Subterfuge?
|
Author | Content |
---|---|
golem Sep 09, 2009 10:49 PM EDT |
Subterfuge is not what I'd call it, but I agree that with very few exceptions, improving its product is not Microsoft's response to competition. |
tracyanne Sep 09, 2009 11:55 PM EDT |
Clearly the product can't be improved, after all nearly everyone chooses it. |
gus3 Sep 10, 2009 12:45 AM EDT |
Vista was an "improvement" over XP: Improved DRM, improved performance, improved security holes. Oh, and don't forget improved price. |
jezuch Sep 10, 2009 2:43 AM EDT |
Quoting:improved performance I think this should be "improved load on the system". |
phsolide Sep 10, 2009 8:15 AM EDT |
Wait, wasn't IE7 and IE8 a response to competitive challenge from Mozilla? Yes, a surprisingly weak response, and one of playing catchup, but still... Farther back, before Windows 3.11, DOS development had stalled. MS-DOS 4.0 was widely regarded as cr@p, even by DOS users. MSFT only started improving DOS in response to DR-DOS challenges. Two instances out of many, and yes, even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while, but let's stay attached to reality. |
bigg Sep 10, 2009 9:22 AM EDT |
The IE team was even disbanded after IE6. Apparently IE6 was supposed to be the end of the road, having crushed the competition. Here's a link for those wanting a citation: http://www.netmag.co.uk/zine/discover-interview/dean-hachamo... |
golem Sep 10, 2009 1:07 PM EDT |
tracyanne: If you mean Windows, hardly anybody chooses it, it is merely the only product they are offered when they go to buy a computer. |
golem Sep 10, 2009 3:54 PM EDT |
phsolide: The primary response I've seen to Firefox has been a propaganda campaign denying Firefox is taking user share away from IE, and denying its importance, even if true. As I recall, the primary response to DR-DOS was a famously bogus error message. |
vainrveenr Sep 10, 2009 4:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:Subterfuge is not what I'd call it, but I agree that with very few exceptions, improving its product is not Microsoft's response to competition.Indeed, at least in its Developmental Strategy for improvements, Microsoft does NOT seem to be engaging in "subterfuge". If anything, Microsoft's product improvements might be considered a copycat approach using F/OSS projects. An example of this copycat approach is from /. 's recent 'Microsoft Releases Linux Device Drivers As GPL', http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/07/20/1643251&tid... Quoting:Microsoft said the move [to release Hyper-V Linux Integration Components under GPLv2] demonstrates its interest in using open source in three key areas: 1) Make its software development processes more efficient, 2) product evangelism, and 3) using open source to reduce marketing and sales costs or to try out new features that highlight parts of the platform customers haven't seen before."So on the surface, this copycat software release is a clear marketing tactic and NOT subterfuge. OTOH, one could clearly question Sam Ramji & Co's ultimate goal in continuing to release software under GPLv2 and MS-PL licenses. Could these releases ultimately be intended for the typical Microsoft Embrace,Extend,Extinguish outcome instead of as mere "product improvements" just to increase sales ??? |
tracyanne Sep 10, 2009 5:30 PM EDT |
@golem, damn, I knew there was a reason people buy computers with Windows. |
flufferbeer Sep 10, 2009 10:57 PM EDT |
@vv I strongly suppose that M$'s developers are under the very careful eyes of higher-ups, so that good talent feeds right back into their own bottom-line $$, instead of to competitors (like G-O-O-G-L-E !) Therefore, this would mean that the Micro$uck management honchos above Ramji are the real nasty ones doing EEE, and deceiving their own F/OSS developers down below. Watch what'll happen to all those GPL-like contracts should their co-developed F/OSS projects REALLY REALLY take off. Now THAT subterfuge is scary!! 2c |
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!