1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ping d-Faktor

Discussion in 'The Lounge - Off Topic' started by ffreeloader, Apr 1, 2006.

  1. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    3,661
    106
    167
    I'm putting this here since you don't accept PM's.

    Hey d-Faktor,

    You surprise me considerably with your analysis that MS has one foot in the grave. I've thought so because their business model is under attack, quite a few of their employees seem to not be fully supportive of the company and/or recognize very serious internal problems--morale isn't good inside MS and I just read this morning where they are slashing employee benefits quite a bit, and Open Source is making considerable gains in government and civil circles, as well as in the small business world where they simply can't afford to pay MS prices. Plus, MS has made many enemies over the years. Way too many people would love to see them go down for this dislike of MS not to have an effect.

    I'd like to hear your reasoning on this as you're someone who has been defending MS to me for quite a while.... :biggrin
     
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1
  2. zimbo
    Honorary Member

    zimbo Petabyte Poster

    5,215
    98
    181
    yes! finally someone agrees with me!

    let the games begin!!! :gun :snipersmi
     
    Certifications: B.Sc, MCDST & MCSA
    WIP: M.Sc - Computer Forensics
  3. d-Faktor
    Honorary Member

    d-Faktor R.I.P - gone but never forgotten.

    810
    0
    39
    freddy, let me start by saying that i have never defended microsoft as such. i just think it's so convenient to constantly burn microsoft for all its faults. it's getting old, and i'm sick of hearing it. i have no problem with solid arguments, but bashing for the sake of bashing is just annoying. and those were (emphasis on past tense) the times when i tried to balance things out.
    just look at zimbos contribution to this thread. it's a flaim bait. a mild one, for sure, but still it brings nothing to the table.
    personally, as a windows admin, i have been promoting linux to my clients for years. but only if the situation was right, not because micro$oft is like sooow evil and linux is 1337, boss dude. the right tool for the right job for the right reason. sometimes it's linux, other times it's windows.

    anyway, i have been fearing the downfall of microsoft for quite some time. i say fearing because i feel that at heart it is not a bad company, and not all its products are bad.
    the keyword to microsofts downfall in my opinion is ginormous. both microsoft and windows are ginormous. while this may be good for the stockholders, in the long run it is not good for the company, or for its products. i think both microsoft and windows have become too large for their own good. for several reasons, which i will get to later, they are now on the fringes of a downward spiral. we can already see the first signs of this. but because microsoft and windows are so large, it's going to be very very difficult to stop that downward momentum. in my opinion what microsoft needs to do, and it needs to do this now, is to split up the company at a business level, and while it's at it, split up windows at a technological level. if it doesn't do that, or if it does it too late, its own weight is going to be its demise.

    that is why i said in the other thread that i think microsoft has already got one foot in the grave. and that is why personally i am trying to diversify my options by going for the lpi certifications.

    now, as i said, microsoft is too large. it has become a slow, corrupt, unimaginative giant. it's got more managers than it ever needs, it's bureaucratic, and worst of all, in the current hierarchy, microsoft is losing sight of its greatest asset, the developers. microsoft has become stale, old school, a living joke and a victim of its own success.
    in my opinion it needs to split up. one seperate company for operating systems, one seperate company for applications, one seperate company for peripherals, and one seperate company for internet services.
    the operating systems company should focus on windows server, windows desktop, windows embedded, and windows media. no more advanced edition, standard edition, home edition, professional edition, web edition, whatever edition. none of that, just simplify and streamline the product line.
    the applications company should focus on their current high profile products, office, sql server, exchange server, isa server and internet explorer. they should sell their other stuff, like biztalk server, speech server, msn messenger, developer tools (!), antispyware, etc. again, simplify and streamline. one might argue that even office, or sql server, should be split off as a seperate company, although i'm not sure that is wise.
    the peripherals company should focus on the xbox (not really a peripheral), a media hub device, and their current line of keyboard and mouse devices. no mp3 players, no mobile phones, no more tablet pcs. simplify and streamline.
    the internet services company should focus on search, mail, and emerging trends. they don't have to go all web2.0, nor do they have to try to mimick google or yahoo.
    so there it is, split up the company, do not try to shove the seperate companies under a parent company, and minimize the ties between the entities. furthermore, chuck out middle management, and respect the developers again by listening to their advice and ideas. allow quality to be the way to defeat the competition.

    so, on to windows. just like microsoft itself, it is too large, and in my opinion it also needs to be split up, or modularized to be exact. it's greatest flaw is that its design is too flat. i had high hopes for vista, but when i first heard the words backward compatibility (in relation to vista) i knew enough. no modularisation, same problems.
    the kernel, shell, gui and applications should all be put in different layers with strict boundaries and securities. yes, something like linux. and while they are at it, they should also get rid of the registry. maybe seperate registries, or xml config files. yes, something like linux.

    i don't think that microsoft should go open source. open source is not a solution for everyone. but i do think that it should use, create, encourage and promote open standards. deviating from existing open standards, and keeping its own standards closed, does not protect its products. if anything, it isolates its products.
    microsoft is a big company, and with its knowledge and expertise it could have a big influence. it could use that influence to help create technologically solid standards. and it could be using those open standards while still maintaining its product code closed source.

    also, i think microsoft should rethink its public relations strategy on two main points.
    firstly, in my opinion it should stop comparing itself and its products to linux, or to other companies. it needs to refrain from throwing mud, and just release great products. a good product takes care of its own public relations.
    secondly, it should not make any advance product statements anymore. how many stories, promises, ideas, release dates, retractions, etc. about vista have we heard? microsoft should just keep its mouth shut, and focus on the coding. only when a product is nearing completion, it should fire up the pr machine.

    all in all, i don't think microsoft is evil or bad or whatever. nor do i think all of their products are bad. windows 2000 was a great step forward, active directory is a very good directory implementation, the xbox360 is well designed and the new office 2007 looks awesome. microsoft just needs to acknowledge the fact that it has made mistakes, and that the company is on a collision course, and it needs to seriously rethink its current business model.

    hope this answers your questions. :eek:
     
  4. simongrahamuk
    Honorary Member

    simongrahamuk Hmmmmmmm?

    6,199
    125
    199
    d-faktor, as you don't use the reputation system I just wanted to add that was simply a great post, quite possibly one of the best I've ever seen.

    A very unbiased, and sound arguement. :thumbleft
     
  5. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    3,661
    106
    167
    LOL. I know. My saying you were always defending MS was a joke, d-Faktor. :D

    Altogether though, as Simon said, that was a good answer. It pretty much parallels what I have seen, although I do think that MS's business practices, in many cases, are evil. But, that's because you and I see things such as morals so differently, as you already know.
     
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1
  6. nugget
    Honorary Member

    nugget Junior toady

    7,796
    71
    224

    So whose business practices aren't when they get to the size of a large corporation freddy? It's the nature of the beast (and a little bit of greed) that when company's get so large they start swallowing the competition or just driving them out of business. M$ is not the firsat and they won't be the last.

    d-Faktor, that was an outstanding post and very insightful. I've long thought along the same lines (but not quite so deeply) and really wondered why they didn't take the opportunity to do something like that years ago when they were given the chance.
     
    Certifications: A+ | Network+ | Security+ | MCP (270,271,272,290,620) | MCDST | MCTS:Vista
    WIP: MCSA, 70-622,680,685
  7. twizzle

    twizzle Gigabyte Poster

    1,838
    33
    104
    Well posted d-faktor!!

    I have to agree with you that MS has got too big... too many fingers in too many pies is not good for any company. I have seen this happen in small companies where they diversify too much and end up over streched and heading downward!

    Yes MS should split into smaller companies to deal with different aspects of the business. They have good ideas, good products (in general) and a good development team.. but thier all over stretched trying to do too much at once....

    I like windows... always have. Its easy to use and setup if you know little about computing, where as linux means you need to know a lil tech stuff to get the most from it. And the windows OS has improved with each release in my opinion. But as always it still need improving... making it as modular as possible would be a good step. Letting users decide what they wanted installed as more levels etc etc...

    Like you, i have been waiting for the MS bubble to burst.. seeing it as inevitable due to the singularity of BG in keeping everything in house as much as possible... Open source would not be the way for them to go but spliting it down into little chunks and opening it up to more developers would be a start.

    As it stands is it any wonder that MS has become the target for more government restrictions, enquiries and monopolies investigations in its lifetime than most other corporations?

    Heres hoping that windows 2050 is a possiblity and that its better than anything else but with the ease of use, modularity and selectivty of anything else on the market.

    And if what i said makes no sense to any one.. well i know what i meant lol!!
     
    Certifications: Comptia A+, N+, MS 70-271, 70-272
    WIP: Being a BILB,
  8. Jakamoko
    Honorary Member

    Jakamoko On the move again ...

    9,915
    60
    229
    Go d !

    I wonder how much MS would pay for a consultancy firm to provide such a thorough critique of all that is good or ill about Redmond right now ?
     
    Certifications: MCP, A+, Network+
    WIP: Clarity
  9. Bluerinse
    Honorary Member

    Bluerinse Exabyte Poster

    8,871
    167
    256
    d-Faktor that was an awsome post 8)
     
    Certifications: C&G Electronics - MCSA (W2K) MCSE (W2K)
  10. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    3,661
    106
    167
    Just curious.... Is this the argument from "well, everyone is doing it so it must be ok?" line of reasoning, i.e. relative morality? If so I thoroughly reject such reasoning.
     
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1
  11. Baba O'Riley

    Baba O'Riley Gigabyte Poster

    1,760
    23
    99
    Cracking post there D. Although I think (and hope, because for all it's flaws, MS has done more for integrating PCs into our lives than any other company) that they have come to realise a lot of this already. Just take a look at the massive redesign Office 2007 has undergone. They've really listened to developer's ideas and given the user what they want rather than what they think the user needs.

    Be sensible. Would the company you work for ever upgrade to Vista if it meant buying 100% new software and hardware? I know mine wouldn't and neither would most home users. If MS didn't make Vista backward compatible that would be the other foot in the grave as well.

    I also think that, short of a massive Enron type scandal, MS is far too big a beast to ever die completely. Any company that's been around as long as they have will go through peaks and troughs and they are definitely in a trough at the moment, but I think they are slowly climbing out of it.
     
    Certifications: A+, Network+
    WIP: 70-270
  12. zimbo
    Honorary Member

    zimbo Petabyte Poster

    5,215
    98
    181
    first of all like everyone has said cracking answer... im not big fan of microsoft as a company but i cant see myself not working with their products.. what i like about linux (i think open source would be a better term) over microsoft is the price of enterprise software.. a small company wanting a file server or web server who cant afford it because of MS's expensive software thus they either go illegalor might turn to linux. Before three weeks i had no clue about linux and reading up on it and what it can do for a company with a tight budget is great!

    I havent meant any harsh comments to ms but it seems this is the second time the two of us have come to blows over this issue... i contribute to cf as best i can and its free for me to express my view on company i see as having tried to get global domination. In future i will avoid adding my 'flaiming' to cf thus to avoid any problems.

    thanks
     
    Certifications: B.Sc, MCDST & MCSA
    WIP: M.Sc - Computer Forensics
  13. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    10,190
    296
    319
    Personally I think Windows Small Business Server 2003 is competitively priced and is relatively straight forward to maintain once it is set up.

    A small business could go for Linux but I would *guess* it would cost more to support as good Linux techs are hard to find, just a thought. 8)
     
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Exchange 2007\2010
  14. snoopy51

    snoopy51 Bit Poster

    47
    0
    19
    Have not surf the certforums for a while!

    What a fantastic posting, d-faktor!

    Excellent observations!

    :super
     
    Certifications: MCSE (2K, 2K3), MCDBA, IBM CP, LPIC-1
    WIP: LPIC-2
  15. Baba O'Riley

    Baba O'Riley Gigabyte Poster

    1,760
    23
    99
    I think there was an article posted here not long ago basically saying exactly that.
     
    Certifications: A+, Network+
    WIP: 70-270
  16. nugget
    Honorary Member

    nugget Junior toady

    7,796
    71
    224
    Absolutely not freddy. This argument is taken from the Business Object Model that applies to every business ever started. When a business starts out small their business practices entail that there is enough market for everybody. As the business grows into a large company they start to fight for more market share. Then as the company grows into a corporation and gains shareholders, goes public etc they actively fight for more market share by any means possible and this includes incorporating smaller businesses into their expanding corporation or just driving them out altogether.

    The shareholders wish for profit on their investment drives the company's wish for more market share and therefore comes across to most people as evil whereas it's just simply greed. Do I agree with these practices? Absolutely not! That's the reason why I can't really blame M$ for what it does. If I was to boycott them for these practices then I would have to do the same for every large corporation in the world. I'd have to stop drinking coke (perish the thought), stop ordering Dell pc's, not order any books at Amazon, not use an Oracle database and so on. The list is endless.

    In Australia we have something called 'tall poppy syndrome' where you dare not be too sucessful. As long as you're seen as the fighter, battler or the underdog then you have everybody rooting for you to win. The problem is that when you eventually do win, everybody wants to cut you down. I used to think this happened only in Oz but then I saw that the rest of the world did the same too.
     
    Certifications: A+ | Network+ | Security+ | MCP (270,271,272,290,620) | MCDST | MCTS:Vista
    WIP: MCSA, 70-622,680,685
  17. Baba O'Riley

    Baba O'Riley Gigabyte Poster

    1,760
    23
    99
    Jeepers Nug, what an excellent response. I too used to be of the line of thought rich/successful=bad, poor/struggling=good. Now I think poor/struggling=cr@p business acumen.

    I was not entirely for all these anti-competitive cases brought against MS. It's perfectly natural for a company to want to batter the competition, if Bill had come out and said otherwise, I'm sure he would have been committed. It's actually illegal (in the UK anyway) for a board of directors to be seen to be doing anything other than trying to maximise the profits for their shareholders. So, the governments are actully punishing MS for behaving in a fashion that their own legislation encourages.
     
    Certifications: A+, Network+
    WIP: 70-270
  18. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    3,661
    106
    167
    I see....

    So, if we were in business competition with each other I could expect you to steal my intellectual property, lawyer up, and drive me into bankruptcy though a delaying action in the courts as a normal part of your business practices. And if I did the same to you, you would just shake my hand and say, "Wow. What a sharp businessman. No hard feelings at all. It's just business. I admire your "good business practices".

    Sorry, but I call b*u*l*l*s*h*i*t on that.
     
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1
  19. nugget
    Honorary Member

    nugget Junior toady

    7,796
    71
    224
    Under no circumstances would I do that. Maybe you missed the part where I said I didn't agree with these practices.

    As for us starting out in competition together: when we're about the same size I would treat you with some respect and espouse that the market is big enough for both of us. At the same time I look for ways to increase my share by complementing my services with what you don't offer. Some time later due to my ingenuity my business grows larger and yours stays the same or has less growth.

    More time passes and I get larger still. At this point I start treating you with disdain, start moving in on what was once your area of expertise and start pushing my company strength around. I get more market share and you lose it.

    Some time later I form a corporation, gain public shareholders and a board of directors. Now it's not just me with a stake in whether the corporation fails or succeeds, now there's millions of owners. The pressure is really on. Now is when I bring in the army of lawyers to prove what you invented is really mine, tangle you up in copyright lawsuits and try to bankrupt you or make you sell out. Your customers become mine and I reduce the competition.

    Why do I want to grind you into dust? So I can increase the evil corporations market share, increase profits, appease the millions of shareholders who just gained another 5 cents dividends and most of all to get my paycheck and bonus of xx millions.

    Does anyone care that another 20 person business got sold out or went bankrupt? Only you, the employees and maybe one or two government departments. To the shareholders of mega-corp you're just another faceless entity and that's only if they know about you at all. The only thing they're interested in is their returns on their investments.

    If you could take a survey of all the top managers and leaders of these corporations you would probably find an alarming trend in that they all have very similar traits. They would all generally be self centered outspoken greedy meglomaniacs that will do anything to get ahead. The corporations feed the need of these people and these people drive the needs of the corporations. They are one and the same.

    Nice guys like you and myself tend to get left behind.
     
    Certifications: A+ | Network+ | Security+ | MCP (270,271,272,290,620) | MCDST | MCTS:Vista
    WIP: MCSA, 70-622,680,685
  20. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    3,661
    106
    167
    Well, maybe that's because your statement of denial got lost in all the justifications. You said practices like that are straight out of the "Business Object Model". In other words, you gave your OK to them....

    Basically your argument was of the relative ethics variety, you just don't see it as that. It is nothing more than situational ethics that is tolerated because all the big businesses do it....

    In my book it doesn't matter how large a corporation is, and how many shareholders they have. The corporation still has a responsibility to operate ethically and morally. If they can't survive and make a profit in that manner then they really don't deserve to survive.... Just because a corporation is a "business entity" doesn't mean there are still individuals making the calls, and operating on a personally unethical basis.... It seems many people forget that.
     
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1

Share This Page

Loading...