A typical Microsoft / cowboy programmer "solution". Ever wonder why Microsoft products are so buggy and unrealiable in every possible way? That's because they are built from hacks upon hacks just like this one with no regard for the user experience.
Could the cold hard truth be that Microsoft's top developers lack the technical expertise to fix a trivial bug in their own software because the code its self is a complete mess?
Is there any evidence that the software is actually poorly written? Isn't the only reason they use undocumented/unstable hacks that Microsoft refuses to provide a documented or stable way of doing what they want to do?
>Almost always, nobody has any intention to "make it run buggy."
Well, Microsoft has a long history of "making things buggy" everywhere else to create lock-ins. This instance may not be strictly related, but people's attitude has been shaped by years of anti-competitive stuff that MS has pulled.
Actually, they do. Microsoft could spend more time and resources debugging it, or limit the number of use cases it addresses, make it simpler, support less hardware...
Obviously, they chose more functionality for the end user, a broader selection of supported hardware and shorter time to market. That comes with a price.
It's always a compromise. "Done is better than perfect"
And, to be fair, it could also be a hardware problem. You know, hardware has bugs too.
You must do BJJ, to be able to twist yourself into such knots to blame Microsoft for a 3rd party vendor's unsupported buggy hacks. No mention of how the 3rd party vendor lies by omission to the users by not telling them that their software is very literally using unsupported, buggy means to accomplish its goals. Leaving the user to blame Microsoft for the crash, when if the user knew the truth, they may feel differently, and maybe not even use the 3rd party software. But it feels better to blame the big bad corporation, despite the fact that they have not lied, and are just trying to fix security issues.
I am constantly amazed at the number of bugs and seemingly obvious UI issues pervasive throughout microsoft products. It feels like their product philosophy is "jack of all trades, master of none" - they try to support so many uses cases that there isn't a cohesive best practice anywhere.
Even if Microsoft had a proper sandbox system they would have exempted themselves from it "for security scanning and product improvement". It isn't the apps that are the problem, it is Microsoft.
What a horrible design decision. Instead of making a system that simply works or doesn't work Microsoft allowed everyone to produce apps which break at random times in the future. It's one of those "what could possibly go wrong?" cases.
I'm not sure why this is Microsoft's fault as opposed to the developer's. Exactly the same kind of techniques have been used for years on desktop applications/games.
(and, y'know, you could pay for stuff that you like using, feed a developer's starving family and continue to get updates and improvements rather than ripping them off)
I can assure you that Microsoft isn't very good at making installers for their own software on their own OS that don't also have a lot of strange side effects.
reply