Summary: Stuff that doesn't fit anywhere else

Advertizing other companies...

Adv DiskView Check out Windows Explorer's missing half. Visually see disk space usage in Windows Explorer as cool 3D Pie and Bar charts!

Why do so many developers hate Microsoft with a passion?

I'm not sure hate is the best word, but there is a large amount of very rational frustration with Microsoft among developers because of its tendancy to take widely-accepted, standard protocols and modify them to be non-standard and proprietary. Because of Microsoft's market share, these bastardized "standards" quickly become mainstream and make countless independently developed products incompatible and non-operational.

Secure Password Authentication (SPA) is a Microsoft tack-on to e-mail protocols that make them unfriendly to anything but Microsoft products.

Another example is Kerberos, which Microsoft implemented in Windows 2000. Microsoft "extended" the functionality of Kerberos so that it was incompatible with non-Microsoft implementations, once again, making it difficult for other products to interoperate.

---

Windows 2000 can act as a Kerberos server for other systems, but other implementations at the time of Windows 2000's release could not act as a DomainController for a Windows 2000 domain. ActiveDirectory is more than just Kerberos authentication - for logon, it also includes GlobalPolicy, allowing administrators to apply settings to workstations, user profile information, user access times, password expiry dates, multiple group membership. See http://ftp.die.net/mirror/banned/microsoft-kerberos-extensions.html. Third-party Kerberos implementations simply don't know about that stuff - it's all data that Windows either needs in order for the security model to function, or that was required for backward compatibility with NT4 domains, or that helps the administrator to deploy settings more simply. Active Directory clients will refuse to log on without that information.

The other extension was the ability to allow an administrator to set the user's password. Again, this was a feature supported by NT4 domains, but not then supported by Kerberos. Some other mechanism could have been defined for setting passwords, but this would have required registering additional ports or allowing a Remote Procedure Call, etc, and the administrative tool would still have needed to negotiate a ticket with Kerberos to access this service in order to send the new password securely.

Microsoft are quite within their rights to require licenses before disclosing this kind of information. The FOSS community has wacky ideas about some implicit requirements on openness, but the fact is a lot of us are in this business to support ourselves, so we have to charge. -- MikeDimmick

---

The list goes on, but the point is that Microsoft engages in behavior that abuses its market power to disrupt and frustrate the efforts of independant developers. Why shouldn't these developers have a passionate distaste for Microsoft?

10 Ways to calm yourself after a Microsoft bashing tyrade

1. Listen to Enya on your i-Pod.
2. Take a deep breath and visualize a little penguin walking on an icy beach.
3. Try to remember that Redmond is not in the Middle East.
4. ooooOOOOOMMMMMhHhhhh
5. It's a short walk to the fridge, pop another beer.
6. Hug your linux server, it needs love too...
7. Think of AOL or Compuserve, they're much worse.

Comments on these products ::: Internet Explorer, Visual Studio, Frontpage Comments

First of all, thanks guys for opening up Microsoft to feedback from us little people. Its a great strategy that I think we have all seen generate great rewards for Mozilla and that group in making that product where it is today. Second, IE is no doubt still the premium browser online but that is changing now and going the other direction fast. See some stats here:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

The reason is these new browsers support w3c specifications. The code in nearly all WYSIWIGS is horrible...even Dreamweaver, so our designers use caution. But with the terrible non-xhtml compliant stuff Frontpage and Visual Studio puts out, its really sad that those tools are really useless now for front-end development. With the total conversion of our web shop to CSS-driven solutions this year, its even less of a reason to use Microsoft GUI products now, Im sad to say. Thats just one developer's opinion. Thats not to say you guys dont address all our needs in so many other great products. Thats just a very large complaint I have with Frontpage. I recently attended training in Frontpage 2003 with Sharepoint and that is an amazing combo for collaboration development, but again, how much can we trust all the prorietyary javascript and all-caps html all thsoe tools spit out. Sorry to say, I cannot use that code....its useless to us, if its not compliant, and doesnt work in Netscape/Mozilla/Aol/Safari.

Also, as Ive moved from designer to full fledged ASP and ASP.NET content management developer, Ive also noticed an increasing complexity and interrelated dependency between Frontpage, IE, .NET, and various other strategies implemented by your products. Thats a complex issue I know but the leverage you have with developers in making things easier for us (and apps that work "better") I'm not convinced is worth the trade off both increasing dependency on correct orchestration of those components during implementation, complex security configurations, and isolation from other OS's and client side agents. This will certainly unfold in the mobile market, despite robust tools for mobile device and compact device development tools in your products. Im not sure thats a valid argument for me to make, but Im not so sure that trade off is worth the diminishing returns developers find themselves in when a custom app works miracles in an intranet, but suddenly crashes and burns on a unix server (70% of market) or Konqueror, or Mozilla, or when Nortons turns off a user's active x or javascript. If you want to when the war of all this thin client stuff thats coming, you have to abondon the incestuous relationship your products have with each other and Internet Explorer and somehow reinvent yourself and the whole web/web services models to a more open-source, universally accessible, standards-based, model. I think thats the one factor that will make the back end developement environmnet of Visual Studio be the dominant force the next few years, but front-end development tools in VS and Frontpage continue to fail and fail to attract designers who increasingly need better and cleaner, open source, xhtml/css compliant tools. We can live with (and actually do love) IIs and 2003 server and SQL server 2000 but will continue to hate Frontpage and its extensions for those reasons and many more. I'm not saying there is an easy solution....you will have your loyal Frontpage people, and allot who refuse to use it. Only suggestioon for a new business model would be the following, if this helps:

1. Separate Frontpage extensions (including IE schema, Sharepoint tool, etc.) from that tool COMPLETELY, and market those as a module tied top IIS and Sharepoint only.
2. Reinvent the tool from the ground up as a front-end cleaner, meaner web designer's dream tool....one for home users who need a robust drag and drop tool with mini-extension if you must, for quick web development, and a Pro version free of all extension and sharepoint connections, closer to Dreamweaver thats more open source in its coding and use of w3c standards, compliant with CSS1 and CSS2 (not IE code or relationship any more), and allows robust hand-coding structuring and integration with multiple products beyond Microsoft. The key is flexibility and renmoval of extensions and any extra folders, code, or junk in the pages. Web designers are not html dummies any more....we know what that tool spits out!
3. Lessen the complexity and security issues surroundly extensions and move all .net, sharepoint and extensions if possible away from Frontapge and install as a server only add-on. If the development team chooses to integrate VS, FP, and IIs, let that be allot easier and modular than it is.
4. Most importantly, go download and play with Macromedia Contribute. We are moving all our clients to this tool, because its just so easy to use! It doesnt make ASSUMPTIONS about what type of code, or browser or server you are using, and is so easy to implement and use, we find its saved us hundreds of hours and security concerns when it comes to allowing out clients to login to our servers and manipulate content on their sites (beyond the web service and busienss logic layer we build). Its that kind of A. Simplicty of Implementation, B. Ease of Use, C. Open Source architecture that works on many platforms and servers, that has many thinking twice about products they used to use.

Here is the architecture that in the end, will sell your product to a new generation of users, in my opinion:
1.Robust Web Development Software - primary ability is managing multiple types of developer code with tool support components and business logic and DB that supports spped, efficiency, enterprise level components and logic, like Visual Studio does. NO FRONT-END client-side code....that is totally separated from that logic by all but the most basic html controls. The exception would be your web forms which in most cases, a Linux user with Konqueror or Mac User with OSX can access via the browser and use. Visual Studio wins hands down for now....fials on drag and drop front-end tool and xhtml/css coding.
2. Front End XHTML/CSS/XSLT Development tool - totally text-based tool, with nice graphics interface, with full selection of user test agents ordered by platform as testing option. As this evolves, the user can bolt on other browsers , as well as CSS modules, xml and xslt, xform support, and stronger image/graphics inmtegration and management. Rich CSS management and multi-purposing of xml content is key. No server-side dependencies or coding integrated in...these would be options or modules (see Dreamweaver MX 2004 as an example). Optional design view again tied to multiple browsers and user agents, so designer is free to implement for ANY OS of agent! Thats critical with the coming mobile device market! Can Frontpage become this type of tool?
3. The Ultimate Universal W3C Standards Compliant Browser - the winner here is not just the browser with the most features or most compliance to xhtml and css and standards, but really the one who's direction is geared towards complete implementation on every OS, every global market, and user device available! You agree? (right now Mozilla is moving that direction)
4. Static Site manager for the Masses - we see a huge need for a simple tool like Contrute that will allow users to easily update css and text-based page data. This need free of extensions, server-side integration and other applications is needed to address the volumes of non-DB based web solutions out there. (not everything needs a Frontpage or Sharepoint or CMS solution!)

Hope this input helps....I know you guys are the best and brightest out there!
-MS