"Haren Visavadia" <haren(_at_)btopenworld(_dot_)com> wrote:
Microsoft doesn't have much control over the Internet.
Well, Microsoft has some reponsiblity since they produce some the server
software and client software.
I certainly assume that MSN has control of its products and the quality
there-of, and so bears responsibility "to its customers" for the bad behavior
of what it sells.
The fact that MSN has bought a majority mind share is critical here.
Certainly, no non-market entity has much of any control over MSN stuff.
So, the real problem is that the market is accepting the stuff that MSN sells,
including the declarations of "customer beware" regarding any faults (including
bad design choices) that the MSN "stuff" might contain.
This includes massive propagation of the original IBM PROFS Christmas Virus
type facilitation from back in the 1980's, where-in the PROFS mail system was
given the privilege of allowing incoming messages run programs that can mail
copies of themselves to everyone in the recipient's address book. I assumed
back then that the lesson would be learned and the market would cure the design
problem. But, my assumption was dead wrong.
That "FEATURE" was stupid then and it is still utterly stupid, especially
after almost two decades of network experience and $billions of wasted expense
for the users of such stupid systems. A whole industry has grown up to deal
with this one deliberate design flaw.
But still, the rule is very simple: "You Get What You Pay For!"
The main culprits are those large fortune 1000 companies that accept those
strange terms of sale, which disclaim all responsibility for everything bad
(and all he credit for all the good).
They provide MSN with a substantial base market with huge influence over what
everyone else needs to buy to interwork with them. Why else do you suppose MSN
coddles them, and focuses support on them. Many of them are privileged to
participate in beta testing, and no doubt receive superior technical support.
In a way, they are being bought off. In any case, those beta testers seem not
to be noticing that the basic deigns are bad!
So, in my own small way, as a single individual, I refuse to actually use any
MSN systems that deal with any Internet Protocols, such as mail or the web. If
more people took such actions -- (instead of just using MSN stuff while
complaining about it) -- the behavior of MSN might change.
Indeed, you can get along very well without OE or IE, if you choose to.
In my case, I simply forgo access to Internet stuff that requires MSN tools.
If the provider does not want me to see what they mount for public viewing, it
is fine with me, and thus it is their problem, and not mine!
Of course, I know that MSN can hardly care less what I do, so I am only doing
this to protect myself from their careless product designs. Even when I
consulted for them for fee, they did not care what I wanted, and generally sent
my checks to the wrong place, against the terms of my contract.
As Herb Simon pointed out many years ago, and I paraphrase here: "If you can
figure out what is the incentive structure of a situation, you are a long way
toward understanding what you can do about it".
In my case, I simply cancelled my contract and went my own way.
For some reason there is a massive desire (e.g., incentive) in MSN customer's
minds to buy bad stuff, and this fact governs the outcome.
If enough corporate Internet Users were to stop using MSN's bad stuff, their
customers would soon enough notice their target audience's absence and mend
their careless ways.
My point is that we should ALL put our money where our mouth is;-)...
The IETF is not in this loop, and cannot have any influence, therefore.
It is simply not the IETF's mission to save the free world from itself.
So, the IETF is not a party to the MSN Follies!
The market is in control!
So, go talk to the market!
Cheers...\Stef