On 9/19/06, Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem? Microsoft wants it all. If there's a dime to be made, Redmond wants the whole 10 cents. In categories it invents (think hard to remember the last one, maybe Flight Simulator?) that's fine. Create a new category, build a brilliant product, and reap the rewards. That's the American way.
That's nonsense. The man who builds a better mousetrap usually has his invention stolen from him, a big conglomerate patent it before he can, and an offshore facility cranking out cheap imitations. That's the American Way. It's a rare and wily American who succeeds differently. Most big multinationals grow by acquisition more than by innovation. It can be argued that every dynamic within a big company opposes innovation. Hence, skunkworks projects. MSFT is "greedy" because that is what they get paid to do. Why stockholders invest in companies: buying something cheap and selling it for more is how capitalism works. Embrace, enhance, extend, rebrand, repackage, reprice and ship. MSFT bought much of the technology they sell. So what? It's when they steal it (a la Stacker) that they get their wrist slapped. The theme that Microsoft has beaten "the big guns" and are now turning their attention to "the little guys" is silly, too. MSFT may have beaten WordPerfect and Lotus, but that may just be transient. It won't take much for them to start losing ground in networking, web serving, server farms, etc. And they have been buying "little guys" like Vermeer (Front Page, 1996), Fox Software (1994) and One Tree Software (SourceSafe, 1994) since the beginning. Ref: http://www.microsoft.com/msft/acquisitions/history.mspx -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
