|
|
User Controls
|
New User
|
Login
|
Edit/View My Profile
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac
|
Articles
|
Forums
|
Links
|
News
|
News Search
|
Reviews
|
|
|
|
News Centers
|
Windows/Microsoft
|
DVD
|
ActiveHardware
|
Xbox
|
MaINTosh
|
News Search
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats
|
The Lobby
|
Special Events Room
|
Developer's Lounge
|
XBox Chat
|
|
|
|
FAQ's
|
Windows 98/98 SE
|
Windows 2000
|
Windows Me
|
Windows "Whistler" XP
|
Windows CE
|
Internet Explorer 6
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Xbox
|
DirectX
|
DVD's
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips
|
Registry Tips
|
Windows 95/98
|
Windows 2000
|
Internet Explorer 4
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Windows NT Tips
|
Program Tips
|
Easter Eggs
|
Hardware
|
DVD
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews
|
Applications
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002
|
|
Hardware
|
Intel Personal Audio Player
3000
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse
Explorer
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info
|
About This Site
|
Affiliates
|
ANet Forums
|
Contact Us
|
Default Home Page
|
Link To Us
|
Links
|
Member Pages
|
Site Search
|
Awards
|
|
|
|
Credits
©1997/2004, Active Network. All
Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by
Designer Dream. Content
written by the Active Network team. Please click
here for full terms of
use and restrictions or read our
Privacy Statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time:
03:21 EST/08:21 GMT | News Source:
Business 2.0 |
Posted By: Alex Harris |
Thomas Reardon knows exactly how Microsoft (MSFT) thinks when it sets out to destroy a competitor. He knows how it goes about running down rivals that once had huge leads, and how it rips the heart out of little upstarts -- software companies no bigger than the one he works for -- that seem only the most distant threat. He knows because he was once inside Microsoft, helping to push the plunger on one of the greatest corporate demolitions in history.
In the mid-1990s, Reardon ran the Microsoft engineering team that developed Internet Explorer, the product that methodically snuffed out Netscape. This, he says, is the one thing anyone going up against Microsoft must understand: "The presumption at Microsoft," says Reardon, now vice president for technology at cell-phone software maker Openwave, "is that all you have to do is wound the opponent, and they will bleed to death."
The list of companies that have bled out at the hands of Microsoft is long and legendary: Borland, Lotus Development, Netscape, WordPerfect, and on and on. Many others, including Oracle (ORCL) and Sun Microsystems (SUNW), have sustained grave damage. And now there's fresh blood flowing elsewhere. Facing slowing sales of its signature desktop software, Microsoft is swarming into the consumer market, slashing at the likes of AOL Time Warner (AOL), Palm (PALM), and Sony (SNE). That's because Microsoft already owns America's offices, says Sun's chief strategist Jonathan Schwartz; now "it wants America's living rooms."
|
|
#1 By
1896 (66.20.203.205)
at
5/21/2002 8:01:04 AM
|
I read the article and it contains some interesting points, the problem is the author lack of objectivity; for instance the article doesn't mention at all the weak points of MS competitors like Real Players, one of the most introusive program I have ever seen.
|
#2 By
6859 (204.71.100.215)
at
5/21/2002 8:55:41 AM
|
All companies aspire to do this, this is not that big of a deal. What separates MS from the pack is that MS has succeeded more times than not at killing rivals. It's like "Gladiator," and we all know what happened to Maximus' rivals in that one.
|
#3 By
2960 (156.80.64.135)
at
5/21/2002 10:14:00 AM
|
Cthulhu,
"and we all know what happened to Maximus' rivals in that one"
Yeah, and what happened to Maximus in the VERY end.
TechLarry
|
#4 By
20 (24.243.51.87)
at
5/21/2002 10:39:58 AM
|
So what? MS is competetive, it seeks to destroy its competitors. All business do this.
I have never worked for a company that wasn't constantly at war with its competitors.
This is a free market and the money is there for the taking, and if you don't take,
then you won't win.
Like a previous poster mentioned, the fatal flaw in this article is that it never mentions how short-sighted, poorly managed, and stagnant all of the companies he mentioned were. Netscape had no innovation for several years and sat on their near-monopoly and gave dirty looks at Microsoft. When Netscape lost because they dropped the ball, suddenly it's all Microsoft's fault.
The gaul of this idiot to say that MS is going to be the downfall of Oracle or Sun is absurd at best and completely rediculous at worst.
Oracle is just like Microsoft. They haven't released a major update to their software in a long time. Their software still performs as poor as it did 3 years ago. There's no innovation. There's no vision. Oracle buys up smaller companies and starts new projects and goes in 50 different directions and there's no cohesion, no strategy.
Sun is just retarded and has completely missed the boat on Java. They sat on it and did nothing. Meanwhile, they gouged the market with their substandard hardware and cost many companies millions of dollars in trying to maintain their shoddy software.
If there's anyone to blame for Oracle's and Sun's woes, it's themselves.
|
#5 By
1896 (66.20.203.205)
at
5/21/2002 10:42:07 AM
|
#3 The "Sherman Act" is the law the unsettling States are using to attack MS. The law is almost 90 years old and was "tailored" to disrupt the Standard Oil because the company supposedly had a monopolistic control over natural resources which are by far different than something coming out as the result f the human brain work like software. Maybe your post is referring to the famous book "1984" By G. Orwell who described, it was written in the 30's, a futuristic society where humans were not allowed to have any decisional power . The story was a clear j' accuse to the USSR, a country where Stalin was increasing the the ability of the State to rule and condition even the smallest an most private activities. If this is the point I would advise you to check the book because I can' t see the relations between the novel and Passport services. I am more scared of all the data related to my SSN that is available to many different kind of companies willing to pay for it.
|
#6 By
1428 (66.50.159.30)
at
5/21/2002 11:29:20 AM
|
Be American. Be Microsoft.
|
#7 By
135 (209.180.28.6)
at
5/21/2002 1:22:12 PM
|
TechLarry - "Everybody dies, not everybody lives."
I think it's interesting the article brings up MSN with only 8 million subscribers. This despite being bundled with every Windows desktop since 1995. Once again proving that bundling does not provide marketshare. Instead to get the 8 million MSN has had to give away $200-400 per user, which is simply incredible.
I also didn't realize just how small Real is...
Also read the followup article linked at the bottom... It lists the 7 rules of how to compete with MS.
Rule 4 is interesting, and is the mistake Lotus, Sun, Hayes and many others have made not just with Microsoft.
Overall it's a good article.
|
#8 By
2960 (156.80.64.135)
at
5/21/2002 2:30:32 PM
|
Sodablue,
You're quoting the wrong person. I didn't say that.
TL
|
#9 By
20 (24.243.51.87)
at
5/21/2002 2:46:45 PM
|
#16:
[QUOTE]
#10, so are you saying Microsoft has no innovation, and no vision?
Oracle hasn't released a new update in 3 years??? Give me a break, do some real research first about them. [/QUOTE]
a.)No, MS does innovate. However, they are not evil and set out to destroy companies. They compete fiercely, but most of their competitors are stupid and drive themselves out of business.
b.) Oracle has released "updates", but there software has not changed significantly. Their database server still suffers from the same problems and has mainly the same features as it's had for the previous several versions. Sure, they've added a few things, but nothing revolutionary. When I look at SQL 6.5, then 7, then 2000, I see huge improvements, huge advances, tons of new features.
When I look at Oracle 7, 8, 8i, and now 9i, I don't see huge changes. I see tons of extra java crap thrown in, a horrible installer, a buggy main core, a horribly difficult-to-confingure database that performs horribly compared with SQL 2K and others.
Oracle is writing it's on epitath.
|
#10 By
135 (209.180.28.6)
at
5/21/2002 3:13:05 PM
|
TechLarry - Oh sorry, I was responding to you with a quote. :)
#22 - Yes, yes, I know... there's always a back door defense when your arguments fail you.
But I went on and also pointed out that not only does MSN come bundled, but they also give you cash... and still AOL has more users.
MSN will probably succeed with this new version, and MSN will stop offering the cash. We'll see. I can also guarantee that if AOL has issues with moving to Netscape they will blame it on Microsoft.
|
#11 By
3 (62.255.32.4)
at
5/21/2002 3:21:23 PM
|
#13 - errr Alex didn't write this - he posted a quote from the story!
|
#12 By
2459 (66.25.124.8)
at
5/21/2002 5:07:29 PM
|
#22 You should look at the media player comparison. WMP is free and bundled with the OS, yet Real still remains competitive.
|
#13 By
20 (24.243.51.87)
at
5/21/2002 5:42:35 PM
|
#25: Although Oracle would have you believing differently, SQL 2000 smokes everything
Oracle has now. In the SQL 6.5 and 7 days, yes, Oracle was several leagues above Microsoft in the enterprise database arena. Everything from clustering to very-large-database (VLDB) support, to OLAP, Oracle owned. Now, Oracle's OLAP support is laughable compared with SQL 7 and SQL 2000. While Oracle can dust SQL 7 in basic databasing, SQL 2K beats Oracle easily.
SQL 2k owns Oracle in the OLTP (online transaction processing, the big-iron many-thousands-of-transactions-per-minute arena). Check out www.tpc.org. You'll see that the top couple boxes are all Win2K AS or Datacenter running SQL 2K and COM+. Check out the TPC-C category. That's rankings by just performance. Windows has always owned the price/performance category, now it owns the Performance category too.
For many years, the leaders were Solaris or AIX, and Informix and Oracle.
Now, much to my amusement, Oracle isn't even on the top 10! lol that's hilarious,
especially for a company that constantly chides MS for not being "enterprise" enough.
This post was edited by daz on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 at 17:42.
|
#14 By
2960 (24.168.201.39)
at
5/21/2002 11:35:13 PM
|
Otay :)
TL
This post was edited by TechLarry on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 at 23:36.
|
|
|
|
|