Labels: Humor, Internet, Microsoft

Recently a Mozilla observer and contributor asked why Firefox isn't treated as a typical for-profit, commercial effort, and why we are giving up the chance to get rich. This is a great topic for discussion, I'm glad it was raised. I've got a very strong opinion on this, and am quite interested in what others think.

There are many reasons why Firefox is a public asset, built for public benefit rather than private wealth.

To start with, we want to create a part of online life that is explicitly NOT about someone getting rich. We want to promote all the other things in life that matter -- personal, social, educational and civic enrichment for massive numbers of people. Individual ability to participate and to control our own lives whether or not someone else gets rich through what we do. We all need a voice for this part of the Internet experience. The people involved with Mozilla are choosing to be this voice rather than to try to get rich.

For now I want to concentrate on why I have always believed -- and still do -- that Firefox can not become a tool for some people to get rich. And why I believe the organizational home for Firefox (the Mozilla Corporation) must remain dedicated to the public benefit.

Labels: Firefox, Microsoft, Mozilla

A Microsoft attorney says the company has learned how to deal with antitrust regulators and that Google could glean a thing or two from the experience.

Marshall Phelps, corporate vice president and deputy general counsel, said that if Microsoft had negotiated sooner with the US Department of Justice, it might have avoided further trouble. The company has had a running battle with regulators for more than a decade, and in 2002, it signed a landmark settlement with the federal government that called for more stringent oversight of the company's practices.

"Had Microsoft been a little quicker to give in on this, that and the other, [it] wouldn't be in the same pickle," Phelps said.

Phelps, who spoke at the Red Herring East conference here, said "one of the problems companies get into [is] when they don't realise how powerful they are and how powerful they are perceived as being". He then directed his comments at Google, one of Microsoft's main rivals in online search and applications.

"Google is going to face the regulatory burdens that Microsoft faced. It's going to be legislation by bad example. Something awful is going to happen, and legislators will run off and draft something that deals with privacy issues," Phelps said.

Labels: Google, Microsoft

In certain circles, it’s become fashionable of late to refer to Windows Vista as Windows Me2. It’s the second-worst insult you can hurl at a Microsoft program (the worst is to compare it to Microsoft Bob, neatly summarized as “7th place in PC World Magazine’s list of the 25 worst products of all time and [named] worst product of the decade by CNET.com” in 2005.).

Windows Vista is no Bob, as Steve Ballmer has said publicly, on the record. But if you believe the comparison, Vista is heading down a path roughly the same as Windows Millennium Edition (aka Windows Me).

So does Windows Vista deserve the Me2 label? After a careful look back at my Windows history books, I see Vista heading down a different path. In fact, I’m struck by how similar Vista’s path so far has been to the one that Windows 95 traveled.

Labels: Microsoft, PC, Vista

Labels: Apple, Humor, Mac, Microsoft, Vista

Portable Media Center devices - remmber [sic] them? Slightly less cumbersome versions of fully fledged Media Center PCs - are being officially killed off.

Microsoft's David Bono [confirmed that] PMCs are going the way of the dodo:

"We have decided to take what we have learned from our investments in Portable Media Center and focus our product and marketing resources on building media experiences on connected Windows Mobile powered devices....

With the re-investment of resources in media experiences on connected Windows Mobile powered devices, Portable Media Center 2.0 is the last version of our Portable Media Center software under the Windows Mobile brand. We do not plan any future Portable Media Center software upgrades or marketing activities."

Labels: Digital media, iPod, Microsoft

Today we're publishing at the Microsoft Download Center a recommended final compatibility update for users of Windows Vista and the Apple iPod; this same update will be automatically available via Windows Update on Tuesday 22 May. The release is for users worldwide and works with the latest version of Apple iTunes to correct an issue that caused some iPods to become corrupted when ejecting them using Windows Explorer or the "Safely Remove Hardware" function in the System Tray.

The long and short of it is this: Apple and Windows have partnered together to ensure a great experience in using Windows Vista with iTunes and the iPod, and both companies recommend you download this update.

Labels: iPod, Microsoft, Vista

There are ways to make money on an Xbox. Generally it's not on the hardware itself; we'll probably be gross margin neutral on that over the life cycle of the product and try to break even on that.

[Regarding the Zune,] people always want to say, gosh, Apple has such a big lead, what are you going to do, how do you possibly compete with that, and why would you bother? And part of my response is, you know, they've sold 100 million devices. So, let's just do some math. You and I can do this. How many people are there in the world? Five, six billion ... every single one of them has a music experience ... [some math ensues] ... you have a target audience of a 1.5 billion people. Not everyone is going to want a digital device; we can go through the yak-yak around that. But the audience is huge, and we are really early in what's going to happen in the music space. And the music industry is … in the process of reinventing itself.

And so for us, A) there's a big market; B) we think the opportunity is just beginning; and C) if you want to be in what we call connected entertainment, you have to be able to connect movies and video with music, with games, with communications technology to be able to do that. You can't not have a player.

So, early phases of this, we're about 10 percent market share in the category we're in, which is the hard disk. That's a good first step. Like Xbox was before it, the first step is what it is, it's nice, it's not perfect. People have commentary and questions and things we can improve, and we would say, yep, you're right. And we're not stupid, we see all those things, and we're good developers, and we know what we need to do. And you're going to see the product get better and better and better. You're going to see us be relentless in marketing. And you're going to see us expand into other parts of the category beyond the hard disk space. And I think we can be successful; I think we can build a nice business.

[On communities,] Zune today probably isn't a great example in the sense that community is part of the process for Zune that we believe in, and we haven't...really created the community environment.

[Regarding consumer electronics,] From a balanced perspective there are categories where we're not going to do devices. We don't do phones. We don't have plans to do phones ... There are other places like Zune where because of Apple's success, and frankly because of the uneven experience we were able to deliver just by being the platform provider, we decided we had to do it ourselves. I have no desire to do hardware ... Xbox is the hardest piece of consumer electronics hardware to produce in the world, no debate. It just taxes way more of anything you could possibly want to do. Zune technically speaking is dramatically easier. Almost any other device you could describe to me would be dramatically easier than producing what we did in Xbox.

And so by becoming experts at doing that, we are building core skill sets that we can leverage other places if we think the business requires it.

I believe people are going to want an entertainment experience that's always connected regardless of the device and the location they're in. If I want to do that, I've got to be great at video, I've got to be great in music, I've got to be great in games, and I have to be great at communications. Those are the building blocks.

Labels: Apple, Digital media, iPod, Microsoft, Zune

I have written extensively about Microsoft's problems. But last week, I got a stunning reminder about the company's power. It takes Microsoft only 10 hours of business to exceed Red Hat's entire quarterly profit. Skeptical? Check out the math, and nine other facts about Microsoft's most recent earnings report.

Microsoft last week announced quarterly revenue of $14.4 billion and net income of $4.93 billion. In other words, Microsoft's daily net income is about $55 million. That's $55 million in pure profit every 24 hours. Do some quick math and you'll learn it takes Microsoft only about ...

... four days to exceed Starbucks' quarterly net income.

... two weeks to exceed McDonalds' quarterly net income of $762 million.

... two weeks to exceed Apple's quarterly net income.

For a dead company, Microsoft's profits certainly look lively.

Labels: Apple, Microsoft, Vista

Question: Should Microsoft quit the MP3 player market?

Answer: I thought they already did. They’re spending a lot of money, but they’re on a dead end. They always were. They saw the Dip, but instead of embracing it by completely reinventing what it meant to be an MP3 player, they just played it safe and made a piece of me-too.

When you copy something that’s already on the other side of the Dip, you’ve already lost. Microsoft “quit” the MP3 player market when they identified the wrong Dip. They picked the obvious, “safe” one—the one committees of people could live with, but one that is so big and so steep that even Microsoft doesn’t have the money to get through it.

Microsoft has a long history of sticking through Dips, and a long history of quitting dead ends. I have no idea what they’re thinking when it comes to the Zune, but it’s a dead end, through and through.

Question: Should Apple quit the personal computer market?

Answer: Apple has already crossed that Dip, big time. Not the “personal computer Dip” but the Dip of “style-conscious, designer’s, multimedia, student, family computer.” They’re the best in the world at that. They own it. They profit from it. Sure, if Steve hadn’t been arrogant, they could have been best in the world at a much bigger, much juicier market. But they’re not. Once they deal with that—and I think they mostly have—then they can erect a wall behind them, a bigger dip, one that prevents others from following. Over time, personal computers become a profitless commodity while Apple’s market just gets sexier, more fun, and more profitable.

Labels: Apple, iPod, Mac, Microsoft, Zune

Microsoft cast a shadow over the software world for almost 20 years starting in the late 80s. I can remember when it was IBM before them. I mostly ignored this shadow. I never used Microsoft software, so it only affected me indirectly—for example, in the spam I got from botnets. And because I wasn't paying attention, I didn't notice when the shadow disappeared.

But it's gone now. I can sense that. No one is even afraid of Microsoft anymore. They still make a lot of money—so does IBM, for that matter. But they're not dangerous.

Labels: Microsoft

The Thompson site says you pay 2% of revenues from a service - or $0.02/song - to use mp3 in a service. The last time I saw a content distribution fee, it was on mpeg-4 part 2, and it pretty much killed that standard. Thankfully, in h.264 mpeg dropped that requirement for free distribution.

Labels: Apple, Digital media, iPod, iTunes, Microsoft

A lawsuit alleges that Microsoft Corp. engaged in deceptive practices by letting PC makers promote computers as "Windows Vista Capable" even if they couldn't run the new operating system's "signature" features.

The proposed class action, which Microsoft disputes, was filed on behalf of personal-computer buyer Dianne Kelley of Camano Island. It focuses on efforts by Microsoft and computer makers to avoid a lull in PC sales by assuring consumers that the machines they were buying last year could run the delayed operating system upon its January release.

Machines carrying "Windows Vista Capable" stickers included those that only met the requirements for Windows Vista Home Basic -- which lacks the "Aero" on-screen appearance, Media Center PC interface, Flip 3D window-switching and other features available in advanced Windows Vista versions.

"All the 'wow' stuff that Microsoft is selling and marketing is present in (Windows Vista Home) Premium, but it's not present in Basic," said Michael Rosenberger, one of the lawyers representing Kelley in the case.

Labels: Microsoft, Vista

Thought I'd lay out some fundamental facts about a few audio formats - some comments show some common misperceptions.

* Mp3 – the jpeg of digital music. Supported by everyone, everywhere. Mediocre compression efficiency, but utterly dominant in personal libraries because users can simply rip to a higher bitrate. Licensable by anyone for a low fee. Universal compatibility is mp3’s key feature.

* AAC – designed for MPEG, by MPEG. Largely associated with Apple at this point, AAC was designed by a licensing body, complete with patent pool, etc.. Licensable by anyone for a (relatively pricey) fee from MPEG-LA. High compression efficiency. Compatibility is fine – as long as you buy Apple products.

* WMA – Microsoft’s audio format. Adopted by most mp3 player skus (but not by most mp3 player units, thanks to the iPod..). Freely licensable for a low fee. Also associated with WMDRM, which is supported by playsforsure devices. High compression efficiency, good compatibility story, but not as good as mp3’s.

* Ogg, FLAC, etc… - Open source codecs. Generally good compression efficiency, but very low support from services and devices. To use these is to enter untested legal waters, but they’re very interesting, and nobody is asking for money for them...yet.

Labels: Apple, Digital media, iPod, iTunes, Microsoft, Zune

More than 20 million Windows Vista licenses were sold in the opening month of general availability for the new operating system, as new tools and programs ease the transition for consumers.

Initial sales figures from Microsoft show its new operating system Windows Vista made a splash in its debut. In the first month of Windows Vista’s general availability, sales exceeded 20 million licenses, more than doubling the initial pace of sales for its predecessor, Windows XP. These initial figures reflect the broad interest in the security and usability enhancements in Windows Vista.

The more than 20 million copies shipped represent Windows Vista licenses sold to PC manufacturers, copies of upgrades and the full packaged product sold to retailers and upgrades ordered through the Windows Vista Express Upgrade program from January 30 to February 28.

Previous to Microsoft's announcements, various news stories had erroneously claimed that Vista sales were lagging behind those of XP. What's really happening is that most customers have opted to purchase new PCs with Vista preinstalled rather than upgrade their existing customers. This situation has benefitted the entire PC industry, of course. Dell says its customers have "overwhelmingly" chosen premium Vista versions over lower-end versions, purchasing, in turn, more expensive PCs and components.

Labels: Microsoft, Vista

Bill Gates discusses the software and computer industry, and how Microsoft has contributed. Gates also discusses his views on the future of the computing industry. The talk was recorded in 1989 but was only recently digitized.
Topics include:

# The start and history of the microcomputer industry
# The transition from 8-bit to 16-bit computers
# Microsoft's history with IBM
# EGA graphics and WYSIWYG editors
# The importance and future of the mouse
# MS-DOS and OS/2
# History of the Macintosh and Microsoft' involvement
# Apple vs. Microsoft lawsuit regarding user interfaces
# Microsoft Office on Macintosh

Labels: Microsoft

In the past, Scoble has tended to be sympathetic about Microsoft’s failings. However, he was provoked into stinging criticism last week after a series of triumphalist remarks, including some disparaging comments about Google made by Steve Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive.

At a “global summit” of its most-valued software developers, Microsoft repeatedly declared that it would “win” in search and other parts of its Windows Live internet strategy.

“The words are empty,” Scoble responded. “Microsoft’s internet execution sucks (on the whole). Its search sucks. Its advertising sucks. If that’s ‘in it to win’, then I don’t get it.”

He continued: “Microsoft isn’t going away. Don’t get me wrong. They have record profits, record sales, all that. But on the internet? Come on.

Labels: Internet, Microsoft

At the end of the GDC blogger's breakfast yesterday morning, Chris Satchell dropped this bomb that not many people seem to have picked up on. He said, regarding Xbox 360 Backward Compatibility:

At some point we're going to focus less on it. When you get to the end of this year there will be a reduced focus on backwards compatibility. There are so many 360 games out there. I don't know if it's important anymore.

Labels: Microsoft, Video games, Xbox 360

With Apple teetering towards bankruptcy in 1997 and in desperate need of financial aid and help from its partners, top executives at Microsoft reviewed an upcoming version of Mac Office (which eventually shipped as Mac Office 98) and made impassioned pleas for its release, despite Apple's declining market share and falling revenues in Microsoft's Mac Business Unit (MBU). These details came to light in recent court disclosures related to Microsoft's Iowa class action lawsuit. And they paint a decidedly unfamiliar portrait of a corporate super giant who is more infamous for stepping on competitors than aiding them.

Of course, that's not how the Mac community sees things. And it's time for this silliness to stop.

In a June 1997 email exchange between then-Microsoft CEO Bill Gates and MBU chief Ben Waldman, Gates thanks Waldman for showing "the kind of passion about great products that has made Microsoft successful." "I admit we have neglected the Mac business," Gates wrote. "Although the Mac is declining if we move ahead on this product we should ask for the [subsidiaries] with localized product to make a real effort."

Every Mac-oriented publication on earth, from what I can tell, has cited this email exchange as an example of Microsoft's ongoing efforts to keep Apple down. Macworld, for example, also reported that Microsoft was using Mac users as "guinea pigs" to test features that would later appear in Windows versions of Office, as if getting features first were somehow a bad thing. (Microsoft actually promotes these features as its "Mac-First" innovations.) Other publications and Mac news sites played up the threat to shut down Mac Office, which frankly would have made good business sense given that revenues from Mac Office fell from $200 million to $150 million between 1996 and 1997 as Apple teetered toward a bleak finish that, ultimately, never happened.

More important, we have that email record that everyone is so excited about. What it shows to me is a company dedicated to making great products and, yes, supporting then-struggling Apple with the best version of Office Microsoft had yet created. Don't believe me? You can read it yourself. My guess is you'll come away with a less dramatic version of history than the Mac pariahs are pushing.

Labels: Apple, Mac, Microsoft

Microsoft Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie yesterday described the company's most recent Internet-based competitor, Google, as a "wake-up call."

Despite Ozzie's internal efforts, Microsoft has only floundered in the online space since Google's rise. Part of the reason is corporate inertia: Microsoft's biggest businesses, Windows, Office, and Windows Server, are traditional software products with entrenched teams of backers who have only slowly realized the dangers of Web-based software services. Microsoft fears that it will have to cannibalize its most successful products in order to effectively compete with companies such as Google.

One thing is pretty clear: A decade ago, Microsoft was willing to do whatever it took to take down Netscape, including the ill-advised bundling of its Web browser into Windows, despite internal protestations about the technical and moral problems with such an approach. Stung by the innumerable antitrust battles that followed, today's Microsoft seems unwilling to change as dramatically. And its current complementary approach, from what I can see, has failed. Put simply, Microsoft may indeed have gotten a wake-up call, but it's been punching the Snooze button ever since.

Labels: Google, Internet, Microsoft

Labels: Microsoft, Vista

The Coast Guard planned to call off its search early Thursday for an acclaimed computer scientist whose sailboat has disappeared off Northern California.

Despite unusually calm weather, searchers have exhausted any area Jim Gray could have drifted or sailed after leaving for a solo sailing trip Sunday to scatter his mother's ashes at sea, a Coast Guard spokesman said.

"If they were to even find a life raft, they would have located him in their search patterns," said Petty Officer 3rd Class Jonathan Cilley.

Gray, founder and manager of Microsoft's Bay Area Research Center in San Francisco, won the A.M. Turing Award -- the "Nobel Prize of computer science" -- in 1998 for research that paved the way for automatic teller machines, computerized airline reservations and online shopping.

Labels: Microsoft