
windows or apple's mac os, both commercial proprietary operating systems.

------
bsullivan01
_I run our Bing for Schools program. It gets hardware in the hands of kids,
teaches them digital literacy skills, and creates a safe environment for them
to practice in_

Yeah, all altruistic no doubt.

~~~
mattwallaert
Let's take altruism as "devotion to the welfare of others". It is pretty hard
to argue that Bing for Schools is anything but that - we looked at what we
could create that would be good for kids and then we fought our way uphill to
be able to offer it. Does it gain us market share? Hopefully yes. But that
doesn't make it not altruistic.

We could do what Google is doing and advertise to kids. We are choosing not to
do that. How is that anything but good?

~~~
thetrb
When you do something to gain market share then it's not altruistic.

