Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Businesses Google The Internet

Scoble Bites The Hand That Fed Him 178

Posted by Zonk
from the define-sucks dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Times Online points out a post that Robert Scoble, former Microsoft blogger, put up on his site recently. In essence, Scoble has moved 180 degrees from his former blogging tone, saying that 'Microsoft Sucks'. More specifically, he is highly critical of Microsoft's online policy. In Scoble's words: 'Microsoft's Internet execution sucks (on whole). Its search sucks. Its advertising sucks (look at that last post again). If that's in it to win then I don't get it. ... Microsoft isn't going away. Don't get me wrong. They have record profits, record sales, all that. But on the Internet? Come on. This isn't winning. Microsoft: stop the talk. Ship a better search, a better advertising system than Google, a better hosting service than Amazon, a better cross-platform Web development ecosystem than Adobe, and get some services out there that are innovative (where's the video RSS reader? Blog search? Something like Yahoo's Pipes? A real blog service? A way to look up people?) That's how you win.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Scoble Bites The Hand That Fed Him

Comments Filter:
  • It's a trap! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pinky99 (741036) on Monday March 19, 2007 @04:20AM (#18399301)
    ...former MS blogger... How obviuos must it be?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by TapeCutter (624760)
      1. Ex-blogger says MSSucks(TM).

      2. MS upgrades from "failing stragegy" to "doomed stragey II".

      3. Ex-blogger says "doomed stragey II" has "put Google on notice".

      4. Profit!!!

      I'm not sure if it's completely obvious, after all - step three is normally expressed as "???".
    • Dunno about trap (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Moraelin (679338) on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:09AM (#18399445) Journal
      Dunno about trap, or it's just that MS no longer pays him to do PR.

      It's funny how a lot of people previously were taking it as the truth, _whole_ truth, and nothing but the truth, just because he's such a hip blogger. I even remember getting modded down and getting some annoyed responses before, when I pointed out that it was his paid job to show the good parts only. "Noo, it must be all spontaneous and 100% the complete uncensored, unbiased picture, because he says so! He's so hip and irreverent that he even bravely told Ballmer to write a memo that's good for PR! He said that MS lets him write whatever he wants, good or bad, so if he doesn't show anything bad, surely nothing bad exists at MS." Not an exact quote, because I'm too lazy to search for the thread right now, but that was the general gist of it.

      Now it turns out that when his paycheck no longer depends on MS, he suddenly discovers some bad things about MS too. Who would have imagined that?

      So let me just say again, to everoyne: Look folks, do exercise some healthy skepticism when a conflict of interest is _that_ blatant. When people's paychecks depend on the King (or CEO, or whatever) liking what they write, there's rarely even a need to put an explicit "thou shalt present me as the Messiah" clause in their contract. Either they figure it out on their own (like this guy seems to), or natural selection takes care of it.

      You can see that from ancient times to the present day. From the Pharaoh's scribes in the Old Kingdom to Pravda (or Faux News) journalists in the 20'th century to paid corporate PR/astroturfing/whatever, the same theme is there: the Pharaoh/Emperor/King/Beloved President/CEO/whatever is nothing short of perfect, and the enemy/competition/etc are a bunch of vampires or sloped-forehead orcs. And that those who didn't figure out that that's what's expected from them, found themselves "restructured" out. (Though, depending on the time and place, that could mean more fun HR personnel management methods, like beaheading, feeding someone to the crocodiles, or putting them at the top of a sharp stake. How's that for upwards mobility in the organization?;)

      And that when you're interviewed by the CEO's/president's/etc personal pet PR guy, you put on your best smiling face and proclaim yourself happier than a dog in a cat show. When the guys from Pravda came to Ivan Ivanovich's door, what do you think Ivan said? "Oh, I'm so unhappy under the communist party's rule"? Heh. Most of those interviews weren't scripted either, just everyone knew that it's not like it would even make it to print if they don't say what's expected of them. So what makes anyone think that when Ballmer's personal blogger entered someone's office anything fundamentally different happened?

      Briefly, take your infos from less biased sources.
      • by pinky99 (741036) on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:17AM (#18399465)
        Sure, you're completely right. No doubt. I just wanted to grab some "funny" karma points, but, as i got modded as insightful, this tactics clearly didn't work out...
        • I just wanted to grab some "funny" karma points
          I don't think Slashdot's karma system gives karma for "funny" posts, only "insightful" and the like.
      • by clickclickdrone (964164) on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:55AM (#18399553)
        Maybe I've just had my fill of spindoctoring - especially as I live in the UK and have Blair et al to content with but these days I tend to warm to and give my business to firms who admit they make errors.

        If something goes wrong, I don't want it spun to the nth degree to make it look like a good thing or to cover a CEO's back so they can be sure of their bonus. I want it to say what happened and what they're doing to fix it.

        While we're at it, most CEO's bonus's are based around them being able to lie and mislead as much as possible - they're petrified of admitting to any sort of failure or error. That is a crazy situation. They should earn it for doing a good job, not their ability to hide a bad one.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by mgblst (80109)
          This sort of thing has been going on for many years. A lot of people to place more trust in an organisation who will admit their errors, but the majority perfer to live blind. That is, they will trust a company that doesn't admit any error, in the blind faith belief that they must have never committed any errors. To think overwise is to admit that companies are human (or at least made of humans), and most people would prefer to not admit that. So it can backfire.

          Also, as a pessimist, you end up with compani
          • by linguizic (806996)
            I think part of the problem is the culture that has arisen out of branding. Once you create a culture where a company's public image isn't the product but an ideal you have to jump through hoops to maintain that ideal. Take Nike for instance, if they admitted that their shoes cause cuticle cancer then their "Just Do It" brand identity would get re-branded "Just don't it" or some counter brand that's actually clever.
      • The enemies of ancient egypt were orcs and vampires? There you have it gentlemen, the proof that education through games is a bad idea.

        What? Wrong story? Oh.

        Well, okay, so what you take half a page to say is, "follow the money". Okay got it.

        But what you really should say is this. Be doubtfull of a person who disagrees with you but be suspicious as hell when a person agrees with you.

        In that light, "just what is your game bud, who is paying you eh!"

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by blowdart (31458)

        Briefly, take your infos from less biased sources.

        You're new to slashdot then?

      • by Chanc_Gorkon (94133) <gorkon AT gmail DOT com> on Monday March 19, 2007 @06:37AM (#18399691)
        I think the part...."no longer pays him to do PR." kind of makes this a non story. I mean YE FLIPPIN GODS.....he's NOT biting the had that feeds (that fed....FED him). He no longer works for Microsoft. So who gives a rats ass that he says something bad about Microsoft. It's also not the first time! He's been making comments about Vista since it came out (which he still wasn't working for Microsoft then) and the comments have not all been good. So what I want to kno eis why the hell did this story get posted? Because it's going to generate page views on Slashdot. That's it. Hell it got me to post and all of you too.

      • by someone1234 (830754) on Monday March 19, 2007 @07:44AM (#18399917)
        Just because his paycheck is no longer coming from M$ he didn't become significantly more reliable. Who knows, he might get paid from elsewhere. Or just writes the crap out of spite. Once compromised, ever compromised.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by PinkPanther (42194)

          Just because his paycheck is no longer coming from M$ he didn't become significantly more reliable.
          You aren't paying attention. He's slamming Microsoft now; this makes him 100% reliable...almost saintly in fact (and if you still disagree...please take a moment to look at which site you are currently reading).
          • He's slamming Microsoft now; this makes him 100% reliable

            I am sure there are some who feel this way. But there are things that Microsoft does that are just plain laughable. Have you EVER used msn.com? I can do a google search and go to the best result in the time it takes to load msn.com. When I do use msn (in a give-em-one-more-chance mood) it sucks.

            Also, Microsoft's web presence is quite horrid. You cannot find ANYTHING on their website, and its dirt slow. I remmeber one time I wanted to downloa

            • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

              by Windowser (191974)

              You cannot find ANYTHING on their website, and its dirt slow. I remmeber one time I wanted to download media player 11, went to the site, and had to spend literally three minutes finding the download page.

              You just have to know how to use the tool : http://www.google.com/search?q=download+media+play er+11 [google.com]
              See ? first answer right there
            • Have you EVER used msn.com? I can do a google search

              MSN doesn't do search anymore, it's all Live.

              A while ago there was talk about Microsoft not allowing employees to use Google at work.

              Not true. You can use Google. Most people in my department (not Live Search) do. It's /discouraged/ (and understandably so), but I walk around and I see people using Firefox, I see people using Gmail, Yahoo mail... and managers not caring (or doing the same), not "not allowed".

              • interesting! A guy I work with has several friends who work at Redmond, and it's also neat to hear his insights into the thinking behind various products.

                What exactly is Live? I have been seeing that everywhere. Some kind of indexing service? I know I could read about it, but in a nutshell, what is it?

                Not sure which dept you work in, but I have to say if you have anything to do with Office (just upgraded to 2003 at work, and it is fantastic, esp Outlook), or Visual Studio or SQL Server tools, you gu
                • Definitely, there are nice products, and not so nice.

                  Live is "Windows Web Services" - Hotmail, Maps, Messenger, Search. Search is your garden variety search engine. It's a lot tidier than MS's search offering used to be, at least, but still much younger than other engines.

                  Me, I work in one of the more "innocuous" areas (though some would have you believe there's no such thing)... I'm a PM in the MSN.com dev team.

        • by Danse (1026)

          Just because his paycheck is no longer coming from M$ he didn't become significantly more reliable. Who knows, he might get paid from elsewhere. Or just writes the crap out of spite. Once compromised, ever compromised.

          How about we just read what he has to say and then decide for ourselves whether his claims hold any water? Would that work too?
      • Look folks, do exercise some healthy skepticism when a conflict of interest is _that_ blatant. When people's paychecks depend on the King (or CEO, or whatever) liking what they write, there's rarely even a need to put an explicit "thou shalt present me as the Messiah" clause in their contract. Either they figure it out on their own (like this guy seems to), or natural selection takes care of it. In Soviet Russia, Putin takes care of you!
    • by Bamafan77 (565893)
      Emporer Gates: It was I who allowed you to know have Robert Scoble. I assure you we are quite safe here in Redmond from your pathetic little band.

    • As I've said many times here and elsewhere:

      ANYBODY who works for Microsoft who is authorized to talk to the public is a LIAR. (Except the guy last week who said OneCare shouldn't have been released - I'm sure he's unemployed today.)

      So Scoble isn't with Microsoft any more. Fine, now he can tell the truth - maybe. There are plenty of shills here at /. and elsewhere who shill for Microsoft without being paid.

      The important point was that when he WAS with Microsoft - he was a LIAR.

      By definition.

      Microsoft does no
  • by jkrise (535370) on Monday March 19, 2007 @04:29AM (#18399331) Journal
    It appears you are angry and agitated. Here, take this chair!
  • by PO1FL (1074923) on Monday March 19, 2007 @04:41AM (#18399363) Homepage
    Frankly, I think the average consumer is intimidated by a perceived need for serious technical know-how to be able use just about anything other than MS (with the exception of Mac). Others probably aren't even aware of anything other than Microsoft and Mac.
    • by linguizic (806996)

      Others probably aren't even aware of anything other than Microsoft and Mac.

      I think for now that's not an issue. Until I can put Ubuntu on my laptop and have it automagically support my wifi card and the proper screen resolution for my screen I won't be recommending it to the lay. The average user should not have to bother with config files. This being said, I don't recommend Windows either, for now Mac OS X is the best operating system for average use. Though I personally love it, I can see why some pe

    • by vertinox (846076) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:26AM (#18401811)
      Frankly, I think the average consumer is intimidated by a perceived need for serious technical know-how to be able use just about anything other than MS

      Actually, I would argue the average consumer is intimidated by any software regardless of who makes it. Secondly, they most likely really don't know how to use Windows/Office as enough to get by to what they specifically want to do (surf, email, write printed letters).

      The only reason most consumers use what software they use is because either:

      A.) It came with the computer
      B.) It was on the shelf at Best Buy/Stapes/Target/Walmart.
      C.) Their relative/friend gave them a "copy"

      Seeing that Windows and MS Office apply to all 3 rather easily it is a no brainier to why it is successful. It isn't that people are too familiar with MS products so much that they are unwilling to move on, but rather there is really no need.

      Of these three reasons... Only C provides the opportunity for Linux and Open Office if they happen to have a relative/friend who is in the "know".
  • by MichaelSmith (789609) on Monday March 19, 2007 @04:43AM (#18399375) Homepage Journal

    Its the kind of thing people promise themselves and their co-workers they are going to say after they leave. Its good for the people still there, and its good in the long term for any stock you own in your previous employer.

    Yes, he is bad mouthing them, but its not like he is posting their private bug database on bittorrent. And Microsoft might be better for it.

  • by jimicus (737525) on Monday March 19, 2007 @04:46AM (#18399383)
    I know this is absolutely begging to be modded Troll, but let's get real for a minute.

    The web's been around a few years now. While they were late in recognising it, Microsoft have been taking the Internet seriously since before Google left Stanford University.

    IMO, if Microsoft were able to develop "better search than Google.... better hosting than Amazon..." - they'd have done so long ago. As it stands, they can't even implement searching in their own OS (certainly not in XP - even with the Search addon, it's trivially easy to dig out something which returns zero results when it patently shouldn't) - and they've got far more control over that than Google has over the Internet.

    Fact is, Microsoft's business plan has never been "build a better OS/office suite/mousetrap". It's been "build one that's good enough and market it as being better". But such marketing doesn't work so well in the Internet age because it's much easier to find out how much truth there is behind it, and AFAICT Microsoft still haven't worked that one out.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:31AM (#18399499)
      Microsoft have been taking the Internet seriously since before Google left Stanford University.

      Have they? I havn't seen much fabled "innovation" coming from Microsoft on the internet. They only take it seriously where it could threaten their traditional revenue streams, not because they have any interesting or innovative ideas that could make the internet a better place. The internet threatened to be an open network that anyone could play on, Microsoft tried to get people to use MSN instead. Netscape threatened to make the web, a killer application, platform-neutral: Microsoft made sure they killed it with Internet Explorer and ActiveX. Standard compliant email servers threatened to make email platform neutral; Microsoft push Exchange and Outlook with gratuitous incompatibilities and a lack of open standards. When Google were just a search engine Microsoft let them be; when Google started to become an on-line application provider, Microsoft suddenly begin to roll out technology to counter the threat to their Office and Windows revenue. Let's not forget the whole early ".NET will revolutionise the entire internet once we work out what it is!" marketing circus that amounted to nothing.

      Microsoft talk big, deliver little and focus all their energy on crushing any threat to their income streams.
      • by clickclickdrone (964164) on Monday March 19, 2007 @06:05AM (#18399581)

        Have they? I havn't seen much fabled "innovation" coming from Microsoft on the internet
        Oh, I don't know. They really did turn on a dime and go all out Internet around the time of Win95. In a space of 6 months they went from no Internet to Internet enabling just about every product they had. Taking it seriously wasn't their problem.

        What was their problem was 'getting it'. They added 'Internet' but didn't understand what or why so most of it was of no real use to anyone. The fact that they seriously thought they could puish MSN as a better and quite seperate Internet shows how wide of reality they were. I remember trying it out when it first went live - tons of unique content, online magazines, software etc but all quite seperate to the rest of the world. Sort of AOL without access to the Internet. Quite crazy.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by rbochan (827946)

          ...In a space of 6 months they went from no Internet to Internet enabling just about every product they had. Taking it seriously wasn't their problem...

          Which partially, if not totally, explains their godawful security track record. "Security" isn't something you can download or bolt-on.

      • by Bogtha (906264)

        Microsoft have been taking the Internet seriously since before Google left Stanford University.

        Have they? I havn't seen much fabled "innovation" coming from Microsoft on the internet.

        For some reason I have yet to fathom, Microsoft as an organisation seem pathologically incapable of bringing innovative products to market. But this applies to every aspect of their business, not just the Internet. That doesn't mean they don't take the Internet seriously. They clearly take the Internet seriously. I

    • by kripkenstein (913150) on Monday March 19, 2007 @07:07AM (#18399783) Homepage

      Fact is, Microsoft's business plan has never been "build a better OS/office suite/mousetrap". It's been "build one that's good enough and market it as being better".
      More recently, they added the "do everything to maintain the Windows monopoly" strategy. This is in fact why Microsoft cannot "Ship [...] a better cross-platform web development ecosystem than Adobe", as Scoble would suggest they do. Cross-platform? Never.

      Cross-platform tools are always created by Microsoft's competitors, not Microsoft. Java is cross-platform, .Net isn't (despite even Mono). Firefox is cross-platform, IE isn't. And so on and so forth.

      Scoble suggesting Microsoft do something 'cross-platform' is a sign of ignorance, I would say.
      • by jimicus (737525)
        More recently, they added the "do everything to maintain the Windows monopoly" strategy.

        True. I was talking about historically.

        I'm not sure Microsoft are still capable of changing direction quickly. Certainly there's been no evidence of it for some years. Without that ability, I think they'll do what IBM did - start looking more and more likely to render themselves obsolete until sooner or later a new person comes in at the top, makes major changes and reinvents the company. (Actually, I'm rather lookin
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by thejynxed (831517)

      As it stands, they can't even implement searching in their own OS (certainly not in XP - even with the Search addon, it's trivially easy to dig out something which returns zero results when it patently shouldn't)

      There are a few reasons for this:

      Their XP search tool (and the search tool add-on), rely heavily on the Indexing Service to be run before the search tool is used (and continuously thereafter).

      Another reason is that (in particular) the case with system files and other files deemed "important" by MS, they were attributed with an extra "Secret" flag, that the search tools and indexing service were programmed to skip over/ignore. The same thing happens when you use the Find function in the Registry editor, cer

      • by jimicus (737525)
        I've got a file here which isn't secret, existed before the indexing tool was run and still isn't found after running it.

        I know one anecdote isn't data, but please don't imagine I haven't taken account of that. I have.
    • "It's been 'build one that's good enough and market it as being better'."

      In other words, as I've been saying, Microsoft does not sell software - they sell LIES.

      Absolutely correct.
  • Hah! (Score:2, Funny)

    Well done Mr, you've just said what the rest of the IT industry has been saying for years!
  • In there to 'win'? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by WaZiX (766733) on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:32AM (#18399501)
    That's the problem with Microsoft, they are so obsessed with winning that they forgot that in the end, they are a service company, and in a service company you serve your customers, not yourself! Stop wanting to take over existing markets on the Internet and start creating yourselves new Internet markets. About any Internet company I think of that has been successful has brought a new experience to it's customers: eBay, Amazon, Yahoo, Google, Youtube, ... they all had a compelling reason for customers to use their service.

    On Internet you need 2 things to be successful, and Idea and money for development/marketing. They definitely have the money, all they need is NEW ideas to use their money on.
  • by Bert64 (520050) <bert AT slashdot DOT firenzee DOT com> on Monday March 19, 2007 @05:47AM (#18399535) Homepage
    Release better products? Compete on product quality? That's not the Microsoft way...
    Do you really think they will spend all that money and effort to produce better products than google/yahoo/etc ?
    No, they will leverage their desktop monopoly to push their search. Their search engine may be crap, just like IE is crap, but when 95% of desktop computers sold comes with their search engine as the default, very few people will ever bother looking for anything better.
    Aside from that, how will they find something better when the search engine they use is designed to lock customers in?
    • by danpsmith (922127)

      Do you really think they will spend all that money and effort to produce better products than google/yahoo/etc ? No, they will leverage their desktop monopoly to push their search. Their search engine may be crap, just like IE is crap, but when 95% of desktop computers sold comes with their search engine as the default, very few people will ever bother looking for anything better.

      I was waiting for this quote, I knew someone would say it. And what I want to say is this: that might have worked in the past w

  • "In Scoble's words: 'Microsoft's Internet execution sucks (on whole)."

    MS was a late comer to the internet and little has changed since they came around. In some ways, you'd think MS has simply been waiting for the internet to peak and go away, so they could get back to having the full attention of users when kool-aid time comes around. Scoble's rant is just more evidence that their business model spanks of a rigidity that mimics the tobacco and music industries (resisting change) where respect for the cl
    • I want to know what is really behind his new attitude...

      Maybe he has a new employer.

    • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

      their business model spanks of a rigidity that mimics the tobacco and music industries (resisting change)

      It's only recently that the music industry resisted change. For decades, from sheet music to records to cds, from adults to teenyboppers and back, from live to records to radio to tv, they did just fine. It's only in the Age of the Internet that they've completely shut down.

      And the tobacco industry has been one of the most flexible when it comes to maintaining their revenue stream. They're even doing

    • by HangingChad (677530) on Monday March 19, 2007 @07:13AM (#18399807) Homepage

      ...business model spanks of a rigidity...

      I'm not sure what that means, but I like it anyway. That's right up there with Cobert's "flaccid with anger". Can't wait to be in the middle of a really important high-level meeting and announce some part of the plan "spanks of rigidity."

      They'll still be wondering what it means on the plane home. Adding that to my quote tiddler. ---->

  • by giafly (926567) on Monday March 19, 2007 @06:03AM (#18399573)
    "If you have a technical issue with Microsoft, it's faster to search their database with Google rather than their own search engine" Times Online [timesonline.co.uk]. Get your act together guys!
  • I think he's fairly pro Microsoft. I mean I am Anti-MS, and when I read this I say: "Yay, go Microsoft! Just go on like that."
  • Ship a better search, a better advertising system than Google, a better hosting service than Amazon, a better cross-platform Web development ecosystem than Adobe, and get some services out there that are innovative (where's the video RSS reader? Blog search? Something like Yahoo's Pipes? A real blog service? A way to look up people?)

    Yeah! More useless web apps! That'll show 'em!
  • by nanosquid (1074949) on Monday March 19, 2007 @08:56AM (#18400363)
    While some marketing departments may believe that the only good publicity is good publicity, I don't think that's the case. Microsoft's biggest risk is becoming irrelevant, and even being criticized is better than being ignored. Besides, if the criticism is something fairly obvious, it's not like it's going to be news to people who have actually tried the product.
  • by halliburton (116075) on Monday March 19, 2007 @09:24AM (#18400591)
    MS should focus on its core competency, which is hardware.
    Drop all these other side projects like the search engine, the news site, the OS..
    Go back to making great mice, keyboards and joysticks.
    They used to be the best, and now that they are sidetracked with all these other projects they are losing focus, and it's starting to show.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nuzak (959558)
      > Go back to making great mice, keyboards and joysticks.

      That's like saying Lucas should direct more movies like The Empire Strikes Back.

      (go look it up on IMDB)
    • by moochfish (822730)

      MS should focus on its core competency, which is hardware.
      Drop all these other side projects like the search engine, the news site, the OS..
      Go back to making great mice, keyboards and joysticks.
      They used to be the best, and now that they are sidetracked with all these other projects they are losing focus, and it's starting to show.

      Yeah, and Slashdot needs to focus on its core competency too, which is being CmdrTaco's blog.
      Drop all these other side projects like news, comments, and job listings.
      Go back to ma

  • Train Wreck (Score:2, Informative)

    by jrentona (989920)
    The truth is that M$ has pretty muched sucked since 2000. It took them a whopping 5 years for them to get XP working properly.

    And Vista/Visual Studio 2005 is pretty much a train wreck for C developers. We used to be able to rely on the development environment. In fact, that area was always a significant innovation for these guys. No more. Fire Steve Embalmer before it is too late.

    And the evidence just keeps rolling in:
    http://www.microsoftweblog.com/2005/11/05/problems -with-visual-studio-2005/ [microsoftweblog.com]
  • Hah (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Greg_D (138979) on Monday March 19, 2007 @10:20AM (#18401105)
    Microsoft didn't make all that money by innovating or being better than their competitors. They made that money by doing a better job of selling their products to their customers.

    They still do.
  • by Greyfox (87712)
    Did someone not get their Scobie snack today?
  • Longtime current and former Microsofties dont see the problem stemming from Ballmer becoming CEO, they see it as the result of Brad Silverburg losing the internal power struggle with Jim Allchin back in 1997. Silverburg had browser responsibilities and was preaching that Microsoft needed to start transitioning to the web in a much more substantial way, including MS Office.

    Allchin convinced upwards that Microsoft needed to keep the jewels propriatary, and he won. Silverburg left, and you can trace Microsof

  • About time (Score:4, Funny)

    by MrCopilot (871878) on Monday March 19, 2007 @10:52AM (#18401443) Homepage Journal
    You are coming to a sad realization.
    Cancel or Allow

    Allow

    • MrCopilot, meet my sig.
      • by MrCopilot (871878)
        Nice to meet you sig.

        I think I will let the mod system sort out what it thinks is funny or not.

        So far It is funny, says so right at the top there.

        You realize you are recursively guilty of the same offense.

  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Monday March 19, 2007 @11:22AM (#18401775)

    John Kennedy once said:

    When written in Chinese the word, "crisis" is composed to two characters. One represents "danger", and the other represents "opportunity".

    Microsoft is in crisis, but they are not willing to acknowledge it. It seems to me that they would rather spin everything so that no one notices it. The last time they had a crisis (being late to the Internet and world wide web) they responded admirably.

    But that was a different world. These days their monopolistic practices have been exposed. Competitors are not afraid of them. Microsoft is defending too many fronts, many of which they created (Xbox, Windows CE/Mobile, etc.)

    More importantly, Microsoft isn't as lean and hungry as they used to be. They are living off the the wealth of Office and Windows income. However in other areas, they have not produced. Windows and Office are their crutches but if those products start to fail, MS has nothing to fall back upon anymore. As with the release of Vista, it is apparent that they have lost focus of their core products. With Office, Microsoft's problem is that older versions of Office are good enough.

    A decade ago, Apple faced a similar situation. Except Apple didn't have reserves MS has today. That forced them to get lean. Whole product lines were cut while the company refocused. They scraped their old OS and developed a new one. Some credit Jobs with getting the company's comeback as he was the driving force behind it. Right now, there is no one at MS that seems is doing that. If the recent relevations from Allchin are true, his managers (Ballmer, Gates) are not focused.

  • Why does anyone listen to this guy? His blog is a poorly-written pamphlet filled with entries that are either obvious, moronic or both. What does he even do? Doees he have some kind of job, other than writing crap about stuff he has no clue about?

    Can we just ignore him until he does something of value?
  • Ship a better search, a better advertising system than Google, a better hosting service than Amazon, a better cross-platform Web development ecosystem than Adobe, and get some services out there that are innovative ... That's how you win.

    Nah; what you do is sit back and wait for the "smart guys" to develop something new that people seem to want. Then you invest minimal resources in making shoddy ripoff, so that you have resources left over to agressively market your product to the majority of people who ca
  • ..."Sure, I'm paid by X, but it doesn't affect my objectivity."
  • I sure hope MS doesn't win, because then we'll all be stuck using products and services that suck -- cluttered, cumbersome, and ugly.
  • I'd like to see MS just make software. Strong, reliable OS's and apps' that run well on all PC's and function well with legacy apps. OK, now stop your chortling. Instead, MS focuses on trying to win at everything, and they usually start out WAY behind. The two most glaring examples that come to mind are IE (back when Netscape had already established itself as THE leader) and Zune, when the IPod had already totally OWNED the portable music player market. I'm sure there are others, but that's what comes to

Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson

Working...