John Dvorak's Eight Signs MS is Dead in the Water 711
j79 writes "John Dvorak has written an opinion piece on why he believes Microsoft is dead in the water. He discusses Vista, Office 2007, MSN and MSN search, the Xbox 360, Pad-based computing, .Net, and Microsoft's obsession with Google. "
The future is now! (Score:5, Funny)
They have incorporated Web 2.1 Server side blink [blartwendo.com]!
If you think I'm joking, just look at the stock quotes on the page.
As for MS being dead in the water, I think they certainly have the sharks swimming around them, but I wouldn't call them dead just yet.
Remember, its not over until the fat penguin sings.
Re:The future is now! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The future is now! (Score:3, Funny)
c--------1---------2--------3--------4---------5- - -----6---------7-------8
PROGRAM
PRINT 100, 'Just as long as you stay in 80 columns per line '
1
PRINT 100, 'DIGITAL VAX FOREVER!'
100 FORMAT(A)
Re:The future is now! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The future is now! (Score:5, Funny)
I would just like to point out that, cash or not, maintaining a cow at sea has got to be pretty difficult...
Re:The future is now! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The future is now! (Score:3, Informative)
If you read the entire article (specifically the last paragraph), you will see that Dvorak agrees that Microsoft is not dead, nor does he expect them to die.
What a coincidence! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What a coincidence! (Score:4, Funny)
Sign #1 - The Slashdot tags for his stories read: "dvorak, moron, troll, microsoft, idiot".
Honestly...why do the editors keep posting his garbage? Humor value?
Re:What a coincidence! (Score:5, Funny)
"Honestly...why do the editors keep posting his garbage? Humor value?"
Isn't it obvious? So that we can argue about it and they can be amused by all of us arguing about it.
Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Insightful)
MS is headed for diminshed expectation land - but Dvorak is like the IT version of Limbaugh. What a maroon.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Insightful)
The Office UI is 100% different form every previous Office version. 16 years of training - down the Toilet!
I may be "better", but the adoption curve is huge, and the backlash will be tremendous. There is no "fallback" or "training-wheels" mode for the old Office UI - and it STILL won't render correctly under Vista. All of this has escaped Mr. Know-It-All Dvorak.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Insightful)
Then they rethink the UI and people start going "OMG! Training!". Let's be realistic here -- a substantial portion of the userbase is still on MS Office 2000 -- companies will have at least 5 years to get ready to adapt to this, and by that time it will be quite easy to hire people who know the new UI.
Slashdot is the kind of place where everyone thinks that enveryone should all switch to Linux/Mac/OpenOffice/Whatever tomorrow as the magic bullet. Nobody here ever seems to care about training until MS Office comes up.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Insightful)
EVERYONE: But what about the new Office? It is totally different, and will require retraining everyone.
MICROSOFT: Well...Uh...that is...uh...maybe so, but at least it isn't Linux!
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Interesting)
Having a new UI for Office is not (in itself) a reason for another sign MS is dead in the water. I agree that re-training would only involve those who were trained on the earlier version, not on new trainees.
It's important to throw all the "eight signs" out on the table, because of the hit the stock (MS) has taken this week with the new spending directions "mostly designed to head off the likes of Google" as WSJ puts it (May 3, 2006, Marketplace, B1 column 1.
WSJ goes on to sa
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Insightful)
MICROSOFT: Are you retraining everyone for something better, or are you using something that's "10 years behind" like OpenOffice.
The idea being that the new Office UI improves effeciency and therefore has a Training ROI and isn't just gratuitiously different.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Funny)
are you using something that's "10 years behind" like OpenOffice
Certainly not 10 years behind... My kids have been using OpenOffice for all their schoolwork for the past two school years and I'm yet to see a BSOD.
There's a lot to be said for being cheap, reliable, portable and standards based.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Funny)
People who talk about BSODs are not welcome at Slashdot anymore. Because, you know, it shows that you pretty much suck at being a computer nerd.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Interesting)
Learning curve yes, I can deal with, but too often Linux and OSS alternatives - whilst in most cases being equally stable and useful products - are marketed as being "Just like Windows" or "Just like Office".
I've been working with the Vista CTP for a while now, and the learning curve from even Windows 2000 is virtually non-existant. Getting used to a similar level of functiona
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Informative)
On the flip-side, finding the options and changing defaults is trickier if you don't know what to look for. But overall, I think the "retraining" argument doesn't hold a lot of weight.
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:5, Funny)
A possible other explanation (Score:3, Insightful)
For someone currently using the new Office beta, and having been intimately familiar with previous versions, I'd just like to say that the learning curve is suprisingly low.
While I'm sure your familiarity is a factor, could the reason for the low learning curve also be the fact that it's a word processor?
No offense, but a word processor shouldn't really have much of a learning curve at all in the first place. The task it was created to fulfull is a simple one. Create a new document, then type. Sav
Re:Dvorak is a Goofball Gasbag (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is sad, really. Several hundred dollars worth of software is used by the majority as nothing more than glorified Notepad.
Re:Dvorak has some insight (Score:3, Insightful)
*That's when a doctor puts in a clear plastic panel in your stomach, so you can see the way forward whilst your head is jammed up you ass.
If Dvorak is right (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If Dvorak is right (Score:3, Funny)
[If Dvorak is right] ...and he almost never is.
"almost?" Did that slip in there on accident?
Where will the giant fall? (Score:5, Insightful)
History is littered with many examples of sudden changes in power structure causing a lot of pain all around (Roman Empire, break up of USSR,...). Far better would be shift so that MS no longer abuses its power and instead becomes a contributory member of the industry.
Re:Where will the giant fall? (Score:5, Insightful)
-matthew
Re:If Dvorak is right (Score:3, Informative)
I love this (Score:3, Insightful)
~S
Re:I love this (Score:3, Funny)
No kidding! He is the Ann Coulter of the tech world, and just as manly.
Re:I love this (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I love this (Score:3, Funny)
What?
Re:I love this (Score:3, Funny)
Some people's standards are just too low. Why else would they be busy posting on here anyway...
Re:I love this (Score:5, Funny)
Eight! (Score:5, Funny)
How About... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How About... nine signs. (Score:3, Funny)
Nine signs - Netcraft confirmed it.
Oh No! Apple is DOOMED! (Score:5, Funny)
If Microsoft is dead in the water, what OS will Apple put on its next gen computers?
Re:Oh No! Apple is DOOMED! (Score:5, Funny)
oh, wait...
The obsession with Google (Score:5, Insightful)
MS has taken their eye off of the ball and has been concentrating on everything but the user.
Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ [runfatboy.net] -- A workout plan that doesn't feel like homework.
Obsession with Google is smart (Dvorak is wrong) (Score:3, Insightful)
I can make a pretty good guess as to what that is--Google provides rich software as a service and they make money
Microsoft and innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
Those nifty AJAXified updating stock quotes are using an XmlHTTPRequest.
The XmlHTTPRequest was developed by Microsoft and later implemented in other browsers.
Its been around a long time, and MS never really did much with it.
It took a bunch of open source coders to make anything cool or useful with it.
But MS should get the props for inventing it.
It is the one example of innovation I can think of from them that has ever amounted to something.
I think the fact that Microsoft avoids innovation like the plague is actually one of their secrets to profit and success.
Let others waste their time and money innovating. Innovation is for the losers. Wait, stall, and make empty vaporware promises, then buy someone else's finished product at the last minute and rebrand it as yours.
It has always made them the most profitable software vendor in the past, why should they change now?
Re:The obsession with Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The obsession with Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, MS innovates a lot. The fact that you do not see that, is because you confuse "innovating" with "inventing". "Inventing" means doing something new. MS does nothing new. So they coined the term "innovating" to refer to slapping a label saying "new and improved" on an existing product.
Re:happend long before that (Score:3, Insightful)
My assumption is that MS is going to have to lose in the market for a while if it's going to lose the corporate fat. The question is, will MS be able to hold onto these e
Doesn't matter. (Score:5, Insightful)
With a 90% installbase and billions and billions of dollars... Microsoft isn't going anywhere. People are still addicted to their software and will keep coming back for more. They can sustain a lack of creativity for many many years.
http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:5, Insightful)
In the tech industry , the market leader can lose ground EXTREMELY rapidly. Anyone seen a Hayes modem recently?
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:5, Funny)
mods, double check parent! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:3, Insightful)
Very good point. For a long time the PC's were synonymous with IBM-Compatible. Now IBM's not even in the PC game.
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:4, Insightful)
Bottom line is, this is indeed a very rapidly changing industry. As long as compatibility (and I mean more than WINE) exists, people will easily switch.
Im not holding my breath though
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:3, Insightful)
How many of the above were knocked off by Microsoft products?
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't matter. (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft exists only because investors (the owners) have continuing confidence in it.
Making sense for once (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Making sense for once (Score:4, Interesting)
The last real innovation I saw from MS was Windows 2000. That was such a HUGE step up from Windows 9x for consumers, while things worked well enough that it could be used by normal people since it supported DirectX and other things that NT 4 didn't.
The next version of Office I do think is interesting though. They are completely changing the UI. This is a BIG decision, but they are going in a VERY different direction and I think it's a good thing. If you turn on all those toolbars for Office to get to all the functions, things are a HUGE mess. It's almost impossible to find many thing.
Office is trying to innovate. Windows isn't. XBox 360 isn't. MSN isn't. IE isn't.
By and large, Microsoft has "settled in" and is only starting to stir again. I agree they would be dead in the water if it wasn't for, as another poster pointed out, their huge war-chest. They are going to have to start spending a bunch of that if they want to try to stay relevant.
Re:Making sense for once (Score:4, Informative)
Just because MS got a patent on it, doesn't mean they had anything to do with its creation.
See this article [itotd.com] for more.
From what I can tell, MS has never innovated even once, but instead buys or steals ideas from others, or just buys the companies outright.
Re:Making sense for once (Score:3, Insightful)
Mine (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mine (Score:3, Insightful)
A. The have little or no competition so they can charge whatever they feel like for their product
B. Their product is preinstalled on most new computers sold on the planet and so they get a tax for every machine so shipped.
C. Developing software is expensive but manufacturing and shipping it costs next to nothing, espec
.NET is dead in the water? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:.NET is dead in the water? (Score:3, Interesting)
-Rick
I definitely agree with this article (Score:3, Informative)
I cant complain though, i believe that this has given the open source community time to breath and catch up.
Wait, is Dvorak an idiot this time or a genius? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dvorak's eight reasons to view my ads (Score:5, Funny)
2) flamebait!
3) hey, I might not be right but at least I'm fun to read...
4) M$ $uck3rz!!1!!
5) Hey, I own a Mac too!
6) Did I mention my employers advertisements? Could you buy something please?
7) I'm too old to find a real tech job. Thanks for the "work"!
8) Hey, Slashdot linked to me! Again and again and again! I must be doing something right!!!
1 sign why I will not read this article (Score:3, Funny)
And soon will come the flood (Score:5, Insightful)
of Slashdrones denouncing Dvorak as a troll. Well, that might be right, but he's a successful troll. You can only accomplish that if you put enough truth and insight, wacky and wrongheaded though it may eventually turn out to be, into your communications as to make for interesting reading. Dvorak does that.
Take this article. I don't know about all the reasons. For example, I'm not a gamer so I don't know crap about the 360. But there's something here for everyone. He says that Vista OS and Office 2007 will be problematic letdowns. He says MSN and the MSN Search Engine are essentially useless. He points out an abandoned former focus, pad-based computing. Is there anything there that's really all that nuts?
No, there isn't. But then, like a good troll who has thrown out a couple of interesting statements to which nearly everyone can say "He's got a point," he then moves on to the provocation - Preoccupation with Google. He calls it a distraction. He tosses out opinions like they're facts. No matter how you view the relationship between Google and MS, there's something in that paragraph to disagree with.
Thus, conversation ensues. Slashdot stories get posted. Traffic gets created.
The man is a damn good troll and he deserves far more props (for that) than he gets around here.
Re:And soon will come the flood (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes.
I'll put it this way--Sony has abandoned Betamax. They must be dead in the water. DAT was a let-down. No more movies on UMD. DRMed CDs. Time to start short-selling Sony.
The facts on Sony's failures are not in despute. It's the conclusion, that Sony is dead in the water, that would be nuts.
Likewise, Microssoft has made mistakes. But with huge leads in the desktop OS, web browser, office suite markets, with signifigant presence in the server OS and application markets, plus the gaming, and, oh yeah, a couple billion in the bank, I would LOVE to be that kind of dead in the water.
Dvorak throws out some statements to which people who don't think for themselves and figure, it's on the internet it must be true, can say, "he's got a good point." For the rest of us who use our brains, he's full of shite.
Re:And soon will come the flood (Score:3, Insightful)
ENOUGH OF THIS TROLL!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:ENOUGH OF THIS TROLL!!! (Score:3)
Hell, as much as they do post about him, they *should* make him a topic.
Re:ENOUGH OF THIS TROLL!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do people listen to this clown? (Score:3, Funny)
-Rick
he may have some valid points. (Score:5, Insightful)
Six years ago I had a heated debate with a friend about what should be done about Microsoft. I was (and still am) adamant Microsoft needs legal throttling. Microsoft escaped by the hair of their chin with a fortuitous changing of the guard shortly after losing their DOJ battle (Clinton and Democrats to Bush and the big-money-friendly Republicans). Clearly the new regime had no appetite for any meaningful punishment for Microsoft.
My friend waved his hands and said, "Let the market forces settle it", to which I pointed out Microsoft had gained so much power and momentum that market forces may have become irrelevant.
While better late than never, I think Dvorak makes some good points, but would focus on one I think he misses the mark:
I think Microsoft is right to worry about Google. Google has blind-sided Microsoft on yet another "it's the internet" facet they either glibly ignored, or just didn't see. Google has planted the seed that maybe, just maybe, the OS isn't going to be relevant in the future, thus allowing more free choice, and less dependence on Microsoft. Google's "proof" that XMLHTTPREQUEST can provide responsive web apps as stopgap technology (I can't believe that there eventually will be some better replacement) has spawned many other interesting companies and application.
Some of these "AJAX" apps are downright useful, and for the casual user, can completely replace their office suites in functionality (for their purposes), and then some (remote, network accessible from anywhere).
The amazing irony in all of this is Microsoft invented what may end up being the Silver Bullet that defeats them (XMLHTTPREQUEST). And, finally, maybe market forces will level the playing field.
Re:he may have some valid points. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're a moron. The very idea that anyone (or a significant number of people) would want to use a browser based office suite is just... stupid. There is really no polite way to put it. Not only is the technology for it just not there, but the whole idea is just dumb. Who needs to use an office suite "from anywhere?" Do you find yourself in Internet cafes just dying to open up Excel so you can go over your employer's sales figures? Guess what? The kind of people who need to do this sort of thing already have laptops with MS Office installed. And If, for some reason, they can't afford MS Office, there is OpenOffice.
Who in their right mind would give up a full featured, locally installed, copy of MS Office for some browser based, Javascript powered, HTML monstrosity? Say what you want about MS Office and bloat, but a browser based version would be 1000 times worse. Ajax applications only make sense when dealing with network sensitive information and services such as email, which doesn't even require ajax.
No, the amazing irony in all of this (AJAX powered desktop-like appliations) is that it was already tried before with Java applets.
-matthew
Re:he may have some valid points. (Score:3, Interesting)
I can hardly think of an application that would suffer more latency and "slow link" issues than an office suite running via AJAX in a web browser. Nobody is going to want to use it. Well, I guess an AJAX version of Worlds of Warcraft might be worse... but hey, you can play it from anywhere and you don't have to worry about your character getting out of synce between... oh, wait, WoW manages to keep data in a central l
CmdrTaco... (Score:3, Interesting)
As for Dvorak (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not MS, it's Dvorak (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft 2006 = IBM 1984 (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think Microsoft is in any danger of dying - companies with billions of dollars in their war chest don't tend to die. What Microsoft will do is lose their dominance of the market to smaller, more nimble competitors. Microsoft is in the same position that IBM was in during most of the 1980s - they have a near-monopoly position in a maturing market, but they're struggling to adapt themselves to changing conditions.
Like Microsoft, IBM was a massive corporation with an entrenched and risk-averse corporate culture. IBM had the same kind of market dominance and clout that Microsoft has now. IBM came out with their latest and greatest consumer machine in 1984 - the PCjr [wikipedia.org] - but it was a horrendous flop because it didn't take the needs of users into consideration. I'm becoming more and more convinced that Windows Vista will be the same thing - a flop that came about because of a poor understanding of what users really want. I think that the LUA system in Vista will be as badly received as the PCjr's chiclet keys.
IBM didn't die, but they did lose a lot of money and a lot of marketshare to smaller, more nimble competitors like Compaq. It was only after IBM started refocusing on their core competencies (big iron, blade servers, etc.) that IBM's really regained some of its strength - but even today it doesn't have near the dominance that it did now.
The days of the Windows monoculture are starting to wane - Apple has a product that's more than competitive with Microsoft's offerings. Microsoft, like IBM back then, just isn't nimble enough to meet the demands of a changing marketplace. Microsoft's attempts to do vertical integration aren't working all that well - the XBox Division is bleeding cash left and right despite the popularity of their product, the online division is floundering to compete with Google, and businesses aren't going to retrain their staff to deal with Office 2007.
Microsoft isn't belly up yet, and probably won't be for a good, long time, but their continued missteps may see them lose a significant amount of money and marketshare.
IAD Says: (Score:4, Funny)
This text had been classified as
INAUTHENTIC
with a 29.1% chance of being authentic text
Nice Try Dvorak!
Dvorak is right about this - but not the reason (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason is that Bill wants everybody else's money - not just his own.
The magnitude of greed in this asshole is mind-boggling.
I'm surprised he isn't trying to have Microsoft make aircraft, cars and nuclear power plants - or maybe tanks - or run his own bank and stock exchange as well.
Bill - fix your fucking operating system before you do ANYTHING else today, okay?
News today is that Gartner is saying no way will Vista ship even to volume licensees in 2006. They don't expect Vista to ship to consumers until at LEAST 2nd quarter of 2007 and possibly even third quarter. The reason is that MS has scheduled only ONE release candidate for Vista. Also:
"The analysts point out that the release of Vista is more akin to the release of Windows 2000 than Windows XP, which was basically a renovation of Windows 2000. Thus, the timing of Microsoft's release schedule, in which the company allots just five months between the beta 2 release, expected in June this year, and the final product has been questioned.
The gap between Windows XP beta 2 and final was release was just five months. However, the gap between Windows 2000 beta 2 and final release was 16 months."
On the other hand, if you view Vista as a gussied up XP, maybe we can halve the difference to eight or ten months. But based on the Microsoft employees who have been bitching on blogs about bad test results being certified as accepted and the like, I'd guess Vista has a long way to go yet.
And if it comes out of the box with the sort of bugs and bad design features Thurriot was complaining about, it could well be dead in the water.
Not to mention it will only be installed on new consumer PCs - most of the old ones won't run it effectively at all. So it's doubtful that consumers are going to drive its adoption.
Even corporationa are probably going to implement it only as machines are upgraded to newer ones via attrition. The article I read about Gartner also says analysts don't expect Vista to be deployed by most corporations until sometime in 2008.
I foresee Vista being adopted by corporations even more slowly than XP was. In other words, in 2010, probably thirty percent of corporations will still be using Windows XP.
My prediction: by 2015, Windows is history.
Dead in the water != dead (Score:4, Insightful)
For better or worse, Microsoft will be around for a long, long time. Look how long Western Union lasted after the telephone replaced the telegraph. However, what Dvorak may be saying is that the days of Microsoft being a driving, innovative, vibrant force in the computer industry have long since passed. Microsoft's stock price illustrates [yahoo.com] this [yahoo.com] nicely.
you ALMOST got it (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is starting to look lost because it is focusing so much attention at so many businesses that are not its core: software development. Things like MSN, search, xbox are cash sinkholes that are not what makes Microsoft the powerful and respected (well, maybe not at Slashdot) company that it is. Up to here, everybody is getting.
But what Dvorak and most of everybody here on Slashdot is missing is that this is not a choice Microsoft has. Microsoft sees 5, 10, 15 years ahead and knows that the days of its packaged software dominance are going to end. With computers reaching the power and speed of "good enough for daily tasks," consumers are less and less likely to want to pay to upgrade to a new operating system. With the emergence of browser applications and the gradual (albiet not full) maturation of free open source alternatives to Office and Windows, Microsoft has serious looming threats in the near future.
Microsoft is smart. It is trying to reinvent itself BEFORE the trends of technology FORCE it to. By finding a new cash cow to rely on, it can sit comfortable the day a new version of Windows *doesn't* gain wide adoption (thinking - of course - two or three versions from now). Traditionally, that cash cow was and is Office. Let's not forget many people are perfectly content with Office 97 and see no need to upgrade to the newest version. This will only become more common as the Office product matures further. And as I stated above, and with the news that ODF is now an ISO standard [slashdot.org], even Office is no longer a safe bet *in the long term.* Microsoft execs realize this threat is not yet mature as everybody here on Slashdot wishes, but DOES realize that given enough time, their Office revenue stream will dwindle as well.
So what happens? Microsoft looks at the current fastest growing technical market and tries to enter that race: search (Google), online ads (Google), online content deliver (iTunes). Microsoft is banking on online content distribution and services. If they're smart, they will tie their Office products with various online services to create the next generation online desktop Office applications. They will then charge a subscription fee and serve ads. THAT is where Microsoft is going. And they've got 40 billion dollars to ensure it happens.
And what about the xbox? It's got NOTHING to do with anything. It is Bill Gate's life long dream to make Microsoft an entertainment hub. But if all the threats mentioned above come around in full force as they probably will in 10 years, this dream will probably never fully materialize. It's just the world's richest man making his company invest in his pet project.
I think you've got it dead right... (Score:3, Interesting)
Quite frankly, when I look at the Microsoft monopoly, I see a monopoly that's actually in very poor health. It isn't going to fall over soon, but it isn't going to last too many more years either.
As far as I can see, Microsoft has two core products:
1. Windows - it's a good product to have as a cornerstone, because everybody will need to keep it updated to be current. However, it's a product that is under siege. Every malware writer out there has it in their sights.
Dvorak is no business man (Score:3, Insightful)
No fan of Microsoft here, but I think Dvorak really misunderstands the problem. Yeah, Vista slipped, and that probably sucks for Microsoft. Not sure it's really the death of Microsoft.
I think what we're really seeing is that Microsoft is a much further thinker than Dvorak is. Not that outhinking Dvorak is really a hard accomplishment. What amazes me is that Dvorak thinks Microsoft is just making an enemy out of Google because they're successful. I think Microsoft is much smarter than that.
What is Google's business model? Advertising. What does Google create? Just about everything. Google is looking at old products and businesses and thinking about how to make them free of cost but full of ads. This definitely should scare Microsoft.
Google has search, mail, and now calendar. What happens when they get a word processor, spreadsheet, and a presentation program? And what happens when consumers look at the money they are paying for MS Office when they are no longer using it?
If Microsoft doesn't at least consider being able to switch to an ad-supported services company, then I think this might just happen and then Microsoft truly will be dead in the water.
However, for some reason John Dvorak sees Microsoft competing with Google as purely a distraction. I think Dvorak needs to be thinking on a grander scale.
Dvorak doesn't get it. . . (Score:3, Funny)
He just doesn't get it. He really doesn't. Google hired an engineer Microsoft did not want Google to hire. *throws chair* Steve Ballmer is going to fscking kill Google!!!111!!!
Never Expected This: I Agree with Dvorak!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems they really need to refocus on individual consumer needs instead of what businesses need, and not be afraid to refactor their software with top-to-bottom interface redesigns when functionality and/or workflow changes significantly.
Dot Net initiative is fine (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Another BS prediction (Score:4, Informative)
Mister Coward, you obviously didn't read TFM where Dvorak says Microsoft will continue to make "gobs and gobs" of money. He argues that they will be less and less relavent, not that they will make less and less profit.
Re:Dear God... (Score:5, Funny)
PLEASE make my dreams come true!!!
Okay, but where will we find a dead hooker, a llama, and 12 gallons of motor oil at this time of night?
Re:Dear God... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Eight signs Dvorak is dead in the water (Score:3, Insightful)
A 926-word metaphor for what truly ails Microsoft: the company and its supporters spend more time defining and rationalizing why MS is great than they do making something great
FWIW, yes, Dvorak is an idiot...
Re:Eight signs Dvorak is dead in the water (Score:3, Insightful)
For the developers and consumers, the coolest features are Aero Glass, Indigo, Avalon, Net 2.0 and the rest of the WinFX framework. They were ultra cool but now they are just "gussied-up" XP upgrade? Get your facts straight.
For consumers? Really? Try Aero, but that's about it. Most users don't know what .Net 1 is, much less .Net 2.0.
Almost anything in Vista was rebuilt/enhanced: the framework, the interface, the IP stack, the color profiles, there's actually a new advanced printing standa