Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Wanted To Drop Mac Office To Hurt Apple
Overly Critical Guy writes to mention that more documents in the Iowa antitrust case have come out. This time, it's revealed that Microsoft considered dumping the Mac Office Suite entirely in a move to harm Apple. "The email complains at poor sales of Office, which it attributes to a lack of focus on making such sales among reps at that time. It describes dumping development of the product as: 'The strongest bargaining point we have, as doing so will do a great deal of harm to Apple immediately.' The document also confirms that Microsoft at the time saw Office for the Mac as a chance to test new features in the product before they appeared in Windows, 'because it is so much less critical to our business than Windows.'"
February 7, 1997 - Steve Jobs returns to Apple
June 27, 1997 - Bill Gates sends email explaining threats made to Apple of pulling the plug on Office for Mac.
August 6, 1997 - Apple and Microsoft announce $150 investment of Microsoft in Apple.
What happened between June 27 and August 6?
Of course they found emails saying this. It's blatantly obvious to any armchair strategist. The only way you wouldn't find an email somewhere in the MS vault saying something anti-competitive is if the entire organization had been coached not to use this type of language. In fact, this is how corporate America operates today. Employees at market leader companies are specifically taught not to use phrases like crush, damage, etc when refering to the competition in electronic communications. It's perfectly fine to advocate these types of tactics in verbal communications, though.
Everyone these days knows enough not to say anything incriminating in emails, but rather to save it for face-to-face meetings.
To be honest, I use my MS OFfice installation on my Parallels instance, as it's much faster and usable than the Mac Office 2004. I'm planning to give Office 2008 (which should be universal) a bit of a look, and approach that with an open mind, but for now I'm happier with using the Windows version under my VM.
Ouch!
Yes, it would definitely hurt Apple sales.
Of course, there is software like NeoOffice, Pages and Keynote.
But people *want* MS Office, and in corporate environments, people *need* MS Office.
The OSX Version of MS Office is still not 100% compatible with the Windows version, but it's still better than NeoOffice.
And "MS Office runs on OSX" is a strong selling point. People familiar with Windows and Office are thinking "cool, Office runs on OSX, I won't feel lost if I ever switch to OSX".
{{.sig}}
Halo development for Macintosh was not canceled when Microsoft bought Bungie.
Yes, it was.
Halo was released for the Mac in December, 2003.
True, and in fact, I worked as an alpha and beta tester for the company that did the port (look for my name in the credits). The important thing to note is that MS *did* cancel all development for the platform and decided at a later date to allow the existing code to be brought to the Macintosh through a third party developer who did all the work required.
I don't believe a Linux version was ever being developed by Bungie.
To my peripheral knowledge, there were active efforts at Bungie to bring a number of their titles to Linux and Halo was one of them.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Technically MS has just enouigh of a war chest to manage those purchases, but of course there is no way they would fork over that much cash, nor be allowed to.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
I know the parent didn't make reference to this, but a lot of people think it, so:
In August 1997, Microsoft purchased $150 million in non-voting Apple stock.
As of the prior quarter, Apple had $1.2 billion in cash on hand .
The money didn't "bail Apple out", as some people think. It was a symbolic gesture. The symbolism of the "badly needed" "investment" (which really wasn't needed from a financial standpoint) renewed peoples' faith in Apple, renewed the faith that Microsoft and Office would still be on the Mac platform, etc.
So while you could argue that the gesture was needed (and I'd tend to agree), the money itself wasn't.
And Microsoft made out like bandits on that investment.
I think this problem is symbolic of much larger one in which entire industries are out to "hurt" their competitors, but also their very customers. Look at the way the computer industry, the telecom industry and the entertainment/industrial complex has worked to limit our choices, roll back our access to new technologies, and lock us in to carefully controlled uses of their products. Equipment is hamstrung, demand is ignored, products are made less friendly to the user but more friendly to the profit margins. While trumpeting technological advances, they ship products that don't work or don't work well. There is outright hostility to those of us who are the ones pumping money into these industries. The entire model of supply and demand/free market is turned on its head and WE become the consumables.
I don't want to make too big a jump here for those of you who are happy as clams as long as you can go to the best buy and get a 52" something that sets you back a month's pay, just to find that it can't do the things you really want it to do because those features are "just around the corner". The next release, the coming upgrade, THAT's the one you really want. But this fundamental change in the flow of power from the consumer to industry is being mirrored in the realm of public life. Politics are no longer about us. Elections are held but voters are optional. With all the things happening in the world, all the stories that could be told, every single media outlet has the same half-dozen stories on the front page. I used to wonder why some insignificant event would suddenly show up as the most important story in every single newspaper and news show. Now it becomes clear: as long as there's something to show us, it doesn't matter if it's the things that matter. As long as we watch. As long as we consume, as long as we pay, and most important, as long as we get up to go to work tomorrow so we can keep making those credit card payments.
I'm sorry that I'm making these big jumps from this rather unsurprising story about one company doing something to hurt another. The thing is: I just don't believe it. Microsoft, Apple, how different are they really? Smart people have epic battles in these pages arguing the benefits of one platform over another as if it somehow matters, or if one will somehow defeat the other. To them, it's all good as long as we keep upgrading, keep paying, keep working. We have become the consumables.
Now go read another story and let me finish my drink in peace. Tomorrow's another working day.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If Steve Jobs had a secret Intel port of Mac OS X going on for years, is it so hard to imagine that he might have a secret office suite project going on in case Microsoft dumps Apple? The only reason he wouldn't release it would be because Microsoft's support for Apple is good for sales and Apple's own office suite would be for a ``use only in case of emergency'' scenario. I mean, even if it were vastly superior to Microsoft Office, it would be a hard sell.
This is quite silly. Apple is already at war with Avid (DigiDesign) on two fronts, and currently winning. In the video end of things, the entire industry is quickly switching to FCP, away from Avid. If they have not already overtaken Avid, they will very soon. Secondly, ProTools is in trouble, and not just from Apple, but from MOTU (Mark of the Unicorn), as Digital Performer is very quickly becoming the industry standard for many audio applications. Logic (Apple's multi-track editor) is also doing very well. Throw in the fact that Cubase is trouncing ProTools on the Windows end of things, and you have a very bad situation for DigiDesign. It probably still has the largest install base, but that is rapidly diminishing. They used to own a majority of the multi-track install base, and now they're lucky if their a simple plurality.
Bottom line is, Avid got caught sitting on their asses. They got fat and happy being the industry standard in two markets, and failed to notice that other developers were actually doing their homework. Both Avid Video and ProTools are vastly inferior to their Apple and MOTU counterparts. I used to be an avid ProTools user (no pun intended), until I got my hands on Digital Performer, and now I haven't even touched the damn thing in months. The multimedia audio industry (ie: film composition/sound effects) will laugh in your face if you say that your primary multi-track software is ProTools, and developers of softsynths and audio suite plugins are dropping ProTool support like flies.
Microsoft's aquisition of Avid would simply make matters worse, as they have a history of alienating creative fields. Instead of hurting Apple, it would just confirm everyone's suspicion that Avid is failing, and would send the last remaining ProTools and Avid users crying for DP5 or Logic, and FCP.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.