E-mails From 2003 Reveal Microsoft Caught 'Flat Footed' by iTunes Music Store Launch

MacFly123 said:
Microsoft is what they are pretty much because they took from others and then locked OEMs into their monopoly! PERIOD!

They got lucky once, and boy did they get REALLY REALLY LUCKY! But the fact that they have never been able to produce valid competitive results since that time only serves as proof! They NEVER win with competition. They still struggle to this day on every front that they face competition in. The only thing they have been able to do successfully is keep OEMs locked in to their monopoly. In fact every other front they enter into competition with only serves to protect their monopoly from unraveling!

Microsoft's days are numbered! No they won't go out of business, but in the near future they will loose HUGE relevance to the other emerging tech giants like Apple and Google. Their throne will no longer exist though they will continue to be on the scene.
.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm as big a Apple fan as anyone, but even I gotta take the blinders off sometimes. I think your revision of history might be somewhat...jaded. And let's also not forget, that if not for Microsoft not too long ago, there might not even be an Apple... depending on who's revision of history you subscribe to.

all I'm saying is...sometimes you have to give credit where it's due.
 
Wingsy said:
Gates: "However I think we need some plan to prove that even though Jobs has us a bit flat footed again we move quick and both match and do stuff better."

Key word here is "again".

We know it, and we know they know it.
Click to expand...

You beat me to it!
It makes it seem like there were countless emails and correspondence (not mentioned) before hand that mentions "Jobs ... he did it to us again!"

(in the same way that Seinfeld talks about Newman)
 
gfiz said:
Hey, I'm as big a Apple fan as anyone, but even I gotta take the blinders off sometimes. I think your revision of history might be somewhat...jaded. And let's also not forget, that if not for Microsoft not too long ago, there might not even be an Apple... depending on who's revision of history you subscribe to.

all I'm saying is...sometimes you have to give credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

MacFly wrote with heated language, but the essence of his message was accurate. Microsoft did get lucky when they were chosen to provide DOS to IBM, and they did leverage a later monopoly position to ensure lock-in to Windows from OEM PC manufacturers, and they still do rely on OS and Office profits to prop up the other parts of their business which typically do not make money. This is not revisionist history, it's recorded history. Some of us lived through every one of Microsoft's years and remember.
 
gfiz said:
Hey, I'm as big a Apple fan as anyone, but even I gotta take the blinders off sometimes. I think your revision of history might be somewhat...jaded. And let's also not forget, that if not for Microsoft not too long ago, there might not even be an Apple... depending on who's revision of history you subscribe to.

all I'm saying is...sometimes you have to give credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

I think the whole reshaping of the IT industry is fascinating.

14 years ago anyone'd written them off as a has-been curio from the dawn of the PC era, now it's the no. 1 choice for discerning users with a big budget for their computer, media delivery devices, high end mobile phones and represents a huge percentage of online media sales.

Then we've got Google that's come from nothing to the dominant force in web technologies and online advertising and making efforts to invade the smart phone market as well as attempting to convince the public that the world doesn't need serious computing power in their homes and just need a dummy terminal in the home (what goes around comes around!).

Then there's Microsoft, the dominant provider of desktop OSes, a company with huge resources that has designs on both Apple's and Google's territory, as they do Microsoft's.

I think these three will find themselves attacking each other's core competences more and more, which as a consumer suits me very well indeed.
 
There is no doubt that MS have been supremely successful, but the question is successful at what?

i think they have been most successful at marketing,they managed to convince everyone that windows is the way to go, they were also largely helped by hardware prices falling sharply over the years and cheap parts from the east, regardless how go or bad the product was they still managed to get it on every machine, i think they used the old business method of sell it first and fix the problems later, the biggest mistake they made was never truly fixing it and now they are paying for it, most people now see Windows for what it is, dont get me wrong 7 is very good but still mistakes like Millennium/Vista should never be made in the first place let alone repeated.

i believe steve took the long road, build solid products from the start that do what they should and in the end they will get noticed, now is Apple's time, Mac's are selling more than ever before, Apple are now the company that everyone else looks to, they now set the standard.


i also see the same fate for Google as MS at the moment, other than search they seem to be dipping their toes into as many pools as possible but not really making a splash, they should pick an angle and try to be the best at it rather than try to compete with everyone, every where they turn they now have enemies, competition from all sides is not the best position to be in unless your at the top, unfortunately for google they are not.

People are porn and die every day, as are companies , as big as MS is they can fad into dust in only a few short years, whether they will or not only time will tell however they really need to start to make headway now.
 
NebulaClash said:
MacFly wrote with heated language, but the essence of his message was accurate. Microsoft did get lucky when they were chosen to provide DOS to IBM, and they did leverage a later monopoly position to ensure lock-in to Windows from OEM PC manufacturers, and they still do rely on OS and Office profits to prop up the other parts of their business which typically do not make money. This is not revisionist history, it's recorded history. Some of us lived through every one of Microsoft's years and remember.
Click to expand...
They didn't get lucky, they had the vision that in the future software would be far more important than hardware and set about making sure that they controlled the software platform by giving away their OS and seizing control of the consumer software market before anybody realised that there was a market to seize control of.
 
hundleton1 said:
i think they have been most successful at marketing,they managed to convince everyone that windows is the way to go,
Click to expand...

They have been good at marketing, but one of the most basic ways they convinced everyone that Windows is the way to go is to make it almost impossible to buy a new PC without it also coming with Windows. When you remove choice from the marketplace, you tend to get customer lock-in.

So one of the reasons people became convinced that Windows was what they needed is that they never saw an alternative on the Dell web site (or wherever they bought it from). It did not succeed on its merits but on its ubiquity.
 
NebulaClash said:
MacFly wrote with heated language, but the essence of his message was accurate. Microsoft did get lucky when they were chosen to provide DOS to IBM, and they did leverage a later monopoly position to ensure lock-in to Windows from OEM PC manufacturers, and they still do rely on OS and Office profits to prop up the other parts of their business which typically do not make money. This is not revisionist history, it's recorded history. Some of us lived through every one of Microsoft's years and remember.
Click to expand...


every successful entrepreneur got lucky at some point. And Windows and Office are their bread and butter...I do not see that as a negative for them. Not everything has turned out to be a glowing success, but that's the case with all successful companies. You don't need to look much further than Apple to see examples of the same. Xbox is no Pippin, that's for sure.

dammit...stop making me say nice things about MS...that's not what I set out to do...just think that sometimes we feel like MSFT has to fail for Apple to be successful, just like Jobs explained in 1997 keynote at Macworld, which I was lucky enough to be at.
 
Denarius said:
They didn't get lucky, they had the vision that in the future software would be far more important than hardware and set about making sure that they controlled the software platform by giving away their OS and seizing control of the consumer software market before anybody realised that there was a market to seize control of.
Click to expand...

The luck part was beating out CP/M as the choice instead of DOS. It could have gone either way.
 
at least if we did so did Real
Click to expand...

Damn.

Even looking past the third-grade "he did it too!" tone, by 2003 we were well past the stage of anyone thinking that measuring your success against that of Real was like measuring your good looks against a hemorrhoid.

On a dog's ass.

I have standing do-not-rescuscitate orders for if I ever justify anything I ever do by saying "well, at least the retarded three-year-old next door did something just as stupid."

Just, damn.
 
gfiz said:
every successful entrepreneur got lucky at some point. And Windows and Office are their bread and butter...I do not see that as a negative for them. Not everything has turned out to be a glowing success, but that's the case with all successful companies. You don't need to look much further than Apple to see examples of the same. Xbox is no Pippin, that's for sure.

dammit...stop making me say nice things about MS...that's not what I set out to do...just think that sometimes we feel like MSFT has to fail for Apple to be successful, just like Jobs explained in 1997 keynote at Macworld, which I was lucky enough to be at.
Click to expand...

I hear you, and I'm not trying to say Microsoft has to fail. I just wanted to point out that they achieved their success with Windows through lock-in, not a better product.
 
hundleton1 said:
i also see the same fate for Google as MS at the moment, other than search they seem to be dipping their toes into as many pools as possible but not really making a splash, they should pick an angle and try to be the best at it rather than try to compete with everyone, every where they turn they now have enemies, competition from all sides is not the best position to be in unless your at the top, unfortunately for google they are not.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I've never understood how a company can thrive with a bunch of disparate internal departments throwing things against the wall to see if they stick and looking to widen their mediocrity - rather than focus on their core skills. If Apple ran its business like MS and Google, you'd see the emergence of a new Cereals Division making a play for Apple Jacks.

Bizarre.

hundleton1 said:
People are porn and die every day
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
I always knew Bill had a soft spot for Jobsy. I watched this interview of the 2 of them at a trade show and Steve showed genuine affection for Bill. He even quoted a Dylan song! Bill just sat there looking uncomfortable. These 2 guys secretly love each other. Remember Microsoft doesn't have to fail, in order for Apple to succeed. Rock on geniuses!!! :)
 
LagunaSol said:
Indeed, I've never understood how a company can thrive with a bunch of disparate internal departments throwing things against the wall to see if they stick and looking to widen their mediocrity - rather than focus on their core skills. If Apple ran its business like MS and Google, you'd see the emergence of a new Cereals Division making a play for Apple Jacks.

Bizarre.



:confused:
Click to expand...

clearly you forgot how Apple did run their business in the early to mid 90's? :eek:


And I think it will be the glue between Apple and MS fans...a mutual hate and desire to destroy Google. Like Autobots and Decepticons banding together to destroy Alien invaders.
 
NebulaClash said:
The luck part was beating out CP/M as the choice instead of DOS. It could have gone either way.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that's valid when you consider that CP/M kicked off in the early 70's where DOS kicked off in the early '80's. I don't know enough about CP/M to measure it against DOS 1.0, but you can bet that IBM knew about it when they were introduced to DOS. Trying to write off Microsoft's success as luck is absurd.
 
gfiz said:
clearly you forgot how Apple did run their business in the early to mid 90's? :eek:
Click to expand...

Indeed, before the hatchet man came in (Jobs), Apple was heading right down the MS (and now Google) path. It would have been ugly. Thankfully there was a rebirth, which is exactly what MS needs. Like General Motors, sometimes the king must fall before he can rise again.

gfiz said:
And I think it will be the glue between Apple and MS fans...a mutual hate and desire to destroy Google. Like Autobots and Decepticons banding together to destroy Alien invaders.
Click to expand...

Unlikely. While I am starting to have a distaste (and distrust) for Google, I will always loathe Microsoft. Microsoft has proved over many years they can't be trusted. The jury is still out on Google.
 
Denarius said:
I really don't think that's valid when you consider that CP/M kicked off in the early 70's where DOS kicked off in the early '80's. I don't know enough about CP/M to measure it against DOS 1.0, but you can bet that IBM knew about it when they were introduced to DOS. Trying to write off Microsoft's success as luck is absurd.
Click to expand...

Then you should read up on the history back then and see how close it came to being the other way around.
 
LagunaSol said:
While I am starting to have a distaste (and distrust) for Google, I will always loathe Microsoft. Microsoft has proved over many years they can't be trusted. The jury is still out on Google.
Click to expand...

All three of them are just big companies that are looking to get that exist to get the best return for their shareholders. Being people's friend is of no importance to any of them, getting a return for their shareholders is. They provide products that people may or may not choose to by. Sentiment or trust is misplaced in all cases.
 
NebulaClash said:
Then you should read up on the history back then and see how close it came to being the other way around.
Click to expand...

I did. What I saw was little to choose between them and the fact that Microsoft were smart enough to hook people with a loss leader and won as a consequence. That was judgement, not luck.
 
billystlyes said:
You wanna know why? I work in the record industry and saw the fast one pulled first hand. Apple basically said that iTunes and the iPod would be limited to the Mac platform. So with that small of a market share, who really cares? Therefore, they got the deals set in place. Then they took iTunes and the iPod to Windows. End of story....
Click to expand...

Yep.
Tough I don't know that it's been documented that Jobs/Apple actually said that (if you can provide a link, please do) that's clearly what the recording industry thought and that's a big part of the reason they got the deals that they did.
 
LagunaSol said:
The Internet - Microsoft caught flat-footed
The iPod/iTunes - Microsoft caught flat-footed
Web search - Microsoft caught flat-footed
The iPhone - Microsoft caught flat-footed

Is there a pattern here?
Click to expand...

Yes, only two of those things have to do with Apple. Apple didn't invent Web search or the internet. Nor did Apple invent the MP3 player, Creative and other companies had MP3 players out way before Apple did.
 
LagunaSol said:
Unlikely. While I am starting to have a distaste (and distrust) for Google, I will always loathe Microsoft. Microsoft has proved over many years they can't be trusted. The jury is still out on Google.
Click to expand...


I don't know... I'm fairly convinced Google will be changing their name soon to Skynet :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top