Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

We tend to forget that Microsoft ALREADY did what these "startups" did. MSFT already pushed the envelope and changed the way we use technology in our day to day lives.

There is (probably) only so much change one company / person can do. Even if there is additional potential, in the end companies will seek profit and stability.




> We tend to forget that Microsoft ALREADY did what these "startups" did. MSFT already pushed the envelope and changed the way we use technology in our day to day lives.

We tend to forget that IBM did that in a previous era.

Another example that "in the end companies will seek profit and stability" and be an "enterprise software company"

-----


Agreed, 100%. I see it as kind of an inevitability.

-----


OH, yes, IBM started very early and veery "promising"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

-----


IBM had been around for something like 22 years by 1933. Facebook has only been around for what, 9 years?

-----


This may well be true. That doesn't make it any less sad.

-----


No sadness here - Microsoft has been a stain on the last decade of the computing industry. The only sadness is that their trajectory of circling of the toilet might change, with a new CEO. But I doubt it.

-----


>Microsoft has been a stain on the last decade of the computing industry

Pretty easy to make bold claims without expanding on them.

-----


Ridiculous claims are impossible to expand on without showing how ridiculous they are.

-----


Your ridiculous claim that ridiculous claims are impossible to expand on is so ridiculous that I find it impossible to ridicule to show how ridiculous it is.

-----


> Microsoft has been a stain on the last decade of the computing industry.

Wrong decade. Microsoft has made a lot of positive changes these past ten years.

If anything, I'm betting that we are going to uncover some pretty dirty business practices exercised by Apple this past decade (I'm predicting that the e-book price rigging is the tip of the iceberg).

-----


How could you possibly imply that the electronic device messiah could somehow do wrong.

Apple lost me at their ridiculous patent fights with Samsung.

-----


You don't know how much of a bully Samsung is. Apple looks out for the little guy. The dreamer.

-----


Exactly. Just ask those app devs that have gotten screwed out of a large chunk of their livelihood because one day Apple decided that functionality of their app competed with Apple/iOS.

Apple's developer ecosystem is setup to give you everything for free. It's also setup to take everything away as it pleases all while controlling every aspect of it - even subjective components of it. It's not free at that point, and the control for security basis only goes so far before the argument starts to fall apart. Yes, it is a good thing to have controls for that exact reason. Is Google any better? In some regards yes (the platform has dwarfed iOS in terms of technical security controls but fragmentation plagues the ability of everyone to take advantage of updates) and in others no.

Apple is just an accelerated Microsoft at this point. Significantly slowed innovation (compared to the early OS X and iPhone days) - again because of the "innovator's dilemma". They're now locked into this massive ecosystem which will artificially continue to suffocate them over time.

-----


You know 100 000 people are employed there right? And its blue chip stock for probably millions? Just checking to confirm you don't care at all about any of these people...

-----




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: