Is it still allowed to have criticism on Microsoft here?

With the invasion of MS employees and with the amount of solely pro-Microsoft blogs very recently, I more and more feel less at home here, since I have the feeling it is not that appropriate to say something less pro-Microsoft, with all the Microsoft employees now moving to weblogs.asp.net. I'm considering moving my blog elsewhere because of this.

45 Comments

  • Company A, company B who cares...? Microsoft sux Linux rules or was it the other way around ;) I don’t see why (considering you have valid arguments) posting something anti-Microsoft wouldn’t get accepted in this community. The flipside is we receive good .NET related information from these guys and that is exactly the target Scott is aiming for.

  • Paul, it's not that MS guys shouldn't be here, it's that with all the blog material expressed HERE, it looks like there are only positive things to blog about, when it comes to Microsoft's material. I don't think it is appropriate to babble about something that's not so good when the rest is just venting what corporate policies dictate them. (look at the recent new postings... sign up for Microsoft seminar bla etc..)

  • I forgot to mention I normally skip the main feed to dis lead my eyes from the pro-Microsoft, Interscape Technologies etc writings.

  • I will repeat what I said elsewhere. This was always a Microsoft site. If you don't like it, set up your own. I think it's good for Microsoft people to be here, as it increases the content and number of knowledgable people here.



    And more good content means more people reading. And re the Microsoft criticism, even Scoble criticises Microsoft and he works there!



    Just FYI



    Registrant:

    Microsoft Corporation (ASP67-DOM)

    One Microsoft Way

    Redmond, WA 98052-6399

    US



    Domain Name: ASP.NET



    Administrative Contact:

    Gudmundson, Carolyn (GPIIZCVTVI) domains@microsoft.com

    One Microsoft Way

    Redmond, WA 98052

    US

    (425) 882-8080 fax: (425) 936-7329

    Technical Contact:

    MICROSOFT CORPORATION (EPMKOEAUSO) msnhst@MICROSOFT.COM

    One Microsoft Way

    Redmond, WA 98052

    US

    425 882 8080 fax: 206 703 2641



    What's new?

  • Matthew, my blog was here when scott's site was elsewere. Then we migrated to asp.net, something that gave me mixed feelings, but alas.. Now this.



    What scoble does, is his choice. I simply don't feel comfortable that I criticize the host of the criticism.



    There is a lot of heat and tough debates ahead of us, especially in O/R mapper land related to Objectspaces and MS attempt to kill all O/R mapper vendors. It's sad that this cool blogspace is now also the heart of MS' own blogging: it's like preaching about some christian god in a synagoge.

  • I see no censorship here. On the contrary, I see reasoned criticism all the time, just not obvious anti MS zealotry, although the only prohibition against that is that this sights charter is about .Net, so it might be off topic. If you decide that you want to blog on more personal topics, than you should probably move ... if you want to conduct educated discussion, including criticism, of .Net related topics (and endure occassional and annoying plugs for interscape) then stick around. THIS IS where that criticism will be seen and read by the right folks ....

  • I've never once seen any attempt by MS to censure criticism or debate -- if anything I've seen the exact opposite. I've had opportunities to take the "red pill" and join MS -- and I've clearly stated some anti-MS things in my interviews and dealings with MS. I would move my blog in a second if I wanted to be seen as a Linux/Java developer, but I am mostly a MS developer, so it makes perfect sense to be part of their community. But that doesn't mean I always agree with them, nor do I always state the party line. On the contrary, you're criticisms of MS will be even more read by the right people if you stay here, so please do NOT move.

  • So you'd rather move of to a less popular location with less MSFT employees around to read your views on their products? To me that calls into question your motivation for writing as critically as you do. Do you complain because you want things to improve or do just complain for complaining's sake?



    If you want things to improve you probably know as well as I do that proximity is a very important factor in being heard, which is the first step to things actually changing. By blogging on the same website as many MSFT employees you greatly increase your chances of being heard and things actually changing for the better, so why move?



    Furthermore I'd expect most MSFT employees are used to be being critized by now and, in general, respond to it very well. I expect one of the main reasons you were let in to the Whidbey early-access program is because you were so very critical of VS.NET or am I mistaken?

  • Yep, this site should be Weblogs@Microsoft.Net. I don't think I like this feed much anymore. That's why I tend to read weblogs@DotNetJunkies.Com. It's not commercialized, and I find that if there is an article of interest over here, then someone at DotNetJunkies will link to it. I do respect, and like to hear what MS Employees have to say, but it is just covers to many spectrums from Outlook to Longhorn to...

  • "there is a difference between complaining and having criticism"



    Very true! So what do you want to do: sit in a corner somewhere where nobody hears you and complain, or do you want to be in (what appears to be) the center of the Microsoft blogging universe and direct your critical remarks at the people that can actually change the things you're critical about?



    It's not about being popular or being part of an 'inner circle', it about being heard, it's about not running away from a discussion!

  • Jim, my thoughts exactly.



    Paul III :) That's also a good point, that's why I'm not certain what to do: move or stay.

  • I say criticize all you want.

  • Frans,



    I hope that you'll stay. I enjoy your posts. I you have something to say, say it. Maybe that is how we'll get some lively discussions going with the MS people. I like the idea of them being involved, and I have to believe that the opinions of others should interest them, otherwise whats the point?



    Regards,

    Paul Speranza

  • Frans,



    I agree with Paul. I hope you stay as well. I certainly have felt free to say things that do not follow the MS company line, though certainly the fact that I sgree with what MS says more than I disagree, but I have no concern about being censored in any way. I expect this main weblogs.asp.net feed is lots more popular with folks than any individual feed is likely to be, and I certainly agree you have things to say that I like to hear.

  • Why don't you like weblogs.asp.net?

    This blog dedicated to asp.net and related

    and if you have what to say negative on

    THIS topic you're welcome...

    How I can understand it's official microsoft

    politic for now(Longhorn was released solely

    for developer feedback for example) so

    participate in discussion and blog in other

    place about other themes no hesitate.

    And of course I'm greatly apprecate MS developers attention on this subject without dubt.

    What's the problem mate?

  • Andrew just showed what's wrong. These weblogs were not revolving around ASP.NET and Microsoft only in the first place.

  • Look at it another way - any criticisms, etc will get to MS real fast as they would be reading this directly! No sales & user support layers here.. :-)

  • Exactly! Change the name, break it into categories, that way if a person wants to read the Microsoft Employee Blog then they can subscribe to the Microsoft Employee Blog feed.

  • My personal feeling is that you will not have a problem of content as the additions will raise the bar (in a good way) on productive discussions. I think the thing to worry about is content overload. That's why I think Frans' original idea of feed groupings is interesting. A group could be based on an entire blog being in one category (and I think the blogger could choose which one they fit into) or back to the oft-discussed idea of common post categories. Now defining those categories will be a challenge! "MS Bloggers" "ASP.NET Bloggers" "Jack of All Trade Bloggers" "Genius at Work Bloggers" ".NET Novice Bloggers" or even one for people like me "Bloghorrea Bloggers". :-)

  • I quote...



    "If a tree falls in the woods and no-one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"



    If you run off to some corner of the web, and critisize where no one can see you..well then whats the point?



    Stay here, yell and scream and you KNOW you will get some sort of response. Justify your critisizms and back it up with something intelligent and you just never know....



    If the 20+ comments above, alone, didnt convince you that your thoughts are being heard every day (and are valued), then I guess you might as well just slink away. ;)



  • I have a weblog here just to talk .NET, not about Microsoft.

    However, if I have criticism towards Microsoft (which is healthy for any company), I think they should hear what I have to say.



    And a note about the main feed - I never go there, it's just full of people talking about things that aren't really related to .NET. If I find a link to an interesting blog, I read it. If I want to read a blog, I subscribe to it.

  • stop being a little baby!



    criticize all you want

  • I don't have a blog here but am subscribed to many of the feeds and read the main feed often to see what I may be missing. I love the varying opinions from all of you and I'm not concerned that the MS crew is going to distort that. It's great to see the interaction between the people building the product and those using it.



    Regarding MS taking over the O/R world, you should only be concerned if their product is better than yours. Sure, many people will use it as a default because they can easily find it, but others, like me, will do our research and pick a product that best fits our needs. Products like yours are certainly in need so I can understand why MS is building one. By the way, despite all the hype surrounding ObjectSpaces, I recently bought your product and it's working great for me.

  • Frans, I don't understand why you would want to move. I've read what you posted but I don't buy it. You don't seem like the type to hide like that. Why would you want to move away from the target of your criticisms? If MS is your target, you should fire as close to them as possible. There is no better place to put your soapbox than right here where it has been for months.

    If you are planning on lying about MS, then maybe you should move. If not, then you shouldn't have any worries. If you point out something bad someone did, it isn't your fault for saying it, it is their fault for doing it.

    Also, the chances that you will gain insite on the facts is much higher here than whatever other corner you would move off to hide in.

  • I can't believe the FUD and general gross inaccuracies in Tomiczek's comment.



    Since when is extending a product and giving the enhancements to customers illegal? When it's your product that the enhancement is replacing, right.



    Extending functionality for a given product and giving it to customers *when they own a valid license for the same product* is not considered fair play? Let's drag out the "it's not fair!" argument, again only because it's our product that is losing market share. That's a weak argument that has been repeatedly thrown out in court, although if you asked an attorney to take your case he would tell you it was a great argument and then ask to be paid in advance (not on contingency of you winning).



    Competitive advantages and disadvantages are the results of competing well in the marketplace. Don't cry just because Microsoft decided to move into what you claim is your product space. MS added CD-burning support to Windows XP, that's more of a new piece of software than an extension of the operating system, and it's totally legit and you don't even mind do you?

  • Darrell, it's no FUD, he's right.



    Objectspaces is part of the problem. It's also the free tool MS gives to developers to create the mappings. This way, a lot of potential O/R mapper customers do not have to buy such a tool. This will make a lot of O/R mapper vendors go out of business.



    When they do that, and they will because the market all those O/R mapper vendors are targeting is dramatically decreasing, MS has what it wants: people use Objectspaces, there are no real competing products, and they can sell MBF, which is the true cash cow for MS in the coming years.



    If you want to know, Darrell, we're currently talking to lawyers because of this, simply because what MS will do with Objectspaces is illegal in Europe, plain and simple.



    It would be a TOTAL different ballgame if MS would SELL a competing product, because then they would play fair. Now they will not, they will give away a tool that is on every developers harddisk when they install .NET sdk or visual studio.net. How are O/R vendors able to compete with that?

  • I see Frans' point here about the tool being part of VS. I understand that things like this do put developers out of work.



    But isn't this the natural progression of anything? Once a concept gains popularity people starting asking companies to include it in their products.



    Didn't Sheridan give us the first set of 3D widgets, then they became standard in VB. How about all of the tools Borland puts in their enterprise versions?



    What about opensource? Look what they and Sun are doing with the Office products.



    What I don't want is any government telling a vendor what they can give away for free with their products.



    Now product developers can try to innovate all they want but like a previous poster said, if the MS version does most of what we need, will we be willing to shell out money for the extras?



    That is the paradox.

  • ::That is the paradox.



    It is not a paradox.



    Destroying product markets is simply one thing: illegal. There are laws about it.



    Open source is fine - when noone involved gets paid. But when a company puts up money to develop and then gives it away for free, there are laws for handling this.

  • > But isn't this the natural progression of anything? Once a concept gains popularity people starting asking companies to include it in their products.



    Big chance this is MS's main line of defense in court. Personally I don't think the OR-mapper tool suppliers have a case here... MS is just filling up the gaps in a product (which isn't actually a product) they gave away for free from the start. Why would they change their business model, just because the world surrounding them is changing? That makes no sense at all. It's their technology, tool/product suppliers just hop along on the success trip exposing themselves to these vulnerabilities.

  • That line of defense hasn't brought them anything in the Netscape case and will not bring them anything in the Mediaplayer case in Europe.



    The problem is not that MS includes a given technology in a framework. The problem is that MS includes a TOOL into the framework and lacks to produce a foundation for these tools in the framework. MS should have build an EJB equivalent in .NET so each and every O/R mapper vendor could have build his tool on that foundation. Now that foundation isn't there, worse, a competing tool is delivered, and even worse: it's free.



    Now, the free pricetag, the extremely large marketing power of MS (it's hyping the stuff already, 1 year before release), the availability of the tool on every harddisk of each .net developer... a situation you can't compete with.



    Paul G.: you remember the KNP lawsuit with the free internet for schools and why they lost? They lost because they delivered something for free that costs them money. MS puts a lot of money in Objectspaces and the free tools. To win over developers for Objectspaces so they know it thouroughly and will look further towards MBF. A simple scam, yet very harmful for the .NET community, because MS has now shown they will change .NET to make it sell their own products, not just to bring a good foundation for developers.

  • Frans,



    Please stay. Sometimes your posts infuriate me. And therein lies their value. That which infuriates me makes me think, and your presence makes the feed more balanced and therefore more useful, IMO.



    If the proprietor starts to censor you, by all means move, OTOH, please don't effectively censor yourself by removing yourself from a feed where people who aren't looking for you will find your thought-provoking posts, to a new location where only those already looking for you will find you.

  • I see your point Frans, but one thing isn't clear to me.

    You state that they haven't created a foundation for these tools in the framework, but isn't that the System.Data.ObjectSpaces assembly?



    Greetz,

    -- Rob.

  • Rob: no, EJB is something complete different. EJB is a framework which can be used as a base for O/R mappers, and thus for objectspaces, a generic framework, not something just focussing on O/R mapping and inside that just focussing on Oracle. If they had done that, OTHER people could have added for example oracle support to that framework. Now this is not possible.

  • Frans: I didn't know it was only focused on Sql Server. Then it's indeed a shame...

    To come back on your original point, about leaving this blogscene: if you would have left, this large discussion wouldn't have occured, because the amount of people reading it wouldn't be so high, and I think this is a good place to have such a discussion.

    I can imagine how you're feeling by being pushed out of the market, but I would advise you to let it sink in for a couple of weeks...



    Greetz and good luck with it,

    -- Rob.

  • Am I the only one that reads blogs via an RSS reader?



    Once I've subbed, I don't know or care where a blog is hosted, I'm just reading the content.



    I think the only reason to move is if the site host censors you or gives you other difficulties, which doesn't seem to be the case.

  • Frans,



    Remember what happened to Don Box. If you can't beat them, then join them.

    Don said, he had to think about his pension. ;)



    But I'm afraid that all big companies will keep on filling the gaps all the time. Yukon is another gap being filled, and I'm sure you can name some other already filled gaps.



  • "Objectspaces is illegal in Europe, plain and simple." It's not illegal until proved in court. You may think it is illegal, and that's fine. I may think it is legal, and that is fine as well. We'll all see what the court says.



    I am not condoning anti-competitive practices. But I also do not want to see statements such as "Objectspaces is illegal" stated as truth when in fact nobody knows yet.

  • How about WebMatrix, also a free tool which MS supplied? Do you think that's unfair as well?

  • FWIW: stay and write here. your posts make this place better.



  • Andrew says "How I can understand it's official microsoft politic for now(Longhorn was released solely

    for developer feedback for example)"



    Wrong. They make you feel you are part of the making of the product, and that's part of the marketing initiative. That's so obviously a way to monetize communities and make each of those members act as evangelists that I can hardly think you don't get it, do you?





  • Regarding contributions to a MS-centric weblog, I wonder whether it makes sense at all anyway.



    If you provide good remarks, feature wishes with a very customer-centric eye and anything else that helps them build and sell better products, then you are basically doing the job of an employee without getting paid.



    In the real world, no one works for free. Since work must be paid, and it isn't what's currently being done through weblogs.asp.net, I don't see any point in contributing at all, anyway.



    Alternatively, someone not from MS may wish to contribute a MS blog site to tease or impress. I think it's a valid scenario for a lot of people out there who would do that as a matter of getting a job. That being said, I don't think that's the best way to succeed. Quite the contrary, people spending their time on weblogs are people not designing products. Someone would impress them much more with well designed products.



    My 0.5 cent







  • Hi Stephane,



    I see your point, but blogs aren't always about product feedback ;). I like to talk about software development in general, so I hope someone will learn something from my texts. I agree that giving excessive feedback about all kinds of products to MS is indeed non-payed testing. But people are greedy, so a free longhorn cd is seen as a gift, I don't think that will ever change ;)

  • Good. Leave. Goodbye!

  • I don't know if someone mentioned this or not, but Microsoft has had package and deployment solutions built into their products for sometime. There still seems to be a market for things like Wise and InstallShield. Visual Studio has setup projects that directly compete with those directly. Why should an O/R mapper product be any different?



    I don't think Microsoft is violating any laws, and or violating any code of ethics. They are exposing technology to people who might not have been aware of it to begin with. You state that it is harmful to the .NET community, how can it be? It is harmful to YOUR community and YOUR pockets. You can speak for your company, but you cannot assume to speak for the .NET community.



    I think your effort should be concentrated on developing features and providing services that ObjectSpaces will not. Why waste all of this energy whining about it and do something productive instead?

  • Perhaps we could do without whining babies blogging here?

    Leave if you don't like it.

    Fine by me.

Comments have been disabled for this content.