Why does Microsoft

Continue with yesterday's topic and draw today's conclusion.
First of all, I would like to thank you for your reply to yesterday's topic. Some of the rules may be difficult to understand since I first came to the garden, but I have carefully read the homepage principles, self-perception is original, after careful thinking, and can bring gains to othersArticle. However, since there are too many non-technical things, I always think it is inappropriate. This time I put them in a non-technical area. It's interesting to see that it's boring to skip.
None of the respondents said that the rice cooker 2.0 is worth development and discussion. Are there any gains?

My intention is not to discuss specific technical details, but to explore a way of thinking.

In fact, I will cook steamed rice, from an ordinary aluminum pan to a rice cooker, and the success rate is 99.99%. It is worth boasting that it will not be cool or too great. In fact, the rice cooker instructions are very clear, a few bowls of rice to add water to the first few scales, it is indeed very simple.
Although this is already very simple, there are always people who don't operate it. It's not suitable for putting water in it. If it's more or less, you just forget to press the heating key. This is definitely not an IQ issue, but an attitude issue.
However, if you think about it for your master, you don't have to worry about it. Check whether the rice cooker has enough water or less. If there is more, it will automatically pour out some; if there is less, add a point from a water tank. In this way, Will rice cookers be friendly to people who cannot cook or who are not very skilled?
I know that some people will definitely think about specific technical details, such as how difficult it is to measure the water in a rice cooker, how complicated the water storage and irrigation structure, and how to clean and water quality, I admit that we really need to consider this for a real product. However, we can say that this can be achieved without any problems. There is a saying that you are not afraid to do it.

Back to our topic, machine-friendly or fault-tolerant. This is our main line.
Human invention and manufacturing of machine equipment will have some operational specifications, if not according to the standard operation, it may cause an accident. These nonstandard operations are not caused by subjective intent, but by behaviors such as unfamiliar, inskillful, inattentive, and wrong understanding.
Then, friendly and fault-tolerant machines can use technical means to avoid these wrong operations, so that people no longer worry about unfamiliar, unfamiliar, and inattentive, misunderstanding and other low-level errors that common human beings often encounter. They can easily deal with themselves as machines, so that machines can better serve humans.
For a machine and a device, being useful is the first stage, while being friendly and fault tolerant is the second stage and a more important stage. From useful to easy-to-use, it requires long-term evolution and continuous evolution. The higher state of machine evolution from easy to use is machine intelligence. At that time, machines can think like humans, instead of humans, and become real assistants of mankind.

In real life, there are countless examples from useful to useful. The simplest thing is that our car, from a machine that can be started after complex operations, to a tool that can run well as long as you step on the accelerator, is a useful and useful change. The transformation process from manual shift to automatic shift is a huge improvement, so automatic shift to automatic driving will be a great leap.

The same is true for the software we developed.
Speaking of friendliness, I will definitely mention windows, and I will definitely talk about why Microsoft makes a Windows PC rule all over the world? (This topic is controversial. I will not talk about it here. If you disagree, please pay attention to the main topic and ignore the details)
I said that Windows is a model of friendliness and fault tolerance. With this feature, Windows allows thousands of people who are not computer professionals or do not understand machines to simply become computer masters.
Why does Microsoft?
Windows is indeed insecure, but the surface is insecure, which makes windows friendly and attracts a large number of users to install the operating system.
In terms of file system access control, the original windows system was very simple. At most there were system, implicit, or read-only restrictions, that is, everyone could read and write these files. This is indeed not safe, but it is easy to use. From the actual situation, most people who use machines are in good faith. They do not want to destroy the system or steal some information, they just want to write their articles in a file, or others. Therefore, file system security issues do not affect them, so they accept windows.
Therefore, in the early stage, Windows thought that all the people who use computers were good intentions, so there was no need to impose more restrictions.
So how does Mr. UNIX, the so-called Secure Operating System, do? UNIX is not as kind as windows. He thinks that all unauthenticated people and operations are malicious and illegal, and all resources need authorization, such as file read/write execution. When an operator creates a file, in addition to reading, writing, or executing the file, he can also authorize the group or all the operators, so he also needs to use the command chmod XXX, if this permission is not set, no one else can access it. That is to say, the operation should be performed at least twice, so when a good person is not allowed to open an unauthorized file, although the Object Creator's intention is to allow it to be opened.
What about later? The possession of Windows ranges from a few percent to 50%, or even more. When there are more people, we find that not all people are in good faith, and people are malicious. The so-called Forest has all birds, mr UNIX's strict restrictions are true, so he began to verify and restrict it like Mr. UNIX, But windows knew his family history and he would not kill all the birds, he wants to distinguish malicious and malicious users by means of strategy and machine intelligence, which improves both security and ease of use, so the operation is still very simple, security still has many problems.
Later, security in all aspects of windows was improved, and ease of use naturally declined a lot. However, thanks to the good faith, people are used to Windows operations, even with some additional authorization operations, so many people continue to use Windows. But it is undeniable that as security is improved, there are more and more complaints from users.
However, due to the initial restrictions, Mr. Unix was unable to use and maintain the service only by specially trained technical personnel. In addition, it was not necessary to invest too much R & D in usability, therefore, UNIX is always a system environment where professionals perform elegant and skillful command line operations.
Here we briefly talk about how file systems and access security play a role in the popularization of windows. It can be said that one aspect may be explained in other articles.

There are some conclusions:
Why does Microsoft? Because Microsoft provides more systems for non-professionals, it will make windows or PCs more popular. Its approach is more friendly and easy to use than it is, think of the operator as a fool, and such a system will become a new favorite of people.
Windows simplifies the configuration and settings of many systems, and blocks or ignores operation errors. This allows the operator to focus on the work rather than the technology, the operator naturally improves the efficiency by automating technical errors of some minor details.
Simple and beautiful.

Microsoft's past is like this. Microsoft's past success does not represent the path of Microsoft's future. What will happen in the future? Can Microsoft understand why Microsoft is?

Questions:
Does Google understand why Microsoft?
From available to easy-to-use Google
Can machine intelligence replace human intelligence?
How does machine intelligence obtain methodology from human evolution?