3 ms·

Here's a simple way to disprove him: name one brilliant idea that Microsoft has had.

by 10ren 18y ago

DanHulton 18y ago
Licensing DOS to IBM instead of selling it.
- jimbokun 18y ago
  That is indeed brilliant, but I think it is pretty clear from context that Rondam was referring to brilliant technology and product ideas. The Google ideas he cites fall into those categories. Microsoft's most brilliant ideas were always about how to sell their products and maximize profits. A fascinating example of this is Gates' memo to Apple about licensing the Mac. http://www.scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html http://www.scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html Common wisdom is that Windows became the standard because Apple did not license Mac technology. Very early on, Gates explained the rationale for this to Apple and even suggested potential partners for licensing agreements. So it seems the "ideas" behind Mac OS were not as valuable as Gates' and Microsoft's business sense. (If you want to cite Apple's resurgence as a refutation, I would argue that the maturation of Jobs' business sense is behind that. He has been brilliant in negotiating deals that favor Apple since his return, has done a better job competing on price than people realize, and has undeniably manufactured customer demand for Apple products.)
  - 10ren 18y ago
    "text-only ads" are not really a technology or product idea. It's really closer to clever marketing, in terms of delivering what people want. I think the most brilliant non-technical idea of Google is its PR. They seriously spend on it - not on telling people that Google is good, but in doing things that people will think are good and cool. Like free GMail. I think they genuinely like to do it; but you can't run a billion dollar company without having a business justification for it - which is that people can switch search engines so easily, you better make them like you (it works on me). It's not just a nice to be - it's crucial for the very existence of the company, and it's justifiable to spend actual money on it. Other companies provide cool free stuff - but not to the extent that Google does. They are exceptional in this. Microsoft could make billions even when hated by many; Google can't.
  - whacked_new 18y ago
    There is some brilliance going on here: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/cue/bci/ http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/cue/bc... research.microsoft.com/otherplaces as well. Corporate-backed R&D, plain and simple. The only unfortunate thing is they are mostly hidden from the public eye, and the consumer market.

Here's a simple way to disprove him: name one brilliant idea that Microsoft has had.

by 10ren 18y ago

Here's a simple way to disprove him: name one brilliant idea that Microsoft has had.

DanHulton 18y ago

Licensing DOS to IBM instead of selling it.

jimbokun 18y ago
That is indeed brilliant, but I think it is pretty clear from context that Rondam was referring to brilliant technology and product ideas. The Google ideas he cites fall into those categories. Microsoft's most brilliant ideas were always about how to sell their products and maximize profits. A fascinating example of this is Gates' memo to Apple about licensing the Mac. http://www.scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html http://www.scripting.com/specials/gatesLetter/text.html Common wisdom is that Windows became the standard because Apple did not license Mac technology. Very early on, Gates explained the rationale for this to Apple and even suggested potential partners for licensing agreements. So it seems the "ideas" behind Mac OS were not as valuable as Gates' and Microsoft's business sense. (If you want to cite Apple's resurgence as a refutation, I would argue that the maturation of Jobs' business sense is behind that. He has been brilliant in negotiating deals that favor Apple since his return, has done a better job competing on price than people realize, and has undeniably manufactured customer demand for Apple products.)
- 10ren 18y ago
  "text-only ads" are not really a technology or product idea. It's really closer to clever marketing, in terms of delivering what people want. I think the most brilliant non-technical idea of Google is its PR. They seriously spend on it - not on telling people that Google is good, but in doing things that people will think are good and cool. Like free GMail. I think they genuinely like to do it; but you can't run a billion dollar company without having a business justification for it - which is that people can switch search engines so easily, you better make them like you (it works on me). It's not just a nice to be - it's crucial for the very existence of the company, and it's justifiable to spend actual money on it. Other companies provide cool free stuff - but not to the extent that Google does. They are exceptional in this. Microsoft could make billions even when hated by many; Google can't.
- whacked_new 18y ago
  There is some brilliance going on here: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/cue/bci/ http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/cue/bc... research.microsoft.com/otherplaces as well. Corporate-backed R&D, plain and simple. The only unfortunate thing is they are mostly hidden from the public eye, and the consumer market.