
Microsoft is Dead - kkim
http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
======
Benja
I guess I'm in the younger half, because on reflection, I realize that not
only do I agree, but that this _is_ old news to me. I'm not complaining,
though -- this article made me realize something I didn't know consciously.

A lot of commenters here seem to argue that Microsoft still has the vast
majority of desktop installations, and that this isn't likely to go away soon.
I agree (I don't like it, but I think it's true). But I also agree that
Microsoft isn't a _threat_ any more, like it used to be. And, on reflection, I
agree that it is web apps that are making the difference.

I don't think that Word or Photoshop moving online is what really makes the
difference, though. Every hoary Windows competitor has had a word processor
and an image editor. (Sure, they didn't match Word feature-for-feature; does
Writely?) But I believe a major reason that prevented people from switching
has been the long tail of applications: "It doesn't have any accounting
software for plumbers!"

The feeling that Microsoft had a secure monopoly came from the fact that these
long-tail programs were all written for Windows, because that was what was
economic for its developers. Word and Photoshop always had a Mac version.
Accounting for Plumbers never did.

Now, these applications live on the Web. And while the people using them still
might use Windows, _it doesn't matter_ ; it makes Microsoft money, but it
doesn't buy them any leverage.

~~~
hello_moto
I think this is a little bit ironic. One of Paul's YCombinator companies,
Loopt.com is using Microsoft/IIS 6.0 and Paul has been touting them to be one
of the best of his startup investments. I agree with you on this one Paul,
Loopt.com is the only one that is actually doing something real.

Another startup that just caught Techcrunch attention (and apparently got
financed because the company has a real business model) is Gigya
(<http://www.gigya.com/)> and they, too, are using Microsoft/IIS 6.0.

I'm not saying that there's a strong correlation between Microsoft and your
success rate, but I just find it ironic.

The rest startups seem to not to have their business models and hoping for a
buyout. Actually that includes Reddit as well. If you read Aaron's blog and
see how they're desperate to get a "deal" from PG.

Note: I assume Microsoft/IIS 6.0 = ASP.NET

~~~
Benja
I don't find it ironic. I find it unrelated. If you could find a successful
startup today that used a lot of IBM technology -- even if you could show that
a startup today succeeded only because they were using IBM technology -- that
wouldn't turn IBM back into the dangerous monopolist it once was (which was
what Paul's article was about).

------
BobG
Being nearly 50years old, what frightens me about MS is that they think they
can sell an OS which they can remotely turn off without out a court warrant
and then its up to you if your business hasn't gone bankrupt to sue them .
This just shows complete and utter contempt for their customers.Which will do
for them in the long run.My next box will be linux. Maybe the apple setup etc
looks attractive to the younger generation but its only superficial. They have
their own history of arrogant greed too. Bob G

~~~
erdos2
I recently acquired a Mac Book Pro. There was precisely one Windows program I
wanted to run on it (SuperMemo) under Parallels, which received good reviews.
Rather than wait to purchase a copy of Windows from the local CompUSA, I used
an OEM copy of Windows from a defenestrated a DELL box (I replaced Windows
with Debian). After installing XP as a guest OS under Parallels, I activated
XP online by purchasing a product key through the Genuine Advantage program.

But that wasn't good enough for Microsoft. Microsoft informed me in their
emailed order acknowledgment that I was some kind of felon: "To convert your
counterfeit Windows XP software to a genuine copy of Windows XP using the new
Product Key, you will need to download and run the Windows Product Key Update
Tool on the same computer you used to purchase the electronic license for
Windows XP."

The following week I received in the mail a Windows Genuine Advantage Kit for
Windows XP Professional; it contained a letter asserting that I had "submitted
a counterfeit report" with my order, and that this report would be "treated as
confidential." Moreover, "...Microsoft's anti-piracy team investigates each
and every lead we receive. Since investigations are ongoing and extremely
confidential, we are unable to provide you with the status of the particular
lead you have submitted. The length of time to bring about enforcements varies
depending on the nature of a particular investigation."

Hateful monsters! Frightful miscreants! I suppose I deserve this for having
anything to do with Windows.

~~~
grauenwolf
Technically it isn't a legit copy of Windows. OEM versions are usually tied to
the computer they are originally sold with.

Personally I don't think it is fair, but that's how licensing works under a
monopoly.

Jonathan Allen

~~~
BitGeek
Tied how? Certainly not legally. When you buy the computer you buy a
license... no court would uphold charging people for something and not letting
them have it.

The "shrinkwrapped" license agreements are not really enforcable... at least
not in a legitimate (eg: competant) court.

~~~
fishcar22
Actually yes legally. You never buy the software. You are always buying the
right to use the software under a set of circumstances. OEM Licenses are
licenses sold under the basis of being tied to a single physical piece of
hardware.

------
flarosa
Microsoft used to be my hero, ever since the day I turned on my first TRS-80
and saw the Microsoft Basic copyright notice.

For 20 years Microsoft was my whole world. MS-DOS, old Windows, new Windows.
DLLs, ODBC, IIS, and all the rest of it. Keeping up with Microsoft was a
chore. I'd learn to program DLLs, and by the time I was good at it, they were
pushing Active X. Or I'd learn to use named pipes, only to find that everyone
was using sockets. Everything was a confusing mismash of competing APIs, old
code, new code, multiple ways of doing the same thing with no good
explanation. Finding help in MSDN was a nightmare. Sometimes they'd just
repackage or rebrand the same technology for no other reason than to confuse
you. DNA? What the hell was that?

One day my boss asked me to do a project in Java. What an eye-opener.
Everything made sense. Everything I needed was there, but without tons of
redundant, obsolete material. Today I run Linux servers, program in Java,
deploy on JBoss with MySQL databases. I ditched Visual Studio in favor of
Eclipse. I love working with this stuff. I feel truly sorry for people who are
forced to limit themselves to Microsoft technology.

~~~
frobot
Java used to be my hero, ever since the day I learned it would manage memory
for me, while still scaling to the heights demanded by the enterprise.

For 10 years, Java was my whole world. Servlets, old EJB, new EJB, JSP, JDBC,
Spring, Hibernate, JSF, and all the rest of it. Keeping up with enterprise
Java was a chore. I'd learn to program EJB 1 and by the time I finally figured
it out, they were pushing EJB 2. Or I'd learn Entity Beans or Struts, only to
find nobody was using it anymore. Everything was a confusing mismash of
competing APIs, old code, new code, multiple, dogmatic ways of doing the same
thing with no good explanation. Finding help with this J2EE crap was a
nightmare. Somtimes they'd just repackage or rebrand the same technology for
no good reason. Hibernate? EJB3? J2EE? JEE 5? WTF?

One day, in spite of my boss's mandate that we were strictly a Java shop, I
started to rewrite a struggling project in Ruby on Rails. What an eye-opener.
What took months and 5 people now took days and 1 person. Everything I needed
was there, but without tons of redundant, repetitive lines of boilerplate code
and XML -- and without endless compile-deploy-restart cycles.

Today I run Linux servers, program in Ruby, have abandoned JBoss, and use
Apache and Mongrel with MySQL databases. I ditched Eclipse in favor of
TextMate. I love working with this stuff. I feel truly sorry for people wo are
forced to limit themselves to Java technology.

(Sorry for the too-obvious, too-easy parody. But I couldn't help myself -- it
was the natural response to someone praising the virtues of Java during a
discussion about a dying, irrelevant company.)

~~~
knewter
GUI text editors used to be my hero, ever since the first one I used that
supported regular expression find and replace (dreamweaver's crap crap crappy
editor, shudder).

For, heck I don't know, maybe two years, GUI text editors were my whole world.
UltraEdit (needed it for reading EBCDIC data), JEdit, Eclipse, Komodo, Kate,
GEdit, each with their uniquely useful featuresets.

One day I determined that I would run vim and vim only for all of my text-
editing needs. Since that day roughly a year and a half ago I've developed
some quadzillion immediate-throwaway macros via 'q1q@1', developed a .vimrc
that follows me from machine to machine that I couldn't survive without,
integrated into various little ruby scripts that I use.

I don't have the passion to do the parody right, but I figure while we're at
it I'll push vim where I can. And I've pair coded for around a year on a RoR
project where we've done all of the development in TextMate, so it's not like
I don't have any TM experience :) ++| ft(m)w

I love working with this thing. I feel truly sorry for people who are limiting
themselves to a single-mode text editor.

~~~
knewter
++| ft(m)w was supposed to read <ctrl+<shift+| ft(m)w

Not that that's any less dense

------
dhpeterson
Old news! I've been using Linux since 1993, been involved in startups since
1999, and about the last time that I paid _any_ attention to Microsoft was
when they launched .NET (around 2003). In fact, the .NET implementation (a
belated catch-up in many ways to Java) was about the only semi-innovative
development effort I have seen come out of MS in the last 10 years. Even so,
it was little more than a tarted-up virtual machine, a cleaned-up set of Java-
equivalent programming APIs, and a couple of cool features like crypto-signed
DLLs, a global assembly cache (hmm - where do _you_ put all _your_ JAR files,
then?!) and the ability to mix and match programming languages in a single
application (though only one target language per DLL, or more strictly, per
.NET "assembly").

Then, Miguel and the gang came along and wrote Mono, and pretty much re-
implemented everything of value from .NET, without the licencing overheads of
running in a windoze only environment. That basically took the wind out of the
sails for Microsoft, and they've been floating around, almost impassive,
pretty much just watching the emergence of ASP/SaaS computing, web 2.0, AJAX,
Ruby on Rails, blogging, wikipedia, bittorrent, skype, asterisk and everything
else from the sidelines ever since.

I think the real problem comes back to people. It's a bit like Paul's articles
on Great Hackers and what motivates them. I know plenty of great hackers (and
I would like think that a couple of startups later I am at least a good one! -
though I find myself more and more on the business side in recent times,
growing our company and developing our people - good young hackers
themselves). I even used to know a few guys at Microsoft (Australia and
Singapore). The last "good" person that I knew who went to Microsoft (from a
PhD programme at Melbourne Uni) joined in 2002. Since then, nobody I know even
went near the place. If you can't attract great people, then you won't build
great products, and everything else is a forgone conclusion. Microsoft has
built great cash-cow businesses, and great fortunes for its founders, but I
don't believe it will ever be a player again.

~~~
rbirkby
Sorry to be really anal and pedantic, but you can have more than 1 language in
a .Net DLL (assembly). You compile the code for each language to a .Net
module, then bind these together with a manifest into a .Net assembly. I told
you it was anal.

------
bfarmer
Great points. I think that part of what microsoft doesn't understand is that
it's no longer completely about the bottom line. Customer satisfaction is the
driving force of the web 2.0 movement, and while I think that microsoft is
hardly dead, it needs to evolve a great deal (basically reiterating what Paul
said). I disagree that the desktop is dead though, I think that many people
overestimate the capabilities of the of the web as it is today (give it a few
more years). This might just be me overreaching and being completely wrong,
but I believe that desktops will have a greater role in the far future because
people will be able to host and manage their own slices of the internet. In a
few years the desktop will be the equivalent of a glorified facebook profile
and weblog hosted by the individual, and the user experience will be something
of an integrated desktop/internet environment with web 2.0 companies reduced
to widgets downloaded onto the desktop. Maybe. Thanks for the good essay Paul.

------
tshelton
Speaking to a microsoftie this evening about all this and another lightbulb
went on -- one of the things hobbling Microsoft is its historical focus on the
partner as the channel for connecting with customers. Think about it -- how
often do you buy a Microsoft product directly from Microsoft? Never? You
always buy it through someone else, through the "channel" -- which might be a
reseller, a var, or an oem. This disconnection from the customer is killing
microsoft in the NEW world...

------
trek
Microsoft recently came to my graduate school to recruit for user experience
design and user experience research positions. 10 folks out of my program
(about 25% of us) scored and interview.

Every single one of us had no intention of working for Microsoft and joked
about it intensely. Microsoft had be relegated to the realm of other boring
places to do our type of work but that you interview at for practice (and, you
know, just in case that job at google doesn't pan out).

In my interview, the topic of digg.com came up and neither interviewer had
heard of them. I said they were like a type of slahsdot, or maybe magnolia.
Never heard of those either I quipped "oh, maybe you're not involve much in
the web / web development world".

"Actually, I'm one of the project managers for Internet Explorer."

The interview went downhill, from Microsoft, from that point forward. My heart
wasn't even in it "just in case" anymore.

------
jim-in-austin
I no longer consult but if I had a small business or non-profit as a client
today I would:

\- Hook everyone up to a high speed connection.

\- Not worry about OS or platform as long as they could run Firefox or IE

\- Sign them up with Google Apps ( <http://www.google.com/a/> )

\- Sign them up with a web-based accounting system such as ACCPAC Online,
ePeachtree, Oracle Small Business Suite, etc if they do in-house accounting

\- Spend 45 minutes showing them how to admin the system via the web

\- Present my bill

Of course Microsoft is dead.

~~~
fishcar22
Don't think that would work unless you intend to be out there on a weekly
basis. We as IT people can get around any system but throw an average user in
front of something they haven't seen before and they refuse to even try to
learn.

Also what I think most people are overlooking is that while you can run
INFRASTRUCTURE services on any OS, those are services that everyone has. Most
companies out there have some custom grown app that differentiates them. They
use this app internally to do their specialized work on. These apps run almost
exclusively on windows simply because it has not been worth it to develop them
for the other operating systems.

Everyone is trying to find a reason not to use Microsoft, but it is my opinion
that if you take an objective look at the operating systems out there (right
now) it is still the best OS. Do you think it is easier to find someone to
support windows or do you think it is easier to find someone to support OS X?
If you hire an employee, what are the odds that they will be familiar with
Windows vs Linux? Do you have an existing investment in Windows? If so how
long a ROI is there on scrapping your existing config for something new? What
are the odds that the software that someone suggests to you will run on
Windows vs running on Unix? Why would you want to limit your options to only
those programs that have web front ends when you can have a rich selection of
Desktop programs and web interface programs?

Maybe in 10 years we will be at a point where Microsoft isn't in control but
its also possible in 10 years that someone new will come on the scene and own
everyone. While different can be good, different for the sake of different is
not usually worth it.

Also as a side note: Google Apps may be a killer in about 5 years but right
now its pretty infantile. I've really tried to use it but honestly OpenOffice
or Microsoft Office as so much better its not even funny.

------
PeterdeLaat
It used to be the case, that if you created an application, you could be
crushed very easily by Microsoft if they copied your functionality, because
they owned the dominant platform.

I think Paul is right that Microsoft cannot do that anymore. The dominant
platform is the web now, and Microsoft is not a dominant player there, let
alone the owner. The web platform does not have an owner.

Currently Google is the most dangerous company for companies who bring a new
application, but even they are not as dangerous as Microsoft was. It is still
not perceived by its users as the company that brings the web platform.

For Google to crush MySpace or YouTube for instance, is not as easy at all as
it was for Microsoft to crush Netscape.

------
schoudha
Microsoft is still and will likely continue to be the world's most profitable
software company. OS X will not reach 20% global marketshare by the end of the
decade and Goldman Sachs IBankers will still be punching away on MS Excel for
the foreseeable future.

What does it mean to be dead then?

What I think Paul Graham is saying, and this is underscored by the notion of
"being dangerous," is that Microsoft is no longer the place where new ideas
and true innovation is going to come from. Startups are born from fresh ideas,
and the companies that are dangerous to them are places like Google which seem
to being designed to produce competitors to startups.

Microsoft will continue to sell $50 OEM copies of Windows to Dell and licenses
of Office but this is a business on the decline. Microsoft is Old-tech stuck
in the era of desktop applications, closed development strategies, and the
economics of software licensing.

The financial effects of MS being dead are already showing some effect, MSFT
has moved much since the dot-com boom, but it will take 5-10 years and
continued blunders from MS to see some real damage.

~~~
pg
Microsoft was never the place new ideas and true innovation came from. But
they did once have the power to shut down people who had them. They no longer
do; that's what's changed.

~~~
jellerbee
Can you explain the power Microsoft had to shut down people where "true
innovation" came from? and who or what stopped them from doing this?

What is the difference between "true innovation" and -- I don't even know how
to ask this exactly -- "untrue innovation"?

~~~
danielha
They had the ability to throw their weight around -- and they did. One popular
example: competing browsers such as Netscape or Opera hardly stood a chance
against an integrated IE in Windows. What changed this landscape? A few
things, one of which was US v Microsoft.

~~~
Goladus
Lotus 123 and WordPerfect were also crushed by Microsoft.

~~~
alive88
and Microsoft developed a superior office package. They were at one point
behind 123 and WP.

------
cs
From Eastern Europe ::: for us, the real life hackers with only 1% of your
GDP, it is obvious to _USE_ a software or any IP product, service rather than
paying for it. We have money only for cheap hardware (forget macbook),
broadband, and maybe some for hosting. These trends represent the future: 4/5
of world population the chinese, indian, arabs, or latinos won't have more
money to spend going online.

From this entire business scene only Google is able to get money from us. We
are willing to pay only for Google Ads because they are cheap, straight, and
delivers ROI next minute.

We go connected for nothing, we create for nothing and we get revenue by
partnering Google.

Any other company who does not follow this business model is, or will be dead.
Nobody ever will pay for any tools to create an online business but we will
share our revenue with who generates us profit.

------
jmpeters
I agree with the article in general, but you lost some credibility by equating
Snipshot to Photoshop. I realize that you have an investment to promote, but
please.

~~~
raganwald
If PG has something worthwhile to say, it is true whether he has a vested
interested in the truth or not. If it is false, it can be debunked without
questioning his motives.

Here is what I have observed about people. In general, people with vested
interests do not lie. What they do is pick and choose the truths they want to
share.

So someone with an investment in an online photo editor might say that "people
are now writing online photo editing applications," but is unlikely to say,
"that are faster and have more features than Photoshop."

Is that bad? Of course not. There are this other group of people with no
alleged interest in the subject. They are called journalists. And you know
what? My observation is that they are much less reliable than peopel with a
"vested interest."

------
khodabakchian
7 years ago, we started a company called Collaxa. At that time, all our
intranet servers and developer machines where dell/windows with a couple of
linux machines only (CVS, build). Most people where using Office.

This year, we are starting a new venture. This time, all the developers run on
Mac and all the servers are either hosted or running linux. All the
presentations are make using Keynote, the intranet is a wiki (no more word)
and some google spreadsheets. No one is using Office. The end result: we have
not payed a single dollar to Microsoft.

Although big corporations are locked in, the trend is clear. MSFT is going to
need a major turn around to get back on their feet.

------
jonhendry
Paul,

I think Apple's resurgence _required_ that Jobs be pushed out. I feel that his
time in the wilderness helped him grow in ways that would not have been
possible if he had stayed safely ensconced at Apple.

Instead of being at a hugely successful company like Apple, he spent 12 years
focused on the challenges at NeXT and Pixar. And the challenges at NeXT were
significant. Both companies brought him into contact with very different
customer bases. For example, NeXT had a number of major investment banks as
big clients. (Granted, Jobs would have had contact with them as CEO of Apple,
but as _their_ customer, which is rather different.)

~~~
vitaboy
jonhendry is right that Apple is only where it is today because of the wisdom
that Jobs gained after being pushed out of Apple.

From the commencement speech he gave to the Stanford graduating class of 2005:

<http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html>

"I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the
best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being
successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure
about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my
life.

During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company
named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife.
Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy
Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a
remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the
technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple's current
renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.

I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn't been fired from
Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it.
Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith. I'm
convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did.
You've got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is
for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the
only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And
the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it
yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know
when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and
better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle."

I think this pretty much disputes Paul's notion that Jobs' being fired from
Apple was somehow a bad thing. It was bad in the sense that the people who
took over nearly destroyed Apple, but it also set-up the conditions for a
reborn Jobs to return and make the company into what it is today.

------
apansari
Paul, excellent article. I have two additional reasons behind why Microsoft is
"dead."

Reason (5): Steve Ballmer took over from Bill Gates as CEO in Jan 2000. Chief
Sales Guy takes over from Chief Egghead and the company stops building
products for its real users.

Reason (6): Web 1.0 hiring. Microsoft hired a huge number of people in
1998-2001, people who were too stupid or incompetent to get a job pretty much
anywhere else. The good people all went to web startups then. This was the
first crack in Microsoft's "we have the world's best people" armor. B players
hire C players, and it goes downhill from there.

~~~
jjrs
It's true...what bright, iconoclastic young thinker applies for a job at
microsoft these days? It's a stuffy drone corporate gig, and those are the
people that'll gravitate to it.

~~~
Elfan
Maybe there arn't any wizardly hackers applying for a job at Microsoft , but
there are smart people interested in a steady pay check.

~~~
william42
...most of whom are looking at Google now.

------
mukund
Well what hurts me is the thing they have forced people like me to stick to
MSFT. Atleast in our univ, they have exclusive tie up with MSFT and they
install 99.99% windows only. Its rather 0.01% apple. But some who have admin
access put on linux. Most of standard mech engg softwares run on windows. MSFT
gives their products at dead cheap prices ... as low as $5 a CD. These dirty
tactics are seeing them ahead, but it may not continue as people start seeing
the reality. For MSFT to die, these loops must be plugged and nailed to
accelerate its death.

~~~
jellerbee
So let me get this straight: Microsoft offers your university worthless
software that provides no value to end users. The university knows its
worthless software, you know its worthless, but the university is forced to
buy it anyway because the dirty rotten scoundrels at Microsoft set the price
so low.

University S/W Buyer: "We have to buy some MS Software." University S/W Boss:
"Why?" University S/W Buyer: "Its $5.00 dollars per CD" University S/W Boss:
"Ok, then I guess we have no choice."

~~~
jjrs
kind of. look at it from the competitor's end. they can't afford to sell at
$5, they'd go under. It's like wal-mart putting mom and pop record stores out
of business by selling CDs at cost.

So MS keeps their software standard at colleges, which influences students'
buying habits (god forbid they grow accustomed to Mac or Linux and lose their
fear of them).

~~~
mukund
Well with the amount of fees i shelled out in here, buying a computer,
installing linux and learning it wasnt easy. So had to go for computers
provided by schools with no admin rights :(

------
jacksprat
It appears that the business life cycle has sped up in the last century. If it
took Standard Oil 50 years,IBM 30 years and MS 20 to enter the decline phase,
what should we expect GOOG's life cycle to be ?

Ironically, the business that views their 'competitors' as harmful and does
not embrace and view them in a positive way, will not benefit long term and
will create many enemies - besides losing public trust . If Google is true to
their 'do no evil' mantra, then they may possibly be the nemesis of big
business and enjoy a very long business life cycle.

------
grauenwolf
Have you taken a look at their developer toolkit?

ASP.NET is a really strong player in the web, and ATLAS has given them serious
AJAX support. It is still pretty buggy now, but has the promise of the same
easy drag and drop development that revolutionized Windows developement.

Or XNA? The next generation of game deveopers are already cutting their teeth
on C# and XBox.

Or Robotics Studio? They are positioning themselves to corner the OS market
for Robotics the same way they did for PCs back in the 80s.

As long as Microsoft has the hearts and minds of millions of developers, they
aren't dead.

------
djasek
Microsoft will still be THE MAN on the desktop and enterprise for a long time
(I just switched to Mac however. Parallels rocks). And .Net is what will keep
them ticking. (Office too, but that's a different post. Have you seen what
MindManager has done with Word?) If anyone wants to put the last nail in their
coffin, build a better .Net. And do it with Lisp.

.Net shows what we have needed for a long time. A consistent development
platform where it doesn't really matter what language you program in.
Everything gets compiled down the same way, everyone uses the same API and
libraries. But the syntax is locked away and guarded (big surprise coming from
a monopolist). You can't easily find it, and you sure as hell can't easily
change it. And even if you do, the byte-code doesn't offer any more power than
the over-language. All you can do is beg for a change, and maybe a year later
you will get a watered down version.

Free us from our syntax chains.

You've gone on at length about how cool Lisp is. How it can be morphed into
whatever language is needed at the time. So prove it. Fix .Net by describing
the language syntax in Lisp. Give the end programmer the ability to see and
adjust their chosen language to behave as needed on a project by project
basis. And do it in a way that will actually get used.

Instead of making a 100 year language, make a 100 year platform where the
language can shift as the problems and fads do. It won't be easy, but it might
just change the world.

~~~
Bogo
I'm not sure you realize the can of worms you would be opening up by feeing up
the syntax chain. I agree freeing up syntax is a very viable method for
imporving codeing, but it is also very easily leads twards confusion in the
minds of code maintainers. The idea is old and has been implemented a number
of times, but also it has never taken off because of the major problem with
what does "for (x) in Y {;;some more code here}" mean? FYI, I've implemented a
flexible programming language. They are a bear to implement. I'm positive you
don't want to go there. Think about this. The developer tweeks the syntax
translation for the code he is working on. What happes to all the other uses
of that syntax in the program?

~~~
djasek
The appropriate use of namespaces and developer discretion would be needed to
ensure you don't F up your other code. If you want a switch that checks if one
string is contained in another, you don't modify the switch syntax. You make a
switchContain.

And you know what "for (x) in Y {;;some more code here}" means the same way
you know what "x= someFunc(a,b,c)" means. You look it up. Of course it is best
if the developer uses good names and comments so you can make a good guess by
looking at it.

Yea it's hard, and yea it's dangerous. All powerful things are. I don't like
being told I can't have something because you think I am too stupid to use it
safely. Some people won't be able to use it, and everyone at one point will be
too inexperienced to use it correctly. But thats why you layer the more common
languages on top. And if you are running an enterprise shop where you can't
guarantee the quality of the maintenance developers, don't let your developers
use it. etc...

Because it's too powerful is not a very convincing argument for me.

------
BrandonM
I agree that Microsoft is on the decline, but I disagree that web applications
will totally replace the desktop. It's still way too convenient to have
hundreds of programs a mouse-click away, and to be able to fire up 50 of them
at once on new hardware without any lag. It is true, however, that that
desktop needn't be Windows anymore.

I agree that OS X has been partly responsible for converting people away from
Windows, but equally responsible is a growing Linux community. Since Linux
came out, it has been slowly gaining some of Microsoft's desktop market share,
especially since Gnome and KDE have gotten more polished and Ubuntu made its
number 1 bug Microsoft.

I was a bit disappointed to see no mention of open source software, because it
is not Google Docs that is replacing MS Office, but Open Office. GIMP has been
slowly replacing Photoshop since it came out, not Snipshot. Likewise with
Firefox overtaking Internet Explorer, Thunderbird being the first to stand in
for Outlook, and gcc has been the compiler of choice for years.

In summary, I agree that Microsoft is on the decline and that we are seeing
software shift to the Internet, but I never think the desktop will go away.
The number of desktops running Windows and other Microsoft software, however,
is going to continue to decline. It's one thing to offer free software on the
Internet alongside Google ads, it's another entirely to be able to install
entirely free, ad-free software with no strings attached, which is an
opportunity that the open source community has afforded us.

------
carstenklein
Nice essay, however, I do not actually think that M$ is dead. They are
actually recovering from a very chaotic phase of restructuring after the old
king was declared dead and with the new ones taking over lead of the company.

Not that I like that company very much, I'd rather go without them as they are
not only causing shadows to fall on an otherwise fertile ground, but they also
manage to dry out those fertile grounds by taking over and taking in.

And now that they have finally found that they could do patents by means of
bribing and replicating existing technology and forge that into something that
would even more so protect their grounds, i.e. the global IT market, it seems
to me as if we were in for something more, even more treacherous than what we
have seen so far.

Now, what is true is that M$ has long led the pack and they for sure have left
that pole position of being the scapegoat running, but they sure will manage
to take the lead back by simply replicating existing technology and research.
By that they have gone through a process of accepting other people's
technological advances and by incorporating them into their infrastructure and
overall corporate culture they will slowly try to regain their old status.

It would be a nice move, however, to give them the death blow by asking them,
in court, how many LOC of open source software they have included in their
past projects by simply rewriting the existing code?

------
tapp
With regard to the thesis Microsoft is Dead and it was Google that killed
them, some food for thought:

How Microsoft could crush Google in one easy step: <http://tinyurl.com/2y8dbh>

~~~
Goladus
Block all Google ads?

It might be a viable strategy, but hardly an easy step. If Microsoft simply
offered it as an option, it's unlikely that anyone would care.

"Hey users, download this and block Google ads!"

Users say, "What are google ads and why should I care about blocking them?"

Or, Microsoft sneaks a blocker in via internet explorer and enables it by
default. If they're lucky, it won't break anything else and Google won't be
able to hack around it, but either way Google would sue.

------
niklas72
My problem with this essay is that it could just as well have been written in
1985, 1990, 1995 or 2000. Microsoft has always been slow in responding to new
threats.

1985: Windows 1.0 was a totally insufficient response to the Macintosh. There
were plenty of other Window Managers too, all superior (oops, not Topview, now
that was an inferior product). Lotus and Borland is going to kill Microsoft
with superior applications. 1990: Microsoft put out Windows 3.0. Still DOS
inside. ACE consortium wants to kill Microsoft with Motif. 1995: Netscape is
the latest presumptive Microsoft killer, IE is an inferior product. Sun
unveils Java, purported Microsoft killer. Windows 95 looks nice, still very
much DOS at heart. Constant refrain during the latter 90's: Desktop Linux is
going to kill Microsoft... 2000- The Web/Sony is going to kill Microsoft.

And it's not like the cool kids ran Microsoft products in 1990 or 1995 either.
The tastes of an elite doesn't necessarily reflect the future of the broader
market.As long as Apple won't let you run OSX on non-Apple hardware it can't
be anything but a niche product.

Sure, Microsoft is vulnerable, but so is Google or Apple or any other company
in this business. I don't know why Microsoft are underestimated so often, it
might be that we root so much for the underdog that we fail to see what the
big meanies strengths are.

~~~
mrpostmaster
No, he is not saying microsoft is vulnerable, but that no one fears microsoft
any more. In the past, if you were trying to get VC money, one of the
questions they would ask you is - why should I fund you? Can't Microsoft do
this?

That question is not asked today, even as a few years back. I was trying to
get a patch management company going, and that 8 or so VCs I met didn't even
asked if this is something Microsoft would get into.

And from what I understand, today's questions are more along the lines of -
how can you beat google.

-Tai

------
rhue
Dear Paul,

While you lay out several interesting point and are right on the fact that
Microsoft is facing some serious challenges. It is not dead by any means and
still exists in the game.

You point out some reasons Microsoft why is "dead": "AJAX and Javascript is
the new programming model of choice" I am currently developing a web 2.0
venture namely UReporting. Our Project is based almost entirely on Microsoft
technologies. We had the option to use both LAMP based development or ASP.Net/
MS Sql. We chose Microsoft as it served all our needs and then some. Mapping,
mobile, streaming, AJAX, Scalability, Community building you name it we are
doing it. I have nothing against Javascript or AJAX but I can assure you
Microsoft technologies can do everything that AJAX or Javascripting can. Also
Ajax for ASP.NET is widely avaialable and used. This is a view not from
someone who funds ventures but an actual entreprenuer seeking to minimize
costs and develop a scalable and efficient platform.

"Buy all the good "Web 2.0" startups. They could get substantially all of them
for less than they'd have to pay for Facebook."

Interesting point especially coming from someone who funds such venture...

In conclusion, While microsoft is definately facing some challenges today
(normal for all major businesses), there is no indication they are even close
to where you claim them to be.

Have a Good Day

Danial Jameel www.UReporting.com

------
linuxiac
Deep thoughts. Thanks for them.

Exeeding my goal since 1997, converting one computer and/or person each week
to Open Source, usually GNU/Linux, but, have done some _BSD (yes, there are
some 25 of them!), I am fighting the lock-in monopolism of BOTH
Apple/Macintosh and the multiple convicted felon Microsoft.

Major reasons people switch, from my experience: 1\. Simplicity of use -
GNU/Linux and _BSD are immune to the "114,000 Microsoft Virus Definitions" and
provide thousands of included applications: games, suites, browsers.

2\. Users are tired of having to become a computer technician and spend 2
hours or more each week trying to clean or prevent Microsoft virus, trojan,
malware infestations.

3\. Disgruntled that Microsoft treats paying customers like criminals, but,
now aware that convicted felons act that way, thus, WGA, and in Vista,
corporate Microsoft spyware with a "shutdown feature"! Why would anyone accept
this?

4\. Realization that Microsoft and Mac will sell included free stuff, without
proper conscience, and worry about the 'details' such as royalties, customer
support, or customer satisfaction, "later"!

5\. Awareness that 15 day TRIAL WARE is NOT a selling point for new Dell, HP,
Compaq, Gateway computers... it is a dis-incentive, thus the great migration
to FOSS, where all the FREE software is self protecting, at no extra penalty
to the customer.

Yeah, <http://distrowatch.com> has it, and <http://livecdlist.com> has it
Live!

------
gcacic
MS dead - yes, just because it has no good moves for a long time now. In my
humble opinion last turn point were the times of the first browser's wars.
BitGeek wrote this - "That's a very sick and twisted view of the world-- and
it is from Karl Marx." - it is a bit out of context here, but stil.

Yes M$ dying has to do somethng with Karl Marx, too - let me put aside "sick
and twisted" for a moment. Not even prime flagships of economy, which of
BitGeek knows about, weren't able to undermine one simple sentence from Marx's
"Das Kapital" - Only (human) labour and labour only can produce new value. Not
money - labour. There is no need, I presume, to point out the quantity of
labour pumped into the "market" since early 1990's on radically different
principals then ones driving the dead.

Another view could also come from the economy principals. Shortly it is a
story of smart and dumb monopols. The smart ones optimize the production level
- the dumb ones optimize the profit. The dead rocketed profit (and extra-
profit) sky high.

Personally I do not thik that the future is in web-based IT. It simply is not
cost effective - why the hack should I have powerfull desktop just to run
application on the server. For me it server centric IT was already seen and
the come back is (could be) no more than a cycle in everladting evolution of
IT.

------
carboncat
I think you're thinking too much in sort of "playground politics" and not
about capitalist systems. It doesn't matter who is afraid of who, or who the
big mean kid is. Microsoft dominates the charts in the Amazon software
bestsellers: google doesn't have anything in that list. What does that tell
you? You're comparing apples and oranges. The "IT industry" is no longer a
single industry, so it's no longer about getting a bigger slice of a single
cake. When Microsoft does a major product launch that bombs (in the sense of
Battleship Earth), then I'll take this proposition seriously. While they have
chart topper after chart topper, there isn's a case. I can see that your
response to the "well they sell lots of software" argument is dismissive, but
the fact that they do says a lot. It speaks to: market dominance due to
historical monopoly; continued product development and support; and continued
acceptance of Microsoft products by the marketplace. This might sound
simplistic, but these are the hard, cold facts. It's fun to predict the demise
of a giant (and exciting and controversial). It's boring to predict that
they'll lumber on, giant-like, for years to come. That's not interesting or
newsworthy! But sometimes the boring predictions are the most likely ones to
occur.

------
aston
I disagree with the general sentiment of the article (mostly the hyperbole),
but one quote hit the nail on the head: "They're in a different world."

There's no question that Microsoft is still dominant in the areas they care
about, and because of that dominance they're likely to stay there. At this
point, I think people understand that dominance intuitively and so don't
really even _try_ to beat Microsoft, especially since the web-as-a-platform
thing is looking so exciting.

------
CerberuS
Well,

I have to be honest, I loved the article, it gave "kind of" the same
information but from a different view.

I agree to the most of what has been said, and I do NOT disagree with the
rest, but it seems to be little bit early to say so, and I am talking about
Web Applications, I teach computer technical certification curriculum (A+,
Network+ Server+, and yes some of MCSE's courses as well), when my students
(the young ones mostly) ask me what career path do you advice us to pursuit, I
say IMHO, MS is an old news, look how Google is changing the way we live, the
way we think, I would say, go for web development (AJAX), yes there would
still be need for C# and the rest of the other programming languages (at least
at the server side and the client OS), but the real volume would be at the
web.

The part on which I think it is too early to say so is : On other part of the
planet (and I am sure in some part of the US as well as I've read in some of
the comments below) the fast internet connection is not available (if any in
some parts of the world), I agree that one day sooner or later this is
inevitable, but it might not be as soon as (NOW).

Somewhere else we have discussed this issue few months ago, it can be found
here.

<http://www.syrian-it.net/forum/index.php?topic=25.0>

Regards

CerberuS

------
polibius
I agree with you: Microsoft is dead, long ago. However you fail to note that
another famous victim of Google, Javascript and broadband is Apple itself. In
fact desktop software in general is dead. Word processing, spreadsheets,
e-mail, image editing, project management and many other traditional desktop
killer-apps are now offered for free on the web. Let's face it: only
professional graphic designers and architects really need the power of Adobe
Creative Suite or Autodesk Autocad and, as a consequence, a Windows or Apple
machine.

How people are coping with this new reality? There are, in my view, two
different attitudes. People more sensitive to hype are buying expensive Apple
laptops even when they are simply overkill for their real needs. Programmers
buying Apple laptops just to run Textmate are similar to fashion victims
buying the latest Gucci handbag. Other people are more rational and choose
cheap but sound Linux boxes (especially the Ubuntu flavor).

I think 90% of computer users can live with Ubuntu without any problem. Of
course the desktop software libraries for Linux are very meagre compared to
Microsoft and Apple's universes but we've just stated that desktop software is
dead: web apps' user experience is the same on every platform. The operating
system really doesn't matter. Don't you have other needs to satisfie instead
of buying an expensive and useless Apple fashion laptop? Buy a cheap laptop,
install Linux and enjoy your life!

And what about the business side of the moon? What will happen when companies
will suddenly discover they don't longer need desktop software? Companies are
more cost-conscious and I assume they will migrate to Linux en masse.

------
moko
Please don't stoop to worshipping Google, the new world doesn't allow giants
in it anymore.

And Microsoft's main problem is, has always been, and is killing them now -
that their software is rubbish. The DOS TSR model they have pushed since the
80's could only go so far. UNIX models are now, we know with 20-20 hindsight,
the only viable long term OS model.

And what did M$ bring to the table, exactly? Everyone says "They made the
desktop a reality when Apple were charging too much!" - maybe so, but did you
NEED that desktop? No, really, seriously, did you need it?

 _PC's were incapable of running serious apps simultaneously until about the
time Linux's X started to really work._ Word 5 for DOS was probably the last
decent version of Word. _OS/2 was a near-perfect OS for small scale
applications_ There were others, nearly all forgotten.

So what was Windows? I'll tell you. A backplane that allowed Word and Excell
to be run at the same time.

I'll re-iterate that.

Windows was only ever: A backplane that allowed Word and Excell to be run at
the same time.

All the hard work is done by the application writers.

AND - before you squawk "Driver Database! Driver Database!" - that's the same
thing, the work was thrown onto the manufacturers whilst Microsoft just
provided a truly awful API for them to work with, then another, then
another....

Really.....Windows never brought much along at all. It is one of the most
amazing marketing parlour tricks ever pulled off, like Madonna, like WMD's in
Iraq - newsy and flashy and utterly empty. "Full of sound and fury, signifying
nothing..."

~~~
BostonGeorge
Since Windows is the only OS model that is measured in multiples of all the
other models, that is to say "Windows has 10 times the users of Unix, or
1,000x the user base of the Mac OS, I think you could say that Windows, is a
viable long term OS model. You think that we really didn't need a desktop? You
must be a communist. Oh and I'll agree with you on WMD's in Iraq, but please
don't bring Madonna into this.

------
gRm
Old news...

2005? Man you HAVE been under a rock haven't you? Hacker? Sigh...ok here's
some coaching for you the next time you want to front.

1\. - "Hackers" don't call themselves hackers, poseurs call themselves
hackers. (and anyone reading this saying "but I'M a hacker.." guess wha? YOU r
a poseur.)

2\. - Web 2.0 is just another BUZZWORD. Like AJAX, LAMP and (gasp) blog. Duh,
it's the web dummy, it's made of ALL KINDS OF TECHNOLOGIES.

3\. - PHOTOSHOP over the web? Not for a LONG time buddy, IF EVER. Oh wait,
lemme guess: "The network IS the computer" right? When will you hypemasters
get the drift that not EVERY app is right for a BROWSER? Let me put this nice
and easy for you, SOME APPS WILL GO TOTALLY WEB, MOST WON'T. You can't whittle
every peg to fit your web-hole...you webhole.

4\. - Google became BMOC BEFORE their IPO. If you were any good as a venture
capitalist you would have seen that.

5\. - SURPRISED to see lamers running windows? What, did you think they would
be running Linux (sorry, GNU)? Not everyone wants to spend the $$ for a Mac.
(Disclaimer: I do.)

C'mon man, smarten up. Oh, and yeah, IBM lost it's monopoly WAAAAY B4 2005. I
think it was called OS2...maybe they should have hired a rock band...anyone
have one of those Win95 discs with Weezer on it?

You were right about one thing. This is OLD NEWS. Dumbass.

------
IamDavo
Agree. I now laugh when I hear the Softies talk about how MS is competing with
Google. That game is over. Google does not need to compete with MS, but MS
must compete with Google. It is also sad to see their current ad campaign with
the dinosaurs...do they even see what they are doing? I went back to Mac 4
years ago and have never looked back. I am am one app away from being
completely Microsoft free!

If they did not have so much cash I would short the stock.

Davo

------
volida
I think Microsoft is playing it safe. And don't forget everyone, that MSN
Messenger is being used by as much x20 times the users of Facebook. Microsoft
did the smartest acquisition in 1997 when they bought Hotmail and caught the
train. What would it stop them from doing that again? I don't know. And what
if they took PG's advice and their new move was his suggestion to buy all new
startups?!

They introduced VS.Net and again they were able to provide services to the
enterprise. Then it killed the Sony Playstation.

And to everyone who missed the point, I think thats what PG means with dead.
They are not direct threat to someone starting-up --because their products are
on the market which is the platform for accessing web services (Windows and
IE), which web services is the new trend to bringing something of value to
users), as much as Google is (because web services is their essential market)
or another startup doing something similar.

I think MS will really worry when mobile devices become your desktop...But
they seem to be catching up there too... Maybe that explains acquiring Tellme
for 800 million few weeks ago...

But does anybody even remembers MS's attempt to make a video sharing site.
Whats was its name? I can't even remember...

~~~
theoutlander
Soapbox

------
weblivz
They're are easy target and i had this discussion over drinks with some friend
last night. I actually think their software in the last few years and what is
coming through is getting great respect from hackers.

Also, a few things to remember.

1\. Search in only 10% done.

2\. Pervasive devices are taking over as the key interface to systems.

3\. Collaboration is the big wave on the web.

4\. Privacy/Trust - things like google apps work for some data (and are a
great addition) but add in trust and privacy in business and they're screwed.
Open ID is thinking about identity, but there's a long way to go.

For these reasons there is a long way to go before anyone can be considered
alive or dead. I for one think Google will be overtaken by someone in the not
too distant future as well. It may be a resurgent Microsoft - remember
Netscape.

Oh, the have an ace in their cards. Ray Ozzie is Chief Software Architect (a
position Gates himself used to hold) and created probably the more powerful
collaboration software in its time at Groove. He's been very quiet recently
and his emergence may be their resurgence.

Not everyone is going to want to create 5 minute web 2.0 software to get
bought by Google - a big change will emerge as happened with Netscape and
AltaVista. Stay tuned.

------
jvdvyah
MS is dead that in that it doesn't need to be feared anymore, yes. Nowadays,
when MS peceives a startup to be a threat, they rather them acquire them than
out-compete them; it's cheaper.

Also, I can see Microsoft changing already. .Net Framework v3.0 is actually
impressive (which follows tradition: MS always needs three tries to deliver
something that is any good).

They're definitely catering to the web now with WPF+WPF/E+XML+Atlas+Expression
tools, etc.; these are acually great tools (even if rough around the edges)
and they can exist and be used alongside all the open source and standards
stuff (yes, WPF/E runs on say Firefox on Linux as well); there is no conflict
anymore.

So, take your average Windows developer/ISV: they know Windows stuff and now
they get a bunch of extra tools to help them develop for the web. Why on earth
would they switch to Linux or Apple development? By staying with Windows they
can slowly migrate their apps and their customers to the web without
disrupting anything.

And MS has both the resources and the patience to go the distance with this.

MS Dead? Nah, don't see it happening. MS no longer to be feared? Sure, but,
uh, in what way does that matter, except to incumbent startups?

~~~
RamonFHerrera
MS no longer to be feared? Sure, but, uh, in what way does that matter, except
to incumbent startups?

What kind of world do you live in, jvdvyah?

Suppose you spent considerable resources learning Java, and one morning M$
wakes up a says; "what company or technology should I kill today?" and they
decide to kill Java.

Suppose M$ bribes a public (or private) manager, or a State Senator (Marc
Pacheco from MA comes to mind) because they don't like ODF. If you were
betting on ODF you are suddenly collecting unemployment.

-RFH 

------
brad
This is a very thought provoking essay. Very forward thinking. I agree with
many of the things that you say, but the fact of the matter is that much of
the economy - domestic and global - runs in a Windows environment. Most
consumers still run Windows. Am I missing the point? Perhaps. I suppose it is
true that anybody who takes personal computing seriously is running Firefox
and Thunderbird and Google Desktop on Windows. In that sense, yeah Windows is
dead. Personally, I use Macs, so I am well insulated from Microsoft. However,
they are alive and well if only because of the Office suite. If I send a an
OpenDocument file to ten of my friends, they won't be able to open it. If I
send a Word file, everybody can open it. The point is, Microsoft is still
quite relevant today. Although, I can see your points and would fully agree
that free Linux could easily supplant Windows as a desktop environment (to run
your stated Web 2.0 apps) or Macs. I applaud your essay; you take some
interesting positions and provide some profound insight. Very interesting.
Brad Engelmann.

------
ipso
So you think that Microsoft is dead, because they have lost the leader role in
invention. It's true, they have no popular initiation. But Microsoft used to
steal the new technologies: they did it in Windows, in which they used the
user interface inveted by Apple. Microsoft is following the technical
engineering nowadays too, look at the view of XP and Vista. Microsoft
realised, that an OS must be not only useful, but beautiful, too, and they
followed this trend. And they have mixed it with the common Windows
experience, which means Windows will be a real alternative for years. Maybe
they don't have the leadership, but after some years Microsoft will plead the
traditions in the computer world. Don't forget that there are millions of
grandmas, and their claims are real claims from a new technology. Microsoft
seems dead from a technology-invertory view, but Microsoft's spirit is still
alive, and Microsoft has written informatical history. Even if they are dead,
even if they aren't the future, Microsoft's influence is not unimportant for
the future.

------
kim
my self My name is KANIKA . i am 10 years old . I am in class 5 . In ICSC
board in india . I like to give test on internet . my hobbeis are dancing
,cycling, watching t.v , helping mother , helpnig the family . my wish is to
work hard and be the great person but the great from father of india gandhi ji

------
danw
Microsoft is dead because we no longer use windows as a platform. We mostly
stay away from desktop applications and instead develop web apps. We build on
browsers now. They're easier to develop for, there's no need to install apps
and compatability is easier (compare porting an app between mac, linux and win
to firefox, IE, safari).

Now that getting apps to the users is easier I think people need to tackle the
next problem: Mobile. Currently developing apps for mobile is possibly harder
than for the desktop. The operators restrict you and the handsets are
fragmented and inconsistent. Even with the supposedly crossplatform java has
different api's on different handsets.

Perhaps the mobile problem could be solved in the same way as the desktop with
web apps. We would need reliable, fast wireless broadband coverage and good
mobile browsers that follow the same standards. I dont see this happening for
5 or so years.

Without allowing web apps to access phone api features I'm not sure if this is
the best solution. All I can see is that whoever solves the mobile problem has
a chance to be a new tech giant.

------
ar
Microsoft has just moved-on in scope. If you're running a $60B business and
you need to grow it to make shareholders happy, you look for the next $10B
business. A small project would be something that is a $1B business. It's an
amazing scale--growing your business by a billion dollars is less than 2%
growth and barely moves your stock price (you know, the CEO's goal).

In the space of YCombinator, start-ups are lucky to be targeting a tenth of
that small move. They're not dangerous to those players because they've simply
stepped beyond that level of playing the game. Sure, one of those start-ups
could emerge to be the next big idea, but Microsoft can afford to sit back and
acquire them or jump into the market when they see the opportuntity, after a
couple attempts at a profitable model have assumed some of the risk. They have
no need or incentive chase every little opportunity. Their not going to get it
right every time, they missed both online auctions (eBay) and walk-up ad
serving (Google), but missing these hardly renders the company dead or
irrelevant.

------
rsheridan6
I wouldn't count them out just yet. It's true that they can't kill a web 2.0
businesses like youtube the way they could kill desktop-based competitors in
the past, but don't forget that the browser itself is a desktop-based app.

If I controlled MS, I would try to develop a better platform for web apps than
Firefox (which is definitely possible). I'd use patent-encumbered APIs, which
I would share while trying to build market share, and then force my
competitors to stop using once they were entrenched. Maybe somebody smarter
than me could come up with a better idea, but the point is that it's probably
still possible for them to leverage their OS near-monopoly into a web near-
monopoly.

It would have been far easier for them if they had started earlier. Firefox
would have been easy to kill 3 or 4 years ago. But MSFT has so much money and
such a large installed base that they can get away with a lot of screw ups
before they really cease to be a threat.

I agree that, for the time being, entrepreneurs don't really have to worry
about MS. But they're not really dead. They're just comatose.

------
coalincash
As a heavy Google user I would have to strongly disagree with you. Why?
Microsoft might be trying to play catch-up with Google all the time, but there
are more important things than Google. Sure I use Google and Linux all the
time for all my docs, e-mail and just about all my work as well. Here's the
thing though, a PC is still cheaper than a Mac even with Vista. PC makers
won't want to switch to Linux either because of tech support. Microsoft still
has a very big share of the market and no one can deny it. Sure the iPod helps
Macs sell, but not enough for Microsoft to care. Here's the argument, everyone
needs an operating system and something that just works. Linux is still not
for the average human, and PC makers won't resell something from Apple. Right
now Microsoft wins, and probably will for the next five to ten years. Sure
there are Firefox, Google, Linux, but people just want something that works
and to be honest Microsoft offerings are good enough.

P.S. We need to remember that Microsoft has Xbox 360 and the Zune. All which
work with Windows.

------
bklooste
Im increasingly beginning to believe that Web 2.0 will die... Its an
abomination think what Web 2.0 applications are

Middle ware apps \- with java script clients , a language where few people
have the required skils \- A non deterministic rending system for the UI with
archaic postbacks \- A back end which is also badly dated \- an inefficient
protocol that sens 10-13 bytes of data for each byte if you need to send
binary data .. or you need to encode it. \- A slow and polluted UI . as
marketers push flash etc into pages as well as browser addins \- Security
issues due to the browser architecture itself.

For a limited number of companies who can afford to hand craft their
javascrips ( ie not ASP.NET / server components) and who need broad reach Web
2.0 is good , but for most enterprises its a poor solution. Delivering java
/.Net apps to your clients is far cheaper / more maintanable model with betetr
user experience.

I have had a look at Silverlight(WPF/E ) and it seems to have much better
rendering/performance and be more elegant but its from Microsoft.

Regards,

Ben

------
BitGeek
I realized Microsoft was dead in early January 2007 when it occured to me that
vista was about to come out and I didn't see anyone who really cared. Of
course now that Vista has failed to garner any real attention, this view is
confirmed.

Further, I think that even on the desktop things are going to change and fast.

I don't think people realize just how well Apple is doing.

Their Mac sales are up something like %50, but they havent' really experienced
network effects yet... as MS fails to come up with anything inspiring, PC
owners are going to try switching in larger and larger numbers.

We aren't yet seeing the watershet that this is yet-- but the Mac has moved
from the margins to a viable maisntream possibility.... and as PCs bought
between 2004-2006 come up for replacement, a huge number of those machines
will be replaced with Macs.

It was only in 2006 that people outside the software and web industry really
started to see the Mac as a viable alternative.

Personally, I am starting to feel a bit odd, since suddenly there are all
these new Mac users.

When the Mac becomes mainstream, I'll lose the comfortable non-conformity I've
enjoyed since 1988.

------
abhilashgp
I don't think its valid, saying, that all applications will be deployed off
the web; that would be very wrong. The fact that Google docs hasn't really
clicked just points to the fact that certain software makes sense to be
offline. One reason why; user sometimes wants to be very close to his data.

The key to the future i believe is the right mix of offline and online
capabilities in applications. Microsoft has been kind of late in putting
offline capabilities to many of its products. But that doesn't mean they are
dead; they have the resources and ability to create paradigm shifts in this
business. The fact that a person like Ray Ozzie (who is more or less
associated with network computing and collaboration) is now overlooking the
software giant's product teams also sends indications that Microsoft will
start looking into the online/offline match. Infact the concept of "internet
services disrupted", term coined by Ray Ozzie in a recent talk, precisely
shows the direction in which Microsoft is headed.

------
DanB
This is developing news, and there are a few interesting consequences:

1\. Microsoft's software is unmaintainable, without throwing titanic amounts
of money at it. This means that if Microsoft experiences declining sales on
its basic products (Windows, Office), the products themselves will disappear.
In a decade, Wine may be all that is left of Windows.

2\. The price of Windows is increasing, as the price of computers is
plummeting. A $2000 computer with a $100 operating system works. A $500
computer with a $200 operating system doesn't. Windows should cost no more
than $20 today. Microsoft's model is clearly unsustainable.

3\. The biggest benefit from Microsoft alternatives isn't replacing Windows,
the benefit is being able to do things that were never possible with Windows.
Linux bootable CD/flash is a wonderful approach for single-purpose devices,
which is what most of the world wants almost all computers to be.

I've been programming computers for 40 years now, and this is about the third
major transition I've been through. It is by far the most fun.

------
zeusx64
At the end of January 2007, I bought my first MAC. Yes I hold licenses for
Windows so I can play Unreal Tournament 2003 and other already purchased
software. No, I will not be purchasing Vista unless I run out of things to
throw on the fire. Everyone, Please buy a MAC. Help support the death of a
big, dumb, pathetic excuse for a real OS. Bill Gates, Please stick to games
and Office. You have my credit there but really, genuinely, there is no
advantage to having to reactivate because I changed my video card. The Genuine
advatage program is malware at it's best. As far as screwing the customer,
Microsoft is all about that. Especially with the 64 bit XP Pro and it's
wonderful lack of drivers and wireless support, which I found somewhere else
on the web, gave the tip to them and in turn, Microsoft thanked me for my
comments and blew me off. I just now installed over XP Pro on my main PC and
am compiling KDE on FreeBSD 6.2. You are very right sir, they are dead.

------
mmiller
Your thesis is based on the idea that Microsoft is dead because nobody fears
them anymore. I think this is the wrong way to look at it. Does fear =
relevance? It can, but how many people fear IBM? I doubt many. IBM is not
dead. It's come back from the ashes of the late 1980s. They used to be feared,
but I don't think that's the case anymore. Probably the only company that does
fear them is Sun.

I think one reason people are less afraid of Microsoft is they're doing things
that are less scary. I agree with one commenter that customers might fear them
more than entreprenuers do. They're gradually making their client technologies
more cross-platform, not Windows specific. Customer requests were probably a
big part of that, but it may reflect a change of consciousness on the part of
Microsoft's workforce, too.

I think Microsoft will remain relevant, just less scary.

I think Google's gotten a little scary with the deal they made to censor
search results in China. They found an exception to their "don't be evil"
motto.

------
dogbert
Old guy here (54). Great piece 100% on target. To quote one of my favorite
movies, "your saying its all swirling around the drain. Had to end sometime."
(Chhronicles of Riddick). Classic disruptive technology (web 2.0) transition,
but still about five to ten years away from completion. Remember, Microsoft,
like any adversary, has a vote.

A couple of things still slowing down the transition.

1.) Broadband is not yet universal. Rural areas don't have it always and it
they do, it is pricey to get. 2.) The installed base will use Win OS's for
quite a while still (i.e., Office, engineering apps, business apps), my bet is
on a ten year transition. 3.) There is still and will always be value in a
stand alone system with an operating system and a cpu onboard for the same
reason that the internet was invented. Millions of independently functional
and capable cpu's+OS is a million times more robust than central-source server
farms having it all. It will only take one war and one EMP burst to prove
that.

------
Rares
Hey Paul,

Just because Microsoft sucks right now in Internet stuff and is not that
flashy like the cute AJAX startups (who are dying like flies), doesn't means
too much, we need to see how the winds are blowing:

a. You can't build an Office with AJAX. AJAX is too hard to program, relative
to the functionality you get out of it. Heh, I am sure I will get a lot of
smiles for this. The keyword is "relative". Btw, I have been doing AJAX in
2001, and it sucked big time.

To build a WebOffice, you need something much more reliable, faster and
powerful than the shitty JavaScript. A development environment with static
compile time checking, better control of machine resources, faster. A FLASHy
virtual machine for example.

Google Apps (Sheets and Docs) are nothing more than toys, and they are locked
in pit. They cannot grow larger than they currently are in an incremental
manner.

It is a pity Google did not snatch Macromedia, for lack of vision. Now
Microsoft is building their own lightweight virtual machine, for exactly this
purpose: deliver large scale apps to the web.

b. .NET binding to the OS (the binding of Windows GUI to .NET 3.0). That's the
single most aggresive move I have ever seen from a company. It goes like this:
we are a monopolist of the OS market. Should you want to develop for our OS
(which you must), you MUST use our developments tools and proprietary
languages, which do not work on any other OSes. The monopoly is self-
reinforcing, with one more leg added. The plan of the MS new boss is far-
fetched (they mentioned 10 years), but it is sound.

The seeds are in place and the wind is blowing Microsoft's way, just give them
time to grow.

So, I will start to respect Google's strategy the moment they push for the
control of their underlying platform, making that little virtual machine.

Regards, Rares

------
oneildg
Microsoft is not dead. They are smart. Do not forget that they own significant
shares in Apple. It was Microsoft that helped Apple come back. If you take a
close look you may find that Apple is Microsofts support. Strange angle I
agree. With Apple being percieved as strong, Microsoft can not be suide as
easily for anything they do to control or manipulate the market. Deffinately
they are not publicly viewed as a Manopoly any more. Take a close look from
this direction and you may find another good article to write.

What has helped the market more than Apple or Linux is this: desktop
applications have standardized and the conversion tools make even programs
like excell (with macros and arrays) interchangable with other nock off
products. Thanks goes to the unknowns that supply open source that is
interchangeable with MS products. If this was not avaialble every business
would be locked into one desktop and that would likely still be MS Office.

------
nuke
IBM died in exactly the same way. They became a niche player in the market
they had a hand in creating... all the way down to the actual hardware
(desktop then laptop). They finally sold their interest in the personal
computer market that they said would go nowhere. Now, Microsoft, with the same
attitude towards open source and open standards is suffering the same climb
towards obscurity. Google embraced open standards (POP, SMTP, HTTP, AJAX,
Jabber, etc) and actually extended such to amazing utility (check out their
stock market tools) and somehow free... the concept that undoes Microsoft.
Microsoft crushed the browser market with "Free" IE and Google is crushing
Microsoft with free computing. Do you need MS Vista? Heck no, just XP with a
decent browser (Firefox) and most people are good to go. Microsoft creates the
new terminals of the millennia and Google is the new mainframe. The king is
dead, long live the king.

------
lak
I guess I must be old now, because I find it hard to believe that a company
that still has their software running on 95% of the world's computers is
"dead". I just don't get this argument.

I totally agree that there's this very small, very insular part of the world
that thinks it's dead, but that part of the world is apparently not working in
large companies, or trading files with professionals in any profession other
than design (e.g., try to find an Architect using Mac-based software -- they
can't, because they couldn't trade files with each other or clients).

I'll believe MS is dead when they have, say, less than 70% of the world's
computers running their operating system and when my corporate clients stop
asking for files in Word format. Until then, they're just a monopoly that has
massive amounts of power but that the cool kids aren't interested in.

It's like saying POTS telephones are dead -- they might not be interesting,
but that's a big difference from being dead.

~~~
gibsonf1
I think PG's point isn't that MS will vanish or is vanishing from the current
installed user base point of view (mainly their OS), but that they no longer
control the direction of software development. This is a major opening for us
Entrepreneurs that, as PG pointed out, has never happened before.

MS Office is clearly under serious attack now, and I'm sure the OS will follow
in a few years unless MS takes a major tack in their business, which seems
unlikely but is possible. If you are a top-notch programmer brimming with big
ideas, do you want to work for MS? Probably not, and I think that is the
biggest barrier they have to succeeding in the new web world. You can buy
programming mercenaries with enough cash, but the genius paradigm-shifters
will be hard to find over at MS.

~~~
hello_moto
May I know whom attacking MS Office?

Last time I checked, none of the online web two point ooh software can open
big documents. These web-apps only match probably 20% of MS Office features
and it's simply not enough these days when people are more tech-savvy than in
the past.

~~~
BrandonM
If you haven't heard about a free program that does everything that Microsoft
Office does and more, then you should really be looking at OpenOffice.

1\. It's free

2\. It can read all Microsoft and open formats

3\. It can export as PDF

4\. It runs on Windows, Mac, Linux, ... (written in Java I believe)

5\. It's open source

6\. Various other features have been added which MS now adds to MS Office in
order to catch up (like auto-completion).

~~~
microsoftx
It's buggy

~~~
BrandonM
...and Microsoft's software isn't?

------
stolennomen
FACT: All companies dies eventually one way or another.

FACT: Microsoft is in the company I would like to see die the most.

Overall I wouldnt say that the company is dead yet, but I agree that they are
dying. I do agree that the concepts on which they were built have died - this
is probably what the author of this article really means. The body is dead but
rigor mortis has not yet set in.

Im not sure I would agree with this Web 2.0 business. To me the web is a very
vacuous place - all sizzle and no steak. Its mainly a playground for the porn
industry and identity thieves, and Microsoft wannabees desperately trying to
convince people something great is about to happen there. So far nothing great
has.

In many ways the web is like present day hollywood with its boom-vrash flash-
bang movies. Full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing. All sight and
sound but no plot and nothing for the intellect.

The web is a wild west arizona desert - full of snake oil salesmen - its just
the bandwidth is higher.

~~~
skeeterbug
FACT: Your second fact is actually an opinion.

------
BostonGeorge
Yikes Paul. I think it's safe to say that you jumped the shark on this one. I
too have been in awe of your past essays and have learned from your wisdom. I
feel that this must have been a reactionary piece that you've written. Perhaps
Microsoft is competing with or hurting one of your Y-Comb startups or
something? It sounds like you're venting in frustration. The Mac IS "just
plain cool" but the fact is that Microsoft does treat their developers with
respect and loves them. They still know how to say "Thanks" and do it often.
For you to suggest that Google and company have crippled them shows your lack
of understanding of Microsoft's true power. It is not in the OS. It's in their
developer base that utilizes their development tools - still the largest of
it's kind on the planet. The day Microsoft starts taking these guys for
granted is the day they will die - not a day sooner.

------
dave59
I went to one of Microsoft's rollout conferences recently -- to get a free
copy of Office. The new Word really is better than the old Word, and--call me
grandma--I still like it--I'm used to it. I sat at a big table eating lunch
with my fellow small business types who came for the same thing, and listened
to the MS power users talk about looking around and seeing, and realizing how
old they, and the rest of the loyalists were. True. The loyal MS IT guys were
there in force, to applaud Bill warmly. But it wasn't a big under-thirty
audience. The presenters all talked about the many new enterprise features of
Vista and the servers, the tightest possible integration of everything a huge
organization needs to control every detail of work. And how much they hate
pocket flash drives -- those enemies of corporate security. And all of us
Office freeloaders smiled and nodded, and ate their sandwiches.

------
linuxiac
Surprisingly eye opening to me, who is still trying to educate WinIdiots and
WinMorons, by handing out free LiveCDs like <http://pclinuxos.com> in Costco,
and WalMart.

CompUSA and BestBuy seem to be dead, ala Microsoft. They have a few devoted
WinIdiots and WinMorons, but, most folks just shop on the Internet, now, for
high tech. goodies, running upto 50X faster in GNU/Linux, on an old PC, so it
all looks as great as Mac, at reduced investment, that recycles systems for
another 10 years!

Anybody who knows a school kid, or, a geek, has heard of Linux, and probably
even has at least one computer that runs it! Exception is School Boards in 10
remaining states who still support convicted felon Microsoft, desktop Windows,
and the "trusted partner" protection racket, while Linux is faster, safer,
runs on old equipment, and is FREE!

310 of the distros are at <http://livecdlist.com>

------
interneton9
Microsoft is not DEAD yet!!

This is the conclusion I come out with after I read the news about Microsoft
in action again. If you read the news on the recent All Things Digital you
will know what I mean.

I am not super fan of microsoft but I respect them as they are really working
on new product to benefits people like you and me.

They have came out from the stiff competition of internet & pc world and go
into new arena that again they become the leader now.

If you want to find out more about this, I have put up in my blog about the
recent introduced of Surface Computer:
<http://www.interneton9.com/2007/06/microsoft-surface-computer-appeared-in-d-
all-thing-digitals/>

There is no point to discuss who afraid who here now. We should go on to
discuss how this products can bring a lot ore convenience to us in our daily
life.

Steven Wong

------
interneton9
Microsoft is not DEAD yet!!

This is the conclusion I come out with after I read the news about Microsoft
in action again. If you read the news on the recent All Things Digital you
will know what I mean.

I am not super fan of microsoft but I respect them as they are really working
on new product to benefits people like you and me.

They have came out from the stiff competition of internet & pc world and go
into new arena that again they become the leader now.

If you want to find out more about this, I have put up in my blog about the
recent introduced of Surface Computer:
<http://www.interneton9.com/2007/06/microsoft-surface-computer-appeared-in-d-
all-thing-digitals/>

There is no point to discuss who afraid who here now. We should go on to
discuss how this products can bring a lot ore convenience to us in our daily
life.

Steven Wong

------
bobb
This is really silly stuff. Microsoft is successful because they deal with all
the messy stuff around a platform - 3rd party vendors, APIs, integration,
training, blah blah blah...Just take a look at Google's online software and
you will see that it sorely lacks competitive features. Meanwhile, back at the
ranch, Google says "I give up" when it comes to providing a platform for the
proliferation of devices that will not end soon. Add to it the scattershot
nature of their search engine (still based on text search, unable to find
stuff such as "middle aged female authors from the 13th century") and you see
Google for what it is - a company that has made a huge amount of money from
advertising - period. Do they have some cool technology - yes. So did Ashton
Tate - does anyone remember the company that was the worlds largest software
vendor in 1990? Not really...

------
mikev
You say: "Ironically, Microsoft unintentionally helped create Ajax. The x in
Ajax is from the XMLHttpRequest object, which lets the browser communicate
with the server in the background while displaying a page. (Originally the
only way to communicate with the server was to ask for a new page.)
XMLHttpRequest was created by Microsoft in the late 90s because they needed it
for Outlook. What they didn't realize was that it would be useful to a lot of
other people tooÂin fact, to anyone who wanted to make web apps work like
desktop ones."

I think that's slightly off -- I think the folks who designed XMLHttpRequest
fully understood its general utility. I think they're thrilled that lots of
really interesting apps are being built on top of it. I think the problem was
that the people writing apps at Microsoft didn't realize you could now use
this to write compelling web-based apps.

------
Zendor
What a small view of the world you have. So, since all you see are macs
therefore MS is dead. This also resembles the all I see is linux so MS is dead
to. LOL. It's 2007, Why is MS still in business then? MS keeps moving forward.
The battle ground is not the os anymore but what you will do with it. I do not
see Apple creating there version of .NET and getting the largest amount of
developers on board to work with it. Linux has a long way to go before Gradma
can use it daily, Many gradmas ARE using MS to blog, share pics and more
everyday. And once the other contenders get to that point, it will gradmas
PROGRAMMING for windows. So say what you like. You know deep down they can't
beat MS, MS will just adapt and create a more compelling reason for the
majority to work with them. There is room for everyone. Just a bigger room is
needed for Microsoft!

------
Zendor
What a small view of the world you have. So, since all you see are macs
therefore MS is dead. This also resembles the all I see is linux so MS is dead
to. LOL. It's 2007, Why is MS still in business then? MS keeps moving forward.
The battle ground is not the os anymore but what you will do with it. I do not
see Apple creating there version of .NET and getting the largest amount of
developers on board to work with it. Linux has a long way to go before Gradma
can use it daily, Many gradmas ARE using MS to blog, share pics and more
everyday. And once the other contenders get to that point, it will gradmas
PROGRAMMING for windows. So say what you like. You know deep down they can't
beat MS, MS will just adapt and create a more compelling reason for the
majority to work with them. There is room for everyone. Just a bigger room is
needed for Microsoft!

------
jcconnor
I recall Mr. Gates in the mid to late 90's talking about the impact the
Internet was going to have on their business model and their efforts to be at
the forefront of that. The problem was, and always has been, that they
couldn't and can't change their entrenched business model for a new one.
Typical to the Innovator's Dilemna, an entrenched organization cannot easily
remodel its' business practices to meet new challenges. IBM has, to some
extent, but the premier example is, obviously, Apple. In the cases of IBM and
Apple they had to undergo an almost complete demise of the company to fight
their way to a new approach. I'm willing to bet that a similar situation will
come about in the case of Microsoft. The only question is will they (like the
others I mentioned) be able to recover in time or will they be the Wang of
this century?

------
alive88
Why have you chosen Death as your metaphor?

We should pay some credence to what Microsoft has done to computing. I think
they have built industry leading applications and provided (in some cases)
some vision for development. Hands down they once owned computing.

Certainly the business model allowed them to become very rich and powerful.
Knowing what we know now - maybe we shouldn't have let it happen.

Does your article simply state, the industry has changed? Why is Google more
important now than Microsoft?

Collaborative documents and its respective monetization - who are the leaders?
Monetization and sustainability seem to me to be king.

What is important about your article? Doesn't Microsoft continue to be
profitable, sustainable, and offer value to its customers? Is there something
important about a loss of their lock (except the obvious)? Is there a social
statement there?

How does this translate to me as a user, a developer, a business person?

------
Switched
Couldn't agree more. This subject has in fact been in my mind since I switched
to using Mac OS X. One would only have to look at Windows Vista to realise
just how much MS has fallen behind. After years of development, hypes,
numerous delays and billions of dollars spent, all it could come up with is a
product that devoids of any innovation. What a disappointment. Curiously, MS
has further shot itself in the foot by releasing so many versions of the OS
and confused its loyal users in the process. A case in point, it has abandoned
"Pay For Sure" music copy protection, leaving its loyal partners and users in
the lurch. It goes to show just how deperate MS has been trying to catch up
(let alone compete) with its competitors. Would the company disappear tomorrow
? No, Is the company dying ? Yes. Is it the beginning of the end ? Yes.

------
Switched
Couldn't agree more. This subject has in fact been in my mind since I switched
to using Mac OS X. One would only have to look at Windows Vista to realise
just how much MS has fallen behind. After years of development, hypes,
numerous delays and billions of dollars spent, all it could come up with is a
product that devoids of any innovation. What a disappointment. Curiously, MS
has further shot itself in the foot by releasing so many versions of the OS
and confused its loyal users in the process. A case in point, it has abandoned
"Pay For Sure" music copy protection, leaving its loyal partners and users in
the lurch. It goes to show just how deperate MS has been trying to catch up
(let alone compete) with its competitors. Would the company disappear tomorrow
? No, Is the company dying ? Yes. Is it the beginning of the end ? Yes.

------
randallsquared
Microsoft is still an enormously profitable and powerful company in the real
world, and you should be more careful about drawing conclusions based on what
a few people think in your insular little "Web 2.0" bubble.

More seriously, I mostly do business right now with small businesses (2-8
people), and some stupidly high proportion of these businesses run totally on
Windows. When they go to buy the computer(s) they need, it never even occurs
to them that there is any choice about whether to buy Windows, because Windows
is just what programs run in. This kind of customer laughs ruefully along with
the Apple commercials they see on TV, but I don't think it ever crosses their
mind that they could actually buy a Mac for their business, much less a Linux
box.

Word, Excel, Internet Explorer, Outlook, and Exchange are the core software
apps of 90+% of small businesses.

~~~
jonhendry
"Word, Excel, Internet Explorer, Outlook, and Exchange are the core software
apps of 90+% of small businesses."

You forgot the CPU-sucking antivirus apps they need to run that still can't
guarantee that the business won't be brought to a standstill by a worm.

~~~
randallsquared
Well, there is that. I spend rather more time gloating about my Macs than I
should, I suppose, and much of the gloating is about antivirus suckage for the
Windows boxes. :)

------
iamwil
I'm a little bit surprised that pg posted this article at all. It's probably a
bad choice of words, as "dead" can mean lots of things other than what I think
pg means: it's not as intimidating to startups as it use to be. It will not be
the source of technical innovation that attracts the best minds in the world,
as it once was.

In any case, a couple days ago, I was on the john, reading Hackers and
Painters, and there's a chapter on "What you can't say" dealing with
controversial thoughts. Apparently, this is one of them. pg's advice in the
end of the article was not to say anything at all, so you don't have to deal
with bickering with others, and go about your merry way.

But then again, I don't see pg here in the trenches. In fact, most of us have
wasted our time (some more than others) posting 200+ posts here, instead of
working on our startups.

------
scd
Two comments:

1) I think you underestimate the importance of Firefox in Microsoft's decline
in importance. It is Firefox that makes sure that all those Web-based apps
aren't held hostage to Microsoft's implementation of web standards.

2) Whilst its all about the web it isn't all about the browser. Ajax-y web
apps show the potential for ignoring platform specific APIs (such as
Win32)--especially when you don't try to mimic platform specific behaviour
(the big problem with Swing-based apps: stop pretending to be a native desktop
app! Rejoice in being a x-platform web app!). But ajax inside Firefox/Safari
isn't going to be enough for me to abandon all of my 'rich' Mac OS X apps: if
you want me to put all of my brain in your web-based wiki or PIM, give the
same 'richness' and sophistication of design that I can get with VoodooPad,
DevonThink, and Curio.

------
jill_gates
Hmmm, no mention of the close scrape with the DoJ (but for a change of
government...).

And no mention of how the current EC drubbing has emboldened competitors to
take the first tentative steps back out into the sunshine in decades?

Apart from this strange omission, I agree with the sentiment of this essay.

I wish I had kept the transcript of the argument I had with a Microsoft
employee in one of their forums about 6 years ago.

At the end of it, he said something like, "well, good luck storming the
fortress. The walls are pretty high and our war chest is huge!".

To which I replied with something like, "I am sure that's just the sort of
thing the captain of the Titanic was thinking right up to the part where that
iceberg ripped his boat apart like a piece of wet tissue".

I then went on to mention that bigger companies had fallen than Microsoft
(can't recall the timing of Exxon, or whatever it was called).

------
chuck
Seems way to early to declare them dead. Have you never watched a basketball
game where momentum shifts and the dominant team is on the ropes, but it's
only halftime. There's plenty of time to come storming back. In other words,
the game isn't over. It's way too early to call them dead.

Based on your assumptions, if they are indeed dead or headed inexorably in
that direction, then why aren't we all using thin clients connected to
superfast pipes running ajaxified code? Perhaps, it doesn't always work that
well?

I guess all these web2.0 companies, y-combinator included, didn't use
powerpoint for their deck? Or the execs don't run windows mobile 5.0 on their
smartphone?

You make a lot of valid points but you omit a lot in the analysis and you get
kinda religous about it all.

When a team declares victory just by taking the lead... you know that team is
scared.

------
theManMyth
If this article was renamed, "Microsoft Potentially Faces New Challenges and
more Intense Competition in the Upcoming Future," then, sure. But "Microsoft
is Dead?" Give me a break. How can the most profitable and recognized software
company on the planet be "dead?"

Could it be stagnant? Yeah; I suppose. Maybe it is stagnant. Or maybe you're
just so caught up in your "hip" counter-culture $2,000 iMac lifestyle that you
are blinded to the plain facts. The facts, like, that 99% of businesses and
developers EXCLUSIVELY use Windows. And 99% of all homes. And 90% of all
students. I don't understand how any company with around 90% of the entire
marketshare could be considered dead.

You made some good points but ultimately this whole "essay," is just off-base
hogwash for Apple fanboys.

------
hyoussef
Paul realizes that he cannot win by predicting market dynamics. Instead, this
is his shot at shaping it.

~~~
stolennomen
Lets hope he succeeds.

------
maverick
This is a poor article from Paul. I don't know why does he engage in this sort
of stuff. Anyway Microsoft is maybe "off the spot" today in some popular
stuff, but being "off the spot" is hardly equal to being dead. Microsoft
acumulated so much value in their products/services today (built by them and
assisted by the whole industry) that it would be crazy to think they are dead.
And don't forget that lots of those smart emerging engineers from India,
Pakistan etc. end up at Microsoft, soon they will produce interesting results.
They have the desktop and without the desktop no browser can run, and they
have a large part of the server too and server is where things really matters
today, plus development tools & environments. Time will tell...

------
Nakarti
I don't think the desktop is dead, but I will agree that it's retired: It will
pick up new jobs(programs) just for something to do, but it will be part-
time(eg Openoffice) whereas the real effort will go to vacations(games) and
hobbies like collecting videos(YouTube) which won't even always need so much
effort. I'll stop because my thoughts aren't making sense anymore, but yes the
Desktop is retired, and the desktop companies are dead. You can tell some of
them(Adobe) know this because they're buying webtop application(Macromedia)
companies to stay alive.

I just wish Flash would work better on Linux instead of worse.

And if I ever buy another prebuilt computer, it probably will be a Mac, since
Linux doesn't get the same recognition or money for its similar market share.

------
nkais
I can't understand why MS is so hated vis-a-vis Apple. I've had a software
made for Win 3.1 run on Win-XP, but a device driver had to be updated so that
my wife's MAC-book could identify the printer. Why is there any reason to
think that a monopoly under Apple would be better than one under MS (in the
90s)?

The reason why Google rocks is that its not a monopoly. It makes chunkloads of
money and then some more. But it does not have a 96% market share of search or
maps or video or any other service. And its the same reason why Yahoo or
Amazon or Ebay rock. They are leaders and profitable and everything that
90s-MS was, but they aren't monopolies.

My comment is from the point of view of a consumer, not a competitor... so
this isn't really a reply to the original post.

------
xemacs5
Almost exactly ten years after John Walker (founder of Autodesk) wrote
"Microsoft at Apogee" - <http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/msapogee.html> . I
have to admit I was surprised that no-one mentioned this essay.

------
ynotds
25 years ago I grabbed a job writing for ComputerWorld Australia and quickly
settled on a methodology of getting two more names from anybody I spoke to.
Within months I had had contact with just about everybody in the local
computer industry with the exception of IBM. No leads led there, at least not
until much later when I heard from Boyd Munro who had been our IBM rep back
when I was learning to program (Assembler) and to analyse and design systems,
but even he did not provide much in the way of links back to IBM as he was
busy with his own software company by then.

A generation later "They're in a different world." clearly applies to M$ the
way it did to IBM in 1982, though IBM's shadow was still large enough to
inspire Apple's 1984 commercial.

------
gregshortdotcom
Your observation that Macs and Linux machines outnumber computers running
Windows is either humorously incorrect, or an outright lie. I work at a
newspaper and the only people using Macs are the graphic designers. The rest
of us, the vast majority of the company, use Windows.

You need look no further than any old web stats program to see who is online.
(A quick look in Omniture at the stats for our newspaper web site shows that
74.4% of the operating systems are running Windows XP. Only 5.2% are using
Macs. And just 3.9% are using other operating systems, i.e. Linux.) Or, for
the less tech savvy, check the software shelves and see just how many programs
support Macs.

It's really too bad. Your essay is otherwise very well written. It's just not
founded in fact.

~~~
busy_beaver
"I work at a newspaper"

Which is another dying industry, in case you hadn't noticed.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/business/media/26paper.html?ex=1176091200&en;=870eff3de332e892&ei;=5070](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/business/media/26paper.html?ex=1176091200&en=870eff3de332e892&ei=5070)

[http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8HFM6GOB&show;_article=1](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8HFM6GOB&show_article=1)

<http://www.journalism.org/node/797>

I work at an R1 research institution. When I attend talks in EE and CS (i.e.,
the ones attended by the guys doing research for tomorrow's technology), I see
essentially nothing but Linux and Mac notebooks. 3-4 years ago it was about
50-50 Linux and Windows, rarely a Mac.

I don't think Graham is disputing that there are a lot of Windows machines out
there (in fact, I seem to remember the article explicitly acknowledging this).
He's talking about tomorrow, not today.

I'll bet if someone had visited your newspaper 25 years ago they'd have seen
CP/M or Wang systems.

------
cleenwe
Now that the storm of comments died down a bit, I'd like to say that I agree
with you. I've been attending the yearly Fosdem in Brussels, Belgium (an open
source convention) for several years now, and this year a lot of the people
working on open source had Macs. As a matter of fact the Macs were everywhere.
Like you said, the geeks already switched to Mac. Many people have a PC,
because someone they know advised them to get one, and because they knew that
they could get help from the geek they knew if they got in trouble, but the
geeks switched to Mac now. Combine this with the fact that those same geeks
are telling people to stay away from Vista, and it doesn't look good for
Microsoft. Just my two cents from Belgium.

------
talkingtab
I agree with everything you said, but there is one crucial bit more. MS is
like the Soviet economic model competing against the "free trade" model. One
is adaptive and the other isn't. Here it is the collaborative, adaptive model
of software development (y-combinator like) versus the large monolithic MS
development culture. Which is why MS will just not come back ever. They may be
able to use Ajax, or other technologies, but they will never be able to change
their culture. Doing so would require them to repudiate Bill Gates , et al and
they are not going to do that.

We should thank them in a way, because rather than having to compete against a
mob of dinosaurs, MS has killed the others off for us - Novell for example.
Thanks Bill.

------
peter
I also hate microsoft. When I learned of the xbox elite I returned my xbox.
Now I don't have any microsoft products.

I disagree with the end of desktops however. I'd prefer to be a geek at home,
not show geekery everywhere I go. I don't like how much time people (including
myself) spend on computers and its sad that they bring their laptops with them
everywhere they go. A PDA makes more sense. I know two people in my class who
have laptops. Everytime I see them open the laptops the battery is dead and
they look for an outlet to plugin. They also use the laptops while in class
and distract people with windows startup music and MSN messenger beeps. This
is a recent addition to cell phones going off in class.

------
jmd
Obvious, but necessary. The most obvious of ideas are often the hardest to
articulate.

Google seems destined to become the world's most valuable corporation[1]. Who
wants to be Pepsi?

To compete with Google, copy Google's game plan. Focus on search. Evolve to
AI.[2] (An AI is something that can give me a useful answer to my question.)
Organize the world's information. Everything else Google does is cover
fire.[3]

What I'm really asking is, why can't I name a single pure play search company
other than Google?

[1] Besides oil.

[2] <http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dyson05/dyson05_index.html>

[3] <http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000339.html>

------
agkjgh4kjghkjh
As a developer of MS web solutions that people are happy with, and can be
developed quite quickly, many of these points fail to resonate with me. Users
pretty much don't care what the file extension of the page is serving up their
content, they just want it to work. I can develop develop rich UI pages with
the MS AJAX controls very easily and users are happy.

As a developer, working in the open source, 5 billion different products in
various stages of non-existant support and working in a single consistent
framework with fabulous support, it isn't a difficult decision which way to
go... Unless you are one of those "software tools should be free" kind of
people who doesn't mind not getting paid either.

------
jetforme
I think there's one more cause of death, tangentially related to "everyone can
see the desktop is over." It is the reason Microsoft did so well in the first
place: people will use seemingly arbitrarily bad software. Even with Ajax, the
best web applications still fall far short of the best desktop applications. I
guess even Microsoft underestimated users' ability (and willingness) to adapt
to constrained or poorly-designed software, and thus use (relatively great)
web software.

As a born-and-raised Mac user, I still think web apps suck, and for that
matter, most Mac apps suck. But the few gems out there are phenomenal (or at
least, approach the standard I hold). I wish more apps worked as well.

------
enemyofpaulg
You must have been in the passenger seat of that car they dug up from 1957.
There is no doubt Microsoft has helped progress the industry (albeit sometimes
monopolistically and heavy handedly - but hey they are trying to maximize ROI
for shareholders). Often they also wait for others to progress the industry
and come late to the game. Nonetheless, it is remarkable that a company of
that size and influence can adapt to such changes and drive further
improvements and direction. I don't see them becoming a non-factor. They are
far from dead. Time for you to get back into that car and get lowered back
into the old drive-in movie you must have been watching.

------
hhall
Microsoft feels secure because of its momentum. How many complacent companies
have lost their markets to more agile and inventive competitors?

Microsoft is not a technology inventor; it notices a growing market and comes
in late. This worked in the past because its operating system and office
systems lived on virtually every desk top and because it could undercut
competitor prices.

Now they are facing a competitor that is also on every desktop and offers its
products for free. Hard to undercut that. Even worse, this competitor is very
inventive and is a comparable size.

"Take away their oxygen" is the phrase Bill Gates once described as the way of
handling competitors. Whose oxygen is going to be taken away this time?

------
tijaska
Very insightful! Microsoft will become completely irrelevant once the
desktop/laptop becomes history, which may take another 5 years. Mobile phones
will have enough smarts to run the apps that most folks need, wherever they
need them, and will be able to deliver them to big screen docking stations via
Ajax web apps when we need to see the detail. Check my blog at
<http://trevors-trinkets.blogspot.com/2007/02/after-desktop-what.html> and
<http://trevors-trinkets.blogspot.com/2007/03/mobilizing-mobiles.html>

------
krazyal
In a very strong way I think you are away out to lunch. The only people afraid
of Microsoft is the Microsoft Haters out there who for some obscure reason,
can't think much about anything except bashing MSoft

If any of you knew anything about the software business, you would know that
almost all the drive for making your product a great product is so M$oft will
buy you out. Again for some silly reason a lot of the haters believe that all
companies other than M$Soft are fair, reasonable and above board and that sure
ain't true. Name me one company that M$oft took over than didn't make the
owner a millionaire.

Lets get real and realize that consumer's opinion is not worth zippo to all
these companies.

------
polterguy
It's quite funny you say this, because even their Ajax initiative deliberately
sucks! We're a competitor to ASP.NET Ajax and we're not even afraid of them!
Sure they've got like 10 000 more downloads per month than us, but their
product quality sucks to such an extent we think they've with purpose built it
bad just to make sure it's good enough for developers to embrace it but bad
enough it'll take ten years to build Office with it! Someone at MS once said;
"for someone to take the lead over MS today means MS must 'bend over' and let
themself become the IBM version 2.0", well that's just what they're doing in
these days! And we're here to "plug" them!! ;)

PS! ajaxwidgets.com

.t

------
joeschmoe
"Their victory is so complete that I'm now surprised when I come across a
computer running Windows. Nearly all the people we fund at Y Combinator use
Apple laptops."

I love "essays" where someone has experience from the last few years and says
stupid things like this. "I'm surprised" when I see people using laptops their
companies buy...and they run windows? That's just naive and foolish to say.
Yes, Apple is cool, but that's like me saying I'm surprised when I DON'T see a
laptop running Linux. Hey, I go to little conferences too, and everyone is
using a Linux laptop. See how dumb it sounds? Now think that Linux and Mac
have close to the same market share.

------
gibsonf1
I agree, the shadow is gone - but for how long?

As much as I am frustrated with having to use XP (My Autodesk BIM cad system
only runs on it), I wouldn't underestimate MS's ability to bounce back from
bad directions/decisions like they have in the past.

If Gates radically changes his vision and business model to the new web world
and gets Balmer to agree, they could dominate again. But can a company that
has written extensively buggy software in the least lean way transform at this
late date?

If it were anyone else other than Gates at the top of the company, I would say
no. But does Gates have the energy this late in his career to make such a
dramatic change in his business? Maybe not.

~~~
ph0rque
Speaking of CAD software, how long until we will have an online version? (I
would guess CAD software is on the same order of complexity as photoshop.) Are
any perspective YCers working on it?

~~~
gibsonf1
It's highly unlikely in the near term. The software my firm uses is Autodesk
Revit's "Building Information Modeling", a highly evolved "intelligent" 3d
modeling database system. The software uses every byte of ram, every hz of
cpu, every byte & hertz of video interface on a users system - it takes
serious horsepower to run a large model which is accessed over the network by
multiple users. (Refreshing the model remotely via vpn over dsl can take 15
minutes) I don't see AJAX coming close to handling this kind of load for a
long while. Also, the files can be huge, and in a web-hosted environment, the
file storage would have to be absolutely massive and absolutely fast.

An interesting note is that Autodesk started out with Autocad, which they
coded in lisp (eventually transformed into autolisp.) They took the MS model
to software development and proceeded to make bigger and more complex versions
with increasing quantities of bugs to the extent that multiple crashes per day
were the norm. But they owned 80% of the world cad market, they became the 2nd
largest software company in the world.

Revit was developed by a small company with an incredibly sound software
architecture with a database at the core(without the massive bandaids that had
piled up in Autocad and are still there today.) and developed a devoted cult
following. Autodesk fought back with "Architectural Desktop", which I bought
(before I knew about Revit). Their version: Cut a section through a building,
wait 30 minutes. Revit, Cut a section through a building - instantly. Autodesk
got very scared, then bought Revit. They saw the writing on the wall and
undersood that Revit would be completely replacing Autocad in the next few
years, which it is doing now.

So if MS can buy Google, they'll be all set :)

------
VinnyLingham
In a recent blog post, I explain why Web Applications are far superior to
Desktop Applications. Desktop apps are by and large OS dependent and the
economics of running a desktop business are not as good as a web app business.

My post here : <http://www.vinnylingham.com/2007/02/top-20-reasons-why-web-
apps-are-superior-to-desktop-apps.html>

I totally agree with Paul in almost everything, however I don't believe buying
up all the web 2.0 companies would work. Microsoft has to actually concede
that web apps are the future - they still don't believe that it is!

------
JohnF
I think one of the major contributors for the change of impressions of MSFT
between older techies and younger is Linux. For us older guys, MSFT ate
everyone alive during it's hayday - Borland, Novell, Quarterdeck, GEM, Amiga,
and so on. It seemed that no one - not even IBM - could compete with MSFT and
survive.

Linux thrives and it's the younger generation of techies that have carried on
this battle in an unstoppable fashion. Curiousity + frustration + dogged
determinism has led to a people powered movement that could not be crushed by
money, FUD or other corporate methods. Democracy and anarchism is the antidote
to corporatism and fascism.

------
spanky_monkey
The poverty of analysis and thought in this essay is best illustrated by the
sentence:

"There can only be one big man in town, and they're clearly it."

I love reading the "Microsoft is dead" stories - there has been about 1 a year
for the last 10 years or so.

I remember when Netscape was going to rule the world - or AOL.

I even recall that people seriously thought that a Palm Pilot would slay the
giant.

Oh how we laughed!

And just because your tiny geek-chic niche all uses Macs doesn't mean that
everyone does.

Nor does using a Mac make you A) cooler B) smarter C) more attractive to the
opposite sex D) more creative or E) qualified to make sweeping generalizations
about industries and business you apparently know little about.

Other than that, very interesting.

------
marksashton
It's intersting that you highlight GMAIL as the point where Google became
scary. If anthing, GMAIL is another example of how Google's efforts outside of
Search have largely failed...at least by the standard they set with Search. I
used tried to find the latest marketshare numbers using Google but could't
find anything current :) but as of the middle of last year they had about 2%
of the Web mail market. Hmmm... Huge success?

I think their only real succcess outside of Search is mapping but even there
they're trailing Microsoft (local.live.com) in innovation. Check out the 45
degree angle photos on local.live.com if you don't believe me.

~~~
dougo
2% is not bad for a product that's still "beta".

~~~
marksashton
LOL! Let's see...three years of beta... Talk about plausible deniability. Hey,
we can't vouch for the quality. It's only beta! :)

------
magitam
Hmm... interesting story... the question, in my mind, is when will the rest of
the world learn the good news?? Especially when travelling in places like
South America, everywhere you go, everyone runs windows computers... They're
just easier to handle, and manage, when the software comes pre-installed. That
people haven't yet had the opportunity to learn and use linux, or that there
isn't an open OSX for them to be able to use is a crying shame... And until
they have access to the software, they won't be able to enjoy these benefits,
that we know to be the case, of Microsofts legacy starting to be buried...

------
TrueOrient
To paraphrase how management guru Peter Drucker put it "Growth that increases
productivity is healthy, growth without an increase in productivity is fat,
and growth that decreases productivity is cancer...."

Lately, MS has been coming up with nothing but Bloatware. To be productive
these days, all I need is a Live CD of Linux Puppy and connect to the net to
access all the online applications I need for work.... I store all my files
online and access them from anywhere in the world....

Once I am on the net, it matters little if I use OSX, Windows or Linux. It is
only a matter of time before Web based applications will be as good as desktop
applications....

------
cmcfrank
I personally have had enough of Microsoft's business practices, DRM, security,
constant updates and hype, and have been reviewing alternative operating
systems. I have settled (with full knowledge of the Novell Microsoft
"agreement") on openSUSE 10.2 for the time being and so far have been very
satisifed with the results. The Vista driven "leave all your obsolete hardware
at the end of the driveway for garbage pickup" mentality doesn't wash. SUSE is
running just fine on an old 1Ghz Athlon. I urge others to try some sort of
current Linux distro (try more than one) and experience it firsthand.

------
MikeLevin
Yeah, the reason this is going to take so long to shake out is that there can
be only one dominant platform. And Microsoft is it. The Web interface even
with Ajax is still kludgey in comparison. And things like Apollo from Adobe
will take a long time to reach critical mass. The only thing I see chaniging
the platform are endeavors like Nick Negroponte's one laptop per child (OLPC),
which will force down hardware costs until it's eventually completely off-set
by advertising. When PCs are free, a major platform shift can occur. Steve
tried to get OSX on OLPC and was rebuffed by Nick, from what I hear.

------
shiv
There have been multiple instances when the same grand declarations have been
made and Microsoft has only survived and remain dominant.This is just the next
cycle of competition. Microsoft is paranoid enough and this article makes the
assumption that they have blinders on and while the move to web etc is
happening people at Microsoft are twiddling their thumbs and will say please
come and take our business away. Maybe they are in a good position to take
advantage of these new paradigms. Of course there is a fight out there but
declaring death is premature, significantly challenged, yes.

------
test
As a younger (20's) half reader who also happens to be a pro photographer, I
think the hyperbole of "all apps on the web!" is silly. Tell me, when will my
upload speed equal the speed of my 10,000 RPM Raptor HD's? My Core 2 Duo? Man,
I can't sit around and wait while 75MB RAW files are uploaded to someone
else's computer (that's all a server is, after all). This is the day and age
of the personal super computer. Outsourcing apps to the web and cheering their
stripped down interfaces isn't progress to me. It's like watching your
neighbor's HD TV through the window with binoculars.

~~~
raiken
Yes I agree with you on that. Only I am 18 and I am a game developer/photoshop
artist. Also I have tried alot of these online sites that have programs like
phtoshop or office. They are not anywhere near as good as the ones you install
on your pc or mac or whatever you use.

Also I have tried out a mac and I didn't like it as much as I like my windows
pc. Manily for the price and the fact that you can't upgrade it yourself.

------
vcz
PG: I already know what the reaction to this essay will be. Half the readers
will say that Microsoft is still an enormously profitable company, and that I
should be more careful about drawing conclusions based on what a few people
think in our insular little "Web 2.0" bubble. The other half, the younger
half, will complain that this is old news.

 __ ______You may know a lot about computers, but your math sucks. Try
factoring in the third half of your readers [those of us who read your words
and think, "forget the Lone Ranger. When I grow up I'm marrying THIS guy"]!

------
avironim
Paul - predictions like yours appear regularly - each time it is something
else that would Âkill MicrosoftÂ: pen-computing and OS/2 Warp in the early
90s, Netscape in the mid-90s, Client-Server and the network computer from Sun
and Oracle in the late 90s, Linux and open-source in the early 2000s, and now
Google and Apple. Clearly Microsoft has lots of challenges ahead but I suspect
they have many smart people working to tackle them. ItÂs far from Âgame-
overÂ, just like it was 17 years ago when there were far fewer Microsoft
users on this planet..

------
KitDoc
The only thing that I would add here, is that Microsoft still has a few cards
up its sleeve. Aside from the cash reserves, they hired one important man, Ray
Ozzie, to take over Gate's role and departure. Ozzie's knowledge, experience
and visionary ability, especially in networking/Internet, means that they are
not completely sunk. "If" the Microsoft board gives him the time, money and
latitude, to express his creative genius. They have the ability to make a
comeback. It's time for a shakeup at Microsoft. It should probably start with
Ballmer's departure as well.

------
wanderson
Your story maybe true, but probably unacceptable by most all the Microsoft
supporters, shills and apologists, who content quite proudly that because
Microsoft products, primarily Windows and Office have the "largest market
share by far", the company is therefore the best, with the greatest products.
Quite sick thinking really, but pervasive and illogical. I wonder if these
same group think GM is the greatest car company compared to Honda, simply
because of the disparate market share. Never mind the issues of quality,
reliability, creativity or other important criteria.

------
zackola
Old news! Death to Microsoft! The more interesting question is do they really
not realize they suck? When you have Google as the #1 search engine being used
within Microsoft and iPods as the #1 music players being used by Microsoft
employees, I find it very hard to believe they don't know they suck.

[http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=189500876&cid;=RSSfeed_TechWeb](http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=189500876&cid=RSSfeed_TechWeb)

<http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2005/02/66460>

~~~
alive88
In your two examples MS acknowledges the comparison (1) they entered search
late, with the wrong strategy. they admit it. (2) Zune also entered late. but
was an effort to get established in those markets.

Both examples do not comprehensively define MS, or future of core MS
strategies, or of the future of MS including search and player strategies

~~~
zackola
Out of morbid curiosity, what would you say comprehensively defines MS, or
future MS strategies? They seem to constantly try to branch out into
established markets by throwing tons of money at every area they can think of
without actually doing innovative work in any area. It seems they are
generally left in the dust trying to catch up to established markets because
they lack the innovation to develop and market anything new and interesting on
their own.

------
froggyking
Firefox is also definitely a HUGE contributer to the downfall of Microsoft in
its web-based assets. Had Internet Explorer updated more frequently, kept up
with RSS (something just recently introduced), and integrated it more into the
OS, perhaps it would still be gasping for air. Also, it should have continued
the fight in Apple's OS X territory for Internet Explorer. Safari was a baby
at the time. Microsoft whimped out for no reason. It's funny that Microsoft
funded Apple in the 90s when hope seemed frail. (Not the Microsoft is going
anywhere anytime soon.)

------
danielha
They are so enormous that they stifle themselves. Sometimes Microsoft seems to
put out something, from _some division_ , that makes one think: "Hey, this is
a good move -- maybe they're starting to get it." But before one can utter
those words, another of Microsoft's many appendages does something to
completely nullify those sentiments.

That "appendage" is usually the head itself. Microsoft often acquires a good
thing (many times a catchup move) but this thing only stays good for a short
time. When integration is complete, it's a single bumbling Microsoft entity
once again.

~~~
jjrs
what are some examples of that?

~~~
mrpostmaster
Anything that Microsoft perceives itself to be bad at, and wants to be better
at.

1) xbox (though, at this point it has not really been adsorbed back in yet) 2)
IE 3) MS Office 4) MS Windows 5) MS-DOS 6) Hotmail

------
fuzzyman
As an open-source developer (with Python) who uses Windows, Microsoft and
their actions hardly ever seemed to feature in the things I was interested in
or that were important to me.

That actually changed when I got a job developing an application with
IronPython (an open-source implementation of Python for .NET - funded by
Microsoft).

Now I actually use .NET, and I have to admit that it isn't bad. Generally a
sane API, and C# is nicer than Java.

Still, when I develop my own projects I use cPython, and Microsoft is now
'slightly; relevant whereas for the last few years they have seemed completely
irrelevant.

------
prwiding
I believe that paulgraham meant that Microsoft is a DEAD-END. My opinion as to
what killed them: suicide by REGISTRY. While any operating system needs a file
system, the usual critical lack is a DATABASE system. But instead of a
(relatively) simple, open relational database, MS chose some key of
hierarchical network database they called the Registry. This made Windows
suitably arcane, but rediculously hard to manage and maintain. Coupled with
the security holes, and the advent of a capable unix-like OS, makes Windows
obsolete, if still operable.

------
terrycojones
Another telling sign: in the late 90s when trying to raise money for a startup
you had to have an answer to the M question. These days you need an answer to
the G question. No-one asks the M any more, it's just not relevant.

------
dougmartin
Short sighted. Although Linux is making significant rounds for servers in the
corporate world Microsoft is still the office PC leader. web 2.0 will never
break into this coporate niche just due to the flow of information out of the
secure office. However this is not to say the application can not come IN
house. This is how they must be sold to corporations. That and the price of
training new hires on the linux based platform with web apps.

If enough companies train enough people then the "we use microsoft because
everyone knows it" excuse will be out the window.

------
chai
"As Google becomes more and more application-oriented, it will look more like
MS. While MS is pushing itself to be more web-based, it is snapping up
Google's market share as well and therefore more Google-ish. The clash of
titans will definitely be interesting. The winner will rewrite the rule of
future computing platforms, while the loser will be left in oblivion and soon
forgotten."

Full text here:

<http://not-your-cup-of-chai.blogspot.com/2007/03/distributed-vs-centralized-
entities.html>

------
krischan68
I didn't read all 411 comments, but I think saying that the desktop was dead
in a general sense (due to AJAX) and cite Apple with OS X (core asset besides
the iPod is OS X as desktop!) as a nail in Microsoft's coffin seems somewhat
contradictory to me.

Btw.: I don't think that desktop apps are really dead. System file
assets/album/playlist integration (iLife suite) or the comfort of a desktop UI
(e.g. better shortcut integration - which pro doesn't work with time-saving
Photoshop shortcuts) will be hard to mimick in an AJAX, browser-based setting.

------
juancarlos
I disagree to some extend. I rather see it as things don't disappear; they
transformed.

Microsoft realized it would die if they didn't react with their environment.
They know they where gonna get hit in their software department, so... While
people were concerned with Microsoft and its monopoly in the OS market, they
realized they needed to expand and eventually transform.

People, may I say they own the gaming industry, and Nintendo. But according to
reg stats whichever gaming system comes out firsts wins the market. Hello
Xbox360 ~ Microsoft's new empire.

Windows is dead. That is true.

------
stephenrwalli
Well said. I have a couple of blog wrinkles on your view from a year ago:

<http://stephesblog.blogs.com/my_weblog/2005/11/msft_will_not_b.html>
OpenOffice on /Windows/ actually has the ability to perturb the revenue stream
in interesting ways.

<http://stephesblog.blogs.com/my_weblog/2005/11/i_started_the_w.html> Why they
can't just spend their way out of the hole, and why they can't actually
motivate the troops under Ozzie.

------
AndyDavies
MS may be past their peak but they're certainly not dead and won't be while
they've still got large corporations willing to buy their software.

Some of your arguments just don't hold water, at one point you're arguing the
desktop is dead but then oh one of the reasons MS is in trouble is Apple's
desktop?

Web based applications may be on the rise but there are plenty of problems
with them too, disconnected operation, lack of backups etc. being some of
them.

The platform of the future is the phone - you've only got to look at how it's
used to fuel innovation in some of the third world countries.

------
sriganesh
Can't agree more! One of their partners in creating that world of monopoly was
Intel. Remember the Wintel combo. For one, there are other chip companies (AMD
esp) which has not allowed a monopoly situation. Intel itself is now available
on Apple.

Now, MS might be loosing because slowly the rules of the game are changing.
IBM - Mainframe, MS - Desktop. Get it. Cellphone/mobile - ???

Maybe it's still early but we may have to watch out who will be the dangerous
player on mobile. That is if it becomes the device for - computing,
entertainment, and communication.

------
prometheas
I feel like Steve had to get ousted and come back for the dramatic resurgence
Apple has seen. It seems to me that both Apple and Steve needed to walk down
their roads, and work things out for themselves, before they could both be
ready to make the accomplishments they've made since 2000.

I don't think Apple would have allowed Steve such free reign as they did after
his return, had he never left. Conversely, I don't think Steve had the
contacts to do what was done with OS X, had he never met Avie and created
NeXT.

That's just my $0.02, though. :-)

------
rrameshp
When articles like this stop appearing on the web only then can one assume
that Microsoft is dead. The barometer of a Organizations success can be gauged
by the number of enemies they have.

------
alphanum
What a bunch of morons and whiners! Microsoft was and is a great company that
change the way everybody work with computers. All Google have created is web
advertisement tax. It provides nothing you did not had before, but you still
crawl to their web site to find the page you were watching yesterday, because
you was too lazy to bookmark it. Google already is reading your searches, your
emails, and your files. One day they will own you and they will tax you all
like they are taxing businesses.

------
wykthorr
Now that I read this I realize that I haven't been paying any attention to
Microsoft lately and that is because they don't matter anymore.

The clearest proof of their death is their failure to launch an improved
operating system. Vista was a big failure and I think they are starting to
realize it. I think this particular piece of software is going to kill them
for good. (that being 6ft under) Though this process could take some time it
has started and it's not going to stop.

Bye Bye Microsoft. Hope not to see any lookalikes any time soon.

Victor

------
snick
I've never understood the fear and loathing of Microsoft, now or in the past.
Microsoft isn't perfect but they've done more than any other company
(including Apple) to raise the level of software. They've been the benchmark
to which all other software companies compare themselves. Microsoft may not
have startup cachet or support of the "fanboys" (of Mac, linux, google, or
whatever the latest anti-Microsoft parade is rallying around) but let's hope
it sticks around for a long time to come.

------
wanderson
Your story maybe correct, but I would not bet on majority of Americans
supporting the theory, simply because Microsoft "remains" the largest,
independent software company. I will laugh beforehand at all the comments from
Microsoft supporters, shills and apologists. They will inevitably content that
because Microsoft products - Windows and Office have the "most market share"
by far, they (automatically) are the best and bravest. Pretty sic thinking,
but that which proliferates.

------
dawie
I agree Paul, but Microsoft is still running that boring Enterprise Software
that you always talk about. Also Microsoft's shitty software pays for my
lunch,dinner, beer and women.

~~~
Goladus
Microsoft has the corporate desktop, but it's ripe for the taking. Google and
various startups are trying to get their foot in the door. Big corporations
don't do anything fast and no one expects windows to be wiped out. There are
still mainframes out there running ancient software. In some cases simple
terminal emulator front ends still outperform newer, browser-based
alternatives.

And microsoft will still probably come out with new useful and popular
products, but they won't be the sort that cause shockwaves throughout the
whole industry (well maybe the Game Industry but that wasn't the point).

------
teddlesruss
dunno which place you pulled the Mac/Linux observation from but I can assure
you that finally Microshaft are actually getting it right, and company IT
departments are finally realising that TCO and facilities is tipped in MS's
favour. I would thus say that your observation comes from clique formation,
and perhaps doesn't reflect the overall industry. I freelance IT for
organisations which go all the way from accountancy firms, to car sales
chains, market chains, Art and Commercial offices, and realtime
tracking/monitoring of heavy equipment. Out of all those (and there are often
several under each heading,)I visit one Citrix office but they are going to
Terminal Server ASAP. One company is busily switching from OSS server
structures to Windows 2003 Servers. Cannot argue with it - MS often comes out
cheaper, there is definitely more skill in the arena than there is skill in
the Linux / OSX area, and tens of thousands of users still want a cute Window
Start button. Out of some 20 businesses I do on demand IT for, one - only one
- is a Mac shop, and a shambles it is too. They are graphics artists. One shop
has custom boxes at the mineface talking to Windows 2003 Servers back at the
office. One uses their own proprietary Application between mobile trucks and
huge Wintel servers. The other 18 are MS shops doing everything from running
fish markets all over town on RDP links, to monitoring, to aerial surveying,
to good old accountancy under a wall to wall Windows environment. I see Linux
boxes as routers and firewalls, Macs as the liberal arts students' foolproof
workstation. Everyone I work for who is serious, runs Wintel machines. And I
work across a wide sector of a fairly large city.

~~~
linuxiac
You have been infected with the disease of Microsoft, rose colored glasses,
greed in the marketplace, tunnel vision...

Wake up and shake off the shackles of corporate greed! Gnu/Linux processes
upto 50X faster, runs on any platform, DEC Alpha to Sparc. Why else is
Microsoft using 'Nix in front of all servers, on all Redmond networks, for all
routers (Aruba leased routers are on all MS nets), and etc.?

Learn the new revenue streams, or go bankrupt with them.

------
amichail
I think the situation is somewhat unpredictable since Microsoft could try to
break AJAX apps by introducing all sorts of problems in IE.

Unreliable AJAX apps under IE would discourage users from using web apps. Most
users are generally clueless and will not try to switch to another browser.

Microsoft could also undermine the business model of many web services by
providing free advertising. The ads could even appear on users' desktops so
improving their search engine may not even be necessary.

~~~
brett
It would take an incredible amount of sack for Microsoft to deliberately break
IE; there's no way they would ever take a risk like that and I really doubt it
would play out like you think. Web based applications have way too much
momentum. Initially the clueless would go without, but the backlash would be
so severe in the development and tech communities that pretty soon the
clueless would have a working alternative preinstalled. The big internet
companies (the ones we should still actually fear) would step in right away
and partner with consumer hardware companies to make this happen.

~~~
amichail
Even if Microsoft does not intentionally break IE, what incentive would it
have to improve support for AJAX apps?

For example, what incentive would it have to support an offline mode for AJAX
apps?

~~~
brett
You think Microsoft can stop web app innovation by just ignoring it
themselves?

Their incentive is to maintain their market share. IE7 is their attempt to get
their ass in gear for precisely that reason. The market's not going to stick
around and wait for IE and the web will progress whether MSFT wants it to or
not.

~~~
amichail
Well, apparently MS killed Java on the client:

<http://java.sys-con.com/read/37121.htm>

So yes, they could make life difficult for AJAX developers.

~~~
volida
the fact that MS Atlas exists makes your AJAX hypothesis false.

Microsoft tried to kill XForms. The workaround of AJAX made Microsoft to open
their eyes 10-12 months ago...

------
bartsimpson007
Paul, I have great respect for you. But I think you contradit yourself a bit
when you say this "..everyone can see the desktop is over. It now seems
inevitable that applications will live on the webÂnot just email, but
everything, right up to Photoshop". That by itself is a accuate and I can
agree with. But you go on to rant about how Apple has put MS on the run and
how you fund people that use Mac etc etc. Don't you consider Apple a desktop
too??

~~~
jjrs
He basically said that all they have is the desktop...but that even that
market is getting chewed away too.

microsoft can be getting hit by web apps and competing desktops
simultaneously...no contradiction there. He just chose to choose one as a
bigger factor than the other, that's all.

~~~
bartsimpson007
To rephrase, does Paul suggest that Apple is dead as well? If not, how are
they going to survive according to paul in the Google Apps/Web 2.0 Era?

------
Robby
I really don't get the hype about Ajax etc. This (and maybe the younger ones
are lacking this knowledge) effect could be done since the mid 90s.

In those days, you eithr used a frameset with a hidden frame to get the update
stuff from the server and put it into the browser via DOM access. Or, to stay
with MS, you could use a hidden IFRAME.

Really no rocket science... so, the killer apps these days are small, simple
and FAST desktop apps (whatever desktop people use). We will see...

------
bellboy
You missed the point about MS's release of .Net.Aimed to reach over and better
Java style. MS sales even targetted co's using java for development offering
$'s to switch to .Net. What was left out in their design was the sheer
easiness to reconvert .net back to source code using off the web debuggers. My
point being, ofcourse they would die. If you can't give ulitimate development
tools, how can you expect them to stay ahead of teh pack.

------
bellboy
You missed the point about MS's release of .Net.Aimed to reach over and better
Java style. MS sales even targetted co's using java for development offering
$'s to switch to .Net. What was left out in their design was the sheer
easiness to reconvert .net back to source code using off the web debuggers. My
point being, ofcourse they would die. If you can't give ulitimate development
tools, how can you expect them to stay ahead of teh pack.

------
bellboy
You missed the point about MS's release of .Net.Aimed to reach over and better
Java style. MS sales even targetted co's using java for development offering
$'s to switch to .Net. What was left out in their design was the sheer
easiness to reconvert .net back to source code using off the web debuggers. My
point being, ofcourse they would die. If you can't give ulitimate development
tools, how can you expect them to stay ahead of teh pack.

------
fuzzyman
I think the death of the desktop is much exaggerated.

AJAX is better than the last generation of web-apps, but the browser still
basically sucks as a platform. Latency is a bitch. :-)

~~~
Elfan
But is it unsucky enough in a "worse is better" sort of way?

~~~
knewter
There are, for me, quite a few reasons it's unsucky enough in a 'better is
better' sort of way these days. I use Foxmarks to synchronize my bookmarks,
and I keep a detailed bookmarks toolbar folder categorized into tons of nested
folders. Thousands of bookmarks by now I'm sure. I also use deskbar so I can
just start typing the title of one of my bookmarks to launch it. This is far
more intuitive for me than any previous way of running web applications, and
the level of organization and interoperability I've achieved between all the
apps I use (most of which have some form of live collaboration built in these
days) makes any computer I'm ever at just feel right.

I feel there's money (or fame, failing that) to be made in a competitor to or
addition to foxmarks that allows feeds of bookmarks to be easily subscribed
to, so I could distribute a bunch of links in structured format to a
development team, say, right in their web browser, that they could all
collaborate on. Would take very little effort, and at least I myself could see
immediate benefit.

------
justified
Please let's continue not to care about Mikrosopht (sorry, I don't recall the
correct spelling, and I'm no slave of internet search either, but to me it
sounds much antique, so I hope my guess is right...).

Instead, people of worth, let's help pushing stuff like this:
<http://www.cs.stevens.edu/~dlong/software/kamen/index.php> (Note that I'm not
the author, just heard of it recently.)

------
josephroberts
Hi. While I totally agree with your conclusion, you and so many other
"analysts" totally miss the #1, the premier reason why Microsoft has been dead
for a long time ( 5 years). Microsoft had a massive leadership (not brain)
drain during the late 1990's web gold rush. They've never recovered. And, at a
time when their girth most demanded leadership, it was gone. Long gone. To
Google, Apple, and few dozen other top SV firms.

------
DITSS
When did Microsoft die? That's simple. It is the day that Bill Gates decided
to leave Microsoft. Not the day he left, but the day that privately, to
himself, he decided to leave and devote his life to philanthropy. Everything
since then has been just a desperate attempt to grip the sand as it flows
through their fingers. The harder they sqeeze, the faster it flows through
their fingers ( _cough_ Zune and PlaysForSure)

------
yuvipanda
LMAO. You haven't seen WPF, have you? Or, do you really know how things are
inside Microsoft now?

And, btw, I'm pretty much in the younger half of the population(16), and I'd
much rather work at Microsoft which allows you to blog and conducts events in
countries outside the US than at Google where you aren't even allowed to say
what the dominant color in the data center is...

P.S. You rock, but this one made me LMAO. Tell me it was a late April Fool's
joke.

------
papersmith
I think despite Steve Ballmer's fanaticism, Microsoft knows its dying. They're
already diversifying into safer industries like enterprise, gaming, and media.
These are not hostile takeovers like in the old days, they're major moves
trying to position MS as a major player in the respective fields. I think the
MS identity well remain, but it will become a much more diluted entity, with
branches each going its separate way.

~~~
abstractbill
Media isn't a safe industry. Not for very long at least.

------
girl
I think since I'm also part of your "younger generation" I can see the
validity in your argument that no one uses Windows anymore, but as I'm
beginning to look for jobs and as i meet more and more people outside of my
tech bubble, I can see that the general public still attaches itself to
Windows OS. The more tech inclined are all about Linux and the like, but those
that are all about enjoying youtube and checking email could care less.

------
mint
well, is IBM dead?

It seems to me that the word dead really sends people off the edge.

IBM is doing better than they were when they made computers. To give them
credit, Microsoft could be in the transitional phase. I mean, can you honestly
say that you've never played 20 straight hours of Halo on an XBox? I know I
can't.

Call me optimistic or just crazy, but I still believe that Microsoft is a
competitor in technological innovation. I think Google will suffer from the
same condition that plagued Microsoft during 2001-2005 (massive egos). This
will help other companies (including Microsoft) get their footing and
potentially launch a comeback (as Apple did).

It seems easy to denounce Microsoft as an evil corporation. It's harder to
recognize that they have battles of their own. Remember those antitrust cases?
Microsoft was given grief for packaging IE into Windows (let's see, who else
packages a wad of their own software into their operating system?
hmmmmm.....). Do a search for torrents and you can find the latest Windows (or
any windows version). Did geeks believe that stealing someone's hard work was
cool? Hell yes. Microsoft is the paranoid old man that it is because we helped
put it there while we give graces and laud Google and Apple.

I use a Thinkpad running Windows XP (and Ubuntu).

To address your Apple computer usage by geeks: it's the same problem with most
amateur photographers, they still think fancy toys are vital in making a
photograph (ie having Mac OSX in no way improves your abilities as a
designer).

Like many others have said: stick around and let's see what happens.

Meanwhile, anyone up for a game of ultimate frisbee?

------
jjrs
Excellent post. Not only did you nail the growing feeling that Microsoft is
gradually becoming irrelevant, but you gave the best explanation as to why
that I've seen anywhere.

I think another reason is that younger people are more computer literate and
more open to new OS's and software. Mom and Dad were intimidated by computers
and just wanted the simplest, most common software (microsoft/IBM), which
they'd learned to use at work.

------
mrpostmaster
Well, you said Apple's board made a mistake - however, I think it was a
necessary move. If you think about all the great movements in the history of
mankind, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, Moses, etc, all of them had to be kicked
out, suffer in the desert, receive enlightenment/burning bushes/next/pixar and
then come on back as the conquering hero. Would Jobs be as good as he is now,
if he didn't do Next and Pixar? Maybe, maybe not.

-Tai

------
wayne01
I somehow don't think that Microsoft are simply going to go away. When 95% of
the worlds people use a Microsoft OS including big business with great
application support and the ability to buy cheap hardware (which Apple cannot
replicate) Microsoft will be dominant. And now they have a fairly decent OS
which is comparable to OSX, it just isn't compelling enough to switch any
more. At least for the people I know....

------
professorguy
Anyone who cares can have fast Internet access now.

Um, no.

I care to have fast access (I am a network administrator at a hospital so it'd
be useful). But I cannot have it. Therefore your comment does not reflect
reality.

I'm sure that's true in the city where you live, but come to Dalton, NH and
tell me again how I'm supposed to get high speed access. DSL? Nope. Cable? Ha!
Satellite? Not on my wooded hillside. Magic internet fairies? Oh, that must be
what you're talking about!

------
poopstech
Nice "Essay". I also bet that you dream in complete Eastman Color as well,
right? MS is to big - too powerful and has it's hands in too many things to
simply "die"! I read somewhere that if MS decided to pay off all the share
holders and close its doors tomorrow, may western governments have to scramble
to hire all the MS staff just to maintain the status quoi! As I guessed - you
do dream in color...

PooPsTech Sr. Software Eng.

------
pythonic
Paul Graham, you are so Not Enterprisey. Thank You!

What some of the (ok, us) "older" folks don't realize is that the younger
generation will bring their technology to work with them and it will eat away
at the corporate desktop from within despite all the "we need a big vendor to
cover our asses when the Fed regulators come a knockin'" attitudes that
prevail in that world. And IBM is still there to beat them down from above.

------
ka
I suspect that you're right, but MS is not quite fully dead as yet, but they
are dying a long, slow, lingering death because they have been so entrenched
for so many years past.

Think of it as a layer of skin tissue. When the a layer of skin tissue is
replaced by the body, it doesn't just disappear overnight. Rather, it starts
cracking and peeling first, then over time, it is gradually replaced by a new
fresh layer from underneath.

MS is currently peeling...

------
JamesPunk
You've got to be an idiot to think Microsoft is dead. Ever seen WPF/e?
Photosynth? Xbox 360? Virtual Earth 3D? Not to mention the framework for 90+%
of computers and one of the biggest R&D; initiatives of any private company.
Then there's that little $60 BILLION nestegg sitting in the bank waiting for
new oppotunities.

Is there even one synapse in your whole head firing? You've got to be cold
stupid to think they're dead.

------
gabrielroth
Wanted to point out a typo. You have:

"Thanks to OSX, Apple has come back from the dead in a way that is extremely
rare technology."

I think that should be "extremely rare IN technology."

~~~
celoyd
And s/OSX/OS X/

------
pharbeson
Maybe this is silly, but the only sentence I didn't really understand was "The
situation is analogous to the writing of "literary theorists." I've tried to
understand literary theory and had zero success. I just assumed that either I
wasn't trying hard enough or just wasn't smart enough. But you suggest they
_could_ make it clearer, and simply _don't bother_?! That would
be...disappointing? Inexplicable?

------
BenKittrell
I just don't understand why everyone is so concerned about MS vs Google vs
Apple. MS sells software, Google sells ads, and Apple sells hardware. Anything
else they do is just to sell their core business.

Each company is extremely successful, and in no danger of going away anytime
soon.

Paul saying that he's surprised to see someone running Windows is proof that
this is a very big planet, and there's lots of room for all kinds of love.

------
stevenm12345
4/24/07 sundays BARRONS stated MS poor sales with new os offering (VISTA)
walmarts lcd tv price cut cause big shake up in tech sales. LISTS retail
closings etc.

got vista at closing comp usa 20% off awhile back... its linux with windows
name (protected mode) works fine!

MS is now to busy with the MS FOUNDATION and that BURKSHIRE guy from OMAHA to
care about WINDOWS or computers. I'll bet VISTA is the end of it!

THEY HAVE OTHER FISH TO FRY......

------
Some1
You certanly have something realy messed up. MS dead ? Wake up! How can u even
compare MS wich has 90% of the market with Apple wuch haves like 5% to 7% well
that's rubbish. How can u think that ... Appple is evolving and leaving
Windows behind.. hm.. do u think that Bill G. Will allow that ? Have u
heard/read about the interview of Windows Vienna? Sorry "my frind" but u are..
simply wrong.

------
enemyofpaulg
To paraphrase, everybody is moving off of Windows to Macs and Linux... only
grandmas are using Windows? What have you been sniffing? Do they only hire 12
year olds at Y Combinator or just people with the mental capacity of a 12 year
old (no offense intended to those readers who are actually 12 years old out
there... just making a point about Paul Graham's immaturity of thought).

------
jwalkernet
Perfect. Brilliant. Yes we have known it but you encapsulated it so well. At
Atlassian we focus our attention on the still impressive accomplishments of
Google and companies such those you fund and work with. The New World wants
things lighter weight, cheaper, but with no trade off on usefulness. And
without a salesman or any annoying popups or other crap. Thx Jeffrey
www.radiowalker.com

------
Tweeker
If you want to play games your still stuck with Microsoft. They have been
fairly effective at marginalizing OpenGL. However, requiring Vista for DX10
will push many to looking for alternatives. Alas, the alternative seems to be
the console currently. While games is may "fun", its still the main driver of
PC hardware development. 3D cards for games have long since subsumed CAD
cards.

------
nicodaemos
Just two days ago I wrote an article about web server stats and noticed that
a) Microsoft is almost nonexistent amongst the geek programming community and
b) that contrary to Netcraft's numbers, Microsoft servers are in a small
minority of sites frequented by geeks like myself.

<http://hitesh-jasani.blogspot.com/2007/04/web-server-stats.html>

------
ex_libris
The number one caboose to for companies to switch platform from Windows to
Linux is the that the employees are reluctant to the switch. They had a hard
time just to get adopted to computers in general (Windows) from type writes
and are terrified for a change. When the people from the 1960 retire there's
nothing to hold companies back from switching desktop platforms.

------
ngift
You article sums up what I think as well. Microsoft no longer has an technical
relevance, and many other companies have taken the lead in innovation. I
blogged about this in December in an article I called "The Microsoft Bubble in
2006":

<http://www.osxautomation.com/2006/12/10/the-microsoft-bubble-in-2006/>

------
Horsey
What is the number one activity a 15 - 25 year old American male will buy a
computer for today? Its gaming. And Microsoft is still the number one gaming
platform.

By hanging out with a bunch of graduates from top schools that work at your
startups you've basically stuck your head in the sand. These people are not
your average Americans. Your Average American is using his computer for things
that your circle of friends have no interest in.

Seriously, get out of the valley for a few months and go visit people, regular
people, around America. Go see what kids are doing in PC "bhangs" in Asia.

"Everyone uses macs" ... this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

And do you think Snipshot and Jumpcut type programs are ever going to be fast
enough and feature rich enough for people that care about their media?
Snipshot might be ok for a quick brightness adjustment or a resize, but have
you seen what kids are using photoshop for today? Go visit a popular online
forum like Something Awful, Fark, or Genmay -- look at the Photoshop Phriday
type activities the kids are having fun with. Tell me that you can do that
stuff with Snipshot.

Honestly, you old school Valley guys are just as bad as anyone from Redmond.
You've got your own blinders and have as little clue as anyone else about what
people actually want to do with their technology. Everyone embraces trends
like Google, Facebook etc. after the fact, as though those things were
carefully thought out strategies when really there are a thousands of things
being tried and some are bound to succeed because people want to do
_something_ online.

The internet is evolving organically and though you smarty pants would like to
think that a bunch of clever people are making clever choices to provide the
market with what it wants, its more like putting capabilities out there seeing
what will stick. People love to paint this fiction about succesful start ups,
as though they were smarter than others in choosing the right "niche". Its all
a load of horseshit -- nobody, least of all the founders, has any idea what
the market is going to take to.

So you can all sit in a circle jerk dumping on Microsoft, as though their
random-walk through feature scape is something different than what you guys
do, but the fact of the matter is that you are all the same. They use their
own money to fund a ton of crap, most of which is nonsense, and you use other
people's money to fund a ton of crap, most of which is nonsense.

------
chuck
there's no comment link for your cliff notes
(<http://www.paulgraham.com/cliffsnotes.html)> followup so i will comment
here.

you seem to be back-pedaling with this cliff-notes post. so you are going to
be the first to "call it"... call what exactly? that seems to be your cliff
notes discussion... it required several paragraphs to define what you mean.
nobody is going to remember what you exactly called.

you say the following... "When I said that Microsoft was dead, I meant they
had, like IBM before them, passed across into this underworld."

so you are basically saying now that ibm is dead... in which you define it as
"people at the leading edge of the software business no longer have to think
about them."

i guess many would disagree with you on what "leading edge" or relevance in
software is about. if you think these web2.0 companies, then perhaps, then
many will disagree with you whether there's much new tech coming out of these
web 2.0 companies.

------
biofusion
This could quite possibly be one of the worst written articles I've read this
year. The points your bring up are beyond childish and really have little
information to back it up. So you claim a few groups of yours are using Apple
computers, my god that must mean everybody is! I really am not going to argue
with you here, Microsoft is clearly not dead.

------
morlock_man
Microsoft isn't dead. They're still killing startups. There was a perfect DRM
model evolving that would have killed Major Record labels while saving the
local music stores... and Microsoft killed it with Windows Media Player
updates and Vista.

What's sad is that now they've fallen below everyone's radar. Which makes it
that much easier to get away with shit like this.

------
pyite
I somewhat agree with you.

However, it is obvious that hardware vendors still fear Microsoft. The day
that they stop fearing Microsoft is the day that just about every PC will have
the option of either Windows or Linux.

Last time a company tried something like this was IBM in the mid-90's and
Microsoft made quite an example of them by increasing their annual Windows
licensing charge by $200 million.

------
ripragged
Well, I don't know much about markets and such, but I know this. There is no
spontaneous positive buzz about Microsoft anywhere -- not even on sites where
Microsoft is king. There is spontaneous positive buzz about Apple, everywhere
-- even on sites where Microsoft is king.

It isn't hard to see. Microsoft may not be dead, but they have definitely
dropped the soap.

------
joshperry
Microsoft is dead. Right. That's why they still have abut 95% markeet share in
the desktop OS market. Remember that you need to have an OS to connect to
broadband and that means any growth for Google, is pretty much automatic
growth for Microsoft. if another desktop OS actually gets more than a 10%
market share then you might be right.

------
sachman
You nailed it - I think it is a cultural and mindset issue and unless they
change at the core they are never going to intimidate anyone nor be the
powerhouse they were once. Here is an interesting piece that complements
yours...

<http://republicofinternets.com/2007/03/17/is-microsoft-done/>

------
Skyhoper
Besides from talking about how young entrepreneurs like myself do not see
Microsoft as a threat, a photo in the middle of the article links to my
picture!

<http://pieceofpaper.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/all_macs_and_all_writing.jpg>
I think Im picking a pimple on my cheek

------
cweekly
"[E]ventually the open source world triumphed, in the form of Javascript
libraries that grew over the brokenness of Explorer the way a tree grows over
barbed wire."

${applause}

This is a beautiful simile, one I will repeat to others. Also (I'm 32) this
_feels_ like old news but hearing it put so succinctly by you, well, it puts a
big ol grin on my face. =D

Thanks, Paul -- and keep it up!

------
Maximus
I am very sorry, but the language of this article is almost exactly same as
used by communist propaganda: everything is good, evil capitalism is (as the
historical materialism had pre-determined) de-facto dead, just a couple of
years and a perfect society will come ... are all the penguins really so mad
about the different preferences?

------
tommyw
I think your point about MS inheriting status from IBM is key here. MS has
always been primarily a business proposition. Bill, in presenting IBM a DOS he
essentially bought off the shelf, posited the entire enterprise as 'a deal' to
be struck.

What OSX and Linux both present is a vision, an ideal of how things should be.
That ultimately is what is absent in Redmond.

------
prasad
One word comment would be "Rubbish". I have seen articles like these for past
10 years. Please note that its the consumer who drives the market. Unless
there is someone who makes another "Windows XP" alike or better software and
have the power/synergy to capture atleast 30-40% market. This aint going to
work. Just my 0.02 cents, thanks.

------
JoeDuck
For a company to be'dead' yet still make lots of money is a questionable
concept. Invoking the fear of startups should not be a goal for MS, rather
pulling an IBM and staying viable while Google and Yahoo innovate their pants
off. I think MS is (slowly) figuring this out, and they have a lot of momentum
and cash to help them along.

------
rickt287
MS isn't dead. People aren't afraid, but have accepted the reality of them
being who they are. Just like oppressive governments; eventually they beat you
down so much that you stop caring and just accept it.The fact that articles
still bash them proves who is top dog. To quote a famous line, "...we're
better than you" "...it doesn't matter..."

RT

------
lmasanti
"Actors and musicians occasionally make comebacks, but technology companies
almost never do. " Although not in the form and style of Apple's comeback, I
think that IBM has "reshaped" itself in a very intelligent way, not reling
anymore in "monopolic" strategies but being really competitive. I do not know
if M$ can do this morphing.

------
seandc
Quote: "It now seems inevitable that applications will live on the web."

Well.......... 1\. I don't trust the web providers server security. 2\. I
don't trust the network security on the Internet. 3\. I don't trust that the
Feds - they can obtain my "web-based" stuff through subpoenas or other means.

....so I won't be usimg web-based applications for anything personal any time
soon!

Sean

------
Peter_G
Like an Oliver Stone movie, this entry is interesting and fun to read despite
being entirely wrong in every major respect.

------
glah
Y Combinator is Dead. Why? Because all the little MeToo Point Oh companies it
funded aren't making any money. So Paul Graham writes this article practically
daring Microsoft to buy all Web 2.0 companies in the valley, hoping that a
couple of his little darlings will also be scooped up. We should all be
screaming "shill".

------
bmcginty
I am disappointed that you came up with The Cliff Notes. John Dvorak has been
saying that for a while. Thanks for the link to <http://live.com.> I typed in
"microsoft is dead" and got a whole lot of irrevelant articles. Google had
yours at the top along with Dvorak's. Gave me a good laugh.

------
stolennomen
Do people really trust these web services with their private info? Is this the
same web with all the spam emails - lottery wins, viagra sales, fake bank
communications, etc? The web that is full of viruses? The web where no one
really knows who they are dealing with?

These must be some strange new kind of human beings. Me, I trust no one.

------
nelsonj
Re: your comment about Steve Jobs, I don't think Apple would be the company it
is today unless Steve was pushed out. I think he learned a lot in the
wilderness and came back a prodigal son with something to prove. As such he
was a lot more motivated and had more backing than he would have had if he
hadn't left.

------
nadeem
I actually thought it was an excellent piece. I don't necessarily think that
Microsoft is down and out for the count but equal they do seem to be playing
catchup a lot.

It was a great little piece Paul.

<http://www.virtualchaos.co.uk/blog/2007/04/08/microsoft-is-dead/>

------
roark
If being "not feared" means being dead, then Google was never born. Who is
afraid of Google anyways, except that they might misuse our trust by breaching
our privacy !

People are no longer afraid of MS because technology has now grown into areas
(e.g. web) where they can work without competing with MS.

------
hairypotter
There's an article in Iberian Portuguese, for those who want to read this
language, based on this essay at
<http://www.efeitosvisuais.com/blog/2007/05/22/microsoft-is-dead-parte1/>

------
BrandonM
There is one high-selling area of software that I can never imagine being
separated from the desktop: activity-monitoring anti-virus suites. So for all
those people to be able to run their anti-virus programs, they are going to
need Windows, and therefore, Windows will stay relevant.

------
henryturner
Great essay but the death was previously called

[http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B629B28CD-9E0E-48CA-8E8B-243AA6E2CB92%7D&dist;=lycos&siteid;=lycos](http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B629B28CD-9E0E-48CA-8E8B-243AA6E2CB92%7D&dist=lycos&siteid=lycos)

------
carverjd
Another way Microsoft has shot its self in the foot began in 2000 with the
release of Office 2000, then a year later Office XP then within 18 months
Office 2003. Were they trying to milk the cow dry. That is why corporations
are in a mass exodus from Office to other alternatives.

------
joeschmoe
Secondly, I believe that this "essay" sounds young, and a bit smarmy. Like a
first-year sophomoric newbie would write, trying to sound like they are _so_
surprised that the students in dorm 13 haven't been going to the new dining
hall, because everyone _knows_ it's the best.

------
tbone
Ok, but are we trading Microsoft's monopoly for Google's? Google essentially
controls (or plans to control) search and online advertising, which of course
feed off each other like Windows and Office did. Just becuase Google has Web
2.0 street cred doesn't mean they are benign.

------
yaddoshi
Please tell all my customers for me so I can start making the switch to
providing Apple and LINUX systems.

I'm confounded by the number of customers I run into who are convinced they
either need a new Windows Vista computer, or worse, that they need to install
Windows Vista on their old computer.

------
gknauth
Is IBM dead? Maybe Microsoft is just another IBM. In 30 years, they may even
be backing free software.

~~~
william42
IBM basically did what PG says MS should do. They started concentrating on
PCs.

------
Jordi
One of the clear signs that show how wrong they are on strategy is Vista.
Vista is everything against web 2.0 with a web 2.0 face. All control and get
attached as much as you can to your Desktop. They need to get some people from
Google to use their cash wisely. Jordi Vallejo

------
Armin
Hi Paul,

Joel Spolsky came to a similar conclusion back in 2004:
<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html>

I think that is more true than ever, When your primary computer access is via
a browser, the OS (and standalone applications on top) does not matter any
more.

------
connellybarnes
Microsoft will linger on as long as games are based on DX. They might be able
to do some additional damage with their browser monopoly. But I agree: fresh
air is blowing in the door, and programmers are getting a feeling that it at
last is spring-time.

~~~
connellybarnes
Wow, OK many of these comments are kind of like disrespectful to Paul Graham
because they kind of indicate that many people have learned absolutely nothing
from him. Wow. That's really depressing.

~~~
connellybarnes
Or see <http://www.google.com/intl/en/options/> . The point is, if you're not
talking about games, Microsoft is basically irrelevant to the way that the
majority of people use computers.

------
tetley
I find this unnecessary and to refer to Microsoft as being for Grandmas, I
hope all the Grandmas land on this guys head and trample him. Such an
unfortunate phrase for him to use. I sure hope Microsoft rises up and pounds
h... out of such superegos.

------
tetley
I find this unnecessary and to refer to Microsoft as being for Grandmas, I
hope all the Grandmas land on this guys head and trample him. Such an
unfortunate phrase for him to use. I sure hope Microsoft rises up and pounds
h... out of such superegos.

~~~
microsoftx
what he actually means is that windows is Intuitive enough for even a grandma
to use. That in my opinion is a tremendous compliment.

Ask yourself this : Can a grandma install Debian? Is a grandma interested in
setting herself apart from the masses with a trendy powerbook? No and No. A
grandma only wants something that works well. Like 99.999% of the world's
population.

People want what is easy and intuitive. Geeks, hackers and trendy insecure
people revel in the obscure and fashionable (Linux and Macs).

------
monkeyshines
Please, Adobe, PLEASE GIVE US PHOTOSHOP FOR LINUX!!! Gimp sucks and I hate
Windows, and I can't afford a Mac and I don't want to throw away 2 perfectly
useful laptops just so I can dump Wintel. Gimme Photoshop on Linux (Ubuntu)
and I'm done with Win.

------
aprocrastinator
It's not dead, just a paper tiger. The final nail in the coffin will come with
Web 3.0/4.0 when the operating system will be accessed on the web in the same
way apps are now and the need for a system like Vista or OSX will go the of
the dinosaurs.

------
raj
the only issue i take with this article is the following (and its an issue
that, when i hear someone say it, it almost immediately calls everything else
into question about their logic and reasoning): not everyone can get
broadband. not everyone can AFFORD broadband. get your head out of the Valley,
out of San Fran, out of Austin or California or New York city, and go ANYwhere
in Everywhere, USA, or Anywhere Else, Rest-of-the-World, and you'll see that
broadband is either insanely prolific or utterly non-existent, government-
funded or tough-to-afford for the working class, and a complete scattershot
congregation of technologies, hardware and security.

------
javaJake
I think you are definitely catching on to what is going on. Microsoft is only
hanging around because of the monopoly it has in its grip. As soon as Windows
drops in usage (which, by the way, is happening) Microsoft will drop in ranks.

------
starman
I'll suggest one other disruptive piece of the puzzle. What's the sound of...

BILLIONS of copies of Mac OS X interconnecting?

\- iPhones, iPods/tablets(soon), notebooks, desktops, media nodes, wearables
(see shuffle jewelry to come).

And yes, something else will displace the Apple universe.

------
shosie
as an IP lawyer frequently adverse to MSFT, i can assure you that it is not
dead quite yet. on the essay itself, as thoughtful as we have come to expect,
I suppose the relevant question is what will the next "black swan" event be?

------
juwo
Here is a piece I wrote: Java has harmed Unix but helped Windows win
<http://juwo.blogspot.com/2006/11/flatface-musings-java-has-harmed-unix.html>

------
belhassen
yes this is true. the desktop has gone. but you make your analysis trough a
little hole in the wall (window?) from this little hole it seems that web2.0
euphoria is indeed due to microsoft monopol lost. High bandwith - everything
on the net - microsoft application cloned online.unleashed creativity applied
to no rule game, again.. ok. now walk back and see how much microsoft is more
than desktop software and has already took submarine advanced positions in the
future concurrential world.(PWC, NFC). Desktop - all net - ? dont
underestimate people with glasses.

Inside the bubble - insider joy. outside the bubble - outsider again.

------
Adler
I get a kick out of these articles.

But, Google is my friend. I tell evey one that. Power beyond belief.

Meanwhile, when will MAC die?

I believe in opensource, and all the goodness there.

It is a global village. The MAC is too expensive hardware-wise, and well we
don't call it M$ for nothing.

Adler Phoenix, Arizona

------
yb927
Paul, As usual brilliantly written and fantastically succinct-even though it
is indeed 'Old News'.

------
costar
Dead or not, the company is buying up a lot of property.
<http://www.costar.com/News/Article.aspx?id=AE40DC75921BEB714FCC9D697D42A6F2>

------
davewhittle
Dead? I know you're making a dramatic overstatement, but as long as Bill Gates
is still Chairman of the Board, I hardly think they're dead. How could you not
even include Gates' diminished role in your list of reasons why they're
"dead?" Gates is clearly the evil genius behind Microsoft. Look at the early
flopping around of Vista and the Outlook slowdown fiasco - clear evidence that
Gates isn't paying as much attention as he once did. He conquered the industry
and doesn't much care any more - now he's off to conquer disease and ignorance
and perhaps even world hunger some day.

Microsoft dead? Not yet. If they were dead, NOBODY in their right mind would
be buying Vista - but just try buying a new PC without Vista... Lame maybe,
big and increasingly incompetent, clearly - but certainly not dead.

Dave Whittle \- Former IBM OS/2 Evangelist

------
ernie
MS is no longer significant to startups because (at large companies):"No one
was ever fired for buying Microsoft"

It's a value proposition that panders first to management's Fear Uncertainty
and Doubt and second to actual results.

------
amitm123
i have no idea in what planet you live in, my website statistics show 99.56%
of my visitors (150,000 a month) are using windows 0.38% macintosh and the
rest 0.06% linux. you want to be an apple resseller thats fine, but pleaese
stay away from this bulshit. yes we are all waiting for microsoft to fall (20
years we are waiting). we all know that linux is nice (pain in the ass but
nice) and apple has a great os (only graphic artists, and journalists uses it
these days).

nobody is afraid of them accept their customers but then they are far too
strong for any other os

------
gggggdfgdfg
Your claim that no-one uses Windows anymore is a bit, eh, out of touch with
reality. Even though many web designers and web programmers use Macs, the
majority of businesses still run Windows on their desktops.

------
yfain
I blogged on the subject at
<http://yakovfain.javadevelopersjournal.com/microsoft_is_not_dead_it_just_has_a_flu.htm>

Yakov Fain

------
sumedh_inamdar
<http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/macosx_leopard_preview.asp>

As far as I see around (in India) we hardly see any Mac PC's or laptops
here...

------
kencarpenter
Microsoft is dead because their primary product is sold to sheep, who buy the
biggest instead of the best. ... How long did they work on Vista, and how bad
is it? Too long, and awful!

Long live Apple! Gimme an iPhone now!

------
Lessien
Don't discount the impact of the antitrust suits. The lawyers get a veto on
nearly everything within Microsoft now. A company simply cannot be agile when
the balance of power is skewed like that.

------
theafroguy
Although I totally agree that Macs are far superior, I don't share your
surprise when I come across a PC. Apple are definitely gaining traction, but
Micrsoft still commands most of the market.

------
deep_throat
Microsoft makes more money than any Y Combinator startup ever will. Bill Gates
is off saving the world with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, while PG
is busy exploiting young talent.

------
Richard
I would like to accept that MS is dead, but I can't until MacOS and Linux
start making a better showing in my webserver logs. MS can't die as long as
they still have a lock on the end user.

------
shredinator
"The other half, the younger half, will complain that this is old news."

I laughed out loud when I read this because, as a 17 year old, it was exactly
what I was thinking when I saw the essay's title.

------
foobar999
I just interviewed at Google. They are dead, too. All the egos and hubris of
MSFT from the mid 90's, wrapped up in a comforter of cult-like Jesus-freak
"this is teh google wayz" BS.

------
theoutlander
Windows has its quirks, but it is still the OS regular users choose. Visual
Studio (THE BEST PRODUCT FROM MSFT!) beats everything out there! Although, my
startup is not using ANY Microsoft technology, I am using Windows to code!
Unix is GREAT for server-side....terrible for client-side and Windows is GREAT
for client-side, but terrible on server-side!

Google owns search but they are losing focus, just like MSFT. Remember that if
it weren't for MSFT, Apple wouldn't have taken the PC market too far .... this
is just the beginning of the IT revolution!

IBM - MSFT - GOOGLE - ADOBE - WHO'S NEXT?

They are all gonna slow down at some point.... I am not afraid of Google...
Even if a company is a mammoth, it HAS its limitations!!!

~~~
BrandonM
If you think that Unix is terrible for client-side, then I don't think you've
been working in Linux for long. How about the ability to install any of 20,000
programs from a convenient package/portage/rpm directory for free in seconds?
How about updating every single program on your computer, including the OS,
and recompiling everything, with one command?

And as for programming, whenever I'm working in Visual Studio, I feel like I'm
working in Notepad. Honestly, if you take the time to learn the keybindings
for vi or emacs (I won't say which, I use both :-), you will find that a much
more lightweight program can manage projects just as well, and you can code
many times faster.

Honestly, it's hard to get away from what you're used to, but immerse yourself
in a non-Microsoft environment for a few months (I've been using Unix heavily
for less than a year), and you'll realize that Microsoft is the one with the
bad interfaces. For years they have been catering to the lowest common
denominator. The people who want true control over what they are doing use or
write an open source program.

~~~
theoutlander
I do like the ability to install on demand! Why is Windows leading client-
side? Because it is easy! I am speaking from an average users perspective. Not
us! I have used VI and I love it! Visual Studio is NOT like notepad. I'm sorry
but AFAIK, VI or Emacs cannot provide intellisense can it? I have used both
environments for development and based on my productivity, I concluded that
Windows is a better environment for ME. Ultimately, it is about getting the
job done FAST and using what works for you. I have used freeBSD and it is
definitely STABLE, but really not something I would like to sit and develop
on. Think about the millions of END-USERS??? Windows is really the solution
for them... at least for now. Although Windows has its issues, I think
Microsoft has improved its product in many ways. Do you realize how hard of a
problem it is to solve, making the OS secure and user-friendly at the same
time? I like Windows, Redhat and freeBSD... I wish Windows stayed away from
the Server market and likewise Redhat stayed away from the client!

~~~
Elfan
VI and emacs both have intellisense like features.

~~~
theoutlander
Oh that is great ... I last used VI and Emacs to do C++ development and then
there was no concept of intellisense :-P ....btw, do I need to install
anything to activate intellisense in VI/Emacs??

------
bongokarl
all the game-developers and 3d-technology-people use windows. they are pretty
strong in this field. thats because osx and linux dont natively and fully
support the gfx-hardware...

~~~
BrandonM
...and of course, with that reply you actually mean that the gfx-hardware
doesn't natively support osx and linux :). I, for one, marvel at the sheer
number of drivers that have been written for free for hardware manufactured by
companies who still think Windows is the only OS.

~~~
malkia
Talk about the frustration of your game not working properly under Vista. At
least some pieces of DX10 would be brought back in XP at the end of the year.

------
vijaypullur
Paul,

Why kill Microsoft if all you care for is the browser? Install Firefox, dont
upgrade to Vista or later...Just have one desktop icon and start menu
program...Firefox.

Microsoft is not dead till this can be viable.

Vijay Dekoh

------
jonhendry
Also... I don't know why any company would use Windows for important machines.
Requiring the use of Windows is like requiring that all key staff be recruited
from drug rehabs.

------
far33d
I can't decide whether etiquette requires you to allow the author of an
article to post it if they are members (founders) of the site.

Then again, etiquette doesn't help entrepreneurs much.

~~~
ehabkost
I read this comment multiple times, but I just couldn't understand what is it
about.

~~~
nostrademons
He's wondering if PG should have been the one to post this article, given that
PG wrote it and also wrote this site.

And I dunno about news.YC, but Reddit at least doesn't work that way. I've
written pieces that were picked up on Reddit and posted by other people. I
found it rather flattering; it meant other folks thought it was interesting
enough to post without my intervention.

------
bitemebiteme
It's pretty obvious to the MILLIONS of developers and hackers that not only
survive but thrive in the Windows world that you really have ignored them for
your entire career. You live in one ecosystem we live in another,

The main difference between us and you is that you feel it necessary to throw
stones at us (or in this case verbal diarrhea) every so often and we are happy
to let you live in your world, and respect you for it, while we happily go
about our business shaking our heads at how absolutely uninformed you are
about our world.

You are part of the problem not part of the solution.

See you in a couple of years when you pop your head out of your hole and shit
all over us again.

~~~
BrandonM
Did you just say "MILLIONS of [...] hackers [...] in the Windows world"? Wow,
that's pretty funny, because Windows isn't really designed for hackers, you
know? I mean, sure, they can go out and buy Visual Studio and write some
programs, but why not just get an OS that supports real hacking out of the
box, and is free?

I mean, either the definition of "hacker" has expanded quite liberally, or we
should start seeing a slew of awesome apps start rolling out any minute now...

~~~
FritFrut
"designed for hackers"??? Haha, what a load of... You could look at the many
definitions of 'hacker', and none of them precludes hackers on Windows. But,
if you believe that 'real hacking' is wasting hundreds of hours trying to make
your graphics card work, then yes, by no means use the free one, and consider
yourself 'a real hacker', when you manage to get the sound out of your
soundcard.

~~~
BrandonM
I didn't mean hacking the OS, which I agree can be a time-sink if you don't
know where to look for the answers online (Gentoo-wiki is a great source of
answers). I meant that GNU/Linux has simple but powerful IDEs like vim built-
in, and most distributions come with gcc as well for compiling the basic
languages. There are higher-level programming languages included in the
installation like Perl, Python, Java, and more. If you want to install new
ones, it's simple, just type "emerge ruby sbcl ocaml ...".

I didn't intend my comment to mean that Windows doesn't have legitimate
hackers, I was just saying that it doesn't support them nearly as well as
others do, with its closed API and licensed software-building tools. I was
also poking fun at the "MILLIONS of hackers" comment, because in my opinion,
there aren't millions of hackers in the entire world. I don't believe that
hacker simply means "programmer", but rather, something a bit more. I
certainly wouldn't consider myself to be one yet, even though I am quite
confident in my programming skills.

So I'm sorry, I didn't mean to say that there aren't Windows hackers, just
that I seriously doubt that there are millions of them.

~~~
FritFrut
Hm, ok, I guess I was a bit harsh, so I apologize... however, availability of
certain tools/languages on Linux really depends on the distribution and what
options you install. Perl is probably installed everywhere, but others are
not. Also, all the major languages are very well supported on Windows (I've
been using Perl on Windows since '97 or so, and lots of people are using
Python and Ruby lately). .NET framework is free and includes libraries,
documentation, tools and compilers. There are a lots of editors (including vi
and emacs). Also, there's free Visual Studio express, etc. Granted, they are
not included with Windows installation, but I guess that's because of the
difference in distribution and licensing models, rather than some fundamental
inability of Windows platform to include them.

About the support for the hackers... hm... it probably depends on the
definition of 'hacker', but there's MSDN, a HUGE resource for the developers
on the Windows platforms, with references for all products, languages and
tools, examples, knowledge base etc.

Speaking of installation, I guess it's a matter of preference. Personally, I
prefer to download stuff that I need, burn the 'developer tools dvd', and
install from there. apt, urpmi and similar tools are nice and I quite like
their elegance and simplicity, but they are great when you have enough
bandwidth and don't have to pay for the extra traffic, and not so nice if you
have 3-4 machines to install or update.

And, finally, yes... hackers are few and far between, developers are a bit
more common, and the rest are coders.

------
amoroso
More online Web 2.0 image editing tools: <http://www.dailyblogtips.com/free-
online-photo-editors/>

------
Sushant_Madhab
Hi! Paul,

You are so correct in your essay. I ditto you. I would say that, the time has
come where "USERs" do not want standalone, unstructured or single sing on
applications. I say that, its time for eWorking Facilities.

Not to advert, if I could suggest is, please have a look at www.WorkACE.com.
Its a smart eBusiness solution, with built in features of Intranet, Extranet,
Groupware, Knowledge Management, Business Ecosystem Management,
Project/Process Management, Supply Chain Management, Webmail, IM/Chat, Work
Flow Management and eSupport, all compiled into a comprehensive and cognitive
eWorking facility.

Rgds, Sushant Madhab www.qxsystems.com

------
rintaromasuda
I think I'm in the younger half, so I felt this should be the old news.

But the day which I finally don't use Windows while I'm work is going to be
several years later from now.

------
thisissilly
Microsoft is dead ? Haa Think XBOX Think SQL SERVER Think Longhorn server
Think IPTV Now which one of this is not there and wait til play talbe comes
into market..

------
gwint
Photoshop itself will soon have an online version:
<http://news.com.com/2100-7345_3-6163015.html>

------
ecuzzillo
I think the link from the essay to this comment page caused an enormous number
of dumb users to register here, much like the Web 2.0 article with reddit.

------
noway
Might be true if you live in "Silicon Valley lead shielding" talking only with
startup guys. Completely wrong outside. How many people know Y-combinator?
Here you are...

------
johnlongawa642
You nailed it, Paul. The bad reaction is akin to what you'd expect from a
dowager having been goosed by an upstart who crashed her stuffy fund-raiser.

-john longawa 

------
kieranw
The rest of us will just think that you are pushing your agenda, and
therefore, your own view of the world. Is it a coincidence a Web 2.0 investor
supports an evangelically blinkered approach to non Web 2.0 solutions.

I am a fantastic believer in history telling us about the future. And in this
case, history says, Microsoft will always be key to a desktop centric world.
And desktop centricity is cyclical. For now Web 2.0 seems to have the baton,
but as we nove into a very rich multi-media world we will become constrained
by the broadband pipes. This will push apps, content, and everything else back
to the user device, be it a Windows PC or a Windows Pocket PC. Apple stole the
march with the single purpose iPod (don't pretend video or anything else on
the iPod is a killer App), but Microsoft still own the multi-purpose device.

DRM has been the Achilles Heel of Microsoft. As they have come back from many
Anti-Trust cases they attempted to sidestep more brouhaha in the world of
Digital Media, and have attempted to play fair (don't get me wrong I know they
usually do not play fair). This has allowed Apple to gain the upperhand in
Music Devices. But, as Apple are now breaking the mold on this to allow DRM-
free sales from EMI, they in turn will have just given Microsoft the opening
it will need to reinforce its position. It wont be success through intent, as
I believe that the Zune player will fail. But a new competitive ecosystem of
devices will lead everything back to the desktop as the hub.

No matter what, no-one is going to trust their personal memories, be it music,
video or photo's entirely to the Web. They will share it there, but not leave
it there.

Microsoft is back where they were when Netscape first launched, they are the
slow lumbering laggard.

But as history shows us, they turned themselves around, and owned (however
briefly) the mindset of everyone who had money to spend (and this is not
typically your 15-year old Web 2.0 consumer with no money), it was the
corporates, with their large cheque books.

Google are moving more and more to follow the Microsoft lead. Microsoft is far
from dead, but like all parents who have given life to others (such as Google,
albeit through removed ways), they from time to time will be less involved in
their Children's lives. But, they will always retain some criticality in their
lives. MS will never really die in our lifetimes. They just move from being
the soul point of attention.

Good luck to your startups, but imagining them operating in a world where they
do not know and respect the importance of Microsoft, and try to emulate or
utilise them in their goals, seems like a recipe for failure to me.

~~~
dht
You know, I could take that postingand make some wording changes.

"And, in this case, history says, IBM will always be key to a central
computing-centric world....For now minicomputers seem to have the baton, but
as we move into a very rich data environment....No matter what, no-one is
going to trust their corporate data entirely to desktop computers. They will
share it there, but not leave it there." and so forth.

This would have seemed very plausible thirty years ago, when IBM was dominant.
And, indeed, nobody pushed IBM out of the dinosaur pens. There are still IBM
mainframes out there, and they don't have much competition in the mainframe
business. Of course, IBM wasn't pushing anything as relatively bad as Vista in
those days.

Microsoft isn't going to die because of being pushed off the desktop, unless
they do it themselves with increasingly unusable operating systems. They will
cease to be relevant as applications become less tied to the underlying
desktop OS, much as IBM ceased to be relevant as data became less tied to the
central mainframe.

------
juwo
Microsoft died shortly before Bill Gates became a saint. Anyone who knows
religion knows that you become a saint only when you die. \- Anil Philip

------
dmj
Sorry, you've been scooped by ten years, and by someone even older:

<http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/msapogee.html>

------
dfranke
The link to 'The Other Road Ahead' is broken.

Edit: looks fixed now.

------
benknight
I have always enjoyed reading Paul's articles/blogs. I was enjoying reading
this till I got to the line "All the computer people use Macs or Linux now.
Windows is for grandmas, like Macs used to be in the 90s."

Having used gmail since March 28, 05, gcal since it came out, and other web
software as appropriate for a while, I'm a big believer in software-as-a-
service because I hate the idea of having desktop software on one computer and
not the other. I also own both, an Apple PowerBook and a Dell laptop. I find
Windows a lot more keyboard friendly, since I like to fly around with both
shortcut keys and the Mac just can't keep up with me. On the other hand, I
love Mac's Zen-like environment and the rock solid BSD underneath it --
Windows can seem pretty cheesy with all its pop-up baloons and MS-DOS prompt.
However, given the apps and hardware available for Windows, I still prefer
Windows because I'm a developer and business guy. I also disagree that Windows
is for grandmas. I mean, Paul, which world do you live in? Just because a
niche of designers, developers and a few affluent folks use Apple, doesn't
mean EVERYONE is using Macs. Your bias clearly shows through here.

I personally am not biased to any particular hardware/OS because I use them
all (even Ubuntu/Linux for servers). Having worked with 5 flavors of Unix
since 1991, I feel equally comfortable with the _nix world, Windows and Mac
OS.

In the end, Apple is a cult -- it always has been. Apple isn't any better of a
company than Microsoft and neither is Google. I've always had a love-hate
relationship with Microsoft. I hate how they try to break stuff (e.g. Java,
JavaScript) but I absolutely don't mind using MS Office to get stuff done.
And, the fact that I almost entirely use open source for my
development/deployment and not feel hampered on Windows combined with the fact
that most of my personal information management is done using gmail/gcal, I
can use Microsoft to get the best of all world: i.e. MS Office, web 2.0 apps
through Firefox, anything open source (e.g. eclipse, rails, mysql), etc., etc.
I strongly believe OS will eventually become less relevant for desktops,
whether it is Microsoft, Mac, or Linux.

In the end, consumers have personal preferences and corporation want to make
money. That's as simple as it gets.

On June 2, 2006 (thanks to gmail's quick search engine for locating the
email/date), I sent an email to a bunch of folks pointing them to Paul's "How
to start a startup" article (<http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html)> because I
absolutely loved it! On this article, I have to agree with the previous
commenter that "Paul Graham is the Ann Coulter of the Web 2.0 world." :-(

~~~
KitDoc
If you want user customizable keyboard shortcuts on the Mac, use QuicKeys...

I run Office 2007 in Parallel's virtual machine software, since I have
necessary add-ins, and reboot the machine to Windows when needed for a
project.

Since the release of Tiger, I have been performing many conversions from
Windows to Mac. There are also large corporations like Mastercard, which are
mainstream Mac.

------
atanas
It is a cultural shift that will bury Microsoft. Much like the Walmart
distribution deal killed Levi's as a brand.

------
yako
If Paul ever tried new Yahoo mail, he would found Gmail pretty lame. As far as
Ajax utilization goes at least.

------
khollzhovbdam
Nice article. Wrote it at YNET 4 years ago same subject, more reasons. pitty
you can't read hebrew :)

------
slk
Nice article! Quick question: by Nero, do you mean the Roman emperor, or the
CD/DVD burning software?

------
vzakharov
Be afraid of Microsoft or be afraid of Google - what's the difference, if
you're a startup?

------
rayteagarden
WOW! This is right on the money, the future of computing is getting even more
interesting.

------
will_lin
I agree that Microsoft is dead. The biggest reason is simply that Bill Gates
is leaving.

------
stevecla
Micrsoft is very much alive and though Paul makes some great observations
about the challenges that lie ahead this discussion seems to be centred on
people who want Microsoft to be dead and why Microsoft is such a threat.
That's the real challenge...changing years of negative sentiment. That's what
I care about

------
anonymoustroll
Microsoft may be dead, but it's also a zombie and it wants your
brainesszzz....

------
TechNoWeb
well with Microsoft holding a good 90% of the desktop market and most schools
only have classes for Microsoft software i just don't see Microsoft as dead
and not anything in the near future

this article was well just a bunch of FUD

------
larsw
Paul Graham is dead.

Dead in the sense that I won't read his ever increasing b __ _sh_ t anymore.

\--larsw

------
charmained
This is the most BRILLIANT article I have ever read! Publish it!

------
leoderja
Bill Gates a bigger hero that Alexander Magnus. HE is the way...

------
rick
Stop talking about young vs old! It's irrelevant as Microsoft.

------
crappydeli
Microsoft died before the mainframe. There's irony for you.

------
pio
Paul, have you heard anything about enterprise software? :)

------
rickygee
eh, I still find Windows 2000 perfectly adequate for everything I do -
including reading your excellent essay. That said, VISTA may well be a coffin
nail. R/G

------
carlco
well in a way it was good that steve jobs did get pushed out it gave him focus
on nextstep and that is the bedrock of why apple have bounced back.

------
amirking
u didn't explain why u count MS out of the web 2.0 world. may be because as u
confessed u never use MS products and are so unaware of what they are up to.

------
chambcm
This is the dumbest article I have read in a long time.

------
kawabago
Will the corpse of Microsoft be considered toxic waste?

------
yousuck
Would've been good read on April First ... reading it now, its not even funny,
the blogger is complete idiot.

"We didn't invite Microsoft and they didn't bother contacting us" LOL, because
they don't give a shit about you =)

Microsoft FTW.

------
sha
Yes you Are right

------
bobsil1
Remind me which Web-based apps make money again?

~~~
pg
The very first one did.

------
skp
Super awesome ! @M$ : Web 2.0 is no Bubble.

------
cogitate
i agree with 50 yo Bob G.apple is superficial too. only when they go GPL will
they leverage "web x.0".MS is old news.

-monish 

------
twocents
I agree, MS is definitely moving in this direction... though not quite dead.
They just need a little help getting there. A few additional points...

1\. Data formats: The Operating System is becoming less important. The focus
should continue to be toward standards. Proprietary Data formats, such as DOC
are slowly dying. This is absolutely one of the keys (as evidenced by MS's
reaction to Massachusetts when they attempted to pass legislation requiring
the use of Standards on their documents).

MS has spent nearly their entire dev cycle ensuring "vendor lock in". This is
beginning to end. You mentioned JavaScript as an attempt to compromise popular
3rd party solutions. Further research will turn up an unbelievable number of
attempts at this (some successful others just a joke and a waste of the
customer's time).

The message to ALL users is this: __Keep your data open __It's your data and
you should have access to it from more than one company or Application. Avoid
forced upgrades and security issues when MS decides to stop supporting an
application.

2\. Hasta la Vista: BrandonM pointed out MS's apparent contempt for the
customer - and contempt is what it is. This is why Windows XP will absolutely
be the last OS I ever use from MS. It doesn't make a difference to me if Vista
is the greatest OS ever or can be completely killed by an animated cursor. MS
has done more to alienate their customers than all the competing products and
companies together have been able to do. Alternatives are now ready and
available.

3\. Alternative OSes: The re-emergence. This area has continued to rise in
prominence thanks in large part to Linux, BSD and OS X as well as serverLinux
on hosting accounts. Upper-tier Operating systems such as Apple's OS X, Linux,
BSD and Solaris are exciting viable alternatives. Second-tier Operating
Systems such as OS/2 (eComStation) - capable of running modern browsers
(Firefox) and applications can also fill a niche.

Even fundamentally sound and high-quality third-tier OSes; such as AmigaOS4
and The RiscOS are beginning to see new momentum, as a result of Web Apps and
the kind of backlash Microsoft has created among too many users. While I think
these 3rd-Tier OSes need additional modern softTek, I hope they hang in there
and continue to progress forward. The OS battle is a war not a battle won
within a year or two.

4\. Web 2.0 Apps: not just Internet/WAN-based... There is no reason why
internet enabled apps couldn't reach _any_ desktop OS. A complete local LAMP
environment, for example, can easily be set up on any number of alternative
Operating Systems. So if your needs can be filled with Web-based Applications,
they can also be run locally (or over a LAN) for enhanced speeds. Even
portable computing devices (Nokia N800, Pepper Pad, etc..) shouldn't have a
problem setting up this environment.

By default, these types of apps are network-centric. Businesses already loves
and need them but many solutions are currently custom-built. Web Apps will
continue to grow in functionality and will find a home on low-cost LAMP
infrastutures as opposed to the more expensive WIMP or proprietary windows
architecture.

5\. Pointed out in the article was the power of a monopoly. A user commented
on it's ability to kill competition. There was at least one objection to this.
Below is only _one_ example of the _many_ instances of mafia-like bahavior by
Microsoft:

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/02/20/be_inc_sues_microsoft/>

In general, arrogant and abusive behavior by any company has a negative effect
(google: Sony, DRM, backdoor rootkit OR Intel cpu tracking ID privacy). Are
commercial software and digital media companies in danger? Yes... Google (as
well as many users) are aware of the dark side of capitalism. This dark side
has opened the door to GPL software (as well as various other open source
licenses) and the famous "do no evil" guarantee from a major international
vendor - probably a first in the history of commerce (maybe someone can verify
this).

6\. Newbies: The most important segment of the population and the hardest to
reach. It wasn't until the emergence of Firefox that this group began to take
notice of the failings of MS. Microsoft has never recovered from this. IE7
with it's built-in advertising, constant registry writes and lack of
portability to even other MS OSes was not the solution.

Thanks but no thanks, Microsoft. You are a dinosaur, a relic from a time we
will all hopefully soon forget.

------
joeschmoe
I think this is an essay for people who _want_ to be MS is dead, but it just
ain't true.

------
Pakspectator
and reincarnation is just round the corner, perhaps.

The Pakistani Spectator

------
fryke
old news. (just wanted to be young again.)

------
asdffdsa
Guess what, Microsoft still owns your dumbass.

------
stopbuggingme
sorry for double posting...

------
RamonFHerrera
A dead snake can still kill you.

-Ramon

------
stopbuggingme
This article is absolutely ridicolous. First of all, "Web 2.0" and "AJAX"
software won't ever replace Desktop Software, period. The first issue is
Performance. JavaScript is awfully slow compared to real programming
languages, and this won't change because of some language-specific features.
An eMail or calendar application is certainly doable with JavaScript (even
though they still aren't as good as desktop software because of the latency).
Perhaps even word processing and spreadsheets will be possible with an AJAX
app, even though the current AJAX "word processing" and "spreadsheet" apps are
ridiculous compared to MS or OpenOffice. But other things, like image editing,
video editing, rendering and 3D games just aren't feasible with AJAX.
JavaScript is too slow to compute stuff on the client and the latency is too
high to do everything on the server, and also someone would have to pay for
the server the work is being done on. It won't happen. But even if it were
technically feasible it wouldn't happen. That's because it doesn't offer many
advantages over traditional apps. Sure, you can access your data from
everywhere, but for everything that matters, that is already the case. For
example, IMAP is spreading more and more - why on earth would i use some
crappy AJAX eMail client? And there's another very important reason why AJAX
won't take over the World: privacy. There are a lot of things that i just
don't want to lie around on someone elses server.

Secondly, high-bandwith connections aren't available for everyone. Think of
people living in rural areas, and of people who just don't need it. Yes, those
people do exist, and they won't spend 20Â/Month just to do what they already
do with conventional software.

Thirdly, it's just not true that "All the computer people use Macs or Linux
now". I study CS, and while most of my fellow students have tried Linux,
nearly everyone returned back to Windows. That's because nearly every
interesting piece of open source software is available for Windows too, while
there is a lot of software that is Windows-only. An OS is just a platform for
running software, and the software is what matters.

In the end, you even claim that Microsoft sucks. Well, the truth is, they
don't really suck very hard anymore. Yes, Windows 1.0-ME were crap, but the
Windows NT/2000/XP series is good enough for most people (I haven't tried
Vista yet). I've never worked with Visual Studio, but _a lot_ of people claim
it's a superb IDE for C/C++. Then you have MS Office. It's not perfect, but
it's good enough for almost everyone, and it doesn't suck any harder than it's
primary competition, OpenOffice.org (In fact, OpenOffice.org's Base doesn't
even come close to the functionality of Access and there is also no good
replacement for Visio - no, Dia and Kivio aren't, and then there is Sharepoint
and Exchange and a lot more). Claiming that Microsoft Software generally sucks
doesn't help, because it's simply not true, and by expressing stuff like that
you only make a fool of yourself.

------
artsnooze


------
hello_moto
Paul, I think you're being an ignorant a little bit in this case. Have you
seen how Microsoft become the second major player in the game industry behind
Sony PS brand? I think right now more people own XBOX 360 compare to Sony PS3.
Of course there's Wii, the Apple of Console machine.

Google is popular because people like Michael Arrington, Walleywag, and those
biased non-professional bloggers-turned-online-reporters sing praises toward
Google. How many Google apps dying? How many Google apps that people use these
days? AdSense, GMail, GMap, and of course, their search engine.

I think you read online hi-tech newspaper or surf reddit.com too much where of
course the content is full of new startup that does pretty much nothing
astonishing.. "Scribd, the YouTube of document..." or.. the X-programming
language and how X is cool but C# isn't.

Apple is sort of the "new trend" these days because it looks good. Most of the
computer science students in my university now are switching to Apple of
course because they saw the cool/smart kids are using it.. for browsing
reddit.com and talk how cool ruby on rails and DHH are.

I bought Apple 2 weeks ago and by the 3rd day, I installed Parallel Desktop
with Windows XP loaded with MS Office and Visual (C# and Web Developer)
Express Studio 2005. By the way, I'm a long time FreeBSD users and I have a
machine with XP dual boot + Ubuntu (now Ubuntu on the other hand is one piece
of distribution... respect..!)

Microsoft is not dead. They're still up and running. They're just not visible
in your path Paul. They're doing other things that do not interfere with your
Web 2.0 posse. One IPTV company gave a talk in my e-Business course a month
ago, she sang praise for Microsoft because they have the most complete
strategy in IPTV world. FYI, IPTV is better than YouTube.

Let's admit it, people need to hear new information, new gossips, new products
and new toys. But only time will tell if these new stuffs can replace
Microsoft.

The other thing is, if Desktop is dead, why am I keep hearing news about
Slingshots, Apollo and WPF/E ?

Maybe Microsoft knows how broken the WWW is and they prefer not to build their
interest around it (other than just to be another big player next to Yahoo!
and Google because they have pride and they want to be acknowledged that they
still can be a big player in any field..)

MS isn't dead yet, not until they stop creating software/hardware and move to
the business/consulting field. It's true that they lost the "touch" and that
they lost in understanding their customer, but they're not as bad as you
envisioned.

Of course you're writing this essay to fire up these hotshots or web 2.0
wannabes to quit their jobs and to forget applying for big companies and make
a web2.0 thing for YCombinator (^_^)

~~~
zach
The Xbox is a red herring. Microsoft's "Home and Entertainment" division still
loses millions a day, six years after the Xbox unveiling, and has very little
to do with technology in the first place, much less software innovation.

~~~
JMiao
This isn't a fair analysis. XBOX is probably one of the only groups that is
moving in a positive direction at Microsoft. Yes, they've lost billions, but
Microsoft expected that going in. The billions they've spent over the last few
years is a small price to pay for making Windows technology the center of the
home entertainment experience as well as owning a significant content pipeline
into the living room.

However, despite my confidence in XBOX, Microsoft is still going to experience
a lot of bleeding because XBOX at its best isn't enough to cover for the fact
that the Desktop and Windows OS are becoming irrelevant.

~~~
Elfan
Its a strange irony that Microsoft's best products (Xbox, Natural Keyboards)
are hardware.

~~~
JMiao
True to a certain extent, but I would say that the XBOX also features pretty
nifty software. Its Dashboard and Blade-UI make for what is arguably the best
entertainment computer experience. Oh, and don't forget XBOX Live.

------
dietzsignals
old news.

------
djasek
dupe.

------
Wanderlust
old news

------
Roybatty
I'll pass on whatever Paul is smoking. I guess there's a psychological
condition (I'll coin it Slashdotitis), where the downfall of Microsoft is just
right around the corner - or in Paul's case it has already happened.

Here's a cluestick. HTML (even with AJAX) is not a freaking platform. Wake me
up when Google has an actual platform. Until then, Paul can go live in the
fantasy world with Larry Ellison where the networked thin client was going to
take over years ago. Yawn.

------
pablos
Nice text. Did you take your medicines today ?

------
SFBayman
It's always funny to see people with Apple laptops struggle to get their
presentations up and running when they come to my company in hopes of a
partnership.

------
microsoftx
Paul Graham is the Ann Coulter of the Web 2.0 world.

Formula for success: 1) Write/say something controversial 2) Leverage the idea
into a book 3) Profit!

~~~
BrandonM
Yeah, because his books so far have no substance at all... ( _cough_ one of
the top Lisp books out there _cough_ )

------
redbeard
I actually respected Paul Graham and linked to him in his article about
starting a startup. Now I see he is basically not even serious enough to keep
reading. What a dork.

------
blabla
Hahahahaha.

What are you trying to do? Apply the John Dvorak method to Microsoft?

I can't seem to find any other way to account for that accumulation of the
absurdest possible statements that this "essay" essentially is.

BTW: I suppose I am in the younger half.

~~~
blabla
<http://tinyurl.com/2kwrbo>

------
cK
You're a moron with an MBA. There is very little substance in what you said,
just speculation. You clearly do not understand the Software and IT Services
space.

~~~
pg
Calling me a moron is one thing, but accusing me of having an MBA is really
too much.

~~~
JMiao
ZING!

------
reality2345
Need a Dose of Reality

From TFA: "Their victory is so complete that I'm now surprised when I come
across a computer running Windows. Nearly all the people we fund at Y
Combinator use Apple laptops. It was the same in the audience at startup
school. All the computer people use Macs or Linux now. Windows is for
grandmas, like Macs used to be in the 90s. So not only does the desktop no
longer matter, no one who cares about computers uses Microsoft's anyway."

This guy needs a dose of reality. If he is "surprised" running across Windows
computers, he needs to visit a business, any business. I'd say...99.9% of them
use Windows. Perhaps he is just surrounding himself with counterculture
hippies, or perhaps he wants to ignore reality.

From TFA: "Nearly all the people we fund at Y Combinator use Apple laptops"
well perhaps they need to fund more broadly. Cool is cool, but not always
profitable.

From TFA: "Windows is for grandmas"...and 99.9% of corporate users, and most
home users, and many students.

~~~
rinconj
I work for one of the $100B+ market cap companies that officially is windows
only, but internally 20% of people have already replaced their windows with
Linux or Mac for superior performance. The OP of this is all about the new
breed of startups not the grandma companies you see or work for.

