Hello Toy,
Just to play devils advocate here ...
> If any company in the tech industry - including AOL - would not be
> worried when MSFT decides to target and overtake an industry
> segment that they are in, they are either stupid, arrogant, IBM, or
> a combination of all three.
As it should be. Just as Microsoft should be worried about Novell closing the door on Active Directory and controlling the distributed naming, and security, of all networked devices.
> AOL has a very valid reasons to worry about its recent battle with
> MSFT. MSFT has proven time and again that there is no business
> activity that is either too immoral, unethical, or even illegal.
> The DOJ trial is clear evidence of that.
First, since the trial is not over I'm not sure about the guilt that you express here. I recall this "innocent until proven guilty" thing that we have. ;-)
Second, when I view the trial and was has occurred, it appears to be that a lot of people with a lack of vision made very poor choices and doomed their own companies. Yes, Microsoft continues to leverage the market that they have ... and yes I believe that in places they seemed to over step boundaries ... but in general I don't agree with many of the silly arguments that I've heard. I'm not convinced that Microsoft has done much more than to capitalize on the errors of their competitors.
Third, I do agree that AOL should be worried. They are in a very difficult position now. They are going to begin to see the loss of dial-up customers occurring as a landslide as more and more people move to DSL and Cable Modems. AOL will no longer have the monthly "tax" revenue for dial-up accounts ... they are going to need to replace this with other revenues ... and they want to try and keep a lock on those customers. I believe this is their own fault for not recognizing the inevitable trends ...
> The DOJ trial and the resistant industry actions against MSFT's
> more recent exploits will definitely slow MSFT's progress, but the
> recent actions that MSFT has been caught doing against AOL is proof
> that even the government does not scare MSFT enough to stop its
> unethical acts.
Wow! Now *this* is a set of severe accusations! ;-)
What actions have they been caught in? You mean an employee posting a note to the guy at PharLap? That was an employee ... not a Microsoft move ... unless you have other proof? They haven't even identified the employee due to the internal machines used. And I would argue that I *know* Microsoft *didn't* do this since they would simply go to a reseller or big customer and have them do it for them. Much more credible and "innocent" ... no, I believe the employee worked alone ...
So what other unethical acts? It's *AOL* that has been specifically trying to close the door on Microsoft by employing proprietary, lock-in, tactics ... and purposely *breaking* Microsoft software ...
So if this is ok, then how do you feel about it if Microsoft decides to "break" Novell's NDS for NT product? Is that ok also? Should Microsoft be able to "protect" it's products and customers by eliminating the ability of potential competitors (like Novell) from integrating? Or are there different rules due to personal bias? ;-)
> Having several industry players circle the wagons and unit against
> these attacks from MSFT will likely be the most effective method of
> stopping MSFT's overthrow attempts at new industry segments.
I don't believe this. This is a defensive posture ... and in most games the defense rarely puts points on the board! If you really look at what has the most momentum against Microsoft it is the exact *opposite* of this ... the Open Source projects and Linux. Microsoft thrives on the closed proprietary world ... but as Frederick and I have both agreed ... it is opening the door to freedom that will win the battles.
> The AOL-NOVL-IBM agreement on instant messaging and the previous
> announcement of the DIF vs MSFT's Zoomit acquisition are clear
> "circle the wagons" examples of the industry protecting itself from
> MSFT attacks. I'm sure you can name a couple more examples (like
> Java, Open Standards, etc.).
So again, playing devils advocate, can you show me the real successes here, other than press and hype? For example ... how many Java applications do you run on a daily basis? Not little tools or utilities ... full blown Java applications? Or, how many web sites that are implemented in Java Servlets compared to ASP or PHP3?
I don't agree that tightly controlled committee work is the way to go ... the open source and "unlocking", I believe, will be the way things will be won.
Just some spew to add to the conversation ... ;-)
Scott C. Lemon |
