DealsOnTheWeb Daily Deal: J&R Computerworld.com: Free Shipping on TVs 42" and Under - Extended
Just a Thought - A Moment 20 Years P.G. (Post Gates)
by
- June 30th, 2006"Stephen, I have a message for you from your son, Bill. Would you like me to play it for you?"
Stephen Doors inserts his uPad into the receptacle in his apartment's entry way; the receptacle connects the device to the apartment's cMac (Centralized Mac) where security is checked and data is synced. The process had actually started wirelessly when Stephen had entered the building, this is the final check where biometric data freshly gathered by the uPad is compared to the last stored record. The whole process takes 5 milliseconds after the uPad is placed in the receptacle.
Stephen ignores his apartment's query (he calls the artificial intelligence 'Robot' after the man-made being in the 1927 movie, 'Metropolis'). A nasty virus got into the software that controls the air conditioning at work, Stephen is hot, sweaty and irritated, and he wants nothing more than to relax. He answers Robot with a question of his own, "How's the beer today?"
"As always, I can provide you with a fresh brew of your choice," Robot replies.
Stephen frowns and wonders when NouvoSoft will finally get around to giving the software that runs on the cMac enough intelligence to know when its being asked a rhetorical question.
Instead of grousing about it aloud, which would only confuse the system even more, he tells the apartment to make a pitcher of J.W. Dundee's Honey Brown Lager. Robot chimes its acknowledgment of the request and sets into motion a series of events that ultimately result in an glasstic pitcher filled with a dark brown liquid sitting on the counter top in the apartment's small kitchen.
As Stephen showers and dresses for the evening, he is not thinking about the processes involved with making his beer, or the pitcher for that matter. Nor does he care that the same company that wrote the software and algorithms that control the food creation system in his kitchen (called a For-Matter) that makes the beer and everything else he eats and drinks in his apartment is the same company that ruled the computing world 20 years before. He has heard of Microsoft, but only in passing conversations between techs who deal with low level software, applications that control the myriad devices that make the modern world livable, like the air conditioner at work.
Now comfortable, Stephen grabs the pitcher of cold beer and a glasstic mug, and settles into his chair in front of a large blank wall. He pours himself a mug full of lager, takes a sip, and grimaces. He curses to himself under his breath, then says to his apartment, "Robot, do a diag on the For-Matter, I think it's picked up another bug."
Robot chimes its compliance. A moment later it says in its unemotional sing-song, asexual voice, "A virus has been located in a For-Matter sub-program that relates to liquids. The CDC has classified this virus a medium threat: illness may result from consuming any product made while the virus is active. I have eradicated the virus and have put into place the latest protocols to guard against reinfection. Please discard any liquids generated by the For-Matter within the last 24 hours. I have created a new pitcher of beer for you. I hope it is to your liking."
Stephen disposes of the old pitcher and fetches the new one. He takes a sip from the pitcher and smiles as the familiar bittersweet liquid washes down his throat. He settles in his chair again and tells Robot to play the message from his son.
It's been a good day a good after all.
------
Now that Bill Gates has decided to turn over the scepter of his kingdom to others I have to wonder what the world will be like 20 years P.G. (Post-Gates).
It is interesting that one man who has no direct political or social influence can affect the entire world in such a fundamental way.
Think about it: Through Microsoft, Bill Gate has literally affected nearly every facet of the day to day lives of the majority of the people in every developed nation on the planet, and a good portion of the people in under-developed nations as well. Whether you like them or not, the company that Gates built is the epicenter of information technology for the entire planet; from Krakow to Kansas, from Capetown to Kalamazoo, Microsoft creates, and therefor controls the ebb and flow of the information and data that keep our world running.
That, my friends, is a lot of power.
Now, the man who has thrust himself into the center of the Information Age is stepping aside.
What will the world do?
Well, hard as it may be for some to believe, the world won't implode, data won't stop flowing, banks won't crash, and the sun will continue to rise. The vacancy left by Gates will be filled and Microsoft, at least on the surface, will continue to be the (evil?) empire that it is today; for a while at least. What Big Redmond will be like a few years down the pike is a different story.
When IBM ruled the computing world no one would have believed that the 'personal computer' would unseat the room-filling behemoths that crunched all of the data that ran our increasingly IT-dependent world. Back then, if you needed a computer your choices were limited to which vendor you decided to buy your room-filling behemoth from. True enough there are room filling data cruncher still being sold by IBM and others, but these systems are not the be-all and end-all of the computing world that they were in the past; they are niche players catering to globe-spanning companies that require a bit more horsepower than PCs can provide. Today, businesses as well as consumers have a far broader range of computing options to choose from. This is a good thing because now you can get exactly what you need, scale it up when your needs expand, and spend a lot less.
Chalk one up for the average Joe.
Something similar, I believe, will happen to Microsoft once Gates steps aside. Though there will be promises to the contrary, Microsoft will change. It will be slow at first, but I think it's bound to happen.
Why?
I propose that image, as much as anything else, is what keeps Microsoft first in everyone's mind; the carefully cultured image of a large company with a leader firmly in control. People respond to such images for good or ill, because they believe that, as a whole, the company has to be doing something right to remain in such a position, after all, everybody else uses their products.
IBM had it 20 years ago. They created an image of data stability as solid as granite; you could bet your career on it. As the saying went, "No one was ever fired for buying IBM."
The image of IBM as the solid, blue suit and tie company gave businesses the idea that the company would be at the top of its game forever. Microsoft is in pretty much the same position.
The problem with Microsoft's image is that it is built on a house of cards. There was substance behind IBM's image, it had the technical prowess, if not the marketing aptitude to back up its image of industry leader. Microsoft is merely proficient, which is hardly enough to maintain the notion that it is an industry leader. And if the perception of the leader changes then the precariously stacked cards that its industry leading position rests upon will come tumbling down.
I can't think of any real reason why people insist on buying Microsoft products in the number that they do; the products are no better, and have often been proven worse than products from other vendors in the same categories, and the company has certainly made as many enemies as it has friends. What friends it does have may only be around to suckle at the power teat and may not be counted on for support should Big Redmond falter.
With Gates gone, despite who steps in to take his place, the image of Microsoft as the world IT leader may be irrevocably changed, and Microsoft may not be the juggernaut it appears to be today. People could start to take a more serious look at other, less expensive and more robust options, and soon, Microsoft might find itself a few years down the road where IBM is today; not THE industry, but a player in the industry, trying to stay relevant in an ever changing world.
The world 20 years P.G. will be, I think, a far more interesting place. New players will rule where today's IT sovereignty once held court, and that's got to be a good thing, right?
is a writer who currently lives in Orlando, FL. He's been a Mac fan since Atari Computers folded, but has worked with computers of nearly every type for 20 years.
You can send your comments directly to me, or you can also post your comments below.
Most Recent Columns From Just A Thought
- Apple's New Cards: Aces and Kings? - September 14th
- Power to the People - September 1st
- Too Soon To Zune - August 28th
The Just A Thought Archives
Observer Comments
Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:47 pm Subject:
Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:38 am Subject: I'm pretty certain...
Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:24 pm Subject: Why Microsoft sells products
I can't think of any real reason why people insist on buying Microsoft products in the number that they do; the products are no better, and have often been proven worse than products from other vendors in the same categories, and the company has certainly made as many enemies as it has friends.
Must be a conspiracy, huh? Or severe cheating. Andrew Orlowski hit it out of the park this weekend relating the traditions of conspiracy and techno-politics to the just concluded Network Neutrality debate. Orlowski's thesis applies to lots of market goings on that we just "don't understand".
I'll give you three reasons that Microsoft is where it is today. (1) Application Suite (Office). (2) In other things, they make themselves a bridge rather than an endpoint. (3) They build on successes.
(1) In business office products, from the earliest days, where other developers did one product really well, Microsoft did a suite well enough. They also developed for both Mac and Windows, and kept data reasonably portable across platforms. Apple did not try to cross into the Windows market with AppleWorks (a "lite" office product) until the OS market was settled. When the hard currency of office documents was Microsoft formats, why would people want to use non-Microsoft editors and viewers and risk future incompatibility?
(2) Notice how Microsoft's Internet strategy (once they figured it out) was not to own the Internet (AOL) or own the server market (Netscape), but to just be the dominant interfaces to the Internet (Internet Explorer and Outlook Express). They succeeded quickly with the first, not so quickly with the second. While "bundling" was how they ended up getting into monopolist trouble, it probably made no difference. A startup with their strategy, good capitalization, and a plan to leverage browser market share to make money (say on search or hosting) probably could have done the same thing. Netscape thought they would sell the browser and the server side tools.
There is hope for Apple in using this model. Free QuickTime/iTunes puts Apple between consumers and content on both major OS platforms. This lets them sell iPods and music. Sure, there are 100 music players that are "better" in 1000 different ways feature-wise, but nobody else bridges users to affordable consumer content the way iTunes does.
Even Microsoft's OS, Windows, was about bridging users to applications. They made a lot of APIs easier to use and able to reach a bigger market than Apple, as far back as 1991/1992. While Apple retained API elegance superiority through 1995 or 1996, Microsoft delivered the market to third party developers. Sure Mac users were 3 times as likely to buy software, but there were 10 times as many Windows users. Buy contrast, Apple was always an endpoint. Wanna use Apple API's? You have to buy Apple systems. Wanna use Microsoft API's? Buy whomever's systems and pay $50 - $200 (depending on how you buy Windows).
(3) Microsoft sticks to its guns. Windows XP is a long way forward from Windows 2.0 or Windows 3.1 (the version most tech savvy people over 35 first saw). It's gone from Solitaire Shell to the dominant OS. Word and Excel were both staples of business in the late 80s and early 90s. And they still are 15 years later.
There are no quick fixes Vern. If a company succeeds in displacing Microsoft 20 years from now, it will be because it was gaining momentum today, it will be picking the right ways to get between consumers and what they want, it will not be thinking of these as double-clickable applications to be sold, but relationships to be leveraged.
Sat Jul 01, 2006 11:32 pm Subject: Re: Why Microsoft sells products
QuoteBosco wrote:
Must be a conspiracy, huh? Or severe cheating. Andrew Orlowski hit it out of the park this weekend relating the traditions of conspiracy and techno-politics to the just concluded Network Neutrality debate. Orlowski's thesis applies to lots of market goings on that we just "don't understand".
I'll give you three reasons that Microsoft is where it is today. (1) Application Suite (Office). (2) In other things, they make themselves a bridge rather than an endpoint. (3) They build on successes.
(1) In business office products, from the earliest days, where other developers did one product really well, Microsoft did a suite well enough. They also developed for both Mac and Windows, and kept data reasonably portable across platforms. Apple did not try to cross into the Windows market with AppleWorks (a "lite" office product) until the OS market was settled. When the hard currency of office documents was Microsoft formats, why would people want to use non-Microsoft editors and viewers and risk future incompatibility?
(2) Notice how Microsoft's Internet strategy (once they figured it out) was not to own the Internet (AOL) or own the server market (Netscape), but to just be the dominant interfaces to the Internet (Internet Explorer and Outlook Express). They succeeded quickly with the first, not so quickly with the second. While "bundling" was how they ended up getting into monopolist trouble, it probably made no difference. A startup with their strategy, good capitalization, and a plan to leverage browser market share to make money (say on search or hosting) probably could have done the same thing. Netscape thought they would sell the browser and the server side tools.
There is hope for Apple in using this model. Free QuickTime/iTunes puts Apple between consumers and content on both major OS platforms. This lets them sell iPods and music. Sure, there are 100 music players that are "better" in 1000 different ways feature-wise, but nobody else bridges users to affordable consumer content the way iTunes does.
Even Microsoft's OS, Windows, was about bridging users to applications. They made a lot of APIs easier to use and able to reach a bigger market than Apple, as far back as 1991/1992. While Apple retained API elegance superiority through 1995 or 1996, Microsoft delivered the market to third party developers. Sure Mac users were 3 times as likely to buy software, but there were 10 times as many Windows users. Buy contrast, Apple was always an endpoint. Wanna use Apple API's? You have to buy Apple systems. Wanna use Microsoft API's? Buy whomever's systems and pay $50 - $200 (depending on how you buy Windows).
(3) Microsoft sticks to its guns. Windows XP is a long way forward from Windows 2.0 or Windows 3.1 (the version most tech savvy people over 35 first saw). It's gone from Solitaire Shell to the dominant OS. Word and Excel were both staples of business in the late 80s and early 90s. And they still are 15 years later.
There are no quick fixes Vern. If a company succeeds in displacing Microsoft 20 years from now, it will be because it was gaining momentum today, it will be picking the right ways to get between consumers and what they want, it will not be thinking of these as double-clickable applications to be sold, but relationships to be leveraged.
Good response, but I think that some of your reasons are based on a fairly narrow perception of the past.
Microsoft was not the only maker of Office products that worked well in business; WordPerfect and IBM both had suites of office tools that worked well together. IBM's office products worked across several platforms including UNIX and mainframes and in far more languages than Microsoft's offerings at the time.
Actually, Microsoft strategy WAS to own the Internet (once they figured out that money could be made there). Microsoft's first forays into the Web was against services like AOL, which had a huge, exclusive customer base. Once portals became popular, Big Redmond figured it was a good way to have a captured audience. While it didn't pan out that way (Remember the early days of MSN?, Microsoft still managed to create a decent web presence. Not as big as AOL, but big enough to become a respectable portal for news and entertainment.
And finally, sticky to your guns is well and good, but doing so obsessively or beyond the point where it doesn't make sense is not so good.
IBM stuck to its guns concerning PCs and you see where it got them.
On the other hand, Apple has been willing to let got of things when it finds that it is not working. The processor changes, OS changes, even its relationship with Microsoft are great examples of letting go of an idea that's become useless and even harmful to the health of the company.
Understand that I believe much of what you say about Microsoft, but keep them in the proper light: It's products are OK, not great, just OK. It's business strategies are also OK; when you are the 600 pound gorilla, you don't have to be too smart to stay ahead.
Gates has done an admirable job of keeping the company moving, but, as I said in my article, I'm not so sure that others can keep that momentum going. It doesn't mean that Microsoft will fold months or years after Gates steps aside, but it will mean that the era of Microsoft as top dog may be coming to an end.
Things change. The companies that will be ruling IT tomorrow may only be a glimmer of an idea in someone's head today. It's bound to happen sooner or later, I just think that, with Gates gone, it will happen sooner for Microsoft.
Vern Seward
Sun Jul 02, 2006 12:17 pm Subject: Re: Why Microsoft sells products
QuoteVSeward wrote:
Things change. The companies that will be ruling IT tomorrow may only be a glimmer of an idea in someone's head today. It's bound to happen sooner or later, I just think that, with Gates gone, it will happen sooner for Microsoft.
Vern Seward
That's wonderful news and all, but the problem for Apple is that they've proven they can't survive without Jobs. As far as we know, looking from the outside, there IS no one else who makes Apple, well, Apple.
In 5 - 10 years, Apple will not be Apple any longer when Steve Jobs departs. Then whatever lumbering drifting beast Microsoft will be will still be larger and more widely accepted than Apple, with no hope of Apple changing that.
Quotestudentx wrote:
Yes, its amazing how we can embrace a convited monopolist as a great man.
He's spent more on wiping out diseases in third world countries than you have by a factor of millions. And he's just getting started.
Microsoft the company has problems, Bill Gates the man probably has problems, but he's also doing a lot of good that someone less successful would not be able to do. Ignoring that on purpose to suit your hatred of the guy is your right, but it doesn't make you any more open-minded.
Sun Jul 02, 2006 1:58 pm Subject: Re: Why Microsoft sells products
Quotehangtown wrote:QuoteVSeward wrote:
Things change. The companies that will be ruling IT tomorrow may only be a glimmer of an idea in someone's head today. It's bound to happen sooner or later, I just think that, with Gates gone, it will happen sooner for Microsoft.
Vern Seward
That's wonderful news and all, but the problem for Apple is that they've proven they can't survive without Jobs. As far as we know, looking from the outside, there IS no one else who makes Apple, well, Apple.
In 5 - 10 years, Apple will not be Apple any longer when Steve Jobs departs. Then whatever lumbering drifting beast Microsoft will be will still be larger and more widely accepted than Apple, with no hope of Apple changing that.
Now, there is a good point. Apple has been Jobs-less (pun intended) and shown that it couldn't make it.
It might be argued then that the lesson was learned and the Apple would not make the same mistake twice. If Jobs steps aside I would think that he would hand pick his successor to insure that the ideas and culture that has made Apple a bonifide success continues.
Gates may be able to try the same thing, but understand that there is a big difference between what a new Gates would have to do versus what a new Jobs would do.
For one thing, as I mentioned before, Microsoft is only adequate technologically speaking; the stuff they are doing now others have done 20 years ago. The new Gates would have to take cues for the old Jobs and learn how to truly innovate. That's a tall order because steering Microsoft is like steering a supertanker that's lost its main engine. Microsoft would have to become light, more nimble, which would mean a drastic change that I don't think the company is willing to make yet.
Apple without Jobs will also change, but I think the change won't be nearly as drastic as what will occur when Gates leaves Microsoft.
But I could be wrong.
Vern Seward
QuoteVSeward wrote:
For one thing, as I mentioned before, Microsoft is only adequate technologically speaking; the stuff they are doing now others have done 20 years ago. The new Gates would have to take cues for the old Jobs and learn how to truly innovate.
Oh please. Dominance has nothing to do with adequacy and innovation, and everything to do with positioning, and I don't mean marketing and hype. Once successful market strategy that Microsoft has used is to position themselves as a common, trusted bridge between customers and products they want. Microsoft doesn't make computer boxes, nor do they make music players. They make the software that runs them. I would bet that over the next 5 years in the music player market, if Apple doesn't license, Apple iPod marketshare will go down, Microsoft powered device share will go up. And then we're right back to 1992/1993 again. Really, the only thing helping Apple defend iPod marketshare now is the iTMS/iPod dynamic. As big retailers like WalMart gain traction in online sales, the iTMS advantage will diminish.
Look, I agree that Apple has more innovation built into its DNA, and that it generally makes very high quality hardware, and I *like* paying the premium for the good stuff they make. I am a huge Apple fan. However, I'm not a fan of repeatedly being marginalized because Apple can't ever figure out how it can license to keep its fingers in dominant market share while continuing to make best of breed hardware for its customers who appreciate it. That is the real challenge for whoever follows Jobs, not throwing a Jobsian tantrum because someone didn't get the right brand of bottled water.
Sun Jul 02, 2006 7:06 pm Subject: Re: adequate
QuoteBosco wrote:QuoteVSeward wrote:
For one thing, as I mentioned before, Microsoft is only adequate technologically speaking; the stuff they are doing now others have done 20 years ago. The new Gates would have to take cues for the old Jobs and learn how to truly innovate.
Oh please. Dominance has nothing to do with adequacy and innovation, and everything to do with positioning, and I don't mean marketing and hype. Once successful market strategy that Microsoft has used is to position themselves as a common, trusted bridge between customers and products they want. Microsoft doesn't make computer boxes, nor do they make music players. They make the software that runs them. I would bet that over the next 5 years in the music player market, if Apple doesn't license, Apple iPod marketshare will go down, Microsoft powered device share will go up. And then we're right back to 1992/1993 again. Really, the only thing helping Apple defend iPod marketshare now is the iTMS/iPod dynamic. As big retailers like WalMart gain traction in online sales, the iTMS advantage will diminish.
Look, I agree that Apple has more innovation built into its DNA, and that it generally makes very high quality hardware, and I *like* paying the premium for the good stuff they make. I am a huge Apple fan. However, I'm not a fan of repeatedly being marginalized because Apple can't ever figure out how it can license to keep its fingers in dominant market share while continuing to make best of breed hardware for its customers who appreciate it. That is the real challenge for whoever follows Jobs, not throwing a Jobsian tantrum because someone didn't get the right brand of bottled water.
When did this become a debate about Apple's problems?
I agree that Apple could very well end up begging for quarters on the IT corner if they are not careful. But I happen to think that Apple WILL be careful, and that they will do what needs to be done to grow.
On the other hand, Microsoft, even with Gates at the helm, stumbles and falters its way along, relying on its sheer size to keep the wolves at bay. Look at the delays of key software, and the problems with existing software. As you've pointed out, they are a software company; this shouldn't be a problem for them.
Don't confuse bullying with strategy; throw enough money and weight around and you could dominate a market as well.
However Microsoft got where it is today,once Gates leaves I believe that the company will ultimately settle into its rightful niche, which will be a far cry from its dominating postion it enjoys today.
Vern Seward
Recent Headlines - Updated Saturday, November 29th, 2008
- Sat., 9:00 PM
- Podcast - Apple Weekly Report #135: Apple Lawsuits, Banned iPhone Ad, Green MacBook Ad
- Fri., 12:45 PM
- Podcast - Mac Geek Gab #178: Batch Permission Changes, Encrypting Follow-up, Re-Enabling AirPort, and GigE speeds
- Thu., 1:30 PM
- iPO Review - Scosche kickBACK iPhone case
- 7:00 AM
- Happy Thanksgiving from TMO!
- Wed., 6:00 PM
- TMO Appearances - Nancy Gravley Joins MacJury Gift Guide
- 5:15 PM
- TMO Visits The Bay, a Premium Apple Reseller in New Zealand
- 3:25 PM
- iPO Oh the Games You'll Play - iPhone: The Wii of Handheld Gaming Devices?
- 2:15 PM
- Sonnet Releases Simply Fast FireWire 800 to 400 Adapter
- 1:10 PM
- Mac Gaming News - Disney Plans 1st Annual PotC Online Thanksgiving Event
- 12:05 PM
- iPodObserver - UK Shuts Down iPhone 3G Ad
- 11:15 AM
- TMO Appearances - Jeff Gamet on MacJury Gift Guide
- 10:30 AM
- TMO Contest - TMO Announces Macworld Expo Pass Winners
- 9:50 AM
- PhotoCopy 1.1 Adds iPhoto Event Support
- 9:15 AM
- Acclivity Buys MYOB US
- 8:30 AM
- Review - Bento 2 Holiday Pack
- 7:50 AM
- Microsoft Offers Black Friday Office Discount
- 7:30 AM
- iPO Quick Tip - iPhone: Google Street View
The Mac Observer Reader Specials
- Download Typestyler, still the Ultimate Styling Tool for Internet, Print and Video Graphics. Works great in Classic with a Native OS X Version on the way. Free Tryout: www.typestyler.com
New MacPro Memory 800Mhz With Apple Spec Heat Sink - 2GB $72 / 4GB $104 / 8GB $204. Click to Maximize your Macs...
Mac observers can now play Party Poker for Mac as well as Mac casino games by going to MacPokerOnline.com.
RamJet Memory: Mac Pro FB-DIMMs: 2Gig kit $95, 4Gig Kit $179, 8Gig Kit $355! MacBook 2Gig Kit $78, 4Gig Kit $149! Click hereFor the latest Apple products use Ciao a comparison website to find laptops like MacBook Air. Then find the best prices on MP3 players and use our comparison tool to evaluate cell phones.
Laptop Hardware Provided by TechRestore - Overnight Mac & iPod Repairs.
Marshmallow Popper Gun Shooter: $9.99 Delivered - Make the Yam Side Dish a Sporting Event 
OnSale's ThanksGiving Day/Black Friday Combo Sale - Turkey, Deals, and LeftOvers - The Holiday Trifecta! 
Fall Knuckle Deep into Dell Small Business's Black Friday Sale - Going on Now!!!!! 
File Your Nails Now - Overstock's Black Friday Sale is Coming! Get Great Gifts at Great Prices 
