Donna,
Have we passively come to accept buggy Microsoft software because 90% of computers come with it pre-installed? How many of you on the thread have never used anything other than a PC? And if this is the case, how easy is it for you to claim objectivity?
I will vouch for being one on the thread who has used something other than a Wintel PC. Outside of that experimental high school class where we loaded up our punch cards into some sort of a Radio Shack contraption back in 1978/79, my fingers have only touched Apple products for my personal computing needs since 1984. This is simply because my boss in NYC bought an Apple and I had to learn how to use it to stay gainfully employed at the time. I guess the investment I made in learning on that Apple just stuck with me all these years and I never had any reason to learn another system. Talk about a long term buy and hold strategy!!! Therefore, I believe that I can claim an amount of objectivity in regards to some of your views.
By the way, my PowerBook has just crashed four times in a row trying to type this missive via Netscape Communicator 4.6 in the last 30 minutes. The only Microsoft software I have on any of my computers is Internet Explorer. If I crash again, I'll have to go fire up my desktop Mac with IE to get out of this buggy Mac software to send my post. ;-)
I have never let computer platform choice stand in my way of investing over the years. I can also say, that for my personal needs since 1984, I have had everything I ever needed or wanted in terms of Macintosh software. Then again, I'm a home user who never was required to use any other machine all these years due to job requirements. Therefore, I can't relate to your claim that you have "encountered the same message, literally, thousands of times over the years.":
"The Nightly Business Report Y2K Countdown Clock was written using Microsoft's Visual Basic 6.0 and should run on any Windows 95, 98 or NT 4.0 system."
I think if I had encountered that message a thousand times over the years I would certainly have also built up a growing frustration. By my calculations, 1999 - Windows95 = 5 years. That's 200 annual encounters of 'requires Microsoft' to run. However, based on my personal needs for the two dozen or so programs that I use from time to time - I have not had any great number of messages to halt my computing needs over the years. The Internet has certainly leveled the playing field for my needs at this point.
Is Microsoft a monopoly? You bet it is.
We never, ever questioned that. At least I've never questioned it. In fact, that's what attracted me to Microsoft as an investment in the early 90's. I was too busy and unfocused to catch it earlier than that, but was well aware of the stock price appreciation since 1986.
Have you read what Geoff Moore says about Apple's strategy all these years in his writings? It's quite insightful and supports the claim that Apple has played its cards in the technology field exactly right - especially with Jobs at the helm. I had just come to accept Apple as a 'chimp' with Microsoft as the gorilla all these years. However, Moore points out a much deeper, clearer vision in his excellent book Inside the Tornado that is an exemplification of how well Apple's strategy was executed in the industry. Then again, I would assume that the whole point of Mr. Moore's Chasm Group and the consulting they do with high tech firms is centered around proper execution. Of that, I'm not sure.
Regardless, I've never been one to understand the petty, personal fighting over the years that people have engaged in when it comes to platform choice. I think I first encountered this type of passionate, energetic fighting in my youth when the issue of "Fords suck and Chevy's rule!" type of exchange littered the free time of many. I never understood it then either. My Mustang got me to school and back without any hitches. I've always tried to remain objective from an investor's point of view.
That being said, as students of the Gorilla Game where we are looking for standards in high technology to emerge for the obvious repercussions in our investing, I have been disturbed by the anti-trust litigation that the DOJ has embarked upon in the technology industry. What disturbs me is the far reaching damage that it could cause just might turn out to be much more harmful to the consumer (big and small) and economy than any damage Microsoft caused to its competitors or consumers (big and small) over the years through the natural fact that they became the standard and fought hard to dominate their industry in the 90's. For lack of a better analogy, the entire past two years has reminded me of previous blunders in US history that are somewhat removed from business. Events like Communist black balling, witch hunts and the process that became the norm - political smear campaigns. Plenty have climbed on board to point fingers and raise fists at our monopoly Microsoft. Yet, in so doing, the end result may create more harm for all than any healing of past lost opportunity wounds.
The boiling kettle will continue to be stirred, but I for one hope that Microsoft fights with all it's power and might to prevent an environment from developing that might just be more harmful than wise.
BB
P.S. I just got a PM from somebody I went to high school with after he read my posts here on the G&K. Ah, the beauty of the Internet....
|
