Gosh, I was a bit wrong on the link to Economist....Novell did get a some coverage as it relates to MSFT NT5 and Novell NDS.....hmmmm, I've got to get a subscription to The Economist.....smart people writing there. PS: I can't wait for IBM and Novell to get more serious as dancing partners by early 1999 <grin>.........
<<The price you pay
For all Microsoft's swagger, there is a whiff of tragedy in all this.
Whatever the firm may say, the investigation will take its toll.
Microsoft will be distracted. A wonderful company, one of the best in
any industry, will be damaged.
Just how much, is far from clear. The scope of the investigation is
unlikely to be as narrow as the initial complaint or the sought-for
remedies indicate. Given Microsoft's history, nobody has much
confidence that new attempts to change its ways will succeed. More
radical solutions, such as declaring Windows a regulated "essential
facility", will probably gain momentum. The government also has
time on its side when deciding what to do about NT 5.0-the real
future money-spinner, which incorporates features that may crush
Netscape's server-software business and Novell's directory-service
product.
If this escalation comes to pass it will be because Microsoft has a flaw
at its heart. Bill Gates has an ability to visualise and implement a
business strategy that is almost unmatched. But the clarity of vision is
too often accompanied by blinkers. The flip side of flawless execution
is a ruthlessness that takes Microsoft to the edge of-and perhaps
beyond-the law. Mr Gates dominates his company as few men do.
The reporting structure is flat, he controls every detail. For the bright,
aggressive, relentlessly striving people who work for him "face-time
with Bill" is everything.
The Redmond campus, a few miles from Seattle, though superficially
relaxed is in fact a tense, nervy place that feels far removed from the
other technology centres of America. Without the day-to-day contact
with rivals and partners that shapes the ecology of Silicon Valley,
Microsoft's tendency to see itself as permanently embattled is
intensified. Noticeboards at Redmond carry slightly sinister cartoons
showing how erstwhile rivals like Lotus and Novell have met their
match.
The thing that strikes anybody who has followed the fortunes of this
extraordinary company and which puzzles both friend and foe is the
absolute refusal of Bill Gates to accept the responsibilities that go with
monopoly-or even that he has a monopoly. Intel's Andy Grove,
though not averse to the occasional act of brutality, realised more than
12 years ago that his company was heading for dominance and would
consequently need to watch its act.
Everyone at Intel who has dealings with other companies is schooled
in antitrust law. Intel insiders regard the macho memos circulating in
Redmond, and which the Department of Justice has netted in such
numbers, as, at best, examples of near-suicidal indiscipline. Intel has
its own problems with regulators-it is once again under investigation
by the FTC-but seems confident that at least it hasn't created a
veritable arsenal of smoking guns.
It may be that this antitrust case will prove unnecessary. The advance
of technology may in time be unkind to Microsoft. The firm could be
left with its monopoly of the desktop PC-but big fully-featured
operating systems like Windows might come to seem like IBM's
mainframes, important only as one element in a computing world of
great diversity. With hindsight, then, the case could seem beside the
point, an instance of generals continuing to fight the previous war.
But for now, and on the basis of the evidence revealed so far, it is
justified.>>
Regards,
QuadK |
