IMHO Microsoft has usually limited it's interoperability products to competitors who have had marketshare worthy of notice, for example Novell (the Netware Gateway). Once the competitor drops off the radar so does Microsoft's product, even though there may still be a significant number of users for the legacy systems.
This implies that Microsoft's strategy is driven by market share rather than some bigger world view or longer time horizon planning. Could you comment on that?
It also seems that Microsoft responds to the market demand with new features, rather than fixing and tuning what is already on offer. From my point of view this has resulted in bloatware that makes a fast machine look slow, lots of troublesome Service Packs, and support facilities that can be a little light-on. Do Microsoft plan on changing that approach any time soon?
Slashdot Mirror
IMHO Microsoft has usually limited it's interoperability products to competitors who have had marketshare worthy of notice, for example Novell (the Netware Gateway). Once the competitor drops off the radar so does Microsoft's product, even though there may still be a significant number of users for the legacy systems.
This implies that Microsoft's strategy is driven by market share rather than some bigger world view or longer time horizon planning. Could you comment on that?
It also seems that Microsoft responds to the market demand with new features, rather than fixing and tuning what is already on offer. From my point of view this has resulted in bloatware that makes a fast machine look slow, lots of troublesome Service Packs, and support facilities that can be a little light-on. Do Microsoft plan on changing that approach any time soon?