Microsoft Originality
I’m not really in a Microsoft bashing state of mind the past months. The reality is that at some point I switched from Microsoft bashing to recognizing that they do somethings very well. Hell, I want to run b5media email through Exchange some day. That doesn’t make me an advocate or an evangelist. That just makes my mindset as an IT manager one of maturity and discretion. Folks in my position have to look at options and determine the best option for a job and some times that means throwing money at Bill Gates.
However, I had lunch with Zak Ainsworth today and was talking about some of this kind of stuff and some of the things I hope to see done at b5. I referred to an entry that I can’t find anywhere. I don’t remember when I wrote it or where I wrote it or how long ago I wrote it. But I do know I wrote it. The ironic thing is that the same thread came up in conversation later in the day with Jeremy and I couldn’t find it then either. So being OCD as I can sometimes be, I must dot my i’s and cross my t’s and put this entry out. For historical reference.
You see, Microsoft excels at marketing. They don’t excel at innovation. In fact, very little of what Microsoft has to offer is truly innovative. There is a tendency to come late to the game and snatch up an idea and build on it, perhaps years after the concept has hit the market, and call it their own. They market themselves as innovators and do a degree they are. Their innovation comes in the spit and polish and not in the technological breakthrough itself.
Examples of this go way back:
- The most popular example is Windows. Windows revolutionized computing by putting a point and click GUI on top of the OS kernel. But did it? Apple actually did this with the Mac long before Microsoft did with Windows. (And Xerox did it before Apple).
- Likewise, the Mac was the first OS to employ 32-bit processing. Microsoft did not support 32-bit processing until 1994 when Windows 95 was released.
- Microsoft released Active Directory as a much touted solution to domain management with Windows Server 2000. However, LDAP existed long before Active Directory was a thought. Oh yeah, and Novell had NetWare, their domain management too while Windows networks suffered through NT domain environments.
- Search? Seems like Microsoft is still finding their way among search. They’ve had iterations of MSN resulting in a brand new search mechanism, Windows Live. But you know Google still rules the roost.
- Gaming? Well, the XBOX still rocks, but Nintendo was the great grand daddy of modern gaming platforms.
- Instant Messaging? MSN Messenger (erm, sorry, Windows Live Messenger) is good, but it will never be a powerhouse. AIM dominates and Skype is growing among business users.
- Even blogging suffers from Microsoft’s lack of creativity. Windows Live Spaces doesn’t even compete with Blogger. Maybe MySpace.
- Maps. There are still a lot of people who insiost on using Web 1.0 map apps like Mapquest, but smart users use Google Maps, the new Yahoo Maps and a few smattering use Windows Live Local.
There’s more examples, but I’d like to hear from you if you have any examples of Microsoft demonstrating real innovation. I mean technological breakthrough stuff, not R&D on user interfaces or usability.
Pick up your copy of the WordPress Bible, a wildly popular resource for beginners and experts alike.
Written by Aaron Brazell on October 17, 2006
Popularity: 1% [?]
Aaron Brazell
Steven Fisher
Ray Capece
Carlos Granier-Phelps
Andrew Feinberg
Mike Dougherty
Chris Bachmann
Leslie Poston
Jerald Sheets
Scott Goldblatt
Mykel Nahorniak
Peter Corbett
Jonathan Dingman
Geoff Livingston
Jeremy Toeman
Rachel James
Chris Parandian
Warren Sukernek
Joseph Hauckes
Shana Glickfield
Vinnie Garcia
David Nick
Duncan Riley
Carol Ott
Darren McLaughlin
Mike Oliver
Rico Masterson
Lou P. Nuts
Well, Aaron, believe it or not I have a couple of items that MS makes that are quite good.
#1 The Microsoft Keyboard.
I bought my MS Keyboard like in 1992 or 1993, and still use it today. It is simple, elegant, and has pretty much eliminated a burgeoning carpal problem.
#2 The Microsoft Mouse
I have the MS mouse because at 6′5″, just about any mouse is dwarfed in my hand. The MS mice, however fit my hand EXTREMELY well for whatever reason, and I can really appreciate the ergonomic engineering that went into the (at the time) unique design of the mouse shape.
#3 Microsoft Windows Mobile 5
I have a Smartphone, and with the wane of Palm products all but inevitable, I find Windows mobile (until iPhone, of course) to be the smartphone OS of choice.
Microsoft may not do very well with innovation and originaliity in their current suite of applications, but their hardware has ALWAYS been one of my favorite features of the MS corporation.
OS: crap
APPS: crap
Hardware: A-OK.
Well, Aaron, believe it or not I have a couple of items that MS makes that are quite good.
#1 The Microsoft Keyboard.
I bought my MS Keyboard like in 1992 or 1993, and still use it today. It is simple, elegant, and has pretty much eliminated a burgeoning carpal problem.
#2 The Microsoft Mouse
I have the MS mouse because at 6′5″, just about any mouse is dwarfed in my hand. The MS mice, however fit my hand EXTREMELY well for whatever reason, and I can really appreciate the ergonomic engineering that went into the (at the time) unique design of the mouse shape.
#3 Microsoft Windows Mobile 5
I have a Smartphone, and with the wane of Palm products all but inevitable, I find Windows mobile (until iPhone, of course) to be the smartphone OS of choice.
Microsoft may not do very well with innovation and originaliity in their current suite of applications, but their hardware has ALWAYS been one of my favorite features of the MS corporation.
OS: crap
APPS: crap
Hardware: A-OK.
Actually, it was Novell’s Directory Services (NDS) that was the technical progenitor of Microsoft’s Active Directory. One of the issues with the introduction of AD with Windows 2000 was its use of proprietary extensions to the Kerberos authentication scheme–a long-standing authentication mechanism. There were many places–educational institutions that had to make modifications to allow the easy integration of AD systems into their existing Kerberos infrastructure.
Nonetheless, there are very few who will argue with MS tendency to be very good at marketing. They are also good at increasing adoption by giving something away initially to build support for the product. Compare this to Novell’s products through the years (as a former and still occasional NetWare Admin). Novell has been notoriously bad through the years with marketing. Great technical products, but incredibly bad marketing.
Jerald: Okay, if you say so. I still prefer Logitech, but it’s not a matter of preference.
Jason: Yep. NDS was a bane to the existence of all network admins. I also remember the less-than-smooth uptake of AD too. Good times.
Interesting.
Now, I didn’t have the problems with DS everyone else seems to have had with NDS. It was just a fancy LDAP storage infrastructure. I had no trouble with NDS trees local or across both slow and fast links. It was very logically thought out, laid out, and implemented.
Yeah, I liked NDS quite a bit. ;)
I’m with Jerald on this one. I had few problems with NDS, but I do seem to recall some of my colleagues having, shall I say, interesting times with the introduction of its early versions. Nonetheless, my former employers had an NDS tree that has been running flawlessly since around 1994.
Now, there were some interesting issues introduced in later versions of DS–eDirectory, as it is called these days. Nonetheless, from a bare-bones application of LDAP functionality, I would take NDS/eDir any day of the week over AD.
Like Jerald, I miss NDS quite a bit, too. Heck, there are some things that NDS has handled easily for years that AD just cannot handle now.
Actually, it was Novell’s Directory Services (NDS) that was the technical progenitor of Microsoft’s Active Directory. One of the issues with the introduction of AD with Windows 2000 was its use of proprietary extensions to the Kerberos authentication scheme–a long-standing authentication mechanism. There were many places–educational institutions that had to make modifications to allow the easy integration of AD systems into their existing Kerberos infrastructure.
Nonetheless, there are very few who will argue with MS tendency to be very good at marketing. They are also good at increasing adoption by giving something away initially to build support for the product. Compare this to Novell’s products through the years (as a former and still occasional NetWare Admin). Novell has been notoriously bad through the years with marketing. Great technical products, but incredibly bad marketing.
Jerald: Okay, if you say so. I still prefer Logitech, but it’s not a matter of preference.
Jason: Yep. NDS was a bane to the existence of all network admins. I also remember the less-than-smooth uptake of AD too. Good times.
Interesting.
Now, I didn’t have the problems with DS everyone else seems to have had with NDS. It was just a fancy LDAP storage infrastructure. I had no trouble with NDS trees local or across both slow and fast links. It was very logically thought out, laid out, and implemented.
Yeah, I liked NDS quite a bit. ;)
I’m with Jerald on this one. I had few problems with NDS, but I do seem to recall some of my colleagues having, shall I say, interesting times with the introduction of its early versions. Nonetheless, my former employers had an NDS tree that has been running flawlessly since around 1994.
Now, there were some interesting issues introduced in later versions of DS–eDirectory, as it is called these days. Nonetheless, from a bare-bones application of LDAP functionality, I would take NDS/eDir any day of the week over AD.
Like Jerald, I miss NDS quite a bit, too. Heck, there are some things that NDS has handled easily for years that AD just cannot handle now.
I’ve always thought Microsoft hardware was top-notch and well designed. For example, my intellimouse fits my hand almost perfectly (seriously, the only “complaint” I’d have about it is that I can’t find a left-handed version), and the XBox controller, as much crap as it initially got, I thought was very innovative with the cords that snap off rather than taking the whole console down with it (my dog tripped over them a lot ;)).
Software? I have a love-hate relationship. The two pieces of MS software I find a joy to use are Excel and SQL Server. Much of their other software drives me insane though, because of its “annoying” factor (MSN messenger and Outlook I’m looking at you). And of course, IE is a pain in any web designer’s ass.
I think Microsoft can do a lot better than it has lately with regard to its products. A lot of it seems like its features get committeed to death or uselessness, a common sign for larger companies with byzantine management structures.
Sadly, I see Microsoft going in a direction similar to IBM in the future, which sucks because I like their mice and video games :)
I’ve always thought Microsoft hardware was top-notch and well designed. For example, my intellimouse fits my hand almost perfectly (seriously, the only “complaint” I’d have about it is that I can’t find a left-handed version), and the XBox controller, as much crap as it initially got, I thought was very innovative with the cords that snap off rather than taking the whole console down with it (my dog tripped over them a lot ;)).
Software? I have a love-hate relationship. The two pieces of MS software I find a joy to use are Excel and SQL Server. Much of their other software drives me insane though, because of its “annoying” factor (MSN messenger and Outlook I’m looking at you). And of course, IE is a pain in any web designer’s ass.
I think Microsoft can do a lot better than it has lately with regard to its products. A lot of it seems like its features get committeed to death or uselessness, a common sign for larger companies with byzantine management structures.
Sadly, I see Microsoft going in a direction similar to IBM in the future, which sucks because I like their mice and video games :)