Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


DeathByVisualStudio DeathBy​VisualStudio If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote


    I'm just tired of all the hatred toward Metro as a whole when really the main issue is the removal of the Start menu and Start button.  

    I think that's where your big misunderstanding is of us that speak negatively against W8. I think WinRT and the Windows Store app environment (a.k.a. Metro <- Now there was a marketing fail :D  ) was a good start but not good enough to kill WPF/SL. They jumped the gun. It's nothing personal against Metro. 

    IMO people didn't like what Microsoft did with Windows as a whole and for a variety of reasons. Windows Store apps and the related environment wasn't the main issue but it's implementation sure was a big factor.  Just because people speak negatively about W8 doesn't mean they hate Metro. Is that why you're constantly spinning W8 to the positive? You're afraid Metro will be left in the dust if we air Microsoft's dirty laundry? IMO it's hard to move forward by ignoring the past.


  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote


    Care to repeat this one more time?  Perhaps 2, 3, 20?  How many times will we go through this before you read?

    Ok we can play that game. You want to tag Sinofsky with the source of being late to the game? How about Ballmer? He dismissed the iPhone. Are his hands clean too? What you seems to be ignoring is that these guys both worked for Microsoft and both had a heavy hand on W8's outcome. You can close you eyes, plug your ears, and say "lalalalalala" as you want but at the end of the day these guys were part of the W8 failure and the last time I checked "being late" was not a marketing issue.

    Actually, 0, I'm done this time for real, at least with you.  For some reason (maybe it's your rainbow unicorn) I really want to believe that you might not be a troll, that you might have the ability to form a coherent argument.  But you can't.  Learn from Craig_Matthews... he managed in one post to do what you haven't done this entire thread.

    Sorry I don't do much work on servers and haven't encountered a W2012 one yet. In any case Craig points out yet another example of the non-marketing related internal issues at Microsoft were central to the failures of WP and W8.

    You're done with this? LOL! I surmise that you'll continue to post this nonsense until your last breath. As long as there will be someone else to blame other than Microsoft...

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote


    We were talking about Sinofsky.  You just refuse to keep up, don't you?


    You seriously don't know what we're even talking about, do you?  You keep mixing things up when the context is crystal clear.  (PS - That's one reason why people call you a troll.  I wouldn't be surprised if all you've been doing this whole time is trolling me.)

    The root problem for Sinofsky was failure to deliver Microsoft's mobile platform on a time table that would be competitive with Apple and Google.

    The root problem for Windows 8's "failure" (according to those of you who believe it is a failure) is marketing.  You know why it's marketing?  Because those of us who saw through the marketing issue didn't get burned... I know exactly what version of Windows is for what purpose and I'm totally fine with what I have.  And I'm excited about Threshold that will pull many of those features across the aisle.

    Dude, you seriously need to get a grip. I'm the one "mixing things up"? You can't decide if W8's failure was:

    1. Being late to the game: "Nevertheless, I still assert that the root problem was being late to the game."
    2. A marketing issue: "You think design is the problem.  I think marketing is the problem."

    Then you go on to blame those who installed W8 and "got burned" as not being smart enough to see through Microsoft's marketing. You're effectively saying that Microsoft lied about W8 and that's on us. Wow. Microsoft can do no wrong in your eyes and even if they do it's someone else's fault.

    I know it's hard for you when your assertions make no sense when you look at the whole picture. Maybe it's some kind of insecurity that makes you behave like this and when you fail to successfully support your point of view you reach for the troll card. Sometimes you just have to accept that it's ok to be wrong and not take things so personally.



  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:  You totally missed the point of that quote.  It wasn't talking about failings of Windows 8.  It was talking about the failure to predict the success of the iPad and iPhone.

    Oh so now W8's failure isn't a marketing issue?  


    Sinofsky's firing wasn't about what was in Windows 8.  It was about being too late with Windows 8.

    But I WOULD BET you don't agree with me.

    In that case, are you suggesting that, even though Microsoft put out a public alpha of Windows 8 over a year before its release, and got tons and tons of feedback, that their solution was to release it as a failure (so you say) instead of fire/demote Sinofsky earlier in the process when he refused to budge?  


    You are correct! I don't agree. W8 and WPH were both rushed to market with a lot of holes and nothing that consumers felt met or exceeded what was on the market. Sinofsky's pride and joy was shipping (and being on schedule). Marry that with the incomplete, "comprimised" experience of W8 and it's pretty clear they shipped "on time" -- just a very incomplete product with delusions that they knew better than the customer. Sure they got a lot of feedback early on but it pretty much fell on deft ears until Sinofsky and crew left.

    I mean, that's what you said, it's his Stalinesque ways that were the problem.  All of Windows 8 "failings" are because of that.

    I never said all of W8's problems were because of Sinofsky. I was suggesting you ignore these inconvenient truths when making the argument that W8's issue was principle one of marketing the OS as a Windows upgrade for all Windows customers rather than a new experimental mobile OS.

    In which case they knew well ahead of time that they were risking the company over his attitude... but for some reason decided "nah we're good, release this anyway"... is that what you're saying?

    If that's the case, then it was completely 100% Ballmer's fault.  Sinofsky was just doing his job, the job he was good at and the job his boss allowed him to do and continue for over a year after public comments.

    I'm saying Sinofsky was one of the principle reasons (but not the sole reason) that W8 was a flop. Ballmer as well as many others in Microsoft were complicit in the failure of W8. Sinofsky isn't a mindless drone doing some fixed task. He chose to take the clout he gained from his successes and abuse it. Lots of peoples hands are dirty here.

    , bondsbw wrote

    Nevertheless, I still assert that the root problem was being late to the game.  Your whining about features is beyond old, lots of people disagree with you, I disagree with you, and sorry but you need to just stop.

    What happened to marketing being the problem? Lots of people also agree with me.

    Actually I need to stop.  I said I would a while back, and I responded to a different topic yet you drug us back into this one.  You think design is the problem.  I think marketing is the problem.  Please, let's just leave it at that.

    Oh now we're back to marketing being the problem. Have you ever thought of a career in politics? I think you'd excel at it.

    I drug you back? You didn't have to respond at all. You could have avoided responding to my post and just left it as a counter to your indefensible position.

    In any case: Long Live KDE Plasma 5.0!

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:  I say the problem is bad marketing, you say marketing caused you to upgrade and you didn't like the result... I just hope you realize you're not actually arguing against me.

    Are you that desperate to blame marketing for the whole W8 debacle that you suggest that's the reason I upgraded? I upgraded because of the performance improvements on the desktop, the new task manager, and the syncing of application settings, and the few other additions that made W8's desktop better. That doesn't mean I should have to accept the unnecessary hobbling of the desktop that Microsoft did solely to get people to take a look at their new Windows Store environment. And in the case of my Yoga I didn't have a choice; it came with W8 and was specifically built to be used as a laptop (in desktop mode) and a tablet (in Windows Store app mode). Was the Yoga also a Microsoft marketing blunder?

    I think your last quote makes my point and it the bit that you like to ignore:

    As Mendillo points out, Sinofsky's focus on hitting schedules sometimes meant a reluctance to chase after breakthrough innovations. Just like Ballmer, Sinofsky underestimated the threats that Apple's iPad and iPhone posed to Microsoft, and he deserves much of the blame for Microsoft's decline in relevance.

    Sinofsky did not seem to register these failings. Instead, he tried to expand his empire beyond Windows, while alienating more and more people along the way. Ultimately, Ballmer had to decide whether to keep coddling him or to part ways. 

    All of that closed mindedness resulted in the "No Compromise" experience that was Windows 8 and was its principle failure IMO. You can blame marketing all you want but Sinofsky's "Stalinesque" ways were clearly part of Windows 8 and its failure. Add to that the related politics that kept the Windows and Windows Phone team apart and it's quite clear a lot of the changes we see from Microsoft now (re-adding the start menu, UA, merger of WinPRT & WinRT, etc.) are driven from their reaction to the technical problems they created due to those politics and not simply the next logical step in some strategy they had planned all along or a reaction to a simple marketing blunder.

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:  I haven't disagreed with you and still do not disagree with you on most of your points.



    I'm not trying to make Microsoft look better.  I'm just placing blame where I think it lies... with marketing, not design.

    You don't like tablet features on your desktop.  I say that's because it's a tablet OS and you knew that and still installed it anyway (or, are ranting about something you don't even use).  Well why was it called Windows 8 as if it were an upgrade for desktop users too?  Because marketing is dumb.

    That's what I started this post with.  I'm really tired of having to repeat myself to you.

    LOL! So if it's just a marketing issue then why did Sinofsky and related staff leave or were demoted? Are you suggesting they were unfortunate scapegoats?  

    *Edit: You called it a tablet OS so it's my fault for upgrading to it? Oh my bad; I didn't know the great Bondsbw had spoken. Sorry pal; that's just utter non-sense. Microsoft more than marketed W8 as an upgrade.

    And BTW I do own a Yoga and the Build 2011 tablet so please refrain from suggesting I don't use it.

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote


    Yes, essentially.  But now that I look back, the term "iPad OS" was just a nickname and the real name was iPhone OS 3.2 (and 3.2.2).  Those versions were made specifically for the iPad and couldn't run on iPhone/iPod Touch.  Version 4.0 was the first to be named iOS and was available for all devices.

    Wow that's a stretch. So in the end you're comparing the merger of two extremely similar mobile OS's (for which you "enhanced" your point by making up names for the OS's) to the merger of two completely different UI/UX's in the form of the Windows desktop and the new Windows Store app environment.

    IMO, it would be more fair to compare the merger of the iOS version with that of WinRT and WinPRT.


    I agree completely.  Except that you seem to suggest that Microsoft just give up and die. Actually the best thing is to go back in time and yank Ballmer out of the captain's chair a decade ago or more, but since that hasn't happened I assume time machines will never exist.

    Ah I see where you got confused. You think I want Microsoft to "give up and die" when in reality I just want guys like you to quit making stuff up in order to make Microsoft look better. Microsoft need to face the realities they have created, Ballmer or no (the same realities we "trolls", "haters", etc. said they would when W8/WinRT was first announced). We can all sit around the firing singing cum-by-ya and pretend it was "Windows 8 - We meant to do that!" or just admit Microsoft screwed up and keep the pressure on them to course correct. They seem to be doing a better job post Ballmer, Sinofsky, and all but that's no reason to rewrite their history.

    Here's an article I just found from someone who seems to agree with me (and notice the article was dated before Windows 8 was released):  http://bgr.com/2012/08/22/microsoft-windows-8-praise-forward-thinking-innovation/ 

    None of which is to say that Windows 8 will be a smash hit that will put Microsoft back on the map for top-notch innovative technology. But all the same, risk-taking is an important part of what makes markets work and consumers on the whole will benefit the more companies are willing to go out on a limb. And personally speaking, I'd rather have companies fail from trying too hard than fail from not trying at all.

    Yes they had to take some risks but in the case of W8 and WPH they failed on execution. For W8 contributing factors were:

    • Insisting that their way was the right way (copying Apple's attitude -- which is one thing Samsung wisely didn't copy)
    • Believing that the desktop had to be compromised in order to push a new mobile UI/UX.
    • Assuming that developers would be happy to be caught between desktop technologies with no future and the new WinRT that was locked to an unproven W8. They only carrot they offered was "skills transfer".

    Even with all of these gaffs they could have saved W8 by listening to their customers and making small changes to the UI/UX but unfortunately they were unwilling. It took the rejection of W8 in the marketplace and the departure of a lot of senior execs before Microsoft finally capitulated.

    For Windows Phone contributing factors were:

    • Assuming that consumers would accept a phone that didn't have the apps they loved and on the spec sheet didn't appear to measure up to the hardware on competing handsets. You can tell people "That's because WP is a better OS and requires less horsepower" all you want but that won't (and didn't) change many people's minds.
    • The continual rebooting of the platform. Why would you want to risk writing for a fledgling platform whose owner didn't seem to mind inconveniencing devs? (And I loved the AT&T commercials selling WP as "The beta test is over!") 
    • Showing no love to corporate use of WP to replace WinMo. If you give them a locked handset 

    In the end it's a similar story to W8; politics and not listening to your customers. 

    Fortunately for XBox One they quickly dropped the Apple attitude and listened to their customers in time to make the necessary course corrections and prevented it from being a total flop right out of the gate. Don Mattrick's exit certainly helped out here.

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , bondsbw wrote


    When iPhoneOS and iPadOS merged to become iOS, I didn't see much disparity or distrust.  Neither did I see it when some features began blending between iOS and OS X.  Is that what you expect to happen when Windows Phone and Windows merge?  

    Wow, I must be living in a cave. There was an iPhoneOS and iPadOS before iOS? Two mobile interfaces that were distinctly different that Apple somehow managed to merge together and not piss people off? If that's true then maybe it was so easy for them because they were both mobile OS's and not desktop + mobile.

    I guess when it comes the blending desktop + mobile OS's Microsoft should look to Apple as they seemed to be able to pull it off without the same negative effects. Maybe it's because they didn't try and force desktop users to "experience" the new mobile OS. Maybe it's because the Apple's mobile OS was already a success in and of its own right rather than unproven and unwanted. 

  • and What's up with the trackpad to visible pointer movement latency?

    , bondsbw wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:  I don't understand your question, unless you have never heard of Office for Windows.  But I suspect you have, so I'm back at "I don't understand your question."

    Sorry I thought you meant the as-of-yet to be release Windows Store app version of Office. Even so I agree with spivonious; been there did that.

    A computer that is too slow to use won't be of value at any price.

    , spivonious wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio: Do you really think Chromebooks will ever be more than a novelty? People have moved away from traditional PCs.

    Well they're selling better than they used to:

    Following the same logic that triple digit percent increases in Windows Phone sales shows they are viable the same would hold true of Chromebooks.

    Now I've said in this forum several times I think Chromebooks are a joke. Apparently I was wrong (and so was Microsoft once again).

    What Microsoft really needs to do is make a Surface Pro 3 with an i3, 4GB RAM, 128GB SSD and sell it for $600 with the TypeCover included. It would place it solidly in the market of the Dell Inspirons that fly off the shelves at the local big box store.

    Now that sounds like a winner as long as it includes the pen. Once Office for Windows Store is available I'd also hope they'd consider a Windows RT only (no desktop) 8 inch edition with similar specs for sub $300 (maybe put a fast atom or arm processor in with 2GB RAM) . Throw in a dock for $50 and you've got a great device for students: a OneNote device that doubles for lightweight desktop use (using Windows Store apps). They key to performance would be a mini-fied Windows OS that would only include stuff required for Windows RT and not legacy desktop. It sounds like Microsoft might have that in Windows 9 and beyond. Sadly by the time that's available they'll have something else to chase and this will be so "yesterday". 

  • KDE Plasma 5.0 released

    , TexasToast wrote


    Anyway this thread is way off original topic.

    On the contrary; this type of debate is why we should be running for the Linux hills and embracing KDE Plasma 5.0.