In his blog post, “How to Turn Microsoft Around,” Thomas Hawk writes, “More than all of this though is the informal anecdotal evidence I’ve been seeing of a shift from the Windows operating system to the Mac. I wrote about my own conversion last year. In the past few months I’ve been completely surprised at some of the names of people that have privately emailed me saying that they were switching as well. And then earlier this week over coffee with one of the top technology journalists in the world (no, not Walt Mossberg, but close up there) what did he pull out of his bag? A brand spanking new sleek black MacBook Pro less than a week old.”
“Now the numbers are not necessarily going to reflect this yet, but when your key influencers, bloggers, journalists, etc. begin abandoning Windows and moving to the Mac it’s like a wave and over time this wave can actually threaten Microsoft’s monopoly on the operating system. Look for Apple’s numbers to continue advancing here in the months ahead,” Hawk writes. “So the question becomes how should Microsoft turn this around?”
Hawk looks at the Windows user experience, “It’s not good. Especially when compared to a Mac… Apple has the luxury of being able to test limited and known configurations on their products. Combine this with an almost manic commitment to user experience and you get a better product… Microsoft of course can’t just reverse course and piss off all of their OEMs and start building their own PC, but what they can do is create a Microsoft certification whereby thoroughly tested systems receive a special Microsoft seal of approval.”
Hawk looks at Microsoft’s Live.com, “Now it is pretty much dead.” Hawk writes about Microsoft’s big pile of dirty cash and how they need to buy “cool” companies, starting up a San Francisco-based “think tank of sorts,” and getting “their evangelism back on track. Scoble was a big loss for Microsoft. Gartenberg would have been an interesting choice to try and fill his shoes but now he’s gone as well.”
Full article here.
All very interesting, but it begs the question: why bother? Why spend all the time, capital, and effort needed to make Microsoft like Apple, when Apple already exists? Microsoft has always been a follower; one can only image what absolute garbage would flow forth from a Microsoft think tank when they have decades now of looking to 1 Infinite Loop for their R&D. Even if you could turn the Titanic around, get it into dry-dock, and attempt to retrofit the thing, it’ll still be the Titanic. All of that effort isn’t worth it when the Queen Mary 2 is already berthed in Cupertino.
And, puleeze, a Microsoft seal of approval? Is Hawk nuts? A seal of approval only works when offered by a respected entity. Microsoft is known for badly-hewn fake Macs, a bloated office suite, a fecal-colored non-selling fake iPod, unexplained and incomprehensible crashes, shoddy security software that doesn’t secure their insecure OS, the worst browser on earth, executives blinded by hubris, layer upon layer upon layer of bureaucracy, being Google’s minor league, a game console they’ve never sold for a profit, failed initiatives like watches and ultra-portable PCs, patches, viruses, overbearing DRMs, monopoly abuse, an idiotic dancing CEO/buffoon, and pure frustration. A Microsoft seal of approval would be a product’s kiss of death. Plus, we don’t think there’s even room left for any more stickers on most ugly-ass PCs. As we’re fond of saying, “The first time Microsoft produces something that doesn’t suck will be when they start making vacuum cleaners.”
Related articles:
Analyst: Windows Vista UI is step back in Microsoft’s pursuit of Apple’s Mac OS X – February 27, 2007
Gates: ‘Windows Vista’s had incredible reception’ – February 21, 2007
The Register reviews Microsoft’s Windows Vista: ‘Don’t buy it’ – February 20, 2007
Forbes: ‘Windows Vista utterly unimaginative, internally discordant and woefully out of tune’ – February 09, 2007
Digit: Don’t buy Vista; Microsoft may be driving millions to stick with XP or move to Apple Mac – February 05, 2007
TIME Magazine: Microsoft’s Windows Vista ‘an embarassment to the good name of American innovation’ – February 02, 2007
Microsoft’s Windows Vista: Five years for a chrome-plated turd – January 30, 2007
Digit: ‘Microsoft’s Windows Vista may be the best reason yet to buy an Apple Mac’ – January 29, 2007
Pioneer Press: Windows Vista shows ‘Apple is an innovation engine; Microsoft, not so much’ – January 29, 2007
Windows Vista disappoints, so get a Mac – January 29, 2007
CNET Reviews Windows Vista: Is that all? Clunky and not very intuitive vs. Mac OS X; warmed-over XP – January 24, 2007
Mossberg: Microsoft’s Windows Vista offers lesser imitations of Apple’s Mac OS X features – January 18, 2007
Windows Vista disappointment drives longtime ‘Microsoft apologist’ to Apple’s Mac OS X – January 17, 2007
InformationWeek Review: Apple’s Mac OS X shines in comparison with Microsoft’s Windows Vista – January 06, 2007
NY Times’ Pogue reviews Microsoft’s Windows Vista: ‘Looks, Locks, Lacks’ – December 14, 2006
Dave Winer: ‘Microsoft isn’t an innovator, and never was – they are always playing catch-up’ – December 01, 2006
Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard is 64-bit done right, unlike Microsoft’s Windows Vista kludge – August 14, 2006
Microsoft Windows Vista: If you can’t innovate… try to impersonate Apple’s Mac OS X – August 10, 2006
Analyst: Apple’s new Mac OS X Leopard sets new bar, leaves Microsoft’s Vista in the dust – August 08, 2006
Microsoft botches another copy job: Windows Vista Flip3D vs. Apple Mac OS X Exposé – June 26, 2006
Windows Vista rips-off Mac OS X at great hardware cost (and Apple gains in the end) – June 13, 2006
Computerworld: Microsoft Windows Vista a distant second-best to Apple Mac OS X – June 02, 2006
Microsoft — proof that you can’t be all things to all people.
Why bother changing Microsoft to become like Apple?
If you don’t do that, then Apple would become the next Microsoft.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Sorry to burst his bubble, but the black laptop is a MacBook. MacBook Pro is shiny aluminum.
He’ll get over it. It’s just a passing phase in his inner development
“A brand spanking new sleek black MacBook Pro less than a week old.”
A rare computer indeed.
They could try reading the manual: So You Want To Turn Microsoft Around?
“How to turn Microsoft around”
With 50 pounds of C-4 and a few
flamethrowers. A .50 caliber machine
gun could help too.
M$ has already tried the “seal of approval” concept. Remember “Made for Windows 95” which was replaced by some message for windows 2k and then by “Designed for Microsoft Windows XP”
(I’m sure they have one for Vista too.)
Anyway – the Dell I use at work with a 2ghz single core pentium 4 and 512mb ram that has that “Designed for Microsoft Windows XP” sticker on it doesn’t actually work well with Windows XP…
A certification program only works well if it’s used to show that something has been tested to work well instead of just being used as a marketing tool.
I love the seal of approval part — 10 versions of Vista now. Then add 10 more for Offical Microsoft Seal of Approval PCs.
Vista Home Basic Edition
Vista Home Basic Edition for OMSAP
Vista Home Premium Edition
Vista Home Premium Edition for OMSAP
.
.
.
Microsoft keeps telling us, they’re all about choice.
“How to turn Microsoft around”
Too much counterweight.
First, you’ll have to leave a long trail of doughnuts to coax Ballmersaurus Rex from his lair and off the property.
A black MacBook Pro? Did I miss something?
Someone want to fill me in?
I think the black MBP is the best part of my day so far.
Close it down and give all the money back to the shareholders.
Wait… that’s advice for Dell
Thorin –
Forget the little stuff – you’d only piss them off!
A few Specters or a flight of BUFF’s ought to to the trick!
Do you think Microsoft uses Windows for their own security system?
MW – face – as in time to face the music…..
MDN’s take is kind of harsh.
Why turn Microsoft around? Because if there are two companies offering good products it spurs more innovation and lower prices. The consumer wins.
Admitedly having Apple as the dominant platform would be a hell of a lot better than having Microsoft, but it’s still better to have more good (and the important word there is good!) products and choices.
Microsoft has been found wanting and Microsoft will never regain the image of invincibility it once had. Redmond, WA is the Potemkin village of the digital age. The sheen is off the façade, the lie has been exposed, the rot is beginning to soil all within arm’s reach. I am confident that with the demise of Microsoft the last barrier will fall to the rise of alternative software companies. Let Microsoft slip into the archives of ignominy and profound mismanagement. The future looks very competitive indeed with the collapse of Microsoft. Apple had better think about making alliances with other innovative companies and not celebrate too soon.
Ask Clippy! Clippy can help you! Wait,didn’t they fired his ass from MS Office? Bollocks =(
But seriously now: real competition between MS and the rest of the industry is good. It’d be a shame to waste so much of MS’s billions.
Microsoft would need to buy some “vision” as well to make any kind of turn-around.
I don’t think that sort of thing is for sale. Either you have it or you don’t.
Microsoft has NO vision and never has.
If there’s a black macbook pro…
I WANT
Just wanted to say, nice QM2/Titanic reference.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Long live Cunard! Long live Jobs!
While everyone could just buy a Mac and solve most of their computing problems. The sad truth is that while Apple is growing market share at an incredible rate, it will be a decade before we could hope that parity with MS could be reached.
This is not really a problem as many have pointed out that Apple is growing in the most profitable sectors, so Apple will be the driving force in computers for some time. But the days when we can ignore the windows market are in the distant future.
Microsoft has several things propping it up:
1. Perceived need – most people feel that they need windows to live. This is exaggerated by the fact that most normal people go to their windows friendly IT staff of game playing geeks that care nothing about ease of use and assume that because they can’t play counter-strike and half-life on the mac that it has no value.
2. Fear of proprietary hardware – Many people believe that competition yields innovation and do not understand that this ceases to be true once something becomes a commodity, lower price drives out R&D. They believe that Dell, HP and Gateway are pushing the state of the art forward and to fall back on Apple alone would sniffle development due to lack of competition. The reality that Apple is the only reason there have been advances in PC’s for the last decade escapes them. Most people do not understand that the hardware has been stagnant (other than clock speed) since Windows took over.
3. Developer Base – MS has done a great job at building a very loyal developer core. There are corporations that are buying .net en mass because MS has convinced them they need it. In spite of the fact that it gives them all the VM slowdown of java without the hope of cross-platform operation. This will keep people locked into MS for years as the software they use is Windows only.
These things will keep MS alive for decades and keep holding back the industry.
In addition, Microsoft is entrenched in the economy – Even after the dot com crash, tech is still a huge part of the economy. Most people own MS stock – usually unknowingly in their 401K. People gauge the entire sector by MS’s health. When Dell’s sales fall off, they assume the sky is falling. So a titanic shift away from MS would scare the financial markets.
The stockholders of Microsoft will insist on improved revenue growth – so MS will be forced to find ways to produce. At some point they have to acknowledge that The entire company is riding the Windows/Office Wave of the 1990’s that has crashed ashore already will set in. I would argue it has already, that is why they have been pushing XboX, Zune, Windows CE, etc. Only XboX has had minor success, the rest have been flops.
The first step is for MS to recognize that they have a problem.
The second step is to realize that using the OS monopoly to drive everything is drying up. Apple and even Linux have become legitimate threats by offering people an alternative to the MS trap.
MS next needs to decide that they are about making money not dominating the market. I believe that the only reason they have pursued the path of market domination is that they fear that they can not compete in a competitive market.
They need to realize that the best way to regain the OS market is to give it up. The should sell an API runtime to allow windows apps to run on Mac’s and linux (think Wine by MS). Why would you care losing a $30 OEM windows contract if you trade it for a $50 runtime API sale. Once the API is broken from the OS and generating more revenue they could then develop a totally new secure OS to sell to run under that API.
If I was Bill Gates, that is what I would do. I believe that MS could take this route to increase revenues while losing OS/Share and leverage that to retake the market when they have a viable OS.
I doubt MS would ever do this, because they have tunnel vision on Windows domination as the Key. I believe that instead, MS will continue to erode into GM over the next couple of Decades. But if I ran the place, I would take the high road and grow even bigger.
Seems like another naive “take” for MDN.
Microsoft is too big of a company to allow to collapse. Just look at the fallout and lives ruined by WorldCom, Enron, etc. To have similar fate befall either Dell or Microsoft would catastrophic. Just remember that Microsoft’s Market Cap is worth more than many countries.
However, something dramatic will need to be done to turn it around. The image of invincibility is almost gone. Once that passes, MS will actually have to innovate to compete in the market. MS won’t go away any time soon. But unless it changes directions soon, the proverbial crack in the dike will continue to cause problems.
There is such thing as a BLACK MACBOOK PRO, look up the recent article with the rumor about the black iMac and follow the link MDN gave……
Frankly, I’d love to see MS turnaround and become a decent company. If Apple becomes the big dog in the computer world, they may not remain the Apple we love. Let Apple get a healthy 20% marketshare and continue to do what they do best. Let MS grow a heart like the Grinch and maintain their hold on the market, but start using that power for good instead of evil.
Step one, get rid of Ballmer!
A black anodized MacBook Pro would go nicely with my Calphalon cookware. As hot as the MB Pro gets, I could use it to cook on.
Difficulty rating out of 100 to produce a competitor for Apple’s Mac/OS X/Apple TV/iPod (and it isn’t just the software):
1. Brand new start up, result in 3 years – 60/100
2. Turn around Microsofts’s products, people, culture, history – 99/100
Microsoft have had it and they can thank their lucky star that they kept Office for Mac going.
The key to turning MicroShaft around ???
UNIX is better than DOS !! …
But, Ballmer cant even see his belly button, let alone the writing on the wall !!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
> The sad truth is that while Apple is growing market share at an incredible rate, it will be a decade before we could hope that parity with MS could be reached.
Apple is a hardware company. It profits mostly from selling Macs and iPods. Mac OS X is a means of selling more Macs. Apple does not need to reach “parity” with Windows; it just needs to beat the PC box makers (individually). Since they all share the Windows piece of the pie chart, that would be a much more reasonable goal. Getting to 20-25 percent should do it. That might happen in the next three to four years.
Regardless, the “marketshare” issue will become less meaningful as Apple continuues to demonstrate its resurgence; Apple is selling as many Macs as it can make right now. Customers, developers, and the media are taking notice.
@ Mac Arch,
I can’t believe you said that, I work on the BUFF simulators! LOL
Microsoft doesn’t have enough cash to buy off its bad karma. The bishop of Redmond is going
to have to make a trip to the Vatican ….but has the new Pope ever seen anyone soil themselves like this ..
……and does he have that much Heavenly credit of his own that he could launder this ugly load?
My, my, I might need to consult an analyst.
Gee I hope that Machopeless / Unrealist and the other Windoze fanbois are reading this…
“…moving to the Mac it’s like a wave and over time this wave can actually threaten Microsoft’s monopoly on the operating system…” Hawk writes. “So the question becomes how should Microsoft turn this around?”
So… what this guy is saying is he wants to prop up and support a monopoly…and make it even better (bigger).
Hmmm.
“it just needs to beat the PC box makers (individually). Since they all share the Windows piece of the pie chart, that would be a much more reasonable goal”
This is very true, and is why Apple already is more healthy than any of the hardware manufacturers. However it is still useful to compare Apple and Microsoft. Given that any innovation in personal computers is going to come from either MS or Apple, it is useful to compare them.
For developers such as myself it is a much better comparison to compare MS and Apple. For all practical purposes all the other PC manufacturers are Microsoft. The reality they are commodities. If I want to make money with a product, it makes a lot more sense to go after all the Windows systems than Apple. I am faced with the problem all the time – people want me to write something for windows. I have NEVER had anyone say can you write me something for the Mac. Because I love the Mac, I often deliver a cross platform application and I am usually the only person to ever use the Mac version.
This is why the comparison matters – getting developers. I personally would rather work totally on the Mac, but I can’t. Sure as long as Apple remains profitable, I can choose to use a Mac, but I am never going to be able to get away from the Windows crap because OS market share does matter.
If Apple were to exceed 25% or even better approach parity, my life would get better as would many others.
Alternatively, If MS could change cultures and provide a much better user experience, then I could enjoy working on Windows stuff.
Hmmmm, while businesses are always slow to turn around and try new things, could Apple produce enough computers to produce 80 percent of the worlds needs??
Actually yes, but it would need the help of HP – Dell, etc. Apple could sublet the production of its computers to them. The computers would have to meet Apples standards in design and quality but the companies that build PCs could — I say COULD produce Apple machines within say 6 months.
Will they? NO. Cause egos run HP and Dell etc. And you will still be selling machines to replace those currently running PC software to people who like to be able to play with their machines.
So, JMHO.
N.
“it would need the help of HP – Dell, etc.”
Apple would not need their help – Apple would just have to expand. The truth is Apple (like everyone else) uses fabricators – it can hire more.
RUMOR: New version of Vista being released this week:
Vista OMFG
@Bobby
I am sure you are right. Do Dell actually own factories?
Spark: – “As hot as the MB Pro gets, I could use it to cook on.”
You are perpetuating a myth. My MacBook Pro never gets hotter than mildly warm.
How to fix Microsoft….hummm…
1. Well, the proper fix would be for Microsoft to be broken up into smaller companies, and Gates and Ballmer banned from the industry for life.
Personally, I think some jail time would have been appropriate to send a message, but I don’t believe the legislation supports that, altho it should.
2. Since the regulatory process failed, let the normal corporate process happen: let Microsoft grow into a mindless corpporate cancer moving imperceptibly in all directions.
This happens to all rotten companies that are based on theft/piracy/reverse engineering, and especially monopolies, however formed.
3. I’m particularly pleased with the leadership of Ballmer: Microsoft only has two cash cows – Office and Windows. He seems to have done a good number on both of them…. Vista,in particular, seems to be just a wonderful upgrade, with particularly positive reviews…<end sarcasm>
Seriously: don’t change a thing, everything is going according to a bigger plan. Unfortunately, due to a regulatory failure, we (the citizens and the industry) have had to put up with this for about 10 years longer than we should have, but that is another matter.
4. Microsoft, in spite of revenue growth, has a flat share price. They’re now doing the classic rotten big company trick: squeeze your existing customers (lower quality, raise prices), since all of their new ventures are failing.
How far are we away from declining revenues similar to Dell? If Apple’s market share continues to grow, not that far. (Hello Linux – are you there? You’re part of the solution – care to get with the program on the desktop?)
Remember that Apple’s market share doubled in the last 6 months, which is almost unbelievable. Will it be double yet again in another 6 months? 4x in a year? Hard to say, but this will start to bite the Microsoft Felon’s revenue fairly soon.
Personally, I can’t see 100% growth every 6 months continuing – this is too much, and it might be hard for Apple to manage. Plus, Apple has to be very careful to continue to listen to its customers, and not be arrogant…
I would not be surprised to see Apple in the #3 PC mfr spot in a year, at around 10% market share.
But I digress.
MDN Magic Word: down, as in “Microsoft is going down”.
(who comes up with these uncannily relevant words, anyway?)
i just love the seeing the picture of both of these twats in V-necks.
the whole jeans and black turtleneck thing of jobs is pretty lame, but the v-necks do certainly take the cake.
Sounds like Microsoft should,
1) buy Dell
2) make a more streamlined version of Vista optimized for the Dell machines
3) sidestep antitrust problems by including a non-iLife version of OS-X preinstalled as a boot option.
How to turn MS around. Quite simple: Split it in two. Windows and Office. The two should not be allowed under one roof. Until Office no longer has the monoply position to leverage off of Windows, but instead has to compete on the open market, and visa-versa.
Windows is being challenged = Good.
Office needs to be challenged. To do this MS cannot be allowed to dictate standards of document formats. I would go one further, and state, that at least for the time being, MS not even be allowed participation, in establishing these standards.
Splitting the company would be a step in the right direction, but that one additional step need also be taken, until such time as Office software publishers get a step up in market share.
I hate MS just as much as the next person, I truly feel it is an evil enterprise, however, it would be bad for it to cease to exist.
Apple is making the right steps with multi-boot macs. However, there will reach a point where Apple is the dominant player, and competition is always good.
PCs (beit Macs or Dells or HPs) should be platform agnostic. Truly they should a commodity. It is the software that counts, and really even the OS should not matter, as it is merely the platform on which you use software. The Software should matter, and you should be allowed to use whatever app floats your boat, however, with the apps using standarized formats.
I will get off my rambling soapbox
zac
@Sure Am Relieved
I was not wanting to justify Microsoft’s past actions. As much I would like to se MS in little pieces, that was never going to happen. Their “crimes” should have brought about huge fines and Civil awards to companies like Netscape and Digital Research. Let’s face the facts, the bulk of the problem we have today was the fault of John Sculley who chose to artificially inflate the prices of Macs (and force NeXT’s prices higher by settlement agreement) that kept Apple from winning. He created a market waiting for Microsoft to offer a cheap substitute.
Microsoft stepped over the line in building their market share advantage, but not that terribly far until it came to netscape. If a company had risen to the occasion and created a product that was well designed and enjoyable to use, we would be barely angry.
The reality is other than the thing with Netscape it is hard to find a huge violation of anti-trust laws at Microsoft. However if you look at all the little things they did, it adds up.
Though I can strain to see evil in Microsoft, but it is much more likely that they simply played hard and were able to convince people that the crap they were selling was good enough. Chances are they had no intent to violate the law, they were just playing hard ball and got a little too rough.
A reformed Microsoft would be a good thing. Eliminate the market domination, and they could expand their revenues and create good will by becoming a coopering member of the community and eliminate the monopoly issue.
It will not happen, because the people that chose to walk the monopolistic line are still making those decisions and will try to continually push closer to the line where-ever we draw it. I think the vast resources of the company, if run by the right person(s) could be put to good use and be even more profitable.
I’m with MDN on this one – Why? Why? Why?
If we’re gauging things at all correctly here, it looks like more and more peopel are asking why, and are not simply buying the anti-Mac myths that they have been so willing to swallow in the past.
Bobby Skinner:
“VM slowdown of java without the hope of cross-platform operation.”
Please do not propogate this long ago debunked “Java is slow” myth.
Java is NOT slow, it is in the same ballpark as C++, and has been so for years (roughly in the 1.3/1.4 timeframe), with each version getting faster.
If fact, Java with its dynamic compilation can apply optimizations to code that statically compiled languages like C/C++ cannot do, based on ACTUAL runtime usage, and change them when usage changes. In fairness, this hasn’t made Java faster than C/C++, as one would have expected, but I digress.
see
http://kano.net/javabench/
caveats: #1 phone java excepted generally (still slow) #2 java, particularly on first load (when not in cache) has a slow startup time of a few seconds (better than it was but still noticeable particularly for applets; the Big Fix is coming, but slowly) #3 java has a larger memory footprint (in the interest of full disclosure) due to the compiler being around at run time – don’t starve Java for memory – this WILL make it crawl. #4 the GUI has only recently become decent, performance wise, out of the box (say, 1.5/1.6) #5 a inefficient Java program will be slow, just like an inefficient “C” or assembler program will be slow – this is the big reason for slow Java programs today, using modern Java runtimes.
@Sure Am Relieved
I perpetuate no myth, as you see from your own caveats.
I will confess that JIC (Just In time Compilation) of the VM Code has vastly improved the performance Java (an entire order of magnitude) and bringing it much closer to C/C++.
I like Java, it is a great language and with a good JIC and fast modern computers I highly recommend it’s use. However, to claim that it is as efficient as C/C++ would be a flat out lie.
Not all the inefficiencies lie in the VM, for instance the String manipulation library is horribly inefficient when compared to C++ strings and even more when compared with C’s char arrays.
However my point is this:
Java is a great language that offers you cross platform operation in exchange for a degradation in performance (we could argue the amount), but this is a good tradeoff. .Net on the other hand offers the same kind (more or less) of performance degradation, but without the positive cross-platform operation.
I am sorry if I offended any Java proponents out there, I did not mean to. As I said I like Java. All languages have tradeoffs. Java is not as fast as C and it never will be, but it is much easier to shoot yourself in the foot with C/C++ because part of what makes them faster is lower constructs that can be dangerous. I did not mean to say that Java was so slow as to be un-usable – it is VERY USABLE.
turn microsoft around?
how about just getting it to a complete stop?
“Java is NOT slow, it is in the same ballpark as C++, and has been so for years (roughly in the 1.3/1.4 timeframe), with each version getting faster.”
Note this means nearly 50% slower – that is a huge difference. That is not yet the same ballpark.
Is a Jet flying at 400 knots (turbo-prop) in the same ballpark as one at 600 Knots (fast jet).
Perhaps it would be better to not perpetuate the Myth that Java is now as fast as C/C++.
Again, It is often a good tradeoff for type and pointer safety and a cross platform GUI library.
If you need cross-platform use Java, if you need speed use C. If you need a compromise use REALBasic http://www.realsoftware.com/ (You have to use BASIC, but it is a good OO-BASIC … but sadly not C++).
Bobby Skinner:
You really need to do more digging on Microsoft:
1. Microsoft is a reverse engineering shop (which, while distasteful to me, is legal, and it keeps innovative companies from getting arrogant and charging too much). So I’ll let this one slide, but it doesn’t earn any respect points from me.
2. Unfortunately, Microsoft chronically supplements their reverse engineering with piracy and intellectual property theft. Check out the Stacker conviction, for example (long before Netscape).
Resolution: after the conviction, they bought the company.
And you forgot about the Java case, where Microsoft deliberately (according to the court) made a non compatible version of Java to break Java’s cross platform promise (this resulted in their biggest single settlement, as I recall, 1.9 billion).
3. In fairness, they buy a lot of companies (not a problem; Apple does this too), however, when coupled with a chronic lack of innovation is a severe long term problem for Microsoft – is unsustainable.
4. Name just one significant technological innovation that Microsoft has made (and buying/stealing/reverse engineering innovation doesn’t count). And Microsoft Bob doesn’t count (a flop is not considered an innovation). And innovative abuse of the legal system/the press/politicans doesn’t count – is only, at best, peripherally technological.
5. They also have a flagrant disregard for the law (“to heck with Janet Reno”, at the time, the Attorney General of the U.S.) and are chronic liars. In other words, they are not an appropriate company to do business with – are disreputable in the extreme, if anybody cares to check.
6. Unfortunately, they have so terrorized the press (especially the technical press) that, until recently (the Vista launch), the press went along. But watch out, now that the press has suddenly got a bit of spine and is sensing weakness – Microsoft is due for some serious comeuppance.
And spending ill-gotten gains (that is, a big chunk of Microsoft’s cash; some to be fair, was obtained fairly – Wordperfect/Lotus made some really boneheaded moves and generally lost mostly fairly, ignoring those secret APIs) on charity is not what I am talking about as regards comeuppance.
7. They grossly disrespect their customers and are focused on killing the competition, instead of making the customer happy. The business model in a nutshell is: get 90% market share by any and all means, legal or otherwise, then let the products rot, while they go after another company/market segment.
This is not the way capitalism is supposed to work – a company is supposed to provide good products at a good price, and monopolies are always bad for customers and the industry (and the monopolist’s long term survival). In fairness, certain temporary situations like creating the first telephone network may make sense if done as a monopoly, but even that is debatable, and market subsidies are a much better idea, generally (with proper oversight, of course).
8. ATT was broken up, so was Standard Oil – there are prededents; Microsoft should have been.
Regardless, the time is past for that, and now a worse punishment is coming, courtesy of the market, in my opinion.
9. To everybody who is worried about Microsoft stock: don’t be – this will take a few years. But remember that big companies tend to die or become very inefficient, which only starts the cycle again for small companies.
Look at the changes at IBM. IBM was the Microsoft of the 60’s and 70’s. But they’re still around, and have a new business model: ditching hardware, consulting and strip mining open source with offshore talent (not really sustainable, but that’s another story).
I also think that Microsoft will survive, just smaller, and with current management turfed (particularly Ballmer).
IT will survive; they will change, just like they changed from IBM mainframes and 3270 terminal to PC’s.
I think there should be a major accounting for IT being an accessory to Microsoft’s Crimes, but that won’t happen either.
As much as Microsoft sucks, I’d rather they were still around than totally crumble. A monopoly for Apple would not be a good thing. It’s the competition with Microsoft that gets Jobs all riled up, and to make everything Apple produces better and better.
Hey Bobby Skinner:
Poor choice of words on my part, let me try again:
1. Java is close enough to C/C++ in performance that any performance differences are so minor as to not be a concern, in general (phone Java excepted, but that is getting better also), assuming a modern machine (i.e. not memory starved).
2. Should you experience a performance problem with Java, you should first check your code, not assume it is a Java issue. Also, remember the first rule of optimization: optimize as narrowly as possible.
3. Please check out the link I posted, it includes other references. This is a serious performance comparision, with rebuttals included – we’re not talking about some language bigot ranting in a bar.
In a nutshell, the guy implemented C benchmarks in Java and compared them back to C. In a couple of cases C was faster but most of the time Java was, and this is including startup time.
I call this “in the ballpark”. Maybe I should have said “in the infield”, or “usually faster” – that would have been more accurate. I was trying to not overstate the case, however – I don’t like hype.
Or write the same program in Java and C to prove it to yourself.
The major Java IDEs are written in pure Java, by the way (MASSIVE applications) – Netbeans, Intellij, Eclipse (altho Eclipse uses a non standard GUI toolkit). You can download them for free (Intellij has a trial version). Compare to Visual Studio, say (including startup time).
Ever use Tomcat? Written in Java, again.
4. I am talking about Java the language, and Java the runtime, not the libraries per. se. Altho the libraries are getting pretty decent now, also.
And String manipulation is not a problem – the runtime will do amazing optimizations based on actual usage, like, for example, inlining a method call because in your current usage, it is static (and un-inlining it when your usage changes). This offsets the other things that Java does that costs performance, so that the net effect is a wash.
You can use StringBuffer if you want, instead of String, but I haven’t found it makes enough of a difference to bother, altho I did it once on a large application.
@ ChanM
“Spark: – “As hot as the MB Pro gets, I could use it to cook on.”
You are perpetuating a myth. My MacBook Pro never gets hotter than mildly warm.”
Myth hell!! I’ve got a burn scar on thigh to prove it. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t swap my MB Pro for anything else available right now…but…
When playing WOW on my MB Pro it gets so hot that it will shut itself down. I got a Targus Chill pad a couple of weeks ago and that makes a huge improvement in temp control. I recommend it for anyone with Macbook.
When using the machine for simple internet work, wordprocessing or database development, it is not so bad, but World of Warcraft has all components working at peak power and the laptop gets HOT HOT HOT.
“… but what they can do is create a Microsoft certification whereby thoroughly tested systems receive a special Microsoft seal of approval.”
It’s the OS stupid!
Windows will NEVER be secure- it wasn’t built for security- security for Windows was an afterthought and done very poorly- Unix on the other hand was designed, conceived and built with security as the forethought. Anybody heard of the Department of Defense- the beginnings of the “Internet”.
Try changing user settings on a Mac and then do the same on Windows- We all know what happens- with the Mac- you need the Administrator password- with Windows- hey- no problem dude. Change system settings?… again- with Windows- it’s easy- easy for malware too.
How to turn Microsoft around?
tfosorciM
There, that was easy! So what good does it do to turn Microsoft around?
…around the corner where the garbage dump is…
Here’s how you turn Microsoft around: You walk up behind it and tap it on the shoulder. Presto! Microsoft turns around.
But I really agree with MDN: Why bother. The world doesn’t need Microsoft any more than it needs General Motors. Times change. Good riddance.
Here’s how you turn Microsoft around: You sneak up on it from behind and tap it on the shoulder. Presto! Microsoft turns around.
But I agree with MDN: Why bother? The world doesn’t need Microsoft any more than it needs General Motors. Times change. Good riddance.
Microsoft, as evil as it is, is not going anywhere. IT departments will not let that happen. Too many jobs and too much power is on the line. IT weenies will not go down without a fight.
“1. Microsoft is a reverse engineering shop”
agreed – but not illegal, if they actually copied someone’s code then convict them.
“2. Unfortunately, Microsoft chronically supplements their reverse engineering with piracy and intellectual property theft. Check out the Stacker conviction, for example (long before Netscape).”
I am not familiar with this case, but I am with the Java one and the court resolved it because Sun sued and won. They violated the terms of their license and they were forced to adhere to it. They still have not won this battle
“3. In fairness, they buy a lot of companies (not a problem; Apple does this too), however, when coupled with a chronic lack of innovation is a severe long term problem for Microsoft – is unsustainable.”
No problem. As for the lack of innovation any “fix” of MS would have to bring innovation to the table
“4. Name just one significant technological innovation that Microsoft has made”
Again, I am not saying that they should continue as is. But they have a huge stockpile of cash and a lot of useful assets that could be used if they did bring in some innovators
“5. They also have a flagrant disregard for the law”
Again, I was talking about what could be done to fix MS, not sustaining them as is. If you look at my original post, it was what I would do if I ran the company, not what they would do. I end it bay saying they will not do any of it because they are committed to their current philosophy.
“6. Unfortunately, they have so terrorized the press (especially the technical press) that, until recently (the Vista launch), the press went along. But watch out, now that the press has suddenly got a bit of spine and is sensing weakness – Microsoft is due for some serious comeuppance.”
I think the press is just largely made up of people that know nothing beyond the press releases they read. I do not think MS has to terrorize them, and as we can see with vista, they occasionally do notice a pile of crap when they read it.
As for Vista, it is the proof that the Microsoft Emperor has no clothes. This the reason the question of fixing MS. My post was how i would fix it, not an attempt to prove MS to be workable as is”
“7. They grossly disrespect their customers and are focused on killing the competition, instead of making the customer happy. “
Though I agree they try to kill the competition, I disagree about their desire to keep the customer happy. I have been forced to call their support staff on several occasions and was pleasantly surprised in their desire to be helpful. The problem is that Windows is crap. I personally like Word (though I have switched to pages).
As for a split up, they are very rare and generally are done to split a monopoly and provide competition. Though MS has often acted in a monopolistic manner, they have never achieved a monopoly. There have always been alternatives. In 1990 there was Apple, NeXT, Commedore, AT&T, Sun and Apollo (the last 3 all ran UNIX). In 1995 the computer manufacturers had dropped. But you could still chose MacOS, BeOS, AmigaOS, OS/2, BSD and a fledgling Linux. It 2001 Apple Made OS X the pinnacle of OS’s, you still had Linux and BSD. Now you have those, plus a new AmigaOS clone and a whole ocean of Linux, Be and amiga spin offs. The federal government had no need to break up MS, the most we could have hoped for were some big fines. MS managed to even use the fines to grow their share.
I wish I could have come up with a legit reason to split MS, because I would have loved to see it knocked down a notch, but that desire does not make it happen.
@Bobby et al
Good to see some well reasoned discussion on here.
Companies are split up more often than you think – actually what happens is that when a company’s cash runs low they sell off the valuable assets. Sometimes when profits are under pressure they sell off loss making assets…
Microsoft make their money from Servers & Tools, Windows, and Office.
Online Services losses continued, with an operating revenue loss of $136 million compared to a profit of $68 million a year earlier. Revenue fell 4 percent to $539 million from $564 million, year over year.
Client revenue was $3.303 billion and operating income $2.637 billion for the fourth quarter.
Server and Tools revenue grew 17 percent to $2.499 billion compared to $2.127 billion a year earlier, with operating income increasing 36 percent to $827 million from $608 million.
Entertainment and Devices revenue rocketed 70 percent to $1.03 billion with an operational loss of $96 million, compared to $606 million and a loss of $3 million a year earlier.
Their problems are fivefold:
1. Windows sales have stalled
2. Nothing comes close to the 75% gross margins delivered by Windows
3. Microsoft is a high cost operation
4. Office and server business is to some degree (perhaps a high degree) dependent on the continued dominance of Windows.
5. There is no market which will allow the growth rate of Microsoft to continue.
They are pumping money into loss-making ventures and failing. They can only do this for so long. IE, Zune, Vista, Windows Live, Windows Search… It all costs money and produces no profit.
Sooner or later the market will demand change.
The first “How to turn around microsoft” have appeared. These will soon be reflected in Wall Street analysts comments.
Then there will be a huge departure from Microsoft. The market will demand cost cutting, loss making ventures will be sold off.
You will know the end is nigh when Microsoft sell either the Server and Tools division or Microsoft Office.
But the end of this era has begun…