Joe, my enthusiasm for WIND is based on the following:
o They recognized their area of competency and set out to build the
best product in it's class;
o They have remained focused throughout - no money-centered
diversification forays or acquisition sprees (ala INTS);
o They do not have the "Not Invented Here" syndrome - they have
not wasted their engineering resources reinventing the wheel,
but rather they have leveraged the work of others (GNU compilers
and development tools, Tcl scripting language and shell, etc.);
o They have remained committed to an Open Systems architecture,
supporting all platforms/manufactures, network protocols,
programming languages, etc.;
o They have a VERY high commitment to the quality and reliability
of the products they deliver;
o They understand the intrinsic value of their employees to the
long-term success of the company and treat them accordingly; and
o They are smart and have vision!
As far as Apple goes, their first mistake was keeping their system
"closed". They wouldn't allow anyone else to supply memory or disk
drives, etc. The result was a higher system price for the customer.
Like the Sony BETA VCR, they had a better product, but their
competition beat them on price. Their second mistake was hiring a
soft drink guy to run the show. I think Jobs understood that he
needed management help, just like Jerry Fiddler did, but Jerry chose
a MBA with an embedded systems background, not a soda pop manager.
I think you are being too rigid in your association of MBA to "control
freak". I don't think one necessarily follows the other. A person
can be highly confident and motivated, and embrace competition,
without being a "control freak". However, I don't think Bill Gates
is that type of person. I do think Scott McNealy is that type of
person, and I suspect that Ron Abelmann is also. McNealy wants to
put the gloves on, get in the ring, and beat you; Gates will be
happy to mug you in a dark alley. Personally, I think you're missing
something if you think that Gates, win or lose, is the better man.
One thing that always strikes me on this thread is that everyone
seems to see things as an all-or-nothing proposition. You
(collectively) seem to think that IF MSFT enters the embedded RTOS
market in a legitimate way, sometime in the future, that will spell
the end of WIND. How absurd! If nothing else, the installed base
that WIND has, at that time, would preclude it from being blown
away by MSFT. You bean counters should know that the companies that
have built their product lines around WIND are NOT going to simply
chuck that capital and personnel investment, just so they can jump on
the MSFT bandwagon. Do you think that the Fortune 1000 companies
that have based their corporate data bases on Oracle are going to
spend the huge amount of money it would take to switch to MSFT SQL
Server? Absolutely not! That doesn't mean that SQL Server won't be
used by small shops that can't afford the up-front investment to
buy into Oracle, but as (if) they grow, they will realize that SQL
Server doesn't scale well, and they'll end up at Oracle's doorstep.
I think WIND is the Oracle of the embedded RTOS market, only better!
-Dave Lehenky |
