Marauding Microsoft?
Published by Yazad Jal October 14th, 2003 in TechnologyWhen you mingle in a community which comprises largely (>80%) of IT professionals, Microsoft is going to feature in some conversation, somewhere. And generally the commentators are on a crusade against poor Bill Gates. Whilst I don’t hold a candle for him, I do think people go overboard. Last Saturday at dinner after a game of bowling, the topic of why Microsoft should be banned popped up. Amongst the usual anti-Microsoft litany (network externality, evil monopoly, gross money power, etc) one reason stuck out.
If a startup has any product which is in competition (or might in the future be in competition) with a Microsoft product, then VC funding for that start-up evaporates. VC’s allegedly are convinced of Gates’ massive money power that if he decides to compete, he will wipe out the start-up. (My paraphrase)
I find that hard to believe but the only argument I could put up was “Larry Ellison.” Dear Readers, especially the various tech gurus who flit here, please give us some gyaan.
In the meanwhile, I was reminded of Winners, Losers, and Microsoft. Its authors, Leibowitz and Margolis, take on the “network effects,” “lock-in,” and “path dependence” theories and show why they are all flawed. Real life examples of the QWERTY vs. Dvorak keyboards and VHS vs. Beta video are discussed. If you can’t get the book, the summary is here.
Hotmail, Money, Powerpoint, Visio - products made by startup companies that looked like they would compete with Microsoft, but instead got bought out by them instead. Well, its better than getting bulldozed.
Your friends are right. Dunno if the VC’s are being smart in doing that though.
Kings,
The argument was that MS would compete and make the start-ups bankrupt. If MS is on a buying spree, it might make good sense for the VC’s to invest not abandon.
Kind of OT, but Microsoft-related - what do you guys think of Eolas’ lawsuit against IE? I think it is stupid to grant such overreaching patents to entities that anything and everything can be claimed to be patented by them.
Hi Yazaad,
I think you completely missed my point.
I have no qualms about microsoft ban,but what i meant to say is “Windows operating system be it any,98,2000,professional,me is not a very user friendly operating system”, it gives various errors,conflicts and what not which is difficult for a layman to settle”.
If Bill Gates gives me a very good product and enough variety of choice to suit my needs,i would gladly kiss .
Manoj, I am a “layman” using computers on a daily basis now for 10 years. I’ve not yet come across a better OS than Windows. On the contrary Linux is harder to use. It might be better, but it is definately *not* user friendly.
I’d agree with you on that one, Yazad.
Manoj, you say that MS as a OS isn’t user friendly? I’m just shocked. I would think MS put the “friendly” in user-friendly. Why do you think most Linux apps that are coming up look exactly like MS look-and-feels? It’s partly because of the comfort people have with MS products, but it’s also because it is the best OS out there. And the errors you speak about as simply because it’s undergoing rigorous testing every single day. I’ve seen enough issues with OSS too, and that’s in a limited audience.
(Kingsley, before you launch into a usability analysis of MS products, hush!)
I agree, Ankh - now a Mac is something that I absolutely, positively cannot use - almost at the same level as a command-line-based OS liked Linux or Unix. Very unintuitive interface.
The truth is a lot more complicated.
You might get bought over (kingsley’s examples - that is a good thing, btw), Microsoft might have a token product but not really interested in the market(Visual sourcesafe - MS’ worst product ever)
MS might try but fail (Frontpage - which it bought, but doesn’t seem to be really going anywhere)
There are thousands of niches where MS is not going to be a threat except to the paranoid( take citydesk for example - easy-to-use content management made by a former MS guy who was in the excel team)
Then there is the fact that MS makes life a lot easy for developers and exposes APIs to such an extent that it is actually giving you tools to come up with a competitor to its existing product.
So yes, MS is a threat. but it is a threat like any other. Before entering a market you have to worry about whether MS will enter or not, whether you have a chance even if it does, whether MS will buy you out, or whether its better to compete in a niche where MS won’t go, etc.
That’s true for any venture.
Actually, the Macintosh is the most user-friendly. Apple put the friendly into user-friendly in 1984 with System 1’s GUI (Graphic User Interface). Of course, it has it’s niggling faults and minor problems, but nothing like the crap that I went through with Windows. Linux if for the techie.
The Windows 3.1 user interface is an exact reverse copy of Apple’s System 6. Many aspects of Windows XP are stolen from Mac OS X, which Microsoft is quite famous for.
Right from the go, things just worked without much thought, with the Mac. I don’t have to reinstall my OS every few months.
Well what you say about Jobs’(Apple’s) originality in the field of usability is very true. But what most MS bashers tend to overlook, is that had it not been for MS (or some other evil empire) we would not have had such a fantasticaly large number of users in such a short period of time. (ofcourse that is because microsoft actively overlooks piracy)
No MS (or clone) would mean no variety in PC hardware and no choice of hardware vendor a la Apple. Also the instability problems of Windows are largely due to the wide and ever changing types of hardware it has to run on to make a living for the evil MS employees. Apple makes the software and the hardware and can custom tailor both. Windows’ has to do a far more complicated job at running on existing and future hardware and still keep on going. And i think XP does a more than decent job.
It matters little if MS copied the Mac interface. I never used a Mac coz they are so bloody expensive. i have had about 4 or 5 computers since the early 1990s. all running flavours of windows/dos, and linux maybe the apple of a techies eye but it has a long way to go to become stable user friendly and hardware compatible (from a novices perspective).
(case in point it takes 5 minutes to load a sound driver in windows and restart the comp, it takes about 45 minutes to compile ALSA on the same comp and you are still not sure whether its going to work.. and then you got to get eSound.. and the it goes on :-D)
Yep, Windows XP seems to work better than say Windows 98, but then again I don’t like Palladium (anti-privacy stuff).
Yep, it’s expensive. But well worth it.
Not “bashing” MS, but pointing out the myths about user-friendly and user-interface points. A spade is a spade.
Some people I know in the US who are Microsoft and Apple service and support engineers say much of their total income comes from Microsoft customers, since they have to spend more time with more Windows people. So, it’s good that way.
There’s an old joke which says Windows users are masochists. :D
I find that defending Microsoft is a lot like defending the war on Iraq.
I would have expanded on this thesis, but that would involve work.
Ravi, No Please!
Dear readers,
Defend / attack Microsoft here.
Defend / attack the war on Iraq on various other blogs which have done serious thinking and commentary on it. You could start here:
The Examined Life–Iraq Blogathon I
The Examined Life–Iraq Blogathon II
The Examined Life–Post War Musings
Dancing With Dogs, Iraq Posts
Don’t panic.
If I had the time I’d put up a lengthy post on this fascinating topic on my blog.
Yaz, no fair pulling me into the Iraq discussion again - but then I guess it could be fun removing the rust off of my fighting skills again ;)
Well a comparison between Microsoft and any other issue may well serve to elucidate the point, but i think it is more likely to obscure it.
The much hankered after truth is that Microsoft plays and will continue to play a significant role in the popularisation of techonology. A role which linux may take up at a later stage, but the mass appeal of software which runs on an easily availabe and relatively cheap platform. And which is easier to use (not neccessary easiest) is something that Microsoft has pioneered.
Incidentally the thing about MS users needing more support is something like a Broken Window fallacy. What say Yazad?
Sorry to be getting in so late on this shipo, and for beating a dead donkey sensless.
But I do think Microsoft does nothing bad.
(I am very very pro Microsoft)
Which other company can give straddle all spheres of computing so effectively, give you the very best of what they are capable of, yet jump on nobody’s toes in the process(well, they did, but not without adequete provocation).
Mass Volumes, and amazing marketing, no wonder Gates is the richest man