Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

The 25 Worst Tech Products of All Time - PCWorld.com

<< < (2/5) > >>

jgpaiva:
I think there are some pretty bad stuff in that list. But i surelly wouldn't consider most of them "the worst tech products", there are much worse peices out there. (take for example the nasty "gator", which isn't even featured there, although that's arguable, as gator does do exactlly what it was designed to :S)

As for real player, i surelly wouldn't consider it a bad product. Maybe it's true that there isn't any need for the format itself (although it's a bit superior to microsoft's wmv), but the player sure is great. Apart from always placing a damn process in the startup list, the player is much better than windows media player, at least for DVD's. (it was the only one which allowed me to go over a bug that made DVD's display in a very small size on my computer).

I think i support the previous statements. This looks like a list that someone came up with out of 10 minutes of rant thinking.

mouser:
i get a bit defensive about realplayer - because they virtually pioneered mainstream low-bandwidth audio/video.  the big cites serving up audio and video (like c-span.org) were all built off of realplayer.  their tech achievement is substantial.  to label them one of the worst is ignorant.  it would be more appropriate to give them an award for their tech accomplishments.  as we speak there are some viable alternatives to realplayer - and there are some annoyances with the player, but that's another matter.

f0dder:
I've always been hateful towards realplayer - it's too intrusive, the player always felt bloated to me, and I hate having to install "yet another player". Not to mention that, unless you use shady software, real media is only playable in their player.

And WinMe surely does belong on the list, too. I know it's worked fine for some people, and those will never understand the animosity other have for WinMe. But well, having to roll back some 30 school computers to win98se does say something about the stability for the masses...

The list does seem like it's been thrown together in a lunch break though, and it's order isn't very realistic either :)

koncool:
Hmm I kind of agree with f0dder, WinME was really nasty back then... And I when I really thought that it was my beta not being stable/having driver problems/etc, soon I realised that the RTM product wasn't any better :tellme:

JavaJones:
Hmm, I think the list catalogs combinations of success/notoriety vs. poor technology/bad business practices. In other words "stuff that should never have been a success". Maybe the name of the list is just wrong. ;) I mean yes we can all agree there have been worse "tech products" - any genuine spyware qualifies admirably. But I think I get what they're aiming for here and given that I don't think the list is that bad. Sure it's a bit knee-jerk and based on "one side of the story", but I think there's a reason AOL and RealPlayer have the reputations that they do. They earned them. And the article goes into specific reasons why, which I think are pretty much all valid.

They do also give a bit of "credit where it's due": "To be fair, RealNetworks deserves credit for offering a free media player and for hanging in there against Microsoft's relentless onslaught. We appreciate the fact that there's an alternative to Windows Media Player; we just wish it were a better one." or "To its credit, Me introduced features later made popular by Windows XP, such as system restore. Unfortunately, it could also restore files you never wanted to see again, like viruses that you'd just deleted." Even though it's a bit of a booby prize. ;) They even acknowledge exactly what Jazper pointed out - IE's vulnerabilities are so well-known in part because of its popularity.

I do think the article is a bit heavy on the mindless MS bashing and that probably exposes the true mindset and perspective of the authors. But hyperbole notwithstanding their list is again not that far off IMO, given the right criteria at least. What I mean by that is for example AOL being above Bob - well, AOL had more success and a wider reach, so if it is to be considered a "worst tech product" it is worse by the fact that it succeeded more. That seems to be the general approach they're taking and I don't really disagree with it. Perhaps the list could have been named "The 25 tech products that were most succesful in spite of themselves" or something. :D

It does seem like they're scraping the barrel for good ones after the top 10 though - maybe some of those could have been replaced with more notables like Gator. Then again it seems like they're trying at the same time to back up their "25 years covering the PC industry" claim by putting some of the older stuff on there.

Btw re: RealPlayer and its "accomplishments" - remember that they're targetting RealPlayer, not the format and not the company. ;) Yes Real pioneered some good streaming video/audio tech. But the player was always awful and the fact that it was proprietary was part of its big problem. So even though the tech may have been great, it was tied to something that wasn't great, just like so many other company's products. Ultimately a mixed bag at best. Fortunately you don't need RealPlayer to play Real content these days.

- Oshyan

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page