Emperor's Nudity Remarked

New York Times technology columnist David Pogue precipitated a hacker tsunami by speaking — aloud — certain truths about the Evil Empire's flagship product:

As you know, I review new products all the time. Then later, after I return the hardware products to the manufacturers, I have to clean out the detritus their installations leave behind on my Windows PC. And today was housekeeping day.

The first program I spotted was Adobe Acrobat 5, which I don't need any more because I now have Acrobat 6. But when I tried to remove Acrobat 5 (using Windows's Add/Remove Programs program), a message said, "The system indicates that the following shared file is no longer used by any programs and may be deleted: C:/program Files/Dell/ShareDLL/djbsdk.dll. If any programs are still using this file and it is removed those programs may not function. Do you want to remove the shared file? Yes/No." WHAT THE...!?!? Like I'm supposed to know if some other program is going to need C:/program Files/Dell/ShareDLL/djbsdk.dll?

No normal person could possibly know that--heck, no technology columnist could possibly know that--which can mean only one thing: That whoever writes that kind of error message is lazy and mean-spirited. Let's move on to program #2, from Creative Labs. This time, when I clicked REMOVE, it whirred for a moment and then said: "Do you want to completely remove the selected application?"

Ummm, no. I actually clicked REMOVE because my index finger had an itch. DUH!

The third program, Firefox .08, I didn't need anymore because I have Firefox 1.0 now. But I can't uninstall version .08, because a message says: "Uninstall log folder not found: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/Mozilla/Mozilla Firefox/0.8. (en)/Uninstall/Uninstall Log Folder."

The next removal, of the Virgin Player software, required THREE confirmations that yes, I really, truly, cross my heart and hope to die, DO want to remove this darned software, hard though Richard Branson may find it to believe.

And let's not even talk about all the crud in my "Currently installed programs" list that I didn't put there, that I have no idea whether it's doing me any good or not. ("ADP Sample Data?" "Dolet Light?" "Digital Line Detect?" "Windows Media 8 Encoding Utility?")

If all the best and the brightest programmers work at Microsoft, you'd think they could answer questions like these: If I click Remove, why must I be asked twice more if I want to remove something? Why can't Windows keep track of which programs need which pieces, so Microsoft's long-suffering customers don't have to judge whether some shared DLL file is still necessary? When we install a new program, why aren't we asked if we'd like it to replace the older version, rather than making us mop up afterward?

Of course, you already know the answer. Microsoft doesn't improve this kind of thing because it doesn't have to. It's got a bad case of a little thing called Monopoly Complacence.

[Edited excerpt from "Want a New Headache? Try to Uninstall," by David Pogue, New York Times, February 17, 2005.]

The resulting tsunami was confined to the Times forum for reader opinions on Pogue's columns, since participants weren't illustrious professors with access to vent on Op-Ed pages. But there, the tearful joy was palpable. Many seemed stunned that Microsoft's obscene defects, which for decades have paralyzed information processes and enraged the common man in every city of every nation of every continent, were finally, incredibly, being openly acknowledged in an establishment media organ like the Times:

It is so reassuring to hear that David Pogue has the same sort of problems with his PC that I have with mine. Misery loves company!

---

I completely agree with the column addressing the complexity (and incompleteness) of uninstall procedures in Windows. It is infuriating to think that I have a hard drive cluttered with files whose possible use I cannot reasonably determine.

---

Amen. I thought I was alone in the world wondering what the h@@### are these DLL's I might remove at my peril. What's outrageous is that we pay good money for such sloppy, and yes, THOUGHTLESS programming. What's even more astonishing is that an operating system so full of bugs and vulnerabilities is so dominant. The old saying is "cream rises." In this case, it's the garbage.

---

Thanks for drawing attention to another fragment of Microsoft misery.

---

For the first time in nearly a year or maybe a year and a half you have written an article that is close to my heart.

---

Thank you David. Not being as tech savvy as most, I am totally intimidated by the statement that removing a program may corrupt untold numbers of other programs. As a result I back off and leave the unwanted material clogging the arteries of my computer.

There was also heavy traffic concerning third party programs to which desperate users could turn to do the job Windows is supposed to do:

The best cure I've found for the uninstall blues is PC Magazine's free utility "Unclean".

---

I have the same problem with uninstalling stuff, it drives me nuts.

I went to get Unclean 2.0, but it's not free. You have to pay to join PC MAG. No thanks!

Any other suggestions for a decent program remover would be greatly appreciated. I know there must be some out there.

---

Besides Unclean 2.0 I have found Total Uninstall 2.34. Any others?

---

I recommend you purchase Ashampoo's Uninstaller Plus. The beauty of this little app is that it will provide you with the choice of running it everytime you do an install. It does a thorough pre and post install check and record process.

---

Mr. Pogue hit the proverbial nail on the head!

I also share his frustration. Is anyone aware of any third party uninstallers that are both reliable and reasonably idiot-proof?

---

I decided to try out "Registry Mechanic." It's a shareware thingy which checks out orphaned stuff in the registry and gets rid of it if you want to. It found 357 supposedly unneeded *things* in my registry and I had the option of removing them. I took a leap of faith and removed them. It's been about a week and so far, so good but like everything else with computers, I have no idea if anything was accomplished or not.

---

Instaclean Uninstaller costs ten dollars and also gets rid of broken registry keys. There are other "cleaning" utilities that promise you they will do the same; I assume they're better because they're more expensive, but this one seems to do what the Windows uninstaller can't.

One visitor offered an astute observation:

When you have thriving industries surrounding virus protection and software installation, something is very wrong with your system architecture.

Others offered practical advice:

Don't fight--switch.

I suffered 20 years of the kind of Microsoft clunkiness that Mr. Pogue is describing. Then I switched to Mac. In three years of upgrading and downloading/trying/removing Mac software, I've never experienced the kind of geeky abuse David describes. In most cases, uninstalling on Mac is as simple as deleting the program's folder. My advice: dump Windows and move to Mac.

Another visitor was more succinct:

May I recommend the following website to help delete all your Windows applications: http://store.apple.com.

One visitor posited that there were worse transgressions than Microsoft's:

Painful as it usually is, the worst I've ever experienced was when the "weather bug" program threatened that I would likely die if I chose to uninstall it.

Others were more forceful in Microsoft's defense. I was reminded of many arguments I'd had in my software career with technical people who seemed incapable of imagining designs that weren't abysmally stupid, offensive, and exasperating for any reasonable human being:

Confirmation of a delete of any kind is both a bit annoying and a valuable requirement. It's part of the look and feel of Windows. I for one would not have it any other way, especially at the end of a long hard day when my thinking and my fingers get sloppy.

As a programmer I've even put in a double confirm ("Do you really, really want to do this?") when what is being deleted is critical to the operation of my software.

---

While I have lots of problems with Microsoft, you are being a bit unfair. Most of the issues you raise in the column have nothing to do with Microsoft but rather with the application author. Microsoft provides the shell that is used by the application to uninstall.

Further, the unused DLL question is giving you a chance to opt out of a determination made by Windows that the files are no longer needed. If you weren't given the choice you would complain about Microsoft taking an action without your knowledge. You can always keep the superfluous file in any case.

---

Mr. Pogue:

I suspect that you have not had the experience of handling a panicked telephone call from someone who "accidentally" hit the wrong button in a computer window and deleted a file that was vital for them.

Asking, "Are you sure you want to delete ..." is a simple, non-technical way to give the user a moment to be sure they did not do something by accident or did not change their mind suddenly.

---

Today's column was an extreme disappointment. Why do you so strongly assert that Microsoft is to blame? Microsoft provides a technology called Windows Installer (msi). The problem occurs when a third party developer decides not to use that technology, which they often do. Wouldn't it make more sense to blame the companies that actually inconvenienced you with a negative Uninstall experience? If Microsoft forced you to use their installer all of the time, wouldn't this be considered restrictive and anti-innovation?

---

I want to add my 'voice' to what now seems to be a chorus of us who find it offensive that an alleged professional like yourself can't put blame where it belongs. Microsoft is not the bad guy in this case as others have aptly pointed out. I find it alarming and surpising that you would make this sort of gaffe. Some of your readers are apt to believe what you write. Please be careful!

One MS defender was both nasty and apparently a bit shaky on his history:

David, David, David. You remind me of the reporters during the Watergate scandal. If President Nixon would have gone out to the Potomac and walked across the water, your headline would have been "Nixon Can't Swim!" All those program removal problems you are discussing are NOT Microsoft's doing. A little research (you know what that is, right?) would have showed you that the programmers who write those programs you name also write the uninstall software - not Microsoft. Stop being like the rest of the uninformed Microsoft bashers.

Some MS defenders seemed to want to buy credibility by professing disdain for MS — most likely a devious trick by MS plants to deflect suspicion:

Well, I admit to hating Microsoft (more or less). Still, I find it hard to point the finger at them on this one. Microsoft provides a service to developers, who often abuse it. Programs that do not uninstall well probably do not provide the information Windows requires to use the uninstaller service. Microsoft could, I suppose, police this, but think of the uproar that would cause. I see lawsuits for restraint of trade.

Just this once, I don't blame Microsoft. The rest of the stuff is a result of monopolistic arrogance, though.

Those moles can be subtle.

Pogue himself eventually appeared and gave a marvellously apt retort:

If Microsoft is not responsible here, then how come uninstalling from Mac OS X is an effortless piece of cake?

You just drag the app to the Trash. Period.

It's about the DESIGN OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM.

Microsoft left uninstallations open to the developers, sure, but it's had, what, 20 years now to correct that mistake?

In discussions of MS product deficiencies, some MS lackey often pipes up to announce that the next-generation product takes care of all the problems. This discussion was no exception:

You may or may not be familiar with the Microsoft strategy for easing all this. It is called "dot net." Essentially it puts another level of software between programs and the operating system. This layer has extensive checks built-in and makes lots of things simpler for both the software maker and ultimately the user. It makes playing by its rules extremely attractive. (Among other features it purportedly will end "dll hell".)

Innocent neophytes, in their first decade of computer use, are liable to be gulled by such propaganda. They'll naively go and get that next-generation product and spend 200 hours mastering it — only to learn that it does not solve the problems (and typically introduces new ones).

But Pogue was prepared. His rebuttal to the "dot net" technobabble confirmed him as the little guy's champion:

But I already have .NET installed on my PC--a huge, seething glop of software, hundreds of megabytes.

It did nothing for my case of DLL hell.

Thank you, David Pogue!

More on Microsoft: The Independent Institute.

David Pogue's website: www.davidpogue.com.

Article Author: Uriel Wittenberg

Visit Uriel Wittenberg's author page — Uriel Wittenberg's Blog