"Haren Visavadia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
