NYTimes Op-Ed Piece: Microsoft’s Creative Destruction - Written by former MS engineer

[HotHotHeat]

Some people take joy in Microsoft’s struggles, as the popular view in recent years paints the company as an unrepentant intentional monopolist. Good riddance if it fails. But those of us who worked there know it differently. At worst, you can say it’s a highly repentant, largely accidental monopolist. It employs thousands of the smartest, most capable engineers in the world. More than any other firm, it made using computers both ubiquitous and affordable. Microsoft’s Windows operating system and Office applications suite still utterly rule their markets.

The company’s chief executive, Steve Ballmer, has continued to deliver huge profits. They totaled well over $100 billion in the past 10 years alone and help sustain the economies of Seattle, Washington State and the nation as a whole. Its founder, Bill Gates, is not only the most generous philanthropist in history, but has also inspired thousands of his employees to give generously themselves. No one in his right mind should wish Microsoft failure.

And yet it is failing, even as it reports record earnings. As the fellow who tried (and largely failed) to make tablet PCs and e-books happen at Microsoft a decade ago, I could say this is because the company placed too much faith in people like me. But the decline is so broad and so striking that it would be presumptuous of me to take responsibility for it.

Microsoft’s huge profits — $6.7 billion for the past quarter — come almost entirely from Windows and Office programs first developed decades ago. Like G.M. with its trucks and S.U.V.’s, Microsoft can’t count on these venerable products to sustain it forever. Perhaps worst of all, Microsoft is no longer considered the cool or cutting-edge place to work. There has been a steady exit of its best and brightest.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinion/04brass.html

I know this will probably turn into a fanboy war, but I thought this was an interesting take. Not much to argue with really.

[mykalberta]

There shouldnt be any fanboy war, its true. The good thing is unlike GM and the like M$ has been trying to do different things and spending alot of money doing so.

I think the problem with M$ is all political. They need to do an almost sutter style hacket job with management there.

[Phaneuf3]

Say what you will about the company or its products - like anything they've got their faults. Bill Gates' philanthropy is something pretty neat to keep an eye on though.

[Shazam]

Dick Brass is doing a little bit (okay, a lot) of historical rewriting here.

MS did have a tablet PC. It sucked. Royally. There was no compelling market for it. There were no apps specifically for it. Imagine 2000-year era technology in tablet format. No one could figure out what to do with it - including Dick Brass.

No one brings the rhetoric like an executive scorned.

[sclitheroe]

As a publicly traded company making record profits for the shareholders, there is no other measure of success required - Microsoft is doing exactly what is expected of them by the shareholders, and is doing is quite well.

The author of the article seems fairly bitter overall - quibbling over Cleartype and MP3 players ignores the tremendous gains in technology, innovation, and marketshare that Microsoft has made on the server/enterprise side, a market that they barely (and poorly) competed in exactly 10 years ago when Server 2000 was introduced.

In fact, on further reflection, I'd say that the author is a prime example of what WAS the wrong thinking of Microsoft in previous years - that it had to saturate, dominate, and monopolize every market, from handhelds to phones to consoles to the living room, and as a result did many things poorly rather than fewer things well.

[octothorp]

Interesting article when it comes to the internal politics, but I tend to agree with others; Microsoft has really nicely positioned itself as the best office and server software, and the movement towards further integration of office, sharepoint, exchange and other similar products is really a positive thing and is proof of some creativity (even though the lack of compatibility in really obvious places is absolutely maddening!).

On the other hand, if Windows had really buckled down and made a tablet designed for Office, and made an edition of Office designed for their tablet, (pretty much what Apple is doing) what would have happened? Hard to say, given that we have no idea yet whether or not the iPad will be a success.

[Burninator]

I thought Windows 7 sales were really doing well, no?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by octothorp

On the other hand, if Windows had really buckled down and made a tablet designed for Office, and made an edition of Office designed for their tablet, (pretty much what Apple is doing) what would have happened? Hard to say, given that we have no idea yet whether or not the iPad will be a success.

Back in 2000? There's no way the tablet they designed would've even been able to run Office at an acceptable speed. What stage was wireless networking at back then? Even a wired router was very expensive.

The thing was a useless POS. I don't know why Brass is bringing it up now - sounds like he's got awful chip on his shoulder.

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by Burninator

I thought Windows 7 sales were really doing well, no?

Yup. Well, compared to themselves at least.

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/2...er-than-vista/

[Shazam]

Here's Microsoft's retort:

http://blogs.technet.com/microsoft_b...ad-impact.aspx

You suck, Dick Brass, if that is your real name.

Shocking, really.