Is Microsoft dying?

[cosmolinguist]

Well, is it?

Great, healthy companies not only dominate the market, but share of mind. Look at Apple these days. But when was the last time you thought about Microsoft, except in frustration or anger? The company just announced a powerful new search engine, designed to take on Google -- but did anybody notice? Meanwhile, open systems world -- created largely in response to Microsoft's heavy-handed hegemony -- is slowly carving away market share from Gates & Co.: Linux and Firefox hold the world's imagination these days, not Windows and Explorer. The only thing Microsoft seems busy at these days is patching and plugging holes.

I don't know enough about this to have an opinion, but I find the idea intriguing (and not just in a schadenfreude kind of way ... though that probably helps). I'm interested in what the geek contingent of my friends list might have to say about this, though.

Comments

[ruudboy.livejournal.com]

It's not dying, I'm afraid. There are just too many people out there who don't know/don't care that they're being taken advantage of by Microsoft. As became only too apparent today when I was ranting about them at work, and the IT staff - the fucking IT staff - were looking at me as if to say "what's he talking about?" So, no, they aren't dying, but there are enough of us out here that we won't need to use them for anything but the bare minimum - playing games that are only available for Windows.

[cosmolinguist]

There are just too many people out there who don't know/don't care that they're being taken advantage of by Microsoft.

This is what I was telling stealthmunchkin today when he was telling me how stupid people are (with a tech-support job, he has all-too-good a view of the stupid people in the world); they are led by the software companies and the hardware companies and the people selling computer services lead them to believe that a computer is like a toaster or something: you can just plug it in and it works.

Or else they think computers are just magic boxes that do things for reasons that are totally beyond them. This works in favor of the computer industry as well, and I think they use it to their advantage—I've seen Dell commercials and such that say "You don't have to think or know anything! Just tell us what you want the computer to do and we'll figure it all out without bothering you with any of those nasty details!" People think this is a nice convenience but it also gives the companies a lot of power over them, because they have the knowledge and they can get money from stupid people.

Andrew says computers should be thought of more like cars: something you have to be careful with, something you need some basic thinking skills to use, if not a license! Something you don't just hand over to your kids and then yell at the manufacturers if they hurt themselves or find out about something you didn't want them to know.

Not that this is terribly relevant to the possible demise of Microsoft, but it's what I thought of when I read that sentence.

there are enough of us out here that we won't need to use them for anything but the bare minimum

Yeah, I know people like that, with "Wintendo" boxes. It's a nice silver lining.

[ruudboy.livejournal.com]

Wintendo

I like that.

[cosmolinguist]

Yes, it seems to be an indication of someone who really understands the strengths of the operating system.

[etoilepb.livejournal.com]

I think there are distinct advantages to havin an international standard, so ease communication both personal and corporaate... but I think we can do it in a variety of new and innovative ways, with FireFox being a great example.

Of course I'm probably a great deal less geeky than many of your friends.

[cosmolinguist]

I've heard Microsoft guys claim that open-source stuff is evil because it's not compatible with anything ... meaning, of course, it's not compatible with Microsoft stuff because they won't tell anyone how their stuff works.

And I'm not going to test your geek cred today. :-) It's just that it's been so long since I talked about computery things that I think I've almost forgotten how; it's because I haven't been paying attention to this stuff recently and thus feel that I'm likely to say something stupid or stupidly obvious.

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

No, Microsoft claims open source stuff is evil because it's consistently proven itself to be better than the crap they overcharge for.

They say it's inferior to their product because nobody else can make things that work properly with Windows. Of course that's only because they deliberately modify Windows to break third-party applications that compete with crap they fling.

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

I only wish Microsoft was dying. Remember the monopoly trial that they managed to drag on long enough to get their shills in government to kill? They had more than enough spare cash on hand to deal with it.

They've managed to convince far too many people that there isn't any other option. Yes, people complain. But they don't realize there are alternatives. That's the power of a monopoly.

[cosmolinguist]

But they don't realize there are alternatives.

My family are such a good example of that. XP basically self-destructed on this computer a couple months ago, and my mom talked about it as if it was just one of those things that happens. It's so frustrating.

My dad is a little better, but he's suspicious of my Linux box and of things like Firefox which have infiltrated their computer. He called my computer "off-brand" once, and I think that's what he thinks of Linux: it's like a generic equivalent of Windows. But since he, like a teenage girl with jeans from the Gap, has paid for the brand-name, he's certainly not going to see any advantage in trading in his fancy stuff for some laughable thing (especially with my brother, the "computer genius" in my parents' eyes, telling them that Mozilla is Linux and Linux is bad).

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

On the bright side, it means that nobody's going to be messing with your computer. Not that there's anything they could do to screw it up anyway (short of messing with the hardware).

[gamahucheur.livejournal.com]

If someone has her foot wedged in the subway railroad, and there's an on-coming train, one doesn't normally say that she is dying. Yet one may think that she will likely die.

Two elements were essential in the effecting of Microsoft's original rise:

• Microsoft recognized the importance of path dependency. They spent significant sums to creäte an order in which people bought Windows because it ran the apps that they had, and bought the apps that they had because they ran on Windows and exhibited familiar behavior.
• Microsoft exploited the incompetence, laziness, and need for copy on the part of journalists (especially those at Zipf-Davis). Microsoft persuaded reporters to hype its stuff.

Those two seem essential to its indefinite preëminence; and those two are gone.

• Linux isn't an equally good OS for running apps designed for Windows, but linux is (roughly speaking) free, and far more stable.
• Open source freeware similarly undercuts the price of Microsoft apps, and also offers greater reliability.
• Java offers programs which needn't be replaced should one switch operating systems.
• Journalists have been increasingly compelled to write about these alternatives. And, as security became an increasing problem, a dam broke and the media began telling people to abandon IE for Firefox.

Microsoft has tremendous inertia, in two senses of the word “inertia”. The inertia that works for it are the large numbers of people still on the Microsoft path — buying Microsoft apps because they are used to them, and buying MS Windows because it runs those apps. But their corporate culture imposes a resistance to the reform that would enable longer-run survival.

Another reason that the IE/Firefox situation is fascinating is that IE was originally created in attempt to impose a Microsoft brand on the 'Net. Microsoft pumped huge sums of money into the development of a free application, with the objective of creäting an order in which IE was the Windows browser and MSN was the Windows , all integrated so that giving up any one would be difficult. So long as MS continues to flog IE, you may infer that they retain some hopes of reälizing that original dream.

Antitrust law, is not really the answer to a problem such as Microsoft. It is difficult if not impossible to write coherent antitrust law, and in practice it often perversely ends up being a tool for the formation and maintenance of cartels. However, on the way to the near-univeralization of Windows, Microsoft did something that should, under law, be actionable — they engaged in a pattern of over-promising. People would refrain from buying rival products because Microsoft would promise that their products would be better; and by the time that it was clear that the Microsoft product would not live up to the earlier claims, the rival would be laid low by lack of sales. Engaging in a pattern of such over-promising should be treated as fraud, subject to civil and criminal penalties.

[cosmolinguist]

Thank you. Most of this stuff is not new to me, but is the sort of thing that I can never quite articulate myself. I know someone who says French is a language he can read but not speak; I think that's how I am with Computer Geek. I used to be a little better; my skills have gotten rusty of late.

[davmoo.livejournal.com]

I heard the same kind of crap when IBM's monopoly was broken up in the 60's and 70's. Is IBM dead? Not hardly. They are still one of the most powerful companies in the industry.

Likewise for Microsoft. Microsoft, like IBM, has reinvented itself so many times I've lost count. Microsoft is not dead. Nor is it dying. Its not sick either. Its not even tired. Hell, its not even broken a sweat from working too hard. A company with a cash reserve of $49 Billion dollars is not having health problems.

You show me someone who says Microsoft is dying, and I'll show you an idiot.

As you know, I like Linux. I run Linux. But Linux has a way to go yet.

When I install a new program on Windows XP, I click on a package or insert a CD and its done. I've never once had to recompile part of Windows to make a program work. I can't say the same for Linux.

Linux also suffers from "almost there". With certain exceptions like Open Office, instead of having one or two really good apps for a specific job, Linux has 49 that are not quite good enough for production use. For examples that I have experience with, anyone who says GIMP can stand toe-to-toe with Adobe Photoshop doesn't use either in a hard-core graphics production environment every day. Likewise, Linux has nothing that compares to Adobe Premier for video editing. There are a few "almost there" packages like Cinelera, but nothing I want to use every day. For video editing, I keep my Windows XP and Adobe Premier.

People need to look at one other benefit of Microsoft. You can go to a store and buy a CD with a program on it. That program will work on any PC...whether its from Dell or Gateway or you built it from pieces-parts. I'm old enough to remember when that wasn't true. The package you bought to run on Brand A computer would not work on Brand B computer, even though they both called themselves "PCs". Computers would not be the inexpensive commodity appliance they are now were it not for Microsoft.

[daggerquill.livejournal.com]

When was the last time you thought about Cisco? HP? Digital? SAS? SyBase? Lucent? Qwest? Or even IBM, for that matter?

Yes Microsoft is dying a dying empire, but like all emipres, it's going to take a long time to collapse. Decades, at the very least. Apple is hot. Linux is hot. Geeks and journalists have banded together against Microsoft...in major urban centers in the United States. Worldwide, Linux and apple marketshare is barely a blip on the screen, especailly when compared to the possibilities of emerging markets like China, where the governemetn is scared stiff of the consequences of Open Source anything, including the apples BSD core, and getting Western-compatible technology through a predatory closed-source vendor through Microsoft is appealing. Take your million-odd Linux geeks and give me 2 billion Chinese any day of the week.

And the old truism is still true: individual users drive sales for small comapnies like Apple, but Micrsoft's money comes from corporate site licsences. And not only is it tememdously expensive to shift a multinational coporation to a new platform, the major software packages you need don't exist for any other platform. Corporations don't make big changes except gradually. Forget moving on from windows; most large companies and universities are still bust porting their COBOL software to windows so they can get rid of the racks of thirty-year-old VAXen. some companies still have DEC/PDP-10's running for chrissaskes, and the PDP-11/94 was produced until 1990. Windows machines look young by comparison, and not only arene't big organizations ready for another big platform shift, they haven't even finished the move from mainframes yet. Windows has a lot of life in it yet.

And let's not forget that while Windows is still the flagship product, Microsoft makes a great deal of money selling desktop applications, internet services and applications, and hardware platforms. They also have lucrative video game market. When the courts were deciding whether to split MS in the anti-trust case, it was thought that that the non-OS company (including MSN) would be the largerof the two children.

Microsoft has a a lot of life in it, for good or ill.

[hilker.livejournal.com]

Yeah, China’s government is really scared stiff (http://www.redflag-linux.com/eindex.html) of oss.

[daggerquill.livejournal.com]

I didn't say they weren't more scared of the WTO. Let's not forget that the Red Flag contracts were awarded as part of the hoopla surrounding china's entry, in and effort to show good faith regarding software piracy after decades of officially pirating--or, rather, pirating for official use--Windows. Windows--legitimately or illegitimtely--is still by far the ost dominant OS in China, and us companies doing business there will only increase it's exposure, and they'll pay for liscences.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the Chinese governemtn sees Red Flag as something more than a bargaining chip. Maybe they don't realize the danger; or maybe they see Microsoft, as one of the worlds great examples of successful American capitalism, as a greater threat than an operating system that people can build themsevels, without government intervention.

Personally, though, if I wanted to maintin party control of a state as large as the People's Republic, I'd want to keep piracy off the table at the WTO, and then take OpenSSH, OpenSSL, and Blowfish--not to mention snort, squid, and ethereal--among others, back from the population at large as soon as possible. I think a quick tour through Amnesty International's website should give a pretty good indication of the value the Chinese government places on spyware, and state control of communication technologies.

I don't think the current trends say much for Red Flag's long-term vibility. Unless of course they're modifying the source of distributed binaries (I assume someone's audited the publically available source)in violation of the GPL. Hadn't considered that. should have, I suppose, but hadn't.

double click

[setharoo.livejournal.com]

Nice user pic. It certainly shocked me.

Re: double click

[cosmolinguist]

Isn't it great!? I love that picture. I found it on the Internet, of course. The Internet is strange and wonderful.

Re: double click

[fairy-dianae.livejournal.com]

I also did a double take...that is just one wrong pic >

Re: double click

[cosmolinguist]

Speaking of which, I like your new icon as well.

Re: double click

[setharoo.livejournal.com]

Thanks! Not bad for MS Paint...

[parakleta.livejournal.com]

I don't think Microsoft is going anywhere, but I think the alternatives like Linux and Mac and OSS are not really in any danger from them anymore. There are enough people that have migrated across to support these alternatives, but the regular masses still don't know any better.

The problem is that most of the tech articles are written by techs for techs, and so they forget just how many people there are out there that don't think like them. Like stealthmunchkin I too work in technical support, and there's almost no shift in the consumer market at all. It actually took us several months to convince our manager that we should be promoting Firefox, by pointing out to him that IE and malware was causing about 20% of our calls, and he finally agreed, so at least that's one small victory. We'll never convince our customers to shift OS though.

A good benchmark for the success of computer related products is to see what's being taught at Tafes and Universities and stuff, at least of the ones I know of, most of them are still teaching Microsoft based stuff for their IS and IT degrees, using .net and VB and all that stuff. It's only really the CS and SE degrees that look at the more general OSS stuff, but there are plenty more enrolments in IS and IT degrees at the moment.