I swear to tell the truth,

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Okay, my blood pressure is back down and my brain has re-engaged.  If you
will bear with me for one more post I will let the subject go.  I feel it
necessary to clear up the record and post what M.S. has done for me.

1.  Active-x
With this lovely extension to web content M.S. has made it possible for me
to spread viruses simply by having preview message turned on in outlook
(shouldn't that be look out?).  Simply by cursoring down or up to an
specially constructed email it will automatically launch it's code and
possibly send to all entries in my addressbook.

2.  M.S. java vm
No swing library.  No true accessibility.  Most of the "text" applets
somehow write directly to the screen and "clickable" areas are not reported
any differently than just plain text, if it can be called that.
3.  M.S. proxy
Where do I start in describing this wonderfull product?  GUI based
configuration and control.  It's MICROSOFT which means you get all the
support you buy.  Lots of third-party stuff you can buy to address it's
limitations.  Contrast with squid, free and persons who make their living
selling support take the time to answer your questions at no charge, it's
configured with a text file and reports it's health through a webpage that
uses very standard html.
4.  Policy editor
CPU goes critical (or something) acts as if I poured concrete into the case.
Makes one very good boat anchor.
5.  MMC (Microsoft management console)
Not too bad, makes heavy use of msaa (sure it does), uses standard controls
(sure it does).  It is usable, but that doesn't make it pleasant.
6.  Undocumented interfaces, standards and other misc.
For years M.S. used undocumented interfaces in order to implement fancier
appearance for it's products than was available to other companies through
the "standard" interfaces.  The most notable effect of this was to make
developers use to making "custom" methods of presentation so that they could
compete appearance wise with M.S. products.  In fact, for many years the
only thing standard about M.S. standards was that M.S. did not use them.
This practice appears to be continuing.
7.  M.S. TTS
Awesome!  They certainly broke the budget on this one!  It has speech
quality almost as good as my old echo pc.  Did they find a copy of monologue
(no offense to monologue's programmer intended) on a 5 1/4" diskette
somewhere and dust it off and include it?
8.  Business practices
In a word, monopolistic.  If the screen reader market was worth their notice
freedom scientific and others would be singing a lot different tune.
Remember Netscape?  Soon it will be remember Real Networks?  Driving your
competition out of business really spurs inovation, they have to inovatively
create new employment for themselves.  If you're in a market segment that
isn't really profitable, such as access technology they'll let you continue
doing business unharrassed, as long as you sing their tune.  Why should they
spend their resources if they can throw an api or two your way and have you
run with it from there so that they can claim compliance with laws such as
section 508?  Well, we developed MSAA, it's not our fault that it hasn't
caught on.....  Oh, and one question, if you're doing things just like other
access developers, where's the inovation, where's the potential for growth
and improvement, and finally what truly distinguishes your product from your
competition's?  The keys you press to get a particular result?

I would like to thank the list for allowing me this opportunity to rant.  I
do apologize, I realize this post has nothing to do with either speakup or
linux in general and is therefore a waste of resources better spent for
their original purpose.

Once again, Thanks.

Cecil H. Whitley





[Index of Archives]     [Linux for the Blind]     [Fedora Discussioin]     [Linux Kernel]     [Yosemite News]     [Big List of Linux Books]
  Powered by Linux