Quote Originally Posted by nihil
CTO



Absolutely! and please do not forget the hardware part of the equation. You need to give manufacturers sufficient advanced notice of your final product to let them develop reliable drivers, management software, and the like.
This is something that still gets me... How hardware manufacturers are still crying that it was Microsofts fault they weren't ready to support Vista... It's pure bullshit... They had access to Vista for a long time (I know when we had access to it, and I bet a number of hardware manufacturers had it before that). The number of people who complained about printers not work was astounding... It's really funny to watch.

Printer Owner -- My printer doesn't work with Vista
Printer Company -- Microsoft didn't give us nearly enough time to develop drivers, so we can't make your printer work. We suggest you purchase one of our new Vista compatible printers.

It's the perfect marketing ploy on the part of the printer companies... they increase printer sales (selling to all those people who are happy with their older printers) and get to lay the blame elsewhere.

It's like my Logitech Quickcam... The installer essentially said (paraphrased):
"Your webcam is not compatible with Vista, for a list of compatible products please click here". Translation: "We want more money... buy one of these items".

It strikes me as somewhat ironic that the EU are fining M$ for not adopting what I would have thought would be a superior business strategy for them.

As in: "Be especially nice with your fellow (non-competitive) vendors, and drive a wedge between them and open source"
Microsoft plays well with non-competitive vendors... most of the protocols that have been opened up don't benefit their non-competitive vendors... They benefit open source projects, direct competitors who want to develop replacement software and other operating systems (for Windows Interoperability).

In my view, Microsoft grew very quickly, but lost direction because they failed to grow and refine their business model along with their revenue. The business equivalent of "sitting on your laurels"?

Lawsuits and underhand dealings are not the way to go............... Microsoft are far too large for that to stand any chance of working.

My criticism is not that "Microsoft are doing too well because they are too big". My argument is that they are big enough to do far better.
I'm all for a good lawsuit to eliminate those who are infringing upon your technology... It's the right approach. As for Microsoft "sitting on it's laurels"... I dont' think they've done that... Since their initial OS offering they've done a good job of expanding business... it has worked and they have grown.. expanding into new area after new area and because of that they have no reason to change their business model... It has brought them nothing but success.