3 ms·

Its been Microsoft's strategy since its formation to make a lot of proprietary technology when it moves into any space and do so in a way that locks customers i

Its been Microsoft's strategy since its formation to make a lot of proprietary technology when it moves into any space and do so in a way that locks customers in such that if and when it is no longer the top product the customers can't easily leave. They do this in every single product and market they operate in. Where they can't ultimately win they buy their competitor and integrate the product then slowly kill it.

BizarroLand 1y ago
Gates never even made DOS. He bought it from someone else and rebranded it. He's been a con man since day 1.
- edm0nd 1y ago
  Still the only big tech CEO who can jump over a chair tho
  - loloquwowndueo 1y ago
    But I bet he can’t throw them the way monkey boy Ballmer did.
  - ASalazarMX 1y ago
    New business idea: selling small luxury chairs to big tech CEOs. Subscription service, if they don't pay a million per month, they lose their license to jump over their chair.
- psunavy03 1y ago
  . . . being a savvy businessman is a con man? There's loads to criticize about MS in the 80s and 90s, but buying DOS fair and square and then building an ecosystem around it was just a good business move. The stuff they got sued and almost broken up over is the sketchy part.
  - coliveira 1y ago
    The point that he's a con man is that he signed a document with IBM to supply an OS when he had none. Of course in retrospect he was "smart" to go around and buy one, but in fact he was promising IBM something he didn't have and in an alternate universe he could be sued for that.
    - pletnes 1y ago
      If I order a new car, it may well not exist yet. The deal is that there will be a car on hand at some agreed upon date. I don’t think Gates did anything more illegal than the analogous car deal. More risky, perhaps, but that’s another thing entirely!
      - BizarroLand 1y ago
        IF you order a car from an unknown company, you might get lucky and it turn out to be Lamborghini in 1963 but it also might turn out to be Aptera Motors in 2004.
      - gh02t 1y ago
        It's unethical to sell someone something if there are hidden risks. You wouldn't knowingly order a car from a company that tells you they know how to make cars but doesn't actually have the experience. Maybe IBM was informed and understood the risk, but from what I've read about it Gates was less than forthcoming about what Microsoft actually had.
    - keeda 1y ago
      Based on the top links from a quick search, it seems IBM was fully aware that they were sub-licensing the OS through Microsoft: https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got-the-ibm-pc-os-contract https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got... https://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with-the-devil/ https://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with... From the second link: However, Microsoft knew that a small company named Seattle Computer Products had developed an operating system similar to CP/M called QDOS, for Quick-and-Dirty Operating System. Microsoft suggested to IBM that QDOS could work as the IBM PC’s operating system. IBM asked Microsoft to license and further develop the operating system, which led to the formal contract on November 6, 1980. After the contract was signed, in December 1980 Microsoft would license the QDOS operating system to begin development of the IBM PC version.
coliveira 1y ago
It is important to remind people of this, because they imagine that MS is integrating open source projects like git, linux, and others for the goodness of their heart. It's well know that this is just step 1 of embrace, extend, and extinguish. Next step (underway) is to add many features that will work only under the MS ecosystem and finally declare those original tools as legacy that should not be allowed in corporations.
- madeofpalk 1y ago
  I don't think anyone is under the impression that Microsoft is integrating with projects like git or linux out of the goodness of their heart. They do it for the exact same reason anyone does - thats were users/customers are, and they want to make money from them. This isn't some evil conspiracy, it's just normal boring ways to build products for people.
  - coliveira 1y ago
    > just normal boring ways to build products Microsoft is never looking for normal, boring ways to build products. A software company does't get much ahead thinking like this. They're using their old and successful strategy of embracing, extending, and extinguishing.
  - HPsquared 1y ago
    A little from column A, a little from column B.
- josephcsible 1y ago
  They even do that with ISO C. They claim that portable functions like strlen are deprecated and insecure, and their recommended replacements are MSVC-specific.
strongpigeon 1y ago
Honestly, having worked on Excel at Microsoft (though pretty far from the file format and a long time after OOXML was introduced), I'm pretty sure that the structure of OOXML is convoluted because it was easier to align with the data structures used by the app.
- piker 1y ago
  My take as an interested third party as well.
broknbottle 1y ago
Yah and they’ve only gotten sneakier with it. VS Code and the proprietary Pylance, remote ssh, etc

BizarroLand 1y ago

Gates never even made DOS. He bought it from someone else and rebranded it. He's been a con man since day 1.

edm0nd 1y ago
Still the only big tech CEO who can jump over a chair tho
- loloquwowndueo 1y ago
  But I bet he can’t throw them the way monkey boy Ballmer did.
- ASalazarMX 1y ago
  New business idea: selling small luxury chairs to big tech CEOs. Subscription service, if they don't pay a million per month, they lose their license to jump over their chair.
psunavy03 1y ago
. . . being a savvy businessman is a con man? There's loads to criticize about MS in the 80s and 90s, but buying DOS fair and square and then building an ecosystem around it was just a good business move. The stuff they got sued and almost broken up over is the sketchy part.
- coliveira 1y ago
  The point that he's a con man is that he signed a document with IBM to supply an OS when he had none. Of course in retrospect he was "smart" to go around and buy one, but in fact he was promising IBM something he didn't have and in an alternate universe he could be sued for that.
  - pletnes 1y ago
    If I order a new car, it may well not exist yet. The deal is that there will be a car on hand at some agreed upon date. I don’t think Gates did anything more illegal than the analogous car deal. More risky, perhaps, but that’s another thing entirely!
    - BizarroLand 1y ago
      IF you order a car from an unknown company, you might get lucky and it turn out to be Lamborghini in 1963 but it also might turn out to be Aptera Motors in 2004.
    - gh02t 1y ago
      It's unethical to sell someone something if there are hidden risks. You wouldn't knowingly order a car from a company that tells you they know how to make cars but doesn't actually have the experience. Maybe IBM was informed and understood the risk, but from what I've read about it Gates was less than forthcoming about what Microsoft actually had.
  - keeda 1y ago
    Based on the top links from a quick search, it seems IBM was fully aware that they were sub-licensing the OS through Microsoft: https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got-the-ibm-pc-os-contract https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got... https://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with-the-devil/ https://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with... From the second link: However, Microsoft knew that a small company named Seattle Computer Products had developed an operating system similar to CP/M called QDOS, for Quick-and-Dirty Operating System. Microsoft suggested to IBM that QDOS could work as the IBM PC’s operating system. IBM asked Microsoft to license and further develop the operating system, which led to the formal contract on November 6, 1980. After the contract was signed, in December 1980 Microsoft would license the QDOS operating system to begin development of the IBM PC version.

coliveira 1y ago

It is important to remind people of this, because they imagine that MS is integrating open source projects like git, linux, and others for the goodness of their heart. It's well know that this is just step 1 of embrace, extend, and extinguish. Next step (underway) is to add many features that will work only under the MS ecosystem and finally declare those original tools as legacy that should not be allowed in corporations.

madeofpalk 1y ago
I don't think anyone is under the impression that Microsoft is integrating with projects like git or linux out of the goodness of their heart. They do it for the exact same reason anyone does - thats were users/customers are, and they want to make money from them. This isn't some evil conspiracy, it's just normal boring ways to build products for people.
- coliveira 1y ago
  > just normal boring ways to build products Microsoft is never looking for normal, boring ways to build products. A software company does't get much ahead thinking like this. They're using their old and successful strategy of embracing, extending, and extinguishing.
- HPsquared 1y ago
  A little from column A, a little from column B.
josephcsible 1y ago
They even do that with ISO C. They claim that portable functions like strlen are deprecated and insecure, and their recommended replacements are MSVC-specific.

strongpigeon 1y ago

Honestly, having worked on Excel at Microsoft (though pretty far from the file format and a long time after OOXML was introduced), I'm pretty sure that the structure of OOXML is convoluted because it was easier to align with the data structures used by the app.

piker 1y ago
My take as an interested third party as well.

broknbottle 1y ago

Yah and they’ve only gotten sneakier with it. VS Code and the proprietary Pylance, remote ssh, etc