F***ing Microsoft
- Thread starter OmniKnight
- Start date
That's it? I was tagged over this shit? I could give you a shitload of other examples of worse stuff. Come on.
@UCF w00t are they coming out with a Surface 4 along with the Surface Pro 4?
I am debating between the 2 models (in terms of the 3's...but I am waiting to see the new stuff). I think my use might be more light so was leaning to the non-pro but wasnt sure if they were coming out with a new one. Google is not my friend in figuring this out since all the results are about the Pro 4.
I am debating between the 2 models (in terms of the 3's...but I am waiting to see the new stuff). I think my use might be more light so was leaning to the non-pro but wasnt sure if they were coming out with a new one. Google is not my friend in figuring this out since all the results are about the Pro 4.
I would be surprised if there's a regular Surface 4 right now. The 3 just came out a few months ago and I believe it's running the latest chip from Intel still. There are supposed to be two Surface devices announced on Tuesday though. http://www.windowscentral.com/what-expect-microsofts-windows-10-devices-event-nyc
Surface Pro 4 looks sweet. I definitely dont need anything close to that new Microsoft Book thing though
I'm on day 3 of not being able to use Outlook on my Mac because they couldn't be prepared for El Capitan. Microsoft is the only 3rd party software that I have that's not working with the new upgrade, and they have no end in sight for actually making their, very expensive (although I didn't pay for it my company did) software up and running.
If you had a better computer you wouldn't have that problem. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So anyone have the Surface 4 yet? I'm sick of screwing around with my broken screen ASUS tablet and it's awfully tempting to get it.
Why did Apple break one of the most highly used applications on their OS? I'm not even kidding when I say, whether you consider it a good thing or bad thing, Microsoft would never ship an OS update that breaks something like Photoshop. Microsoft would've either fixed whatever they changed that is causing the issue or they would include an app compat shim in the OS to patch that application from the breaking change.
Why does Microsoft have to be the only POS applications that can't handle the new OS?
Why didn't Apple allow Microsoft apps to work on their new OS?
I'm still using Outlook 2007 and haven't had a problem with XP, Vista, 7, 8, or 10. My father still uses Anytime Deluxe from probably the early 2000's and has never had an issue reinstalling on new OS'. Apple more than likely did this on purpose. Like woot said, it is one of the most used apps and Apple doesn't care about their customers that use it. It's your own fault, you should be using Mail.
I'm still using Outlook 2007 and haven't had a problem with XP, Vista, 7, 8, or 10. My father still uses Anytime Deluxe from probably the early 2000's and has never had an issue reinstalling on new OS'. Apple more than likely did this on purpose. Like woot said, it is one of the most used apps and Apple doesn't care about their customers that use it. It's your own fault, you should be using Mail.
I HIGHLY doubt it's the only app that doesn't work. Apple breaks stuff all the time. They don't give a shit about backward compatibility. I'll be curious to see what the root cause of this is (assuming there is one made public). Was Microsoft doing something wrong (like using an undocumented API) or did Apple change a supported feature? I put money on the latter. Does OSX even have a compatibility shim system? This is the problem with Apple. They don't give a shit about the enterprise and software stability. If you want some guarantee of software to work for an extended period of time and be fully supported you might want to use Windows.
I cannot count the number of apps i had to delete and redownload so they wouldnt crash on iO9. Happens every major update.
Just remember 2 things ...
1) Even when it's disabled in MS IE, it's not always disabled.
2) MS non-Win32/x86 JavaScript has many limitations versus Win32/x86 JavaScript implementations
Now ... to give Microsoft credit, their new browser is trying to dump a lot of MS IE'isms that are a security nightmare for corporations. So you have to give them some slack for trying to reverse a lot of the issues they've created.
1) Even when it's disabled in MS IE, it's not always disabled.
2) MS non-Win32/x86 JavaScript has many limitations versus Win32/x86 JavaScript implementations
Now ... to give Microsoft credit, their new browser is trying to dump a lot of MS IE'isms that are a security nightmare for corporations. So you have to give them some slack for trying to reverse a lot of the issues they've created.
Portability. They are trying to drop Win32/x86-only bytecode objects in their software so they can port without bringing an entire run-time over to emulate/translate things.
Microsoft is just basically 15+ years behind what Apple did long ago (for PowerPC, having gone through the 68k change before that). They know x86 won't be the primary bytecode in the near future, and are planning for it. At the same time, Microsoft is becoming a PC OEM vendor so they can sustain x86-compatible architectures as long as they can.
It's a very smart strategy by Microsoft. They are honestly trying to do things now, that they should have years ago. Especially back when their tools purposely made Win32/x86-only web pages.
They use completely different series processors, so they come out based on their processor availability.
Intel just released its performance x86 core design, aka "i-series." This is the "SkyLake" (6th generation i-series), hence the availability of the new Surface Pro 4. The "Y" and "U" tablet-mobile products are used.
Starting with the Surface [non-Pro] 3 (I won't re-cover my prior ARM v. x86 posts), Microsoft now uses Intel's low-power x86 core design, aka "Atom" (no longer ARM).
In the case of the Surface [non-Pro] 3 ...
This is the "Airmont," a 14nm die-shrink of the "Silvermont." The "Silvermont," more specifically the "Bay Trail" products, was not previously used in Surface, but was in many Chromebooks, even a few Windows Mobile products. The "Airmont" product version is "Cherry Trail."
When Intel releases its next iteration of "Atom," the "Goldmont" series, you'll likely see the Surface 4 with some sort of new "Trail" product. Microsoft could ship a Surface 4 before then, but with little to offer over Surface 3 (which only recently became available), they'll probably wait.
Again, we'll likely need to wait for "Goldmont" from Intel before seeing the Surface [non-Pro] 4.
But the Surface [non-Pro] 3 with the Cherry Trail is no slouch. Atoms are basically half the performance of the i-series, clock for clock, core for core, but still do a great job. They offer out-of-order execution and other benefits now, things that used to really hurt Atom, especially on platforms not optimized for them (long story).
Prior to the Surface [non-Pro] 3, it was ARM based and had all sorts of Win32/x86 compatibility issues. The return rate on the original Surface [non-Pro] RT was over 70%. The Surface [non-Pro] 2 didn't sell well as a result, except in applications where Windows compatibility was not desired (select industries).
If you need Windows compatibility, you should be grabbing a Surface [non-Pro] 3 or later. Everything else is usually going to be ARM based, even with Windows Mobile et al.
That's not true. What Adobe usually does is update the software with new libraries prior to a new Windows release. Because of Microsoft's size, they can force this. Apple doesn't have that kind of clout.
I deal with this constantly, having worked for an Enterprise software vendor directly (as well as a hardware-software vendor), most of the past decade. I've even worked on Windows (just because I keep my knowledge current) when a new Service Pack wiped out an entire division, because they screwed-the-pooch on a storage driver (even though my employer eventually had to pull my SoW out, as I was fixing a competitors product).
Obviously you missed the entire NT 6.0 (Windows Vista) controversy. NT 6.1 (Windows 7) is basically Vista with a lot of compatibility additions (among other things). I won't even touch NT 6.2 (Windows 8).
NT 10 (Windows 10) is attempting to remove as many libraries that are Win32/x86-only, and force the vendors to either adapt to more portable libraries, or include their own. It's really NT 6.3, but with the removal of some compatibility, they went ahead artificially increased the version.
That's why a lot of companies that have standardized on Windows 7 aren't going to move until Windows 10 gets more release time, skipping Windows 8. Windows 10 is also the last version of Windows, at least as announced by Microsoft.
Wait... so you think a week is a long time to be made aware of an issue, debug the issue, develop a fix, package that fix, test it, and release it? This isn't some little POS app that show you funny pictures on the internet. This is a complex app with millions of lines of code. While I'm sure it was frustrating for you, that's some seriously fast turnaround IMO. I figured you'd be waiting at least another week.
Indeed, has to go through the full test suite, including mitigating impacts to other software.
Or... being a world leading software company, it should have never been an issue. Either way...
It's extremely difficult to get everything correct.
That said ... knowing people at Microsoft, when it comes to its applications on Apple MacOS X, they take a back seat.
Too many words.
I think I'm gleaning to getting the Pro 3 once the price drop hits. The 3 vs 4 seems good and all but it's comparable. Plus it's still a step up from the nonpro 3. I just might get the 4 keyboard as long as it's backwards compatible
I think I'm gleaning to getting the Pro 3 once the price drop hits. The 3 vs 4 seems good and all but it's comparable. Plus it's still a step up from the nonpro 3. I just might get the 4 keyboard as long as it's backwards compatible
Short version ...
Non-Pro (3+, ignoring 1-2):
- Longer battery, lower performance, "good enough" as a portable PC with constraints.
- But the non-Pro 3 does offer full Windows (Win32/x86) compatibility.
Pro (especially 3+):
- Shorter battery, higher performance, "good enough" as a PC notebook replacement
- The Pro 3/4 options with higher-end i5/7 processor options for $1,000+ can second as desktop replacements (sans internal storage, of course).
That, and ...
Don't expect a non-Pro 4 anytime soon, 2016 at earliest.
- When Intel actually starts "sampling" "Goldmont," Microsoft will likely announce a date.
- Disclaimer: This is assuming Microsoft waits for the Intel "Goldmont" products that end in "Trail" ("Willow Trail" is the current codename, but that could change).
Last edited:
Actually, they do have some developer agreements with IP share (although others have expired). Heck, even Novell and Sun had developer agreements for open source with IP share, while Red Hat's agreements with Microsoft also include pre-release collaboration, but no IP exchange (no cross-patent licensing).
Developer agreements, like those that give access to the Microsoft "Gold Books," do occur. It's in the interest of all companies. It's all how Microsoft "classifies" the company. In the case of Apple, they are a collaborator, not a competitor, in many aspects. Again, that same has happened with Sun, Novell and others in the past too.
That said ... Microsoft continues to treat MS Office for MacOS X as a "second class citizen." E.g., it took almost 6 months for MS Office 2008 (MacOS X) to get fixes to address incompatibility issues with MS Office 2007 SP1 (Windows). It has not improved, and has actually become worse, since MS Office 2013's release.
Latest posts
-
-
How did you enjoy the Shareholder Meet & Greet with Frost?- Latest: Knightro2003
-
-
