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

[PC WhizzKid]

Source Window7news Website.

On February 4th 2010, *Dick Brass, former Vice President at Microsoft, wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times about the state of the union, the union being Microsoft. It was not a pretty picture that he painted. *No innovation, too much internecine warfare, very few successful products…these were some of the complaints laid down by someone who had worked at the worlds largest software company for years.
His biggest complaint centered on the fact that the most succcessful products were conceptualized decades ago. Like the car manufacturing alternates, GM, for one, who relied on trucks and SUV’s to make the case for profits, Brass charges that true innovation has been stifled from the inside.
At this site, however, there have been numerous posts about the growth of*Windows7, touch screen innovation, Browser modifications, and other technology changes, all coming from Microsoft. It is hard to reconcile the charges that Brass makes with the things we read about the Microsoft does. It does fail, take*Vista, but it bounced back within less than four years with Windows 7.
The other charge that was made was that true hardware innovation has come from competitors of Microsoft. Apple, Blackberry, and other companies have run away with the IPhone market; that’s true. But Microsoft has not pursued the*hardware*market, not in the way that Brass would like to see.
But it is also true that many of the software innovations have been implemented by Microsoft. Touch screen technology is now coming of age because of what Windows7 is capable of doing. *But there are other software innovations that Microsoft has done.
Take the XML innovation. A small Canadian company sued Microsoft, and won, over patent infringement in the XML implementation in*Office*2007. Yet it is precisely the fact that Microsoft has used XML in so many products that this technology is now more widely available. This is not to excuse or forgive Microsoft for the patent infringement problem, but it goes to show that without Microsoft, the XML technology would not be widely used.
Many will no doubt say, that Microsoft has squashed the competition unfairly or illegally, and it deserves to fail. Many of those issues have a grain of truth to them. 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. Microsoft probably did something like that in the 80’s and 90’s. Forced the competition to become partners, or Microsoft simply stole the technology if it couldn’t buy it. Undoubtedly this lead to the US government, and later European governments to go after them. But on the other hand, a lot of companies became very successful using Microsoft products. Just ask Dell, HP, and a host of other PC makers which are reporting sales notwithstanding the present day economy.
Many of the problems that Brass talks about are probably true, but that may have to do more with Steve Ballmer not being the tech guy that Bill Gates was. Ballmer is a good*manager, but a visionary, no he is not. His stockholders are probably very happy with him, in the same way that the stock holders at GM or Ford were happy for decades. But look what happened there.
Brass makes the complaint over and over that innovation is lacking at Microsoft. With that I would have to agree. Innovation is the one element that must be maintained, or you are stuck in the past selling typewriters over and over again.
You can read the New York Times article*Microsoft’s Creative Destruction.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
Quote from an old Catholic Hymnbook

"Empires rise and sink like bellows -- Vanish and are seen no more".

Nobody ever stays on the top for ever -- different products - different times etc.

Remember how "Big Blue" (aka IBM) used to be the world's biggest Hardware manufacturer both for PC's and Mainframes and had fantastic labs world wide.

Now they are just a "Common or Garden" service organisation -- no different from zillions of other "I.T Service companies" out in the big wide world.

Other companies such as "Hoover", "Xerox", "Frigidaire" were so big at one time that the company name became synonomous with the product - especially "Hoover" and "Xerox".

Now even these names are fading into the Industrial twilight whilst other more suitable appliances take their place.

MS will eventually go the same way as not only products but the way we use them evolve. However they've had a GOOD run for their money.

Other companies supplying stuff we can't even dream about will arise and take their place.

This isn't a disaster - just "Natural Evolution -- and there's still plenty of life left in MS for a while yet.

Cheers
jimbo.

 

[Boastree]

And Thomas Edison once held the patent on the light bulb...

 

[seekermeister]

Regardless of how MS has fared, good or bad, it seems to me that Dick Brass may be one of it's biggest problems, because it is not good that the vice president of any company should bad mouth it.

As far as MS fading away, that is not going to happen until someone is there to take their place, and so far, Linux is the only thing on the horizon, but it is so distant that them actually overtaking MS seems more like a dream than a possibility.

 

[Lee]

Jimbo is right on the money. Companies come and go that is just part of being in business; you only last so long until another company kicks you off the mountain.

If I were going to place money on the next large OS company it would be Google. If you are into reading the tech news of today "Google" is in the fore front with all that they are doing now or planning to do in the future.

Apple, at the moment is on top of the Media Mountain (iPod, iPhone, etc.)and holding their own, albeit they will never go for the OS mountain, they seem to be happy right where they are at the present. Can't really blame them, once you are on the top it seems that everyone wants your crown, and as the owner of the Media Mountain crown it is critical to be able see who is climbing up to kick your butt off.

As to Linux there are two many fingers in the pie. There are just too many distros running loose out there in the wild. Until someone can bring the Linux community into a united entity it is going to be nothing more than a techie OS. Sorry if this is not the view of you hard core Linux users, albeit it is touch on at the present time.

Microsoft has been lazy as late, with Bill Gates going away it would appear that there is no one at present working at Microsoft who has the vision to move the company into new directions without there being some form of failure. With Win 7 being a winner, just maybe someone at Microsoft will have the ability to move them back to the fore front of the tech world. But, to do so they will have to be looking at more than Microsoft Office, and Windows Operating System.

Just some thoughts.

 

[seekermeister]

I really don't anticipate MS disappearing anytime soon. At most, if they slip too much, they will just sell out to a bigger company, and that company will retain the MS name, and it would continue as a subsidiary.

 

[Lee]

If my company took over Microsoft you can bet the farm I would add their name to my letter head, albeit it be second. I would want the rest of the world to know that it was I who brought them down.

My new letter head; "Lee's Microsoft Corporation." The Smiley face is part of the Letter Head.

 

[seekermeister]

If my company took over Microsoft you can bet the farm I would add their name to my letter head, albeit it be second. I would want the rest of the world to know that it was I who brought them down.

My new letter head; "Lee's Microsoft Corporation." The Smiley face is part of the Letter Head.

I hope that your company has deep pockets, because they aren't going to slip so much that they would become a cheap buy.

 

[swarfega]

MS will be here for a while yet and this is just a disgruntled ex-employee bad mouthing his former boss.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
I think those of you who said MS isn't going to disappear any time soon have missed the point.

Nobody is even suggesting this -- what I am saying is that with the next generation of OS'es the stuff MS is currently shipping will become increasingly more and more redundant / obsolete and MS itself will probably evolve into a "Bog Standard" IT service company like the many many others out there.

The Cloud or some variation on it is where it's at currently and the only company who's got anywhere near producing an OS fit for this type of computing is GOOGLE with GOOGLE CHROME. - Very few people have seen the actual OS yet but it will definitely come.

Google has also got the servers and hardware to support a VERY LARGE CLOUD too.

There may also be variations on this that we haven't even thought of yet. - I for one would love say a Holographic 3-D type of computer display with instant net access.

It will be NEW companies with New products -- maybe parts of the old companies will still exsist but it will be a brand new company with new products.

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

Actually with companies getting more and more away from their core businesses who knows -- in the UK the GAS company can supply ELECTRICITY, the BUS company can supply PARCEL services, the Garbage company can generate ELECTRICITY -- so who knows maybe SHELL or another OIL company might supply infrastructure for "The Cloud".

Cheers
jimbo

 

[RST101]

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.

 

[jimbo45]

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

 

[Fantail]

Meh - history is replete with turning points.

 

[seekermeister]

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.

 

[Lee]

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.

 

[Colonel Travis]

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.