by Michael S. Kaplan, published on 2011/08/01 07:01 -04:00, original URI: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/michkap/archive/2011/08/01/10191481.aspx
Now it is all well and good to take the issues I mentioned in The example was wrong, but the point of the example was spot on! and be dismissive of them.
I mean, if you do, you are mistaken.
And if your reasons are offensive enough, then it can all be incredibly obnoxious. And racist.
But there are bigger reasons to be bothered by the real limitations that these architectural limitations have imposed on us.
I mean, it was never a great idea anyway.
But as the past couple of decades have unfolded, the true consequences of our mistakes are becoming more clear.
Just to give yet anther example for a moment.
It is easy enough to try to lump together the whole problem as an Islamic one.
But that ignores the fact that the Thai Buddhist calendar is not just used in Thailand.
And it is not just used in Myanmar (which we do not currently support, and have never supported).
You see, it is also used in Laos, Cambodia, and Sri Lanka (which we do currently support -- to varying degrees -- even though we used to not support any of them).
This means we have not just been mishandling Islam through our neglect; it seems that Buddhism has also been a target of our laziness!
Ugh.
Now the Buddhist calendar is complicated, and there are really at a minimum four different answers to the questions of how many days there are in the year (354, 355, 384, or 385), which means we would probably be talking about adding four new calendars. So perhaps the lack of a consistent answer is the reason nothing happened there....
As a side note, our support for Hindu and other calendars is also decidedly non-stellar (ref: Oh (Saka to me, Saka to me, Saka to me, Saka to me) Whoa Babe (Just a little bit) A little respect (just a little bit)).
In fact, even the Hebrew calendar support is a tad spotty (ref: I Adar you! Hell, I Double Adar you!).
Perhaps we're just not so great when you add religion to the mix?
But either way, once again it is clear that the only way to be impressed by Microsoft is to ignore calendars!
Some residual issues still remain, for a future blog....
John Cowan on 1 Aug 2011 11:00 AM:
I think you mean "decidedly non-solar", though it's true that the Sun is a star.
Michael S. Kaplan on 1 Aug 2011 2:37 PM:
I did mean decidedly non-stellar, actually. Though I am not opposed to the sun pun....
John Cowan on 7 Aug 2011 11:24 AM:
That was a joke....
referenced by
2011/08/03 Avoiding our Office moment (when we can!)
2011/08/02 The "Thai Buddhist" calendar isn't