4 ms·

As with a good chunk of MS's desktop dominance, a big factor was Lotus' inability or unwillingness to embrace the common interface in Windows (what we now think

As with a good chunk of MS's desktop dominance, a big factor was Lotus' inability or unwillingness to embrace the common interface in Windows (what we now think of as standard menus for File/Edit/etc). Lotus had its own proprietary menu structure generally invoked with slash. ALL programs did when Lotus was introduced. Its partisans made it hard for Lotus to abandon it, but its failure to shift into the new reality meant the oodles of new people flocking to computing as Windows exploded went to Excel by default, because 1-2-3 was impenetrable. Word vs. WordPerfect played out in much the same way. In both cases the MSFT offering was, in many ways, superior, but a key piece of it was the legacy player's refusal to adjust to the common menus Windows users expected.

trelane 4y ago
Also, there was the bundling and OEM backroom deals.
- ubermonkey 4y ago
  That was mostly (exclusively?) Windows, though, not Office.
  - trelane 4y ago
    It was Office + Works, and other strategic assets.
    - ubermonkey 4y ago
      I do not believe any bundling or OEM deals were material factors in Office's success beyond the fact that exactly those deals helped establish and preserve WINDOWS' hegemony.
      - trelane 4y ago
        Ok. I do belive it. You have that entirely backwards. The Windows monopoly was leverage they used to push out competing applications. From the DOJ's proposed finding of fact (https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings-fact-1 https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings...) "208.3. Microsoft's unresponsiveness and its actions to delay the Windows 95 license negotiations with IBM followed soon after IBM announced that it was seeking to acquire Lotus Development Corp., a direct competitor of Microsoft in messaging and office suite software, among other products. IBM announced on June 5, 1995 a hostile takeover attempt of Lotus. On June 11, IBM and Lotus reached an agreement for IBM to acquire Lotus. IBM completed the acquisition on approximately July 5, 1995. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:9 - 36:12. Among other products, Lotus offered Lotus Notes, an e-mail product, and Lotus SmartSuite, an office productivity suite, that competed with Microsoft's software. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:21 - 36:5." "Microsoft repeatedly penalized IBM for competing against Microsoft Microsoft withheld a Windows 95 license from IBM until 15 minutes before the product's launch because of IBM's preloading of competing products Microsoft conditioned access to critical marketing support, and other terms and conditions for Windows provided to other OEMs, on IBM's not preloading competing products with the PCs it shipped Microsoft sought to condition substantial MDA price reductions on IBM's ceasing to support competing products Search for "quicktime" for more joy.
        ubermonkey 4y ago
        But all that is still small change compared to the deals forcing OEMs to bundle a license for Windows with every PC sold.
        trelane 4y ago
        Other than Office, sure? (Office is has long been one of their main cash cows. Is part of why they wanted to keep it on Mac, which is pointedly not Windows). It's also irrelevant. The point was that they used the pricing of Windows (which the OEMs) and withholding information about Windows to force OEMs to bundle Office/Works instead of competitors. That they did it is clear. Whether they did it for simple profit (Office/Works) or to further enhance the moat around Windows (Java, QuickTime). They did it using Windows as both carrot and stick, to gain compliance. Because OEMs had no other choice.
taylodl 4y ago
There was also the plethora of undocumented Windows API's the Office programs were using that weren't available to anybody else. That was one of the thrusts of the antitrust lawsuit leveled against Microsoft. The best thing coming out of that was Microsoft's $150 million investment into Apple in an attempt to convince the government that they had competition and weren't a monopoly. Apple had 2% of the marketshare at the time - some competitor!

trelane 4y ago

Also, there was the bundling and OEM backroom deals.

ubermonkey 4y ago
That was mostly (exclusively?) Windows, though, not Office.
- trelane 4y ago
  It was Office + Works, and other strategic assets.
  - ubermonkey 4y ago
    I do not believe any bundling or OEM deals were material factors in Office's success beyond the fact that exactly those deals helped establish and preserve WINDOWS' hegemony.
    - trelane 4y ago
      Ok. I do belive it. You have that entirely backwards. The Windows monopoly was leverage they used to push out competing applications. From the DOJ's proposed finding of fact (https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings-fact-1 https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings...) "208.3. Microsoft's unresponsiveness and its actions to delay the Windows 95 license negotiations with IBM followed soon after IBM announced that it was seeking to acquire Lotus Development Corp., a direct competitor of Microsoft in messaging and office suite software, among other products. IBM announced on June 5, 1995 a hostile takeover attempt of Lotus. On June 11, IBM and Lotus reached an agreement for IBM to acquire Lotus. IBM completed the acquisition on approximately July 5, 1995. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:9 - 36:12. Among other products, Lotus offered Lotus Notes, an e-mail product, and Lotus SmartSuite, an office productivity suite, that competed with Microsoft's software. Norris, 6/7/99am, at 35:21 - 36:5." "Microsoft repeatedly penalized IBM for competing against Microsoft Microsoft withheld a Windows 95 license from IBM until 15 minutes before the product's launch because of IBM's preloading of competing products Microsoft conditioned access to critical marketing support, and other terms and conditions for Windows provided to other OEMs, on IBM's not preloading competing products with the PCs it shipped Microsoft sought to condition substantial MDA price reductions on IBM's ceasing to support competing products Search for "quicktime" for more joy.
      - ubermonkey 4y ago
        But all that is still small change compared to the deals forcing OEMs to bundle a license for Windows with every PC sold.
        trelane 4y ago
        Other than Office, sure? (Office is has long been one of their main cash cows. Is part of why they wanted to keep it on Mac, which is pointedly not Windows). It's also irrelevant. The point was that they used the pricing of Windows (which the OEMs) and withholding information about Windows to force OEMs to bundle Office/Works instead of competitors. That they did it is clear. Whether they did it for simple profit (Office/Works) or to further enhance the moat around Windows (Java, QuickTime). They did it using Windows as both carrot and stick, to gain compliance. Because OEMs had no other choice.

taylodl 4y ago

There was also the plethora of undocumented Windows API's the Office programs were using that weren't available to anybody else. That was one of the thrusts of the antitrust lawsuit leveled against Microsoft. The best thing coming out of that was Microsoft's $150 million investment into Apple in an attempt to convince the government that they had competition and weren't a monopoly. Apple had 2% of the marketshare at the time - some competitor!