Reply to Message
Wrong history
rickk suggests that history explains Windows' "popularity." He
should go back further in history.
Microcomputers (Northstar, Apple II, etc.) were considered "toys"
by IT/MIS types. This in the age of mainframes and
minicomputers. There were multiple architectures and operating
systems and they were pretty primitive, largely the province of
hobbyists.
Then IBM came out with the first "Personal Computer" running
DOS. The project took about a year from gleam in the eye to
delivered product, and it was in part experimental. IBM wanted
to see if they could come up with a system made of readily
available components. To hold the price down, support was
virtually non-existent.
Two things occurred which IBM didn't anticipate. Corporate
America saw the IBM label on the PC and considered
microcomputers to have been blessed. Until then, the doors
were closed to micros. Now, they were let in, very slowly at first,
but when line departments found that they could buy a PC for
$10K on Monday and start solving business problems by Friday
instead of waiting 1-1/2 to 2 years for MIS to get around to
solving their problem (or maybe last year's problem), they began
to come into business en masse. Often under miscellaneous
departmental expense budgets to avoid MIS oversight.
When prices fell, people started thinking of buying systems for
themselves, and it was natural for many to buy the same type of
system they used at work. Thus the expansion into the
consumer market. Not the best product (never was), but the
obvious one. Combine that with Microsoft's predatory practices
and voila! As an example of such practices, PowerPoint was
decidedly inferior to a number of other presentation products.
But by bundling PowerPoint into Office, they essentially gave
PowerPoint away and drove the competition out of the
marketplace. (Don't get me started on why PowerPoint is
essentially brain-dead.)
The PCs got out of control, as far as IBM was concerned, once
the clones started coming from Compaq and others. Prices
plummeted. PCs were no longer a high margin business, and IBM
couldn't find a model to pay for expensive services. PCs, along
with minis, almost killed their mainframe business, and IBM
went through some tough times rethinking and remaking
themselves.
The other mistake was their contract with Microsoft. I'm sure the
skeletons of a lawyer or three are waving in the breeze from a
flagpole at IBM headquarters. Instead of writing contracts for
DOS and Windows that gave IBM ownership of the operating
system, they allowed Microsoft to retain ownership rights, which
allowed Microsoft to sell to the clone makers and exploit their
control of the operating system to support their own products
better than any competitor could.
Microsoft's dominance is part historical accident and dumb luck,
part brilliant contract writing, and part predatory marketing.
If Longhorn/Vista/whatever-they-call-it-next-week doesn't
resolve the problems of security while remaining open to third-
party hardware and software innovation, Microsoft will go the
way IBM's mainframe business went. Microsoft has, in fact,
become what IBM once was:
The company everybody loves to hate.
should go back further in history.
Microcomputers (Northstar, Apple II, etc.) were considered "toys"
by IT/MIS types. This in the age of mainframes and
minicomputers. There were multiple architectures and operating
systems and they were pretty primitive, largely the province of
hobbyists.
Then IBM came out with the first "Personal Computer" running
DOS. The project took about a year from gleam in the eye to
delivered product, and it was in part experimental. IBM wanted
to see if they could come up with a system made of readily
available components. To hold the price down, support was
virtually non-existent.
Two things occurred which IBM didn't anticipate. Corporate
America saw the IBM label on the PC and considered
microcomputers to have been blessed. Until then, the doors
were closed to micros. Now, they were let in, very slowly at first,
but when line departments found that they could buy a PC for
$10K on Monday and start solving business problems by Friday
instead of waiting 1-1/2 to 2 years for MIS to get around to
solving their problem (or maybe last year's problem), they began
to come into business en masse. Often under miscellaneous
departmental expense budgets to avoid MIS oversight.
When prices fell, people started thinking of buying systems for
themselves, and it was natural for many to buy the same type of
system they used at work. Thus the expansion into the
consumer market. Not the best product (never was), but the
obvious one. Combine that with Microsoft's predatory practices
and voila! As an example of such practices, PowerPoint was
decidedly inferior to a number of other presentation products.
But by bundling PowerPoint into Office, they essentially gave
PowerPoint away and drove the competition out of the
marketplace. (Don't get me started on why PowerPoint is
essentially brain-dead.)
The PCs got out of control, as far as IBM was concerned, once
the clones started coming from Compaq and others. Prices
plummeted. PCs were no longer a high margin business, and IBM
couldn't find a model to pay for expensive services. PCs, along
with minis, almost killed their mainframe business, and IBM
went through some tough times rethinking and remaking
themselves.
The other mistake was their contract with Microsoft. I'm sure the
skeletons of a lawyer or three are waving in the breeze from a
flagpole at IBM headquarters. Instead of writing contracts for
DOS and Windows that gave IBM ownership of the operating
system, they allowed Microsoft to retain ownership rights, which
allowed Microsoft to sell to the clone makers and exploit their
control of the operating system to support their own products
better than any competitor could.
Microsoft's dominance is part historical accident and dumb luck,
part brilliant contract writing, and part predatory marketing.
If Longhorn/Vista/whatever-they-call-it-next-week doesn't
resolve the problems of security while remaining open to third-
party hardware and software innovation, Microsoft will go the
way IBM's mainframe business went. Microsoft has, in fact,
become what IBM once was:
The company everybody loves to hate.
Posted by rm3mpc
28th Jul 2005
