03/8/09 :: [Other] I am a PC [permalink]
A lot of my friends who work at Microsoft think that I don't like the company and I never miss an opportunity to criticize it. Some might say that I do that because Microsoft never extended me an offer to work for them. I did interview for Don Box's team back in 2005 and had a phone screen in 2007 with the BizTalk team. I think it is actually a good thing that the CSD never wanted to hire me, it would have been a disaster. I was a big fan in 2003-2005 and was happy to recently join again a Microsoft shop. Unfortunately the CSD only shines by the lack of progress it exhibits over the years. I don't know what they are doing there all day, unless it is the new "fixed time, flex scope" approach they have taken. Or maybe, the CSD is actually using a flex time, fixed scope approach. These things are so confusing.
I won't go in too much detail but here is what happened to me in the last couple of days of trying to use CSD's wonderful technologies. So I now use the BizTalk server, hence I have to use VS2005. Ok, so what, I don't see any difference between VS2008 and VS2005 except that they can't share anything. As one of my Microsoft friend told me VS2008 is a "new platform". So I wanted to build a mockup service to invoke it from the BTS. I remembered that I had to download the WCF extensions to be able to do that. So I searched for them on MSDN. You would never guess what happened to them? They are gone, you can only get the ones for the "new platform", you have to go to "download.com" to get them (illegally).. I mean come on , is the CSD really part of Microsoft? My "reconnect" adventure with the CSD did not stop here. I have an MSDN subscription so I installed the "new platform" and got the VS2008 extensions for WCF. (Can't wait to see what will happen with VS2010). I had a WSDL to start with for my mockup service, so I searched on yahoo for the antinomic query "WSDL-first WCF". Don Box never quite understood how WSDL-first differed from Contract-first and WCF has always had the hardest time to deal with it. He realized after the fact that WCF could not do it and basically put the baby in the hands of patterns and practices which did not really solved the problem. Yahoo search gave me a great reference written by Dino Chiesa, Microsoft's Interop Guru, in September 2008. I'll let you read it... I just want to point out that my WSDL was basic, especially the message types, and had only one operation and SVCUTIL choked on it. After a couple days of adventures with WCF, I went to download WSO2 WSAS and it took me less than 30 minutes (I love the form BTW) to deploy my mock up service. Oliver Sharp could possibly reflect on the fact that an ultra small outfit in a developing country was able to deliver a first class job on one of the most basic SOA problem.
But I digress, I wanted to write this post to express that I am a PC. I have owned a Mac for a couple of months (I miss Objective-C) and after checking with a Mac user that I was not hallucinating, I started to wonder how Microsoft's marketing could let Apple run these silly ads. It took me 12 years to give some money to Steve Jobs after he left the NeXT of us behind. OS X is a joke, as far as I am concerned. Even the hardware itself is a complete joke. My top 3 complains are major:
- Can't switch between users, when my kids want to use the Mac, I have to logout or let them use my account
- Can't deal with dual monitors very well, the software can't position the second monitor where it is physically, and the hardware offered me a mere 1280x1024 on my 37" 1080p monitor. What a rip off...
- I don't know if this one should be first or not, but Apple still has a single menu bar, just as if I rarely switch between apps. That's very handy in dual monitor mode as you can imagine.
I bought the iWork suite and the software is abysmal, I would easily pay double for Office. Not to mention that the finder made me appreciate MS explorer.
Anyone who has used a NeXT in the early 90s would agree that OS X has made hardly any progress since then. Even the documentation is using the same old style. OS X and iWork are about 15 years behind.
So I am a PC, and yes when my PC breaks down, I have several others at home that I can use in the mean time. I don't think I'll ever buy a Mac again, I don't see why they can charge 30-40% more for 30-40% less functionality and efficiency. At that level, I am happy to pay for the extra 2Gb of RAM I need or the silly little flash memory to "ReadyBoost" my computer.
Now, it is does not mean that Windows is perfect or can't be improved, but I am a PC and happy so.