Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yep, this is the sort of thing happens when you've deeply internalized that trustworthiness and continuity is not important. Microsoft today is not a serious company, it is not run by serious people, and it is at the forefront of a deeply unserious industry.


Even most non-serious companies generally tend to follow their own statements regarding product license duration which is a very fundamental thing.

"He renewed Canopy’s yearly license last October, and Microsoft had emailed him to confirm he would retain access until Oct. 4, 2026"

Someone decided to pull the plug anyways.


What does "serious" mean in this context?


In this context it would presumably mean not casually deleting your customers' data.

When people say a company is unserious they almost always mean that they're not thinking about, and taking seriously, the work that their customers do. This seems like a classic example of that.


Unprofessional or irresponsible are more applicable.

Some define a standard others set it. This came up when my employer was applying for business continuity insurance


Hopefully they form a class action lawsuit and get the label "criminally negligent"; allegedly.


competent, wishing to be competent, and not having your leadership suffer a psychotic break with reality: https://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporize...


Thanks for sharing this. It really highlights github's issues as well.

The more Microsoft directly manages Github, the more unstable, buggy, and unreliable it will become. Why? Because that's how Microsoft rolls...


Not the person you’re responding to, but I’d say serious here means committed to delivering value for customers, willing to take lower profits in the short term to be steadfast and reliable, deeply introspective about process (with transparent communication).

Just, you know, taking business seriously. Like they did even 6 or 8 years ago.

The core business now is execs ego-stroking each other and hoping disaster strikes after they cash out.

When Satya came in there was a dramatic shift in culture, and things were improving. I won’t argue they were super-serious, but at least getting better, and focusing on the business rather than the internal strife that Balmer loved to much.

But now… just the opposite. This IS a deeply unserious business. The tech bros got the keys to the combine and have no idea WTF to do, so it’s all cosplay.


Dependable.


producing an os with a focus on utility to end user would be a start. Even just something that makes some form of effort to give users a return on investment on their hardware. Right now, you unluck massive headroom, battery life, and stability, on a laptop by simple putting linux on it. All that despite windows enjoying better all around driver support from manufacturers.

A serious company would never have allowed its core product to turn into the clown show it currently is, yet here we are, a massive corporation pushes an OS that feels vibe coded, and is largly propped up by what little residual community goodwill/ignorance exsists.


MS's core product is and always has been Office, specifically Excel. Windows is simply the delivery method


ok, if that's the case, my OS critique holds word for word if replacing with some libre flavoured "office" suite.


What about Azure? Looks like it takes more revenue than Windows and Office put together.


Does it now.

Azure's cost of revenue is someplace between 14% (Productivity and Business Processes) and 36% (Intelligent Cloud). Software is 1%.

Looks to me like Software pays for the whole thing.


You can't know that based on only cost of revenue percentage.


We also have revenue. They're a public company.

You can look all this stuff up yourself.


Why didn't you post that number then. I have to assume because it contradicts the point you wanted to make.


Azure is Microsoft's attempt to get into the market that Amazon dominates with AWS. Microsoft traditionally was a software company. Microsoft today is a desperate company trying to make money and stay relevant in a world fed up with the bull crap that they have been peddling over the years. Windows could have been so much more and better, but it's now a sold out clown show, just like XBox, just like Office, just like every other thing they have ever made. In the 35+ years I have been around Microsoft products, I have never seen a product where they didn't over promise and under deliver. Frankly, that is their MO: Over promise, under deliver, and move on the moment they have squeezed every dime they can out of a product. They are not an honest company, they never have been.


IMO it all started going downhill for Microslop with Windows Product Activation in Windows XP. That was the first shot across the bow and sign they were going to be user-hostile.

Now they want to neuter the KMS server emulators.


I started with Microsoft in the DOS, Win 3.0, NT Server 3.51 days. I'll never forget Microsoft promising, writing books that promised, RAS would work on NT 4.0 Server. It was never stable, never consistent. I ended up losing my first job as a Systems Administrator over it. I will never forget being burned by them. Then, there was the joke known as Windows ME (Windows MFE (Multiple Fatal Exceptions)). By Windows 2000, I was over it. I eventually got begged into taking on a Windows Server 2003 / Windows 8 install and talk about a constant pain in my butt. Active Directory seemed so hostile to any external hardware controlling the network. I don't think I could ever miss it. I have been doing Linux and Unix happily for almost 30 years now and I am so grateful for the open source movement. What KDE has turned into today is nothing short of amazing. What Valve has done with Steam and Proton is also nothing short of amazing. It makes everything including MacOS seem like it is a decade behind. I have to use MacOS for my 3d modeling software, but there isn't a day that goes by that I hope to see the news that its finally been ported to Linux.


This still do much better than GCP, and quite relevant as 4 trillion valued company.


Microsoft doesn't sell any product called Office.


Backups!!!


It's just an internet meme phrase. "X is not a serious Y" just means that X is a joke.

It's a dumb phrase and overused in contexts like this.


That’s not the meaning here. It means that Microsoft lacks the qualities required to be taken seriously, like competence or reliability.


"Is not serious" is not serious?


As long as the legal department is very serious, that might work rather well.


Until nobody uses your products anymore.

Just like you know to never use anything from Google apart from ads (since everything else can get cancelled next month)


They don't care about end users. Like Oracle, they care about corporate and government contracts.


It's what happens when you don't have a backup strategy. Even paper works as a backup.


Selling backup for data that is stored in the cloud (whether selling solution as a provider or selling any solution (even free one) internally to your team), is one of the hardest things in the world.


I'd have to imagine that naivete is broadly declining at a quite sharp rate. Perhaps the greatest broad accomplishment of the powers that be.


Not among corporations and governments, who are Microsoft's target audience. They have an extreme BAU bias.


Just got a little easier I imagine.


Microsoft is serious because the world is full of people with needs who do not know better and Microsoft is still the default to serve those needs.

Something does not have to be useful, benign, consistent, worthwhile, or deserving to exist in order to be serious.

For example: Losing an arm and an eye to a fireworks accident, being grievously assaulted in an alley, or having Microsoft arbitrarily delete all your data, are all very serious things. So, I think it is fair to say Microsoft can still be called serious.


No.

Just because an entity is able to do things with serious consequences, does not mean they are a serious entity.

For other examples, see school shooters in the US.


Drink drivers and other reckless endangerment as well.


Right, exactly. "Oh yeah? Well I drive drunk" is not a valid rebuttal to "you are not a serious person".


I think you misread your parent comment; he drives drink, not drunk.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: