It's cool to hate Microsoft for some odd reason. I think it's got more to do with "you hate MS so I should hate them as well". There are more followers in this world than leaders so it's the herd mentality that I think has caused so many people to hate MS.

It doesn't make sense to hate a company that has done so much for computing as MS has. Where would we be if they didn't exist?

So maybe you don't like Windows or other MS products but disliking their products doesn't mean you should hate them. You should just say "I prefer...." and go about your business and be happy using whatever it is you use. I don't use Apple as an example but I don't go around hating Apple because I can.

That's a) exactly how I feel, and b) the most sensible belief I have heard any one else say.

I happen to like their products, because they're generally easy to use, dependable (providing you're responsible and not a moron), and when they do have problems they make me profitable for being able to fix them.

The majority of people who hate and bash MS like no tomorrow online are the *nix and Apple fans who live and die by their OS of choice,  the vast number of Windows or Office etc users don't hate MS at all, or if they do it's nowhere near the level of people on say, slashdot.

I've used lots of OSs and other apps but many times I come back to Windows in the end, because I know what I'm doing with my system and how to stay safe online, I have zero problems and thus no need to hate MS.   Last time I had a crash it was a sound card driver gone bad, so insted of hating MS for windows blue screening, I hate the sound card makers poor driver coding.

Basically I guess it all comes down to what, if any, problems you've had while using MS software,  if you've had lots, then you'll have MS and vice versa.

People either have short memories, or were not aware how Microsoft used to behave. Steven Bink had a taste of the Microsoft lawyer intimidation, and that was after they became a little more "touchy-feely".

10 years ago Microsoft CRUSHED any decent or critisism of their products, using all means possible, including intimidation. They ripped off others ideas, and put companies out of business, by dragging out legal cases, much like the current EU action.

They are not so different now, it is was only when their own country procecuted them did they become a LITTLE less nasty.

I have a long memory, as do many other people over 35 years old who have been in the computer industry!

The reason I dislike Microsoft is thier business practices. I mean come on, who else has been sued that many times by that many countries (successfully I may add) for what they do? I dont deny that Microsoft has some good products (MS-SQL, .NET for an example), and I dont hate them for what products made my life hell in I.T. What I do not like is when a company uses mob-like tactics to get where they are. As for the argument of where would computing be without them, thats like saying where would we be without the civil war, implying that we are better off with it than without having fought. Who knows what the landscape would have been like without them, I for one dont think it would have been bleak, just different.

What companies don't rippoff others ideas and use them even now?  True MS have it's Windows monopoly can do more damage, but lots of big companies do the same all the time.   When you're out to protect your money, stuff like this happens, though at different levels.   I don't see MS intimidation any different from say, Apple forcing Mac news sites to stop writing about future apple products,  where does that fall under in this whole context of things?

And states aside, MS is sued more from other companies over patents than anything else.  It has reached the point where someone like Adobe can sue MS for giving Office users the option to use the PDF format,  though, it's fine for it to be in OpenOffice because why?  It's free? 

I'm not saying what they've done in the past isn't bad, only that they aren't the only ones who have and still do much of the same. 

   Reason 1: They are bullies

If you haven't you must see the Simpson's episode where Bill Gates "buys out" Homer's start-up.  It says it all.

As simply put by Jason Calacanis in a recent podcast, Microsoft's goal is to kill the opposition.  How can you side with/like the murderer.

Microsoft doesn't believe in cooperation.  Their strategy is best summarised as: embrace, enhance, eliminate.   They first say they will work with some company/standard (eg, Java), then they say they will enhance things a bit (just enough to create some incompatabilities) then they establish a new product/standard directly threatening the one they started working with.

Contrast that with Google that (so far) try to work with others.  They promise them more traffic in exchange for a cut in the ad revenues. 

If Microsoft knocked on you door you'd be wise to jump out through the kitchen window.  If Google knocked you'd be wise to serve some bourbon on ice and sit to chat.

   Reason 2: Crappy product

Microsoft consumer products are delayed, sub-standard, buggy, bulky, over-priced (look at their margins) copies of competitor products.

Never have so many talented individuals spent so long and so much money to simply copy others. 

XP wasn't Cairo as promised -- it was built on the Windows 3.1 kernel.  The only innovative thing was the annoying paper clip and search (what search!) dog.  Vista is not Longhorn -- it's built on XP with little innovation other than the Aero-thingy.

As a consumer, in all it's history, Windows has NEVER innovated.

   Reason 3: Envy

People will always criticise #1.

...do you need more reasons?