Microsoft dropping support for IE for Mac

[mjs1973]

Someone emailed this link to me at work this moring and thought some of the people here might like to know about it.

http://www.microsoft.com/mac/product...ternetexplorer

[Peter_AUS]

Nothing surprising there, this is typical for Microsoft over the years to drop support more and more and move to paid support. Once upon a time you actually could ring Microsoft and ask about anthing to do with their products and not pay a thing, but then they realised how much money they could make charging for support cases and the time it takes to support their products which have been inherently buggy. Why do you think they release beta versions now of their software. They no longer have to take the time to debug things they have millions doing it all the time now.

As a group of users of products we have followed like sheep to the farm of Microsoft to purchase their products like other products supplied by big firms and I think it is about time we all got together and said enough is enough. Start supplying better less buggy software at more reasonable prices or just don't buy the products and upgrades. How long do you think that would take for them to realise that buying power has a big effect.

There needs to be a national worldwide effort by everyone to get this message across finally. People just can't continue to pay the high prices expected to feather the nest of the big companies. How much is Bill Gates worth Now, something like what 30 Billion US maybe more or less, but gee what can one do with so much money, I know I would like a few Million but that would be enough for most of us just to live comfortably and never worry again about buying something or paying the bills etc.

Time for People Power World Wide to Just Say NOOOOOOOOOOO MORE !!!!!!!!

[Michael Fanelli]

Ack! I can't stand it anymore! Don't take it personally, but my RANT IS ON!

Nothing surprising there, this is typical for Microsoft over the years to drop support more and more and move to paid support. Once upon a time you actually could ring Microsoft and ask about anthing to do with their products and not pay a thing, but then they realised how much money they could make charging for support cases and the time it takes to support their products which have been inherently buggy. Why do you think they release beta versions now of their software. They no longer have to take the time to debug things they have millions doing it all the time now.

First, the number of downloads of Mac IE has pretty much dried up. MS had a choice, continue to develop for the Mac or let others, including Apple, do the work. It was an obvious choice.

Second, MS is not the small company it used to be. Support costs money. People complain about how expensive products are but then turn around and expect unlimited free support. That's just silly, just ask Dell about that. One phone call pretty much eliminates the profit for a low-end Dell computer.

Third, the products are perceived as "buggy" for a reason. Most of the world uses Windows. A 1% failure rate for hundreds of millions of units is a lot more than 1% for a tiny market (under 3%) for Apple. Also, who "complains" about having no problems? I have had few problems with MS products, I don't run around screaming and yelling about it.

Fourth, a company such as Apple controls both the hardware and the software. Their software should be almost perfect and very well tested. Yet, it too fails, sometimes in spectacular ways. MS is expected to run perfectly on everything from a pre-installed masterpiece to a junker hacked up out of spare parts by some teenager without a date!

As a group of users of products we have followed like sheep to the farm of Microsoft to purchase their products like other products supplied by big firms and I think it is about time we all got together and said enough is enough. Start supplying better less buggy software at more reasonable prices or just don't buy the products and upgrades. How long do you think that would take for them to realise that buying power has a big effect.

People buy Microsoft because it provides what they need and is easy to use. I am writing this on a Linux box right now. I just spent two hours trying to install a simple software package and falling into the famous Linux library hell. Without IT expertise, the package would never have installed. Drivers? Much better but still not enough to make the system useful for general apps. This is not something a typical MS user expects or wants.

Apple is much better than that but has a much smaller base of applications. There are apps I use that only work on Windows. For better or worse, Windows does what most people want and without problems. So, that's what people write for.

You complain about quality, yet want the software prices to go down and the support to be free. LOL! How many people who work at Microsoft do so for free? Something for nothing is a dream most people can't kick. Even with lots of support from Sun, the Office competitor, free OpenOffice, is just now **starting** to see the ballpark.

There needs to be a national worldwide effort by everyone to get this message across finally. People just can't continue to pay the high prices expected to feather the nest of the big companies. How much is Bill Gates worth Now, something like what 30 Billion US maybe more or less, but gee what can one do with so much money, I know I would like a few Million but that would be enough for most of us just to live comfortably and never worry again about buying something or paying the bills etc.

People have been choosing alternatives. This is especially true with browsers. For example, Firefox is a great competitor that people happily use on their Windows machines. I use Firefox and Opera on my Windows computers. But alternatives have to be as good or better than what exists. I don't use Real Player because they've built spyware into it (look at the Zone Alarm catches). Quicktime is stripped down and constantly bothers me with "reminders" to buy. Winamp is clumsy and complex comapred to WMP. Why should people support alternatives that just aren't as good?

What a wonderful idea: give everyone a few million and don't let them earn anymore! Nothing breeds loathing and envy like someone else being sucessfull. Gates knew what he wanted, did those things that put him into a good position, and showed himself to be a marketing genius. More power to him, that is what capitalism is all about.

RANT OFF

Whew...

[Norfindel]

I think Microsoft, with all his economic power, and the vast majority of the market using windows, could afford to take some time to release the next windows version, but do it right. There is too much things to optimize and too much bugs to repair.
But instead of that, they are "improving" the graphical interface. Why? Because it sells, but this makes the OS work better? NO.
That's because the future of the OS is determinated by the marketing department, instead of the development department. That's today's reality about vaporware, a very sad reality, indeed.

[ken1953]

Ack! I can't stand it anymore! Don't take it personally, but my RANT IS ON!



First, the number of downloads of Mac IE has pretty much dried up. MS had a choice, continue to develop for the Mac or let others, including Apple, do the work. It was an obvious choice.

Second, MS is not the small company it used to be. Support costs money. People complain about how expensive products are but then turn around and expect unlimited free support. That's just silly, just ask Dell about that. One phone call pretty much eliminates the profit for a low-end Dell computer.

Third, the products are perceived as "buggy" for a reason. Most of the world uses Windows. A 1% failure rate for hundreds of millions of units is a lot more than 1% for a tiny market (under 3%) for Apple. Also, who "complains" about having no problems? I have had few problems with MS products, I don't run around screaming and yelling about it.

Fourth, a company such as Apple controls both the hardware and the software. Their software should be almost perfect and very well tested. Yet, it too fails, sometimes in spectacular ways. MS is expected to run perfectly on everything from a pre-installed masterpiece to a junker hacked up out of spare parts by some teenager without a date!



People buy Microsoft because it provides what they need and is easy to use. I am writing this on a Linux box right now. I just spent two hours trying to install a simple software package and falling into the famous Linux library hell. Without IT expertise, the package would never have installed. Drivers? Much better but still not enough to make the system useful for general apps. This is not something a typical MS user expects or wants.

Apple is much better than that but has a much smaller base of applications. There are apps I use that only work on Windows. For better or worse, Windows does what most people want and without problems. So, that's what people write for.

You complain about quality, yet want the software prices to go down and the support to be free. LOL! How many people who work at Microsoft do so for free? Something for nothing is a dream most people can't kick. Even with lots of support from Sun, the Office competitor, free OpenOffice, is just now **starting** to see the ballpark.



People have been choosing alternatives. This is especially true with browsers. For example, Firefox is a great competitor that people happily use on their Windows machines. I use Firefox and Opera on my Windows computers. But alternatives have to be as good or better than what exists. I don't use Real Player because they've built spyware into it (look at the Zone Alarm catches). Quicktime is stripped down and constantly bothers me with "reminders" to buy. Winamp is clumsy and complex comapred to WMP. Why should people support alternatives that just aren't as good?

What a wonderful idea: give everyone a few million and don't let them earn anymore! Nothing breeds loathing and envy like someone else being sucessfull. Gates knew what he wanted, did those things that put him into a good position, and showed himself to be a marketing genius. More power to him, that is what capitalism is all about.

RANT OFF

Whew...

OK...I have to comment here...Most of the large manufacturers now believe that it is actually cheaper to send out inexpensive, untested products, and then let the customer do their quality control for them. IMHO, that makes it the manufacturers responsibilty to provide free customer support, since, in most cases, the products are put together with inferior or just plain bad parts. This goes as much for hardware as for software, hence the beta products.
The other thing under this heading is..."PLANNED OBSELESCENCE". For those of you who haven't heard of this, manufacturers purposely make products with high probablilities to fail within a certain amount of time. This ensures people constantly have to come back and purchase "newer" products to replace the ones that no longer work or meet your needs.
We are a capitalistic society and will follow like sheep the strongest ram in flock, even if it is over a cliff!!! In this case...Bill Gates/Microsoft, IBM, George Bush...etc. There is a way to stop this type of abuse of the public, but most of the sheep will not stand together against the bullies.
Just my rant!!! haha
Ken

[Michael Fanelli]

I think Microsoft, with all his economic power, and the vast majority of the market using windows, could afford to take some time to release the next windows version, but do it right. There is too much things to optimize and too much bugs to repair.
But instead of that, they are "improving" the graphical interface. Why? Because it sells, but this makes the OS work better? NO.
That's because the future of the OS is determinated by the marketing department, instead of the development department. That's today's reality about vaporware, a very sad reality, indeed.

When Longhorn was delayed, people screamed that MS just couldn't get the job done. If Longhorn had been released on schedule, people would complain that it was too unstable, why didn't they take longer. Nothing MS does will be considered good (as the opposite, anything that Apple does can't possibly be bad!).

Like it or not, the OS is an extremely complex piece of code. There have been many studies showing that any software that big can never be bug free. Its not a conspiracy, its just a fact of life. How about Linux? My Linux box crashes a lot, XP (the last XP crash was two years ago) doesn't. Does that mean that the developers of Linux are conspirators or greedy? What about Apple, you pay for each and every update, no free SP packages. The first version of OS X was so slow that your fingernails grew faster than the windows would draw! Should Apple have taken yet more time? I don't know.

Most of the large manufacturers now believe that it is actually cheaper to send out inexpensive, untested products, and then let the customer do their quality control for them. IMHO, that makes it the manufacturers responsibilty to provide free customer support, since, in most cases, the products are put together with inferior or just plain bad parts. This goes as much for hardware as for software, hence the beta products.

Betas are the user's fault. The companies don't try to deceive anyone. If it says beta, or worse, alpha, it's "user beware." These things used to be well controlled, now its open to everyone. Good? Bad? Just a matter of opinion. Once again, look at Linux: almost everything outside the kernal is not "production quality." If a user can't handle a beta, they shouldn't be using it.

Big companies make big mistakes, no doubt about it. But very few, in spite of the publicity and rumors, are underhanded thieves conspiring against their customers!

[ken1953]

Betas are the user's fault. The companies don't try to deceive anyone. If it says beta, or worse, alpha, it's "user beware." These things used to be well controlled, now its open to everyone. Good? Bad? Just a matter of opinion. Once again, look at Linux: almost everything outside the kernal is not "production quality." If a user can't handle a beta, they shouldn't be using it.

Big companies make big mistakes, no doubt about it. But very few, in spite of the publicity and rumors, are underhanded thieves conspiring against their customers!

I agree with you and I probably, as usual, didn't state my position on beta's very well. Basically, all I was saying is how big companies now use "we", the consumer, to do much of it's testing and quality control. And much of the reason for this is to save money, and hopefully decrease release delays.

I also strongly agree with your last statement. I don't think the majority of the large companies are intentionally trying to rip people off...just trying to give us what we want when we want it...whether it is ready or not.
Ken

[Norfindel]

When Longhorn was delayed, people screamed that MS just couldn't get the job done. If Longhorn had been released on schedule, people would complain that it was too unstable, why didn't they take longer. Nothing MS does will be considered good (as the opposite, anything that Apple does can't possibly be bad!).

*Some* people screamed that MS couldn't get the job done, not all. This world has a lot of people, and there are very different opinions, just as people is different from each other. And if "people" are reporters, well, they always will say things like that, just to rise rating.

Like it or not, the OS is an extremely complex piece of code. There have been many studies showing that any software that big can never be bug free. Its not a conspiracy, its just a fact of life. How about Linux? My Linux box crashes a lot, XP (the last XP crash was two years ago) doesn't. Does that mean that the developers of Linux are conspirators or greedy? What about Apple, you pay for each and every update, no free SP packages. The first version of OS X was so slow that your fingernails grew faster than the windows would draw! Should Apple have taken yet more time? I don't know.

Agreed, no software will probably be bug free, but that doesn't means software companies could allocate resources in a huge quantity of products... what happends with the quality of that products this way? Just look at microsoft to see how many different products they make. They have huge resources, but limited nonetheless.
Linux is maked by people around the world, who need something that do the job, for no money at all, but that means not very much effort to make things user friendly, and has growed innecesarily complicated for doing almost anything.

Betas are the user's fault. The companies don't try to deceive anyone. If it says beta, or worse, alpha, it's "user beware." These things used to be well controlled, now its open to everyone. Good? Bad? Just a matter of opinion. Once again, look at Linux: almost everything outside the kernal is not "production quality." If a user can't handle a beta, they shouldn't be using it.

Big companies make big mistakes, no doubt about it. But very few, in spite of the publicity and rumors, are underhanded thieves conspiring against their customers!

I have nothing against betas, i think they are useful to the software company and to the end user.
The software company has his product tested for free, and the user can test it if he like, and in the end obtains a more tested product. Is a win-win situation in my opinion.

Obviously, if you install a beta release, and it blows your computer hdd to subatomical particles, you can't complain about it, you where warned it was a beta, and that's ok.