There have been some postings lately about how Microsoft is dead. The most famous probably being the one by Paul Graham. Now granted, Paul wasn’t really saying that they were literally dead, just that other companies and technologies are making them irrelevant. And in this industry, being irrelevant is equivalent to being dead. However, I don’t think it’s other companies that are causing it. I think it is Microsoft themselves. Here’s a little secret: I think Microsoft has gone insane. What makes me think that, you ask? Well, let’s look at some evidence:
Office 2007 Ribbon Bar and New File Formats
Microsoft is rebelling against the standards that they helped create. I’m pretty sure the first toolbars appeared in Office apps in the early 90’s. Microsoft now thinks it can catch lightening in a bottle again with its Ribbon Bar. I applaud them for attempting to innovate, but I’m not liking the Ribbon Bar. It throws everything in your face. It’s overwhelming. And this makes it harder to find stuff.
And was a new file format really necessary? I think Microsoft was just sick of all these other apps starting to have built-in compatibility with all the office file formats so they felt they needed to come up with something new.
I know a lot of companies that have no plans to switch to Office 2007 and are actually investigating OpenOffice.
Vista
I won’t go on about Vista being late. Software is always late (hello, Mac OS X Leopard). I will go on about the User Account Control (UAC). Who thought that monstrosity up? I have it disabled on all my Vista installations because it’s just gets in the way far too often to be practical. It comes up when installing any software, which is somewhat understandable, but also comes up when doing seemingly innocent things like adjusting the time.
Definitely an Insane Idea. “Wow”, indeed.
Another crazy thing about Vista is that Microsoft will not support using Visual Studio 2003 with it. A lot of places are still using Visual Studio 2003 and are now getting new computers with Vista. They’re forced to set up virtual machines in order to do their work. It’s crazy!
.NET
.NET used to be great. I loved the initial releases of .NET. I talked it up to anyone I could. I’ve built a lot of software with Visual Studio 2003 and .NET 1.1. But since the release of .NET 2.0 things have gone downhill. Fast.
.NET 2.0 was released on November 2005, along with Visual Studio 2005. Kind of late in the year to release a product with the year in its name, but that’s just me, I guess. Anyway, now all the talk is about .NET 3.0 and Visual Studio Orcas. There’s WPF, WCF, WF, CardSpaces, Silverlight, C# 3.0, LINQ and more I’m sure I’m forgetting. Microsoft and their 10 million employees are banging out new technologies faster than anyone can keep up. You want to use those technologies with Visual Studio 2005? Well, you have to download the .NET 3.0 framework and install a bunch of (beta) add-ons for Visual Studio. “This will all be seemless with Orcas”, we’re told.
When technologies start to get too complicated, people start evaluating others. Why do you think people (like me) migrated from Java to .NET back in 2002/2003? It was because Java had gotten too complex and .NET was a breath of fresh air.
The quality, too, is telling. Visual Studio 2003 did not have its first service pack release until 2006 (3 years after it was released) mostly because it just worked. Visual Studio 2005 had its first service pack released 1 year after it was released, and people were clamoring for it long before then because of bugs and slow performance. Because of this, I know a lot of companies and organizations that are sticking with Visual Studio 2003.
I’m also annoyed at Microsoft’s naming conventions. On the one hand they go with really lame names like Windows Presentation Foundation when they had a cool code name like Avalon they could have kept using. Then, in complete contrast, for other products they switch from the boring name (Windows Presentation Foundation/Everywhere) to a name like Silverlight. It makes no sense. Surely a sign of insanity.
Visual Basic
Which way are they going with this? First they kill Visual Basic 6, quite possible the most popular programming language on the planet, and replace it with Visual Basic .NET. Then for .NET 2.0 they decide that Visual Basic will start to get back some of the ease-of-use capabilities it that VB6 had, such as edit-and-continue. BASIC (and Visual Basic) is what identifies Microsoft. Altair BASIC was their first product. Visual Basic is what brought legions of programmers to Microsoft’s Windows platform.
I know a lot of companies that don’t want to switch to .NET and are now evaluating other options.
Insane, Insane again
Microsoft is one of the largest and most profitable companies on the planet. It seems like they should be able to do more. Their revenue of $44B for 2006 would put them at number 63 in the world if they were a country.
Microsoft is now like a crazy rich uncle who thinks you have to tolerate him because he’s rich. Microsoft is not dead, but they moving towards irrelevance. Is it a coincidence that all this is happening at about the same time that Bill Gates has been transitioning from the company? Perhaps not.
Recent Comments