April 7, 2007

“why microsoft is dead”

thriving71265.jpg
From the ever-thoughtful Paul Graham: “Mic­ro­soft is Dead”:
He cites four main rea­sons why Mic­ro­soft lost their cul­tu­ral domi­nance in the tech sec­tor:
1. Goo­gle.
2. Ajax.
3. Broad­band Inter­net.
4. Apple.
30 years ago, Mic­ro­soft asked them­sel­ves a very cle­ver ques­tion: How do we make a pro­fi­ta­ble com­pany, based on the assump­tion that all hard­ware will one day be free? I sup­pose they need to ask them­sel­ves another ques­tion now: How do we make a pro­fi­ta­ble com­pany, if peo­ple no lon­ger need or want the desk­top?
Microsoft’s issue is not a lack of finan­cial, tech­ni­cal and inte­llec­tual capi­tal. They have all that stuff in spa­des. Microsoft’s issue is cultural.


[Bonus Link:] Maybe Paul spoke too soon. Heh.
[UPDATE:] Dave Winer offers some wise and infor­med perspective.

[UPDATE:] Rick Segal gives Paul a good run for his money:

4. While Paul’s lite­ral view about Mic­ro­soft buying up the Web 2.0 world is funny/wrong, Mic­ro­soft actually agrees with Paul’s assess­ment about get­ting Web 2.0 com­pa­nies outside of the Red­mond fold. For the last cou­ple of years, Mic­ro­soft has been spen­ding tens of millions of dollars spin­ning out tech­no­logy, com­pa­nies, and emplo­yees in a rea­li­za­tion that they won’t live inside the Red­mond machine so spin em out. Some make TechC­runch, some don’t. The point is, unlike other mons­ter com­pa­nies that now lay actually dead, Mic­ro­soft does get the point about making some types of inno­va­tion hap­pen inside the machine while lots of it needs to hap­pen elsewhere. Mes­sage recei­ved, Paul.
5. Desk­top Apps are not going away, that’s just non­sense, but that’s not actually what Paul said. Paul makes the rea­so­na­ble point that lots and lots of appli­ca­tions can now hap­pen because of AJAX, Javasc­ript, etc. Where as before, everything was desk­top or a Green Screen, today this is no lon­ger the case.
6. Don is right that if making good money now and for some time to come is a defi­ni­tion of ‘dead’, bring it on. But as I said at the begin­ning, I believe Paul was using hot words to make broa­der points.

[UPDATE:] Microsoft’s Dan Dodge:

Since when does gro­wing $4 Billion a year = Dead?
For the record, Mic­ro­soft is gro­wing reve­nues at over $4 Billion a year and is on track for $50 Billion this year. Since when does gro­wing $4 Billion a year equal DEAD? If that is dead I know a lot of com­pa­nies that would like to be so dead.

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

22 Responses to ““why microsoft is dead””

  1. I’m ready to go outside and do a happy dance in the cold rain from rea­ding Graham’s article. I switched to Apple gear a few years ago and I still have to use Win­dows at work. I can’t begin to tell you how much I loathe and des­pise Mic­ro­soft. It’s a cons­tant battle every day at the office when something on the Win­dows desk­top doesn’t work as I either need or expect. The greed and arro­gance of Mic­ro­soft is so clearly on dis­play in their pro­ducts and O/S plat­form that it’s a per­so­nal affront to my sen­si­bi­li­ties as a human every time I encoun­ter anything from that des­pi­ca­ble com­pany. I make it a point to bad-mouth Mic­ro­soft in every con­ver­sa­tion I have with anyone when the sub­ject of any tech­no­logy comes up and I pro­vide fac­tual exam­ples of every bad expe­rience I’ve ever had with their horri­ble s/w. On my Apple gear I’ve eli­mi­na­ted every trace of anything even remo­tely asso­cia­ted with Mic­ro­soft. I won’t use their search, I won’t watch their tele­vi­sion, if any pro­duct I con­si­der is exc­lu­sive to the Win­Tel plat­form, I won’t even con­si­der buying it. You’re abso­lu­tely correct that their pro­blem is cul­tu­ral. Their arro­gance has come close to rui­ning com­pu­ting. Thank GOD for Goo­gle, Ajax, Broad­band, and most espe­cially Apple! Suck as much money from them as pos­si­ble and enjoy the show as we all watch them die writhing in agony.

  2. hugh macleod says:

    Yes, but what do you REALLY think, Joachim? :-)

  3. Very hapy to read this post, Hugh.
    Something else MS is pro­bably asking — how do we make a pro­fi­ta­ble com­pany, if dis­tri­bu­tion costs are approaching zero, and you cant con­trol it.
    Robert Sco­ble com­men­ted the other day that you shouldnt bet against a com­pany that had billions in the bank. Not sure he has this right, as you won­der whether this is the currency that begets the suc­cess MS wants. Aris­troc­rats rarely made it through the indus­trial revo­lu­tion with as much power and suc­cess as the indus­tria­lists. Etc.
    Cul­tu­ral pro­blem, as you say.

  4. In the middle ages mind­set, when the world was widely con­si­de­red flat, Mic­ro­soft could have star­ted a major reli­gion, Mic­ro­sof­ta­nity — it rhy­mes so per­fectly with insanity

  5. I agree that it is cul­tu­ral, but that cul­ture has to seep into the tech­ni­cal, finan­cial, and inte­llec­tual capi­tal. So until they attain the cul­ture they need, all of this “capi­tal” is utterly use­less. Do I think they should buy every Web 2.0 star­tup under the sun? Hell no. If some of these com­pa­nies can’t make money with a cou­ple of million dollars, who knows what they’ll do when part of a multi billion dollar com­pany. I’ll leave the rest of my com­ments for my own blog post.
    –JLB

  6. Nick Husher says:

    This reminds me of an entry on 37signals I read a few days ago which covers the dif­fe­rence bet­ween ‘cor­tex’ purcha­sing deci­sions and ‘rep­ti­llian’ ones. Peo­ple aren’t always ratio­nal when they buy pro­ducts, espe­cially when the dif­fe­rence bet­ween pro­ducts is pri­ma­rily one of image rather than one that is quan­ti­fia­ble.
    Why do peo­ple buy the PT Crui­ser? It’s basi­cally a Dodge Neon with a dif­fe­rent shell over the frame. It has a gene­rally poor record com­pa­red with, say, a Honda Civic. It’s because it’s a ques­tion of image, not ratio­na­lity.
    Peo­ple buy Apple, follow Goo­gle, and are beco­ming less ena­mo­red with the beige box under their desk simply because what they have doesn’t appeal at all to their rep­ti­llian sen­si­bi­li­ties. Com­pa­nies like Apple and Goo­gle have suc­cess­fully posi­tio­ned them­sel­ves to appear to care more about their cus­to­mers, and by exten­sion, the self image of those cus­to­mers. Mic­ro­soft hasn’t really appea­led to any of those things. The Zune gets pretty close, as well as the 360. Win­dows, Office, and Mic­ro­soft as a whole seems inca­pa­ble of get­ting anywhere close to that ideal, though.

  7. alan p says:

    I thought Goo­gle was the new Mic­ro­soft, Mic­ro­soft the new IBM, and IBM is the new GM :)
    So who is the new Goo­gle? ;)

  8. alan p says:

    Oh.…and the New Ques­tion for Mic­ro­soft is:
    “How do we make a pro­fi­ta­ble com­pany, based on the assump­tion that all *soft­ware* will one day be free?

  9. Defi­ni­tely not a Mic­ro­soft fan then Joachim eh? :) Kind of weird that you cite Mic­ro­soft as greedy and arro­gant though given the cost of Apple gear by com­pa­ri­son to PC’s and the recent Mac vs. PC ads
    Love to know where you see the arro­gance in the pro­ducts too. Lets hear some of those fac­tual expe­rien­ces here too…lets get it all out in the open. Oh and steer clear of AJAX as Mic­ro­soft is a BIG sup­por­ter of that.

  10. adp says:

    It’s not about facts, Steve, it’s about emo­tion. As my class­mate told me recently: “osX loves me.” It’s the power of great design.
    Wasn’t Hugh’s one-word mani­festo: “Love.” :)
    Hugh, I can’t wait to see what you do with this “glo­bal mega­brand”.…..
    al.

  11. Michelle says:

    I like both Apple and Mic­ro­soft. I have Apple at work and a PC at home. I don’t give a rat’s ass which does what, who’s evil and arro­gant, who’s not..blah, blah, blah.
    Perhaps I don’t give a rat’s ass because I have an actual life (a hus­band, a cha­llen­ging job, a family, pla­ces to go, bills to pay, friends to see). Or perhaps it’s because I rea­lize that even if I hated one or both of them, it wouldn’t change a damn thing… oh, and no one would give a rat’s ass if I hated one or both of them any­way. Besi­des, neither one would be any good w/o the other.
    But I really love the com­ments from cry-baby “for­mer rea­ders” or “soon-to-be for­mer rea­ders”, hys­te­ri­cal. I will always be a rea­der Hugh. Even if I don’t agree with you, rea­ding an oppo­sing point of view is good for peo­ple, whether they rea­lize or not.
    Michelle

  12. Geoff Lane says:

    For a com­pany with zillions in the bank, Mic­ro­soft seems curiously una­ble to do anything new and exci­ting. “Copy what Apple does” used to be the joke, but now seems to be the only policy used by the mana­ge­ment.
    Does Vista have any wow-factor? If I wan­ted fancy graphi­cal shells, Apple has stuff that is already pro­ven in the mar­ket place. But far too often we see pretty graphics as a repla­ce­ment for good user inter­face design. Does DRM do anything for _me_? No it doesn’t.
    MS has been coas­ting for at least 10 years.

  13. Robert de Forest says:

    It’s hard for me to take Dave Winer’s post seriously when he attacks a posi­tion Paul didn’t take. Hugh, were you being sar­cas­tic when you desc­ri­bed Dave’s res­ponse as “some wise and infor­med perspective”?

  14. Don Crowley says:

    I’ve used win­dows, linux and Mac OSX (which I use at the moment). I don’t hate Mic­ro­soft. I’m not a fan, but I do like it when they kick ass. Kic­king ass is about fea­tu­res and the human voice. I see Mic­ro­soft chan­ging. They have great peo­ple wor­king for them like Ray Ozzie for star­ters.
    I really think they need a new CEO. When I think of Steve Bal­mer I think ‘red­neck’, ‘loud mouthed’, ‘arro­gant’ and a nut shou­ting ‘deve­lo­pers, deve­lo­pers…’. It is image, because Mic­ro­soft is chan­ging under Steve Bal­mer.
    The fea­tu­res: Live maps are beau­ti­ful, but it has no open API. The sate­llite ima­ges ouside Ame­rica suck (it needs both yes­ter­day). Mic­ro­soft Video called soap­box, great qua­lity. I just can­not log on using Fire­fox on my Mac. I want to use your stuff. You are loc­king me out or not pro­vi­ding fea­tu­res. Key is — make it easy to use your stuff and for non mic­ro­soft users to user Mic­ro­soft pro­du­ced con­tent. Do not stand in our way, help us to get from A to B.
    I have writ­ten to Mic­ro­soft. No reply. Mic­ro­soft needs another open blog­ger with a human voice like Sco­ble. Sco­ble has not been repla­ced. Mic­ro­soft very much needs that human voice.

  15. Dave Armstrong says:

    As a 30 year soft­ware deve­lo­per vete­ran I can say with great com­fort, “Mic­ro­soft has been very, very good to me.” I like the money and the weekly phone calls and Emails from rec­rui­ters that have seen my Mons­ter resume. My M.B.A. is paying off. My ego and my bank account are bul­ging. I am having lots of fun. Life is good …

  16. geoff, Vista has a few more things than just fancy graphics. I mean come on, we didn’t spend 5 years just doing graphics ;)

  17. Don — I’m lis­te­ning. I may not be the next Sco­ble but that’s solid, actio­na­ble feed­back on Live maps and Soap­box. i can’t say I can get it fixed but I can try by taking your com­ments and sen­ding them to peo­ple who I know lis­ten. thanks
    Steve

  18. Jas Dhaliwal says:

    Whilst sug­ges­ting that Mic­ro­soft is dead, or even at least dying is clearly bull. I’m more sur­pri­sed about how emo­tio­nal peo­ple feel about this really “non story”.
    There are indeed some ele­ments that make sense. I’ve res­pec­ted Mic­ro­soft for years. Hell, its because of Win­dows I’m in the IT industry. Mic­ro­soft DOES lis­ten to its cus­to­mers, howe­ver it takes too long for things to change. Why did we have to wait so long for IE7? Clearly, many wrote off the brow­ser, but now look at it today. Its rapidly eating FireFox’s mar­ket share, because its a great pro­duct
    The com­pany is still doing great inno­va­tive stuff. (xbox 360) Gran­ted, it doesn’t get it right all the time, but it lear­ning from its mis­ta­kes. Look how it wor­ked hard to turn the tide on its secu­rity pro­blems.
    What we need, is Mic­ro­soft “Web Celebs” Eva­lan­gists on ste­roids. Pro­mo­ting web tech­no­lo­gies for ever­yone and not just for big busi­ness
    The M$ secu­rity team have Steve Riley and he does a smashing job at pro­mo­ting secu­rity issues for the industry. But where’s someone simi­lar for the Web?
    Mic­ro­soft cer­tainly isn’t dead, though with the new sea­son approaching, I’d like to see exis­ting blog­gers evol­ving to the next level. Quick someone give them a Hi-Def camera quick!
    Intel Vs AMD ?
    ATI Vs nVi­dia ?
    Goo­gle Vs Mic­ro­soft?
    Funny how no one talks about gTalk? You see Goo­gle gets things wrong some­ti­mes too..
    We don’t care. Its all about the com­pe­lling end user expe­rience. Give me Speed, Ser­vice and Simplicity.

  19. tomdog says:

    MSFT is not a huge sup­por­ter of AJAX, the con­cept, they are a huge sup­por­ter of a MSFT-branded AJAX-like deve­lop­ment plat­form. I work for a soft­ware ven­dor that pro­vi­des deve­lop­ment tools for Visual Stu­dio deve­lo­pers. We’ve been offe­ring an AJAX pro­duct for years before it was even called AJAX. Now we’re run­ning into irate Visual Stu­dio deve­lo­pers who are assu­ming that we are pro­vi­ding tool­kits that are opti­mi­zed for this bullc­rap MSFT-AJAX for­mat since MSFT has been pro­mo­ting the heck out of it. MSFT seems des­pe­rate to taint and des­troy everything that is open and honest — peo­ple are finally star­ting to see this and that is poten­tially the death of MSFT.

  20. What a lot of fuss. To me, as a per­son who thought AJAX was a kitchen clea­ning pro­duct, it seems pretty clear. Mic­ro­soft isn’t dead — but the busi­ness model that made Mic­ro­soft is.
    Paul Graham makes two points which, when the dust has sett­led, deserve atten­tion. First, the days of a Win­dows type desktop-based approach to things are limi­ted as on-line sto­rage and inte­rac­tion become fas­ter and chea­per. Second, the reac­tion of the young start-up guy should serve as a war­ning to Mic­ro­soft that, as a brand, it is losing its mojo. Impor­tant, but not ter­mi­nal, issues.

  21. James says:

    Don’t for­get the follo­wup: http://www.paulgraham.com/cliffsnotes.html

  22. iafzhql tkrismc jhdmxnw wyqauzpxn gmkzq­lexu zuqfbgwi yevzkdmc