Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's 'Freedom to Innovate' Brochure
SEA writes: "Scans of a Freedom to Innovate Network (FIN) leaflet passed out by some of the cutest boothie chicks from MS's largest booth @ PC Expo. Felt so dirty for taking one but had to just for giggles and rant ..."
Here's
the front and
the back of the brochure. My favorite part is that this is a 'grassroots effort' but it has a Redmond address. One can only speculate.
Do I have to agree with every position FIN takes?
No. As a member, you can use the facts to make informed decisions...
Oh thank you Bill, honestly, I wouldn't know that it's alright to think for myself unless you told me that it's OK. I can't BELIEVE this question needed to be asked.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Good for a grin, if nothing else.
Now, what possessed them to write that? What could they have been thinking? That people might read this flyer and think that perhaps participation wasn't voluntary? That by reading the flyer you were automatically a member of the group?
Could they have thought that there is any possible way that they could make participation non-voluntary?
Little sentences like 'Participitation is voluntary' show how much Microsoft operates in a different world than everybody else. Which is the 'real world' is an exercise for the reader.
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
Don't you worry about being discarded by MS once you can no longer expand their market share any further, or if you come to be perceived as a threat to them? It sounds to me like a very Faustian bargain - you've done well for yourself by allying with the market leader, but at the same time your business is irrevocably tied to their business goals and their bottom line. As you mentioned, if MS changes (or is forced to change) their business strategies they aren't going to give you and your business any consideration.
Let me put that another way - now that you know the dependencies that this sort of partnership locks you into, would you take the risk again and get into a similar relationship with the next big technology company?
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Maybe they are terming it as a "Grass Roots Effort" Because you would have to be smoking that grass in order to assume that Microsoft is respomisible for innovation.
On a more serious note: Perhaps it is "Grass Roots" because the effort is being led by Microsoft employees and not directly by the corporation's management?
I think that my respect for Microsoft would triple if they would just drop the "Freedom to Innovate" charade and start up a "Freedom to Capitalize" movement.
Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
What I am saying is that Micros~1's upper management and grunt personnel are exhibiting similar reactions to a crisis where the facts, once exposed, threaten their world view:
- Delusion: all the forged testimony during the trial, in particular the videotape that MSFT tried to pass off as "real" footage, was forced to admit was "just a simulation" when exposed, and whose justification for the faked evidence was "well, the simulation shows what it would have been like had we really done the experiment".
- Denial: Endless trumpeting about how Micros~1's triumph during the trial was somehow inevitable, ignoring the mounting evidence that indicated that they'd lost all credibility before the Judge.
- Astroturfing: Countless brainwashed minions and bald-faced propaganda campaigns, all writing essentially identical letters supporting the party line...
- Demonization of the Other: Slogans and buzzwords in Co$ for its opponents include words like "bigot", and for themselves, the notion that they fight for "religious freedom". Likewise, opponents of MSFT are anti-free-market radicals, and supporters are people who fight for "freedom to innovate". The more evidence to the contrary (Co$: "Clear the planet" - exterminate all who do not join the Cult, MSFT: "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"), the stronger the rhetoric becomes. The red, white, and blue in the MSFT pamphlet was so blatantly propagandistic that it was almost comical.
I could go on, but you get the idea.I wonder if this is universal? These behaviors appear throughout history, but are most common in top-heavy authoritarian regimes faced with an imminent demise brought about by a new paradigm.
(Thinking back to the dying days of the cold war, when former Soviet republics seemed to break away and collapse on a weekly basis -- Romainian dictator Nikolai Ceaucescu appeared to sincerely believe that his people loved him, right up until they booed him in public, summarily revolted, and put him up against the wall within the week...)
Prediction: Therapists who want a guaranteed clientele over the next 15-20 years should set up shop within 100 miles of Redmond :)
... That membership is still voluntary! I bet when Microsoft.net comes out we'll have to fill out a registration form *and* a "Freedom to Innovate" membership form before we're allowed to use our applications!
Walt
Hi!
In a word, yes. There is a very large community of programmers and database analysts who have grown substantial businesses by using Microsoft tools and technologies. Microsoft has grown by expressly targeting these people (including me) as "influential end users." We're the people Microsoft originally created the Microsoft Developer Network for, and the people that Microsoft is constantly plying with information and inexpensive tools.
When people rant about "Microsoft hegemony" and "bullying" they're being clueless. Or showing their age. The way that Microsoft has developed a monopoly isn't by driving around with fedoras and machine guns, threatening some CIO's family unless he installs Windows NT. Microsoft has been much, much more sneaky than that. Microsoft has, since the late 1980s, expressly targeted the "influential end user" (their term) and particularly software developers. They have expressly sought to gain "mindshare" (I believe an original Microsoft term, but perhaps "embraced and extended" from somebody else) among developers for a very specific purpose: custom apps written by developers require customers to buy the operating system.
Microsoft has been candid about this all along: they'll provide all kinds of tools and help, because at the end of the day they want the client to buy the OS. And the more of the OS they buy, the greater the opportunity for site license deals on Office, etc.
For the developer, it's a great deal. Microsoft development tools are always substantially less expensive than anybody else's, and Microsoft bends over backward to get you to sign up for programs (like the ISV program) that give you the tools even cheaper. Price developer versions of Oracle tools and databases for a team of five developers, for instance--Oracle won't quote you a price. They'll schedule a meeting, bring in a bunch of suits, try to estimate how much you're worth, ask a zillion questions about who your clients are and how much they're worth, and then quote you an astronomical sum. Microsoft will sign you up as a Solution Provider for $2495, which gives you licenses to everything. And they'll refer customers to you as well (unlike Oracle, who has no compunction about calling on your customers).
Partnering with Microsoft is a very, very good deal. But (and here's the wrinkle:) everybody involved knows how the deal works. In the end, Microsoft wants the OS sale. In effect, they're subsidizing all the tools, all the conferences, all the contact, all the support based on sales of the OS. Split the OS off into a different company than products (especially developer tools) and all of a sudden we're looking at a whole new pricing model. And for the small companies out there, like mine, an uncertain future.
So, yes--I've registered as a member of FIN. I've written to my congressman, and to both my senators. I have a strongly vested interest in the success of Microsoft, and I'm not shy about saying so.
Accountant: Hey Taco, ad revenues are down this week. Do something.
Taco: Don't worry I'll post another Microsoft article.
Accountant: Thank God for Microsoft, gauranteed 500 post articles. I see you're poking fun of Microsoft for using the term "grass roots". Do you think anybody is going to realize that your average joe really likes Microsoft? Have they seen the ABC polls? Do they ever talk to mechanics, soccer moms, those kinds of people?
Taco: No, for them "grass roots" is the Linux hacker community.
Accountant: Well, I guess that's to be expected from people who call "outside" the "big blue room with the bright light".
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Everyone knows about the dedication of the linux subculture, fanatics, loyalists, whatever you want to call them.
Is there such a culture surrounding windows? I'm asking honestly, because I don't know... Is there a huge following that would join the FIN, support microsoft, and rally around them during these "trying times" ??
I was just wondering exactly what leads microsoft to PR moves like this... are they trying to tap into this culture? create one? whatever you may say about gates/microsoft, they are where they are today from sheer business sense.. it may not be the best code in the world, or the best product, but they are sinister business people..
i was wondering why they are throwing money into a PR thing like this - whether they are rallying the subculture, or trying to create one..
wish
---
Also - the leaflet is a copy of the information on the website. Don't waste your time trying to read a scanned image - it's all on the web site (and then some, just for more yuks!)
A: Yes, drink it all. We'll all be together soon, in Redmond. Together forever, and ever.
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.