I just found out how to make even Microsoft’s software run like a champ. (Sometimes.)
(That is, run fast; it is still full of bugs, and there’s no fix outside of Microsoft itself for that — but they seem uninterested in fixing bugs.)
Buy a really fast computer.
I’ve been a computer professional (among other things) for a great long time, but I’ve never had a really cutting-edge machine. I’ve always sort of had to deal with the upper end of mediocre machines — budget has always had to split in too man directions at once. But now I’ve come into possession of a really fast machine (4+ GHz i7 processor, 32 gb of memory and a solid state hard drive on a motherboard designed for high performance, blah, blah, blah… the details don’t really matter here.)
I was astonished at the difference. It ordinarily takes around 20 minutes to install a fresh copy of Windows latest-whatever on a typical mid-range consumer machine. On this machine it took under 5 minutes, start to finish.
That was nice. In fact, that was jaw-dropping…
Frankly, though, I don’t want to have to spend top dollar for a fast-fast computer that has so much of its time taken up with Microsoft’s slug-like code. Those extra “clock cycles” (think of it as processing speed) are supposed to mine to use, not the operating system’s. An operating system, especially, should be intensely streamlined, run as fast as is humanly possible (or even better), and most of the time just lie there quietly, remain almost completely unnoticed.
Except… yeah, ok, Windows installed very fast on a very fast machine, but manages not to run all that fast in regular use. I can still type faster than file explorer can keep up with. Microsoft Paint was recently badly crippled with a Brand New Bug (why introduce a new bug on an old, old, standard, stable product like that? Because you are trying to move people over the 3D Paint, which as far as I’m concerned has a name one letter too long — yes, I am suggesting it was deliberate) And as for Microsoft Publisher goes… geez, even on a super-fast machine it’s still like trying to run through quicksand. How that is possible is hard for this master programmer even to imagine.
<Sigh…>
Microsoft stopped — a very long time ago — doing what’s called “optimization” of their software. That is, they decided to put getting it to market on time and adding new features ahead of making it run fast, and making it run flawlessly. New features make your stock value go up, improving the product gives your customers much better service, but actual service to ones customers doesn’t seem to be a popular concept right now.
My problem with Microsoft is that they symbolize the cutting edge of what’s going on in computers for most consumers and even much of the media, who don’t realize how wrong that assumption is. For a long time Microsoft was the leader and deserved the accolades. No longer, though. Now it’s inertia, and instead of trying to live up to the responsibility of holding the premier place in the market, they produce utterly indifferent products that run slow, slow, slow.
Here’s what I think is going on at Microsoft:
- Everyone in development and testing has unreasonably fast computers to work on.
- Fixing bugs is not allowed once a something-or-other has shipped.
- The Master Programmers (any one who’s been at it for at least 15 years) have been retired, forced to move on or bumped into management and kept out of the production stream — possibly because they are considered “obsolete” and keep saying things like “quality!” and “quality first!” and “bugs are bad!” and such tiresome phrases. There’s a lot of age discrimination going on in the software industry right now, too — a lot, a lot, which is silly considering how long it takes to produce a master programmer. Yes, age discrimination is illegal, but so you fail to hire such folks or move them on for other reasons than age, “well, you’re just not compatible here any more,” an easy statement to make, impossible to define precisely). Done every day by “silicon valley types,” truly.
- The “frameworks” (established software toolboxes of ready made / ready tested routines, bits and pieces, are not allowed to be fixed or improved or streamlined ever. For reasons that escape my quality-first mind.
I’m really not making this up. Much of this I have been able to verify directly from Microsoft employees, current and former, the rest is educated deduction, professional deduction. However, let me give you a specific on how poorly Microsoft is doing.
I recently (last week) licensed a copy of Office 2019, upgrading from 2017 on the desperate hope that some bugs might have finally been fixed (even if accidentally!) and went straight into Publisher, for some work I needed to get done. Imagine my surprise (well, hardly surprise, but major irritation) when it turned out new bugs have been added instead, including one of the simplest and most important and most routine functions it has now randomly fails to work reliably.
(The function is selecting a group of objects: use mouse to draw a selection box around some things; you might get all of them; you might get some of them. Each time you select you might get a different sub group, or, like I said, sometimes you get all of them.)
You kidding me? This is a pretty gosh darn awfully important function to have gone out untested and broken in this way. So, really… between (apparently) no longer caring how slowly their software runs, and (seemingly) no longer caring how poorly it even operates, why is Microsoft still considered a successful company and industry leader? Why doesn’t the consumer rebel and demand money back when software fails to measure up?
(Answer: first, the Consumer doesn’t know how much better it all could be for the same money / effort and, and secondly the Consumer doesn’t know there are alternatives to almost everything Microsoft offers, allowing Microsoft to operate effectively as a monopoly.)
Me, I don’t use Office, except for Publisher. I curse, and fidget and fume my way through, only because I haven’t afforded the expensive alternative to Publisher. For the rest, I use Open Office, sometimes Libre Office: both work far more reliably than MSFT Office, faster, and both are free! Holy Reverse-Capitalism, Batman!
(The software industry has a lot of excellent software that is utterly free. In fact, some of the best packages I know of are free. It’s called “open source software,” and it really rocks, in part because it’s put out by people who truly believe in and love the product, rather than the profit or the job.)
Sorry this article is so much more rant than article. Short version: I just can’t swallow the Herd’s Opinion about Microsoft nor about the state of the software industry in general. Personally, I wouldn’t put any money into software right now, not until several fundamental attitudes get readjusted: namely: more quality, less smoke-and-mirrors. You might make a profit on your software investments, but so what? You have supported an industry that is spiraling down the Rabbit Hole at warp speed, and that’s not a forward-looking thing to do. Profit isn’t always worth it.
(Oh, and also stop treating your customers like Idiots — it’s insulting, and shows that, besides not loving software, you also don’t love or respect your customers. This is, actually, the #1 problem with the entire computer industry right now (except for the open source industry). If you don’t expect competence from your customers, you ain’t never gonna get it!)
[30]