Amnesty International says that Microsoft, along with Yahoo! and Google, has colluded with the Chinese government on Internet censorship. And maybe they all have. But there's a knee-slapper of a quote from Amnesty in this one: "The willingness of Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google to override their principles amounts to a betrayal of trust in the face of the lucrative opportunities that the Chinese market offers them."
Override their principles? Sure, Google touts its "Don't be evil" tagline, but isn't the principle in business still to make money? Granted, it would be great if big corporations would buck the hard-line government in the world's most populous country (and one of the world's fastest-growing markets) and stand up for freedom on the Web, but don't hold your breath. With Western markets looking ever more saturated, executives constantly looking for greener sales pastures and investors demanding a return on their money, the only principles most companies follow have dollar signs attached to them. That might be morally uncomfortable, but that's the nature of business -- and dealing with (often also known as "giving in to") the government at absolutely every turn is, to my understanding, the essential to business in China. It is bitterly ironic, though, that the pursuit of capitalism might have led some of our corporate leaders to make decidedly undemocratic decisions. Complicated world, huh?
Do you do business in China? Do you think Microsoft and friends are in the wrong on this issue?
Posted by Lee Pender on 07/20/2006 at 1:19 PM1 comments
"The entire mountain trembled violently. There was the sound of a ram's horn, increasing in volume to a great degree. God came down on Mount Sinai, to the peak of the mountain. He summoned Moses to the mountain peak, and Moses climbed up...Moses went down to the people and conveyed this to them." --Exodus 19 (Thanks,
Wikipedia)
Moses, meet Brad Smith. In the most spectacular and far-reaching declaration of numerated principles since the 10 commandments, Microsoft's top lawyer yesterday passed down to the gathered masses a set of decrees the company literally calls "Windows Principles: 12 Tenets to Promote Competition."
Our exclusive RCP camera caught this image of Smith delivering his message to the lucky peasants at the National Press Club.
The big news here seems to be that Microsoft will allow computer manufacturers to set Google (or Yahoo!, even) as a default search engine within Vista. That's big news given how much money Microsoft is pumping into MSN and Windows Live and the huge role Windows has obviously played over the years in killing off competitors' wares.
But, just when you think Redmond might really be changing its often arrogant ways, check this out: Microsoft has bravely said that it will "not block access to any lawful Web site or impose any fee for reaching any non-Microsoft Web site or using any non-Microsoft Web service."
Well, thank you, Redmond! You mean we're going to have the freedom to download our own non-IE browsers and use them to look at whichever Web sites we want? Oh, Redmond really is being too gracious with this one. How will we Windows-using simpletons ever handle the responsibility? (You ought to read what they're saying over at this ars Technica thread.)
In fairness, there are some encouraging tenets, such as Microsoft declaring itself willing to support industry standards, provide APIs to other software developers and not engage in retaliatory practices against computer manufacturers that support non-Microsoft software. But most of what the 12 Tenets represent is Microsoft finally admitting that it will comply with its U.S. antitrust settlement (see this and this). On that front, Europe -- where the real antitrust battle is raging -- has been eerily quiet so far.
Really, though, a lot of what Microsoft is talking about doing is probably what it should have been doing all along for the good of users, partners and maybe even itself: opening Windows for competition and making it an easier platform for non-Microsoft development. And
many observers don't see enough in the 12 Tenets to declare the era of a "new Microsoft."
Still, any commitment to openness, a reduction of predatory practices and support for industry standards from Microsoft is a good sign. So we shouldn't be too quick to bury the 12 Tenets, which do represent a rare admission from Microsoft that the company hasn't always been perfect in the past and might need to make some adjustments to better serve its customers and partners in the future. Microsoft, however, would do well to step down from Mount Sinai and stop pretending (with its trademark arrogance) that it has just, out of the goodness of its heart, ushered in some new era for Windows and the company as a whole. Also, let's wait and see how well Microsoft sticks to its own 12 Tenets. Actions, as always, speak louder than words.
What would you add to Microsoft's 12 Tenets? Do you have a list of your own for making Windows more open to competition? Is Microsoft really turning over a new leaf, or is this all just spin?
Posted by Lee Pender on 07/20/2006 at 1:19 PM1 comments
Not everybody who responded to Tuesday's newsletter was thrilled with Steve
Ballmer's Microsoft's-way-or-the-highway WWPC keynote.
Wayne wrote to say:
"If Steve Ballmer wants to ramp up the Microsoft strong arm business tactics,
I will start selling Linux packages. I am NOT going to turn my back on other
companies that I have partnered with. I plan to provide my customers the best
computer services that can be found in (I won't reveal where he is -- just in
case --LP). If I can NOT provide solutions that fit my customers' needs and
can only provide the Microsoft solution to continue my partnership then COUNT
ME OUT!"
Well said, Wayne. And you're not alone. David's not happy, either:
"I like Microsoft (sort of), but when they start hammering anyone that
doesn't toe their line, it just makes me... angry. I knew it wasn't an accident
that the Security Center didn't recognize my Norton Anti-Virus installation,
but I'm really tired of their arrogance. It's no wonder the EU is hammering
them daily. If the apps my company needs to operate were available on Linux,
we'd be there in a heartbeat."
Serial RCPU e-mailer Matt also chimed in with this gem:
"Pushing all Microsoft no matter what isn't going to fly if you want to
have long term credibility with your clients. My clients look to me to determine
what works best for their situation, not what is easiest for me to source and
integrate. Asking clients to put full trust in Microsoft for their security
is a little like asking Ted Kennedy to teach driving safety."
Driving safety is a bit of a sensitive issue in Boston this week, Matt, but
we get your (very funny) point. And William chimes in with a thought-provoking
history lesson:
"Having spent more time in the computer industry than I really want to
remember, I know of another company that took the same attitude that Ballmer
is now shouting. Maybe he should look at how far down IBM went with that attitude
and then concentrate on putting the product on the market that makes us want
to follow his wishes instead of feeling we must follow."
All valid points, well articulated. Now, with all of that said, let's give
Microsoft its due, at least on the security front. Some of the incentives the
company announced this week at the WWPC could end up being very sweet deals
for partners. Partners that take part in the new Security Software Advisor Program
can get some fat referral fees for sales of Antigen and ForeFront applications
-- 20 percent of the sale price of the product, and 30 percent with a special
deal Microsoft is offering for the next seven months. That's on top of the original
partner margin for the sale. VARs can also get a 5 percent fee on renewals of
existing products on top of normal margins.
In order to participate in the SSA program, partners must be at least registered
members of the MSPP. Then, they must then either be Certified or Gold members
of the Security Competency program or eligible for that certification, or be
Sybari partners, or be top-tier member of another security vendor's program.
Hey, we're not promoting the all-Microsoft, all the time concept, but this is
definitely worth a look.
What do you think of SSA? Let me know at [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 07/13/2006 at 1:19 PM0 comments
This week's Partner Conference in Boston has been a show for the big guys and
the global guys. One partner told me that Microsoft told him that more than
70 percent of conference attendees are Gold Certified Partners, and almost half
are from Europe. The Dutch in particular have been easy to spot with their bright
orange shirts.
I also heard that Microsoft's Ballmer-attended Gold Certified Partner luncheon
on Tuesday turned out to be a little less regal than expected. Instead of having
the tables, table cloths and other signs of civilized dining that partners surely
deserve, Microsoft's channel champions got rows of chairs (no tables) and cold
box lunches! Heck, we got a better deal in the press room. Maybe those Eurofines
have already led to some cost cutting in Redmond...
If you were at the WWPC, what was your favorite part of the show? What did
you not like? Drop me a line at [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 07/13/2006 at 1:19 PM0 comments
The
Eurostory we've been telling you about continues....
Well, Microsoft has not settled its anti-trust case with the EU, so now it's time for Redmond to throw some euros Brussels' way. The news, not exactly a shock, doesn't seem to have affected Microsoft's deflated stock price much, but it's surely one expense (and a big hassle) that Redmond would rather not have to deal with. Click here to read the piece from Reuters.
Update: The EU has finally arrived at a number that amounts to what Gates might have in the couch cushions. Click here to read the details.
Posted by Lee Pender on 07/11/2006 at 1:19 PM0 comments
Europeans have taken to sticking the prefix "Euro" on all kinds of stuff, from the Eurostar train that connects Paris and London to the fantastically cheesy annual Eurovision Song Contest to the sports TV network Eurosport. So, with the European Union apparently preparing to do what the Department of Justice wouldn't in the US -- that is, really hit Microsoft hard with fines for anti-competitive practices ? it?s time to start thinking seriously about Redmond's Europroblems.
The scenario is pretty simple. Back in March 2004, the EU's regulatory hammer ordered Microsoft to turn over information about how Windows works to competitors so that those competitors could better develop for the operating system. The idea was to prevent Microsoft from doing what it has done for a long time: tying its own applications to Windows and freezing out those from competitors that don't have the advantage of native integration with the operating system. Hmmm...haven't we heard all this somewhere before?
Well, Microsoft says that it has complied with the March 2004 ruling. The EU isn't convinced, and there's talk now (from "people," apparently, in the comically non-specific headline in the story linked below) that the EU will fine Microsoft $2.5 million a day for every day that it has not complied with the ruling. That Eurothreat has been out there for a while, but it's now looking more serious than ever. And even for Microsoft, $2.5 million a day back-dated more than two years is a big chunk of change, especially with the stock price on the wane.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news? pid=10000085&sid=a786mbXJsFBw&refer=europeThis is just another headache that Redmond doesn't need. With investors grumbling about Microsoft's stock price, Bill Gates announcing his slow pullback from the company and the sudden departure of Windows Live marketing honcho Martin Taylor all making headlines in the last couple of months, Redmond could use a little stability more than anything else. This Euromess getting ever more serious won't help that cause, though.
Besides, our guess is that most of these EU regulators (sorry...Euroregulators) wouldn't know Windows documentation from a copy of the now-dead European Constitution. They also don't seem to realize that Microsoft got the pot of gold with Windows years ago, and the best way for competitors to deal with that is either for them to work with Redmond or develop applications that are markedly better than what Microsoft offers in the OS. The EU should leave well enough alone, but it's worth watching this situation. Eurofines are surely something Microsoft, the partners who profit from it and the industry that lives off of it should hope to avoid.
Should the EU leave Microsoft alone? Tell me at
[email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 06/26/2006 at 1:19 PM0 comments
Everybody needs to calm down.
Sure, Bill Gates' announcement last week that he'll be leaving his day-to-day responsibilities at Microsoft in 2008 is probably the biggest news to ever come out of Redmond. After all, Gates is the architect and talisman of the company, the public face not just of Microsoft but, for many, the technology industry as a whole. All of that is obvious.
http://rcpmag.com/news/article.aspx?editorialsid=7536And, there's an air of nervous anticipation among Microsoft watchers regarding the ascent of Ray Ozzie to head technical guru and the restructuring of the team that will take Microsoft forward on the technology front. We get that, too.
http://rcpmag.com/news/article.aspx?editorialsid=7537So, yeah, this is a big deal, no question. But check out some of the reactions to Gates' announcement. Nobody seems quite sure what to make of it. We've got those who have already started to talk about a "revolution":
http://weblog.infoworld.com/techwatch/archives/006812.html...and those who don't expect too much of a change in the status quo:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003070379_brier19.htmlThen we have those who just don't know what to think:
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3614206...and so their headlines end in question marks:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/corporatenews/ 2006-06-18-microsoft-future_x.htm?POE=TECISVAYou'll notice in all of these stories that the usual suspects -- analysts, pundits and commentators -- are all over the place on this one, too. Gates' decision, although not exactly a big surprise to many, has led to a general freak-out, a sort of near-panic about the state of the company that is so critical to the financial futures of so many players in the industry. But that panic is ridiculous and unnecessary on several levels.
First of all, Gates has said for years that he couldn't see himself running Microsoft at 50. Well, he's 50 now. Second, Gates has slowly been distancing himself from running Microsoft for years. He turned the CEO role over to Steve Ballmer six years ago, and it's obvious that he's been spending more and more time over the last few years working with his charitable foundation. Third, when Microsoft acquired Ozzie's Groove Networks last year, the buzz was that Ozzie would eventually become the new Gates -- or at least head of a team to replace Gates -- on the technical side. Fourth, Gates' departure from his day-to-day role is still two years away, which signals that Microsoft has learned something about leadership transitions after the somewhat uncomfortable Gates-Ballmer CEO handoff. Gates isn't walking out the door tomorrow.
What will Gates' departure and Ozzie's takeover mean for Microsoft from a technology perspective? What course will the company set for its future? Right now, despite all the speculation, nobody knows for sure. And that's OK because we don't have to know right now. You'll notice that Wall Street reacted coolly to Gates' announcement; Microsoft's stock price barely budged the next day. We should all take a cue from the button-down types. Partners, customers and observers have a couple of years to watch the Microsoft transition -- one that obviously has a plan behind it -- and to offer their input on it, which, we hope, Microsoft's new brain trust will receive with an open mind. So, there's no need to panic...for now.
What should be the first thing on Ray Ozzie's agenda as chief software architect at Microsoft? What do you think of Bill Gates' decision to step down? Tell me at
[email protected]
Posted by Lee Pender on 06/19/2006 at 1:19 PM0 comments