Ask Paul: November 5 (Premium)

Happy Friday, and Happy Call of Duty day! Here’s another great set of reader questions to kick off the weekend—and my game playing—a bit early.

Branding is hard

OldITPro2000 asks:

Are you as frustrated as I am with the constant renaming and rebranding that Microsoft does? It’s always been ridiculous, but the recent past has felt exceptional. A few days ago at Ignite, they announced another rebranding effort around the Defender name. Some of these products have received a different name each year for the past 3 years.

Yes and no. Defender has certainly gone through several rebrands over time, and it has expanded into a product family that includes many solutions across multiple platforms. But at least in this case, it’s a good name. There have been some truly terrible brands elsewhere. (That the security feature in Windows itself has been renamed every other Windows version is another issue. But Windows Security is, at least, a clear name.)

This goes back to the communication problem around Universal Mute you were mentioning yesterday. Why is it so hard for them to communicate clearly? Is it because they have so many product teams that are simply “doing their own thing”?

I wish I could explain the why of this. But you’re probably onto something with regards to the size and complexity of Microsoft and its many product teams. And it’s worth pointing out that sometimes corporate-level marketing will make decisions that are out of the hands of the individual product teams. The most famous example, perhaps, is Windows 2000, which was originally going to be called Windows NT 5.0. That released retired the NT branding, which I really felt stood for something important, with the sad and redundant tagline “powered by NT technology.” That still bugs me today.

Metaverse: hype vs. reality

bschnatt asks:

How successful do you think Meta’s VR / metaverse thing is going to be? I wouldn’t trust Meta (*cough*Facebook*cough*) as far as I can throw them, and I don’t exactly relish the idea of staring at a screen 2 inches in front of my eyes for hours a day (which is why I never got into VR in the first place). I’m already half blind from staring at computer monitors a foot in front of me. Give us the Star Trek holodeck or go home!

My big question is why now? Why has this term suddenly exploded into the mainstream?

I don’t even care what Facebook/Meta does at this point. I don’t see how VR or the metaverse helps them or fixes any of their problems. We collectively need less time on social media, not some deeper integration. I think it’s time for a push back against this nonsense.

That said, Microsoft’s take on the metaverse is interesting. It’s odd how closely this happened to the Facebook ting, but that may just be a weird coincidence since Microsoft has been working towards this for several years, implicitly with efforts like HoloLens and Windows Mixed Reality, and more explicitly in early 2020 when it first started using the term metaverse to describe these mixed reality work locations.

Here’s what I’ll say about Mesh for Microsoft Teams (speaking of rebranding, Mesh used to be a OneDrive-like file sync solution with a built-in apps platform): After 18 months or so of virtual meetings, I think we’re all a little camera fatigued. And given that hybrid work is the future, not just on the team level, but also more broadly for bigger events like conferences, Microsoft needs to address how we’ll interact with people who are there physically and people who are not. And yea, the cartoony 3D avatars things are a bit silly. But I bet there are a lot of people who would very much prefer that representation over their own video-based appearance. And for those who don’t care, it’s a way to “be” there “physically” when they can’t be, perhaps because they’re using a phone in a car or whatever. It’s not a replacement for what we used to do, it’s a new thing that will be a choice or an option for meetings going forward. Should we ever get to the point where mixed reality glasses are a thing, this will be even more compelling. Also, the avatars will get more sophisticated.

Normally, I would dismiss this the same way I dismiss emoticons and emojis, which I feel are destroying our ability to communicate. But this actually seems like an improvement because it’s more inclusive and will allow people who can’t be there—whether it’s two people at work or 100,000 at some future Ignite conference—to still interact and participate.

Also, everyone should look into Neal Stephenson’s book Snow Crash, in which he introduces the concept of the metaverse. It’s a great book, and unlike most of his later work, it’s not overly long or hard to read.

But Facebook? Seriously, I hope that company just implodes.

Island life

bschnatt also asks:

Have you ever thought of moving to the U.S. Virgin Islands? Aside from not being able to vote in presidential elections, it’s far from the madding crowd and still “American-enough” to give me the warm & fuzzies. Should the apocalypse / zombie invasion / Russian-Chinese invasion occur, I’m thinking I’d rather be there than anywhere else, LOL. A little pricey living there, but it *is* paradise…

No, but that’s mostly because we’re not really beach people, and the overall lifestyle there doesn’t mesh with what we like to do day-to-day. (One of the first questions in any travel quiz is always “Which do you prefer, city vacations or beach vacations?” We prefer the former.) That said, we did consider Puerto Rico. It is part of the United States, uses the same currency and electrical system, is easy and inexpensive to fly to and from, and is inexpensive. But Puerto Rico is poor, has a terrible infrastructure, can be unsafe, and it’s right in the path of major hurricanes every year. So the power can go out, etc. It’s just not quite there, though we do like it there and hope to visit again.

My brother is considering moving to the Dominican Republic (his wife is Dominican) and he’s asked us whether this sort of thing would ever be of interest. The answer is no, for the reasons noted above, but Mexico—non-beach Mexico, that is—is a possibility. We’re going back to Mexico City for 18 days in late January to see what a home swap-like experience (just an Airbnb, in this case) is like and whether just living there for some amount of time makes any sense.

IBM WTF

erichk asks:

Hi Paul. In 1987, my best friend Brian’s father gave him an ultimatum. “I’ll buy you an IBM compatible, but you’ll have to buy your own Apple //c.” He said to Brian, “The world runs on IBM.” So he got an XT clone, I got one too, and the rest is history. But my how times have changed. My question for you is, what’s up with IBM these days? How big are they, and how influential are they? Are they mainly mainframes, cloud, and services? Seems like according to something Bill Gates once said, back in the day when IBM said jump, you asked how high.

IBM’s fall from the PC industry is one of the more fascinating things I’d ever watched happen, and it’s a cautionary tale for today’s Big Tech firms (just as it was for Microsoft for about 20 years there). They let the genie out of the bottle by building all of the original PC save the BIOS with open hardware components and software and then unsuccessfully tried to reverse that decision with proprietary PS/2 hardware and in-house operating system, OS/2, that it hoped would replace MS-DOS and Windows. That didn’t just not work, it imploded in their collective faces, and IBM eventually sold off its PC business to Lenovo—a company few in the western world had even heard of—in 2005 (and its server business in 2014). At least that worked out: Lenovo has been a great steward of the Think brands and products.

As for IBM today, your guess is as good as mine, and I don’t even understand what the point of this company is anymore. It seems to have continued forward on pure inertia. It’s still part of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, somehow, but everything that made it great seems to be gone. It is a much smaller company by revenue that it used to be—$5.6 billion in 2020 vs. $14.8 billion in 2010 and $7.9 billion in 2005—but it is also somehow a bigger company by market cap. Much bigger. But why any business would choose any IBM solution today is beyond me and its website reads like a parody of a big technology company’s website. Again, inertia? I really don’t know.

Android vs. iOS updates

crunchyfrog asks:

I’ve been somewhat obsessed with the progress of the new Pixel 6 phones and before and even after I ordered one, I have been watching unboxings and reviews about the phones just to see what others are saying about them. So far it has all been quite positive.

Same.

My own experiences have also been quite positive with the standard Pixel 6 and I love the new design and performance. There is one thing, however that really no one has touched upon that really blew me away and that is how Android updates are rolled out and installed. We’ve all known that Google has streamlined the update process for some time now with Android and Chrome OS but when my Pixel came out of the box it performed an update of several hundred megabytes in practically a blink of an eye with a quick reboot. No lengthy file verification with one or more reboots, just a quick reboot and it was done. I was so taken aback, I thought the update had failed.

When I updated my iPhone 11 Pro to iOS 15, I think the entire process took about an hour or more to finish from download to completion. I realize that what I am about to ask is probably as deep as it is wide and probably naïve coming from a guy who is not a coder but why does iOS update the way that it does and why can’t Apple update iOS to update like Android?

I have experienced this as well, and it’s clear that the problem is architectural: iOS is based on macOS, which used to be OS X and was originally based on FreeBSD, and the updating process on that desktop platform always was, and frustratingly still is, terrible and time consuming. My understanding of this is probably out of date, but I recall reading about how OS X updates worked many years ago, and it basically involved touching every single file in the system. Windows was always much more sophisticated in this regard, and is even more so today.

That said, Apple, like Google and Microsoft, has worked to separate some system components from that monolithic OS updating process so that they can be upgraded more quickly and frequently. But Google and Microsoft have done a much better job, and I think that the many ways in which both Android and Windows can be updated today is the superior approach. On iOS/macOS, most updates are very time consuming.

There are probably people here who have a better technical understanding of the differences, but reality is reality: Updating is quicker, less painless, and more sophisticated on Android and Windows than it is on any Apple platform. Apple really needs to figure this out. They needed to do so many years ago.

Amsterdam

ryguy asks:

Hey Paul, my wife and I are planning our first post-Covid European trip for 2022, and we’re looking at Amsterdam. Any recommendations?

Sure, though this is a huge topic. I’d start with the Rick Steves guide (and TV shows and website) for the obvious tourist destinations, and be sure to pay attention to the walks he recommends as Amsterdam is a beautiful city to see by foot. Definitely do some kind of a canal tour. The Anne Frank house, which requires reservations. If you’re there long enough, consider visiting some nearby places like Haarlem and Delft by train. If you’re into food, I can give you some specific recommendations as it gets closer, but some of our favorites—Elsa’s café and the high-end De Kas—are close to each other in an area we’ve spent a lot of time in. Ping me via email if you want ([email protected]).

The steady slide in quality journalism

j5 asks:

Hi Paul. How do you think YouTube tech channels have affect tech journalism? Do think the video format has allowed consumers to see and in a sense “try” a product before buying it or see it in action without having to drive to brick and motor stores checking products out talking to an employee there that may know a lot about it or knows nothing at all about it (aw the Best Buy vs Circuit City days). I feel like it’s been a positive in spreading tech news/reviews/podcasts/satellite tech industries and careers. But also negative (and this could be a strecth and me being an older GenXer “get off my lawn” hot take) in that it’s contribute to the tech industry having to commit to releasing new products yearly, which in turn has lead to gimmicks and failures, and majorly contributed to our e-waste problem, and the jumpy reviews Millennial open mouth videos, contributed to our short attention spans and attention to detail. I’m kind of all over the place with this once, flow of consciousness. But yeah what are your thoughts on this? Thanks in advanced!

Same here.

YouTube videos are like everything else in technology: good and bad. (We notice this with travel-related topics too.) Even a horrible YouTube video can show you a product in ways that a written review can’t, which is great. But I also feel that they are part of a steady slide in journalistic quality. And they’re not even the end game: Just look at Tik Tok to see how much dumber it can still get.

The problem, of course, is that many of these people are heavily influenced by the companies that give them products for free, and some are outright bought and sold. Even some channels I like have had suspiciously biased sponsored videos that make me not trust them.

The biggest issue, I guess, is that there are very few YouTube channels that are made by people with decades of industry experience who have actual journalistic training and ethics. They’re all about “ringing the bell” and “leaving comments below” and racking up views, which promotes brands over integrity and presentation over actual content quality. But there’s nothing to be done about it, and just as local news quality fell hard between the 1980s and the 2000s, what we’re stuck with today is sometimes slick, sometimes amateur content made by people who are generally much younger than me and who I generally don’t trust. Many younger people won’t even understand the issue because this is just what content looks like today.

Does the good outweigh the bad? Barely. But finding quality channels you can trust is hard. And many of the voices in this space are just of no interest to me personally. They probably have much bigger audiences too, so whatever I think about this is pointless and will probably reek of sour grapes. But I’m more upset about it from the perspective of a content consumer than as a rival creator of sorts. I wish there was better content out there.

Windows 11 vs. Windows 8

jwpear asks:

Is Windows 11 doomed to be another Windows 8? There seems to be a lot of negativity about it. Maybe it’s just a vocal minority, but negative fuels negative more than ever in this world we finds ourselves in.

No, it’s not that bad. It’s based on a very solid foundation, and while we can debate some of the features that we were lost in its simplified UI, that’s kind of minor compared to the major and terrible changes that Windows 8 brought.

I’ve only been using Windows 11 for a short time. I find it perfectly workable. I can’t say I love the Start menu, but honestly, I don’t use it all that much and I can make it work. The taskbar is also workable.

I agree. I never use the Start menu anyway.

I find the visual refresh to be quite pleasant and welcome. It isn’t quite there with macOS in terms of the breadth and depth of the refreshed UI, but I am impressed with what has been accomplished. It truly feels more modern.

I agree and I think your comparison to macOS is accurate. I think we need to just live with the fact that Microsoft will never and can never deliver the same level of consistency and visual quality that Apple does. And it’s not all bad: Windows brings forward a level of compatibility with the past that Apple ignores too. If Windows 11 can be made to be more consistent and more attractive than is Windows 10—and I think it, even now—then it’s still a step forward. And I do prefer Windows 11 to Windows 10 overall.

Windows and quality

madthinus asks:

This week was not a good one again for the Windows team. Is it just me or does it seem that all the energy going into Windows is just again lip service?

I assume you’re referring (mostly) to the expired certificate issue that caused some Windows 11 apps to stop opening. When Panos Panay took over Windows, I saw this is a positive step since Windows had had no direct leadership before that. And I was willing to give him time to put his stamp on this thing and see how it turns out. But it’s obvious now that he’s no better than his predecessors at delivering on the quality promises. And every time a F-up like this happens, I will take to Twitter, quote a headline, and respond with “details matter.” Because they do matter. Just not to the Windows team.

M1, a year later

wright_is asks:

You haven’t covered the MacOS experience for a while. You bought a mini, then sent it back and I believe you ended up with an Air?

I have a 13-inch MacBook Pro (M1) for now, but it’s a loaner. I’ve kind of lost interest in the Mac in recent years. It’s just not that interesting to me.

I know OneDrive used to cause problems, but a native client is now on its way/available(?) and a lot of other applications are now M1 native.

Yes.

I’d be very interested in a one-year-on review of the current situation. I am currently thinking about getting a Mac mini or the 13″ MBP, but I am still undecided, whether to stay on Linux or whether to go to macOS – the main reason for a change of hardware is my Ryzen 1700 is a “gas guzzler” and the electricity prices have gone up over 30% since the beginning of the summer, I think we are currently at around 34c/kWh, so I’m looking at replacing it (I don’t really need all of its power these days) for something a little more economical and the M1 looks really interesting, at least on paper.

So, I did mean to write a “One year of M1” post (or whatever) ahead of the new MacBook launch recently, as I’m impressed with what Apple has done here on a technical level. But from a personal viewpoint, I just can’t get excited about using a Mac. I don’t like the OS at all and I’m not super-impressed by the hardware. I do think it’s amazing how well Windows on ARM works on this Mac, however, and wish there was some official way to just run that. That a virtual WOA image is better on a Mac than on native hardware isn’t just confusing, it’s amazing.

If you can deal with macOS and some hardware weirdness (I still can’t get over the trackpad on this thing, everyone seems to love it, but I can barely use it, for example), M1-based Macs aren’t any more expensive than quality PCs. But I just can’t do it myself.

But yeah. I need to do a year-end conclusion for Intel Evo, and I’ll try to do something about the M1 as well.

Communication

hrlngrv asks:

Re your article about MSFT’s evasive, unclear or impenetrable public communications, MSFT employs a lot of very smart people. I figure most of them are smart enough to know how to communicate clearly if they wanted to. If they repeatedly fail to communicate clearly and accurately with the public, how long do they need to continue doing so before one would be forced to conclude that such unclear and/or inaccurate public communication is deliberate?

I understand the need to ascribe purpose where there is none, but no, I don’t think it’s deliberate. I think it’s lazy. I think it’s incompetent. I think it’s unprofessional. And I think it shows an utter lack of regard for the people who really pay their salaries … Microsoft’s customers

I also don’t think it’s “Microsoft.” It’s a very specific part of Microsoft. Other parts, like Microsoft 365 more broadly as a great example, do a much better job at communicating and at doing what they say they will. They’re not perfect, no one is. But much better.

If MSFT’s unclear/inaccurate public communication is deliberate, what are the odds it’d change for the better this decade? More cynically, if MSFT actually believes their typical public communications serve MSFT’s interests, what’s in it for them to communicate any differently? That is, isn’t the wisest course deliberate skepticism about all MSFT public communications until there’s objective evidence they (accidentally?) told the truth?

What’s the line about an insane person? Someone who does the same thing over and over again and hopes for a different outcome? (Something like that.) That’s how I feel about this issue: I can hope that it will get better, wish it will get better. I can passive-aggressively communicate the problem again and again and again, as I have. But there has never been any evidence of it getting better. I just don’t know what to say about this anymore. It’s frustrating.