Slashdot Mirror
What Microsoft Could Learn from OSS and Linux
An anonymous reader writes "An article on OSWeekly.com discusses a few things that Microsoft could learn from OSS and Linux. 'As Microsoft continues to understand that open source does not mean they cannot generate a decent profit, I honestly wonder if they will eventually "get" that releasing MS Office code to the open source community is their only option. Since the whole threatening to sue thing will be met with the same fan base response, just like the RIAA, it is certainly not a wise decision. And if Microsoft thinks Open Office is a pain now, try suing people over it, then see how many people refuse to buy their products.'"
They dont have to release code.. just give out a 100% accurate specification, and don't threaten to sue just because you write a program that can parse Word 97/07 docs.
This goes for any closed shop. Especially hardware vendors. We'll write the code, just release the docs! :)
The next headline we'll see is "Hippy's Show Soldiers How to Clean Rifles".
Leave the money makin' to the convicted monopolists, shall we boys?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Microsoft already has the benefits of their product being free for home/casual users. It's called "piracy".
Besides which, Open Office is in no way a real threat to MSOffice's success and market dominance. Like Microsoft is supposed to throw away their monopoly because someone else has made a word processor for free? Right.
Lunix zealot/"journalist" with no business experience worth mentioning delivers condescending speech on what Microsoft needs to "get" and how much money they're giving up by not switching to Ubuntu's business model. Yawn.
Just about anything else could be released as Open Source, or given away free, and they'd do ok. They've done some things like that - Netmeeting was the first widespread H.323 voice/video/data/conferencing product, and while they didn't give out the source, the product was free beer (on Windows, of course), and was a reasonably standards-based reference implementation that everybody else in the industry could use. But messing with Office is messing with the crown jewels.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I honestly wonder if they will eventually "get" that releasing MS Office code to the open source community is their only option if they really want to stop making almost 3 billion dollars a year in sales.
There, fixed that for ya.
"Microsoft thinks Open Office is a pain now, try suing people over it, then see how many people refuse to buy their products."
How old is whoever wrote this? 12? Who honestly believe that anyone gives a flying expletive about whether Microsoft sues the Open Office project or not? As if the millions of technologically apathetic Microsoft Office users will rebel against Microsoft for a cause that they've likely never heard about.
How did this get on the front page? It's like a half-way thought through anti-Microsoft rant taken from any random open source related IRC channel.
Look, I loathe Microsoft and all of its business practices. But until something seriously threatens Windows, they really have little to worry about. People ask me, "Is that Vista?" "No, I'm running Linux with XGL/Compiz. Look at what I can do!" And they say wow and move on, because it wasn't Windows and they have no intent to use it. Nothing will stop them from making their programs incompatible with yours, or changing libraries or whatever to make OpenOffice.org so unbearably slow on Windows. If you want to play games, you'll probably need to support DirectX. The RIAA was voted the most-hated company in America by The Consumerist IIRC, yet their sales really have not been hit that badly (or not as much as they want you to think). It hasn't stopped people from buying music, listening to the radio, or supporting them indirectly.
You want to sue Microsoft for sabotaging you or stealing your patents? Go right ahead. You'll be embroiled in a long, expensive lawsuit, and the eventual penalties, if you get any, will be very little. As a result of FUD or "embrace, extend, extinguish," your company is more likely to be marginalized by the end, like RealNetworks or Netscape. I really think the only way to have dealt with it was the major antitrust lawsuit by the government, but we know how that resulted.
TFA is a classic example of misunderstanding the user base of a product. The article writer assumes that other users are like him/her self - annoyed by Microsofts patent mongering and monopolistic behavior. The writer does not realize that a huge portion of Office users couldn't care less about such behavior. Many aren't even aware its going on at all, in reference to patent mongering at least.
This mistake is VERY common among technical people. Programmers assume users will want to use an application the same way they would want to use it. In many parts of the Open Source community, programmers write open source applications with themselves in mind as the target audience. There are definitely exceptions, of course, but this is true of the majority. Having to jump through a few highly technical hoops to install or configure the software is often considered fine, even in a "release" version. For a regular user this is a disaster, as they are unable to navigate the installation/configuration hurdles and quickly give up.
Microsoft, meanwhile, fundamentally understands users. Look at what they concentrate on: Installation and Look and Feel. Technical users bemoan XP and Vista as lipstick on a pig. They're right. But Microsoft knows that the road to wealth is not paved with hidden efficiencies like optimized TCP/IP stacks and user/process security models. The road to wealth is paved with nearly foolproof installations and preinstalled pretty looking software. Software that caters to the user. (Technical software with a smaller audience, such as the nightmare installation of Team Foundation Server, are not a part of this discussion since the user base of such software is by nature highly technical)
You may say, "But wait, MS products aren't all that pretty, and they don't always install well!" True today. But Office, when it came out, was prettier and easier to install than anything else on the market. Windows 95 even more so. Now that they've gained the upper hand, they've become complacent, living off their inertia. Still, when new products debut (like Vista), the same two focuses emerge: Ease of Installation and Look and Feel. (Note that Pre-Installation of Microsoft OSes and Office is a HUGE factor in Ease of Installation, don't overlook it if you respond - there's no easier install than no install).
// harborpirate
// Slashbots off the starboard bow!
As long as people maintain the attitudes like the one you shredded, Microsoft has nothing to fear. Microsoft has some of the worlds brightest technical people, who get beaten down on a regular basis when they try to get all 'geeky' with the software. Eventually, really good technology makes its way into the products, especially in the case of Office 2007, but only when the "user experience" is taken care of. It has to look good, feel good, install and uninstall with ease, and become second nature to the user in a short amount of time.
Linux people need to understand what they are up against. I work with a group of small medical research companies. When Merck decides to move to Office 2007, guess what all these companies have to do in order to continue working with Merck? Ya think they are going to take a moments look at Open Office? Nope.
You see, Microsoft understands that they can focus all their sales attention at a group of select companies, and the rest of the market has no choice but to follow, just to stay in business. Suppose you are a small manufacturer, trying to get your product sold at Walmart? Try sending them a financial forecast on anything but Excel, and see how far you get?
You dont beat this kind of lock-in with technical superiority. Steve Jobs understands this, and has restructured Apple accordingly. Linux vendors should follow his lead, but they dont. In no way is the IPod, or IPhone the most technically superior solution in its space, but both will be market leaders on the cool-factor alone.
Geeks dont like it, but tough shit, that is how the world turns.
In every industry, and in every marketplace, marketing determines who wins. I say it over and over again on Slashdot, but until Geeks relinquish the direction of their creative inventions to people who understand how to SELL something, the folks at Microsoft will lose no sleep.