Fuckheads II
This deserves a more articulate rant, because it's still frustrating to me.
Who exactly had the idea that it would smart to require that all software installed must pass some entirely arbitrary test? I mean, even if it worked properly - instead of, say, preventing you from upgrading Internet Explorer 6 - even if it worked like it was supposed to, is that the kind of thing that's going to benefit consumers?
- Can the monopolism get any more obvious? If MS can arbitrarily decide which programs pass XP Logo Testing and which don't, what's to stop them from making it impossible to install, say, Word Perfect or Mozilla?
- Even if we want to stretch our imaginations and pretend that their intentions are perfectly benevolent, it's a perfectly useless technique. If they could somehow include an exhausive list of allowed software at release time, there's still the issue of XP coping with future releases - and right now, it doesn't cope at all. It rejects updates coming from Microsoft itself. Are the developers honestly so shortsighted that they didn't realize their technique would only work until the next security patch?
« Clarity | Home | New and Improved »
Comments
An alternate theory is that Bill Gates thinks Logo Certification is viable because he is near to completing his demonic time machine, which will allow him to go into the future and see which patches need to be certified.
Posted by Aa at November 3, 2002 11:16 AM :: Linkk i dunno what any of that means…but my monitor is really small now and it sucks…
the end
Posted by Becca at November 3, 2002 11:30 AM :: LinkPost a comment
Comments for this entry have been closed. Try e-mailing me instead.
Ironically, the latest security patch also isn’t Logo Certified.
ah well.
Posted by Ben at November 3, 2002 11:13 AM :: Link