digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Why Microsoft could be setting itself up for a long-term decline

money.cnn.com — "Some of the principles Microsoft has pledged to adopt are almost shocking, coming from this long-arrogant company. The company permanently adopted many of the temporary restrictions the DOJ had ordered in resolving the antitrust action. Those restrictions would otherwise have expired in 2009."

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 21, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

81 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Haroldx, on 10/12/2007, -10/+49it's own software is setting itself up for a long-term decline in my opinion
  • wayhip, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21You obviously have limited experience. From years of experience doing both support and application development, the most frustrating aspect was trying to make MS products play nice with each other. You heard right, a huge amount of time has been wasted trying to get MS own software to integrate. We are talking about incompatibilities between web browsers, application development tools, database engines, mail server and clients. MS is a huge time sink, draining resources from what they should be doing, solving problems for users and businesses. Using MS software is very very expensive in hidden costs.

    I have become so digested with that I switched to Apple at home. It just works. No bizarre crashes, incompatibilities, weird messages, viruses or trojans. It is very close to what a computer should be.
  • jonshipman, on 10/12/2007, -8/+23I just wished you remove things from windows like MSN messenger, IE, and Windows Media Player. If MS let you choose to not install those components (or even allow uninstallations) then they wouldn't be in this monopoly fiasco.
  • Lounger540, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20Or maybe if they where just decent and unobtrusive. Have you ever heard of a Mac user complaining about apple bundling iTunes, iDVD, iMovie etc... in OSX? Nope. Because they don't suck first and foremost, and it's easy to not even realize they exist if you don't care to use them and really easy to remove.
  • aptget, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Simply put, they should've never misused their market position. They could've let OEMs customize Windows the way they wanted to, like preinstalling Netscape, RealPlayer, etc. It would've allowed fair competition between formats, but they chose the "You include competing products, and we'll price you out of the Windows market" route.

    And now, every knowlegable person in tech doesn't have any reason to trust them.
  • vostek, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18Maybe Microsoft wants to decline. Most people are well aware that large corporations are weighed down by their size and have a harder time keeping up with ever-changing trends. Perhaps they are strategically dumping their assets to gain foothold in new markets.

    Then again, I've never considered myself an insightful businessman.
  • Eeqmcsq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"The company commits to disclose various interfaces and software techniques which heretofore it has kept to itself...."

    IMHO, I think Microsoft is doing this as a response to the EU's fining them. I think they're afraid that if the EU could fine them, other countries could also start fining them for not providing a "level playing field" for application developers.

    If the EU did not start fining Microsoft, I suspect they would not be doing this.
  • Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Microsoft's decline has been set up for a long time, and it's not because they're opening up to permit competition. They set up their own decline by two consistent behaviors:

    1) Making lousy software, and demonstrating that they weren't interested in doing the hard work without the threat of competition. IE is the best example; after dominating the browser market with that piece of crap via monopolistic tactics and integrating it with Windows, they let it sit, stink, and fester. Dozens of security holes remain unpatched in spite of having been reported for months. IE doesn't render CSS correctly, and is the most non-compliant of the browsers. The only reason they got moving again with IE 7 was competition from Firefox.

    2) Making people hate them by repeatedly infringing on patents and other unethical behavior, thiking that they could get away with it. They forget how pervasive widespread public hatred can be bad for business. Or, they remembered, but didn't think it would hurt them 'cause they're effectively a monopoly.

    The combination of the two is largely responsible for the enthusiastic embrace of the Open Source alternatives, and for the window of oportunity they gave Apple to grow the Mac market share (though the iPod is also a major factor).

    The anti-trust trial is vindicated, IMHO. The charge was that Microsoft crushes competition, and without competition, it stagnates, and that's exactly what we see. Vista and IE demonstrate this principle perfectly; no other company would be tolerated with such late/crappy software.
  • wayhip, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Yeah but what if Honda had used illegal, unethical and immoral tactics to crush its competition, obtained 90% of the car market and then refused to let anyone install a different stereo system?

    Esp. if the stereo system is faulty, or poor quality requiring constant service and when it crashed you lose you brakes and power steering. This is the slip shod crap MS is creating. They do not have to care because they have monopoly control. The sooner MS dies, the better for consumers and the over all economy.
  • macewan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12The Internet wouldn't be what it is today if Microsoft had been allowed to squash "threats" like they had been doing. It seems to me that as a result of the governments actions we have the playing field we currently enjoy.
  • renegadeafk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11if a change in the start menu confused people they shouldn't be using pc's in the first place
  • pantuky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6In short the article says that the web is everything these days and the long decline of local applications has begun. Whist I marvel at what the Web 2,0 guys are doing there are many fields where they cannot tread. 3-dimensional visual effects and 2d composition are two such areas. Although a Java-script ray tracer was demoed on the web, it was greeted by howls of laughter everywhere. Advanced audio mixing and mastering is another area you can't address with Java script. We won't see an Ajax competitor for Photoshop in the near future either.

    Many people now use the web as their school/newspaper/library and shopping mall all rolled into one. As a power user, I love the fact that non-professionals have figured out that computers are good. Nevertheless, there are many things beyond these recreational uses of computers. For the pros, Java-script-ware just ain't going to cut it.
  • q3ctf4, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10"It's ironic because Windows in fact has become much less central to modern life since Microsoft agreed to the antitrust decree. Today, the "window" represented by a web browser is far more important to how we use computers. The Internet itself is our operating system and when we access information it comes, in many cases, not from the hard drive controlled by Windows but from some remote server to which we are connected by the Internet."

    Since the web browser has been proven to be more "centric", why has Microsoft allowed Internet Explorer to fall in market share by lack of updates since 2001?. Has Google's success had anything to do with this wake-up call? Look at Live.com now, if Microsoft had rolled this out 2 years ago, they would have been a better competitor to Google. I'd like to see how they get people to set their home page to Live.com once Vista comes out. (Hint: Innovation needed)
  • mattjumbo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10"Without it, we would not have had a personal-computing revolution or, accordingly, an Internet one."

    I see someone else picked out that comment as well.

    I never thought MS did anything illegal but, that being said, the above quoted comment is utterly idiotic. The writer clearly doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. Really. None at all.

    While a common reference platform *is* valuable, a dominant, proprietary one is horribly restrictive. Without MS we absolutely still would have had the PC and internet revolutions. MS is not responsible for much of anything we appreciate in tech (unless you make a living keeping MS gear working of course).

    Without MS we would have a much stronger, more diverse software industry. We would have many more (and healthier) hardware companies, and far fewer of the security, virus, and malware problems that the MS monoculture has caused.

  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5GM was being scrutinized in the '50s. They decided they shouldn't pursue market share, so they focused on making better/more expensive cars. Take a look at the '55 Chevy vs. the '57 Chevy, which are basically the same car. If only Microsoft would follow that example and improve what they have rather than try to take over everything.
  • koko775, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Indeed. The guy is anti--the-DOJ-case, and is generally indignant that people would dislike Microsoft for using (or abusing) its position.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14"Without it (msft), we would not have had a personal-computing revolution or, accordingly, an Internet one."

    THIS GUY IS ON CRACK!!!
  • MechaFenris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Whether or not you believe it, Apple did. Microsoft just rode the coattails of IBM's personal computer with a purchased OS and a shrewd licensing deal. Apple, Atari, Commodore, TI, Altair, Tandy, Timex, Acorn, Osborne, DEC... etc etc. :) I could go on, but you get the idea. They all predated Microsoft's little jaunt.

    What's the one thing Microsoft developed completely on their own without grabbing, absorbing, or running competitors out of business?

    Microsoft Bob.

    I rest my case.
  • WhiskerTheMad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"I don't hate Microsoft. I just love freedom. Microsoft hates freedom. So we're enemies."

    Best thing I've heard all week.
  • mcflynnthm, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Seriously. So there's gotta be more to it than that. Otherwise, why haven't we sued Apple for including iTunes, iChat, and Safari in OSX?
  • mastercheif, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@mcflynn

    The problem isnt that Apple is including these with their OS. Microsoft is getting in trouble becuase if you can't remove their products, and if you do, windows breaks. It is very easy to unistall anything apple includes with their OS.
  • pantuky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4These guys are missing the point of the article entirely. The article depricates legal efforts to corner Microsoft. It focuses on the technological changes we are seeing in computer usage.
  • rattus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Anyone who has seen what has happened to Wang, EMC, or anyone else that attempts to lock in and manhandle their customers (ie. anyone paying attention) should not be surprised.

    They should hurry up and make something new as opposed to trying to bully the market into giving them money. No one likes to pay when they feel like they're being punked.
  • author20, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5GM, Firestone and Standard Oil were actually sued (1st anti-trust lawsuit by the US gov) in the 1920s for anti-trust action; they bribed Los Angeles city officials and the Red Line tracks were removed from critical lines in LA.

    You could get across town in 45 minutes, faster than any freeway today even if you go full bore 100 MPH.

    GM killed the electric car in the 90s, and it seems they did so because of the oil industry, which it appears to be representing. GM might not really be a legitamate auto manufacturer, and if Nissan takes them over, it will be the death of a company that is not really good for America.

    One thing i wonder -- why is the UAW so silent for 5 years as Honda and Toyota sold hybrids and GM killed their electric car? Don't the workers deserve mass layoffs if they let GM drive off a cliff?
  • deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Windows is easy to support? I think one of the hardest jobs in the entire IT industry is trying to deal with Windows desktop support. It's supposed to be easy but it's just not. It's never as simple as it sounds. I can't tell you how many times I've said to myself "OK, this should be an easy job" and 4 hours later I'm knee deep in malware disinfection. That's not easy.
  • carmencada, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sounds like this guy is a total MS fanboy to me.

    And BTW Apple made the first PC. Microsoft just made it cheaper and popularized it.

    Seeing as Microsoft got where it is by stealing freeware off the internet and copywrtting it as their own inventions I think they are getting their just due. It's about time the biggest thieves in the computer world gave back something to the companies and programmers they stole from.
  • Lanser84, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I'll agree that it hasn't shined like it used to in a while. However, the role of: 1: Antitrust litigation against it, and 2: its lack of moral opposition in it's own self-defense to those antitrust prosectutions should not be discounted.

    #1 and #2 combined have to hurt a companies ability to innovate. They are right to fear further anti-trust prosecution (which continues to this day in Europe), and without a proud moral defense they can't help but internalize that fear and cut off their own innovation before they get rolling.
  • h2d2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Yes MS is in for a "longterm decline" and there's going to be peace in the middle east soon.

    Yawn!
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I don't hate Microsoft. I just love freedom. Microsoft hates freedom. So we're enemies.
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3[quote]The only people that "hate" Microsoft for the most part are those select few here[/quote]

    The old "Those who hate so and so are not normal" claim.

    Or should I say "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists"?

    I don't know where you've been hiding, but MS has become an industry joke for MOST people. Consumers use MS products because they are the "standard." I've seen this time and again from the average consumer; they want to use what everyone else is using.

    But they aren't impressed by MS software. They don't praise MS or get excited by new product releases. Look at the reaction to MS products compared to cults like Nintendo and Apple. MS is bland and mediocre--and when it tries to be "cool" it comes up with something goofy or offensive.

    If you don't believe that, go to Best Buy or Walmart and talk to some people. The majority will say "Oooh, I hate Windows. It's always crashing. And I have to clean my PC from viruses every month." People are having so many problems that they now just reformat and reinstall rather than pay someone $90-290 an hour to fix a problem.

    Vista isn't going to make things significantly better, btw. It's more of the same mediocre MS bloatware.
  • uassholes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3All of these comments about the trees are just fine, however the article almost but not quite, manages to see the forest. His biggest mistake is in giving credit to Microsoft for the ubiquitousness of computers in our modern times as if they had invented them.

    In fact there were a multitude of vendors trying to put computers in homes and offices in the late '70's and early '80s, including the Apple II since 1977. I and others who had been using the big iron professionally but played at home with S100 and CP/M, admired and adopted the original PC when it came out in '81, it seems to me, from a feeling we had that 1) IBM had got it right, and 2) it was IBM. It had nothing to do with Microsoft; we didn't much care who was the middleman that had bought a version of QDOS (itself copied from CP/M) from Seattle Computer Products, then turned around and licensed it to IBM as MS DOS.

    Over the years whenever someone developed some software that would make DOS and later, Windows useful, such as networking and spreadsheets, MS bought or copied, and incorporated it. Considering that MS just happened to be in the right place at the right time to ride IBM's coattails, and later have done little if any innovation or development, then to claim as the article's author does that they are responsible for a PC in every home and office is *****.

    So that's the past. At present, OSes such as Linux and Solaris which are super for servers are getting better on the desktop. And as the article's author correctly points out, our OS from now on is more and more becoming the Internet.

    Basically, MS is a phenomenon, not a fixture. A big one to be sure, but still just a dust devil that only exists when the conditions are just right.
  • RichPowers, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14That, and Microsoft's desire to overextend itself just so it can be no. 1, usually at great expense...
  • joshwehatetech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You need to get out of your little loving hole where companies want group hugs and figure out that ASP competes against PHP. I enjoy PHP and work in it primarily (mainly because it can run on anything), but there is plenty of spark in PHP running on IIS due to different libraries available to it. However, Microsoft has an invested interest in ASP and closely integrating it with their products. Compitition is good and if PHP makes ASP better and ASP makes PHP better who exactly loses?

  • rotten777, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6@pennyfx

    If Honda's stereo controlled which music you heard and was unable to be removed to be replaced by another stereo, I'm sure there would be a decrease in sales of Hondas and/or a lawsuit from stereo manufacturers.
  • rotten777, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8@ScornForSega

    How many linux users have you supported? How many Windows servers have you supported? How many Exchange servers have you supported?

    I have yet to see, in my career supporting BSDi, NetBSD, Debian, RedHat, WBEL, Windows NT 4.0, 2K, 2K3, and all desktop releases of Windows since 3.1, a unix/linux/posix system randomly stop working. I have seen hardware failures on all platforms but only on Windows based systems have things stopped suddenly, only to have a reboot fix it. Especially with Exchange and NT4&5.

    I can say that 2K3 and XP have gotten much better but I've still had better luck with other platforms.

    Note: At my last job, I supported close to 30k people with 73 servers on RedHat, 2 of which on Windows 2003.
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2[quote]Kirkpatrick should be attacking the anti-trust laws[/quote]

    Now why the hell should anyone attack the anti-trust laws!? You should be glad we have them!
  • predhme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I work in a multi-platform environment. We have several versions of Redhat Enterprise, Windows XP, VMS, OSX, and others. To tell you the truth, Windows has to be the easiest operating system to support out of the aforementioned. Mainly for its GUI (i know, a real admin doesn't need a GUI).

    We have a requirement to setup about 10 workstations (HP) with quad-head video cards running on RedHat Enterprise 4. Guess what, it won't work. Why, the nvidia driver causes xwindows to crash. Apparently it is a known bug with nvidia driver. We have had a call in for over 6 months to Nvidia. Driver support for Windows is unsurpassed, one of Windows positive attributes (mostly attributed to its popularity).

    A user with limited knowledge of Windows could successfully setup and configure a workstation with 4 monitors given the appropriate hardware. Imagine someone knowing nothing about Linux being told to vi the xorg.conf (may vary on version).... Scary isn't it?

    Even so, system files, configuration files etc, are consistently RELOCATED throughout the system with each upgrade. Either that or they are renamed. Microsoft has been fairly consistent in the location and names of system files that administrators work with on a regular basis.
    Personally I am a OSX fan and am not trying to promote Windows in any way.
  • radiofrequency, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I never understood how a rational, thinking human being could conclude that the government's legal assault on Microsoft was only a reaction to its inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows.

    Indeed, if anyone read the Court's findings of facts, they would discover a list of no fewer than 100 examples detailing how Microsoft leveraged Windows to grow Internet Explorer not for consumer good but to deprive a competitor of access to distribution channels, limit the rights of systems builders to include alternative browsers, and leverage proprietary hooks in Windows to alternately break a competitor's browser or put it at a severe performance disadvantage.

    Read the findings of facts here: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
  • joshwehatetech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Managing Windows clients isn't exactly rocket science. Unless you are only handling a few clients dealing with malware isn't really an issue (you either have software/hardware to prevent it, you run them all with restricted access, or you simply blow the machine away when it becomes screwed up). I have spent more time dealing with bad hardware (CAPS!!!!) than I have spent trying to fix Windows related problems.

    Also the argument that Windows applications don't play well together I find rather humorous (if you say they don't play well with other 3rd party applications I would agree with this), but I haven't had much problem from an integration standpoint in regards to their own products. If anything it spawns integration through LDAP that makes the user experience as a whole a better experience. I think some people just need to look at the bigger picture and how they are dealing with their Windows environment or simply switch to Mac or Linux if you can.

    --Josh
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"David Kirkpatrick, FORTUNE magazine senior editor"

    Needs to learn a little bit more computer industry history so he doesn't say foolish things about MS anymore.

    I don't think he's an MS fanboy, I think he's a big-business Republican type. The kind that blindly sides with a corporation over government regulation no matter what crimes it committed. Here he is advocating that MS go back to its evil ways when it says its going to reform.
  • opnickc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2author20 - a lot of FUD towards GM in that comment, not entirely unfounded, but not entirely true either.

    Indeed, GM worked to get rid of the public transit in LA. Bear in mind this was before anybody really thought burning gasoline would have any ill effects. It was a smart business move that helped all car manf - without public transit, people would buy cars. I hardly consider it a major antitrust violation, since this move helped all car companies, not just GM.

    As far as the electric car, keep in mind GM is the one who created it too. They stopped the program because it wasn't making money. Short-sighted? Yes. Conspiracy? Nah. GM was the first to make electric cars; if they thought they were the future (which I still believe they are), they would've stuck with it and dominated the competition as they tried to catch up. Now when electric cars do really start to take off (most likely starting in the form of plug-in hybrids, which will open public to the idea of plugging in a car), GM could be behind. Stupid business yes, but not conspiracy.

    With the Nissan talks, you need to remember that despite all of the negative news coming out of detroit, GM is still the worlds largest automobile company, not Nissan. It's highly unlikely that Nissan will "take over" GM. Some sort of alliance is most likely.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"
    I also remember when Microsoft started listening to people, and when they started treating security as a requirement and not a swearword. It was when news sites started saying Linux is more secure than Windows and people started listening. Once Microsoft realised they had real competition they acted:"

    With the "Get the Facts campain."
  • jzp-digg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Today sharing, openness, and interoperability are simply what customers expect and demand." Yup, that crazy internet winning again.
  • jamey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't think Microsoft will ever live up to what most consumers actually now want. It's up to the alternatives to dislodge some of Microsoft's market share, especially in the home. There is a large percentage of people that use their computer at home for just basic computing tasks: word processing, spreadsheets, surfing the Web. In this instance, the alternatives (Linux-based OSes mainly) are far more enticing, they just need to be a cinch to switch to - and they need to know they exist.
  • sdevoid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@OBKenobi

    When I said he should be attacking antitrust laws, I just meant that his argument was misdirected. I don't agree with his argument--but I would rather he direct it where it belongs. I've always thought antitrust law was necessary to protect the consumer.
  • joshwehatetech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The only people that "hate" Microsoft for the most part are those select few here on Digg and Slashdot who are anti big business and feel Microsoft's policies of the late 90s and early this decade should get them eliminated off the face of this planet. The reality is the rest hate Microsoft because of Spyware and Vendors seling $300 with POS equipment. If they fix this with Vista (no matter if everything is copied from Apple who copied someone else) no one but this community will give a flicking ***** about it. I would bet 85% of Mac users switch due to computer failure or Malware not because Microsoft is the evil empire bent on world domination.

    Hopefully they get their ***** together (recent history with SP2 and Server 2003 and IIS 6/Exchange 2003 shows they are) and then they can focus on providing something that isn't that this community deems a Mac clone.
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]In short the article says that the web is everything these days and the long decline of local applications has begun[/quote]

    That's been the dream of vendors for years. But it's never going to happen. Online services will become much more sophisticated, taking over the functionality of some apps. But when you're doing work, rather than screwing around with some social-oriented web stuff, the web is no substitute for desktop apps. Who would use an online 3D app instead of Maya? What online office suite is going to have the features needed for professionals?

    Another problem is security. Businesses are not going to open up their networks to online application services, or have their documents hosted by someone like Microsoft, Yahoo, or some shady company operating out of Kazakhstan. You've already seen how fast these companies sell out customer data to the highest bidder--or a government.
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]GM, Firestone and Standard Oil were actually sued (1st anti-trust lawsuit by the US gov) in the 1920s for anti-trust action[/quote]

    They also drove Ethanol out of the market. Now look at what "cheap" gas prices have gotten us. They're not so cheap after all, if you include all the war.
  • 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@predhem -> We have a requirement to setup about 10 workstations (HP) with quad-head video cards running on RedHat Enterprise 4. Guess what, it won't work. Why, the nvidia driver causes xwindows to crash. Apparently it is a known bug with nvidia driver. We have had a call in for over 6 months to Nvidia

    This has nothing to do with Linux, and everything to do with vendors. The fact that vendors have better driver support for windows says nothing of the quality or suitability of Windows itself to a particular task. NVidia sucks, not Linux. Drivers matter, of course, but I'm not sure if good driver support is as valuable on a system riddled with vulnerabilities.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"And BTW Apple made the first PC. Microsoft just made it cheaper and popularized it."
    sounds like carmencada is a total Mac fanboy to me.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.