3 ms·

Microsoft Has Failed

10 points by Thrymr 14y ago

ameister14 14y ago
This guy displays in this article a fundamental misunderstanding about the direction Microsoft is going. That's totally understandable, but it really undercuts the effectiveness of his argument.
- hcarvalhoalves 14y ago
  Which direction you consider Microsoft is taking? Personally, all I see them doing is the same thing they have been doing for 2 decades: milk their legacy cow. I don't really see big changes in direction. They have Windows Phone? Yes, but that's hardly new, they had Windows Mobile and CE for ages. Windows Surface? Sure, but again, not new, they are just catching up with the market. The most innovative thing I've seen Microsoft release was the XBox - and even then, it was the next logical step after predicting the death of PC gaming. They released it to keep their DirectX/.NET lock-in.
  - digitalpacman 14y ago
    Uh. They released tablets with multi touch before apple did, just no one cared, ha ha.
  - digitalpacman 14y ago
    Also, Visual Studio is still the most advanced IDE in the world. And also Microsoft's development suite for Windows Phone 8 is amazing. It's years ahead of android, and a "bit" better than iOS. Just no developers care because the market is so low.
- jpatokal 14y ago
  I think his argument is more that Microsoft can try to go in that direction (by which I presume you mean the dream of seamless mobile-tablet-desktop integration) all they want, but their current policies are pissing off all their partners and customers to such an extent that they will be unable to, and are thus doomed.
- astrodust 14y ago
  Microsoft is driving off of a cliff in a hurry. It's not good in the worst possible way. Not only do they have to win the next generation console wars for XBox to remain a viable platform, but they have to simultaneously fight for their very survival in the post-PC era where they're being absolutely thrashed by Android and iOS. If they just circled the wagons, stuck to their core competencies of Microsoft Office and Windows Server, made their services play nice with everyone, and lived in quasi-retirement Computer Associates style, they'd do quite well for themselves, remain a viable company for decades to come servicing the enterprise. Instead, trying to position Windows 8 as more "friendly" or whatever they're going for with the new look and feel is just going to piss off Corporate IT while simultaneously not really catching on with a fussy, increasingly savvy general public. They're also burning their relationship with their OEMs by making their own hardware. When HP and Dell decide to go with Android or ChromeOS instead, Microsoft will undoubtedly report a billion dollar loss in one of their quarters because Windows everything sales will have dried up. This is also coupled with their complete inability to understand what the cloud means to consumers and corporate users. You'd think by now Microsoft would have, for instance, a world-class desktop management platform, that you could pay Microsoft a fixed fee, per PC, for a complete managed solution, but no, they don't do that. They leave it to their highly dysfunctional ecosystem of independent vendors and certified consultants, most of which are barely more competent than your average Geek Squad or Taco Bell employee. Microsoft's success comes largely from being able to dupe and deceive various organizations into doing their bidding. The bait-and-switch with IBM and OS/2 is legendary, not only sending IBM into the weeds for a decade, but ensuring they came out on top with Office, as many of the competing products were porting from DOS to OS/2. They also scored a huge hit with DEC (now HP) and SGI by convincing them to switch to Windows NT instead of shipping their own proprietary OS. That's largely why Windows Server is such an embedded part of enterprise. If DEC was committed to doing it, it couldn't be bad, right? Those days are over. Nobody's going to be fooled twice. Fortunes can change quickly in this industry. One day Novell was the undisputed king of office servers and in less than four years they were almost completely displaced by Windows NT. At best any company is two purchasing cycles away from complete irrelevance.
digitalpacman 14y ago
He didn't even mention one of the other facts that lots of people are using their technology, the fact that C# is growing in popularity, which is why windows servers are purchased. Windows servers aren't purchased because someone wants exchange. The developers for a new company choose to use C# for development, then naturally want everything to be of one OS. Then they hire Microsoft IT personnel who install Exchange. He also says if you don't use Office you don't need Exchange. Who the hell uses Exchange because you're using Office? No idea what this guy is talking about. He also doesn't talk about other gigantic money makers, like Microsoft SharePoint.
- astrodust 14y ago
  C# can be used on other platforms so don't think they have much lock-in here. Unity 3D (http://unity3d.com http://unity3d.com) uses it as a scripting system. You can author on Linux, OS X and Windows just the same. If anything C# is becoming more popular because it's like Java but not from Oracle, one of the few companies that is less liked than Microsoft.

10 points by Thrymr 14y ago

This guy displays in this article a fundamental misunderstanding about the direction Microsoft is going. That's totally understandable, but it really undercuts the effectiveness of his argument.

hcarvalhoalves 14y ago
Which direction you consider Microsoft is taking? Personally, all I see them doing is the same thing they have been doing for 2 decades: milk their legacy cow. I don't really see big changes in direction. They have Windows Phone? Yes, but that's hardly new, they had Windows Mobile and CE for ages. Windows Surface? Sure, but again, not new, they are just catching up with the market. The most innovative thing I've seen Microsoft release was the XBox - and even then, it was the next logical step after predicting the death of PC gaming. They released it to keep their DirectX/.NET lock-in.
- digitalpacman 14y ago
  Uh. They released tablets with multi touch before apple did, just no one cared, ha ha.
- digitalpacman 14y ago
  Also, Visual Studio is still the most advanced IDE in the world. And also Microsoft's development suite for Windows Phone 8 is amazing. It's years ahead of android, and a "bit" better than iOS. Just no developers care because the market is so low.
jpatokal 14y ago
I think his argument is more that Microsoft can try to go in that direction (by which I presume you mean the dream of seamless mobile-tablet-desktop integration) all they want, but their current policies are pissing off all their partners and customers to such an extent that they will be unable to, and are thus doomed.
astrodust 14y ago
Microsoft is driving off of a cliff in a hurry. It's not good in the worst possible way. Not only do they have to win the next generation console wars for XBox to remain a viable platform, but they have to simultaneously fight for their very survival in the post-PC era where they're being absolutely thrashed by Android and iOS. If they just circled the wagons, stuck to their core competencies of Microsoft Office and Windows Server, made their services play nice with everyone, and lived in quasi-retirement Computer Associates style, they'd do quite well for themselves, remain a viable company for decades to come servicing the enterprise. Instead, trying to position Windows 8 as more "friendly" or whatever they're going for with the new look and feel is just going to piss off Corporate IT while simultaneously not really catching on with a fussy, increasingly savvy general public. They're also burning their relationship with their OEMs by making their own hardware. When HP and Dell decide to go with Android or ChromeOS instead, Microsoft will undoubtedly report a billion dollar loss in one of their quarters because Windows everything sales will have dried up. This is also coupled with their complete inability to understand what the cloud means to consumers and corporate users. You'd think by now Microsoft would have, for instance, a world-class desktop management platform, that you could pay Microsoft a fixed fee, per PC, for a complete managed solution, but no, they don't do that. They leave it to their highly dysfunctional ecosystem of independent vendors and certified consultants, most of which are barely more competent than your average Geek Squad or Taco Bell employee. Microsoft's success comes largely from being able to dupe and deceive various organizations into doing their bidding. The bait-and-switch with IBM and OS/2 is legendary, not only sending IBM into the weeds for a decade, but ensuring they came out on top with Office, as many of the competing products were porting from DOS to OS/2. They also scored a huge hit with DEC (now HP) and SGI by convincing them to switch to Windows NT instead of shipping their own proprietary OS. That's largely why Windows Server is such an embedded part of enterprise. If DEC was committed to doing it, it couldn't be bad, right? Those days are over. Nobody's going to be fooled twice. Fortunes can change quickly in this industry. One day Novell was the undisputed king of office servers and in less than four years they were almost completely displaced by Windows NT. At best any company is two purchasing cycles away from complete irrelevance.

digitalpacman 14y ago

He didn't even mention one of the other facts that lots of people are using their technology, the fact that C# is growing in popularity, which is why windows servers are purchased. Windows servers aren't purchased because someone wants exchange. The developers for a new company choose to use C# for development, then naturally want everything to be of one OS. Then they hire Microsoft IT personnel who install Exchange. He also says if you don't use Office you don't need Exchange. Who the hell uses Exchange because you're using Office? No idea what this guy is talking about. He also doesn't talk about other gigantic money makers, like Microsoft SharePoint.

astrodust 14y ago
C# can be used on other platforms so don't think they have much lock-in here. Unity 3D (http://unity3d.com http://unity3d.com) uses it as a scripting system. You can author on Linux, OS X and Windows just the same. If anything C# is becoming more popular because it's like Java but not from Oracle, one of the few companies that is less liked than Microsoft.