- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Microsoft sucks with extreme consistency.
Microsoft produces the highest level of "design by comittee" products ever achieved in the history of commerce.
Some of Microsofts products are so entirely mired in a culture of mediocrity and being all things to all people that they have no hope whatsoever of producing anything that excels at it's purpose for any one individual.
The existence of products that are very specificly targeted at a singular or small set of purposes provides a stark contrast to the genericly functional Microsoft paradigm. Since these products have more narrowly targeted designs they are better able to fullfil the desired functionality and ease of use that their users want to experience.
This comparrisson causes a reaction umong those that experience better performance using non-Microsoft products, particularly when this exposure comes after a long exposure to only Microsoft products. The resultant disatisfaction is frequently shared with others. If these others have not experienced the comparisson first-hand then they are very unlikely to be accepting of the suggestion that the Microsoft products that they use to good effect are inferrior. This often elicits a rebuttal based soley on their limited experience without any effort to test the suggestion.
These actions cause a opinionated division between the two parties that frequently persists until experience with other products occurs naturally for the inexperienced party.
Personal comparrisson of Microsofts products with other more carefully targeted products frequently reveals a lack of focused and polished commitment to a purpose. This is experienced by the user as "Suckiness".
Microsoft must first be judged as an unit to make respond to this argument.
If I view Microsoft as a whole and average all of their efforts and actions then I personally conclude that they do not suck. They produce effective software and hardware solutions for various uses. These products and hardware are useful in their roles and are successfully deployed in real world situations with a high degree of efficacy.
Sucking is a condition of underperformance. Underperformance is based on comparrison to a stated target level. Setting this target level is a function of defining a desired result.
Since Microsoft achieves success in meeting the majority of expectations that are set in using their products they do not suck.