Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft At Middle Age
gordyf writes "The Seattle Times has an interesting article concerning Microsoft's current position in the market. It describes how its customers and parners are reacting to its heavy-handed tactics, and how 'you can point to Linux being one of the major drivers for this decade.' An interesting read."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But the court findings that Microsoft violated antitrust law revealed the company's harsh side, and today it's distrusted by rivals and even partners.
Most people who've watched the story can already guess this.
What's this Submit thingy do?
"In a sense, despite the market climate, everything, we need to be even more committed to charging in and helping out and building products in areas where we don't compete today ... because that's what's really in the best interest of the customers," Ballmer said.
The last thing I want is for MS to be in new markets. They have a tendancy to move in to a market, play 'fairly', and manage to use Windows to kill everyone in the market.
The problem here is that they don't really make great products. They make mediocre products that 'look nice,' but nothing that's really spectacular. Shouldn't they be dedicating more of their time towards creating an OS that is not a security risk, and not in expansion to other markets?
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
Cygwin.
AC
GUI is just a small part of the real battlefield: functionality. Sooner or later, Linux is going to blow past MS in terms of user experience due simply to the fact that they can pick-and-choose which bits to emulate (fast-launching browser in, annoying Clippy and friends out). At that point, it won't matter if MS gives away Windows because nobody'll want it anyhow. The only way they'll survive is if they can consistantly innovate new, useful features at a reasonable price to stay ahead of the curve, something which MS has *never* been able to do.
So, MS will have to flee off the desktop to other things the OSS community doesn't do well -- game development, console systems, etc. There, they'll have to compete in a far more level playing environment and will in the long term probably get their monopolostic asses handed to them by smaller, faster companies.
How can I predict this? Because that's how things work with most industries which don't exist as regulatory monopolies. I don't see software being any different -- in fact, I predict the decline of MS on the desktop will come so quickly that if you blink you'll miss it.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
unfortunately microsoft have always had the habit of promising much and doing nothing.
look at intel, they also dominate the CPU market, but they introduced hyperthreading to the mass market, now they are trying to make wireless lan a standard. in comparison, the latest major two innovations microsoft made (kinda) was ripping off mac os's user interface in windows95, and using the NT kernel on desktop computer (yaay, a stable os, what a great breakthrough)
atleast we get to read another interview with bill gates, and again he leaves the impression that he is simply a geek living his dream.
ah well, let's hope that in his view of the future some good news comes from microsoft, for a change, and they start using all that money and influence for something useful, instead using it to control the computer market, as we saw today as microsoft didn't bring out the opteron version of windows.
Hostes alienigieni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
IMHO, this just highlites whats really going on in the US economey now days. Companies with big revenue streams like MS (and even RIAA members) are in effect forbidden from investing in the next generation technology with the highest growth rates like Linux (and p2p) because they cut into this revenue. Magnify this by millions of other companies and industries and you have a real economic problem - that will not be solved nicely. With trillions at stake, don't be supprised if all hell breaks loose.
I love this bit:
... because that's what's really in the best interest of the customers," Ballmer said.
The company is trying to adopt a more paternal role. It's using its vast resources to help the ailing PC industry in new ways.
So, Microsoft's press pack for lazy journalists says that MS is now a mature grown-up company. Lazy journalist writes that MS has changed for the better.
Argh. And don't you just hate MS doublespeak!:
"[..]we need to be even more committed to charging in and helping out and building products in areas where we don't compete today
Steve. Please. Drop the bullshit. You need to move into other markets to maintain your current revenue growth. It is not because "that's what's really in the best interest of the customers".
Do you think Microsofties say these things to themselves so many times that they end up believing them? It's kind of like a bizarre cult. I chatted to some friends of friends the other day who work at Microsoft. I was ruminating on the facts surronding OSS. They just flipped. They couldn't believe that I could be so stupid as to think that OSS was ever going to get anywhere. MS calls OSS people "zealots", but believe me, you wouldn't believe how fanatical and brain-washed some Microsofties are.
Rant over and out.
Just for the hell of it, the other day I typed 'Windows' into Google. I got (about) 57,600,000 results.
Then I typed 'Linux'. I got (about) 53,700,000 results.
Now, one could write a whole book on how unscientific those statistics are, but it was still interesting to see a (damned near) 1:1 ratio. I had anticipated something more like 5:1
Sigs are bad for your health.
For the record, Gnome 2 is generally faster and has lower system requirements than Gnome 1.4.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
But they don't lace their computers with a highly addictive substance.
Yes they do, they are just called minesweeper and pinball. Those two little games can be damn addictive. And even if you uncheck the Games box during install, they are still put on the computer, you just don't have the ready to use shortcuts in the start menu.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
Uh, duh. Boss. Chief. The Big Man. He who leads. Does this mean anything to you? Microsoft is 100% Bill Gates' vision as the Ultimate Money Making Machine. Let's face it: many people have spent much time trying to build such things, dreaming of such things, wondering what it would be like to have an endless flow of dollars. Billy G just happened - by luck, family, and intelligence - to make it come true. If you choose to use words like "blame", then you must point the finger at the right person, and that is William H. Gates III personally.
But the entire discussion is tedious and vapid. Wealth comes from careful and lucky negotiation of the (male) networks that thread our business world. Get born into the right family, with the right brain, and at the right time, and you stand a good chance of being rich. Choose the wrong parents, genes, and place and time, and you will dish out hamburgers.
Talking about it just mixes jealousy and ignorance. History shows that wealth never stays in one place for very long. Inequality of wealth creates the condititions for its own redistribution.
With Microsoft, its very stranglehold on PC operating systems has been a major stimulus behind the development of what will become the de-facto standard operating system, being Linux of course. Without Microsoft as the enemy, would so many people really have focussed on one single reliable alternative? It certainly did not happen before.
So, sit back, and watch history in action. We are approaching a period in which the Linux OS is becoming a standard commodity product, and in which all businesses that rely on control over one or other OS will die. If Microsoft realize this within two or three years and embrace Linux fully, they will survive. If they continue to rely on Windows, they will fail.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
MS has soemthing the tobacco industries don't: Users that only know that system.
I would say operating systems AND tobacco are similar when it comes to addictions. Yesterday at the gas station, I watched a customer insist on purchasing some obscure brand of smokes. He was so picky for the right one, with the exact size, and exact type of box, that he might die if just one thing changed about the package. It may just be nicotine, the same stuff in pipe tobacco, but he had to have his brand recognition matched exactly like if it was a member of his family.
Many people buy completely into branding. Even though there might be a bulk generic product, they will think its the curse of the devil and the fall of civilization if it doesn't have brand stamping on it. Operating systems, cigarrettes, cars, motorcycles, soft drinks, you name it. Linux vs. Mac vs. Windows is just heating up and the boundries are just beginning.
old news for some, i'm sure, but this snippet is interesting:
a new version of Windows code-named Longhorn. One key feature is expected to be a new file-storage system for better organizing things stored on a Windows-based PC. It could finally make it easy for people to search and find all sorts of files -- contacts, printers, documents, programs, photos -- with a single search tool.
wonder if it's anything like non-HFS systems, like this?
IBM thought they could dictate the new *standard*. .NET, License 6, and other MS BS look more and more like an MCA kind of thing.
Their arrogance cost them dearly.
Palladium,
I think that within 2 years there will be a mass exodus from Microsoft by developers, OEMs, large and small business sites, and finally, even home computer users.
May you live in interesting times, Mr. Gates.
1000 SlashDot sigs
Ease of use is only one small part of the picture. That is why Microsoft outsold the Macintosh even before Windows came out. No one in their right mind would tell you that DOS + Wordperfect + Lotus 1 2 3 was easier to use than the comparable Macintosh software, but this wacky combination of OS and applications outsold Apple's best by an order of magnitude. The Apples were easy to use, but the DOS-based solution was good enough at a far lower price.
When push comes to shove it is all about being good enough at the lowest price. Currently, for most folks anyway, part of being "good enough" is being able to share software and documents with the large Windows using crowd. This requirement puts Linux at a serious disadvantage. However, marketshare is a pretty flimsy protection (ask Novell, Lotus, and the original makers of WordPerfect).
"I'm not an economist, but I think sometime in the next five years you'll see that turn around," he said. "And I think the advances we're making this year and next year will be part of the reason that will turn around ... the extra productivity and efficiency that Web services and the new form factors, simpler forms of communication will bring will help drive that productivity."
I can't believe it. Ok, well, actually I can. How much sheer arrogance does it take for Gates to claim that the economy will recover when, and only when, Microsoft "innovations" make it possible?
This is the kind of thing that makes me want to just reach through the screen and choke the living sh*t out of Gates. He's a megalomaniac evil businessman posing as a lovable geek. And people buy it.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Then I guess the XP look is like their getting a sports car? But I guess they reverted too far, the style looks more like Playskool...
Seriously though, It in many ways seems that they may have reached a peak and are falling from it. The 2000 products I think were the pinnacle in the professional world. Even though XP has a 'professional' edition, businesses seem to not really care about it.
Business people aren't excited about it if for no other reason than there being no 'XP Server'. While this has no technical merit, suits like to see consistancy, and feel that the best match for '2000 Servers' are '2000 Workstations', even if not always true. Plus, the new default look doesn't give an impression of 'professional', and the arrangement of the new start menu and desktop configuration can annoy them to no end. Yes all these things can be changed, but in first impressions, it really makes suits doubt the platform.
For IT people, they see that XP added shiny round windows and.... ummm..... that's just about it. They know it is an incremental update with few non-cosmetic feature enhancements. They know that while it offers little to no practical benefit, it at the same time will forever be slightly less tested and proven than Windows 2000 with all their respective updates. Additionally, though pretty efficient, the new graphics have some impact on performance, and at times the impact can be drastic if your video card isn't perfect.
Legal departments that bother to look at MS EULAs know to be scared more and more with every revision. MS is really trying to push their ground more and more, and they really haven't been giving back anything.
XP was a great thing to home users, finally going to the 2000 core for that segment. I would say XP could be the peak for the home segment, but I know full well that the home segment will buy up pretty, shiny, useless improvements endlessly. I think MS knows that too and is moving more and more into that segment (XBox, Tablets, Media Center..)
Windows 2000 offered a great deal of improvement over NT4 (mainly AD, but other stuff too). Windows XP offers next to nothing. Looking at the upcoming Windows 2003 release, there isn't that much to be excited about. Their revolutionary filesystem is the *only* feature I see that anyone cares much about, and I'm not sure how the market will ultimately view the feature.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
There's been little difference between Windows and Linux and OS X, especially since XP was released. They're all variations on a theme. Linux is cleaner if you're writing command line applications, but it's just as messy as Windows if you're using KDE or Gnome or, good heavens, xlib.
.net. Once that is done, then the Win32 underpinnings can be changed, then removed, and then .net will be the OS. As much as I hate to say it, that will be a huge win in reducing the complexity of the system.
But things are changing on the Windows side. Microsoft is poised to deprecate the entire Win32 API in favor of
"It's got Unix roots. Unix has had historic strength, but at the end of the day, I'm quite sure we can out-innovate and deliver sort of a better solution than the work of a bunch of uncoordinated hobbyists."
You obviously aren't a smoker.
Cigs are like beer, folks know which ones suit their taste.
Then there's people who don't buy for the taste, just the effects.
Same can be said for computers. If it gets the job done, who cares what it runs?
What were the downsides again? MS loses money on each XBox. Sony breaks even (more or less) on each PS2. MS should have reason to be scared shitless
And so Sony damn well should be. At this point they should be raking in money; they're past the hump, and their components should be much cheaper than when they started manufacturing.
The PS2 was, after all, released a year before the XBOX in the US. Earlier still in Japan.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
This to me is an interesting point...I've often wondered why there aren't other desktop "shells" out there for windows, being that at this point, everyone (on /. (: ) knows that you can change your shell from explorer.exe to other programs...but using calc.exe or progman.exe for your shell is not very useful (: The only thing I can think of is/was LiteStep, and as far as I can recall, that was more of a hacked "explorer.exe" than a complete seperate desktop program.
Admittedly, I haven't checked for new desktop shell's for Windows, are there any out there that replace explorer? Or is explorer too embedded at this point for a different shell to be feasible?
Would being able to choose between several desktop programs be something useful in Windows anyway? (: I think it would, at the very least, be a neat thing to see, whether I use it or not...
Yuma, AZ...You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.
For the record: I do not use XP and what little I've seen of it confused me.
That being said, although XP isn't perfect, I've anecdotally heard a lot of positive comments regarding it's UI. Sometimes you HAVE to change things around to make something more intuitive. Sure, you and I are very used to the win9x interface, but a new computer user may find XP more user friendly. Human's naturally resist change, so don't mistake change as "less user friendly" in this scenario.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Well, I once installed windows 95 on a 386 with 4Mb ram. So a 32bit operating system on a 16 bit system. It took about 30 minutes only just to boot the thing.
On the other hand, my router is a 200MMX with 80Mb ram. It was once my desktop machine and I coded a LAMP site on it. Used icewm as window manager. All was fine, if u didn't use kde / gnome / java.
The difference is, you can boot allmost any linux distro on any machine without much performance problems and then CHOOSE the apps you want to use knowing they won't hit performance that hard.
On a windoze machine, well you all know...