3 ms·

The Perpetual Microsoft Canard

15 points by kenjackson 16y ago

latch 16y ago
When people talk of the demise of a company with billions in cash (and more billions coming in every year), they are generally talking about the demise of its influence. The question isn't whether Microsoft will vanish next year (or even in a decade), because it won't. The question is will Microsoft be a leader or a follower? An innovator or a copy-cat? It isn't inconsistent to say that Microsoft will continue to sell a lot of copies of Windows and Office and remain very relevant in the enterprise, while at the same time saying that Microsoft, on its present course, is doomed (for lack of a better word). Because, the Microsoft that we know from the 80s and 90s just isn't the same Microsoft in a lot of ways that matter to geeks and investors. Much like GM isn't the same car company it was a couple decades ago. Things can always change. It's probably easier to claim the #1 spot or fall from the #1 spot, than to reclaim it, but it isn't impossible. As for XBox's success, I remain highly skeptical of that division. First, they haven't recouped the billions it took to enter the market. Most importantly though, you are only as good as your current console. There's little loyalty in the video game console market. Had the PS3 been better priced and launched sooner, the red-ring would have been a far bigger disaster. It's cut throat...which is great, but you simply can't say Xbox 720 will succeed because Xbox 360 [barely] came in 2nd place in a 3 person race.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Actually XBox 360 is #3 in the race (just fell behind PS3 WW sales -- XBox kills the PS3 in the US, but the PS3 kills it in Asia by a HUGE margin. PS3 has a slight lead in Europe, but pretty much a wash there). With that said, for MS the "race" in the console wars really isn't a race. They want to be in the race, but it doesn't really matter that much if they are #1, #2, or #3, as long as #3 isn't 5M units sold WW. The XBox has always been strategic to be in the living room. And for that it is succesful. The real question is can MS leverage that to do something bigger? That remains to be seen, although so far they've been a bit slow with it. Fortunately Sony, Apple, and Google have been even slower.
georgemcbay 16y ago
"I don't like how much Microsoft charges for its tools" I've got plenty of issues with Microsoft but the cost of their developer tools isn't one of them. I mean, sure Visual Studio Ultimate Super Turbo Edition Alpha X costs $11k, but who actually needs that? The Express Editions are free, which is very favorable pricing compared to say MonoTouch for Android or iOS which cost $400 just to get your foot in the door.
drewcoo 16y ago
I'm an ex-'softie and proud of the work I did there. It seems every current or past employee of Microsoft has some story to tell about "the good old days" when everything was smaller or faster or they were all only X steps from BillG or everyone was just more "hard core". Most of the stories I personally hear (or comments I read on minimsft.blogspot.com) about the impending implosion at Microsoft seem more like seeing greener engineering grass somewhere else. Usually in the past at Microsoft. The internal politics are often toxic and the raw amount of stuff for someone new to learn is so daunting that someone who's been there for a while seems like a god relative to the newcomer. I think that probably helps grow this kind of mythology. More experienced people leave (by choice or because of the draconian review system) and the newer 'softies think the golden age is ending. Externally, it's a lot of fun to talk about Microsoft dying. In the face of record profits, wasn't it? Yeah, whatever. Are they relevant? What does that mean? Is my sewer bill relevant? I still pay it. People still pay Microsoft. I could use their stock chart as a straight edge but that doesn't mean they're dying.

15 points by kenjackson 16y ago

latch 16y ago

When people talk of the demise of a company with billions in cash (and more billions coming in every year), they are generally talking about the demise of its influence. The question isn't whether Microsoft will vanish next year (or even in a decade), because it won't. The question is will Microsoft be a leader or a follower? An innovator or a copy-cat? It isn't inconsistent to say that Microsoft will continue to sell a lot of copies of Windows and Office and remain very relevant in the enterprise, while at the same time saying that Microsoft, on its present course, is doomed (for lack of a better word). Because, the Microsoft that we know from the 80s and 90s just isn't the same Microsoft in a lot of ways that matter to geeks and investors. Much like GM isn't the same car company it was a couple decades ago. Things can always change. It's probably easier to claim the #1 spot or fall from the #1 spot, than to reclaim it, but it isn't impossible. As for XBox's success, I remain highly skeptical of that division. First, they haven't recouped the billions it took to enter the market. Most importantly though, you are only as good as your current console. There's little loyalty in the video game console market. Had the PS3 been better priced and launched sooner, the red-ring would have been a far bigger disaster. It's cut throat...which is great, but you simply can't say Xbox 720 will succeed because Xbox 360 [barely] came in 2nd place in a 3 person race.

kenjackson 16y ago
Actually XBox 360 is #3 in the race (just fell behind PS3 WW sales -- XBox kills the PS3 in the US, but the PS3 kills it in Asia by a HUGE margin. PS3 has a slight lead in Europe, but pretty much a wash there). With that said, for MS the "race" in the console wars really isn't a race. They want to be in the race, but it doesn't really matter that much if they are #1, #2, or #3, as long as #3 isn't 5M units sold WW. The XBox has always been strategic to be in the living room. And for that it is succesful. The real question is can MS leverage that to do something bigger? That remains to be seen, although so far they've been a bit slow with it. Fortunately Sony, Apple, and Google have been even slower.

georgemcbay 16y ago

"I don't like how much Microsoft charges for its tools" I've got plenty of issues with Microsoft but the cost of their developer tools isn't one of them. I mean, sure Visual Studio Ultimate Super Turbo Edition Alpha X costs $11k, but who actually needs that? The Express Editions are free, which is very favorable pricing compared to say MonoTouch for Android or iOS which cost $400 just to get your foot in the door.

drewcoo 16y ago

I'm an ex-'softie and proud of the work I did there. It seems every current or past employee of Microsoft has some story to tell about "the good old days" when everything was smaller or faster or they were all only X steps from BillG or everyone was just more "hard core". Most of the stories I personally hear (or comments I read on minimsft.blogspot.com) about the impending implosion at Microsoft seem more like seeing greener engineering grass somewhere else. Usually in the past at Microsoft. The internal politics are often toxic and the raw amount of stuff for someone new to learn is so daunting that someone who's been there for a while seems like a god relative to the newcomer. I think that probably helps grow this kind of mythology. More experienced people leave (by choice or because of the draconian review system) and the newer 'softies think the golden age is ending. Externally, it's a lot of fun to talk about Microsoft dying. In the face of record profits, wasn't it? Yeah, whatever. Are they relevant? What does that mean? Is my sewer bill relevant? I still pay it. People still pay Microsoft. I could use their stock chart as a straight edge but that doesn't mean they're dying.