This was a long post, and there are some things I'm not qualified to comment on (e.g. revenue models, since I'm not a marketing person). However: if I understood you correctly, the main points of your message are that the source code should be made public because:
a)it'd make Microsoft people less biased and let them see other things that are happening in the industry
b)it'd make Windows more x-platform and ubiquitous
c)it's good from a political standpoint
d)revenue from Windows will decline due to Java/NC computing
Now, a-b-c are valid points. No denying that we were very busy shipping Windows95 and didn't focus on shipping a browser earlier. No denying that if you give something away it expands its marketshare. No denying that other people will like you more if you're altruistic.
However, and this is where subjective gut feeling comes in, in my opinion the *quantity* of improvement brought to the company by doing a-b-c is nowhere near big enough to offset the revenue, bureaucratic, and competitive disadvantages of such a move.
Regarding d), and based on my personal experience with the technology and talking to customers and developers, again I simply don't see such a thing happening. There are thousands of man-years of work invested in hardware compatibility, device drivers, application software, and many other things that make Windows anything but a commodity. And we will continue to add value with things like IE4. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that throughout the next 3-5 years (which is as far as one can reliably see in software) 90+% of all computers will continue to ship with a Windows OS. At worst, marketshare will remain the same, but I'd be surprised if it didn't rise (e.g. if Rhapsody or Apple or Novell have problems). And we have a lot of other growing businesses that will over time hopefully contribute to the bottom line to the same extent as Windows/Office. Remember, five years ago we did not really have any substantial server-side revenue, but that is rapidly changing.
Again, nothing is set in stone, and some of your points have kernels of truth in them. The difference is that I disagree with your assesment wrt. the magnitude of cause & effect of your proposed changes, the rate of technology adoption, and the value of Windows going forward. I fortunately get to see a lot of the things that are being done across the company before a lot of other people do, and I honestly have never been as positive about the 3-10 year outlook as what I am right now (and rest assured I mirror that belief in my investment choices).
--Carlos |
