|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 23 2013 @ 06:01 PM EST |
Microsoft has been extremely good at targeting decision-
makers within businesses, not necessarily the ultimate users
of their software. They understood early on that managers
would love being able to sign up for a "complete package" of
operating system plus server plus desktop software, with the
implication that everything will work better together. Once
they achieved a big lead in the mid-1990s, they became
almost unassailable because managers were afraid to ever
pick anyone else. The home market was just gravy.
Now, it is abundantly clear that the Windows home PC has
long passed its peak as a key household component. But the
business desktop is still solidly locked into MS. It is
still nearly impossible for any manager to choose anything
other than Microsoft for general office use, even though
other platforms could absolutely do the job.
MS used to be like the IBM of the 1960s-80s. They are headed
toward being like today's IBM - a major player, but far from
a monopoly.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 23 2013 @ 10:56 PM EST |
Actually, it's anything but.
Microsoft has acres of real estate both at home and abroad; a top-heavy army of
employees and legions of 'supporters'; huge expenses on marketing,
decision-driving, and lobbying; commitments in terms of lucrative stock-options
that could do to Microsoft what pensions did to big auto - particularly if their
stock starts to fall.
They are pursuing an aggressive litigation strategy and involving themselves in
untold industry interests organisations.
On top of that, they have been unsuccessful in trying to leverage their
market-leading position to dominate or even just compete in the new market
spaces (like music players and mobiles) at great expense with no gain or many
loses.
And all this must be paid for by their Windows and Office franchises in a market
that has long since gone elsewhere and no longer equate Microsoft with cool.
I think the word for all of the above is overhead and Microsoft's got too much
of it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|