PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft: The End of and Era (Unfinished)


DoctorZettabyte
02-18-2008, 5:48 PM
I thought I could finish this a week ago, but then I realized I was writing a freakin novel in the process, and I dropped the ball. The tech annex is a better spot for this editorial because Microsoft + Gaming = Fail. Here goes.

So, dear readers, let us embark once again down editorial alley into a more personal, close to home topic instead of a (however broad) niche of gaming.
Before we begin, I’d like to state that this is not a “bash M$, Apple’s 1337, Google is a godsend” thread. I’m a firm believer in Microsoft’s ability as a business, and this is strictly a commentary on the business world today.
As we learn the details of Microsoft’s rejection by Yahoo, what does this signify?
Well, a lot of things. Let’s start at the top.
In the early and mid nineties, Microsoft Corporation was making tremendous gains on all fronts. 95 and 98 were both excellent operating systems, despite a few flaws, and they both did an excellent job of incorporating computing into modern society, like businesses and schools, raking in a sizable profit to boot. The only real threat to Microsoft was Netscape, the top competitor of Internet Explorer. MS had partnered with NBC to create a joint news corporation, MSNBC, and Yahoo was a simple search service. Apple, at this point, was facing troubling times, as their new Mac platforms had not sold well, and money had been getting tighter as IBM had decided to partner with Microsoft. A dynasty in computing had been built in just inside a decade, and nobody could have predicted what the next decade would bring.
The end of the nineties into the start of the new millennium saw a flurry of OS’s from Microsoft. 2000, ME, 98SE, and our beloved (or hated) XP were launched within three years. It also saw the creation of Google, and Yahoo had become an enormous internet mogul. Apple was buying out companies left and right, and it was about to resurge into a major media corporation and Microsoft’s main competitor through the middle of the decade. Things remained quiet until one fine day, people suddenly started to listen to the music. On their iPods, no less. Image searching was made fast and easy through Google, so people would begin to Photoshop these images for their desktop backgrounds.
Gone were the days of crawling through MSN Search for links to images. Gone were the days of fooling around in MSPaint because good image editing was expensive. Gone were the days where people tolerated BSODs every other minute. And with those days went Microsoft’s security as the top company in technology.
Seven years later, Apple’s market share nears the 15% mark, the highest it’s been since the days of Apple II. Google has stormed the internet and wrested control from Yahoo and AOL, and if this goes where common sense predicts, Google will develop its own OS, or its own portable media device, etc, and eventually become Microsoft 2.0.
Let’s see where Microsoft went wrong, starting with Apple.
Hard to believe, but long before you were born (if you’re older than, I don’t know, 15, you know this), Microsoft worked for Apple, making word processing apps for their OS’s, notably the II and Mac I. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were considered friends. Look how far we’ve come. In 2001, right around the launch of XP, Apple launched its now most profitable device of the last 15 years, the iPod. Bulky and expensive, this monochromatic mp3 player didn’t even have iTunes with it. That’s right kiddies, a world without mp3’s. All manual searching and downloading on a blazing fast 56k modem. Whoopee.
Microsoft was launching nice, sleek updates to Windows Media Player, and it was the player of choice then, as Winamp was still somewhat buggy and didn’t have much of a fanbase. Then, in 2003, the world changed for the…music industry. iTunes was launched, making it quick and easy to download songs.
Microsoft’s answer? Nothing.
Apple exploded back onto the scene almost every year with a new iPod generation, like one that has color, or a backlight, or a bigger hard drive. Everything got better for Apple. And still, MS waited.
2007 saw the first end-user OS release for Microsoft since XP in 2001. Vista had a sleek new design, few security holes and was promised to be all-around better than its predecessor. Months later, we’re still waiting for that, as Vista is widely considered a failed business enterprise. Apple released Leopard, its latest update to Mac OS in late 2007 as well, with a better interface and newer security patches. In 2006, Apple also partnered with Intel to make better processors for Macs than ever, making Apple a now tough competitor for hardware as well as software. How does this affect MS? Well, in a lot of ways, this is most of how Microsoft will lose its empire.
Macs continually get cheaper and come pre-loaded with nifty software to get users creating their own content immediately, so they can share and publish it quickly and with ease. Microsoft has…the Office Suite and Windows Movie Maker. While nice and relatively easy to use, they’re simply flat tools.
The gap between Vista and XP has also been a major factor for Microsoft’s failure. XP has been streamlined over the years, security threats have been closed, and the UI is familiar to anyone who uses it regularly. Fixing it and developing for it are simple tasks, and XP is very slim in terms of HDD space and resource usage. Vista, on the other hand, is a system hog, doubling the requirements of most programs just to get them off the ground. When starting up Vista, sure, people know mostly how to use it, but there’s still a lingering unfamiliarity with it. Icons that have been a staple of Windows since 3.1 and 95 are gone, replaced with shiny blue counterparts that many people can’t get accustomed to easily. Network code is shoddy, making music quality priority over connection speed and bandwidth by default. While the requirements for Vista are somewhat low in today’s market, Microsoft is making a tremendous jump from 128 Megs of RAM to 1GB of RAM as a requirement. A lot of people don’t have 1GB of RAM. Those of us who can and do use Vista have almost certainly seen the compatibility issues surrounding it. Drivers are buggy, most products don’t have Vista drivers, and most of our games, like StarCraft, weren’t designed for Vista. By most of our standards, Vista is a failure. People like XP.
This leaves an open market for better OS’s and newer companies and cheaper hardware to move in and take the top spot as operating system mogul. Linux is gaining a huge following, not just by webmasters and business server networks, but around the globe, police forces, governments and school systems are making the switch to various forms of Linux.



Okay, so I wanted to cover MSN and Google too, and maybe move into the console arena, but I only got around to Apple & co. Thoughts?

-DocTera

GroG
02-18-2008, 9:21 PM
Just some things I've picked up over the years, wanted to clear up some confusion..

1) Apple's initial design concepts for their first GUI-OS were based off an advanced GUI-OS Xerox had been designing. They invited the Macintosh team to their labs, and the Mac team took a lot of ideas and "used" them.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation
2) Apple would have actually went bankrupt in '97 had Microsoft not purchased $150 million in stock to keep them alive, so they wouldn't have an OS market monopoly.
Source: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/cyberspace/july-dec97/apple_8-6.html
3) Apple used to always say how much better their powerPC processors were, and secretly knew they had reached a limit in speed and developed the Intel-based Mac OSX in secret so that when they needed it, it would be available, without telling anyone.
Source: http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-5733723-7.html
4) Netscape wasn't a competitor to IE, in 1995 it was speculated that Netscape Navigator controlled 80%+ of the web browsing market..
Source: http://www.eskimo.com/~bloo/indexdot/history/netscape.htm

I may sound like I hate Apple, but I don't. Personally, I don't care for either Apple, Microsoft, or even Google. I just use computers without really caring about what the hell is going on with companies. I think what Microsoft is doing by shipping on pretty much all new computers is wrong. But I also think that Apple does it's fair share of bad stuff, too.

I think you are missing a huge point though - Microsoft gets tons, TONS of their market share from big business. Corporations are using excel, access, word, and windows. Vast free training, tutorials, ease of use, etc allows people to hire people and quickly get them going on projects using these standardized tools.

As far as professional software goes at large companies, I think you'd be hard pressed to find Apple anywhere. Linux you would, since it's free and so is Apache, but not Apple.

BTW, a little fact but did you know that Skype (VoIP company/software, the guys who made Kazaa ran from the US and started Skype in Estonia I think) made a deal with Intel to include Skype software embedded on all Intel chips? How do you think this will effect the cell phone market? Do you think this is.. wrong?
Source: http://about.skype.com/2006/02/skype_and_intel_collaborate_to.html

Black.Ice
02-18-2008, 9:36 PM
There's a lot that you missed, and it's kind of pompous for us gamers to sit around and attempt to speculate what analysts and business administrators have not been able to for years. But while we're doing it, here's my view.

Microsoft is going to continue losing footing, but the end is not coming. In fact, I think they're going to keep on kicking ass for a long, long time. They have a huge market share, and it's going to be a long time before they lose that share. Lets say it's 2012. Linux is taking over. Let's say that it's extremely popular and gains an astonishing 50% of the market share... what would Microsoft do?

Well they'd probably release their own free operating system.

Ok, I was about expand on what I'm writing but it's going to get too long and none of it will ever happen. I'm cutting myself off and stopping myself from speculating. But let me summarize my thoughts about the three companies. Microsoft, Apple and Google. We have to realize that the three companies are insanely huge and they're not going to die as long as they're properly managed. They're so diverse and they'll continuously keep expanding to changing environments. It's going to take a lot more than a failure of a few products to kill them.

DoctorZettabyte
02-18-2008, 9:50 PM
So basically, to sum it up: It's the console wars all over again, but with no time frames or release cycles and change occurs much more efficiently and much, much faster.

I see both of your points on the matter, but the point I was trying to get across (if I recall correctly -- it's been a week and a half), was that Microsoft is no longer the dominant specie in the computing world any longer. Better products have been launched, patches have been released, etc, and the vicious, sometimes squiggly circle goes on and on. Microsoft is not the dynastic computing mogul it once was, and the future looks bleak for having that big a market share ever again.
In the way of gaming: The 360, while a top-notch console, has been ousted by the Wii for the top spot. However, I keep coming back to XBox Live. It's a great service, and is simple to manage your content and connect with anyone. On the flipside, it's the same old graphics-pwn-innovention console war we've seen since the days of the PSOne. The Wii, however, has a huge draw from all ages and enthusiasm -- I don't see many seniors picking up a 360 controller or a SixAxis these days. The XBox project was a good foray into the console wars for Microsoft, and it's still a great crowd pleaser at parties.

It'll be very interesting to see how the next half-decade, or even the next year plays out, especially with the news of this. (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/81525-Microsoft-to-Acquire-Epic-Games)

-DocTera

Modred
02-18-2008, 10:22 PM
I see both of your points on the matter, but the point I was trying to get across (if I recall correctly -- it's been a week and a half), was that Microsoft is no longer the dominant specie in the computing world any longer. Better products have been launched, patches have been released, etc, and the vicious, sometimes squiggly circle goes on and on. Microsoft is not the dynastic computing mogul it once was, and the future looks bleak for having that big a market share ever again.

I disagree with this on almost all accounts. Could a non-dominant company force a vague, overly verbose and under-documented file format through one standards committee and most likely through another with almost no opposition? Could a non-dominant company maintain a virtual monopoly on office productivity software, despite a decade of sacrificing progress for the sake of backwards compatibility? Could a non-dominant company possibly sue the free software movement out of existence for patent violations? (although on that note, IBM has a much larger patent thicket, but IBM is generally more friendly than MS in this regard).

Microsoft is the dominant corporation for desktop software and that will not change for years. Apple makes designer products that supposedly show their dedication to the consumer, while applying terms and conditions to their software equally damaging, if not more so, than those imposed by Microsoft.

As far as professional software goes at large companies, I think you'd be hard pressed to find Apple anywhere. Linux you would, since it's free and so is Apache, but not Apple.

You'll find Macs galore in the movie and television production, marketing, advertising, and printing fields, and possibly a few others. Even though you can get Adobe's suites and various high end editors on Windows platforms now, Apple clinched a large portion of this market years ago.

Black.Ice
02-19-2008, 12:09 AM
Modred, as usual, is right on all accounts.

As I stated (somewhat badly above), I think it will be many more years before Microsoft before Microsoft becomes less dominant.

Think of it like car companies; they've been around since the twenties. They've changed names, merged, bought each other out, split, and a bunch of other things. Take Ford for example. At one point, it was incredibly huge. They've mellowed down, but still a huge player in the car industry.

It's all about the business cycle that we have. If a company has a monopoly or is taking over, competition will come up. They'll eventually level out.

GroG
02-19-2008, 10:51 AM
You'll find Macs galore in the movie and television production, marketing, advertising, and printing fields, and possibly a few others. Even though you can get Adobe's suites and various high end editors on Windows platforms now, Apple clinched a large portion of this market years ago.

Although I would've agreed with this maybe 5 years ago, this isn't really true today. For instance, I was just looking at ILM (Industrial Light and Magic - Skywalker Studios) and they pretty much use propriety software on Linux and UNIX based systems for all their job positions (there was a couple with Windows/NT and MAC) and this is one of the largest Movie Production Studios there is. I then followed up and looked at Pixar, and immediately the first job required Microsoft Word and Excel .. the next one required Linux/UNIX with SQL knowledge. I think that this is one of those things that is a misconception and I'd really like to see proof of it, if you have any. I know that the image editing is done on MACs, but the rest of the tasks are done on Windows or Linux - such as rendering, storage, testing, etc.. which would mean the majority of computers aren't MACs, so there really wouldn't be MACs galore.

I guess maybe I shouldn't have said you'd be hard pressed to find a MAC anywhere in a large company. But other than specialized applications, the majority of computers at most major companies are Windows/PC's..

King_Critter
02-19-2008, 2:20 PM
Regarding macs, I know that all the schools in my town have nothing but macs for the administration. The computer labs are all PC/Windows, but you'd be hard pressed to find anything but a mac in the office.

Of course, my town is kind of odd. :P

DoctorZettabyte
02-19-2008, 4:06 PM
I've been in places where there is mainly a Win/PC userbase, but one wing was enturely Mac only. Great network.

Hats off to Modred for a great counter-argument. I had three different counter-counter arguments, but they were moot upon closer scrutiny.

Also, GroG -- not all creativity is done on a Mac, a lot of it can and a lot of the time is done on Windows platforms. People just like to use Windows -- they know how it works, vaguely how to fix it, and a lot of their programs run on Windows only, or have limited support for Mac versions.

Windows, however, being business friendly, scoffs at any pitiful attempt to get away from MSPaint, and throws your pitiful machine into DLL Hell.

-DocTera

GroG
02-19-2008, 5:41 PM
Don't you mean Modred? I was arguing that creativity stuff is done on Windows machines also, except for some exclusive image editing stuff.

BTW, it's funny if you look at jobs in those fields, they actually say on them "Must be proficient in Mac OSX" specifically on the jobs that require certain Mac only software. Yet, on all the rest they don't say anything else about an OS, even if earlier they mention Microsoft Excel or something.. pretty funny.