Microsoft at Crossroads...A Beginning of the End?

RST101 said:

It'll happen no time soon..

We will see our days out with microsoft. Of course its all part of evolution and who knows, something may come along to replace computers never mind microsoft.

Hi there
It's already happening - albeit slowly - but probably will speed up significantly in the next few years.

For example a Smart phone is quite sufficient for some people who ordinarily would have used a computer,.

Things like Vortex Media streamers remove the necessity for running this type of application on a "typical computer".

Ebook readers obviate the need for using a laptop to read e-books and an "Ipad" like device - which hopefully will have genuine handwriting capability will lessen the need for "Classical Computing devices" too.

Some of the apps will be popular - others won't but even here you can see that there are all sorts of devices appearing that can take the place of some (not all of course) of the functionality of a "Classical Computer" and its OS.

One area that I suspect is ripe for development is in Professional Digital Cameras which should have a built in facility to do SOME post image processing and be able to transmit the pictures directly to the magazine / news organisation requiring them.

So even applications like Photoshop CS4 might be able to be offloaded to the devices that need them directly.

We won't need LESS computing -- far from it - but the applications will be embedded in to a lot more different devices making the need to have a full blown computer always available not necessary.

Ms in particular will need to find products to supply to this growing market or it will eventually wither away -- not quickly but it will just soldier on for a decade or two like a lumbering Industrial Dinosaur.

Cheers
jimbo

Meh - history is replete with turning points.

jimbo45,

Ms itself might even work with google etc etc. Who knows.

This seems like the most conceivable part of the the scenario that you painted. It doesn't require the downfall of MS, for them to form this type of interaction...only a change in mindset. In one aspect, this would be good across a broader spectrum of the IT industry, because it would create a degree of standardization that is now lacking, but that standardization would also deter progress.
At this point, I'm not entirely sure whether I'm pro or con on this idea...for various reasons.

Jimbo - again point on. I have attempted to get this point across to a great deal of people over the years, but for some reason they cannot see into the future, only what is in front of them at the moment. People need to remove the blinders and get out of the tunnels. The tech world is changing at a rapid pace.

Regardless of what we think of Apple or Google they are moving forward with some excellent ideas while looking to the future. In my mind the iPad, netbook or tablet PC is something that will not grace my home or business at the present does not mean it won't in the future.

Think ahead, not what has been, albeit what just might be.

PC WhizzKid said:

But I’m reminded of J.D. Rockefeller in the late 1800’s when he organized, and later monopolized the oil industry. If you joined him you made money, if not he squashed your company and went belly-up.

Ugh, the Gates/Rockefeller thing always gives me corneal ulcers. Actually, just the Rockefeller thing. I read that NYT story and Brass said:

Some people take joy in Microsoft’s struggles, as the popular view in recent years paints the company as an unrepentant intentional monopolist. Good riddance if it fails. But those of us who worked there know it differently. At worst, you can say it’s a highly repentant, largely accidental monopolist.

No, you can't say that at worst. First, they're not a monopoly. Second, assuming they are, how does a monopolist get to that spot accidentally?

The reason Standard (and MS) got so big was because they made stuff cheaper and better than most everyone else. Standard didn't deal with just oil, but kerosene and varnish and tons of stuff no one else had figured out how to refine. Yes, they bought competitors. But the company had hundreds of them, Rockefeller couldn't just buy anything he wanted. Standard was the most efficient, creative oil company in the U.S. They lowered prices for consumers because most everyone else in the oil industry then was too busy wasting money because they had no @#$%! clue what they were doing. You can read a bunch of historians/economists who thought Standard should have been broken up, just like you can with MS. But you can also find a bunch who don't. Standard at its height almost equaled MS in respective market share - about 90%. Standard fell to about 60% by the time they went to court.

Anyway, Brass made a lot of good points but I'm surprised he never mentioned a big reason why MS products exploded - clones. IBM allowed them, Apple didn't. Always thought that was so stupid on Apple's part.

Agree about Google. They are going to clean everyone's clock because they have been thinking ahead better than anyone else - just like Rockefeller did 130 years ago and Gates did 30 years ago.