Verily I say unto thee, that Philip spake thusly:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> http://www.itworld.com/small-business/63509/yo-microsoft-ignore-vista-ensure-windows-7-success
>>
> Reading the second reference, I just cannot comprehend people willing
> to give M$ a second (third, fourth?) chance to make it right. The
> fact that they have to do at least 10 things right to make Whatever-7
> successful is already 9 reasons why they are not going to make it.
Here's my top ten list of things Microsoft needs to do to recover their
failing business, ensure the future integrity of their company, satisfy
customers' needs, repair their damaged reputation, and once and for all
resolve the interminable problems with their software:
1. Sack Ballmer, who is a major PR liability
2. Sell off every division except Windows and Office, the only two
profitable divisions in the company, and thereafter stop trying
to have a finger in everyone else's pies
3. Stop wasting money on dubious marketing practises and attacking
other companies, and start actually developing software - for a
change, ensuring this software is interoperable in both *legal*
and technical terms with other platforms. IOW stop blackmailing
OEMs, using "IP" as a weapon to attack others and lock-in their
customers, and abusing their platform as a monopoly device, but
instead rely only on the technical merits of their software for
success or failure. In particular, they need to start following
industry standards, instead of perverting them to exclude other
platforms. If there are no technical issues with their software
then they shouldn't have a problem with this strategy
4. Prioritise customers needs above the "needs" of cartels such as
the RIAA and MPAA, and Microsoft's perceived "needs" to control
and subjugate their customers. Give customers what /they/ want,
*not* what a bunch of self-appointed "IP" police dictate. Their
software should be designed to /empower/, not inhibit
5. Stop fiddling with the UI to make it seem it's a new "product",
and instead concentrate on the core code, making it more stable
and secure, stripping out superfluous bloat, and making it more
modular. Microsoft needs to completely change their attitude to
product releases, and move away from the paradigm of style over
substance. Microsoft should provide the substance, let the user
pick his /own/ style
6. Transform the Windows platform to a UNIX core, whilst retaining
compatibility using emulation, much like Apple have done. There
is very little of any technical merit in the Windows API that's
worth clinging on to anyway, and such a move would resolve many
other issues, such as stability, security and interoperability,
so this is probably the most crucial undertaking Microsoft must
consider, if they're to have any kind of viable future
7. Perform a complete audit of the (remaining) portfolio, in order
to identify those components over which they lack any licensing
control, with a view to long-term relicensing, and moving every
Microsoft-owned component to a more permissive license, and the
goal of replacing everything else with their own products. This
will not only reduce their third-party liabilities, but it will
also permit them more flexibility, in both design and licensing
of their products, whilst allowing contributions to the core of
their products from the community. That latter point alone will
have a tremendous impact on resolving the many technical issues
with their software, and also allow them to reuse solutions the
community utilises on other platforms. It will also relieve the
burden of maintaining the ever-increasingly unmaintainable code
in Windows, much of which is legacy bloat that should have been
permanently eradicated years ago, immediately resolving many of
the other issues such as bloat, stability and security, so they
can move forwards, instead of (as it seems) backwards
8. Move the entire business to a purely services-based model, with
a view to selling support contracts and vertical integration to
end users and enterprises, rather than the present rental model
which provides limited permission to utilise their "IP". Others
(such as Red Hat) have proved conclusively that this model does
work, so Microsoft, with their vast resources, should have very
little difficulty making it work too
9. Advance the state of the art and provide *real* progress in the
field of computing, rather than being obsessed with domination.
Think of what *might* have been achieved, and could *still* be,
if even a small fraction of Microsoft's vast resources had been
used for something other than running a racketeering operation.
The incredible irony is, that by investing in *real* innovation
instead of assimilation and sabotage, Microsoft might easily be
able to provide software that gives people compelling technical
reasons to actually *want* it (rather than having to endure it,
because of a lack of choice perpetuated by nefarious deals with
OEMs), thus precluding the need to operate racketeering methods
to secure sales in the first place. This would then form a good
basis for a /legitimate/ business based on /genuine/ demand for
/good/ software, rather than this "channel" racketeering method
which Microsoft currently abuses, to force people to rent their
assimilated "IP". In short, Microsoft needs to become an actual
software developer, instead of an "IP"-harvesting tax collector
10. Work *with* the rest of the industry, not *against* them. They
would have considerably fewer problems if they were not such a
bunch of thugs, didn't treat everyone else as enemies, stopped
using gangster methods to secure their business, and worked to
achieve a common goal - in cooperation with others - including
the community which uses their software. Then they might stand
a chance of actually providing software that people want, that
does *what* they want, the *way* they want it, and without any
of the Draconian restrictions that make proprietary software a
nightmare to support and work with. This would restore balance
to the software industry, allowing fair competition to resume,
and vastly reduce Microsoft's overheads, in terms of marketing
and development, as the money they currently waste, sabotaging
and otherwise undermining the competition, would be redirected
towards something actually productive - software development -
the costs of which would be even /further/ offset by community
contributions, as they would now be working under a permissive
licensing model
Executive summary:
1. Implement better leadership
2. Streamline and consolidate
3. Improve business ethics and priorities
4. Put the customers' needs first
5. Pursue substance over style
6. Move to UNIX
7. Move to Free Software
8. Move to a services-based model
9. Innovate, not assimilate
10. Work with others, not against them
If Microsoft were to adopt these goals, then in the short-term they
would lose money, (the spoils of their racketeering operation), but
in the long-term they'd secure a business which is currently doomed
to failure, because its methods are completely out of sync with the
needs of both customers and the rest of the industry.
Personally, I doubt if Microsoft has the ability to change, as they
are far too dependent on their current racketeering methods, and as
they say; you can't teach old dogs new tricks. As dogs go, this one
may be massive, but it can't live forever, and given its aggressive
nature - it really won't be missed when its gone, indeed it will be
a huge relief to most of us when it does.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which
| the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf
| denounces him for the same act, as the destroyer of liberty.
| Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of
| the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails today
| among human creatures." ~ Abraham Lincoln
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
17:55:13 up 152 days, 38 min, 4 users, load average: 0.02, 0.07, 0.02
|
|
