yer repeating yerself. :) ALL : MSFT: sales are lousy...no problem, we are a monopoly! let's force it down people's throats....
From Computer Reseller News (CRN), Danish Edition, No. 1, 10 January 2001]
[Translation from the original Danish by Hugh Whinfrey. For personal,
non-commercial use only]
____start_____
INCREASED DISSATISFACTION WITH MICROSOFT
_Distributor irritation over new license policy, which analysts call
monopolistic exploitation, and which is creating an image problem for Microsoft_
by Allan Thestrup
Microsoft's decision to remove Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows ME from the
volume sales agreements (Select and MOL) as of 1 July is raising irritation and
resignation in the channel.
Among the distributors who CRN has spoken with, the irritation is however clear
enough. Most of them are certainly recommending that their customers use
Windows 2000, but do not believe that the change-over should be forced.
"It is problematic that Microsoft is attempting to exert pressure in this
manner. Actually, it is sensible to switch, however it is still a misuse of
power when it occurs in this manner," says Jacob Heiberg from Heiberg IT.
It is in particular being in the position of having to be the one who explains
the new rules to the customer that is frustrating the distributors.
Susanne Arildsen, and analyst with IDC Scandinavia, understands quite well the
frustrations of the distributors and regards Microsoft's behaviour as a
monopolistic abuse.
"This involves an offer which one cannot say no to because Microsoft is so
dominant in the market. It is clear that the distributors are unsatisfied with
is because it is them who are being caught in the middle."
She is also of the opinion that it is unwise of Microsoft to utilise its
dominant role to force the transition to Windows 2000.
"They ought to take the reactions of the customers and distributors into
account, because it is giving them a bad image."
At Microsoft, Business Unit Manage Niels Appel defends the new license rules by
it being cheaper in the long run for the customers if they are going to upgrade
to Windows 2000 anyway in the next few years.
"You can of course 'downgrade' your license and use one for Windows 98 until
you eventually have a need for Windows 2000," says Niels Appel, who is of the
opinion that the price difference in this context is not of any great
significance. Appel hence rejects that it involves forcing customers over to
Windows 2000. Instead, he views it as a part of the normal process of upgrading
technology.
However, neither the distributors nor Susanne Arildsen are buying it.
"I believe the explanation for the new license policy can be found in the poor
sales figures for Windows 2000. They have had some very aggressive sales
figures which they cannot live up to," says Arildsen.
She is seconded by Jacob Heiberg, who sees it as an element of the same
pressure on the market as the new, aggressive certification policy.
"NT 3.5 and NT 4.0 have lived side by side with each other for years. But now,
we suddenly all have to go over to Windows 2000 within the space of a year."
Niels Appel from Microsoft absolutely does not concur that there is any
connection between the new license rules and the new certification rules. He
does not in general understand the criticism of the new certification
programmes. He is of the opinion that they are namely an expression of the fact
that Microsoft is taking technical competence seriously.
___end_____ |
