Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
Personally, I dislike them because I feel Microsoft is largely responsible for the opinion held by many in the world that software which malfunctions, crashes, doesn't do what it's supposed to, etc. is acceptable.
|
I agree that this practice is avoidable but many people would choose not to make the sacrifice for that alternative. People still choose a PC that can work with thousands upon thousands of different hardware and software configurations and yet they will still criticize Microsoft for imperfect compatibility. If you lock down those configurations (like Apple) some people opt for that sacrifice of diversity and price for something a bit more reliable. Even when Microsoft seeks to fix these problems - like with user authentication controls, people complain endlessly. Unfortunately you can't expect everything from Microsoft and complain when they in actuality do a pretty good job at satisfying such a large and diverse group of users.
I would still rather have something that does what I want it to do - even if it crashes from time to time, than something that is incapable or too costly.
People buy devices that are made to work reliably and consistently - like video game consoles. More and more now though you find people altering them to run their own software and upgrade the hardware. This is can be risky, voiding warranties and putting reliability into question, but many people would still choose the freedom of having options with their devices.