Which is worse?
Edit: Not that I expect much from here, but since there are a number of child(ish) replies, I might as well clarify this for the replies that I'm not going to individually address:
I'm not saying it's not cool to say "Microsoft sucks" or anything like that. If that's how you feel, then feel free to just say that. It's the internet. What's NOT cool is making up an imaginary situation where someone's simple error is part of this conspiracy that Microsoft is this terrible evil corporation, when there's thousands of decent, community-loving people that work there, one of whom made this error, more than likely by simple carelessness. It's not that big of a deal, it's not a showstopper by any means, and will be a simple fix in due time, almost undoubtedly.
There are people behind software, but a lot of commenters seem to think it's professionally appropriate to just shit on things because they're from Microsoft or because they're from Apple, or wherever. Just say you don't like Microsoft, or that you don't like Apple. It's so antisocial to take the stance I keep seeing.
I think the young people call this "parasocial" these days. Back in my day, we called it "fanatics", where there's this unhealthy obsession and seemingly anthromorphized view of corporations and institutions where hundreds or thousands of different, varied, diverse groups of people are all cohesively accomplishing or building things. It dismisses nuance, it rejects common sense understanding of how teams of people work, and is reductive and hostile to actually intelligent conversations about products and ideas.
If we're chalking it up to "Microsoft sucks" then that's fine, but it'd be better imo to just say THAT, rather than sneak up to the point via this auxiliary issue of this user agent string. Someone has to answer for these individual fuck-ups, it's intentionally shitty behavior to be insinuating that someone did this maliciously under the guise of end users assuming innocence, thereby obscuring the responsibility for it.
Ok, sucks to work at Microsoft then, it is not the fault at people outside Microsoft that they have terrible management, if that's how things go there.
> Someone has to answer for these individual fuck-ups, it's intentionally shitty behavior to be insinuating that someone did this maliciously under the guise of end users assuming innocence, thereby obscuring the responsibility for it.
Yes, management who are the decision makers should obviously answer for this, and if the culture is to blame some random engineer who happened to program it, the engineer is probably better off getting fired from such a toxic environment where they have to be some scapegoat for managements fuckups.
It’s almost never an individual person’s fault, but rather that the process failed in stopping a regression from going through. If anything should be blamed, it’s that the process didn’t catch this; at the PR, testing, or release phases.
If individuals were reprimanded nearly as much as it’s implied, there wouldn’t be a lot of people employed at Microsoft or any other big company.
Just being a faceless megacorp is reasonable grounds for losing the benefit of the doubt, but one with their history? Ascribing anything other than malice first is plain and simple naïveté.
It isn’t likely that any one individual is pushing for incompatibility, but that nobody cares about incompatibility. That lack of care about any standards, with “it works” and “it works on our browser/OS/hardware/etc” treated as synonymous, can be part of a company culture.
You're making up stuff to make your case stronger. Also, it's totally legitimate to fire people for making mistakes, it's not an injustice.
edit: Instead, imagine being fired for making a mistake when you were actually told to ignore something by a supervisor.
Three decades of experience in the field, and unfortunately, I don't have quite the brooding disdain for Microsoft. Their stock has lined my pockets, their employees have treated my respectfully when we've worked together, their products do what they're advertised to do.
Something tells me you're under 40.
"They've lined my pockets and treated me nice so anything they do is all right by me."
> Something tells me you're under 40.
No. But during my three decades of experience, I actually grew up.
But hey, revel in your internet wit, mighty commenter! Your immense mental stature frightens me! ;-)
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
I do consulting and bill upwards of 300/hr worked in the DC area, with several decades of experience and a network built up along the way.
I took this position thirty years ago too, my mind hasn’t changed except that young people feel like they’re clever or somehow intellectually valid for copy pasting a quote into a web forum.
But at the same you elaborate in great (and unnecessary) detail about the level of success you have attained.
BTW: I am hardly young. I am nearly ancient.
Making a personal remark about me is plenty of reason for me to mention my success, since they implied that my perspective is somehow fueled entirely by some stock that I own. I have actual experience working alongside some MS people, and I have held that stock since 2013. So what? My opinion just goes out the window? That doesn't make much sense to me, I don't know about you...
The reason I associate that with youth is that young people often don't have a healthy portfolio or indeed any financial hygiene to speak of and seem to think that business is a zero sum game. We all benefit from the business world pushing things forward if we're holding stock in the most powerful companies. I'm hardly a supporter of the capitalist system, but I'll be damned if it's not going to work in my favor, since I understand how things are. My responsibility is to my family first. Had there been a revolution when I was younger, I'd have been among the first in line to change things, but it didn't happen.
I think I'm wasting my time in this thread, though.