Discussion on:

10 flawed products that are really bad

Wow, I think I have heard the biggest line ever with this one. I have had MS Sec Essentials allow tons of malware onto systems. I have to use a free product to take them off!!

Sorry, but I had to signup just to respond to this. A large part of my business in recent years has been virus removal. And without exception the biggest leak in recent years has been Symantec Endpoint Protection. Every client that used it was getting (or is getting, for those still on it) with at least one virus every month (not to mention performance overhead issues). Steady work for me, but not the way I like it. And EVERY ONE of those that I moved to ESET instead has NOT had a virus since. One client wanted to just renew Symantec because times are tight and it was more to migrate to ESET (labor time and all), but I explained the 'real cost' of having me over every few weeks to fix a downed computer, along with the down-time and aggravation. They changed and have not had another virus.
I have seen Symantec touted in several articles as being the effective one but am totally at a loss for why. It has consistently failed the 'real world' test in my experience. I would like to know the how and why as I knew the product and wanted to believe in it. We were running version 11.4 or 11.5, but I had not seen a new version out for years, and I checked every couple months.
What am I missing here?
Oh, and MSSE?? My only experiences with computers that run that are when they are in the shop with viruses and/or performance issues that have traced back to MSSE. So I have used Avast for a free AV and found it in most cases to be fast and effective. The biggest issue there is the 'auto-sandbox' feature which causes problems with apps for clients so I disable that.
Sorry to be so wordy.

What about Quicken? Slow, out of date, cumbersome, and clearly just kludge on kludge. Th 2011 edition added some sort of graphics layer that made it painfully slow. The best example of why monopolies are bad since.. Microsoft.
It you did not like Acronis 11, have you tried Acronis 12? Bad documentation, claims it can do things it really cannot do (like restore a drive to dissimilar hardware.. leaving the user to figure out what drivers are needed and where to find them).
How about IE8, for machines that cannot run IE9?

Singles out Windows Explorer 9, but the complaints are general to are revelent to all browsers.

I do rarely comment on articles however I am doing so as I do not agree entirely with list of flawed software. Outlook 2012 may be flawed due it it's bloated functionality and slow performance when compared to its predecessor, however the reasons given are not justified in general.

If you're going to put IE 9 on this list, then you should put both Firefox and Chrome on it and rank them as being even worse, because they are. I've used all three and IE 9 comes out on top every time for speed, user-friendliness and trouble free operation. Chrome is too lackluster and watered-down to be a viable option at all. The latest version of Firefox did nothing but crash CONSTANTLY, even after several reinstalls, once on a brand new OS install, and didn't perform nearly as well as IE 9 does during general use. I use IE 9 all the time, every day, and the number of issued I have with it are minimal. You didn't even bother to list exactly what problems you have with IE 9 that made you think it should be on this list in the first place.

Outlook has quirks and there are features that could work a little better than they do, but I've been administering an Exchange server for several years with ~60 Outlook clients and it's rare, VERY rare, that I have issues between clients and the server. Even then, I can solve it 99.9% of the time by telling the user to close and restart Outlook. Oooh, wow,... yeah, that's really hard to do.

Bottom line, you provided virtually no real evidence whatsoever that either IE 9 or Outlook belong on this "flawed" list of yours.

Really? That's some great advice you're handing out there. Step out into the real world of IT and see how far you get with that.

As for flaws, "professional writers" who live in glass houses... Many of your little diatribes have glaring typos in them. Perhaps you should put your own house in order 1st.