5 ms·

As it apparently needs to be explained: Microsoft's predatory behavior in 1990s resulted in an incalculable and unrecoverable loss of trust among technologists

As it apparently needs to be explained: Microsoft's predatory behavior in 1990s resulted in an incalculable and unrecoverable loss of trust among technologists -- which was bound to ultimately catch up to the company. You can get away with predatory behavior when you're dominant, but when you miss new markets -- as Microsoft did repeatedly in the lost decade of the 2000s -- you can be damned sure no one is going to be foolish enough to open those markets to a known monopolist. Microsoft is left with two choices: invent new markets or try to earn back the public's trust. They have no track record in either department; as the Magic 8-ball says, "outlook not so good"...

tomphoolery 13y ago
What about Apple and Google? They have repeatedly violated the trust of hackers, yet only a small minority have fully divorced themselves from these companies' products. As much as I'd love to believe in the morality of our market, I don't really think that's the case. Not that I believe MS's predatory behavior helped their cause at all, but I still think the primary reason why people don't use, or don't want to use, Microsoft products anymore is because they are inferior to others' products. There was definitely a time where, for most people, that was not the case. Edit: Just a little example...I don't remember continuously hearing about Microsoft employees going to fucked-up countries and running clandestine rescue missions http://pastebin.com/CuUcHM6m http://pastebin.com/CuUcHM6m
- iopq 13y ago
  The difference is that Google had the trust of hackers when it launched Android. Apple is a different demographic, it's almost the "luxury" line of tech products.
- lukifer 13y ago
  From where I sit, Google and Apple have been steadily hemorrhaging enthusiasts with their creepiness and arrogance, respectively. They're still the least worst options in their fields, but they no longer seem like the golden saviors they did in the early 2000s.
einhverfr 13y ago
But my point is still this. All of the new computing areas are ones that were big areas of development when I was there. Yet Microsoft still can't produce a product in these areas that people want to buy. I think you are right that it goes to predatory behavior, but I think there is another aspect too. There is very little groundbreaking work in UI paradigms to come out of Microsoft. They didn't invent the WIMP approach. They did manage to invent Bob.... But it means that they had no expertise in the things that were needed to catch the trends they were trying to ride. It took Apple to develop a really good touchscreen interface. So I keep coming back to problems of execution. Yeah. Outlook(TM) not so good ;-)
marvin 13y ago
I'm 26; I wasn't around to see Microsoft's monopolistic behavior. I've only read about it from the history books. So people my age don't have the same emotional reaction to this. I'm pretty sure that engineers' perception of Microsoft will change back to neutral as my generation enters the industry.
- icefox 13y ago
  Don't worry you guys will have your own version of Microsoft, perhaps Facebook. In 5-10 years time when there are good enough alternatives to whatever feature of Facebook you require today you will never go back and actively encourage others to switch.

tomphoolery 13y ago

What about Apple and Google? They have repeatedly violated the trust of hackers, yet only a small minority have fully divorced themselves from these companies' products. As much as I'd love to believe in the morality of our market, I don't really think that's the case. Not that I believe MS's predatory behavior helped their cause at all, but I still think the primary reason why people don't use, or don't want to use, Microsoft products anymore is because they are inferior to others' products. There was definitely a time where, for most people, that was not the case. Edit: Just a little example...I don't remember continuously hearing about Microsoft employees going to fucked-up countries and running clandestine rescue missions http://pastebin.com/CuUcHM6m http://pastebin.com/CuUcHM6m

iopq 13y ago
The difference is that Google had the trust of hackers when it launched Android. Apple is a different demographic, it's almost the "luxury" line of tech products.
lukifer 13y ago
From where I sit, Google and Apple have been steadily hemorrhaging enthusiasts with their creepiness and arrogance, respectively. They're still the least worst options in their fields, but they no longer seem like the golden saviors they did in the early 2000s.

einhverfr 13y ago

But my point is still this. All of the new computing areas are ones that were big areas of development when I was there. Yet Microsoft still can't produce a product in these areas that people want to buy. I think you are right that it goes to predatory behavior, but I think there is another aspect too. There is very little groundbreaking work in UI paradigms to come out of Microsoft. They didn't invent the WIMP approach. They did manage to invent Bob.... But it means that they had no expertise in the things that were needed to catch the trends they were trying to ride. It took Apple to develop a really good touchscreen interface. So I keep coming back to problems of execution. Yeah. Outlook(TM) not so good ;-)

marvin 13y ago

I'm 26; I wasn't around to see Microsoft's monopolistic behavior. I've only read about it from the history books. So people my age don't have the same emotional reaction to this. I'm pretty sure that engineers' perception of Microsoft will change back to neutral as my generation enters the industry.

icefox 13y ago
Don't worry you guys will have your own version of Microsoft, perhaps Facebook. In 5-10 years time when there are good enough alternatives to whatever feature of Facebook you require today you will never go back and actively encourage others to switch.