M$'s origins
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| flufferbeer Jul 31, 2006 5:13 AM EDT |
Scott Rosenberg wrote a book review over ten years ago on Bill Gates' book 'The Road Ahead', called
'Lost Highway, Tripping Down Bill Gates' Road to Nowhere', http://www.salon.com/02dec1995/departments/gates.html It is interesting that some of the contents of this review are still relevant from SJVN's article. One example of this is quoted here: "Though digital technology invites its creators into a world of absolute control, the computer market remains a place of frustrating chaos. Gates long ago adopted the strategy that made Microsoft's fortune: ship early with imperfect products, seize market share and then upgrade toward an acceptable level of performance. This drives engineers nuts, but it's sharp business, and it has kept the company on top of the software industry -- until now." Keep on going SJVN! |
| boborooster Jul 31, 2006 6:34 AM EDT |
Entree le boborooster. Yea, I see the points from this. Seems to be relevant, OK. OTOH, here is another quote found from The Daily Princetonian that seems to support the idea that Microsoft still doesn't completely get it, http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/10/14/news/13... This is less than a year old and is an interview of Bill Gates by the DP interviewer. --- start quote --- DP: Some of your competitors are increasingly embracing open-source software as part of their development process. Do you see Microsoft moving in the same direction? Gates: We encourage everyone to develop in our environment. Free software's nothing new ... There was an early browser, an early mail program. But as times moved on, it's been the commercial programs that get the support, get the richness. The magic thing has been the high-volume, low-price approach that we've taken, where you can go to an employee of a corporation and say, "Hey, for a hundred dollars a year, you can have the very best software so your productivity, your communication and collaboration is the best possible." And of all the investments [a corporation] makes in an employee's productivity, that's almost a rounding error and yet they get all of those capabilities. We have lots of free software, as I said. In the educational realm we make tons of stuff free. But we also have commercial software because in terms of giving people a career, you know, they want to send their kids to school, buy food, and things like that. There'll always be a mix. Fortunately, with the commercial what we can do is a lot broader than what any other model can do. --- end quote --- Gates's statements have drawn irritation in most of we LXers, yes? Is it completely lip service for SOME of the Microsoft heads (those without the key decision-making power) to say that they will consider the strengths of the Open Source model ?? |
| incinerator Jul 31, 2006 7:09 AM EDT |
Of course it is lip service. Ms's business model relies on making money by licensing non-free software. It is true that educational organisations can get ms licenses for much less money (or no money at all), but that's just like the crack dealer around the corner giving you the first shot for free. You won't have to pay before you're hooked but afterwards. Not to mention gates deliberately using the term "free" for non-free software. Otoh, they'll certainly "consider" the advantages of the so-called open source development model. But I don't think they'll adopt them. They would have to change their way of doing business completely, and I don't think they're able to do so. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!