This whole Microsoft vs. the Forces of Good debate never ceases to amaze me.
Know some history, integrate the information, and see the big picture.
I was at Microsoft early on. At that time, Microsoft played second fiddle to Lotus, Wordperfect and Novell, and there was a nascent war brewing with IBM over next generation operating systems (NT vs OS/2).
People don't realize that Microsoft has as much and more cred as any company in this industry, and it's run and staffed by good people. It is not an Evil Empire.
In 1988, I had a poster on my (Ivy League)college dorm wall from Microsoft (before they hit a billion in sales) that was all about "hard core software." Microsoft built itself by attracting the best talent to the Seattle area to build personal computer operating systems and applications. Apple was really the only competitor. Otherwise, you were going to end up at IBM, Sun, DEC, Apple, Oracle or Andersen consulting (et al). If you really wanted to Change the World by creating Great Software for People at that time, your only real choices were Apple or Microsoft.
Important thing to realize: at this time, there were probably less than 1000 people in the world who were smart enough to write an OS. Those people were divided between Microsoft, Apple, Sun, DEC and IBM. The company with the most talent was going to win.
Fast forward. Apple hires John Sculley from Pepsi. Sculley's claim to fame will be that he dumbed down perfectly good fast food chains like Pizza Hut and Taco Bell in an effort to market his crappy second-rate Cola.
Sculley ousted Jobs, and spent a decade beating off, trying to market computers as if they were sugar water, and pissing away Apple's commanding lead in the personal computer OS space.
Steve Jobs started Next, which would have trounced everyone if he could understand the difference between a hardware and software company, which he still can't. (I shouldn't say that. He has a hard-on for great hardware, and more power to him. But it's really hobbled Apple's potential as a software company).
Jobs took pretty much all of Apple's top-tier software talent with him to Next.
Jean-Louis Gassee took pretty much all of Apple's 2nd tier talent with him to Be.
(I know I'm generalizing here, and I'm really, really sorry if I offend individuals who lived through it. I hope you can see the fundamental truths I'm trying to express.)
This basically left Apple's QA staff to build the operating systems. An outside observer could see it happening. It was like the original Mac ROMs built by Wozniak were the magic crystals that none of the apprentice wizards dared touch. Sculley turned a beautiful thing into a decade(++)-long clu5t3r f**k by driving talent out of the company.
At some point during those times, Apple employees learned on NPR on the way to work that Apple and IBM had formed an alliance to build a next generation operating system (Bing: Taligent). My friend in Microsoft HR that day said "our fax machine runneth over." (With Apple resumes). That day marked the ignominious end of Apple's hapless struggle to deliver quality software, which sinking ship only righted upon Jobs' triumphant return.
Meanwhile in the applications space... Lotus 123 owns spreadsheets. WordPerfect owns word processing. Novell owns networking. Note that Novell and WordPerfect are both from Utah, represented by Senator Orin Hatch. IBM owns the overall PC space, though they've made a critical error outsourcing their OS to Microsoft with no exclusivity. They failed to anticipate "clean room" BIOS implementations. Much to their dismay.
Microsoft releases Excel for Windows 1.1, and also Mac. Excel on Mac propels Apple's adoption in the business world. One can actually make a fairly reasonable argument that Apple would not exist without Microsoft Excel / Office applications for Mac.
Microsoft Word is second to WordPerfect. Excel is second to Lotus 123. Peer networking for PCs is expensive and in its infancy, and Novell is the leader.
Things begin to change with the release of Windows 3.1, which has pretty good peer networking, and runs Excel and Word.
Meanwhile, strong public / private key encryption is becoming feasible on personal computers. The US and other governments regard this technology as a "munition" with national security implications since it hampers the ability of intelligence agencies to intercept communications. They still do, though they seem to have given up enforcement. (Bing: RSA munitions t-shirt).
The Clinton Adminstration (who I know lots of modern Firefox / Open Source types probably idolize, but whatever) is all about "key escrow" and other schemes which would enable the government to have a back door into encrypted systems. (Bing: Clipper Chip; CDA) Clinton was not your friend.
The spooks approached Microsoft during this time with the idea that Windows should implement features to make it easy for the government to come in through the back door. They were (and still are; see recent news regarding standard fees for government agencies seeking "private" information) accustomed to communications providers playing ball.
You know, For the Children. Because it Takes a Village. In a Village, everybody knows everybody's business. Right? Bill and Hillary are your friends and neighbors. You've nothing to fear. If you need that much privacy, maybe you should not be doing whatever you're doing.
Microsoft, being a bunch of libertarian capitalists with an eye for international sales, basically told them to go to hell. How do you sell your new OS into international markets when the US government has a back door key? Best not to go there.
The government has a problem now. How do you bring a company in Seattle, which seems to be staffed and run by a bunch of surprisingly wealthy, libertarian, dope-smoking geeks (real geeks, not California hippie posers), to heel?
Fast forward. Excel is trouncing 123. Word is trouncing WordPerfect (Utah). Windows for Workgroups is trouncing Novell (Utah). IBM spends billions on a crash program to build and ship OS/2 Warp. Nobody can install the damned thing. Denver's Stapleton airport baggage handling system is the poster child for Warp, and it pretty much crashes and burns. Epic Fail. NT wins.
Orin Hatch, Senator from Utah, sics the FTC on Microsoft for antitrust. After much deliberation FTC comes down on the side of Microsoft. Bill Clinton wins the presidency. There's a bit of hoopla about his support amongst young Bay Area tech entrepreners (prominent is Jim Barksdale of Netscape, the progenitor of y'alls beloved Mozilla / Firefox). Clinton appoints Janet Reno. One of her first moves it to re-open the Microsoft antitrust investigation under the auspices of the Justice Department. This is unprecedented. Orin Hatch (R, Utah) is right there cheering her on.
Payback for political support? You be the judge.
The Clinton Administration spent most of the 90's trying to break Microsoft into an applications and (more easily controllable) operating systems company. Maybe I'm a wild-eyed, tin-hat-wearing conpiracy theorist, but I suspect that back doors, encryption, and political payola had more than a little to do with that.
I really believe there was a concerted effort to paint Microsoft as the "Evil Empire" at this time, and it has stuck amongst people who regard themselves as intelligentsia, and it has no merit. If you think Microsoft is the Evil Empire, you are the dupe of a much larger propaganda campaign aimed squarely at your privacy, and driven by the fact that Microsoft is one of the only companies in this industry who has ever given two shakes for your privacy.
Fast Forward to present day. Eric Schmidt goes on record stating that maybe your personal privacy ain't that important, and maybe if you don't have anything to hide you have nothing to worry about. Everybody who cares about the relationship between government and citizen should understand that statements like this strike at the very core of liberty.
Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google has been around the block a couple of times:
From April 1997 to July 2001, Schmidt served as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Novell Inc
You think he doesn't know the score? You think he would roll over before he'd be on the receiving end of a government inquisition? I think so.
Microsoft has been there and survived intact. They understand a few things. They know the parameters, and they also know the value of privacy to the consumer.
Can you trust Microsoft? Can you trust Google?
I know two things.
Microsoft is in business to make money, and they understand that they must provide a good product and win my trust. I can relate to that, and I know where I stand.
I also know not to turn my back on anyone who takes extra time to tell me about how good they are. As in, "don't be evil." If you feel the need to say that to me, I'm going to watch you like a hawk.
Also, Bing is easier to type. Which will save many millions of person-hours over the long haul, and probably save the planet from global warming.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 11, 2009 4:55 AM