90 likes | 161 Views
Let The Battle Commence *. David Kleinman, Ken Song, Dallas Thornton, Marck Vaisman, Ashish Khamar. * Feb 14th 2002 | SAN FRANCISCO From The Economist print edition. Microsoft, A brief history.
E N D
Let The Battle Commence* David Kleinman, Ken Song, Dallas Thornton, Marck Vaisman,Ashish Khamar *Feb 14th 2002 | SAN FRANCISCO From The Economist print edition
Microsoft, A brief history • In 1995 Microsoft began its quest for market dominance with a product code-named Chicago. Better known as Windows 95 • Soon after the O’Hare project was launched I.e. Windows Plus • As we know, Office 2000 was later released as an integrated, fully-functional personal productivity suite, designed with a common code base and featuring interoperable components easily built by developers and used by consumers • On the development side, MS has invested heavily in “developer relations,” spending millions on special events, gifts for developers, training and certification programs, and technical support
The benefits to Microsoft • A unified code base for all its programs, allowing developers to easily build upon existing code without “re-inventing the wheel.” • This unification allowed MS to basically define the standards by which its products will operate, independent of the rest of the software industry. • The investment on developers has allowed MS to control developers and mold them into MS-loving, MS-standards-adopting people.
Thought • MS’s integration strategy has obviously paid great dividends. (Apart from anti-trust concerns). • While standards proponents will gripe about Microsoft not conforming to standards set by “the industry” (a.k.a. MS’s competitors), it can do this—it is not against the law. • In fact, because it does not always conform to standards, it is able to bring new technologies to market more quickly. • Also, as the circle continues, developers embrace the new Microsoft technology, develop for MS products, and grow MS market share.
Limitations • Most importantly, Microsoft must be wary of consumer confidence. • This “integration strategy” is like putting all your eggs in one basket. • If one of the underlying components is flawed or has a security hole, any product that uses it is vulnerable. • MS must put stability and security first and foremost on its priority list
A possible solution • Introduce a new quality control and auditing division that reports directly to the top of the organization. • The division would have at least one FTE developer assigned to each project. • The main goal of this employee would be to ensure code stability and test applications during their development. • Assuming annual costs of $250K/field employee x 100 employees, MS would incur costs of at least $25M . • This really is a small price to pay.
The Future • MS has seen its growth stall as its initial core markets become saturated. • To continue to grow, it must latch on to and develop emerging technologies, overtake competitors’ markets, or create new markets. • Enter the .Net initiative. • MS plans to offer centralized authentication, secure services, easy application development, and multi-platform support.
.Net • The web-services concept allows companies to easily develop applications that communicate with each other over the Internet (and are dependent on Microsoft-controlled technologies). • .Net provides rich new features that link in to other MS client applications such as Office and Windows and server applications such as Exchange and SQL Server. • In short, .NET is MS’s attempt to link all its products into a central platform, from which developers can program, companies can leverage the technologies, and MS can make money.
DOJ concerns • Through this approach, MS has to worry little about conforming to standards and, rather, create standards for the rest of the industry to write to and develop on top of. • Dominance over the market will lead to further scrutiny from the DOJ. • One possibility is spinning off complementary business units—support services, consulting services, and hardware development would be atop the list. • Long-term contracts with these spin-offs should be worked out to ensure the stability of the enterprise. • Downsizing will not reduce MS’s dominance but will ease tensions with the DOJ